Trump Regime thread.

[Cherry 1,302]

Cherry feels bad for the poor insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies that are just struggling to get by with all these troublesome regulations.... what? lol

Uh no. I feel bad for the people who are being forced to purchase insurance getting fucked by increased costs or a government fine. I also feel bad for the people that need these products, but can't get them because the government won't clear alternatives. Thanks to shady deals that pharmaceutical companies have made with the government to maintain their place as top dog on the market, everyone else is getting fucked.

 

Insurance companies are just a domino along the line that gets swiped because the government tampers with healthcare and plays favorites. That intervention is eliminating competition.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Chernobyl426

[blotsfan 2,112]

Y'all see that Rachel Maddow shit?

That was ridiculous. I watched because I assumed she would at least have enough integrity to not tease something like that if she couldn't deliver substance. I was wrong. Hard to imagine it was worth it to get great ratings for one show at the cost of whatever credibility you had.

[Thanatos 2,847]

 

Their own healthcare is their responsibility once they are an adult. It's a good/service, and if they aren't able to afford it, that's their problem. An individual shouldn't have to sacrifice 10% of their income to help pay for others healthcare costs.

 

No its not. It's a right. Every individual in the country deserves to not have to make a choice between getting treatment for a disease not even their fault and their own livelihood.

 

And no, I don't agree the ACA is shit. Its sure as hell a ton better than what we had beforehand.

 

Simply on a personal level, before the ACA, I paid $145/mo just for catastrophic insurance- which I quit buying because I couldn't really afford that, and it just seemed pointless as it was still a 30% co-pay AFTER the 10k deductible. 300k will bankrupt me as effectively as a mil.

 

After the ACA passed, I paid $32/mo last year for health insurance. I went to a doctor for the first time in three years. I had strep and didn't have to just suffer through it like the two previous times, and I also had mono for two months, and was able to get medicine to help me through it.

 

This year, those costs have jumped to $58/mo, but it's still a third of the cost of insurance prior to ACA- and that shit I had prior to it wasn't really insurance at all, IMO.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Thanatos

[seanbrock 1,684]

 

No its not. It's a right.

Bring back the Gilded Age, yo.

Edited March 15, 2017 by seanbrock

[Cherry 1,302]

 

No its not. It's a right. Every individual in the country deserves to not have to make a choice between getting treatment for a disease not even their fault and their own livelihood.

 

And no, I don't agree the ACA is shit. Its sure as hell a ton better than what we had beforehand.

 

Simply on a personal level, before the ACA, I paid $145/mo just for catastrophic insurance- which I quit buying because I couldn't really afford that, and it just seemed pointless as it was still a 30% co-pay AFTER the 10k deductible. 300k will bankrupt me as effectively as a mil.

 

After the ACA passed, I paid $32/mo last year for health insurance. I went to a doctor for the first time in three years. I had strep and didn't have to just suffer through it like the two previous times, and I also had mono for two months, and was able to get medicine to help me through it.

 

This year, those costs have jumped to $58/mo, but it's still a third of the cost of insurance prior to ACA- and that shit I had prior to it wasn't really insurance at all, IMO.

 

You do not have a right to the product of other people. That's not how rights work. Freedom of speech is a right. Freedom of religion is a right. Equal treatment under the law is a right. It should be your right to choose whether or not you participate in healthcare, and if you decline to purchase insurance, then that is your decision.

 

A large part of why the cost of healthcare so high is because of government intervention in the market. Getting campaign funding from pharmaceutical companies tends to mean favorable policies for pharmaceutical companies to avoid competition and create ridiculous prices. Eliminate that and the cost of healthcare in the free market is reduced by a large amount for everyone.

[oochymp 2,393]

 

You do not have a right to the product of other people. That's not how rights work. Freedom of speech is a right. Freedom of religion is a right. Equal treatment under the law is a right. It should be your right to choose whether or not you participate in healthcare, and if you decline to purchase insurance, then that is your decision.

I've always taken issue with the argument that people should have the right to choose not to participate in healthcare, because you know who doesn't have the right to make that choice? Sick people. If you get sick then you have to participate in healthcare and under our current system that can bankrupt someone. The idea that people should be responsible for their own healthcare is great in principle, but it assumes that people can choose to just not get sicker than they can afford, but that's not the way illnesses work.

[Thanatos 2,847]

You just keep on repeating right wing talking points that have been debunked over and over. No, government interference is not why healthcare costs are as high as they are, corporate greed is. Your stance on healthcare is essentially just another version of trickle-down economics, which has been shown over and over again to not work, as it relies on the morality of the rich and their willingness to not skirt the law with ethically questionable actions.

 

Not to mention your position is irrational. If people who are healthy do not buy in, the costs will skyrocket even further, pushing more people out of healthcare, which then raises costs higher in a vicious cycle.

 

There is really nothing further to debate here. You think its ok for people to make a choice between going bankrupt and going to get cancer treated, and I don't. There's no argument that can be made from those two utterly opposite starting points, at least not logically. Emotionally, I would argue your position is a cold and heartless one best left in the Stone Age where it belongs instead of in a first world country, but logically there's no way to approach soemone who actually believes the way you do. Healthcare should not be a for-profit service, and is a right to everyone. Full stop, no exceptions.

 

 

Also, on a purely practical level, what do you people that don't believe in an individual mandate do in the following scenario.

 

A healthy 25 year old decides not to get insurance. Two years down the road he is diagnosed with a treatable form of cancer that would cost a million dollars every year to treat.

 

Do you give him the treatment and put him on some sort of payment plan, knowing he's never going to be able to pay it back even close to in full?

 

Do you allow him to go on insurance now?

 

Do you tell him tough luck, man, you made your choice and let him die?

Edited March 24, 2017 by Zack_of_Steel

[seanbrock 1,684]

Sorry about your luck. You should have had a better job so you could afford your insurance. Those 3 retail jobs you have that give you just enough hours to avoid paying your insurance are creating jobs. Not their problem.

[Sarge+ 3,436]

 

You do not have a right to the product of other people.

 

Give me one good reason why the ability to be healthy should be a "product."

 

You might as well try to sell the air we breathe.

[Cherry 1,302]

That's blatantly wrong. The cost rises with the demand, not the other way around. If the demand for healthcare decreases, companies will be forced to lower their prices in an attempt to regain customers. That, or improve their services while maintaining the same price.

Also, on a purely practical level, what do you people that don't believe in an individual mandate do in the following scenario.

 

A healthy 25 year old decides not to get insurance. Two years down the road he is diagnosed with a treatable form of cancer that would cost a million dollars every year to treat.

 

Do you give him the treatment and put him on some sort of payment plan, knowing he's never going to be able to pay it back even close to in full?

 

Do you allow him to go on insurance now?

 

Do you tell him tough luck, man, you made your choice and let him die?

His choice to not get insurance, and he should seek out a payment plan for his treatment.

Sorry about your luck. You should have had a better job so you could afford your insurance. Those 3 retail jobs you have that give you just enough hours to avoid paying your insurance are creating jobs. Not their problem.

Stop forcing them to pay increased taxes for state-subsidized care and they'll be more inclined to pay for the insurance of their employees. Companies that could typically do it are being forced to let people go or cut hours to avoid paying it.

 

Give me one good reason why the ability to be healthy should be a "product."

 

You might as well try to sell the air we breathe.

Give me one reason why a doctor should treat you if he isn't being paid to do so. Give me one reason why a company producing medicine should give you their product if you don't pay them for it.

[blotsfan 2,112]

Give me one reason why a doctor should treat you if he isn't being paid to do so.

 

The Hippocratic oath that literally every doctor has to take.

[RazorStar 4,025]

I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:...

I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow.

I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism.

I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug.

I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery.

I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. Above all, I must not play at God.

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can but I will always look for a path to a cure for all diseases.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help.

[Sarge+ 3,436]

^^ Not to mention, they do get paid...lol. Doctors get paid as well in Canada as they do in the U.S. So you can cut the drama if you please.

 

Thank you for totally ignoring my question by answering with your own though.

[seanbrock 1,684]

Stop forcing them to pay increased taxes for state-subsidized care and they'll be more inclined to pay for the insurance of their employees. Companies that could typically do it are being forced to let people go or cut hours to avoid paying it.

This is laughably naive and borderline absurd. I realize how much of an asshole I sound like when I word it that way and I apologize for my douchiness. I even think in some cases you would be right, but companies like Walmart would absolutely still try and screw people over in that regard. Unfortunately those are mostly the jobs being created in this country currently.

 

His choice to not get insurance, and he should seek out a payment plan for his treatment.

This is an irresponsible oversimplification of the choices that millions of American's face when balancing their personal budgets and deciding whether the electric, rent get paid. Whether they can eat that week or whether they let their registration on their car go for a week.

Edited March 15, 2017 by seanbrock

[oochymp 2,393]

That's blatantly wrong. The cost rises with the demand, not the other way around. If the demand for healthcare decreases, companies will be forced to lower their prices in an attempt to regain customers. That, or improve their services while maintaining the same price.

Demand curves don't function properly when you're talking about essential services like healthcare. The standard demand curve assumes adequate replacements, if the price for beef gets too high people start buying chicken instead and the price comes back down. If someone's sick, they can't just forego medication and hope that the prices drop before they die.

[Cherry 1,302]

 

The Hippocratic oath that literally every doctor has to take.

How many people are actually gonna go into the field if they aren't getting paid I'll give you a hint. A lot less.

[blotsfan 2,112]

I agree, which is why I'd like it to be a system where everyone is covered, since now if someone with no money goes to the ER or whatnot, the doctors actually don't get paid.

[seanbrock 1,684]

How many people are actually gonna go into the field if they aren't getting paid I'll give you a hint. A lot less.

I haven't looked into it but I'm sure Canadian doctor's and in other countries with universal health care are not exactly struggling to get by...

[Sarge+ 3,436]

Colombia has universal healthcare. Doctors make more than pretty much anyone here.

[Thanatos 2,847]

ITT: Cherry getting rekt by pretty much everyone.

 

Lmao @ Healthcare costs will go down if more people go out of it. That's not how this works, bud, as oochymp pointed out.

[Favre4Ever+ 4,476]

If you want universal healthcare , you need to do it right. Using Canada as an example of outstanding healthcare to model ourselves after is a complete and utter joke.

 

No matter which system we use, we are still likely going to have he same problem -- cost is outrageous.

 

If we could model ourselves after Costa Rica or Colombia or even fucking Mexico ... then maybe I could get behind Universal Heath care.

[Cherry 1,302]

Demand curves don't function properly when you're talking about essential services like healthcare. The standard demand curve assumes adequate replacements, if the price for beef gets too high people start buying chicken instead and the price comes back down. If someone's sick, they can't just forego medication and hope that the prices drop before they die.

 

I'm not referring to mandatory procedures and the like as much as I am referring to typical medication and insurance policies. The price of insurance would be reduced for sure. I'd also argue that with less government obstruction (aka: no letting pharmaceutical companies control legislature as special interests) you'd see more alternatives or knock-off medicines that would force the price of the original medicine to be reduced.

 

Emergency procedures are an obvious must need situation, but typical medication and insurance in general has an entirely different demand curve.

 

I think everyone is completely missing my point. To accept that doctors should be paid, you must acknowledge that they are producing some form of product/service. To acknowledge that, you're acknowledging that healthcare is a product/service, and not a fundamental right. Pointing to different healthcare systems paying doctors well missed my point entirely, which was that doctors aren't doing what they do for free. You guys all bandwagoned on state compensation for doctors, when I was simply attacking the belief that healthcare is somehow a right.

 

Edited March 24, 2017 by Zack_of_Steel

[Sarge+ 3,436]

To be blunt, I am quite happy to live in a country where the courts say healthcare IS a right.

[blotsfan 2,112]

lol

 

https://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/842209771457462272

[oochymp 2,393]

I think everyone is completely missing my point. To accept that doctors should be paid, you must acknowledge that they are producing some form of product/service. To acknowledge that, you're acknowledging that healthcare is a product/service, and not a fundamental right. Pointing to different healthcare systems paying doctors well missed my point entirely, which was that doctors aren't doing what they do for free. You guys all bandwagoned on state compensation for doctors, when I was simply attacking the belief that healthcare is somehow a right.

I'm an attorney in a public defender's office, I get paid to provide a service that also happens to be a fundamental Constitutional right, there's nothing contradictory about that.