UJRefugees.net

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:48 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:18 am The 8th amendment requirement that prisoners are given "adequate medical care" (Estelle v. Gamble). If The Constitution requires it for prisoners who are the worst of us, by definition. How can the innocent not be required to be free from the same "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain".

Well, because the innocent are not in the custody of the state.

So much for promoting the general welfare

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:58 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:48 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:18 am The 8th amendment requirement that prisoners are given "adequate medical care" (Estelle v. Gamble). If The Constitution requires it for prisoners who are the worst of us, by definition. How can the innocent not be required to be free from the same "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain".

Well, because the innocent are not in the custody of the state.

So much for promoting the general welfare

But that’s the point. I’m not arguing against health care per se, but against the false equivalence of state custody v state responsibility.

Does the state owe you food? Shelter? Cable? Internet? A job? A car? A mate? Etc etc. I promise, whatever they do, it will not be enough.

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 6:11 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:58 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:48 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:18 am The 8th amendment requirement that prisoners are given "adequate medical care" (Estelle v. Gamble). If The Constitution requires it for prisoners who are the worst of us, by definition. How can the innocent not be required to be free from the same "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain".

Well, because the innocent are not in the custody of the state.

So much for promoting the general welfare

But that’s the point. I’m not arguing against health care per se, but against the false equivalence of state custody v state responsibility.

Does the state owe you food? Shelter? Cable? Internet? A job? A car? A mate? Etc etc. I promise, whatever they do, it will not be enough.

The State owes you the opportunity to gain all those things on your own, a sick populous is not a productive populous

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:49 pm

Who wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 2:49 am

Ohhh, because he's fat! I get it!

If that's what you're seeing, you're seeing it wrong. Symptom of too much Faux Nooz scrambling brain.

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:05 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 6:11 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:58 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:48 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:18 am The 8th amendment requirement that prisoners are given "adequate medical care" (Estelle v. Gamble). If The Constitution requires it for prisoners who are the worst of us, by definition. How can the innocent not be required to be free from the same "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain".

Well, because the innocent are not in the custody of the state.

So much for promoting the general welfare

But that’s the point. I’m not arguing against health care per se, but against the false equivalence of state custody v state responsibility.

Does the state owe you food? Shelter? Cable? Internet? A job? A car? A mate? Etc etc. I promise, whatever they do, it will not be enough.

The State owes you the opportunity to gain all those things on your own, a sick populous is not a productive populous

Nor hungry, nor unclothed, nor without shelter, nor... see how that works?

FSchmertz wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:28 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:49 pm

Who wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 2:49 am

Ohhh, because he's fat! I get it!

If that's what you're seeing, you're seeing it wrong. Symptom of too much Faux Nooz scrambling brain.

They're not making fun of the fact that he's overweight? Not including that in the joke? So if he was thin, would that work, then?
I don't watch Fox, or TV at all, except for netflix, amazon prime and walking dead.

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:59 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:05 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 6:11 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:58 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:48 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:18 am The 8th amendment requirement that prisoners are given "adequate medical care" (Estelle v. Gamble). If The Constitution requires it for prisoners who are the worst of us, by definition. How can the innocent not be required to be free from the same "unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain".

Well, because the innocent are not in the custody of the state.

So much for promoting the general welfare

But that’s the point. I’m not arguing against health care per se, but against the false equivalence of state custody v state responsibility.

Does the state owe you food? Shelter? Cable? Internet? A job? A car? A mate? Etc etc. I promise, whatever they do, it will not be enough.

The State owes you the opportunity to gain all those things on your own, a sick populous is not a productive populous

Nor hungry, nor unclothed, nor without shelter, nor... see how that works?

No, healthcare is the discussion

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 8:10 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:59 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:05 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 6:11 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:58 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:48 pm Well, because the innocent are not in the custody of the state.

So much for promoting the general welfare

But that’s the point. I’m not arguing against health care per se, but against the false equivalence of state custody v state responsibility.

Does the state owe you food? Shelter? Cable? Internet? A job? A car? A mate? Etc etc. I promise, whatever they do, it will not be enough.

The State owes you the opportunity to gain all those things on your own, a sick populous is not a productive populous

Nor hungry, nor unclothed, nor without shelter, nor... see how that works?

No, healthcare is the discussion

And, by calling in other necessities of life, we can ask if the original premise holds water?
If the state owes you health care, doesn't it also owe you other things not provided?

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 8:39 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 8:10 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:59 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 7:05 pm

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 6:11 pm

CaptQuint wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 5:58 pm So much for promoting the general welfare

But that’s the point. I’m not arguing against health care per se, but against the false equivalence of state custody v state responsibility.

Does the state owe you food? Shelter? Cable? Internet? A job? A car? A mate? Etc etc. I promise, whatever they do, it will not be enough.

The State owes you the opportunity to gain all those things on your own, a sick populous is not a productive populous

Nor hungry, nor unclothed, nor without shelter, nor... see how that works?

No, healthcare is the discussion

And, by calling in other necessities of life, we can ask if the original premise holds water?
If the state owes you health care, doesn't it also owe you other things not provided?

It owes you Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

If they spend my taxes shouldn't i have a say in how it's distributed. I prefer healthcare over war

Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Charliesheen wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 4:37 am Bullshit. The poor dear goes to any emergency room and gets treated for whatever. The bill goes to nobody.

And you are still too fucking stupid to see that preventing the reason for going to the emergency room is cheaper than treating it afterwards.

Stapes wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 8:59 pm If they spend my taxes shouldn't i have a say in how it's distributed. I prefer healthcare over war

So do I. But can you imagine what the world will look like without the United States at the forefront? Seriously, think about how things would change. Some for the better, but what about the downsides? Interesting exercise.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

I recently read a headline that trannies were upset because they couldn't get tiddies thanks to mastectomies. What kind of monsters are you?!

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

Cassandros wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:50 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

Those would be the least wasteful parts, if you exclude them it is just even less efficient. Take a simple blood test, performed millions of times a year, it can cost from $11 to $950, and how much your insurer will pay your provider is likely to be a secret you won't know until you get the bill.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/upsh ... ncies.html

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 12:08 am

Cassandros wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:50 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

Those would be the least wasteful parts, if you exclude them it is just even less efficient. Take a simple blood test, performed millions of times a year, it can cost from $11 to $950, and how much your insurer will pay your provider is likely to be a secret you won't know until you get the bill.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/upsh ... ncies.html

Ok, first off you completely wrong about which side of the coin is most wasteful. Medicare by itself wasted 60 billion dollars in 2015 alone.

Second, as long as insurance is in the mix --> healthcare will always be an un-affordable mess. Something you link does in fact suggest, but is too pathetic to outright say.

Cassandros wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 12:31 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 12:08 am

Cassandros wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:50 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

Those would be the least wasteful parts, if you exclude them it is just even less efficient. Take a simple blood test, performed millions of times a year, it can cost from $11 to $950, and how much your insurer will pay your provider is likely to be a secret you won't know until you get the bill.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/upsh ... ncies.html

Ok, first off you completely wrong about which side of the coin is most wasteful. Medicare by itself wasted 60 billion dollars in 2015 alone.

Second, as long as insurance is in the mix --> healthcare will always be an un-affordable mess. Something you link does in fact suggest, but is too pathetic to outright say.

When comparing which of two things is more wasteful, looking at only one and saying that's a jolly big number doesn't really get you there.

Both private insurance systems, e.g. Germany, and single payer public insurance systems, e.g. Britain, can produce far more efficient and cost effective systems. The US approach of a patchwork of private insurers with secret price lists doesn't work so well. Have you picked up some fundamental conspiracy style misunderstanding of what insurance is, like you did with what the fed is?

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 12:39 am

Cassandros wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 12:31 am

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 12:08 am

Cassandros wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:50 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

Those would be the least wasteful parts, if you exclude them it is just even less efficient. Take a simple blood test, performed millions of times a year, it can cost from $11 to $950, and how much your insurer will pay your provider is likely to be a secret you won't know until you get the bill.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/upsh ... ncies.html

Ok, first off you completely wrong about which side of the coin is most wasteful. Medicare by itself wasted 60 billion dollars in 2015 alone.

Second, as long as insurance is in the mix --> healthcare will always be an un-affordable mess. Something you link does in fact suggest, but is too pathetic to outright say.

When comparing which of two things is more wasteful, looking at only one and saying that's a jolly big number doesn't really get you there.

Both private insurance systems, e.g. Germany, and single payer public insurance systems, e.g. Britain, can produce far more efficient and cost effective systems. The US approach of a patchwork of private insurers with secret price lists doesn't work so well. Have you picked up some fundamental conspiracy style misunderstanding of what insurance is, like you did with what the fed is?

Citation needed. Government is synonymous with wasteful spending, to act like the UK and Germany are somehow the exception is a very bold claim, I look forward to seeing the numbers.

Also, you seem to be confusing price gouging for waste. Big difference. But feel free to show me some numbers of actual waste by the non-government funded aspects of US healthcare so we can compare. Afterwards we should then look at the waste for the unregulated aspects for an even better comparison. But you are fairly bright and probably know exactly where such a side by side comparison will lead.

I worked with health insurance for many years. In a nutshell this is how it works: hospital wants a minimum amount of money for X procedure. Insurance company get a contracted rate, discounting the base cost said procedure (usually by a percentage). Hospital increases the base price for x procedure so that after the contract percentage is applied, they get at least the minimal amount they originally wanted (often/ideally more). Anyone with shitty insurance, or no insurance, pays the inflated price.

If we remove insurance from the equation and reintroduce competition --> healthcare cost will fall while actual services would improve. Guaranteed.

Cassandros wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 1:12 am
Citation needed. Government is synonymous with wasteful spending, to act like the UK and Germany are somehow the exception is a very bold claim, I look forward to seeing the numbers.

Also, you seem to be confusing price gouging for waste. Big difference. But feel free to show me some numbers of actual waste by the non-government funded aspects of US healthcare so we can compare. Afterwards we should then look at the waste for the unregulated aspects for an even better comparison. But you are fairly bright and probably know exactly where such a side by side comparison will lead.

I worked with health insurance for many years. In a nutshell this is how it works: hospital wants a minimum amount of money for X procedure. Insurance company get a contracted rate, discounting the base cost said procedure (usually by a percentage). Hospital increases the base price for x procedure so that after the contract percentage is applied, they get at least the minimal amount they originally wanted (often/ideally more). Anyone with shitty insurance, or no insurance, pays the inflated price.

If we remove insurance from the equation and reintroduce competition --> healthcare cost will fall while actual services would improve. Guaranteed.

Citation for what? The fact that the US and German healthcare systems cover everyone with better outcomes for half the cost per capita? Are we somehow achieving that while also wasting way more than some comparison you won't specify?

Price gouging is a form of waste, one largely eliminated with single payer and higher in private versus public spending for the US, along with all other forms of waste-
https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.137 ... 5587/full/

As always you don't know what you are talking about. And how on earth do you imagine any healthcare system could work without insurance? Most people simply could not afford the big bills, it does not work without risk pools.

Cassandros wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:50 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:29 pm

Antknot wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 10:25 pm

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 9:34 pm Welfare, HUD and foodstamps do in fact exist. It may not work as well as other developed countries, but y'all do basically recognise that food, shelter, clothing, education, basic healthcare etc are basic necessities of life and the government has a role in providing those things to the helpless. The question from there is just one of efficiency.

Government efficiency.

Compare healthcare spending and results in the US and UK.

It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

One reason is insurance itself. If you pay cash you can get a 25% discount. They gouge the insurance companies for the fights and aggravation, and the insurance companies gouge us. Look at a hospital bill.

AnalHamster wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 1:43 am

Cassandros wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 1:12 am
Citation needed. Government is synonymous with wasteful spending, to act like the UK and Germany are somehow the exception is a very bold claim, I look forward to seeing the numbers.

Also, you seem to be confusing price gouging for waste. Big difference. But feel free to show me some numbers of actual waste by the non-government funded aspects of US healthcare so we can compare. Afterwards we should then look at the waste for the unregulated aspects for an even better comparison. But you are fairly bright and probably know exactly where such a side by side comparison will lead.

I worked with health insurance for many years. In a nutshell this is how it works: hospital wants a minimum amount of money for X procedure. Insurance company get a contracted rate, discounting the base cost said procedure (usually by a percentage). Hospital increases the base price for x procedure so that after the contract percentage is applied, they get at least the minimal amount they originally wanted (often/ideally more). Anyone with shitty insurance, or no insurance, pays the inflated price.

If we remove insurance from the equation and reintroduce competition --> healthcare cost will fall while actual services would improve. Guaranteed.

Citation for what? The fact that the US and German healthcare systems cover everyone with better outcomes for half the cost per capita? Are we somehow achieving that while also wasting way more than some comparison you won't specify?

Price gouging is a form of waste, one largely eliminated with single payer and higher in private versus public spending for the US, along with all other forms of waste-
https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.137 ... 5587/full/

As always you don't know what you are talking about. And how on earth do you imagine any healthcare system could work without insurance? Most people simply could not afford the big bills, it does not work without risk pools.

Hehe, more insults. Classic...

Price gouging != waste. But, for some weird reason it is often presented as one and the same. (I guess its easier to skew the data that way, thus easier to manipulate the narrative. But whatever...).

A couple quick examples:
-Its estimated (by the National Academy of Medicine) that unnecessary and needless care cost $210 billion a year.
-Vimovo. If you don't know a big pharma co discovered two non-patented drugs are often used together so they combined them 'for the consumer' and raised the price from ~$40 for a months supply to over $3000, all under the guise of convenience.

These are labeled "waste" but its not actually wasteful. Its price gouging.

The only true way to eliminate price gouging (and waste in general) is to make these entities compete for peoples money.

VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Mon May 06, 2019 1:46 am

Cassandros wrote: ↑Sun May 05, 2019 11:50 pm
It would be interesting to see that comparison when the most wasteful (and most socialist) aspects of US healthcare (VA, medicare, medicaid...) are excluded.

Even more so if we also included non-regulated aspects of US Healthcare into the mix.

There is a reason why Healthcare cost are constantly increasing* in America; but not for the reasons you probably think.

*= Constantly increasing for regulated and insurable healthcare. Non-regulated healthcare that does not utilize insurance is actually becoming cheaper.

One reason is insurance itself. If you pay cash you can get a 25% discount. They gouge the insurance companies for the fights and aggravation, and the insurance companies gouge us. Look at a hospital bill.

Oh hell yeah. Insurance has become a devil unto itself.

Though from my experience the self pay discount is usually between 5 - 25% (with hospitals in my area tend to be 15%; and often they want the full amount at once to give you the discount).

Compared that to the usual 40-60% insurance gets... I have personally seen that number as high as 86%... and you can see someone is getting screwed. But that isn't enough, with the ever raising out of pocket maxes and deductible amounts- even if you are insured you are getting raked over the coals.

And sadly this is just the tip of the Healthcare Industrial Complex iceberg.