Skip to comments.GOP Healthcare Plan (Vanity)
Posted on 07/05/2012 3:17:34 PM PDT by firedawg76
OK fellow Freepers, I'm in need of some assistance. I am constantly getting into debates with liberals I work with who, of course, just love ObamaTaxCare. Like good liberals, when I present them facts demonstrating what a terrible law this is, they simply ignore them.
One problem I have is that when they ask what the Republicans plan is, I'm having some difficulty. I know what the tenets of the Republicans plan would look like, such as tort reform, selling insurance across State lines, high risk pools, etc. Has there been formally been a plan introduced by the GOP or Mittens yet? I have to admit that if they have put one out, I haven't been paying attention as closely as I should be. If they haven't, I definitely think they need to put out something. I don't think just saying we will dump ObamaTaxCare is enough. I believe we need to have something to tell the American Public what will be put in it's place as a viable alternative. Thanks for any assistance!
Yeah, pretty much...plus "Association Health Plans" which gives anyone access to a large group.
Has there been formally been a plan introduced by the GOP...
Only until they are blue in the face. You mean you haven't seen it mentioned in the press? Hmmm.....
While he isn’t my preferred senate candidate, this ad with Pete Hoekstra holding the democrat plan vs the republican plan is pretty good.
I’ve been searching and searching, but have not been able to come up with a link.
Has the House voted on a alternative? I know on the budget side, we’ve got the Ryan Plan, but I’m talking specifically about Healthcare.
‘something’ DOES NOT ‘HAVE’ to be done
their ‘something’ has created the $200 aspirin - they are not smart enough to ‘fix’ it
free healthcare (or affordable) is not a government function
if your health is so unimportant to you that you are unwilling to pay for it, die in the street - don't force me to pay for YOUR health when you don't care enough to pay for it
gather all your crap about you - you ipads and titanium cable plan - while on your death bed and die
Hey, thanks for that. I like it.
Over 13,000 pages of regulation
150+ new taxes....Some of them having nothing to do with health care.
Why? Just leave it to the individual states to come up with a plan that will work for them. If the Fed would like to make it easier, they could allow competition across state lines, and tort reform where loser pays to decrease the frivolous lawsuits. That should be plenty, don't you think?
Romney Care seems to be OK for Massachusetts, but another state may like something different. Let the PEOPLE choose what they want. Who could argue with that?
Do you think states want homo "marriage" forced on them? No, they don't.
Do they want sanctuary city status forced on them? No, they don't.
Why force a massive liberal federal program on them for health care if they don't want it? It doesn't make sense.
In 1964 the total bill for my delivery and a 3 day stay in the hospital was $85 which was about a week and a half’s pay for my dad at the time.
Today I believe childbirth runs between around $5,000 and $10,000.
While I agree with you, I think the GOP and Mittens will have to have a more coherent message than just “repeal and replace ObamaTaxCare”. What is the “replace” part?
Promising to repeal is great, but an incomplete message in my opinion.
And lets not forget, we got new taxes to pay for health care already. A 2300% increase in the tax on loose tobacco in 2009 was intended to pay for children’s health care.
it costs so much because democrap tort lawyers like john edwards sued using LIES and fake science - so now every doctor and hospital does a c/sect if the mother farts
Dumping Obamacare falls under the do no harm rule. Tis better to have no plan than to have Obamacare. Much like it is better to have an empty chair in the Oval Office than having Obama occupy it.The simple fact of the matter is that we cannot afford Obamacare as a nation. Contrary to Dem representations that it pays for itself, it does not and it will drive the deficit and debt up. Additionally I have seen projections that this pipedream of covering people with preexisting conditions effortlessly is just that - a pipedream. I have seen estimates that premiums on those currently insured who will be subsidizing folks with preexisting conditions by merging them in the healthy pool will rise 35% to 100% over time to compensate private carriers required to cover those with pre exiting conditions. All of this is hidden from view.But this argument will fall on deaf ears of your Dem friends as they have no concept of the realistic impact of deficits and debt on the future. Their mindsets are focused exclusively on the benefits side of the ledger without regard to cost. That is why they are Democrats.
Sis is in Michigan...Who are you supporting?
Amen. My sentiments exactly. While I don't think somebody can win elective office while advancing such notions, that reality speaks to the decline in the American people. What you said is the only position that is ultimately compatible with individual liberty.
Stop “getting into debates with liberals.” What in the world makes you want to beat your head against that wall? Sheesh.
I’m leaning toward Clark Durant but would have no problem voting for Hoekstra.
Here is your problem. They are emotion driven people. They don't do well with facts. If they did, they could add numbers up and figure out that every liberal idea ever thought of is a failure.
