Obama’s big sellout

[davelj]

[quote=Arraya]

Come on, you can do it. Think for yourself.[/quote]

Given that your typical M.O. is to simply cut and paste (or provide a link to) what someone else has written, this is unintentionally humorous.

[briansd1]

[quote=sobmaz]
Forget about France, how about Germanys healthcare system? How about Switzerlands? Norways? Demarks? They all spend 8%ish of GDP, that means you SAVE MONEY compared to 15%!![/quote]

I agree that at first glance it seems simple.

But it’s more complicated than that.

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

I think the key is to get everyone covered first. Then, over time, we can bring down health care costs by legislating costs controls. We can then allocate resources, away from health-care, to other areas of the economy to bring down health-care cost as a portion of GDP.

[briansd1]

[quote=sobmaz]
Forget about France, how about Germanys healthcare system? How about Switzerlands? Norways? Demarks? They all spend 8%ish of GDP, that means you SAVE MONEY compared to 15%!![/quote]

I agree that at first glance it seems simple.

But it’s more complicated than that.

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

I think the key is to get everyone covered first. Then, over time, we can bring down health care costs by legislating costs controls. We can then allocate resources, away from health-care, to other areas of the economy to bring down health-care cost as a portion of GDP.

[briansd1]

[quote=sobmaz]
Forget about France, how about Germanys healthcare system? How about Switzerlands? Norways? Demarks? They all spend 8%ish of GDP, that means you SAVE MONEY compared to 15%!![/quote]

I agree that at first glance it seems simple.

But it’s more complicated than that.

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

I think the key is to get everyone covered first. Then, over time, we can bring down health care costs by legislating costs controls. We can then allocate resources, away from health-care, to other areas of the economy to bring down health-care cost as a portion of GDP.

[briansd1]

[quote=sobmaz]
Forget about France, how about Germanys healthcare system? How about Switzerlands? Norways? Demarks? They all spend 8%ish of GDP, that means you SAVE MONEY compared to 15%!![/quote]

I agree that at first glance it seems simple.

But it’s more complicated than that.

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

I think the key is to get everyone covered first. Then, over time, we can bring down health care costs by legislating costs controls. We can then allocate resources, away from health-care, to other areas of the economy to bring down health-care cost as a portion of GDP.

[briansd1]

[quote=sobmaz]
Forget about France, how about Germanys healthcare system? How about Switzerlands? Norways? Demarks? They all spend 8%ish of GDP, that means you SAVE MONEY compared to 15%!![/quote]

I agree that at first glance it seems simple.

But it’s more complicated than that.

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

I think the key is to get everyone covered first. Then, over time, we can bring down health care costs by legislating costs controls. We can then allocate resources, away from health-care, to other areas of the economy to bring down health-care cost as a portion of GDP.

[blahblahblah]

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

Good summary. It’s basically the same situation as in “Idiocracy” where the economy collapses after they stop spraying Brawndo on the crops. Everything you need to understand the world today can be found in that film.

[blahblahblah]

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

Good summary. It’s basically the same situation as in “Idiocracy” where the economy collapses after they stop spraying Brawndo on the crops. Everything you need to understand the world today can be found in that film.

[blahblahblah]

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

Good summary. It’s basically the same situation as in “Idiocracy” where the economy collapses after they stop spraying Brawndo on the crops. Everything you need to understand the world today can be found in that film.

[blahblahblah]

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

Good summary. It’s basically the same situation as in “Idiocracy” where the economy collapses after they stop spraying Brawndo on the crops. Everything you need to understand the world today can be found in that film.

[blahblahblah]

First the people who have private health insurance (middle class salaried folks who vote) don’t want any change or are very afraid of change.

Second, Americans are addicted to expensive medications and costly tests which are generally unnecessary.

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.

Good summary. It’s basically the same situation as in “Idiocracy” where the economy collapses after they stop spraying Brawndo on the crops. Everything you need to understand the world today can be found in that film.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.
[/quote]

Regardless of how you feel about healthcare, this is not correct. The money spent/invested on healthcare would get spent/invested elsewhere. There isn’t necessarily an impact on GDP.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.
[/quote]

Regardless of how you feel about healthcare, this is not correct. The money spent/invested on healthcare would get spent/invested elsewhere. There isn’t necessarily an impact on GDP.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.
[/quote]

Regardless of how you feel about healthcare, this is not correct. The money spent/invested on healthcare would get spent/invested elsewhere. There isn’t necessarily an impact on GDP.

[davelj]

[quote=briansd1]

Third, saving money on healthcare means cutting people’s incomes (those who work in health care). That reduces economic turnover and wealth. If you suddenly eliminate 1/2 the health care industry, you eliminate a substantial portion of GDP.
[/quote]

Regardless of how you feel about healthcare, this is not correct. The money spent/invested on healthcare would get spent/invested elsewhere. There isn’t necessarily an impact on GDP.

[Author]

Posts