posted October 24, 2013 10:08 PM            

Chaos ensued.

People are losing their individual insurance policies...more than 500,000 to date..and almost no one can get through the healthcare.gov website to even find out what O'BomberCare is going to cost them.

A little "Muddy Road" music for O'Bomber.

DETOUR
Headed down life's crooked road,
lots of things I never knowed
And because of me not knowing I now find

Trouble's got in the trail spent the next 3 years in hell
Should have read that detour sign

Detour, there's a muddy road ahead detour, paid no mind to what it said Detour
oh these bitter things I find
should have read that detour sign

When I got right to the place
where it said about face
I thought that all my worries were behind
But the father I go
the more sorrow I know
Should have read that detour sign

Detour, there's a muddy road ahead, Detour
Should have read that detour sign

posted October 25, 2013 01:19 PM            

Jwhop you are old enough to remember, but may not have noticed at the time, the rollout of Medicare and the mess caused by obstructionists (mostly southerners who refused to desegregate their facilities, a requirement for funding...and doctors who organized to sabotage the practice of the law)

We didn't have websites then, but it was a few YEARS before the program was ALLOWED to run anything like smoothly.

Change is so scary for some people. And then there are the ghouls rubbing their hands together in glee over the headache this is causing their sworn enemies....

posted October 25, 2013 02:38 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Randall:
Yep, it failed with a test of only 200 users.

---

He doesn't even care. NOBama has no care for any Americans. He is the poorest excuse for a US president ever.

------------------
Want To Ask Any Question About Bible Prophecy? Go For it. It is Free, of course.

posted October 25, 2013 11:53 PM            

How can leftists be so dumb as to not know that the greater hazards..or more hazards are insured against...the higher the insurance premium is going to be.

This is the case with O'BomberCare where add-on hazards are required to be insured against...even for people who will never need that insurance.

That's the driver of increasing insurance premiums under O'BomberCare. It's not insurance company greed.

posted October 26, 2013 10:15 PM            

Yes, that's exactly what I think because it's true that when insurance companies are required to cover more risk, the premium will be higher. Only in the leftist land of non reality would that not be true.

posted October 27, 2013 10:56 AM            

But even if it were true, what is good about a system where the rich of the world come to spend their money on doctors who can't/won't see their own fellow citizens ?

Do you know how many people die HERE because they can't afford a visit to the doc, jwhop? Honest people who are told in the ER that any tests will cost them thousands - and that ten minutes talking to a doc costs $1800 to insured patients and $1100 for the uninsured?

But at least they die without having to give their "sensitive info" to the government, right? Oh except the government already HAVE that sensitive info, on driver's licenses, school records, tax forms, and all the other things that they have to fill out.

posted October 27, 2013 11:20 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by jwhop:
"I realize that's what you think. Not only do the numbers not back you up, but the health "outcomes" for the US lag far behind many other countries"..Catalina/katatonic

Yes, that's exactly what I think because it's true that when insurance companies are required to cover more risk, the premium will be higher. Only in the leftist land of non reality would that not be true.

Outcomes for Americans are far better than outcomes for Europeans...and Canadians...with the very same illness or disease. Which is the reason Europeans and Canadians who can afford to pay American doctors and American hospitals come to America for treatment of serious illness or disease.

---

How you deal with these people without going batty is amazing, Jwhop.
You deserve a Medal of Honor.

I will confer one on you--Ami's Medal of Honor for EXTREME patience in the face of INANITY.

You can accept it in absentia

------------------
Want To Ask Any Question About Bible Prophecy? Go For it. It is Free, of course.

posted October 27, 2013 12:52 PM            

Indeed.

Full Definition of PANIC PARTY

posted October 27, 2013 01:45 PM            

On page 18 of this pdf is the WHO list of health outcome performance for all member countries. The US is no 37

You have seen this list before I am sure, jwhop. Care to explain where you get your dogma from?

There is also a map on p 14 that clearly shows that all the countries you describe as having socialized medicine are far more EFFICIENT and have better outcomes than the US.

