• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: tryptakid | Foreigner

The Ferguson Thread: Part II

Status
Not open for further replies.

Thanks for being as vague as possible. That proves no point never once mentioned illegal immigrants getting Obamacare. Why ask when they are eligible then say your point is made?

Simple economics that if more and more third-world country people with Ebola or AIDS or other diseases come into our country and have not a dollar to their name we will asborb the expensive costs of health care and treatment the rest of us will decline as result (rates getting higher and doctors busy treating diseases of immigrants, much higher rates of even tuberculosis amongst the migrants).

Nevermind that immigrants who get citizenship are eligible for the ACA, those that are illegal can still waltz into an emergency room get thousands in services and have it billed to the taxpayer.
 
I wouldn't have an issue with even an actual immigrant acknowledging their needs to be a limit on the flow of immigration. Most Americans are either immigrants or recently descended from immigrants, so I guess no one should say anything about the issue, just allow mass-immigration from any country, any person and they are eligible for food stamps, Obamacare, and housing assistance. A large criticism of many people is that America is the police-force of the world, but I suppose to many it's actually the world's police force and homeless shelter/soup kitchen. An uncontrolled immigration policy along with generous benefits programs means higher and higher deficit, an unsustainable model of operation.

Simple economics that if more and more third-world country people with Ebola or AIDS or other diseases come into our country and have not a dollar to their name we will asborb the expensive costs of health care and treatment the rest of us will decline as result (rates getting higher and doctors busy treating diseases of immigrants, much higher rates of even tuberculosis amongst the migrants).

Nevermind that immigrants who get citizenship are eligible for the ACA, those that are illegal can still waltz into an emergency room get thousands in services and have it billed to the taxpayer.

Is this really happening though? How many people with AIDS and ebola were allowed into the USA last year? Your ire is clearly misdirected here. If overspending on spending on healthcare is a problem (which I agree it is), the issue is not immigration but the outrageous cost of healthcare in the United States, which is specifically what the ACA was drafted to combat, and what it in fact has accomplished. It could have done a lot better was it not so bitterly opposed. I personally was in favor of much more radial overhaul of the system as the cost of healthcare in our country is truly despicable.

An uncontrolled immigration policy along with generous benefits programs means higher and higher deficit, an unsustainable model of operation.

Luckily we don't have an uncontrolled immigration policy...
 
Is this really happening though? How many people with AIDS and ebola were allowed into the USA last year? Your ire is clearly misdirected here. If overspending on spending on healthcare is a problem (which I agree it is), the issue is not immigration but the outrageous cost of healthcare in the United States, which is specifically what the ACA was drafted to combat, and what it in fact has accomplished.

Did it accomplish this ? Or did many rates on premiums go up much faster than usual ?
 
Did it accomplish this ? Or did many rates on premiums go up much faster than usual ?

way to ignore the point about mass migraton and ebola and aids and gremlins and unicorns and shit being rolled into the country in tax payer paid chauffeur limousine services. norf pointing out how your "mass migration" fantasy is completely false kind of undermines your entire schtique in these forums, don't you think?
 
Did it accomplish this ? Or did many rates on premiums go up much faster than usual ?

Premiums have been growing at a slower rate for the last five years.

Her (Michelle Bachmann) comment that there have been “huge increases” in the private market “where we are getting health care through our employers” is low-hanging fruit for fact-checkers. Employer-sponsored insurance premiums have been growing at low rates for the past several years. The average annual family-plan premium went up 3 percent from 2013 to 2014, according to the latest annual employer survey from the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust.

As the press release on the survey says: “Premiums increased more slowly over the past five years than the preceding five years (26 percent vs. 34 percent) and well below the annual double-digit increases recorded in the late 1990s and early 2000s. This year’s increase also is similar to the year-to-year rise in worker’s wages (2.3 percent) and general inflation (2 percent).”
 
way to ignore the point about mass migraton and ebola and aids and gremlins and unicorns and shit being rolled into the country in tax payer paid chauffeur limousine services. norf pointing out how your "mass migration" fantasy is completely false kind of undermines your entire schtique in these forums, don't you think?

We don't comprehensively test for either of those diseases. I fail to see how I was disproved. Using deductive logic immigrants from regions with large numbers of their populace infected present great risk for bringing those afflictions to the states.
 
We don't comprehensively test for either of those diseases. I fail to see how I was disproved. Using deductive logic immigrants from regions with large numbers of their populace infected present great risk for bringing those afflictions to the states.

but it isn't happening. :|

here's the point, i'm glad you two are finally able to become aquainted.
 
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...g-premiums-rising-at-fastest-clip-in-decades/

As for insurance premiums rate of increase slowing down take a look at this article.

