If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN) Obvious Obamacare won't make a difference because Americans are too drunk, lazy, fat and stupid to stay out of the hospital to begin with   (cnn.com) divider line 215
More: Obvious, Americans, National Bureau of Economic Research, American Enterprise Institute, life expectancy, David Frum, quit smoking, infant mortality, gym class  
•       •       •

8078 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Dec 2009 at 4:03 PM   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»   |    Get this fabulous T-Shirt and impress the methane out of your friends! shirt it!



215 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-12-28 12:36:13 PM
It's funny how, in the span of 3 or 4 years, conservatives went from "America is the greatest country on Earth and if you say otherwise you're a traitor" to "American's are too stupid to breathe or tie their shoes and we're all going to die like the sheep we are in MAObaMAO's socialist death camps."
 
2009-12-28 12:37:25 PM
CNN is conservative news now?
 
2009-12-28 12:39:52 PM
Edgar Friendly: You see, according to Cocteau's plan I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think; I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder - "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".
 
2009-12-28 12:50:53 PM
i35.photobucket.com

i35.photobucket.com
 
2009-12-28 12:54:24 PM
seniorgato: Edgar Friendly: You see, according to Cocteau's plan I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think; I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder - "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".

And I say.... all of the above is fine and dandy.

Just don't come running to the public dime when you need an angioplasty at 45.

Or complain that it costs too much and you don't have employer health insurance.

Unless I am misreading you, you want to be able to do all of that, PLUS the government (ie, everyone else) should pay for you when your lifestyle makes you sickly.

Let me know which part I am missing your point of there.

The government is going to pay for health care, but, they want to encourage people to live healthier lives, that is part of how you "save money" with the system. Part of what is "broke" with health care is ordering 2-3 of the same test when one was already taken 2 weeks ago, and that one would be fine for the next doctor, if he knew that it was taken. Or having to have procedures and surgeries when if someone would have been more diligent with their medications or lifestyle changes for the better, they probably would not have needed it.

And this... "I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section." I assume you mean that you don't want non-smoking sections anymore. Sorry... I just really don't want to have to breathe your smoke. Now, I am actually not for the severity of some of the laws.... I do think that an "adults only" bar whose primary purpose is to serve alcohol (little to no food service), that is they want to have smoking, that should be fine. But, the Applebees/Bennigans, etc, having the "bar" in the middle of the restaurant, which has no really barrier between it and the main dining area, should have to be completely smoke-free. There was really no "Smoking/non-smoking" section to begin with, when there is really no delineation of the sections.
 
2009-12-28 12:55:12 PM
Obama may be taking the political heat, but this bill was written by the insurance/banking cartel. They came out on record and said they'd oppose it if it didn't include jail time and heavy fines for those in "non-compliance".

Stupid and lazy, indeed. Us, that is.
 
2009-12-28 01:02:43 PM
Speak for yourself subby. I'm only 3 out of those 4.
 
2009-12-28 01:05:39 PM
drunk, lazy, fat and stupid

www.sitcomsonline.com

/ lolwut
 
2009-12-28 01:06:12 PM
Two thumbs up on this. As much as I hate insurance companies, it's not only them driving up the costs. We're too stupid to take care of ourselves, and then we expect some little pill to take care of it all. Any pill--doesn't matter. Just give me something.
 
2009-12-28 01:16:44 PM
I may be drunk, lazy, and fat, but I'm not stupid. Well, sometimes.
 
2009-12-28 01:17:51 PM
Without reforming our food and agricultural policy or promoting investment in infrastructure (to build up public transport), Americans will continue to be obese and will continue to be injured in drunk driving accidents. I don't think, though, that alcohol in and of itself is a problem seeing as Europeans drink more than us yet are healthier.
 
2009-12-28 01:25:00 PM
I can't argue with the premise, but the conclusion is a non sequitur.
 
2009-12-28 02:00:02 PM
The international community points and laughs at Americans for being overweight. All the while, McDonalds, Burger King and KFC franchises are popping up in foreign countries like mushrooms in a cow patty after a good rain. You better look in a mirror Europe. You're next.
 
