So if conservatives hate Obamacare so bad then what is your idea's?

[wbcoleman]

Make everyone responsible for their own insurance. But I'm just mocking that guy. Besides, many 26 year olds were getting their own insurance. I was at that age.

Sorry, I understand the sarcasm but it doesn't work.

 

[wbcoleman]

Have you read the ACA? just curious...


As far as who cares? I care.. because like it or not, our healthcare system needs to be changed. And there is a lot of good ideas in the ACA.. a lot of bad ideas.. but a lot of good ones.. (many of those come from republican think tanks)..

And rather than have the democrats run from the ACA.. and the republicans demagogue it (who haven't even read the thing).. "death panels".. sheesh!

What should have happened and what should be happening is that the republicans and democrats work to preserve the things that make sense... mandate for healthcare insurance, exchanges, expansion of Medicaid, no pre existing conditions, increasing private purchase of insurance over employer based healthcare...

And change those things that don't make as much sense, such as arbitraty penalties on employers like 50 employees okay.. 51? Not.. or the penalties based on arbitrary payroll numbers. Or the subsidy fiasco... that's going to end up screwing us over...

The republicans did it with the Medicare Part D in the Medicare Modernization Act... and that's why costs skyrocketed.. and the same is going to happen here.

When I said, "Who cares," I meant who cares which parts of the scheme came from or allegedly came from Republican sources. That is irrelevant to how the scheme will operate.

As for "what should be happening is that the republicans and democrats work to preserve the things that make sense," the Democrats vetoed that idea at the outset when they decided to steamroll through an unacceptable bill. Since they had lost their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate [and why did they lose that seat?] they used parliamentary tricks to force through a bill that they knew full well was loaded with errors. The decided to forego the normal legislative process because otherwise they didn't have the votes. Their attitude was demonstrated by their arrogant, in-your-face behavior on the day of the final vote:

They bought the mess, they made it, they rubbed our faces in it, and now they own it.

 

[imagep]

Lack of greed is the bigger issue

The problems with out of control prices is that one component of greed is not part of the system. Those of us consuming the services don’t price shop as we do in other areas of society.

The greed that makes us find a tv $100 cheaper is not pervasive in health care. When people don’t price shop, the incentive to keep costs down is lessened. So one problem is we are not greedy enough when it comes to acquiring health care services...

You hit the nail on the head with your price shopping point. But, it's not lack of greed that keeps us from shopping for healthcare. It's the fact that most people have employer provided insurance, or more to the point, that most of us have insurance that covers the small stuff. When our copay is a fixed sum, or when our deductable is a fixed amount and we only pay a small percent over that deductable, we have little incentive to price shop. If we outlawed the prepaid healthcare plan that most of us call "good insurance", and replaced it with high deductable major medical insurance, then we would ALL price shop for medical care. We would probably smoke a lot less, exercise a little more, and eat a better diet.

 

[Jack Hays]

You hit the nail on the head with your price shopping point. But, it's not lack of greed that keeps us from shopping for healthcare. It's the fact that most people have employer provided insurance, or more to the point, that most of us have insurance that covers the small stuff. When our copay is a fixed sum, or when our deductable is a fixed amount and we only pay a small percent over that deductable, we have little incentive to price shop. If we outlawed the prepaid healthcare plan that most of us call "good insurance", and replaced it with high deductable major medical insurance, then we would ALL price shop for medical care. We would probably smoke a lot less, exercise a little more, and eat a better diet.

And we'd all be a little less free.eace

 

[wbcoleman]

You hit the nail on the head with your price shopping point. But, it's not lack of greed that keeps us from shopping for healthcare. It's the fact that most people have employer provided insurance, or more to the point, that most of us have insurance that covers the small stuff. When our copay is a fixed sum, or when our deductable is a fixed amount and we only pay a small percent over that deductable, we have little incentive to price shop. If we outlawed the prepaid healthcare plan that most of us call "good insurance", and replaced it with high deductable major medical insurance, then we would ALL price shop for medical care. We would probably smoke a lot less, exercise a little more, and eat a better diet.

Bingo. Furthermore, markets depend upon price signals in order to operate. It's the lack of such signals which plague the healthcare industry.

 

[Misterveritis]

most wealth doesn't necessarily mean whats best though. unrestricted capitalism inevitably leads to a financial elite who act only in their own self interest and care nothing for the well being of the common citizen beyond their usefulness, corporations stronger than the government itself, a working class that lives in financial slavery, monopolies that actually discourage competition (the bread and butter of capitalism) and raises the price of necessities and commodities while lowering quality. Unrestricted capitalism inevitably consumes itself and reverts to an aristocracy.

