keepthefaith Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 Republicans are saying insurance is too expensive already, love to see them lower taxes, lower co-pays, lower premiums and deliver similiar care. Ya right! I don't see us getting meaningful cost reduction without the following aspects of healthcare being addressed in new laws: Get rid of minimum mandated coverage levels and allow consumers and insurers to craft insurance plans that consumers want Get rid of state line insurance restrictions Allow premium incentives for healthier lifestyles Address the high list price of medical services so that people can actually pay a fair price for services when not using insurance Make health savings account very tax advantaged so that people will want very high deductible plans when account balances rise Allow all out of pocket medical expenses and insurance premiums to be tax deductible Get rid of individual mandate and employer mandate Educate consumers better on maintaining their health better and knowing when not too see a doctor or take a prescription Reform malpractice laws Address end of life expenses and coverage thereof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 Huh? I start and end with this: Our economy spends 9000 per person on HC...every other first world country covers their citizens for half that and does it cradle to grave. They dont burden the business community or local and state govt or have 6-8 delivery systems. That is the bar we should meet. Surely this can be done using free maket methods. I have outlined more that once what inthink would be a structure that can accomplish this in the past...you can look it up. I dont think the ACA works well Meanwhile - as you can read below - most of the general public - like B man - are preoccupied with who is right and wrong - do yourselves a favor and do some research You continually harp on Republicans for not putting out "a plan" of their own, and now you suggest a free market solution resulting in something comparable to "every other first world country's" cradle to grave coverage. Further, you state that in the countries that do provide such coverage, that they do not burden the business community, ignoring the massive tax burden that socialized medicine places upon every single one of these nations. If you were consistent in your logic, then you wouldn't have to continually remind us how intelligent and wealthy you are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TH3 Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 (edited) I don't see us getting meaningful cost reduction without the following aspects of healthcare being addressed in new laws: Get rid of minimum mandated coverage levels and allow consumers and insurers to craft insurance plans that consumers want Get rid of state line insurance restrictions Allow premium incentives for healthier lifestyles Address the high list price of medical services so that people can actually pay a fair price for services when not using insurance Make health savings account very tax advantaged so that people will want very high deductible plans when account balances rise Allow all out of pocket medical expenses and insurance premiums to be tax deductible Get rid of individual mandate and employer mandate Educate consumers better on maintaining their health better and knowing when not too see a doctor or take a prescription Reform malpractice laws Address end of life expenses and coverage thereof Almost none of that will reduce cost. To reduce cost the risk pool has to include everyone....any structure, plan, blah blah blah...that doesnt simply wont work. This can be accomplished a number of ways. The risk pool - as either a whole or in large segments must have ability to negotiate. Single payers will never be able to do this in a straight up "insurance" structure. The pay for play insurance structure has to be tossed. The incentive to profit has to be to gained from improving peoples health in a preventative and accoutable manner rather than a pay for play. Start with those basic tenants and craft your finance around it. You continually harp on Republicans for not putting out "a plan" of their own, and now you suggest a free market solution resulting in something comparable to "every other first world country's" cradle to grave coverage. Further, you state that in the countries that do provide such coverage, that they do not burden the business community, ignoring the massive tax burden that socialized medicine places upon every single one of these nations. If you were consistent in your logic, then you wouldn't have to continually remind us how intelligent and wealthy you are. Re massive tax burden....YOU pay $9000 per person for health care here in the US via the price of the goods you buy and the cut in your salary for HC. Happy with that....why do you put up with it? Whether via tax or COGS we in the US share the burden of that cost. An educated citizenry would really help And yes...where is the GOP PLAN. And yes...why should not have the most effecient lowest cost HC in the world....why are people so satisfied with simply eliminating ACA. The Gop has not put a plan down because they keep running into actuarial issue...they run models of their plans and it diesnt work.....Conservative/GOP ideaology doesnt necessarily work well with insurance markets Written with ipad Edited January 14, 2017 by baskin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 Almost none of that will reduce cost. To reduce cost the risk pool has to include everyone....any structure, plan, blah blah blah...that doesnt simply wont work. This can be accomplished a number of ways. The risk pool - as either a whole or in large segments must have ability to negotiate. Single payers will never be able to do this in a straight up "insurance" structure. The pay for play insurance structure has to be tossed. The incentive to profit has to be to gained from improving peoples health in a preventative and accoutable manner rather than a pay for play. Start with those basic tenants and craft your finance around it. Re massive tax burden....YOU pay $9000 per person for health care here in the US via the price of the goods you buy and the cut in your salary for HC. Happy with that....why do you put up with it? Whether via tax or COGS we in the US share the burden of that cost. An educated citizenry would really help And yes...where is the GOP PLAN. And yes...why should not have the most effecient lowest cost HC in the world....why are people so satisfied with simply eliminating ACA. The Gop has not put a plan down because they keep running into actuarial issue...they run models of their plans and it diesnt work.....Conservative/GOP ideaology doesnt necessarily work well with insurance markets Written with ipad What is it that makes you think that I - or anyone else here for that matter - is fine with the current health insurance structure? Because we reject the ACA for being the piece of crap that it is? In your mind that means that we're happy with things as they are? You're being a bit presumptive, don't you think? I won't try to speak for everybody, but I would suggest to you that most people here want as little government involvement as possible. Even you have to acknowledge the onerous regulatory burden and massive government intrusion into both healthcare and health insurance over the last fifty years. You think that's been a good thing? You must think that it's not a bad idea since you're still a proponent of having a government "plan" and suggest a structure similar to other "first world" nations. So your suggestion is to pursue a socialized structure by looking for free market solutions, and you say that educating the citizenry would help? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 I won't try to speak for everybody, but I would suggest to you that most people here want as little government involvement as possible. This is why having a conversation with baskin is useless. Because all he wants is for the government to be in charge of every aspect of his life. And your life. And everyone's life. Because only the government knows how to make things fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 14, 2017 Share Posted January 14, 2017 This is why having a conversation with baskin is useless. Because all he wants is for the government to be in charge of every aspect of his life. And your life. And everyone's life. Because only the government knows how to make things fair. It's also because that if you disagree with him, he reflexively assumes that you support the most extreme opposite of his opinion. Which is why he's a complete tool: there's no discussing health care with someone who hears "The ACA is a horrible law" and thinks you're saying "People who can't afford to pay a doctor should just !@#$ off and die." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Trump reportedly insists healthcare replacement will have 'insurance for everybody' http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/16/trump-reportedly-insists-healthcare-replacement-will-have-insurance-for-everybody.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Miner Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Trump reportedly insists healthcare replacement will have 'insurance for everybody' http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/16/trump-reportedly-insists-healthcare-replacement-will-have-insurance-for-everybody.html I guess we'll have to pass whatever new plan they come up with so we can figure out what's in it. No way to know beforehand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I'll just throw my hat in for healthcare being a basic public service that everyone should have a minimum level of access to for 'free' (tax funded), like education, emergency services, etc. That being said, I don't expect it to happen in the US, and if it does, it'll have a boat load of issues. Our government is not set up in a way to promote efficiency with all the lobbying, sweetheart deals, pork, etc etc. If we remove for profit entities from our government, then I would have a lot more faith in efficient and well managed programs. So, realistically, I 'settle' on ****ty bandaids like the ACA, or maybe whatever Trump's system is. In the end, I don't think we'll ever see a healthcare system in the US that covers everyone, due to our love of 'free market' profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Trump reportedly insists healthcare replacement will have 'insurance for everybody' http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/16/trump-reportedly-insists-healthcare-replacement-will-have-insurance-for-everybody.html How bout it! This is why having a conversation with baskin is useless. Because all he wants is for the government to be in charge of every aspect of his life. And your life. And everyone's life. Because only the government knows how to make things fair. A real debate breaks out on PPP and we can't have at! I don't see us getting meaningful cost reduction without the following aspects of healthcare being addressed in new laws: Get rid of minimum mandated coverage levels and allow consumers and insurers to craft insurance plans that consumers want Get rid of state line insurance restrictions Allow premium incentives for healthier lifestyles Address the high list price of medical services so that people can actually pay a fair price for services when not using insurance Make health savings account very tax advantaged so that people will want very high deductible plans when account balances rise Allow all out of pocket