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.

(Bloomberg)   Doctors are preparing for the massive influx of patients once Obamacare goes into full effect. "It's like we're handing out bus tickets and the bus is already full"   (bloomberg.com) divider line 319
    More: Obvious, obamacare, American Academy of Family Physicians, Holy Cross, Medicine study, San Francisco General Hospital, Commonwealth Fund, George Washington University in Washington, health law  
•       •       •

3849 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Sep 2013 at 9:34 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



319 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-24 11:57:20 AM  

washingtonman: No one was denied healthcare before. Not in America. So get over that bullshiat. What did we have 10% uninsured?

Now, they will be. Not only that, our most talented doctors will be leaving the field.


I'm not sure I wanted to have a doctor who only looked at my medical files in terms of how my illness might best be optimized for his bottom line...so yeah, what you describe is actually a good thing then.
 
2013-09-24 11:57:22 AM  

Weaver95: kortex: Yeah libtards let's give everyone everything for free

As opposed to only giving the corporations freebies? We bailed out wall street, we can spare a couple billion for health care. Suck it up and learn to deal with it.


I think I'd rather we bailed out main street and regulated the shiat out of the banks. I don't think our founding fathers envisioned a government that let financial systems that raped the shiat out of their people.
 
2013-09-24 11:57:34 AM  

lovefirststool: Because, speaking as a physician, it isn't worth it.

Because, speaking as a physician, it isn't worth it.

Because, speaking as a physician, it isn't worth it.

Because, speaking as a physician, it isn't worth it.


You're not really a physician, are you?
 
2013-09-24 11:58:35 AM  

Kit Fister: Weaver95: kortex: Yeah libtards let's give everyone everything for free

As opposed to only giving the corporations freebies? We bailed out wall street, we can spare a couple billion for health care. Suck it up and learn to deal with it.

I think I'd rather we bailed out main street and regulated the shiat out of the banks. I don't think our founding fathers envisioned a government that let financial systems that raped the shiat out of their people.


That's what the GOP believes tho.
 
2013-09-24 11:58:50 AM  

RedTank: Kit Fister: Tigger: moral consequences

I love how people keep bringing up morality as if anyone even began to consider morality in the equation with regards to healthcare. Seriously, most people in this country don't give a flying fark about people they don't know, and for most of us, it's not our problem.

/I got enough of my own shiat to worry about, I don't need to worry about your shiat too.

How do you expect humanity to survive if you think that way?  Not giving a fark is step one to the end of everyone.  I'll bet you don't vote either because what does one vote matter right?


im biting the hand that feeds me, so to speak, but... what he said

we're stronger together than alone. individuals can improve the length and quality of their own life by 'fark you I got mine' but we improve the longevity and quality of society by cooperating

am I imagining that it tends to be people who have more than enough who say 'fark you I got mine'? they wouldnt even notice a bit less
 
2013-09-24 12:00:05 PM  

Capo Del Bandito: HotWingConspiracy: Yeah! Just like how you can't argue you shouldn't pay more taxes if you're rich. You're rich, dummy! Of course you can pay more.

It is bull to say you can't pay more taxes while fueling up a 20 million dollar jet to take you to your 40 million dollar yacht.

But is that all you have for being ok with taxing the rich more? "They have more, the government should be able to take it"?


No, that's not all I have.

I don't see how that's any different from their 'i earned it it's mine' attitude.

I'm merely applying the argument against the poor against the rich. You just said "Life's tough. It sucks. Learn to deal with it."

This applies to the wealthy too. Sucks that you're so rich that you pay a different tax rate. Life ain't fair, boo hoo. Learn to deal with it.
 
2013-09-24 12:01:21 PM  

Weaver95: Kit Fister: Weaver95: kortex: Yeah libtards let's give everyone everything for free

As opposed to only giving the corporations freebies? We bailed out wall street, we can spare a couple billion for health care. Suck it up and learn to deal with it.

