Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Team Up to Disrupt Health Care
Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway and JPMorgan Chase announced on Tuesday that they would form an independent health care company to serve their employees in the United States. The three companies provided few details about the new entity, other than saying it would initially focus on technology to provide simplified, high-quality health care for their employees and their families, and at a reasonable cost. They said the initiative, which is in the early planning stages, would be a long-term effort "free from profit-making incentives and constraints."
The partnership brings together three of the country's most influential companies to try to improve a system that other companies have tried and failed to change: Amazon, the largest online retailer in the world; Berkshire Hathaway, the holding company led by the billionaire investor Warren E. Buffett; and JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in the United States by assets.
Various health insurance and pharmacy companies were hit by the news:
The move sent shares of health-care stocks falling in early trading. Express Scripts Holding Co. and CVS Health Corp., which manage pharmacy benefits, slumped 6.7 percent and 5.5 percent, respectively. Health insurers Cigna Corp. and Anthem Inc. also dropped. The health-care industry has been nervously eyeing the prospect of competition from Amazon for months. While the new company created by Amazon, Berkshire and JPMorgan would be for their U.S. staff only, this is the first big move by Amazon into the industry. The new collaboration could pressure profits for middlemen in the U.S. health-care supply chain.
Related: $54 Billion Anthem-Cigna Health Insurer Merger Rejected by U.S. Judge
CVS Attempting $66 Billion Acquistion of Health Insurer Aetna
Related Stories
Two recent health insurance mergers have been blocked by judges:
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled against U.S. health insurer Anthem Inc's proposed $54 billion merger with smaller rival Cigna Corp, derailing an unprecedented effort to consolidate the country's health insurance industry.
The U.S. Justice Department sued in July to stop Anthem's purchase of Cigna, a deal that would have created the largest U.S. health insurer by membership, and Aetna Inc's planned $33 billion acquisition of Humana.
On Wednesday, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued the ruling against Anthem's deal, saying that the merger would have worsened an already highly concentrated market and was likely to raise prices.
Last month, a different U.S. judge ruled against Aetna's proposed deal for Humana.
Government antitrust officials argued that both deals would lead to less competition and higher prices for Americans. The acquisitions would have reduced the number of large national U.S. insurers from five to three.
Also at Bloomberg, The Hill, and WSJ.
Amazon Health-Care Move May Be Next 'Home Run' Like Cloud Services
Amazon.com Inc.'s foray into health care won't be the first time it has disrupted an entire industry by starting with an effort inside the company.
Amazon Chief Executive Officer Jeff Bezos is teaming up with fellow billionaires Warren Buffett and Jamie Dimon to revamp health care for the 2.4 million workers and dependents of the companies they run. The move fostered widespread speculation the trio will eventually make their approach to medical care available to companies far and wide.
Bezos has a long, increasingly successful, record of starting new businesses on a small scale, often for the benefit of his company, then spreading them to the masses -- creating a world of pain for incumbents. Consider the ways Amazon is changing industries as varied as product fulfillment, cloud computing and even the sale of cereals, fruits and vegetables.
This is just a cheap excuse to follow up on the machinations of the world's richest human:
Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase to Offer Their Own Health Care to U.S. Employees
Walmart could acquire the health insurer Humana, in a deal reminiscent of CVS's acquisition of Aetna:
Walmart Inc. is in preliminary talks to buy insurer Humana Inc., according to people familiar with the matter, a deal that would mark a dramatic shift for the retail behemoth and the latest in a recent flurry of big deals in health-care services.
It isn't clear what terms the companies may be discussing, and there is no guarantee they will strike a deal. If they do, the deal would be big: Humana currently has a market value of about $37 billion. It also would be Walmart's largest deal by far, eclipsing its 1999 acquisition of the U.K.'s Asda Group PLC for $10.8 billion. Walmart, which in addition to being the world's biggest retailer is also a major drugstore operator, has a market value of about $260 billion.
[...] Walmart has a vast pharmacy business, with locations in most of its roughly 4,700 U.S. stores and in many of it Sam's Club warehouse locations. Humana is a Medicare-focused insurer that could deepen Walmart's relationship with a key demographic—seniors—at a time when the retailer is being threatened by Amazon on several fronts.
Also at CNN.
Related: $54 Billion Anthem-Cigna Health Insurer Merger Rejected by U.S. Judge
CVS Attempting $66 Billion Acquisition of Health Insurer Aetna
Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase to Offer Their Own Health Care to U.S. Employees
Is Amazon Planning a Disruptive AWS-Like Move Into Health Care?
Amazon Prime... For Medicaid Recipients
Surgeon Atul Gawande selected as CEO of new health care company from Amazon, partners
Dr. Atul Gawande — the prominent physician, prolific writer, and all-around health care celebrity — will become the chief executive of the new health care company launched by Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase, the three companies announced Wednesday.
Gawande, a surgeon at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston who teaches at Harvard's medical and public health schools, will take charge of the new organization July 9. In a note sent to friends and colleagues, Gawande said that he is not giving up his positions at Harvard or the Brigham and that he will keep writing, including for the New Yorker. But he said he will transition from being executive director to chairman of Ariadne Labs, which works on solving problems in health systems around the world.
The new company will be based in Boston.
[...] Not much has been revealed about the new health care enterprise from the three corporate giants; in the release Wednesday, it doesn't even have a name. The new organization is meant to come up with ways to address the health care costs for the companies' employees, though its founders have indicated they hope that it comes up with solutions that could be spread across the entire U.S. health system.
Also at CNBC and TechCrunch.
Previously: Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase to Offer Their Own Health Care to U.S. Employees
Health systems representing around 500 U.S. hospitals have formed a not-for-profit pharmaceutical manufacturer called Civica Rx. The drugs will be cheap, and the CEO will not receive a paycheck:
A drugmaking venture backed by major U.S. hospitals has picked a chief executive officer, hastening the arrival of another threat to generic pharmaceutical manufacturers.
Martin VanTrieste, 58 and a former top executive at biotechnology giant Amgen Inc., will run the organization, a not-for-profit called Civica Rx. Dan Liljenquist, 44 and an Intermountain Healthcare executive, will be chairman. Health systems with a total of about 500 hospitals -- including Intermountain, HCA Healthcare Inc., Mayo Clinic and Catholic Health Initiatives -- will help govern the venture, alongside several philanthropies.
Civica Rx will work to combat drug shortages and skyrocketing prices for some treatments given in hospitals by manufacturing generics or contracting with other firms to make them. Generic drugmakers have faced scrutiny for raising the prices of certain older drugs, particularly when hospitals lack alternatives. The supply chain for such treatments has also been vulnerable to disruptions, leading to persistent shortages.
"Civica Rx will first seek to stabilize the supply of essential generic medications administered in hospitals," the group said in a statement. "The initiative will also result in lower costs and more predictable supplies of essential generic medicines."
The venture, announced by Intermountain in January, said it plans to have its first products ready by as early as next year. It's focused on a group of 14 drugs given in hospitals, but a spokesman for the group declined to identify them. Liljenquist said that the drugs are in categories such as pain relief, antipsychotics, antibiotics and cardiovascular treatments, including drugs that are stocked on so-called crash carts used in emergencies.
Also at NPR, CNBC, The Washington Post, and Forbes.
Related: The Cheerios Theory of Branded Medicine
Mylan Overcharged U.S. Government on EpiPens
Martin Shkreli Points Fingers at Other Pharmaceutical Companies
Amazon, Berkshire Hathaway, and JPMorgan Chase to Offer Their Own Health Care to U.S. Employees
Analysts Question Whether Curing Patients is a Sustainable Business Model
FDA Has Named Names of Pharma Companies Blocking Cheaper Generics [Updated]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @06:54PM (95 children)
Alternatively, how about we do what pretty much every other first world nation has done and just have single payer? Since our current system will actually cost more in the long run due to the price-gouging middle men that are for-profit insurance companies, rather than saying 'The richest country on the planet can't afford to do what much less wealthy countries have already done!', it would be more logical to say 'We can't afford not to do it.' Somehow it's acceptable for tens of thousands of people to die every year due to not being able to afford health care, but potentially having delays based on medical need is just intolerable. Rationing care based on how much money one has is fine, but doing so based on who needs it the most is terrible.
Ugh. Now continue with your regularly scheduled news program where they talk about Russia 24/7 to avoid talking about actual policy.
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:00PM (2 children)
The Soylent Plan:
1. You die
2. The Mighty Buzzard eats you
3. Capitalism works, bitch.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:37PM (1 child)
Awww, come on, people. AC's post is kinda funny. Why are moderators such party poopers? I'm gonna mod him funny - maybe someone else can go to the trouble of doing the same. I'm waiting for the quality to improve so that some of us who aren't buzzards will enjoy eating the soylent. Right now, there are to many liberals in the recipe . . .
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:36AM
...because, apparently, it was the Reactionary Capitalist Ownership Class who came up with the 8-hour day, 40-hour workweek, overtime pay, paid sick leave, paid vacations, and paid healthcare.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:14PM (26 children)
A sufficiently complex system is not amenable to Intelligent Design; worse yet, any given shape for such a system is guaranteed to become misaligned with respect to the conditions for which it initially arose—the design is guaranteed to become sub-optimal.
The only way to keep the shape of such a system aligned with dynamic conditions is to subject that system to Evolution by variation and selection, which is a process that can be completely mindless.
The philosophy of resource management that most closely aligns with evolution by variation and selection is Capitalism, where variation takes the form of supplier competition, and selection takes the form of consumer choice.
In contrast, a single-payer system would inhibit both variation (supplier competition) and selection (consumer choice), and would therefore inhibit evolution, and would therefore be doomed to become unfit for the conditions of society.
In the broader case, this is why socialist regimes always decay back into black markets, which are the most primitive form of the necessary foundation of society: Capitalism.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Immerman on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:24PM (25 children)
What you claim might come to pass *if* we were talking about socialized medicine - i.e. single-supplier healthcare. But we're not, we're talking single payer healthcare. I.e. it will only kill competition in the *insurance* marketplace - but do so by eliminating the profit motive from it.
Healthcare will still be delivered by a multitude of private corporate entities in thriving competition. The only thing removed is the insurance companies - which are parasitic by their very nature. By definition, the expected value of any insurance you buy is less than you paid - any other arrangement costs the insurance company money. If you sell something material there's a chance for wealth generation - I make pans, you need a pan, so I sell you a pan for less than it would cost you to make it yourself. Because I've specialized and can make a pan cheaper than you can, the difference in that cost is real wealth generation, and we share the benefit of it depending on where exactly the sales price falls between our respective production prices.
With financial instruments like insurance though, there is no wealth generation - Lots of people pay in, lots of benefits get paid out, and the benefits MUST be less than the payments by enough to cover administrative overhead and profits. There can be no possibility of improvement except by lowering overhead, and eliminating profit. Contrast that to healthcare itself, where there's lots of possible ways to improve the amount and quality of healthcare that can be delivered per dollar, and hence plenty of room for competition to improve things.
Heck, all you need to do is look at the current benefits-per-dollar delivered by Medicaid/Medicare, VA, etc. and we can see that government-run insurance already outperforms private insurance by a substantial margin.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:44PM (11 children)
There will always be risk, and managing that risk is a service known as "insurance".
Not everyone needs risk to be serviced in the same way; meeting the needs of various risk profiles is how insurance companies create wealth for society. Competing insurance providers create wealth by finding better ways to manage risk; as with all activities in the market, the competition between participants is actually cooperation to find the best ways to allocate resources.
Part of the problem with the insurance market of today is that governmental meddling has indeed forced insurance companies to act more like payment networks rather than risk managers. However, the problem that needs to be solved is not payment, but rather risk management, and the only way your single payer option handles that is through Tyranny, which—as already explained—will only provide a transient solution at best.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:05PM
If it weren't for that darn government and their pesky dogs!! We'd all be living the good life in anarcho-capitalist utopia!@!
For someone who seems to be intelligent you sure do make me question the dictionary.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:44PM (8 children)
I strongly disagree. Insurance creates nothing, and they produce no wealth, for society at large, nor for individuals. The insurance industry is nothing more than legalized gambling. And, as you should be aware, the house always wins. The odds are stacked in favor of the house, such that, they can afford to make a big payout on occasion, just to keep the suckers coming back for more. When GP referred to the insurance industry as parasitic, he was right on target.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:43AM (7 children)
That goes for the entire FIRE sector: Finance, Insurance, Real Estate.
They are all extractive.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:16AM (5 children)
I just bought another house. It's a disaster; the previous owner used it up for all its worth and then some, and it's falling apart and filled with unspeakable things.
I'm the person who's going to cut out the rot, replace the plumbing, upgrade the flooring, rehang doors, re-do electrical, apply new decor, and clean out the pathogens in order to revive what is otherwise a dead and useless structure; I'm the person who is going to make a livable space for someone, and I'm doing it solely for profit.
