Santorum lost my vote. - Page 6 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Current Events, News, Politics Keep the politics here.

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-16-2012, 03:03 PM   #101
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,574
Total Cats: 151
Default

You can't rebut with an argument though that solely looks at initial economic savings. You have to consider how behavior would be affected by those changes and result in a collapse of the system. Using a highly flawed argument for the sole purpose of challenging a specific point of another invalid argument is pointless andcproves nothing
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:06 PM   #102
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_G View Post
You can't rebut with an argument though that solely looks at initial economic savings. You have to consider how behavior would be affected by those changes and result in a collapse of the system. Using a highly flawed argument for the sole purpose of challenging a specific point of another invalid argument is pointless andcproves nothing
So, you are admitting that the argument of "But health care costs too much! We need to do X as a result" is an inherently flawed and stupid argument?

If so, I agree. The public health care counter is meant solely to demonstrate just how bad of an argument that is. The arguments about health care costs have nothing to do purely with costs, but with a great deal more - but all people argue about is the costs, and not what their actual motive or goal is.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:09 PM   #103
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,809
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
However, just as equally, people love to trot out "But healthcare is too expensive!" argument when it's not what they are actually arguing. If it was purely a cost concern, public healthcare would be wildly popular with the fiscally conservative types.
Execpt they aren't dumb enough to fall for that.

(posted as I watch the TSA make a woman use her breast pump in front of meto prove it's not a bomb)



See, at least blaen has come clean in this thread, this is exactly why i dont argue with him. hell say a bunch of stupid flawes ---- that you cannot actually rebute, call you a troll, pretend to play devil's advocate, and then say he's agreed with you the entire time and to vote for ron paul, in the meantime he's off getting arrested with Clooney for protesting the sudanese embassy like a filthy hippie.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:13 PM   #104
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
Execpt they aren't dumb enough to fall for that.
And why wouldn't they be too dumb to fall for that, Brainy?

We could reduce healthcare costs by 40% or more overnight (Well, overyear) with the change.

If being fiscally conservative was the only concern in the debate, it would be wildly popular. Or are you trying to say that there are other goals and motives trying to be argued? I mean, from a pure fiscal standpoint, it's obviously a winner.

Quote:
(posted as I watch the TSA make a woman use her breast pump in front of meto prove it's not a bomb)
Lulz.

(Edit) Oh ----, you were serious. .... and

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
See, at least blaen has come clean in this thread, this is exactly why i dont argue with him. hell say a bunch of stupid flawes ---- that you cannot actually rebute, call you a troll, pretend to play devil's advocate, and then say he's agreed with you the entire time and to vote for ron paul, in the meantime he's off getting arrested with Clooney for protesting the sudanese embassy like a filthy hippie.
Come clean with what, Brainy?

I've donated to Paul's campaign, and would vote for him in our primary.

Or are you refusing to answer my question?

What part of opposing public health care is fiscally conservative?

There's no trolling. It's a genuine question. You don't seem to want to answer it at all, however.

I've posted a great deal of facts and figures in the past demonstrating a minimum of a 40% savings within a year of public health care's implementation. It's not something that is questionable or doubtful - even the GOP's figures agree with this.

Where does the opposition from a public health care system stem if fiscal conservatism is the only concern in the health care system?
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:20 PM   #105
Elite Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 1,970
Total Cats: 49
Default

not sure if this was said, but They will all be just like senior Obama.
Seefo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:24 PM   #106
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,809
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
And why wouldn't they be too dumb to fall for that, Brainy?

We could reduce healthcare costs by 40% or more overnight (Well, overyear) with the change
we could also reduce costs today by allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines and to abolish HMOs other thrid-party payers.

Quote:
If being fiscally conservative was the only concern in the debate, it would be wildly popular.
but it's not. so this is higly flawed.

Quote:
I've donated to Paul's campaign, and would vote for him in our primary.
I already voted for him in my primary on March 6th.

