Monday, August 10, 2009

Epic. Fail.

By Ellipses

And another gagger bites the dust!

This pile of steaming bullshit was posted in the comments by the illustrious Wes earlier today. I shall dismantle it piece, by bullshitty piece.

Cylenschmuck…Cold hard facts: Page 29. The bill admits on page 29 that your health care will be rationed.

Cy took care of this one.

Page 30: A government committee will decide what treatments and benefits you get.

Yes! A "public/private" committee will be formed to determine the range of services offered. Without a central planning committee, I guess we'd be covering... what, exactly? If you are going to offer coverage, you kinda have to define what you are covering. Otherwise, I could set up my "Ellipses' Fart Therapy Clinic" and collect gubbermint dollas.

Page 58: Every person will be issued a national ID health card.

Wow, so they are going to do EXACTLY WHAT PRIVATE INSURERS DO NOW? Fuck you, batman!

Page 59: The federal government will have direct real-time access to all individual bank accounts for electronic funds transfer.

Well, let's see what it ACTUALLY says?
"The standards under this section shall be developed, adopted and enforced so as to… (C) enable electronic funds transfers, in order to allow automated reconciliation with the related health care payment and remittance advice"

So, I can pay for services rendered electronically? The same way I pay my water bill, my car insurance, my Amex bill, my student loans, my mortgage, my gas bill, my electric bill, my car payments, and every other fucking expense that I have? Are these people from the fucking future?

Page 239: The bill will reduce physician services for Medicaid, meaning there will be Medicaid cuts.

Medicaid will be folded into the public option. This will be done by phasing out physician services in order to compute costs from 2011 onward. Basically, the only honest thing in this statement is that it's on page 239... but it runs over to page 240, so even that is bullshit.

Page 427: Government mandates program that orders end-of-life treatment. Government dictates how your life ends. The Washington Post read the section, Section 1233 and came to the same disturbing conclusion:
“Ideally, the delicate decisions about how to manage life's end would be made in a setting that is neutral in both appearance and fact. Yes, it's good to have a doctor's perspective. But Section 1233 goes beyond facilitating doctor input to preferring it. Indeed, the measure would have an interested party -- the government -- recruit doctors to sell the elderly on living wills, hospice care and their associated providers, professions and organizations. You don't have to be a right-wing wacko to question that approach.”

The relevant part of this actually starts on page 426:
‘‘(F)(i) Subject to clause (ii), an explanation of
orders regarding life sustaining treatment or similar
orders, which shall include—
‘‘(I) the reasons why the development of
such an order is beneficial to the individual and
the individual’s family and the reasons why
such an order should be updated periodically as
the health of the individual changes;"

which goes onto say:

‘‘(II) the information needed for an indi10
vidual or legal surrogate to make informed deci11
sions regarding the completion of such an
order; and
‘‘(III) the identification of resources that
an individual may use to determine the require15
ments of the State in which such individual re16
sides so that the treatment wishes of that indi17
vidual will be carried out if the individual is un18
able to communicate those wishes, including re19
quirements regarding the designation of a sur20
rogate decisionmaker (also known as a health
care proxy).
‘‘(ii) The Secretary shall limit the requirement
for explanations under clause (i) to consultations
furnished in a State—

•HR 3200 IH
‘‘(I) in which all legal barriers have been
addressed for enabling orders for life sustaining
treatment to constitute a set of medical orders
respected across all care settings; and
‘‘(II) that has in effect a program for or6
ders for life sustaining treatment described in
clause (iii).
‘‘(iii) A program for orders for life sustaining
treatment for a States described in this clause is a
program that—
‘‘(I) ensures such orders are standardized
and uniquely identifiable throughout the State;
‘‘(II) distributes or makes accessible such
orders to physicians and other health profes15
sionals that (acting within the scope of the pro16
fessional’s authority under State law) may sign
orders for life sustaining treatment;
‘‘(III) provides training for health care
professionals across the continuum of care
about the goals and use of orders for life sus21
taining treatment; and
‘‘(IV) is guided by a coalition of stake23
holders includes representatives from emergency
medical services, emergency department physi25
cians or nurses, state long-term care associa-

•HR 3200 IH
tion, state medical association, state surveyors,
agency responsible for senior services, state de3
partment of health, state hospital association,
home health association, state bar association,
and state hospice association.

So, the health care bill offers insurance for periodic revisions of living wills and end of life planning... and mandates that there are trained professionals available to explain why it's good to have a living will. And then, get this, it goes on to require that living wills are verified and honored. Holy fucking Jesus!

Page 429: Advanced care planning consult will be used to dictate treatment as patients' health deteriorates. This can include an order for end-of-life plans. The order will be from the government.

Page 429 requires that an order for "life sustaining treatment" be signed by a physician so that it can "stay with the individual and be followed by health care professionals and providers across the continuum of care..."

And then, it goes on to say that this life sustaining order must "effectively communicates the individual’s preferences regarding life sustaining treatment, including an indication of the treatment and care desired by the individual"

Sorry, Wes... you had a good run at it... you made an entertaining, if not almost kinda close to being somewhat reasonable in a really abstract kinda way-argument. But then, of course, you gagged on a giant cock made of bullshit and dryer lint.

Wow... that was good, if I do say so myself. That was like a smack-down squared... and then cubed just for good measure.

You are welcome. Sphere: Related Content


LittleJ said...

*starts slow clap and standing ovation, as the crowd joins her to do the same.*

Having read all these gosh darn bills, I have to say that Ellipses is totally right.

My only qualification would be that the Senate hasn't passed a bill, so there are 3-4 being passed by individual committees, any combination of which could end up being passed by the full Senate. However, the Senate is likely to be far more conservative than the House on health care reform, so my guess is that these same points would apply to the Senate bill.

The main point still stands: people want to criticize health care reform because they want to criticize Obama, not because they oppose the policies that are being debated.

For Clay Aiken's sake, do people really actually think that Obama wants there to be "death panels" that execute disabled people?! For reals, think for a second. And read the House bill, even though that's only one version, and the President hasn't formally endorsed it. Can you, honest injun, say you truly believe Obama wants to implement a "death panel"?

I get verbose with champagne. Sorry. But still.

Lori said...

So Euthanasia is now accomplished by denying health care to speed things along.

Ellipses said...

If by "now accomplished" you mean today, prior to a bill being passed, yes...

Ellipses said...

LittleJ, thanks! That's the second slow clap I have gotten in my life... ever...

I hope to get more, in the future... every one so far feels like Varsity Blues :-)

Cylinsier said...

Screw the actual wording of the bill. I want to know what Ramussen says I should think.

Wesley said...

Wit (two half-wits= wit)….at least I got you to finally read part of the bill. Now we need to work on your reading comprehension. Especially you Cytard. Ellipshits…admit it: you have had the clap before. In fact you are in a syphilitic rage as you grunt out these steaming piles.

My props Efuckulus…”giant cock made of bullshit and dryer lint.” More imaginative than Cyborgtard’s “Tool” and “bitch” LMFAO! Cylendouche…you need to expand your reading horizons from just the warning labels on your meds. Whether the source is Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, the Wall Street Journal, NPR, the Washington Post, or even the New York Times; every recent poll on the issue shows that either pluralities or majorities of Americans have serious doubts about Obamacare. Reviewing the month’s polling data, Gallup’s Frank Newport said: “The bottom line is a sense that, while Americans apparently favor some type of healthcare reform in the long term, they are in no hurry to see healthcare reform legislation passed in the short-term on a rushed schedule.” A Pew Research poll released this week shows that those who are worried about new health care legislation are most likely to say it is because it involves too much spending and would increase the deficit.

Wrapped in your liberal shit cocoon, however, you and the imperious fucks in Congress simply do not want to hear this message. Instead, Pelosi and Hoyer have chosen to pen an op-ed in USA Today calling those who want Congress to hear their concerns about health care “simply un-American.” Pelosi and Hoyer and their brain dead tools like you, claim that opponents of Obamacare are disrupting townhalls across the country by “drowning out the facts” about health reform. However, it is not the townhall-attending voters that don’t have their facts straight. It is Pelosi, Hoyer, and you fuckwads that are raping the truth.

Exhibit A: “The first fact is that health insurance reform will mean more patient choice.” That is a fucking lie! According to the non-partisan Lewin Group, under the House legislation about 83.4 million people would lose their current private insurance. This would represent a 48.4 percent reduction in the number of people with private coverage. You lying weasels also claim: “Reform will mean affordable coverage for all Americans.” But thanks to new price controls set in the legislation, yearly premiums for the typical American with private coverage could go up by as much as $460 per privately insured person.

