• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Newt Gingrich: Gingrich: Republicans have 'zero' health care ideas

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Incorruptible said:
There are already death panels under socialist healthcare.
Click to expand...

Random sayings as an argument...

Here in France there s no death panel , whatever your income
you are well treated , as well as your boss if he happens to be
on the same hospital as you.

There s private hospitals if you wants , and it is state paid
but the bests ones are by far the public ones.

Truth is that the US health system is a parasistic one.
 
Fern said:
Nobody can figure out an acceptable path to get there. If they have it sure hasn't been articulated.

UHC will decimate our current private HC businesses, and that's big business here. Insurance companies? They'll be gone or we'll have a few remain but will be a fraction of their current size. Where will those people find work?

All of our physicians, physician groups and clinics are private. What's going to happen to them? Same with hospitals.

No one has answers. Heck, no one even talks about it.

Besides, none of this is the real problem. The AMA and the HC professionals keep telling us how to control costs but no one will listen.

Then there's a serious lack of trust in the govt. Many don't want them running HC.

Fern
Click to expand...

They will work in the same place that all the people whose jobs have been replaced by technology, outsourcing, or layoffs during record corporate profits...but at least people will get healthcare...
 
Let's be honest here, the free market has absolutely consideration for the well being of people. Its sole focus to create wealth for those who desire to have more wealth. If a company can make more money by not insuring someone or refusing to pay for a procedure, the incentive is strong to do so. Not to mention, the natural evolution of a market is towards monopoly, where not only do they control their own industry but also vie for control in government. For everything else outside of people's health, the market can work, fine, whatever.

I wouldn't consider universal healthcare to be a right, but it is damn something I would associate with any society which wants to be considered 'advanced.' Seriously, what's the point of all this stuff we call life if we can't even be healthy enough to live it. The health of a nation's citizens should be the number one objective of any country.
 
brycejones said:
As usual, you'll throw something out there and refuse to support it. I was genuinely interested in what source you were basing your statement on. But I can only take your refusal to back it up as a sign that you know you really don't have anything and are just repeating someone else's talking point.
Click to expand...

I'm on your side, but I think you really aren't getting it, at all.

Incorruptible's position, on anything, is based strictly on what he believes. Facts don't matter. Reason doesn't matter. He still believes what he said to be true, and he always will. He creates his own "reality".

Colbert showed himself to be a truly profound thinker & observer of the human condition when he defined "Truthiness", which is pretty much this-

"It's true because *I* believe it, and *I* couldn't possibly believe anything that isn't true."

Given that, it's better to have a discussion with a fencepost, if only because the fencepost won't insult you.
 
Jhhnn said:
I'm on your side, but I think you really aren't getting it, at all.

Incorruptible's position, on anything, is based strictly on what he believes. Facts don't matter. Reason doesn't matter. He still believes what he said to be true, and he always will. He creates his own "reality".

Colbert showed himself to be a truly profound thinker & observer of the human condition when he defined "Truthiness", which is pretty much this-

"It's true because *I* believe it, and *I* couldn't possibly believe anything that isn't true."

Given that, it's better to have a discussion with a fencepost, if only because the fencepost won't insult you.
Click to expand...

I use facts, It's not my fault you prefer to remain ignorant and attack Capitalism. You're doing the same thing you falsely accuse me of when you blame Wall Street and deregulation for the Wall Street crash when it's complete BS.
 
shadow9d9 said:
They will work in the same place that all the people whose jobs have been replaced by technology, outsourcing, or layoffs during record corporate profits...but at least people will get healthcare...
Click to expand...

Yes. You can have a do it yourself appendectomy.
 
Incorruptible said:
I use facts, It's not my fault you prefer to remain ignorant and attack Capitalism. You're doing the same thing you falsely accuse me of when you blame Wall Street and deregulation for the Wall Street crash when it's complete BS.
Click to expand...

Support your statement about death panels then. Please provide the facts you are basing your statement on. Should be a simple task for you.
 
Last edited:
Incorruptible said:
I use facts, It's not my fault you prefer to remain ignorant and attack Capitalism. You're doing the same thing you falsely accuse me of when you blame Wall Street and deregulation for the Wall Street crash when it's complete BS.
Click to expand...

No you haven't used facts. Not once in this thread and rarely in any other threads. You continually make claims without any substantiation. You almost never post links to reputable sources that support your assertions.

In fact, it is WIDELY believed by economists that a major cause of the meltdown (not the ONLY cause, because reality is rarely that simple) was the under-regulation of financial institutions that engaged in excessive risk-taking and almost no self-restraint:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–08#Background

The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011. It concluded that "the crisis was avoidable and was caused by: widespread failures in financial regulation, including the Federal Reserve’s failure to stem the tide of toxic mortgages; dramatic breakdowns in corporate governance including too many financial firms acting recklessly and taking on too much risk; an explosive mix of excessive borrowing and risk by households and Wall Street that put the financial system on a collision course with crisis; key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels"
Click to expand...

Do you see the above link to a reputable source and the attribution of the quotation to a serious study? That's called evidence. But you don't provide evidence. Your idea of "debate" is writing empty slogans cheer-leading "free markets" and making unsupported claims about the negative consequences of "socialist" policies.

I'm sure you consider yourself to a highly informed and effective debater; but calling something "complete BS" and "utter nonsense" is not a serious form of intellectual exchange.
 
Still waiting on Incorruptible to provide even a SINGLE shred of proof to back up any of his claims in this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top