I think I'd rather we bailed out main street and regulated the shiat out of the banks. I don't think our founding fathers envisioned a government that let financial systems that raped the shiat out of their people.

That's what the GOP believes tho.


Which is why I'm more and more believing that the heart of the GOP, the ultra-right-wing assholes, can get farked. However, I don't get the feeling that even if we kicked out the GOP, things would change much substantively.
 
2013-09-24 12:02:00 PM  

Weaver95: Capo Del Bandito: Weaver95: gretzkyscores: randomjsa: I know things like "reality" are really hard for some of you to accept but the consequences of saying "screw the reality, we're moving forward no matter what" are going to be pretty significant.

This is exactly why I laugh when I hear leftists and liberals describe themselves as "reality-based". Reading through these comments here, none of them appear to be concerned in the least with the reality that is coming and utterly fail to comprehend what the law of unintended consequences has in store for all of us because of this abomination of a health care law.

But hey, how about a few more snarky and unfunny comments mocking republican/christian stereotypes - that ought to show everyone how smrt you leftists all are! I'm sure everything will work out just fine and the poorest people in our society will receive a never-ending supply of Mayo-clinic-levels of healthcare for free! Economics be damned!

You haven't studied this out yet, have you?

What in Seven Hells had that got to do with being given healthcare? It insures rights pertaining to living your life, not extending it.

Um, technically it's nine Hells, not seven. Nobody reads the classics anymore...


They got their Hells mixed up with their seas. Amateur's mistake.
 
2013-09-24 12:02:41 PM  
Fact one : We're not giving health care away for free. We are paying for it, collectively, through taxation, because that's a good thing to pay for. Healthy people is both practical and ethical. Valuing life is both practical and ethical. And the only two arguments for not doing this are a: to instead give all that money stupidly to the military and already wealthy corporations or b: to be pointlessly greedy, short sighted and petty. So to hell with all that noise.

Fact two : Most people who need assistance need it temporarily. They aren't forever poor. Of those who are, most are handicapped and definitely do need assistance. Anyone saying, "these people need to learn to fend for themselves," are pretending this isn't the case, which is to say that they're appealing to a lie. 

Fact three : The health care system, including the insurance angle, in the USA is broken. Like the housing problem, costs have gotten so high that there is no easy fend for yourself option anymore. Even among the insured, over 80% of the population is in a situation where any serious health care problems will redefine their economic status, often leaving them in a crisis state. This is not their fault for being lazy or stupid or anything like that. The system is broken and it ensures this will happen.

Now, if you're one of the people on this thread, or anywhere, saying things like, "We can't give everyone health care FOR FREE," or, "These people need to learn to be responsible and self sufficient, LIKE ME," or any of that pure drivel, then congrats, you've just proven  that you're an ignorant, petty twatsicle. Not even joking, you have directly appealed to the most bullshiat, provably invalid arguments. Stop doing that, because more than anything, the one thing this nation/world/species needs less of is mouthy, ignorant, self centered little assholes.
 
2013-09-24 12:03:02 PM  

HotWingConspiracy: This applies to the wealthy too. Sucks that you're so rich that you pay a different tax rate. Life ain't fair, boo hoo. Learn to deal with it.


You're twisting my words. I was saying life's unfair in it's randomness. It's not fair. The laws and such are supposed to be fair for the people etc. Not that they are a shining example of goodness right now, but ti's supposed to be for the betterment of society, blah blah blah.

Why should we up their taxes other than 'you have it, we're going to take it it's unfair'.

I'm ok with reality being chaotic. Making laws should be a bit more orderly.
 