I'm providing a service to society. It's not extractive. It's productive. And, it's voluntary for everyone involved.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:30AM (4 children)
You are talking about the construction trade.
I'm talking about landlords who repeatedly increase rents without improving anything.
...and who simply BUY from builders; they add nothing.
I'm talking about people who make money when they are ASLEEP.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:38AM (3 children)
When a landlord buys from a builder, he's paying for that building—it only got built because he bought it!
What's wrong with you? How can you not perceive that?
If you're not making money while you sleep, you're a drag on society; you're wasting so much time.
Even slums are a matter of management. Many people who rent are total trash—they are worse than unruly children—and need at least a modicum of external structure. That is a service.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:58AM (2 children)
The landlord PERFORMS NO LABOR.
What he is doing is NOT productive; it is EXTRACTIVE.
He makes money WHILE HE IS ASLEEP.
In Poland, 27 percent of the residences are in housing cooperatives.
Those folks have no landlords.
In particular, no landlords who continually jack up rents while making no improvements, but instead letting things fall apart.
What -those- folks have is a superior system.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @06:37AM
Why are those dwellings falling apart?
Why don't those renters pool saved resources and buy out the landlord?
Do things right. Follow the rules of the game. Only engage in voluntary trade; that's all we ask.
When you socialists take over (again), you'll quickly find that most slumdwellers ain't your average Pole, my friend. So, being the anti-capitalists that you are, you'll try to make a New Man, like you always do, and when traditional education fails, you'll start labeling undesirables for later transport to the
gulags"re-education" centers, far out of the way of civilized people, where you'll later send those misguided fools who have dissenting opinions. Then your society will collapse under the weight of its Tyranny, and you'll beg us Capitalists to come back and save your sorry, starving asses (again).(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:54PM
Why are those dwellings falling apart?
Why don't those renters pool saved resources and buy out the landlord?
Do things right. Follow the rules of the game. Only engage in voluntary trade; that's all we ask.
When you socialists take over (again), you'll quickly find that most slumdwellers ain't your average Pole, my friend. So, being the anti-capitalists that you are, you'll try to make a New Man, like you always do, and when traditional education fails, you'll start labeling undesirables for later transport to the
gulags"re-education" centers, far out of the way of civilized people, where you'll later send those misguided fools who have dissenting opinions. Then your society will collapse under the weight of its Tyranny, and you'll beg us Capitalists to come back and save your sorry, starving asses (again).(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:27PM
I don't agree. Rental property does provide value to tenants. Landlords are responsible for maintenance. Landlords must deal with the hassle of making repairs or out sourcing them. In my area, if a property can't be used for its purpose, the landlord must pay the tenant the costs of not being able to use the property. Renting allows for flexibility. It is much easier to pack up and move when you don't have to worry about selling a property. Try selling a house in area where the main employer left town. Renting lowers startup costs for new businesses. Even renting retail space has merits. Suppose I own a chain of clothing stores. I want to open a store in an area with completely different demographics. I can buy or build a store and be on the hook for all the associated costs (interest, taxes, closing closts) and pay 2X dollars to test the market for a year or I can rent and pay 1X dollars. Buying property outright might not be the best return on capital for a growing business so renting can make sense. So with the clothing store example, by renting, I can open two new stores with a known cost of the property for the length of the lease, or open one new store with the potential for unexpected costs. Renting is great for contractors on the move a lot. Have a 6 month contract to build ABC corps ERP system? The costs of 2 real estate transactions would be more than 6 months rent; that is assuming you can sell the property the day you are done and you sell it for what you paid for it.
I agree on health insurance, but with property and auto, it protects me from being wiped out financially by a storm, mechanical failure, etc. I may never have to use that insurance, but I gladly pay less than 1% of my income to protect me from losing 10 years or more of income should I be hit with some bad luck.
Disagree with you on finance too. Paying 5 or 10 dollars to easily buy or sell securities is much better than signing over a stock certificate or traveling to an exchange. As far as advisors go, there are fee only advisors that will function as a fiduciary that are required by law to act in your best interest (not that self regulated "suitable" FINRA stuff). Banks provide me a convenient way to pay for things and transfer funds. My credit card is easily replaced if lost or stolen. Cash, not so much. Paying it off every month means I pay 0 interest. It takes me 1 minute to move $10k from my bank account to my brokerage account. Much better (and safer) than carrying a wad of hundreds to a stock exchange and signing a stack of certificates and then contacting the company I just bought to provide my contact information so they can send me reports, meeting invitations, and dividend checks by mail. Taking a loan to buy real estate can make a lot of sense when you can deduct the interest from your taxable income and invest in securities that pay a return higher than your interest rate (especially when considering the tax benefit). You benefit even more if the money goes into a tax sheltered account like an IRA.
gewg, you strike me as a an intelligent and passionate individual whose heart is in the right place. I am like that, just remember that uncontrolled passion can be blinding.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday February 01 2018, @09:39AM
And writing shitty operating systems is how Microsoft creates wealth for society?
And creating shitty insecure voting machines and cash machines is how Diebold creates wealth for society?
And selling Daraprim for $750/pill is how Turing pharmaceuticals creates wealth for society?
Are you confusing "doing business, and making a profit doing it" with "creating wealth for society". Clue - a small number of shareholders is not "society".
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Informative) by pTamok on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:55PM (1 child)
With financial instruments like insurance though, there is no wealth generation - Lots of people pay in, lots of benefits get paid out, and the benefits MUST be less than the payments by enough to cover administrative overhead and profits.
While I understand the sentiment, this is simply not true, because you are missing what the insurance company does with the premiums before they pay out claims.
They invest them.
Insurance companies are effectively mutual funds, and a proportion of their profit is made by investing the premiums received for the period before a claim is made that they pay out on. You pay your car insurance at the beginning of the coverage period. The same is true for health insurance. So all the time you don't make a claim is time the insurance company can invest the money. If insurance companies simply collected the premiums and put the cash in a big pile somewhere, and paid out claims from that pile, then what you say is true. They would simply be collectivising risk, which, while good, is not the most efficient thing they can do with the money. They use the money. They can make loans, they can buy shares, or government bonds. They can even buy revenue-generating companies, or buy commodities. Some of the money is used for administration, and some is used to buy re-insurance, to lay off their risk portfolio with other companies that specialise in this: the re-insurers [wikipedia.org], like Munich Re [wikipedia.org], Swiss-Re [wikipedia.org], Berkshire-Hathaway [wikipedia.org] (Owners of Gen Re [wikipedia.org]), and Lloyd's of London [wikipedia.org] - you may of heard of some of those.
So, your insurance premium collectivises risk, pays for administrative services, and is an investment. This is a good deal for insurance companies that calculate risk properly: they get oodles of money to invest for free. It is not for nothing that actuaries are both clever and well paid.
Bookmakers, on the other hand, don't get very much time to invest the bets that are made before they have to pay out on the winners.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:52AM
...in dirty energy.
When they get out of the Let's Add To Climate Disruption business[1] entirely and stop buying fossil fuel stocks, we'll have a starting point for a discussion.
[1] For those companies who write coverage for seaside dwellings, it's a particularly stupid business.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:46PM (1 child)
The above comment [soylentnews.org] was marked "Troll", so I'm taking the liberty of posting it again for the original AC, and I will keep doing so.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:03PM
The bot is learning how to impersonate others to continue the spam! Stop teaching it!!
(Score: 2) by slinches on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:49PM (7 children)
There is no price competition in health care. The patient who needs an emergency heart transplant can't go shop around for the best value on surgeons. Private, for profit, insurance should act as a check on prices, providing a strong negotiator on the patient's (and their own) behalf to counteract the natural monopoly present in health care. In a single payer system the government takes on that role, so the profit motive to minimize the costs isn't there. People will demand more coverage and private health care providers will gouge the government as far as the treasury allows. We'd be better off to make it all government controlled than the mix of public/private entities you are suggesting. And that's coming from someone who considers himself to be quite libertarian. I do think there's a solution that isn't a complete government takeover of healthcare, but I think that would be predominantly focused on addressing price equity and transparency with only minor modifications on insurance regulations to to help better align insurer and patient interests.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:29AM
Most people don't shop around for much of anything; they buy something, and then react.
Or, more likely, they react to the stories that other people tell them about past experiences.
This is the same with health care; there is still room for iteration.
Indeed, this is actually one of the services that an insurance company provides; it is in the self-interest of the insurance company to pay attention to these iterations, and strike deals or move resources accordingly—and you are paying the insurance company to do that research for you.
You're correct about one thing: There is no price competition.
The prices for various services are hidden, or obscured by convoluted calculations; in the U.S., figuring out the cost of even a flu shot is a bizarre experience through the bowels of the insurance system.
This is the result of governmental meddling, which has forced insurance companies to become payment networks rather than risk managers.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Immerman on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:48AM (4 children)
It could - but quite obviously it does not.
A big (probably huge) part of the problem is that in the US there is no transparent pricing structure. If you want to do something totally normal, like give birth by the book, it's basically impossible to comparison-shop among hospitals beforehand - nobody will show you any prices, and it's quite possible for the price to vary by a factor of 10 or more from one hospital tot he next.
You want to drive down prices - make medical providers list their prices up front, right on their web page and in pamphlets in the waiting area - exactly how much a typical procedure X will cost. And if they charge you more than that, they should be able to justify exactly what complications justified the increased price. Combine that with patients having to pay some small percentage of their bill out of pocket, and you can bet most will shop around.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Wednesday January 31 2018, @04:22PM (3 children)
I agree completely on price transparency. That should include "menus" for common products/procedures and defining standards of acceptable margins on monopolies like patented drugs and emergency services. Why our congresscritters don't see that (or intentionally ignore it), I really don't understand.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday January 31 2018, @05:59PM (2 children)
Seems easy enough to understand to me - bribery. Ahem, sorry, I mean "lobbying".
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday January 31 2018, @06:48PM (1 child)
Don't forget "professional courtesy"---as in lawyers and sharks.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Wednesday January 31 2018, @09:12PM
Ah, but does it flow both ways? I certainly wouldn't want to be the shark thrown into a lawyer tank to find out...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @01:20AM
Most people don't shop around for much of anything; they buy something, and then react.
Or, more likely, they react to the stories that other people tell them about past experiences.
This is the same with health care; there is still room for iteration.
Indeed, this is actually one of the services that an insurance company provides; it is in the self-interest of the insurance company to pay attention to these iterations, and strike deals or move resources accordingly—and you are paying the insurance company to do that research for you.
You're correct about one thing: There is no price competition.
The prices for various services are hidden, or obscured by convoluted calculations; in the U.S., figuring out the cost of even a flu shot is a bizarre experience through the bowels of the insurance system.
This is the result of governmental meddling, which has forced insurance companies to become payment networks rather than risk managers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:51PM
one if the major drivers for health care costs is hospitals etc. recouping costs incurred by those who can't pay by those who can pay.
Emergency rooms in the US are not allowed to refuse service. Yes there are hospitals that do discriminate admissions and transfers. but not in their emergency rooms. So they will naturally push the limits on the minimum for "stabilize the acute condition" before releasing (kicking out) the patient.
They can refuse to admit patients for further observation or care once the patient's current acute needs have been "met".
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:34PM (42 children)
Live in Canada:
My son was born 3-4 weeks early.
My wife has just been diagnosed with uterine cancer.
If we lived in the States, we'd be screwed, but because we live in Canada we are okay.
Dog bless Canada, long live Canada.
Can't imagine being American and having to worry about how we'd pay this.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 5, Funny) by DannyB on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:51PM (11 children)
Yeah, you can brag about how much better your health care is, but you don't have a president like ours!
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:06PM (8 children)
That's because our elections aren't beauty pageants! But don't worry, they're not real smart either. They'll elect another Harper soon enough. Too bad we can't just put all the yahoos from both countries on a garbage barge, send it out to sea and sink the fucker! I really don't know what stops us from doing it.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:10PM
You like the 'B' Ark, eh?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:53PM (1 child)
I don't know what would be more entertaining: sinking it, or letting them live on it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:02AM
Sounds like Reality TV.
Hey, we've got a politico with experience in that.
Maybe he could join the Canucks.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Redundant) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:55PM (4 children)
Many people are saying I'm a handsome guy, very tall (6'3"), with all my own hair. Thank you! But I think Justin is also very good looking! I love the way he looks. And he's working very hard to make Canada great again. I was ready to cancel NAFA, which has been killing our economy in the USA. He talked me out of it (we're renegotiating). You made a great choice when you elected him.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:50PM (1 child)
So, you've got the hots for Justin Beiber? Who'da thunk it.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:40PM
A lot of the boys at my boarding school were gay. I wasn't. I brought a lot of ATTRACTIVE girls there, nobody else brought girls. It was an all-boys school. Except for those girls I brought. I'm not gay. I shouldn't have to say this -- I have a beautiful wife and four beautiful children (and Theresa). But I know a handsome man when I see one. There's no shame in that. I see one every time I look in a mirror. And Justin Bieber is one. Many people say he's a big fan of mine. We invited him to play his wonderful music for our Republican Party -- his manager told us "no," the manager is a VERY NASTY Dem. We offered FIVE MILLION DOLLARS, he told us "no," very foolish guy.
But I didn't mean Justin Bieber. I meant Justin Trudeau. A lot of guys from Canada are named Justin, a lot are named Trudeau. But Justin Trudeau is the one running it now. He's their Prime Minister, it's what they have instead of a President. It's a VERY WEAK office. But he's a great guy, great smile, nice to look at, nice to talk to. And unlike Gorbachev, he keeps his appointments. They say 90% of success is showing up. The other 10% is looking fabulous. And Justin Trudeau gets 100%.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:07AM
Radio/TV presenter Thom Hartmann tells of the time his wife Louise was close enough to Trump to check that out.
She told Thom, "Bad plugs."
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 08 2018, @10:56AM
Watch Trump Board Air Force One and Accidentally Reveal How His Hair Works [alternet.org]
The style is best described as a wraparound combover
Is Donald Trump's hair real or fake? [twitter.com]
image [twimg.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Offtopic) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:37PM (1 child)
Thank you for your support! I always thought you were a Dem, a lot of Dems are starting to come around. The ones who love America, they see how hard I'm working to Make America Great Again. VERY SUCCESSFULLY! And they want to be part of that. I welcome them, I'm saving seats for them at my table. I'm very bipartisan, believe me. One Team, One People, One American Family!
Let me tell you, the Democrats' ObamaCare is imploding. Massive subsidy payments -- BAILOUTS -- to their pet insurance companies has stopped. Because I signed an Executive Order. Dems should call me to fix! And I can sign another Executive Order to end the MASSIVE BAILOUTS for Members of Congress! I'm sitting in my office in Washington, pen in hand. Pen in hand, folks. I'm making ObamaCare IMPLODE!
Our HealthCare Bill, as you know, went down in flames I worked very hard on the Repeal & Replace of ObamaCare, I call it the American Healthcare Act. Many people are calling it Trumpcare. It's a great honor, I'm very honored. But I didn't do it alone, I can't do it alone, I'd love to do it alone, I'm not a dictator. We have guys in Congress, they've been working on it for years. But it FAILED very badly because our Congress is a mess. We have some guys in our House, supposedly they're R's, the Freedom Caucus. They didn't caucus with us on that one, they caucused with the Dems. We wanted to STOP THE FUNDING for Planned Parenthood, they said that wasn't enough. They want us to go fully to the Right. So they told us "no." And the Democrats are smiling in D.C. The Freedom Caucus, with the help of Club For Growth and Heritage, have saved Planned Parenthood & Obamacare!
And our Senate is a DISASTER too. The very outdated filibuster rule must go. Republicans in the Senate will NEVER win if they don't go to a 51 vote majority NOW. They look like fools and are just wasting time. Mitch M, go to 51 Votes NOW and WIN. IT'S TIME! Republican Senators are total quitters, Repeal & Replace is not dead! Demand another vote before voting on any other bill!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:41PM
Seems like you might seriously hurt yourself repeatedly twisting your mind into "word salad, with turds and anchovies" mode.
Just saying. It is funny, because Trump is such a profoundly dysfunctional assclown, but damn. I worry about you.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:52PM
Dog bless Tommy Douglas the greatest Canadian.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:56PM (18 children)
What about those Canadians who recently had to find medicine in the States? [foxnews.com]
Anyway, your situation in the United States would be handled by your insurance. Now, it would be nice if the insurance system were simpler and cheaper, but you can blame a long history of governmental meddling for that irksome complexity.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:04PM (1 child)
FDA won't admit Tide pods are food!! It's a conspiracy!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:25AM
I buy generic laundry detergent and am not aware of what's going on with name brands, so I had to check to see if we are thinking about similar things.
Yup. [google.com]
In years past, the brand was Salvo. [google.com]
(Fist-sized tablets of detergent.)
For laundry, they were convenient.
If you were the owner of an outdoor fountain, however, in time, you could expect a salvo of Salvo tablets being thrown into it, requiring a total flush.
...and some fountains had goldfish in their pools.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by quacking duck on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:19PM (6 children)
Invalid example. A federal agency overseeing pharmaceuticals not (yet?) approving a medication in Canada is no different than the FDA prohibiting US sales of drugs that are otherwise legal in other jurisdictions.
Such as preventing cheaper prescription drugs into the US from companies that *are* licensed in Canada: Opponents of easing federal laws on drug importation, including the pharmaceutical lobby, say it could expose Americans to unsafe medicines that haven’t been vetted by U.S. regulators [morningconsult.com]
So right there we have a bunch of *capitalist* companies preventing access to medications, and enlisting the aid of government officials to enforce the ban.
A more direct counter to your post is this: FDA denies approval of muscular dystrophy drug [nhregister.com], which is fully legal and marketed "in the European Union, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Israel and South Korea"
In any event, GP is talking about health care, not pharmacare.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:47PM (4 children)
Irrelevant. Canada failed at basic medical care. End of argument over the superiority of Canada.
Enlisting men-with-guns to prevent voluntary trade is not an example of capitalism.
Indeed, that's an example of anti-capitalism; it's an example of authoritarianism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:09PM (3 children)
Spewing lies every day is a shitty way to live. My guess is you're a paid shill, otherwise you'd probably have better quality arguments.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:28PM (1 child)
I hereby declare the following reply:
"You must be a Russian troll or paid shill!"
to be the New Godwin; if you reply in such a fashion, then you automatically lose the argument.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:06PM
I hereby declare all ACs who throw tantrums about downmods and repost their screed to be losers. It is the new loser, much worse than yesteryears. Even the 80's say "at least our hair wasn't THAT bad."
(Score: 3, Informative) by DannyB on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:47PM
It's a qualification for White House Press Secretary.
You don't need better quality arguments to get paid. Again, see White House Press Secretary.
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:49PM
The above comment [soylentnews.org] was marked "Troll", and so I have reposted it here on behalf of the original AC, and I will continue to do so.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:35PM (3 children)
I love Canada. America is deeply fortunate to have a neighbor like Canada. We have before us the opportunity to build even more bridges -- bridges of co-operation and bridges of commerce. Not a wall. I would not build a wall on the Canadian border. With Canada, you're talking about a massively long piece. You're talking about a border that would be about four times longer. It would be very, very hard to do -- and it is not our biggest problem. I don't care what anyone says. It is not our big problem.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:53PM (2 children)
The maple syrup must flow.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:07PM (1 child)
Yes! Canadian maple syrup must flow!...over my boday...and have gorgeous nerdy Canadian girls licking it off of me...yes...lick it off my boday...my chest, by legs...my....
Oh, shit....where'd i put those gluten free pancakes....?
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:58AM
man up [kodiakcakes.com]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:54PM (3 children)
I'm tired of this stupid propaganda. No system is perfect. I'm sure you can find legitimate examples of things going wrong in countries with single payer systems. The point is not that single payer systems are perfect, but that they are much better than our for-profit price-gouging healthcare system. When something bad happens in a single payer system - or even if it can be spun to make it seem as though something went wrong - the corporate media never stops talking about it, but when tens of thousands of people die every year in the US due to not being able to afford healthcare... crickets.
Another comment, possibly yours too:
Some instances of things going wrong does not mean their system is not better. Try again, and this time without nirvana fallacies.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:30PM (2 children)
I think the point of this troll is to sow discord and derail conversations. It isn't about right/wrong, it is about preventing people from gaining momentum. One trollish comment and the conversation is de-railed into debunking their idiocy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:53PM (1 child)
You've almost New-Godwinned. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:01AM
So you're saying you're a neo Nazi huh? Why don't you go get another tattoo or something.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday January 31 2018, @07:04PM
That may (or may not) be true but there are many US citizens who drive, even fly, into Canada to buy prescription medications because the same drugs and insurance company's co-pays are to damn expensive.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 1) by turgid on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:09PM (5 children)
That's terrible. I feel very sorry for all of you. I hope she gets the very best care.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Insightful) by isostatic on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:36PM (3 children)
Thoughts and prayers?
If you're willing and able to spend millions you'll obviously get better health care than anyone else. What's of more interest is the typical healthcare to the typical person, and the worst healthcare you can get.
The US fails miserably in both regards.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:02AM
...while being the most expensive on the planet.
My question here would be "How soon did the Canuck medicos catch the uterine cancer?"
Getting quick, easy access is a serious hurdle in USA.
(The American Medical Association, the physicians' guild, likes to keep the number of USAian physicians low to maximize profits by limiting the number ofmedical students and medical colleges, as well as making immigrant physicians--who have been in practice for years elsewhere--jump through hoops.)
Economist Dean Baker has criticized these anti-competitive practices.
Why Don’t We Have Free Trade for Highly Paid Professionals in the US? [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [counterpunch.org]
...while in Cuba, Costa Rica, and Bolivia (places you don't think of being high on the list of "advanced"), access to medicos is easy and they get they get excellent results--both medically and monetarily--by early diagnosis and early treatment.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2, Informative) by turgid on Wednesday January 31 2018, @07:57AM (1 child)
There's not a lot I can do other than offer moral support in this situation so you will excuse me. I've been contributing to my own National Health Service through National Insurance since the age of 16. Mrs Turgid also had cancer that was cured through surgery, no chemo, on the NHS, for what it's worth. Luckily it was a very slow growing one.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Informative) by isostatic on Thursday February 01 2018, @11:12AM
Absolutely. The NHS is brilliant. For a small extra fee you can go for bupa (which when added to your share of the nhs is still way less than you'd pay in the US) if you do want fancier or quicker non-emergency care, but the minimum care provided to 99.99% in the UK is way way higher than the minimum care provided to that provided to 99.99% of the US.
There are a few people who slip through the cracks in the UK, usually mental health reasons, or misunderstanding if you're homeless (https://www.homeless.org.uk/connect/features/2017/oct/06/homelessness-and-healthcare-right-to-register), but by and large everyone is covered
(Score: 3, Informative) by Gaaark on Wednesday January 31 2018, @04:02AM
She just got the tests back, oh about 10-12 days ago and she's scheduled for surgery for Feb 27, so pretty quick. Would be happier with quicker, but happy anyways (Doctor said "if you're going to get cancer, this is the one you want": hysterectomy and it shouldn't come back, so no chemo just surgery.
Just surgery...yeah. Could be worse......
Now just gotta wait, and I hate waiting. My wifes a tough nut to break, but this is cracking her a bit.
So...less than a month of waiting, waiting. Nice thing, like I said, is we don't have to worry about where the money's going to come from. Just gotta worry about keeping my son from hurting her, lol (he's just clumsy in his movements).
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 3, Informative) by JoeMerchant on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:19PM
The Americans who make the rules, and the ones who defend the rules as they are, are well able to pay for these things because they either have better-than-average jobs with better-than-average employers which provide (barely adequate) health insurance, or they are in the top 20% wealthiest of the population and can afford private insurance - often both.
The idiots who claim to be poor and in-favor of an insurance based system that leaves them uninsured aren't explainable by ordinary logic - something about worshiping the wealthy whom they aspire to be like might start to explain their flavor of insanity. Or, maybe they're in denial that a relatively common, treatable health issue in their family could leave them choosing between bankruptcy vs. early death. Then there's the lifelong smokers' pre-disease mentality: the sooner I die the sooner this shitshow ends.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:09PM
our system is great once your in. my wife is currently on a list to see a neurologist, she have to wait one more year according to the we waiting list manager...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:48AM (1 child)
Just don't get sick in Canada if you are a US citizen. At least not according to a story told by a friend. He's from Atlanta, but was visiting Toronto for a few weeks. Due to a prior head injury, he started having balance and coordination issues, visited a Canadian emergency room. Instead of helping him, they fairly quickly figured out that he wasn't part of the Canadian health care system and they put him out on the street.
Otherwise, I've heard good things about the Canadian system -- cycling friend was hit by a truck and his broken hip was repaired very nicely. Many other success stories like that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:16AM
In another recent (meta)thread, someone mentioned that some countries who have universal healthcare have -reciprocal- agreements with other such countries as regards treating visitors.
I read a guy's article about his having a health incident in France and getting no-bullshit/no-bill care.
It seemed to me that guy was USAian. Maybe not.
I have read of folks crossing the border from Fascist Argentina into Paraguay and its socialized medical system and receiving care without identity cards or anything like that.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:37PM (4 children)
There is a high correlation between the group that cares about the Russia stuff and the group that supports Single-Payer. And neither of them are in power right now...
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:54PM (3 children)
The group in power right now want to create a new health care plan. I'm sure they aren't done trying. But they will create it eventually.
Black Sword Health Care
To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:41PM
Inspired by Stormbringer? (Michael Moorecock)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:22AM (1 child)
Congressman Alan Grayson (D-FL) [google.com] described the Republican healthcare plan thusly:
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @10:15PM
Auto-Tune the News #9 [youtube.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:01PM (14 children)
"our current system will actually cost more in the long run due to the price-gouging middle men that are for-profit insurance companies"
What percentage of health care costs do the middle-men account for? If middle-men are the problem then as health care costs have spiraled out out of control the past decade you'd see insurance company profits skyrocket by the same percentages, which they haven't.
Health care in the US is expensive because everyone wants all the latest greatest treatments with no regard to cost when someone else is paying for most/all of it. If everyone had to pay for all health care costs themselves out of pocket, prices would drop like a rock as people shopped around and chose the most cost effective solutions. Of course that doesn't work from a humanitarian standpoint for most people. In other countries bureaucrats (sometimes corrupt and/or incompetent) decide what the costs should be and what should be covered, but Americans love their freedom.
Has anyone found a good solution to healthcare that balances personal responsibility, humanitarianism, and freedom?
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:05PM
Look! They have the machine that goes 'bing'!
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:08PM (3 children)
Canada??
Love Canada.
Love it.
Jeph Jacques moved to Canada.
http://questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=3666# [questionablecontent.net]
So WE could pay for his physical problems.
Americans seeing Canada as a GOOD place to live.
God bless Canada.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Zinho on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:23PM (2 children)
Is that the link you intended? It doesn't appear to match your post...
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 2) by Zinho on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:29PM (1 child)
Never mind, I figured it out. It took me a bit to realize that the Jeph Jacques was the author of the comic you linked.
"about" page from the comic [questionablecontent.net]
"Space Exploration is not endless circles in low earth orbit." -Buzz Aldrin
(Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:23PM
Yeah, laziness hit hard. I was going to lin
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:21PM (8 children)
That solution starts with rounding up all the rent-seeking greedheads and injecting them with several random diseases each, then letting them die off and seizing their assets. Then joining the rest of the civilized world in single-payer healthcare.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:02PM (7 children)
And look at that! You've already got laudatory upmods, despite calling for the forcible transmission of disease just to meet your political ends.
Well, what else can you expect from people who explicitly reject the philosophy of voluntary trade?
It's worth noting that Fascism sprung from Marxism, when Marxist predictions failed to materialize. You gotta force in the new paradigm by hook or by crook.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:13PM (3 children)
Tongue in check is real.
At least she isn’t illogical.
Save the babies from evil abortion (unwanted babies are great for society!) so they can die in elementary to college due to gun toting kids (who probably didn’t feel loved).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:25PM (2 children)
It's only tongue-in-cheek because you say it is.
It's not even defensive in nature; it's a totally aggressive point of view.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:32PM (1 child)
Look on the bright side; any attempt to give *you* AIDS via injection would fail, either because the viruses would refuse to work on you out of professional courtesy, or they'd be so disgusted they'd kill themselves rather than remain in your body.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:08PM
AC is so bitter that your little quip gets better traction than their long diatribes.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:43AM (2 children)
Marx described an international brotherhood of workers.
"Workers of the world, unite; you have nothing to lose but your chains."
That you managed to twist that into nationalism, racism, and collusion between Oligarchical Capitalists and government shows exactly how stupid you are.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:03PM (1 child)
You can scoff at me all you want, but that doesn't change history. Fascism sprung from Marxism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @04:36PM
Doubling down on ignorance. And you wonder why people downmod you...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:03PM (1 child)
In Canada, the triage nurses assess need:you need to see a doctor right away, you are seenrightaway. If you can wait, you wait...not you have bucks you get seen now, not you have nobucks you get a doctor later...some day.
God bless Canada.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 2) by Post-Nihilist on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:35PM
that is great at treating sever problems but it suck at stopping the progression of degenerative desease when an artificially rare specialist is needed. But the problems are not with the single payer system, no, they almost all reside with the doctor's mafia. Mafia that is granted by law the power to set the number of students admitted not only in med school but in every speciality.
Be like us, be different, be a nihilist!!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday January 30 2018, @06:54PM
It's gonna rain cash in D.C., because those incumbents are not gonna take that one without a fight...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:02PM (26 children)
It starts off well, but then destroys itself:
Yes! That is the way every successful endeavor has achieved a non-Pyrrhic victory: Start small and manageable, and then build little by little into new domains.
No! Profit-making is the only reason to do anything—either an endeavor creates wealth, or it doesn't; indeed, their initial point is a matter of profit-making: They want to re-capture the overhead that gives current systems of health care such "unreasonable" costs.
One must simply assume here that these deep-pocketed capitalists are merely virtue-signalling as a matter of marketing; they know that the Zeitgeist won't allow them to admit (especially in health care) that profit is all that matters.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:09PM (4 children)
> No! Profit-making is the only reason to do anything
Which is why other civilized countries do single-payer healthcare (and many have universal coverage).
A healthy productive population is far better at paying taxes than a disease-ridden one.
Same logic applies to free schools, all the way through college.
By being the ultimate taxing power, the government is strongly incentivized to do things which indirectly generate "profit".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:21PM (3 children)
Politicians are incentivized to buy votes from people by handing out "free" goodies, despite the fact that they may well be destroying society's wealth in the process.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:30PM (2 children)
Where are my Bread and Circuses?????
(Score: 3, Touché) by fyngyrz on Wednesday January 31 2018, @12:52PM
Says right here you didn't sign up for circus insurance. So, no bread for you. Starve. It's the
AmericanRepublican Way.(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Wednesday January 31 2018, @01:59PM
Well, you can until the age of 18 or graduation from 12th grade attend school, learning everything from 2+2=4 through Calculus AP, for the cost of supplies and food, and if you can't get those they'll be gotten to you somehow. (Despite our establishment doing its damndest to not make the system universal but subsidize the children of the elite's education at different institutions).
If you are sick to a degree that you could be dying, you can walk into any Emergency Room in the country and know that you will get assessment and immediate care treatment for emergency conditions, regardless of your ability to pay. (Despite our establishment doing its damndest to sink that with for-profit urgent care centers and the like to classify emergent and urgent care conditions).
If you are hungry, there are very few semi-urban areas that do not have a place where you can have 3 subsistence meals a day at zero cost. You can also probably obtain free groceries at a food bank to cook them yourself. (Despite our establishment doing its damndest to sink that by cutting all possible forms of public aid, upping the number of people who need such services, then saying "those lazy bums need to work more!")
If you can follow a modicum of appropriate public behavior, almost every community has a building that you can enter where both entertainment and facts are available for the reading (or browsing). You can spend entire days there feeding your mind with entertainment or knowledge (or both). (I don't know how the establishment is gunning for this one, thank God!)
If someone punches you in the nose, you may call an agency in which an ambulance will come and pick you up and take you to the emergency room, regardless of your ability to pay (even if the ambulance crew feels you don't need it they must take you if you ask, and you might not get the treatment you think you want, dependent on the injury..... but if you've been stabbed or shot you'll be glad of the service if you survive). A whole bunch of other people will show up who can attempt to take the person who punched you away and lock them up so you're safe. (Despite our establishment doing its damndest to make people foot the bill for it who don't have the resources to, and take the people who have the resources and give them tax breaks. And yeah, lots of injustice happens too, but this is the ideal.)
I think those are enough for the moment. But I'm sure I can come up with more if you want.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 2) by Uncle_Al on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:11PM (8 children)
Health care didn't always work that way.
http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/24403-health-care-lets-have-people-over-profits-once-and-for-all [truth-out.org]
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Tuesday January 30 2018, @07:57PM (5 children)
Did not read link, but: research wasn't for profit at a past time: governments and universities did research and shared all findings at one time, reducing duplicate funding AND research (whether the research was Chinese, Russian American, Libyan..... research was shared world wide).
Now it is all for profit and research is duplicated and research is faked and side-affects are pooh-poohed and money is made while lives are lost and...
....profit!
Mankind suffers while personal profit gains with each life lost.
Sad.
Glad i live in Canada, not the US.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @08:09PM (4 children)
Nobody does anything unless it's profitable.
Otherwise, you'd be spending resources studying underwater basket-weaving.
If you want to see more money spent on a particular area of research, then maybe you should fight for more "private" control over the allocation of such money; it's hard to donate to such research when the government already spends that money locking people up for smoking a plant in the supposed privacy of their own homes.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:12PM
I see you've taken to using a new format, but you're still identifiable by your generally tenuous grasp of reality.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:14PM (2 children)
I guarantee you there are jobless bums who code open source software all day for zero profit. They don't get paid. They can't get paid. There's no money to be made in software because profitable private enterprise will not pay for software which can be outsourced for free to jobless bums.
You mock underwater basket-weaving; I submit to you: computer science is worthless.
Here in reality, computer science is the real underwater basket-weaving. Studying computer science is a sure guarantee of dying in poverty. Tech is a dead end field. You can thank private sector tech giants like Amazon for making it a dead end field.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:30PM
In no way did the other AC's argument depend on money.
Your problem is that you are confusing the word "profit" with "improved bank balance".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:35PM
You see? You're suggesting that the economy has produced signals alerting people that it's unprofitable to study computer science; if that's true, people will put their resources into studying other fields that seem to be more profitable.
Nobody does ANYTHING unless it's profitable. Capitalism embraces the notion that profit is in the eye of the beholder; two parties need to agree to make a trade.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday January 31 2018, @07:35PM (1 child)
Yep, here is example of great health insurance programs that got run over by Ronnie and the Rs. (That could be a good name for a rock band.)
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday January 31 2018, @07:40PM
Oops...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Cross_Blue_Shield_Association [wikipedia.org]
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:23PM (10 children)
> No! Profit-making is the only reason to do anything
This is the crux of your pathology. Money, especially fiat money, is the delusion *of* a delusion. If you truly think units of money, or even hard assets, are all that matters...i don't know what to say. That's not even immoral; that's completely a-moral, utterly divorced from reality.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:37PM
That's not even immoral; that's completely a-moral, utterly divorced from reality
No, not really. Philosophy is reality, even though it's all in peoples' heads, because people act on their beliefs, and form institutions and even wage wars over them. The reality is that the person you replied to epitomizes modern American philosophy: all that matters here is profit, nothing else, because that's how Americans believe. Call it amoral if you like, but it is part of reality, because that's how a very large number of people think.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:40PM (8 children)
In no way did the other AC's argument depend on money.
Your problem is that you are confusing the word "profit" with "improved bank balance".
Nobody does ANYTHING unless it's profitable.
Money is just one way to measure profit.
Capitalism embraces the notion that profit is in the eye of the beholder; two parties need to agree to make a trade.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday January 30 2018, @10:35PM (7 children)
We've been over this before, O Sultan of the Peoples' Republic of Dumbfuckistan: money, power, and privilege accumulate to one another, exponentially. Your no-rules utopia has no one to enforce contracts and no one to see that things remain voluntarily. Within weeks, if not days, it'd be a hellhole that makes Somalia look like mythological descriptions of Atlantis.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:09PM (6 children)
Who are arguing with? Certainly not the AC to which you replied, who never argued in favor of "no rules".
Enforcing a contract is a service; there's nothing magical about a government—there's no reason that the service provider must be a culturally revered monopoly imposed by coercion rather than agreement.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2018, @11:59PM (5 children)
What happened to you as a child? Did CPS take you away? Maybe you're Ayn Rand's secret love child with Donald Trump? How does someone like you come to exist!?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Wednesday January 31 2018, @03:49AM
Well, when a lot of damned souls in Hell hate each other very much, and the fabric of spacetime is somewhat weak, they can rip the fabric of the Calabi-Yau manifold a bit and leak into our plane.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @04:21AM (3 children)
...and, once again, it's worth mentioning to the Randians that Ayn Rand spent her last years in poverty, on Social Security and Medicare.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 31 2018, @02:10PM
That doesn't justify Social Security or governmental subsidy; that proves "self-interest".
Besides, if true (I know nothing about her), Ayn Rand undoubtedly payed into those programs, so why shouldn't she have been able to take from them? Certainly, having contributed much to the global dialog, she deserved any such resources far more than many of the resources squanderers on the dole.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Wednesday January 31 2018, @07:46PM (1 child)
At least she had guaranteed basic income and single payer health insurance. The only question is, why did she have manage to survive to 65 to get them?
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 01 2018, @12:21AM
Those "social" programs were designed to be systems that essentially forced people to save for their retirement: You pay into it throughout your productive youth, and then you get that money back in your dotage; perhaps, too, with a little means testing, it's possible manage risk throughout life, and thereby make those programs a kind of national insurance plan.
Of course, it didn't work out.
Wherever there is a pile of money, the vote-buying politicians connive to plunder it, and plunder it they did.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Tuesday January 30 2018, @09:44PM
Don't be sure. Remember Kaiser-Permaneti started off as a health plan for workers at Kaiser. (I'm not sure whether it was Kaiser Steel or Kaiser Cement, or whether it handled both of them.)
Sometimes that kind of thing fails miserably, but other times it's quite successful.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.