Go Back   Computer Forums > Welcome To Computer Forums .org > Social Lounge | Off Topic
Click Here to Login
Join Computer forums Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-12-2009, 03:01 AM   #121
Golden Master
 
01001010's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,888
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

It's President Obama's fault. The recession, global warming, everything.

I stubbed my finger in the door today. President Obama probably had something to do with it. He's trying to bring me down! Did I mention he's trying to bring socialism to the United States?

Blasphemy.
__________________

__________________
Stop the genocide now.
↳ www.savedarfur.org

Send comments, suggestions and criticisms.
↳ 01001010listens@gmail.com
01001010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2009, 06:57 AM   #122
Site Team
 
root's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,003
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster View Post
Yup, but what does that have to do with the price of rice in China? A bad bill bill is a bad bill no matter how you slice it.
OK, what would make it better?
to me it sounds like...

at present a proportion of your taxes goes towards medicare/medicaid, this is socialised healthcare, just the provisions available on this are inadequate, and the system is open to fraud.
so why is the system open to fraud? does this bill do anything to change this?
to me the answer is yes, but bear in mind that you can never eliminate fraud all together because people overall are bad and out for themselves... but
medicare/medicaid are a socialist system, you don't pay into it, yet when you're in trouble you put your hand out and beg, and the government coughs up.

this bill aims to provide a third option, a capitalist style health insurance scheme, that's all it is. forget for a moment that it's underwritten by the government, what if it was underwritten from the personal bank account of bill gates? all that it is doing is providing a third option that aims to be more efficient and offer a cheaper price.

go to your health insurer, stalk the CEO for a while, you'll find that he wears nice suits, lives in a big house, might even make it onto the forbes rich list? where do you suppose that money comes from? you the insured.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster View Post
I see nothing in any of those reports that say the middle class are not insured. I see numbers for low income "working" families and those who were temporarily without health insurance. It looks like the vast majority of the uninsured (85%) are native or naturalized citizens.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01001010 View Post
$40,000 isn't really stretching it when the median household income is about $50,233.
I'm not sure on this, class is a moneyless function of status.

you can have upper class people who have no money.
you can have working class people who do have money

but lets assume that money and class are linked. $40,000 is the kind of wage a household might expect if there was one professional in the house. or perhaps 2 young people just starting their careers? are the young not entitled to healthcare, are the old not entitled to healthcare?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bullzi View Post
I'm not reading random crap on the internet, facts are facts.

I will NOT stand to be placed in a queue amongst leeches of society for surgery that could save my life or my family's life.
I will NOT stand to pay healthcare for people who f***ed around their entire life.
I will NOT stand to let the elderly be placed on a waiting list for surgery and get denied due to age.

Answer me this.

Can you think of one single government agency that does their job better than somebody of that same profession in the private sector?

Don't worry on answering that, it's a trick question.

I invite you to visit a VA hospital then visit your local privately owned hospital. Only then will you understand the difference.
Reading random crap? I assume what you mean is that you won't give anything that doesn't agree with your point of view the time of day...
can I think of a single government agency that does their job better than a private firm?
yes, many state run ambulance services run better than private ambulance firms, most private run "security" services are not as well run, trained or professional as the average beat police man/woman.
many private land owners employ parking wardens who don't work as well, (or within the rules) as state/council run parking wardens, and thus they issue illegal fines etc...
can you give me an example where there are private companies doing a better job that the state run services, the overlap between state run and private run sectors is actually so small that I doubt that you can find any.

Quote:
But seriously im from a country where we thankfully have a national health service which is free for all as i said before regardless of your wealth class or education . There is also a private healthcare industry in the UK however that is only taken up as a general rule by the extremely wealthy in this country and even then they are still entitled to NHS healthcare at any time
Firstly, many people (not just the rich) take out private health plans, for a start think dental care...

if you need to have a check up on your teeth you pay for this, (not the total amount that you would seeing a private dentist) but the cost is still there, split with the state.
the only way that you can get dental care totally for free is by emergency, for example you may have lost all your teeth in an accident, have a dangerously infected cyst, have severe and chronic tooth pain that may be dealt with in A&E.

