Repealing and replacing Obamacare: What kind of healthcare plan do you support?

Because pursuant to the 9th and 10th Amendments of the Constitution, healthcare falls solely under the purview of the States.

It's up to the people of each State to decide if they want a healthcare system like the UK, Sweden, Portugal or Spain, or if they want a difference system like the one France has, or an even different system like Germany has, or no system at all.

 

I believe in the next paragraph, you couldn't find it but still a statement arguing against facts presented not by the poster but from the poster's source, the actual Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (.gov), the keeper of the numbers. Do we need to mention the next set of numbers that come directly from SSA, the Social Security Administration, but what the heck you probably know better than them, eh?

By cost to the American people, are you referring to South America? Central America? North America? Or all the Americas? With all the fallacies in your posts, not prudent to just assume as I'm not convinced even you are sure of what you are addressing. However, for the sake of discussion, let do the exercise using North America, that only leaves the US or Canada, again a quandary. Sorry too many variables to form any answer to that not stated as fact.

Another empty conclusion based on lack of any logic whatsoever.

 

I wouldn't support any plan, except for federal government initiatives to make it conducive for the States to create their own plans.

 

Wow talk about fallacy. Here we have a claim that government can't be trusted to fill a small pot hole but they would be fantastic fulfilling health needs. Hey, Rumpelstiltskin, where have you been napping for the past 7 years? Did Odumbocare not prove the governments hand is the death knell? All they touch is but a slow steady march to the grave, well some not so slow. Health care, ask not for whom the bell tolls, it is for thee!!!

 

Still in left field sonny. "Ah say, can anybody get this boy a clue?"

The current president is opposed to regulations ESPECIALLY those that might "harm" businesses (you know, like requiring good faith in paying insurance claims.)
The current congress has majorities in both the Senate and House that are opposed to regulation.

THEREFORE, if they allow sales across state lines, AND insurance companies change their domicile to take advantage of "friendly" state laws, this President and Congress are little likely to respond with regulations to counter, sure to come, anti-consumer actions at the state level.

The quote has nothing to do with the size or extent of current federal regulations.

"Ah say, son, is this sinkin into that noggin?"

 

Nope, the math is right on the money. I even gave you the documented sources, which are all from the federal government.

You're free to show your own math and sources.

 

A Free Market starts with the States attacking hospital monopolies and cartels, and repealing or rescinding the various State laws that mandate coverage for health plans.

 

Moral relativism at it's finest where there is no harm in an action so long as it's someone else. A for profit company never "absorbs" anything, it gets passed along as a cost of doing business. It is the customers that always pay in the long run.

As to France, please feel free to go live there if they will accept you which I would doubt. But being you believe all the hype maybe the experience would provide an education.

 

Uh, that is not a State plan.

Only two States have attempted to create single-payer systems.

Vermont tried to implement a plan, but abandoned it due to the outrageous taxes necessary to support it.

Colorado had a ballot-initiative that was shot down by voters, due to the high costs and poor plan.

 

From the frying pan into the fire, not a very intelligent thing to do.

 

Why don't we just confiscate all the wealth, put all the slaves to work and for those that get sick or hurt, just kick them in the ditch and move on. So those that sit on the front porch drinking mint Juleps can say everyone is treated the same. Makes about the same sense as what is proposed and so much easier to implement.

 

I support getting rid of insurance companies that are only there to profit off the sick. However you want to do that, fine. I will say that as someone who used to live in Canada and has family in France, I don't know of a single person who would give up their healthcare system for the one we have in the US, pre or post Obamacare.

 

Not really what I meant. For the most part you logic is based on sound reason. That is except for the parts wherein you try to soften which results in a total breakdown of the logic. The truth is harsh by it's very nature. The truth respects no one's sensibilities, otherwise it is not the truth.

The Federal government can't force anyone to do anything. All governments are but fictions, a piece of paper purporting to be controlling but how can a piece of paper control anything? It is not that piece of paper that is controlling but the flesh and blood psychopaths that declare themselves to be the agents of government that control. But still, that is only the symptom, not the disease. And this is my stopping point for the rest must be rectified in the mind of the individual. It can't be told, it must be reasoned. Only then can one come to the final conclusion of why Odumbocare or any other act to follow is just pure evil.

In this case, asking for help is harm. To ask is to beg as is to demand. A man, responsible for his own actions, stands and commands as those inalienable rights bestowed upon him by his creator dictates.

As to healthcare, assume your own responsibility. Discover what health really means and set a path toward it's discovery. Always a good starting point, Socrates. From what I have seen here so far, you seem to have potential, my advice, use it. Life is a long hard journey, no need to make it more arduous than it already is.

 

How do you "purpose" single payer system? But moving on, I propose a new Corvette for everyone but that isn't going to happen either, is it?

