waiting

[eflatminor]

what do you think making insurance too expensive to own if you are already sick does?

The better question is "What causes insurance to be too expensive to own?". The answer is government requirements to include every coverage under the sun in every policy sold and government price fixing of premiums. In a free market, there would be thousands of choices in every state for all kinds of coverage, from emergency only policies to Cadillac coverage with all the bells and whistles. Instead, government forces the latter down the throat of the few carriers allowed to sell these policies, then the government tells them what they can and cannot charge. This defeats the very purpose of insurance and causes higher premiums for us all. When carriers can no longer offer tailored policies to folks with serious medical conditions at a reasonable price, they will understandably seek to avoid the exposure entirely. Obamacare does not fix this, it makes it worse.

In a free market, everyone would have coverage priced to their exposures. In your world, a 400 pound couch potato that has never eaten a fruit or vegetable has the 'right' to full coverage at the same price as a healthy person. That is insane, the results of which we see today.

 

[Liability]

I look forward, with a little sense of dread, but mostly with anticipation that the SCOTUS will do the right thing and gut the shit out of ObamaCare.

It's a win win, though.

If they gut it completely and eradicate that blight, then the American Republic wins.

However, if they fool around and flop and fail and permit that crap to survive the Constitutional challenge, thereby allowing it to continue, the BLAME for it will have to land fully on the liberal Democratics.

 

[koshergrl]

As time trickles out with the Supreme court staggering to a healthcare decision I wish to remind the GOP that this is a lose/lose situation.

Many of the provisions of obamacare are already in place and are hugely popular. The GOP leadership is already running about trying to find ways to salvage these.

Today I heard two of my state (GOP) senators proclaiming that we ought to adapt Romney care for our state. Odd since just last week they were denouncing it as an abomination, forgetting that it was a GOP inspired plan as far back as the nineties.

Whatever the court decides the GOP loses. If the entire bill is struck down that will give absolute ownership of this broken down system to them. They alone will be required to find a way out. That will be interesting since there is no escape short of national health care.

If the bulk of the program remains intact they must then explain why they made such a fuss about a constitutional bill. (not the the ussc gives a damn what is or is not really constitutional)

Meanwhile he idiot GOP base grows restless.

Conservatives Give GOP Hell On Health Care, Taxes As Crises Loom | TPMDC

Like what ?

Wow? You don't know? Here are a couple . Children can stay on parent's policy until age 26.

Cannot be refused for preconditions. Look it up you will be gratified.

Of course they're popular, it's free to the people.

Unfortunately, it's not *free* to the state, and the state can't afford it.

 

[onecut39]

dear idiot.

they changed the whole program to try and get the Rs to help the county.


Dont you even remember the Public Option?

Yep the democrats revised and revised the program to meet Republican objections. They revised it until it was pretty nearly ruined to meet republican objections.

Then not one republican voted for it.

Ah the irony!

 

[Truthmatters]

so true.

Obama and the dems really underestimated how dishonest the republican party is

 

[Truthmatters]

what do you think making insurance too expensive to own if you are already sick does?

The better question is "What causes insurance to be too expensive to own?". The answer is government requirements to include every coverage under the sun in every policy sold and government price fixing of premiums. In a free market, there would be thousands of choices in every state for all kinds of coverage, from emergency only policies to Cadillac coverage with all the bells and whistles. Instead, government forces the latter down the throat of the few carriers allowed to sell these policies, then the government tells them what they can and cannot charge. This defeats the very purpose of insurance and causes higher premiums for us all. When carriers can no longer offer tailored policies to folks with serious medical conditions at a reasonable price, they will understandably seek to avoid the exposure entirely. Obamacare does not fix this, it makes it worse.

In a free market, everyone would have coverage priced to their exposures. In your world, a 400 pound couch potato that has never eaten a fruit or vegetable has the 'right' to full coverage at the same price as a healthy person. That is insane, the results of which we see today.

then why did we have to fix it in the first place you fucking idiot?

 

[onecut39]

Yes, that's what we have today in healthcare and health insurance, a free market. Wow are you dumb. Good luck with that.

dear fucking idiot are you claiming everything is just peachy that way?

Foul mouthed "lady", aren't you? How very mature.

I'm claiming all the government intervention (state and federal) in healthcare and healthcare insurance has caused costs to skyrocket, kept competition out of the market and quelled innovation, efficiency and choice. More central planning is not the answer, it never is.

If intervention of government raises the policy price then why is it that every one of the "government run" systems elsewhere are cheaper? In fact the next most expensive being about half of the cost of the US system. Why is it that The US is rated about 35 in outcomes?

Why is that?

 

[Truthmatters]

Now if we can only get that for homeowner's insurance. That way, you wouldn't have to buy insurance until your house is actually on fire. That will certainly be GREAT for the insurance industry, homeowners, and the banks that lend money on those homes.

how does refusing health care to sick people make this country better?

Better question: How is a care provider's refusal to treat people in need the fault of insurance companies. Why would it matter whether the insurance company is privately or federally run?

they cant refuse them now legally.

that is what the republicans want to do eventually

 

[onecut39]

Like what ?

Wow? You don't know? Here are a couple . Children can stay on parent's policy until age 26.

Cannot be refused for preconditions. Look it up you will be gratified.

Of course they're popular, it's free to the people.

Unfortunately, it's not *free* to the state, and the state can't afford it.

A government programm is not free but it is multiple times cheaper than the private system is only because profit is not required.

15 to 35 percent of our private system premiums go to overhead. (administration and profit)

Overhead for medicare is 3%.

 

[Truthmatters]

facts dont permeate their braincases

 

[onecut39]

Yes, that's what we have today in healthcare and health insurance, a free market. Wow are you dumb. Good luck with that.

dear fucking idiot are you claiming everything is just peachy that way?

Dear Fuckbrain - you want Healthcare? Trade in some of your food stamps for some, asswipe.

Ah, the depth of the conservative mind.

 

[Truthmatters]

they pretend everything was working fine by letting the market determine prices of coverage.


it was balloning into a disastor.


they hate history

 

[dblack]

this is going to fuck the republican party.

Hopefully. Maybe then people will wake up. Neither major party is interested in providing good government.

 

[eflatminor]

dear fucking idiot are you claiming everything is just peachy that way?

Foul mouthed "lady", aren't you? How very mature.

I'm claiming all the government intervention (state and federal) in healthcare and healthcare insurance has caused costs to skyrocket, kept competition out of the market and quelled innovation, efficiency and choice. More central planning is not the answer, it never is.

If intervention of government raises the policy price then why is it that every one of the "government run" systems elsewhere are cheaper? In fact the next most expensive being about half of the cost of the US system. Why is it that The US is rated about 35 in outcomes?

Why is that?

Because if you need an operation in those countries, be prepared to weeks, probably months. An MRI? Even longer. Socialized medicine "works" for the recipients with common ailments...but there's a reason rich people from around the world come to America for serious care.

In addition, it has been America's relatively free healthcare industry that has produced the majority of medical advances, from which all the socialized countries benefit. We absorbed the R&D costs, the testing and regulatory burdens of new drugs, new technologies, equipment and machines as well as new operational procedures. America's pursuit of profit in this market that has subsidized socialist healthcare experiments.

Further, I seriously doubt a list of medical "costs" in socialist countries adequately accounts for the lost opportunity costs of all those taxes that could have been invested elsewhere. All I can say is from America came some pretty tremendous advancements since our founding and a true superpower economy, one that makes our poor comparatively rich.

From Sweden? Well, there is ABBA.

Anyway, that's why.

 

[onecut39]

Foul mouthed "lady", aren't you? How very mature.

I'm claiming all the government intervention (state and federal) in healthcare and healthcare insurance has caused costs to skyrocket, kept competition out of the market and quelled innovation, efficiency and choice. More central planning is not the answer, it never is.

If intervention of government raises the policy price then why is it that every one of the "government run" systems elsewhere are cheaper? In fact the next most expensive being about half of the cost of the US system. Why is it that The US is rated about 35 in outcomes?

Why is that?

Because if you need an operation in those countries, be prepared to weeks, probably months. An MRI? Even longer. Socialized medicine "works" for the recipients with common ailments...but there's a reason rich people from around the world come to America for serious care.

In addition, it has been America's relatively free healthcare industry that has produced the majority of medical advances, from which all the socialized countries benefit. We absorbed the R&D costs, the testing and regulatory burdens of new drugs, new technologies, equipment and machines as well as new operational procedures. America's pursuit of profit in this market that has subsidized socialist healthcare experiments.

Further, I seriously doubt a list of medical "costs" in socialist countries adequately accounts for the lost opportunity costs of all those taxes that could have been invested elsewhere. All I can say is from America came some pretty tremendous advancements since our founding and a true superpower economy, one that makes our poor comparatively rich.

From Sweden? Well, there is ABBA.

Anyway, that's why.

What you have said is 87% bullshit and the rest is just dumb.

 

[eflatminor]

If intervention of government raises the policy price then why is it that every one of the "government run" systems elsewhere are cheaper? In fact the next most expensive being about half of the cost of the US system. Why is it that The US is rated about 35 in outcomes?

Why is that?

Because if you need an operation in those countries, be prepared to weeks, probably months. An MRI? Even longer. Socialized medicine "works" for the recipients with common ailments...but there's a reason rich people from around the world come to America for serious care.

In addition, it has been America's relatively free healthcare industry that has produced the majority of medical advances, from which all the socialized countries benefit. We absorbed the R&D costs, the testing and regulatory burdens of new drugs, new technologies, equipment and machines as well as new operational procedures. America's pursuit of profit in this market that has subsidized socialist healthcare experiments.

Further, I seriously doubt a list of medical "costs" in socialist countries adequately accounts for the lost opportunity costs of all those taxes that could have been invested elsewhere. All I can say is from America came some pretty tremendous advancements since our founding and a true superpower economy, one that makes our poor comparatively rich.

From Sweden? Well, there is ABBA.

Anyway, that's why.

What you have said is 87% bullshit and the rest is just dumb.

Take a look folks, there you have it. The modern liberal retort to...well, anything that isn't an emotionally based argument void of logic and reason. If it feels good, it must right...and if you don't feel like they do, why you're just dumb.

Thank you young one for exposing to the light a little insight into your thought process and your ability to construct a compelling argument. After all, rule #1 is to know thy enemy. You've been great.

All the best.

 

[onecut39]

Because if you need an operation in those countries, be prepared to weeks, probably months. An MRI? Even longer. Socialized medicine "works" for the recipients with common ailments...but there's a reason rich people from around the world come to America for serious care.

In addition, it has been America's relatively free healthcare industry that has produced the majority of medical advances, from which all the socialized countries benefit. We absorbed the R&D costs, the testing and regulatory burdens of new drugs, new technologies, equipment and machines as well as new operational procedures. America's pursuit of profit in this market that has subsidized socialist healthcare experiments.

Further, I seriously doubt a list of medical "costs" in socialist countries adequately accounts for the lost opportunity costs of all those taxes that could have been invested elsewhere. All I can say is from America came some pretty tremendous advancements since our founding and a true superpower economy, one that makes our poor comparatively rich.

From Sweden? Well, there is ABBA.

Anyway, that's why.

What you have said is 87% bullshit and the rest is just dumb.

Take a look folks, there you have it. The modern liberal retort to...well, anything that isn't an emotionally based argument void of logic and reason. If it feels good, it must right...and if you don't feel like they do, why you're just dumb.

Thank you young one for exposing to the light a little insight into your thought process and your ability to construct a compelling argument. After all, rule #1 is to know thy enemy. You've been great.

All the best.

If you take unfounded premises and put them forth as fact you are either dumb, or a liar or both. There are no other choices. Either way you are hoping I will be really stupid.

Sorry I'm not.

 

[eflatminor]

What you have said is 87% bullshit and the rest is just dumb.

Take a look folks, there you have it. The modern liberal retort to...well, anything that isn't an emotionally based argument void of logic and reason. If it feels good, it must right...and if you don't feel like they do, why you're just dumb.

Thank you young one for exposing to the light a little insight into your thought process and your ability to construct a compelling argument. After all, rule #1 is to know thy enemy. You've been great.

All the best.

If you take unfounded premises and put them forth as fact you are either dumb, or a liar or both. There are no other choices. Either way you are hoping I will be really stupid.

Sorry I'm not.

Ah, you're back. Isn't that wonderful...responding now with logic, reason and specificity. Okay, not really, but it sure is nice to hear from you again young man (woman?).

When you grow up and learn to debate like an adult, you may be capable of actually pointing out "unfounded premises", explaining how they're unfounded, while offering an alternative. If you're really mature, you'll be able to do that without childish name calling and ad hominem attacks. That's a big "if" of course.

Lastly, I'm not hoping you're stupid. You can demonstrate that all on your own. Good luck with all of that.

 

[Avorysuds]

Proven fact, everything TM says is false.

 

[Avorysuds]

Every Government program that has to do with HC claims to bring costs down while providing more services… Yet here we are wondering why welfare has bankrupted our nation and yet HC prices keep skyrocketing.

Let me guess, it's all that "small government" and cuts to spending we never actually do that is fully to blame for this.

We only run a 1.5 Trillion dollar annual deficit with HC costs being #1, SS being #2 and Defense being #3 on gobbling up the budget... I guess we better cut Defense by about 300 billion (about 40%) and pretend that will balance the budget, then we can still complain Government does not do enough for welfare.