1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Solution to Healthcare

Discussion in 'U.S. Politics' started by BigRob, Aug 20, 2009.

  1. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Here is all that needs to be done:

    1) Eliminate government regulation that prevents insurance companies from selling across state lines. This will result in private competition for people and drive prices down.

    2) Give tax breaks back to individual people for buying directly from these insurance companies. When people can buy their own policies early in life and keep it for the duration, pre-existing conditions will not be as big a deal as they are now.

    We do not need a government option, we need government to let the private options actually compete.
     
  2. Mr. Shaman

    Mr. Shaman New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2007
    Messages:
    7,829
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah....and, health-insurance companies will promise not to raise-their-premiums any higher, too, huh?

    :rolleyes:
     
  3. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    I think those are great ideas. Add in tax breaks for doctors or nurses who donate time to clinics or see people for free.

    Our work gives us a way to have a health savings account tax free, I am not sure if everyone has it since I work for the government I know we often get special perks.. but if that is not already an option for people then that too.

    I would also like to see tax breaks for people who "for charity" pay other peoples medical bills. I am sure many do that for family or close friends but more might if they could have a tax deduction for it.

    There are probably a dozen other ideas to help but I dont think the point of this health care is to help, the point of it is to control.
     
  4. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    No, they will compete with one another in the private market place for business. I do not expect a company to function that has no hope of making money.
     
  5. TruthAboveAll

    TruthAboveAll Active Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    615
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Further North than I'd like
    Agreed. Since the Democrats in Congress and PBO have now deemed that the insurance companies are the real villain. Right.

    I'd see a bit of difference:

    1) Eliminate FEDERAL regulation as stated. Encourage STATES to establish insurance review/rating boards made up of average policy-holding citizens. Encourage organizational co-ops (like your credit union, where you can buy "group" auto insurance en masse with other credit unions nationwide).

    2) Tax breaks, but expand HSAs and tax deduction for medical expenses beyond HSAs. The current tax restrictions on medical deductions is onerous, and easily remedied. The benefit to the tax payer could be astounding.

    3) Replace existing Fed regulations with things actually helpful and/or necessary. For instance, look at the issue of pre-existing conditions. That is one of a few things that could be "legislated guidelines/requirements", a list of items to ensure health care insurance for anyone wanting it, but finding it impossible under the current system.

    4) Torte reform. It is going to be an unavoidable issue, and should be handled separately from elimination of current restrictions and availability reform. Torte reform has worked in the states that have implemented it, in spite of the other problems remaining that only can be resolved by the other steps being needed. Done on a national scale along with other enhancements to the health care system and insurance system would have significant results.

    It is amazing that PBO continues to spout the need for government involvement to ensure competition. Removing the restrictions of interstate availability, as you stated, would provide all the competition needed.
     
  6. TruthAboveAll

    TruthAboveAll Active Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2007
    Messages:
    615
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Further North than I'd like
    You don't, and I don't. But then we both firmly believe that free markets work, for the most part. I am just sick of this attitude of needing to have the heavy hand of the federal government thrown in to solve the problems we know are there. Don't bother to truly identify the problems themselves and focus on viable solutions within the system as it is. Just throw the whole d*** thing out and rush in with another massive bureaucracy to fill the void.
     
  7. Greco

    Greco New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    See, BigRob made it clear for all of us. He's in favor of having a business bureaucrat make decisions about his health care, especially if they are trained in how to decline coverage, and actually receive bonuses for doing it.

    BigRob knows the honor system of for profit corporations has worked so swell it's really hard to just not place total blind faith in their always doing the right thing, especially when faced with the choice of our health or making more profit.

    Great idea BigRob. Now we know why you're party is in the minority with thinking like that.
     
  8. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Yes, in fact I would rather a business bureaucrat do something than a government bureaucrat. Especially since the business bureaucrat can do the same job more efficiently.

    If you believe that corporations that make a profit are so bad, why are you not advocating for a government car insurance option? How about life insurance?

    Competition is what keeps business in line. I am not opposed to a small amount of regulation to address certain problems, but the health market can be reformed in the private sector and the private sector alone.

    I am registered independent. I have voted for both Republican and Democrat actually. If being able to make up my own mind based on policies puts me in the minority, then that is a sad testament to our country.
     
  9. Greco

    Greco New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "If you believe that corporations that make a profit are so bad"

    Now BigRob, you're doing it again. You make up a claim (lie), assign it something you claim I believe (absent of fact), then rail away at it. That may work in the middle school, but not in the real world.
     
  10. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    You state, "BigRob knows the honor system of for profit corporations has worked so swell it's really hard to just not place total blind faith in their always doing the right thing."

    You use that as basically a manner to advocate for a government option. Fine. If for profit corporations are such a bad thing, why not advocate to eliminate them completely?

    If you want to have a debate about academic credentials (judging by your continued bringing up of my "middle school" sarcasm comment) by all means, tell us about your illustrious academic career.
     
  11. Greco

    Greco New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's quite simple actually. Let's use two examples. Administrative costs for private, for profit insurance companies average 30%. Their top executives earn millions. That's money not going into the improving health care. By comparison, Medicare, contrary to what some Republicans believe, is a government program. Their administrative costs are 4%, and the director of the program is paid $150,000 annually. More money is actually flowing into actual health care.
     
  12. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    And somehow Medicare is going bankrupt and cannot sustain itself. Personally, I would prefer a different system. Maybe we can get the government out of the way and actually let insurance companies compete.
     
  13. Greco

    Greco New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well golly BigRob, if allowing insurance companies to fix the insurance company problem is such a swell idea, are you saying they're so incompetent they couldn't get it done in say the last 100 years? Or have they just prefered things the way they are?
     
  14. Andy

    Andy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    48
    First government intervention has caused many of the problems. Second, right now they are operating on a system setup by government, and needs to be dismantled.

    Saying that they should have fixed the problem, is like your boss telling you that you must fix a car with a rubber ducky and a pencil sharpener, and having a bystander say "well he's the mechanic, why can't he fix it?".

    Insurance companies are operating under the conditions created by government. Government shouldn't even be involved, but they are. So we need to get government out of the way, not try and have them fix a problem they created to begin with.
     
  15. Greco

    Greco New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2008
    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not so fast kemosabe. What "government intervention" caused the insurance companies to refuse to sell to individuals with pre-existing conditions? What "government intervention" caused to insurance companies to stall and deny claims? What "government intervention" caused the insurance companies to pay bonuses to claims people that turn down claims? What "government intervention" caused the insurance companies to devote millions each year to executive compensation, rather than actual health care?

    There's more. Lots more, but this should keep you busy for a while.
     
Loading...

Share This Page