Both parties not serious about deficit; $750 billion wasted per year in health care

PHOENIX TRADING · Dec 22, 2012

Quote from tmarket:

The U.S. health care system squanders $750 billion a year â roughly 30 cents of every medical dollar â through unneeded care, byzantine paperwork, fraud and other waste. That is the report from the Institute of Medicine, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, an independent organization that advises the government.

That's just too GD funny, the byzantine paperwork is present directly as a result of govt regs. How is more gubbermint going to fix that.

I got news for ya it ain't, it's only going to increase the problems.

pspr · Dec 22, 2012

Quote from PHOENIX TRADING:

That's just too GD funny, the byzantine paperwork is present directly as a result of govt regs. How is more gubbermint going to fix that.

I got news for ya it ain't, it's only going to increase the problems.

Haven't you heard, PT? Obama is going to squeeze the inefficiencies out of the healthcare system. He has already squeezed $700 billion out of Medicare by cutting payments to those vastly over paid doctors accepting Medicare patients. Who knows what other inefficiencies he can find to cut out of medicine and channel that "saved" money to his pet projects and donors.

Remember all those jobs Obama "saved," that contributed so much to the explosive economic recovery Michelle said we are having?

piezoe · Dec 22, 2012

Quote from kmgilroy89:

Our healthcare spending is out of control. Our government spends more per person in healthcare than all, but a few countries and those countries cover everyone. The US Government spends more in healthcare per person than Australia or the UK spend in both public and private healthcare, and they cover everyone while we don't. The Dems had a chance to modernize the healthcare system to the rest of the world, but decided to make healthcare spending more expensive with Obamacare. The GOP passed Medicare Part D under Bush which forces the government to buy drugs at retail cost. Both parties are to blame for this bloated healthcare system.

Indeed, both parties are at fault. I opposed Obama care in its final convoluted form. Had the public option been retained I could have been somewhat more enthusiastic. That was a major cost control feature, but the Republicans killed it.

The campaign against it was based on characterizing the public option, which was designed to be paygo, as socialism, which, even though optional, it would have become if premiums for the poor were subsidized, which they would have been. That is not, however, why the Republicans killed it. They killed it because the insurance industry wanted it killed. As it turned out, we taxpayers will not only subsidize the insurance premiums of the poor, but also the profits of the insurance sector. If it were true that the private sector could do the job more efficiently and at lower cost, then that sector would have had nothing to fear from the public option. Obviously, it scared the bejesus out of them, because they stood to lose profits on the taxpayer subsidy of low wage workers' premiums. What does that tell you about who can do the job more efficiently and at lower cost?

Capitalism, despite its desirable features, stinks when supply and demand are not elastic. Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that and recognize that capitalism is less well suited to some sectors of the economy than others.

BSAM · Dec 23, 2012

Quote from piezoe:

Indeed, both parties are at fault. I opposed Obama care in its final convoluted form. Had the public option been retained I could have been somewhat more enthusiastic. That was a major cost control feature, but the Republicans killed it.

The campaign against it was based on characterizing the public option, which was designed to be paygo, as socialism, which, even though optional, it would have become if premiums for the poor were subsidized, which they would have been. That is not, however, why the Republicans killed it. They killed it because the insurance industry wanted it killed. As it turned out, we taxpayers will not only subsidize the insurance premiums of the poor, but also the profits of the insurance sector. If it were true that the private sector could do the job more efficiently and at lower cost, then that sector would have had nothing to fear from the public option. Obviously, it scared the bejesus out of them, because they stood to lose profits on the taxpayer subsidy of low wage workers' premiums. What does that tell you about who can do the job more efficiently and at lower cost?

Capitalism, despite its desirable features, stinks when supply and demand are not elastic. Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that and recognize that capitalism is less well suited to some sectors of the economy than others.

Hold up, brother Pie.
Think about it.
If you were a whore, wouldn't you want to keep your clients happy, too?

PHOENIX TRADING · Dec 23, 2012

Quote from piezoe:

Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that and recognize that capitalism is less well suited to some sectors of the economy than others. [/B]

What a collection of stupidity.

zdreg · Dec 23, 2012

Quote from piezoe:

Indeed, both parties are at fault. I opposed Obama care in its final convoluted form. Had the public option been retained I could have been somewhat more enthusiastic. That was a major cost control feature, but the Republicans killed it.

The campaign against it was based on characterizing the public option, which was designed to be paygo, as socialism, which, even though optional, it would have become if premiums for the poor were subsidized, which they would have been. That is not, however, why the Republicans killed it. They killed it because the insurance industry wanted it killed. As it turned out, we taxpayers will not only subsidize the insurance premiums of the poor, but also the profits of the insurance sector. If it were true that the private sector could do the job more efficiently and at lower cost, then that sector would have had nothing to fear from the public option. Obviously, it scared the bejesus out of them, because they stood to lose profits on the taxpayer subsidy of low wage workers' premiums. What does that tell you about who can do the job more efficiently and at lower cost?

Capitalism, despite its desirable features, stinks when supply and demand are not elastic. Perhaps it is time to acknowledge that and recognize that capitalism is less well suited to some sectors of the economy than others.

post office
public school education
private monopolies sanctioned by govt e.g. cable inmost cities
public transit
welfare

pupu · Dec 23, 2012

Health care cost are perfectly fine and under control
stop whining and men up

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-sty...0-000-year-state-data-shows-article-1.1144838

As long as you pay in American dollars you are getting something for nothing

USA!USA!USA! Guns and Bibles for all.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/tcM6YQ3NPlE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

jem · Dec 23, 2012

Quote from BSAM:

We need true national health care, not just a health care system for veterans, old people, and the poor.
What we got now is USA Scamcare.

What we need is USA Care....period.

its a shame the one thing the dems could have done while they had control of all 3 branches... they let the insurance companies do muck it up even more. miserable sell outs.

piezoe · Dec 23, 2012

Oh! THOSE whores!

kmgilroy89 · Dec 23, 2012

Quote from jem:

its a shame the one thing the dems could have done while they had control of all 3 branches... they let the insurance companies do muck it up even more. miserable sell outs.

The Dems sold out to big insurance, the Reps sold out to big pharma earlier in the decade, everybody else has gotten screwed.