View Poll Results: Would you approve of the individual mandate if it were passed as an amendment?

Voters
41. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    3 7.32%
  • No

    37 90.24%
  • Possibly/Other

    1 2.44%
Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 103

Thread: To those against Obamacare -

  1. #51
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    I would much rather have a UHC system than mandated health insurance. At least with a UHC, I know which doctors I can go to and should know pretty quickly how much it will cost me to get treatment from them.
    Oh, so would I. No argument from me on that.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  2. #52
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    01-09-12 @ 10:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    1,014

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    The government has no right to tell me what I must buy.

  3. #53
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    [QUOTE]
    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    If we are going to talk numbers, then we at least have to admit that UHC has a huge advantage over any private scheme - and that's law of large numbers. With UHC, anyone who has an income would be paying in. That, in and of itself, should reduce uncertainty drastically, which lowers the premium that is required to insure each individual. So we can blame this or that, but UHC is inherently cheaper because of its ability to reduce uncertainty. Then, after that, you can start discussing prevention vs treatment, since more people would be able to visit family doctors and search for early warning signs. This, too, makes health care cheaper.
    UHC is only an advantage for government. The fact is that government gets to dictate what your care is under a UHC system and you have no recourse, you can't sue government and you become less than a number, you become a "unit". Doctors lose options under UHC. UHC countries are a generation behind the U.S. in equipment and are having to step back care and delay surgeries do to monetary strain, this means a leg gets amputated instead of operated on, a tooth gets pulled instead of repaired, a person dies waiting to get a chest pain checked out instead of triaged. The best part, post-op care under many UHC systems is weighted, meaning you can be denied for any factor the governmnet chooses, and you have no recourse. Frankly I think UHC is the absolute worst system imagineable, it is so bad that many countries are starting to pare back the regulations banning private supplementals because their systems are in the beginning stages of bankruptcy.
    Anyway, I felt that was worthy of being pointed out - just by a quick look at numbers UHC should work out cheaper in the long run. And, according to cost of health care per person world wide, statistics do show that countries with UHC pay roughly half of what we pay.
    I've never seen a truly comprehensive comparison, in other words it is compared dollar for dollar, it should be compared as coverage for coverage. UHC will seem cheaper because you don't get comprehensive care so less money is spent, if coverage was a factor and you weighted the operations not budgeted for and upgrades in the UHC systems there would be no appreciable savings.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  4. #54
    pirate lover
    liblady's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    St Thomas, VI
    Last Seen
    03-14-16 @ 03:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    16,165
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by coolwalker View Post
    The government has no right to tell me what I must buy.
    i will agree with that. i think people should be able to opt out of an individual mandate, as long as they legally agree to cover any debts they rack up with no gov't assistance and no bankruptcy.

    Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:

    These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.


  5. #55
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    i will agree with that. i think people should be able to opt out of an individual mandate, as long as they legally agree to cover any debts they rack up with no gov't assistance and no bankruptcy.
    And no having the providers passing on the costs.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #56
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    UHC is only an advantage for government. The fact is that government gets to dictate what your care is under a UHC system and you have no recourse, you can't sue government and you become less than a number, you become a "unit". Doctors lose options under UHC. UHC countries are a generation behind the U.S. in equipment and are having to step back care and delay surgeries do to monetary strain, this means a leg gets amputated instead of operated on, a tooth gets pulled instead of repaired, a person dies waiting to get a chest pain checked out instead of triaged. The best part, post-op care under many UHC systems is weighted, meaning you can be denied for any factor the governmnet chooses, and you have no recourse. Frankly I think UHC is the absolute worst system imagineable, it is so bad that many countries are starting to pare back the regulations banning private supplementals because their systems are in the beginning stages of bankruptcy.
    No, I don't think there is any evidence of that. Those places operate on a triage basis, just as our hospitals do. Also, as in many countries that operate with UHC, you can still buy privatized insurance. So hell, if you want to make sure you are getting A1 care and you can afford it, go ahead. No one is stopping you. But this idea that we're all going to get horrible care is unfounded and has no basis - in fact, these countries have higher life expectancies than we do! And again, none of this even has to do with cost or law of large numbers. There is literally no arguing that law of large numbers reduces uncertainty, which makes something like health care cheaper. That is what is called a fact.

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    I've never seen a truly comprehensive comparison, in other words it is compared dollar for dollar, it should be compared as coverage for coverage. UHC will seem cheaper because you don't get comprehensive care so less money is spent, if coverage was a factor and you weighted the operations not budgeted for and upgrades in the UHC systems there would be no appreciable savings.
    Ohhh, ok, so the only reason it appears to be cheaper is because they are doing the comparison wrong, at least according to LaMidRighter. Whatever. Ok ok, let me change the phrasing so it is easier for you to understand:

    Fact: The more people insured, the cheaper the insurance because of less uncertainty.

    Better?
    Ted Cruz is the dumbest person alive.

