by Cylinsier
Also known as the ad hominem attack strategy. Typically employed by those without the ability to win an argument based on the basis of their dialog and supporting evidence alone. It is sometimes used reflexively by morons or Republicans when they are cornered on an issue and feel the need to lash out to pamper their bruised ego. This should not be taken as a partisan attack; there are many democrats who fit into the "moron" category.
So let's examine the absurdity of the ad hominem attack, shall we? A recent op-ed by Whole Foods CEO John Mackey revealed that he was vehemently against any type of government health plan. Since Whole Foods attracts a lot of liberal shoppers, the result of his sharing this opinion is a massive boycott of the store. Okay, maybe not massive. But noticeable. Many a former shopper also went to the Whole Foods website and posted on their displeasure on the forums. But Whole Foods has also garnered some support; one little gem reads as follows: "[I will] support this man who understands the real needs of this country and it isn't paying for doctors for a bunch of lazy smelly hippies who need a bath."
Not to be outdone, bloated windbag and creature of the night Rush Limbaugh has referred to Obama's plan as a "Nazi plan," apparently not able to distinguish the difference between socialism and fascism. I know, its hard because socialism was in the name of Hitler's party, but Fair and Balanced is also the slogan of Fox News so I would have thought since he probably watches it exclusively that he would know the difference between actions and words. Limbaugh parroters have appeared in short order to further this message of hate. One in the previously-mentioned-on-this-blog Barney Frank confrontation, and another somewhat more offensive instance in this video (thanks for the source, ellipses).
So we have smelly hippies pushing Nazi plans down our throats? Sounds logical and not at all the result of an uncontrolled emotional response. But wait! Surely the other side has its wackos too? Of course. We have liberals claiming that the conservative backlash is nothing more than a carefully manufactured lobbying effort by private insurers and pharmaceutical companies out to lose a buck. There is nothing to suggest that this is any more of a logical reaction than the above nonsense. I mean, the only thing that could be trusted at this point is an admission of guilt from someone within the system itself. Oh,look what I found. Wendell Potter spent twenty years as a PR guy for CIGNA. Follow that link and see what he has to say for yourself.
I'm not here to try and make an argument for health care reform or a public option; I feel like that argument makes itself for one thing and for another...if you take a second to look around here you'll see we've made it about ten times. What I'm asking in this blog post is why can't the conservative opposition come up with a valid argument against it? We have many false claims made about the plans that have been proven as such. We have an inherent distrust of politicians which is understandable based on the previous administration's track record, and a much less understandable inherent trust of private insurers who all but laugh in your face as they steal your wallet and sleep with your wife. We have politicians in congress who are giddy about doing whatever it takes to piss off the liberal majority without caring about the future of their own party or the good of the nation. We have said democratic majority who can't seem to sell water to a Bedouin, or even give it away.
And we have the point of this post: a complete lack of logical counterargument against fixing a system that is clearly broken and an unending campaign of attacking the debater instead of the debate. So I ask the conservative opposition one thing. A question which fellow blogger ellipses has been asking repeatedly in our comments section here. A question to which I have yet to hear a real answer. And that question is, "What does a private insurer bring to the table? What value do they provide that cannot be found via other means without them?" I'll appreciate any response to this question that is logical, supported by objective evidence and free of any needless and distracting attacks which serve only to expose the blatant lack of a viable defense against this argument. Sphere: Related Content
65 comments:
At risk of sounding like your own personnal fluffer, I have to say that this post was fantastic. I'm going to promote the heck out of it tomorrow.
Oh, got a chance to watch most of Frank's town hall on cspan this afternoon... The wife and I both agreed that he is our new favorite politician... The guy is a bulldozer. See if you can find it online. He laid it down on more than just the crazy lady
Thanks! I graciously ripped off a few of your points to make it work, so don't forget to tell everyone you were my muse. That sounds gay...but I'm not going to worry about it.
I've been a fan of Frank's since I started watching C-SPAN. He acts less like a Senator and more like a guy that's there to laugh at everyone else.
I wish I could tell roomfuls of people that they are too stupid for me to waste my time on and still rock something like 68% of the vote (his 2008 total, i think... 68 or 62).
The sad thing is... there are a great many people out there whose ONLY perception of Barney Frank comes from the characterization they get from talk radio... The REAL barney frank is MUCH more entertaining than Hannity or Limbaugh's caricatures of him.
If you can find his town hall on Cspan.com... definitely watch it. I don't know how long it is, but I watched at least an hour (which would be the "last" hour)... It's better than just about anything else on TV at 4:30 :-)
Blogitards…I hate to break up your 69 action but before you get any more lathered up in your mutual admiration circle jerk…you are some stupid fucks…Nazi is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers' Party). The nickname is based on the first two syllables, as pronounced in German. Facism is not on the right…it is extreme left.
Elliptitard…as much as you would like to tell a room full of people they are too stupid for you, maybe you should concentrate on telling your short bus full of people.
Newsflash…Limbaugh has lost over 80 pounds since March and is probably skinnier than your bovine wives. How ironic that in a posting about ad hominem attack you have to call someone who disagrees with you a “bloated windbag” and “creature.”
Cytard…if you are going to write about your new word for the day, you should make a point of learning what it means first. An ad hominem attack is used in argument to take away the credibility of your opponent as in “Cytard yo mama is a ho so why should I listen to anything you have to say.” Now the you have to spend time defending yo mama instead of your original argument. (unless of course yo mama is a ho) English lesson over.
And keep in mind that Barney emperor of Uranus Frank had not shouted down his constituents when he rocked 68% of the vote. Let’s see what happens next time. I find it interesting that you are so entertained by a guy who was too stupid to know his boyfriend was running a prostitution ring out of his basement.
Does that post by Wes count as an Ad Hominem attack? :-)
LoL...
For kicks, I have decided to edit out all the ad hominem attack elements of Wes's post and repost it. You know, to sort of boil it down to the actual content of what he was saying. This is what I got:
"Nazi is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers' Party). The nickname is based on the first two syllables, as pronounced in German. Facism is not on the right…it is extreme left.
Limbaugh has lost over 80 pounds since March.
An ad hominem attack is used in argument to take away the credibility of your opponent
Let’s see what happens next time. "
And that's a lot easier to deal with, isn't it? Let's go point by point.
First, I'm happy that you are so excited about knowing the origin of the word Nazi. I'm not sure why you are bringing up the political affiliation angle, but if you are trying to imply that socialism and fascism are related, you are mistaken. Fascists as a rule despise socialism. They are also highly nationalistic and in favor of a military state. Socialism...is an economic system. So its apolitical.
Limbaugh is fun to make fun of. I certainly made a personal attack on him but it wasn't in any way a part of my argument against his point.
An ad hominem attack is an attempt to take away the credibility of your opponent by using a personal attack as though it were a pivotal piece of the argument. For example, calling Obama's plan a Nazi plan. It is a red herring used to draw attention away from the fact that the arguer has no ground to stand on.
For kicks here is the original post...
Blogitards…I hate to break up your 69 action but before you get any more lathered up in your mutual admiration circle jerk…you are some stupid fucks…Nazi is short for Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (National Socialist German Workers' Party). The nickname is based on the first two syllables, as pronounced in German. Facism is not on the right…it is extreme left.
Elliptitard…as much as you would like to tell a room full of people they are too stupid for you, maybe you should concentrate on telling your short bus full of people.
Newsflash…Limbaugh has lost over 80 pounds since March and is probably skinnier than your bovine wives. How ironic that in a posting about ad hominem attack you have to call someone who disagrees with you a “bloated windbag” and “creature.”
Cytard…if you are going to write about your new word for the day, you should make a point of learning what it means first. And ad hominem attack is used in argument to take away the credibility of your opponent as in “Cytard yo mama is a ho so why should I listen to anything you have to say.” Now the you have to spend time defending yo mama instead of his original argument. (unless of course yo mama is a ho) English lesson over.
And keep in mind that Barney emperor of Uranus Frank had not shouted down his constituents when he rocked 68% of the vote. Let’s see what happens next time. I find it interesting that you are so entertained by a guy who was too stupid to know his boyfriend was running a prostitution ring out of his basement.
Yeah, its still up there where you posted it the first time too.
Cytard...that's the spirit...once you have been proven wrong...double down on it!
Cyloser...you are supposed to show some spine here. You are pouting and arguing like a pussy. Don't you know you look like a dork if you remove words from someone's post and then answer it?????
So let me get this straight, you would rather talk abut my excitement over knowing what I am talking about in the face of you being clueless...I guess that's true.
And your second point...it's okay to use ad hominem attack if you think it's funny??? And you still don't understand what it is. An ad hominem attack never has anything to do with the points of the argument and it always attacks the messenger. That is precisiely which makes it ad hominem which is latin for "against the person."
My original point is that you don't know what you are talking about and you continue to prove me right.
Okay, let's filter out the bullshit again.
"An ad hominem attack never has anything to do with the points of the argument and it always attacks the messenger. That is precisiely which makes it ad hominem which is latin for "against the person.""
Is that not exactly what I said?
this is so ironically hilarious that I just can't stand it anymore!
Not a PEEP about the actual content of the post... just endless ad hominem attacks :-)
Oh my... it's like that alanis morissette song "Ironic"- nothing in the song is actually irony... which is ironic, since the song is called "Ironic"...
It's a death spiral, I tell ya!
I think he's actually intentionally trying to illustrate my point for me. And he's doing a great job! Thanks, Wes. I knew when I wrote this entry that I could count on you to do your part.
Thank you, Wes... for the inspiration:
http://blogitard.blogspot.com/
The word "private" means no government interference. I don't want some fat ass slob politician, GOP or DUMBOCRAP, to dictate to me my medical needs.
Government can't get out of it's own way, and Abomb! wants it to decide on his health matters...
LIBCHITS are so helpless, so needy.
Osamaobama
Luckily, nowhere in the bill would it allow "some fat ass slob politician, GOP or DUMBOCRAP" to dictate your medical needs... that will be left up to doctors and nurses...
I see phony has found his way to the blogosphere.
So, E, you trust the government to allow the doctors and nurses to dictate your medical needs?
The legislature could pass the bill, today, and next year, change the "RULES and REGULATIONS".
Osama obama
"So, E, you trust the government to allow the doctors and nurses to dictate your medical needs?"
Yeah...
Well, I guess that's settled.
I stared at "Yeah..." for like 3 minutes until I realized that I didn't really have anything else to say :-)
"I certainly made a personal attack on him but it wasn't in any way a part of my argument against his point."
I think that is exactly what you said Cylendork. And that is exactly the definition of ad hominem attack.
The title of the post is "The art of winning a debate via misdirection" and then you immediately define your terms wrong. You were obliquely talking about Whole Foods. You revealed your real point was that you found one asshole supporter of John Mackey who called would be health care recipients "lazy, smelly, hippies."
Then you decide to cue up Rush Limbaugh and once again just repeat what you have read on HufPo...you have no idea what Rush really said about the health care plan. You do not know that he was responding to Nancy Pelosi's lie that people were showing up at town meetings with swastikas. He merely pointed out that it was one person with a swastika patch with an ex out through it. And then he made real live comparisons to Hitler's early socialist programs.
But it is a smoke screen to start that blather about Nazi's, another ad hominem attack on anyone that is opposing government run health care. Now it's why should we listen to them because they are name callers. You are right Eliptidupe, this is a death spiral.
And finally you say your point is that you want to know what private insurance brings to the table? Which is assinine because people are not against reforming current health care? You are changing the argument. It's veryy ADD of you to turn the argument on its head. We are not defending private care. People are attacking public care and they are completely different things.
And opponents of government health care are not uninformed. they prove that with the intelligent questions they ask at Town Halls. Questions their stupif fucking representatives can't answer because they have not read the bill.
People have lost their trust of Obama and that's what is at play here. All the polls show that he is swirling around the drain in public approval.
Lets just take one point. Private insurance does not have price controls and two especially troubling elements of many public proposals are government price controls—which are payment rates set by law rather than emerging from a competitive market—and mandatory provider participation requirements—which demand that doctors accept patients with public plan coverage. If a public plan included these regulations, it would not be on a level playing field with private plans.
Although the public plans are put forth with the goals of boosting choice and competition, they would actually undermine these important values. They would displace most private sector health plan enrollment, and their enactment would lead America towards a single-payer system with private plans tolerated as second-rate alternatives. Arguments that these plans could contain costs or boost quality by modeling themselves on Medicare overlook the fraud and lack of managed care in traditional Medicare and the quality deficiencies in an existing public health insurance program— Medicaid.
No governmental entity in the United States actually administers a true health insurance plan, so there is little preparation for this type of program. Finally, Congress will not let the public plan fail, so competition and choice in health care markets would become a memory.
You have said on numerous occasions that people at the town hall meetings (whom I refer to as gaggers) are actually INFORMED as opposed to being UNinformed... Can you give me one example of an informed objection that you have seen from a town hall meeting?
TRICARE and the Department of Veterans Affairs are both administered by the government.
I don't care if you think I used an ad hominem attack against Limbaugh because he's a fat pompous prick and the point of the blog post was not to ridicule me, it was to ridicule the health care opposition's lack of a valid argument against a public option.
What does a private insurer bring to the table that benefits the consumer?
Eliptiperrymason…Anecdotal evidence really sucks.. Just as the whack jobs that make it into the news every night mislead as to what is really going on. So I am reluctant to start citing examples. I think its more important to look at BO’s poll numbers crashing and make the connection that the anger is real at these town halls.
But, just to be brave, I will take your challenge and risk an example. Take Kathleen Syphilius and Arlen Sphincter in Philadelphia. A woman stood up and said: "I look at this health care plan and I see nothing that is about health or about care. What I see is a bureaucratic nightmare, senator. Medicaid is broke, Medicare is broke, Social Security is broke and you want us to believe that a government that can't even run a cash for clunkers program is going to run one-seventh of our U.S. economy? No sir, no."
After some courteous applause, Empress Syphelius didn't earn any fans when she said that if lawmakers say they don't understand the legislation voters should urge them to go back and read it. Sphincter was shouted down when he said that lawmakers divide up the bills into sections and have their staffs read portions because, "We have to make judgments very fast." A man cried out from the crowd “Why???” These people seem informed to me.
He then said he will have read the Senate bill before he votes on it, which Syphmonger pointed out hasn't been written yet. "The Senate bill isn't written so don't boo the senator for not reading a bill that isn't written," she commanded from on high. Translated by most as “How dare you ask us a question.”
Dozens in the back shouted at Syphilius when she said the bill would stop the system of rationing that insurance companies use. Shitfelius then scolded the audience who jeered her, saying she would take questions if people could stop shouting at each other. They are angry because they have read the bill and they know that in all recorded history, socialized medicine ends in rationing. Some of these people are Obama voters and they are getting tired of the I won’t come in your mouth lies.
Americans want lower health care costs -- not a trillion-dollar government takeover of health care that increases costs and lets Washington bureaufuckers make decisions that should be made by doctors and patients.
Wow, ironic indeed. First Cy defines what an ad hominem attack is, then Wesley provides an example.
Great post, Cy.
VA is a nightmare and TRICARE is mixing apples and oranges. The military owns the troops so they have a vested interest in protecting their investment.
If the VA is a disaster, try taking it away from retirees and see what happens.
Are you implying that the government doesn't have a vested interest in the welfare of its citizens?
That's exactly what I am implying. The government works for the people not the other way around. The government should stay out of people's lives and have no interest vested or otherwise except for staying the hell out of the way.
And if that's what it boils down to, then there's nothing else to talk about. We'll just have to agree to disagree. The only way to win this argument is to wait until after a public option is implemented and see who is right.
Wesley, you are putting the LIBCHITS on this forum to shame. They can't keep up to you. Keep up the good work.
osamaobama
Any chance of getting the original question answered?
Elliptischlemiel, Cylenschlammazel, and baloneyponyfeminazi...is there any chance you will actually start reading and comprehending my answers?
I sometimes forget I am speaking to the shortbus. I acknowledged that the original question was "what does private insurance bring to the table?" I asserted that is a fucking stupid question since we already have private insurance at the table. And to take that further, acccording to BO's lies if you like your private insurance you can keep it. So there is no argument out there right now (at least in the open) to do away with private insurance. So what argument needs to be made as to what private insurance brings to the table if it is guaranteed a seat?
Perfect people are no more common in the insurance industry than in politics or even among paragons of virtue like bloggers. So there will always be horror stories, even if they are less numerous or less fucked up than what will happen if BOcare gets passed into law.
BO even gets away with saying things like we need to have a system to "keep insurance companies honest"-- and pissboys like you don’t see the painful irony in politicians trying to keep other people honest.
We can both agree that healthcare is serious business which is why I don’t understand why BO has been trying to rush it through Congress. This legislation is important enough for all of us to stop and think, even though BO's political strategy from the outset has been to prevent us from having time to stop and think about it.
What you have to consider is you have a half a brain blogitards, is the mindset behind this legislation, which is very consistent with the mindset behind other policies of this administration, whether the particular issue is bailing out General Motors, telling banks who to lend to or appointing "czars" to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they can and cannot do.
They are trying to create an America very unlike the America that has existed for centuries…that same America where people have been attracted to by the millions from every part of the world, and an America that many generations have fought and died for.
And the thing most associated with America-- freedom-- is precisely what must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally different country to suit BO's vision…a vision that does not seem to bother you mouth breathers one bit.
You may not think of it in these terms. (You may not even think. I am not sure you can even dress yourselves in the morning...but I digress) You may think of it in terms of promoting "social justice" or making better decisions than ordinary people are capable of making for themselves, whether about medical care or housing or many other things. Throughout history, egalitarians have been among the most arrogant mother fuckers of all.
Some day it will begin to occur to you that this is how you are going to die: by the wave of the hand of some shithead ideologues…the considered judgment of a government committee. They are going to snuff you out and never lose a minute's sleep over it, because it's only fair, after all.
That’s what this is about for you pussies. Fairness. That logic is relentless too. Free people can treat each other justly, but they can't make life fair. To get rid of the unfairness among individuals, you have to exercise power over them. The more fairness you want, the more power you need. Thus, all dreams of fairness become nightmares of tyranny in the end.
"I asserted that is a fucking stupid question since we already have private insurance at the table."
What is the value of private insurers? This is the question. Yes, they are at the table. My contention is that they are not necessary... at least they are not necessary for providing the thing that they are supposed to provide. An insurance company is not necessary to spread risk and reimbursement costs across a population. Yes, you can keep your current insurance if you want... feel free to pay too much for too little. You are free to do so.
"or appointing "czars" to tell all sorts of people in many walks of life what they can and cannot do."
Example, please...
"They are trying to create an America very unlike the America that has existed for centuries…"
Yes. And bravo for that.
"And the thing most associated with America-- freedom-- is precisely what must be destroyed if this is to be turned into a fundamentally different country to suit BO's vision…a vision that does not seem to bother you mouth breathers one bit."
Freedom to do WHAT? Decide which company I want to pay 1500 bucks a month to so that they can try to get out of paying for every claim I submit to them? Woohoo for freedom to choose who fucks me in the ass and how hard!
"They are going to snuff you out and never lose a minute's sleep over it, because it's only fair, after all."
It really IS impossible to have a rational conversation with you, isn't it?
"That’s what this is about for you pussies. Fairness. "
Nope. Fairness doesn't really figure into it at all... it's really a desire to have something better. It's like we are sitting here in "dial-up" America while the rest of the world has gubbermint provided T-1 lines in every household... We want the thing that is A) Better and B) Cheaper... you know, the health care systems of just about every other developed country on earth.
Fairness? Fuck fairness. Give me something that is cheap and awesome... That's the American Way.
