Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

To much logic for the low info voter

sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/2/2013 6:59:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
How shall we insure everyone? How can we make it fair? How do we cover pre existing conditions? How will the poor get health care. Lets look at what the supposed greatest most intellectual ivy league minds in Washington DC have come up with. A monstrosity bill of rules and regulations that they can't even understand.

Lets consider a different solution so simple and would work over night and cause the cost of health care to plummet virtually over night. The cost of this simple solution has already been spent just setting up the ACA website alone, not including the millions more that will be spent fixing it.

This idea is so cheap and so logical you won't be able to fathom how the greatest minds in the world didn't think of it.

Are you ready? Do you think you know what the solution is? This solution will require only one govt mandate that every business in operation has to do already and does so voluntarily. Post it's prices. You say "that's not a solution" Well of course it isn't.

Here is the rest of it. The current population of the US is 317 million people. The govt spent well over 600 million on the worthless non functional website already, not including the millions more to fix it.

Lets do some grade school math shall we.

317 million + 317 million = 634 million

So if we look at this simple math the govt could have just cut a check for 2 million dollars to every man woman and child living in the US. Hell I will even include the 10 to 20 million illegals. What are millions when govt wastes money in terms of trillions.

No new federal agencies with tens of thousands of employees, no new regulations, nothing is required of govt "NOTHING"

So in conclusion every man woman and child gets a health care account with 2 million dollars in it that can only be spent on health care related issues. Doctors and hospitals post their prices therefore encouraging competition as the person is now going to shop around so as not to needlessly waste their 2 million dollar health care dollars.

I know to simple to logical.

Way to hard for the low information voter to even wrap their heads around it. There is no catch. The govt has already spent 600 million without even so much as giving it a thought. What's another 600 million when govt spends trillions. A million is a nickel compared to trillions.

Think about it, how many people spend 2 million on health care in a life time? Those who die prematurely will have their remaining balance rolled over into the chronically ill who require more than two million. And lets be honest 2 million is a lot to pay just to keep one person alive. Now we can spend 2 million on every single person to keep them alive. I don't know what could be more fair, equitable and cost effective than this. What more can you expect from the tax payer. Oh and the monthly fee to manage the account will come from your two million dollars. And best of all the filthy blood sucking govt can't touch it.
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
Volkov
Posts: 9,765
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2013 2:45:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't see how you could support it, sadolite. Much of the opposition to Obamacare is that it is government redistribution or a waste of tax money - how do you think literal redistribution would come across?

Plus, how could the "filthy, blood-sucking government" not become involved in this endeavour? First they need to redistribute that amount, then I assume someone has to be in charge of this money, especially to ensure that it isn't spent on anything except health expenses, and the government is best suited to do that job. They'd practically be involved in every step of the way, so what exactly would be the difference?

Here's another concern as well: if everyone in the US has $2-million to spend on healthcare, what stops healthcare providers from raising the prices of their services? The filthy blood-sucking government? I thought you didn't want their involvement.
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2013 8:03:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 11/3/2013 2:45:05 AM, Volkov wrote:
I don't see how you could support it, sadolite. Much of the opposition to Obamacare is that it is government redistribution or a waste of tax money - how do you think literal redistribution would come across?

Plus, how could the "filthy, blood-sucking government" not become involved in this endeavour? First they need to redistribute that amount, then I assume someone has to be in charge of this money, especially to ensure that it isn't spent on anything except health expenses, and the government is best suited to do that job. They'd practically be involved in every step of the way, so what exactly would be the difference?

Here's another concern as well: if everyone in the US has $2-million to spend on healthcare, what stops healthcare providers from raising the prices of their services? The filthy blood-sucking government? I thought you didn't want their involvement.

I am wrong 2 million x 317 million = 600 trillion
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%
sadolite
Posts: 8,837
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/3/2013 8:21:56 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Flag for weekly stupid
It's not your views that divide us, it's what you think my views should be that divides us.

If you think I will give up my rights and forsake social etiquette to make you "FEEL" better you are sadly mistaken

If liberal democrats would just stop shooting people gun violence would drop by 90%