Sick and Wrong: How Health Care Reform is Screwed

[dustinbrowder]

Current US health care system - FAIL
New health care system - less fail

Its only better because the current one sucks. With billions of dollars going from your budget to wars, wars, wars, weapons, weapons, weapons, military, military, military, you only need to stop the military spending or decrease it and only invest 5% of your budget to have great health care.

And no socialism is not evil, bad, wrong, hell. It actually worked pretty well in Yugoslavia and can work great elsewhere if there is a responsible and uncompromisable leader.

But yeah, US citizens need to focus more on learning history, politics and generally more learning to comprehend what changes means what to you.

[Nenol-phoenix]

from:
- -09-27-2009, 08:01 PM #19- -
to:
- -07-12-2010, 05:33 PM #20- -
'nuff said
ALL HAIL THREAD NECROMANCY!
that's awesome, nearly 10 frickin months

[TheRabidDeer]

from:
- -09-27-2009, 08:01 PM #19- -
to:
- -07-12-2010, 05:33 PM #20- -
'nuff said
ALL HAIL THREAD NECROMANCY!
that's awesome, nearly 10 frickin months

If it is on topic, thread necromancy isnt always bad. Do you think he shouldve made a new thread for that post?

With billions of dollars going from your budget to wars, wars, wars, weapons, weapons, weapons, military, military, military, you only need to stop the military spending or decrease it and only invest 5% of your budget to have great health care.

Why do people say things like this? Do some research.
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/m...-states-budget
Nearly 17% is defense related (I am unsure of how much more is military related)
21% is for medical (already 4 times as much as you say we need to invest to have great health care!)

What should really be done, is something to handle the abomination that is social security. Nearly 20% of our budget goes towards it? What a waste!

[dustinbrowder]

If it is on topic, thread necromancy isnt always bad. Do you think he shouldve made a new thread for that post?



Why do people say things like this? Do some research.
http://manyeyes.alphaworks.ibm.com/m...-states-budget
Nearly 17% is defense related (I am unsure of how much more is military related)
21% is for medical (already 4 times as much as you say we need to invest to have great health care!)

What should really be done, is something to handle the abomination that is social security. Nearly 20% of our budget goes towards it? What a waste!

No, if 17% are billions and billions of dollars, even closer to trillions of dollars for killing people and you cut it to 1% than the budget increases by trillions of dollars and 5% is now a lot more.

Basic mathematical calculation.

And throwing money at the problem isn't the solution, as I've stated properly in my post, how this new plan is just a little bit less fail than the previous one.

once again you show how you fail to see through the numbers and probably didn't even read the new plan.

[sandwich_bird]

If it is on topic, thread necromancy isnt always bad. Do you think he shouldve made a new thread for that post?

I'll let it pass but I would have preferred a new thread.

Carry on!

[TheRabidDeer]

No, if 17% are billions and billions of dollars, even closer to trillions of dollars for killing people and you cut it to 1% than the budget increases by trillions of dollars and 5% is now a lot more.

Basic mathematical calculation.

And throwing money at the problem isn't the solution, as I've stated properly in my post, how this new plan is just a little bit less fail than the previous one.

once again you show how you fail to see through the numbers and probably didn't even read the new plan.

You said to invest 5% of our budget, if you cut that 17% on the military and give it all to medical, then it simply increases from 21% to 38% of the total budget. The only way to make it a smaller % is to cut how much you spend on that particular thing or to increase the size of the budget. If we cut military spending and dont spend it on anything else then the country starts to "save" money, which is useless. The point of a budget it to appropriate the funds that you do have and spend it wisely (while not going over and entering a deficit).

So, I think you are slightly off in your thinking here.

[//MavericK\\]

While I do not have enough understanding of the bill(no one really does I don't think) to accurately provide my own insight... I will say that right now the system we have doesn't work all that great...but I'm not sure anything would be better than what we have now.

I will leave you with this hilarious clip. While taken somewhat out of context, it has been used by the Conservative block to great effect and pretty darn funny regardless.

[Santrega]

I Apologize for the thread necromancy. I'm not sure what happened exactly. I believe I saw it on page 1, because I didn't go to any other page. However, I can't say its not possible I clicked a page by accident and didn't notice the page change, then clicked on this thread thinking it was a current discussion.

I really did think it was a current discussion, which is why i didn't notice the post directly before mine was back in September.

Sorry again :/

[dustinbrowder]

You said to invest 5% of our budget, if you cut that 17% on the military and give it all to medical, then it simply increases from 21% to 38% of the total budget. The only way to make it a smaller % is to cut how much you spend on that particular thing or to increase the size of the budget. If we cut military spending and dont spend it on anything else then the country starts to "save" money, which is useless. The point of a budget it to appropriate the funds that you do have and spend it wisely (while not going over and entering a deficit).

So, I think you are slightly off in your thinking here.

Considering how I said throwing money won't solve the problem the best way is hardly to increase medical to 50%.
Instead add the money from military to the budget and reorganize it.
if you had 800 million previously, you now gain say 100 million from the cut military expenses and you re-calculate the budget.
So 5% of 900 millions is more than 5% of 800 millions.

[TheRabidDeer]

Considering how I said throwing money won't solve the problem the best way is hardly to increase medical to 50%.
Instead add the money from military to the budget and reorganize it.
if you had 800 million previously, you now gain say 100 million from the cut military expenses and you re-calculate the budget.
So 5% of 900 millions is more than 5% of 800 millions.

If you reorganize the money that you are spending, then medical is still using at least 21% of the budget, which is way over what you estimated earlier ("only invest 5% of your budget to have great health care"). My argument is just that you didnt do research and simply didnt realize that under the old system we are already spending an enormous amount of money on medical (on the order of 710 billion dollars). Changing the budget and cutting the US military down to nothing and removing any power that the US might have in the world doesnt solve anything.