2013-09-24 12:06:37 PM  

Lady J: im biting the hand that feeds me, so to speak, but... what he said

we're stronger together than alone. individuals can improve the length and quality of their own life by 'fark you I got mine' but we improve the longevity and quality of society by cooperating

am I imagining that it tends to be people who have more than enough who say 'fark you I got mine'? they wouldnt even notice a bit less


On a personal note, I disagree with it just because society at large has never given a shiat about me when I needed them most, so why should I give a flying fark about them? fark 'em. I'm all out of farks to give because I've had to fight and scratch for my own sake. No one gave me anything.

However, I'm all about being smart in the way we handle programs to help people. I would like to see more systems there to help in general, and it's only right that every member of society contributes in an equal fashion, 1% on down because they're still part of the tribe.
 
2013-09-24 12:08:50 PM  

James!: Sounds like a good time to go to medical school.


I have two engineering friends who are in medical school. When it became clear that good-paying engineering jobs for new grads are a thing of the past, they went back to school to become MDs.
 
2013-09-24 12:09:59 PM  

Lady J: im biting the hand that feeds me, so to speak, but... what he said

we're stronger together than alone. individuals can improve the length and quality of their own life by 'fark you I got mine' but we improve the longevity and quality of society by cooperating

am I imagining that it tends to be people who have more than enough who say 'fark you I got mine'? they wouldnt even notice a bit less


This is true to a degree.  We all have to progress forward equally.  That equality id not free and we must all pay for it and that equal progression can be forced and regulated by the government through taxation.  But on the other side of the coin we have to make sure the inequality gap does not grow or shrink too much.  There is a perfect mathematical distribution of poor, middle class, and rich.  That balance and that proportion is achieved by and maintained through capitalism.  Combining both ideals together means we all move forward at the same rate but we all still have room to reward those that are more skilled and motivated.

/rambling, thinking out loud...
 
2013-09-24 12:11:26 PM  

Capo Del Bandito: Tigger: Not everyone shares your failings.

Why would you consider it a 'failing' because someone has a different set of morality guidlines than you?

That's like the Bible Thumpers saying you're a failure because you didn't accept zombie Jesus as your lord and savior. Your idea of Good and Evil supercedes his?

Sheer dickery.


You've already stated you believe in moral relativism. That's the equivalent of saying you believe the earth is 6000 years old in a discussion about astronomy.
 
2013-09-24 12:11:39 PM  
i.images.cdn.fotopedia.comThere's plenty of room on the bus. It just won't be as comfy of a ride.
 
2013-09-24 12:13:13 PM  
Just nationalize it
 
2013-09-24 12:13:32 PM  

RedTank: This is true to a degree. We all have to progress forward equally. That equality id not free and we must all pay for it and that equal progression can be forced and regulated by the government through taxation. But on the other side of the coin we have to make sure the inequality gap does not grow or shrink too much. There is a perfect mathematical distribution of poor, middle class, and rich. That balance and that proportion is achieved by and maintained through capitalism. Combining both ideals together means we all move forward at the same rate but we all still have room to reward those that are more skilled and motivated.

/rambling, thinking out loud...


I don't think we HAVE to progress forward equally, and that it's going to end up hurting us more than helping us.
 
2013-09-24 12:14:16 PM  

olddeegee: [i.images.cdn.fotopedia.com image 850x504]There's plenty of room on the bus. It just won't be as comfy of a ride.


What if we just tax higher earners so that we can buy more buses?
 
2013-09-24 12:15:02 PM  
Why can't these uninsured people just die quietly already?
 
2013-09-24 12:16:14 PM  

Kit Fister: I don't think we HAVE to progress forward equally, and that it's going to end up hurting us more than helping us.


No, we do for sure.  There are indirect costs associated with not progressing forward equally.  Psychological costs included.

If we can all progress equally then we either need to all take a step back or be willing to pay more.
 
2013-09-24 12:18:17 PM  

James!: Sounds like a good time to go to medical school.


