A half measure, at best.What do you think Medicare, medicaid, and ER care for insured or non insured is?
A half measure, at best.What do you think Medicare, medicaid, and ER care for insured or non insured is?
Also, we'd spend waaaaaaay less on the items you mentioned and less overall by providing a basic level of preventative care.What do you think Medicare, medicaid, and ER care for insured or non insured is?
Well that is not trueAlso, we'd spend waaaaaaay less on the items you mentioned and less overall by providing a basic level of preventative care.
But you quoted something saying "basic" which we already haveA half measure, at best.
1. That analysis was done by a conservative think tank funded by the Koch brothers and it STILL found savings in one of their projections.Well that is not true
The study often cited has 2 outcomes...1 showing savings and 1 showing more expenses
I think a basic level of preventative care fits that description.But you quoted something saying "basic" which we already have
The quote just says "health services" are a basic good, not that only basic health services are a basic good.But you quoted something saying "basic" which we already have
The koch study found 2 results1. That analysis was done by a conservative think tank funded by the Koch brothers and it STILL found savings in one of their projections.
2. I wasn't talking about M4A in this case, I meant literally just basic preventative care, things like checkups essentially.
We have health services as I laid out already...like I saidThe quote just says "health services" are a basic good, not that only basic health services are a basic good.
Off topic...but preventative care should start at home and most people dont give a crap. The definition of preventive care these days is: "lets check up on how your progressing with your self inflicted suicide and lets see how we can mask it."I think a basic level of preventative care fits that description.
The thing is the study was biased to the right to begin with. That's the context you're leaving out. They set out to prove M4A would be more expensive and still ended up with 1 scenario where it's less expensive and one where it's only slightly more.The koch study found 2 results
Best case scenario numbers..savings
Not best case scenario numbers...more expensive
So which side you favor largely depends on how much faith you have in the govt to be efficient...I bet you know where I stand
Most ppl that are pro m4a, only use one side of the story
And they're clearly insufficient, like I said.We have health services as I laid out already...like I said
Yes, everyone is awful. Got it.Off topic...but preventative care should start at home and most people dont give a crap. The definition of preventive care these days is: "lets check up on how your progressing with your self inflicted suicide and lets see how we can mask it."
Ok you can spin it that way but it's irrelevant since that's the study often cited by the leftThe thing is the study was biased to the right to begin with. That's the context you're leaving out. They set out to prove M4A would be more expensive and still ended up with 1 scenario where it's less expensive and one where it's only slightly more.
Disagree...covers children, disabled, elderly, and even non citizens...which leave able bodied americans to get their own insuranceAnd they're clearly insufficient, like I said.
So your correlating life expectancy with healthcare?Yes, everyone is awful. Got it.
Our life expectancy is going down. Healthcare is insufficient in the US.
Dude, really? I could do a dissertation on why healthcare in this country is insufficient.So your correlating life expectancy with healthcare?
Yeah really...are you saying life expectancy decreasing is driven by healthcare in america?Dude, really? I could do a dissertation on why healthcare in this country is insufficient.
It's not spin it's facts. It would be like if mother's against drunk driving conducted a study that found a scenario where alcohol improved driving and one where alcohol was a detriment.Ok you can spin it that way but it's irrelevant since that's the study often cited by the left
I'm simply pointing out that they arent telling the full truth
So to say m4a would save ppl money flat out, is not something that could be said with 100% certainty
I'm saying life expectancy is one major data point and healthcare plays a huge role in that. There are many many other ways in which healthcare in this country is insufficient.Yeah really...are you saying life expectancy decreasing is driven by healthcare in america?
Yeah and if Budweiser then cited only the part that said alcohol improved driving...it would be dishonestIt's not spin it's facts. It would be like if mother's against drunk driving conducted a study that found a scenario where alcohol improved driving and one where alcohol was a detriment.
