Another Federal Judge rules Obamacare unconstitutional

[theeedude]

There isn't free market health care and nothing has been done to address or even consider the far greater problems I've mentioned. In fact they all mysteriously go away when the government takes over, as you've seen from the posts of others. That's magical thinking, and it's indeed like 6 day Creation. No answers, but a lot of faith. In every other civilized country those who are in control are pooping their pants if their demographics have a substantial aging population.

It's the health care system GOP chose to leave in place when they had a decade to reform it, aside from expanding Medicare, of course. I guess that shows how much faith they have in the free markets they like to preach about.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

It's the health care system GOP chose to leave in place when they had a decade to reform it, aside from expanding Medicare, of course. I guess that shows how much faith they have in the free markets they like to preach about.

I don't care about the GOP nor the Dems. I care about severe and unavoidable problems coming within a decade. "The government can cure all this" or "the market will decide" is irrelevant. As I said earlier, Alzheimers alone will cost $600 billion annually by best estimates. There isn't enough money to handle all that no matter who pays. That's why we need to start planing now, but we get window dressing. Government CAN assist, but assuming control by a group of people who haven't a clue about these sorts of things is the wrong way to go about it. We need an honest analysis of the situation and we can't even get that.

 

[Tab]

You brought up police and fire. I said that it isn't a valid direct comparison due to the nature of the systems. You said they are both services provided for the common good. I said so is the mail. Now you are arguing for... what exactly?

How are illnesses any different than getting robbed? The government, does what individuals can't and certainly has a vested interesting in supporting its' citizens.

Nobody COULD, because it was of such massive size, with so little time before the vote, that NOBODY had any idea what the exact outcome of it would be...

Like, every, other, bill? Do I completely read technical documentation before I work on another companies network? No, sometimes I simply don't need to or it's more effective that I talk to someone else who knows it or something like consultants do give me a summary with just enough concise to make a well-informed decision.

yet so many claimed that *whatever was in it* would save our health care system.

Nobody said that, and even if they did, what do you expect? We've been trying to change the system for years after people continually being fucked, abused, and some circumstances left to literally die.

So many people contributed so many different things to it, that there is was no possibility for anybody or any group to fully understand what the outcome would be from enacting it.

It's probably impossible to know the full-impact a lot of our bills make, but we can get a well-enough informed opinion on the matter.

There you go again... insisting something will be just because you think it will. If you missed it earlier... not-for-profit insurance companies raise their rates basically at the same rate as for-profit companies... which I also pointed out, even the largest insurance company in the US makes extremely modest profits, contrary to your anecdotal claims.

Either you're forgetting or ignoring my posts. I'm arguing that the system should be like a UK-Taiwan hybrid, the insurance companies wouldn't exist, big phrama wouldn't be charging as much and neither would physicians.

The $5 trillion figure is simply an illustration of something being too much for us to afford. You said COSTS DON'T MATTER. That is what YOU said. COSTS DON'T MATTER. So if we decide to spend $10 trillion a year to make sure everybody has access to any medical procedure, any time of day or night, no expenses spared... even if it cost us 3x our national GDP... COSTS DON'T MATTER.

They don't, and neither does your example. This 7 Trillion socialized medicine would, never, ever happen. Which I said it my last post.

PS... on the subject of lobbying... who is to blame? The companies that spend money trying to influence congressmen? Or the congressmen who take the money?

The citizen who let it happen.

But, really, it's everyone's fault.

Again... Wellpoint spent about $21 million lobbying in 2010. Take that money and apply it to reduced premiums for all 33.7 million policy holders. What is the net effect?

Not a lot, but if you were to remove all the healthcare companies, how much would that be in total?

I thank you for at least being civil during our argument... but I can't continue. You've ignored about every one of my points, and discounted the rest by simply making a counter-claim with zero supporting evidence.

To paraphrase yourself, the idea that one can simply argue by stating that something is "unfair", or something is "good for everyone", or some other similarly subjective descriptor, or make comments like "infinitely more efficient and ethical" despite what real-world evidence suggests, is insane, and a trap that so many fall into when arguing for something that would be great in theory, but would not work in practice.

Have a good night. Take care of your back.

Thank you for the kind words PeshakJang.

I have the same thoughts regarding healthcare right now, it's absurd. And, while the word is still, today, recovering from the wounds left my communism I can see why many are, partially, fear-full of such a system. I see no reason why the United States, literally, the leader in world doesn't offer it's citizens healthcare and lets them go bankrupt, live misery or in some cases, die.

 

[Tab]

Funny, that's what we think about people that argue that government could handle health care efficiently. Big government has proven time and time again that it is not efficient. Some of the saner people round here have huge reservations about handing over such a large portion of our economy to a body that has no incentive to operate efficiently.

Really? Do you have any idea how many various and crazy oversight committees there are? The inspections, regulations, etc. This isn't even counting the public oversight which includes the internet and 24/7 news networks with nearly 3/4 of their programming dedicated to government.

The idea, that capitalism are some just "more efficient" and socialism is "less efficient" is some awful thinking.

 

[Rock Hydra]

obamacare a criminal infringement? No way!

 

[theeedude]

I don't care about the GOP nor the Dems. I care about severe and unavoidable problems coming within a decade. "The government can cure all this" or "the market will decide" is irrelevant. As I said earlier, Alzheimers alone will cost $600 billion annually by best estimates. There isn't enough money to handle all that no matter who pays. That's why we need to start planing now, but we get window dressing. Government CAN assist, but assuming control by a group of people who haven't a clue about these sorts of things is the wrong way to go about it. We need an honest analysis of the situation and we can't even get that.

OK, how are you planning for Alzheimers?

 

[xj0hnx]

Really? Do you have any idea how many various and crazy oversight committees there are? The inspections, regulations, etc. This isn't even counting the public oversight which includes the internet and 24/7 news networks with nearly 3/4 of their programming dedicated to government.

You need to spend some time in the real world, college isn't the real world. Your illusion that the internet, or TV is going to keep politicians honest, or some how magically make giant bureaucracy efficient is cute and all, but far from reality. I've worked for the government, I've dealt with what you are asking for, it is horribly inefficient.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

OK, how are you planning for Alzheimers?

That's a fair question and I'll give you an answer in several hours when I have time.

 

[bfdd]

You need to spend some time in the real world, college isn't the real world. Your illusion that the internet, or TV is going to keep politicians honest, or some how magically make giant bureaucracy efficient is cute and all, but far from reality. I've worked for the government, I've dealt with what you are asking for, it is horribly inefficient.

Not to mention how can the internet or TV keep politicians honest when they control the kill switch?

 

[Tab]

You need to spend some time in the real world, college isn't the real world. Your illusion that the internet, or TV is going to keep politicians honest, or some how magically make giant bureaucracy efficient is cute and all, but far from reality. I've worked for the government, I've dealt with what you are asking for, it is horribly inefficient.

How old are you, seriously?

I'm almost done with school, but I've been working full-time in the so-called "corporate world", it's absolutely filled with dumb fuckery, roughness and plenty of inefficiency.

The amount of media that is watching politicians these days is absolutely enormous and only a fool would say otherwise. Every single word you say, every action no matter how small is instantly recorded for eternity and can be put on for the world to see. To say this doesn't make a bit of difference is pure ignorance.

And the fact that you or anyone else think this is a half-way decent argument is equally depressing and angering at the same time.

 

[xj0hnx]

How old are you, seriously?

Old enough to have seen it, and know that it will fail in this country.

I'm almost done with school, but I've been working full-time in the so-called "corporate world", it's absolutely filled with dumb fuckery, roughness and plenty of inefficiency.

And?

The amount of media that is watching politicians these days is absolutely enormous and only a fool would say otherwise. Every single word you say, every action no matter how small is instantly recorded for eternity and can be put on for the world to see. To say this doesn't make a bit of difference is pure ignorance.

lol@youthinkingthatmakesadifference.fail

 

[Tab]

You know it will fail, you don't know why, mostly because you're experienced with "life".

Somehow, I doubt the last bit.

 

[werepossum]

How old are you, seriously?

I'm almost done with school, but I've been working full-time in the so-called "corporate world", it's absolutely filled with dumb fuckery, roughness and plenty of inefficiency.

The amount of media that is watching politicians these days is absolutely enormous and only a fool would say otherwise. Every single word you say, every action no matter how small is instantly recorded for eternity and can be put on for the world to see. To say this doesn't make a bit of difference is pure ignorance.

And the fact that you or anyone else think this is a half-way decent argument is equally depressing and angering at the same time.

As you get older you may understand reasons more of the "dumb fuckery" in the corporate world. Maybe not. But with Obamacare, it matters not what level of scrutiny is leveled on politicians, because by far the bulk of the power has been placed in the hands of the unelected bureaucrats. There are no cameras watching those folks and what they do, and damned few of them will have any experience with or expertise in health care.