When you awake form your pods later this afternoon and discover your bloodied carcassas on this blog, maybe you will think next time before you write. Didn't anyone ever tell you that you do not win an argument simply because you say you have. You actually have to win the argument.
Thanks Osamaobama...at least someone gets it.
You are winning an argument that nobody else is having...
"Didn't anyone ever tell you that you do not win an argument simply because you say you have. You actually have to win the argument."
I love it when people try to give out advice that they can't take themselves. I appreciate your pseudophilosophical attempt at justifying your irrational adherence to the status quo by claiming that fairness and equality are the root of all evil. It made me laugh. And the continued ad hominem attacks are a nice touch too.
Eliptibacteria…some entity has to collect premiums from the population for which the risk and reimbursement will be spread. Insurance companies do that now and you are suggesting that the government could do that. You are quite right, but the question should be do we really want the government to do that? When the government does it, and insurance leaves the free market place, then the government can also dictate your daily behavior in exchange for that health care and if they want to control the costs of that health care they will have to make decisions on levels and types of treatment you are eligible to receive.
Congress is looking at raising taxes by $591 billion over 10 years to fund the BO health care plan, which ass fucks your claim that expanding government health care would save money, since policies that save money typically do not require economy killing tax hikes. The House's tax proposal would impose a new surtax on top of existing taxes between 1% and 5.4% on singles earning over $280,000, and families earning over $350,000, redistributing that money to pay for their massive government health care program.
U.S. tax rates are already among the highest of industrialized nations. The average top rate for developed nations is 42%. The U.S. average top rate, including the top federal rate and an average of state, local and Medicare taxes is also 42%. If Obama’s tax hike proposal and this new “surtax” are enacted, this rate jumps to 52% with the scheduled expiration of Bush’s tax cuts. Higher than Canada, France, Italy, Finland, Japan, Austria, Germany and Australia.
This surtax will be a huge job fucker. In 2011, this “surtax” would raise the current top tax rate for a successful small business owner from 35 percent to 46.4 percent, meaning the federal government will take almost half of every dollar earned by successful small business owners. With the scheduled expiration W’s tax cuts, the federal top marginal rate on small business earnings will be 48% and exceed 50% in most states.
And this tax on small businesses is in addition to the “pay or play” mandate that will force businesses with payrolls over $250,000 to either provide health insurance or pay a penalty of as much as 8% of payroll to the government. According to the CBO, employer mandates would also hurt wages and decrease jobs: “if employers who did not offer insurance were required to pay a fee, employees’ wages and other forms of compensation would generally decline by the amount of that fee from what they would otherwise have been.” During a recession, these reckless tax hikes will butt fuck the economy by crushing productivity, and bitch slapping small businesses.
None of this troubles you because by your own admission, you want to live in a nanny state. Having realized that you are destined to remain on the bottom rung of society and knowing yourself well enough to know you don’t want to make the effort to increase your station in life, the only way that you will ever get Cadillac insurance is if you can get your paws on some of the wealthy people’s money because after all we know they came by it unfairly.
Rather than get off your lazy ass and get your own piece of the American dream, you intend to remain lazy and let the industrious people pay for you. After all, that’s the lottery you won when every one in this country stuck their head up their asses and voted BO’s bunch in office.
Now it’s the booger eating morons chance to really stick it to the popular kids. It’s revenge of the nerds. You don’t give a flying fuck that people have earned their Cadillac health plans as part of benefits that come from businesses they have helped to be successful. You could give a rats ass if they have to give that up because you never intend to earn it for yourselves…not when you get the cheat codes for this video game on YouTube.
and...
You suffer from delusions that you will get better health care than you have now and it will be cheaper. The CBO’s numbers disagree with you. The day the bill came out, they released a preliminary scoring of the bill putting a $1.3 trillion price tag on the effort. Weighing in at 1,018 pages, that comes to $1.264 billion per page. But even this analysis understates the true costs of the bill. CBO only scores bills on a ten-year time frame. So, that $1.3 trillion price tag will only swell after 10 years, not shrink like your dicks when you read this response, and will do nothing to fix our country’s disastrous long-term fiscal path.
But none of that matters to you really. Just as long as you can make the ambitious and accomplished American’s suffer. If you can fuck up their health care that will make it all worthwhile for you.
I don’t know where you get your health care policy from but I get a family policy for $236 a month and its PPO. You are either lying or the dumbest fucks that ever lived and need to live in a nanny state. (Was that you who greeted me at Wal Mart yesterday?)
"but the question should be do we really want the government to do that? "
Yes. I have no problem with the government doing that. Rather than having however many private insurers, I'd rather have one big one.
"When the government does it, and insurance leaves the free market place, then the government can also dictate your daily behavior in exchange for that health care and if they want to control the costs of that health care they will have to make decisions on levels and types of treatment you are eligible to receive."
How much dictation does the government do to old people on medicare and social security? The fact is, private insurers do this NOW... and I don't really have any say in what private insurers do... I have a say in who my government is made of.
"Congress is looking at raising taxes by $591 billion over 10 years to fund the BO health care plan, which ass fucks your claim that expanding government health care would save money, since policies that save money typically do not require economy killing tax hikes."
My company, facing an increase in minimum wage at our production facility, invested 200,000 dollars in new software and hardware to make our employees 30% more efficient. It has been a net-gain for us so far, but we still had to cut that check for 200k. CFL lightbulbs are considerably more efficient than incandescent bulbs... but you still have to buy the bulb.
Our per capita expenditure on health care right now is around 7,000 dollars. A 600 billion dollar tax increase represents a per capita "tax" of 2,000 dollars per person. If that gets a public option up and running, and the premiums for that are less than 11,000 dollars per year (the average health insurance premium is 13,000 per year), then I still win on price.
"U.S. tax rates are already among the highest of industrialized nations."
Yes, the RATES are... but the EFFECTIVE tax rate, ie, the amount that the government ACTUALLY gets, is far less.
"In 2011, this “surtax” would raise the current top tax rate for a successful small business owner from 35 percent to 46.4 percent, meaning the federal government will take almost half of every dollar earned by successful small business owners. With the scheduled expiration W’s tax cuts, the federal top marginal rate on small business earnings will be 48% and exceed 50% in most states."
So it will be closer to Reagan's tax rates?
Kidding aside... see my statement about effective tax rate...
and...
"“if employers who did not offer insurance were required to pay a fee, employees’ wages and other forms of compensation would generally decline by the amount of that fee from what they would otherwise have been.”"
Those same employees would also have health insurance... which, in most cases, is a lot more than 8% of their wages.
"Having realized that you are destined to remain on the bottom rung of society and knowing yourself well enough to know you don’t want to make the effort to increase your station in life,"
You obviously don't know me...
"Rather than get off your lazy ass and get your own piece of the American dream, you intend to remain lazy and let the industrious people pay for you."
Again... you quite obviously don't know me...
"You don’t give a flying fuck that people have earned their Cadillac health plans as part of benefits that come from businesses they have helped to be successful."
You are right... I don't give a flying fuck what other people earn... I don't think that you should have to EARN the right to not lose your house because your appendix burst while you were laid off and couldn't afford COBRA. Go earn a pool, earn a lexus, earn a beach house in Duck... but if you live in a civilized society, you shouldn't have to earn medical bills that don't bankrupt you.
"You suffer from delusions that you will get better health care than you have now and it will be cheaper. The CBO’s numbers disagree with you."
But the numbers from just about every other industrialized nation disagree with the CBO...
"The day the bill came out, they released a preliminary scoring of the bill putting a $1.3 trillion price tag on the effort."
Which is... about half of what we spend on health care, now... 50% off, huh? Good deal.
"So, that $1.3 trillion price tag will only swell after 10 years..."
Of course, everything gets more expensive over time... hopefully it grows at a rate closer to inflation... rather than the double digit increases we see in health care costs now...
"I don’t know where you get your health care policy from but I get a family policy for $236 a month and its PPO."
What's your deductable? Is the TOTAL premium 236 a month or is that just what comes out of your pay check? What is the coverage? Do you get it from your employer?
I have the wonderful choice of ONE health care plan at work... We have already covered the cost of it on here... and if I bought a similar policy on my own... well, we have covered that cost, too...
I may be retarded, but the AVERAGE annual premium for health insurance is 13,000 dollars. There must be a lot of us retards out there...
Btw, have you checked out my retard blog? www.blogitard.blogspot.com
You inspired it... thank you.
Wesley, I've seen these libchits run with their tails between their legs, but these two poor libchits are running "TAIL-LESS"....you chewed them off and spit them back out.
E and Abomb!, you two have met your match and then some....Wesley makes you guys look like recent graduates from Miss Peabody's kindergarten class..
LOL....I love it.
osamaobama
The public option won't be an option for most people, but rather a mandate for buying government care. A free people should be outraged at this advance of soft tyranny. Washington does not have the constitutional or moral authority to outlaw private markets in which parties voluntarily participate. It shouldn't be killing business opportunities, or limiting choices, or legislating major changes in citizen’s lives.
In a free market you vote by where you place your hard earned money. That’s what a free market is. So you do have control.
However, you have no say in who the next BO czar is. These unelected government officials are making policies that effect your life directly. This may make you wet your pants with glee right now but imagine how you would feel if this unelected government were being appointed by a GOP administration. The pendulum will swing and probably sooner than you would like to think. Our Constitution was written to protect us from these sort of abuses regardless of which party is at the helm at any given time in history.
Once health care becomes "free" and the government pays for it, demand will skyrocket and government costs will skyrocket too. When the public finally reaches its taxing limit, something will have to give on the care and spending side. Quite simply, care will be rationed by politics.
You smugly retort that private insurance companies already ration, by deciding which treatments are covered and which aren't. However, there's a galaxy of difference between coverage decisions made under millions of voluntary private contracts and rationing via government. A universe, in fact. Virtually every European government with "universal" health care restricts access in one way or another to control costs, and it it’s fugly.
The Brits are most restrictive, using a black-box actuarial formula known as "quality-adjusted life years," or QALYs, that determines who can receive what care. If a treatment isn't deemed to be cost-effective for specific populations, particularly the elderly, the National Health Service won’t fucking pay for it. Even the Frogs who have a mix of public and private medicine, have fixed reimbursement rates since the 1970s and strictly controls the use of specialists and the introduction of new medical technologies such as MRIs and CT scans.
And supposedly the U.S. "rations" by ability to pay but in the end, to quote Bob Dole, you know it, I know it, and the American people know it: no one is denied actual care. This is how it works with every good or service in a free economy and in a world of limited resources but unlimited desires. Yet no one would say we "ration" houses or gasoline because those goods are allocated by prices. The problem is that governments ration through brute force, either specifically restricting the use of medicine or lowering payments below market rates. Both techniques lead to waiting lines, lower quality, and less innovation.
A substantial portion of Medicare spending is incurred in the last six months of life. From the point of view of politicians with a limited budget, is it worth spending a lot on, say, a patient with late-stage cancer when remission is a long shot? Or should they spend to improve quality, not length, of life? Or pay for a hip or knee replacement for elderly, when palliative care might cost less? And who makes those decisions? In UK, the NHS decides, and under its QALYs metric it generally won't pay more than $22,000 for treatments to extend a life six months.
BO seems to believe medical issues are all justifiably political questions that government bureaucrats or some galactic senate on planet Coruscan can and should decide. No wonder so many seniors have a screaming shit fit about these judgments that they know they could do little to influence, much less change.
And Medicare already rations care, refusing, for example, to pay for virtual colonoscopies and has payment policies or directives to curtail the use of certain cancer drugs, diagnostic tools, asthma medications and lots more.
Social security is not a health care plan so I will discount that remark as another one of your random word generations that have nothing to do with the conversation at hand.
Your company either had the 200K to buy that software and hardware and they did not use your grandchildren’s money or money form their competitor company's grandchildren to buy it. They have or will earn it back in short order and that’s no different than any other business decision that private businesses make every day.
(Sidebar: CFL light bulbs are also considerably more retarded. Why the fuck is the government telling me what kind of light bulb I can use. If I want to burn all my cash on electric bills what business is it of yours. And if I drop and break one I need to call a HAZMAT team. And please don’t start that environmental whacko shit on me.)
You are confusing individual personal spending with government spending. Fuck per capita spending. You say you win on the price cause some rich people are paying for your insurance asshole. Your health care is your responsibility. If your appendix bursts that’s very unfortunate but I have never heard of anyone losing their house over a burst appendix and if they did they were probably living beyond their means to begin with. I know that sounds cold and upon hearing about someone like that I would be the first to offer charity, what little I have to offer, BUT its not the place of the government in a free society to protect everyone from everything bad that could ever possibly happen to them. It’s called freedom and it comes with responsibility. (Note to self: There ought to be another statue in New York Harbor: the Statue of Responsibility.)
As bad as you and Cyfishfood want it to be so, there just is no consititutional right to health care.
Effective or actual tax, it’s still a ton of fucking taxes and my arguments are still valid. If they only stick three fourths of their schlong in your ass, you are still getting schtooped.
Those same employees that you say would also have health insurance that in most cases, is a lot more than 8% of their wages is a wonderful liberal sentiment but once you tax almost half of every dollar made in private business, some of those employees won’t have a job anymore because you have taxed away the money that pays his salary. You are killing the goose that lays the golden egg.
You are right I don’t know you but I know enough to know you do not respect the personal property of others. You think that everyone should share what they have earned for themselves with you. What you want goes beyond a welfare net for unfortunate people that have fallen through the cracks and cannot take care of themselves. You want free health care for people who can go out and earn it for themselves. You think all the kids should get a trophy at the end of the season and everyone should get a passing grade.
The CBO numbers are what the Congress historically uses. I was not aware that we go to other industrialized nations to overrule what our CBO numbers say.
I have a $15 copay for each visit. I pay my monthly fee and I could give a rats ass what the company pays. Its part of the benefit package we agreed to when I was hired. And its should be no concern of yours how much companies pay for these policies on their employees behalf and its none of your fucking business if insurance companies are awash in profits 400% or otherwise. Who appointed you the profit police.
I thought this was your retard blog??? LOL!!!!!
Yes I did visit blogitard…too fucking funny. I think the last picture with the real down syndrome kids was in bad taste.
This is great! Over 40 comments!
As far as I know, the public option is still an option. I'm unclear as to why you would think the creation of said option would hinder private insurers since close to 50% of the population aren't going to touch it with a 50 foot pole if it is created.
If you think the consumer has any control over what the private insurance market does, you are sadly mistaken.
Yes, the Constitution is built to protect us from government abuse. So why are you so convinced the government is going to abuse us? You are making the argument against your anti-government paranoia with this point.
Europeans and Canadians love their health care. Americans only think its fugly because of the irrational fear of government programs and health care lobbyists trying to start panics over costs and wait times, neither of which will be any worse for the consumer than they are now. The Brits love theirs too. And even if what you are saying is true, all that means is more consumers will stick with the private insurers.