You aren't telling the full truth when you leave out the fact that study was biased.Ok you can spin it that way but it's irrelevant since that's the study often cited by the left
I'm simply pointing out that they arent telling the full truth
So to say m4a would save ppl money flat out, is not something that could be said with 100% certainty
So what do you think will improve healthcare?I'm saying life expectancy is one major data point and healthcare plays a huge role in that. There are many many other ways in which healthcare in this country is insufficient.
I'm saying that even the Heritage Foundation try as they may couldn't prove M4A is the boogey man they make it out to be.Yeah and if Budweiser then cited only the part that said alcohol improved driving...it would be dishonest
Somehow you are trying to say the koch study is right wing...came up with 1 scenario that works for the left and the left have run crazy with it
I am not saying if it was bias or not....you said m4a would be way cheaper and I just pointed out...that's not factually correctYou aren't telling the full truth when you leave out the fact that study was biased.
Like I said, at least a basic level of preventative care for everyone.So what do you think will improve healthcare?
No one is saying it's the boogey man...just blowing holes in the idea that it will save us allI'm saying that even the Heritage Foundation try as they may couldn't prove M4A is the boogey man they make it out to be.
We have that...try againLike I said, at least a basic level of preventative care for everyone.
Again that's not what I said, I said if we had a basic level of preventative care, we'd save money.I am not saying if it was bias or not....you said m4a would be way cheaper and I just pointed out...that's not factually correct
LoL maybe you do but the US as a whole does not.No one is saying it's the boogey man...just blowing holes in the idea that it will save us all
We have that...try again
I'm not talking about meLoL maybe you do but the US as a whole does not.
No, you did not. You said the able bodied were on their own to take care of themselves. That is not providing a basic level of preventative to everyone. Key words being "providing" and "everyone."I'm not talking about me
I laid out for all americans
I was just exaggerating the situation, but I find it to be a big problem and I find its unfair monetarily to pay for others lack of effort when I want to further progress my own. If we lived in a world of medicare for all, basic health indicators such as BMI should factor into the tax equation in addition to lifestyle risks such as people that go cliff diving or something.Yes, everyone is awful. Got it.
Yeah if your able bodied....get a job or sign up for the affordable care act.. it is literally available for everyone hahaNo, you did not. You said the able bodied were on their own to take care of themselves. That is not providing a basic level of preventative to everyone. Key words being "providing" and "everyone."
I agree with this...diet for example is a huge factor for healthI was just exaggerating the situation, but I find it to be a big problem and I find its unfair monetarily to pay for others lack of effort when I want to further progress my own. If we lived in a world of medicare for all, basic health indicators such as BMI should factor into the tax equation in addition to lifestyle risks such as people that go cliff diving or something.
If it were BMI alot of the guys here would be paying extra when they really shouldn't be.I was just exaggerating the situation, but I find it to be a big problem and I find its unfair monetarily to pay for others lack of effort when I want to further progress my own. If we lived in a world of medicare for all, basic health indicators such as BMI should factor into the tax equation.
Its bureaucracy care first and foremost, healthcare comes 2nd these days.Dude, really? I could do a dissertation on why healthcare in this country is insufficient.
That doesnt necessarily imply its directly due to lack of health care, but rather people overeating, junk food and lack of physical activity. More people are playing on their phones rather than moving around.I'm saying life expectancy is one major data point and healthcare plays a huge role in that. There are many many other ways in which healthcare in this country is insufficient.
Yes but dumb young people that think they're going to live forever screw it up for everyone. Then they end up at the ER, default on their medical bills, the hospital writes it off and gets a tax deduction for the loss and our taxes go up to make up for that shortfall.Yeah if your able bodied....get a job or sign up for the affordable care act.. it is literally available for everyone haha
I think those habits are largely a result of depression and I include mental healthcare when I say healthcare.That doesnt necessarily imply its directly due to lack of health care, but rather people overeating, junk food and lack of physical activity. More people are playing on their phones rather than moving around.
Whereas if they were provided a basic level of care that would end up costing the system as a whole much less.Yes but dumb young people that think they're going to live forever screw it up for everyone. Then they end up at the ER, default on their medical bills, the hospital writes it off and gets a tax deduction for the loss and our taxes go up to make up for that shortfall.
