ObamaCare

[Jjz1109]

Interesting issue you raise. Maybe our "experts" can help do the research.

 

[Fuzzy_]

Hahahahahahahahha. So now it's the right wingers fault that taxes will go up because they influenced decreased enrollment?

Yes, of course. They spent the past year desperately trying to block the bill and enrollments. The Tea Partiers were especially active in trying impede the ACA.

Don't you think the government should have done cost/tax impact assessments based upon enrollment rates?

They did. They expected about 7 million enrollments, and this was what they used for their assessments. However, they didn't factor in the angry mob of right-wing extremists who tried to sabotage the ACA by all means necessary.

I guess you are part of the "you have to approve it to know what's in it" school of economics? Nice job trying to, once again, deflect any responsibility for a poorly designed, thought out plan.

It's a good act and it will work. Unfortunately, the RWNM will do everything they can to impede its progress. They can't defund it or repeal it, but they can sustain their tantrum until 2016. In fact, they plan on it.

The GOP's approval ratings are at an all-time low, party because they seem angry and detached. As they keep bringing up Benghazi and "Obamacare", they'll lose even more votes.

And do you think the decreased enrollment may perhaps be related to people who now "know what's in it" and do not want it, precisely as was forewarned by conservatives? Or in that incomprehensible to you?

Nope. The implementation problems were caused by a poor website and an angry mob. If you see any flaws with the ACA itself, why don't you mention them, rather than dancing around quotes and making fun of people's intellect? Or, is that all ya got?

Btw, I like the way you switched to using ACA from the standard obamacare reference. Distancing yourself already???

Fuzzy was putting "Obamacare" in quotes because he didn't like the term. Now that "Obamacare" is no longer the de facto name, Fuzzy prefers the ACA because it's more accurate, and will likely use it from now on... but only because it upsets you so much.

 

[Jjz1109]

Yes, of course. They spent the past year desperately trying to block the bill and enrollments. The Tea Partiers were especially active in trying impede the ACA.

Of course they did, because it's a bad program. And current polls show Americans are now realizing it as well.


They did. They expected about 7 million enrollments, and this was what they used for their assessments. However, they didn't factor in the angry mob of right-wing extremists who tried to sabotage the ACA by all means necessary.

Well, apparently poor assessment analysis. I guess they underestimated the power of the "angry mob right wing extremists" (aka, anyone who disagrees with obamacare).



It's a good act and it will work. Unfortunately, the RWNM will do everything they can to impede its progress. They can't defund it or repeal it, but they can sustain their tantrum until 2016. In fact, they plan on it.

Agree, as they should.

The GOP's approval ratings are at an all-time low, party because they seem angry and detached. As they keep bringing up Benghazi and "Obamacare", they'll lose even more votes.

As are obamas ratings as well. It's a general referendum on the current state of washington politics. Are you implying Benghazi should no longer be brought up???????? Omg, so we should close our eyes and sweep it under the carpet? Is this another conservative conspiracy against Hillary? It was a spontaneous uprising? Do we not need to learn from our mistakes?!?!?!?!


Nope. The implementation problems were caused by a poor website and an angry mob. If you see any flaws with the ACA itself, why don't you mention them, rather than dancing around quotes and making fun of people's intellect? Or, is that all ya got?

Apologize if you interpreted as a challenge to your intellect. Not my intention.


Fuzzy was putting "Obamacare" in quotes because he didn't like the term. Now that "Obamacare" is no longer the de facto name, Fuzzy prefers the ACA because it's more accurate, and will likely use it from now on... but only because it upsets you so much.

Don't lose sleep, doesn't upset me. Obamacare is how it generally remains to be referred, and will be. His ego had hoped it would go down in history this way, and for once I now hope it does a well.

 

[B_underguy1]

Can we define what is included in that amount?

Does it include doctor visits? Does it include hospital visits? Does it include overhead insurance companies pay to comply with policies? Does a TV ad for Blue Cross Blue Shield go into the "healthcare" bucket of GDP? Does it include research (either privately or publicly funded).

The New England Journal of Medicine states that the US spent almost $120 million is R&D, where the rest of the world combined just under $150 million.

Oh, and Canada? They spent $5 million.

That spread is significant if this R&D is included in the comparison.

My point is if you are going state that the US spends a greater percentage of GDP on medical care as compared to other nations, it would only be a fair comparison if you backed out all the things that are not common between the nations.

What?

 

[Jjz1109]

What?

I guess the point has been made.

 

[B_underguy1]

I guess the point has been made.

What point?

If he wants to see the statistical basis he can find it himself. I suspect that he doesn't though.

 

[Jjz1109]

What point?

If he wants to see the statistical basis he can find it himself. I suspect that he doesn't though.

Are you afraid of learning something?

 

[craigsmith]

I'm glad the web site is working in Calif. It needs help here in Missouri.

 

[Jjz1109]

Can we define what is included in that amount?

Does it include doctor visits? Does it include hospital visits? Does it include overhead insurance companies pay to comply with policies? Does a TV ad for Blue Cross Blue Shield go into the "healthcare" bucket of GDP? Does it include research (either privately or publicly funded).

The New England Journal of Medicine states that the US spent almost $120 million is R&D, where the rest of the world combined just under $150 million.

Oh, and Canada? They spent $5 million.

That spread is significant if this R&D is included in the comparison.

My point is if you are going state that the US spends a greater percentage of GDP on medical care as compared to other nations, it would only be a fair comparison if you backed out all the things that are not common between the nations.

