Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: KeithE

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Apr 13, 2017 5:49 am

Sandy wrote:Emergency room care cannot, in any way, be equated to access to the kind of health care that is available for those who are affluent enough to afford the insurance to get it. An ER isn't going to provide chemotherapy or radiation treatments for cancer, dialysis, surgery beyond what is required for the emergency, treatment for the underlying causes of a heart attack, or provide any medication beyond what is immediately needed. And a lot of for-profit hospitals are getting out of the ER business by simply closing them down.

I'm old enough to remember when hospitals that had the names of Christian groups on them actually belonged to those groups. You can pick up an old Texas Baptist Annual and look through the reports of the Baptist hospitals and easily discern, from the mission and purpose statements, what Baptists believed about health care because they were putting a lot of money into caring for those who had no other means of getting it. The names are still, for the most part, on the hospitals, and the for-profit companies that operate them even use them to self-identify, but the charitable care is gone. I developed a chronic atrial fibrillation from a viral infection in my late 20's, and had trouble getting health insurance. When I lived close enough to Nashville, because I was an ordained Baptist minister, I could get treatment and care at the Baptist Hospital there, until it was sold to a conglomerate that also bought the Catholic hospital. Fortunately, my doctor got me enrolled in a program at Vanderbilt and I got treatment that way, and when I moved back to Texas, got transferred into one at the UT Texas Medical Center. I would most likely be dead now if I had to depend solely on emergency room treatment.

If the way most conservative, right wing Christians want to handle health care in the US were applied to the Bible, I wonder what the price tag would have been on Lazarus' resurrection? Jesus could have made a fortune.


So when someone needs insurance and cannot afford it, who is responsible? Who do you say gets to pay the bill?
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:30 am

Jon Estes wrote:
Sandy wrote:Emergency room care cannot, in any way, be equated to access to the kind of health care that is available for those who are affluent enough to afford the insurance to get it. An ER isn't going to provide chemotherapy or radiation treatments for cancer, dialysis, surgery beyond what is required for the emergency, treatment for the underlying causes of a heart attack, or provide any medication beyond what is immediately needed. And a lot of for-profit hospitals are getting out of the ER business by simply closing them down.

I'm old enough to remember when hospitals that had the names of Christian groups on them actually belonged to those groups. You can pick up an old Texas Baptist Annual and look through the reports of the Baptist hospitals and easily discern, from the mission and purpose statements, what Baptists believed about health care because they were putting a lot of money into caring for those who had no other means of getting it. The names are still, for the most part, on the hospitals, and the for-profit companies that operate them even use them to self-identify, but the charitable care is gone. I developed a chronic atrial fibrillation from a viral infection in my late 20's, and had trouble getting health insurance. When I lived close enough to Nashville, because I was an ordained Baptist minister, I could get treatment and care at the Baptist Hospital there, until it was sold to a conglomerate that also bought the Catholic hospital. Fortunately, my doctor got me enrolled in a program at Vanderbilt and I got treatment that way, and when I moved back to Texas, got transferred into one at the UT Texas Medical Center. I would most likely be dead now if I had to depend solely on emergency room treatment.

If the way most conservative, right wing Christians want to handle health care in the US were applied to the Bible, I wonder what the price tag would have been on Lazarus' resurrection? Jesus could have made a fortune.


So when someone needs insurance and cannot afford it, who is responsible? Who do you say gets to pay the bill?


If health care is a basic human right, and I believe that's a case which can be easily made from the principle of the sanctity of human life, then it is a collective responsibility of a nation to provide it. Our current insurance and health care system considers both the health care provision and the insurance as economic commodities, which is why half of what Americans pay for health care goes to something other than health care, mainly dividends and profit margins.

You are already paying the bill for the people who go to the emergency room because they don't have insurance.

The structure is already in place to do this. Countries that have such a system, which is most of the "industrialized west", use a system of payroll deductions like our FICA tax, part of which is designated to their medical provider, whatever they call it (interesting that in Canada they call it Medicare). Then you get a card with your account number which you take with you when you go to the doctor or hospital. Of course, that eliminates insurance premiums, and since the program is based on its cost to provide services, the dollar amount of the "premium" is, in most countries, half of what it is in the US. The cost is reduced because the hospital ownership is not in the hands of corporate entities that use them to generate profits, but they operate on a cost basis, which means that things like medical research and facility improvements, which now take a back seat to dividend payments which are made off the top, would be well funded, and salaries of the medical professionals, which are also subject to the profit margin coming off the top, would go up because there would be more money available to pay them. It also doesn't take an army of clerical workers to figure out who gets paid what, and how much goes here like they do now in a system where every insurer has negotiated a different rate system with the hospital.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby JE Pettibone » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:52 am

Ed: Sandy writes " If the way most conservative, right wing Christians want to handle health care in the US were applied to the Bible, I wonder what the price tag would have been on Lazarus' resurrection? Jesus could have made a fortune."

So again Sandy, you over simplify, if Jesus was setting an example for us in your example, why then did he not heal all who where Ill. And keep in mind the cost of his resources, and that he alone paid the price.
JE Pettibone
 
Posts: 287
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 11:48 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Apr 13, 2017 8:55 am

Sandy wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
Sandy wrote:Emergency room care cannot, in any way, be equated to access to the kind of health care that is available for those who are affluent enough to afford the insurance to get it. An ER isn't going to provide chemotherapy or radiation treatments for cancer, dialysis, surgery beyond what is required for the emergency, treatment for the underlying causes of a heart attack, or provide any medication beyond what is immediately needed. And a lot of for-profit hospitals are getting out of the ER business by simply closing them down.

I'm old enough to remember when hospitals that had the names of Christian groups on them actually belonged to those groups. You can pick up an old Texas Baptist Annual and look through the reports of the Baptist hospitals and easily discern, from the mission and purpose statements, what Baptists believed about health care because they were putting a lot of money into caring for those who had no other means of getting it. The names are still, for the most part, on the hospitals, and the for-profit companies that operate them even use them to self-identify, but the charitable care is gone. I developed a chronic atrial fibrillation from a viral infection in my late 20's, and had trouble getting health insurance. When I lived close enough to Nashville, because I was an ordained Baptist minister, I could get treatment and care at the Baptist Hospital there, until it was sold to a conglomerate that also bought the Catholic hospital. Fortunately, my doctor got me enrolled in a program at Vanderbilt and I got treatment that way, and when I moved back to Texas, got transferred into one at the UT Texas Medical Center. I would most likely be dead now if I had to depend solely on emergency room treatment.

If the way most conservative, right wing Christians want to handle health care in the US were applied to the Bible, I wonder what the price tag would have been on Lazarus' resurrection? Jesus could have made a fortune.


So when someone needs insurance and cannot afford it, who is responsible? Who do you say gets to pay the bill?


If health care is a basic human right, and I believe that's a case which can be easily made from the principle of the sanctity of human life, then it is a collective responsibility of a nation to provide it. Our current insurance and health care system considers both the health care provision and the insurance as economic commodities, which is why half of what Americans pay for health care goes to something other than health care, mainly dividends and profit margins.

You are already paying the bill for the people who go to the emergency room because they don't have insurance.

The structure is already in place to do this. Countries that have such a system, which is most of the "industrialized west", use a system of payroll deductions like our FICA tax, part of which is designated to their medical provider, whatever they call it (interesting that in Canada they call it Medicare). Then you get a card with your account number which you take with you when you go to the doctor or hospital. Of course, that eliminates insurance premiums, and since the program is based on its cost to provide services, the dollar amount of the "premium" is, in most countries, half of what it is in the US. The cost is reduced because the hospital ownership is not in the hands of corporate entities that use them to generate profits, but they operate on a cost basis, which means that things like medical research and facility improvements, which now take a back seat to dividend payments which are made off the top, would be well funded, and salaries of the medical professionals, which are also subject to the profit margin coming off the top, would go up because there would be more money available to pay them. It also doesn't take an army of clerical workers to figure out who gets paid what, and how much goes here like they do now in a system where every insurer has negotiated a different rate system with the hospital.