From your article:

"A recent survey of 148 insurance brokers shows that ObamaCare is sending premiums rising at the fastest clip in decades.

'For the last, about, five years they've been doing this survey, so this was the largest percentage increase in any quarter since they've been doing (it),' said Scott Gottlieb of the American Enterprise Institute."

Who is "they"? It says nowhere in the article what study is actually being referenced here. Looks to me like they went out of their way to obscure where this data is coming from.

Here's some data that you can actually verify:

us-pce-health-care-price-index-year-on-year-change-us-pce-health-care-price-index-year-on-year-change_chartbuilder-1.png

Inflation on healthcare has slowed since 2010

screen-shot-2014-03-04-at-9-42-32-am.png

US cost of healthcare is wildly inflated compared to other nations

As I said, I was in favor of more radical reform with regard to healthcare. It's clear that the American people are being exploited by the current system. Los Blancos, if the ACA hasn't lowered healthcare costs as much as you'd like to have seen, what is your alternative proposition that would have done better?
 
As I said, I was in favor of more radical reform with regard to healthcare. It's clear that the American people are being exploited by the current system. Los Blancos, if the ACA hasn't lowered healthcare costs as much as you'd like to have seen, what is your alternative proposition that would have done better?

As I stated earlier, we can lower the costs of health care by loosening guidelines the AMA imposes on doctor licensing. It shouldn't be as rigorous as it is to be a doctor who can set a broken bone, when compared to one that is performing neurosurgery. We have a system designed to not only limit the number of doctors but also turn away qualified applicants in the name of diversity. Turning away Asians with high MCAT scores and GPA's for lower qualified candidates due to diversity ratios is lowering the pool of doctors within the United States. A small supply of doctors and lots of sick people leads to high healthcare costs, while a larger supply of doctors with the same number of sick people means lower healthcare costs. Supply-and-demand.

Ending coverage of unnecessary procedures like gender-reassignment surgery. Some procedures people should pay for out-of-pocket. As far as I'm concerned it's not as a tenth as important as getting a tumor removed or dialysis. Your health is not at risk if you don't get a boob job and your penis morphed into a vagina. At my university our premiums went up in as soon as the provision for gender-reassignment surgery was added and was officially attributed to offsetting the costs of such surgery.

Reduce health expenses by subjecting all immigrants to an extensive physical with a wide battery of tests performed, if they have serious diseases and no money and expect to have the American taxpayer cover hundreds of thousands or millions in future medical expenses then the Utilitarian rule (greatest good for the greatest number of people) would be to deny them entrance.

Just some ideas.
 
Los Blancos said:
Using deductive logic immigrants from regions with large numbers of their populace infected present great risk for bringing those afflictions to the states.

You failed to employ the inductive logic by which one would derive trends from populations necessary to somewhat plausibly model the spread of disease within and among populations.

ebola
 
You failed to employ the inductive logic by which one would derive trends from populations necessary to somewhat plausibly model the spread of disease within and among populations.

ebola

The disease is believed to have originated in Western Africa, and was spread from chimpanzees to humans. Assuming Western tourists didn't go enjoy masse to Africa to eat chimpanzees or have unprotected sex with Africans, it likely spread through migration of infected people. Currently sub-Saharan Africa accounts for 67% of the infections in the world. Using any kind of logic any significant immigration from this region pose much higher risk than migrants from other regions: a risk to the health of our citizens and a potential strain on health care resources should the disease spread.
 
The disease is believed to have originated in Western Africa, and was spread from chimpanzees to humans. Assuming Western tourists didn't go enjoy masse to Africa to eat chimpanzees or have unprotected sex with Africans, it likely spread through migration of infected people. Currently sub-Saharan Africa accounts for 67% of the infections in the world. Using any kind of logic any significant immigration from this region pose much higher risk than migrants from other regions: a risk to the health of our citizens and a potential strain on health care resources should the disease spread.

let me clarify your position, and please correct me if i am wrong.

you want to stop mass migration from areas with people who might pose a risk to the public safety in america through either crime or disease

is that right?
 

then how does that gel with the fact that people in amercia aren't dropping like flies?

as EW put it said:
Considering that the number of people who have died of Ebola in the US are less than the number of men Kim Kardashian has called a husband, it's unlikely we're letting many immigrants with Ebola into this country.

you can't stop a thing that is not actually happening.
 
then how does that gel with the fact that people in amercia aren't dropping like flies?

More than 1.2 American's currently have HIV. That's the documented cases, there are likely many more than are unaware of their infection

you can't stop a thing that is not actually happening.

You could have said the same thing at the early onset of the HIV epidemic, people weren't "dropping like flies" in America after the initial outbreak in Africa. It's about preventative measures, not waiting until it's an epidemic like HIV/AIDS to take measures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top