Kasich warns Republicans on ObamaCare repeal

ive addressed this canard already. There was no lie. The statement was made prior to the ACA and was a different bill than he one that passed.

What didn't you understand the first time I posted this?

 

Because, rahl, this whole rotten, deceitful bag of LIES originated with, and was shoved through Congress by BARACK OBAMA and his sycophants! Obama owns this thing, from alpha to omega! Obama was the one who stood up there and made the campaign promises, over and over and over (do I need to provide a link to all the YouTube clips where he did this?). Here, have this for breakfast: http://www.investors.com/politics/c...ly-climbed-despite-obama-promise-to-cut-them/

But you completely EVADE my question (not for the first time) -- In 2009, Obama was a virtual 'King of the Mountain' -- and all during his first term especially. He had the House and the Senate, and, as it turned out, the Supreme Court in his pocket. So, if Obamacare turned out to be a FRAUD and a LIE, then whose fault was that? Why was the Obamacare that we are in the process of taking out to the trash pile today any different from the Obamacare that Obama himself promised during his 2008 campaign? The man always was a deceitful fraud and liar, and 'the truth was not in him'!

 

No fraud or lie. Just not the bill that ultimately passed congress that Obama referred to.

 

It is pointless to argue with you, and you evade my questions endlessly. I'm weary of this dance in which we simply step on each other's feet.

I've read Orwell's "1984" often enough to figure out how this is going to end, and neither of us is going to like it, rahl.

The part of the "new-and-improved" healthcare system we will both like is that it will be a "single-payer" system that will be open to everybody. We who are part of the system will make up the largest customer-base for any insurance endeavor in the world -- by far. Costs should be dramatically reduced, "co-pays" could become a thing of the past, and "deductibles" could also disappear. In other words, it could be a system like most of us had back in the 1960's and 1970's, where our employers included healthcare as part of our employee compensation. It was WONDERFUL!

The part you will love and that I will loathe is that everybody will be taken into the same system whether they actually PAY to be part of it or not! Parasites will be treated the same as those who actually PAY. The system will break down under the weight of millions upon millions of people who "bring nothing to the party" but their problems and demand for services. The government will probably just push it out to us as a mutated form of Medicare -- one in which people who have EARNED their benefits are thrown into the same pile as those who have EARNED little or nothing in their vapid, useless lives on other forms of government welfare.

Nearly the entire medical industry, including many thousands of doctors, nurses, hospitals, and specialty treatment centers will detach itself from this gigantic ball of bureaucrat-infested (*)(*)(*)(*). They won't take the "new-and-improved" Medicare, and instead demand that people sign up for their own individually-offered "health insurance" plans (my dentist already offers this), or, pay "cash on the barrel head". Many doctors have already relocated themselves overseas, and wealthier clients fly to their clinics in Mexico and Central America often for medical treatment. Many others have simply said, "(*)(*)(*)(*) it!", and retired. You can live well and inexpensively in many parts of Central America -- in American enclaves.

When YOU are old, sick, and feeble, I hope YOU get to enjoy the weeks of delay YOU are required to endure before somebody finally lets YOU into a packed and overflowing doctor's office. Just like today, YOU probably won't actually see a "doctor"... YOU'LL see some "nurse-practitioner" (whatever the hell that actually is), who will run YOU through a tense, overscheduled mill, write YOU a "scrip" which may or may not be relevant to whatever it was YOU went in about in the first place, and when YOU need to make a follow-up appointment YOU'LL have to go through all of this same bull (*)(*)(*)(*)! Thanks, Obama! Thanks, Jonathan Gruber! Thanks, cowardly RINO's who will shrink away from killing this unconstitutional, socialistic monstrosity when you had the chance!

 

Anytime the government creates a new monster, it has a structure that is forced on the people- and Obamacare is the biggest yet. It's logical that you can't just pull the plug; that you need to create a transition to a better condition. That would be like throwing the driver off the bus while it's traveling, then having a committee start interviewing for a new driver. The administration is fully aware that this transition must be orderly, and working on it.

This has been in numerous reports, seems obvious- not a point of contention.

 

There isn't anything to argue about. You were wrong, and proven to be so.

Yes, single payer, like most other countries have, is superior to the US system.

I agree we will need to do something about those red state leeches. Their free ride needs to end.

The US healthcare system is almost 40th in the world. Socialized healthcare is proven superior.

 

Obamacare was a fraud and a lie, and I've already proven that about a dozen times or more.

But, let's try to find a form of single-payer healthcare that makes sense, and that won't crash and burn under the weight of too many slackers, bums, and non-contributers. Perhaps this may be something that Left and Right can work together on? Otherwise we'll end up with healthcare as bad as North Korea's -- only MUCH bigger....

 

He's still alive? He should be embarrassed to show his face.

 

A lot of us on the Right may really want REVENGE for the way that ex-president Jive-ass ran this country with a "pen-and-a-phone" without the slightest regard for what's written in the Constitution -- BUT -- we have to rise above that, somehow, and try our very best to work together. If we don't, we are (*)(*)(*)(*)ED!

I know, I know... we on the Right shouldn't have to be the ones to coddle these adult-children and bring them into the light of reality in the real world. But understand... these poor delusional hyperlibs have been living in fairyland for the past eight years. Drug addicts need a certain amount of time in order to throw off their dependencies, addictions, and other "issues". The same is true for the adult-children of the hyperliberal Left....

The adult-children fell totally in love with the idea of almost-free healthcare! They loved the idea that they could lay around on their asses at Mommy and Daddy's house all day, playing at Facebook with their little bustout friends until they were TWENTY-SEVEN FREAKING YEARS OLD before they even had to think about any of this icky healthcare crap! After that, all they had to do was whine, cry, and get the biggest "subsidies" they could (with the help of very generous Democrat 'social-workers').

We have to wean them off this irregular, half-assed, "socialism-lite" sugar-teat, and that is going to require understanding and a degree of restraint on the part of those of us on the Conservative Right. And, although it seems like anathema, a single-payer system could work very well -- if it is set up correctly and run right from the very beginning.

 

lol, well, no you didn't. you have been bloviating on, as you are accustomed to doing.

I would love to find a to work with the GOP on getting a single payer system. But, the first step to recovery is admitting there's a problem. The right needs to admit for profit healthcare is unsustainable.

 

I cannot help but agree mostly with you on this, even though (as a Conservative), I'm supposed to passionately defend for-profit healthcare "no matter what". Fact is, I DON"T. Does that surprise you?

I'm older than you, I'm certain of that. Rahl, I can remember back up to about the mid-1970's that medical care was affordable and the costs didn't leap upward every damned year. A person's health insurance was almost always provided as part of an employee's salary/compensation, and back then there weren't any "co-pays", and very few, rare "deductables". But, big corporations moved into healthcare and started buying and/or merging with hospitals, medical research corporations, and pharmaceutical companies. The whole idea, seemingly, was to put a hammerlock on availability and drive costs, plus add big, fat profits to the bottom line. Needless to say, this was very conspicuous and horrible, especially during the economic catastrophe we called "Stagflation", where wages were stagnant, but costs and inflation exploded ever upward!

But what has been the Left's response? To create a socialist "mandate" that unconstitutionally forces everyone over the age of 26 to buy healthcare insurance! How did that help anything? You deny it, but the truth is that health care costs have continued to spiral upward, and it's caused by both government AND the for-profit corporations.

The ONLY thing I can think that will really (REALLY) bring back affordability in overall healthcare at this lousy stage is relentless, bottom-line competition between all the big for-profit players. A Federal Government single-payer system would be able to do exactly that through the use of Invitations to Bid (IFB's). Think of it! We American citizens who would be stakeholders in the single-payer system would constitute the largest customer-base in the world! The for-profit people would be FORCED to come up with the best offers, at the best prices, covering the largest array of contingencies, and in all probability, with no more of this "co-pay" crap, and very little, if any, "deductibles".

So, let's say the Federal Government puts out the bid requirements to all the "big boys", and in the Statement of Work and other bid spec's, it stipulates what the Terms and Conditions MUST be in order for contract compliance. Before that, the government polls all of "we, the people" to determine who many of us would be willing to PAY the required premiums to be part of the single-payer system, with no "subsidies" or other welfare crap involved in it. The "big boys" will have a good idea of the "tonnage" of both the customer base and the income, and they can produce their bids accordingly. All plan participants would save a great deal of money, prices would be locked-in for the contract period, and we'd have much better health care also!

The government might want to conduct these bids once a year in the beginning, but contracts of three or five years would be better, and cause a bidder's "pencil" to be sharper. Obviously, if you're a winner, you've got almost ALL the business, and if you're a loser, you probably have to hope you can be an affiliated subcontractor to the winner, or, go out of business.

Do you see any merit in this suggestion at all? I know we never agree on anything, but this would be an excellent place to start. If nothing else, we do agree on this -- we simply cannot go on like we've been going, under either for-profit corporate manipulation and gouging, or, under socialism-lite that could only sustain its legal existence by being changed from a "mandate" to a "tax". Do we at least have a basis for an understanding?

 

It does indeed my friend.

but this is the conservative wet dream. "free market" and "free enterprise".

it's not unconstitutional. The mandate was to offset the requirement that pre-existing conditions would now need to be covered.

Corporations, definitely. Government? only in so far as politicians being in the pocket of insurance, pharma and mega corporations owning hospitals lobbying groups.

I think the best model is similar to the Canadian model. A single payer plan covering every man woman and child in the country for basic medical care. People can then purchase supplemental plans on the open market if they desire.

I do see some merit to your suggestion. It has the "flavor" of "free market" (sort of) that would or should potentially make conservatives happy. And it is a single payer system, which should make liberals happy.

but alas, I do not see cooler heads prevailing in this. there's simply too much money involved with the status quo, and playing politics.

 

I am going to study the Canadian system because I simply don't know anything about it, really. It could be a good model.

Again, my main reason for recommending the competitive bid system for government single-payer contracts is that these big corporations have to step up, sharpen their pencils, cutting prices and improving their offers. A lot would depend on how the bid spec's are written. I worked many years for a large Fortune 50 corp in IT/Telecom, and I know how the bidding wars are fought. In this situation for healthcare, we American taxpayers can be the real winners if our legislators and president have their thinking caps on.

It is unfortunate that too many of "my" people hate the mere suggestion of "single-payer" health insurance coverage. But if I suggest to them that a bunch of us all go in together and put in a bulk-buy order for, say, new vehicles, I know we'll get better prices and better conditions from all the vehicle dealerships in Colorado. The best way to handle many large corporations is to make them do what they do best -- turn on each other like gladiators in an arena and slug it out! Meanwhile, you and I can sit up in the stands, sipping wine, eating hors d'oeuvres, and watching the blood flow. Let's turn them loose on each other instead of on us!