but our health service suffers in the same way that an earlier poster pointed out, (might have written or been in an article) that too many people expect far too much stuff.
great examples being experimental drugs, (non-essential) plastic surgery, sex change operations, or fertility treatment. all based around the idea of a fundamental human right, (i.e their 'condition' is causing them distress).
fertility treatment, having kids is a privileged, not a fundamental human right, and if you can't have kids, then you should save yourself for IVF, consider adoption etc.
sex change operations, I'll agree if you are one gender and really feel that you should be another, this is terribly sad. but it's not your human right to have gender reassignment surgery, and the state shouldn't have to pay.
non essential plastic surgery, if you;re horribly disfigured in an accident, then by all means healthcare should cover you!, if you just want bigger tits, then you should save yourself, bigger boobs are not a human right.
experimental drugs, unproven and experimental drugs, can be a life saver, but the might also not work, insurance (whether private or state run needs to work with the known to work. not the might work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster View Post
Right. . .

Name one government run program that is efficient.
right... I took exception to this in the article that you posted as well.
in that case, name me one African American that is not a slave
name me on British person that's not travelling out in the world to build colonies and conquer the world.
name me one Italian that's not trying to build an empire by invading other countries

oh, yes, times changed, the Romans empire fell, and the Romans stopped invading other countries, British colonial rule ended over a hundred years ago, slavery was abolished...

and governments change as well. I think it's quite unfair to judge people based on their past. and unfair to judge a current government based on governments of the past.

to point to the actions of different individuals of the past that have nothing to do with the current administration is ignorant at best. times change. people change governments change...
__________________

__________________
I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2009, 06:57 AM   #123
Site Team
 
root's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,003
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster View Post
The federal deficit is larger now than all previous years combined, and Obama wants to increase it even more with this bill.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01001010 View Post
I'm sorry, but which president started this mess? Anyone? Yes? No?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atomic Rooster View Post
It's Bush's fault. ROFLMAO!
Quote:
Originally Posted by muz View Post
wow im actually intersted to here whose fault this is then
well... who's fault is it?
well. bush started the bank bail out plan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7639031.stm
then Obama almost trippled the figure...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...t-1606328.html

so...
plain hard numbers look like it's Obamas fault?
well not really.
it appears that the first $800 Billion was pretty much wasted, it wasn't enough money to patch up the leaking banks or economy, so it just kind of disappeared.

so along comes Obama and says, lets throw more money at the problem... ($1500 billion more)...

which, appears to have 'solved' (and I use the term loosely) the problem.

of course it begs the question, if Bush had initially pumped in $1500 bil would this have solved the problem and meant that no more money was needed later.
it's a reasonable theory, but one that can never be proved...

the same as the quantitative easing in the UK, some people say that they should have pumped more money in at the start, then they wouldn't have needed to add more later, and the overall spend would have been less.

it's like buying tools, if you don't spend enough at the start, it doesn't do the job properly, and you end up paying again!


in any case.
the government HAD to bail out the banks. the alternatives were:
1, bank collapse, lots of people loose their jobs, debt is passed to administrators, who reclaim debts. lots of houses repossessed, loads made homeless even though they have no prior financial problems.
2, banks find alternative investment, and lets face it 23 trillion dollars isn't the kind of money that any one single investor or investment group is going to just find down the back of the sofa, and if an investor did find that money, well there weren't exactly a rash of investors charging forward to invest in banks last year was there?
so basically, trying to find private investment would have led to the first choice.


so from this we gather that firstly there was joint liability for the bail out, both presidents suggested bail outs, and secondly that there was simply no comfortable choice to be made.
and state bail outs were likely the better option as this kept more people in homes and jobs,
mass unemployment and homelessness would have prolonged the recession, (that I think America is coming out of, -over here in Blighty we're still wading through).

so to answer the question... who's fault is the deficit...

Clearly it's Bush's fault, he didn't put enough money in at the start, that meant the money was wasted
Clearly it's Obamas fault, he nearly tripped the carefully measured amount the the bush administration came up with
Clearly it's Bush's fault, he didn't regulate the banks enough...

and that last one actually says where the problem really lies.

the banks. it is the banks fault.

there was a good interview on a British radio station where they were talking to someone from the financial services authority about new rules and regulations, a new rule is about not allowing people to 'self certify' basically say, give me millions, I can pay it back -honest!

when they asked why there weren't rules in place to stop the banks lending sub-prime loans and mortgages to start with the answer was simple.

sub prime loans hurt the banks when people default, we didn't think that we'd need to regulate against this, in much the same way that we don't regulate against poking yourself in the eye with a stick.


it's neither bush's nor Obamas fault. a deficit would have come. either they give money to help keep the banks afloat and rely on the trickle down process to try to ensure that the average Joe gets the loans to keep his business afloat.
or they don't give the banks anything.
bankers loose their jobs, home owners loose their houses, and average Joe's who can't get loans loose their jobs and homes.
people earn less, there is massive unemployment.
people claim more welfare, the government aren't getting as much in taxes, but are giving out more in welfare, the deficit is still mounting,
except that unemployment and homelessness are also at record highs.
and it's harder to get people back into work than it is to let them stay in work with a little state assistance...

it's neither presidents fault. it's neither administrations fault. neither really had much of a decision.
the fault of the deficit is the banks fault for the mess that they created.

(it's a long post, I don't expect many will read it)
__________________
I didn’t fight my way to the top of the food chain to be a vegetarian…
Im sick of people saying 'dont waste paper'. If trees wanted to live, they'd all carry guns.
"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; The inherent vice of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries."
root is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2009, 07:42 AM   #124
Golden Master
 
superman22x's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 7,903
Send a message via MSN to superman22x Send a message via Yahoo to superman22x
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2009/10...llion-deficit/

There's the man that caused your problems. The one who threw money at the problem.
__________________
“Adults are just obsolete children and the hell with them.” - Dr. Suess
superman22x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2009, 09:25 AM   #125
muz
Golden Master
 
muz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,928
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by root View Post
Firstly, many people (not just the rich) take out private health plans, for a start think dental care...

if you need to have a check up on your teeth you pay for this, (not the total amount that you would seeing a private dentist) but the cost is still there, split with the state.
the only way that you can get dental care totally for free is by emergency, for example you may have lost all your teeth in an accident, have a dangerously infected cyst, have severe and chronic tooth pain that may be dealt with in A&E.

but our health service suffers in the same way that an earlier poster pointed out, (might have written or been in an article) that too many people expect far too much stuff.
great examples being experimental drugs, (non-essential) plastic surgery, sex change operations, or fertility treatment. all based around the idea of a fundamental human right, (i.e their 'condition' is causing them distress).
fertility treatment, having kids is a privileged, not a fundamental human right, and if you can't have kids, then you should save yourself for IVF, consider adoption etc.
sex change operations, I'll agree if you are one gender and really feel that you should be another, this is terribly sad. but it's not your human right to have gender reassignment surgery, and the state shouldn't have to pay.
non essential plastic surgery, if you;re horribly disfigured in an accident, then by all means healthcare should cover you!, if you just want bigger tits, then you should save yourself, bigger boobs are not a human right.
experimental drugs, unproven and experimental drugs, can be a life saver, but the might also not work, insurance (whether private or state run needs to work with the known to work. not the might work.
I accept that some practice areas such as dental and minor optical matters are issues that are either subsidised or not at all funded by the NHS . Although people under 18 in full time education and those on low income are afforded free dental treatment on the NHS. I dont however have an issue with dental care not being on the NHS as most dental ailments are preventable if you have good oral hygine standards and as you said in emergency situations you are also covered by the NHS

I accept that the NHS is not perfect and i think after and at the next general election and the coming of the inevitable funding cuts optimising the NHS is going to be a major issue both in vote winning and in debating how its done afterwards

I dont think non essential plastic surgery should be available on the NHS this is something that sickens me in fact that people can be having their noses done or their tits done when there is massive waiting lists for other essential work
Gender reallignment and IVF as you have already said is another area that i say shouldnt be available on the NHS unless there is sufficient evidence that staying the same gender you are now would play some detriment to your health . However even then i dont think these patients should be given priority

