Page 1 of 2
#3
"My Way News"? yeah, sounds like something written for aging house wives and old men with balls the size of raisinetts.
#6
I too like to report every biased newsarticle from made-up paper I see.
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#8
Quote by SeEsAw12
How are facts biased? I don't get it..
and the AP isn't exactly conservative either..


He has a point about the Associated Press.

And it is very possible that the Dems are attacking the insurance industry to justify their aspirations to control healthcare.
#9
Quote by SeEsAw12
How are facts biased? I don't get it..
and the AP isn't exactly conservative either..

Calling things facts doesn't make them facts.
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#10
Quote by SeEsAw12
How are facts biased? I don't get it..
and the AP isn't exactly conservative either..

It's a legit AP article. Though the site hosting it is run by an organization that prides itself on brand protection...

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#12
What this article misses, though, is that profiting off my health at all is bloody evil.

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#13
Quote by CoreysMonster
Prove it

It is a fact that coreysmonster spells his UG username like AIFAS)IDRQ#R(Q#HR.

Is that a fact? Do you spell it like that? No.
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#14
Quote by SteveHouse
What this article misses, though, is that profiting off my health at all is bloody evil.

Then farmers should reap no profit, and neither should homebuilders, school teachers, doctors, or anyone else who contributes to your health, wellness, and safety?
#15
Quote by Kensai
It is a fact that coreysmonster spells his UG username like AIFAS)IDRQ#R(Q#HR.

Is that a fact? Do you spell it like that? No.

what? you wrote my name twice?


(plans to run circles around the "fact argument" with the argument of personal perception)


nah, just kiddin, brah
#16
Quote by CoreysMonster
what? you wrote my name twice?


(plans to run circles around the "fact argument" with the argument of personal perception)


nah, just kiddin, brah

████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#18
Quote by captaincrunk
Then farmers should reap no profit, and neither should homebuilders, school teachers, doctors, or anyone else who contributes to your health, wellness, and safety?


He meant no one should profit off you are I being sick. Your argument is moronic.
Originally posted by arrrgg
When my grandpa comes over to visit, after his shower, he walks around naked to dry off
#19
My family has been in the insurance industry for 50 years. My dad took home a spreadsheet of how much health insurance agencies collected, and how much they spent out on claims. They spent out 80% of what they brought in, on average.

But trying to make an argument for a reasonable health care solution is like talking to a 4-year-old. Its gotta be the most liberal solution ever or else it isn't cool anymore.
#21
Quote by captaincrunk
Then farmers should reap no profit, and neither should homebuilders, school teachers, doctors, or anyone else who contributes to your health, wellness, and safety?

Don't be hyperbolic. The people who do it should get a salary, obvs, or no one would do it, but then that counts in a business's expenses, rather than profits, amirite?

Pay to workers == expense
Profit == income - expenses

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#22
Quote by captaincrunk
Actually, its healthy people who pay the profits. Your argument is moronic.

What options do they have? Not pay, get sick, die?
████████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
█████████████████████████
██████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
███████████████████████████
#23
Quote by SteveHouse
Don't be hyperbolic. The people who do it should get a salary, obvs, or no one would do it, but then that counts in a business's expenses, rather than profits, amirite?

Pay to workers == expense
Profit == income - expenses

In other words, you want what's called "normal profit". It's still considered profit.


A profit that equals the Average Variable Cost is typically found only in monopolies that are heavily regulated by the government, such as the power companies.

I'm just trying to ensure that the notion of profit isn't confused with evil.
#24
Quote by captaincrunk
In other words, you want what's called "normal profit". It's still considered profit.


A profit that equals the Average Variable Cost is typically found only in monopolies that are heavily regulated by the government, such as the power companies.

The problem with that in health care is...?

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#25
Quote by SteveHouse
Don't be hyperbolic. The people who do it should get a salary, obvs, or no one would do it, but then that counts in a business's expenses, rather than profits, amirite?

Pay to workers == expense
Profit == income - expenses



Well there can be up to $50k a year for malpractice insurance since we sue doctors for looking at us wrong.

Then there is the average $154,000 in student debt, for a subpar education.


Then we've got the special interest groups that get discounts through state mandates that can take up to 50% of your health insurance payments directly.


Profits also sometimes act as incentive to do a good job.
#26
Quote by Zombee
Well there can be up to $50k a year for malpractice insurance since we sue doctors for looking at us wrong.
Because America is sue-happy, patient information is written in impenetrable legalese so no one knows what they're getting in to, etc.

Then there is the average $154,000 in student debt, for a subpar education.
Which is why doctors already make loads. Not the companies, the doctors. That's a really important distinction to draw.

Then we've got the special interest groups that get discounts through state mandates that can take up to 50% of your health insurance payments directly.
I'm gonna need more on that. It sounds bad.


Profits also sometimes act as incentive to do a good job.

So does keeping your job...

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#27
Quote by SteveHouse
The problem with that in health care is...?

Energy providers have ridiculously high prices because of the laws regulating their output. I agree with this specific monopoly, but it is only beneficial in so far as it would be impossible to get adequate power any other way.

Health care on the other hand isn't simply running big as generators, its much more complicated. Its also not something I would like to see as a monopoly.

It would be sort of like Microsoft running everything.
#28
Quote by captaincrunk
Energy providers have ridiculously high prices because of the laws regulating their output. I agree with this specific monopoly, but it is only beneficial in so far as it would be impossible to get adequate power any other way.
Fuel costs, which laws have little to no power over, has a good chunk of sway here as well...

Health care on the other hand isn't simply running big as generators, its much more complicated. Its also not something I would like to see as a monopoly.
Why not? It can work. There are government health monopolies that work in the world right now.

It would be sort of like Microsoft running everything.

Not quite, since tech is a luxury product. I don't think health == computer.

(Hurry back from class, now, y'hear? ) SHEdit: (Which isn't meant to be condescending, but 100% literal.)

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

Last edited by SteveHouse at Oct 26, 2009,
#29
Quote by SteveHouse
What this article misses, though, is that profiting off my health at all is bloody evil.


You're absolutely right! I'm just adding some facts, many believe the insurance companies themselves are profiting way more than they really are.
Last edited by SeEsAw12 at Oct 26, 2009,
#30
Quote by SteveHouse
Because America is sue-happy, patient information is written in impenetrable legalese so no one knows what they're getting in to, etc.

Which is why doctors already make loads. Not the companies, the doctors. That's a really important distinction to draw.


If any regulation is needed, its to protect the doctors from being sued so much.

Go add up how much you're paying in mandates

On average, it takes 12 years and $350 million to get a drug through the FDA regulation/approval process

I've been in enough of these debates that I'm not going to keep looking up links to answer everyone's response. It always ends up people telling me I'm bullshitting me and me spending an hour linking to 50 different sites, even though they claim to be well versed on the subject.

It isn't difficult to google what I say.
#31
Quote by Zombee
If any regulation is needed, its to protect the doctors from being sued so much.
I agree that we need that, but it's a start, not an end.


Quote by CAHI.org
The Council for Affordable Health Insurance (CAHI) is a research and advocacy association of insurance carriers active in the individual, small group, HSA and senior markets. CAHI's membership includes insurance companies, small businesses, providers, nonprofit associations, actuaries, insurance brokers and individuals. Since 1992, CAHI has been an active advocate for market-oriented solutions to the problems in America's health care system.

I'll play with you if you don't give me something produced by such an obviously biased entity.

This is an ad for an OTC herbal supplement. I'll play with you if you don't give me something produced by such an obviously biased entity.

I've been in enough of these debates that I'm not going to keep looking up links to answer everyone's response. It always ends up people telling me I'm bullshitting me and me spending an hour linking to 50 different sites, even though they claim to be well versed on the subject.

It isn't difficult to google what I say.

We wouldn't have to if your "proof" were.

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#33
Quote by millerdrr
Shenanigans. That may be the reported profit, the amount their taxes are based on, the amount they tell jurys in civil tort suits, but corporations of that size are good at hiding profit.



Tort refers to a lot of things, not just malpractice, brah. Anyhoo:

#34
Liberals always look to me to bring the facts to the debate, and when I do it always digresses into them trying to discount the facts.

Apparently liberal media doesn't count as biased.
#35
Quote by Zombee
Liberals
... always look to me to bring the facts to the debate, and when I do it always digresses into them trying to discount the facts.
Because your facts are produced by people trying to save their pocket books, not my blood pressure.

Apparently liberal media doesn't count as biased.

Quite a leap. I'm not sure where you can find me quoting Kos, Think Progress, MSNBC, MoveOn, or any other lefty source without at the very least naming it as such. But don't worry, keep trying! I'm sure your straw man is around here somewhere.

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

#36
Quote by Zombee

Apparently liberal media doesn't count as biased.



Lol, when was the last time the intelligent people of the pit posted something by CommunistDaily or similar and called it factual and unbiased?
#37
Quote by SteveHouse
Fuel costs, which laws have little to no power over, has a good chunk of sway here as well...

Why not? It can work. There are government health monopolies that work in the world right now.


Not quite, since tech is a luxury product. I don't think health == computer.

(Hurry back from class, now, y'hear? ) SHEdit: (Which isn't meant to be condescending, but 100% literal.)

It's a different kind of monopoly though. Doctors aren't government employees are they?

Our problem is that the current plans try to have it both ways, monopoly and free market. Both systems would work, but not in conjunction. What I mean by this is that a monopolized healthcare could work, or a deregulated drug market with heavy hitting watchdogs could work, but not a mix of the two, because that's just too inefficient.
#38
Quote by SteveHouse
Because your facts are produced by people trying to save their pocket books, not my blood pressure.

Quite a leap. I'm not sure where you can find me quoting Kos, Think Progress, MSNBC, MoveOn, or any other lefty source without at the very least naming it as such. But don't worry, keep trying! I'm sure your straw man is around here somewhere.


I have linked to lots of different sites representing the same fact. I constantly have to link to them so I just link to the top of the list on ask.com

Whatever though, people will bitch about everything being biased, but when it comes to a liberal news source, oh god no, they couldn't possibly be propagandist!


Here it is in simple terms:

Medical work costs money. Government has never reduced costs for the product or service administered. I'm pretty sure everyone was bitching about the government last year, the PATRIOT act shows how they don't deserve our trust. The most unregulated areas of medicine are the cheapest. After all that, people still want the government to control health care. This doesn't make sense to me.

Especially since we haven't even tried to reduce any of the 133,000 pages of regulation in the federal register.
Last edited by Zombee at Oct 26, 2009,
#39
How about we look at it this way:

Government takeover is irreversible. It isn't competition when one of the competitors doesn't have to make a profit. How about you give ME an argument AGAINST reduced regulation?

After all, if we reduced regulation we would be seeing a purer health care system and there are still flaws, they would be more blatant..
#40
We all get it. You trust the government almost as little as you like "liberals" (terror, horror, and fearsome loathing). Yet the government is in charge of veterans' healthcare, and I fail to see anyone jumping up and down about that (Walter Reed, which is one whole facility, not withstanding).

SHEdit: Oh, and this is how you avoid double-posting btw.

[IN PHIL WE TRUST]


Quote by Trowzaa
I only play bots. Bots never abandon me. (´・ω・`)

Page 1 of 2