Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-23-2014, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,624 posts, read 19,041,484 times
Reputation: 21728

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
Healthcare is one of those things that should NOT be a private sector enterprise.
Nice fallacy...

Is-Ought
The is-ought fallacy occurs when a conclusion expressing what ought to be so is inferred from premises expressing only what is so, in which it is supposed that no implicit or explicit ought-premises are needed.

To debunk your argument, government control, or monopoly control exercised by any group causes the wasteful and inefficient use of Capital.

See....


Lung cancer treatment waiting times and tumour growth.

Therefore, 21% of potentially curable patients became incurable on the waiting list. This study demonstrates that, even for the select minority of patients who have specialist referral and are deemed suitable for potentially curative treatment, the outcome is prejudiced by waiting times that allow tumour progression.

US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health


The Laws of Economics apply to everything, including healthcare, whether you like or not; whether you have "your Master in Con" or not.

Capital is both fixed and finite.

There is only so much Capital available. Of the available Capital, only a certain amount is available for healthcare....and there is nothing you can do to alter that fact.

Those Brits who died on waiting lists in the British NHS, died because of a shortage of Capital.

There are only so many doctors in Britain. Of those, only a limited number specialize in oncology. The British government does not have the Capital to obtain additional doctors, and that wouldn't matter anyway, since Britain doesn't have sufficient Capital to train doctors in oncology, and that wouldn't matter, because Britain doesn't have enough doctors to train additional doctors, and that would matter, because Britain doesn't have the facilities or space to train additional doctors, and Britain doesn't have the money to build additional space or facilities to train additional doctors.

And none of that matters, because Britain doesn't have enough money to pay additional doctors.

And still none of that matters because Britain doesn't have enough hospital space, and it wouldn't matter, since Britain doesn't have enough money to build additional hospital space, and that wouldn't matter, because there aren't enough people to hire to maintain and staff the additional new space, and that wouldn't matter, because Britain doesn't have enough money to pay the additional staff.


And none of that matters, because Britain doesn't have the Capital to obtain additional equipment to put in the space, or to maintain it properly, etc etc etc etc.

The fact that Capital is limited is not nearly as bad as the fact that the British government wastefully uses that Capital inefficiently.

Those people died, because the British government wasted Capital on some bloke with a boil on his bum.

Same in the US --- spending health plan money on contraceptives diverts Capital from people with serious illnesses.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
It isn't like buying a car, where we have choices as to what kind of car we want, and what features we want it to have, etc.
Oh, yes, it is.

Free Market health insurance in the US ended in 1954 with the passage of this law...

"Premiums paid by an employer on policies of group life insurance without cash surrender value covering the lives of his employees, or on policies of group health or accident insurance...do not constitute salary if such premiums are deductible by the employer under Section 23(a) of the IRS Code."

Source: Public Law 83-591, August 16, 1954; Internal Revenue Code of 1954, Section 106. For more information on the 1986 Internal Revenue Code.

With Free Market health insurance, a young single person could simply buy $50,000 or $100,000 or $500,000 of annual ER coverage.

Repealing the federal law above, people could tie catastrophic health with their life insurance policy once again.

You can have separate insurance plans for the people who want office visits and prescription drugs covered.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
Healthcare, at it's simplest, is the same for everyone. We ALL want access to it, because when we need it, that's it. We need it. It's not an economic "want", it's an economic need.
And people exercise Freedom of Choice to make those decisions instead of having people like you ram it to them.

Contrary to your assertion, healthcare is not the same for everyone, and everyone's needs are different and changing.

A post-menopause woman does not need coverage for pre-natal or neo-natal, and yet you would force her against her will to pay for something she neither needs nor wants.

Many people are ready and willing to pay for their own office visits and drugs and don't want a co-pay or even to be covered, but thanks to the American Hospital Association, health insurance companies are forced by State laws to charge those people anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
As such, profit needs to take a backseat to humanity.
And you claim to have "your Master in Econ?"

I think you meant "your Master in Con."

Even though in the Cincinnati Market open-heart surgery only costs $13,000 --- with built-in profit -- it's perfectly okay for hospital cartels and monopolies to price-gouge patients and charge them $26,000 to $41,000, right?


