Posts: 1,402
Threads: 17
Joined: May 2016
(11-17-2016, 03:10 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: And the voters who wanted "change" last Tuesday, and before, seem unable to grasp that there are 3 branches of government. Imagine that, allegedly voting for Trump because he promised change, better trade deals that would bring jobs back, so what do they do? Vote for Pat Toomey and Ron Johnson, the most typical GOP Republican stooges imaginable who don't care a thing even about better trade deals? Anyone in the right mind call THAT "voting for change?" How many GOP congress-critters were thrown out? Just 6; is that "voting for change??" NO, it isn't!
Uh, no. The upside of Nov 8th is that I finally got the forest fire for the Democratic party which burned out all of that nasty "New Democrat" underbrush.
![[Image: high-res-photo-of-a-forest-fire-in-progr...d470437144]](http://media.istockphoto.com/photos/high-res-photo-of-a-forest-fire-in-progress-picture-id470437144)
Just for old time sake Eric. Burn! baby, Burn!  Yeah, I remember those fires as well as a kid. 
---Value Added
Posts: 1,402
Threads: 17
Joined: May 2016
(11-17-2016, 12:01 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: To the contrary, private insurance is far more able to negotiate for lower prices. As you point out, government is subject to lobbying from the suppliers, keeping prices high; private insurance doesn't have that problem.
Whatcha talkin' about Warren? Health insurance companies are useless intermediaries , man.
The money going to them is utter waste. Just think about all the money going to them that could just go to health care providers directly. Like, I'll take the Medicare starts at age 0 over the crap we had before Obamacare and the sort of messed up stuff with Obamacare. Health care does not work under free enterprise do to a mismatch in the ability to afford what is actually needed.
---Value Added
Posts: 3,956
Threads: 11
Joined: May 2016
11-18-2016, 04:16 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2016, 05:14 AM by Bob Butler 54.)
CNN is covering Obama's visit to Berlin, Despite reassurance, Obama warns Europe of a 'meaner world'
One paragraph in particular raises some of the same themes we've been discussing here.
Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.
Now, is he talking about this forum specifically, or the world in general? That's my problem with extreme partisans in a nutshell.
That this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
11-18-2016, 07:11 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2016, 07:14 AM by pbrower2a.)
(11-18-2016, 04:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: CNN is covering Obama's visit to Berlin, Despite reassurance, Obama warns Europe of a 'meaner world'
One paragraph in particular raises some of the same themes we've been discussing here.
Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.
Now, is he talking about this forum specifically, or the world in general? That's my problem with extreme partisans in a nutshell.
Basically, Stresemann meets Hoover. Nice talk, but now largely irrelevant.
This forum is something of a microcosm, if somewhat selective in its left-right composition.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
If the Dems want to fight back and win they need to adopt the model of "alt-left" parties like the Scottish National Party in the UK and Podemos in Spain. The main problem with the mainstream Center-Left parties through much of the Western World is that they have completely ignored the rising tide of anti-globalization and anti-technocratic sentiment among the working class, dismissing it as the "stupid plebs not knowing what is best for them". This has given an opening for the Far Right and now the Far Right are reaping the fruits of wooing the working class and riding the wave of anti-globalism and anti-technocratic elitism.
Those on the Left who defend Free Trade and Globalization, you have a choice to make. What do you care about more, your own ideological purity, or fighting off the rising tide of the Far Right?
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(11-17-2016, 04:59 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: (11-17-2016, 12:01 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: To the contrary, private insurance is far more able to negotiate for lower prices. As you point out, government is subject to lobbying from the suppliers, keeping prices high; private insurance doesn't have that problem.
Whatcha talkin' about Warren? Health insurance companies are useless intermediaries , man.
The money going to them is utter waste. Just think about all the money going to them that could just go to health care providers directly. Like, I'll take the Medicare starts at age 0 over the crap we had before Obamacare and the sort of messed up stuff with Obamacare. Health care does not work under free enterprise do to a mismatch in the ability to afford what is actually needed.
Of course you'll take a system that allows you to spend other peoples' money as freely as you want.
For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
There are absolutely problems with employers making decisions on employees' health care, but for medicare that permitted the individuals to choose their insurers, that problem would be ameliorated to a great extent.
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(11-18-2016, 04:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.
Now, is he talking about this forum specifically, or the world in general? That's my problem with extreme partisans in a nutshell.
Pretty clear he's talking about himself, even if he doesn't realize it. No one took absolutist views, demonized opponents, and refused to compromise more than Obama.
Posts: 880
Threads: 18
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 11:42 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-18-2016, 04:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.
Now, is he talking about this forum specifically, or the world in general? That's my problem with extreme partisans in a nutshell.
Pretty clear he's talking about himself, even if he doesn't realize it. No one took absolutist views, demonized opponents, and refused to compromise more than Obama.
Are you accusing Republicans of being imbeciles? I thought you were a Republican.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 11:42 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-18-2016, 04:16 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.