2009-12-28 02:15:13 PM
BillCo: The international community points and laughs at Americans for being overweight. All the while, McDonalds, Burger King and KFC franchises are popping up in foreign countries like mushrooms in a cow patty after a good rain. You better look in a mirror Europe. You're next.

Boht continentz Я teh bad.
 
2009-12-28 02:20:36 PM
www.staugustinebootcamps.com
 
2009-12-28 02:29:45 PM
BillCo: The international community points and laughs at Americans for being overweight. All the while, McDonalds, Burger King and KFC franchises are popping up in foreign countries like mushrooms in a cow patty after a good rain. You better look in a mirror Europe. You're next.

So America is powerless against its own fast food businesses? Why do you hate active Americans who have a sense of restraint and moderation?
 
2009-12-28 02:37:19 PM
Want to cut down on the number of fat people and fund health care?

Let's say we have a goal of spending 10% of GDP on health care, instead of the 16% we are now. US GDP was $14.2 trillion in 2008, but round that to $15 trillion in 2010, and round the U.S. population down to 300 million to make the numbers easier.

That means $5000 per person per year spent on health care. Divide by the number of days in a year, and you end up with roughly $13.70 per day. Men have a recommended daily calorie intake of 2500-2800 calories. A tax of one half cent per food calorie would result in about $12.50-$14.00 per day if a man of moderate activity was eating right.

You would thus fully fund health care, reduce the number of fat people walking around, *and* increase the number of family gardens.

/Not responsible for black-market restaurants or calorie tax scofflaws.
//You might as well make health care costs as in-your-face as possible.
 
2009-12-28 02:41:05 PM
Snarfangel: A tax of one half cent per food calorie would result in about $12.50-$14.00 per day if a man of moderate activity was eating right.

DAMN you hate poor people.
 
2009-12-28 02:51:16 PM
IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE EXCESSIVE AND CRIMINAL COSTS OF HEALTHCARE IN THE UNITED STATES.

All this bill is doing is allowing the healthcare industry to keep charging whatever it wants. Only now it's mandatory. Without any competition.
 
2009-12-28 03:12:30 PM
Snarfangel: Want to cut down on the number of fat people and fund health care?

Let's say we have a goal of spending 10% of GDP on health care, instead of the 16% we are now. US GDP was $14.2 trillion in 2008, but round that to $15 trillion in 2010, and round the U.S. population down to 300 million to make the numbers easier.

That means $5000 per person per year spent on health care. Divide by the number of days in a year, and you end up with roughly $13.70 per day. Men have a recommended daily calorie intake of 2500-2800 calories. A tax of one half cent per food calorie would result in about $12.50-$14.00 per day if a man of moderate activity was eating right.

You would thus fully fund health care, reduce the number of fat people walking around, *and* increase the number of family gardens.

/Not responsible for black-market restaurants or calorie tax scofflaws.
//You might as well make health care costs as in-your-face as possible.


After looking at your profile, I think that you might actually be serious. *shudder*
 
2009-12-28 03:14:50 PM
GurneyHalleck: IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE EXCESSIVE AND CRIMINAL COSTS OF HEALTHCARE IN THE UNITED STATES.

All this bill is doing is allowing the healthcare industry to keep charging whatever it wants. Only now it's mandatory. Without any competition.


Hey- you with the Truth. Get out of a Fark HC thread!
 
2009-12-28 03:15:11 PM
GurneyHalleck: IT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ADDRESS THE EXCESSIVE AND CRIMINAL COSTS OF HEALTHCARE IN THE UNITED STATES.

All this bill is doing is allowing the healthcare industry to keep charging whatever it wants. Only now it's mandatory. Without any competition.


Medicare, either directly or indirectly (ie many insurance companies use some sort of multiplier of medicare reimbursement) dictates how much providers and facilities are reimbursed. If everyone was covered by a plan (be it private, public, state, federal, etc) and could benefit from the fee structuring large group bargaining brings about.

For example someone who undergoes an MRI (with and without contrast) may get a bill from the hospital or facility for 5-8K. If they were covered with BCBS or United or whatever, the facility would collect roughly $1500 (give or take). Medicare would reimburse $900 or so. (Numbers are not accurate, just rough estimations)

Why is it set up that way? I really don't know.. perhaps someone else could shed some light onto how the ridiculous fee structures got set up how they did.

Either way, everyone gets charged the same, but the uninsured get stuck with a much larger bill due to lack of an agreed-upon fee schedule. I agree that it is asinine and completely unfair.
 
2009-12-28 03:38:58 PM
alywa: Either way, everyone gets charged the same, but the uninsured get stuck with a much larger bill due to lack of an agreed-upon fee schedule. I agree that it is asinine and completely unfair.

It's because people without insurance sometimes default. Or often default, depending upon the charge. The prices get jacked up to cover the people who get it for 'free'.
 
2009-12-28 04:05:11 PM
hillbillypharmacist: t's because people without insurance sometimes default. Or often default, depending upon the charge. The prices get jacked up to cover the people who get it for 'free'.

That's the justification they give at the hospital, but the outrageous fees lead more people to not pay their bills in the first place. Rinse and repeat. The delta between the charges and collections, however, is horrendous. Lab tests that get billed out at $200 often get reimbursed at $15. It's the delta that makes everything so freaking unfair to the uninsured.

Many doctors offices will work with patients and lower fees to that of commercial carriers, but getting hospitals / surgical centers / imagining centers / labs to lower charges is very difficult. If everyone had coverage it wouldn't be such an issue.
 
2009-12-28 04:07:11 PM
Only a third of us (U.S. citizens) are overweight? That seems low.
 
2009-12-28 04:07:26 PM
alywa: That's the justification they give at the hospital, but the outrageous fees lead more people to not pay their bills in the first place.

Yeah, it's a problem.

If everyone were covered, we could start getting accurate medical bills.
 
2009-12-28 04:08:34 PM
...and on December 28th, 2009, America became self-aware...and was too fat and lazy to do anything about it.
 
2009-12-28 04:08:40 PM
Obamacare won't make a difference because Americans are too drunk, lazy, fat and stupid to stay out of the hospital to begin with

At this point, Obamacare will make a difference. It will jack up health insurance premiums, which will in turn amount to a lot less money in the pockets of the middle and working classes, which will in turn work wonders on our already weak economy.
 
2009-12-28 04:08:45 PM
 
2009-12-28 04:10:11 PM
dletter: seniorgato: Edgar Friendly: You see, according to Cocteau's plan I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think; I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder - "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".

And I say.... all of the above is fine and dandy.

Just don't come running to the public dime when you need an angioplasty at 45.

Or complain that it costs too much and you don't have employer health insurance.

Unless I am misreading you, you want to be able to do all of that, PLUS the government (ie, everyone else) should pay for you when your lifestyle makes you sickly.

Let me know which part I am missing your point of there.

The government is going to pay for health care, but, they want to encourage people to live healthier lives, that is part of how you "save money" with the system. Part of what is "broke" with health care is ordering 2-3 of the same test when one was already taken 2 weeks ago, and that one would be fine for the next doctor, if he knew that it was taken. Or having to have procedures and surgeries when if someone would have been more diligent with their medications or lifestyle changes for the better, they probably would not have needed it.

And this... "I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section." I assume you mean that you don't want non-smoking sections anymore. Sorry... I just really don't want to have to breathe your smoke. Now, I am actually not for the severity of some of the laws.... I do think that an "adults only" bar whose primary purpose is to serve alcohol (little to no food service), that is they want to have smoking, that should be fine. But, the Applebees/Bennigans, etc, having the "bar" in the middle of the restaurant, which has no really barrier between it and the main dining area, should have to be completely smoke-free. There was really no "Smoking/non-smoking" section to begin with, when there is really no delineation of the sections.


That went way over your head didn't it?
 
2009-12-28 04:10:31 PM
We would have a lot better argument against the nanny state taking care of us, if we actually took care of ourselves.
 
2009-12-28 04:14:15 PM
alywa: For example someone who undergoes an MRI (with and without contrast) may get a bill from the hospital or facility for 5-8K. If they were covered with BCBS or United or whatever, the facility would collect roughly $1500 (give or take). Medicare would reimburse $900 or so. (Numbers are not accurate, just rough estimations)

An uninsured person in Japan would pay $200-300 for an MRI. US healthcare practitioners are price gouging.
 
2009-12-28 04:16:33 PM
I've been saying this since the start. Sure we provide free health care for the masses, but does that mean the masses stop saying "hold my beer and watch this"? Does that mean the masses start actually doing what doctors tell them to? Regular checkups? Proper hygiene? Etc, etc?

Probably not, no. Even now poor people go to hospitals, get the care they need at the cost of us who can afford the visit, and then they don't do any of the follow up stuff, take the drugs, do the therapy, etc, and end up right back in the hospital where the rest of us have to pay for their visit again.

We don't need to spend money on health care. We need to spend money on education. Secondary care, I think is what its called, as opposed to primary care, but essentially educating people how to help themselves a bit too.
 
2009-12-28 04:16:37 PM
BAMFinator: That went way over your head didn't it?

I bet he doesn't know how to use the 3 seashells, either.
 
2009-12-28 04:16:52 PM
I can only think of one product that clearly states that the use of such product will kill you. As long as the US Gov allows the sale of cigarettes I refuse to believe tha they care about the welfare of the citizens.
 
2009-12-28 04:16:58 PM
it won't do any good because the retards reading this blog are a bunch of quasi-marxists who sadly will one day have jobs running the country. i strongly recommend moving abroad to a country which isn't on a course for destruction. unfortunately, there is no such place that also shares the same freedoms as usa, right now. possibly canada, but it is cold there.
 
2009-12-28 04:17:20 PM
dletter: seniorgato: Edgar Friendly: You see, according to Cocteau's plan I'm the enemy, 'cause I like to think; I like to read. I'm into freedom of speech and freedom of choice. I'm the kind of guy likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder - "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecued ribs with the side order of gravy fries?" I WANT high cholesterol. I wanna eat bacon and butter and BUCKETS of cheese, okay? I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section. I want to run through the streets naked with green Jell-o all over my body reading Playboy magazine. Why? Because I suddenly might feel the need to, okay, pal? I've SEEN the future. Do you know what it is? It's a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener".

And I say.... all of the above is fine and dandy.

Just don't come running to the public dime when you need an angioplasty at 45.

Or complain that it costs too much and you don't have employer health insurance.

Unless I am misreading you, you want to be able to do all of that, PLUS the government (ie, everyone else) should pay for you when your lifestyle makes you sickly.

Let me know which part I am missing your point of there.

The government is going to pay for health care, but, they want to encourage people to live healthier lives, that is part of how you "save money" with the system. Part of what is "broke" with health care is ordering 2-3 of the same test when one was already taken 2 weeks ago, and that one would be fine for the next doctor, if he knew that it was taken. Or having to have procedures and surgeries when if someone would have been more diligent with their medications or lifestyle changes for the better, they probably would not have needed it.

And this... "I want to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section." I assume you mean that you don't want non-smoking sections anymore. Sorry... I just really don't want to have to breathe your smoke. Now, I am actually not for the severity of some of the laws.... I do think that an "adults only" bar whose primary purpose is to serve alcohol (little to no food service), that is they want to have smoking, that should be fine. But, the Applebees/Bennigans, etc, having the "bar" in the middle of the restaurant, which has no really barrier between it and the main dining area, should have to be completely smoke-free. There was really no "Smoking/non-smoking" section to begin with, when there is really no delineation of the sections.


Lol have you never watched a movie before?
 
2009-12-28 04:18:19 PM
An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name: CNN is conservative news now?

Well, what do you think the acronym stands for?
 
2009-12-28 04:18:47 PM
Schadenfreude ist die schoenste Freude: I know that's supposed to be amusing ("He's eating fast food and thinks taking the diet soda will help! HAHAHAHA!"), but the sugar water sold with fast food, especially when you get the 2 gallon "Big Gulp", often has more calories than the rest of the meal combined.

