Posted on 09/04/2009 1:49:37 PM PDT by pabianice
Obama apologist "Steve" was just on Cavuto telling ever greater whoppers. According to Steve, 1,500 people die each month because we don't yet have ObamaCare and thus no health insurance. Cavuto tried to get him to admit that no one is ever turned away from an ER but Steve stayed right on talking points: The right is killing the poor because we are dangerous, selfish, and anti-American .
Steve then launched into a pre-packaged rant -- eyes wide and unblinking, words coming at 200 a minute -- about how Obama is not getting the credit for the one million jobs he's saved and created since inauguration. According to Steve (Obama talking point # 44), the jobs Obama thinks can be created (presumably by powering cars with dilithium crystals and replacing coal and oil power plants with naquada generators) will easily top "several million." Cavuto, thoroughly exasperated, went off on him, saying how stupid such a statement was and asking if he (Cavuto) could claim he is losing a pound a day now by promising to start dieting next year. "Steve" became more animated and the interview ended with Cavuto having to stop him in mid-rant.
The Libs are losing the healthcare and labor debates and they are becoming that much more dangerous. We can expect ever more desperate, secret actions by the White House... you know, the most open and transparent administration in history.
“72.3% of all statistics are made up on the spot”
The statistic is legitimate, having come from the U.S. Institute of Medicine. It’s actually probably higher now since the number of uninsured has increased since 2000 http://www.urban.org/publications/411588.html
Assuming it’s valid, the House health reform plan (i.e., the most liberal version of health reform under active consideration in Congress) will reduce uninsured deaths by 105,000 during its first 7 years at a cost of $1.2 trillion, or $11.2 million per death averted. Needless to say, if saving lives were our only objective, we could save WAY more than that, so for every uninsured person we save through expanded coverage, there likely are 2,3, 4 or more people we COULD have saved had we taken those same dollars and spent them on something else. So universal coverage is far from the most cost-effective way to spend our tax dollars.
It gets worse. As a rough rule of thumb, every $10 million reduction in personal income in a community results in 1 statistical death. That is, as income rises, people are better off and have better health (e.g., can afford to drive safer cars, eat healthier food, and live healthier lifestyles). Thus, the $1.2 trillion sent to Washington for health reform will generate about 118,000 statistical deaths, i.e., deaths that could have been avoided had Uncle Sam left these dollars in the pockets of taxpayers. Thus, when BOTH sides of the equation are considered, health reform is at best a wash in terms of death reduction and arguably makes things slightly worse.
In short, if this is the principal rationale for health reform, it provides just one more reason to oppose rather than support the plan about to be approved by Nancy Pelosi and company.
Yeah we had a Cleveland Clinic Hospital locally. Florida requires them to have an emergency admit and take all patients. They refused. They were finally forced to sell the hospital and left. The Hospital now admits anyone for emergency care.
1500 Americans? Is the SEIU killing people we don’t know about?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2316804/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2316804/posts (clickable I hope)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.