Debate thread (Sept. 10)

[homersapien 12,245]

BS!   BS!   BS!   BS!   BS! 

 

 

[homersapien 12,245]

6 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

By

[wdefromtx 3,611]

2 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Again, maybe for you, but they were a godsend to many many more.

And they didn't force your employer to do anything.

They didn't force states to have speed limit laws either.....

You need to learn about cause and effect and unintended consequences. 

Edited September 13 by wdefromtx

[wdefromtx 3,611]

4 minutes ago, homersapien said:

BS!   BS!   BS!   BS!   BS! 

 

 

Glad you realize you are spouting BS. 

[TexasTiger 14,310]

15 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

Look at a model of some other countries and see how what they can do can be applied. But you act like what I would do means anything. 

What would you like to see be different? 

[auburnatl1 6,182]

22 minutes ago, homersapien said:

I was shocked how easily he went for her highly predictable traps/ land mines - crowd size, dog eating, rigged election, ect.  Everybody knew she’d try. And he literally ran to each of them and jump up and down on them. 

[wdefromtx 3,611]

13 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

What would you like to see be different? 

If referring to our current healthcare system in the US, a lot. 

Like I said, I would look at some of the countries that successfully implemented some type of system and see what worked best what didn't and how we could apply them here. Assuming our government won't screw it up like everything else they touch. But that is another issue. 

[Didba 5,510]

24 minutes ago, wdefromtx said:

If referring to our current healthcare system in the US, a lot. 

Like I said, I would look at some of the countries that successfully implemented some type of system and see what worked best what didn't and how we could apply them here. Assuming our government won't screw it up like everything else they touch. But that is another issue. 

Britain and the European Union’s system is pretty good. Essentially universal healthcare. 

[TexasTiger 14,310]

6 minutes ago, Didba said:

Britain and the European Union’s system is pretty good. Essentially universal healthcare. 

Britain not so good. EU countries vary tremendously. France pretty good. So is Switzerland, which uses insurance but… gasp… has reasonable regulations.

[auburnatl1 6,182]

5 minutes ago, Didba said:

Britain and the European Union’s system is pretty good. Essentially universal healthcare. 

Anyone that can afford it uses private healthcare in the U.K.  vs the nhs (public).  Nhs is seen as a safety net. Adds 12–20% to their taxes.  Candidly it’s similar to the public vs private schools model in the US - if you want private you’re paying twice.

[TexasTiger 14,310]

2 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Anyone that can afford it uses private healthcare in the U.K.  vs the nhs (public).  Nhs is seen as a safety net. Adds 12–20% to their taxes.  Candidly it’s similar to the public vs private schools model in the US - if you want private you’re paying twice.

And yet the overwhelming political sentiment is to improve it, not end it.

[wdefromtx 3,611]

34 minutes ago, Didba said:

Britain and the European Union’s system is pretty good. Essentially universal healthcare. 

UK isn't a good example to point to. Their system is not very good. Many people I know personally that have obtained US citizen from the UK say the US and UK are about equal when you consider the good and bad of each. 

[Didba 5,510]

I should clarify. I was speaking to the NHS compared to the ACA and how each were implemented. Not the overall quality of the healthcare. 

[auburnatl1 6,182]

8 minutes ago, Didba said:

I should clarify. I was speaking to the NHS compared to the ACA and how each were implemented. Not the overall quality of the healthcare. 

Got it. Again, I encourage people to check out the profit margins of a health insurance company. Any health insurance company. Put simply - they stink.  5-12% ebit.  Compare that to most tech companies at +25%.  

imo the bottom line problem: Only 15% of health costs actually go to … dr’s .  So where’s the rest  it of go?  2 examples  - regulatory administration ($55b/yr) and litigation costs and administration ($35b/yr). 

If people truly want to fix health care instead of just arguing about who to blame or foots the bill, we need to focus on the real problem. It’s a overhead nightmare mess. And it’s growing.

 

[SaltyTiger 8,579]

4 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

It’s a overhead nightmare mess. And it’s growing.

Same is true with most things would be my guess. Pure cost of a construction project is not frightening until all required add ons go into the equation. 

[Didba 5,510]

24 minutes ago, auburnatl1 said:

Got it. Again, I encourage people to check out the profit margins of a health insurance company. Any health insurance company. Put simply - they stink.  5-12% ebit.  Compare that to most tech companies at +25%.  

imo the bottom line problem: Only 15% of health costs actually go to … dr’s .  So where’s the rest  it of go?  2 examples  - regulatory administration ($55b/yr) and litigation costs and administration ($35b/yr). 

If people truly want to fix health care instead of just arguing about who to blame or foots the bill, we need to focus on the real problem. It’s a overhead nightmare mess. And it’s growing.

 

What kind of litigation are you referring to with health insurance companies?

Edited September 14 by Didba

[wdefromtx 3,611]

21 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Same is true with most things would be my guess. Pure cost of a construction project is not frightening until all required add ons go into the equation. 

Hit em with a change order!!!

[auburnatl1 6,182]

1 hour ago, Didba said:

What kind of litigation are you referring to with health insurance companies?

Should have posted link and now I can’t find it. It was more the paperwork requisite to avoid litigation.  Here is a similar article.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/content/briefs/role-administrative-waste-excess-us-health-spending

[wdefromtx 3,611]

Anyone see her solo interview? 🤣🤣🤣 

She avoids the important questions again. They were trying to give her a chance to explain her positions that she wouldn’t state in the debate. 
 

She rambled about her childhood and how her neighbors were proud of the lawn and whatever. 🤣🤣

[AU9377 6,037]

6 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Anyone that can afford it uses private healthcare in the U.K.  vs the nhs (public).  Nhs is seen as a safety net. Adds 12–20% to their taxes.  Candidly it’s similar to the public vs private schools model in the US - if you want private you’re paying twice.

The way I understand it is that they use the NHS and supplement it with additional coverage.  Of course, you can add the cost of both together and still be at half what we pay per resident.

[auburnatl1 6,182]

16 minutes ago, AU9377 said:

The way I understand it is that they use the NHS and supplement it with additional coverage.  Of course, you can add the cost of both together and still be at half what we pay per resident.

You’re forgetting the increase in the national income tax rate. However, in states with high tax rates like ny and cal - combined it’s almost a wash.

[TexasTiger 14,310]

5 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

Got it. Again, I encourage people to check out the profit margins of a health insurance company. Any health insurance company. Put simply - they stink.  5-12% ebit.  Compare that to most tech companies at +25%.  

imo the bottom line problem: Only 15% of health costs actually go to … dr’s .  So where’s the rest  it of go?  2 examples  - regulatory administration ($55b/yr) and litigation costs and administration ($35b/yr). 

If people truly want to fix health care instead of just arguing about who to blame or foots the bill, we need to focus on the real problem. It’s a overhead nightmare mess. And it’s growing.

 

Profit after all the expenses of the insurance company (which isn’t healthcare delivery, but the overhead you decry), including the salaries of those whose job it is to deny coverage and excessive CEO salaries.

[TexasTiger 14,310]

2 hours ago, wdefromtx said:

Anyone see her solo interview? 🤣🤣🤣 

She avoids the important questions again. They were trying to give her a chance to explain her positions that she wouldn’t state in the debate. 
 

She rambled about her childhood and how her neighbors were proud of the lawn and whatever. 🤣🤣

She needed to get to it quickly and more sharply, but she did answer the questions.

[auburnatl1 6,182]

5 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Profit after all the expenses of the insurance company (which isn’t healthcare delivery, but the overhead you decry), including the salaries of those whose job it is to deny coverage and excessive CEO salaries.

What does cro pay have to do with anything? Market pricing. Drs too? Everyone?

[TexasTiger 14,310]

2 hours ago, auburnatl1 said:

What does cro pay have to do with anything? Market pricing. Drs too? Everyone?

You cite what you deem as low profit as supposed evidence that’s not where the problem is in healthcare costs. Fallacious argument. Our money goes into the whole apparatus of the insurance industry, not just the profits after expenses. Outrageous compensation packages averaging over $20M a year for each insurance company (and we’re not even looking at all the executives paid to deny us coverage) ceo is relevant to any thinking person who doesn’t start with the assumption that corporate America is entitled to take the lions share of “healthcare” expenditure. I don’t see how anyone can discuss the problem with healthcare costs if insurance company costs aren’t part of the equation.