When you lose your health care, remember who took it away

I knew it. That's OK you're on the left so you don't need facts. Just keep talking about how the other side wants poor children to die.
 
The flip side to this is that Americans subsidize medical research for the entire world precisely because our government doesn't control prices the way everyone else does.
Oh, we make use of the American subsidization of medical research, but not so much due to the spending done by Big Pharma. The research we make use of is the win/win spending on low-level research that's done in research labs funded by governments, charities, and universities. Of course, my making use of their publications is win/win since I am also adding to the collective knowledge base. As well, my local institutions are spending money to add to the databases that American scientists use, too.
 
Last edited:
I too can find graphs tailored specifically to the points I'm trying to make on the internet.

I'm really not certain how he thinks that graph supports his point in the first place.

Just keep talking about how the other side wants poor children to die.

If you're on the Republicans' side, you definitely do want poor children to die. The Republican health care plan is to literally kill poor children so that rich people can make more money.
 
I knew it. That's OK you're on the left so you don't need facts. Just keep talking about how the other side wants poor children to die.
I'm too busy crying in my safe space to care about all the children Republicans are going to kill.
 
Oh, we make use of the American subsidization of medical research, but not so much due to the spending done by Big Pharma. The research we make use of is the win/win spending on low-level research that's done in research labs funded by governments, charities, and universities. Of course, my making use of their publications is win/win since I am also adding to the collective knowledge base.
Good to know there is literally no redeeming qualities of our current health care system in the US.
 
Well, it's not so bad. I mean, the US is able to get health outcomes roughly similar to those seen in other advanced countries. And those countries spend a reasonable fraction of their GDP on healthcare! So you know it's not easy!

Edit: and on the demand side, we often look to produce products that we know that Big Pharma will buy from us. But we also don't only look at American pharma companies. But we look at ones with money...
 
Last edited:
If you're on the Republicans' side, you definitely do want poor children to die. The Republican health care plan is to literally kill poor children so that rich people can make more money.
You can't make this stuff up folks. Poe's law is strong with you.
 
I honestly think you're a right-winger having a laugh with some of the stuff you post. It's like you try as hard as possible to avoid any nuance whatsoever.
 
I honestly think you're a right-winger having a laugh with some of the stuff you post. It's like you try as hard as possible to avoid any nuance whatsoever.

Maybe you can tell us how nuanced the Republican health care bill is then?
 
You have discovered Baumol's Cost Disease

It's a bit more than that. Firstly, the total demand on the system has gone up. This is a good thing, because it means we're intentionally putting more and more effort into taking care of people who are hurting. But, we also see that demand has gone up because total wealth has gone up. As the price of iPods falls, that extra money will be spent elsewhere. And people (in aggregate) are choosing to spend it on healthcare.

Healthcare also (in aggregate) hasn't gone through the deflation curve that information technologies do.
 
I knew it. That's OK you're on the left so you don't need facts. Just keep talking about how the other side wants poor children to die.

Not two pages ago you were telling GEFM that he shouldn't have health insurance because he's too poor and sick to deserve it.
 
Not two pages ago you were telling GEFM that he shouldn't have health insurance because he's too poor and sick to deserve it.

Hogwash! Women should just buy extra insurance that will cover their child should they become pregnant. Like how life insurance has those suicide clauses, the woman has to pay into this insurance policy for at least 2 years before their would-be baby can be eligible for insurance coverage. (But remember, men should pay nothing because they don't get pregnant.)
 
Hogwash! Women should just buy extra insurance that will cover their child should they become pregnant. Like how life insurance has those suicide clauses, the woman has to pay into this insurance policy for at least 2 years before their would-be baby can be eligible for insurance coverage. (But remember, men should pay nothing because they don't get pregnant.)
This is a Poe's law post. True statements are mixed with sarcasm so you that cannot separate the two.

J
 
Not two pages ago you were telling GEFM that he shouldn't have health insurance because he's too poor and sick to deserve it.
Do you understand how insurance works..? You wouldn't buy car insurance after your car was already wrecked. GEFM needed health CARE not health INSURANCE.
 
Do you understand how insurance works..? You wouldn't buy car insurance after your car was already wrecked. GEFM needed health CARE not health INSURANCE.

But in the US they are de facto the same.
 
Last edited:
Do you understand how insurance works..? You wouldn't buy car insurance after your car was already wrecked. GEFM needed health CARE not health INSURANCE.

Yeah man I should have just paid the 15k in medical bills as a 19 year old college student with no insurance. God I love this country.

It's a bit more than that. Firstly, the total demand on the system has gone up. This is a good thing, because it means we're intentionally putting more and more effort into taking care of people who are hurting. But, we also see that demand has gone up because total wealth has gone up. As the price of iPods falls, that extra money will be spent elsewhere. And people (in aggregate) are choosing to spend it on healthcare.

Healthcare also (in aggregate) hasn't gone through the deflation curve that information technologies do.

Oh absolutely, that wasn't meant to be a one off solution. But graphs like that fundamentally misconstrue the point by comparing completely different sectors of the economy under completely different technological and price pressures.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom