GOP Healthcare Plan (Vanity)

[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!

[supercat]

Moan about all the poor people who are suffering because the government runs medicine with as much empathy as the Nazis ran death camps.

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.

[sloop]

yes

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

[GSWarrior]

So you are saying that Republican/conservative interests were represented during the creation of Obamacare? Because I am saying they were not.

Where and when exactly did conservative interests come into play? Did I miss something? Where do you get that crap?

[GSWarrior]

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.

[sloop]

the conservative interest in obamacare is not to pass it

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

[sloop]

what i am saying is that government ‘reform’ caused the problem

more government ‘reform’ can’t fix it

the free market can

[rlmorel]

LIBERAL: You want to get rid of "The Affordable Care Act"! What are you going to put in its place?

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?

LIBERAL:But...but...

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-

LIBERAL: MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

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!

[GSWarrior]

We are in complete agreement. This a perfect illustration of what happens when government goes wrhere it shouldn’t—chaos and confusion.

[rlmorel]

This is where I see this eventually going (fictional dialog)

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..."

[ROCKLOBSTER]

you have given in to the idea that we need government fixes... government broke it

Well, it needs to be undone, who the hell else is going to fix it...armed revolutionaries?

[rlmorel]

I made this graphic a while back...

I had to make it small, unfortunately, but the morphed image shows very thin people in striped uniforms.

[sloop]

the only serious answer is electing conservatives

it will take a long, long time

there won't be a quick answer at the end of this sitcom or hbo movie

wish it was - i’d like to focus on the mall and movie star divorces - but that life is gone

[sloop]

good posts

like the graphic too

[privatedrive]

The answer is free markets. Allow people to buy insurance across state lines. Less Regulation! Empower the States to figure out what works best for them. Duh, Mitt?

[EternalVigilance]

what the Republicans plan is

A more competent form of socialism.

As much outside the Enumerated Powers as ObamaCare.

[SoConPubbie]

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?

You're joking, right?

RomneyCare was Socialism, plain and simple.

AN individual mandate forcing the redistribution of wealth by forcing those who earned the money to give it to those who didn't earn so they could have Health Insurance, backed up by a fine if you did not pay for the mandatory insurance.

Romney still vocally supports this pile of crap socialistic mess and you want to say it is ok?

[MV=PY]

Regardless of what the GOP comes up with (tweaking knobs when the problem is systemic), I always like to point out the free market successes in the medical industry.

Have a look at the cost of market-driven medical procedures like lasik and cosmetic surgeries. These technologies were allowed to flourish outside of the formal “medical insurance” domain, and show the power of the free market meeting demand.

Can you imagine what the healthcare industry could be if the power of competition were unleashed?

[privatedrive]

but it can be argued that Socialism as a concept does not apply on the State level, because people can move freely between states. At least that’s what Mittens should argue.

[ROCKLOBSTER]

So you are agreeing with me that the two parties aren’t serious about reforming healthcare

First of all I reject the propaganda term "reforming healthcare"

What the hell does that mean? Does it mean destroying private health insurance? Most definitely.

Does it mean cutting back on medical welfare? It should but doesn't.

I'd say from personal experience it means the former and additionally it mean increasing medical welfare.

The two major portions of "healthcare" are the funding mechanism (insurance or welfare) and the actual providers (hospitals, doctors etc)

Now, directly to your question:

Because of the term you used, it is an unanswerable question. The RATs want to destroy the insurance companies and implement nationwide, government controlled medical care. The GOP does not.

The GOP wants to protect the best health care funding system in the world, private carriers, and even go so far as privatizing MediCaid. The RATs want nothing to do with that.

just staging political theater

It's not just "political theater" because the GOP can't get anything through the RAT-senate or past the chief execu-RAT.

[privatedrive]

“The two major portions of “healthcare” are the funding mechanism (insurance or welfare) and the actual providers (hospitals, doctors etc)”

There is a third funding mechanism: ‘pay for service’. If you need it, buy it. I know this doesn’t address other issues, like ‘what if I can’t afford it’, but it must be allowed, even encouraged. Viagara, anyone?