D
deleted171991
Politically incorrect debates should not be done in public. You win.
Last edited by a moderator:
Politically incorrect debates should not be done in public. You win.
Just an FYI: most legal immigrants become citizens within 5-7 years after immigration, hence would not qualify as immigrant non-citizens. So the proportion of legal immigrants who suddenly cannot support themselves,after getting their green card less than 5 years ago, is probably much lower than you think.
Actually family-based permanent residents do. And it expires only when the sponsor dies or the sponsee becomes a citizen.Why? "Immigrants" includes recent immigrants as well as people who have been here for decades. It's simply everyone who wasn't born here. Immigrants don't have permanent sponsorship deals.
Look at the graph above. The ACA/Obamacare has been a success or has it? The Uninsured rate dropped mostly due to Medicaid Expansion (free healthcare) and subsidies on the exchanges (paid for by the taxpayer). This Trillion dollar expansion of the welfare state will lead to either higher taxes and larger deficits or both. The Medicare tax on the "rich" ( many of you) won't cover the cost of the ACA.
The middle class voter, who buys insurance on the exchanges, is facing higher deductibles and large premium increases in 2016. Obama must be quite pleased with his transitional plan to a single payer health care system.
The problem with that argument is by correctly pointing out administrative costs it implies that other countries with single payer systems are completely efficient with their cost structure. As if the government that administers healthcare has no waste and and is entirely efficient.The whole ACA to single-payer debate is a rhetorical tool used equally by both sides (excite vs incite).
The problem is that the current system, pre or post-ACA, sucks. And it sucks because, like most industries in the US, it has been systematically co-opted by large businesses to serve their interests, and those interests are advanced by the government in exchange for campaign contributions.
We have the highest administrative burden of any healthcare economy in the world. Look at this:
https://magic.piktochart.com/output/2353598-admin-cost
View attachment 193884
We have reached the first part but all that means is we are at a point of no return - i.e. we'll never get a government that will try to stop these costs from accelerating because if they tried, they'd get deselected at the voting booth.
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy." unsourced attribution to Alexander Fraser Tytler
I'm reading the article they cited for the claim "In the US system, nearly 15% of all spending is administrative waste."
I can't figure out what in this article would justify that claim. It doesn't even use the term "waste" at all. This seems to be the closest thing I could find:
"In the United States, administrative tasks consumed 13.5 percent of physicians' time"
The problem with that argument is by correctly pointing out administrative costs it implies that other countries with single payer systems are completely efficient with their cost structure. As if the government that administers healthcare has no waste and and is entirely efficient.
I have an easy fix for that. Only people who pay income taxes should be allowed to vote. The rest of the people are dependents of the state just like children.
I have an easy fix for that. Only people who pay income taxes should be allowed to vote. The rest of the people are dependents of the state just like children.
So if I'm a college student I get no say? You didn't enjoy the minute you could vote for a presidential candidate after you turned 18? Stay at home dad can't vote? 70 year old retired anesthesiologists?
No doubt that we don't get the return for our money that other countries seem to. It's unfortunate that our politicians are to dysfunctional to make a dent in per capita spending anytime in the forseable future.Not true. It defines waste as the delta between what other countries with similar levels of economic development spend on a per-cap basis and what we spend on a per-cap basis.
The other countries need not be perfectly efficient, nor are they assumed to be in this analysis.
No because at age age 18 we are idiots, too easily persuaded by rhetoric. Yes, I got a thrill when I voted after I turned 18 and soon after I realized the folly of my vote and got buyer's remorse the summer I got my first good paying job and saw my pay check assaulted with all the B.S. deductions. Stay at home Dad usually has a spouse who pays income taxes to the system. 70 year old anesthesiologist has paid way way way more than he will ever take back from the system - he should get 2 votes for all the $ he has paid in over the years.So if I'm a college student I get no say? You didn't enjoy the minute you could vote for a presidential candidate after you turned 18? Stay at home dad can't vote? 70 year old retired anesthesiologists?
Tell me what you think the founding principles are. This should be interesting.I'm happy to see you guys really believe in the founding principles of the Constitution.
You do realize that when our nation was founded, only property-owning male individuals (plus property-owning females in NJ) had the right to vote? That was less than 5% of the population back then. Check out the history of voting rights.I'm happy to see you guys really believe in the founding principles of the Constitution.
So if I'm a college student I get no say? You didn't enjoy the minute you could vote for a presidential candidate after you turned 18? Stay at home dad can't vote? 70 year old retired anesthesiologists?
Actually. To add.Look at the graph above. The ACA/Obamacare has been a success or has it? The Uninsured rate dropped mostly due to Medicaid Expansion (free healthcare) and subsidies on the exchanges (paid for by the taxpayer). This Trillion dollar expansion of the welfare state will lead to either higher taxes and larger deficits or both. The Medicare tax on the "rich" ( many of you) won't cover the cost of the ACA.
The middle class voter, who buys insurance on the exchanges, is facing higher deductibles and large premium increases in 2016. Obama must be quite pleased with his transitional plan to a single payer health care system.