Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Slyfox
It goes deeper than that.

The core of the problem with medical care in this country is that it is financed almost entirely through third-party payment systems. The underlying problem is the same, regardless of whether the "third party" in question is a government or an insurance company.

You really can't have a "free market" unless the buyer and the seller interact directly.

Very few Americans would ever want this -- and this is really a pathetic indictment of what this country has become. The dirty little secret even for many so-called "conservatives" is that "health care" means nothing to them beyond how it answers one question: "How do I get someone else to pay the medical bills I can't afford to pay myself?"

15 posted on 02/21/2016 12:26:02 PM PST by Alberta's Child (Bye bye, William Frawley!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: Alberta's Child

This is where positive, voluntary charity might be able to start addressing this. Might... we would need to do the math. But if as part of the bargain of doing this, a Christian charity got to state to the beneficiary that it was Christian, I think more would be willing. They would think “Mission opportunity.”


17 posted on 02/21/2016 12:28:43 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck (Embrace the Lion of Judah and He will roar for you and teach you to roar too. See my page.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child

I would suggest “asset testing”. I know someone, very close to me, as in family member, worth more than I could ever hope to be, but has set up his finances in a way that shows minimal income, enabling him to take advantage of several gov’t programs, although he’s very vague on which ones.

Everything he’s doing is legal, within the rules as they’re currently written.

You can’t separate him from a penny if he doesn’t want it separated. He uses “other peoples” money to accomplish his goals.


29 posted on 02/21/2016 12:40:43 PM PST by GeorgiaDawg32 (www.greenhornshooting.com - Professional handgun training.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: Alberta's Child
In the old days the doctor provided healthcare and the patient paid for it; it was affordable enough that sometimes the doctor would get a chicken for his services. Not bad.

The insurance companies and employers provide a service for employees. Not bad but the chicken paying began to fall out of favor.

In the 70s doctors are mandated to be 'managed' where the government begins to mandate how doctors and insurance companies interact. Not good because Uncle Sam began to make decisions.

Hillary introduces her version of Obamacare and falls flat on her face. Not bad, in fact really fun.

Managed care increases - liberals in Congress begin to stomp for 'single-payer' claiming that what we really have is a healthcare issue when it is really a 'medical costs have risen because of government butting in where it should never have been.' Not good.

Obama pushes for and succeeds in getting the first part of his grand scheme to hook every person in America into healthcare which is determined by the 'single payer' the Federal government. Really, really bad.

And Donald Trump wants to play around with the chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

37 posted on 02/21/2016 12:52:56 PM PST by Slyfox (Ted Cruz does not need the presidency - the presidency needs Ted Cruz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson