Conservatives Brace for the Possibility Obamacare Won't Totally Suck

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gator996, Aug 22, 2013.

  1. gator996
    Offline

    gator996 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    9,963
    Likes Received:
    15
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings Received:
    +15
    The individual mandate is a conservative creation...

    So was it a socialist, government takeover, etc. when the Heritage Foundation thought of the idea 15 years ago? :roll:



    No, then it was a markets based solution to the healthcare problem... :laugh:

    Now tell me a story about Cap & Trade daddy, will ya? :grin:
  2. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Likes Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,878
    Yes and no. You can't buy auto insurance in GA if your car is garaged in FL. The auto insurance mandates in each state actually probably make auto insurance a bit more expensive than it would be for the very best of drivers without one, or for the very lucky people who never make a claim. But the big difference is that its ok that insurers can drop risky drivers, because there are voluntary and involunatry markets that cover those people, because there is a legal requirement that you insure your car that necessitates those markets. Until the ACA, there was no involuntary (or voluntary) market that would insure people that were unhealthy that werent medicaid or medicare eligible. I would actually argue that the ACA makes health insurance more like how car insurance works than less like it.
  3. gatordowneast
    Offline

    gatordowneast Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    11,730
    Likes Received:
    302
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +984
    You ain't seen nothing yet. Of the new enrollees on these subsidized plans, who will sign up first? the young healthy, never go to doctor types (who are needed for balance) or those who have chronic conditions and will need tons of health care dollars? Keep in mind when you tax something, you get less of it and when you "subsidize" something you get more of it.
  4. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    People often conflate health insurance with health care. If a person without private health insurance gets sick or hurt, today do they have access to health care?

    If they are under a certain age, SHIP insures them and gives them access to health care. If they are over a certain age, Medicare/Medicaid insures them and gives them access to health care.

    The in between group have to go to emergency rooms. But they will get some level of health care.
  5. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Likes Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,878
    Yes, and this is a situation the ACA attempts to correct my mandating that people either a) purchase insurance (with the aid of subsidies for some) or b) contribute to the cost in the form of a tax/fine, rather than consuming healthcare that they can not pay for where the costs of that care are already passed on to the people who can afford or obtain insurance.
  6. tim85
    Offline

    tim85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    4,162
    Likes Received:
    310
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Jacksonville, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,157
    Can the ACA realistically and efficiently do what you're claiming it can do, in a way that the private sector can not do, and also in a cost-respective way?
  7. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Likes Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,878
    If you think private insurance is the best way to share the burden of market-driven costs for healthcare, than I think it is, especially if something approaching universal coverage is a goal. Indeed I think the original Heritage proposal was an attempt to answer the question of: "How can a private healthcare system provide universal coverage?"
  8. dangolegators
    Offline

    dangolegators Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    7,652
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +750
    If the private market hadn't failed in the first place, there would be no need for Obamacare.
  9. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,949
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +630
    It is unfortunate that liberals abuse the ignorant like is.

    People have liked SS and Medicare as they are getting more than they paid for. Now going forward...
  10. TJtheGator
    Online

    TJtheGator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    10,064
    Likes Received:
    130
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +738
    Get the lawyers out of the health profession. This is first and foremost. Get each and every one of them out forever. Then and only then, healthcare can be affordable for those who currently pay, and those who don't pay.
  11. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,949
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +630
    Since when did the "private market" fail?

    This ought to be an entertaining answer!
  12. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Likes Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,878
    Well, the only way to do that is to have no laws that apply to healthcare, and to absolve anyone providing healthcare in any form from legal liability for anything.
  13. dangolegators
    Offline

    dangolegators Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2007
    Messages:
    7,652
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +750
    Maybe you should ask some who's been unable to get insurance because of a preexisting condition.
  14. mdgator05
    Offline

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    6,922
    Likes Received:
    243
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +808
    Of course, the question starts at what the goal of healthcare is and what the goal of a private sector is.

    If the goal of healthcare is to keep people alive, and the goal of a private sector is to do so as efficiently as possible, then yes, this system has failed to do that.

    [​IMG]

    That is at the most basic level. The question of why is an interesting one. I would posit that the reason why is that you can't effectively price your own life or your family's life, especially within a system that allows bankruptcy.

    So for example, a private market works very well for a television set, because I can go to the store, decide how much utility I get from a television set (obviously, we don't quantify this in our heads but we do consider how much benefit we will get for that object), and then decide whether to purchase that item or not. If enough people decide that the price is too high to purchase a television, the television maker won't sell enough, and will be forced to either lower their price or exit the market. Capitalism at its finest.

    Now, think about a family member of yours getting cancer. How much are you willing to spend on keeping that person alive? Is there a price that you would be unwilling to pay for that to occur? Would you be willing to bankrupt yourself, deal with the financial ramifactions of that, if that was what was required to let that person live? I speak for myself and probably most people when I say, yes I would make that decision instantly. But that causes a problem for the free market. If the free market has nobody that decides, "nope that is too expensive," what is the incentive to hold costs down?

    A free market advocate would say "Competition." However, one of the primary drivers of cost in this market, the cost of pharmaceuticals, occurs in a market with explicitly limited competition, ie. a complete monopoly on many markets for a long period of time. I recognize the benefits of the patent system, but it certainly holds down the competition argument in this portion of the market. In the hospital portion of the market, there is at best oligarchic competition, in which the number of hospitals available in each market is low. For cancer, this might not be as big of a deal (although still there is much greater utility for getting treatment closer to home). For a heart attack? Competition may disappear completely or, at best, be contained to oligarchic competition with two or three providers. So again, it really can't hold down the costs.

    As of now, our system's only mechanism by which to hold down cost is a middle-man with substantial economic power. However, that comes with its own issues (which have been discussed over and over).

    So the question becomes, how do you operate a free market system in which the central mechanism by which free markets work, the ability to value a product for each consumer individually, is essentially not possible?
    • Like Like x 2
  15. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,949
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +630
    I had a feeling it would be an entertaining response. And it did not disappoint.

    Well done!

    Now please explain how forcing an "INSURANCE" company to cover a KNOWN loss is INSURANCE. While you are at it please explain how using force to do this creates a "private/free market" (something healthcare has not seen in decades).
  16. QGator2414
    Offline

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    12,949
    Likes Received:
    169
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +630
    Can someone provide me the stories of people left to die because Americans did not care about their fellow citizens before government began its takeover back in the 60's?
  17. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    What part of "they will get some level of health care" do you not understand?

    The mandate is unconscionable to me, in spite of the SCOTUS ruling it is a tax, not a mandate
  18. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    "Share the burden of...cost?"

    In a non socialist society, that should never be a goal for any product or service.
  19. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    It was not the "market" that failed. It was the uneven regulation.

    Eliminate across state barriers and eliminate the tax subsidy. Then cost and service will be more tightly linked. Once that happens, then people can decide whether they want market level insurance, or self insurance.

    Sounds like a win/win to me.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,486
    Likes Received:
    442
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +1,878
    I understood exactly what you were saying. Maybe you think this was an acceptable state of affairs, but I doubt you'd find many people who say the status quo didnt need some major fixing or reform.

Share This Page