McCarthy: Democrats Must Cap Spending to Avoid US Debt Default

I have several autoimmune diseases and my outcomes were actually better than many in other countries and I didn't and don't have to go through all the same bullshit people in other countries do. No matter what you say, you're not going to talk me into wanting the socialized healthcare other countries have. I will fight it to the bitter end because I don't want our healthcare to turn into that ****.

One thing you don't realize when you read crap stats like you read is that figures from our country are averaged, meaning you take all the bad stories and average them in with the great stories to get your figures. The fact is, over half of our country, including many poor with good health insurance through their employers, have better healthcare and better outcomes than those in other countries. In other countries everyone is about roughly the same so you get an accurate figure but, in our country, you are averaging everything in which includes the outcomes of the better off with those of the worse off. I'm not giving up my great healthcare in order to make the healthcare of others better. If you want to make their's better then make their's better but don't screw me over in the process.

 

I 100% agree with what you said. My point is that they only bitch when the other side does it.

And FTR, the repubs are playing a very dangerous game here, but in the end they will approve the increase, they cannot be that dumb......or can they ?

 

All due respect, your wrong. OUTCOMES is exactly what your claiming if you get cancer. We are NOT as good as many other countries in the outcomes. Care/Technology/treatment/availability all play into outcomes. And those outcomes are better in countries with socialized medicine.

 

Your allowed to ignore facts. Thats on you. I showed you the facts, and you choose to make reasons you claimed make the study bad, wigh no basis in reality. I eagerly await your proof of your claims, but the study is the study. You can scream "MURICA" all you want, but in the end, you will still be wrong.

 

I thought you claimed to have some sort of personal experience allowing you to judge the healthcare of the first world.

If I got that mixed up, I apologize.

 

What would your plan be for increasing the capability of the screening process for our numerous overlapping programs?

 

You believe America has worse cancer outcomes than the rest of the world?

That's just not true. Americans are more likely to have comorbidities and still our healthcare system overachieves.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/...s-than-the-rest-of-the-world/?sh=762442664b67

https://www.healio.com/news/hematol...-survival-rates-remain-among-highest-in-world

 

You showed me the left's normal cherry picked facts. I explained to you how the US figures are flawed because they are an average of those doing worse and those who have better healthcare than other countries. You ignore that fact for your own bias. I'm one of the many getting better healthcare than they have in other countries and I will fight it to the end not to screw me over so that others in the US can have better healthcare. If you want to help those in the US who have worse healthcare than other countries then do it as long as it doesn't make mine worse.

 

I have literally talked to thousands around the world who have autoimmune diseases such as myself and I don't want their damn healthcare so why in the hell would I move there?

 

Why do I actually need a plan? My healthcare is better than that of other countries. Always has been for decades, even when I was poor. I don't give a crap about those with worse healthcare. If you want to help them then help them but don't screw up my healthcare in doing it.

 

OK, that pretty much sums up your view on us being a country of people working together.

 

As I clearly said, if you want to make some people's healthcare in the US better then do it. I'm all for it. Just don't go screwing up mine and making it worse in the process. So, if you can't figure that out, it means I'm fine with helping those in the US with worse healthcare than mine. I only have three criteria in doing so: don't screw mine up, don't add more money onto our national debt, and get away from the liberal notion that you're going to make the rich or businesses pay for it. But, thanks for your admission that many in the US actually do have far better healthcare than other countries do. By the way, one step would be to get rid of Obamacare. I was on it for two years and it was the most expensive and worst healthcare I have ever had in my whole life, spanning decades.

 

The World Health Organization


All due respect CornPop, but the Forbes story is one doctor from Stanford making claims with no stats or proof. The other doc is from a study in 2012-2014.

And it was mostly based on survival times. i.e US patients lived longer.

In almost every worldwide study, the US ranks very low in overall outcomes of medical treatment. It's not being used a tool to bash our system, its just a fact. It is my contention, and that of many of the studies done, that the profit motive is what drives outcomes. The most interesting aspect from one of the studies was that when you add incomes levels in the US, that poor people have much worse outcomes, and that countries with socialized medicine have better outcomes.

 

AGAIN, you make claims not based in any fact..i.e."the left's normal cheery picked facts", yet you apparently don't understand the meaning of that last word ....

Then you jumped to how you "explained" something that you have no proof of. SHOW me how those stats were derived from the study. Just show us....

 

Healthcare costs in the US are rising significantly:
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...health expenditures, US $ Billions, 1970-2020

This is true even when one considers the rise in GDP. That is, healthcare is taking an increasingly large bite out of our GDP:
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...s, U.S. dollars, PPP adjusted, 2019 and 2020 

I think one important question is where this is going to end.

Other countries have demonstrated solutions. We have not. And, I do not see ANY chance that our system, which is fundamentally based on making a profit from healthcare, is going to solve this problem.

I'm fully aware that you care about you.

But, this is an issue that has serious national importance, as our direction is not going to save rich people from carrying a large load AND from having our national debt as well as our economy impacted in increasing fashion.

 

And what was the purpose of posting what we all know about insurance and annuities?

 

Then let's get rid of Obamacare which was supposed to lower it and has totally failed.

 

Did I say it has been successful especially since Biden opened the borders?? Are you saying we should stop all efforts?

 

Those who own interest in insurance companies (and aren't the executives of those companies) have one motive - profit.

They are NOT taking poles on happiness. They are measuring profit.

Plus, these investors are mostly large investment firms. Individual shareholders who aren't executives of the company make up a tiny percent.

And, let's remember that NOT paying for healthcare of customers is one way that healthcare insurance companies keep profits up.

 

And with our depleted stockpiles, dwindling forces and a China on the fast track to becoming the superior military force and Russia trying to start WW2 and NK chomping at the bit to reunify through force we can afford to cut it on a national security basis when it is the TOP priority of the Federal Government? What should rank ahead other than meeting our debt financing obligations?

 

Few, with a brain, believe the Lying Fake News Media. McCarthy is right, if Dems don't spend past the cap it is impossible for the US to default.

 

Republicans blocked the portions of the plan that would have reduced cost.

The primary improvements of our care system were that anyone can get insurance (where insurance companies previously denied policies to those they deemed to risky), that insurance companies can not dump customers who get sick, that policy costs were controlled (again allowing risky individuals more affordable coverage), and other similar protections.

Poles at the time showed that Americans were WILDLY in favor of the policy changes our system introduced. The one they didn't like was that everybody would need to have a policy - so that has pretty much gone away. That policy was in place for ONE reason - insurance companies argued that without everyone having to buy a policy, people would simply wait until they were sick to buy a policy, making it impossible for insurance companies to stay financially viable.

 

Do you think you can have a successful company by treating all your customers crappy? One way they keep profits up is hy keeping CUSTOMERS. Without them they can't exist. I have money invested through several large investment firms you should tonic you want a nice retirement

Now how much profit is too much profit?

 

What you dodge is that there are no rational limits that must be met for defense spending, and our legislature even buys stuff that DoD doesn't want.

We need defense.

But, there is a near complete lack of control on procurement.

 

The fundamental changes to our healthcare system as designed by bipartisan committees in the House and Senate targeted insurance practices that were OUTSTANDINGLY CRAPPY.

And, insurance companies were fat and happy with those practices.