Oh, sure, but it's hard to attract students to residencies in family medicine because the average pay compared to other specialties is horrendously low, and that creates a problem with costly medical school loans. Increasing costs in malpractice premiums over the years have hit specialties like family medicine and pediatrics hard due to the fact that those areas aren't high paying to begin with. The fact is that becoming a primary care physician has been fairly unattractive for a number of years, and this isn't likely to improve that. Thankfully, we have doctors and other healthcare professionals in my family, so we can always get in through the back door in a pinch.
 
2013-09-24 12:18:25 PM  
Kit Fister: surrender903: The thing is noone is asking to imposition YOU for others to be insured. Noone is asking for you to "carry anyone else." Healthcare is not mutually exclusive. Its not as if me caring for those on medicaid disqualifies you because you have Personal Choice.

I didn't say that it did. My original point was that people don't go into the business of healthcare because it costs a lot and given the job description, not many people wnat to do the job, and that's their choice. The attitude that people should be made to is silly.

If we're going to make a change for the better, then we need to do a lot more than just force coverage for a bunch of people without fixing some of the underlying problems in the system in general:

1. Cost of education.
2. Cost of supplies, medications, and insurance
3. Ability of insurers to collude with hospitals and doctors to artificially set pricing.
4. Ability of insurers to collude with each other to artificially set pricing
5. Overhauling the patent system such that lifesaving medications cannot be artificially inflated or kept out of the hands of people who need it by companies making a profit
6. Overhauling the way medications get approved and how research is conducted to stop favoring pharma companies who research to make a profit, not to stop diseases.
7. Overhauling how people view health care in this country and the mechanisms that are there to provide it
8. Improving the overall health of the general populace to reduce the dependence on healthcare.

and so on and so on and so on.


1.  I agree, the cost of education is ridiculous.  Not just on the health care front, on all fronts.  This can be done in conjunction with the affordable care act.
2.  Supplies and medications are cheaper when you are insured.  They are expensive on private pay to cover the costs of the uninsured or under insured.  The cost of insurance on the federal marketplace is pretty cheap at the moment for inception periods to begin Jan 1 2014.  Will insurance costs go up?  Im sure they will, but i doubt they will drastically inflate the way some people are making it sounds.
3.  Insurers and hospitals collude to set pricing so that the hospital doesn't get dicked out and so the insurance company doesn't pay out a huge amount.  This is called a contract.  If you are trying to compare this to price fixing, you are incorrect.  This is called negotiating.
4.  I am unaware that this exists.  Most prices are based off medicare and medicaid rates which are cost based rates.  That's the starting point and that's the lowest negotiable rate a provider will usually accept.  This is where negotiations begin.
5.  I don't believe the pharmaceutical industry operates the way you believe it does.  Patents on medications don't last very long (10 years i think it was).  You may think 10 years is a long time, but all the stages of trials will take at least half of that, if not the majority of it, to put the drug to market.  They then have the remaining time to make enough money back to cover the R and D costs and the manufacturing costs.  Then they can start making a profit.  Once that patent runs out, any company can make that combination of drug without going through the startup costs.  Hence why generic drugs cost remarkably less.
6.  I'm not sure i understand the argument here.  What you've presented is a very left leaning argument.  A private company, in business to make a profit, is not going to produce items for the better of man kind.  The way to change this would be to make pharmaceuticals a government controlled entity, and entity of the people.  It seems counter intuitive to the argument you are presenting about the Affordable Care Act being a bad thing when you present an argument for a government controlled pharmaceutical industry.
7 and 8:  These are direct initiatives of the Affordable Care Act.
 
2013-09-24 12:20:28 PM  

RedTank: Kit Fister: I don't think we HAVE to progress forward equally, and that it's going to end up hurting us more than helping us.

No, we do for sure.  There are indirect costs associated with not progressing forward equally.  Psychological costs included.

If we can all progress equally then we either need to all take a step back or be willing to pay more.


Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't subscribe to such a utopian view of society.
 
2013-09-24 12:21:36 PM  

jfivealive: 1. I agree, the cost of education is ridiculous. Not just on the health care front, on all fronts. This can be done in conjunction with the affordable care act.
2. Supplies and medications are cheaper when you are insured. They are expensive on private pay to cover the costs of the uninsured or under insured. The cost of insurance on the federal marketplace is pretty cheap at the moment for inception periods to begin Jan 1 2014. Will insurance costs go up? Im sure they will, but i doubt they will drastically inflate the way some people are making it sounds.
3. Insurers and hospitals collude to set pricing so that the hospital doesn't get dicked out and so the insurance company doesn't pay out a huge amount. This is called a contract. If you are trying to compare this to price fixing, you are incorrect. This is called negotiating.
4. I am unaware that this exists. Most prices are based off medicare and medicaid rates which are cost based rates. That's the starting point and that's the lowest negotiable rate a provider will usually accept. This is where negotiations begin.
5. I don't believe the pharmaceutical industry operates the way you believe it does. Patents on medications don't last very long (10 years i think it was). You may think 10 years is a long time, but all the stages of trials will take at least half of that, if not the majority of it, to put the drug to market. They then have the remaining time to make enough money back to cover the R and D costs and the manufacturing costs. Then they can start making a profit. Once that patent runs out, any company can make that combination of drug without going through the startup costs. Hence why generic drugs cost remarkably less.
6. I'm not sure i understand the argument here. What you've presented is a very left leaning argument. A private company, in business to make a profit, is not going to produce items for the better of man kind. The way to change this would be to make pharma ...


Well, I'll accept that and admit I learned something.
 
2013-09-24 12:24:02 PM  

doyner: Kit Fister: doyner: Kit Fister: No one does anything out of the good of their hearts.

Doctors who do it out of the good of their hearts are few and far between. Most of them get into the job for the pay. And again, with the cost of education, it's not worth it for most people.

So which country's system do you think works best?


It seems to me that the countries where universal healthcare is a reality also don't leave people in debt for pursuing higher education. British doctors don't generally graduate with a huge debt, nor do Swedish doctors...
 
2013-09-24 12:25:01 PM  

alkhemy: It seems to me that the countries where universal healthcare is a reality also don't leave people in debt for pursuing higher education. British doctors don't generally graduate with a huge debt, nor do Swedish doctors..


It's almost as if the entire system is based on an entirely different set of values and priorities, leading to radically different outcomes...
 
2013-09-24 12:26:48 PM  
Necessary medical care is a basic human right.

Quite obviously and demonstrably it is not.
 
2013-09-24 12:27:33 PM  
Hey, I hear there are a bunch of doctors coming back from war that need jobs and don't complain about feisty clientele.

Maybe we could give them the jobs that the other guys don't think they can handle?
 
2013-09-24 12:28:27 PM  

Nabb1: James!: Sounds like a good time to go to medical school.

Oh, sure, but it's hard to attract students to residencies in family medicine because the average pay compared to other specialties is horrendously low, and that creates a problem with costly medical school loans. Increasing costs in malpractice premiums over the years have hit specialties like family medicine and pediatrics hard due to the fact that those areas aren't high paying to begin with. The fact is that becoming a primary care physician has been fairly unattractive for a number of years, and this isn't likely to improve that. Thankfully, we have doctors and other healthcare professionals in my family, so we can always get in through the back door in a pinch.


"Backdoor doctor's 3: All in the Family Practice"
 
2013-09-24 12:30:04 PM  

Alphakronik: Hey, I hear there are a bunch of doctors coming back from war that need jobs and don't complain about feisty clientele.

Maybe we could give them the jobs that the other guys don't think they can handle?


For your sake, let's hope so. We know you couldn't handle it.
 
2013-09-24 12:36:24 PM  

doubled99: Necessary medical care is a basic human right.

Quite obviously and demonstrably it is not.


The right to be healthy, and the right to act to improve your health is a basic human right. It is not a right to force a system or another person to care for me and expend their time, energy, and resources on making me healthy.

The right to learn and be educated also exists. That does not extend to forcing others to give up their time and resources to educate me.

As a society, we can argue that, for the good of everyone and the betterment of society, health care and education should be provided in a way that is easily accessed by its members and without financially overburdening the members such that they may more effectively contribute to society. However, this isn't a "right" per se, but more of a mutual agreement made between willing participants of society.

Where I think humanity fails is translating these notions of insular communal support into large-scale operations where the direct interactivity of persons is taken away somewhat from the every day life of its members. When the members stop feeling connected to society, or find themselves less willing to participate in society because society has embraced ideals and beliefs that are not shared by those members, they don't have an easy means of remedying the situation. They can't form their own new society, and having influence over the society they are a part of to make their own voices heard is nearly impossible.  This is where the fragmentation of society leads to a lethargical/disjointed "fark you I got mine" attitude, since there is literally no incentive or desire to contribute to support groups you have no connection with or reason to support -- they're not your tribe or community, and supporting them just takes away resources from your community.

That's not a bad thing, that's just the downside of large, monolithic societies, and why I believe we as a species are not designed to live in large groups like we do now.
 
2013-09-24 12:42:35 PM  

doubled99: Necessary medical care is a basic human right.

Quite obviously and demonstrably it is not.


There is a segment of our population that will never understand that medical care is a right. Our society will soon hit a time when we must re-evaluate what is subject to capitalism. Necessities shouldn't be. Capitalism is awesome, but tying it to things that you need simply to live is barbaric. Obviously, you also have those who will fight this. I mean, what fun is it to be rich, unless there are poor people?
 
2013-09-24 12:45:30 PM  

Kit Fister: RedTank: Kit Fister: I don't think we HAVE to progress forward equally, and that it's going to end up hurting us more than helping us.

No, we do for sure.  There are indirect costs associated with not progressing forward equally.  Psychological costs included.

If we can all progress equally then we either need to all take a step back or be willing to pay more.

Guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't subscribe to such a utopian view of society.


It's not about all people having all things and services available... It's about rich people being able to beat cancer or other diseases and poor people being unable to say the same as to no fault of their own.  Just because they happen to be a weak link doesn't make them less human.  It's about seemingly miraculous medical advances certain people get because "they are better" while others trying harder and being unable to attain that same healthcare because of their personal circumstances or shortcomings.  So, for me, we all suffer in this case in order to progress equally, hardly a Utopian society in my view.  The moral superiority from such a choice is the positive that comes from the suffering, it's the thing that allows us to be OK with a decision...  Religions do this all the time... It's how people end up being happy with being dirt poor.  How about we use that here?  I apply this thought to healthcare but not to everyone owning a house, being paid the same, or having a 70" 1080i plasma TV.  Those last bits are where capitalism comes into play.
 
2013-09-24 12:46:28 PM  
Isn't this a good thing?
 
2013-09-24 12:47:02 PM  

olddeegee: doubled99: Necessary medical care is a basic human right.

Quite obviously and demonstrably it is not.

There is a segment of our population that will never understand that medical care is a right. Our society will soon hit a time when we must re-evaluate what is subject to capitalism. Necessities shouldn't be. Capitalism is awesome, but tying it to things that you need simply to live is barbaric. Obviously, you also have those who will fight this. I mean, what fun is it to be rich, unless there are poor people?


It's not a right. It's the product of someone else's labor. It's no more your right than the products of your labor are anyone else's right. We should provide things like food, shelter, clothing and medicine for those unable to provide for themselves because it is right to do so and betters us as a society, but nine of those things are rights.
 
2013-09-24 12:54:44 PM  

Nabb1: olddeegee: doubled99: Necessary medical care is a basic human right.

Quite obviously and demonstrably it is not.

There is a segment of our population that will never understand that medical care is a right. Our society will soon hit a time when we must re-evaluate what is subject to capitalism. Necessities shouldn't be. Capitalism is awesome, but tying it to things that you need simply to live is barbaric. Obviously, you also have those who will fight this. I mean, what fun is it to be rich, unless there are poor people?

It's not a right. It's the product of someone else's labor. It's no more your right than the products of your labor are anyone else's right. We should provide things like food, shelter, clothing and medicine for those unable to provide for themselves because it is right to do so and betters us as a society, but nine of those things are rights.


Ok, so the distinction you are trying to make is that there are rights and then there are certain products that a society has the right to provide?  Why does that distinction matter in this case?  Seems like you're splitting hairs a bit and missing the point.
 
2013-09-24 01:02:09 PM  

Capo Del Bandito: HotWingConspiracy: This applies to the wealthy too. Sucks that you're so rich that you pay a different tax rate. Life ain't fair, boo hoo. Learn to deal with it.

You're twisting my words. I was saying life's unfair in it's randomness. It's not fair. The laws and such are supposed to be fair for the people etc. Not that they are a shining example of goodness right now, but ti's supposed to be for the betterment of society, blah blah blah.

Why should we up their taxes other than 'you have it, we're going to take it it's unfair'.

I'm ok with reality being chaotic. Making laws should be a bit more orderly.


Modern nations did away with your notions of fairness centuries ago as a survival imperative.
 
2013-09-24 01:08:43 PM  

King Something: Weaver95: Republican Jesus no doubt wants these people to crawl back in their holes and die quietly out of sight. Oh, and let's cut food stamps and give the rich another tax break, because why the f*ck not right?

Don't forget the lucrative contracts for the military hardware manufacturers!


You know that goes without saying!
 
2013-09-24 01:09:23 PM  

RedTank: Ok, so the distinction you are trying to make is that there are rights and then there are certain products that a society has the right to provide? Why does that distinction matter in this case? Seems like you're splitting hairs a bit and missing the point.


Quite simply, the distinction is important for the purposes of understanding limitation of responsibility. It is right to provide certain things to people, but it is not their right per se, and for that purpose they cannot demand more than society is capable of providing.

It is also important to distinguish this as there are very real legal connotations to "rights" that do not translate to "privileges".

It is right that I give as much as I can to help others. It is not their right to demand and take from me beyond my capacity to give.
 
2013-09-24 01:09:43 PM  

Nabb1: Alphakronik: Hey, I hear there are a bunch of doctors coming back from war that need jobs and don't complain about feisty clientele.

Maybe we could give them the jobs that the other guys don't think they can handle?

We know you couldn't handle it.


You're probably right.  Cause you know, I'm like, not a doctor and stuff.
 
2013-09-24 01:09:56 PM  

RedTank: Nabb1: olddeegee: doubled99: Necessary medical care is a basic human right.

Quite obviously and demonstrably it is not.

There is a segment of our population that will never understand that medical care is a right. Our society will soon hit a time when we must re-evaluate what is subject to capitalism. Necessities shouldn't be. Capitalism is awesome, but tying it to things that you need simply to live is barbaric. Obviously, you also have those who will fight this. I mean, what fun is it to be rich, unless there are poor people?

It's not a right. It's the product of someone else's labor. It's no more your right than the products of your labor are anyone else's right. We should provide things like food, shelter, clothing and medicine for those unable to provide for themselves because it is right to do so and betters us as a society, but nine of those things are rights.

Ok, so the distinction you are trying to make is that there are rights and then there are certain products that a society has the right to provide?  Why does that distinction matter in this case?  Seems like you're splitting hairs a bit and missing the point.


There's a difference between rights and needs.
 
2013-09-24 01:10:54 PM  
Actually firing your staff and retiring early due to the threat of ACA implementation is rather common these days. If they aren't firing their staff and closing shop, they threaten to do so whenever ACA comes up.

Part of being well off and in power means not having to explain your actions when you intentionally hurt those around you in order to make a point about something. And they earned that right.


shaumah:
I don't know what the general concensus actually is, but from my personal tiny sample size, I haven't spoken with any doctors who are happy about the Affordable Care Act. My wife's OB/GYN recently retired early rather than try to keep his practice open once the policies go into effect.

While I fully agree that it would be wonderful to have healthcare for everyone, I'm just not sure the reality is feasible, because even if you have a fully funded program, you can't force people to become doctors/nurses.
 
2013-09-24 01:12:22 PM  
So... student loan forgiveness for doctors and nurse practitioners once they've worked 5 or so years in the field?
 
2013-09-24 01:14:31 PM  

Kit Fister: RedTank: Ok, so the distinction you are trying to make is that there are rights and then there are certain products that a society has the right to provide? Why does that distinction matter in this case? Seems like you're splitting hairs a bit and missing the point.

Quite simply, the distinction is important for the purposes of understanding limitation of responsibility. It is right to provide certain things to people, but it is not their right per se, and for that purpose they cannot demand more than society is capable of providing.

It is also important to distinguish this as there are very real legal connotations to "rights" that do not translate to "privileges".

It is right that I give as much as I can to help others. It is not their right to demand and take from me beyond my capacity to give.


Fair enough, but morality should define those and it does not because there is no morality in capitalism because there is no morality in money.
 
2013-09-24 01:14:36 PM  

Protricity: Part of being well off and in power means not having to explain your actions


Nope.
 
2013-09-24 01:18:19 PM  

Capo Del Bandito: TelemonianAjax: Capo Del Bandito: Highroller48: The notion that ability to pay should ever impact necessary medical care in any way is laughably stupid. Necessary medical care is a basic human right. Unless you're conservative, in which case the only truly inalienable human right is to make as much money as you can off, of whomever you can, for as long as you can, by whatever means you can, because FREEDOM!

I never understood your kind. Too much compassion or empathy or something. The idea that anyone has a 'right' to any sort of extension on their life, or to be 'well' is laughable.

You've never read real books, have you? May I recommend starting with John Rawls.

A cursory google search says 'american moral philosopher'.

Not really interested. More into moral relativity. That seems to be the main force behind the 'everyone deserves to have access to health related services; 'Other people dying and stuff is sad'. Life's tough. It sucks. Learn to deal with it.

Instead we have 'noooo everyone else has to be taken care of cuz equality'.

Damn normal people. They ruin everything nice.


You are wildly off base, as Rawls provides an explanation for welfare rights. Relativism actually has nothing to do with this conversation.

So, thanks for proving my point.
 
2013-09-24 01:19:24 PM  

RedTank: Fair enough, but morality should define those and it does not because there is no morality in capitalism because there is no morality in money.


And you confuse personal morality with societal values.  Your morality is not mine, nor much of society's.
 
2013-09-24 01:19:49 PM  
Nobody owes you healthcare. Act like a grown-up and take care of yourself.
 
2013-09-24 01:22:15 PM  

mwfark: Nobody owes you healthcare. Act like a grown-up and take care of yourself.


On the flip side, as a nation, it's pretty damn shiatty to game the system so that people can't afford to purchase it. I don't agree that it must be *given* to people, but at least find a way to make it so most people can afford it. That way, they actually pay what they can and have access to it.

This is where I agree having a baseline program that one pays for as part of their taxes (medicare?), with supplemental insurance available if one wants more coverage.
 
2013-09-24 01:25:26 PM  

mwfark: Nobody owes you healthcare. Act like a grown-up and take care of yourself.


I know, right?  Part of taking care of yourself is not having a childhood illness that is deemed a pre-existing condition.  Another part is not having your insurance recinded.  Another part is having a job that allows you to afford insurance...  It's so obvious!  Why is this so hard for people to understand?
 
Displayed 50 of 319 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report