13
   

Why are people thinking Obama can magically create jobs out of this air.

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 05:27 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Not all for profit insurance companies are parasitic as you believe. Look into the health care systems of Canada and many countries of Europe where they have "private health insurance."

There's absolutely nothing wrong with competition; that's what capitalism is all about.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 06:26 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:


Let them do this! It's a win-win for us every time this happens. If enough companies would do this, we could do away with the parasitic for-profit HC insurance industry altogether.

Cycloptichorn


Perhaps we could also do without the "parasitic, for-profit" pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, clinics, laboratories and medical practicioners as well.
Pemerson
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 08:14 pm
According to Paul Krugman federal government has not spent enough

http://www.statesman.com/opinion/krugman-not-enough-government-spending-966573.html?cxtype=rsso
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 08:18 pm
@Pemerson,
I agree with Krugman; now's the best time to spend money on our infrastructure, because it'll create jobs that will circulate more money into our economy - and all at low interest. It's a bargain for the feds, but they're waiting for who knows what.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 08:34 pm
@cicerone imposter,
That doesn't work as quickly or as efficiently as it once did. One of the unplanned side effects of our environmental law is that the permitting process for such projects has become as time consuming as design and construction - and the cost is generally greater than that for design. About two years of up front work will be required producing and getting approval of the Environmental Impact Statement; add another year for lawsuits by intervenors & special interest groups, and litigation associated with property acquisition and local government permits; then two years for the federal and State transportation agencies to agree on funding and design; and only then can construction contracts begin.

It isn't all bad: we make a lot of money doing it.

"Shovel ready" has become an illusion.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 08:59 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:


Let them do this! It's a win-win for us every time this happens. If enough companies would do this, we could do away with the parasitic for-profit HC insurance industry altogether.

Cycloptichorn


Perhaps we could also do without the "parasitic, for-profit" pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, clinics, laboratories and medical practicioners as well.


None of those are changed in the slightest by having non-profit or single-payer health care insurance.

Cycloptichorn
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 09:09 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:
Fido wrote:

Quote:
Do you think it is in some respect better for individuals to go broke trying to keep their health and health insurance and lives while the economy and government are doing great???


Our federal and local governments are not doing great! Our economy currently has some 25 million folks unemployed; that's not a sign of a good economy.
So long as the government must still care for all who cannot find work, or otherwise support themselves, and yet deny to itself the power to tax those who have benefitted from this country, its wealth, and its government, then it should flounder around, paralyzed to do little good, or much evil...Tell me how many people are unemployed...What does that tell you??? The fact that of those employed, only twenty percent are actually employed in production, and all the rest are in service and finance... And that twenty percent in production account for 80% of our exports... What does that tell you???

What I take from it is this fact : A small minority can create such a great amount of value that the whole society can essentially be supported by them, doing nothing or nothing directly productive, only serving others directly or indirectly... If there are 25 million unemployed which does not really reflect all outside of the work force in one fashion or another, clearly those working are working too many hours to keep others not working at all... All the people are supported, though some poorly, and some better than poor, but profits soar, and government stuggles to keep up with more and more, non tax paying, non profit making, non productive people... Isn't the eight hour work day obsolete??? Aren't starvation wages for so many obsolete... If income must pay the support of government, shouldn't the government ensure workers can pay taxes??? The problem is simple and the solution is simple too... The commonwealth has been put into private hand in the belief that there, good would result... Whether in private or public hands, the commonwealth must still support all the people and the government... This is thought an unreasonable obligation by the rich; but if they do not do so, or cannot do so, then the government that support them will fall... And there will be hell to pay...

Quote:
Quote:
Public health is a public problem and one we should all deal with together, and if it is too expensive then tax the profit out of it, and by that I don't mean bloat it up with highly paid relatives sitting on the assess picking up paychecks for nothing... I mean; Make Certain people are paid enough to afford their health, make certain people are not poisoned as the price of having a job or an address, and make certain people pay for all risky behavior without a general benefit...


All good points, except for the reality that taking away the profit motive will reduce quality. If you have kept up with the news on company sponsored health care, you would know that a greater portion of their premiums are being transferred to the worker while their salaries remain stagnant – and the CEOs and officers rake in millions in salaries and bonus. Greed has taken over our economy.

Yes greed; and the thought that it is inevitable makes it acceptible, kind of like everyone having crabs or worms... It is hard to say that the profit motive has a positive effect on health care when more stress, more bankruptcies, and much more pain and suffering, denied care, and death have all resulted from profiting from what all find so necessary...


