Hospitals ripping you off

[jsherloc]

^^^ Yup, I guess we will agree to disagree. i believe emotion trumps logic in this specific scenario...as do the majority of Americans and people located in the rest of the world. and this is why i believe we will implement more "socialized" things into our current healthcare system in the very near future here in the united states. it is an inevitability i believe. and i am saddened that it has taken us this long and so many generations of people have suffered at the hands of what you call "ignorance" and "emotion-based principles" i guess? why cant our elected officials and the people at the TRUE top-tier of the intellectual spectrum so to speak be reasoning their way to insight? is this not their job? they had to arrive in authoritative positions for many reasons. of course, there is always exception, especially in the world of politics. but please dont confuse exceptions with the general reality that the masses collectively deal with day and day out.

im sorry, but you can only be so "intelligent" in this world when it comes to the xore issues of humanity that we are discussing within this thread. i am not buying the "you just don't get it man" argument. it is extremely weak with no actual proposed alternatives int his thread especially.

you guys have not once told me what you see the future of our healthcare system looking like. all you do is say that "we just don't understand". i wish we could round up all you smarty-mcsmarties here on WF and send you to DC to solve our nation's problems and healthcare system woes. you guys act like you are so ahead of the pack in terms of your viewpoint because you are oh just so "logical"...but i apologize for being the first to let you know that there IS other solutions and insights out there that are based upon emotional intelligence.

 

[jsherloc]

And a bit more to add as it truly is frustrating to be "absolutely dismissed" due to YOUR PERSONAL VIEW.

this debate played out just like offline in the real world. repubs/many independents condemn everything about the reform and dismiss/judge/label activists for the reform, yet they suggest no viable alternative solutions to the problems the people in power need to alleviate in order to better our society. very interesting indeed. people often do need emotional intelligence to effectively reason their way to insight, believe it or not.

perhaps you should send that link to the people making the decisions in our country/government, as you are and the people in that organization are clearly in "the know" on this, one of the most important issues we face in this lifetime. and those of us wanting reform, we are clearly "ignorant, emotionally-based, illogical" creatures that just want to see the downfall of America and continued handouts or something? That is where I am feeling like you are taking things here lol. i guess you ARE right then...i just don't get it.

i mean c'mon libertarian ideals are fantastic and i firmly hold many libertarian values, but these values shouldn't interfere with your ability to "feel" or "compassionately reason" in this sense, in regards to THIS specific issue, in my opinion. values and insights ARE derived from emotions in the purest sense, because we cannot interpret logic without emotions framing the outcome somewhat. especially when it comes to actual governing/societal policies that are derived FROM collective interpretations of various "reasonings". if some idea or policy was "reasoned" to fruition, rest assured there was emotion involved on all accounts.

we are emotional creatures, i hate to break it to you. even the most intelligent and logical humans out there...yup...they are emotional creatures too. not just the 12 year old girl "emoting"? kind of one of those things that makes us special as humans i guess. or so i like to believe. sometimes my faith in this kind of emotional intelligence dwindles when considering some viewpoints in this thread.

the beauty is that we all respect and value each other's rights to these opinions. it will be interesting to see how things pan out over the next few decades in terms of actual signifanct healthcare reforms versus the continuation of the status-quo. if you do have some alternative solutions to improve our current healthcare system that are entirely logical/economically sound, yet also take into account humanity and basic human "core values" such as life health and death, i'd love to hear them. and im sure many others in this thread would too. better yet, you guys should really be using your logical insights and values on capital hill if you truly believe that socialized medicine and its various forms would not benefit the people of this country longterm.

 

[guerilla]

I didn't realize people were so against a basic human right on here

It's not a basic human right. You have no right to demand medical care from anyone. To argue otherwise, is to argue for slavery. An argument that when you need something, someone must provide it. (or what?)

That's silly, and dangerous.

and put profit/economics before life and death issues.

Profit is psychological. Economics helps us understand human action. If you cannot grasp these definitions, and the implications of those definitions, then there isn't much more to discuss.

If wanting and believing that every single person in this country should be able to access affordable and quality healthcare worry-free

Doesn't the person who has to pay for, or provide the medical care having to worry? Aren't you shifting the burden from the sick person to the person providing the care?

Do you believe you have a right to demand things of other people?

There is no amount of "logic" that can explain to me why you would be for peace, yet against healthcare reform.

If you want peace, you leave people alone. If you want universal or single payer healthcare, you necessarily have to harass the people forced to provide it for others. It's really that simple.

