Good News, that POS Comrade Obama ruined the Democratic Party

IPSIS: Formerly the Spine Intervention Society
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Ligament, he is saying that everyone is entitled to healthcare. the problem is the amount - $2000.

thats barely enough to pay for the visits to see the noctor for a year.
Members don't see this ad.
 
SSdoc33 said:
also, dare i say, that minorities need much less competitive requirements to be accepted to better undergrad and medical schools.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't you save the racism for the evil racist republicans? And don't even think about insulting a woman because the republicans also own the "war on women!"

So STAY IN YOUR LANE SSDOC!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
SSdoc33 said:
also, dare i say, that minorities need much less competitive requirements to be accepted to better undergrad and medical schools.
Click to expand...

Damn SSdoc33, did you really say that? The "minorities" in my area are a hell of a lot more academically accomplished and competitive than "non-minorities."
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Ducttape said:
Ligament, he is saying that everyone is entitled to healthcare. the problem is the amount - $2000.

thats barely enough to pay for the visits to see the noctor for a year.
Click to expand...
People are better off not seeing their noctor at all... I like the idea of the pt having skin in the game. They will not say, "You're not helping me...so when is my next appointment?" I don't think a million dollars a year would be enough. The cost of health-care would skyrocket in response.
 
Ligament said:
Damn SSdoc33, did you really say that? The "minorities" in my area are a hell of a lot more academically accomplished and competitive than "non-minorities."
Click to expand...

ok, ligament, which minorities are you talking about? are you talking about the hard-working south asians or chinese in seattle? those same minority groups that DONT get preferential treatment in the application process? Carson doesnt fit into that group. just because im liberal doesnt mean that i think affirmative action is insane. it immediately makes me question the qualifications of minorities in positions of power. obama included.
 
It is not conjecture, we are commenting on stances on things such as Healthcare and Evolution. Yes an anecdotal story about what a "great guy" he is carries so much more weight.
It is all a waste of time, he will win Iowa Caucasus, fall off the map, then get a Fox News program
 
If he can withstand the extemporaneous banter and disrespect on the campaign trail, he'll be a contender, regardless of his religious beliefs. The Democratic plan on healthcare is so incredibly unpopular, it's hard to imagine criticism of Carson's plan would get any traction. Seriously, would Jonathon Gruber be the one criticizing Carson?
 
lonelobo said:
It is not conjecture, we are commenting on stances on things such as Healthcare and Evolution. Yes an anecdotal story about what a "great guy" he is carries so much more weight.
It is all a waste of time, he will win Iowa Caucasus, fall off the map, then get a Fox News program
Click to expand...
It worked for Huckabee. His TV job is a way better job than being President. Carson may want to be the Sanjay Gupta of Fox News. Would be a good gig. Lots more money, and much less stress than either being a brain surgeon or President of the USA. Props to him if it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I think it's funny that you guys believe Republicans and Democrats are different in DC. I know these guys, they all want whatever their lobbyist wants. They aren't destroying the country, they just increasing their wallets. I hear this hyperbole about this party or that party destroying the county and that has to be the most asinine statement of all. Politicians will never destroy something that benefits them financially, so stop with the unnecessary rhetoric.
 
TexasDoc2388 said:
I think it's funny that you guys believe Republicans and Democrats are different in DC. I know these guys, they all want whatever their lobbyist wants. They aren't destroying the country, they just increasing their wallets. I hear this hyperbole about this party or that party destroying the county and that has to be the most asinine statement of all. Politicians will never destroy something that benefits them financially, so stop with the unnecessary rhetoric.
Click to expand...
I definitely have my favorites regarding party and candidates, but there's a lot of truth to this statement, unfortunately. Sometimes I also wonder of they're just one big country club up there in DC, and know they have a very good thing going and are primarily intent on preserving it for themselves. I also wonder myself if a lot of the party arguing and posturing is mostly window dressing to appease the donators, while mainly just keeping the status-quo racket going underneath.
 
TexasDoc2388 said:
I think it's funny that you guys believe Republicans and Democrats are different in DC. I know these guys, they all want whatever their lobbyist wants. They aren't destroying the country, they just increasing their wallets. I hear this hyperbole about this party or that party destroying the county and that has to be the most asinine statement of all. Politicians will never destroy something that benefits them financially, so stop with the unnecessary rhetoric.
Click to expand...

lot of truth here. Almost everyone in congress is worthless and largely interested in getting rich and getting endlessly re-elected.

