Obamacare has led to a increase in US death rate

[jerniebert]

So people have a lifetime of bad health habits and the side effects of said bad habits is finally coming through. Do people really expect it's supposed to be magically cleared in 2 years because of Obamacare.

It took you years to become obese and unhealthy. It will take you years to stabilize and become healthy. It doesn't happen over night. Sometimes you just run out if time.

Get healthy brehs.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

I guess this is another website I can add to the conservative list

@David_TheMan has some of the worst opinions/threads from what I can remember. Just terrible.

 

[David_TheMan]

I guess this is another website I can add to the conservative list

@David_TheMan has some of the worst opinions/threads from what I can remember. Just terrible.

libertarian isn't conservative,

 

[tru_m.a.c]

libertarian isn't conservative,

In what world?

Just cause you believe in marijuana reform

 

[hayesc0]

I cant neg @David_TheMan but will be back to do so later.

 

[David_TheMan]

In what world?

Just cause you believe in marijuana reform

In the real world.
You probably need to actually read what libertarians stand for to understand, but in terms of economic policy, foreign policy, and domestic policy and rule of law libertarians are nothing like conservatives.
But, hey you seem to be proud of your ignorance, so carry on.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

In the real world.
You probably need to actually read what libertarians stand for to understand, but in terms of economic policy, foreign policy, and domestic policy and rule of law libertarians are nothing like conservatives.
But, hey you seem to be proud of your ignorance, so carry on.

In the real world, open markets and free trade don't exists. So considering most of your views can only take place within a managed market with managed competition - ah fukk it....

You have to go above and beyond to explain how libertarians are "nothing" like conservatives, because you're not liberals.

 

[David_TheMan]

In the real world, open markets and free trade don't exists. So considering most of your views can only take place within a managed market with managed competition - ah fukk it....

You have to go above and beyond to explain how libertarians are "nothing" like conservatives, because you're not liberals.

Except in the real world open markets and free trade does exist, mainly on the local level.
We also know that when evaluated freer managed markets are better in producing for a society than unfreer markets, and can conclude as has been done since the 1800s that free trade would provide internationally, better service for the world than managed markets.

So we can disregard your claim of free trade not being feasible off the bat because your initial contention is clearly wrong in its face, of there being no practice of open markets and free trade in the world, garage sales, barter, all being examples of free trade in the real world. We can also disregard your critique as falling into the fallacious argument category close to appeal to tradition, of since its not what is used and always used it must fail.

As for libertarians not being conservatives, its easy, ideologically libertarians aren't conservatives, beliefs in government, interventionism, and economics are opposed to traditional conservative beliefs, same with neo-liberals/progressives. So libertarianism is a defined body of political belief that stands on its own, if you expect to be able to actually have an intelligent discussion on points with libertarians, it would be beneficial for you to take the time and actually ask or research what we believe.



Now if you want to learn more and ask questions or be directed to some sites that explain our ideology, let me know and I'll kindly answer questions or send links your way.

 

[tru_m.a.c]

Except in the real world open markets and free trade does exist, mainly on the local level.

No, because all markets are regulated.

We also know that when evaluated freer managed markets are better in producing for a society than unfreer markets,

unfreer b? I'm out.

 

[David_TheMan]

No, because all markets are regulated.



unfreer b? I'm out.

No all markets aren't regulated, hence the existence of grey and black markets.

Yep unfreer, if you would prefer more restrictive then use that.

That said, funny how the substance of your replies declined so quickly.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Americans' health has been deteriorating even as the provisions of the Affordable Care Act were supposed to be providing improvements.The Economic Policy Journal predicted in 2012 that “life expectancy will decline under Obamacare.” In 2009, the dean of Harvard Medical School, Jeffrey Flier, predicted that Obamacare would cost lives by harming life-saving medical innovation. In 2013, two doctors wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Obamacare is “bad for your health,” and that it would eventually have a devastating effect on medical innovation by driving down investment in medical devices.

Do you realize how dumb this argument is. Obamacare didn't even take effect until 2014, and the claim was that it would limit new "innovations", yet you're blaming it for a drop in life expectancy that was already occurred. Do you think that Obamacare somehow magically eliminated medical innovations the moment it took effect, and those innovations were going to magically be put into the market and be used to extend people's lives immediately, and that was going to happen so many places so quickly that it would immediately extend life expectancy?

No one can make the logical jumps being made in this article without being completely clueless about the entire health care system. You're basically claiming that Obamacare immediately shut down a miracle cure that was going to immediately take effect, but somehow mysteriously disappeared into thin air instead.

