Health Care Bill Passes 219-210Follow

That's not what I'm saying at all. What I'm saying is you're a moron.

Actually, it is.

I don't know what the f'uck you were trying to say there, but what you accomplished was asinine and completely misguided and inaccurate, not to mention ignoring of the fact that private business and the right to purchase or not purchase from a company makes it all irrelevant.


No, what you meant to do was try and act imposing, make a pseudo-threatening remark, and tuck your balls between your legs when you got called on it. But you're a p'ussy non-vengeful person, so it's ok. Fly that PFLAG.

Sensing a pattern here?

Or that you're the Terry Schiavo of simple argument making.

I can believe it. I tend to perform down to the level of competition.

Your moms face.

Right. How many more times do we have to say it?

If my fellow citizen can get the care they require, instead of spending their days chasing it to no avail, they can contribute more to society.

Simple.

I just want to know how many of you honestly, truly believe they will be able to fund this bill without raising taxes significantly on something. Even assuming that the implementation of the program is perfect, with 0 cost overruns (and as someone who works for the government I can assure you that will likely not happen) I don't see any means for it to sustainably fund itself without denying access to the more expensive medical proceedures, like cat scans and ambulance rides. Or brain surgery. I dunno, maybe I'm missing something here. How does this pay for itself long term?

My friend Felicia was interviewed today by a local news station for this bill passing. Her son had a tumor on his leg when he was born and had to go through chemo. She had to quit work to care for him 24/7 and they lost their house because of the costs. Even though he's a healthy 3 yr old now, no insurance would touch him.
Anyways if youre interested in watching you can watch the video of her here.

http://news14.com/triangle-news-30-content/top_stories/623588/citizens--businesses-look-ahead-after-nbsp-health-bill-passes

I expect there will be some increased cost, but what we won't necessarily see trumpeted will be the cost offsets.

When hospitals aren't writing off massive amounts of debt because everyone is covered, your local taxes should go down - or at least be freed up for other stuff like police and fire and maintenance. When people aren't locked in to their current employment because they're afraid to go without coverage, you'll see more cottage industries and other types of start-ups.

There will benefits, but many of them will be hidden simply because there is no way to track them.

Which is you avoiding the question. The question is about cost increases. Whether that comes in the form of taxes to cover the government subsidies into the health care system as a result of this bill, or increased insurance costs due to the increased mandated coverage required by this health care bill, the costs "the people" will have to pay for health care will go up. Not a little bit. A whole hell of a lot.

That's what Kao is asking. If it costs X amount to provide insurance for the number covered today, and we increase that number by say 25%, and then we also prohibit insurance companies from not covering some things they don't cover today, then who makes up the difference in cost? Isn't it insane to think that this wont cost at least 25% more? And that's before the whole "you must cover things you didn't before" bit.


Of course it will cost more. And now I'm just waiting for the predictable Liberal response of "Well duh. Only an idiot thought it wouldn't", despite having argued for a year that this was about cutting costs. Sad...


I just don't understand how people can cheer while they are destroying the liberty of themselves and their children. Are you all really closet fans of authoritarian rule? Or are you just stupid? You'll give up your freedom for a handful of trinkets and freebies? That's the saddest part of all.

Well, if it's corporate charity then it's a-ok.

Really, gbaji should be thrilled. It's basically a handout to his corporate buddies

Edited, Mar 22nd 2010 11:27pm by Sweetums

No, it's not. It's the same "a larger pool thereby reduces overall expenses" situation.

More likely, increasing the number covered by 25% would reduce the cost by about 5% - because those new people aren't all currently uninsureable. Some, yes. Others just can't afford the coverage without reducing the cost of it first - and the cost wouldn't come down unless there was some way to increase the pool.

And the insurance companies come out ahead in any situation where, assuming the new people are roughly representative of the rest of the population other than not being able to get insurance through their work, costs aren't assumed to drop by more than 20%, so any figure for costs above, roughly, 85% of current per-customer costs is reasonable.

This includes the likely case where the insurance companies decide that they're in this to suck every spare dollar possible out of people, drop their rates ridiculously initially to bring in every possible customer... then jack rates to 300+% of their current levels. Capitalism plus government mandates at work!