New, Improved Obamacare Program Released On 35 Floppy Disks

Holly Sh*t, I didn't realize how much was spent on the failed website?!

Bloomberg reports $352 million of our tax dollars was spent, thus far on this website. So, we're each had to pay $100 in tax towards a website that doesn't work. But, get this, the budget is for $1 billion in awards! So, we're each paying $300! Oh, but only 50% of us pay any tax, so it's actually $200 per person up to $600 per person!

THIS is a wonderful example of the State. You think the same people who brought you Public Housing are going to fix the healthcare system!? The same people who lost the last three wars, wasting generational debt on lies like weapons of mass distraction, the same sociopaths who bailed out (and continue to bail out through QE) the crooked banking system - is going to suddenly turn a virtuous leaf and create a fair and equitable healthcare system?

Like I said, this idea you can use force to achieve a virtuous outcome is superstitious magic thinking. The State IS the new church.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Dude, that is $1 per person, not $100.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Michael, how many people live in the US? 350 million? Last I checked 350 million divided by 350 million equals one, no?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Sorry, but history shows you are insane. We had free-market medicine and it was modern for the times and it was very cheap. And guess what? Back then, people didn't have 1/1000th access to the information we have now - yet there was NO healthcare problem.

And, unlike you, I'm going to provide you with some evidence:

Historically:
How Government Solved the Health Care Crisis
Medical Insurance that Worked — Until Government "Fixed" It
by Roderick T. Long (B.A. in Philosophy Harvard University, Ph.D. Cornell University; presently American Professor of Philosophy at Auburn University)

Modern:
Free-Market medicine (or as free-market as one can legally provide in the USSA).
Surgery Center of Oklahoma

 

haha.... yes

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I said I was in a hurry!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I think we can still agree that $350,000,000 to $1,000,000,000 for a website that doesn't work, is ridiculous.

 

What's the average price for a commercial website designed to deal with millions of customers?

 

From: MotherBoard
Obamacare's Busted Site Cost More to Build Than Facebook and Twitter Combined

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

I don't think many people who have worked in the upper levels of the public sector will find this at all surprising. I'm certainly not surprised. Not even a little bit.

 

You have to think about the type of person who wants to BE a public servant. I've stated before that 1 in 25 people are thought to fall on the sociopathy spectrum - so you have that type of person. And you also will find many of these people, because they've never had to work in the free-market, never had to work WITH people, never been dependent on satisfying people, they continue to develop a classic Authoritarian attitude (which you will see in children, but most children grow out of it as they come to realize they don't know as much as they think they know - these people never actually grow out of that). Go back to the Political Spectrum Test, you'll see a lot of political leaders are Authoritarian by nature.

This is a short video of career 'public servants' in Washington doing what's in the 'public's interest' (notice they're not at all abashed at using State Force against private citizens, it doesn't even cross their mind this is immoral. Their way of thinking is quite sick. Seriously, they're stunted children in adult bodies)

Uber Wars: How D.C.Tried to Kill a Great New Ride Technology

[video=youtube;4U9tMTni9dU]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4U9tMTni9dU&feature=c4-overview&list=UU0uVZd8N7FfIZnPu0y7o95A[/video]

 

CBS Uncovers 'Serious', 'Incredibly Misleading' ObamaCare Website Price Quotes

If you want to make sense of all this, simply recall that Government ONLY distinguishes itself from all other groups of 'Citizens' in society by having one, and ONLY ONE, additional legal attribute - the obligation to initiate force against innocent Citizens. A lot of people think government is something it isn't. I think 'Democracy' sort of tricks us into thinking it's OK when an immoral action becomes 'legal'. Which is why, long ago, I made the argument the 5 men on an island and a woman washes ashore, take a vote on rape, may make rape legal - but not moral.