Do you believe that a political elite is the better option?

We are all better off when every one of us acts in our own self interest. Why don't you know these simple things?

 

[Misterveritis]

well we can't exactly go back to the system we had before the affordable care act was passed.

and no republican has laid out exactly what they want to replace obamacare with.

Why not? Nearly everyone was happy with what they had. Only the malcontants and the Marxists were for Obamacare.

I want the free market to replace nearly all government intrusions.

 

[Misterveritis]

Then what is your idea to fix skyrocketing prices. The status quo? Get off your outdated,cold war John Birch crap. We have to pay one way or another. Do you think it is free to have all those people going to the emergency room? Conservatives have no ideas just obstruction. The cold war is over and we have to get the capitalist pigs out of health care.

Get the government completely out of our health care. Completely.

Then it will become affordable. The Affordable Health Care Act should have simply said,"No government entity will be involved in health care for any reason. Good Shopping."

 

[Misterveritis]

As you conservatives love to say we are the greatest nation on Earth so why do we rank behind so many other countries in so many important issues. 40 million uninsured Americans is not right and the thing of it is we pay for their health care anyway when they fill our emergency rooms. I have heard no good conservative ideas on this issue other that defending the staus quo.

Is it a problem for you that 40 million Americans (let's assume your numbers are more than a lie, for the moment) do not want to buy health care pre-paid plans?

Would it bother you if 40 million Americans did not buy cars?

 

[Misterveritis]

Your response is not constructive.

It was, however, true.

 

[Jerry]

We are all in agreement. Our healthcare system is broken. 40 million Americans without health insurance and prices going trhu the roof. If not the AFA then what do you right wingers want? The status quo? That does not work. Greed has corrupted our health care system. Tort reform would be just a drop in the bucket and so would inerstate insurance. You have to do better that that my conservative friends. Why is it American conservatives are the only conservatives in the world who are against a state ran health care system? British,German and French conservatives do not seem to have a problem with it. Neither do Canadian conservitives. Are our conservatives more stupid than the rest?

The status quo American Conservatism is based on is the Declaration of Independence.

Also, American Conservationism can be very different from a Conservative party of another country.

Healthcare solution:

• Make a law ordering everyone to buy a private policy, just like w did with car insurance.
• Allow insurance to be bought across state lines.
• Offer a tax credit to income qualified people.

That's it. That's all there is to it. No big programs, minimal government involvement.

 

[Jerry]

The Affordable Care Act was originally a Republican idea until Mr. Obama was elected president. From that day forward it is the biggest evil ever. And they will continue to spread lies and perpetuate their hatred. I think they are taking another repeal Obamacare vote. That makes it 39. ACA is the law of the land. That will not change. Amen.

Just like TARP and other 'stimulus' programs.

 

[shagg]

Do you believe that a political elite is the better option?

We are all better off when every one of us acts in our own self interest. Why don't you know these simple things?

False Dichotomy, it doesn't have to be one or the other. I believe capitalism is an overall good economic system that has a few flaws. To admit it has these flaws does not equate a desire to scrap the whole system though. Government regulation is necessary to overcome these flaws and maintain a truly free market. I don't understand why people think if the market was left totally unregulated that suddenly businesses would develop some sense of honor and chivalry that put the consumer and worker ahead of profits. In many cases people and profits both benefit, but a point is reached where if you are to advance one it must be at the expense of the other, and any business owner whos successful enough to reach that point will always choose profits.

 

[jaeger19]

When I said, "Who cares," I meant who cares which parts of the scheme came from or allegedly came from Republican sources. That is irrelevant to how the scheme will operate.

As for "what should be happening is that the republicans and democrats work to preserve the things that make sense," the Democrats vetoed that idea at the outset when they decided to steamroll through an unacceptable bill. Since they had lost their filibuster-proof majority in the Senate [and why did they lose that seat?] they used parliamentary tricks to force through a bill that they knew full well was loaded with errors. The decided to forego the normal legislative process because otherwise they didn't have the votes. Their attitude was demonstrated by their arrogant, in-your-face behavior on the day of the final vote:

They bought the mess, they made it, they rubbed our faces in it, and now they own it.

I see.. so in your words the smart thing.. the best thing for this country is to have a "well we will take our ball and go home".....

Well sorry... but that isn't the best thing for the country.. heck its not the best thing for the Republican party.

 

[Glen Contrarian]

False Dichotomy, it doesn't have to be one or the other. I believe capitalism is an overall good economic system that has a few flaws. To admit it has these flaws does not equate a desire to scrap the whole system though. Government regulation is necessary to overcome these flaws and maintain a truly free market. I don't understand why people think if the market was left totally unregulated that suddenly businesses would develop some sense of honor and chivalry that put the consumer and worker ahead of profits. In many cases people and profits both benefit, but a point is reached where if you are to advance one it must be at the expense of the other, and any business owner whos successful enough to reach that point will always choose profits.

One thing I've seemed to find common about conservatives over the years is that "if it doesn't work perfectly, scrap it." Some abuse a system, so the conservatives want to scrap a system regardless of how well that system's working overall. This applies to public schools, welfare, Medicare, gun laws, drug treatment, green energy subsidies, Obamacare...you name it. It's as if they see the molehill of the flaws in Hi-Def 3D, but the mountain of good that the programs do is completely invisible to them.

Unless it's a program that benefits them personally, that is - and that's when we get the signs that say, "Keep your government hands off my Medicare!"

 

[Montecresto]

They're ok with fossil fuels though!?!?!

 

[Misterveritis]

False Dichotomy, it doesn't have to be one or the other. I believe capitalism is an overall good economic system that has a few flaws. To admit it has these flaws does not equate a desire to scrap the whole system though. Government regulation is necessary to overcome these flaws and maintain a truly free market.

This is where you begin to go terribly wrong. It is like saying that the slave's collar must be added to make him or her truly free.

Government's role is to have good laws and good courts to ensure that we understand and protect property rights.

 

[shagg]

This is where you begin to go terribly wrong. It is like saying that the slave's collar must be added to make him or her truly free.

Government's role is to have good laws and good courts to ensure that we understand and protect property rights.

Its more like saying we need police so the strongest person with the biggest stick doesn't just take what he/she wants from people who aren't strong enough to defend themselves from him/her. Without regulations the only mitigating factor in a free market is consumer awareness and how consumers spend their money. even with regulations, advertisements in the US are based mostly on deceiving the consumer, confusing them, getting them to make poor irrational impulsive choices, and part with their money even if they don't really want to. Convincing them they need something they really don't. I guess what I'm trying to say is I believe an honest free market is best. Businesses are are more than willing to be dishonest to increase profits. Government regulation, as it stands, attempts to curb but not eliminate dishonesty in the market. We're like sheep in the marketplace, and we buy stuff from the company with the best herd dogs.

Dishonesty, as I'm using it here, is defined as intentionally vague or inaccurate claims about a product or service in an attempt to attract buyers who aren't really interested or in need of said product or service. It is the very foundation of modern American (other countries too I'm sure) advertising. If consumers don't make informed rational choices then competition becomes a game in psychology, not a race to make better products or provide superior services.

 

[Misterveritis]

Its more like saying we need police so the strongest person with the biggest stick doesn't just take what he/she wants from people who aren't strong enough to defend themselves from him/her. Without regulations the only mitigating factor in a free market is consumer awareness and how consumers spend their money. even with regulations, advertisements in the US are based mostly on deceiving the consumer, confusing them, getting them to make poor irrational impulsive choices, and part with their money even if they don't really want to. Convincing them they need something they really don't. I guess what I'm trying to say is I believe an honest free market is best. Businesses are are more than willing to be dishonest to increase profits. Government regulation, as it stands, attempts to curb but not eliminate dishonesty in the market. We're like sheep in the marketplace, and we buy stuff from the company with the best herd dogs.

Dishonesty, as I'm using it here, is defined as intentionally vague or inaccurate claims about a product or service in an attempt to attract buyers who aren't really interested or in need of said product or service. It is the very foundation of modern American (other countries too I'm sure) advertising. If consumers don't make informed rational choices then competition becomes a game in psychology, not a race to make better products or provide superior services.

We are not that far apart. Good laws and good courts require a good executive branch to execute the laws.

Regulations forced upon us by five hundred agencies who are judge, jury and executioner are instruments of tyranny. We must dismantle them. The legislative branch makes the laws. A separate branch, the executive enforces the laws. If I could be tyrant for a day I would seek out every person who got us into this mess. I would seize all the wealth from the individuals and families that were involved in this. One vote for tyranny is enough. I would go back one hundred years. No property other than an individual's clothing would be spared.

But that is just me. It is a very good thing I hold no strong opinions.