Exhibit B: Obamacare will “lower costs.” But this has been thoroughly refuted by the Congressional Budget Office. In fact, the House plan significantly expands health care costs and it’s your gang in Congress that have gamed the system to try and conceal this truth from the American people. The House plan delays any real spending increases until 2013 so that the State run media like the Washington Post can claim the bill only increases government health care spending “by about $140 billion.” In reality, once all of the House bill’s spending takes effect, Obamacare will be spending $245 billion a year. And in the out years? CBO director Doug Elmendorf said “In sum, relative to current law, the proposal would probably generate substantial increases in federal budget deficits during the decade beyond the current 10-year budget window.”

BO claims his health plan would not: “bring about a government takeover of health care.” Obama needs to check his facts with the Democrat Caucus, because Barney Frank is on record saying that Obama’s plan “is the best way to reach single-payer.” And Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) is also on record saying: “A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single-payer.” Do Pelosi and Hoyer consider Frank and Schakowsky un-American for contradicting the President?

Cylinsier said...

Like a broken record of ineptitude. You whine like a little girl with a scraped knee and continue to provide anything resembling relevant counter-argument. You can quote all the obscure sources you want, but the facts are in the bill itself. A third grader could make out the truth from it. The polls prove only one thing: a large percentage of the population of the country is stupid and easily influenced. We already knew that.

Wesley said...

Cycho…you mean obscure sources like the New York Times, Washington Post, and NPR? You know, other people can read this sophomoric horseshit that you are spewing? They know I have made solid factual and sourced points and your responses are worthy of the smartest kid in third grade. How about an intellectual response that dpoes respond to the factual points I raise. Prove me wrong bitch. And your awkward prose is the written equivalent of fingernails on blackboard.

However, we finally agree, “a large percentage of the population of the country is stupid and easily influenced”…the 41% that think Obamacare is good are like sheep to the slaughter. People like you, are little girls and are not interested in taking responsibility for themselves and probably not capable of taking care of themselves. You are immersed in identity politics. Obama is a cool guy and that’s all that matters to you.

Cylensphincter, the fact is millions will lose their current insurance. Period. End of story. BO wants Americans to believe they can keep their insurance if they like, but research from the government, private research firms, and think tanks show this is not the case. Proposed economic incentives, plus a government-run health plan like the one proposed in the House bill, would cause 88.1 million people to see their current employer-sponsored health plan disappear.

Cytard…Your health care coverage will probably change anyway: Even if you kept your private insurance, eventually most remaining plans--whether employer plans or individual plans--would have to conform to new federal benefit standards. Moreover, the necessary plan "upgrades" will undoubtedly cost you more in premiums.

The main argument for a "public option" is that it would increase competition. However, if the federal government creates a health care plan that it controls and also sets the rules for the private plans, there is little doubt that Washington would put its private sector "competitors" out of business sooner or later.

BO said: "They're going to have to give up paying for things that don't make them healthier. If there's a blue pill and a red pill, and the blue pill is half the price of the red pill and works just as well, why not pay half for the thing that's going to make you well." Does that sound like a government that will stay out of your health care decisions?

Individual mandate means less liberty and more taxes. Although he once opposed the idea, BO is now open to the imposition of an individual mandate that would require all Americans to have federally approved health insurance. This unprecedented federal directive not only takes away your individual freedom but could cost you as well. Lawmakers are considering a penalty or tax for those who don't buy government-approved health plans.

Higher taxes than Europe hurt small businesses: A proposed surtax on the wealthy will actually hit hundreds of thousands of small business owners who are dealing with a recession. If it is enacted, America's top earners and job creators will carry a larger overall tax burden than France, Italy, Germany, Japan, etc., with a total average tax rate greater than 52%. Is that the right recipe for jobs and wage growth?

Who makes medical decisions? What is the right medical treatment and should bureaucrats determine what Americans can or cannot have? While the House and Senate language is vague, amendments offered in House and Senate committees to block government rationing of care were routinely defeated. Cost or a federal health board could be the deciding factors. BO himself admitted this when he said, "Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller," when asked about an elderly woman who needed a pacemaker.

It's not paid for! The CBO says the current House plan would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years. And that number will likely continue to rise over the long term. Similar entitlement bills in the past, including Medicare, have scored much lower than their actual eventual cost.

Ellipses said...

Oh dear God, where to start?

"Whether the source is Gallup, Pew, Quinnipiac, the Wall Street Journal, NPR, the Washington Post, or even the New York Times; every recent poll on the issue shows that either pluralities or majorities of Americans have serious doubts about Obamacare."

What do you expect when people like you are saying that old people and Down Syndrome babies are going to be set adrift on an ice floe? If all I heard about it was that it was going to have a death panel and kids would be dying of tonsillitis, I'd have doubts, too... However, you did neglect to mention the polls that consistently say that 80% of people WANT reform.

"Instead, Pelosi and Hoyer have chosen to pen an op-ed in USA Today calling those who want Congress to hear their concerns about health care “simply un-American.”"

Pelosi's ACTUAL quote was this:
"Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American."

I accept your apology for fucking up the facts on that one.

"However, it is not the townhall-attending voters that don’t have their facts straight."

Really? So the crazy shit that they are asking about... you know, putting grandma to sleep, letting retarded babies die, implanting medical devices that track your every move, and screaming incoherent things about socialism and gubbermint... that's all accurate information? Sounds like the crazy old fucks that insist that THEY are the ones that see things for what they are, and everyone ELSE is crazy.

"According to the non-partisan Lewin Group"

This Lewin Group?

The same Lewin Group that is WHOLLY OWNED by United Health Group? Which is the same United Health Group that underwrites the health insurance policies of 70 million people in this country?

Really? Non-Partisan?

Anyway... so 83 million people would go from private insurance to the public option... why, exactly? Because the public option will offer comparable insurance for a lower cost to those people? God forbid! To a casual observer, it sounds like those 83 million are getting fucked hardcore in the ass right now and the public option would serve as a much deserved squirt of lube and maybe even a cold compress.

Why is it "bad" that 83 million people will go from one insurance plan to another?

"But thanks to new price controls set in the legislation, yearly premiums for the typical American with private coverage could go up by as much as $460 per privately insured person."

Average premium in America, currently, is somewhere north of $13,000 per year... So this will cause their costs to rise by 3.5%... That's like a gentle, velvet gloved reach around compared to the 22% and 19% increases that my company has seen the past two years WITHOUT THE EVIL OBAMA PLAN.

Let me know when we get to the bad part.


Ellipses said...

"In reality, once all of the House bill’s spending takes effect, Obamacare will be spending $245 billion a year."

There are 300,000,000 people in America... So "obamacare" costs something like 816 bucks per person... AKA a negligible amount.

“A public option will put the private insurance industry out of business and lead to single-payer.”

A couple of things... 1) why is single payer bad? That's the system that I want. 2) How did the "public option" work out for picking shit up at one address and dropping it off at another address? Certainly there aren't any private sector businesses that can compete with a gubbermint subsidized post office, right? No FedEx, no UPS... those are just figments of my imagination.

"BO wants Americans to believe they can keep their insurance if they like, but research from the government, private research firms, and think tanks show this is not the case."

And that is based on the public option making more financial sense to the individual. It's like there are two apples on the shelf. One costs $1, one costs .50... if everyone chooses the 50 cent apple, good for them.

"If it is enacted, America's top earners and job creators will carry a larger overall tax burden than France, Italy, Germany, Japan, etc., with a total average tax rate greater than 52%."

That may be the total tax rate, but what's the EFFECTIVE tax rate? You know, the amount that people ACTUALLY pay? Nobody pays the actual rate they are in. So we could set the top rate to 99% and it doesn't mean shit.

"The main argument for a "public option" is that it would increase competition."

No. The main argument for a public option is that it works better because it's a minimum layer of coverage for everyone.

"Who makes medical decisions?"

Doctors. The end.

"The CBO says the current House plan would increase the deficit by $239 billion over 10 years."

Again, back to the calculator... That is 796 dollars OVER TEN FUCKING YEARS! 79.60 per year, per person...

Now... onto a much more interesting point... you made a compelling argument here (still mostly built on pet dander and psoriasis scabs)... Why did you start with the crazy birther gagger bullshit? Why didn't you just cut into a real and logical argument?

That's like saying "we shouldn't build our house on the river because there might be a demon in the water that will rape us at night and eat our pets and bring plague and pestilence upon our families and cause us to go to hell and suffer for eternity... oh, and it might flood our basements."

Cylinsier said...

How is it that you type more and more every time you reply and say less and less? If you don't like my prose, then why are you my bitch? Can't stop reading?

When I said "obscure sources," I was referring to Ramussen. You don't read the New York times or listen to NPR. They're too liberal for you, remember?

You say "Cylensphincter, the fact is millions will lose their current insurance. Period. End of story. " Which is based on what, exactly? You are so fucking brainwashed I could put a stack of 100 dollar bills in front of you, tell you its from Obama, and you'd give me a spin on how its going to cost you 200 dollars to pick it up.

And I hope my coverage does change. I don't care if it costs more, I care if it works. I've seen first hand what happens when you actually need your insurance. I can tell you've never received notice from your insurer telling you that they have decided to retroactively remove you from their coverage area after a serious illness like I have. Insurance companies exist for one purpose, and it is not to help those in need. It is to make money. Until a public option run by the taxpayers/voters exists, there will be nothing stopping the insurance companies from continuing rape and pillage anyone who actually comes to need their coverage while the majority of people, like you, live in your own little world outside of reality.

You say: "BO said: "They're going to have to give up paying for things that don't make them healthier. If there's a blue pill and a red pill, and the blue pill is half the price of the red pill and works just as well, why not pay half for the thing that's going to make you well." Does that sound like a government that will stay out of your health care decisions?" It sounds like a better option than "pay us 500 dollars for something that costs 5 in Canada." That's the status quo. Time for a change.

All you do is reiterate the same horror stories over and over again, which exist in the realm of conjecture and nothing more. The negatives of health care reform fall into three categories: imagined, not actually negative, or only negative for those that stand to lose money. That's it. Health insurance should have never been about making money in the first place. The health of human beings is not a business.

Wesley said...

Cylenbeavis and Elliptibutthead, did you ever wonder what life would have been like if you had enough oxygen at birth?

Numb nuts like you are sitting around being ignorant rather than getting informed, understanding evidence and truth about what's happening. You are relying on your template. You're relying on whatever your partisan biases make you believe in, and it's people like you that are going to allow this administration to take over and take away as much liberty and freedom from the American people as possible, all in the name of partisan politics. You think people like me oppose government health care because I don't like Obama? You think these people out there are opposing Obama because of that? It's not about Obama. It's about them. It's about their freedom. It's about liberty. It's about their health care. It's about their right to make decisions in their lives as they see fit. It's not BO’s business to determine who gets what kind of health care when!

It has to be stopped for this country to remain the way it was founded, pure and simple. And we're going to need people like you on our side rather than just having your head stuck in your ass getting your thrills because you think Republicans and conservatives are taking it on the chin.

BO keeps assuring us in soothing, dulcet tones “You can keep your doctor; you can keep your insurance, if you're happy with it.” Oh, really? And what if my doctor is not the one appointed by the new government medical boards for ruling on my access to tests and specialists? And what if my insurance company goes belly up because of undercutting by its government-bankrolled competitor? Face it: Virtually all nationalized health systems, neither nourished nor updated by profit-driven private investment, eventually lead to rationing.

And why the insane rush to pass a bill, any bill, in three weeks? And why such an abject failure by the BO administration to present the issues to the public in a rational, detailed, informational way? The U.S. is huge; many of our states are bigger than whole European nations. The bureaucracy required to institute and manage a nationalized health system here would be Byzantine beyond belief and would vaporize whatever savings Obama thinks could be made. And the transition period would be a nightmare of red tape and mammoth screw-ups, which we can ill afford with a faltering economy.

Democrats, through their own clumsiness and arrogance, have sabotaged healthcare reform yet again! Blaming obstructionist Republicans is nonsensical because Democrats control all three branches of government. It isn't conservative rumors or lies that are stopping healthcare legislation; it's the justifiable alarm of an electorate that has been cut out of the loop and is watching its representatives construct a tangled labyrinth for others but not for themselves. No, the douche bags of Congress will keep their own plush healthcare plan -- it's the rest of us lab animals who will be thrown to the wolves.

This is not the Harvard Debate Club. We don't have two propositions and at the end of the day which one wins doesn't matter. It's not an academic exercise going on out here. There's not an effort here to show who's the smartest, most well behaved person in the room. (except for Cytard who is delusional) This is about saving the United States of America as it was founded, standing up and fighting against the most radical leftist leadership this country has ever had.

Ellipses said...

Many of us don't believe that the US, as it existed 233 years ago, is what we should be striving toward... Nor do we believe that the epitome of liberty is 40% profit margins of insurance companies that is achieved by denying claims, dropping people who are sick, denying coverage to people for pre-existing conditions or raising premiums by 20% a year. I think the concepts of freedom that were enunciated 2 1/3 centuries ago were of a larger magnitude relating to the basic essence of humanity... Not something as trite and petty as health insurance (which didn't exist).

Cylinsier said...

Wesley, you think we're stupid, but we're just different from you. What we value is not what you value. And what we value is quickly becoming the status quo. Eliminate baby boomers and older from those polls and see what they say. That's the future. I hope it scares the hell out of you.

Wesley said...

I don’t know exactly what you mean by “the US, as it existed 233 years ago, is what we should be striving toward”. Our nation and its government relies on the foundation of the Constitution. We do not have the option of interpreting it in new and exciting ways every time another Elliptitard or Cylencreton crawls out from under a rock. There is no free style when it comes to the Constitution. And the world was not waiting for you to come along and tell us what you think it should mean.

We have no argument that health care industry needs reform. But, under no circumstances do you want government run health care. This should clear to every thinking American. You are defending it out of political zealotry. You don’t care if it is fucked up, you just want to skewer Republicans. You are Kamikaze liberals. You have miserable fucking health care and instead of trying to figure out a way to improve your own lot, which is your responsibility, not everyone else’s, you want everyone else to have piece of shit health care too.

The Constitution specifically confines all the powers of the legislative branch of government in Article 1 section 8. The Legislative Branch has less than 20 enumerated powers. And nowhere in those 20 enumerated powers is health care mentioned and neither is health control which is really what Obamacare is trying to do. The only business our Congressmen and Senators have with regard to government healthcare is fighting against it. The Constitution is not some sort of huge elastic document that they can try to wrap around everything. In the Federalist Papers all of the Founding fathers from Jefferson on down, all wrote that then general welfare clause can only to be used in the confines of the enumerated powers in Article 1 Section 8.

The Constitution exists to keep governent out of your life to the maximum extent possible. That's real freedom and liberty.

Wesley said...

Cylendung…I do not think you are stupid. I would not waste my time if I thought you were. I think your are fucking ignorant and like I said when this all started you guys have to quit drinking your own bathwater. Your political philosophy is some boring old shit that has been around as long as dirt. And every fucking time it has been tried it has failed. Read a few history books. I think we can safely say that not all baby boomers and older are conservatives. But even if you could get rid of them you would still have guys like me to contend with. Get out of your stale fart filled closed circle jerk and take a look at the winners out there. If what you propose ever becomes status quo, eventually we will have no creation of wealth and we will all be just a bunch of losers like you turds waiting to be taken care of. And all the caretakers will be gone.

Cylinsier said...

There's a pretty good chance that the person you think I am is not at all what I am like. If actually reading the bill and listening to what congress says first hand instead of getting it filtered through Ramussen and Limbaugh makes me ignorant, then bring it on. I probably also have a better understanding of history than you do.

My political philosophy is not boring according to the voters. Did you forget the outcome of the national elections? Take your own advice and take a look at the winners out there.

In short, you're just like the rest of the conservatives in this country right now; choking on the sour grapes and still wrestling with the fact that the nation threw you out with the rest of the trash. If you think the views we are expressing here are ignorant, then you're in for a long ride for the next 3 and a half years. And if you think we are in the minority, you've got another thing coming. How are the Republicans' numbers doing right now? Face it, your view is the old stale bullshit. We did it your way and look where it got us.

Ellipses said...

Also... I do not support single payer based on political philosophy... I support it because I want single payer...

Kinda the same way I supported GW when he made a pathetic push to privatize social security.

Wesley said...

Elliptocunt…Just as people use hugely different amounts of groceries, they also use hugely different amounts of medical care, especially dick drippers like you two and especially when an appointment with a highly trained doctor costs less than a deluxe carwash.

Insurance plans that force everyone in the plan to pay for Eliptodong's Viagra and Cylenbungholer’s anti-depression pills are already grossly unfair to people who rarely go to the doctor. It's like being forced to split gas bills with a 18-wheel cross country truck driver or a restaurant bill with Rosey Odonnell. On the other hand, it's an awesome deal for fucking hypochondriac rump rangers like you that are in the plan.

Now you fucks want to force us all into one gigomongous national health insurance plan that will cover every real and newly imagined ailment that has a powerful lobby. But if you have a rare medical condition without a lobbyist, you'll be out shit out of luck.

Even twenty years after the collapse of your beloved USSR, you can't fucking calculate that it's easier and cheaper to obtain any service provided by capitalism than any service provided under socialism.

You don't even have to have any of your drug induced visions of how health care would be delivered in this country if we bought it ourselves. Just go to a grocery store or get a fucking haircut from someone other than your bovine wives. Or think back to when you bought your last lube job (no not the happy finish massage parlor kind), history tutor, computer and every other product and service available in inexpensive abundance in this capitalist paradise.

Third-party payer schemes are always a cosmic disaster -- less service for twice the price! If you want good service at a good price, be sure to be the one holding the credit card. Under Obamacare no one but government bureau-fucking-crats will be allowed to hold the credit card.

Isn't beer important? Why not "universal beer coverage"? If politicians and employers had guaranteed us "free" beer 50 years ago, today you little ass pirates would be wailing about the "beer crisis" in America, and you'd be on the phone with your beer care provider arguing about whether or not a Stout was covered on the plan.

Instead of making health care more like the DMV, how about we make it more like hardware stores? Give the poor and tough cases (like you bottom feeders) health stamps and let the rest of us buy health care on the free market.

Ellipses said...

So why do single payer systems cost HALF, per capita, than the US?

Oh, and I've been to the doctor once in the past 5 years, fyi

Cylinsier said...

I enjoy knowing that I'm getting through to him enough to at least elicit these little outbursts of attempted communication.

I actually kind of hope his hair-brained apocalyptic bullshit comes true; the idea of him losing his shit in the midst of a meltdown of communist proportions makes me chuckle.

In response to this statement: "Give the poor and tough cases (like you bottom feeders) health stamps and let the rest of us buy health care on the free market."

This is how I know that you haven't actually read the bill, listened to anything anyone has said about it who knows what they are talking about, or have even the most basic ability to comprehend simple statements. That's basically what the reform will do.

The single payer, for better or for worse, is decades away and will have a whole new congress and President to go through, so why the fuck are you bringing it up over and over again? This reform creates a "food stamp" option for health care while leaving the rest of us to shop on the market. Its not really a "food stamp" option per se, but I didn't want to confuse you. So basically exactly what you are suggesting is what is happening.


Wesley said...

Cylenloser…I bet you also enjoy knowing that Megan Fox wants to have your children you delusional snot swallower. My great grandfather and great grandmother immigrated from that communist shit and you would be laughing out the other side of your cock socket mouth if it ever came to pass. I don’t have any shit to lose so it would be sweet irony if your anarchist wish came true. In spite of your claims to be a learned historian, it looks like the history you know about is confined to Dr Seuss books.

Cyputz…please get Ecliptitard to read this to you or some other adult that you trust that has at least the basic reading comprehension of a third grader, because it appears you are missing out on a lot and don’t have the vocabulary for this level of discourse.

You are a glittering jewel of ignorance. The single payer will be a fait accompli if this bill passes. Here is what it requires, for businesses with payrolls greater than $400,000 per year. (The bill uses “contribution” to refer to mandatory payments to the government plan.) Pages 149-150, SEC. 313, EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTIONS IN LIEU OF COVERAGE

(a) IN GENERAL.—A contribution is made in accordance with this section with respect to an employee if such contribution is equal to an amount equal to 8 percent of the average wages paid by the employer during the period of enrollment (determined by taking into account all employees of the employer and in such manner as the Commissioner provides, including rules providing for the appropriate aggregation of related employers). Any such contribution—

(1) shall be paid to the Health Choices Commissioner for deposit into the Health Insurance Exchange Trust Fund, and
(2) shall not be applied against the premium of the employee under the Exchange-participating health benefits plan in which the employee is enrolled.

(The bill then includes a sliding scale of payments for business with less than $400,000 in annual payroll.)

The Bill also reserves, for the government, the power to determine an acceptable benefits plan: page 24, SEC. 115. ENSURING ADEQUACY OF PROVIDER NETWORKS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—A qualified health benefits plan that uses a provider network for items and services shall meet such standards respecting provider networks as the Commissioner may establish to assure the adequacy of such networks in ensuring enrollee access to such items and services and transparency in the cost-sharing differentials between in-network coverage and out-of-network coverage.


1. The bill does not prohibit a person from buying private insurance.
2. Small businesses—with say 8-10 employees—will either have to provide insurance to federal standards, or pay an 8% payroll tax. Business costs for health care are higher than this, especially considering administrative costs. Any competitive business that tries to stay with a private plan will face a payroll disadvantage against competitors who go with the government “option.”
3. The pressure for business owners to terminate the private plans will be enormous.
4. With employers ending plans, millions of Americans will lose their private coverage, and fewer companies will offer it.
5. The Commissioner (meaning, always, the bureaucrats) will determine whether a particular network of physicians, hospitals and insurance is acceptable.
6. With private insurance starved, many people enrolled in the government “option” will have no place else to go.

Ellipses said...

And that's bad, why?

Cylinsier said...

It appears I've gone from socialist to communist to anarchist. And a man who can't string together three words without talking about a cock has the gall to tell me I'm an idiot.

Wesley said...

Ellabotomal...I understand it is not bad for you and your butt boy Cylensteamer.. You guys live on the bottom rung and have no hope of ever leaving it but you resent people like me who want to take advantage of our American freedoms to climb as high as our heart's desire. You bottom dwellers will always have shit stick health care and so you don't mind seeing winners being pulled back into your loser mung. You think everyone should stand in line for appointments and rationing is just fine by you. Because you can never hope for anything better.

(Not to dissapoint Cytard I will work the word cock in here) think that the implications for small business health care and the fact that they will be forced to the single payer govt run health care is fan-fucking-tastic.

Cylenbuffoon...I keep waiting for you to add something that is material to this conversation. Why are you so obsessed about finding out hidden meanings of what I call you? This is not about about NPD.

Cylinsier said...

Both ellipses and I have added many things of substance to this argument. You have failed to argue against a single one. To add anything more would just be overkill. You're already well out of your league here. Please continue to insult me in place of actually saying something smart. It amuses me.

Cylinsier said...

I posted a new entry on health care today, Wesley. Go check it out. Also, I deleted your last comment. Why? Because I can.

Wesley said...

That's the spirit Blogitard, if anyone disagrees with you delete their comments. How embarrassing for you. And the other two people that are reading this now know that you are a spineless fuck that cannot defend your positions. Slam dunk.

Ellipses said...

Jeez, what did I miss today?! That's what I get for going to a meeting... We actually had a good traffic day today... Definitely more than 2

Cylinsier said...

I figured you'd respond that way. Your post was not a disagreement with anything I said and it had nothing to do with the discussion. If you want to obsess over my genitals, do it in private. Any future posts of that nature will also be deleted. If you want to act like a baby you're going to get treated like one.

Wesley said...

Cylenliar...I never said a word about your genitals. I guess Elliptiprincipal called you into the office and wanted to know why the fuck you are childishly removing posts from his blog. For his sake, I have a record of what I wrote. Please be so kind as to point out the reference to the short subject you claim I obsessed over.

"Elliptisyphilis has at least made some some comments that have to do with the subject at hand. Cylendisease you on the other hand have the attention span of fromunder cheese and the reading comprehension of a rock. Etard must have let you come on this blog as a pity fuck."

Nice try but Etard should not have given you the keys to his blog. You deleted what I said because you don't have what you so condescendingly checked me out for, in my first blog comment when you said you were seeing if I had what it took for the verbal pugilism that lay ahead.

You need to be a little less thin skinned and when you get caught deleting the knock-out punches by Etard you need to learn a little honesty. As long as you lie you will alwys lose.

Ellipses said...

Cy is a 10th degree awesome writer and I am lucky to have his contributions. I value his opinion and perspective on a range of issues.

That said, Wes... I do enjoy the cadence and meter of your writing as well as your somewhat creative way to incorporate "adult language" into what you say...

Why don't you send me an email so we can get to know each other a little better?

Wesley said...

Eliptisardonic, I prefer the obscured story of who I am for now. Who I am is not important anyway. Once the curtain is dropped it will be difficult for me to remain angered, defensively antagonistic, and desperate. We truly have a disagreement in political philosophy but the conversation thus far has been entertaining without resembling Twitter.

Cymuzzler is in fact one of the best writers I have seen when he puts his mind to it and checks his thin skin at the door. I can see he is kind hearted because he just cannot muster any insult greater than stupid, dumbass, or ignorant. I thought his entry on Windows 2000-and-lumpty-fuck was sharp, informative, and its what brought me here in the first place.

Refill Cyborg’s shit-sack and send him back into battle. Fight’s on.

Ellipses said...

Ha! That's fantastic!

Well, if you ever change your mind and would like to be a writer for TEP, the offer is open.