Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

    http://budget.house.gov/UploadedFiles/WydenRyan.pdf

    Wydens a Democrat, Ryans a Republican. Together they came up with yet another plan to reform medicare in hopes of decreasing spending. Dems immediately attacked both as wanting to murder seniors in their sleep.

    Summary:

    -lets medicare eligible choose between medicare approved private insure plans and traditional plans, medicare still pays, seniors still pay medicare
    -premium support payments
    -cap on cost growth
    -consumer protections
    -tax deduction for small business to let employees buy their own healthcare
    Last edited by jviehe; 12-16-2011, 09:59 AM.

  • #2
    Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

    At least there is one Dem and a Pub that is together on this. The Dems will rip at anything that reforms Medicare, as they don't want it touched. Period. All the Dems want to do is raise taxes. Ryan at least has one Democrat supporter that he has teamed up with.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #3
      Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

      Yeah, it has a lot of common sense reforms that shouldnt be too objectionable, but since it tries to move away from universal healthcare, Dems wont go for it.

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #4
        Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

        The attacks on Republicans for their despicable actions during the health care debate are wholly justified. They LIED. They never had any intention of working with Democrats on a bill. It would have made Obama look good. They wanted to hand him his 'Waterloo'

        Ryan's stand alone plan for Medicare is a nightmare for seniors. Even Newt called it radical "right-wing social engineering"

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #5
          Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

          Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
          The attacks on Republicans for their despicable actions during the health care debate are wholly justified. They LIED. They never had any intention of working with Democrats on a bill. It would have made Obama look good. They wanted to hand him his 'Waterloo'
          To have any chance of believing that, you'd have to forget the meeting the GOP leadership had with Obama in Jan 2009, going there to work with the young president, they were greeted with: "I won" and "Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh"

          Allow me to remind you:

          The top congressional leaders from both parties gathered at the White House for a working discussion over the shape and size of President Barack Obama’s economic stimulus plan. The meeting was designed to promote bipartisanship.

          But Obama showed that in an ideological debate, he’s not averse to using a jab.

          Challenged by one Republican senator over the contents of the package, the new president, according to participants, replied: “I won.”
          Obama to GOP: ‘I Won’ - Washington Wire - WSJ

          So much for history... where are we today?

          The good folks at Resurgent Republic send along these poll results, and I think what’s interesting is that in light of all the contrary evidence, so many Democrats insist that Obama is more interested in “working” than campaigning.

          Shot: ”President Obama has not met with Republican leaders in Congress for 145 days, choosing instead to visit 20 states for 34 policy addresses and 34 campaign speeches.” (Richard Wolf, “Observers: Obama has been keeping far afield of Congress,” USA Today, (12/16/11)

          Chaser: By 53 to 37 percent, Independents believe President Obama is more interested in campaigning against Republicans in Congress to win reelection. (Resurgent Republic, National Survey of Registered Voters, 10/30 – 11/2/11)

          At this point in his presidency, do you think Barack Obama is more interested in working with Republicans in Congress to get things done, or campaigning against Republicans in Congress to win reelection?


          The American voter doesn't believe you either...

          Independents Don’t Think Obama Is Interested in Working With GOP - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #6
            Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

            You know Democrats are on the wrong side of an issue when even The New York Times acknowledges in a front page story that the party needs to kill something for political reasons.

            In 2010, many Republicans won House seats — and the support of older voters — by arguing that President Obama’s health care law would damage Medicare. Democrats are hoping to retake the House by arguing that Mr. Ryan and other House Republicans are pushing for the privatization of Medicare, which they say could greatly increase costs for beneficiaries.

            The new Wyden-Ryan proposal, by blurring the contrast between the parties on this issue, could make it more difficult for Democrats to win the argument.
            Lawmakers Offer Bipartisan Plan to Overhaul Medicare - Dec. 14, 2011

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #7
              Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

              Originally posted by tsquare View Post
              To have any chance of believing that, you'd have to forget the meeting the GOP leadership had with Obama in Jan 2009, going there to work with the young president, they were greeted with: "I won" and "Don't listen to Rush Limbaugh"

              Allow me to remind you:



              Obama to GOP: ‘I Won’ - Washington Wire - WSJ

              So much for history... where are we today?





              The American voter doesn't believe you either...

              Independents Don’t Think Obama Is Interested in Working With GOP - By Jim Geraghty - The Campaign Spot - National Review Online
              You mean the meeting then President -elect Obama had with the House GOP, where leaders gave members an edict that they would not support the stimulus? Or the LIE you just posted? President Obama didn't say 'I won", Eric Cantor said it.

              “We just have a difference here, and I’m president,” Mr. Obama said to Mr. Cantor, according to Rahm Emanuel, the White House chief of staff, who was at the meeting.

              Mr. Emanuel said that Mr. Obama was being lighthearted and that lawmakers of both parties had laughed.

              Mr. Cantor, in an interview later, had a similar recollection. He said the president had told him, “You’re correct, there’s a philosophical difference, but I won, so we’re going to prevail on that.”

              “He was very straightforward,” Mr. Cantor added. “There was no disrespect, but it was very matter-of-fact.”

              Obama Presses for Quick Jolt to the Economy - NYTimes.com

              BTW, did you even READ David Frum's Waterloo? The former Bush speechwriter was fired by the right wing think tank American Enterprise Institute for telling the truth.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #8
                Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                Wyden-Ryan is a joke.

                First, it doesn't kick in until 2022.

                For you to believe in this plan, you have to get past this line, "Private plans will compete directly with traditional
                Medicare based on their ability to provide quality coverage at an affordable lower cost."


                For almost every other sentence in this plan, it brings up a ton of questions.

                Like, how could a private insurer possibly offer a cheaper plan to anyone in a demographic whose bodies are, let's face it, falling apart?

                Respiratory illnesses, heart issues, high blood pressure, arthritis, cancer, and the list goes on.

                It's a plan where just about every other sentence contains some kind of wishful-thinking at it's core, based on some misnomer.

                The plan would not save money.

                Private insurers aren't just going to start magically offering cheap plans after more than doubling health care costs on the American public over the past decade.

                Get real.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #9
                  Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                  Originally posted by Jason Marcel View Post
                  Like, how could a private insurer possibly offer a cheaper plan to anyone in a demographic whose bodies are, let's face it, falling apart?
                  It's called competition .. you know, unlike the government that inhibits competition, drives up prices and excels at inefficiencies.


                  Originally posted by Jason Marcel View Post

                  It's a plan where just about every other sentence contains some kind of wishful-thinking at it's core, based on some misnomer.

                  The plan would not save money.
                  Sounds kind of like Obamacare to me.

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #10
                    Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                    Originally posted by jotathought View Post
                    It's called competition .. you know, unlike the government that inhibits competition, drives up prices and excels at inefficiencies.


                    Except in the real world it doesn't work.... if you had taken a course in economics, you might have a clue why, here's a clue, "incentives".


                    There are zero incentives for a private insurance company to reduce medical costs.

                    Private plans cannot compete with Medicare, private Medicare D plans are subsidized, they need about a $1000/yr subsidy to be "competitive" with traditional Medicare.
                    Because Medicare does not have underwriting costs, advertising costs, sales costs, executive bonuses or any of the other stuff that makes private insurance cost 30% more than government insurance.
                    Last edited by goober; 12-16-2011, 04:18 PM.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #11
                      Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                      Originally posted by goober View Post
                      Except in the real world it doesn't work.... if you had taken a course in economics, you might have a clue why, here's a clue, "incentives".


                      There are zero incentives for a private insurance company to reduce medical costs.
                      Wow Goober, that is done everyday by insurance companies. They are always fighting cost. Are you serious to claim that all insurance companies pay out willy nilley every bill that comes in for medical cost.

                      As for competing with medicare, think again. Obama told us there is 500 billion of waste and fraud in Medicare alone. Are you telling me a private company could not do a better job than our wasteful government that allows at every turn.

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #12
                        Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                        Originally posted by Forplay View Post
                        Wow Goober, that is done everyday by insurance companies. They are always fighting cost. Are you serious to claim that all insurance companies pay out willy nilley every bill that comes in for medical cost.

                        As for competing with medicare, think again. Obama told us there is 500 billion of waste and fraud in Medicare alone. Are you telling me a private company could not do a better job than our wasteful government that allows at every turn.
                        You're right there is probably 500bn if not more in waste and fraud. But, it's the DRs, Hospitals, and private insurance compaines that commet this fraud with bogus billing.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #13
                          Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                          I've got a simple plan for Medicare: just raise premiums to reflect how much the program is costing. Let seniors by cheaper plans that provide less if they feel Medicare premiums are too high to afford.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #14
                            Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                            Originally posted by Forplay View Post
                            Wow Goober, that is done everyday by insurance companies. They are always fighting cost. Are you serious to claim that all insurance companies pay out willy nilley every bill that comes in for medical cost.

                            As for competing with medicare, think again. Obama told us there is 500 billion of waste and fraud in Medicare alone. Are you telling me a private company could not do a better job than our wasteful government that allows at every turn.
                            Insurance companies try to avoid payouts, they don't try to limit costs. If insurance companies are so good at limiting costs, why do we have the highest costs in the world, when we have the lowest involvement by government in the world, and the most privatized medical market in the world?

                            I'm saying that even with that waste, Medicare is cheaper than if it was private, that is what the actual experience is.
                            And yes, I'm saying that there are things the government can do better than a private company, and Medicare is one of them.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #15
                              Re: Ryan-Wyden Heathcare Plan

                              Better at controlling costs. Better at actually delivering medical services, that's questionable. Government health care also primarily saves money by not paying out, although medicare doesn't ration the way national health care systems do. Yet.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?

                              Working...
                              X