People are denied health care in this country all the time. Every day. And they have private insurance.
I keep hearing these claims that a public option will mean longer waits and poorer care. Why? That makes no sense. Just another scare tactic.
$22,000 to extend a life 6 months is a bit much.
Aren't most seniors on Medicare? Nothing is going to change for them as a result of this legislation. They shouldn't get a say in this because it doesn't affect them. Well, that's not entirely true. If new legislation isn't passed, Medicare will be out of money in a few years. That would affect them. So if they each had half a brain they'd be supporting this.
Did we say there was a constitutional right to health care? That's a fallacy of necessity. Just because the constitution does not say health care is a right does not mean that it is not.
I don't think taxes are so bad if they go to good things.
The amount of taxes required to pay for health coverage would be equaled out by the amount of money saved every month not paying a private plan. Employees staying with a private plan would not have the health care deduction taken out of their paycheck.
Free health care for those that cannot earn it themselves? That's what we have now. When people without health insurance get sick, they go to the Emergency Room. Then your money pays for their care. However, they cannot seek cheaper preventative care because they do not have insurance.
It is our business if insurance companies are making 400% profits. Why? Because that's my money and I want it back. I want the option to spend it somewhere where my money goes further. Like a public option, or at least a private company that has to lower its exorbitant rates because of a non-profit competitive option.
Seriously, wes... Make a bullshit gmail account and write blog posts... That way you won't have split your responses into two parts...
Oh, and I hemmed and hawed over that last pic... I went with it because a) it's cute and b) I need it for posterity... So I can tell my son "before obamas death panels, there used to be people with down syndrome."
Makes sense. I think its time for a more lighthearted blog post. You know, so we can get back to like 1 or 2 comments and a bunch of people wondering what is wrong with me.
LoL :-) that's a fly idea
Here's an interesting poll I found on Gallup.com about which states have the highest percentage of uninsured. I hate to bring up the whole red state-blue state argument, but it's pretty dramatically illustrated in this poll. And don't suggest immigrants are weighing heavily here, because Gallup asked "Americans" whether they have insurance. This kinda destroys the myth that dirty hippie liberals are the ones without insurnace.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/122387/Uninsured-Highest-Percentage-Texas-Lowest-Mass.aspx
MJ....that was one asshole who made that remark and that hardly makes it a myth. The number of people uninsured is a myth. Some people just don't want insurance and under BO care they would have to get some whether they like it or not. Liars figure and figure lie.
Gallup also shows that Obama's approval ratings are steadily falling.
MJ...in fairness I went to the Gallup site url you posted. You failed to see the more glaring correlation. The states with the highest uninsured are also the states with the highest number of illegal immigrants. And it says that respondents were "national adults"...not Americans. The poll was done on land line telephone so th only requirement was a US land line telephone number, not citizens. Sorry to dissapoiunt you.
And that puts it over 50 comments! Bravo!
Several things, Wes.
1. You are right. Gallup has showed Obama's approval ratings dropping. Although he currently sits at 54 percent, and that isn't bad in our divided country.
2. I want insurance, but COBRA and Highmark are hardly an economical option. Sure, I can afford it, if I don't mind forgoing my mortgage payments and groceries.
3. The poll interviews "1,000 Americans aged 18 and older, Gallup asks respondents whether they have health insurance."
4. It mentions that the states involved have a higher population of Hispanics, but that does not equate to illegal immigrants. You can be Hispanic or black or whatever and still be an American. Regardless, they clearly interviewed American residents in this survey.
5. I don't have a land line, does that make me less worthy of this polling data?
A couple quick things...
Illegal hispanics are less likely to have a landline phone than legal hispanics.
The reason only landline-phone owners are polled is because it is cost-effective to buy sample that way. Random Digit Dialing phone numbers for landlines runs about 1.5 cents per phone record. It's a LOT more for cell phones.
I saw a study recently that shows that illegal aliens are considerably less likely to seek medical care from a doctor or hospital. They account for a smaller percentage of costs than uninsured, middle aged white people.
"I saw a study recently that shows that illegal aliens are considerably less likely to seek medical care from a doctor or hospital. They account for a smaller percentage of costs than uninsured, middle aged white people."
Yeah, I saw that same study. Wish I could remember where though.
I know... brain fart.
It was all over the liberal media a week ago :-)
Ellipses, Cylinsier and MJ...Right on! It's funny...I hadn't read this blog, yet I've been having the same argument on Facebook with a certain person...You know who you are "Anonymous"...lol
Oh, that's our boy PhonyFeminazi :-)
;-)
For endless hours of fun... and to see what we've all been talking about for the past year and a half... check out http://oronline.s2.bizhat.com/index.php
I'm gonna have to save that link for my after work entertainment!! LOL
Make sure you have loads of spare time on your hands :-)
Who's the new kid?
Some stranger I met on facebook... Long story... Bottom line is: she gets phony's goat, so she can't be all that bad:-)
He's probably just upset that someone is letting a woman use technology besides an oven.
hehehe...You may be right, Cy!
Post a Comment