Politics
Out of context: Reply #11348
- Started
- Last post
- 33,771 Responses
- mathinc0
They go hand in hand ukit. I'm not saying that fixing cost would eliminate the issue of access. But the big problem here is the cost. It's a real threat to this country. Just looking at the total cost and how much it's risen is cause for serious alarm. Here is the big issue I have with this bill, it doesn't touch the cost portion of the problem at all.
Yes, access is a big problem. But thinking politically the lack of access is something that could drive people to vote and be vocal about solving the cost issue. Now that we've basically mandated access, who gives a shit about cost? The actual costs of healthcare are now hidden between doctor, pharma and insurance companies for the most part. Where are we going to be getting the political support to solve the REAL issue that threatens the economy of this country?
I'm not discounting the fact that there are people who can now go and get health care, that's a good good thing. But now that we've mandated away the symptom and thus eliminated the reality of cost from people like you and I, how the fuck are we going to fix the big reason why we're in this situation to begin with? I'm not some cold bastard who thinks that health care is only for the privileged. I'm practical and I have serious doubts about the viability of this. I know I know, other countries have this so we can too.. which imo is a magical way of justifying this solution.. however with the current economic situation we're in making a transition from where we are now to where other countries are is going to be extremely costly. To not address the big issue, because of politicians being so tightly tied to special interests and corporations, I think this being some sort of 'solution' is a fucking joke. If you're going to reform healthcare, then reform it. Not mandate that everyone is now strapped to a flawed system.
Just my opinion of course, I'm a designer what the fuck do I know?
- But you were against the public option.DrBombay
- And still am. If you think costs are an issue now, let government run it!mathinc
- Medicare has less overhead and no for profit model. And it would compete with private ins companies.DrBombay
- So what's your solution then?ukit
- So if you didnt want it, don't get it. The INS companies were afraid of competition and rightfully so.DrBombay
- That is why it isnt in the bill. Or did you miss that part?DrBombay
- Because Medicare wouldn't have a blimp, luxury boxes, corp retreats, bonuses, a stadium, golden parachutes etc.DrBombay
- Private jets, shareholders or any of that overhead.DrBombay
- So the waste of the federal government exceeds all of those things?DrBombay
- Yeah you're right instead of all those luxuries it would simply be mired in the slog of bureaucracy and waste. You just don'tmathinc
- want people to have fun in blimps and sky boxes. Medicare is going bankrupt how the hell can you keep trumpeting that as a success??mathinc
- a success?? While socially worthwhile to the people it supports, it's a drag on the whole.mathinc
- and completely unsustainable.mathinc
- taxes will have to go up to take care of our seniors who you don't care about.DrBombay
- It's ok, you should just tell people that. You don't have to act like you care about anyone but yourself.DrBombay
- But seriously, you would like to get rid of medicare? Sounds like it.DrBombay
- Why am I debating you fucking scumbags?DrBombay