As longtime Democrat Representative (and lawyer) John Conyers replied when asked why he had not read the most far-reaching, sweeping bill of the session, "Why would I bother when I'd have to have two lawyers read it with me to understand it?" Point being that Obamacare was not some well-reasoned response to the rising costs and falling coverage, but merely a federal power grab to facilitate a future move to single payer.

 

[Bowfinger]

As you get older you may understand reasons more of the "dumb fuckery" in the corporate world.

Please. Do tell.

Maybe not. But with Obamacare, it matters not what level of scrutiny is leveled on politicians, because by far the bulk of the power has been placed in the hands of the unelected bureaucrats. There are no cameras watching those folks and what they do, and damned few of them will have any experience with or expertise in health care. ...

Largely true. There isn't nearly enough scrutiny of our government, especially today with our corporatist media. (Good investigative journalism is expensive and not nearly as good for ratings as celebrity fluff and pundits who shout each other down while "debating" immaterial, carefully-crafted wedge issues.)

The alternative, however, is to continue to place our health in the hands of private companies, incented to maximize profits at our expense, with virtually no public oversight whatsoever. In short, we have two bad choices: inadequate oversight and less than that.

 

[chucky2]

How old are you, seriously?

I'm almost done with school, but I've been working full-time in the so-called "corporate world", it's absolutely filled with dumb fuckery, roughness and plenty of inefficiency.

snip

Careful, Corp. is like a mini-Fed Gov...Corp. is like that for a reason(s), and those reason(s) will be magnified proportionally once HC goes Fed.

Chuck

 

[Tab]

Careful, Corp. is like a mini-Fed Gov...Corp. is like that for a reason(s), and those reason(s) will be magnified proportionally once HC goes Fed.

Chuck

Coming from the guy who believes we should mow down men, women and even children with machine guns.

 

[Tab]

Please. Do tell.

When you get into the real world™ bow, you'll understand.

 

[werepossum]

Please. Do tell.


Largely true. There isn't nearly enough scrutiny of our government, especially today with our corporatist media. (Good investigative journalism is expensive and not nearly as good for ratings as celebrity fluff and pundits who shout each other down while "debating" immaterial, carefully-crafted wedge issues.)

The alternative, however, is to continue to place our health in the hands of private companies, incented to maximize profits at our expense, with virtually no public oversight whatsoever. In short, we have two bad choices: inadequate oversight and less than that.

With private health insurance you have state oversight, then federal oversight on top of that. With federal health insurance you have, um, federal oversight of itself.

 

[Bowfinger]

When you get into the real world™ bow, you'll understand.

Well I better get there pretty damn soon, because I'm already about two-thirds of the way through my career. I've worked for three Fortune 100 companies, two levels of government, and several smaller companies. As a consultant I've worked with a couple dozen Fortune 500 cos, countless smaller businesses, and government at all levels. I've even held elected office for a couple of terms and have run my own business.

When I see the righties pontificate about how bad government is and how wonderful the private sector is due to the profit incentive, I just laugh my ass off at their naivete. Big government and big business have far more in common than they have differences.

 

[chucky2]

Coming from the guy who believes we should mow down men, women and even children with machine guns.

It's a long border, and .50's reach out a ways and are cheap, what's the problem? It's not like word won't spread on their side of the border before they ever decide to illegally invade our country. It's not like they'll miss the signs. It's not like most won't be intercepted or turn back. For those that can't, they're going to get something that prevents them from entering, or further illegally invading, the country illegally.

Or, we can use the present solution of ask nicely and do nothing.

Which one do you think works better - for US?

EDIT: On topic: I work in a huge Corp., which when HC goes Fed, will be like a small business compared to the gigantasaur that will be that Fed HC entity. You think "little" many multi-$Billion Corp's have dumb F*ckery, just wait till you see that beast.

Chuck

 

[werepossum]

Well I better get there pretty damn soon, because I'm already about two-thirds of the way through my career. I've worked for three Fortune 100 companies, two levels of government, and several smaller companies. As a consultant I've worked with a couple dozen Fortune 500 cos, countless smaller businesses, and government at all levels. I've even held elected office for a couple of terms and have run my own business.

When I see the righties pontificate about how bad government is and how wonderful the private sector is due to the profit incentive, I just laugh my ass off at their naivete. Big government and big business have far more in common than they have differences.

And there is nothing you've learned, nothing that you once thought was "dumb fuckery" but for which you later understood valid reasons?

 

[Bowfinger]

And there is nothing you've learned, nothing that you once thought was "dumb fuckery" but for which you later understood valid reasons?

Of course, who said otherwise? What's your point? I've also seen an incredible amount of bureaucratic stupidity and waste in private companies, big and small. Are you saying it's ALL for valid reasons? (See, I can pose straw man arguments too.)

If you put aside your partisan dogma and maybe get a little more real world experience, you'll find that some of what you consider to be government "dumb fuckery" has valid reasons too. Of course much of it is bureaucratic stupidity and waste, just like the private sector.

That's the whole point. The right's mantra about the superiority of the private sector over government is nonsense. You simply can't make such generalizations. I've seen wasteful government, but I've also seen examples of exceptionally well run government. I've seen both in the private sector as well. It all boils down to the leadership and the culture of the organization.

(By the way, the federal government is not a single organization. It is hundreds of organizations, and often sub-organizations within organizations, all with their own cultures, all with their own strengths and weaknesses. Some are run well. Some are not.)

 

[chucky2]

But the problem is, Corp's are not omnipotent as the Fed HC entity will end up being, they answer to BoD, shareholders, and the balance sheet (well, within reason).

The Fed HC entity will answer to essentially no one - not in Reality. And, it has unlimited money - the US Taxpayer. I think that is perhaps what most of the people who would go for Fed HC are the most wary about.

 

[werepossum]

How old are you, seriously?

I'm almost done with school, but I've been working full-time in the so-called "corporate world", it's absolutely filled with dumb fuckery, roughness and plenty of inefficiency.

The amount of media that is watching politicians these days is absolutely enormous and only a fool would say otherwise. Every single word you say, every action no matter how small is instantly recorded for eternity and can be put on for the world to see. To say this doesn't make a bit of difference is pure ignorance.

And the fact that you or anyone else think this is a half-way decent argument is equally depressing and angering at the same time.

Of course, who said otherwise? What's your point? I've also seen an incredible amount of bureaucratic stupidity and waste in private companies, big and small. Are you saying it's ALL for valid reasons? (See, I can pose straw man arguments too.)

If you put aside your partisan dogma and maybe get a little more real world experience, you'll find that some of what you consider to be government "dumb fuckery" has valid reasons too. Of course much of it is bureaucratic stupidity and waste, just like the private sector.

That's the whole point. The right's mantra about the superiority of the private sector over government is nonsense. You simply can't make such generalizations. I've seen wasteful government, but I've also seen examples of exceptionally well run government. I've seen both in the private sector as well. It all boils down to the leadership and the culture of the organization.

(By the way, the federal government is not a single organization. It is hundreds of organizations, and often sub-organizations within organizations, all with their own cultures, all with their own strengths and weaknesses. Some are run well. Some are not.)

My point was that Tab isn't even out of school yet and he's already making the claim that the corporate world is "absolutely filled with dumb fuckery, roughness and plenty of inefficiency."

In your life, can you actually claim to have seen more dumb fuckery and inefficiency in the business world - outside of that directly caused by government or the fear of government - than in government? All businesses have competition; most branches of government do not have competition. Don't get me wrong, I deal with government quite a lot, and most of the people I deal with are good, honest, hard-working people who are mostly easier to get along with than most of our private sector clients. But there's no denying that government has a unique ability, the ability to force people, at gunpoint if necessary, to fund its products and its operations. Government never has to fear going out of business due to inefficiency, or to a leaner, more innovative competitor.

 

[Bowfinger]

But the problem is, Corp's are not omnipotent as the Fed HC entity will end up being, they answer to BoD, shareholders, and the balance sheet (well, within reason).

The Fed HC entity will answer to essentially no one - not in Reality. And, it has unlimited money - the US Taxpayer. I think that is perhaps what most of the people who would go for Fed HC are the most wary about.

But in reality, most corps don't really answer to anyone. Their boards are built with each others executives. Their major shareholders are institutional investors who don't care about anything beyond quarterly results. If results are bad they'll shuffle leadership, but the suits in the executive offices are generally totally disconnected from what's really happening in their companies. They turn to the layers of entrenched bureaucracies for answers ... and those bureaucracies have been around long enough to know just what sunshine to blow to make the new boss look elsewhere.

The government, on the other hand, is nominally responsible to voters. Unfortunately, most voters care far more about American Idol than they do about their tax dollars (other than to bitch about how high their taxes are ... during commercials). Consequently, they do almost nothing to hold the government accountable. They could, but they don't

On the other hand, there is almost nothing a customer can do -- in reality -- to hold his health insurance company accountable. One can file complaints, of course, but one can complain about government health care as well. Many do, and it is at least as effective as complaining about a private insurer.