Quote:
Quote:
I worked at a risky profession and my boss paid for workman's comp insurance at a high rate because of the risk, and that risk and cost was one of the things that had to be accounted for in the price of the product... What if some one wants to low ball all the costs by enderestimating the costs the wages and the benefits, and then throws his employers on the public health system when they get injured...


I'm aware of how workers comp premiums work, because I worked in management for most of my working career.

That's the danger with Obamacare: Many company administrators have threatened to pay the $2,500 penalty for not providing health insurance, and load their workers onto the federal mandated system.

I don't think Obama care is going to work... What they needed was the courage to tax, and a single payer system... What they got was a half assed piece of nothing... The insurance companies have not sucked enough blood, and must be allowed time to find some other weakness to exploit, as if they could not see this coming... It is too little too late; but all those who could not pay, and all those who would never be able to pay were going to bring down the whole government program, and at the same time all those bills not paid from any other source had to be loaded onto those with insurance, putting it out of the reach of more and more people...The more people without insurance, the more the system goes critical..

Quote:
Because as we have become a society without health insurance the cost gets paid by fewer and fewer providers who must pick up the cost for all who cannot pay... If government said: Everyone self employed and everyone employed must ahve insurance then the cost would be spread...Certainly, if they taxed all who made their millions shorting their workers and denying them living wages, benefit, retirement and insurance, and who then closed up and exported capital hopeing to import products to sell in our dying market, then there would be no problem... You see, even primitives had to make enough to support themselves into old age, and they too had to pay for their healing... If we have been reduced to a hand to mouth existence to have a handful, 1%, living like Gods with more than they could ever use; then it is time to take it all back... The only reason there is a deficit is that the government refuses to tax those who have actually known some benefit from the economy and government...


I don't have any challenge for your above thesis; governments operate at the level of incompetence that are allowed by us voters. We have met the enemey, and...
It is not our problem... First of all the constitution was made difficult to change, and inertia in the form of the Senate was built in... Then, parties reduced representation in our most representative body, and divided districts much as the ancient Caesars, to divide and conquer... The thing is incapable of serving our needs and reacting to trouble or danger... In other words, the mind of the people, our common intelligence has denied itself perspective, and allowed -because it could not prevent- the level of inertia provided by the parties which none of US is in a position to prevent... It has grown exactly as the founding fathers allowed it to grow because for their own benefit they left it weak and vulnerable, and it has only gotten worse... It has evolved as all forms evolve under the hands of those most in control to serve their personal benefit... Don't blame yourself... Don't blame me... We are the victims and like many victims, we don't know who to blame..
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 09:18 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
If you don't think that a government managed health care system with a single payer under government control won't kill investment in new drugs, new techniques and new laboratory, hospital and diagnostic facilities then you haven't been paying attention. It, of course, will be a self-reinforning system: the government management will create a shortage of available treatment options, so more government management will be required to ration what is available, etc. etc. This is what happened in the UK and it is why funding the NHS is always a major political issue there.

In any event, I was merely expressing my contempt for your infatuation with socialist systems and credulity for the promises if their advocates.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 09:33 pm
@Fido,
Fido, I know you've been following the philosophy threads, and two links were provided to explain about human irrationality and social interactions.

The majority of people believe in Satan and flying saucers, and within our social fabric, we have social intercourse with the same people who are irrational - including our doctors and politicians. We live in this irrational world trying to make sense of reality, but our environment is so screwed up, how are we expected to survive with our mental and physical health intact?

Most humans believe in one god or another, and believe they will be granted everlasting life if they live according to their religious laws. They go around making it miserable for gays, lesbians, and members of other religious beliefs. They even go and kill their "brethren" in the name of god.

We're doomed!

parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 09:41 pm
@georgeob1,
That's interesting george.
Does GlaxoSmithKlein know they aren't the third largest pharmaceutical company in the world? Or maybe AstraZeneca doesn't realize they aren't the seventh.

Of the 12 largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, 6 of them are in countries that have socialized medicine george with 2 of them located in the UK.

I'll just express my contempt for your argument about how single payer killed new drugs in countries with socialized medicine.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  3  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 09:53 pm
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:
If you don't think that a government managed health care system with a single payer under government control won't kill investment in new drugs, new techniques and new laboratory, hospital and diagnostic facilities then you haven't been paying attention.

May I ask which countries with "socialized medicine" you've been living in lately? I've spent 38 years of my life in Germany, which for 130 years has been having a somewhat more socialistic health care system than what Obama is trying to introduce. There is no shortage of new drugs, new techniques, hospitals, or diagnostic facilities in Germany. Your assertions may reflect your reading of the Wall Street Journal's editorial page. It certainly doesn't reflect any personal experience with the health care systems you are criticizing.
georgeob1
 
  0  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 10:16 pm
@Thomas,
Germany doesn't have a single payer system. There is competition among insurance providers and a relatively free market among providers.

However Germany does have a looming demographic problem, which, combined with a disinclination to assimilate immigrants on a large scale, will possibly break the long-standing run of a healthy, export driven economy.

There are also some cultural differences between this country and Germany that, in my view at least, would make duplicating the German model very difficult for us.


You're right though: I do read the WSJ regularly.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 12 Oct, 2010 10:21 pm
@georgeob1,
True; Germany's demographics with their population aging without growing their population has already impacted their economy. That problem will continue to fester and exacerbate their problems as the years pass by, and their cost of social benefits will hurt their economy even further. How they plan to manage this imbalance will be interesting to see.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 09:07 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

Germany doesn't have a single payer system. There is competition among insurance providers and a relatively free market among providers.


I'm sure Thomas can answer better than I, but according to the Wiki page on the subject, that's not exactly the case. They do have a public health system and only those who make above a certain amount qualify for the private system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_in_Germany

Quote:
However Germany does have a looming demographic problem, which, combined with a disinclination to assimilate immigrants on a large scale, will possibly break the long-standing run of a healthy, export driven economy.


Possibly true but hardly relevant to this discussion. Always worth throwing in a barb or two at Europe tho, right?

Quote:
here are also some cultural differences between this country and Germany that, in my view at least, would make duplicating the German model very difficult for us.


What are those differences?

Quote:
You're right though: I do read the WSJ regularly.


Hardly a surprise there.

Cycloptichorn
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 10:13 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

. They do have a public health system and only those who make above a certain amount qualify for the private system.
You are grasping at straws in an attempt to defend the indefensable.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
However Germany does have a looming demographic problem, which, combined with a disinclination to assimilate immigrants on a large scale, will possibly break the long-standing run of a healthy, export driven economy.


Possibly true but hardly relevant to this discussion. Always worth throwing in a barb or two at Europe tho, right?
Right ! I do so whenever I can.

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
here are also some cultural differences between this country and Germany that, in my view at least, would make duplicating the German model very difficult for us.


What are those differences?

They're Germans.

parados
 
  3  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 10:36 am
@georgeob1,
Quote:
You are grasping at straws in an attempt to defend the indefensable.

That seems to define your argument george.

You haven't explained how 2 of the largest pharma companies are in the UK. Instead you just make an unsupported argument then quibble about which countries have socialist medicine.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 10:48 am
@parados,
It is you who are quibbling ... again. I was very clear about exactly what features of the German health care system were relevant in contrast to the government operated single payer system that Cyclo touted and to which I was responding.

I fear the endless (and quite pointless) disputation with okie has dulled your sense of balance and humor as well.
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 10:52 am
@georgeob1,
But, if there's evidence that drug companies are still going strong in a system which you say they won't, isn't that sort of hard on your argument? I almost think it is.

These chicken-little pronouncements about the death of our way of life unless we embrace the Capitalistic Paradise are overblown, George. They are not compelling when people can so easily see that other countries seem to get by just fine without making the profit motive the prime consideration in their HC systems.

Cycloptichorn
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 11:00 am
@Cycloptichorn,
But it's so much easier to just accuse me of not having a sense of humor rather than discussing the fact that 2 of the 7 largest pharma companies are located in a country that george claims can't seem to introduce any new drugs.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 13 Oct, 2010 11:01 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

Fido, I know you've been following the philosophy threads, and two links were provided to explain about human irrationality and social interactions.

The majority of people believe in Satan and flying saucers, and within our social fabric, we have social intercourse with the same people who are irrational - including our doctors and politicians. We live in this irrational world trying to make sense of reality, but our environment is so screwed up, how are we expected to survive with our mental and physical health intact?

Most humans believe in one god or another, and believe they will be granted everlasting life if they live according to their religious laws. They go around making it miserable for gays, lesbians, and members of other religious beliefs. They even go and kill their "brethren" in the name of god.

We're doomed!


I don't need a link to tell me people are irrational, and I have no hope that reason can save us since so much of it is turned to the service of irrational goals...I actually have more hope that people will find some balance and understanding of their irrational side, which is where they live, in their emotions and moral forms... The key to finding the proper place for reason is the knowledge of how instinctual, and emotional we are... Best. Fido
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/27/2024 at 09:39:54