The Conservatives have a Healthcare Plan

[johnmarc]

Had the conservative party spent as much time crafting a competing healthcare plan as they have spent attempting to destroy this one, I, for one, would be more sympathetic.

Actually, they did, more than one. However, they were not allowed to give any input. What they said was ignored, stamped down, ridiculed....(shrug) and another irony is that the liberals are now commenting about the lack of conservative input, rather like the guy who took his hearing aids out so that he could shut out the noise complaining that nobody told him anything.

The Democrats don't like Obamacare any more than the Republicans. Obamacare is a Republican plan---essentially vouchers of government subsides to purchase insurance in the (for profit) market place. Democrats wanted 'Medicare for All'. However, it seems that Democrats at least respect the notion that Obamacare (or almost anything else) is better than the previous status quo.

But repeatedly, we are told that Republicans have (and have had) a different and better plan. I have looked and I have listened, but have never found the plan.

What is it? (some specifics here would be nice)

[The Me's]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Denial of evidence leads to intellectual dysfunction.

No wonder you rely on Wikipedia.

Moderator Warning



Do not make personal comments about the posters. If you have a point to make, make it about what is written, not about the writer.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

It's a waste of your time to try to run a debate forum where people are allowed to use terrible information sources and pretend they have value.

What is this world coming to when the dumbing down of society is preferred over education?

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 70 by The Me's]

Instead of accusing others of not using quality evidence. Let's just say I was wrong and I have no idea what I am talking about.

Lets focus on your claim

Can you show me the data that proves giving grants for medical research increases the cost of cancer medicine?

[The Me's]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

I have two problems with this request:

1--You mistated my claim. What I actually said was that government assistance causes inflation, and I demonstrated it with an example of Microsoft doing the same thing.

2--If you ignored the first evidence I gave, it's a waste of time giving you more. I prefer that you remain ignorant.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 72 by The Me's]

post 46

You can even trace specific types of benefits (such as grants for cancer treatment) directly to increases in prices for cancer treatments.

you did make that claim now back it up.

I also pointed out multiple times your microsoft "evidence" is not applicable to the topic at hand it is in essence comparing apples and oranges you will have to use specific data from the health care markets which you have failed to supply thus far.

Unless your whole position is a sham to troll this thread you need to supply evidence related to the topic of discussion and support your claims now support this claim

You can even trace specific types of benefits (such as grants for cancer treatment) directly to increases in prices for cancer treatments.

[The Me's]

[Replying to post 72 by The Me's]

post 46

You can even trace specific types of benefits (such as grants for cancer treatment) directly to increases in prices for cancer treatments.

you did make that claim now back it up.

I also pointed out multiple times your microsoft "evidence" is not applicable to the topic at hand it is in essence comparing apples and oranges you will have to use specific data from the health care markets which you have failed to supply thus far.

Unless your whole position is a sham to troll this thread you need to supply evidence related to the topic of discussion and support your claims now support this claim

You can even trace specific types of benefits (such as grants for cancer treatment) directly to increases in prices for cancer treatments.

It would be more honest if you didn't edit out of that post you're quoting the inconvenient context.

You're not interested in facts. Arguing is your only skill.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 74 by The Me's]

Do you mean to call me a liar then? How am I misquoting you here? What did I edit out that changed the meaning of what you said?

Just for once please provide some actual data related to the subject at hand.

[micatala]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Costs are high mostly because government assistance has been inflating prices since Woodrow Wilson.

(This is basic supply and demand.)

Medical care has a theoretical equilibrium price people are willing to pay without assistance. If you give someone $50 to help pay, that theoretical price people are willing to pay goes up $50. Medicare, Medicaid, and even veteran health care all contribute to the problem.

Evidence:

I watched this concept happen in the market place once.

About 6 years ago, Microsoft offered a rebate of $30 per share to anyone willing to buy stock. The deal was good from xx-xx-xxxx to yy-yy-yyyy (a 30-day period).

The closing price before the rebate took affect was about $58 per share. For 29 days, the stock traded at $88 per share. The day after the rebate expired, the price went down to $59 per share.

You know, I searched for any evidence that this actually occurred.

I found out that Microsoft stock has not been over 40 dollars per share for over a decade, and that the largest drop in Microsoft stock prices was nowhere close to 30 dollars.

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ ... CCgQ2AEwAA


In fact, MS stock has never been over 60 dollars a share. Where did you get this 88 dollar price?

https://www.google.com/finance?q=NASDAQ ... CCgQ2AEwAA


Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

[The Me's]

[Replying to DanieltheDragon]

Yes, I am.

Lying involves a number of different types of deception, including omission. When you take my words out of their original context and restate them, and you try to make them mean something never intended, you're creating an intentional deception.

That's what a lie is.

In my original claim, I obviously gave you a securities market example for a health care industry phenomenon. I clearly stated that this is a principle of economics, and it applies to all things that cost money in any market.

If your opinion were based on such a strong position in the real world, you wouldn't have to use sophomoric tactics like this. Opinions based on facts have a tendency to speak for themselves without your help.

[otseng]

It's a waste of your time to try to run a debate forum where people are allowed to use terrible information sources and pretend they have value.

What is this world coming to when the dumbing down of society is preferred over education?

Moderator Warning


It is a violation of the rules to publicly respond to moderator interventions.

Please review our Rules.

______________

Moderator warnings count as a strike against users. Additional violations in the future may warrant a final warning. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[DanieltheDragon]

[Replying to post 77 by The Me's]

That is not relevant to the specific claim you made. Also Mitcala pointed out that your evidence never actually happened. Considering you provided no confirming links I would be inclined to trust Mitcala on the matter. Maybe your memory is a bit foggy.

I don't see how me trying to get specific evidence for a specific claim is deceptive it appears you are just trying to deflect so you don't have to answer.