Only thing that could turn things around is to establish term limits for congress, (as we have for the president), so members of congress can only serve two terms max between both houses of congress.
People who get elected for only one to two terms are more likely to vote their conscience and serve their country, not just their wallet.
 
I'm not under any impression the Republicans are good people. They are worthless politicians mostly. They are, however, less evil than the socialists, and far less evil than Comrade Obama. Anything that stands in his way is a good thing.

I think it is fair that Ben Carson may not become a soulless politician. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt. Time will tell.
 
Ligament said:
I'm not under any impression the Republicans are good people. They are worthless politicians mostly. They are, however, less evil than the socialists, and far less evil than Comrade Obama. Anything that stands in his way is a good thing.

I think it is fair that Ben Carson may not become a soulless politician. I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt. Time will tell.
Click to expand...
Like always, it's a choice of the lesser of the two evils. Usually a very easy choice for me.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Obama, Pelosi and Reid are the ones who brought "Meaningful Use" to medicine and other things that directly affect our profession adversely. And watching them (and their mercenaries) lie to their supporters repeatedly and call their supporters stupid, while their supporters just go about complacently, just makes me sick. I have no loyalty to any party but these clowns are the chosen heads of the Democrats. So anyone who wants to step up and stop them is my new best friend.
 
I think the rest of the country agrees with the above statements based on the results of the mid term election. It's the lesser of two evils and yes, Obama, Pelosi and Reid are freaking *****s and should be viewed as such if your are in any kind of healthcare field.
 
Have you guys heard all the Gruber clips about Obamacare?

What is mind blowing to me is Pelosi denies knowledge of him, yet she is on video in 2009 QUOTING him as an expert.

Comrade Obama denies he was "on the white house staff" yet Gruber is on the white house visitor logbooks many times. Gruber himself states he was in the Oval office with the President.

Absolutely amazing what liars these evil humans are.

Oh yeah, did you guys meet your "meaningful use" requirements today? Do you feel meaningful?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ligament said:
Have you guys heard all the Gruber clips about Obamacare?

What is mind blowing to me is Pelosi denies knowledge of him, yet she is on video in 2009 QUOTING him as an expert.

Comrade Obama denies he was "on the white house staff" yet Gruber is on the white house visitor logbooks many times. Gruber himself states he was in the Oval office with the President.

Absolutely amazing what liars these evil humans are.

Oh yeah, did you guys meet your "meaningful use" requirements today? Do you feel meaningful?
Click to expand...
Here's Obama on tape, saying he "stole ideas" from Gruber, who he supposedly didn't know or take influence from:

http://m.townhall.com/tipsheet/kati...erally-steals-jonathan-grubers-ideas-n1920014
 
Problem is we are wasting our valuable talking about this crap, instead of trying to work together to fight the real enemies such Big Insurers, Big Pharma, Hopsitals.
 
lonelobo said:
Problem is we are wasting our valuable talking about this crap, instead of trying to work together to fight the real enemies such Big Insurers, Big Pharma, Hospitals.
Click to expand...
Do you really think these are "enemies" that need to be "fought"? I think the law should prevent criminal activity and anticompetetive practices and should ensure the marketplace remains free of obstruction from new competition. Otherwise, people and companies should be left alone.

Even as the politicians yell and scream about "my enemies", like the ones you mentioned, it's the Federal Government and no one else who brought Meaningful Use down on my nascent practice like a black cloud.

-"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson
 
hyperalgesia said:
Do you really think these are "enemies" that need to be "fought"? I think the law should prevent criminal activity and anticompetetive practices and should ensure the marketplace remains free of obstruction from new competition. Otherwise, people and companies should be left alone.

Even as the politicians yell and scream about "my enemies", like the ones you mentioned, it's the Federal Government and no one else who brought Meaningful Use down on my nascent practice like a black cloud.

-"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson
Click to expand...

incorrect, as usual

you think it is ok for insurance companies to take 1/3 of the piece to act as a middleman? without providing any actual care?
you think its ok for pharma to charge an American $10,000/year for a medication, when a Canadian or European spends 1/2 that?


pure free market doesnt work. you need "some" central control and regulation.

meaningful use, however, completely blows. agreed there
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
SSdoc33 said:
incorrect, as usual

you think it is ok for insurance companies to take 1/3 of the piece to act as a middleman? without providing any actual care?
you think its ok for pharma to charge an American $10,000/year for a medication, when a Canadian or European spends 1/2 that?


pure free market doesnt work. you need "some" central control and regulation.

meaningful use, however, completely blows. agreed there
Click to expand...
I am not really a "pure" free market person -like an anarchist or something. If completely left alone, monopolies will emerge and then stifle the free market. I think you need policing and nurturing of the free market to ensure that it remains fertile for new enterprise and competition - which is the best way to provide the highest quality at the lowest price.

If insurance companies are making so much money, why is another smaller insurance company unwilling to step in and take slightly less and still make a great profit? If the profit margin is so high and it remains high, there must be some kind of prohibitive burden preventing a new insurance company from emerging as a competitor. Same thing with the pharmaceuticals. Rather than try to "bring the companies down" or micromanage them, I would look at the marketplace and remove obstacles to their competition.

The reality is that more involvement of "Central Control" inevitably leads to more corruption and more waste. To these players (industries and companies), Central Control is just another tool for them to dominate the market. Now that Central Control has become involved in the insurance industry, rather than reigning it in, we are required by law to participate its dirty, disgusting, gambling business.

So, to answer your questions, no I don't think these things are ok. But to me they indicate the free market is "sick", probably BECAUSE of government tinkering and burdensome regulation salting the earth. They don't indicate that the free market doesn't work and we need to install communism in its place.
 
If insurance companies are making so much money, why is another smaller insurance company unwilling to step in and take slightly less and still make a great profit?
Click to expand...

answer? this:
If completely left alone, monopolies will emerge and then stifle the free market.
Click to expand...

i disagree with your last assessment. the market was sick way before government tinkering. the ACA signed on 2010.

from 1999 to 2010, the time period BEFORE the ACA, health insurance premiums for single coverage went from (all values average) $2196 to $4704. Family coverage went from $5791 to $12680.

in a similar time period,
They discovered that starting salaries for Female physicians increased from $151,600 in 1999 to $174,000 in 2008, but male physician’s salaries grew from $173,400 in 1999 to $209,300 in 2008.
Click to expand...

the doubling in insurance premiums did not go to us physicians.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ducttape said:
i disagree with your last assessment. the market was sick way before government tinkering. the ACA signed on 2010.

from 1999 to 2010, the time period BEFORE the ACA, health insurance premiums for single coverage went from (all values average) $2196 to $4704. Family coverage went from $5791 to $12680.
Click to expand...
Government tinkering did not begin with the ACA. It began with Medicare. Prior to Medicare, the free market worked when patients controlled the rising costs because the were looking out for THEIR money. The exponential rise in healthcare costs is entirely due to the removal of free market controls as the giant Medicare monopoly entered the game, along with the insurance company bonanza, govt incentives to have insurance subsidized by employers, etc. All these things serve the purpose of detaching the consumer (cost controller) from the service delivered.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
first note - you probably wouldnt have gotten residency training without Medicare.

second, Average life expectancy for males in 1965 was 66.7, females 73.7. for males, that number hadnt changed since 1954. by 1998, it was 73.8 for males, and 79.5 for females. now the existence of medicare may not be causative, but prior to medicare, less than 2/3 of patients over age 65 had any insurance.
 
I don't think it's possible to attribute these improvements to Medicare. Our personal computers and cell phones have also improved since the 1960s without government sponsored CellPhoneCare. Poor people have better cell phones than they do healthcare.

Medicare and private insurances have some virtues, like communism also has some virtues. But here we are, 50 years later, with half the population saying we're not as good as Europe (would anyone have said that in the 50s?), with healthcare costs spiraling out of control and breaking our budget. And we're looking for additional government interventions to compensate for the unintended consequences of previous government interventions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
hyperalgesia said:
I don't think it's possible to attribute these improvements to Medicare. Our personal computers and cell phones have also improved since the 1960s without government sponsored CellPhoneCare. Poor people have better cell phones than they do healthcare.

Medicare and private insurances have some virtues, like communism also has some virtues. But here we are, 50 years later, with half the population saying we're not as good as Europe (would anyone have said that in the 50s?), with healthcare costs spiraling out of control and breaking our budget. And we're looking for additional government interventions to compensate for the unintended consequences of previous government interventions.
Click to expand...

Beautifully said. We have decades of profound evidence that government intrusion into the doctor patient relationship is a total failure. To ask for MORE government intervention to fix the problems the government created in the first place is insane. But that is the nanny state mindstate of liberal sheeple for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ligament said:
Beautifully said. We have decades of profound evidence that government intrusion into the doctor patient relationship is a total failure. To ask for MORE government intervention to fix the problems the government created in the first place is insane. But that is the nanny state mindstate of liberal sheeple for you.
Click to expand...

They should make a law stating that all insurance companies should be none profit hehe
 
Gay mariage is like bestiality or pedophilia
 
Last edited:
ampaphb said:
Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/11/ben-carson-obamacare_n_4086065.html
Click to expand...
I just don't think any of these comments are inflammatory. Marriage IS a definition rather than a "right". By taking issue with the comparison between homosexual marriage and bestiality marriage, I assume that bestiality offends your delicate sensibilities? So, just to be clear, marriage is now defined as between any two humans? And it ABSOLUTELY cannot involve a THIRD human or that would just be wrong?

I personally don't give a rat's ass how you humans wish to define marriage. But Carson is right when he says it's a definition (as opposed to a 'right'). And he's kind of exposing the bigoted hypocrisy of liberals by provoking outrage when bringing in other, less popular lifestyles...
 
Please have him run. As smart as Dr. Carson may be regarding neurosurgery, his political naiveté is rivaled only by candiates like Michele Bachman, Todd "legitimate rape" Akin, and Sharon "Second Amendment Rights" Angle
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
hyperalgesia said:
I don't think it's possible to attribute these improvements to Medicare. Our personal computers and cell phones have also improved since the 1960s without government sponsored CellPhoneCare. Poor people have better cell phones than they do healthcare.

Medicare and private insurances have some virtues, like communism also has some virtues. But here we are, 50 years later, with half the population saying we're not as good as Europe (would anyone have said that in the 50s?), with healthcare costs spiraling out of control and breaking our budget. And we're looking for additional government interventions to compensate for the unintended consequences of previous government interventions.
Click to expand...
you may be correct. however, in a counterargument, the rate of increased life expectancy, after stagnation, is remarkably coincidental to the access to insurance for those older than age 65.


and now here is an interesting concept:

http://www.cumc.columbia.edu/psjournal/archive/archives/jour_v17n1_0015.html

your salary and "expected" quality of life/living, with a high income compared to the general populace, may be due to Medicare...

Before 1965, medicine was not an especially lucrative profession. That changed when President Lyndon Johnson signed the Medicare bill. "This is not the first time money has entered into the doctor-patient relationship," Dr. Rothman says. "To hear some doctors talk about managed care, you'd think medicine had been a priestly duty before. Medicare brings money into medicine in a new way, because it created customary fees. Ultimately, every financial incentive in the system was to do more, which brought physicians additional income." Dr. Rothman also points to the rise in technologically complicated procedures that detach the compensation of care from time spent with the patient to the procedure itself
Click to expand...
 
QFT:

hyperalgesia said:
-"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first." Thomas Jefferson
Click to expand...
 
Works for me, thanks for the correction:
"There are two potential violators of man’s rights: the criminals and the government. The great achievement of the United States was to draw a distinction between these two — by forbidding to the second the legalized version of the activities of the first." Ayn Rand
 
Having read Altas shrugged and the fountainhead in high school, I continue to find her philosophy to be (allusions intended) egotistic and self centered.

She was not, although she may have believed otherwise since she compared herself to Aristotle and Aquinas, the intellectual level of Jefferson.
 
Last edited:
Thomas Jefferson - an American Founding Father, principal author of the Declaration of Independence, and third President of the United States.

Ayn Rand -
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

hyperalgesia
Harvard Medical School Withdraws From U.S. News Ranking
Replies
8
Views
717
Ducttape
D
D
Good Handheld Portable Ultrasound Machines
Replies
5
Views
2K
RaceCanyon
RaceCanyon
drusso
ABC News: Tulsa Shooter Battled Chronic Back Pain
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
258
Views
9K
Ducttape
D
bedrock
One of the true “side effects” of Obamacare
Replies
42
Views
2K
hyperalgesia
hyperalgesia
drusso
What's a good ICD-10 code for Medial Branch Causalgia?
Replies
1
Views
486
lobelsteve
lobelsteve
Top