- This topic has 10 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
Nothing is surprising anymore. Every day it is something amazing.
-
Interesting issues here…
- Why do we need our leaders to hide behind a political narrative/algorithm for health care allocation decisions. Will the approved decision rules be formally published?
- Does this suggest Obamacare is failing to provide adequate coverage to program participants?
- What social benefits are achieved from the new allocation scheme?
- Will this undermine the tenant of hard work as the preferred means to achieve one’s desired living standard?
- Why pray tell doesn’t the proposed algorithm shift the odds based on well understood risks associated with COVID infection? Wasn’t Cuomo’s nursing home faux pas sufficient to demonstrate the benefits from such an approach?
- Some political factions seek to expose law enforcement, business owners and religious organizations to strict liability for adverse outcomes resulting from COVID related decisions. Will politicians/public health officials face similar exposure should a non risk based approach increase mortality rates?
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long -
Rocky, what is your solution to the issue? A presidential order limiting the price of the drug perhaps? That seems pretty socialist too. Blue hat socialist versus a red hat socialism, seems to be where we are right now. I know, send the poor bastards another $1,000 so they can use to buy more health insurance instead of food… great idea Mr. President.
-
“Blue hat socialist versus a red hat socialism, seems to be where we are right now.”
Am I confused Roscoe? I didn’t think we were talking socialism. I thought we were talking about discrimination/affirmative action. Approaches that the nine wise souls have rightly banned as unconstitutional?
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long-
-
No, I’m not that old…I think…but am I going all Biden?
However, lets not forget that you got the first shot at correcting Rocky as to the legal issues involved here, discrimination instead of economics/socialism. You failed completely. You elected to stay off in the weeds. Accordingly I thought I’d respond to you. You are after all the lawyer, our local man of letters.
Is that so hard for you to follow. You were chasing the mirage in this thread. Be proud of yourself. You aggressively joined a debate about a misnomer. Thanks for that important contribution to the dialog here.
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long
-
-
-
-
-
RM, I believe this. No one should be preferentially treated on either end of the spectrum based on net worth, 300 years of history, race, sex or political affiliation. Start with what they propose and any group of elected officials can change the parameters of who lives or dies depending on who wins or loses an election. This is progressive madness.
-
if you really believe that no one is preferentially treated on the upper end of the net worth spectrum when it comes to health care you are just hopelessly naive. That policy is just wrong, I agree with you. Not being preferentially treated on the basis of net worth is hysterical. I am sure you are right, that never happens anywhere, anytime.
-
“if you really believe that no one is preferentially treated on the upper end of the net worth spectrum when it comes to health care you are just hopelessly naive.”
And you’re confused. What’s different with health care. It ain’t “preferential” to sell goods and services to people who can afford the bill. And for those who don’t like that resource allocation system…move to Cuba. And who do you think is treating them preferentially? Their banker who determines there are good funds in the account?
Here's a toast with one last pour, may it last forever and a minute more;
Good fortune seems to you have sung, to live and love way past long
-
-
-
Sarcasm aside, there is some preferential treatment for the very rich and always has been because they can more easily afford expensive care BUT…….once treatment preferences become institutionalized in law, we are prisoners of bureaucracy. This is only one of dozens of issues I fear under socialism.
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.