Obamacare's Birthday

Discussion in 'The Political/Current Events Coffee House' started by 1Historygenius, Mar 23, 2012.

?

Obamacare Poll

Poll closed Apr 2, 2012.
For Obamacare 25 vote(s) 73.5%
Against Obamacare 9 vote(s) 26.5%
  1. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    No were talking about the cost of Canada style healthcare not Obamacare.
    Greece's problem is everyone dodges taxes it's practically a national sport.
    slydessertfox likes this.
  2. Surfusa Lost in space-time

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,592
    Likes Received:
    114
    Trophy Points:
    128
    Location:
    Parradise Valley, Arizona, United States of Americ
    No, it's that it's a socialist country which cannot stand by itself... The Euro doesnt help any of these countries because they can all print money or have different policies with the same currency... Multiple goverments cannot share the same medium!
  3. 1Historygenius Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Message Count:
    511
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    United States
    Off course when your heavily in debt and are in an economic recession with still the majority of the nation not supporting this action it still makes perfect sense to pass this bill. We also cannot predict the future on if this plan make cause trouble in Switzerland and Taiwan in the future. Now we cannot predict the future, but guess what spending has increased for those nations:

    [IMG]

    That bar representing the United States will skyrocket higher and higher and the only reason it is so high now would be because we have a much larger population. Lets look at these deficits:

    [IMG]

    [IMG]

    As for the UK its debt is going up and Canada's debt has to and while it seems to have go down that actually only goes to the 2000s and its is projected to go up past 600 billion this year! You know when universal healthcare was passed in Canada? 1984! It has not made things better from that year.

    @Observer92 so as you can see Canada's had done more to hinder than help it.
  4. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    Healthcare was not the main cause of that. If you perspective on how much we like our system, if you say you want to cut healthcare you will never get elected again period, it is impossible. Notice it also decreasing now rather rapidly without cutting healthcare.
    slydessertfox likes this.
  5. sirdust Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2011
    Message Count:
    621
    Likes Received:
    121
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Location:
    Switzerland
    Statistics are great if you can read them.

    1. picture of yours. numbers from <07 way before "obamacare" only showing that the us had the most expensive/per capita health care without even covering the entire population. The most expensive while uneffective, surely that system is perfect and didn't need reform. lol
    2. picture well look up statistics for every country in 08 ! the financial crisis just hit!!!! Even countries like mine where in deficite that year! nothing to do with health care, but oh shocker a result of not enough government regulation! naughty naughty to post it in this way. sadly most people on this forum(not odly enough you too) probably where too young to remember what happened 4 years ago.
    slydessertfox and Demondaze like this.
  6. 1Historygenius Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Message Count:
    511
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    United States
    The first graph is specifically on healthcare and nothing else. Now I never said anything about cutting healthcare, but these nations are still rising in spending with the national healthcare already in place, the US does not have that as of now, but if it were to come into place healthcare alone would skyrocket to 3 trillion dollars. National healthcare is part of those nations' debt problems. As of now healthcare in our country is not because it is not operated by the government.

    1. The reason is why it is so expensive would be because of a population, but the other nations already have national healthcare long in place. No doubt all spending has risen, but if Obamacare is put in it will skyrocket.

    2. As I said most of those nations had national healthcare in place by then and the debt was still rising in UK and Canada. I also found out that the Canadian debt is projected to go to 600,000 billion this year or next year.
  7. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    You know I bet increasing taxes, closing loopholes, cutting military research, etc. could probably pay for it but god forbid we raise taxes.
  8. 1Historygenius Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Message Count:
    511
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    United States
    I would agree with closing loopholes and cutting military bases around the world, but not research, but not increasing taxes! Even some Democrats knew not to raise taxes:

    “It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high and tax revenues are too low and the soundest way to raise the revenues in the long run is to cut the rates now … Cutting taxes now is not to incur a budget deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous, expanding economy which can bring a budget surplus.” - John F. Kennedy
  9. 0bserver92 Grand King of Moderation

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    6,746
    Likes Received:
    331
    Trophy Points:
    143
    Location:
    Canada
    Well don't raise taxes on people and business who actually help the economy like the lower and middle classes along with small business which in turn also stimulates economic growth which means more tax income form that and you just raise more taxes form the rich and corporations. The gray is also not the best choice for text.
  10. sirdust Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    May 20, 2011
    Message Count:
    621
    Likes Received:
    121
    Trophy Points:
    103
    Location:
    Switzerland
    1. nonesensee, population has no impact if calculated per capita! The reason why they are so high and uneffective is because your system SUCKS there is just no debate about that.
    2. completely went over your head what i pointed out didn't it? Posting defficit numbers out of 08 is useless. Every nation took a massive hit that year, and evidently not because of healthcare, but because the us failed to regulate the credit market! Banks gave out credits for houses to people who couldn't afford it. That triggered the whole shitstorm.
    I say it again even a country like mine had a defficit that year, while this year it had a surplus of 1.6 billion. It was a year of crisis for crying out loud.
    slydessertfox and Demondaze like this.
  11. 1Historygenius Member

    Member Since:
    Feb 20, 2012
    Message Count:
    511
    Likes Received:
    38
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Location:
    United States
    Don't raise taxes on anyone above all! That is why we need a flat tax. That is equality in taxation.