There it is. The free market is the real enemy.

It looks good on paper, as did Obama Care did when they put it before the people.

Too many goodies showing promised which is a venomous snake ready to strike to deal with today. End of the day is arriving - Good Friday to follow and a huge Easter weekend to enjoy. All next week I will be in Tokyo so no time to speak to the many wishful thinking things your comments present.

I will say this one thing though. You begin with your escape door open so not to be caught as being responsible for such nonsense. Two little letters which are the hinge by which you can walk back such nonsense... "IF..."
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:02 am

Health care is not a free market commodity, so the free market is not the "enemy." Putting health care into that category puts a price on the ability to save a life, or relieve pain, or access care to improve the quality of life. It means that those with the means and affluence can access the best, while those who don't have those means must sacrifice what little they do have to pay for it, or suffer if they can't come up with it. And that's a morality that is exactly the same as the kind of thinking that says a baby is a mass of cells that is just part of the mother's body, and is not entitled to life if the mother decides it is an inconvenience.

It is unfortunate that most American Christians have bowed to the almighty dollar, and have allowed that to be their savior, or at least, the principle by which they live their life, and have become calloused and hardened toward those who don't share their wealth, or their opinion. The only economic model that is outlined in the scripture is the one that the Jerusalem church used in its early days, and that's not the free market. Try to preach the principles of those scriptures, and you'll find some of the most convoluted, twisted methods of interpreting scripture, and all kinds of exceptions.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Tim Bonney » Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:44 am

Jon Estes wrote:Can you tell me of any one specific citizen of the USA prior to the ACA that could not go to a hospital and get treated? Maybe you can give me one name of someone who got turned away when they told the hospital they had no insurance. Other than those hospitals who sent non-emergency patients to local and qualified clinics so the ER would not be backed up.

As far as a Christian Perspective in this discussion - why need there be one given if medical treatment is available with or without insurance.


Jon, I know a couple who the wife would have reached the cap of their insurance and would have been turned away for further treatment if ACA had not existed. They also likely would have lost everything to try to get further treatment. It was so important to them that after she recovered from prolonged surgeries etc. they testified on behalf of APA to congress during the Obama administration.

Life time cap issues are real. Pre-existing condition issues are real. And before ACA my daughter would not have been able to stay on our insurance as long as she did before she was able to find gainful employment.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Tim Bonney » Thu Apr 13, 2017 10:46 am

Sandy wrote:Health care is not a free market commodity, so the free market is not the "enemy." Putting health care into that category puts a price on the ability to save a life, or relieve pain, or access care to improve the quality of life.


The "free market" is the enemy when it becomes the god of our nation and allows human rights to be trampled on. Capitalism, while a good system when properly balanced and regulated, isn't ordained by God. :roll:
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby KeithE » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:29 am

Timothy said.
The "free market" is the enemy when it becomes the god of our nation and allows human rights to be trampled on. Capitalism, while a good system when properly balanced and regulated, isn't ordained by God. :roll:


Exactly!

An economic system gets out of control when the goal of the country is not being served. In the US that goal is to form a "more perfect union” in promoting the “common good”. Our inequality in salaries, health care, political influence, opportunity, education are all “out of control”.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
http://www.weatherly.org/discoverycenter
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8357
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:48 am

KeithE wrote:Timothy said.
The "free market" is the enemy when it becomes the god of our nation and allows human rights to be trampled on. Capitalism, while a good system when properly balanced and regulated, isn't ordained by God. :roll:


Exactly!

An economic system gets out of control when the goal of the country is not being served. In the US that goal is to form a "more perfect union” in promoting the “common good”. Our inequality in salaries, health care, political influence, opportunity, education are all “out of control”.


GO BERNIE..... :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol:

Who gets to define what a more perfect union looks like? Can I?

So who is not making enough and should be making more? The women working for HC who are not being paid equally with their male counterparts? The women working for Elizabeth Warren who are not being paid equally with their male counterparts? The list goes on and on and on...

I tell you what. Get those who scream the loudest to back up their words with their payroll and maybe then I might take such seriously. Until then. I'll stick with scripture and do the work for the amount I was hired even if others were brought in later, worked less and made the same. I might even be able to put some Bible with that one.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Tim Bonney » Thu Apr 13, 2017 11:58 am

KeithE wrote:
An economic system gets out of control when the goal of the country is not being served. In the US that goal is to form a "more perfect union” in promoting the “common good”. Our inequality in salaries, health care, political influence, opportunity, education are all “out of control”.


Agreed. When the deck is so stacked that a major portion of our citizens cannot "pursue happiness" because all they have time for it pursue survival, something is out of control.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Tim Bonney » Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:01 pm

Jon Estes wrote:
GO BERNIE..... :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol:

Who gets to define what a more perfect union looks like? Can I?

So who is not making enough and should be making more? The women working for HC who are not being paid equally with their male counterparts? The women working for Elizabeth Warren who are not being paid equally with their male counterparts? The list goes on and on and on...

I tell you what. Get those who scream the loudest to back up their words with their payroll and maybe then I might take such seriously. Until then. I'll stick with scripture and do the work for the amount I was hired even if others were brought in later, worked less and made the same. I might even be able to put some Bible with that one.


Right now Bernie would be a better President. So would John McCain, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton, and a host of other people we didn't elect. It must be killing McCain that he didn't get to be President with his level of qualifications and commitment to the country but his party and the nation elected Trump. OMG.

As to who gets to make the decision, it should be based more on the intentions of our founders. The next GOPer who claims to be a constitutional originalist is going to have to explain to me how that fits giving it all away to the Billionaires.
Tim Bonney

First UMC of Indianola, Iowa - http://indfumc.org
My Blog - http://timbonney.com
User avatar
Tim Bonney
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5520
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 10:17 am
Location: Indianola, Iowa

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 13, 2017 12:47 pm

Stick with scripture, huh?

There is no place in scripture where getting health care, which is maintaining and preserving life, is seen as an economic commodity with assigned monetary values which people must pay in order to receive it. The "Master Healer," as we often refer to Jesus, never charged for his services, nor did he ever advocate for doing so. Acts 8 contains a pretty good example, and some strong words from Peter, about what the apostles thought of exchanging money for healing. Healing arts, whether its modern medicine or miracles, is a gift from God. At least, from the perspective of the writers of scripture, it is.

I don't see much in scripture about a free market economy either. What I see is that humans are tempted to be selfish and greedy, and any economic system needs to have safeguards in place which keep an eye out for advantages that some will take over others. The rules of "free market" health care in the United States are not anywhere close to being beneficial to those who need the care, and in most cases, not even toward the medical professionals who provide it. Profiteers take advantage of people's fears, pain and desperation. It's interesting that those godless, secular, liberal Europeans recognize this, but conservative Evangelicals in America are perfectly fine with allowing the gouging on life-sustaining care and medicine go on, and happily support the politicians who let it happen.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby KeithE » Thu Apr 13, 2017 1:41 pm

Jon Estes wrote:
KeithE wrote:Timothy said.
The "free market" is the enemy when it becomes the god of our nation and allows human rights to be trampled on. Capitalism, while a good system when properly balanced and regulated, isn't ordained by God. :roll:


Exactly!

An economic system gets out of control when the goal of the country is not being served. In the US that goal is to form a "more perfect union” in promoting the “common good”. Our inequality in salaries, health care, political influence, opportunity, education are all “out of control”.


GO BERNIE..... :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol: :roll: :lol:

Who gets to define what a more perfect union looks like? Can I?

So who is not making enough and should be making more?



I say the bottom 80%. That’s the first four quintiles.
Image

This steep increase in the top 5% started deliberately with the complaints levied in Powell Memo in 1971 with its call to American Businesses to assert their rights. It’s recommendations really started to be implemented in the Reagan era and has increasingly favored the rich and the big corporations ever since. Trump is trying to accentuate that even more.

Read what Bill Moyers says about in 2012: The Powell Memo: A Call-to-Arms for Corporations

Or how the Powell Memo virtually ended Collectve Bargaining.
Informed by Data.
Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
http://www.weatherly.org/discoverycenter
User avatar
KeithE
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8357
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Fri Apr 14, 2017 5:25 am

I am correcting this post because it did not attribute who said what when.

Jon Estes asked:
So who is not making enough and should be making more?


Keith E said:
I say the bottom 80%. That’s the first four quintiles.
Image

This steep increase in the top 5% started deliberately with the complaints levied in Powell Memo in 1971 with its call to American Businesses to assert their rights. It’s recommendations really started to be implemented in the Reagan era and has increasingly favored the rich and the big corporations ever since. Trump is trying to accentuate that even more.

Read what Bill Moyers says about it in 2012: The Powell Memo: A Call-to-Arms for Corporations

Or how the Powell Memo virtually ended Collectve Bargaining.


Jon Estes then replied:
There it is... Those who make less - should make more... Those who make more - should make less. The argument always made by the people who make less.


To which Keith E replied:

There are plenty of wealthy people pointing out this growing unfairness in salaries. If your "made by the people who make less” is directed at me, you are dead wrong. I am a wealthy man (a millionaire actually) who earned salaries+perks in excess of $200K/year when I retired almost 3 years ago now - now living on much less quite comfortably.

Remember there is little collective bargaining these days; thus it is the CEOs and their handpicked BoDs who set the salaries. Powell Memo encouraged them to take the money themselves and that they are increasingly doing. That is out of control.
Image

and early signs is that Trump/GOP are set to make matters worse with tax breaks to the high incomers (seen both in the GOP ACA plan, and tax reform).

As long-term readers at BL know, I have advocated for a 100:1 limit on the CEO/Lowest worker salary ratio in any company that wants any federal fund (could be part of the “reps and certs” in any proposal). If the CEO wants more, he must pull those that are enabling his desires up as well.

Note that I am not advocating equality across the board (as you and may have lampooned) and want to maintain the incentive motive. 100:1 is enough incentive; after a point, that desire is exploitation of workers, not “freedom” to commandeer money for him(her) self. The CEO’s freedom curtails the freedom of many others to gain a livable wage and a slice of American pie.

I’m not going reply to your other sarcastic remarks at this time - my daughter is getting released from the Hospital sometime soon after a scary possibility of reverting back into paralysis. Just as well - we just do not see things alike.

I guess I inadvertently deleted the rest Jon Estes “sarcastic remarks” including side swipe at Bernie Sanders. Did not mean to do that.

Pray for my daughter - hospital just made bad mistake - will explain later in Prayer Requests.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Fri Apr 14, 2017 8:58 am

So, as Christians we have a faith that redeems us and makes us right with God, and provides spiritual influence and guidance for living with principles and precepts which come from Jesus as the Master teacher, but we can separate those principles and place them in the category of our own personal life (our business) but we shouldn't allow those principles to interfere with an open and unrestricted free market economy because if your are blessed with abundance, that must surely be a sign of God's blessing, and if you're not, well, he's just sovereign and that's the way things are. So if you are affluent enough to buy the kind of insurance at a level that allows you access to everything that can be provided, then that's a sign of God's blessing, and if you can't, well, then that's a sign of your spiritual depravity.

That seems to be the argument made here against any kind of attempt to level the playing field, and make health care reasonably accessible to everyone.

I saw a comment about "sticking to scripture" in a thread somewhere. A good, conservative, literal application of Leviticus 25 might be just the ticket.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Sun Apr 16, 2017 6:04 am

Sandy wrote:So, as Christians we have a faith that redeems us and makes us right with God, and provides spiritual influence and guidance for living with principles and precepts which come from Jesus as the Master teacher, but we can separate those principles and place them in the category of our own personal life (our business) but we shouldn't allow those principles to interfere with an open and unrestricted free market economy because if your are blessed with abundance, that must surely be a sign of God's blessing, and if you're not, well, he's just sovereign and that's the way things are. So if you are affluent enough to buy the kind of insurance at a level that allows you access to everything that can be provided, then that's a sign of God's blessing, and if you can't, well, then that's a sign of your spiritual depravity.

That seems to be the argument made here against any kind of attempt to level the playing field, and make health care reasonably accessible to everyone.

I saw a comment about "sticking to scripture" in a thread somewhere. A good, conservative, literal application of Leviticus 25 might be just the ticket.


Sign of God's Blessings??? Who is making this argument? Never mind. I see your need to attempt to shift away from the wealth men hold comes from much work... dedication to the task... ingenuity... Risk of ones won resources... Work ethic...

I believe scripture when it says it rains on the just and the unjust. I believe the scripture when it speaks of a man who does not provide for his family. IO believe the bible when it says - you don't work, you don't eat.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Sun Apr 16, 2017 10:28 pm

Jon Estes wrote:
Sandy wrote:So, as Christians we have a faith that redeems us and makes us right with God, and provides spiritual influence and guidance for living with principles and precepts which come from Jesus as the Master teacher, but we can separate those principles and place them in the category of our own personal life (our business) but we shouldn't allow those principles to interfere with an open and unrestricted free market economy because if your are blessed with abundance, that must surely be a sign of God's blessing, and if you're not, well, he's just sovereign and that's the way things are. So if you are affluent enough to buy the kind of insurance at a level that allows you access to everything that can be provided, then that's a sign of God's blessing, and if you can't, well, then that's a sign of your spiritual depravity.

That seems to be the argument made here against any kind of attempt to level the playing field, and make health care reasonably accessible to everyone.

I saw a comment about "sticking to scripture" in a thread somewhere. A good, conservative, literal application of Leviticus 25 might be just the ticket.


Sign of God's Blessings??? Who is making this argument? Never mind. I see your need to attempt to shift away from the wealth men hold comes from much work... dedication to the task... ingenuity... Risk of ones won resources... Work ethic...

I believe scripture when it says it rains on the just and the unjust. I believe the scripture when it speaks of a man who does not provide for his family. IO believe the bible when it says - you don't work, you don't eat.


So you believe that health care should be given according to what you can afford? And that those who have more money should have better health care? That's your "Biblical view"? There are many hard working Americans who can't afford health insurance. That's why there's been such an uproar over the attempt to repeal the ACA. People work hard, can't afford health insurance, get sick, and wind up bankrupt, or dead.

Health care is a basic human right, not an economic commodity. It is a sanctity of life issue, not an issue of provision. That's a position of Biblical morality.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jim » Mon Apr 17, 2017 10:46 am

K: I am a wealthy man (a millionaire actually) who earned salaries+perks in excess of $200K/year when I retired almost 3 years ago now - now living on much less quite comfortably.

I’m a blue-collar pensioner, who took a different career-path: five years of teaching school, 10 years of fulltime “church-work,” and finally a union-bargained job (railroader) that allowed me to send my kids to college…even bought a house at age 43 and paid it out in about 20 years. One church didn’t even pay SS, so I couldn’t, either. You are typical of the liberals who have “made it” and can afford to sermonize about the government being the cradle-to-the-grave guarantor of the good life. You can have anything you want with no actual sacrifice since you have plenty left after taxes to live “quite comfortably.” Despite being on the low rung, I’ve always insisted that those who can make it should do everything legal to make the most and should be able to keep it. After all, virtually the only necessities are realized by everyone – satisfying hunger, thirst and handling the elements. I wish I had made it, too, but don’t regret some choices. I believe that a Medicare-type of health-care for all administered by the insurance companies is the answer, and it will be costly. Your crowd will not have to worry because there will always be plenty left to live “quite comfortably.” The rest will continue to grind-it-out day-by-day…sorta eat cake.
Jim
 
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Tue Apr 18, 2017 9:15 am

Other than the fuzzy numbers right wing media, most of the analysis that has been done on various options for universal health care/single payer/government operated insurance and medical care proposals show most options to be much less expensive than the current per-capita cost of insurance and medical care. It's not a reinvention of the wheel, either. Medicare in this country works, the sheer volume of business that it produces ensures that it is widely accepted at the rates it negotiates. There's a model to look at and which could be expanded. Canada's program is also called Medicare, and since it works, and it is difficult for the right wing media in this country to find Canadians who are unhappy with it, you don't hear much about it. Statistically, the quality is comparable to what you find in the US, the pay for health care professionals is a little better, and the per-patient cost is about half of what it is in the US. There are plenty of other examples of successful systems in most industrialized countries.

The health care/insurance "industry" raked in over 3 trillion in 2016, while for-profit health care providers and insurance companies earned a little over 1 trillion in profit, not including "costs" that aren't directly related to medical care (administrative, construction, R & D, advertising). The profits are records under the ACA by the way, dispelling completely the myth that it is "collapsing." Theoretically, if the whole system was switched over to a single payer, government administered program, using the existing infrastructure, it would free up $1.3 trillion into the economy. A FICA payroll deduction of 3-5% would cover the remaining costs of providing care, not counting the savings in "costs".
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jim » Tue Apr 18, 2017 11:07 am

Sandy wrote:Other than the fuzzy numbers right wing media, most of the analysis that has been done on various options for universal health care/single payer/government operated insurance and medical care proposals show most options to be much less expensive than the current per-capita cost of insurance and medical care. It's not a reinvention of the wheel, either. Medicare in this country works, the sheer volume of business that it produces ensures that it is widely accepted at the rates it negotiates. There's a model to look at and which could be expanded. Canada's program is also called Medicare, and since it works, and it is difficult for the right wing media in this country to find Canadians who are unhappy with it, you don't hear much about it. Statistically, the quality is comparable to what you find in the US, the pay for health care professionals is a little better, and the per-patient cost is about half of what it is in the US. There are plenty of other examples of successful systems in most industrialized countries.

The health care/insurance "industry" raked in over 3 trillion in 2016, while for-profit health care providers and insurance companies earned a little over 1 trillion in profit, not including "costs" that aren't directly related to medical care (administrative, construction, R & D, advertising). The profits are records under the ACA by the way, dispelling completely the myth that it is "collapsing." Theoretically, if the whole system was switched over to a single payer, government administered program, using the existing infrastructure, it would free up $1.3 trillion into the economy. A FICA payroll deduction of 3-5% would cover the remaining costs of providing care, not counting the savings in "costs".


What a disappointment! You rant against the unwashed making ASSERTIONS and then provide two paragraphs of your very own. By the way, Trump won because he got a landslide electoral college, not because of any charts, graphs and far-out opinions about the smart folks voting for Hillary and the deplorables voting for Trump. That's so simple and strictly according to the U.S. Constitution's mandates. Look it up when you're not obsessing over Canada. Have you thought about moving there?
Jim
 
Posts: 3595
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 3:44 pm
Location: Lexington, Ky.

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Tue Apr 18, 2017 2:01 pm

You can google anything I've cited here. I figured you wouldn't go to MSNBC anyway.

The question facing Trump now isn't his electoral college win, or even the votes he got. It's whether he and his campaign colluded with a foreign government to do things that altered the outcome of the election, and interfered with the campaign. From what's been presented so far, the question of Russian interference has been settled with evidence that indicates they did interfere. Nor does there seem to be much doubt that there were Trump campaign officials involved, since at least three have been identified and the dollar amounts of the checks paid to at least two of them are known. If there's enough evidence, then those same constitutional provisions you point to will allow for his impeachment and removal from office by a Congress that will do it in a New York minute without looking back.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Apr 27, 2017 6:41 am

Sandy wrote:
Jon Estes wrote:
Sandy wrote:So, as Christians we have a faith that redeems us and makes us right with God, and provides spiritual influence and guidance for living with principles and precepts which come from Jesus as the Master teacher, but we can separate those principles and place them in the category of our own personal life (our business) but we shouldn't allow those principles to interfere with an open and unrestricted free market economy because if your are blessed with abundance, that must surely be a sign of God's blessing, and if you're not, well, he's just sovereign and that's the way things are. So if you are affluent enough to buy the kind of insurance at a level that allows you access to everything that can be provided, then that's a sign of God's blessing, and if you can't, well, then that's a sign of your spiritual depravity.

That seems to be the argument made here against any kind of attempt to level the playing field, and make health care reasonably accessible to everyone.

I saw a comment about "sticking to scripture" in a thread somewhere. A good, conservative, literal application of Leviticus 25 might be just the ticket.


Sign of God's Blessings??? Who is making this argument? Never mind. I see your need to attempt to shift away from the wealth men hold comes from much work... dedication to the task... ingenuity... Risk of ones won resources... Work ethic...

I believe scripture when it says it rains on the just and the unjust. I believe the scripture when it speaks of a man who does not provide for his family. IO believe the bible when it says - you don't work, you don't eat.


So you believe that health care should be given according to what you can afford? And that those who have more money should have better health care? That's your "Biblical view"? There are many hard working Americans who can't afford health insurance. That's why there's been such an uproar over the attempt to repeal the ACA. People work hard, can't afford health insurance, get sick, and wind up bankrupt, or dead.

Health care is a basic human right, not an economic commodity. It is a sanctity of life issue, not an issue of provision. That's a position of Biblical morality.


"Friend, you cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. And what one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government can't give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody. And when half of the people get the idea they don't have to work because the other half's going to take care of them, and when the other half get the idea it does no good to work because somebody's going to get what I work for. That, dear friend, is about the end of any nation."
- Adrian Rogers
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:18 am

Nice quote from Adrian, but has nothing to do with whether health care is a basic human right, or an economic commodity exchanged on the market with pain and suffering as the means of supply and demand.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Jon Estes » Thu Apr 27, 2017 10:48 am

Sandy wrote:Nice quote from Adrian, but has nothing to do with whether health care is a basic human right, or an economic commodity exchanged on the market with pain and suffering as the means of supply and demand.


Let's just say I agree that health coverage is a human right. That, in no way, means a person with the means to help should be made to help. It is not the governments place to take what is not theirs because they can just to meet the list of what someone wants to say is a basic human right. It will never end.

And the quote does fit.
Living in Dubai for that which I was purposed
User avatar
Jon Estes
 
Posts: 395
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 4:14 am

Re: Why Trump Won ... Based on Data

Postby Sandy » Thu Apr 27, 2017 12:40 pm

Well, that may be a statement that represents Adrian's opinion, or it might require interpreting specifically what is meant by "legislating the wealthy out of freedom," in order to get a clearer understanding, but since I see no scriptural corroboration, and I could come up with a very different argument by quoting scripture, I'll chalk this up to being Adrian's opinion. I still do not see what it has to do with any discussion about health care as a basic human right.

I have an idea that what you are insinuating is that any kind of universal health care proposal automatically means something which will take money from those who work, and use it to provide all kinds of benefits for those who don't. That's always the line used to disqualify or eliminate any such proposal. What we have now is a system in which those who work are tapped out in premium and health care service costs that take right at half of what we pay to cover the dividends that get paid off the top. That means that literally half of what we pay for insurance and medical care is not going toward our insurance or our medical care. I was always taught that taking someone's money without providing anything in return was stealing.

I don't see any health care plan proposals that simply ask the government to take the cost of health care out of their tax dollars, and use that to pay only for those who don't work. What I see are plans which take the massive amount of money we now overpay for health care and insurance, and either subtract it by changing the way it is administered, putting it in a single payer program, and letting the government administer it the same way they do medicare. That leaves plenty of money for the providers, especially for those trained in the medical profession, and would allow a trillion dollars a year to flow back into the economy elsewhere. The witholding "tax" would be about half of what the average person now pays in health insurance premiums, and would no longer have to include medicare tax.
Sandy
Sandy
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 5:10 pm
Location: Rural Western Pennsylvania

Previous

Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Jon Estes and 1 guest