Now, is he talking about this forum specifically, or the world in general? That's my problem with extreme partisans in a nutshell.
Pretty clear he's talking about himself, even if he doesn't realize it. No one took absolutist views, demonized opponents, and refused to compromise more than Obama.
No, it was the Republicans who did that, not Obama.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-17-2016, 04:59 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: (11-17-2016, 12:01 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: To the contrary, private insurance is far more able to negotiate for lower prices. As you point out, government is subject to lobbying from the suppliers, keeping prices high; private insurance doesn't have that problem.
Whatcha talkin' about Warren? Health insurance companies are useless intermediaries , man.
The money going to them is utter waste. Just think about all the money going to them that could just go to health care providers directly. Like, I'll take the Medicare starts at age 0 over the crap we had before Obamacare and the sort of messed up stuff with Obamacare. Health care does not work under free enterprise do to a mismatch in the ability to afford what is actually needed.
Of course you'll take a system that allows you to spend other peoples' money as freely as you want.
The trickle-down meme you just recited may be persuasive, but it bears no resemblance to reality.
Quote:For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
If you want health care costs to rise several times the rate of inflation, then private insurance is your cup of tea.
Quote:There are absolutely problems with employers making decisions on employees' health care, but for medicare that permitted the individuals to choose their insurers, that problem would be ameliorated to a great extent.
People on medicare can choose their doctors. Medicare is the best deal, and it allows you to choose insurers to get more coverage.
The purpose of libertarian philosophy is just to "insure" that only the wealthy can survive and prosper in this world. It's worked to a great extent in fulfilling that purpose for 36 years and counting in the USA.
Posts: 1,970
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2016
(11-18-2016, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
If you want health care costs to rise several times the rate of inflation, then private insurance is your cup of tea.
The only way to avoid that is to ration or to have the people who are getting the medical service to pay for it themselves. I agree that the current system that ties health care to the employer has problems in that respect. Better would be for the employer to pay that money to the employee and for the employee to choose his own health care freely.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 02:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-18-2016, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
If you want health care costs to rise several times the rate of inflation, then private insurance is your cup of tea.
The only way to avoid that is to ration or to have the people who are getting the medical service to pay for it themselves. I agree that the current system that ties health care to the employer has problems in that respect. Better would be for the employer to pay that money to the employee and for the employee to choose his own health care freely.
Why would that way be the "only way?" Only because you don't believe in "socialized medicine." No, single payer is the way to "avoid that."
Posts: 1,131
Threads: 6
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 03:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 02:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-18-2016, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
If you want health care costs to rise several times the rate of inflation, then private insurance is your cup of tea.
The only way to avoid that is to ration or to have the people who are getting the medical service to pay for it themselves. I agree that the current system that ties health care to the employer has problems in that respect. Better would be for the employer to pay that money to the employee and for the employee to choose his own health care freely.
Why would that way be the "only way?" Only because you don't believe in "socialized medicine." No, single payer is the way to "avoid that."
Probably because he understands economics enough to know that having a third party payer is about the worst way to do things. If the consumer is the one paying then they will weigh the costs and benefits of the treatments they are getting. The current system that ties insurance to employment is a direct consequence of the wage controls implemented during the war and making such benefits non-taxable.
Go learn some history and economics you idiot.
Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. -- H.L. Mencken
If one rejects laissez faire on account of man's fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action. -- Ludwig von Mises
Posts: 10,465
Threads: 197
Joined: May 2016
11-18-2016, 07:02 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2016, 07:07 PM by pbrower2a.)
(11-18-2016, 04:31 PM)Galen Wrote: (11-18-2016, 03:12 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 02:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-18-2016, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
If you want health care costs to rise several times the rate of inflation, then private insurance is your cup of tea.
The only way to avoid that is to ration or to have the people who are getting the medical service to pay for it themselves. I agree that the current system that ties health care to the employer has problems in that respect. Better would be for the employer to pay that money to the employee and for the employee to choose his own health care freely.
Why would that way be the "only way?" Only because you don't believe in "socialized medicine." No, single payer is the way to "avoid that."
Probably because he understands economics enough to know that having a third party payer is about the worst way to do things. If the consumer is the one paying then they will weigh the costs and benefits of the treatments they are getting. The current system that ties insurance to employment is a direct consequence of the wage controls implemented during the war and making such benefits non-taxable.
(Insult redacted)
The idea was that medical care for employees was a good thing for employers who needed not concern themselves with desirable workers dying because they chose death over draining the family savings. But if people are obliged to pay -- considering how miserable my parents' last six months of life were, and how much nursing-home care wrecked my hopes --
I would have been money ahead had they died in an automobile wreck. That is how life goes at times.
One can no longer buy insurance for nursing-home costs. One can instead put one's kids who have sacrificed much to take care of their elders into destitution, a fate that I fear. In an economic order that will soon have no priority other than the indulgence of people already filthy rich I might have very little to live for except to protest the insane policies of our dictator.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.