Drugs are another major issue with the NHS with the so called postcode lottery where some primary care trusts will fund certain medicines whereas others wont fund them

I also accept the argument that to some extent alcoholics and smokers who show no attempt at rectifying their behovoiur should not be afforded the same level of priority over others however i know with some this is an emotive issue and one i myself am not entirely too convinced about that kind of system
__________________
Desktop-AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+-2GB Elixer DDR2 800 250gb+500gb+500gb+120gb
Laptop-Apple Macbook Pro 13" Intel core i5(2.3ghz) 4gb Ram 320gb hard drive
muz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2009, 03:01 PM   #126
Golden Master
 
Rubber314Chicken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,574
Send a message via AIM to Rubber314Chicken
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Sorry for linking a US only site to this (you guys know what to do), but you all need to watch this: http://www.hulu.com/watch/5287/30-days-minimum-wage

Now, somebody please explain by allowing sick people to buy insurance at the same rate I buy it will help the minimum wage people. We need a solution better than this one. I suggest that we all pool our resources and make something better. Because this plan is not going to help those that can't afford it.
__________________
AMD Athlon 64X2 4200+, 2 GB ram, 2 TB HDD, Ubuntu+SAMBA ♫ Lenovo T410, i5@ 2.4 GHz, 4 GB ram, 7
Rubber314Chicken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2009, 07:43 PM   #127
muz
Golden Master
 
muz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 6,928
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

But i was under the impression that the whole point was to make that price that you pay decrease as well
__________________
Desktop-AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+-2GB Elixer DDR2 800 250gb+500gb+500gb+120gb
Laptop-Apple Macbook Pro 13" Intel core i5(2.3ghz) 4gb Ram 320gb hard drive
muz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2009, 07:39 PM   #128
Golden Master
 
Rubber314Chicken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,574
Send a message via AIM to Rubber314Chicken
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by muz View Post
But i was under the impression that the whole point was to make that price that you pay decrease as well
It is.... if you are already sick. They can't charge you more based on pre-existing conditions.

Now, what I think will happen is that the flat rate for a normal person would increase to cover all the sick people that would join in. Not that is a bad thing with them being insured (its good, very good) but if it costs more, then how are the poor supposed to be insured?
__________________
AMD Athlon 64X2 4200+, 2 GB ram, 2 TB HDD, Ubuntu+SAMBA ♫ Lenovo T410, i5@ 2.4 GHz, 4 GB ram, 7
Rubber314Chicken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 12:40 AM   #129
Fully Optimized
 
63083's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,129
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rubber314Chicken View Post
It is.... if you are already sick. They can't charge you more based on pre-existing conditions.

Now, what I think will happen is that the flat rate for a normal person would increase to cover all the sick people that would join in. Not that is a bad thing with them being insured (its good, very good) but if it costs more, then how are the poor supposed to be insured?
It's simple. We (the tax payers) just pay x amount more per year/month to cover the increasing number of sick.
__________________
XPEX Vortex 3620 Mid Tower, Rosewill 450 Watt PSU, MSI P6N SLI Platinum 650i, Intel Celeron D 356, 2GB G.SKILL DDR2 800, Western Digital 40GB, (2) EVGA 7950GT 256MB Video Cards in SLI, HP DVD Multi-Burner, Windows XP.
63083 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-2009, 10:00 AM   #130
Golden Master
 
Rubber314Chicken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,574
Send a message via AIM to Rubber314Chicken
Default Re: Ok. so Obama's health-care legilslation passed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 63083 View Post
It's simple. We (the tax payers) just pay x amount more per year/month to cover the increasing number of sick.
Yes, but how do they expect the healthy poor to be able to pay for it? I think it needs to work in a system like taxes (though those need to be curved less) where when you have more money you pay more.
__________________

__________________
AMD Athlon 64X2 4200+, 2 GB ram, 2 TB HDD, Ubuntu+SAMBA ♫ Lenovo T410, i5@ 2.4 GHz, 4 GB ram, 7
Rubber314Chicken is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0