Blue Shield Of California instituting furloughs due to ObamaCare costs (Jackson: house, purchase)

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Nerdlord

You also, didn't answer his question. What are conservative values with regards to health care?

I didn't answer his question because he attached a discussion on nationalized healthcare which I'm not going to spend 2 hours writing about.

But IMO, I would say a good conservative/libertarian plan based on those values would hold up choice, accountability, and pay for what you actually need.

According to the Institute of Medicine, based on a study they released in 2009, about 1/3 of all prescribed care is actually not needed, it's a system that incentivizes "more care" not "better care".

For instance, when a person goes into a hospital weighing 300 pounds and is 5'8, what the doctors immediately do is prescribe a multitude of drugs that seek to lower blood pressure, thin blood, lower cholesterol, etc. I've never seen a prescription that requires the patient to go to a gym for 2 hours and walk on a tread mill with a supervising personal trainer, and maybe spend time with a dietitian for 4 hours a week. I'm not saying that should be the only choice for all fat people who walk into a clinic, but why isn't it a choice? I'd say a 6 month gym membership + personal trainer would be much cheaper than 6 months worth of drugs to fix the symptoms, but not the causes (which are lack of exercise and bad eating habits).

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by Nerdlord

Come now, just look at that graph. Per my estimates of each of the candidates' donation amounts.

Total Republicans Candidates - 555 million
Total Democrats Candidates - 380 million

Now which one is bigger?

First off, you're off an order of magnitude there, it's hundreds of thousands, not hundreds of millions.

Also there were more Republican Candidates in the field last year so Big Pharma had to hedge their bets, but it's obvious where Big Pharma wanted the bulk of their money to go even last year, and it's much more clear where they wanted it to go once the field was Trump vs Clinton.

Clinton took $250,000 from Big Pharma in in May and total this election has taken $3,888,202 (all public data) from Big Pharma.

Guess how much Trump has taken from in donations from industries that are considered Pharmeceutical? $1,700 (again public data).

$3,888,202 vs $1700 seems like Big Pharma is riding the democrat leftist train all the way to the bank.

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

No, kissing up to the pharma cartels is obviously a leftist regressive trait considering who they are donating money to in this election.



We can debate nationalized healthcare and whether it's the "fiscally and morally" right thing to do, but to keep on topic, calling ACA/ObamaCare a "conservative republican" invention is a leftist lie, invented to take the blame away from the leftist who created it.

And where is Bernie Sanders, the only progressive in the primary race? 0 dollars to him from the drug cartels.

[PCALMike]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

I didn't answer his question because he attached a discussion on nationalized healthcare which I'm not going to spend 2 hours writing about.

But IMO, I would say a good conservative/libertarian plan based on those values would hold up choice, accountability, and pay for what you actually need.

According to the Institute of Medicine, based on a study they released in 2009, about 1/3 of all prescribed care is actually not needed, it's a system that incentivizes "more care" not "better care".

For instance, when a person goes into a hospital weighing 300 pounds and is 5'8, what the doctors immediately do is prescribe a multitude of drugs that seek to lower blood pressure, thin blood, lower cholesterol, etc. I've never seen a prescription that requires the patient to go to a gym for 2 hours and walk on a tread mill with a supervising personal trainer, and maybe spend time with a dietitian for 4 hours a week. I'm not saying that should be the only choice for all fat people who walk into a clinic, but why isn't it a choice? I'd say a 6 month gym membership + personal trainer would be much cheaper than 6 months worth of drugs to fix the symptoms, but not the causes (which are lack of exercise and bad eating habits).

No doctor says to patients that they need to start exercise? OK.

What is the conservative plan by the way? Health care for the donor class and death for the 99%? Pay for what you actually need...I've read the libertarian party platform. It spells the death for millions. Insurance companies are given free reign to kick people off of plans whenever they need health care, they can reject anyone they dont want to insure. The 99% will be culled under this agenda.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

Except you spent the half your time in this thread trying to defend the "successes" of ACA/ObamaCare before hitting a sharp 180 once the news of its collapse started becoming overwhelming...

I did? Maybe you could point out where I said anything in support of ACA other than it has reduced the rate of acceleration of health care costs (temporarily). I suppose you might interpret my comment that the ACA was, given the shameful resistance to sensible single-payer plans, likely the best first-step possible in our nationally disgraceful healthcare "system" void.

Maybe you simply can't read discriminately. Or maybe you just love to deliberately reinvent peoples' comments. Either case doesn't speak well of your intellect.

[RoadTripGurl]

I'm really disappointed in this ACA mess, the only thing it did was make it harder for the working class to get health insurance and healthcare

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by PCALMike

No doctor says to patients that they need to start exercise? OK.

What is the conservative plan by the way? Health care for the donor class and death for the 99%? Pay for what you actually need...I've read the libertarian party platform. It spells the death for millions. Insurance companies are given free reign to kick people off of plans whenever they need health care, they can reject anyone they dont want to insure. The 99% will be culled under this agenda.

Alan Grayson already laid out the conservative plan:

"Don't get sick; but if you do get sick... die quickly"

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

First off, you're off an order of magnitude there, it's hundreds of thousands, not hundreds of millions.

Also there were more Republican Candidates in the field last year so Big Pharma had to hedge their bets, but it's obvious where Big Pharma wanted the bulk of their money to go even last year, and it's much more clear where they wanted it to go once the field was Trump vs Clinton.

Clinton took $250,000 from Big Pharma in in May and total this election has taken $3,888,202 (all public data) from Big Pharma.

Guess how much Trump has taken from in donations from industries that are considered Pharmeceutical? $1,700 (again public data).

$3,888,202 vs $1700 seems like Big Pharma is riding the democrat leftist train all the way to the bank.

lol - never occur to you that Big Pharma simply doesn't want to support a mentally deranged candidate? Like lots of corporations and donors and GOP leadership are also refusing to support the moron?

Your arguments are so consistently correlative and non-causative it is a hoot to read you.

[Nerdlord]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

First off, you're off an order of magnitude there, it's hundreds of thousands, not hundreds of millions.

Also there were more Republican Candidates in the field last year so Big Pharma had to hedge their bets, but it's obvious where Big Pharma wanted the bulk of their money to go even last year, and it's much more clear where they wanted it to go once the field was Trump vs Clinton.

Clinton took $250,000 from Big Pharma in in May and total this election has taken $3,888,202 (all public data) from Big Pharma.

Guess how much Trump has taken from in donations from industries that are considered Pharmeceutical? $1,700 (again public data).

$3,888,202 vs $1700 seems like Big Pharma is riding the democrat leftist train all the way to the bank.

I didn't even look at the units as I was just summing the numbers. My point is still 100% valid.

Perhaps big pharma is getting on the Democrat leftist train and steering clear of Trump because its quite obvious who is going to be in the white house in 2017.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by Nerdlord

I didn't even look at the units as I was just summing the numbers. My point is still 100% valid.

Perhaps big pharma is getting on the Democrat leftist train and steering clear of Trump because its quite obvious who is going to be in the white house in 2017.

Ya think!? Heh. Plus they are smarter than to show support for a moronic deranged candidate in any case.