The Free markets simply CANNOT manage affordable healthcare.

when i see a few posters praising each other without setting forth any facts or strong arguments i know who's won. I responded to your posts, which btw, were weak on substance so i'm not sure where you think you debunked anything.

 

The WORLD????

. . . . Well, the world shook its head at Noah. . . . How'd that turn out for them????




“WE KNOW THE TRUTH, NOT ONLY BY THE REASON, BUT ALSO BY THE HEART”

Blaise Pascal

 

I agree. . . . You're confused.

 

actually, apologies, i was confusing you with the other poster i have been arguing with in last few pages lol my bad. i had you and xwsmithx mixed up, he's the one i have educated in this thread.

 

My apologies, but I look at underlying values and it's fairly easy to tell where people stand if you do that.

It would have been very easy for me to go on the public dole if I wanted. Public sector jobs are pretty cushy, all things considered. I could have sent my children to public schools, but they suck. I could have told them to fund their own way through college by getting student loans, but I (actually my wife) started college savings accounts almost as soon as they were born.

If I was one of those who would chicken out and go on the public dole, why did I do everything I could to avoid that?

Pragmatism is fine, but it's usually possible to have principles. For example, going with Trump is a pragmatic choice because there is no option of going with me as POTUS. When faced with a choice between lucifer and satan, you have to weigh the costs of each, hold your nose and cross your fingers.

The interesting thing about that legislation Reagan signed is that it was unfunded, and only applicable to hospitals that accept federal funds (e.g. medicare/medicaid patients). All people have to do is find a hospital that doesn't accept federal funds and you're closer to where things should be. Since it's unfunded, that means any costs associated with the act would jack up the price making that hospital more expensive than the competing hospitals that don't accept them.

Then fear not because you aren't really being all that negatively affected. Hospitals, even those that accept federal funds, could easily close their emergency departments if they were operating at a loss. Yes, there are lots of people who limp into an emergency department who can't pay their bills. I believe it's roughly 20% of the population that doesn't have insurance. The vast majority can pay their hospital bills, and the reason this doesn't hurt their bottom line is that if somebody has a problem that requires hospitalization, they rarely go anywhere else and become an inpatient at that hospital. In other words, it's a way to attract paying customers. Those who cannot pay are given information on alternative options such as free clinics or social service agencies.

 

LOL. You couldn't educate a parrot to say hello. You presume to educate me, you peasant? What arrogance.

 

well, anyone who would read our arguments would see you really didn't get very far and when i see two posters giving other high 5s without actually backing up anything, it's a sign that you've hit a dead end. IMO, i dismembered your position and you gave up... but that's ok. Move on...

 

You might want to see a shrink about your disconnect from reality. You could end up stepping in front of a truck, thinking it's a marshmallow.

 

IMO, government should not play a large role in so many areas where it does today, i myself have to deal with Federal regulators who make things harder for me, in my job. Having said this, i believe that when it comes to security, national defense and healthcare, the government has a large role to play. I believe a single payer system is the most cost effective way and evidence suggests it can work well.

Pragmatism is the best attribute for a president, why? The Country is divided ideologically and people are becoming more and more extreme, the leader has to be able to see all sides' viewpoints and not always think one side is always wrong. I think Bill Clinton was a pragmatist, i loved when he went after BLM during the campaign and many say he didn't like how Hilary ran her campaign. The politicians like Ted Cruz and Elizabeth Warren cannot lead a Country, why? cause they can only lead a base.. Trump is a pragmatist but i have been disappointed in how he has ventured too far right to appease his party.

well, fact is that hospitals don't turn down uninsured people that need urgent life saving care. This is a problem.

this cost is not insignificant and it impacts costs, in one shape or another. I read somewhere that on a yearly basis, care for uninsured is around 50 billion. To cover this 'free' care, hospitals play a game of shifting the costs around and a lot of it falls on tax payers as government chips in to help. It's interesting when the Heritage foundation were the ones who for this very same reason, advocated an individual mandate but now conservatives have changed their minds?

The way i look at this, conservatives are pretty hypocritical nowadays. They claim people advocating for single payer want 'free' care but how is it free when it's funded by taxes? However, knowing that the 'Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act' was signed into law on 1986, they know that the ones who are uninsured are free loaders. Interestingly, it's conservatives that support 'free' care.

 

look, you were confronted and ran away with your tail tucked between your legs. I can see posters like you from a mile away, your positions get blown away and then you resort to cuddling up with other posters and claiming you 'gave up'.

 

Seriously disconnected from reality. You have no case, I rebutted what few facts you presented, and then you claim victory. You're not worth my time. I'm not running away with my tail between my legs, I'm shaking my head in disbelief at your refusal to face facts.

 

you didn't rebut anything, i responded to your posts and poked so many holes in them that you were left exposed as a person who doesn't really understand this subject. Btw, when the ad hominems start, it's a tell tell sign that a person has been put in his place. If you can't stand up and fight, run but don't turn around and cry like you are doing.

 

Nowhere does Jefferson imply, even remotely, that the means to exercise any of your rights be provided to you by others.
Please try again.

 

None of this changes the fact you cannot cite the text of the Constitution or federal law that grants the right to free speech, as per your claim
You know this, and thus, you know your claim is false.

 

Doesn't sounds too bad but why aren't you for H.B. 676? What would be the big difference between this and what you advocate? in many ways, it's the same.

 

Maybe he didn't specifically, but the General Welfare Clause does.
Yes, it does. A healthy nation is a strong nation. Can't go to war with sickly soldiers.

 

Glad you agree.

 

He is NOT the end all be all of our countries laws and constitution. So I can agree 1 person didn't say anything.
Hard to believe you think Jefferson is the god we must follow.

 

well, seems like after 8 years of ranting about ACA, republicans can't even agree on a replacement, why is that? It's simple - they cannot come up with a better plan.

Conservatives have no plan that would make premiums more affordable and they know it. If they remove the individual mandate and pull back on regulations that set guidelines for insurance coverage, the insurance companies will simply move the costs around. Right now, the healthiest Americans are whining about the ACA but the sick are happy. If conservatives repeal and replace, they will just shift the burden back to those who suffered the most pre-ACA. Once again, name me one Country with a successful privatized system which runs on private insurance and private healthcare facilities? meanwhile, many get high ratings by implementing either single player or a government run system.

There is a reason republicans can't get anything passed and it's not Trump, it's not moderates, it's not libertarians, it's not conservatives. THERE IS NO PLAN that does any better than ACA unless the system moves towards a medicare for all or some variation of it.

It's simple, today, in the Country, too many people are uninsured and run to hospitals to get free care (estimates are approx. 50 billion a year). Why? because president Reagan (Mr. Conservative) signed a bill that forced hospitals to care for anyone that needs care but is uninsured. What this means is that without an individual mandate, free loaders are rewarded and it's liberals that get accused of wanting healthcare for free? The only people who advocate free care are conservatives, period.

THERE IS NO good free market alternative, this is why after 8 years, republicans can't even do better than the ACA. Polls show 50% of americans support ACA and like 20% the new republican plan. How pathetic!!!!!!!!

 

Can the private sector cover its incompetence by bailing itself out with taxpayer money, Brainiac?

 

taxpayer money used to provide healthcare.. it all makes sense, you know it.

 

What are the parameters to the general welfare clause?

When does the general welfare become not the general welfare? Has the supreme court ruled on that?

 

dunno.

 

Then you're really on thin ice here, since "general welfare" could mean anything. It could mean let evolution take its course when it comes to health care, or murder. Without a precedent, you're just arguing that anything is anything.

I can tell you that the general welfare clause is included in the preamble, which has never been used as a basis for any law, but rather is included as a direction that the constitution is supposed to take. So really, the general welfare clause has no legal authority at all, and would be laughed out of court if a lawyer ever tried that particular tact.

It is also included in the taxation bit, but provides no legislative power, but rather an explanatory function for the reason to tax.

 

That is exactly what I'm arguing.
There is no natural laws that 100% of humans have. Only what the people, in the USA, let the gov't do and don't do. Nothing is set in stone.