07-31-2009, 04:14 AM | #1 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Bush and Obama
First Bush gives us the no-cost war. No new taxes, no sacrifice--you don't even need to pay attention!
Now Obama gives us no-cost healthcare. A trillion dollars, and you won't have to pay a cent! Why? Because someone else will pay it for you! Don't you love America? Where you can do anything with no cost. The only reason California is in shambles is they can't run a deficit like Obama can. Otherwise, they would be full-forward on the "you can have everything at no cost" government. |
07-31-2009, 01:22 PM | #2 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
|
|
07-31-2009, 01:53 PM | #3 | |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Quote:
|
|
07-31-2009, 02:01 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
|
07-31-2009, 02:16 PM | #5 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
it's not true to say that preventative care saves money. Not even when you limit the scope of savings to just healthcare costs.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/358/7/661 Of course, when you expand your inquiry to beyond healthcare costs, it becomes more tenuous. For example, would we save money if everyone quit smoking cigarettes? No, because we would be paying out a lot more for social security and medicare and other entitlements. Do we save money if everyone gets prostate cancer screening? Highly doubtful. We will spend a lot of money for not a lot of benefit, and many people will be harmed unnecessarily in order to "treat" the supposed suspected cancer. Many more than will be helped. Do we save money by putting in 50,000$ defibrillators in every fat slob in America? Doubtful. Sick people living longer is not savings. Unhealthy people, combined with expensive technology, procedures, and medications--living longer. Someone explain to me how this saves money. It's pretty simple to figure out why the AMA supports Obamacare. Adding millions and millions of paying customers will increase demand for physicians, will boost salaries/reimbursements (at least in the short-term). But then when the public sees the price tag (which will be grossly underestimated), there will be serious sticker shock, and that's when the draconian government controls will come in, which will include price controls and rationing. |
07-31-2009, 02:27 PM | #6 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
You haven't provided any of the data I requested (particularly with respect to your claim that the CBO says Medicare costs more than private insurance). Please do so and we can address your arguments in an orderly manner. |
|
07-31-2009, 02:33 PM | #7 | ||
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Quote:
Go back and read what I said. On preventative care, I guess you have never heard of the New England Journal of Medicine. "Preventative care saves money" is a soundbyte. It is something repeated so often, that it is taken as true. Quote:
|
||
07-31-2009, 02:36 PM | #8 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
See, Cali, what you and Obama don't get is that the argument is not about cost-savings.
The argument is about equity and longer life and improved health, the cost be damned. "It's going to be helluva expensive, for every American. But it is worth it." That's the argument that you should be making. But you won't. Because you are dishonest. Along with Obama. |
08-01-2009, 06:44 PM | #9 | |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,367
|
Quote:
|
|
08-01-2009, 07:50 PM | #10 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,996
|
Quote:
"so now you are claiming cost savings? CBO doesn't agree with you. Sure Medicare has less in the way of administrative cost." http://cougarguard.com/forum/showpos...36&postcount=8 Quote:
|
||
Bookmarks |
|
|