Scott Stantis by Scott Stantis

Scott Stantis

Comments (19) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. exoticdoc2

    exoticdoc2 said, over 2 years ago

    Only the insane and hopelessly deluded would have expected the Obamantion’s plan to work.

  2. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, over 2 years ago

    The Death Chair

  3. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    If you believe that such a large program would just start up without problems, then you are indeed deluded. This would be so even in private industry! But, it does not mean that the program itself is a failure, it needs both work and some time. Something that the tea party types are not willing to do, as they do not wish to just modify the program as it goes along for greater efficiency, the just want to kill it without even having ANY kind of replacement at all.
    <p.

    And of course our current program is so good. It is rated as the 38th best in the world by the world health organization, we are right behind that great industrial power of Costa Rica. But we are number one in one area, ours is the costliest in the world. So, I do not see just how we can get much more costly than that with the ACA program!!

  4. ARodney

    ARodney said, over 2 years ago

    It was a lousy rollout, but it’ll be working fine by the time people need to sign up. And anyone who has noticed how Romneycare works in Massachusetts knows it will work just fine. It sure works better than the old system of “buy insurance, and if you get sick, they are free to not cover you, drop your policy, and you and your family go bankrupt, lose your house, and end up on the taxpayer’s dime.”

  5. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 2 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    “And of course our current program is so good. It is rated as the 38th best in the world by the world health organization,”

    I read the study from which that 38th ranking came from and consider it flawed. It wasn’t the criteria that made me come to that conclusion but the way they ranked the various categories. As they went through the categories they assigned a number rating to that category. When it came to a category that involved socialized medicine, they used a multiple of two or three to boost the raw score to a higher score. It struck me as a questionable way to give something a high score. If a particular category was so good, why not give it a higher raw score (rhetorical)? Without the use of those multiples, I don’t know whether we would be third, thirtieth, or thirty-eighth.

  6. Mark Stanger

    Mark Stanger GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    “Resources are not available, at this time, for ‘non-productive’ members of society. such procedures as you require to enjoy your retirement must be allocated for younger, working members of the population. Here’s a pill. Here’s your sign!”

  7. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 2 years ago

    I thought the wheels were triangular because they eliminated one bump over the previous system!

  8. ODon

    ODon said, over 2 years ago

    “Just another entitlement program that everyone will pay for themselves and another person.”
    Yes, that works.

  9. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 2 years ago

    Real numbers from a friend of mine on his cost if going with the PPACA:

    Bronze Plan: Premium-$200 monthly, 40% copay, $6000 deductible.

    Current employer plan: $86 monthly, no copay, $2500 deductible.

    I don’t know it these numbers are typical, but they certainly put the question to some of the blanket claims that the PPACA is cheaper.

  10. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, over 2 years ago

    I remember one time, I was watching a page on Amazon.com waiting for a particular item to go on sale. As the sale time drew closer and more and more people went to the page, the site became slower and slower, until all attempts to get to it timed out.
    Obviously Amazon is a complete failure as a company and should never have been started.

  11. Kevin Robinson

    Kevin Robinson said, over 2 years ago

    @Robert Landers

    in the privet industry we aim for working results, we test our products and systems before they go out to the public. Yes they maybe problems but none like Obamacare and no private industry would in their right mind allow a rollout like Obamacare has had. if it was that bad they would shut it down and work out the bugs.

  12. Kevin Robinson

    Kevin Robinson said, over 2 years ago

    It has wheels I thought all it had was brakes and payment slot

  13. ODon

    ODon said, over 2 years ago

    @mikefive

    Mike those numbers may well be typical as employers often do pick up a substantial portion of the premium. Its another cost that business incurs making them less competitive in the world market. A single payer system would spread the medical costs of our nation across the entire citizenry thus making it better for all.

  14. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 2 years ago

    @mikefive

    Real numbers from a person who is self-insured. I take cholesterol meds, not because of diet, but because of genetics. This is my only continuing health issue.

    Current plan: Some co-pay with a 4-dimensional explanation as to what is or what is not, $2500 deductible, $650 per month. Just for me.

    My wife and I have decided to put that same money in the bank every month. No deductible, no copay, pay as you go. The alternative from “the best healthcare system in the world” is untenable.

  15. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 2 years ago

    @Kevin Robinson

    Did you even bother to read the post by “The Wolf in Your Midst” immediately above yours? If a company as eventually successful as Amazon had such problems, then your comments about the efficiency of private industry in regard to new internet ventures (especially if they were supposed to reach out to some 50 million people eventually) seems a bit off!!


    Personally, I think it is going to take at least a year to even begin to find out just how good or bad such a program as the ACA is going to be. And if it has problems, then it should be up to Congress and the government to make changes to it. But, just eliminating it (especially at the very beginning) is just plain stupid. Especially, as those that want to do so have not even begun to come up with any kind of a better plan!!


    You do know that it is estimated that because so many people have no health insurance in the US, that just about 45,000 Americans each year needlessly allow conditions that could be caught and cured in the beginning of such conditions, eventually die from the same? That is more people than die from automobile accidents and homicides put together in this country. So, the high cost of our current system is already acting as so called “Death Panels”!!!

  16. Load the rest of the comments (4).