debates

[Fiveflat]

[Iwndr]

Since he did not get it done.... That is a promise we can help him keep

[Nobody]

Spending as well as the budget was a partisanship deal guys.

Health care, Wall street reform, Bank Reform, Mortgage Reform was bipartisan.

They all lie.

[talltigeguy]

I'm a little taken aback by the disingenuousness of the argument that private, for profit insurance will pull us out of the healthcare spiral that they've presided over for the past 40 years. Remember when docs said that HMOs and PPOs would ruin healthcare? They haven't and docs and the insurance companies still make money.

What's the explanation for healthcare costs outpacing inflation year after year after year BEFORE obamacare?

I'm a dem. I don't want more people on welfare. None of my friends who are dems do either. I do want us to have a social safetynet that works when times are bad. If the safetynet is only there when times are good, what kind of safteynet is that?

.

Having talked to you and seeing your posts, I know you to be a rational and genuine person, unlike Nobody. So I am glad you are here. I appreciate your insight.

The healthcare problem is super complicated.
A few random thoughts:

The passing of Obamacare has spurred my company to do some great things. It also has spurred us to do some paperwork and other nonsense that will not improve patient care.

One of the few times that healthcare costs in recent history kept pace only with inflation was in the HMO era. The HMO's limited benefits, plain and simple. They fell because people hated that. One high profile case was a woman with widely spread breast cancer wanted a multimillion dollar bone marrow transplant as a last ditch effort to save her life. Despite the fact that the therapy had not been proven to increase her survival, she sued to get it. The HMO's reputations were tarnished, and they fell. We then returned to double digit healthcare growth.

Americans spend more on 'rescue' care by far than any other country. We do things for 90 year olds that they would never dream of in other countries. I think specialists do this more than primary care. I have been there after the specialists have been wailing on grandma for 3 weeks on a ventilator, and a short heart to heart with the family reveals that grandma and none of her children really wanted this for her. It is easier, and a lot funner to do more procedures and tests. Talking to family about end of life issues is hard. It is emotionally draining to providers, and can be time consuming as well. The republicans branded this as 'death panels'. Unless we tackle the problem of rescue care, we will struggle.

We bear the costs of research for novel procedures and drugs that the rest of the world benefits from. If we cut reimbursement for new drugs and procedures, then there will be less new drugs and procedures, plain and simple. How much is enough? 1 in 7 dollars spent in the US today is spent in the healthcare realm. Think about that for a minute. 1 in 7 out of every dollar spent in the US today will be on health care.

Americans are self-destructive. Many point to our failure to be the best at infant mortality. But most countries don't have nearly as many 13 year old crack whores having babies like we do. And they don't try to rescue babies born 4 months early to said mothers. (see rescue care above). Other countries call that a stillborn, or miscarriage. No doubt that we can do better, even if we adjust for full term babies, we are not at the top, and we should be.

Rambling over for now.

[Nobody]

Having talked to you and seeing your posts, I know you to be a rational and genuine person, unlike Nobody. So I am glad you are here. I appreciate your insight.

That just flat out hurt and you should be banned for such reckless behavior.

[MoneyPity]

Good debate!

X2.

I for once agree with Nobody

After four years it is time for a change. I as an independent wish the choices were better.

[dom w. forte]

Spending as well as the budget was a partisanship deal guys.

Health care, Wall street reform, Bank Reform, Mortgage Reform was bipartisan.

They all lie.

NOT FOR THE FIRST 2.5 YEARS OF HIS FIRST TERM, IT WAS ALL DEMS, DIDNT NEED OR USE THE OTHER PARTY, FOR THE STIMULUS OR HEALTHCARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[shawndoggy]

NOT FOR THE FIRST 2.5 YEARS OF HIS FIRST TERM, IT WAS ALL DEMS, DIDNT NEED OR USE THE OTHER PARTY, FOR THE STIMULUS OR HEALTHCARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Doesn't that tend to show how disengaged the Rs were in the house? 11 D's also voted against.

Three R senators did vote for the stimulus.

I'd love to see some erosion of the two party "pick a team and root for a win" system we have. People get so caught up in us vs. them that our pols won't work together for the common good.

[Nobody]

NOT FOR THE FIRST 2.5 YEARS OF HIS FIRST TERM, IT WAS ALL DEMS, DIDNT NEED OR USE THE OTHER PARTY, FOR THE STIMULUS OR HEALTHCARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To control the senate, you need what's known as the Majority, or 60%.

Democrats had a 60 seat majority from September 24, 2009 thru February 4, 2010. 4 months; not 2.5 years!!

And Shawndoggy's correct, both parties had members cross the lines.

Geez Louise!!

[shawndoggy]

Having talked to you and seeing your posts, I know you to be a rational and genuine person, unlike Nobody. So I am glad you are here. I appreciate your insight.

The healthcare problem is super complicated.
A few random thoughts:

The passing of Obamacare has spurred my company to do some great things. It also has spurred us to do some paperwork and other nonsense that will not improve patient care.

One of the few times that healthcare costs in recent history kept pace only with inflation was in the HMO era. The HMO's limited benefits, plain and simple. They fell because people hated that. One high profile case was a woman with widely spread breast cancer wanted a multimillion dollar bone marrow transplant as a last ditch effort to save her life. Despite the fact that the therapy had not been proven to increase her survival, she sued to get it. The HMO's reputations were tarnished, and they fell. We then returned to double digit healthcare growth.

Americans spend more on 'rescue' care by far than any other country. We do things for 90 year olds that they would never dream of in other countries. I think specialists do this more than primary care. I have been there after the specialists have been wailing on grandma for 3 weeks on a ventilator, and a short heart to heart with the family reveals that grandma and none of her children really wanted this for her. It is easier, and a lot funner to do more procedures and tests. Talking to family about end of life issues is hard. It is emotionally draining to providers, and can be time consuming as well. The republicans branded this as 'death panels'. Unless we tackle the problem of rescue care, we will struggle.

We bear the costs of research for novel procedures and drugs that the rest of the world benefits from. If we cut reimbursement for new drugs and procedures, then there will be less new drugs and procedures, plain and simple. How much is enough? 1 in 7 dollars spent in the US today is spent in the healthcare realm. Think about that for a minute. 1 in 7 out of every dollar spent in the US today will be on health care.

Americans are self-destructive. Many point to our failure to be the best at infant mortality. But most countries don't have nearly as many 13 year old crack whores having babies like we do. And they don't try to rescue babies born 4 months early to said mothers. (see rescue care above). Other countries call that a stillborn, or miscarriage. No doubt that we can do better, even if we adjust for full term babies, we are not at the top, and we should be.

Rambling over for now.

Great stuff TTG. I don't have an answer either, but somewhere in the debate about rationing and death panels there is some sense to be made.

[Timmy!]

The first Obama stimulus yielded 0 votes from the GOP and passed with all but 12 Dem's voting for it.

[shawndoggy]

There are two chambers in congress. You are correct about the house, but three Rs voted in favor in the senate. So it's incorrect to San no GOP votes.

[Nobody]

There are two chambers in congress. You are correct about the house, but three Rs voted in favor in the senate. So it's incorrect to San no GOP votes.

And we must answer the question, why?

Why did the R's say no to health care, stimulus, Wall Street reform, bank reform?

[dom w. forte]

And we must answer the question, why?

Why did the R's say no to health care, stimulus, Wall Street reform, bank reform?

Non of what passed worked , so maybe just maybe thats why they didnt want it.

[dom w. forte]

The bottom line ,is my family or bussiness better off since he took office?? Answer no, we havent had it this bad since the Carter administration, thank goodness he only had 4 years.