The key ingredients to a prosperous society are a free-market (free interaction), sound-money, law and private property rights. The role of the Government is to ensure the law is upheld, mainly the US Constitution. It's not there to regulate wage, it's not there to regulate taxi's, it's not there to regulate healthcare. ALL of these services and trades will occur if the four ingredients are in place. People WANT to trade. Kids spent 12 years of their lives and then attend University for 4-8 more years all just to offer a service and trade. That's what people do. This worry that the rich will take it all - is happening because of Government (which is why we need a fourth branch of government). It's not protecting us, it's protecting the rich. With competing currencies no one can horde currency. And this claptrap that something was tried once 150 years ago, is just that - claptrap. The same argument could have been made AGAINST the Republic (and was). It was just as illogical then as it is now.

Anyway, it looks like more fun is to come. And the babyboomers haven't even started retiring en masse - just wait till then.



As an aside, while we're quite normalized to the oppressive all encompassing government we have, I find it very interesting that this one difference (the obligation to initiate force against innocent Citizens) could allow one group of people (well call government) to grow to such a massive extent. That's quite fascinating when you stand back and look at society.

 

Another long drawn out post that's all preaching and no real thought. Also if your going to boil down my logic into syllogisms could you at least get them correct. And as usual you ignore the facts and push your ideology. Again if the free market which does exist despite your baseless claims to the contrary is so much better why do non profit and public hospitals spend less on administration and have better patient out comes? Your entire argument is predicated in the free market being better. When faced with the facts showing other wise you ignore the facts and the argue meant and pontificate.



Also I'm really getting tired with you constantly misrepresenting my arguments and lying about them to suit your needs. I have never said profit seeking is inherently bad and you have repeatedly claimed such a view point to me

 

The Obamacare exchange website was actually the work of private industry.


By the way, Michael, how can there be rule of law without the threat of force? Or property rights? Or a trustworthy currency? Hell, you can't even ensure a free market without it.

 

And you really think that matters to Michael? He'll look at his sources everything he says is just regurgitated nonsense from libertarian think tanks. Look at his link to the article by Roderick t long. He is a philosophy professor. And given his students views of him on a subpar one at that. Micheal is a crank has a very poor grasp of the subjects he likes to ramble on about.

All he knows is that the his high priests of libertarianism have said only the mighty free market can produce good things.

 

Ah, that's the nice thing about logic, and probably why Aristotle developed it - simply show how my argument is unsound.

Free-Market: A completely free market is an idealized form of a market economy where buyers and sellers are allowed to transact freely (i.e. buy/sell/trade) based on a mutual agreement on price without state intervention in the form of taxes, subsidies or regulation.

Now, lets see here. Our money is controlled by the State. There goes 50% of each and every trade. Of the 50% remaining you're going to argue the Government doesn't intervene in the form of taxes, subsidies or regulation? Give me a break. We do not live in a free market. We live in a highly-regulated market. We do not use money. We use fiat currency. These small differences - actually matter a great deal. As I said, healthcare is the second most highly regulated market, just after banking. AND it's no surprise that it's just as messed up.

Look, we do not have a free-market. So, what you're asking is in this highly State regulated market, where profit no longer functions as a proper signal, is it possible for a State-funded hospital to offer more service compared with a hospital that MUST earn a profit or go broke? I don't see why it wouldn't. If the State gave me a ton of money I'm sure I could offer better services compared with someone who had to earn each and every dollar the honest way - through voluntary trade. But, this is the thing, over time - the service that doesn't have to work for a living, degrades. Which is why you see kids graduating from school with a 47% functional illiteracy rate. It only takes a pencil and paper to learn to read and write. And those kids are in the classroom 6-8 hours a day, 5 days a week for over a decade - yet they still can not read and write.

I can tell you one thing, most Australians will NOT go to a Public Hospital if they can go to a Private Hospital. Public Hospitals are the training-grounds - you can consider yourself practice meat. And while it is true everyone starts from somewhere, that's a fact of reality, this notion that Public Hospitals are better is simply la la land fantasy. It's exactly the opposite.

So, again, there are no free-markets. None. Everything from alcohol, to taxis, to being allowed to be married is regulated by the State. Your toilet is regulated. Your toilet paper is regulated. You can't wipe your arse without violating a few regulations. AND we most certainly do not have a free-market in medicine. That's for damn sure.

 

Of course. The point is these are Public Contracts.

I once posted a threat about a bus manufacturer that was sued by the city of New York. I'll summarize the article. In short, the author was making the argument that the decade long war has helped destroy the competitiveness of US manufacturing. The reason why, is because the Pentagon awards US firms such great public contracts that there's no reason to remain competitive. And as the rest of the world (mainly Germany and Japan) have had to work for their meal, US manufacturers haven't. The example he provided was a company that makes buses for the Pentagon. They wanted to grow their business so they bid on the contract to make New York city buses and won. The delivered buses started breaking down within 12 weeks. 12 WEEKS. They were made THAT shitty. The people running the company was shocked this wasn't considered quality product - given they sell the same buses to the Pentagon.

This is what happens when there's no free market competition. And it's the reason why healthcare in the USA is so damn expensive and so crap. Could the State take total control of healthcare, bring down prices and increase services - and even do so for "free" (actually no, but you get the point)? Yes we could have hospitals where anyone at anytime can go in and be given access to any and every specialist and medical devise and test. AND over time, you'll find (just like this bus company) that the quality will become utterly crap and soon basic services will not be able to be provided. The real world places limits on services and goods. It's a simple fact of existence. The free-market is the best way to ensure those goods and services are provided to the most people. I know a thing or two about the healthcare industry, I think most people would be pretty unhappy if they truly understood how the system functions.

These are good questions.

1) When you walk into a shopping mall, you agree to an unwritten contract that you will not steal. If you do steal, mall police can arrest you. So, it's not that there's no 'threat of force' but that there's no 'initiation of force'. IOWs, if you're minding your own business, in your home, on your property, no one can arrest you.

2) Property rights. This is an area worth having a debate over. But, we can all agree we own our bodies.

3) Currency. With currency competition, you would decide which currencies you'd like to use. For example, if you chose to use gold, you can be pretty sure the price won't fluctuate against most commodities given it's relatively stable. Could a massive gold deposit be found somewhere? Sure. It'd probably be wise to use multiple types of currency. I mean, you don't really want to carry gold around (although you could use a gold-backed visa card). Money is just like anything else you buy and sell. It's price is interest. Thus, when you go to a bank, if the bank is giving you a good interest rate for your money (be it whatever it is) then you know that this money has a high value because the bank wants some of it from you. If it has a low interest rate - then it's not worth as much. It really doesn't matter if it's paper, electronic, metal - whatever. People have used seashells as money. Silk. All sorts of things can work as money. The point here is, in free-market, people can decide for themselves what they want to use. Even now, you may have an option in your bank, to place some of your money in a different currency (if you sell it and make a profit, this is called a carry trade). IMO over time, banks will become obsolete. Maybe in our own lifetimes?

4) Most international trade occurs without threat of force. Something that's more powerful than threat of force, is reputation. People and Companies are extremely protective of their reputation. AND in order to ensure their good name, they voluntarily agree to abide by the arbitration of a court that has NO ability to use force to enforce it's decision. We're talking about trillions of dollars a year worth of trade is done this way. eBay is another example of trade conducted internationally without use of force.



Lastly, as I have previously stated, raising children peacefully and to think logically would go a long ways to correcting a number of the ills in the markets/society. Further, the role of education has shifted. As it is now, most schools just pump students out like cogs - except there are no factories for them to work in. A really great growth industry IMO would be developing a curriculum with 'public' sporting schools (private would be better) combined with home or alternative education (some schooling done on-line, some in small groups - but all of it tailored to the child). In this way children would get an education suited to them and not be treated like a number. Further, studies have shown that the actual structure of public school is conducive towards creating bullying. People think the public schooling 'socializes' children - but the evidence suggests exactly the opposite is true. Children are learning NOT to be social. But to be bullies. I think anyone objectively measuring public schooling would find it to be a complete structural failure. It makes no sense to move children through 'grades' based on age and not amplitude (in only makes sense in a cog-like machine way - exactly what you'd expect from anything run by the public). Suddenly, when the 'magic' age of 17 occurs - students move off to University and this age-grade dichotomy totally disappears and they find themselves in classes with grandparents even. But, the public WANTS public school - not because of education - but because it can then act as a babysitter + parents don't have to waste their time with their children's education. It's so bad now, many parents don't even bother teaching their children how to read! Which I find basis for neglect. Lastly is the notion you can place a baby human into the care of rotating strangers from 6 weeks old to 4 years old. Studies show that children who do not have a stable parent or adult in their life during this time period fail to develop social skills properly and develop depression and anxiety disorders more frequently. Think about all the children being put on anit-depressants, even though there are NO good studies of how these drugs effect the developing human brain. Further research has suggested that while children bond closest to their mothers, they learn to act morally and compassionately from their fathers. Think about all the single mothers out there and all the children who never form a close bond with their fathers. The measured incidence of sociopathy in society has doubled over the last 15 years. I'm sure the reasons can partially be found in the above text.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Hitler finds out about Obamacare Exchange Problems

[video=youtube;e3-RKS0_NKk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3-RKS0_NKk[/video]

 

Yes, they are entitled to healthcare and should have to pay for it them own damn selves. Everyone is entitled to anything they can pay for off their own capabilities. We would not have a Healthcare crisis in this country if we had a government that wasn't strangling our industry.

 

The healthcare industry was doing the strangling dear, get your facts straight. People would be glad to pay for it themselves if the free market provided the living wages and jobs so everyone could.

 

Well that is just the point. People are not paying for it “them own damn selves” because healthcare has become unaffordable. And the reason it has become unaffordable is because of the healthcare special interests which have used their money and political power to restrict the availability of healthcare services, products and suppliers in order to enhance their pocketbooks. Our solution prior to Obamacare was to shift those costs from those who were no longer able to afford healthcare onto government and those who could still afford healthcare. That can only go on for so long before reaching a breaking point. We have reached that breaking point.

Obamacare requires everyone to pay something for their healthcare. So people, who prior to Obamacare were not paying anything for their healthcare, are now paying something for their healthcare. And Obamacare has brought 21st century process efficiencies to our healthcare system like records automation and “best practices, and paying for results and not quantity. If our healthcare industry was competitive it wouldn’t need a law requiring it to implement process efficiencies that have been implemented by every other industry in the country. Only monopolies and oligopolies can afford to ignore costs and inefficiencies.

A few years ago I was hospitalized. I had and have very good health insurance. And let me tell you, I was assaulted with tons of medical procedures…not because I needed them, but because I could afford them. Having been an emergency medical technician many years ago, I witnessed firsthand how people with healthcare insurance are treated versus those without it are treated in our healthcare system. There is a big difference. So what would you have us do…deny healthcare to those who cannot afford it….deny healthcare to elderly and the poor? Is that your solution? If you or your family are in an accident or in a medical crisis would you require them to provide proof of insurance prior to receiving medical care? Is that your solution?

 

Nice Joe, so your solution to Government is more Government.

The fact is, the AMA uses the Government to enact 'regulations' restricting services, reducing healthcare providers, and overall does all it can to prevent free-market competition. The AMA can't stop anyone from practicing medicine - only the State/Government can. What idiot thinks it requires 12 + 8 + 3 years of training to work as a GP? That's insane.

So, Joe's solution to all this Government is more Government. ObamaCare is the Babyboomers doing what they do best, stealing future-prosperity from their children and grandchildren and giving it to themselves. This is what they do, they steal as much as they can as fast as they can. Their like locust, leaving desolation in their wake.