medical expenses and insurance premiums to be tax deductible Get rid of individual mandate and employer mandate Educate consumers better on maintaining their health better and knowing when not too see a doctor or take a prescription Reform malpractice laws Address end of life expenses and coverage thereof Hard to argue against much of that, the how is the problem. Incentives for running and eating broccoli? Great, but how is that checkable? I'd love to see the end Of employer mandate, but then what? That last one on end of life expenses, such an overpoweringly emotional issue there that becomes political dynamite for both sides, such a sad issue that is hard for families to discuss let alone politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Rand Paul previews ObamaCare replacement plan focusing on lower cost policies. Paul suggested Sunday that the replacement plan will include more low-cost insurance plans “One of the key reforms that we will do is, we’re going to legalize the sale of inexpensive insurance,” he told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “ That means getting rid of the ObamaCare mandates on what you can buy.” Paul last week announced some of the early details of the plan on Fox News’ “Special Report” with Bret Baier. Paul said his plan borrows from previous GOP replacement plans and appears to have consensus among congressional Republicans. “The ideas that we’ve taken for the replacement bill come from other Republicans’ bills,” he told Fox. Paul said Sunday the plan also will include health saving accounts and tax credits to help customers save money. Imagine that: Health insurance which acts like insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 THE BATTLE OVER OBAMACARE: The Christian Science Monitor says for many folks the problems with ObamaCare are personal, not political. Well, of course. This article attempts to give pro and con positions a fair shake, but dances around the fact the government forced many citizens to buy a product they didn’t want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I'll just throw my hat in for healthcare being a basic public service that everyone should have a minimum level of access to for 'free' (tax funded), like education, emergency services, etc. That being said, I don't expect it to happen in the US, and if it does, it'll have a boat load of issues. Our government is not set up in a way to promote efficiency with all the lobbying, sweetheart deals, pork, etc etc. If we remove for profit entities from our government, then I would have a lot more faith in efficient and well managed programs. So, realistically, I 'settle' on ****ty bandaids like the ACA, or maybe whatever Trump's system is. In the end, I don't think we'll ever see a healthcare system in the US that covers everyone, due to our love of 'free market' profit. why not let the people and professionals do this? we create more government to do something they do not need to do with all of this. someone like bill gates has done far more than barrack obama has ever and will ever do as far as philanthropy. governments are designed to fail their people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 THE BATTLE OVER OBAMACARE: The Christian Science Monitor says for many folks the problems with ObamaCare are personal, not political. Well, of course. This article attempts to give pro and con positions a fair shake, but dances around the fact the government forced many citizens to buy a product they didn’t want. People don't want health care until they get sick, then they want it. Republicans can now deal with the instant gratification society that wants everything for nothing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 People don't want health care until they get sick, then they want it. : Now you're finally getting it! Good for you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyst Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 People don't want health care until they get sick, then they want it. Republicans can now deal with the instant gratification society that wants everything for nothing so, idiot, why should someone have to buy something they don't want? Why must the government force this down our throat like your truck stop friends do you? In our cases, we don't want it, though. So what makes us have to choose what others think is best for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 so, idiot, why should someone have to buy something they don't want? Why must the government force this down our throat like your truck stop friends do you? In our cases, we don't want it, though. So what makes us have to choose what others think is best for us? Because everyone needs it eventually. You against auto insurance, too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Because everyone needs it eventually. You against auto insurance, too? Are you seriously so desperately stupid that you're dusting off the auto insurance analogy? If you don't have a car, are you forced by the federal government to buy auto insurance? C'mon. Think it through. You can do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Are you seriously so desperately stupid that you're dusting off the auto insurance analogy? If you don't have a car, are you forced by the federal government to buy auto insurance? C'mon. Think it through. You can do it. If you don't have a car.... Great argument. This is why the GOP is going to be in political hell for taking responsibility for the health acre issue. Love it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 Because everyone needs it eventually. You against auto insurance, too? [This is an automated response.] I'm not stupid. Yes, yes you are. Created by DC Tom-bot, beta version 0.5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts