Republicans Have an Obligation to Oppose Healthcare Plan and Propose Alternative

[samsaysit]

It is now up to the Republicans to clearly address to the American people the faults and fallacies of the administrations healthcare plan.

More importantly, they have the obligation to put forward an alternative plan that will address the concerns now clear to all of the populace while at the same time keep us from having to incur the massive costs of what is being proposed.

In order to be seen as something other than being just opposition and obstructionist, it is important to begin addressing this and the other major issues floating around the Beltway at this time.

This is an opportunity to offer leadership and an incredible chance to demonstrate that the Republicans are in tune with what is of uppermost importance now, and it is not healthcare. Unless of course the administration is permitted to spin healthcare up to being the central most important item on the agenda, which it is not.

The economy and jobs are and that is what the Republicans should focus on and bang the drum about and, at the same time, prove to the American people that healtcare can and should wait until the economy is on solid ground showing recovery.

There is no reason to permit the Democrats to push through this healthcare legislation at a time when the economy is continuing to grind down, only to be driven further into the pit with this plan requiring yet another layer of taxation.

Cutting taxes is the most immeditate action that could be taken at this point to impact each and every citizen and to spark recovery.

The administration does not get it and that is the opening that the Republicans have to walk through.

No matter who you are in America it is now evident that the administration will be increasing taxes on everyone and impact everything and this plan should be wrapped in that tax increase paper along with the others and thrown into the garbage where it belongs and where the bulk of voters would put tax increases and all associated with them, programs and politicians alike.

Someone from the Republican side needs to take the leadership role on this issue and get the focus off of what the administrations' agenda is and back onto what is of concern to everyone in the Nation.

Now is the time for true leadership and the line in the sand has to be drawn with the economy at the center.

Obama and his crew have no idea what to do to get the Nation on a path to recovery, it was never and is not now part of their agenda which was from the start to consolidate power and create a Nation of citizens (voters) dependent on Washington for the important elements of their lives and those citizens (voters) viewing them as the providers.

Unless this gets changed, we are all going to be sitting in a much deeper hole in every aspect of our lives and the status of the Nation.

[VirusX999]

I think they did.

Savings accounts for medical expenses, was one I remember hearing about.

[ddye]

Their plan should be to let the insurance companies have free rein. If in the future regular people are priced out of the health insurance market, those people should better themselves and make enough money to be able to afford health insurance.

If in the future 80% of Americans cannot afford health insurance, 80% of Americans will not DESERVE health insurance.

Doug

[SonsofLiberty]

Their plan should be to let the insurance companies have free rein. If in the future regular people are priced out of the health insurance market, those people should better themselves and make enough money to be able to afford health insurance.

If in the future 80% of Americans cannot afford health insurance, 80% of Americans will not DESERVE health insurance.

Doug

Seriously Doug do you honestly think 80% wouldn't be able to afford health care? What prevents Wal-Mart from pricing out 80% of the population? Oh yeah, they want to make money.

The market has a funny effect on bringing down prices.

[old guy]

Seriously Doug do you honestly think 80% wouldn't be able to afford health care? What prevents Wal-Mart from pricing out 80% of the population? Oh yeah, they want to make money.

The market has a funny effect on bringing down prices.

which is why health insurance for familys costs 12k a year

[SonsofLiberty]

which is why health insurance for familys costs 12k a year

It costs that much because:

1- many market forces are non-existent

2- and perhaps most important (and tied in with one) the 3rd payee system causes higher prices.

3- people have this notion that they should not have to pay anything or just a fraction of ANY interaction with health care they encounter.

(Im 38 and my coverage costs $1300/year)

[tislaw]

Why does government need to be anymore involved in our lives?

[tislaw]

It costs that much because:

1- many market forces are non-existent

2- and perhaps most important (and tied in with one) the 3rd payee system causes higher prices.

3- people have this notion that they should not have to pay anything or just a fraction of ANY interaction with health care they encounter.

(Im 38 and my coverage costs $1300/year)

Not to mention that there is more of a demand but through government insurance, medicare, because of mass aging segment of the population.

I'm sorry, but if dumbasses will not pay their $20 copays until over 20 accounts go into collection, wth would this governmental insurance crap stop the unpaid medical accounts to go away?

[johnrocks]

which is why health insurance for familys costs 12k a year

Group costs that but individual health insurance can be had for a family of 4 for $4-5000 a year. Those liberal spin factories are selling bs and looks like you bought it.:hug:

[blackmesa741]

Group costs that but individual health insurance can be had for a family of 4 for $4-5000 a year. Those liberal spin factories are selling bs and looks like you bought it.:hug:

I only wish I had access to your plan. Oh yeah...after the premiums are paid, then I get to worry about all the deductibles and co-pays! Best health care in the world!


Like hell.

[blackmesa741]

Why does government need to be anymore involved in our lives?

In order to stop gay people from getting married.

[Cutiepie]

I only wish I had access to your plan. Oh yeah...after the premiums are paid, then I get to worry about all the deductibles and co-pays! Best health care in the world!


Like hell.




it's called shop around. We have Blue Cross/Blue Shield and we are not paying $12k a year for coverage.

[Trip]

In order to stop gay people from getting married.

That's strange, because gay people getting married involves the redefinition of the word, and then legislative and judicial abuse to push that on the populace, who overwhelmingly want to maintain marriage as it is, between a man and woman.

Yet homosexuals reject civil unions. This is about forcing an agenda on society to validate homosexuals and not about "rights".

[old guy]

it's called shop around. We have Blue Cross/Blue Shield and we are not paying $12k a year for coverage.
health insurance for me and my wife is 10k a year for the 2 of us. Blue cross wont cover us as will no private carrier,we have to rely on the state hi risk pool. fortunatly I can pay for it but I know most cannot afford it

[Cutiepie]

health insurance for me and my wife is 10k a year for the 2 of us. Blue cross wont cover us as will no private carrier,we have to rely on the state hi risk pool. fortunatly I can pay for it but I know most cannot afford it




Maybe the reason it is not that expensive for us is b/c we have literally had no health problems. We barely use the insurance. I was in the hospital one time and that was when our son was born and that was 19 years ago. We are in late 40's too.

[darknessesedge]

It is now up to the Republicans to clearly address to the American people the faults and fallacies of the administrations healthcare plan.

More importantly, they have the obligation to put forward an alternative plan that will address the concerns now clear to all of the populace while at the same time keep us from having to incur the massive costs of what is being proposed.

In order to be seen as something other than being just opposition and obstructionist, it is important to begin addressing this and the other major issues floating around the Beltway at this time.

This is an opportunity to offer leadership and an incredible chance to demonstrate that the Republicans are in tune with what is of uppermost importance now, and it is not healthcare. Unless of course the administration is permitted to spin healthcare up to being the central most important item on the agenda, which it is not.

The economy and jobs are and that is what the Republicans should focus on and bang the drum about and, at the same time, prove to the American people that healtcare can and should wait until the economy is on solid ground showing recovery.

There is no reason to permit the Democrats to push through this healthcare legislation at a time when the economy is continuing to grind down, only to be driven further into the pit with this plan requiring yet another layer of taxation.

Cutting taxes is the most immeditate action that could be taken at this point to impact each and every citizen and to spark recovery.

The administration does not get it and that is the opening that the Republicans have to walk through.

No matter who you are in America it is now evident that the administration will be increasing taxes on everyone and impact everything and this plan should be wrapped in that tax increase paper along with the others and thrown into the garbage where it belongs and where the bulk of voters would put tax increases and all associated with them, programs and politicians alike.

Someone from the Republican side needs to take the leadership role on this issue and get the focus off of what the administrations' agenda is and back onto what is of concern to everyone in the Nation.

Now is the time for true leadership and the line in the sand has to be drawn with the economy at the center.

Obama and his crew have no idea what to do to get the Nation on a path to recovery, it was never and is not now part of their agenda which was from the start to consolidate power and create a Nation of citizens (voters) dependent on Washington for the important elements of their lives and those citizens (voters) viewing them as the providers.

Unless this gets changed, we are all going to be sitting in a much deeper hole in every aspect of our lives and the status of the Nation.

who says the gop has to offer another plan?
how about individuals look out for themselves for a change and quit burdoning the taxpayer?

[SnowSquirrel]

who says the gop has to offer another plan?
how about individuals look out for themselves for a change and quit burdoning the taxpayer?
I think the theory is that the current system has been successfully portrayed as in crisis, despite the fact that it's a government-created crisis. (Excessive federal control, plus the realization that the illegal Medicare and Medicaid programs are doomed to financial collapse.) For the Republicans to advocate no action would seem like an endorsement of the current system, including its problems.

Where the GOP can play a constructive role is in pointing out that the federal government is largely responsible for the problems we face in health care, and proposing a reduction of federal control. Even a fairly timid proposal like opening up the interstate insurance market would be a positive step, both for its actual effects and for marketing value.

[samsaysit]

who says the gop has to offer another plan?
how about individuals look out for themselves for a change and quit burdoning the taxpayer?
You did not do a very good job of reading the post. But, to help you a bit, the position is that the Republicans need to oppose the plan, say why they oppose it, what is wrong with it and then manage the political side of this and focus attention on getting the economy going and creating some jobs by lowering taxes and providing people and businesses with the opportunity of keeping their money and putting it to work in the Country.

[dad49er]

I think they did.

Savings accounts for medical expenses, was one I remember hearing about.

That and tax credits.

What is ironic is that many conservatives believe "no plan" and no government involvement is the best 'plan'.

[Rurudyne]

The alternative should be lawful government.

If they want to go that rout might I suggest a notion like a "National Hospital" built in the mold of the County Hospital idea? In Washington D.C. or a Territory (but expressly NOT in any place also under the jurisdiction of any State) Congress does indeed possess general legislative power and they could fund a hospital to provide subsidized and means tested health care for those going to the hospital in question.

Much cheaper than the trillion that will be spent by CBO's own appraisal on forcing us all into some insane socialist dream that is also expressly unconstitutional.

[Mobulis]

Seriously Doug do you honestly think 80% wouldn't be able to afford health care? What prevents Wal-Mart from pricing out 80% of the population? Oh yeah, they want to make money.

The market has a funny effect on bringing down prices.


Yea right.:rolleyes:

[dad49er]

The alternative should be lawful government.

If they want to go that rout might I suggest a notion like a "National Hospital" built in the mold of the County Hospital idea? In Washington D.C. or a Territory (but expressly NOT in any place also under the jurisdiction of any State) Congress does indeed possess general legislative power and they could fund a hospital to provide subsidized and means tested health care for those going to the hospital in question.

Much cheaper than the trillion that will be spent by CBO's own appraisal on forcing us all into some insane socialist dream that is also expressly unconstitutional.

That might entail seizing such land (hospital) through imminent domain. I don't think anyone favors that.

I know you, and others are very persistent with constitutional, enumeration based arguments, but since such programs constitutionality has already been upheld I just don't see those arguments stopping anything.

[dad49er]

Seriously Doug do you honestly think 80% wouldn't be able to afford health care? What prevents Wal-Mart from pricing out 80% of the population? Oh yeah, they want to make money.

The market has a funny effect on bringing down prices.

The 'market' hasn't brought down the cost of health insurance.
Been going up like crazy.

[Rurudyne]

That might entail seizing such land (hospital) through imminent domain. I don't think anyone favors that.

I know you, and others are very persistent with constitutional, enumeration based arguments, but since such programs constitutionality has already been upheld I just don't see those arguments stopping anything.
If at first you don't succeed bang your head against the wall again and again.

Cause all in all you're just another head banging against the wall. :)

As for e.d. ... at least it would be for a public project and not for some private project the government thinks will give them more tax money to fritter away in the coming years.

[Wino]

It is now up to the Republicans to clearly address to the American people the faults and fallacies of the administrations healthcare plan.

More importantly, they have the obligation to put forward an alternative plan that will address the concerns now clear to all of the populace while at the same time keep us from having to incur the massive costs of what is being proposed.

In order to be seen as something other than being just opposition and obstructionist, it is important to begin addressing this and the other major issues floating around the Beltway at this time.

This is an opportunity to offer leadership and an incredible chance to demonstrate that the Republicans are in tune with what is of uppermost importance now, and it is not healthcare. Unless of course the administration is permitted to spin healthcare up to being the central most important item on the agenda, which it is not.

The economy and jobs are and that is what the Republicans should focus on and bang the drum about and, at the same time, prove to the American people that healtcare can and should wait until the economy is on solid ground showing recovery.

There is no reason to permit the Democrats to push through this healthcare legislation at a time when the economy is continuing to grind down, only to be driven further into the pit with this plan requiring yet another layer of taxation.

Cutting taxes is the most immeditate action that could be taken at this point to impact each and every citizen and to spark recovery.

The administration does not get it and that is the opening that the Republicans have to walk through.

No matter who you are in America it is now evident that the administration will be increasing taxes on everyone and impact everything and this plan should be wrapped in that tax increase paper along with the others and thrown into the garbage where it belongs and where the bulk of voters would put tax increases and all associated with them, programs and politicians alike.

Someone from the Republican side needs to take the leadership role on this issue and get the focus off of what the administrations' agenda is and back onto what is of concern to everyone in the Nation.

Now is the time for true leadership and the line in the sand has to be drawn with the economy at the center.

Obama and his crew have no idea what to do to get the Nation on a path to recovery, it was never and is not now part of their agenda which was from the start to consolidate power and create a Nation of citizens (voters) dependent on Washington for the important elements of their lives and those citizens (voters) viewing them as the providers.

Unless this gets changed, we are all going to be sitting in a much deeper hole in every aspect of our lives and the status of the Nation.
The Federal Government should not be involved in healthcare at all! The Constitution of the United States limits the role of the federal government and leaves these decisions up to the States and local governments. The federal government is making a socialistic power grab from the states. Medicare should also be eliminated and left up to the states. Why should I pay for your healthcare?

[dad49er]

If at first you don't succeed bang your head against the wall again and again.

Cause all in all you're just another head banging against the wall. :)

As for e.d. ... at least it would be for a public project and not for some private project the government thinks will give them more tax money to fritter away in the coming years.

I do admire you're persistence.
Like Pink Floyd too!

[Rurudyne]

I do admire you're persistence.
Like Pink Floyd too!
The Wall is interesting because the commentary about the album simply does not seem to match up to the substance of the movie and yet many I've encountered seem to demand that the movie must mean the exact same thing as the album seemed to mean (must be a lot of dissatisfied Transformers fans in that lot).

In particular, Pink, in the movie, could be seen as speaking ironically of his relationship with his wife even as the whole thing seems to have accurately predicted some of the mechanism behind the rise of skinheads: a youth culture rebelling against their forebears (seen as evil and corrupt) latch onto the very thing their parents said was most evil on the apparent basis that what their parents deemed evil must be good — the parents generation being so obviously corrupt.

Thus the phrase: "Did you ever stop to wonder why we had to run for shelter when the promise of a brave new world unfurled beneath a clear blue sky?" might take on tragic and prescient meaning in contrast to the main character's impression of his formative years (the education system in particular).

All in all, the Wall may be much darker and wiser social commentary than what it has been presented as (at least to me).

[Long Island Bob]

does "propose an alternative" mean "propose a plan to spend tax dollars to cover people who are not currently covered."


What if the alternative is "end jackpot malpractice lawsuits . . . thus making health care more affordble?" does that still count as an alternative or doea a alternative HAVE to involve spending tax dollars to provide health insurance to folks already covered under medcaid?

[blackmesa741]

Maybe the reason it is not that expensive for us is b/c we have literally had no health problems. We barely use the insurance. I was in the hospital one time and that was when our son was born and that was 19 years ago. We are in late 40's too.

Reminds me of a Monty Python skit "the Insurance Sketch."

Car insurance customer comes to the office to file a claim because a truck ran into his car, which was parked at the time.

Insurance agent tells customer "it seems you opted for the never claim policy, which if you never make a claim is quite worthwhile. But you made a claim, so there it is" (as the agent denies the customer's claim.

[blackmesa741]

it's called shop around. We have Blue Cross/Blue Shield and we are not paying $12k a year for coverage.

Why didn't I think of that?

[blackmesa741]

That's strange, because gay people getting married involves the redefinition of the word, and then legislative and judicial abuse to push that on the populace, who overwhelmingly want to maintain marriage as it is, between a man and woman.

Yet homosexuals reject civil unions. This is about forcing an agenda on society to validate homosexuals and not about "rights".

but the question was "why does the government have to be anymore involved in our lives." I was answering the question, not arguing the merits of gay marriage. But the government must certainly be involved in denying that option to gay people.

Do you think the government should NOT be involved in this part of people's lives? Do you think the government should stay out of the business of deciding who can marry whom?

Or do you favor government involvement in this aspect of people's lives?

[Kelzan]

Tort and regulatory reform is the key to cheaper healthcare, not a government monstrosity.

[nunyadb]

Tort and regulatory reform is the key to cheaper healthcare, not a government monstrosity.

Considering that the vast majority of politicians come from a legal background,
what do you think the odds of a common sense solution like that is ?

I'll tell you something though, the tort lawyers shot themselves in the ass with this
one. Once the government takes over medical care, they won't be able to sue
anyone.
So they lose in the end anyway.

Damn shame that they're so shortsighted they can't see this one coming.
And on top of that, they're going to have to pay out the ass just like everyone
else that has a million plus bucks in the bank.
They won't be able to get out of it either.
So they get screwed right along with the rest of us.
No job, no more high dollar income, and on top of that have to pay the
exorbitant taxes on their accrued wealth.

Can't think of a bunch of useless bloodsuckers that deserve it more.
So **** them too.

[EnchantedFrog]

The 'market' hasn't brought down the cost of health insurance.
Been going up like crazy.
The 'market' is not driving the cost up. The lawyers are.

And, anyone in this country can receive health care... despite what libs would have you believe.

Many scam the system for hundreds of thousands of dollars per year EACH.

Recent article in the NY Post:

"Ricky Alardo, a homeless alcoholic nicknamed Ricky Ricardo, swigs cheap vodka by day at his favorite corner in Washington Heights, then calls an ambulance to chauffeur him to the hospital for a free meal and a warm place to sleep, courtesy of taxpayers who fund his Medicaid benefits.
For a chronic caller like Alardo -- who phones 911 four or five times a week -- the annual medical bill can be as high as $300,000. Over 13 years, the length of time he has been abusing the emergency room, he has cost the medical system an estimated $3.9 million."

LINK (http://www.nypost.com/seven/07122009/news/regionalnews/hosp_itality_abue_178789.htm?page=0)

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

Tort and regulatory reform is the key to cheaper healthcare, not a government monstrosity.

I can't believe people still believe this.

[Gaetano "Tommy" Lucchese]

If the GOP continues to offer lame alternatives like tax credits or blaming torts, expect them to get steamrolled on this issue.

They would never propose something sensible like the repeal of the HMO Act.

[ChaosControl]

People whine and complain about deductibles.
Health insurance is not health care, it is not supposed to be. It shouldn't cover an annual or whatever checkup, it shouldn't cover cough medicine.

It should be there if you have a heart attack and need heart surgery or something else major that costs tens of thousands of dollars.

People who want it as a full health care are the very reason why it costs so much. Pay for common things out of pocket. Since an annual checkup is a guaranteed cost, it isn't one bit cheaper to have health coverage than it is to just pay out of pocket.

This is all such b.s.

Have catastrophic care with like a $5000 deductible. Do it as an individual plan without some b.s. group coverage or government nonsense. If we all did this, everyone could be covered and wouldn't have to pay like $5000-10000 year.

[janer]

Here's the plan. You go to the doctor. You pay the doctor. You don't like that doctor, you go to a different doctor. That's how liberty works.
Here's the alternative plan. If the gov't intends to push a government health plan on citizens, there should be a two or three year trial period. For that time, only, and all, government workers from the president on down must be enrolled, and their families must be enrolled in the plan. Work out the kinks. Then write the bill.

[tom1468]

More importantly, they have the obligation to put forward an alternative plan that will address the concerns now clear to all of the populace while at the same time keep us .
No they do not
Socialism is still socialism no matter which side is doing it

[tislaw]

I just think people actually want to hand over their entire paychecks to the government and allow the government to hand them back what they can spend. Seriously, how much more government involvement do people want in their lives? Being told when they can go to the bathroom?

[JackAKM]

No they do not
Socialism is still socialism no matter which side is doing it

Agreed. Don't touch it, it's none of your business.

[Socrates]

No they do not
Socialism is still socialism no matter which side is doing it

I think there are areas of the health insurance industry that could be improved with some leadership from a competent government. However, I hate how debates get framed as demands for presenting alternatives while the problems and the issues haven't even been accurately defined.

Our incompetent government seems to always approach problems with the "ready, fire, aim" strategy. The few who suggest that "aim" come before "fire" get labeled as obstructionist or the "party of 'no.'" They are typically the ones of whom an alternative solution is demanded but even when someone is wise enough to know that one should aim before firing, they're not likely to be wise enough to provide a useful solution to an inaccurately defined problem.

[Voxpopuli]

No they do not
Socialism is still socialism no matter which side is doing it

And reading comprehension is reading comprehension.

The OP is making an excellent point but rather than read the opinion and consider his idea people offer up knee-jerk statements. Which seems to be related to what the OP is talking about. You cannot simply rely on slogans if you want to stop nationalized healthcare, you have to offer reasoned alternatives.

[old guy]

People whine and complain about deductibles.
Health insurance is not health care, it is not supposed to be. It shouldn't cover an annual or whatever checkup, it shouldn't cover cough medicine.

It should be there if you have a heart attack and need heart surgery or something else major that costs tens of thousands of dollars.

People who want it as a full health care are the very reason why it costs so much. Pay for common things out of pocket. Since an annual checkup is a guaranteed cost, it isn't one bit cheaper to have health coverage than it is to just pay out of pocket.

This is all such b.s.

Have catastrophic care with like a $5000 deductible. Do it as an individual plan without some b.s. group coverage or government nonsense. If we all did this, everyone could be covered and wouldn't have to pay like $5000-10000 year.


and what if you cant find a policy like that that will cover you?

[bloods vs crips]

Seriously Doug do you honestly think 80% wouldn't be able to afford health care? What prevents Wal-Mart from pricing out 80% of the population? Oh yeah, they want to make money.

The market has a funny effect on bringing down prices.

except medical care is an inelastic product, in which patients get whatever they can afford. Whether the price is reasonable isn't relevant in this type of demand curve.

[bloods vs crips]

it's called shop around. We have Blue Cross/Blue Shield and we are not paying $12k a year for coverage.

anyone have a bout with cancer?

[bloods vs crips]

That's strange, because gay people getting married involves the redefinition of the word, and then legislative and judicial abuse to push that on the populace, who overwhelmingly want to maintain marriage as it is, between a man and woman.

Yet homosexuals reject civil unions. This is about forcing an agenda on society to validate homosexuals and not about "rights".

government intervention is what recognizes marriage in the first place.

[Iggy]

How about we let people buy health insurance the way they can buy insurance for cars and houses?

"I saved a ton of money by switching my health insurance to Geico."

[bloods vs crips]

Here's the plan. You go to the doctor. You pay the doctor. You don't like that doctor, you go to a different doctor. That's how liberty works.
Here's the alternative plan. If the gov't intends to push a government health plan on citizens, there should be a two or three year trial period. For that time, only, and all, government workers from the president on down must be enrolled, and their families must be enrolled in the plan. Work out the kinks. Then write the bill.

Problem is, the doctor has no incentive to waste his time on you, when he has access to much more money from insurance companies.

[bloods vs crips]

I think there are areas of the health insurance industry that could be improved with some leadership from a competent government. However, I hate how debates get framed as demands for presenting alternatives while the problems and the issues haven't even been accurately defined.

Our incompetent government seems to always approach problems with the "ready, fire, aim" strategy. The few who suggest that "aim" come before "fire" get labeled as obstructionist or the "party of 'no.'" They are typically the ones of whom an alternative solution is demanded but even when someone is wise enough to know that one should aim before firing, they're not likely to be wise enough to provide a useful solution to an inaccurately defined problem.

problem: it costs way too much for too many people

Figuring out way can only come after everyone agrees with this premise.

[Tom Kalbfus]

problem: it costs way too much for too many people

Figuring out way can only come after everyone agrees with this premise.
How about a healthcare program that costs whatever the government can afford. For example, the government sets aside $100,000,000,000 for healthcare, there are 300,000,000 people so divide $100,000,000,000 by 300,000,000 and you write every citizen a check for $333.33. To help pay for health insurance.

This program is guaranteed not to cost more than $100 billion if that was all that was set aside for it.

[bloods vs crips]

How about a healthcare program that costs whatever the government can afford. For example, the government sets aside $100,000,000,000 for healthcare, there are 300,000,000 people so divide $100,000,000,000 by 300,000,000 and you write every citizen a check for $333.33. To help pay for health insurance.

This program is guaranteed not to cost more than $100 billion if that was all that was set aside for it.

I simply want everyone to recognize that there is a problem. I was arguing with someone the other night that there is no problem because people still come here for operations.

As if there aren't literally 10's of millions struggling with medical needs.

There's a reason that the majority of bankruptcies are due to medical care.

Even if we developed a system to manage the uninsured it would be better than sweeping government intervention.

Best case scenario is people shopping for care because insurers don't exist.

[janer]

Problem is, the doctor has no incentive to waste his time on you, when he has access to much more money from insurance companies.

You're kidding, right? Third party providers pay the doctor's a fraction of the fee and make them jump through hoops to get it. It can take months to get partially reimbursed from any third party provider. For the patient, good insurance is a cheap premium, but that company may not fully reimburse the doctor.
Say your car insurance was $200 a month for everything you needed for the car, from accident coverage to tuneups, oil changes, gas was covered save for a co-pay. You wouldn't think about how much the labor and materials and overhead to your mechanic, you wouldn't know or care if his operating costs went up, because all you see going out of your pocket is that $200 plus the co pay. Health insurance is no longer health insurance, it's a pre-paid plan where you either really think that your doctor is being fully reimbursed on his charges, or you don't know and don't care.
Bottom line is, it's going to be harder and harder to persuade a talented, ambitious kid to put up with 10+ years of training and an increasing hostility toward the medical profession. And then you're stuck with what's left, or nothing at all.

[BillBrown]

It is now up to the Republicans to clearly address to the American people the faults and fallacies of the administrations healthcare plan.

More importantly, they have the obligation to put forward an alternative plan that will address the concerns now clear to all of the populace while at the same time keep us from having to incur the massive costs of what is being proposed.

This is what is wrong with us and what will eventually end our liberty.

The only argument you propose is who can augment Socialism the best- Democrats or Republicans.

Health care is none of the government's business.

The only "plan" that should be put forth is to get government out of every vestige of it- including Medicare.

[bloods vs crips]

You're kidding, right? Third party providers pay the doctor's a fraction of the fee and make them jump through hoops to get it. It can take months to get partially reimbursed from any third party provider. For the patient, good insurance is a cheap premium, but that company may not fully reimburse the doctor.
Say your car insurance was $200 a month for everything you needed for the car, from accident coverage to tuneups, oil changes, gas was covered save for a co-pay. You wouldn't think about how much the labor and materials and overhead to your mechanic, you wouldn't know or care if his operating costs went up, because all you see going out of your pocket is that $200 plus the co pay. Health insurance is no longer health insurance, it's a pre-paid plan where you either really think that your doctor is being fully reimbursed on his charges, or you don't know and don't care.
Bottom line is, it's going to be harder and harder to persuade a talented, ambitious kid to put up with 10+ years of training and an increasing hostility toward the medical profession. And then you're stuck with what's left, or nothing at all.

problem is, people NEED medical care when something goes wrong. It isn't like elective surgery where you can simply avoid it if you think it's too expensive. In economics we call this inelastic demand. The product is needed so greatly that the price is of secondary concern.

And the insurance companies pay a fraction, so the prices are extremely high. There is no reason to assume that the doctor will give a cash customer a matching discount. And there is certainly no reason to assume that the customer has the capability to shop around town for something they may desperately need. And if they have a serious issue, forget about affording it with cash.

My 24 year old tennis buddy got testicular cancer, and after treatment the insurer denied coverage. He now owes roughly $200k in medical bills.

[RWReaganfan]

My 24 year old tennis buddy got testicular cancer, and after treatment the insurer denied coverage. He now owes roughly $200k in medical bills.

Why?

These anecdotal stories are meaningless unless you explain why he was denied coverage. Was there some fine print in his contract that ruled out coverage for testicluar cancer? What was it? Tell the WHOLE story and then we can decide.

[Cutiepie]

Reminds me of a Monty Python skit "the Insurance Sketch."

Car insurance customer comes to the office to file a claim because a truck ran into his car, which was parked at the time.

Insurance agent tells customer "it seems you opted for the never claim policy, which if you never make a claim is quite worthwhile. But you made a claim, so there it is" (as the agent denies the customer's claim.




So, you are saying we should make a claim even though we don't need to? Why?

[RWReaganfan]

Our incompetent government seems to always approach problems with the "ready, fire, aim" strategy.

The Obama adminstration is trying to get bills through Congress so fast that "fire, ready, aim!" would be more descriptive.

[Cutiepie]

anyone have a bout with cancer?




nope.

[samsaysit]

This is what is wrong with us and what will eventually end our liberty.

The only argument you propose is who can augment Socialism the best- Democrats or Republicans.

Health care is none of the government's business.

The only "plan" that should be put forth is to get government out of every vestige of it- including Medicare.
Bill, you just do not have reading and comprehension skills and THAT my friend is really what is wrong with America.

Won't take up any more of your time so you can get back to watching tv.

[BillBrown]

Bill, you just do not have reading and comprehension skills and THAT my friend is really what is wrong with America.

Won't take up any more of your time so you can get back to watching tv.

No, I read you right.
I don't watch TV, and I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Maybe that's the best you can do.


What does this mean?:

The economy and jobs are and that is what the Republicans should focus on and bang the drum about and, at the same time, prove to the American people that healtcare can and should wait until the economy is on solid ground showing recovery.



You're saying in effect, let's fatten up the host before we unleash the parasites. That's RINOism at it's finest.

The Republicans should tell the American people that health care is none of the government's business.

[tom1468]

And reading comprehension is reading comprehension.

The OP is making an excellent point but rather than read the opinion and consider his idea people offer up knee-jerk statements. Which seems to be related to what the OP is talking about. You cannot simply rely on slogans if you want to stop nationalized healthcare, you have to offer reasoned alternatives.
What alternative is acceptable to Obama?
He will accept nothing short of a socialize health care system
If you doubt that , then you are truely fooling yourself
If the Republicans wish to get into the mud then fine
The problem with health care now is the government, do you really think more government will help?
Do you think Obama will accept less governemnt?
As I said for the republicans to offer a successful alternative he will have to be another socialist program
Socialism is Socialism regardless which side does it

[samsaysit]

No, I read you right.
I don't watch TV, and I'm not sure what that has to do with anything. Maybe that's the best you can do.


What does this mean?:



You're saying in effect, let's fatten up the host before we unleash the parasites. That's RINOism at it's finest.

The Republicans should tell the American people that health care is none of the government's business.
You know Bill and your other buddies who just don't seem to be able to read.

My position is precisely that the Republicans need to defeat this legislation and if they cannot defeat it then at least let it be the beginning of a dividing line and a differentiation for people to see.

Second point I have made and you just are too blinded by your incredibly knee jerk reaction to anything is that healthcare reform needs to be stopped and focus should be on the economy and job creation.

Third point is that the best way to do that is to reduce taxes across the boards.

Fourth point is to reduce government in all manner.

Fifth point is the Republicans need to begin to get vocal about all that this administration is doing wrong and the danger they are putting the Country in but, it is not enough to point it out, they have to present alternatives.

And lastly, you simpleton, no matter what you are any others want to try and press, government has a role to play in all of this but, it must be a responsible role and it must be a positive role, something that I do not believe the Democrats have in mind or in their genes and the Republicans do and since we only have two parties in the land at the moment, they are the ones to do it.

READ. Get some remedial lessons so that you can read an entire thread, understand it, think about it and then write something solid that is in line with what you read.

[Voxpopuli]

What alternative is acceptable to Obama?
He will accept nothing short of a socialize health care system
If you doubt that , then you are truely fooling yourself
If the Republicans wish to get into the mud then fine
The problem with health care now is the government, do you really think more government will help?
Do you think Obama will accept less governemnt?
As I said for the republicans to offer a successful alternative he will have to be another socialist program
Socialism is Socialism regardless which side does it

Offering an alternative does not equate enacting socialized medicine. Once again, drop the knee-jerk reactions and think before you type. If you haven't noticed people in this thread have already started offering solutions that do not result in socializing medicine.

Think about it.

[SnowSquirrel]

And lastly, you simpleton, no matter what you are any others want to try and press, government has a role to play in all of this but, it must be a responsible role and it must be a positive role, something that I do not believe the Democrats have in mind or in their genes and the Republicans do and since we only have two parties in the land at the moment, they are the ones to do it.
A point about this section. Are you saying that the Republicans should embrace having some federal funding of, and control over, health care, as opposed to finding ways to get the federal government out of it? If so, why?

[Physics Hunter]

It is now up to the Republicans to clearly address to the American people the faults and fallacies of the administrations healthcare plan.

More importantly, they have the obligation to put forward an alternative plan that will address the concerns now clear to all of the populace while at the same time keep us from having to incur the massive costs of what is being proposed.

In order to be seen as something other than being just opposition and obstructionist, it is important to begin addressing this and the other major issues floating around the Beltway at this time.

This is an opportunity to offer leadership and an incredible chance to demonstrate that the Republicans are in tune with what is of uppermost importance now, and it is not healthcare. Unless of course the administration is permitted to spin healthcare up to being the central most important item on the agenda, which it is not.

The economy and jobs are and that is what the Republicans should focus on and bang the drum about and, at the same time, prove to the American people that healtcare can and should wait until the economy is on solid ground showing recovery.

There is no reason to permit the Democrats to push through this healthcare legislation at a time when the economy is continuing to grind down, only to be driven further into the pit with this plan requiring yet another layer of taxation.

Cutting taxes is the most immeditate action that could be taken at this point to impact each and every citizen and to spark recovery.

The administration does not get it and that is the opening that the Republicans have to walk through.

No matter who you are in America it is now evident that the administration will be increasing taxes on everyone and impact everything and this plan should be wrapped in that tax increase paper along with the others and thrown into the garbage where it belongs and where the bulk of voters would put tax increases and all associated with them, programs and politicians alike.

Someone from the Republican side needs to take the leadership role on this issue and get the focus off of what the administrations' agenda is and back onto what is of concern to everyone in the Nation.

Now is the time for true leadership and the line in the sand has to be drawn with the economy at the center.

Obama and his crew have no idea what to do to get the Nation on a path to recovery, it was never and is not now part of their agenda which was from the start to consolidate power and create a Nation of citizens (voters) dependent on Washington for the important elements of their lives and those citizens (voters) viewing them as the providers.

Unless this gets changed, we are all going to be sitting in a much deeper hole in every aspect of our lives and the status of the Nation.

I will respond from a conservative viewpoint. Cap toxic legal fees on medical lawsuits at any value less than $500K, and tax them at 75%.

Problem solved.

[Kelzan]

I can't believe people still believe this.

It happens to be true.

[samsaysit]

A point about this section. Are you saying that the Republicans should embrace having some federal funding of, and control over, health care, as opposed to finding ways to get the federal government out of it? If so, why?
No. My point in this section is that the Republicans should propose the private solution(s) that exist along with other portions of a solution not requiring Government sponsorship or taxes on anyone (rich or poor) to support a plan for insurance.

For example, cutting off any support of any benefits to illegals, who make up well over 9 million of the supposed "individuals without healthcare coverage".

Offering tax incentives to businesses and individuals for programs that make insurance available from the private sector.

Permitting groups to be formed from State to State.

And the litany of alternatives goes on.

Anything other than what is being put on the table now by this lost and dangerous administration and congress.

[peter45]

No. My point in this section is that the Republicans should propose the private solution(s) that exist along with other portions of a solution not requiring Government sponsorship or taxes on anyone (rich or poor) to support a plan for insurance.

For example, cutting off any support of any benefits to illegals, who make up well over 9 million of the supposed "individuals without healthcare coverage".

Offering tax incentives to businesses and individuals for programs that make insurance available from the private sector.

Permitting groups to be formed from State to State.

And the litany of alternatives goes on.

Anything other than what is being put on the table now by this lost and dangerous administration and congress.



The Republicans had all of the Bush years to propose something – ANYTHING.

They didn’t.

So now they are supposed to suddenly realize that somebody is concerned about healthcare costs!

Heck-give them another 50-75 years. Why rush them.

[janer]

problem is, people NEED medical care when something goes wrong. It isn't like elective surgery where you can simply avoid it if you think it's too expensive. In economics we call this inelastic demand. The product is needed so greatly that the price is of secondary concern.

And the insurance companies pay a fraction, so the prices are extremely high. There is no reason to assume that the doctor will give a cash customer a matching discount. And there is certainly no reason to assume that the customer has the capability to shop around town for something they may desperately need. And if they have a serious issue, forget about affording it with cash.

My 24 year old tennis buddy got testicular cancer, and after treatment the insurer denied coverage. He now owes roughly $200k in medical bills.

I am very sorry about your friend, and I wish him a full recovery.
However - I need food, fresh water, shelter, the means to earn a living. I don't think that anyone owes me a meal, a drink, a house or a job. A professional who provides a good or a service is not a slave - I do not get to determine what I will pay him, or whether I will pay him. That's how liberty works.
Unfortunately, when you have a profession like medicine which involves a decade or more of expensive training, and high set-up costs, including high malpractice premiums, it is unreasonable to think that you will continue to have the same number and caliber of highly skilled, highly motivated students willing to put up with it if there is no benefit to practicing the profession - and part of that benefit ought to be financial. In this day, if you are unable to shop around, it may be because doctors are moving to more hospitable states, retiring early or just giving up all together. When I was a kid, there were at least a dozen GPs in my small town. Now, there are one or two.

[SnowSquirrel]

No. My point in this section is that the Republicans should propose the private solution(s) that exist along with other portions of a solution not requiring Government sponsorship or taxes on anyone (rich or poor) to support a plan for insurance...

Anything other than what is being put on the table now by this lost and dangerous administration and congress.
Fair enough.

[RETXED]

Yes, Republicans should definately oppose this illegal monstrosity..... BUT they SHOULD NOT propose an alternative... Why propose an alternative? If you propose an alternative then you are only giving validity to the pharse that something NEEDS to be done with our health care system.... That is like proposing alternative legislation to curb Man made Global Warming... Why do that when Man made Global Warming does not exist?

Republicans need to just OPPOSE it only and concentrate on that. I am so sick of politicians playing this chess game with our lives. That's why we are at this point in this country. Politicians think that they need to be passing legislation 24 hours a day... No they ****ing don't. They need to protect the constitution and PROTECT their constituants from unfair taxation....

[tislaw]

Yes, Republicans should definately oppose this illegal monstrosity..... BUT they SHOULD NOT propose an alternative... Why propose an alternative? If you propose an alternative then you are only giving validity to the pharse that something NEEDS to be done with our health care system.... That is like proposing alternative legislation to curb Man made Global Warming... Why do that when Man made Global Warming does not exist?

Republicans need to just OPPOSE it only and concentrate on that. I am so sick of politicians playing this chess game with our lives. That's why we are at this point in this country. Politicians think that they need to be passing legislation 24 hours a day... No they ****ing don't. They need to protect the constitution and PROTECT their constituants from unfair taxation....


And I agree.