  7. #57
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    No, I don't think there is any evidence of that. Those places operate on a triage basis, just as our hospitals do. Also, as in many countries that operate with UHC, you can still buy privatized insurance. So hell, if you want to make sure you are getting A1 care and you can afford it, go ahead. No one is stopping you. But this idea that we're all going to get horrible care is unfounded and has no basis - in fact, these countries have higher life expectancies than we do! And again, none of this even has to do with cost or law of large numbers. There is literally no arguing that law of large numbers reduces uncertainty, which makes something like health care cheaper. That is what is called a fact.



    Ohhh, ok, so the only reason it appears to be cheaper is because they are doing the comparison wrong, at least according to LaMidRighter. Whatever. Ok ok, let me change the phrasing so it is easier for you to understand:

    Fact: The more people insured, the cheaper the insurance because of less uncertainty.

    Better?
    You are speaking to a guy with years of insurance experience. Let's go over risk tables shall we? The more risk in the data sample the more expense, which means that if the overall risk table is healthy they will absorb the cost of shocking the system with too many unhealthy or otherwise high risk candidates all being forced in within a short period of time, that is economic fact. UHC countries do not provide as much or as quickly, that is also fact. You are more likely to lose body parts or even your life if your personal data isn't deemed "worthwhile" in UHC countries. This is all fact.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  8. #58
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,115

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by whysoserious View Post
    If we are going to talk numbers, then we at least have to admit that UHC has a huge advantage over any private scheme - and that's law of large numbers. With UHC, anyone who has an income would be paying in. That, in and of itself, should reduce uncertainty drastically, which lowers the premium that is required to insure each individual. So we can blame this or that, but UHC is inherently cheaper because of its ability to reduce uncertainty.
    if it werent' for the fact that it was non-competitive and run by government, you would be correct. unfortunately, socialized industry has an atrocious track record for those two reasons.

    there is no incentive not to overconsume, and so instead instead government has to impose a top-down, clumsy, one-size-fits-all set of rationing decisions to allocate the fewer resources that must now go to meet higher demand with no price mechanism.

    Then, after that, you can start discussing prevention vs treatment, since more people would be able to visit family doctors and search for early warning signs. This, too, makes health care cheaper.
    yes. unfortunately, since you now live in an UHC, it doesnt' matter if you want preventative care. because it you will be much less likely to actually get it.

    Anyway, I felt that was worthy of being pointed out - just by a quick look at numbers UHC should work out cheaper in the long run
    yes. you spend less money when you deny people care. we could cut our food bill to nothing by simply starving everyone to death, as well. hooray, think of the savings!

    And, according to cost of health care per person world wide, statistics do show that countries with UHC pay roughly half of what we pay.

    *Edit:

    ****, and then if you were to provide some sort of amnesty to illegal workers, getting documentation for taxation - my God. We might actually have a workable system.
    not really - they don't earn nearly enough.

  9. #59
    Sage
    whysoserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Charlotte, NC
    Last Seen
    12-29-16 @ 03:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    8,170

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    You are speaking to a guy with years of insurance experience. Let's go over risk tables shall we? The more risk in the data sample the more expense, which means that if the overall risk table is healthy they will absorb the cost of shocking the system with too many unhealthy or otherwise high risk candidates all being forced in within a short period of time, that is economic fact. UHC countries do not provide as much or as quickly, that is also fact. You are more likely to lose body parts or even your life if your personal data isn't deemed "worthwhile" in UHC countries. This is all fact.
    Yeah, and you're talking to a student of actuarial science. I have the life tables in the same room as me right now. Those risks you are talking about exist no matter what - you just want to shove them in a dark corner and forget about them. But that doesn't mean we don't pay for them, and by trying to ignore the problem we actually make it more expensive. Guess what? High risk candidates still go to the hospital. Guess what? High risk candidates still have surgery. Guess what? High risk candidates take medication. They just don't pay for them.

    All UHC does is take the risk, shine a light on it, and use law of large numbers to minimize overall exposure. You can hide it all day if you want, but unless you want to start turning people away from hospitals, those "high-risk candidates" are going to **** you either way.
    Ted Cruz is the dumbest person alive.

  10. #60
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: To those against Obamacare -

    Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post
    You are speaking to a guy with years of insurance experience. Let's go over risk tables shall we? The more risk in the data sample the more expense, which means that if the overall risk table is healthy they will absorb the cost of shocking the system with too many unhealthy or otherwise high risk candidates all being forced in within a short period of time, that is economic fact. UHC countries do not provide as much or as quickly, that is also fact. You are more likely to lose body parts or even your life if your personal data isn't deemed "worthwhile" in UHC countries. This is all fact.
    The difference in speed isn't all that different. We wait quite a bit here. This has been linked many times showing that the difference is minimal. Also, it depends on which particular type of system we're talking about. They are not all the same. There are many types. And even if you pick one, say a single payer system, there are several different single payer systems.

    And here, we would ahve different teirs. At a minimum, it would be two tiered.

    Of course to examine these, we would have to have an honest discussion. And this topic has not lent itself to honest discussions.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •