My criticism: did not go far enough. Still allows health insurance to continue its worst practices and excesses. The medicare programs managed by commercial entities are the worst programs available....so why keep involving anthem, Humana, Aetna, on national healthcare, when the admin costs go through the roof when we do and people aren't able to complete treatments at hospitals due to this?

Medicare is better then Humana Medicare, Blue Cross Blue Shield Medicare, Aetna Medicare, etc. Going more commercial has made them more bloated and less effective.

People aren't getting denied for preexisting conditions anymore but they are having shorter than necessary hospital stays.

I'm interested in your opinion. Unless you're going to call me a liar for disagreeing with you about a matter of opinion again....

You're using an example unlike the thing we are talking about.

Argument by analogy is the weakest argument, objectively, and is only used when there is no logical argument to use.

If you are going use it then it has to actually be similar, since it is a pathos argument, one from emotion, and credibility is crucial. If it had any logical underpinnings whatsoever and was logos then it would stand on it's own. As of now you made a poor comparison lol.

Its 2019, ACA was signed several years ago, and is still cutting costs as predicted.

You compare that to a tax cut meant to grow the economy. We know that tax cuts raise do not raise aggregate expenditure which is the economic driver of growth of GDP and arguments for tax cuts are made out of concerns for social justice/unfair taxation.. So even in your anology the fundamental logic was wrong

This post was edited by Skinned on Nov 14 2019 05:34am

A policy can be garbage and still be successful. You can successfully Rob a bank and still be a criminal

I think you are misunderstanding who my post the other day was in response to.
I was pointing out a contradiction in a certain German national socialist's ramblings.

Im not going to claim that the current situation is anywhere close to ideal.
I certainly dont and didnt support obamacare's entrenching and forced participation of the insurance corporation oligopoly.
Some of the points against the administration costs talking point were outlined in my previous post. admin costs aren't the big problem in american healthcare.

Rather than turning healthcare insurance over to the government and ignoring the real reasons for high costs and praying the government will keep costs down without sacrificing quality, quantity and innovation, I support addressing core problems and implementing economically sound solutions.
In my opinion they should look at addressing excessive regulations and laws restricting competition, obfuscating prices, and artificially inflating the cost of service. Allowing competition across state lines and expanded health savings accounts are two that get brought up a lot.

The premise that medicare is clearly better than medicare advantage/private coverage is a dubious one.
People are choosing the private options for a number of reasons, including a slew of additional benefits.
The problems with medicare could fill a library.


I wont pretend I have all the answers or know the definitive optimal amount of time for treatment and administrative costs.
Im not a central planner. Central planning is fatally flawed.

PHONE BAD -some boomer

<--- boomer laugh.




















...gotta love periodical cartoonists.

Anfita, brings batteries and mace to a war of words.

Iraqi protesters, bring lions to counter police dogs:

That doesn't seem like it will end well.

3 police dogs versus one lion. its like one of those conversations u can have fun speculating about but never ever ever ever ever want to see an actual video of.