Admittedly, this is a complicated topic. The short answer to your question appears to be yes. The US is the leading country in spending on research and development. The result is the US also leads in the highest survival rates for certain cancers (breast and colon, for example). Another contributing factor is the broad use of costly diagnostic tests such as CT and MRIs as normal course of treatment. Many countries defer the use of these tests until further along in the process. Also, we have higher rates of certain costly surgical procedures, such as coronary and hip / knee replacements. The former the result of perhaps poor diet, the latter the result of a society that is less tolerant of pains and inconveniences, and seeks this procedure.

Granted, a major problem also contributing is our diet. Segments of our population have poor eating habits, which will require more guidance than just education, such as the desire to change habits. This is due to one of the most diverse ethnic, cultural and socio-economic populations in there world, meaning no other country has the breadth of healthcare challenge as the US. Yes, we fall down the list on life expectancy, but the difference is just over one year from the leading nation. Not significant given some of the challenges listed here.

 

[deleted213967]

Admittedly, this is a complicated topic. The short answer to your question appears to be yes. The US is the leading country in spending on research and development. The result is the US also leads in the highest survival rates for certain cancers (breast and colon, for example). Another contributing factor is the broad use of costly diagnostic tests such as CT and MRIs as normal course of treatment. Many countries defer the use of these tests until further along in the process. Also, we have higher rates of certain costly surgical procedures, such as coronary and hip / knee replacements. The former the result of perhaps poor diet, the latter the result of a society that is less tolerant of pains and inconveniences, and seeks this procedure.

Granted, a major problem also contributing is our diet. Segments of our population have poor eating habits, which will require more guidance than just education, such as the desire to change habits. This is due to one of the most diverse ethnic, cultural and socio-economic populations in there world, meaning no other country has the breadth of healthcare challenge as the US. Yes, we fall down the list on life expectancy, but the difference is just over one year from the leading nation. Not significant given some of the challenges listed here.

This is right on the money but somehow doesn't sound as sexy and charmingly simplistic as "The Koch Brothers Killed Obamacare".

 

[Jjz1109]

This is right on the money but somehow doesn't sound as sexy and charmingly simplistic as "The Koch Brothers Killed Obamacare".

Lol. Or that the angry right wing extremists want to kill off everyone in the blue states!!

 

[Klingsor]

Lol. Or that the angry right wing extremists want to kill off everyone in the blue states!!

Nah. Too busy doing it in the red.

 

[B_underguy1]

Admittedly, this is a complicated topic. The short answer to your question appears to be yes. The US is the leading country in spending on research and development. The result is the US also leads in the highest survival rates for certain cancers (breast and colon, for example). Another contributing factor is the broad use of costly diagnostic tests such as CT and MRIs as normal course of treatment. Many countries defer the use of these tests until further along in the process. Also, we have higher rates of certain costly surgical procedures, such as coronary and hip / knee replacements. The former the result of perhaps poor diet, the latter the result of a society that is less tolerant of pains and inconveniences, and seeks this procedure.

Granted, a major problem also contributing is our diet. Segments of our population have poor eating habits, which will require more guidance than just education, such as the desire to change habits. This is due to one of the most diverse ethnic, cultural and socio-economic populations in there world, meaning no other country has the breadth of healthcare challenge as the US. Yes, we fall down the list on life expectancy, but the difference is just over one year from the leading nation. Not significant given some of the challenges listed here.

What bollocks. The US system sucks money to Wall St with poor results across the spectrum.

It has nought to do with ethnic diversity. It's about access.

 

[Jjz1109]

What bollocks. The US system sucks money to Wall St with poor results across the spectrum.

It has nought to do with ethnic diversity. It's about access.

The topic has moved on to the overall cost of healthcare as a percent of GDP. The question was then raised what were the inputs to ensure for an apples to apples comparison since the US is so much higher than other countries. It appears that the disproportionately higher amount the US spends on research and development is the largest driver. Some additional contributing factors were also highlighted. Just trying to clarify the numbers, not the emotions or politics.

 

[B_underguy1]

The topic has moved on to the overall cost of healthcare as a percent of GDP. The question was then raised what were the inputs to ensure for an apples to apples comparison since the US is so much higher than other countries. It appears that the disproportionately higher amount the US spends on research and development is the largest driver. Some additional contributing factors were also highlighted. Just trying to clarify the numbers, not the emotions or politics.

If $150 million could even remotely appear to be the biggest driver to you, it doesn't say much for your maths.

 

[deleted15807]

Spot on:

'The Daily Show' Nails Why Health Care Will Never Work As A Free Market

The crux: "What does a free market usually have? There's a balance between the buyer and the seller. There is no balance now, you've got to buy that product."

 

[B_underguy1]

Spot on:

'The Daily Show' Nails Why Health Care Will Never Work As A Free Market

The crux: "What does a free market usually have? There's a balance between the buyer and the seller. There is no balance now, you've got to buy that product."

There's no such thing as a free market. It's an Orwellian absurdity.

 

[slurper_la]

The Republican Health Care Long Con
How Red States Are Holding Back Obamacare | New Republic

 

[slurper_la]

Ex-GOP Senator Now Lobbying For Medicaid Expansion
Ex-GOP Senator Now Lobbying For Medicaid Expansion


Utah To Expand Medicaid Under Obamacare, GOP Governor Announces
Utah To Expand Medicaid Under Obamacare, GOP Governor Announces

Obamacare Signups For Private Plans Surpass 3 Million
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/24/obamacare-sign-ups-january_n_4659439.html

New McConnell Campaign: Further Left On Healthcare Than Obama?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/24/mcconnell-obama-healthcar_n_4661694.html

.

 

[B_underguy1]

New McConnell Campaign: Further Left On Healthcare Than Obama?
New McConnell Campaign: Further Left On Healthcare Than Obama?

.

are actually more aggressively liberal than Obamacare,


Sorry, but what the F does that mean?