Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Obamacare Exemplifies the Problem with Liberal Legislation

  1. #21
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4500963]Were your premiums going up above the rate of inflation before Obama care? Mine was. Wages in the US are stagnant relative to inflation which means health care costs were rising as both a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of people’s wages. In a nutshell more people would lose their health insurance if nothing was done on cost alone.

    Is the Republican agenda out of control health care costs that benefit the few and a health care system that caters to less people?

    The Obama plan is clearly flawed but so was the plan before Obama became President. It was the best he could do in the political climate we are under. Pretty crappy result and no doubt should be scrapped. The idea that Republicans have a better plan simply doesn't wash. They controlled the government and sat by while premiums went up and the population continued to age and did nothing. The suddenly became interested in modest reform when they lost elections and the entire debate changed.

    Now even though the results suck, the progressive agenda doesn't suck at all. The concept of health care for all is very sound and as you rightly point out cost control is needed.

    The concept that both sides have hung on to is the myth that those who have coverage can keep getting their own choices when costs are skyrocketing and as the population ages more care will be needed per person. Clearly both sides have to stop lying to us about nothing changing in the way health care is delivered. We are going to need massive changes.

    The progressive agenda isn't the problem. Limited care for the rich isn't a problem either. It's everyone else that's the problem.[/QUOTE]

    My premiums were going up but not nearly at this rate. NYS actually puts caps on how much insurance companies can hike their rates on a year over year basis. We have hit the max increase 3 years running with no end in site. As I said we just got the letter that our rates go up another 15.5% next cycle.

    No one disagrees that healthcare costs are a problem and were before Obamacare. The rising cost of health insurance is a drag on the economy. The primary reason we have those 30million uninsured working poor is because it costs so damn much. My issue with Obamacare is that it does nothing to address the costs of the insurance. They got so caught up in freebies and giveaways and crafting a super expensive Cadillac plan then forcing everyone to buy it.

    If you want universal healthcare and think that is the best system by all means give it a try. Have your elected legislators put up a plan for a vote. Have them get the evidence from other countries that have successfully implemented it and document how it could work here. More importantly have them explain how they plan to pay for it. Make a convincing argument and there you go.

    I repeat however. Obamacare was sold as "affordable care". They said it would reduce premiums by an average of $2500 per family and would not add to the deficit. It already carries a slew of new taxes and uses 500Billion from Medicare. Now we find out it will add trillions to the deficit and premiums have been going up at an accelerated pace.

    You tell me the Winston, are these people complete morons or simply outright liars?

  2. #22
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,277
    [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJyhqlkaHB0[/url]

    Video from February 26, 2003
    Warning that Iaq needs to meet demands of UN.
    Seeds of democracy comments (not word for word) - [B]jump to 4:20 in the video[/B]
    Spread of democratic values - 10:20
    Freedom gap, Arab charter, .... - 10:50
    "A new regime in Iraq would serve as a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom for other nations in the region" - 11:20

    2nd Iraq war started March 20, 2003.

    I guess we can focus on the "chemical and biological weapons"/WMDs that are discussed in about 20 seconds of the video and discard the rest. We can discount that Saddam had used chemical weapons on his own people in the past that proves he had them. You can ignore the monsters that his children were. You can ignore that they were paying terrorists families for martyrdom. Just keep spouting the nonsense.

    That being said the war in Iraq wasn't clean but only modern America, steeped in the Hollywood image of war, would ever think it could be.

  3. #23
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,277
    [QUOTE=Winstonbiggs;4500963]Were your premiums going up above the rate of inflation before Obama care? Mine was. Wages in the US are stagnant relative to inflation which means health care costs were rising as both a percentage of GDP and as a percentage of people’s wages. In a nutshell more people would lose their health insurance if nothing was done on cost alone.

    Is the Republican agenda out of control health care costs that benefit the few and a health care system that caters to less people?

    The Obama plan is clearly flawed but so was the plan before Obama became President. It was the best he could do in the political climate we are under. Pretty crappy result and no doubt should be scrapped. The idea that Republicans have a better plan simply doesn't wash. They controlled the government and sat by while premiums went up and the population continued to age and did nothing. The suddenly became interested in modest reform when they lost elections and the entire debate changed.

    Now even though the results suck, the progressive agenda doesn't suck at all. The concept of health care for all is very sound and as you rightly point out cost control is needed.

    The concept that both sides have hung on to is the myth that those who have coverage can keep getting their own choices when costs are skyrocketing and as the population ages more care will be needed per person. Clearly both sides have to stop lying to us about nothing changing in the way health care is delivered. We are going to need massive changes.

    The progressive agenda isn't the problem. Limited care for the rich isn't a problem either. It's everyone else that's the problem.[/QUOTE]

    Government involvement and "insurance coverage" in medicine drove costs up due to people not caring about cost and the government just paying everything. Now the government wants to control prices? Competition is the only legitimate way to control prices.

    People need huge insurance plans to cover a $10 prescription but can afford $100/month for a cell service with data plan? This doesn't seem like a distorted reality? Insurance was supposed to insure you against big costs not cover everything but companies used the government's tax free benefits plan as a way to entice new employees to come to their companies as added compensation. This was more social engineering by the government. Now people act as though they DESERVE the best care at no cost because they don't care as long as they aren't paying for it directly.

    How many people didn't have health insurance in some form before 2010? How many didn't have it available? Those that couldn't afford it had Medicaid. Most people that didn't have it, didn't have it by choice.

    The one thing I agree with is being able to change plans and having the new plan cover existing conditions. On the other side though is the idea that you can live without any insurance until you have a disease and then buy it and expect them to pay. That isn't the definition of insurance, that is the definition of gambling and then expecting special treatment when you lose.

  4. #24
    [QUOTE=Trades;4501007]Government involvement and "insurance coverage" in medicine drove costs up due to people not caring about cost and the government just paying everything. Now the government wants to control prices? Competition is the only legitimate way to control prices.

    People need huge insurance plans to cover a $10 prescription but can afford $100/month for a cell service with data plan? This doesn't seem like a distorted reality? Insurance was supposed to insure you against big costs not cover everything but companies used the government's tax free benefits plan as a way to entice new employees to come to their companies as added compensation. This was more social engineering by the government. Now people act as though they DESERVE the best care at no cost because they don't care as long as they aren't paying for it directly.

    How many people didn't have health insurance in some form before 2010? How many didn't have it available? Those that couldn't afford it had Medicaid. Most people that didn't have it, didn't have it by choice.

    The one thing I agree with is being able to change plans and having the new plan cover existing conditions. On the other side though is the idea that you can live without any insurance until you have a disease and then buy it and expect them to pay. That isn't the definition of insurance, that is the definition of gambling and then expecting special treatment when you lose.[/QUOTE]

    Here's a reality, the demographics of the country are changing. Elderly people need more health care and that population is growing. Demand for medical care will increase dramatically as this demographic reality plays out. In a free market as demand rises prices go up. When demand over takes supply something that is already happening doctors and health care providers will be able to opt out of taking insurance and government health payments for services. So yes we agree the free market is going to play out as cost controls by both government and health insurance companies fails and the public is going to have to pay the difference or go without.
    Last edited by Winstonbiggs; 06-27-2012 at 10:27 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us