Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

TRUMP IS IN!!! The clown car is nearly complete.

Jon Stewart is going to go out with a bang now. Every comedian in the World is dancing in the streets.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

Health Care was the right thing to go after, but he pussied out and what we got was crap. Obama Care was not what we were promised or the right decision...

Agree and disagree. Current setup is much, much better than what we had before. Caps on out of pocket expenses, illegal to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions and insurers having to pay 80% of revenue to care and not salaries or rebating the difference are strongly liberal policies. Yes they should have included the public option, but again thanks to Useless Harry Reid pledging not to go through reconciliation, thus allowing Lieberman to block it with one vote, and then taking it off the table entirely there wasn't a lot Obama could do at that point. As has been said, the Senate really missed the gravely ill and soon to pass away Ted Kennedy while all the planning was going on.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

Health Care was the right thing to go after, but he pussied out and what we got was crap. Obama Care was not what we were promised or the right decision...

What do you want, single payer with a death panel deciding whether or not you get care? Head to Vermont. They have that there, and they're finding out how much it's really costing the government.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

File this under "The Sun Shines on a Dog's Arse Once in Awhile" but the Vermont example cited by Flaggy is a good one. Before I hop on board the single payer bandwagon, I would like to see it work somewhere in practice. The ACA = Romneycare which worked quite well in Mass. I was a little surprised VT couldn't pull that off.

 

[unofan]

File this under "The Sun Shines on a Dog's Arse Once in Awhile" but the Vermont example cited by Flaggy is a good one. Before I hop on board the single payer bandwagon, I would like to see it work somewhere in practice. The ACA = Romneycare which worked quite well in Mass. I was a little surprised VT couldn't pull that off.

You mean other than almost every other country with an advanced economy in the world?

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

You mean other than almost every other country with an advanced economy in the world?

I'm not fundamentally opposed. I just need to see an example of it working here, if possible. Perhaps another state will give it a try.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

File this under "The Sun Shines on a Dog's Arse Once in Awhile" but the Vermont example cited by Flaggy is a good one. Before I hop on board the single payer bandwagon, I would like to see it work somewhere in practice. The ACA = Romneycare which worked quite well in Mass. I was a little surprised VT couldn't pull that off.

There are a few issues you have to consider:

One, the cost of business. There's no such thing as a free lunch; someone's paying for this. You would expect state revenues to do so, but not only do most go toward environmental policies, but there really isn't much in Vermont in terms of population or commerce (aside from the ski resorts, and even then, those are seasonal).

Two: moochers. The UK is actually having this problem right now, where their welfare policies are resulting in a number of European immigrants flocking to the UK for their "deals". You could probably have some sort of proof of residency establishment, along with some sort of "special card" for those that work in Vermont but live in a border state and pay state taxes (happens a lot where I grew up).

Three: Alternative payment options. The way you can get around the death panels, and this is something Vermont actually does with their plan, is to allow people to use their pre-existing insurance as a sort of "fast track", while saving the government the burden of having to pay for them. Yes, I understand there may be some priority "abuses", but if one payer's money is as good as another's, what's the problem?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

You mean other than almost every other country with an advanced economy in the world?

Scale. What works in a country the size of Iowa won't necessarily work for the entire USA.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

Scale. What works in a country the size of Iowa won't necessarily work for the entire USA.

BS

We fail because we want to fail. This country is a shadow of what it once was.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

BS

We fail because we want to fail. This country is a shadow of what it once was.

I'll give you that there are people running the country with short interests, whether knowledgeable that they are doing so or not. Even if everyone were to be long, though, there's only so much you can do before you have to bring in others to micromanage regions. Sam Walton may ultimately be responsible for 200,000 employees and thousands of stores, but even he can't manage every single one of them simultaneously. That's why he needs district managers and store managers.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

What do you want, single payer with a death panel deciding whether or not you get care? Head to Vermont. They have that there, and they're finding out how much it's really costing the government.

What I want is a system that doesn't involve any insurance at all. It's such a silly way of purchasing something that we regularly need. Insurance is a concept intended for those rare, unexpected occurrences where you are suddenly confronted with a big loss or expense.

I mean think about it. Would anyone in their right mind set up a system where we buy grocery insurance? We pay a monthly premium, and then when we need groceries we go to the store, get what we need, and trust the grocery store to recover their bill from our insurance company pursuant to some complicated contract they've negotiated?

Health care used to be a relative rarity, or something that you could and did pay for out of your own pocket. But it has become so all-encompassing that it is basically an every day need.

The person who actually figures out how to get us from under the insurance system of paying for health care will be the real genius. Everything else, including Obamacare and anything floated by the GOP is just rubbish.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

What I want is a system that doesn't involve any insurance at all. It's such a silly way of purchasing something that we regularly need. Insurance is a concept intended for those rare, unexpected occurrences where you are suddenly confronted with a big loss or expense.

I mean think about it. Would anyone in their right mind set up a system where we buy grocery insurance? We pay a monthly premium, and then when we need groceries we go to the store, get what we need, and trust the grocery store to recover their bill from our insurance company pursuant to some complicated contract they've negotiated?

Health care used to be a relative rarity, or something that you could and did pay for out of your own pocket. But it has become so all-encompassing that it is basically an every day need.

The person who actually figures out how to get us from under the insurance system of paying for health care will be the real genius. Everything else, including Obamacare and anything floated by the GOP is just rubbish.

Actually, FWIW, health insurance came around at the time of World War II, as a response to the wage freezes enacted by FDR. Instead of giving the workers more money, they decided to cover an expense, in this case, health care. Because they couldn't micromanage everyone with a separate "account" at the time, they built a "trust fund" of sorts that would pay out when someone in the "trust" got sick. People saw the advantages of this, and all tried to get into the system. Because the funds grew larger and larger, and more and more people were joining, pharmaceuticals figured they could milk the trust a lot more by jacking up the prices of the drugs. And when malpractice became a big thing and there were lawsuits up the wazoo, there was even more of a justification for higher prices. The people not in the trusts started whining, and so they tried to force everyone into the trust.

I have no issue whatsoever with getting rid of insurance and going back to everyone paying for things on their own. The question of execution of your plan becomes: Which block do you pull first, and how do you deal with the subsequent yelling of "Jenga"?

 

[geezer]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

The person who actually figures out how to get us from under the insurance system of paying for health care will be the real genius. Everything else, including Obamacare and anything floated by the GOP is just rubbish.

In the long run, I don't think there's any other way than the single-payer plan. Because health care provision is both a societal necessity and a moral obligation, and needs for it vary so much. Setting it up as a government sponsored service across the board is no different from (but more defensible and sensible than) building interstate highways with tax dollars. Sure, some people might never use them. But to have everyone who buys a car build their own roads is both more individually expensive, and burdens society like crazy.
The other thing is, a sick person can cost other people besides the victim in different ways. Think of the ebola scare or vaccination. There's no question that health care is a societal obligation, why not fulfill it as efficiently as possible.
And yeah, government bureaucracies are inefficient, but it's a question of relativity. The current mess is completely unsustainable in the age of advanced but expensive medical technology. It burdens the people most who can least afford it (Have schizophrenia and can't work? Here's your massive bill for the only medication that will allow you to function as a human!)
When we finally get to the obvious solution, it won't be "insurance" any more. It'll be a medical tax on income or property. (You don't buy "school insurance", you pay property taxes)
What we'll be fighting over is what should be covered. Abortion? Gender confusion? Skin pigmentation? Skateboarding injuries? 90-year-olds?
I know, I'm a socialist.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

The person who actually figures out how to get us from under the insurance system of paying for health care will be the real genius. Everything else, including Obamacare and anything floated by the GOP is just rubbish.

I wouldn't call Obamacare rubbish. It's a field dressing for a severe wound. It'll be OK as long as we get the patient back to the hospital for real treatment.

I don't pretend to have 5% of the subject matter expertise needed to say what a true solution looks like. There are certainly enough countries with enough experiments running to learn from them. It would be great if there was a magic bullet solution, like say "single payer" in the mirror three times and all our troubles disappear, but it's probably going to be complicated, clunky, and costly. Obamacare, like Medicare before it, is primarily important in saying it is no longer acceptable to voters for people to die just because they're poor. That was a stain on the national conscience.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

There are a few issues you have to consider:

One, the cost of business. There's no such thing as a free lunch; someone's paying for this. You would expect state revenues to do so, but not only do most go toward environmental policies, but there really isn't much in Vermont in terms of population or commerce (aside from the ski resorts, and even then, those are seasonal).

Two: moochers. The UK is actually having this problem right now, where their welfare policies are resulting in a number of European immigrants flocking to the UK for their "deals". You could probably have some sort of proof of residency establishment, along with some sort of "special card" for those that work in Vermont but live in a border state and pay state taxes (happens a lot where I grew up).

Three: Alternative payment options. The way you can get around the death panels, and this is something Vermont actually does with their plan, is to allow people to use their pre-existing insurance as a sort of "fast track", while saving the government the burden of having to pay for them. Yes, I understand there may be some priority "abuses", but if one payer's money is as good as another's, what's the problem?

Was VT trying to eliminate insurers, or were they trying to pay for the care but have it managed through the state's insurers? My company self funds the health care for employees but hires Aetna to manage it. To get to single payer you might need to involve insurance companies as the managers at least initially.

 

[geezer]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

I wouldn't call Obamacare rubbish. It's a field dressing for a severe wound.

The theory behind Obamacare is that if you hit everyone in the face with a baseball bat, the one person who had a broken nose to start with won't feel as bad about it any more. Individual health insurance plans used to have some value, although everyone didn't have them.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

It would be great if there was a magic bullet solution, like say "single payer" in the mirror three times and all our troubles disappear...

I thought if you did that, a Death Panel!1!!1 appears and denies you access to care?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

Actually, FWIW, health insurance came around at the time of World War II, as a response to the wage freezes enacted by FDR. Instead of giving the workers more money, they decided to cover an expense, in this case, health care. Because they couldn't micromanage everyone with a separate "account" at the time, they built a "trust fund" of sorts that would pay out when someone in the "trust" got sick. People saw the advantages of this, and all tried to get into the system. Because the funds grew larger and larger, and more and more people were joining, pharmaceuticals figured they could milk the trust a lot more by jacking up the prices of the drugs. And when malpractice became a big thing and there were lawsuits up the wazoo, there was even more of a justification for higher prices. The people not in the trusts started whining, and so they tried to force everyone into the trust.

I have no issue whatsoever with getting rid of insurance and going back to everyone paying for things on their own. The question of execution of your plan becomes: Which block do you pull first, and how do you deal with the subsequent yelling of "Jenga"?

Health insurance existed long before WWII existed in the United States. It was in response to FDR's wage freezes that companies started adding health insurance as a fringe benefit. And when they did add it, it was a major medical policy. The HMO concept didn't come around until sometime later, and didn't really take off until the late 70's or early 80's. Once the HMO model became popular, that's when prices began to rise at a dramatic rate.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

Was VT trying to eliminate insurers, or were they trying to pay for the care but have it managed through the state's insurers? My company self funds the health care for employees but hires Aetna to manage it. To get to single payer you might need to involve insurance companies as the managers at least initially.

I'm thinking they were trying to come up with a true hybrid system, where every resident of Vermont is covered through the single payer plan (as that's what the lefties seem to want), but also appeasing the inefficiencies of Medicare that Herman Cain described (e.g. it is a felony to be covered by Medicare for something but pay for it by different means, including your own cash) by allowing them another method of paying for it, whether by cash, their own insurance trust fund, etc. If they were trying to eliminate insurers, they wouldn't have given the second option. How it works in terms of medical records, I don't know.

It's not too bad of an idea, as it does provide a decent compromise for most issues (conscientious objections could probably be handled by a separate fund that uses some form of an exemption). The biggest thing that needs to be addressed, though, is that these are managed at a state level, NOT a national level. Anyone who's tried to manage anything knows the bigger the size of what you manage, the more effort it takes to get it right. If you have to have some form of clause about the transfer of medical records and the acceptance of one state's plan in any state to satisfy interstate commerce, that's understandable, but for the love of everything good in this world, keep the entire management, including fiscal responsibilities, at a state level.

 

[French Rage]

Re: Campaign 2016 -- Don't Let the Perfect Become the Enemy of the Good

John Stewart just came.