 

[guerilla]

i mean c'mon libertarian ideals are fantastic and i firmly hold many libertarian values

Name one.

values and insights ARE derived from emotions in the purest sense, because we cannot interpret logic without emotion framing the outcome somewhat when it comes to actual governing/societal policies that are derived FROM collective interpretations.

Values and insights are derived from reason. Derived from our ability to use our cognitive process.

 

[jsherloc]

^^^ OK, so you are telling me that YOUR PERSONAL VALUES are derived entirely from reason...with no emotion involved at mentally/spiritually arriving at these firm values? are you a robot or something? i'd like to know how you do that. seriously.

you still haven't provided any substance aside from saying the status-quo and free market will eventually solve everything? is that your official viewpoint/solution in regards to this specific issue of our current healthcare system?

if so, i am telling you that there is probably a good chance you are wrong according to some of the brightest, most logical, emotionally-based minds on the planet. but like i said, i respect your right to hold these values. i just cant fathom how you arrived at them devoid of emotional constructs and guidelines that science reveals subconsciously effects everyone of your "logical" decisions. as such a champion of logic...i would think you'd recognize the role emotions play here, especially on a large enough scale. it is simple to understand.

 

[jsherloc]

and clearly where most of the disagreement begins here is that fact that you already mentioned, you don't believe it is part of your "civic responsibility" to help out our fellow citizens when it comes to HEALTHCARE. i do. i arrived at this decision through both logic and emotional constructs that were shaped by my surroundings and past experiences. i have argued that you guys are ALREADY giving your money to people that are surely demanding all kinds of worthless shit that probably doesn't hold a candle to YOUR PERSONAL VIEWS and LIBERTARIAN VALUES. this is part of being a citizen i guess in my opinion. we take the good with the bad. in my mind, THE GOOD is that the funds potentially go to actually helping someone. the bad, our money gets pissed away by lazy lowlifes, like it already does etc. for all of the shit that our country's money goes towards, i find it appalling that you guys choose to fight against life and health. in my opinion, that is basically what you are doing if you are against the public healthcare option.

 

[guerilla]

you still haven't provided any substance aside from saying the status-quo and free market will eventually solve everything?

Is the status quo a free market?

if so, i am telling you that there is probably a good chance you are wrong according to some of the brightest, most logical, emotionally-based minds on the planet.

This is called an appeal to authority. It is a logical fallacy.

 

[guerilla]

and clearly where most of the disagreement begins here is that fact that you already mentioned, you don't believe it is part of your "civic responsibility" to help out our fellow citizens when it comes to HEALTHCARE.

First, I have never claimed that. Second, where does a civic responsibility originate? Third, there is no such thing as a citizen.

i do.

Great. Go do something about it.

 

[jsherloc]

you guys also always go to these little analogies that attempt to illustrate the extremes of things: "that equates to slavery. then when you need something, i have to give it. thats just silly and dangerous" I would agree with you if we were discussing other less important issues. but this is the GRANDADDY of all in the GRAND scheme of things in my opinion. we just want affordable healthcare, and to fix a broken corrupt system that is frankly just embarrassingly pathetic, if nothing else. no one wants to steal your money in the way and words you describe it as transpiring. as i mentioned, there are some SMART people making decisions at the top. a lot of dumb ones too though i agree. it is just not quite that "dramatic" in my opinion, the whole "robbery, slavery" equation does not really mesh with my own worldview. i certainly respect your right to hold that view though.

i really do not believe the government is looking to steal from people in the way you describe, the government entity would like to assume that we COULD indeed shift our societal BURDEN to fulfull this deep need. but if you consider it to be stealing in the sense that some of your hard-earned money could potentially go to helping people in desperate need out...i guess you are correct..we don't have much to discuss. we just disagree on values and apparently on how exactly they are derived and carried out via social and fiscal policies in this country.

 

[jsherloc]

guerilla, please elaborate on what you feel we should do with healthcare in this country. please tell me why i should appeal to YOUR authority in this case? i am all eyes and ears here. frankly, i don't care how many formal logic classes you take....the people in power, the authorities, MANY are probably much much smarter (both emotionally and intellectually) than you and i and any others reading this ever will be. i guess i am just able to freely admit my own intellectual limits and am able to intelligently APPEAL to and respect a COLLECTIVE "higher" authority when it involves life health and death and related matters. you are not able to do this? i am able step outside my own constructs in this regard, perhaps you are not. such is life i guess.

where you see a "logical fallacy" i see someone that lacks basic empathy and someone that refuses to override their own ego sometimes. i see someone that is arguing blindly and pushing their own often "fearful" mentality and agendas on issues that affect all our citizens. Yet this person refuses to accept that others' collective opinions can actually be "right" or be "better" for humanity than their own personal values sometimes etc. we just differ i guess?

i just think it is sad we even have to have the debate. in my opinion models of socialized healthcare are inevitable at this point...it is just sad that we want to/have to continue to politicize things and "debate", while people are literally dying directly/indirectly due to the very thing we are debating. you could also say these people often "die" financially due our current system. you could also suggest that their own and their families hopes and dreams often "die" due to our current system. i am just curious to hear some actual answers from you in regards to what type of system YOU see working in the next few decades, and not just fancypants formal logic with condescending tones inquiring and implying that i "just don't get it".. i can whip out the old logic books from school if you'd like, but i prefer to keep the thread full of interesting viewpoints and ideas like our reality-based world. "a is sometimes true if b is sometimes true, but it can't be c if a is also false, etc"....that kind of stuff ignores the "human" element in my opinion as I mentioned. debate and logic are fun though, i agree.

 

[guerilla]

where you see a "logical fallacy" i see someone that lacks basic empathy and someone that refuses to override their own ego sometimes.

When people post logical fallacies, I see individuals who are not able to discern reality from fantasy.

To make a logical fallacy, one has to be speaking in contradictions. Anyone who claims that "feeling" makes it ok to be contradictory is beyond reason, and since my only tool is reason, beyond me.

I am done. Good night.

 

[jsherloc]

OK. So how is it a logical fallacy exactly to suggest that SOME form of socialized medicine could PROBABLY benefit our country more than harm it, just based upon classical scientific investigation into how these systems work in countries that are similar to ours? based upon the studies done on these systems over decades? based upon what the brightest minds in math/science/philosophy/philanthropy/technology/etc believe to be true? to me, it would be illogical to believe that the current system is the "best" we can do as a country. logic tells me that i should leverage the collective facts and people out there in order to come to a "reasonable" conclusion about what we need to do to change things. these people live in the same world that you do, very aware of reality.

so when i tell you that you are probably wrong in your view that the current status quo is better than socialized alternatives, i am in fact appealing to reason here in my opinion. if leveraging the collective intellectual and emotional intelligence of the brightest minds in our country to formulate an alternative path for the people in our country is simply committing a logical fallacy in your mind and thus devoid of any reasoning...i lose i guess? if the only tool you have available in this life is reason, and reason alone....i just think you are missing out on a big chunk of imo what being a human all boils down to. and imo, as i mentioned before, i feel that this issue transcends "reason" in the academic "sense" and "way" that it is being wielded around in this argument that really just centers around humanity and how we value it as a society. there is no reason to over-complicate it i feel.

 

[DanWesson]

where you see a "logical fallacy" i see someone that lacks basic empathy and someone that refuses to override their own ego sometimes. i see someone that is arguing blindly and pushing their own often "fearful" mentality and agendas on issues that affect all our citizens. Yet this person refuses to accept that others' collective opinions can actually be "right" or be "better" for humanity than their own personal values sometimes etc.

Read this back to yourself while looking in the mirror. You seem to be describing yourself here while attempting to project that onto guerilla.

It's probably best you stop posting ITT because even though there are inevitably people here who support your position, your manner of posting these masses of emotional vomit only weakens any support they could lend your "arguments".
Your...uhm..."point" has been made.

 

[Ar Scion]

I didn't pursue my discussion with guerilla because I sense we differ on our priorities. I get the feeling he puts the free market on a pedestal, while I put human well-being on a pedestal.

I feel like any impetus to participate in a market of any kind is rooted in human well being, which is the fundamental motivator as it should be.

If he doesn't prioritize human well being, we have no common ground.

 

[guerilla]

I didn't pursue my discussion with guerilla because I sense we differ on our priorities. I get the feeling he puts the free market on a pedestal, while I put human well-being on a pedestal.

I don't put anything on a pedestal. The problem with my positions (arguments) is that they require some reflection and time to communicate. I can't break them down into soundbites and one liners. Lord knows I have tried.

I feel like any impetus to participate in a market of any kind is rooted in human well being, which is the fundamental motivator as it should be.

All humans act to improve their condition, even the masochist, who seeks out opportunities to be beaten, because he prefers pain to no pain.

If he doesn't prioritize human well being, we have no common ground.

I can only prioritize my own well being, I cannot prioritize yours, and likewise.

I believe every human being places a priority on their well being, but we all define well being subjectively (uniquely) at each moment in time.

 

[jsherloc]

Read this back to yourself while looking in the mirror. You seem to be describing yourself here while attempting to project that onto guerilla.

It's probably best you stop posting ITT because even though there are inevitably people here who support your position, your manner of posting these masses of emotional vomit only weakens any support they could lend your "arguments".
Your...uhm..."point" has been made.

LOL...how about this one guys. I am speaking GENERALLY towards the opposition that I encounter regarding healthcare reform. It is incredibly easy to debate this because imo most of the time people just try to to use the same lame "reasons" why we can't have a form of socialized medicine in this country. They reply with libertarian links and exclaim that others around the globe "just don't get it". If you know something some of the brightest minds in the world don't please share with us a bit. People are literally DYING because of our faulty system, if you have alternatives that are better...SUGGEST THEM BY ALL MEANS.

Apparently, you'd prefer to stop in and basically tell someone that they should stop talking because you clearly don't agree with their point of view. Funny how THAT works. Before you do that next time, please SUGGEST AN ALTERNATIVE and contribute to the actual IDEAS within this thread. It is pretty easy to suggest that someone is wrong (we are all guilty of this i'm afraid), it is a lot more difficult to come up with a reason why YOU are CLEARLY right. That is all I ask of you. And this issue involves millions of considerations (logical/emotional) sure, but imo this should not stop others from providing their own GENERAL ideas as to how they see our healthcare system working in the near and distant future. I get the sense that you guys DO IN FACT REALIZE we are going to have socialized medicine sooner than later here, and it angers you a bit.

If I am correct, which I may not be, please discuss what you see as working here in the US so that we can begin to understand you instead of being "ignorantly" frustrated by each others' ideas. That is all I ask. My frustration arises from a failure to suggest ANYTHING else in this thread, while at the same time suggesting with absolute certainty that the system cannot be improved from a socialized angle. What do you guys KNOW that the other developed nations don't? I'm genuinely curious.

When will some of these other developed nations collapse due to their socialized programs? THAT is what you suggesting, because sure, the US here we are entirely our own animal and entirely a different country than the others. This STILL does not mean we can just dismiss socialized healthcare because we are different? lol I REALLY do think we can and will make this work over the next few decades. Again, this is my opinion that I arrived at from research and just LIVING in the world we live in. If we can kill SOME foreign citizens, we can help ALL our own citizens first and foremost. That is my point, and it is an absolute of sorts...but it reflects my GENERAL worldview in my opinion.

I have asked for concrete reasons why people feel this way when we are currently surrounded by other developed nations surpassing us (on all kinds of levels) WITH their various forms of socialized medicine. Referring the discussion to the experts around the planet is just not enough for the people against socialized medicine I guess. They just are smarter here on WF and know more about the way the world works. In fact, they are so intelligent here on WF that I really do think we must have some people here "in the know", perhaps up in DC.

I have been supplied with interesting libertarian websites that claim to know the real answers. It is interesting that the people in power and the rest of us for socialized medicine are just intellectual dwarves regarding this SPECIFIC issue I guess? We haven't uncovered all of the logic that prevents us from providing a form of socialized medicine here in this country? I and the rest of us liberals must just be BEHIND THE INTELLIGENCE CURVE lol.

I am told here that this issue has NOTHING to do with human emotion, it can only be discussed using "logic" and its academic brethren. I guess my emotions get in the way....in the way that emotions tend to do when formulating a conclusion that we'd like the rest of the world/country to view as "reasonable".

In my opinion, I think it is purely comical to believe that the current system we have now would be better than ANY proposed changes that lean in the "socialized" direction. If this is not the case IN YOUR VIEW, please answer my original questions posted throughout this discussion. What do you see the healthcare system in the united states looking like over the next few decades? If socialized medicine is just so obviously NOT going to work in your opinion/life experiences/logical guidelines/etc...then what do you see as THE ANSWER. I have given my answer in this thread, I believe we need socialized medicine in this country NOW and ANY negatives will be FAR outweighed by the positives.

I believe in discussing ideas, not people. In the quote you mentioned above though....I am explaining what I see as thin attempts to discredit myself/ideas and not answer the REAL questions CONSISTENTLY asked in this thread. I'm sorry, but as I mentioned, masking your inability to provide a GENERAL reason as to why we can't provide for more affordable healthcare in this country with "hey you're wrong buddy", and its just "emotional vomit" does not contribute to this discussion. In fact, it illustrates a juvenile pack-like mentality in my opinion. If you can explain to my why my ideas presented in this thread should be discredited and explain how they are nothing more than "emotional vomit", AND then provide your own general ideas/contributions to this thread....THEN you can feel free to discredit my ideas.

It is easy to attempt to pick holes in arguments that involve MILLIONS of considerations absolutely and we could certainly sit here and play logic games with each other all day. without providing ANY statements about where you see the future of the very thing we are discussing, it truly is hard to understand this opposing point of view. it really is. that is all i am suggesting.

 

[Ar Scion]

I don't put anything on a pedestal. The problem with my positions (arguments) is that they require some reflection and time to communicate. I can't break them down into soundbites and one liners. Lord knows I have tried.


All humans act to improve their condition, even the masochist, who seeks out opportunities to be beaten, because he prefers pain to no pain.


I can only prioritize my own well being, I cannot prioritize yours, and likewise.

I believe every human being places a priority on their well being, but we all define well being subjectively (uniquely) at each moment in time.

We agree then.

I'm eager to know how you justify regulation initiated by the free market above more socialist methods.

Caveat: I'm not advocating socialism, I'm an economic moderate, ie I believe the most effective system is capitalism with regulations. Ie, making sure private nuclear companies don't sell secrets to terrorists, FDA checking food and drugs to make sure they don't have cyanide in them, etc.

 

[jsherloc]

We agree then.

I'm eager to know how you justify regulation initiated by the free market above more socialist methods.

Caveat: I'm not advocating socialism, I'm an economic moderate, ie I believe the most effective system is capitalism with regulations. Ie, making sure private nuclear companies don't sell secrets to terrorists, FDA checking food and drugs to make sure they don't have cyanide in them, etc.

For the record, I am not advocating socialism either just in case someone thinks I am lol. and I'd say I'm an economic moderate with similar views to Ar Scion. I DO however believe that our healthcare NEEDS to be "socialized".

As I stated FROM THE VERY BEGINNING....I feel that this SPECIFIC ISSUE cannot continue to be treated with the "capitalistic free-market" mindset that the opposition claims HAS to happen. I do not buy it, and the many countries throughout the world that are instituting/have instituted some of these policies did not believe it either. For all intents and purposes, I'd say MOST of these nations are doing PRETTY swell. I bet there was a lot of opposition that told them that "it will never work like that here, its not logical we need reason and competition and all that jazz". What happened?

Funny...it IS working better in many areas than most proponents even imagined it appears. We may as well just run around willy nilly and give a big FU to human evolution if we can't as a great developed nation in 2011 provide affordable "worry-free" healthcare to our citizens. that is my general view. why have a marketplace if the people in that marketplace are worried about the costs of calling an ambulance in a medical emergency? that isn't ass-backwards to some of you on the most fundamental level? we need innovations and competition and free market to progress absolutely.....but our lives should be numero uno as we can't have any of those things without a healthy populace in the first place. i understand the worry about government being lazy because of the lack of competition, but i will take my chances with "lazyness and "slower innovation" over unregulated greed ANY day of the week.

 

[guerilla]

We agree then.

Perhaps.

I'm eager to know how you justify regulation initiated by the free market above more socialist methods.

What would I have to justify? I'm merely speaking about the profit and loss system. Winners prosper, losers lose. Socialism attempts to make losers into winners, by making winners into losers.

All socialism is redistributive. It is a zero sum game (win-lose). Only the market has the capability to yield win-win scenarios.

Caveat: I'm not advocating socialism, I'm an economic moderate, ie I believe the most effective system is capitalism with regulations. Ie, making sure private nuclear companies don't sell secrets to terrorists, FDA checking food and drugs to make sure they don't have cyanide in them, etc.

Unfortunately regulated capitalism is socialism.

Moderate economics is a strange term, as economic theories are either true or false. Economics are value free. There isn't a middle road.

 

[Ar Scion]

Perhaps.


What would I have to justify? I'm merely speaking about the profit and loss system. Winners prosper, losers lose. Socialism attempts to make losers into winners, by making winners into losers.

All socialism is redistributive. It is a zero sum game (win-lose). Only the market has the capability to yield win-win scenarios.


Unfortunately regulated capitalism is socialism.

Moderate economics is a strange term, as economic theories are either true or false. Economics are value free. There isn't a middle road.

Depends on whether we are talking in terms of abstract economic value or humanitarian value. When we bring reality into the picture it changes things too.

A win-lose situation might be tolerable it if someone loses a hundred bucks while someone else gains 20 years of life.

Likewise, despite markets guaranteeing win-win scenarios, these scenarios are entirely contingent on external variables. Both sides need to have the required goods or services to make the transaction, for example.

The bottom line is that economic variables interact with human variables. And at some point we have to assess human variables in economic terms and economic variables in human terms. This might not be accounted for by theory, but it sure as hell happens in reality.