Obamacare to cost average of $20 Thousand per family

[dR-vIce]

Reminds me of a picture i saw.

Breaking Bad - Canada edition.

You have cancer, treatment starts in one week.

End.

[Pfeff]

Look, more anti-Obama propaganda. Who would have thought...!?

[oblivionx]

lawl history fail

You're on a computer with access to google.

[Magpai]

You think that's a country you want to live in?

As opposed to one where government effectively confiscates the resources and efforts of private citizens by forcing them into providing a service under the government's terms? Absolutely.

[Chonogo]

Democrats also changed into the "working mans party" but still found time to alienate working African Ameircans for decades.

Your point?

Democrats were always the working mans party. They used to be full of racists. Then the moderate Democrats and Republicans passed the Civil Rights Act, and Nixon said "hey racists, Republicans are cooler". And off they went.

It's a lot more complex than that, but history lessons usually bore people.

[mistuhbull]

Adjusted by purchasing power parity. That means they adjust for cost of living.

When comparing costs of health care, there is no adjustment for PPP. The metric usually used is cost per person (absolute).

A more appropriate metric would be % GDP spent on healthcare. But like I said before, maybe Americans are just unhealthy, increasing health care costs as well as reducing average life expectancy. Most health care isn't a cure, its just a band aid or stop gap for the ailing.

by %GDP? Ok: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

[Fadinglight]

Republicans fought hard to end slavery and Jim Crow so they could deport all black people back to Africa because America was a white nation.

You do know that until Clinton the democrats were hard pressed on oppressing african americans right? It wasn't until Clinton that they realized they'd need the african american vote to have any power and that's when they promoted black rights. Republicans weren't the people behind slavery, it was the opposite during that time. It has nothing to do with being a white nation.

[Bigzoman20]

Republicans fought hard to end slavery and Jim Crow so they could deport all black people back to Africa because America was a white nation.

Is that why they also strode to provide them with voting rights via the 13th and 14th amendment following the civil war? Logic?

1860s Republicans- Lets give them the right to vote even though we plan to deport them sooner or later.

Logic?

[oblivionx]

It was when a President named Lyndon Baines Johnson decided to enact the Civil Rights Act. That's when you see the major party restructuring.

I would have guessed it was prior to that by a bit, 1910 era and Wilson.

[Chonogo]

Truthfully, I'm not sure when the black vote went democrat or why. I suspect it was way before the Reverends without Churches showed up.

Civil Rights Act, 1964.

[Kaleredar]

Don't give me that self-righteous bullshit, you fucking hypocrite. You're spending money on an internet connection so you can spend time on the internet high atop your human dignity high horse, time and money that could be used, regardless of any other work or financial contributions you make, for the good of people worse off than you.

The hell are you going on about? You don't know me at all, or who I am. You have nothing to stand on but a knee-jerk reaction to comment on the degree to which I help other people.

That you apparently rate the continued accumulation of luxuries as a "right" that would surpass giving aid to someone in need is what I find disgusting about your argument.

[Vyxn]

Yes, because that's what people bitched about.

"I can't afford the bill, make someone else pay for it!" was totally the argument.

In reality, it was more like "I can't afford the bill, these costs are outrageous. Do something!"

but Obama care is going to do the opposite it is just going to drive up insurgence cost like how i described in my above post and who are the one who are going to get hit the worse? the average middle class family. the poor will get their insurance for free and the rich the cost wont matter

from my post above

paying the penalty (tax) is going to be a hell of a lot cheaper then it will be to buy insurance so a lot will decide to just pay the penalty. then they become ill lets say they get cancer so then they go out and buy insurance to cover the cost of the cancer treatments the insurance companies can not deny them insurance because of it being a preexisting condition. they get the cancer treatment they get cured then they drop the insurance and go back paying the penalty

[Rosse88]

Which is a whole nother level of bullshit. I can't take a black shirt and call it white and have it magically be white. If a company is non-profit, then it should be non-fucking-profit

Im going to be as blunt as possible. The legal precedent for turning profit in a non-profit is extra-ordinanry. Once a non-profit has demonstrated a trend of growth, they are no longer non-profit. The point of the matter is growth.

In other terms, if you were going to compete with me in business as a non-profit, I would not be all that concerned. The profit in non-profit is essentially just a good year. However, its FAR from being capable of expanding. Therefore the goal was not business but the service. I on the other-hand, priced my services to with a 3 year mark for growth. I am clearly in it for the development and not the singleton service.

Essentially, a non-profit is termed as such for the money variable. As, well, money in a real business is not seen as a green piece of paper that buys stuff. Rather, it is counted as what it actually is. The medium for exchange of services. The more money coming in, the more you can service, the larger you get as an organization. Non-profits do not grow larger. They remain static. There have been many cases of non-profits becoming for profit as their growth started to occur and were forced to make the change (happens in tech and food services often enough).

[Daelak]

As opposed to one where government effectively confiscates the resources and efforts of private citizens by forcing them into providing a service under the government's terms? Absolutely.

Magpai, that doesn't exist. Your entire ideological beliefs are predicated on a complete fantasy. There is no free market, in the early 20th century people did die on the streets, infant mortality was skyhigh, and life expectancy was low, hence the reason people voted people in GOVERNMENT to do something about it. You live in a society, you have no absolute freedom.

[Chonogo]

It was the republicans that passed the civil rights act...

The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

It was the non-racists that voted for the Civil Rights Act.

[oblivionx]

Civil Rights Act, 1964.

I said prior to the reverends without churches ;p

[yurano]

by %GDP? Ok: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...PP)_per_capita

Again, there are other confounding factors like lifestyle.

Moreover, I would like to assert that US consumers carry a majority of the cost of healthcare R&D.

Which is a whole nother level of bullshit. I can't take a black shirt and call it white and have it magically be white. If a company is non-profit, then it should be non-fucking-profit

You realize that there's a difference between your definition and the legal definition of non-profit right?

[Bigzoman20]

Democrats were always the working mans party. They used to be full of racists. Then the moderate Democrats and Republicans passed the Civil Rights Act, and Nixon said "hey racists, Republicans are cooler". And off they went.

It's a lot more complex than that, but history lessons usually bore people.

Nixon's southern strategy wasn't as effective as people beleive.

[Chonogo]

Doesn't change the fact that if the public exchanges can't provide it will trigger a socialized medicine system that was conveniently included.

What socialized medicine system? Are you saying there's a clause in the bill that says the government will thusly own all hospitals and doctors will become government employees?

Cause that's socialized medicine.

[oblivionx]

The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

It was the non-racists that voted for the Civil Rights Act.

I recall it was a higher percentage of Republicans that voted for it than democrats. That chart seems to try and hide that or I'm wrong.

---------- Post added 2013-02-01 at 06:50 AM ----------

What socialized medicine system? Are you saying there's a clause in the bill that says the government will thusly own all hospitals and doctors will become government employees?

Cause that's socialized medicine.

The "affordable" health care act is 2200 pages long or so.

You go look for that part ;p