The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sat Nov 23, 2024 1:01 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 215 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Will Obamacare be overturned by the SCOTUS?
The Supreme Court will completely overturn Obamacare 19%  19%  [ 4 ]
The SC will only overturn the individual mandate 52%  52%  [ 11 ]
The SC will leave the bill intact. 24%  24%  [ 5 ]
Will what be overturned by who? 5%  5%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 21
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:28 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
RangerDave wrote:
Rynar wrote:
Total horseshit. The more an institution or industry is bureaucratized the less efficient it becomes. There is nothing government or monopoly does more efficiently than the market.

I'll take "Ideological Absolutism" for $1000, Alex.

The mechanism by which markets achieve efficiency is competition, and there are a number of factors weighing against effective competition in the market for health care, as noted in my post. A blanket statement that every market for every product that ever was or ever will be must always, by its very nature as a "market", be efficiency-maximizing is just dogmatism.

Save your snark, and give me a supply chain or an industry that responds the way you've described. Furthermore, explain how healthcare costs have decreased as they have become more bureaucratized.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Last edited by Rynar on Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 4:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
I'm just talking basic market theory here, so I think all industries should respond the way I've described - i.e. information asymmetries, time-sensitive trades, lack of substitutes, price inelasticity, and lack of effective comparisons will tend to limit effective competition and move the market away from optimal efficiency.

As for health care costs and bureaucratization, sure, extra bureaucracy (whether governmental or corporate) will typically raise the price of a product, all else being equal. But all else is rarely equal. For example, if that extra bureaucracy improves transparency, thereby reducing the aforementioned information asymmetries and improving the ability of consumers to make useful comparisons among providers, the net effect might actually be efficiency-improving.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 5:17 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
RangerDave wrote:
Um, according to basic market theory...all industries respond the way I've described - i.e. information asymmetries, time-sensitive trades, lack of substitutes, price inelasticity, and lack of effective comparisons will tend to limit effective competition and move the market away from optimal efficiency. Are you seriously disputing that?

All of that is relative to it's own industry, and not to other industries. Healthcare may be more or less responsive to those variables that other industries. The truth is we'll never know, because a modern comparison will never be permitted. However, even competition limited to the point of barely existing is better than no competition. Competition finds a way to improve services and costs, because in order to make money you have to have market share. If your competitor has better services and prices, you'll lose customers, so the drive is always consumer friendly.

In our country we have thousands of different industries, and the ones in which our government is most heavily involved see the highest inflation rates, by far. This is the effect of monopoly, government or otherwise.

Quote:
As for health care costs and bureaucratization, sure, extra bureaucracy (whether governmental or corporate) will typically raise the price of a product, all else being equal. But all else is rarely equal. For example, if that extra bureaucracy improves transparency, thereby reducing information asymmetries and improving the ability of consumers to make comparisons, the net effect might actually be efficiency-improving.

Are you kidding me? List for me some documented examples of effective laws improving transparency, with data points. Also, how do you suppose that the least transparent entity in our in our country can make something more transparent by sticking it's fingers in?

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:03 pm 
Offline
Manchurian Mod
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:40 am
Posts: 5866

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:27 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rynar wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Xequecal wrote:
Did you miss the part where I acknowledged the fact that private health care would result in a large increase in efficiency?

This is not a given by any stretch. Pretty much everything about the nature of health care makes it a bad fit for efficient market competition - there's a massive information asymmetry between supplier and consumer; delaying or foregoing purchase is often not an option; substitute products are limited or non-existent; willingness-to-pay for the most expensive care (i.e. the life-saving kind) is virtually unlimited; the ability to compare quality of care from one provider to the next is minimal; and so on.

Total horseshit. The more an institution or industry is bureaucratized the less efficient it becomes. There is nothing government or monopoly does more efficiently than the market.


Image

Image

Image

Although, if you'd ever experienced the healthcare any of those provide, you'd know why Obamacare is a bad idea.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:29 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:
RangerDave wrote:
Xequecal wrote:
Did you miss the part where I acknowledged the fact that private health care would result in a large increase in efficiency?

This is not a given by any stretch. Pretty much everything about the nature of health care makes it a bad fit for efficient market competition - there's a massive information asymmetry between supplier and consumer; delaying or foregoing purchase is often not an option; substitute products are limited or non-existent; willingness-to-pay for the most expensive care (i.e. the life-saving kind) is virtually unlimited; the ability to compare quality of care from one provider to the next is minimal; and so on.

Total horseshit. The more an institution or industry is bureaucratized the less efficient it becomes. There is nothing government or monopoly does more efficiently than the market.


Image

Image

Image

Although, if you'd ever experienced the healthcare any of those provide, you'd know why Obamacare is a bad idea.

And none of that is built by the government. It's built by private corporations.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:31 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rynar wrote:
And none of that is built by the government. It's built by private corporations.


Do any of those things look like they are under construction to you?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:33 pm 
Offline
The Dancing Cat
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 04, 2009 2:21 pm
Posts: 9354
Location: Ohio
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:
And none of that is built by the government. It's built by private corporations.


Do any of those things look like they are under construction to you?

Also don't we rely on "contractors" in Iraq and Afghanistan?

_________________
Quote:
In comic strips the person on the left always speaks first. - George Carlin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:35 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Understood. However, given my above point that competition makes for efficiency, I still hold that warfare itself is no different. I'm content to allow governments to handle that, and make it less efficient, however, given the ramifications of exponentially increasing the efficiency of killing thousands of people.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:40 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Hopwin wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:
And none of that is built by the government. It's built by private corporations.


Do any of those things look like they are under construction to you?

Also don't we rely on "contractors" in Iraq and Afghanistan?


We use contractors for certain things, but there are a lot of things they simply don't do, or couldn't do. Contractors are ruled by their contracts. If every shift in political or tactical realities required re-negotiationg the contract to meet it, you'd never get anything did and it would cost a million dollars for one guy to guard the chow hall. The contract would put the tax code to shame for length, too. As it is, military contracting is an utter nightmare, it tends to lead to waste, fraud, and abuse, and.. I better stop. I could rant about it for days.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 6:42 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rynar wrote:
Understood. However, given my above point that competition makes for efficiency, I still hold that warfare itself is no different. I'm content to allow governments to handle that, and make it less efficient, however, given the ramifications of exponentially increasing the efficiency of killing thousands of people.


I think you'd also quickly find that having all the weapons in the hands of corporations without corresponding governmental power would quickly mean the corporation is the government.

You also might find that killing people would drop considerably in efficiency. Corporations might be considerably more reluctant to engage in competition when that competition might result in a 2000-lb bomb landing in the board of directors meeting.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 7:33 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:
Understood. However, given my above point that competition makes for efficiency, I still hold that warfare itself is no different. I'm content to allow governments to handle that, and make it less efficient, however, given the ramifications of exponentially increasing the efficiency of killing thousands of people.


I think you'd also quickly find that having all the weapons in the hands of corporations without corresponding governmental power would quickly mean the corporation is the government.

You also might find that killing people would drop considerably in efficiency. Corporations might be considerably more reluctant to engage in competition when that competition might result in a 2000-lb bomb landing in the board of directors meeting.

I'm skeptical that the warfare would be conducted with anything so antiquated as a 2000-lb. bomb.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Jun 29, 2012 8:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Corolinth wrote:

See, the reason businessmen who can make difficult but significant financial decisions to make sure that at the end of the day their books are squared away don't end up in government is because government thinks it doesn't need to square its books.

Diamondeye wrote:
I think you'd also quickly find that having all the weapons in the hands of corporations without corresponding governmental power would quickly mean the corporation is the government.

You say that as if the bolded isn't already virtually the case.

_________________
"Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee
"... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:28 pm
Posts: 476
Location: The 10th circle
<3 Neil


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 6:49 am 
Offline
Has a plan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 pm
Posts: 1584
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:
Understood. However, given my above point that competition makes for efficiency, I still hold that warfare itself is no different. I'm content to allow governments to handle that, and make it less efficient, however, given the ramifications of exponentially increasing the efficiency of killing thousands of people.


I think you'd also quickly find that having all the weapons in the hands of corporations without corresponding governmental power would quickly mean the corporation is the government.

You also might find that killing people would drop considerably in efficiency. Corporations might be considerably more reluctant to engage in competition when that competition might result in a 2000-lb bomb landing in the board of directors meeting.



Which is why Elmo should be able to have a tactical nuke. Or why the people of California should be able to have a 50 caliber semi/full auto if they choose. Any power that's only in a few hands is going to be misused.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Hannibal wrote:
Which is why Elmo Timothy McVeigh, Richard Reid, Nidal Malik Hasan and each of these fine fellows should be able to have a tactical nuke. Or why the people of California members of the People's Temple, the Solar Temple, Heaven's Gate, the Crips, the Bloods, Los Zetas, and the Aryan Brotherhood should be able to have a 50 caliber semi/full auto if they choose.

FTFY.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:36 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
Wow RD really?

So lets restrict the rights of all people based on the actions of the most crazy.

No voting - people have committed fraud.
No driving - people have driven drunk.
No speech - people have lied under oath.

Law school has been extremely detrimental to your moral reasoning.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 10:36 am
Posts: 3083
Elmarnieh wrote:
So lets restrict the rights of all people based on the actions of the most crazy.

When we're talking about the kind of guaranteed mass casualties you get with WMDs? ****. The .50 cal I have less of a problem with.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:43 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rynar wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
Rynar wrote:
Understood. However, given my above point that competition makes for efficiency, I still hold that warfare itself is no different. I'm content to allow governments to handle that, and make it less efficient, however, given the ramifications of exponentially increasing the efficiency of killing thousands of people.


I think you'd also quickly find that having all the weapons in the hands of corporations without corresponding governmental power would quickly mean the corporation is the government.

You also might find that killing people would drop considerably in efficiency. Corporations might be considerably more reluctant to engage in competition when that competition might result in a 2000-lb bomb landing in the board of directors meeting.

I'm skeptical that the warfare would be conducted with anything so antiquated as a 2000-lb. bomb.


The 2000-lb bomb is hardly antiquated, especially when a convenient and cheap (relatively speaking) laser guidance package can be attached. General-purpose high-explosive bombs remain one of the most cost-effective high air-to-ground weapons.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:45 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Elmarnieh wrote:
Wow RD really?

So lets restrict the rights of all people based on the actions of the most crazy.

No voting - people have committed fraud.
No driving - people have driven drunk.
No speech - people have lied under oath.

Law school has been extremely detrimental to your moral reasoning.


There's nothing wrong with RD's moral reasoning. We absolutely should restrict certain actions based on the amount of damage they can cause, and we absolutely should draw lines based on judgement. We should not allow people to own nuclear bombs just to avoid imaginary "inconsistency".

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:51 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Hannibal wrote:
Which is why Elmo should be able to have a tactical nuke. Or why the people of California should be able to have a 50 caliber semi/full auto if they choose. Any power that's only in a few hands is going to be misused.


That's a reason Elmo should not be allowed to own a nuke. Elmo is a single person. Even corporations with large military forces is preferable to individuals having control over nuclear weapons.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 8:13 pm 
Offline
Lean, Mean, Googling Machine
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 2903
Location: Maze of twisty little passages, all alike
Kaffis Mark V wrote:
[...] government thinks it doesn't need to square its books.

I don't know about that. Personally, I think they've been very diligently squaring the circle for years.

_________________
Sail forth! steer for the deep waters only!
Reckless, O soul, exploring, I with thee, and thou with me;
For we are bound where mariner has not yet dared to go,
And we will risk the ship, ourselves and all.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:24 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
A law against it does not prevent it from happening. If I really wanted to make a gun type nuke I could, if I really wanted to make a dirty bomb I could with ease. So could anyone who isn't dirt poor.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2009 5:44 pm
Posts: 2315
No, you really couldn't. They don't sell enriched uranium at Home Depot.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jun 30, 2012 10:56 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
If that is the extent of your imagination Xeq, I'll state that "anyone but Xeq could who isn't dirt poor."

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 215 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 270 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group