Perhaps this FOX link will be more user friendly for you http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/07/10/united-states-health-o utcomes-far-worse-than-other-comparable-nations/

posted October 28, 2013 10:03 AM            

Did you even read that WHO report written by loons which you're touting here to show the US has worse health outcomes than 36 other nations?

What the hell do you think we're talking about here?

I said..."Outcomes for Americans are far better than outcomes for Europeans...and Canadians...with the same illness or disease. Which is the reason Europeans and Canadians who can afford to pay American doctors and American hospitals come to America for treatment of serious illness or disease."

And then you post a loony-tunes report from the helpless World Health Organization which doesn't even use illness and disease outcomes as criteria.

This is from that loony-tunes report which doesn't even consider life spans and health status of populations.

since it is not restricted by biological limits healthy life-span, overall efficiency is a more representative measure of the true efficiency of health systems than one based on health status alone.

Education of the population is also considered in this loony-tunes report..and average education as well.

Listen up, if you're ill with a life threatening illness or disease, your level of education is not a determining factor in whether you're going to survive or not.

The skill, ability and knowledge of your physician and hospital staff as well as the technology of medical device manufacturers applied on your behalf..WILL BE THE DETERMINING FACTORS.

Which is the precise reason those who live in Socialist Health Care nations and can afford to come to the US for treatment do so.

posted October 28, 2013 01:24 PM            

Where do you look for info???

It has been a well known fact, for years I might add, where the U.S. falls regarding health care. As in COSTS vs Results.

posted October 28, 2013 02:16 PM            

The Fox report bears it out - and suggests a possible reason that education matters in health outcomes - since one of the biggest risk factors in US health issues is the way we LIVE, what we eat, and how those things make us sick.

The mention of depression as a major problem here more than other countries, and MISUSE OF DRUGS causing disorders and yes deaths, point to the fact that a lot of the HIGH COST of our medical system is actually MAKING US SICK and killing us.

More drugs and machines do not make a healthier, longer-lived population, in short. They make for more expensive deaths and disabled lives.

PERHAPS YOU WOULD RETURN THE COURTESY OF A PAGE NUMBER OR QUOTE showing me what you are talking about with the education thing and your other points of dispute?

posted October 28, 2013 02:22 PM            

quote:

---

but the Marxist Messiah thinking he's always the smartest guy in the room

---

Is that a Leo thing? Are you projecting again?

quote:

---

How can leftists be so dumb as to not know that the greater hazards..or more hazards are insured against...the higher the insurance premium is going to be.

---

A "leftist" told you that. How could you have been so dumb as to not have known, number one, but also how could you have been so dumb as to try to make the ones that told you that out as the dumb ones?

quote:

---

Yes, that's exactly what I think because it's true that when insurance companies are required to cover more risk, the premium will be higher. Only in the leftist land of non reality would that not be true.

---

Once again, you're putting your own stated position on "leftists":

"In 45 of the 50 states O'BomberCare will cost more than current insurance premiums. In most cases, much more." -Jwhop

You were clearly the one that thought the price should stay the same despite covering more. Then your "leftist" didn't deny this claim, but rather pointed out to you that the insurance coverage wasn't an apples to apples comparison:

"Insurance that provides more benefits --in order to adhere to the new law-- does cost more." - AG

quote:

---

Outcomes for Americans are far better than outcomes for Europeans...and Canadians...with the very same illness or disease. Which is the reason Europeans and Canadians who can afford to pay American doctors and American hospitals come to America for treatment of serious illness or disease.

---

No, not across all metrics. We've been over this. Not only so, but smart Americans go to Costa Rica to get costly procedures done cheaper. My own Conservative parents have engaged in this.

quote:

---

And then you post a loony-tunes report from the helpless World Health Organization which doesn't even use illness and disease outcomes as criteria.

---

You were obviously trying to get off on a technicality there, and I'm actually kind of surprised that they let up on you. [EDIT: Apparently, they didn't! ]

So what study do you have that proves illness and disease outcomes are better in the United States than abroad? Have I already got ya? Do you even have one? Yeah, I didn't think so.

Results: We identified 38 studies comparing populations of patients in Canada and the United States. Studies addressed diverse problems, including cancer, coronary artery disease, chronic medical illnesses and surgical procedures. Of 10 studies that included extensive statistical adjustment and enrolled broad populations, 5 favoured Canada, 2 favoured the United States, and 3 showed equivalent or mixed results. Of 28 studies that failed one of these criteria, 9 favoured Canada, 3 favoured the United States, and 16 showed equivalent or mixed results. Overall, results for mortality favoured Canada (relative risk 0.95, 95% confidence interval 0.92-0.98, p= 0.002) but were very heterogeneous, and we failed to find convincing explanations for this heterogeneity. The only condition in which results consistently favoured one country was end-stage renal disease, in which Canadian patients fared better.

Interpretation: Available studies suggest that health outcomes may be superior in patients cared for in Canada versus the United States, but differences are not consistent. http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/view/8/1

That was just the U.S. and Canada, and already it's looking bad.

The highest survival rates were found in the U.S. for breast and prostate cancer, in Japan for colon and rectal cancers in men, and in France for colon and rectal cancers in women, Coleman's team reports.

In Canada and Australia, survival was also high for most cancers.

The lowest cancer survival rates for all four cancers were found in Algeria. http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-by-country

We're one of the number ones (not the sole number one), but if you read the article you'll note that results are inconsistent across states and demographics. Hawaii had the best record, and you know there employers are required to provide generous" coverage to any employee working more than 20 hours. Hawaii’s health insurance premiums are nearly tied with North Dakota for the lowest in the country, and Medicare costs per beneficiary are the nation’s lowest. Yowsa!

Here's the dissection of a poorly conducted study that tried to make the U.S. out as being better for cancer:

Be that as it may, Carroll points out that the U.S. is among the best in the world when it comes to breast cancer but not actually the best. Japan appears to be doing much better than the U.S. As a cancer surgeon, I will point out that breast cancer in Japan might be different, possibly due to lifestyle differences. In terms of other cancers, Carroll concludes that for cervical cancer, we’re in the middle of the pack; for colorectal cancer, we’re unequivocally doing the best; and for prostate cancer we’re in the high end of the middle of the pack[b]. The most interesting observation is that for lung cancer [b]we are doing abysmally. The obvious excuse for that is tobacco smoking, but it turns out that the U.S. has one of the lowest rates of tobacco use of these countries; so that doesn’t explain it. As Aaron’s last cancer graph shows graph when it comes to overall mortality from cancer, compared to the G8 countries, the U.S. is doing well but is not the best. http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/cancer-care-in-the-u-s-versus-europe/

If you want to pay for a study, how about this one:
In Amenable Mortality—Deaths Avoidable Through Health Care—Progress In The US Lags That Of Three European Countries (2012)

It's still not looking good for your premise, Jwhop.

When mortality rates are restricted only to patients under 65, the US loses its lead – we are right in the middle. Only when we compare mortality rates among patients over 65 do we excel among our peers. Why? Possibly because Medicare gives older Americans the health care access they lacked when younger. http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2012/12/worlds-cancer-care.html

In this article from August of this year...:

That easy access to care is what Maggy Coufal likes about the Taiwanese health care system. She also worries that the U.S. system could cause her to go bankrupt. Even though she’s lived in the U. S. for nine years, and has a job with insurance, she pays about $25 a month to maintain her Taiwanese insurance.

“I’m afraid of the U.S. health care system,” Coufal said. “If I need it, I can go home and have things taken care of that way.” http://www.northcarolinahealthnews.org/2013 /08/28/different-cultures-different-systems-comparing-health-care-in-the-u-s-and-taiwan/

Apparently, our system isn't good enough for her. That's a far cry from your supposition.

Diabetes:
U.S. ranks high on cancer care, lowest on diabetes treatment

Diabetes stats seem hard to come by on the international level.

posted October 29, 2013 09:13 AM            

Oh please, it doesn't take a Ph.D to know super sizing burgers, fries and sugary soft drinks are not healthy choices.

When you're seriously ill, your medical outcome...which is what we were talking about until you tried to insert your absurd WHO report...will depend on your doctor, your hospital, medical devices and treatment drugs. Your education level will have not one thing to do with your medical outcome.

posted October 29, 2013 10:05 AM            

Is that a Leo thing? Are you projecting again?..acoustic

Well acoustic, no one is ever going to accuse you of being the smartest guy in the room...unless you're alone!

quote:
How can leftists be so dumb as to not know that the greater hazards..or more hazards are insured against...the higher the insurance premium is going to be.

A "leftist" told you that. How could you have been so dumb as to not have known, number one, but also how could you have been so dumb as to try to make the ones that told you that out as the dumb ones?...acoustic

No acoustic, no leftist told me that..nor did leftists tell anyone else that. Heads up their as$es leftists..including the Marxist Messiah O'Bomber have been running all over America lying about O'BomberCare reducing insurance premiums by $2500 per family. Common sense told me...and other rationals that was a lie and I've been telling you and the other usual suspects it was a lie long before the study came out showing people in 45 out of 50 states were in for O'BomberCare sticker shock.

quote:
Yes, that's exactly what I think because it's true that when insurance companies are required to cover more risk, the premium will be higher. Only in the leftist land of non reality would that not be true.

Once again, you're putting your own stated position on "leftists"

"In 45 of the 50 states O'BomberCare will cost more than current insurance premiums. In most cases, much more." -Jwhop

You were clearly the one that thought the price should stay the same despite covering more. Then your "leftist" didn't deny this claim, but rather pointed out to you that the insurance coverage wasn't an apples to apples comparison:

"Insurance that provides more benefits --in order to adhere to the new law-- does cost more." ...acoustic

God, this is truly Dufus thinking. Never, ever have I said insurance premiums should be lower...when more hazards are being insured against. I've commented here repeatedly that O'Bomber was and still is lying when he says O'BomberCare will lower insurance premiums by $2500 per year per family.

quote:
Outcomes for Americans are far better than outcomes for Europeans...and Canadians...with the very same illness or disease. Which is the reason Europeans and Canadians who can afford to pay American doctors and American hospitals come to America for treatment of serious illness or disease.

No, not across all metrics. We've been over this. Not only so, but smart Americans go to Costa Rica to get costly procedures done cheaper. My own Conservative parents have engaged in this....acoustic

You're trying to conflate cost with medical outcomes acoustic. Can't do that in the real world..which is rational. AND I never said ALL foreign nationals who can afford to come to the US for treatment do so. AND, I never said Americans NEVER go elsewhere for treatment. For instance, Michael Moore wants to go the Cuba for medical treatment and that's fine with me.

quote:
And then you post a loony-tunes report from the helpless World Health Organization which doesn't even use illness and disease outcomes as criteria.

You were obviously trying to get off on a technicality there, and I'm actually kind of surprised that they let up on you. [EDIT: Apparently, they didn't! ]

So what study do you have that proves illness and disease outcomes are better in the United States than abroad? Have I already got ya? Do you even have one? Yeah, I didn't think so....acoustic

You're so full of crap your eyeballs are floating acoustic. Let's see how America stacks up against Europe and Canada in outcomes for serious illness and disease.

"Let�s compare data for cancer, heart disease, and stroke, the most common sources of sickness and death in the US and Europe, and the diseases that generate the highest medical expenditures.

American cancer patients, both men and women, have superior survival rates for all major cancers. For some specifics, per Verdecchia, the breast cancer mortality rate is 52 percent higher in Germany than in the US, and 88 percent higher in the United Kingdom; prostate cancer mortality rates are strikingly worse in the UK, Norway, and elsewhere than in the US; mortality rate for colorectal cancer among British men and women is about 40 percent higher than in the US."

"Treatment for heart disease is also superior in the United States.

First, a comparison of the US to ten Western European nations (Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland) showed that 60.7 percent of Americans diagnosed with heart disease were actually receiving medication for it, while only 54.5 percent of Western Europeans were treated (a statistically significant difference).

Likewise, US patients needing surgery for heart disease receive it more frequently than heart patients in countries with nationalized insurance. For example, twice as many bypass procedures and four times as many angioplasties are performed per capita in the US as in the UK. A separate comparison between Canadian and American patients showed the same pattern: of patients diagnosed with coronary heart disease, a higher percentage of US patients actually received treatment.

But is there evidence that Americans with heart disease actually benefit from receiving treatment more frequently compared to patients elsewhere? The answer is yes. Specifically, the US shows a significantly greater reduction in death rates from heart disease than Western European nations, the European Union as a whole, and Japan.

A separate study showed that Americans had a significantly longer five-year survival after acute heart attack than Canadians. The authors concluded that �our findings are strongly suggestive of a survival advantage for the US cohort based on more aggressive revascularization.�

Another comparison study showed that fewer Americans than UK residents die (per capita) from heart attack despite the far higher burden of risk factors in Americans for these fatal events. In fact, the heart disease mortality rate in England was 36 percent higher than that in the US. These superior outcomes from US medical care are particularly impressive, considering that American patients have far more risk factors (diabetes, obesity, chronic kidney disease) that worsen outcomes and death rates after heart attack and after heart surgery.

The US shows a far greater reduction in death rates from stroke, the third leading cause of death and the leading cause of disability in adults in the US and most Western European nations, than almost all Western European nations and the European Union overall."

Scott W. Atlas, MD is the David and Joan Traitel Senior Fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and author of the recently published book In Excellent Health: Setting the Record Straight on America�s Health Care (Hoover Press, 2011

That's enough data to sink your stinky horseshiiit acoustic.

We're one of the number ones (not the sole number one), but if you read the article you'll note that results are inconsistent across states and demographics.:...acoustic

Hello, is there any intelligent life there? We're not comparing medical outcomes between states in the US. We're comparing medical outcomes between the US and other nations. Get it now acoustic?

posted October 29, 2013 10:50 AM            

The cost per capita to insure EVERYTHING in countries where EVERYONE is insured AND the pharmaceuticals aren't allowed to charge as much as they do here...is less than most basic plans in this country even before the ACA was passed.

posted October 29, 2013 12:07 PM            

Exactly! Marxist Socialist Progressive thinking. Price controls on doctors, hospitals, medical device manufacturers and drug companies and soon, you'll have doctors leaving their practices, hospitals closing, medical device makers leaving America..drug companies as well.

Then, we can be just like Europe and Canada...with crappy health care and much worse medical outcomes.

Just to be clear Catalina/katatonic, just who in the hell do you think you are to tell health care providers how much they can charge. In case you don't know it, you're not in the Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea or Communist China.

posted October 29, 2013 12:41 PM            

Yes, who are we to gainsay rampant profits for the sake of our health care. The temerity!

Ludicrous.

posted October 29, 2013 12:46 PM            

As to WHO THE HELL I THINK I AM I am one of many who have come and gone through this forum (and others) who don't appreciate your need for threatening belligerent language to make a point.

The simple fact is that we are NOT even near the top of the list in HEALTH OUTCOMES with the possible exception of colon cancer...that machines and pharmaceuticals not only do not always make the best medicine but DO make it the most expensive, and many of our own citizens SHUN doctors for that very reason.

And a large part of that is the collusion between drug companies, insurers and hospitals...twisting the arm of many doctors in the process..to keep the price of drugs high and the prescribing of them over-the-top.

posted October 29, 2013 01:44 PM            

Save the bullshiiit for the tourists. Home boys aren't buying it.

What you're arguing for with price controls is a communist state. We're having no part of it.

As much as you Accidental Americans and usual suspects despise free markets and capitalism, we're keeping them. You're free to go elsewhere.