Posts: 77
Threads: 20
Joined: May 2016
Just a reminder to avoid personal insults.
Posts: 1,216
Threads: 29
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 01:04 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: (11-18-2016, 08:06 AM)Odin Wrote: If the Dems want to fight back and win they need to adopt the model of "alt-left" parties like the Scottish National Party in the UK and Podemos in Spain. The main problem with the mainstream Center-Left parties through much of the Western World is that they have completely ignored the rising tide of anti-globalization and anti-technocratic sentiment among the working class, dismissing it as the "stupid plebs not knowing what is best for them". This has given an opening for the Far Right and now the Far Right are reaping the fruits of wooing the working class and riding the wave of anti-globalism and anti-technocratic elitism.
Those on the Left who defend Free Trade and Globalization, you have a choice to make. What do you care about more, your own ideological purity, or fighting off the rising tide of the Far Right?
Right on. And in many ways, what you describe is a quite patriotic Left wing.
Irony - were there to be an efficacious "Alt-Left" it would be far more patriotic (in fact, diametrically opposed in terms of patriotism) versus the "Alt-Right." The "Alt-Right" in addition to not being all of the Right, is actually faux "Right."
No real Rightist (or any patriot of any polity) aligns with a trans-national "pan" movement such as "Eurasianism" aka "National Bolshevism."
The US "Alt-Right" are actually enemies of the US and Western Civilization in general. To be fair, most of them probably do not realize this and they have been steered via the "Alpha Method" and other tactics into their current position. But operationally speaking, they are enemies.
#RealNationalism
I agree.
#MakeTheDemocratsGreatAgain
Posts: 1,402
Threads: 17
Joined: May 2016
11-18-2016, 08:24 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-18-2016, 08:26 PM by Ragnarök_62.)
(11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: Of course you'll take a system that allows you to spend other peoples' money as freely as you want.
Uh, and how are we denizens of McWages supposed to pay for health insurance. Is it OK for health insurance companies to deny based on pre existing conditions? Now, here's one place I'll agree with you. Let's abolish all laws that allow health insurance companies to remain an oligopoly. I'll go further, let's abolish all laws that allow Big Pharma to remain an oligopoly. All laws that present barriers to entry in the health field should be abolished. I want to gore a bunch of sacred cows that way.
Quote:For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
I see nothing wrong with single payer with deductibles. I rather doubt anyone would go to a doc if they had to pay something instead of getting the latest heavy metal DVD.
Quote:There are absolutely problems with employers making decisions on employees' health care, but for medicare that permitted the individuals to choose their insurers, that problem would be ameliorated to a great extent.
Like someone else mentioned, that's a WWII price control legacy. It needs to go. I'll agree that price controls are utterly stupid. Look at how well they work in Venezuela.
For Eric, a special. "Rent control is the next best thing besides bombing to destroy the housing stock." 
Welcome to Rag's world:
McWageland starring Evil Grimace, CEO.
---Value Added
Posts: 2,936
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2016
(11-18-2016, 03:52 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: (11-18-2016, 02:43 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: (11-18-2016, 12:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: (11-18-2016, 11:41 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: For those of us who care about societal efficiency and the financial stability of the health care system, though, private insurance does a very good job on cost controls. Perhaps you don't look at your insurance statements, but I do, and typically private insurance pays about 1/3 of the health care providers' "normal" rates.
If you want health care costs to rise several times the rate of inflation, then private insurance is your cup of tea.
The only way to avoid that is to ration or to have the people who are getting the medical service to pay for it themselves. I agree that the current system that ties health care to the employer has problems in that respect. Better would be for the employer to pay that money to the employee and for the employee to choose his own health care freely.
Here's a hypothetical for you.
Let's say we have a company you never heard of. Joe's Computer Garage. The reason you haven't heard of it is, it's an army of 1.
Now, let's say we have Dell.
Joe's Computer Garage goes to negotiate a contract with Mega Chip Inc. I wonder what the terms and conditions will be?
Now, Dell goes to negotiate their contract with Mega Chip. Hmmm ... you don't suppose ... Dell might get better Ts and Cs? Maybe, just maybe?
Well, health insurance is no different.
I'd prefer to do business with the more profitable of the two. The army of 1 is actually an army of 1's who exist who have a history of paying their bills on time, costing less and being more profitable to do business and rely upon as a group than a large group like Dell.
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
Posts: 10,013
Threads: 103
Joined: May 2016
11-19-2016, 02:29 AM
(This post was last modified: 11-19-2016, 02:30 AM by Eric the Green.)
Should We Give Donald Trump a Chance? | The Resistance with Keith Olbermann | GQ
"All we are saying, is give fascism as chance? It might not be as bad as we think?"
|
![[Image: 14716270_10155228163862908_5568073137086...e=58C4B49A]](https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/p480x480/14716270_10155228163862908_556807313708677701_n.png?oh=bc9c1d2e0fe2da3950f9f4e01eb658a8&oe=58C4B49A)