• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Under GOP draft of Obamacare Repeal Plan, a lot of people could Lose coverage

Now you're just throwing out platitudes. What UHC primarily has to do with is providing healthcare to a county's population in the most effective, efficient way possible. There are dozens of ways to do it but what they all have in common is some sort of UHC component, with subsidies for the poor, etc.

It's like saying, "the interstate highway system has nothing to do with market freedom but with government control." And you could insert 100 different things in that line. I guess that's somewhat true, but it's drivel. Governments build critical infrastructure from taxes because it works better than letting "markets" do it. The entire world has decided that UHC works better than our system, and the results speak for themselves.

No, I'm not actually the one that did that. You said the countries promoted market freedom and then used UHC as an example of that. The fact is UHC has nothing to do with market freedom, but is in fact a way for the government to CONTROL the healthcare market.
 
No, I'm not actually the one that did that. You said the countries promoted market freedom and then used UHC as an example of that. The fact is UHC has nothing to do with market freedom, but is in fact a way for the government to CONTROL the healthcare market.

OK, you're nitpicking and choosing a line in a much broader point that you understand quite well and focusing on the minutiae instead of the broader point. Have at it.
 
That is incorrect and, if you think about it, you would know that. A large number of those people are subsidized and so do not pay for their coverage
Doh/Umm that's what I said! See the OP and others.
There are taxes that pay for Obamacare that Subsidize the premiums. That WAS the whole idea OF O'care, to insure those who couldn't afford market rates.
Yikes!

So...I looked through the thread and through your article but no where do I see a link to this proposed bill. Got a link to it? Because without it all that we're going by is the word of CNN. Which is not enough for me.
Unbelievable.
We have someone so Hyper-partisan he's joining the Goebbelisn Trumpov in calling CNN "Fake News."
Hey Kal!...
Ever heard of GOOGLE!

https://www.google.com/webhp?source...e=UTF-8#q=draft+bill+gop+healthcare&tbm=nws&*
https://www.google.com/webhp?source...espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=draft+bill+gop+healthcare&*
Unbelievable.
There's a Trump supporter for you!
He can't even look it up before posting.
Unbelievable.
"looked through the thread and through your article but no where.."
But Google never occurred to him!

EDIT
to JoG immediately below.
You had it 100% WRONG guy, so now make up a new objection.
Another Trump fan shows off.
 
Last edited:
Doh/Umm that's what I[ said! See the OP and others.
There are taxes that pay for Obamacare that Subsidize the premiums. That WAS the whole idea OF O'care, to insure those who couldn't afford market6 rates.
Yikes!

Unbelievable.
We have someone so partisan he's joining the Goebbelisn Trumpov in calling CNN "Fake News."
Hey Kal!...
Ever heard of GOOGLE!

https://www.google.com/webhp?source...e=UTF-8#q=draft+bill+gop+healthcare&tbm=nws&*
https://www.google.com/webhp?source...espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=draft+bill+gop+healthcare&*

Unbelievable.

And that, you see, is the problem. Of course people like freebies. But it is no achievement to make presents. What is really astonishing is that in spite of such a horrendous present, the liberals were voted out.
 
And that, you see, is the problem. Of course people like freebies. But it is no achievement to make presents. What is really astonishing is that in spite of such a horrendous present, the liberals were voted out.

Do you have a suggestion about how to provide healthcare to the poor and sick without "freebies?"

It's just math that we have millions of jobs, and 10s of millions of people who couldn't afford insurance before ACA. Even before that we had Medicaid, which mostly covered poor women with children. We have had Medicare for the old which allows nearly every senior, even the most poor, to have access to medical care in their old age. So, yeah, perhaps it's no "achievement" to make presents, but it's also no achievement to throw rocks at attempts to solve a problem without a better idea of how to go about it. We as a country are NOT going to turn people away and let them die in the streets for lack of insurance, at least not from emergency care, so "freebies" are baked into the cake of ANY healthcare system in the U.S. or any other industrialized country. If not, how do you suggest we cover the poor/sick without "freebies" as you describe it? We know how the rest of the industrialized world does it, so can you point to a better model out there somewhere?
 
Do you have a suggestion about how to provide healthcare to the poor and sick without "freebies?"

It's just math that we have millions of jobs, and 10s of millions of people who couldn't afford insurance before ACA. Even before that we had Medicaid, which mostly covered poor women with children. We have had Medicare for the old which allows nearly every senior, even the most poor, to have access to medical care in their old age. So, yeah, perhaps it's no "achievement" to make presents, but it's also no achievement to throw rocks at attempts to solve a problem without a better idea of how to go about it. We as a country are NOT going to turn people away and let them die in the streets for lack of insurance, at least not from emergency care, so "freebies" are baked into the cake of ANY healthcare system in the U.S. or any other industrialized country. If not, how do you suggest we cover the poor/sick without "freebies" as you describe it? We know how the rest of the industrialized world does it, so can you point to a better model out there somewhere?

You are right that health care costs. In Germany about 17 percent of lower income paychecks is withheld for the public insurance.
So you Just have strongly restricted coverage. Then the policies are cheaper. Remove the restrictions on cross border competition. But there is no really optimal solution for the poor given the present mess we have made of social programs. That sector needs to be completely restructured.
 
You are right that health care costs. In Germany about 17 percent of lower income paychecks is withheld for the public insurance.
So you Just have strongly restricted coverage. Then the policies are cheaper. Remove the restrictions on cross border competition. But there is no really optimal solution for the poor given the present mess we have made of social programs. That sector needs to be completely restructured.

No offense, but you didn't answer the question, not even close. Obviously EVERY industrialized country provides "freebies" to the poor for healthcare. There is no way to solve the problem without them, and lots of them. And the only suggestion you made is to remove restrictions on cross border competition, but that's just not a serious proposal because it won't have much effect without MAJOR reforms somewhere else. The barrier to interstate competition is that every insurer in our system has to negotiate contracts with all the big providers in each healthcare market, and that is immensely time consuming and difficult and big providers have no incentive to negotiate with newcomers in a market because those newcomers have few patients and no leverage. There has been a ton written on this, including the complete failure of these efforts in states which did open their markets up to anyone. No one came!

And you'll have to explain how the present mess of "social programs" has much if anything to do with healthcare reform. And how 'restructured?' Sounds good but without details it's meaningless drivel.
 
No offense, but you didn't answer the question, not even close. Obviously EVERY industrialized country provides "freebies" to the poor for healthcare. There is no way to solve the problem without them, and lots of them. And the only suggestion you made is to remove restrictions on cross border competition, but that's just not a serious proposal because it won't have much effect without MAJOR reforms somewhere else. The barrier to interstate competition is that every insurer in our system has to negotiate contracts with all the big providers in each healthcare market, and that is immensely time consuming and difficult and big providers have no incentive to negotiate with newcomers in a market because those newcomers have few patients and no leverage. There has been a ton written on this, including the complete failure of these efforts in states which did open their markets up to anyone. No one came!

And you'll have to explain how the present mess of "social programs" has much if anything to do with healthcare reform. And how 'restructured?' Sounds good but without details it's meaningless drivel.

Funny you wouldn't know that all programs hang together with the whole structure. But the way to think might be along a GMI system from which the premium of the policy of the citizen's choice is paid by the citizen every monthe. But I am not really interested in discussing the optimum structure of safty net in a post industrial society should be.
 
Funny you wouldn't know that all programs hang together with the whole structure. But the way to think might be along a GMI system from which the premium of the policy of the citizen's choice is paid by the citizen every monthe. But I am not really interested in discussing the optimum structure of safty net in a post industrial society should be.

Saying that "all programs hang together with the whole structure" means nothing in this context. It's just diversion, nice sounding platitudes.

And I'd be fine with a GMI system, but that's not likely in this country, so hinging healthcare reform on something that has almost no chance of becoming a reality at this point isn't productive anyway. And whether you're interested or not, the "optimum structure of safety net" as it relates to healthcare is the topic on this thread, so if you're not interested in discussing it, why are you throwing out soundbites, then running when asked for details?
 
Saying that "all programs hang together with the whole structure" means nothing in this context. It's just diversion, nice sounding platitudes.

And I'd be fine with a GMI system, but that's not likely in this country, so hinging healthcare reform on something that has almost no chance of becoming a reality at this point isn't productive anyway. And whether you're interested or not, the "optimum structure of safety net" as it relates to healthcare is the topic on this thread, so if you're not interested in discussing it, why are you throwing out soundbites, then running when asked for details?

Not at all platitudes, but a criticism of partially in justifying partisan economic and sociological measures.

It is nice to hear you would go along with the rational approach.

And being interested in the nuances of a poor structure is a fine distraction from formulating a ratiinal policy and in its essence an instrument of all populism.
 
Not at all platitudes, but a criticism of partially in justifying partisan economic and sociological measures.

It is nice to hear you would go along with the rational approach.

And being interested in the nuances of a poor structure is a fine distraction from formulating a ratiinal policy and in its essence an instrument of all populism.

OK, I have no idea in the world what your position is on anything related to healthcare except you don't like the ACA, don't like freebies that will have to be a core part of any regime that covers the poor and sick, but like with the GOP, that's all we know. Great, fascinating discussion.
 
OK, I have no idea in the world what your position is on anything related to healthcare except you don't like the ACA, don't like freebies that will have to be a core part of any regime that covers the poor and sick, but like with the GOP, that's all we know. Great, fascinating discussion.

Well, then you should sit down and wonder a little. ;)
 
OK, I have no idea in the world what your position is on anything related to healthcare except you don't like the ACA, don't like freebies that will have to be a core part of any regime that covers the poor and sick, but like with the GOP, that's all we know.

Welcome to the Age of Trump.
 
Back
Top Bottom