Conservatives Brace for the Possibility Obamacare Won't Totally Suck

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

  1. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    And why is that a failing of the market?

    If society wants to allow for a welfare program for people with "pre-existing" conditions, then it is something we can vote on and decide.

    But forcing a mandated insurance program for all citizens seems to be much to much a brute force way to accomplish it.
    • Like Like x 1
  2. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    Health insurance has very little to do with this, even assuming it is correct.
  3. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    Oh, I do not doubt that the process needs fixing. The correct way to do it is to reduce government burdens, not increase them.
    • Like Like x 1
  4. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    • Like Like x 1
  5. QGator2414
    Online

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,197
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +723
    precisely!
  6. MichaelJoeWilliamson
    Offline

    MichaelJoeWilliamson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Messages:
    6,820
    Likes Received:
    415
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +497
    I remembered this particular study from a few months ago. It does not bode well for proponents of Obamacare

    Study: Giving People Government Health Insurance May Not Make them Any Healthier

    by Megan McArdle May 1, 2013 5:32 PM EDT

    One of the most important health insurance studies ever done shows surprisingly little effect


    So, when government health insurance kicks in, people use health care more often, they pay less of their own money for it, (presumably to government is paying more), but in important health measure, nothing gets better....

    ...imagine that.

    But...but...does it save lives, you might ask. Er....No

    She points to another study

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ant-health-impacts-from-joining-medicaid.html
    • Like Like x 1
  7. mdgator05
    Online

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,101
    Likes Received:
    290
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +969
    I wasn't talking about purely health insurance but the operation of the current system as a whole, which includes but is not limited to private insurance.
  8. mdgator05
    Online

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,101
    Likes Received:
    290
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +969
    As far as I know, nobody is discussing male versus female mortality on this thread, but yes the United States does much better in overall mortality than Africa, South Asia, or the former Soviet Union. It tends to do worse than other developed countries in East Asia, Western Europe, Australia/New Zealand, Canada, etc. This is especially true when the cost is included as a variable (ie. paying more for less).

    Again, the issue comes in how do you value the treatment to save you from a heart attack or put your cancer into remission? How do you determine a utility for a truly life/death situation? Until we have a good answer for that, free markets in this market are going to be difficult as the price elasticity is essentially 0 without the economic power of the insurance company (ie. how many people turn down treatment for a heart attack because it costs $25,000 instead of $20,000? How about $30,000? How about $40,000?). This is exacerbated by the massive fixed costs for providing this treatment, ensuring oligarchic competition.
  9. mdgator05
    Online

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,101
    Likes Received:
    290
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +969
    "Health Insurance" has always been a bit of a misnomer. At this point, it is mostly about controlling the cost of care through the grouping of people into large groups, which by nature have more economic power. Think of it in the same way that unions push wages up by increasing labor's power within the labor market (for good or bad). Health insurance pushes down the costs by negotiating with more economic power than an individual would have if they tried to negotiate with a hospital (for example).

    The second part of their job is to act as essentially a private market rationing mechanism, by which they determine who is and isn't worth certain treatments. For example, on a health insurance plan, the health insurance company is contracted to determine whether saving your life is worth $1 Million. If they decide you are, they pay for it. If not, you can either choose to go it alone (ie. if you have $1 Million or somebody will provide the treatment in the face of bankruptcy concerns) or not.

    As far as forcing an insurance company to pay for it, what would you suggest for those that are not individually profitable? Those that are not individually profitable lose the economic power built into the insurance system, while not having an effective outlet by which to exercise this power. We could cover them in single payer, but I would imagine you are against that.
  10. mdgator05
    Online

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,101
    Likes Received:
    290
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +969
    Nothing gets better if you assume that effective diabetes management and lower rates of depression are not helpful healthcare outcomes. Both would seem to have significant long-term outcomes, even if the benefit is limited in the short-run.
  11. QGator2414
    Online

    QGator2414 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Messages:
    13,197
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Ocala
    Ratings Received:
    +723
    I don't follow the premise that government is the only means to help those who are sick.

    It is also interesting how in one sentence you try and associate "insurance" with a known loss/Preexisting condition or "not individually profitable". I suggest we allow the free market to work and let individuals, families, charities, doctors, hospitals, and local communities do their thing!

    My dad had a heart attack at 53 so I take heart disease seriously at an age most don't think about it. It is what it is and I buy statin (not expensive), niacin, co-q10, and fish oil along with my diet (yes I still enjoy a good steak but not every day) and exercise (provide a baseline for how oxygen is getting to my muscles) to address potential future issues. It is my responsibility to take care of myself and I purchase a catastrophic insurance policy that covers way more than I want it to. So I can thank the government for forcing me to pay more for healthcare than I need to (higher premiums to pay for mandated coverages that "insurance" has no business covering)...
  12. mdgator05
    Online

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2010
    Messages:
    7,101
    Likes Received:
    290
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +969
    Frankly, hospitals have no economic incentive to provide expensive treatment to those that can't pay for it without a legal threat. Good publicity is really not that important for what are essentially monopolies or, at best, oligopolies.

    So who in this utopian world would you have had pay for someone who was born with a heart defect and by the time of his death in his mid 40s runs up well in excess of $2 Million (remember, no negotiated rates) in medical bills dating back to his birth due to the surgeries? Remember, he is not eligible for insurance, I am unaware of any charitable organizations with that kind of money sitting around for one person, his family did not have the type of money to pay for that (few have $2 million sitting around). So what would occur for him in this utopia you are painting?

    As to your last point, you are paying more for health care than you think you need. The point of healthcare, is you really have no idea what you will actually need and once you need it, you will pay anything for it, including bankruptcy (which we all subsidize).
  13. wcj786
    Offline

    wcj786 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,344
    Likes Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +235
    This has to be a joke, right? Please explain ANY proposal that is in the ACA that Conservatives EVER advocated. It sure as hell was NOT government takeover. It wasn't "mandate". It wasn't "pass it to know what was in it". It wasn't "tax all sales of houses an additional $3,800 in order to pay for health care". It wasn't anything else in the ACA either.

    Not one thing that Conservatives advocated got put in that disaster called Obamacare. Every single thing that WAS suggested by Conservatives got thrown out during the POTUS' "bi-partisan Health Care Summit".
    • Like Like x 1
  14. GatorBen
    Offline

    GatorBen Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2007
    Messages:
    7,173
    Likes Received:
    620
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +2,451
    Eh, conservatives certainly have advocated an individual mandate. Granted they stopped doing so once Democrats decided to also like the idea, but the idea, but the whole idea of an individual mandate originated with Heritage in the 1990s.
  15. wgbgator
    Offline

    wgbgator Sub-optimal Poster Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2007
    Messages:
    23,880
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Orlando, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +2,176
    Totally serious. I mean, the GOPs presidential candidate (and also rans, like Gingrich) thought it was great until roughly 2010. "Romneycare" was Mitt's crowning achievement in public service, one that he eventually had to run away from.
  16. AustinGator1
    Offline

    AustinGator1 Premium Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,949
    Likes Received:
    172
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +666
    After all this time you still can't figure out the basic differences between Obamacare and Romneycare? Wow.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. 92gator
    Offline

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    458
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,616
    The 'private market' failed--to the extent it could be characterized as 'failing'--because of government intervention in the first place, via medicaid and medicare--which made medical billing a complicated clusterf*'n nightmare game, and sent pricing into complete chaos.

    It is the govmt's intervention and regs, that have driven up medical costs more than anything else. Many might point to R&D for p'scriptn drugs, but note that the force that drives the demand that drives the R&D, is govm't enabling, through its intervention.

    So no, the 'private market' didn't fail--it was sabotaged by the gov'mt (intentionally set up to fail, some might say).

    And the neo-libby solution to this problem, as with any problem, is, as always, more government.

    *BECAUSE THAT'S JUST WHAT THE DOCTOR ORDRED; MORE F'N RED TAPE AND BUREAUCRACY!* :devil:
  18. 92gator
    Offline

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    458
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,616
    Exactly.
  19. 92gator
    Offline

    92gator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532
    Likes Received:
    458
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,616
    Neo-libbies vis a vis abortion:

    "...keep the government's hands off my body--so I can kill my baby with impunity."

    Neo-libbies vis a vis health care:

    "...I trust the government to decide everything about my body--so should you."

    :geek:
    • Like Like x 1
  20. Gatorrick22
    Offline

    Gatorrick22 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    34,818
    Likes Received:
    2,813
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +5,861
    Message to the OP: Obama-scam already SUCKS! So does government takeovers of private industries. There is nothing in this lead weight that can make me or you feel more free, in fact is the exact opposite... it enslaves us all.

Share This Page