ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Ask yourself one important question about what you just typed. What entity is causing the false set of economics described in your post and why would we want them even more involved in our health care?
False economics would be those economics that don't exist.
Ask yourself one important question...Is Medicare or Medicaid going away in your lifetime?
The only false set of economics is the one that discusses or debates the issue without recognizing the real, true life parameters that are present. Medicare is real and the percentage of people who could afford any but the most basic of care without insurance is less than 5%.

There are three things that altered the healthcare market. All happened in the 1960's
1. the introduction of Medicare/Medicaid (primarily Medicare) that covers all Americans 65 yrs and older
2. the proliferation of employer based/paid healthcare insurance.
3. the introduction of for-profit medicine

Medicare and providers would love to pay higher reimbursements. Can I take it that you support the tax increases to make that happen?
 
That has nothing to do with the argument. No one forced them to choose non profit status. They've enjoyed decades of no taxation. If they don't like giving basic care to uninsured, then they should back up and pay taxes for every year they claimed exempt.

They can't have it both ways.
How fvcking stupid are you?
They are closing! Get it?
How can you argue that hospital closings don't have anything to do with the argument???

I'm curious to know how many balance sheets you've examined for non-profit hospitals?
If you know what percentage of their billings is written off to charity care?

Is your premise that they should continue to provide care even if it means that the hospital staff isn't paid? How long do you think that would last?

You sir are insanely stupid.
 
Ryan says tax reform could take longer than healthcare overhaul
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Paul Ryan said on Wednesday that tax reform will take longer to accomplish than repealing and replacing Obamacare would, saying Congress and the White House were initially closer to agreement on healthcare legislation than on tax policy.

Speaker of Obstruction needs to GTFO!
 
  • Like
Reactions: screwduke1
False economics would be those economics that don't exist.
Ask yourself one important question...Is Medicare or Medicaid going away in your lifetime?
The only false set of economics is the one that discusses or debates the issue without recognizing the real, true life parameters that are present. Medicare is real and the percentage of people who could afford any but the most basic of care without insurance is less than 5%.

There are three things that altered the healthcare market. All happened in the 1960's
1. the introduction of Medicare/Medicaid (primarily Medicare) that covers all Americans 65 yrs and older
2. the proliferation of employer based/paid healthcare insurance.
3. the introduction of for-profit medicine

Medicare and providers would love to pay higher reimbursements. Can I take it that you support the tax increases to make that happen?
My point is a very simple one that you seemed to side step. Your own words blamed medicare reimbursements for hospitals having financial difficulties and so many of them going out of business. Government intervention in the marketplace created the economics you cited and yet you don't seem to recognize that truth. Government intervention in markets create a lot of issues that wouldn't exist otherwise, and yet people like you seem to always support more government intervention to fix the problems caused by the last government intervention.
 
Last edited:
cRJP.jpg
 
How fvcking stupid are you?
They are closing! Get it?
How can you argue that hospital closings don't have anything to do with the argument???

I'm curious to know how many balance sheets you've examined for non-profit hospitals?
If you know what percentage of their billings is written off to charity care?

Is your premise that they should continue to provide care even if it means that the hospital staff isn't paid? How long do you think that would last?

You sir are insanely stupid.

1) this was not the issue we were arguing

2) I find it ironic that you acknowledge the main issue is federal reimbursement. Yet you think the answer is more government.

3) you're all about handouts until it starts hurting your pocketbook. Typical lib
 
You know he has a 37% approval rating.

lmao. you know he only had like a 5 percent chance to win and was down 7 to 14 points in the same polls that gave you that number. you haven't figured out that the rest of us fly over states don't give any shits what so ever what New York and L.A. have to say about anything.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ymmot31
Op-Ed: The Syrian genocide is now Trump's problem

kentucky.com/opinion/nation…

Hate these people
 
You don't have to like it or care... but to deny the facts is simply self-imposed ignorance.
Hospitals are closing all over because they are unable to sustain their operations due to low Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement rates and absorbing charity care. Even non-profits still have to balance the books. Have to pay staff, pay the light bill...
Yet, you are for government healthcare which would probably lower the amount of reimbursement rates some more and close more hospitals making it even harder to get good care or, I am missing something here about government controlled health care.
 
You know he has a 37% approval rating.

Does he have a 37% approval rating or the Lame Stream Media has 63% of americans agreeing with their narrative?

CNN's Jake Tapper Before hosting Sunday's "State of the Union" and "The Lead" on weekdays, Tapper worked as a Campaign Press Secretary for a Democrat congresswoman. He also worked for a gun control advocacy group. and the Congresswoman Tapper worked for is no less than Chelsea Clinton's mother-in-law, which helps to explain a lot.

NBC's Chuck Todd Before hosting Sunday's "Meet the Press" and "Meet the Press Daily" on weekdays, Todd worked for hard-left presidential candidate Tom Harkin. Todd is also married to a Democrat party strategist.

ABC's George Stephanopoulos Before hosting Sunday's "This Week" and "Good Morning America" on weekdays, Stephanopoulos was a high-level operative for President Bill Clinton

CNN's Chief National Security Correspondent Jim Sciutto Former Obama appointee in foreign affairs, Sciutto is a former colleague of Susan Rice's. Without knowing all of the facts and using sources identified as "people close to Rice," Sciutto has absolved her of all wrongdoing.

ABC News Correspondent Gloria Riviera Married to former-Obama appointee Jim Sciutto Former-ABC News Executive Producer (2008-2011) Ian Cameron

CBS President David Rhodes Brother of Obama Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes

ABC News Reporter Claire Shipman Wife of Obama's White House Press Secretary Jay Carney Former-ABC News and Univision Reporter Matthew Jaffe Married to Obama's Deputy Press Secretary Katie Hogan

ABC President Ben Sherwood Brother of Obama Special Adviser Elizabeth Sherwood

CNN Vice President and Washington Deputy Bureau Chief Virginia Moseley Married to Hillary Clinton Deputy Secretary Tom Nides

CNN Anchor Chris Cuomo Brother of New York Governor Andrew Cuomo

NPR Reporter Ari Shapiro Same-sex-married to Michael Gottlieb, who worked as a lawyer in the Obama White House Washington Post reporter Sari Horowitz Married to William Schultz, general counsel for Obama's Department of Health and Human Services

NBC News Senior Political Editor Mark Murray Married to Sasha Johnson, Obama appointee at the FAA

PBS's Bill Moyers Former White House Press Secretary for Lyndon Johnson Former-Politico/Bloomberg Reporter Jonathan Allen Worked for Democrat Congresswoman and former-DNC head Debbie Wasserman-Schultz

Only 7% of journalists claim to be Republicans, less than half of what it was in 2002 and about a quarter of what it was in 1971. In the most recent presidential election, 96% of media donations went to Hillary Clinton.

Imagine what type of approval rating he would have if they gave this equal time to their smear campaign.
20170310_ADM_working-for-the-people_blog-header.png

 
I like Matt, but sad to say it may be an Ashley Judd moment. They realize quickly because a lot of people agree with their view on the Cats it won't translate into agreeing (or ignoring) their views on politics.
 
Wrong forum? Please....please.....please don't start political stuff here to other's reading this thread. It's bad enough as it is in the world....just need a UK Basketball safe place from that stuff.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT