Perry Nullifies Obamacare in Texas!

[Asher]

So it's sad that people choose to pay as they go rather than pay for insurance when they don't need it? That's actually a rational, economic decision. If one is relatively healthy and doesn't engage in any high risk behaviours, why spend megabucks on healthcare insurance, when you can save that money and spend much less to deal with things as they crop up?



Why is it ridiculous? If you're getting in a car accident that's bad enough that you can't walk away from - you have more serious problems than debt. This is why you drive carefully and don't drive like a dumbass Torontonian.

It's ridiculous because of stupid people like you.

Do you seriously have hundreds of thousands of dollars saved up for when you get diagnosed with Leukemia? Could you really cover the cost of an appendectomy (average cost of $33,000 -- some people paying upwards of $180,000 (source)?

The costs are so obscene and outrageous no reasonable person -- especially a mentally challenged illegal such as yourself -- could have enough funds to cover such treatment.

There is nothing rational or reasonable with what you are doing. You are gambling and you are retarded.

[Asher]

PS: I don't spend megabucks on healthcare insurance, yet I'm still covered.

The Canadian government spent $2,120 per capita on health care in 2004, while in the same year the US government spent over $2,700 per capita. People had to spend a FORTUNE on top of that to get basic coverage.

The math doesn't add up. The ridiculous and obvious inefficiencies of the US system is bleeding the public dry, and you're too ****ing stupid to comprehend it. Americans fixate on not having a "Canadian system" because God knows a fiscally responsible system that demonstrably results in lower infant mortality and higher life expectancy rates would be completely unacceptable.

[Jon Miller]

It is communism.

JM

[SlowwHand]

This thread isn't about Canada, or Texas sticking their nose into Canadian concerns. This is a thread about how people, of whose no business is it, sticking noses into how Texas conducts their affairs. At least that's what it's become. If people don't like it, **** off. Go handle your own affairs.

[gribbler]

Texas is not a country. Whenever the federal government is involved in Texas it is not "sticking noses into someone else's affairs" because the federal government has sovereignty in Texas just as in every other state. What happens in Texas or any other state is the federal government's affair.

[Dinner]

http://nbcpolitics.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...obamacare?lite

The law along with the exchanges will go forward though instead of getting to set up its own on it's own terms now Texas will simply get one set up for them by the Feds. Republican lying douche bag obstructionists fail again. They're so busy pandering to their base that they're losing their opportunity to shape the final outcome. It's nothing but a political stunt which will make them worse off then if they just shut the **** up and did nothing.

[kentonio]

And that is precisely why it is a bad law. If we went the Canada route, we'd be in better shape. Even the UK route would be a marginal improvement.

You spent 17.6% of GDP on healthcare in 2010 and had 50 million people without insurance. We spent 9.6% and covered absolutely everyone. Please explain how this qualifies as a 'marginal' improvement?

[Asher]

This thread isn't about Canada, or Texas sticking their nose into Canadian concerns. This is a thread about how people, of whose no business is it, sticking noses into how Texas conducts their affairs. At least that's what it's become. If people don't like it, **** off. Go handle your own affairs.

I agree that Texas should separate to avoid bringing further shame to America.

[Guynemer]

You spent 17.6% of GDP on healthcare in 2010 and had 50 million people without insurance. We spent 9.6% and covered absolutely everyone. Please explain how this qualifies as a 'marginal' improvement?

Simply because your health care outcomes were, on the whole, no better than ours. Granted, you spent less and spent it more equitably, but from a physician's perspective, on the metric that truly matters, it would be a lateral move.

[kentonio]

Simply because your health care outcomes were, on the whole, no better than ours. Granted, you spent less and spent it more equitably, but from a physician's perspective, on the metric that truly matters, it would be a lateral move.

Physicians aren't concerned about 50 million people without coverage and the whole thing costing vastly more? I'm not trying to be snarky btw, I'm just genuinely confused by that.

[Guynemer]

No, of course physicians are concerned about that. But you have to remember that even people who have no coverage can still be treated in the ED, and that their (our) primary concern is the ultimate health outcomes for their patients.

[kentonio]

No, of course physicians are concerned about that. But you have to remember that even people who have no coverage can still be treated in the ED, and that their (our) primary concern is the ultimate health outcomes for their patients.

But surely if ED is your only healthcare source, then you're going to skip the whole range of preventative healthcare and early treatment etc?

[Asher]

But surely if ED is your only healthcare source, then you're going to skip the whole range of preventative healthcare and early treatment etc?

Therein lies the cost ineffectiveness of the US system.

[Guynemer]

Yes. Very cost-ineffective, but outcome-neutral relative to the UK system.

[kentonio]

Yes. Very cost-ineffective, but outcome-neutral relative to the UK system.

How is that possible when 50 million people only have emergency room care? Does that only include the outcome for the people with coverage?

[DaShi]

What amuses me is that none of the reforms in Obamacare actually brings down the cost curve in the right direction as evidenced by the fact that CBO estimates of the cost of coverage keep going up.

ACOs are one of the attempts to address this.

[DaShi]

it's President Obama

It's Mr. President.

[Ben Kenobi]

It's ridiculous because of stupid people like you.

It's a rational economic decision. The outcomes are always bad when we force people to act against their economic best interests. It doesn't help the state, and it doesn't help the people involved.

Do you seriously have hundreds of thousands of dollars saved up for when you get diagnosed with Leukemia?

Why on earth would I have fear of contracting Leukemia?

Could you really cover the cost of an appendectomy (average cost of $33,000 -- some people paying upwards of $180,000 (source)?

When it costs about 1500 here? Absolutely. I don't live in 'average america', and thank God for that. I live in flyover counrty.

The costs are so obscene and outrageous no reasonable person -- especially a mentally challenged illegal such as yourself -- could have enough funds to cover such treatment.

This 'mentally challenged person', has access to health care professionals and knows that if he needed care, that they would know exactly what to do.

There is nothing rational or reasonable with what you are doing. You are gambling and you are retarded.

I've been hospitalized once in the past 25 years.

[Oncle Boris]

Yes. Very cost-ineffective, but outcome-neutral relative to the UK system.

Wouldn't the price of the outcome be part of the outcome?

[Guynemer]

I'm speaking strictly of health outcomes.

It is horrifying that we spend so much more than every other industrialized nation and get nothing to show for it relative to most, but on most measures of pure health outcome, the US and UK are equivalent. Canada rates much better.

[Tupac Shakur]

Why are you always so reasonable, Guy? It's sickening.

[Hauldren Collider]

I'm speaking strictly of health outcomes.

It is horrifying that we spend so much more than every other industrialized nation and get nothing to show for it relative to most, but on most measures of pure health outcome, the US and UK are equivalent. Canada rates much better.

This is misleading. From what I've read, the US rates better than Canada for outcomes when you separate certain demographic groups. Basically, both black people and white people have better outcomes in the US than in Canada, but when you put the two groups together, because the US has more black people it looks worse than Canada overall.

This might sound racist but it's simply a fact that for various reasons blacks tend to have lower life expectancies and higher rates of illness than whites.

[Tupac Shakur]

This might sound racist but it's simply a fact that for various reasons blacks tend to have lower life expectancies and higher rates of illness than whites.

You're right. That does sound racist.

[Hauldren Collider]

Well I didn't invent the statistics. That's just how the numbers work out.

[Tupac Shakur]

There are plenty of black Canadians, you know. Joel Anthony, Drake ... um ... and others, I'm sure.

[Guynemer]

Why are you always so reasonable, Guy? It's sickening.

My superior French genetics and classical Midwestern all-American upbringing.

Duh.

[gribbler]

Well I didn't invent the statistics. That's just how the numbers work out.

What statistics are you using? Blacks have a lower life expectancy, but I don't think that's what Guynemer was talking about, because the UK's life expectancy at birth is close to Canada's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...2.80.932010.29

[Wiglaf]

At one point, after Kathleen McKinley was done getting a private shooting lesson from the Gov. of Texas (seriously, how cool is that?), Gov. Perry looked over at me and asked if I wanted to squeeze off a few rounds with his personal handgun. I jumped at the chance. So there we are, Gov. Perry and I, squeezed into a 5′ wide alley…and the next thing I know, Gov. Perry has locked and loaded his handgun, and hands it to me and says, “It’s live.”

http://urbangrounds.com/2010/01/gun-...th-rick-perry/

Perry

[MOBIUS]

It's ridiculous because of stupid people like you.

Do you seriously have hundreds of thousands of dollars saved up for when you get diagnosed with Leukemia? Could you really cover the cost of an appendectomy (average cost of $33,000 -- some people paying upwards of $180,000 (source)?

The costs are so obscene and outrageous no reasonable person -- especially a mentally challenged illegal such as yourself -- could have enough funds to cover such treatment.

There is nothing rational or reasonable with what you are doing. You are gambling and you are retarded.

If there was ever anyone I would wish a sudden, unexpected and hugely expensive* life threatening medical condition, it would be Ben - just to serve him right...



*as it currently stands in the US

[Asher]

Why on earth would I have fear of contracting Leukemia?

It's just an example of a terrifyingly expensive affliction that affects men your age all of the time without warning nor any risk-heavy behaviours.

When it costs about 1500 here? Absolutely. I don't live in 'average america', and thank God for that. I live in flyover counrty.

It doesn't cost $1,500 there. You are a liar.

This 'mentally challenged person', has access to health care professionals and knows that if he needed care, that they would know exactly what to do.

That's true of every Canadian ever born...

Whether you "have access to health care professionals" doesn't matter if your income is ****.

I've been hospitalized once in the past 25 years.

You're obviously excluding mental hospitals from this statistic.

Honestly, Ben, there are few people more worthy than you of a lengthy stay in a US hospital while uninsured.