If you absolutely feel the craving for fast food, ditching the soda that comes with it is probably one of the best sacrifices to make.
 
2009-12-28 04:20:05 PM
Cat Food Sandwiches: I can only think of one product that clearly states that the use of such product will kill you. As long as the US Gov allows the sale of cigarettes I refuse to believe tha they care about the welfare of the citizens.

Caring about the welfare of your citizens doesn't mean deciding for them what they can ingest. As stated, there is a big farking notice on cigarettes letting you know hey, these things can kill you. Plenty of people still chose to do it anyways. You know why? Because there is very little out there that can't kill you, so its up to you to decide how much risk you are willing to take, not the government.
 
2009-12-28 04:20:10 PM
ne2d: After looking at your profile, I think that you might actually be serious. *shudder*

That is some profile!
 
2009-12-28 04:21:10 PM
dragonchild: An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name: CNN is conservative news now?

Well, what do you think the acronym stands for?


Cable News Network?
 
2009-12-28 04:21:37 PM
One-third of Americans are overweight. That one single fact accounts for almost 10 percent of all health care spending.

we can set up weight stations, like they do for truckers. randomly pull people off to the side, check them for weight and heart rate, make them carry a log book and force penalties on them for non-compliance.

of course...there goes the constitution. but hey - it's forthechildrenhealthcareomgglobalwarming!

At any given moment, one out of six motorists is unbelted.

Because as we all know, driving without a seatbelt always kills you dead.

always.

American children are nine times more likely to be injured in a gun accident than children in other developed countries.

I liked the qualifier there 'other developed countries'.
 
2009-12-28 04:21:48 PM
If all Americans quit smoking, if everybody wore a seat belt, if gun owners consistently secured their weapons, if we all drank in moderation and abjured illegal drugs and if the one-third of the country that is overweight would drop the extra pounds, those individual actions would do more to improve health and extend lives than any contemplated by Congress or the president.

Wait, personal responsibility is far more important than government regulations and new laws?

SHUT UP
 
2009-12-28 04:22:08 PM
Highest government per capita spending on K-12 and one of the highest in healthcare, and we have the world's dumbest and fattest kids. Our children are the laughing stock of the developed world thanks to the benevolence of liberal policies.

And Upper West Side\Berkeley libs and their Northern European allies wonder why so many Americans are against government run healthcare in the US.

/government intervention works in other countries because their poor aren't a bunch of assholes like America's
 
2009-12-28 04:22:25 PM
dletter:


um, you realize he was just quoting a sylvester stallone movie, don't you?
 
2009-12-28 04:22:40 PM
Huh.

$180 - Average cost of a physicians visit (2006)
$161 - Average cost of a prescription (2006)
$247 - Average cost of a dental visit (2006)
 
2009-12-28 04:22:54 PM
EWreckedSean: dragonchild: An-Unnecessarily-Long-Name: CNN is conservative news now?

Well, what do you think the acronym stands for?

Cable News Network?


Clinton News Network?

/old skool
 
2009-12-28 04:23:21 PM
I laugh because I have unusually fast metabolism that keeps me slim even if I eat a whole medium size combo #1 at McDonald's twice a month.
 
2009-12-28 04:23:55 PM
EWreckedSean: Cat Food Sandwiches: I can only think of one product that clearly states that the use of such product will kill you. As long as the US Gov allows the sale of cigarettes I refuse to believe tha they care about the welfare of the citizens.

Caring about the welfare of your citizens doesn't mean deciding for them what they can ingest. As stated, there is a big farking notice on cigarettes letting you know hey, these things can kill you. Plenty of people still chose to do it anyways. You know why? Because there is very little out there that can't kill you, so its up to you to decide how much risk you are willing to take, not the government.


The major part of our health care crisis is due to smoking related illnesses. This is a fact and will not go away. Although people make the choice to smoke, we all pay for the consequences.
 
Displayed 50 of 215 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »