Posted on 08/15/2013 7:36:39 AM PDT by Cringing Negativism Network
No big huge raving fan of Gingrich anymore, but when he's right he's completely on the money:
Boston (CNN) – Former House Speaker and presidential candidate Newt Gingrich reprimanded his fellow Republicans in unusually harsh terms Wednesday, blaming GOP members of Congress for developing "zero" alternatives to President Obama's health care reform law.
(please see link for full article)
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
It does. Just one example from a few days ago in the family (this took place in Mumbai, India for a cost comparison): My wife's sister had a chunk of concrete fall on her head, was semi-conscious for a while, taken by a friend to the ER, was stapled up and presented with a bill...for SIXTY DOLLARS equivalent. What would this have cost here $6,000, $12,000? 100X or 200X more here? Conceivably even more - I saw a bill for an ankle fracture for over $100,000.
While we’re at it, we need to have an alternative to amnesty for illegals ... and an alternative to recognition of gay marriage ... and an alternative to Voter ID ... and an alternative to *not raising taxes* ... and an alternative to the Second Amendment ... and an alternative to the Democrats’ approach to dealing with the *very real* problem of *anthropogenic climate change* ...
The solutions to all these problem is to stop letting the Demagogic Party define what the problems are and to stop letting them create them in the first place, IOW, vote out all Democrats, and if that doesn’t work, well...
And how would that differ from what we had pre-Obamacare?
Agree: that's a problem. It used to be (so I thought) that you could sign on with some sort of exclusion period - say 2 years - in which coverage could be denied for condition X, Y, or Z. I would support a mandate for something like that: clearly you weren't attempting to 'game' the system.
“1. Reduce government perverting the healthcare marketplace through regulation and legislation. 2. Leave it to the marketplace.”
That’s not really the Republican plan. Though if they actually did that, it would probably work.
But that would mean getting rid of Medicare/Medicaid, treating hospitals and other healthcare providers like any other business, and removing any requlation of insurance that prevents someone from buying only what they want (and living with the consequences of it)
Some people still actually give a shit about the constitution you know. I thought that was supposed to be the Republican party.
“Name recognition and “favorites” aside, if we are to accurately choose leaders who will lead us back onto the right track, we MUST be brutally honest about the probable effects of the ideas from these leaders.
We need to call ‘em as we see ‘em, and from what I see, Gingrich is no Conservative on the topic of the Nationization of the US Medical Profession.
What say all of you?”
I flip flopped between a few candidates . My first was Santorum but I voted for Newt in the FL primary because he was way ahead of Santorum in FL and closest to beating Romney.
Because the minority/Progressives have MASTERED the art of hijacking the nomination by splitting and amortizing the conservative vote over several conservatives - - - the ONLY - ONLY - ONLY -ONLY - I REPEAT - ONLY WAY we will NOT be hijacked again in 2016 once again by the Progressives Rove and Idiots Inc is if we work on mandatory RUN-OFF ELECTIONS for the top two Presidential primary candidates who do not achieve a majority.
We will not do that though because most of us are more interested in bitching and whining than we are in actually defeating those assclowns.
We need to tar and feather Priebus, Rove and all of those GOP imposter/traitors and get them OUT of our party and then make a national party rule - or- if that cannot be done, work to require primary run-offs state by state.
While I agree with you along the states rights argument. Much of the heartburn caused by health insurance is because someone had to move for a job, or whatever, and they lost health insurance and couldn’t get it again because of existing conditions.
Do you know of any other examples siilar to this? I am interested in researching the subject.
The first issue can be fixed by completely cutting the link between medical insurance and employment. There's no good reason why it has become the norm for employers to pay for medical coverage for their employees and even their employees' families.
The second issue involves insurance coverage for pre-existing conditions. It sucks to be in that position, but requiring a medical insurance carrier to cover a policy holder with a pre-existing medical condition is like requiring a life insurance company to sell someone a life insurance policy after that person has died.
That is what public health hospitals used to be about, treating the uninsured.
Actually, the Public Health Service was started to care for Merchant Marines while visiting ports, but was expanded to cover the military and anyone else, who did not have insurance. We should re-establish the Public Health system. It should be staffed by doctors who would have their student loans forgiven in exchange for service. One year of loans for one year of service, plus pay.
Again, I agree. Let a person search and find their own insurance. Sounds good to me! Free markets!
Second, and this isn’t really a slippery slope, it’s simple morality. If someone has been covered under insurance for a medical condition, and then for any reason, they have to move to a different state. They can be excluded from insurance coverage. They are left to rot, to “suck it up” and fend for themselves. They make too much money, and aren’t the poor protected class and can’t get medicaid. What is so right about that?
That is bull. The GOP had plenty of alternatives to Obamacare. They can pull ‘em out and dust ‘em off any time.
Government regulations have permitted the insurance industry to get away with whatever it wants - and at the same time, have also stopped it from offering major medical, high-deductible, catastrophic, etc. individual policies. Federal regs also prevent shopping for insurance among states in which you do not live.
Insurance is a heavily regulated industry, and the insurance companies are basically both controlled by and in bed with the Federal government.
One of the reasons that insurance companies stopped offering group insurance to small professional organizations of self-employed persons, such as actors, translators, or similar professions, is that the government compelled them to cover the enormously high costs of AIDS treatment. Apparently it didn’t stop them from bailing on these organizations, however, which is why group policies that had once been available to professional organizations then disappeared.
I hope you weren’t naïve enough to think the insurance industry has ever not been under the control of the Federal government.
The insurance industry is not free and probably never has been. Between crony capitalism, government regulation to guarantee results and private risk avoidance, the insurance agency has made itself the wealthiest industry in the US while at the same time providing poor or minimum services.
The TRUTH about Myth Romney ("Celestial God-Child from Planet Kolob") ...
and his "enthusiastic" support for GAY Marriage ...
It was orginally posted at Free Republic by "SoConPubbie" on Father's Day 2012 ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2896191/posts
===========================================
.
Get the government completely out of the health business.
How about the Constitution.
Where does it say the federal government is to be in the wealth redistribution business?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.