I don't know the Market rate for appendectomies out on the West Coast, I only know the approximate cost (with a small profit margin) is $2,800.

And yet the hospital billed the insurance company $55,000.

Where's your outrage?

Give us one reason why an insurance company, or any person on this Earth should pay $55,000 for something that only costs $2,800?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
And just to make one last point... for the love of God, if you're going to make a point, back it up with FACTS from a REPUTABLE source. Not a biased one. Some of the claims in here are utterly ridiculous.

Like every single one of yours.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
Newsflash: the stock market has been on a tear since Obama took office.
Newsflash: The Stock Market has no bearing on the economy

#1 The stock market loses 40.9% of its "value" over a period of 959 days. Characterize the state of the economy during that time.


Spoiler


GDP growth was averaging an astounding 12.5% per quarter = economics fail for you.

That actually happened September 1939 to April 1942



#2 The stock market sets records over a period of 651 days. Characterize the state of the economy during that time.

Spoiler


That was the recession 1957-1961. The DJIA doubled in value from 250 to 500+.

Another Master in Econ fail for you.




#3 The stock market loses 45.1% of its value over a period of 694 days. Characterize the economy.


Spoiler


That was January 1973 to December 1974 US GDP grew at rates of 1.03% per quarter to as much as 3.77% per quarter, averaging 2.24% per quarter over those 8 quarters.

Your lack of win is disturbing.



Quote:
Originally Posted by MckinneyOwnr View Post
However, I do want to thank you for your post. There was lingering doubt as to why you could possibly have such an abysmal reputation for your posts, but there's none now. Let me know when the New World Order starts.
Proof Surrogate
Substituting a distracting comment for a real proof.

You should worry about your own credibility.

Schooling...

Mircea
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-23-2014, 09:07 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 63,845,924 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by mkpunk View Post
Then why didn't you quote other sources and not just the site related to Alex Jones who almost anyone knew is a wack-job like Glenn Beck and Coulter?
I did..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-13-2014, 11:42 PM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,800 posts, read 6,536,867 times
Reputation: 3151
Excluding the auto industry, name ONE sector of the US economy really worth celebrating while factoring in the ongoing and forthcoming carnage courtesy of 'ObamaCare', and the millions of 29ers its produced and will continue to produce for years to come?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-14-2014, 08:09 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
7,214 posts, read 9,353,981 times
Reputation: 7802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marv101 View Post
Excluding the auto industry, name ONE sector of the US economy really worth celebrating while factoring in the ongoing and forthcoming carnage courtesy of 'ObamaCare', and the millions of 29ers its produced and will continue to produce for years to come?
Seems like it's your job today to reproduce this talking point in multiple threads. Hmmmm...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 12:37 PM
 
Location: Chandler, AZ
5,800 posts, read 6,536,867 times
Reputation: 3151
it's not a talking point but an unimpeachable fact which has been reported all year long by media outlets from coast to coast.

Toss in a non-existent 'recovery' with anemic job growth compared to previous administrations on top of dismal results so far this year for retailers such as Target & Walmart, millions of folks who've lost their healthcare courtesy of ObamaCare including a ton of Obama-created 29ers, and you have Obamanomics at work alongside the disaster-in-the-making known as ObamaCare which is bound to fail and make things much worse as was predicted 4+ plus years ago.

Then there's the nonstop string of abysmal job reports, as if 200,000+ new jobs per month is really worth breaking out the champagne for.

Then there's his ineptitude about this Ebola fiasco on his watch and a blatantly biased media covering up for his incompetence once again, which explains the lowest in modern history 39% approval rating of the Democratic Party according to the newest ABC News/Washington Post poll as CNN reported two hours ago.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2014, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Northern Wisconsin
10,379 posts, read 10,839,994 times
Reputation: 18712
My guess is that the "economist" may not have realized how many people were going to be forced off their existing plans. Once they were forced out of their plans because so many insurance companies stopped selling their individual policies, they didn't really have any choice except to sign up for Obamacare. However, he or she was also foolish to say "no one will sign up" Anyone with half a brain could see that those who could not previously afford health insurance and were low income would sign up for the govt. insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top