I am thinking that there is no way democrats elect Bloomberg. Not on the first ballot, not even by superdelegates.
But on the off chance they do, i predict it would be the death of the democratic party.
If they use superdelegates to override the will of the people and elect Bloomberg, a trump amount of human crap in a smaller package, the progressives will split from the party and i doubt they would get 20% in any future election.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147487
25 Feb 20
@zahlanzi saidthe democrat party is dead now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2iKT21Efms
I am thinking that there is no way democrats elect Bloomberg. Not on the first ballot, not even by superdelegates.
But on the off chance they do, i predict it would be the death of the democratic party.
If they use superdelegates to override the will of the people and elect Bloomberg, a trump amount of human crap in a ...[text shortened]... e, the progressives will split from the party and i doubt they would get 20% in any future election.
26 Feb 20
@zahlanzi saidIf the Democratic establishment values maintaining the 1% and the status quo more than they fear great change then they may do what you say is bad .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2iKT21Efms
I am thinking that there is no way democrats elect Bloomberg. Not on the first ballot, not even by superdelegates.
But on the off chance they do, i predict it would be the death of the democratic party.
If they use superdelegates to override the will of the people and elect Bloomberg, a trump amount of human crap in a ...[text shortened]... e, the progressives will split from the party and i doubt they would get 20% in any future election.
I think affordable healthcare is a really , really good thing .
26 Feb 20
@mott-the-hoople saidThe Democratic Party certainly stands on the edge of a precipice .
the democrat party is dead now.
Unfortunately they may value the 1% and their corporate owners far more than the fate of their party and the country .
We will all see .
26 Feb 20
@caissad4 saidOf course affordable healthcare is a good thing, a necessary thing. Here is - in part, what prevents that:
If the Democratic establishment values maintaining the 1% and the status quo more than they fear great change then they may do what you say is bad .
I think affordable healthcare is a really , really good thing .
Here's a link showing the cost of medical malpractice, the worst of which I will snip here: https://www.leveragerx.com/blog/medical-malpractice-insurance-cost/
Los Angeles-Orange County, California: $49,804
Connecticut: $170,389
Miami-Dade, Florida: $190,829
Cook-Madison-St. Clair, Illinois: $177,441
New Jersey: $90,749
Nassau-Suffolk, New York: $214,999
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: $119,466
With those costs factored into the doctors fee, it is easy to see why the doctors fee is so high. This country has to get serious about limiting malpractice suit payouts. This is crazy shoot.
26 Feb 20
@earl-of-trumps saidMany States already limit malpractice awards; such reforms have had little effect on health costs for a simple reason - actual awards are a tiny fraction of health care costs:
Of course affordable healthcare is a good thing, a necessary thing. Here is - in part, what prevents that:
Here's a link showing the cost of medical malpractice, the worst of which I will snip here: https://www.leveragerx.com/blog/medical-malpractice-insurance-cost/
Los Angeles-Orange County, California: $49,804
Connecticut: $170,389
Miami-Dade, Florida: $190 ...[text shortened]... high. This country has to get serious about limiting malpractice suit payouts. This is crazy shoot.
"A new study reveals that the cost of medical malpractice in the United States is running at about $55.6 billion a year - $45.6 billion of which is spent on defensive medicine practiced by physicians seeking to stay clear of lawsuits.
The amount comprises 2.4% of the nation’s total health care expenditure."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2010/09/07/the-true-cost-of-medical-malpractice-it-may-surprise-you/#6ea96ca22ff5
So, actual payouts were about $10 billion a year in 2010 or about 0.5% of total health care costs.
Well, maybe things have changed? Nope, there's a lengthy article by a physician here giving lots of figures and neat graphs regarding medical malpractice and the results of laws in 33 States which enacted "tort reform"; it concludes:
"The most obvious conclusion from all of this is that medical malpractice costs have very little impact on healthcare costs overall in the U.S. Even if they did have an impact, medical malpractice costs are going down, so they can’t be responsible for the rising cost of healthcare in the U.S.
What’s more, all of the tort reform laws that different states have passed aimed at controlling medical malpractice costs have had, at best, a very muted effect on these costs directly. These laws have also had almost no effect on whether a doctor gets sued in any of those states that have such laws and virtually no effect on healthcare costs as a whole in the U.S."
http://truecostofhealthcare.org/malpractice/
In reality, limiting awards is just another strategy to shift costs from those who deserve to pay them (doctors who commit malpractice) to the victims of that malpractice or the public.
26 Feb 20
@no1marauder
So, actual payouts were about $10 billion a year in 2010 or about 0.5% of total health care costs.
This all sounds so encouraging, No1. However, telling us what was paid out to recipients is apparently a much different figure than what was paid _in_ by the doctors, and that is the figure that drives the costs UP.
Take a doctor that pays out $190K a year (they exist). What do you think that does to the billing rate of said doctor?
@earl-of-trumps saidMaybe you should find that figure since your argument is reliant on it.
@no1marauder
So, actual payouts were about $10 billion a year in 2010 or about 0.5% of total health care costs.
This all sounds so encouraging, No1. However, telling us what was paid out to recipients is apparently a much different figure than what was paid _in_ by the doctors, and that is the figure that drives the costs UP.
Take a doctor that pays out $190K a year (they exist). What do you think that does to the billing rate of said doctor?
IF doctors are paying out far more in premiums than the actual cost of the claims, then maybe what we need is malpractice insurance caps, not paying victims less.