The only thing that works on these people is emotion. You have to lead with emotion, you have to argue with emotion, and you can only beat them with emotion.
I know this is a difficult concept for a fact driven person to wrap their mind around, but I assure you that irrational arguments work on irrational people. Focus on "Death Panels" and cite England's NHS as an example. Moan about all the poor people who are suffering because the government runs medicine with as much empathy as the Nazis ran death camps.
Use arguments like that, and you'll have better luck. But facts? They are often a hindrance when arguing with Liberals. In a nation that knows more about Snooki than they do about George Washington, reasoning is a waste of time.
Talked with three “independent’ oouples over the holiday. The only thing the seem to know is positive item. ...keeping kids till 26 on parents healthcare etc.
MSM and GOPee are not getting the message out. Repealing Obamacare with out telling why and what will replace it is not helping the cause.
Message needs to be simple :
TAXATION BY MISREPRESENTATION (250+ new taxes)
Or by a few bullet points. Got two, need one or two more.
* Over 230 new taxes, (some not dealing with health care)
* 13,000 pages of regulation emerged from the new laws it creates.
Maybe a creative Freeper can make graphic from them for all of us to share.
There is no other alternative to the soundly discredited socialized medical care systems around this world - other than government-hands-off policies of freedom that we have had.
Just look at the world-wide record. England, where health-care is a murderous joke, leaving the elderly to die without so much as a saddened glance - while throwing them out the door.
Look at the gigantic failure in Canada, where many (no most) came to the US and paid for care they could not get in Canada.
The only alternative is freedom. Freedom to buy health-care options from vendors free to create and market decent, competitive and affordable plans - without any sort of government interference - the kind of plans that I've been able to purchase in the United States since the early 1960's - without socialist wreaking-balls getting in my way.
Simply put, any American that thinks socialized medicine in this nation will be a success are more than just fooling themselves - they are trying to fool you, while often lying through their teeth, knowingly wanting to destroy what is left of the greatest healthcare system this world has ever known.
Tell them that history and common-sense proves that socialized medical care is a hideous world-wide failure.
Would yuu add your death panal to bullet points maybe we can get some one to make a graphic.
I know...but I just can’t help myself sometimes. I can only listen to so much stupidity before I have to set them straight.
“I know...but I just cant help myself sometimes. I can only listen to so much stupidity before I have to set them straight.”
Do you have any shiny objects you can flash to distract them?
The answer is this thing called "competition."
Right now, there's all sorts of restrictions on health insurance providers. Like they can't cross State lines, they have to keep certain minimums, they can't include various things under various circumstances.
And while the restrictions are created by the government, the health insurance itself lobbies for the restrictions, in order to destroy competition, so fewer and fewer, and bigger and bogger, health insurers exist.
It's all bull. Get rid of the free market restictions, and the health insurance business will explode with competition, and helath care costs will plummet - and then the Left won't be able to use it's whip hand against people to join the "collective" over this issue, because healthcare will be affordable and easy to get by everyone, and the tax burden will be negligible.
Ah, and medical research will be unstrapped that way as well, so people can invest without fear they won't be able to develop their inventions except under government and mega-corporate control and domination.
The free market is the answer you're looking for.
you have no recourse under government healthcare
you can sue the insurance company into insolvency
with ghettocare, you'll just be dead
Well a lot sure as hell has to be undone. Creating an environment for free-market practices to exist has nothing to do with promoting socialized medicine.
Any existing federal law limiting free-market should be repealed. You have to introduce bills to repeal this crap.
Tort reform was the first thing he mentioned.
The two parties HAVE to work together if they are serious about reforming healthcare.
REJECT THE PREMISE
WRONG! The Communists want only single-payer.
Unless, of course, by "the two parties" you meant the GOP and the TEApublicans.
50% are NOT left out
where do you get this crap?
That position has not been mentioned in opening of this thread. It is a question of what Republicans plan to do when they say repeal and REPLACE.
The answers were given last Sunday Morning, which are:
1. Selling across state lines.
2. High Risk Pools.
3. Tort Reform.
There are several more, which have nothing to do with the RATs nor with promoting national healthcare.
The Republican position on health insurance public policy is free-market reform.
Are you somehow against that?
Another angle I'd suggest taking is to observe that different people receive different amounts of benefit from various services; some 90-year-olds, for example, would receive much more benefit from a hip replacement than would some 60-year-olds. Willingness to pay for something is not a perfect proxy for "need", but it has some major advantages over alternatives. Among other things, it reward those who "need" less, and punishes those who "need" too much. Most other methods of resource allocation either ignore need altogether, or else reward those who make themselves as "needy" as possible.
you have given in to the idea that we need government fixes
government broke it
drop all medicaid - they will figure something out - like maybe the dignity of a job
phase out medicare
drop the law mandating free care in emergency rooms
insurance is NOT outlawed by anything except the states - the fight to change that is local - not federal
Where and when exactly did conservative interests come into play? Did I miss something? Where do you get that crap?
So you are agreeing with me that the two parties aren’t serious about reforming healthcare and are just staging political theater, cuz that’s what I am saying.
the conservative interest is NOT to craft a bill that takes slightly less freedom from the individual
that is where i got that crap
so yes - you DID miss something - you missed the conservative principles
what i am saying is that government ‘reform’ caused the problem
more government ‘reform’ can’t fix it
the free market can
CONSERVATIVE: First, it is ObamaCare. Stop calling it "The Affordable Care Act", because it most certainly is not going to make health care more affordable except perhaps to those who won't pay anything anyway...
LIBERAL: It IS "The Affordable Care Act"! You only call it "ObamaCare" because you are racist and hate President Obama!
CONSERVATIVE: It ISN'T "ObamaCare"? Oh, really? If it isn't "ObamaCare", can you explain to me why it is branded as such on the Whitehouse.gov website with THIS logo?
Now, if it isn't "ObamaCare", explain that logo to me? Hmm?
LIBERAL: YOU didn't answer my question! What are you going to replace it with?
CONSERVATIVE: Why replace it? Why not fix it and find a way to take care of people who don't have insurance?
LIBERAL: Healthcare doesn't work! We have the WORST healthcare in the world...
CONSERVATIVE: Oh, good God. Let me ask you this, if we have the WORST healthcare in the world, why is it that people come to this country in droves for healthcare? And they come from places that have socialized medicine. Answer THAT, will you?
CONSERVATIVE: Stop slavering. Look, I will make it simple for you. Rubes like you and your socialist liberal buddies can't think past Stage One. You are restricted to "Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad" thinking. A mile wide and a quarter inch deep. But the ability to make money and create jobs in health care fosters innovation and compels providers to stay up to date with technology and techniques. It isn't perfect, but as a whip to spur improvement and innovation, nothing motivates like money and competition.
LIBERAL: The system is broken from top to bottom, and it has to be destroyed and built up by people who can be trusted to do it impartially and fairly: The Government!
CONSERVATIVE: Sorry. I didn't mean to spit my coffee all over you. Really, I didn't. But you did say "trusted", "impartially", and "fairly" in the same sentence as "The Government". I guess it is a good thing you didn't say "affordably" or "efficiently" too, since we would have had to call in a cleanup crew to dispose of my innards which would have followed that coffee out. But seriously. The Government is the answer? Sorry...
LIBERAL:That's right! It has never been tried before! The current system has failed and we need to try a different way! The Government way!
CONSERVATIVE: Please don't interrupt me. As I was saying...sorry. It HAS been tried before and failed everywhere it has been tried. Britain should be enough as an example, but there are a host of others that have failed miserably.
LIBERAL: They all did it wrong! WE would do it right, because we have the most talented people-
CONSERVATIVE: Yeah. You guys CONSTANTLY say that. You say it about Communism, welfare, government, and now healthcare. It never-
LIBERAL: NO! We are-
CONSERVATIVE: Hey. Let me finish. The next time you cut me off I am going to stuff upholstery from a Prius into your mouth and tie you to a chair with wires from a Chevy Volt. This is what-
LIBERAL: How DARE you threaten me! I-
Scuffling sounds ensue.
CONSERVATIVE: As I was saying...this is what we need to do: First, Tort reform. Until that happens, the cost of healthcare won't come down. Nothing will change. Secondly, allow the free market to make competition more of a factor, getting rid of state line restrictions and so on. Thirdly, begin a process to allow normal prices to find their levels by changing the nature of insurance as it is currently offered. Once tort reform is in place, doctors won't have to practice as much defensive medicine, and healthcare providers will find a way to offer services that will give people what they want at prices they can better afford.
LIBERAL: Mmmmphhhh! Mmmmph!
CONSERVATIVE: Funny. I have heard it is tough to talk to liberals. I don't think this is very difficult at all!
LIBERAL: MMMMMPHHHH! MMMMMMMMMMPHHHHHPHHHH!
CONSERVATIVE: Anyway, having the government manage it is not the answer. Name one program the government manages that does a great job.
LIBERAL: THMMM MRRTLY!
CONSERVATIVE:Of course you would say "The Military". All liberals trot that out as an example. You guys all HATE it and want to dissolve it so you can use the funds for your own comically inefficient and useless social programs, so that doesn't surprise me at all. You probably have never served, so it isn't evident to you, but the fact that military actions by their nature are extremely wasteful conceals the fact that the military is basically a bureaucracy that is very, VERY inefficient. But when you need to destroy something, efficiency doesn't matter.
LIBERAL:MMMMHH! MMMHHH! MGGGHHHMMMPH! MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMGGGGRRRHRHHHHRRHHHH!!!!!!!
CONSERVATIVE: I can see we are done here. In parting, destroying something that is functioning reasonably well in order to make it run perfectly is a Fool's Errand. I know that is something you utopians all think you are good at, but I would prefer you just keep your damn fingers out of it. And don't worry about that stuffing from the Prius...I heard they made it a "green" car, so even though it runs on coal generated electricity-
CONSERVATIVE: Yeah. I know. To you guys, that is as disorienting as hearing your parents once had sex, but it is true. Coal Powered Cars. Anyway, they made the rest of the car "green", so the stuffing is probably biodegradable. I am sure someone will come around before it biodegrades though, so that shouldn't be an issue. Cya!
We are in complete agreement. This a perfect illustration of what happens when government goes wrhere it shouldn’t—chaos and confusion.
Here is what will happen first:
"...I'm sorry sir...we cannot schedule that appointment for you in November 2010 to have that melanoma removed because you have not undergone your mandatory annual counseling after age 65...oh, of course you are right. I know you are only 62, but they did move the age down again this year...we have an opening in three months with the counselors office...would you like that?"
This type of thing is fully expected, but It will not be the people you will be FORCED to talk to in order to receive your care, nor the intentional delays in care that will be the most insidiously evil facets of this, in my opinion. It will be the conversations like this one below that will REALLY illustrate what it is all about:
(END OF LIFE COUNSELOR SPEAKING TO THE DAUGHTER OF A MAN WHO REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN HIS "END OF LIFE COUNSELING SESSION")
"...Hi Jan, how are you? I heard your father is resisting counseling. It must be difficult, I know. There just seems to be so much of that lately. I know I am only 40 years old, but I don't understand why people like your father are so opposed to this.
Personally, I went with my mother to her own counseling session. She was pretty angry and initially refused to go. She said that it wasn't right the HCRRA (Health Care Resources Redistribution Agency) moved the age lower by five years without even passing any kind of law or holding any debate, and I said that even though I agreed, there was nothing to do but comply. I had to tell her that the HCRRA and the IRS would begin automatically withdrawing money from her savings account when she was six months overdue, and she said she didn't care. I had to explain that they take half of the money available in her account every month until she either complies or there is no money left. I pleaded with her that her savings money was supposed to be given to me and my family along with the government bonuses to match if she engaged in the counseling and entered EEPSI (Early Exit Program for Seniors and Infirm). I had to plead that we really needed that money, since Tommy is going to college next year.
I thought she was really rude to the counseling agent, who was just a young woman only doing her job. Someone told me they are only hiring young women as counselors now, because the men who were doing it just got angry too easily and shouted at people to just "sign the damned papers". Hm. I tried to tell my mom why they have to do this, but she said they do it just to get rid of old people to save money.
The counseling agent gave my mom a copy of the book "Death is Joy". I read it, and it makes a lot of sense to me. Of course, when I was going to school, we didn't have to read it, but now they have required classes they take every year beginning in first grade.
Suzie is in third grade and is taking the course this year that deals with the chapter on keeping birth rates down, and Tommy is in his senior year where they cover the financial aspects of care for the elderly. He was so excited, he said that since they have implemented this national care program, the number of elderly people has dropped dramatically, so they can spend more money on programs such as monthly equality checks for the economically disadvantaged and reparations for the descendants of slaves. I think it is wonderful.
He asked me why so many elderly people are so selfish and refuse to accept counseling...I didn't really have an answer for him. Hm. Now, don't be defensive, I am not criticizing your father. I am just saying, it is a problem.
They had an hour-long program on PBS about this the other night, and they were saying how the people who are being selfish about this and refusing to take advantage of early exit programs like EEPSI that pay cash to their children (and also pass their savings along to their beneficiaries at a low tax rate) are being so self-centered because they grew up in a time where everyone was self-centered and were interested only in money for themselves. You know, they showed films from the days of the capitalists where there were people who had what they called 'gas-guzzlers", and they used to make so much more money than they needed to live comfortably, so many people were going without health care because they were taking all the money..."
Well, it needs to be undone, who the hell else is going to fix it...armed revolutionaries?