The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 11:02 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:48 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Elmarnieh wrote:
Page 118 or there abouts of HR 3200. It also mandates any grandfathered coverage expires in 5 years even if you keep your job. Or at least it did in the revision of three weeks ago.


This.


Furthermore, if you keep your job and your employer changes benefits package, you have to have one of the new QHRB (whatevers) plan instead of your old one.



Look, the analysts aren't saying 80 million people would be forced onto the government plan for no reason. CBO isn't estimating the cost at 1-2 trillion for nothing. These are facts and estimates based on real numbers and real provisions in the bill.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:00 pm 
Offline
Deuce Master

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:45 am
Posts: 3099
Exactly. And this is why I believe proponents of the current bill are kidding themselves, flat out lying, or being deceptive when they say they want to encourage competition. There would be competition, but it would be short-lived as everybody is basically forced onto a government plan and we end up with a de facto single payer system.

_________________
The Dude abides.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:12 pm 
Offline
Has a plan
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 pm
Posts: 1584
fun little game: go find the phrases some folks keep repeating and put them into a google search engine.

Searches related to: poisoning the well poisoning the well stargate apple polishing ad hominem straw man
hasty generalization logical fallacies false analogy ad populum

_________________
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:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
What do physicians say about the public option?

63% support a public insurance option, 10% support single payer, and only 21 percent support private health insurance only. Prettly clear endorsement of a public insurance plan from health care providers.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 6:43 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Monte wrote:
What do physicians say about the public option?

63% support a public insurance option, 10% support single payer, and only 21 percent support private health insurance only. Prettly clear endorsement of a public insurance plan from health care providers.


No it isn't.

The survey was based on the assumption that physicians want an expansion of healthcare coverage. The question was phrased as follows:

NEJM wrote:
Survey respondents were asked to indicate which of three options for expanding health insurance coverage they would most strongly support: public and private options, providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans; private options only, providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage, without creating a new public plan; or a public option only, eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare.



No choice was given for "no expansion" or any other opposition to further encroachment.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
You are incorrect, DFK. They could choose entirely private, entirely public, or a mix of the two. Please re-read the link and you'll understand.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:54 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Monte wrote:
You are incorrect, DFK. They could choose entirely private, entirely public, or a mix of the two. Please re-read the link and you'll understand.


I understand just fine, you don't.


Let me rephrase: where is the option for "I don't want any expansion of coverage."

It doesn't exist. Therefore, this study is ONLY examining which of the options to expand coverage is more popular, NOT whether physicians believe it should occur.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
DFK, I an baffled as to how you missed it. " I don't want any expansion of coverage" is the "entirely private" option. That would constitute a complete private market, and only a small minority of the surveyed physicians supported that.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:03 am 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Monte wrote:
DFK, I an baffled as to how you missed it. " I don't want any expansion of coverage" is the "entirely private" option. That would constitute a complete private market, and only a small minority of the surveyed physicians supported that.


No it isn't.

Read it again, I'll quote it for you, again:

NEJM wrote:
Survey respondents were asked to indicate which of three options for expanding health insurance coverage they would most strongly support...


Emphasis mine.



See, they weren't asked if they support "any of these three options, or fourth option for non-expansion." The only thing they were asked about was expanding coverage. Period. There is no question about that, and the NEJM is about as impeccable a source as somebody could ask for. Any other interpretation of what this study examined is flat-out wrong.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:09 am 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Here, let me break them out for you.
Quote:
Survey respondents were asked to indicate which of three options for expanding health insurance coverage they would most strongly support:

A) public and private options, providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans

B) private options only, providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage, without creating a new public plan

C) a public option only, eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare.


None of those options are "Keep it the way it is, and work it out a different way."

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
Elmarnieh wrote:
Page 118 or there abouts of HR 3200. It also mandates any grandfathered coverage expires in 5 years even if you keep your job. Or at least it did in the revision of three weeks ago.


I looked there abouts and did not find this. Could you be more specific about it's location?

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
Müs wrote:
Here, let me break them out for you.
Quote:
Survey respondents were asked to indicate which of three options for expanding health insurance coverage they would most strongly support:

A) public and private options, providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans

B) private options only, providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage, without creating a new public plan

C) a public option only, eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare.


None of those options are "Keep it the way it is, and work it out a different way."


Private Options Only seems to fit exactly that mold. They talk about tax credits, subsidies, etc.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:16 am 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Monte wrote:
Müs wrote:
Here, let me break them out for you.
Quote:
Survey respondents were asked to indicate which of three options for expanding health insurance coverage they would most strongly support:

A) public and private options, providing people younger than 65 years of age the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans

B) private options only, providing people with tax credits or subsidies, if they have low income, to buy private insurance coverage, without creating a new public plan

C) a public option only, eliminating private insurance and covering everyone through a single public plan like Medicare.



None of those options are "Keep it the way it is, and work it out a different way."


Private Options Only seems to fit exactly that mold. They talk about tax credits, subsidies, etc.



Incorrect.


Adding tax credits and subsidies is not "keeping things the way they are." It is "Adding tax credits and subsidies."


The status quo is 1. The survey is asking: "What do you want to add to 1?" There is no choice for "I choose not to do addition."

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
DFK! wrote:
Monte wrote:
Where is the push coming from? I want to know, because I *want* single payer health care. All I see is a bunch of democrats not even on board with a simple public insurance plan.

DFK, there is just no evidence to support your claim. When was your tape taken? What was the context?

On the tape, where does the President outline his secret plan to sneak Single Payer into the law through the house bill you quoted? Is it written in invisible ink or something?




I'm pretty sure I'm done repeating myself to you. Just because you feel that argumentum ad nauseum is a viable tactic doesn't mean I need to enable you to use it.


But you didn't actually show the Trojan Horse, DFK. You simply claimed that it existed without showing it's existence.

Perhaps you don't understand what "single payer" means. That might explain your confusion. The House bill does not establish a single payer plan, and the President did not advocate for a single payer plan in his speech to the joint session of congress. If all you have is a tape with him supporting it, the preponderance of evidence indicates that he's changed his mind. Unfortunate, in my opinion, but I think you're argument that this is some how a way to sneak single payer health care is simply not based on any real evidence.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:40 am 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Monte wrote:
DFK! wrote:
Monte wrote:
Where is the push coming from? I want to know, because I *want* single payer health care. All I see is a bunch of democrats not even on board with a simple public insurance plan.

DFK, there is just no evidence to support your claim. When was your tape taken? What was the context?

On the tape, where does the President outline his secret plan to sneak Single Payer into the law through the house bill you quoted? Is it written in invisible ink or something?




I'm pretty sure I'm done repeating myself to you. Just because you feel that argumentum ad nauseum is a viable tactic doesn't mean I need to enable you to use it.


But you didn't actually show the Trojan Horse, DFK. You simply claimed that it existed without showing it's existence.


I cited 4 sections that work to undermine private insurance in the United States. Perhaps you don't understand how those sections work, and how that undermining will work to phase out private care entirely.

Perhaps you don't believe cited videos, and want to take what a politician says now vs. what they said a year ago as somehow more valid, I do not. Especially when we have lots of Democrats who are currently stating a belief that the best way to single payer is via a 'public option.'

You're off 180 degrees here. The preponderance of evidence is that the Democratic party members in Congress and the PotUS want single payer healthcare and have constructed a bill to work towards that end.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:59 pm
Posts: 9412
Monte wrote:
If all you have is a tape with him supporting it, the preponderance of evidence indicates that he's changed his mind. Unfortunate, in my opinion, but I think you're argument that this is some how a way to sneak single payer health care is simply not based on any real evidence.

I'm glad you've forgiven Ron Paul of any allegations of racism.

_________________
"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  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
Kaffis, what does that have to do with the conversation at hand? Please stay on topic. Thank you.

DFK - What evidence do you have to support your conspiracy theory about single payer health care being the real motivation behind legislation that includes no such thing?

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
Monte wrote:
DFK - What evidence do you have to support your conspiracy theory about single payer health care being the real motivation behind legislation that includes no such thing?

Obviously I'm not DFK, but a quick search returned a speech/comment from Barney Frank on July 27th in which he stated:

Quote:
"I think if we get a good public option, it could lead to single-payer, and that’s the best way to reach single payer.”


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:49 am
Posts: 2410
DFK! wrote:

I cited 4 sections that work to undermine private insurance in the United States.


Let me be even more clear - even if your opinion about those sections is correct, that still does not constitute evidence that the President and Congress are trying to sneak single payer health insurance through the legislative process and to the President's desk for a signature.

There is no part of that bill that indicates that, and nothing in the president's proposal indicates that. Believe me, if it was there, I would be very excited. I *want* a single payer system, or an NHS style system.

_________________
Image

It feels like all the people who want limited government really just want government limited to Republicans.
---The Daily Show


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:21 pm 
Offline
I got nothin.
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:15 pm
Posts: 11160
Location: Arafys, AKA El Müso Guapo!
Monte wrote:
DFK! wrote:

I cited 4 sections that work to undermine private insurance in the United States.


Let me be even more clear - even if your opinion about those sections is correct, that still does not constitute evidence that the President and Congress are trying to sneak single payer health insurance through the legislative process and to the President's desk for a signature.

There is no part of that bill that indicates that, and nothing in the president's proposal indicates that. Believe me, if it was there, I would be very excited. I *want* a single payer system, or an NHS style system.


Population of Great Britain: 60,943,912 (2008) Tax rates (Vary from 22-40% with a VAT of 15%)
Population of Sweden: 9,045,389 (July 2008 est.) Tax Rates 55% highest marginal with a VAT of 25%
Population of Canada: 33,212,696 (July 2008 est.)Tax rates 20-30ish percent with national sales tax of approx 15%

Population of the US: 304,059,724 - Jul 2008 Tax Rates 11-30ish percent. No Nat'l Sales Tax, No VAT...

So. Who is this single payer, and how are they going to afford the bills without tax increases?

_________________
Image
Holy shitsnacks!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:37 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Müs wrote:
Population of Canada: 33,212,696 (July 2008 est.)Tax rates 20-30ish percent with national sales tax of approx 15%



Canada's national sales tax (Goods & Services Tax, or GST) is 5%, not 15%. This is down from 7% at inception, when "Conservative" PM Brian Mulroney implemented the GST in 1991.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:42 pm 
Offline
The King
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:34 am
Posts: 3219
Didn't know where to put this but just had to.

This was taken at the massive 9/12 march(the one most networks are doing their best to ignore or downplay).

Image

_________________
"It is true that democracy undermines freedom when voters believe they can live off of others' productivity, when they modify the commandment: 'Thou shalt not steal, except by majority vote.' The politics of plunder is no doubt destructive of both morality and the division of labor."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:46 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 7:54 am
Posts: 2369
I saw one sign saying "I'm not racist, I hate Biden and Pelosi too"

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 1:49 pm 
Offline
Noli me calcare
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:26 am
Posts: 4747
Talya wrote:
Müs wrote:
Population of Canada: 33,212,696 (July 2008 est.)Tax rates 20-30ish percent with national sales tax of approx 15%



Canada's national sales tax (Goods & Services Tax, or GST) is 5%, not 15%. This is down from 7% at inception, when "Conservative" PM Brian Mulroney implemented the GST in 1991.


I'd imagine he was talking about the HST, although even then it's off.

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

Image


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:13 pm 
Offline
Oberon's Playground
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:11 am
Posts: 9449
Location: Your Dreams
Vindicarre wrote:
Talya wrote:
Müs wrote:
Population of Canada: 33,212,696 (July 2008 est.)Tax rates 20-30ish percent with national sales tax of approx 15%



Canada's national sales tax (Goods & Services Tax, or GST) is 5%, not 15%. This is down from 7% at inception, when "Conservative" PM Brian Mulroney implemented the GST in 1991.


I'd imagine he was talking about the HST, although even then it's off.


(1) Most provinces don't have an HST. It's proposed, but not in use.
(2) The HST (Harmonized Sales Tax) is just a proposal to amalgamate of the GST and any provincial sales taxes into one homogenized mass so we can't as easily pinpoint where the money is going. You're not speaking of provincial consumption taxes, as Arafys did not include state consumption taxes in his post either. (Which is fine, because each state and province have different taxes.)

Also, i didn't notice, the tax brackets were marginally wrong. US federal Tax Brackets range from 10% to 35%. Canada's range from 15% to 29%.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me

█ ♣ █


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 140 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