redeyeddawg
New member
HB you are missing the two ton gorilla in the room. Government intervention is THE principle reason healthcare costs are so high. How would more government intervention correct the problem?
White House Ball
- Thread starter jumprightinit
- Start date
Bill B.
New member
Good points made thus far but I'll try to sum up my feelings on healthcare.
First, our system works for 95% of the people. The government wants a complete overhaul for the 5% remaining. Doesn't make sense. For the record, there are not 45-50 million Americans without health insurance. There may be 45-50 million people in America without insurance, but they are not all Americans. Not to mention the number that can afford health insurance but don't buy it.
Second, any public funded healthcare will ruin employee sponsored healthcare for hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Americans when their employers quit carrying them and toss them to the government. I could very well be one of those. The smart ones up in D.C. have no clue how much extra that's going to cost them because they can't even begin to estimate how many it will be.
Third, any government run healthcare plan will have three characteristics: 1) inefficient, 2) substandard quality, and 3) rife with corruption and fraud. If you don't believe me you have never looked into Social Security, Medicade, Medicare, etc., etc., etc.,
Lastly, once the potential to make money is gone it won't take one generation before there is a shortage of doctors and the drug companies and hospitals stop developing the next generation of treatments.
Sounds like utopia to me. What needs to be done is small changes over a longer period of time to tweak the areas that don't work well.
I'll give you examples of not working well. I know two guys that own their own businesses. Their kids are on ARKids First (state run healthcare for kids) because their parents "can't afford healthcare." One family are members of the local golf club and the other races atv's. Hmmmm, they sound like people with messed up priorities to me. However, I'm kind enough to pay higher taxes so they can do things that I don't budget for. Also, I have a sister in law that is 44 and disabled. Her disability? She got whacked out on drugs in her 20's and is now "depressed." Since all of us will pay her to sit around and do nothing, that is what she will do. Probably for the next 30 years or so.
First, our system works for 95% of the people. The government wants a complete overhaul for the 5% remaining. Doesn't make sense. For the record, there are not 45-50 million Americans without health insurance. There may be 45-50 million people in America without insurance, but they are not all Americans. Not to mention the number that can afford health insurance but don't buy it.
Second, any public funded healthcare will ruin employee sponsored healthcare for hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of Americans when their employers quit carrying them and toss them to the government. I could very well be one of those. The smart ones up in D.C. have no clue how much extra that's going to cost them because they can't even begin to estimate how many it will be.
Third, any government run healthcare plan will have three characteristics: 1) inefficient, 2) substandard quality, and 3) rife with corruption and fraud. If you don't believe me you have never looked into Social Security, Medicade, Medicare, etc., etc., etc.,
Lastly, once the potential to make money is gone it won't take one generation before there is a shortage of doctors and the drug companies and hospitals stop developing the next generation of treatments.
Sounds like utopia to me. What needs to be done is small changes over a longer period of time to tweak the areas that don't work well.
I'll give you examples of not working well. I know two guys that own their own businesses. Their kids are on ARKids First (state run healthcare for kids) because their parents "can't afford healthcare." One family are members of the local golf club and the other races atv's. Hmmmm, they sound like people with messed up priorities to me. However, I'm kind enough to pay higher taxes so they can do things that I don't budget for. Also, I have a sister in law that is 44 and disabled. Her disability? She got whacked out on drugs in her 20's and is now "depressed." Since all of us will pay her to sit around and do nothing, that is what she will do. Probably for the next 30 years or so.
jumprightinit
New member
Originally Posted By: HunterBear71Individuals in the U.S. pay more than double per capita for health care than any other developed country. The care offered in this country is certainly not twice as good as the care in these other countries. The American consumer is being overcharged for a number of reasons. The health insurance lobby has killed the public option, so it is unlikely that premiums will be greatly reduced by the Baucus plan. Insured Americans may not be clamoring for health care reform. However, that doesn't mean the system is healthy. Health care costs in this country are approaching crisis levels.
Mostly caused by Gov't regulations that stifle competition.
Mostly caused by Gov't regulations that stifle competition.
redeyeddawg
New member
Apply "free" housing assistance to "free" healthcare and this is what you get-
redeyeddawg
New member
Want some more?
Nice party you got there Hunter Bear.
Nice party you got there Hunter Bear.
So Congress is going to reduce the deficit by increasing spending $829,000,000,000.00?
How's that work again?
How's that work again?
trapper2
New member
in the first video they said that was the day of the deadline and the people he talked to were there to pick up an app. but it was detoits fault that it was like that, did any of them think to go get one earlier, no just wait till the last minute. and i am not a racist, some of my best friends are black, they are some of the best farmers i know, but is there any white people up there, i didnt see a one in that video, just wondering
The Tooner
New member
They are at crisis levels here, too. Have been for years. Universal healthcare is a great lie used by politicians to get votes. When Britain set about implementing their National Health Service after WWII, the government knew that the system would be unsustainable. The Cabinet was told by their advisors that demand for healthcare and medical services would always increase to outstrip the economy's ability to produce the wealth necessary to pay for it. Documents since released from those long ago meetings show that they believed the advice, but decided they had to go ahead anyway because they had been elected in a landslide after promising, among other things, the National Health Service that would provide everyone with whatever medical care they needed without charge, and the people wanted it. They were afraid to face the truth and tell the voters to face the truth.
It is unsustainable whether funded exclusively from the public purse or by private insurance schemes or a mixture. It's a fundamental truth of economics - you can have anything you want if you are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to pay for it, but you can't have everything you want.
It is unsustainable whether funded exclusively from the public purse or by private insurance schemes or a mixture. It's a fundamental truth of economics - you can have anything you want if you are willing to make the sacrifices necessary to pay for it, but you can't have everything you want.
Last edited:
