Home Mail MemberMap Chat (0) Wallpapers
Go Back   ChiefsPlanet > The Ed & Dave Lounge > D.C.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-27-2013, 12:25 PM  
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $1266839
Replacing ObamaCare . The next big step for Washington

The number of people who still hold on to the hope that the ACA will survive is growing terribly small. Even progressive pundits are distancing themselves from the disaster called ObamaCare. Before long only Alan Combs will be left selling this .


The future holds some great opportunity to replace ACA with something that actually does improve HC in the US is huge. Doing the right thing will be a two stage effort. Eliminate all memory of ObamaCare and replace with something that works.

Interesting take from WSJ:


By JOHN H. COCHRANE

The unraveling of the Affordable Care Act presents a historic opportunity for change. Its proponents call it "settled law," but as Prohibition taught us, not even a constitutional amendment is settled law—if it is dysfunctional enough, and if Americans can see a clear alternative.

This fall's website fiasco and policy cancellations are only the beginning. Next spring the individual mandate is likely to unravel when we see how sick the people are who signed up on exchanges, and if our government really is going to penalize voters for not buying health insurance. The employer mandate and "accountable care organizations" will take their turns in the news. There will be scandals. There will be fraud. This will go on for years.


Yet opponents should not sit back and revel in dysfunction. The Affordable Care Act was enacted in response to genuine problems. Without a clear alternative, we will simply patch more, subsidize more, and ignore frauds and scandals, as we do in Medicare and other programs.

There is an alternative. A much freer market in health care and health insurance can work, can deliver high quality, technically innovative care at much lower cost, and solve the pathologies of the pre-existing system.

The U.S. health-care market is dysfunctional. Obscure prices and $500 Band-Aids are legendary. The reason is simple: Health care and health insurance are strongly protected from competition. There are explicit barriers to entry, for example the laws in many states that require a "certificate of need" before one can build a new hospital. Regulatory compliance costs, approvals, nonprofit status, restrictions on foreign doctors and nurses, limits on medical residencies, and many more barriers keep prices up and competitors out. Hospitals whose main clients are uncompetitive insurers and the government cannot innovate and provide efficient cash service.

We need to permit the Southwest Airlines, Wal-Mart, Amazon.com and Apples of the world to bring to health care the same dramatic improvements in price, quality, variety, technology and efficiency that they brought to air travel, retail and electronics. We'll know we are there when prices are on hospital websites, cash customers get discounts, and new hospitals and insurers swamp your inbox with attractive offers and great service.

The Affordable Care Act bets instead that more regulation, price controls, effectiveness panels, and "accountable care" organizations will force efficiency, innovation, quality and service from the top down. Has this ever worked? Did we get smartphones by government pressure on the 1960s AT&T phone monopoly? Did effectiveness panels force United Airlines and American Airlines to cut costs, and push TWA and Pan Am out of business? Did the post office invent FedEx, UPS and email? How about public schools or the last 20 or more health-care "cost control" ideas?

Only deregulation can unleash competition. And only disruptive competition, where new businesses drive out old ones, will bring efficiency, lower costs and innovation.
Health insurance should be individual, portable across jobs, states and providers; lifelong and guaranteed-renewable, meaning you have the right to continue with no unexpected increase in premiums if you get sick. Insurance should protect wealth against large, unforeseen, necessary expenses, rather than be a wildly inefficient payment plan for routine expenses.
People want to buy this insurance, and companies want to sell it. It would be far cheaper, and would solve the pre-existing conditions problem. We do not have such health insurance only because it was regulated out of existence. Businesses cannot establish or contribute to portable individual policies, or employees would have to pay taxes. So businesses only offer group plans. Knowing they will abandon individual insurance when they get a job, and without cross-state portability, there is little reason for young people to invest in lifelong, portable health insurance. Mandated coverage, pressure against full risk rating, and a dysfunctional cash market did the rest.

Rather than a mandate for employer-based groups, we should transition to fully individual-based health insurance. Allow national individual insurance offered and sold to anyone, anywhere, without the tangled mess of state mandates and regulations. Allow employers to contribute to individual insurance at least on an even basis with group plans. Current group plans can convert to individual plans, at once or as people leave. Since all members in a group convert, there is no adverse selection of sicker people.

ObamaCare defenders say we must suffer the dysfunction and patch the law, because there is no alternative. They are wrong. On Nov. 2, for example, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote movingly about his friend who lost employer-based insurance and died of colon cancer. Mr. Kristof concluded, "This is why we need Obamacare." No, this is why we need individual, portable, guaranteed-renewable, inexpensive, catastrophic-coverage insurance.
On Nov. 15, MIT's Jonathan Gruber, an ObamaCare architect, argued on Realclearpolitics that "we currently have a highly discriminatory system where if you're sick, if you've been sick or you're going to get sick, you cannot get health insurance." We do. He concluded that the Affordable Care Act is "the only way to end that discriminatory system." It is not.
On Dec. 3, President Obama himself said that "the only alternative that Obamacare's critics have, is, well, let's just go back to the status quo." Not so.

What about the homeless guy who has a heart attack? Yes, there must be private and government-provided charity care for the very poor. What if people don't get enough checkups? Send them vouchers. To solve these problems we do not need a federal takeover of health care and insurance for you, me, and every American.

No other country has a free health market, you may object. The rest of the world is closer to single payer, and spends less.

Sure. We can have a single government-run airline too. We can ban FedEx and UPS, and have a single-payer post office. We can have government-run telephones and TV. Thirty years ago every other country had all of these, and worthies said that markets couldn't work for travel, package delivery, the "natural monopoly" of telephones and TV. Until we tried it. That the rest of the world spends less just shows how dysfunctional our current system is, not how a free market would work.

While economically straightforward, liberalization is always politically hard. Innovation and cost reduction require new businesses to displace familiar, well-connected incumbents. Protected businesses spawn "good jobs" for protected workers, dues for their unions, easy lives for their managers, political support for their regulators and politicians, and cushy jobs for health-policy wonks. Protection from competition allows private insurance to cross-subsidize Medicare, Medicaid, and emergency rooms.

But it can happen. The first step is, the American public must understand that there is an alternative. Stand up and demand it.

Mr. Cochrane is a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, a senior fellow of the Hoover institution, and an adjunct scholar of the Cato institute.
Posts: 28,297
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 01:13 PM   #16
Calcountry Calcountry is offline
Shoot the tube
 
Calcountry's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Where I am
Casino cash: $738
Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan View Post
The number of people who still hold on to the hope that the ACA will survive is growing terribly small. Even progressive pundits are distancing themselves from the disaster called ObamaCare. Before long only Alan Combs will be left selling this .


The future holds some great opportunity to replace ACA with something that actually does improve HC in the US is huge. Doing the right thing will be a two stage effort. Eliminate all memory of ObamaCare and replace with something that works.

Interesting take from WSJ:


By JOHN H. COCHRANE

The unraveling of the Affordable Care Act presents a historic opportunity for change. Its proponents call it "settled law," but as Prohibition taught us, not even a constitutional amendment is settled law—if it is dysfunctional enough, and if Americans can see a clear alternative.

This fall's website fiasco and policy cancellations are only the beginning. Next spring the individual mandate is likely to unravel when we see how sick the people are who signed up on exchanges, and if our government really is going to penalize voters for not buying health insurance. The employer mandate and "accountable care organizations" will take their turns in the news. There will be scandals. There will be fraud. This will go on for years.


Yet opponents should not sit back and revel in dysfunction. The Affordable Care Act was enacted in response to genuine problems. Without a clear alternative, we will simply patch more, subsidize more, and ignore frauds and scandals, as we do in Medicare and other programs.

There is an alternative. A much freer market in health care and health insurance can work, can deliver high quality, technically innovative care at much lower cost, and solve the pathologies of the pre-existing system.

The U.S. health-care market is dysfunctional. Obscure prices and $500 Band-Aids are legendary. The reason is simple: Health care and health insurance are strongly protected from competition. There are explicit barriers to entry, for example the laws in many states that require a "certificate of need" before one can build a new hospital. Regulatory compliance costs, approvals, nonprofit status, restrictions on foreign doctors and nurses, limits on medical residencies, and many more barriers keep prices up and competitors out. Hospitals whose main clients are uncompetitive insurers and the government cannot innovate and provide efficient cash service.

We need to permit the Southwest Airlines, Wal-Mart, Amazon.com and Apples of the world to bring to health care the same dramatic improvements in price, quality, variety, technology and efficiency that they brought to air travel, retail and electronics. We'll know we are there when prices are on hospital websites, cash customers get discounts, and new hospitals and insurers swamp your inbox with attractive offers and great service.

The Affordable Care Act bets instead that more regulation, price controls, effectiveness panels, and "accountable care" organizations will force efficiency, innovation, quality and service from the top down. Has this ever worked? Did we get smartphones by government pressure on the 1960s AT&T phone monopoly? Did effectiveness panels force United Airlines and American Airlines to cut costs, and push TWA and Pan Am out of business? Did the post office invent FedEx, UPS and email? How about public schools or the last 20 or more health-care "cost control" ideas?

Only deregulation can unleash competition. And only disruptive competition, where new businesses drive out old ones, will bring efficiency, lower costs and innovation.
Health insurance should be individual, portable across jobs, states and providers; lifelong and guaranteed-renewable, meaning you have the right to continue with no unexpected increase in premiums if you get sick. Insurance should protect wealth against large, unforeseen, necessary expenses, rather than be a wildly inefficient payment plan for routine expenses.
People want to buy this insurance, and companies want to sell it. It would be far cheaper, and would solve the pre-existing conditions problem. We do not have such health insurance only because it was regulated out of existence. Businesses cannot establish or contribute to portable individual policies, or employees would have to pay taxes. So businesses only offer group plans. Knowing they will abandon individual insurance when they get a job, and without cross-state portability, there is little reason for young people to invest in lifelong, portable health insurance. Mandated coverage, pressure against full risk rating, and a dysfunctional cash market did the rest.

Rather than a mandate for employer-based groups, we should transition to fully individual-based health insurance. Allow national individual insurance offered and sold to anyone, anywhere, without the tangled mess of state mandates and regulations. Allow employers to contribute to individual insurance at least on an even basis with group plans. Current group plans can convert to individual plans, at once or as people leave. Since all members in a group convert, there is no adverse selection of sicker people.

ObamaCare defenders say we must suffer the dysfunction and patch the law, because there is no alternative. They are wrong. On Nov. 2, for example, New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote movingly about his friend who lost employer-based insurance and died of colon cancer. Mr. Kristof concluded, "This is why we need Obamacare." No, this is why we need individual, portable, guaranteed-renewable, inexpensive, catastrophic-coverage insurance.
On Nov. 15, MIT's Jonathan Gruber, an ObamaCare architect, argued on Realclearpolitics that "we currently have a highly discriminatory system where if you're sick, if you've been sick or you're going to get sick, you cannot get health insurance." We do. He concluded that the Affordable Care Act is "the only way to end that discriminatory system." It is not.
On Dec. 3, President Obama himself said that "the only alternative that Obamacare's critics have, is, well, let's just go back to the status quo." Not so.

What about the homeless guy who has a heart attack? Yes, there must be private and government-provided charity care for the very poor. What if people don't get enough checkups? Send them vouchers. To solve these problems we do not need a federal takeover of health care and insurance for you, me, and every American.

No other country has a free health market, you may object. The rest of the world is closer to single payer, and spends less.

Sure. We can have a single government-run airline too. We can ban FedEx and UPS, and have a single-payer post office. We can have government-run telephones and TV. Thirty years ago every other country had all of these, and worthies said that markets couldn't work for travel, package delivery, the "natural monopoly" of telephones and TV. Until we tried it. That the rest of the world spends less just shows how dysfunctional our current system is, not how a free market would work.

While economically straightforward, liberalization is always politically hard. Innovation and cost reduction require new businesses to displace familiar, well-connected incumbents. Protected businesses spawn "good jobs" for protected workers, dues for their unions, easy lives for their managers, political support for their regulators and politicians, and cushy jobs for health-policy wonks. Protection from competition allows private insurance to cross-subsidize Medicare, Medicaid, and emergency rooms.

But it can happen. The first step is, the American public must understand that there is an alternative. Stand up and demand it.

Mr. Cochrane is a professor of finance at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, a senior fellow of the Hoover institution, and an adjunct scholar of the Cato institute.
Yep, we need single payer, that will fix it, but then, that was the objective all along. Obama in his wildest dreams never thought it would come to pass so quickly. You see left wingers, he HAS been successful. You middle of the roaders, I forgive you, but puhlease, WAKE THE F** UP!!!

All too easy, everything is proceeding according to his plan.
__________________
Amerika, Amerika, I shed my grace on Thee.
Posts: 26,814
Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 01:15 PM   #17
Calcountry Calcountry is offline
Shoot the tube
 
Calcountry's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Where I am
Casino cash: $738
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
"We", since you still seem to believe a collectivist approach is the answer, get the govt out of healthcare altogether starting by rolling back all mandates. Let competition drive down rates. Stop suppression of alternative health care by it's competitors. IOW end the corporatism that you lefties claim to hate.
These asshats don't know how to spell the word free.
__________________
Amerika, Amerika, I shed my grace on Thee.
Posts: 26,814
Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.Calcountry would the whole thing.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 01:40 PM   #18
Just Passin' By Just Passin' By is offline
MVP
 
Just Passin' By's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2009
Casino cash: $4487426
None of this would have been an issue if Roberts had just upheld the Constitution. As long as the 9 clowns in the robes keep looking at the Constitution as their own personal toilet paper, things are going to keep getting worse, for both sides of the political aisle.
Posts: 9,066
Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.Just Passin' By is blessed with 50/50 Hindsight.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 01:44 PM   #19
dirk digler dirk digler is offline
Please squeeze
 
dirk digler's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Clinton, MO
Casino cash: $187234
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
"We", since you still seem to believe a collectivist approach is the answer, get the govt out of healthcare altogether starting by rolling back all mandates. Let competition drive down rates. Stop suppression of alternative health care by it's competitors. IOW end the corporatism that you lefties claim to hate.
JFC quit being a dummy. It was just a general question.
Posts: 48,355
dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 01:50 PM
Just Passin' By
This message has been deleted by Just Passin' By.
Old 12-30-2013, 01:56 PM   #20
HonestChieffan HonestChieffan is offline
Country Santa Year Around
 
HonestChieffan's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: In the Country in MO
Casino cash: $1266839
Its handled. The O has the controls….


__________________
Frazod to KC Nitwit..."Hey, I saw a picture of some dumpy bitch with a horrible ****tarded giant back tattoo and couldn't help but think of you." Simple, Pure, Perfect. 7/31/2013

Dave Lane: "I have donated more money to people in my life as an atheist that most churches ever will."

Come home to Jesus Dave. Come home.
Posts: 28,297
HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.HonestChieffan is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 01:56 PM   #21
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $111583
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk digler View Post
JFC quit being a dummy. It was just a general question.
And it was answered generally. So, you need to quit being the dummy!
__________________
Posts: 56,826
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 02:13 PM   #22
dirk digler dirk digler is offline
Please squeeze
 
dirk digler's Avatar
 

Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Clinton, MO
Casino cash: $187234
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
And it was answered generally. So, you need to quit being the dummy!
Quit trying to read my mind next time. All I did was ask a standard question
Posts: 48,355
dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.dirk digler 's phone was tapped by Scott Pioli.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 03:20 PM   #23
chiefzilla1501 chiefzilla1501 is offline
MVP
 

Join Date: Aug 2008
Casino cash: $128669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prison Bitch View Post
Uh, the biggest cost drivers are (1) demographics which have seen a near inversion of medical actuary tables and (2) perverse incentives whereby nobody really owns their own costs so they "toss it on the house credit card" for payment. Our health costs will never change no matter what system we put into place until we tackle these 2 issues.
That's an oversimplification. Pinning this on individuals is a little bit shady given how many problems are symptomatic. People who need care can't get it or afford it. Some don't have access to it. It's silly to hold people accountable if they can't afford health care. It's not like we are talking about buying video games and iPads.

The biggest cost drivers are that medicine hasn't hit the 21st century. Government and insurance has created a Rubix cube of a reimbursement system. Doctors are forced to follow a government script of care and have to often take overly precautions measures to prevent malpractice. Way too little of med processes are electronic, which creates mass inefficiencies. Pricing is terrible because there is no standard pricing mechanism which is further complicated by the governments Rubix cube approach. We continue to lack ability to measure care based on outcomes. And we focus way too little time on prevention.

Your premise is wrong because we will still have problems after the demographics shift, and because the reason people are credit car debting their care is because they are paying for a massive amount of cost hey shouldn't have to pay for.
Posts: 19,850
chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.chiefzilla1501 is too fat/Omaha.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 03:37 PM   #24
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $111583
Quote:
Originally Posted by dirk digler View Post
Quit trying to read my mind next time. All I did was ask a standard question
And I gave your standard question a standard answer.
__________________
Posts: 56,826
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 09:30 PM   #25
JohnnyV13 JohnnyV13 is offline
Veteran
 
JohnnyV13's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tucson AZ
Casino cash: $62382
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
Nope. That's all equally true for you as in... IF it doesn't come from the state or some sort of Progressivism (the cause of our HC crisis). I just happened to follow the takeover of Cato in the past year and it was ugly. Outside of that FREEDOM works. It's happen right now, with HC servers going free market by accepting cash.

But carry on on with your logical fallacy of ad hominem. I see you've got nothin'!
This is a spectacularly stupid response (note, this is NOT an ad hominem, since my attack is directed AT YOUR ARGUMENT and not you).

I said that you were 1) playing identity politics by rejecting a plan because of who proposed it and 2) that you would only accept a solution with very specific characteristics.

NEITHER OF THESE ARE AN AD HOMINEM!!!!! THe first is directed at your objection which was to attack the plan because it came from a guy associated with the Cato institute---then to attack the Cato institute. You DID NOT ADDRESS HIS PLAN. This is a moronic, fallacious approach because you have attacked the messenger instead of the message, which is the essence of the ad hominem.


The second is a projection about your behavior, which is testable. It is NOT an ad hominem. Instead, it is a test to show if you are indeed playing identity politics. You can refute it by evaluating plans instead of the person proposing them (and not requiring a plan to validate your political views). By attacking a plan because it comes from the Cato institute is your way of saying that this group aren't real conservatives because they don't follow these people I agree with. That's EXACTLY what I mean about requiring self-validation before approving of a solution.

THen you lie and claim that I am hurling ad hominems and give your stock attack of "you have noth'n". Do you even read anything?

Obviously not.
__________________
http://thevirilview.com/royals

Where blogging is cheap therapy for 27 years of frustration
Posts: 2,838
JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 10:10 PM   #26
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $111583
Did you know Ron Paul made Gallup Poll's Most Admired list?
__________________
Posts: 56,826
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 10:53 PM   #27
bobbymitch bobbymitch is offline
Starter
 
bobbymitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Livin' large at LOTO
Casino cash: $40679
Let's face it, there are two distinct, but greatly intertwined issues: healthcare costs and heath insurance costs.

Most other insurance costs are actuarially based. Home, auto, and life insurance premium costs are easily obtained from a company produced chart. Health insurance has been pretty much an employer-based with cost based mainly upon the employee base. That is, all other things equal, an employer with 40,000 employee will have lower premiums than one with 400 employees. Bigger pool to spread the individual risk. One reason why many employer-based associations grew, was to make available lower health insurance costs to it's members. Health insurance companies can't really rate individual polices as they have no experience in doing so.

Hospital costs are based upon the "chargemaster." Steven Brill discussed this in his Time article "Bitter Pill." Why do aspirins cost $5.00 - chargemaster says so. Never mind that no one can definitely say where the numbers come from. Chances are that some costs are duplicated, if not tripled or quadrupled. No one can be sure. Although, even with the steep discounts given to insurance plans, hospitals still make money. Hospitals and other medical facilities are probably one of the few industries that really don't know what are their true costs for a given procedure.

As to the ACA - it was destined to be a big flop. If anyone wanted to help the uninsured, Medicare is up and running and works to a large extent. All congress had to do was to, say, double the monthly premiums for the uninsured to $208/month and move on. But politics got in the way.

And let's face it, there will always those who don't want health insurance. Just like there are those who drive without auto insurance and those who prefer to live on the street or in the woods than in a shelter.
__________________
This is the place where brilliant minds assemble to willfully pool ignorance with questionable logic in order to reach absurd conclusions.
Posts: 333
bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 10:58 PM   #28
BucEyedPea BucEyedPea is offline
BucPatriot
 
BucEyedPea's Avatar
 

Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: None of your business
Casino cash: $111583
After reading your post, I always wondered why we had to have a national health program implemented via law when we already had Medicaid and Medicare. Even some states have HC programs for children.
__________________
Posts: 56,826
BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.BucEyedPea is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 11:10 PM   #29
bobbymitch bobbymitch is offline
Starter
 
bobbymitch's Avatar
 

Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Livin' large at LOTO
Casino cash: $40679
Quote:
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea View Post
After reading your post, I always wondered why we had to have a national health program implemented via law when we already had Medicaid and Medicare. Even some states have HC programs for children.
Politics aside, this would have been the easiest program to expand as the infrastructure is already in place.
__________________
This is the place where brilliant minds assemble to willfully pool ignorance with questionable logic in order to reach absurd conclusions.
Posts: 333
bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.bobbymitch is not part of the Right 53.
  Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2013, 11:39 PM   #30
JohnnyV13 JohnnyV13 is offline
Veteran
 
JohnnyV13's Avatar
 

Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tucson AZ
Casino cash: $62382
Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbymitch View Post
Politics aside, this would have been the easiest program to expand as the infrastructure is already in place.
Sure, from an implementation standpoint.

The problem is that Obamacare was politically easier. Obama went this route because he saw the failure of Hillarycare due to combat with insurance companies.

They are worth billions and will spend enormous sums to stop anything that would end their business.

Is it kludged up? Yes. Is it constitutional? I don't think it should be, but Roberts flipped.

This, "go back to a complete free market" would have massive transition problems that would need to be looked at.

I agree that what we have now is a complete mess. The insurance model runs into the problem that the most profitable strategy is to insure people unlikely to get sick, and to stop insuring them when they are likely to get sick.

Fee for service, tends to encourage doctors to provide lots of service. I think the core problem with our current system is that we do fee for service, and the patients have little incentive to get value for their health care dollar. Heck, the way things are now, patients can't really do this if they wanted to, because they have little werewithal to price shop or evaluate physicians.
__________________
http://thevirilview.com/royals

Where blogging is cheap therapy for 27 years of frustration
Posts: 2,838
JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.JohnnyV13 must have mowed badgirl's lawn.
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.