Of course if you are really intent on single payer, you always have the option to move to one of those Socialist utopias. I would forget Canada though, getting too crowded with all those "if Trump is elected" idiots. They have had there fill of all these liberal bleeding hearts taking up their space.

As as aside, do you know that Canada could have been the 14th state under the Articles of Confederation but they were in love with being shafted by a king? I would bet not.

 

Does the business you are employed in make a profit? If so, you have a bit of a hypocrisy problem. If not, you have a viability problem.

 

There's a difference. Insurance companies are not needed. You can get rid of them and still have healthcare which IS needed. Their whole business model is predatory and I don't support it.

 

More logical fallacy I see. I would say that it wasn't so much Hitlerly lost as the people got some glimmer of hope but not much. Never underestimate the idiocy of the people, I don't. When you think the indoctrinated masses has reached the bottom of depravity, you've done another logical fallacy as there is no bottom.

I am never pompous as I don't half step. I am a pure and unadulterated donkey's behind and proud of it. But to even consider taking advise from one that seems to have a problem stating an argument not starting with a logical fallacy would label me ignorant which I can assure you is not the case.

 

Insurance companies are not essential for health care. The only reason insurance companies exist, is that health care is extremely expensive, so people need money management to access health care services.
The health care in U.S. is very expensive because government make it expensive and probably people themselves want it to be that way.
Government delegates power to private health care organization that govern and participate in the health care market at the same time.
If market participants makes the rules of the market, then prices of the services will be limited only by level of the provider's greed.

 

Guess I need an interpreter as I have no clue what you are trying to say. I take it you are trying to instill an identity of socialistic tendencies while condemning capitalism while actually understanding neither.

For your edification, advances in technology has always resulted in a benefit for mankind, allowing increased production while at the same time lowering labor requirements. This has been the case throughout the millennia. Compare this with the "advances" in medicine you proclaim and then perhaps you can start to form an argument without a fallacy, but then that may be too tall an order.

Cuba, Marc Rubio, I rest my case.

 

It is what is not seen directly that is the problem. During FDR's New Deal, wages were frozen causing people to become stagnant in their careers. But this did not stop aggressive businessmen, the way around this was to offer reimbursement for medical expenses which resulted in extra money in a person's pocket. But as things do, this progressed into a recruiting tool and expanded to include medical benefits which led to companies negotiating deals based on the increased number of people employed. Next thing you know, it wasn't a recruiting tool but a requirement for all. This was the fatal blow to the long slide to what we have today.

First, policies that covered all including running to the doctor for the sniffles. Second, removal of the ownership from individual to group, in my opinion the actual death blow. Third, the responsibility of health care between individual and doctor was transferred to the insurance company and doctor.

Is it any doubt with this captive audience and a liaissez faire attitudes toward medical costs and usage, that those costs would continue to rise. The effect being companies negotiating for less and less coverage to try and curb this ever increasing drain on he bottom line. Now add Odumbocare...

And now you ask for more of the same, insanity.

Ah, a most noble time where people had to take responsibility or perish. Now you have a world of dumbed down idiots indoctrinated to not have any responsibility for their actions demanding instant gratification. Do you really wonder why?

But not to worry, this planet has the capability to self-correct and it has survived before without man. My money is it could probably do it again. Doesn't really bother me, in fact I actually relish the thought, as I made my peace almost a decade ago and each new day is a gift I never expected to receive.

 

Your failure to understand is not my problem, be a human and own it. And I never agree with anyone that not only chooses to remain ignorant when all the knowledge to change matters is readily available. But it is the insistence of displaying that ignorance that results in a challenge rather than joining ignorance.

 

Dang, a breath of fresh air, thank you!!!!

 

why bother replacing it? we can't afford SS, Medicare, etc, so hth can we support millions more of the non-productive? why bother trying? The poor need to wake UP and stop having kids that they can't raise properly! it costs half a million $ to raise a kid, if you aint mooching off of the taxpayer. school costs 20k per year and you haven't raised them until they are able to (properly) raise kids of their own, which takes about 25 years. they have to be grossing about 150k per year and 20 years from now, that will have doubled, as will the cost to raise them.We dont need more lettuce pickers and burger flippers.

 

Where's the breach in the constitution?
and Obamacare was already enacted into law via congress.

 

Why does government have to be involved? And by the way, the government is pushing medicine, not health. I used to purchase catastrophic coverage but for all else I paid cash. Cash has a way to generate discounts, normally 50% of some stated rate but very affordable overall. Of course I had to assume responsibility for my own health. Good nutrition and exercise go a long way in keeping the doctor away.

Also, I just checked and you can get lab test on-line. I used to be able to get a complete blood profile test for $40 that I used to make sure I was keeping all those bad habits at bay and not in excess.