 

[David_TheMan]

Do you realize how dumb this argument is. Obamacare didn't even take effect until 2014, and the claim was that it would limit new "innovations", yet you're blaming it for a drop in life expectancy that was already occurred. Do you think that Obamacare somehow magically eliminated medical innovations the moment it took effect, and those innovations were going to magically be put into the market and be used to extend people's lives immediately, and that was going to happen so many places so quickly that it would immediately extend life expectancy?

No one can make the logical jumps being made in this article without being completely clueless about the entire health care system. You're basically claiming that Obamacare immediately shut down a miracle cure that was going to immediately take effect, but somehow mysteriously disappeared into thin air instead.

ACA took effect in 2010, full enactment took place last year but it started in 2010. So you have your timeline wrong off the bat.
Drop occured during the time of ACA being in effect.
The articles tell you about how it limilted medical innovation but you ignore the article that specifically says it will lead to a decline in life expectancy, and that article doesn't even base its premise on medical innovation.

Do I think obamacare eliminated medical innovation the moment it took place? No and neither do the writers of the articles that cite it, it will take time before the effects manifest and it seems like the 6 year mark going to the 7th we are seeing it.

I think the logical jumps can easily be made because they are common in systems like this, you delink any service from market feedback you get these problems. Everything so far that market medical reformers said would happen has happened. We said premiums would skyrocket, they have. We said cost of medicine would skyrocket due to locked in customer base who would pay and price of medicine has skyrocketed. There has been an increase in usage of medical infrastructure and the next step to come will be doctor shortages in certain fields due to no feedback on which services are actually in demand and waiting lists and healthcare rationing are on the horizon.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

ACA took effect in 2010, full enactment took place last year but it started in 2010. So you have your timeline wrong off the bat.
Drop occured during the time of ACA being in effect.
The articles tell you about how it limilted medical innovation but you ignore the article that specifically says it will lead to a decline in life expectancy, and that article doesn't even base its premise on medical innovation.

Do I think obamacare eliminated medical innovation the moment it took place? No and neither do the writers of the articles that cite it, it will take time before the effects manifest and it seems like the 6 year mark going to the 7th we are seeing it.

The actually serious people questioning whether Obamacare would affect innovation were saying that there were both pros and cons, and talking about the possibilities in 2012 and 2013 as things that hadn't even happened yet.

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32303/title/Obamacare-Will-Affect-Research/

Obamacare’s threat to healthcare innovation



The lag time between spending on medical innovation and payoff is ridiculous. It takes like a decade for a new drug to come to market, and at least another decade before it's going to be showing enough effects that it's target population's average lifespan increases. And you're talking like that's already happened with so many innovations that's the entire nation's life expectancy has been diminished. That's ridiculous.

The Baby Boomer generation was the fattest, most obese, coach potato generation ever, growing up in an era of high pollution, sedintary office jobs, and high-fat, high-sugar, highly-processed junk food and fast food full of all sorts of chemicals. Of course they're keeling over from heart disease and cancers and everything else the weak modern lifestyle propagates.

 

[David_TheMan]

The actually serious people questioning whether Obamacare would affect innovation were saying that there were both pros and cons, and talking about the possibilities in 2012 and 2013 as things that hadn't even happened yet.

http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32303/title/Obamacare-Will-Affect-Research/

Obamacare’s threat to healthcare innovation



The lag time between spending on medical innovation and payoff is ridiculous. It takes like a decade for a new drug to come to market, and at least another decade before it's going to be showing enough effects that it's target population's average lifespan increases. And you're talking like that's already happened with so many innovations that's the entire nation's life expectancy has been diminished. That's ridiculous.

The Baby Boomer generation was the fattest, most obese, coach potato generation ever, growing up in an era of high pollution, sedintary office jobs, and high-fat, high-sugar, highly-processed junk food and fast food full of all sorts of chemicals. Of course they're keeling over from heart disease and cancers and everything else the weak modern lifestyle propagates.

If the sole negative was on medical innovation, you might have a point, but the article talkign about increase in death rate doesn't even mention innovation.
As for the lag time, thats self imposed by the FDA and the US government.

Baby boomers and the greatest generations were fatter than previous aged, had more stationary jobs that the previous generation, and again the obesity rate was growing at a faster rate through those generations than it is currently where we are actually experienced the decline in life expectancy, so to claim those factors now seems weak, imho.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

If the sole negative was on medical innovation, you might have a point, but the article talkign about increase in death rate doesn't even mention innovation.

I just noticed you're claiming 6-7 years after effect but quoting 2015 rates. More ridiculousness - those deaths are ONE year after Obamacare started.

And your quotes are the ones that connect drop in life expectancy to less innovation. Don't run from that now. If you have a different excuse than the one listed, explain how and when.

And nice attempt at diversion with the lag times - complaining about gov to hide that my point is accurate and precedes ACA.