Quote:
What part of opposing public health care is fiscally conservative?
If gov't involvment is the reason that healthcare costs so much now, why would it alos be the solution.

Quote:
Where does the opposition from a public health care system stem if fiscal conservatism is the only concern in the health care system?
I will only answer that if you can tell me why, from the standpoint of a cocaine addict, would it not be better if the sky was pink instead of blue?
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:25 PM   #107
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,574
Total Cats: 151
Default

I did not say brain's arguments were invalid. I only said that your stated approach to challenging a presumably invalid argument was invalid in it of itself. I made no reference to what arguments may or may not be invalid. I personally think healthcare costs are way too high and yes the reasons why are complex and there is no silver bullet approach to it
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:26 PM   #108
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,809
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_G View Post
I did not say brain's arguments were invalid. I only said that your stated approach to challenging a presumably invalid argument was invalid in it of itself. I made no reference to what arguments may or may not be invalid. I personally think healthcare costs are way too high and yes the reasons why are complex and there is no silver bullet approach to it

so youre not a fiscal conservative?!!?!?! wtf.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:29 PM   #109
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
we could also reduce costs today by allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines and to abolish HMOs.
Untrue. Approximately 30% of the costs, according to insurance companies themselves, come from the very multi-payer system that they created. This is something I've posted in the past - as an example, the co-pay system actually ends up costing insurance companies more than what they save by using it looking at pure numbers. The theory of co-pay is that it limits insuree's visits by discouraging them from visiting due to the co-pay cost, theoretically reducing costs to the insurance company.

Quote:
but it's not. so this is higly flawed.
Great. And that's what I've been getting at. People should be arguing all facets of this debate, not just one specific one that is easily countered with something that they don't want.

Quote:
I already voted for him in my primary on March 6th.
Our presidential primary was fucked by our wonderful governer this year, and it went to the good ole boy system for delegates.

Quote:
If gov't involvment is the reason that healthcare costs so much now, why would it alos be the solution.
The primary reason for healthcare costs being so high now is the high demand relevative to supply, Brainy.

Hate to break it to you, but we ration health care right now - via cost. The demand is extremely high, gov't involvement may be a factor, but it's minimal compared to the costs related to demand vs. supply.

One of the best arguments I've heard towards fixing our current system involves creating competing organizations to the AMA and similar, actually. (edit) But this would require government involvement and government regulation to fix. Something that is supposedly opposed as well.

Quote:
I will only answer that if you can tell me why, from the standpoint of a cocaine addict, would it not be better if the sky was pink instead of blue?
Sure.

Because pink is the color of sunrise and sunset, and every cocaine addict knows sunrise and sunset are the best times of the day.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:31 PM   #110
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,574
Total Cats: 151
Default

What? I am but merely cutting government from the equation is not the end all solution. Private insurance does drive down costs but it id those that do not obtain private insurance and then do not pay for emergency medical treatment that aid in driving up health care costs. I have said nothing that implies I am not fiscally conservative, however, I am not as far right as some
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:35 PM   #111
Elite Member
iTrader: (7)
 
jeff_man's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dallas, Tx
Posts: 3,056
Total Cats: 103
Default

Attached Thumbnails
Santorum lost my vote.-christian-dark-ages1.jpg  
jeff_man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:37 PM   #112
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,809
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by blaen99 View Post
Untrue. Approximately 30% of the costs, according to insurance companies themselves, come from the very multi-payer system that they created. This is something I've posted in the past - as an example, the co-pay system actually ends up costing insurance companies more than what they save by using it looking at pure numbers. The theory of co-pay is that it limits insuree's visits by discouraging them from visiting due to the co-pay cost, theoretically reducing costs to the insurance company.
so you are arguing against Ron Paul?

I took that straight from his writings.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:37 PM   #113
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,574
Total Cats: 151
Default

Although that was not really on topic..... I completely agree
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:40 PM   #114
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
so you are arguing against Ron Paul?

I took that straight from his writings.
In that case? Vaguely.

I pointed out that the insurance companies created a large amount of overhead for both hospitals and themselves as a counter-example to your (Ron Paul's) argument that they are inherently efficient.

I've said before there are points I disagree with with Ron Paul. Health care is one.

You want cheap health care? We need to alleviate the supply side of the chain, or we need to address how it's rationed.

Universal health care addresses the latter. Adding competing organizations to something such as the AMA addresses the former. Obamacare is just a ------- bandaid on a wound that needs stitches and possibly surgery, and is just going to make it fester.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:48 PM   #115
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,809
Total Cats: 1,780
Default

What if I want "good" health care?
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:51 PM   #116
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
What if I want "good" health care?
Then you are going to pay for it.

Demand for medical services is only going up and up as our median population age increases. There's no way around it.

You either increase the amount of supply, or affect how it is rationed. There's no other options.

Insurance companies and Obamacare are largely a symptom of the actual problem. They just deal with the rationing end ultimately, and are a poor solution (Disclaimer: I think Obamacare is the best Obama could have done, and as it's largely a copy of Romneycare, well, it can't be all that bad.) This is why I end up getting involved in stupid arguments about universal health care to make people realize what the actual problem is.

You can't have monopolies or oligopolies dictating how and when people are graduated based on a scale they determine. Seriously, if you want a laugh, go check out how bar exam results are determined and how people pass. It's operated similarly to how medical needs are determined.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:51 PM   #117
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,574
Total Cats: 151
Default

Lol. Well played
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:54 PM   #118
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Ryan_G's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 2,574
Total Cats: 151
Default

I find it interesting that your healthcare argument and some of your previous views are so far left yet you claim to support Ron Paul. Not saying you are lying. I just find it very interesting.
Ryan_G is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 03:55 PM   #119
Elite Member
iTrader: (6)
 
blaen99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 4,112
Total Cats: 27
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan_G View Post
I find it interesting that your healthcare argument and some of your previous views are so far left yet you claim to support Ron Paul. Not saying you are lying. I just find it very interesting.
Check my political quiz chart, it explains a lot.

I have extremist left and right views which cancel each other out to a moderate right stance. My only consistently extremist view is libertarian (Really, classical liberal, but that doesn't exist in this political climate since liberal and conservative have been made dirty words.)

As for healthcare: My argument is just based on the realities of the situation. We can affect the supply/demand, or rationing. Or both, I suppose. People are only trying to affect the rationing end of the spectrum, and are completely ignoring the supply end. I know why (Big buck campaign donors), but still. Additionally, people are trying to put in religious beliefs/personal biases/etc into the debate which have no ------- reason to even be in the debate. It's why I say romneycare is to the left of obamacare and romney is to the left of obama - romneycare required everyone to provide contraceptive coverage, obamacare gave an opt-out option. It's also why I trot out the universal coverage argument to counter "But I'm only looking at this as a fiscal conservative!" BS when they really want something else. I'm not saying wanting something else is bad, mind you, I'm just saying that if what you want is something other than what you are arguing, you should argue that.
blaen99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2012, 04:04 PM   #120
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,165
Total Cats: 19
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Track View Post
not sure if this was said, but They will all be just like senior Obama.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff_man View Post
[IMG]Christian dark ages[/IMG]
There are only three people invited to the party, we weren't on the list.
gearhead_318 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
MS PNP requires reading and following directions??? satisfied MEGAsquirt 141 10-06-2015 11:44 AM
WTB HPDE miata - Texas Voltwings Cars for sale/trade 0 09-27-2015 07:40 PM
MS3 Basic Connection Issues EErockMiata MEGAsquirt 6 09-24-2015 10:49 AM
Oregon New Guy Wino Meet and Greet 7 08-29-2015 03:26 PM
Canon Sd750 Brand new. Slidin'Miata916 Miata parts for sale/trade 1 07-01-2007 07:23 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:06 AM.