Benjamin Franklin Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Anyone that thinks that the parties will come to some kind of compromise on healthcare is deluding themselves. You might be right but Congress is about ready to move back towards the middle a bit, especially on healthcare. And with Dems saying they won't pass any tax overhaul plan that doesn't reduce the deficit, maybe on that issue too. Congress has been in shambles of party dysfunction for a while and paying the price with low approval (but no turnover!). Can't keep it going.
Nanker Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 The government should get the hell out of the insurance business for the masses. They could make it illegal for insurers to deny coverage to people with pre-existing conditions - but allow them to charge somewhat higher premiums to insure those folks. If they're too high for the needy, then I'd be okay with some subsidies to alleviate the burden. The only legitimate place they have in that space would be to provide catastrophic coverage like they currently do for kidney disease. Healthcare insurance is not a right by natural law.
Magox Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Anyone that thinks that the parties will come to some kind of compromise on healthcare is deluding themselves. And anyone who thinks that going on a party line basis can produce a working sustainable healthcare plan is also deluding themselves.
Magox Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 2018 election will be really big if it doesn't get fixed. Senator announces bipartisan health care hearing on Obamacare (CNN)Several Republican and Democrat lawmakers agree that Congress needs to prevent a collapse of the health insurance market, which could hurt millions of consumers -- and that concern has opened up some bipartisan dialogue. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, said the Senate health committee will hold bipartisan health care hearings on how to repair the individual market. In the House, a group of 40 lawmakers from both parties endorsed an outline of ideas aimed at making urgent fixes to Obamacare. The step toward bipartisanship on health care comes as some Republicans consider an approach that diverges from the president's stance. http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/02/politics/senate-health-care-hearing-bipartisan/index.html finally Ah, the responsible pragmatic lawmakers, too bad they are far and few between. Or at least they are in hiding because they don't dare buck the base of their irrespective parties. The problem with pragmatism is that it doesn't inspire the passions that the most rigid ideological voices of the party do. People like seeing clear delineations and contrasts from one party to another. It's easier to understand, it's easier to communicate and foment. The most fervent of voters who vote and are the most politically engaged belong to the further right/left spectrum of each party, specially in the !@#$ed up primary system that we have. It rewards those politicians who either are true purists or who pretend to be rather than those who want to compromise and get things done. Which is why I lament over the way information is being disseminated, both conservative and liberal media live in their own little bubbles, only spreading "news" that their viewers want to tune into. It's a vicious cycle sort, sort of a negative feedback loop. In other words, it comes at the cost of quality of news to essentially what becomes propaganda.
Tiberius Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 And anyone who thinks that going on a party line basis can produce a working sustainable healthcare plan is also deluding themselves. Plus the elections next year are forcing Republicans to strengthen Obamacare so they don't face an angry electorate
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Ah, the responsible pragmatic lawmakers, too bad they are far and few between. Or at least they are in hiding because they don't dare buck the base of their irrespective parties. The problem with pragmatism is that it doesn't inspire the passions that the most rigid ideological voices of the party do. People like seeing clear delineations and contrasts from one party to another. It's easier to understand, it's easier to communicate and foment. The most fervent of voters who vote and are the most politically engaged belong to the further right/left spectrum of each party, specially in the !@#$ed up primary system that we have. It rewards those politicians who either are true purists or who pretend to be rather than those who want to compromise and get things done. Which is why I lament over the way information is being disseminated, both conservative and liberal media live in their own little bubbles, only spreading "news" that their viewers want to tune into. It's a vicious cycle sort, sort of a negative feedback loop. In other words, it comes at the cost of quality of news to essentially what becomes propaganda. I love how compromise and tolerance are all the rage when the left isn't in power. You never see lectures like this when they are.
Magox Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 I love how compromise and tolerance are all the rage when the left isn't in power. You never see lectures like this when they are. I don't know what you are talking about, I have advocated bipartisanship with a tilt towards the right on economic issues for as long as I can remember. Are you new here?
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 I don't know what you are talking about, I have advocated bipartisanship with a tilt towards the right on economic issues for as long as I can remember. Are you new here? No. And not singling out YOU specifically. But it seems like among media types, this is the narrative. Advocacy for bipartisanship in favor of the minority ideology.
Magox Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 No. And not singling out YOU specifically. But it seems like among media types, this is the narrative. Advocacy for bipartisanship in favor of the minority ideology. The media sucks both from the right and the left. There is no such thing as non biased media coverage.
ALF Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Insurers seeking huge premium hikes on ObamaCare plans Top health insurance companies in numerous states are looking to hike premiums by double-digits – some by roughly 30 percent or more – for ObamaCare plans in 2018, according to newly released figures that could light a fire under stalled efforts on Capitol Hill to fix the program. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/02/insurers-seeking-huge-premium-hikes-on-obamacare-plans.html
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Insurers seeking huge premium hikes on ObamaCare plans Top health insurance companies in numerous states are looking to hike premiums by double-digits – some by roughly 30 percent or more – for ObamaCare plans in 2018, according to newly released figures that could light a fire under stalled efforts on Capitol Hill to fix the program. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/08/02/insurers-seeking-huge-premium-hikes-on-obamacare-plans.html Fear not, Obamacare working as designed.
grinreaper Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 If we want to fix the healthcare insurance industry the first step is insuring that lawmakers face having the same plans that everyday Americans have. No exemptions and no subsidies.
ALF Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 (edited) Heard on TV that of the 35 richest countries only the U.S. does not have universal healthcare . Yet the cost here is twice as much as those countries with 11.3% with no coverage here. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/11/the-number-of-americans-without-health-insurance-rose-in-first-quarter-2017.html I'll bet no other country would want to copy the U.S. system Edited August 2, 2017 by ALF
TakeYouToTasker Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Heard on TV that of the 35 richest countries only the U.S. does not have universal healthcare . Yet the cost here is twice as much as those countries with 11.3% with no coverage here. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/11/the-number-of-americans-without-health-insurance-rose-in-first-quarter-2017.html I'll bet no other country would want to copy the U.S. system Why do you think that is? We know that governments are not efficient, and that monopolies do not lower prices, so what else could it be? We also know that those healthcare systems are collapsing. Look at Britain.
bdutton Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Heard on TV that of the 35 richest countries only the U.S. does not have universal healthcare . Yet the cost here is twice as much as those countries with 11.3% with no coverage here. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/04/11/the-number-of-americans-without-health-insurance-rose-in-first-quarter-2017.html I'll bet no other country would want to copy the U.S. system Comparing costs is a tricky business. For one, they have limits on the available locations and types of procedures covered by a single payer system. Generally lower quality care and rationing of services is what you get. Its inevitable to control costs in that system. I think the costs could be much lower if patients had a choice of which procedures and where the get the procedures done. Here is an example... my insurance company covers the colonoscopy procedure at 100%. My doctor, who is a standup guy, gave me two choices for the procedure. One at a local hospital which charges over $3500. Or another medical center a little farther away for only $1500. Same procedure and anesthetics but a $2000 difference because the other place can get away with it. What we need is reform and transparency of the medical procedures and the ability of patients to shop for the best option for themselves. I do think that if congress would pass a law allowing insurers to sell their product across state lines, force the service providers to publish the itemized costs of all procedures, and add all people not currently covered by private insurance to an "Open Pool" that a quasi private/federal insurance company (think Fannie Mae/Freddy Mac) to sell minimal catastrophic insurance to. That would enable market forces to control costs and cover those who want insurance but cannot afford the private market plans.
Doc Brown Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 If we want to fix the healthcare insurance industry the first step is insuring that lawmakers face having the same plans that everyday Americans have. No exemptions and no subsidies. Rand Paul laughed at that in an interview saying it wouldn't matter because they're all rich anyways.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Rand Paul laughed at that in an interview saying it wouldn't matter because they're all rich anyways. Then why do they need a subsidy?
ALF Posted August 2, 2017 Posted August 2, 2017 Why do you think that is? We know that governments are not efficient, and that monopolies do not lower prices, so what else could it be? We also know that those healthcare systems are collapsing. Look at Britain. The lobbyists will bribe their way to a new bill . There is not much the average person can say about the outcome.
Recommended Posts