    According to popular misconception the rich pay little to nothing and the poor paying everything. Guess what? The richest one percent pays roughly 40% of country's total income tax and nearly 28% of the total tax burden. The top 10 pay 60% of the total income tax and 57% of the total tax burden. In contrast the bottom 2% pays less than 3% in total income tax and just a fraction of the total tax burden.

    So let's set aside that the rich do pay their fair share and insist they pay more. Let's go one step further and suggest in confiscating all their wealth. If we took all the wealth from the total of 400 billionaires and we would barely dent the debt. Raising the taxes on the rich and alienating them thus not solve the problem and guess what? Lowering taxes on everyone allows everyone to but healthcare and thus there would be no need for Obamacare. So Obama must want to keep taxes on the lower class to get what he wants through! Conspiracy?!

    But don't take my word for it what about these fine to people who understand the threats of socialism well:





    1. Wrong when you have a larger population you have to take care of more people thus you makes logic to raise some spending. Common sense.
    2. But you do not understand off course every nation suffered from the '08 crisis, but above all the debts were still rising and one of the reasons was national healthcare. The 2008 recession did increase the debt, but it was already rising before that one of the reasons was national healthcare.
  12. Demondaze Xenos Scum

    Member Since:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Message Count:
    5,456
    Likes Received:
    925
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    TEXASLOL
    When in doubt, accuse the social justice crowd of class warfare, conspiracy, and closet Marxism. Stay classy ideologues.
    slydessertfox likes this.
  13. JosefVStalin El Presidente

    Member Since:
    Feb 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    2,867
    Likes Received:
    5,818
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    B.C. Canada
    You do realize that the graphs you posted undermine your argument not help it.

    The first graph is per capita, you know what that means right? It means per person, so population is irrelevant in those calculations so the reason it costs so much is not because of your high population but your inefficient healthcare.

    As to the UK federal budget I will not speak on that because I do not study and follow UK politics and policy like I study North American policy. So unlike some people I will not speak on things which I don't know about.

    As to Canada's federal budget the graph you posted is woefully out dated by about 10 years. The CBC did a wonderful graph on this which goes up to 2011, is interactive and all sorts of nice things which you can check out here.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/interactives/canada-deficit/

    Considering your graph stops at 2001 you either chose that graph because you don't understand Canadian Economics at all or because you are intentionally trying to be misleading. Consider that from 1997 to 2008 Canada enjoyed a surplus so if your graph had been extended you would have seen our debt considerably decline until 2008 were the recession hit and the government instituted a stimulus plan to help minimize the effects of the recession. Already government spendings have begun to decrease and hopefully if the governing Conservatives don't completely drop the ball on the economy, which is a big if when talking about Conservatives and the economy, Canada will return to a surplus and once again the debt will begin to diminish. Also I don't think the point about Canada's debt reaching 600 billion actually tells us all that much. The real important number is the debt to GDP ratio which is as you can see from the CBC graph is just over 50%. and America's is about 103%. I would say those numbers strongly favour Canada no matter which way you slice it.

    Lastly I am going to agree with you on something. That is Obamacare does suck. But it sucks for the exact opposite reason you think it does. Because it doesn't go far enough. Obamacare doesn't do anything to curb the raising insurance premiums and in the long run does little to help the American health care situation. It's a band-aid solution at best. What America really needs is for it's entire current system to be thrown out and started from the ground up. I say this as some one who is trying to help the American people, who loves the American people, who only wants them to enjoy the same benefits we do here in Canada.
    Daddy92 and slydessertfox like this.
  14. pedro3131 Running the Show While the Big Guy's Gone

    Member Since:
    Feb 13, 2011
    Message Count:
    3,949
    Likes Received:
    633
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Location:
    Tempe, Az
    Another point to consider in the per capita graph is that in all countries the raise in cost seems to be linear, and most of them at a very similar interval. What that suggests to me is that the raise in cost has more to do with inflation (cross reference this map against a GDP per capita graph and I'm sure you'd see very similar figures. On the other hand you have a near exponential growth in costs in the US.

    On the deficit graphs, health care is fairly non spurious with debt, as out graph is much more skewed then other countries. Bush did far worse to the debt with his increased expenditures and lowered taxes for certain sectors then healthcare in foreign countries.
  15. slydessertfox Total War Branch Head

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Message Count:
    11,853
    Likes Received:
    1,425
    Trophy Points:
    373
    Location:
    Mars
  16. crocve Well-Known Member

    Member Since:
    Jun 6, 2011
    Message Count:
    682
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    78
    If people in America want healthcare (probably the only thing I agree with "welfarism"), then stop spending in the military, in fighting immigration, in bail-outs, in the drug war (and end it, also), etc.

Share This Page

Facebook: