Comments by "whyamimrpink78" (@whyamimrpink78) on "Repealing Obamacare Will Give The Wealthy A Massive Tax Break" video.

  1. Doctors, hospitals and insurance companies do not like Obamacare. Also, several people do not like it. This guy has now clue what they are talking about.
    3
  2. Most "right wingers" have higher income. The left typically attracts the poor.
    3
  3. To me, the problems with healthcare in the US stem from the payroll tax. To highlight it I will ask two simple questions 1. Why do so many employers pay with healthcare insurance as opposed to a higher wage? 2. Why does healthcare insurance equal healthcare?
    2
  4. Jordan Muntz I come here to try to spread information and also learn myself.  I don't have time to call people names.  I actually want to learn and be informed.  In all, what I say is my opinion, and while I strongly support it and want others to hear it, I take what others have to say as well.  For example, the other person supports single payer.  I did not say it to them but I will say it to you, I have seen advantages for it and can see it working at the local level. I mentioned how insurance is for critical care and emergencies.  Single payer can work well in cases such as pregnancies and routine checkups.  A colleague from Canada told me single payer works great for basic care such as that. But for specialized care such as a knee surgery, it is terrible. That, to me does hinder economic growth as well.  So it isn't that great.  Not bad, but not great.
    2
  5. Because the democrats had their chance and failed. Also, the idea of more government is not working as most of our problems come from the federal government.
    1
  6. scruffthemagicdragon In the US when you go to get healthcare you show insurance.  You don't have to, but something like a routine checkup becomes expensive.  
    1
  7. scruffthemagicdragon You are not understanding the issue. Insurance should be if something extreme happens.  Like how car insurance covers a car accident, but not an oil change. I get health checkups every six months. My insurance pays for it.  They are not extreme or an emergency and I schedule them ahead of time. Why can't I just pay with cash?  Why does my insurance plan have to cover that?  If I paid in cash I can force doctors to negotiate and get the best deal. Instead I just walk in and have my insurance cover it not worrying about the price they set.  They could be over charging me for all I know.  That adds up leading to the high price of healthcare in our country. You make it single payer healthcare providers will just increase prices more because people will just walk in and get care, no negotiations and no care about the price. That is the issue, we don't negotiate healthcare prices so the cost goes up.  
    1
  8. Also, you have not addressed the first question.
    1
  9. scruffthemagicdragon You have to look at the first question.  Why don't employers pay with a higher wage?  To answer the second one, employers pay with insurance as opposed to a high wage thus people use insurance to cover all healthcare costs.  They don't have the option of getting a higher wage and thus forcing healthcare providers to negotiate and lower prices. Other countries control the cost of healthcare but it has led to rationing and lower quality.  They have just as many problems as the US.  https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf
    1
  10. scruffthemagicdragon They were never legally forced to begin with.  Now it is cheaper and the reason why is because of the payroll tax.  The payroll tax meant that if an employer paid a higher wage they will pay a higher tax. To avoid that they paid through benefits as benefits are not considered payroll, such as healthcare insurance.   So it is cheaper. To me that has led to problems we have now.  Instead of an employer paying  a higher wage they pay with a generic plan to their employees. If employees had a higher wage instead they could buy insurance that they need.  They can get insurance at a young age when they are healthy to avoid pre-existing conditions.  They can stick with that insurance so they can change jobs without fear of losing insurance.  They can get care for them so you don't have men paying for contraceptives or women paying for Viagra. And they can get insurance companies to compete to lower prices.  Do all of these issues sound familiar? Insurance can be used for emergency care such as an accident like car insurance is for car accidents but not oil changes. But for basic things like a pregnancy or a routine checkup people can pay for that with cash forcing healthcare providers to compete.  Much like LASIK is not covered by insurance, is elective, an has improved and has become cheaper throughout the years. The problem all comes back to, at least to me, the fact the federal government had to get involved in people's lives.  In this case it is with the payroll tax. Now with rationing, that is a problem of not enough workers in the healthcare industry.  We lack skilled workers in healthcare, but that is a different topic in itself.
    1
  11. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf There is a great book for everyone to read about healthcare. Universal healthcare is not that great.
    1
  12. Stan, a colleague of mine was from Canada and him and his family hated the Canadian healthcare system.
    1
  13. ***** And Canadians come to the US to care as well. As my colleague put it, Canada's system is great for basic checkups or if you are pregnant.  But if you need specialized care as in knee surgery, than you are screwed.  
    1
  14. ***** Not really.  
    1
  15. ***** As a whole, read the book I linked.  
    1
  16. ***** That book is written by two professors, one who is the chair of the department.  They cite peer reviewed journals that are reviewed by other professors, the same professors that will teach you if we had "free college". It was published by AEI.  But go ahead and pull a logical fallacy instead of trying to open your mind.  I am not saying the book has all the answers, I am saying it does give a different perspective in an intelligent way.  
    1
  17. Stan Taylor Fair enough.  What Robert Oshfeldt was showing is that other countries do not necessarily have better healthcare systems than the US because their results are not necessarily better.  The US provides great results.  Yes it is more expensive, but in terms of outcomes the US does, arguably have better outcomes.  There is a lot more to it than what was mentioned in the book.  The authors have said the US has problems and I agree.  I don't agree with their solutions but I do agree we can approve.  I just get tired of the same response everyone gives of how universal healthcare is better when in reality it isn't. Not saying it is bad, just saying it will not be an improvement over what we have now.
    1
  18. Stan Taylor That is the issue, do they really have better outcomes?  Also, you have to consider the economic impact.  With universal healthcare they will cater to someone who has a "life threatening" issue over someone who doesn't. But say that person who has a "life threatening" issue is not that productive in society, but they get care over someone who is.  That hinders economic growth.  For example, say I need knee surgery that is not life threatening.  I will have to wait a long time while those who have life threatening issues will get treated.  I am productive in society and having a bad knee hurts my productivity.  That means my research and teaching will be hindered. I have insurance because I am productive along with anyone else who have it.  But with universal healthcare that does not matter.  That does hinder economic growth which is one factor (of many) of why the US is more productive than a lot of countries with universal healthcare. Now it is not that simple as the issue is complicated.  But that book outlines how other countries face just as many, if not more problems than the US. On that ranking, here is what Professor Oshfeldt said " Prof. Ohsfeldt acknowledges that regression was chosen for its relative simplicity for what he called his “little book project.” And he agrees that some deaths that his book attempted to remove from the life-expectancy tables might be dependent on health-care systems. “We’re not trying to say that these are the precisely correct life-expectancy estimates,” he told me. “We’re just trying to show that there are other factors that affect life-expectancy-at-birth estimates that people quote all the time.” These factors (which could also include rates obesity and smoking, also arguably the result of lifestyle choices rather than health care) call into question the value of country rankings, especially where the difference between the leading countries is often less than a year. Prof. Ohsfeldt compared the situation to college rankings where two schools with minute differences are ranked, somewhat arbitrarily." http://blogs.wsj.com/numbers/does-the-us-lead-in-life-expectancy-223/ Which I agree.  I see all of these rankings and question them as their methods are not really clear.  The Commonweatlhfund you pointed me to is just like that.  And as professor Oshfeldt showed, when you change minor things you get different rankings in life expectancy showing how minute the differences are.  You can't say that the US has a system that is inferior to other countries when they face many problems as well.  I am not in the top 5%.  I know several people who aren't, including one who just got heart surgery.  They have never had a problem with healthcare in the US. They are all productive in society.  Now does that mean the US system is great?  No.  I feel it has flaws and stem from the federal government. Allowing the federal government to get involved more is not the answer. People need to realize that just because we have a for profit system does not mean we have a free market system.  In reality we don't, we have a for profit system with government involvement.
    1
  19. Jason, auto insurance laws are state laws, not federal. That is a big difference there. Also, if you don't buy a car you don't have to buy auto insurance. You are being forced to get health insurance just for being alive.
    1
  20. You can't micromanage like that at the federal level. Maybe at the state level, but not the federal level. The IRS can't micromanage that well. I agree with you in a way, but the best solution is to get the federal government out of healthcare.
    1
  21. How have republicans crippled Obamacare?
    1
  22. The left is delusional. The politicians are smart knowing this can lead to more government and power. The supporters aren't and all they see are free shit.
    1
  23. This guy says that doctors and hospitals like Obamacare which is not true at all.
    1
  24. PressForEarth, other countries have just as many problems with their healthcare system as the US does.
    1
  25. kurtilein3  https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf Yes they do.  Read that book, it is interesting.
    1
  26. kurtilein3 It is written by two professors, one who is the chair of their department.  it also cites peer review journals. That is why you should trust the book. But I guess it is easier to pull a logical fallacy.  
    1
  27. Why do businesses pay their employees with healthcare in the first place? Why not with a higher wage?
    1
  28. I have a lot of friends who are nurses and they hate Obamacare. This guy loves to make up shit.
    1
  29. "Well to do folks" are that way because they provided society with goods and services that no one else would offer. So they do "pitch in" for society.
    1
  30. Eazy Fashion designers don't make much money unless you are one of the elites, that is your wife's first problem.  And if she is really dedicated to her job she will push for it.  
    1
  31. One, trickle down economics is not an economic term. Next, the idea does occur though. I earn $23,000 a year and I have a smart phone, my own apartment, and my own car that is better than a car a rich person owned in the 70s. I am better off than rich people were a few decades ago. So while the rich get better, so do everyone else.
    1
  32. Money solved two problems in economics The double incident of wants problem The retention of value problem It is necessary for a functioning economy
    1
  33. https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/-the-business-of-health_110115929760.pdf Your system is not that great.
    1
  34. Jackop, what is funny is that you are citing the WHO, a completely worthless ranking. It compares a country like Malta to the US. All 50 states have a population that is larger than Malta.
    1
  35. News and information is all over the place. You just have to have the intelligence to figure out what is correct, and what it all means. This guy here on TYT is lying as is when he says that doctors and hospitals like Obamacare.
    1
  36. Edgar R You have to critically think.  Facts are facts, you can't change those.  A story of someone dying or a politician pushing for a tax increase is a fact.  After that you have to dig into multiple sources to get the full story and be open minded.  You also have to consider how someone is presenting something.  For example, this guy here does not give one citation and claims that the main reason why republicans want to repeal Obamacare is because it lowers taxes on the wealthy.  He is pushing the false narrative that republicans only support the rich which makes what he says somewhat questionable. There are multiple forms of information out there, you have to piece it all together.  
    1
  37. Barry, single payer has just as many problems as the US system has. Our problems stem from the federal government, so adding more government is not a solution. Also Army: Constitutional and federally funded Fire service: locally ran and funded and 70% of fire fighters are volunteer Police: locally ran and funded National parks: unconstitutional, should be ran by the states You need to understand how government functions in the US before you really start talking about it.
    1
  38. Barry, I love how you bring up KS but fail to mention a state like Connecticut, high taxes but economically poor.
    1
  39. So make it worse.
    1
  40. You do know that Obama lost Congress because of Obamacare.
    1