So the solution is to raise everyone's taxes and have the govt foot the bill for everyone?Yes but dumb young people that think they're going to live forever screw it up for everyone. Then they end up at the ER, default on their medical bills, the hospital writes it off and gets a tax deduction for the loss and our taxes go up to make up for that shortfall.
Or is it distraction such as the internet, and especially the days in smartphones. Ive been going to gyms for 27 years and I have directly seen a decrease in workout capacity as a whole from everyone for example. This is anecdotal of course.I think those habits are largely a result of depression and I include mental healthcare when I say healthcare.
And then maybe some people will be less responsible for their health since your taking away the primary incentive to avoid getting medical care first place. If there is always a drug available to mask the condition lets keep partaking in destructive behavior such as overeating, drinking booze or eating poisonous crap.So the solution is to raise everyone's taxes and have the govt foot the bill for everyone?
Yeah a lot of ppl believe that is what would happenAnd then maybe some people will be less responsible for their health since your taking away the primary incentive to avoid getting medical care first place. If there is always a drug available to mask the condition lets keep partaking in destructive behavior such as overeating, drinking booze or eating poisonous crap.
Its just insane, you get taxed when you make it, then when you spend it, and then when you live on your own piece of earth, they tax you promising to secure your future and then add in what would be a significant tax for a service regardless if you use it or not, and then the ones providing the service get taxed for providing the service, they tax you regardless if you go to school or not even if your 95 years old, and then there are other taxes such as fed/local fees and money gets printed out of thin air which is another trick tax devaluing our currency.So the solution is to raise everyone's taxes and have the govt foot the bill for everyone?
If it means the amount my taxes go up is about the same as what I'm paying now in insurance, copays, deductibles, etc then, yeah, that makes the most sense.So the solution is to raise everyone's taxes and have the govt foot the bill for everyone?
That makes sense, I was just making general suggestion, it can be done with more sophistication. Gym time can be clocked, or better yet why not make personal training and basic nutrition coaching covered under M4A as this would be a form of true preventative care. Alot of people dont know what to do and need direction assuming they are motivated enough to try and commit.If it were BMI alot of the guys here would be paying extra when they really shouldn't be.
You just have to build in incentives to get people off their butts. Things like requiring a recent physical in order to get a job where you work with food or are in contact with the public.
I see what you're saying but that person can now go get therapy and ideally, ultimately, get themselves out of both poverty and depression.Or is it distraction such as the internet, and especially the days in smartphones. Ive been going to gyms for 27 years and I have directly seen a decrease in workout capacity as a whole from everyone for example. This is anecdotal of course.
We give out more anti-depressants than any time in history I dunno how increased health care would solve any of this anyways. Its something in society and perhaps its economical which then taxing people to cover health care would make them less economically stable and probably more depressed. Ive been poor before many years ago, I couldnt have imagined the way it would have been like if I didnt get my tax refund simply because I wasnt able to buy Obamacare I certainly would have felt more depressed knowing its harder for me to catch up economically.
This is a complex issue, the reason I feel the more we put into the solution the more problems we continue to get. Its best to simply stay out of it and give people and and health care system to operated in a free market system.
I think you're taking away the primary disincentive. I also think we could do more in terms of public education (not schools in this case but things like PSAs, outreach programs, etc) to get people to make better choices.And then maybe some people will be less responsible for their health since your taking away the primary incentive to avoid getting medical care first place. If there is always a drug available to mask the condition lets keep partaking in destructive behavior such as overeating, drinking booze or eating poisonous crap.
Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
Anyone still use this website? | Anabolics | 0 | ||
Anyone still sell plcar in powder? | Supplements | 1 | ||
Does anyone still use MST products? | Supplements | 5 | ||
Anyone still taking soy lecithin for the phosphatidic acid? | Supplements | 63 | ||
CL Green Magnitude : Anyone Still Take This? | Supplements | 30 |