The rise of the Third-party....

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,579
30,097
1,743
Australia
#5
You had my hopes up there Steve, thought it was going to be about Johnson.
Oops. That was completely unintentional.:whistle:

I pray Johnson can get into the debates. I don't think it is likely as he will need 15% in 5 polls but that would really shake things up.
 

State

Russian Bot
A/V Subscriber
Mar 15, 2007
13,581
7,967
1,743
Working on the Railroad
#7
The same people concerned about healthcare costs are usually the same people who have no problem spending trillions of dollars to defeat an army of turban wearing Keystone Kops (and then paying for all the soldiers medical bills in those conflicts)
That's a pretty broad generalization and in-congruent with how I've viewed most of your positions. I'm not a fan of either, but health care spending is the elephant in the living room. 832 billion annually vs a total about about 1 trillion spent over the last 10 years on the wars and the wars are coming to an end while health care spending is still growing.
 
Dec 29, 2008
1,979
778
743
Stillwater
#8
That's a pretty broad generalization and in-congruent with how I've viewed most of your positions. I'm not a fan of either, but health care spending is the elephant in the living room. 832 billion annually vs a total about about 1 trillion spent over the last 10 years on the wars and the wars are coming to an end while health care spending is still growing.
Yes health care is bloated and needs to be trimmed but if we talked about priorities the problem I have is I would rather the money be spent on our own people for health care than a backwards country that will never be able to sustain its own backwards government.
 
Aug 19, 2006
1,497
255
1,713
Springfield, MO
#10
That's a pretty broad generalization and in-congruent with how I've viewed most of your positions. I'm not a fan of either, but health care spending is the elephant in the living room. 832 billion annually vs a total about about 1 trillion spent over the last 10 years on the wars and the wars are coming to an end while health care spending is still growing.
Firstly, your figure seems to be grossly underestimated as a Brown University study showed the costs to be near $4 trillion with an estimated $1 trillion due to veterans until 2050. Keep in mind, that's if these wars end and we don't start any others--as if the nearly quarter million dead and counting won't come back to haunt us...

Compounding that figure is this year's $670 billion NDAA spending bill which comes up annually. When you add it all together, the warmongering is placing us into staggering debt. It is every bit as worrisome, fiscally speaking, as entitlement programs.
 

State

Russian Bot
A/V Subscriber
Mar 15, 2007
13,581
7,967
1,743
Working on the Railroad
#11
Firstly, your figure seems to be grossly underestimated as a Brown University study showed the costs to be near $4 trillion with an estimated $1 trillion due to veterans until 2050. Keep in mind, that's if these wars end and we don't start any others--as if the nearly quarter million dead and counting won't come back to haunt us...

Compounding that figure is this year's $670 billion NDAA spending bill which comes up annually. When you add it all together, the warmongering is placing us into staggering debt. It is every bit as worrisome, fiscally speaking, as entitlement programs.
That's a bologna estimate by one of the most liberal universities in the land where they attach anything even tangentially related as a cost of war.

And as much as some would like it to be, it's not a partisan issue. Both sides of politicians support the war though they may not say so. Otherwise we could have been out years ago. And I give it 50/50 odds that we're at war with Iran within 4 years no matter who's elected in November.
 
Aug 19, 2006
1,497
255
1,713
Springfield, MO
#13
That's a bologna estimate by one of the most liberal universities in the land where they attach anything even tangentially related as a cost of war.

And as much as some would like it to be, it's not a partisan issue. Both sides of politicians support the war though they may not say so. Otherwise we could have been out years ago. And I give it 50/50 odds that we're at war with Iran within 4 years no matter who's elected in November.
Tangential or not, the presence of war has raised our debt and has destabilized the entire Middle East region where we are dependent for oil.

On the partisanship issue, I've said it before that BOTH Democrats and Republicans are running this nation into the ground and I say to hell with both parties. The two party system is obsolete and detrimental to our nation's well-being.
 

State

Russian Bot
A/V Subscriber
Mar 15, 2007
13,581
7,967
1,743
Working on the Railroad
#14
Tangential or not, the presence of war has raised our debt and has destabilized the entire Middle East region where we are dependent for oil.

On the partisanship issue, I've said it before that BOTH Democrats and Republicans are running this nation into the ground and I say to hell with both parties. The two party system is obsolete and detrimental to our nation's well-being.
Disagree. If anything the spread of democracy, Arab spring, has destabilized the region, though most of the instability thus far is contained within the borders of specific countries. The stability of the region has a whole is either improved or neutral with the Israeli-Iran situation the most likely to change that.
 
Aug 19, 2006
1,497
255
1,713
Springfield, MO
#15
Disagree. If anything the spread of democracy, Arab spring, has destabilized the region, though most of the instability thus far is contained within the borders of specific countries. The stability of the region has a whole is either improved or neutral with the Israeli-Iran situation the most likely to change that.
It will all depend on what new group of tyrants takes power in the so-called democratized middle east nations. America has a long and sordid history of foreign political intervention that has resulted in outright genocide in some cases and world terrorist organizations in others.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,579
30,097
1,743
Australia
#16
Firstly, your figure seems to be grossly underestimated as a Brown University study showed the costs to be near $4 trillion with an estimated $1 trillion due to veterans until 2050. Keep in mind, that's if these wars end and we don't start any others--as if the nearly quarter million dead and counting won't come back to haunt us...

Compounding that figure is this year's $670 billion NDAA spending bill which comes up annually. When you add it all together, the warmongering is placing us into staggering debt. It is every bit as worrisome, fiscally speaking, as entitlement programs.
Unless we are going to drastically increase the number of countries we go to war with, the numbers just don't bear this out.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
61,996
45,733
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#19
Steross, my brother and I are researching drug shortages, a project which grew out of his MPH thesis. They were non-existent prior to 1970, and rare until 2005. What happened in 1970? Insurance companies began providing prescription benefits. What happened in 2005? The Medicare Modernization Act which created Part D providing third party payment for prescriptions for Medicare recipients. There is a high degree of correlation between third part payment for prescriptions and drug shortages, worsened when the government became the third party. We are working on a predictive model.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
23,579
30,097
1,743
Australia
#20
Steross, my brother and I are researching drug shortages, a project which grew out of his MPH thesis. They were non-existent prior to 1970, and rare until 2005. What happened in 1970? Insurance companies began providing prescription benefits. What happened in 2005? The Medicare Modernization Act which created Part D providing third party payment for prescriptions for Medicare recipients. There is a high degree of correlation between third part payment for prescriptions and drug shortages, worsened when the government became the third party. We are working on a predictive model.
That will be brilliant. I am a bit isolated from that now out in rural Australia but a lot of people on Sermo have been complaining about. We occasionally have a brief shortage. I certainly don't know the details of why this is occurring but it is clear that there is a perturbation of normal market forces. Most of these shortages are in drugs that are quite commonly used, it is not an orphan drug phenomenon. With a normal market, I can't see any reason that a manufacturer could not make these medications and sell them for a profit.