How to Protect Yourself From Obamacare

[heironymouspasparagus]

Now now.  The only reason I think single payer is the way to go is that it works stupendously (better results, far cheaper costs) in every other first world country, not because I necessarily think the government is a panacea for every problem under the sun.  But this problem?  Definitely.

And you know . . . Iraq and Afghanistan have absolutely nothing to do with Obamacare.  Hence, I didn't feel the need to respond. 

I vote straight ticket (surprise!) but because 1) I tend to agree more with with Democrats than Republicans and use that as a guide if I don't know about a particular race; and 2) looking at the type of people the Republicans are putting up in local, state, and national elections, I know I'll disagree with them on just about everything.  Problem solved! 

Except that Blake Ewing cat.  I hear he's an R and I just might have to pull the lever for him anyway. 

The reality of all the other first world countries is just another rallying cry to the NIH crowd (not invented here).  Just because it works well everywhere else means we should NOT do it, most of the time.  Plus, it would be too much like we were doing the right thing for the country and its people - which is directly opposite the plans of 'you-know-who'.  ('you-know-who' is what I use when I don't want to rile Conan up to much by saying RWRE!)

[we vs us]

I was just rereading this part of the thread and literally can't figure out why we would be exempt from how single payer works everywhere else.  I'm thinking of Red Arrow's comment, "we aren't every other country in the world." 

And actually he's right, we're not.  Our preferred solution costs us much much more per patient and our outcomes are much worse.  In fact, the way we've decided to do healthcare takes up approximately 1/6th of our entire economy.  What a waste of capital. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

I was just rereading this part of the thread and literally can't figure out why we would be exempt from how single payer works everywhere else.  I'm thinking of Red Arrow's comment, "we aren't every other country in the world." 

And actually he's right, we're not.  Our preferred solution costs us much much more per patient and our outcomes are much worse.  In fact, the way we've decided to do healthcare takes up approximately 1/6th of our entire economy.  What a waste of capital. 

Because it's all about giving to the rich and taking from the poor.

This is just another reason why we are #38 in health care outcomes.

But, you know what?  I bet when guido's kids get out of high school and into that transition time when they used to be ineligible for his health care plan, I bet he keeps them on 'til 26 if he needs to.  Unless he does live by the conviction of his beliefs and cuts them off at 18 (or 21 depending on past plans) and let's them 'sink or swim'.

[Conan71]

This is just another reason why we are #38 in health care outcomes.

You know why we are supposedly #38 in outcomes?  Because Americans do not take a proactive approach to their health.  Somehow we've been lulled into believing you can abuse your body daily and there will be a pill or procedure to cure the accumulated damage.  Obesity results in heart disease, diabetes, and many orthopedic maladies.

Don't believe me?  Take a look at obesity charts, mortality tables (i.e. longest surviving), and "outcomes".  Obesity rates are almost an exact inverse with the other metrics.

[Red Arrow]

Unless he does live by the conviction of his beliefs and cuts them off at 18 (or 21 depending on past plans) and let's them 'sink or swim'.

You mean like when Warren Buffet voluntarily pays more taxes than he is required to pay?

[heironymouspasparagus]

You know why we are supposedly #38 in outcomes?  Because Americans do not take a proactive approach to their health.  Somehow we've been lulled into believing you can abuse your body daily and there will be a pill or procedure to cure the accumulated damage.  Obesity results in heart disease, diabetes, and many orthopedic maladies.

Don't believe me?  Take a look at obesity charts, mortality tables (i.e. longest surviving), and "outcomes".  Obesity rates are almost an exact inverse with the other metrics.

That too!  

We got massive problems - not too much pun intended.  We are in huge part just like the spaceship residents in that movie "Wall-E".

[nathanm]

You mean like when Warren Buffet voluntarily pays more taxes than he is required to pay?

Don't you think it's a little funny that you can get more than one of the top 400 asking to please be taxed more and Congress is too beholden to party politics to actually take them up on the offer?

[Conan71]

Don't you think it's a little funny that you can get more than one of the top 400 asking to please be taxed more and Congress is too beholden to party politics to actually take them up on the offer?

Have them add a box for additional donations specifically for debt reduction.  Folks like Mr. Buffett can give to his heart's content.  He's also quite capable of paying himself a much larger salary which would be taxed at a much higher rate, yet he declines to do so.

[Teatownclown]

Mitt Romney May Consider Privatizing The Veterans Health Care System

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/11/14/367586/mitt-romney-may-consider-privatizing-the-veterans-health-care-system/

“if other health care providers followed the VA’s lead, it would be a major step toward improving the quality of care across the U.S. health care system.”

[nathanm]

Have them add a box for additional donations specifically for debt reduction.  Folks like Mr. Buffett can give to his heart's content.  He's also quite capable of paying himself a much larger salary which would be taxed at a much higher rate, yet he declines to do so.

I will look up some talking points and get back to you, since you also seem to be content with pithy talking points.

[Townsend]

How ‘Obamacare’ Could Lose in the Supreme Court

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/11/14/how-obamacare-could-lose-in-the-supreme-court.html

The Supreme Court announced today that it will rule on the constitutionality of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement: the landmark health care reform law passed in 2010. Reflecting the significance of the issues raised by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Justices set aside 5 ½ hours for oral argument—more than five times the length of the usual hearing. For the Obama administration, the extended time is welcome news. Its lawyers may need all that time just to answer a single question: What, if any, are the limits on Congress’s power?

[Breadburner]

I will look up some talking points and get back to you, since you also seem to be content with pithy talking points.

[we vs us]

what

[Townsend]

what

He found the GIF and had the shakes he wanted to use it so bad.

[Teatownclown]

You Teabagger/GOPer's really don't want SCOTUS ruling in your favor, do you?

I mean, it's your only issue 'cept for RomneyCare in the coming year.