Fox dispels some myths about healthcare

[StageLeft]

Link

I know many who spend all day on MSNBC understand that the US has worse healthcare than Somalia, but in this article the author is a little more honest than many other sources at the moment. Here are some tidbits:

Myth: ?The U.S. has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world.?

Myth: ?The uninsured can?t afford to buy coverage.?...17.6 mn of the uninsured made more than $50,000 per year, and 10 mn of those made more than $75,000 a year

<- I freakin knew it! A lot who cannot afford health insurance just don't want to pay for it, but can.

Myth: ?Nationalized health care would not impact patient waiting times.?...In 2005, only 8% of U.S. patients reported waiting four months or more for elective surgery.

Countries with nationalized health care had higher percentages with waiting times of four months or more, including Australia (19%); New Zealand (20%); Canada (33%); and the United Kingdom (41%).

As I've always maintained, this is inevitable.

Hopefully a few reading this who didn't know it will let it influence their conclusions instead of put a wall up against it because it's on Fox or too much effort to back out of their sureness.

 

[feralkid]

Fox News.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Link

I know many who spend all day on MSNBC understand that the US has worse healthcare than Somalia, but in this article the author is a little more honest than many other sources at the moment. Here are some tidbits:

Myth: ?The U.S. has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world.?

Myth: ?The uninsured can?t afford to buy coverage.?...17.6 mn of the uninsured made more than $50,000 per year, and 10 mn of those made more than $75,000 a year

<- I freakin knew it! A lot who cannot afford health insurance just don't want to pay for it, but can.

Myth: ?Nationalized health care would not impact patient waiting times.?...In 2005, only 8% of U.S. patients reported waiting four months or more for elective surgery.

Countries with nationalized health care had higher percentages with waiting times of four months or more, including Australia (19%); New Zealand (20%); Canada (33%); and the United Kingdom (41%).

As I've always maintained, this is inevitable.

Hopefully a few reading this who didn't know it will let it influence their conclusions instead of put a wall up against it because it's on Fox or too much effort to back out of their sureness.

There is very little likelihood of the bolded part actually happening.

I read this article as well...it is excellent and very informative. The author cites the CBO report for many of their points.

 

[StageLeft]

There is very little likelihood of the bolded part actually happening.

I agree, but I pre-empted it just in case, so that responses such as feralkid's are seen as useless and don't really need to be subsequently addressed.

 

[Fingolfin269]

Originally posted by: feralkid
Fox News.

There's the first one.

Seriously though, I wonder how many of those uninsured are self employed? (Referring to the ones in the income brackets listed). To me, that is simply a choice. You know when you choose the dream path of working for yourself rather than 'the man' that you will have to supply your own benefits. Cost/benefit scenario all the way.

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: feralkid
Fox News.

Edit: Apparently feralkid was joking around.

5/9 of the points in the article use the CBO report as their source.

In before accusations fly that the CBO is partisan!

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: feralkid
Fox News.

FuckUS.pdf

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: feralkid
Fox News.

Boy, that was record time to hit that macro.

:laugh:

5/9 of the points in the article use the CBO report as their source.

Next up: accusations fly that the CBO is partisan!

:laugh:

No, since he asked for it, I obliged him.

And a cheery "Lighten up, Francis" to you, sir.

 

[lupi]

just to get it out of the way...skoorbnews.txt

 

[RyanPaulShaffer]

Originally posted by: feralkid

Originally posted by: RyanPaulShaffer

Originally posted by: feralkid
Fox News.

Boy, that was record time to hit that macro.

:laugh:

5/9 of the points in the article use the CBO report as their source.

Next up: accusations fly that the CBO is partisan!

:laugh:

No, since he asked for it, I obliged him.

And a cheery "Lighten up, Francis" to you, sir.

It's hard to tell with plain text...use some funny smileys next time.

 

[OCGuy]

Dont bring facts into the healthcare debate. It will scare off the Michael Moore sheep.

 

[spidey07]

I particularly like this one. Insurance plans today cover SO MUCH MORE stuff than they used to. Really good article and it really hammers home the facts and dispels all the BS people keep believing and parroting. It just goes to show if people tell lies enough people think they are true.

"Myth: ?Insurers cover less today than they did in the past.?

No they?re covering more costs. According to the CBO, consumers paid for 33 % of their total, personal health care expenditures in 1975. But by 2000, consumers? personal share had fallen to 17%, and it declined to 15% in 2006."

 

[ayabe]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Dont bring facts into the healthcare debate. It will scare off the Michael Moore sheep.

I know, the whole double-digit inflation thing is a total red herring, those are liberal numbers. 9.555% isn't double-digits.

I wish these commie homofags would just give up and stop whining.

 

[yllus]

I would watch Megan Fox report the news.

 

[Mani]

I'm not sure if making 50k a year automatically means they can necessarily afford health care. Are those household incomes? If so, would a family of 4 with that kind of income would probably just be trying to put food on the table let alone getting health insurance, which depending on preexisting conditions can cost hundreds or even thousands a month.

I'm also not sure that the waiting times are necessarily caused by UHC. The US generally has shorter hospital stays than other countries and I doubt this would change significantly with UHC.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: ayabe

Originally posted by: OCguy
Dont bring facts into the healthcare debate. It will scare off the Michael Moore sheep.

I know, the whole double-digit inflation thing is a total red herring, those are liberal numbers. 9.555% isn't double-digits.

I wish these commie homofags would just give up and stop whining.

9.555...= 9.556

 

[Vette73]

I love that they try to use the difference in population and rules for infant mortality but then turn around and use a blanket statement that if you make 50k+ you should be able to afford health insurance.

Yea I am sure someone making 50k in NYC, SF, etc... skips insurance as they roll in their new caddy and go to their mansion.
This person does the same thing with information that they say you should not. But this is fox they seem to be real good at that. :roll:

 

[SammyJr]

Originally posted by: Fingolfin269

Originally posted by: feralkid
Fox News.

There's the first one.

Seriously though, I wonder how many of those uninsured are self employed? (Referring to the ones in the income brackets listed). To me, that is simply a choice. You know when you choose the dream path of working for yourself rather than 'the man' that you will have to supply your own benefits. Cost/benefit scenario all the way.

And how many people could and should start small businesses but can't due to benefit issues?

Seriously, if you're a diabetic, have depression, you'll never have your own business. No private insurance company will touch you.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Link

I know many who spend all day on MSNBC understand that the US has worse healthcare than Somalia, but in this article the author is a little more honest than many other sources at the moment. Here are some tidbits:

Myth: ?The U.S. has one of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world.?

Myth: ?The uninsured can?t afford to buy coverage.?...17.6 mn of the uninsured made more than $50,000 per year, and 10 mn of those made more than $75,000 a year

<- I freakin knew it! A lot who cannot afford health insurance just don't want to pay for it, but can.

Myth: ?Nationalized health care would not impact patient waiting times.?...In 2005, only 8% of U.S. patients reported waiting four months or more for elective surgery.

Countries with nationalized health care had higher percentages with waiting times of four months or more, including Australia (19%); New Zealand (20%); Canada (33%); and the United Kingdom (41%).

As I've always maintained, this is inevitable.

Hopefully a few reading this who didn't know it will let it influence their conclusions instead of put a wall up against it because it's on Fox or too much effort to back out of their sureness.

So this proves that there is no need for a national health care program of some kind?

 

[Atreus21]

I don't think argument will persuade anyone here. I oppose UHC out of principle, just as it's supporters support it.

 

[EXman]

Originally posted by: Mani
I'm not sure if making 50k a year automatically means they can necessarily afford health care. Are those household incomes? If so, would a family of 4 with that kind of income would probably just be trying to put food on the table let alone getting health insurance, which depending on preexisting conditions can cost hundreds or even thousands a month.

I'm also not sure that the waiting times are necessarily caused by UHC. The US generally has shorter hospital stays than other countries and I doubt this would change significantly with UHC.

If they are the only game in town and people think they are going for FREE they go more often!

Doctors will be getting a paycut so there will not be as many doctors.

Government Employees holding shovels around one working nurse.

Any of these reasons is why take your pick.

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
I don't think argument will persuade anyone here. I oppose UHC out of principle, just as it's supporters support it.

I do neither. There pros and cons to UHC. But in the US if it was turned on overnight it would not work. I am more worried about the bad doctors/Corps then even the people that would use it.

Look how many Doc's/Corp scam medicare and they don;t cover most. Let alone the number of people that would come in for checkups/work/etc... that do not need it but hey its free...

But at the same time the current system is not working and the only people that like the current system are drug makers, insurance coprs, a lot of doctors, etc... The real losers are good doctors and patients.

The dentist office my mom works at had to hire another person just to do all the paper work and deal with the BS from insurance companies.

 

[spidey07]

Originally posted by: Marlin1975


The dentist office my mom works at had to hire another person just to do all the paper work and deal with the BS from insurance companies.

You can thank government for that right there. It's all the hoops they have to jump through. Also medicare had some pretty good reform under Clinton so what you describe doesn't happen anymore because of the per beneficiary limits.

 

[ElFenix]

Plus, the U.S. has a high rate of teen pregnancies, teens who smoke, who take drugs, who are obese and uneducated, all factors which cause higher infant mortality rates

all of which factor into health outcomes, but aren't really medical problems. which is why calling it a health system or health insurance is wrong. and why using health outcomes to indict the medical system is also wrong.

 

[Lemon law]

If nothing else, Limbaugh and Fox news better watch their ass, because Obama has a very good sense for debunking many of their sloganeering arguments.

In today's news conference, Obama directly addressed why a public plan option is one of the options we should have. And pointed out that if private health care plans are the best, not only can people opt to stay with those private health care plans, and if the private health care claims are to be believed, they should be able to be more cost effective than any government plan. But as everyone knows, private health care plans have always flunked at managing costs because the more heath care costs, the more money sticks to their hands, and have also excelled at evading or delaying payment. And dropping all but the super healthy. Making mangled care a moniker they have earned.

And with that kind of Obama make his case directly to the American people with sound reasoning, any entity that does not have a well thought out case to make, are going to find their arguments DOA discredited.