quote:

And trust me, from the ones that I know, most veterans would rather have the VA then none at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

You're just now figuring this out???

Now TK honestly, does my post above really sound like I am...just now figuring this out ?

I am sure you recall that during the 90's this country was in fact actually paying down federal debt...actually shrinking that elephant in the room. Gee, I wonder what happened before and since ? You cannot possibly have a non-partisan discussion when it is all too obvious what and who the problem is.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

You're just now figuring this out???

Now TK honestly, does my post above really sound like I am...just now figuring this out ?

I am sure you recall that during the 90's this country was in fact actually paying down federal debt...actually shrinking that elephant in the room. Gee, I wonder what happened before and since ? You cannot possibly have a non-partisan discussion when it is all too obvious what and who the problem is.

Actually based on this comment "Fast forward to the ACA. ALL that act does is force people who didn't have or didn't want health insurance...to buy health insurance." it not only doesn't sound like you have just figured it out, it sounds like you missed most of what the bill covers. But please by all means keep telling us how much smarter you are than "the american people"

Why don't you educate me, but please include all my points as I have in reply to TK.

I'm sorry, but your op does sound as if you're just noticing this. You're a little late to the party. Some of us have known from the outset that this has been a rigged game. Funny, but there's been a huge contingent of people who've been against it from the start and some have continued to try to stop it. But the diehard liberals have clung to their talking points, screaming from the rooftops that those who want to repeal the ACA just want people to die from lack of healthcare. There's no point in even trying to talk to those folks, so we don't.

As far as insisting all your points be addressed, it appears that all you really want to do is rant and rave at the Republicans. I won't participate. In my book, you either bitch about the past that you can't change, or you move forward fixing what was wrong.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Your insistence on painting everything liberal talking points or not, is a false premise and shows you ignore the post and its meaning. It is about markets and profits...not reform.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

You're just now figuring this out???

Now TK honestly, does my post above really sound like I am...just now figuring this out ?

I am sure you recall that during the 90's this country was in fact actually paying down federal debt...actually shrinking that elephant in the room. Gee, I wonder what happened before and since ? You cannot possibly have a non-partisan discussion when it is all too obvious what and who the problem is.

Here's a fact or two that disputes your particularly rosy view:

The republicans fought for spending cuts in 95/96. One of the side effects of that was Clinton agreeing to spending cuts - aka welfare reform.

Second. And the federal debt wasn't, in fact, paid down. Clinton took Social Security offbook, for the first time, making the Social security obligations disappear overnight. *poof*. Of course, our social security obligations are still there.

Factor them back in, and the story looks quite a bit different.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Your insistence on painting everything liberal talking points or not, is a false premise and shows you ignore the post and its meaning. It is about markets and profits...not reform.

Mr. Rodgers I question the meaning of the word "reform". What exactly are we supposed to reform here. Under the previous system, we had doctors providing a service for a fee. Customers were entitled to buy insurance if they wanted to protect themselves against unexpected health care costs.

Of course that original idea of health care devolved into where all costs were passing through insurance middlemen.
Terrible idea.

So I agree wth you that we have not reformed health care in any meaningful way - although it is managed care in that the government put limits (that don't actually matter) on the expenses that must be medicine related.

I say it doesn't matter because contrary to liberal rantings, health insurance profit margins are fairly low - they are certainly lower than most other industries - software, contracting, manufaturing, etc. The last figure I saw was 7% but *meh*.

Back to the point: Do you think *healthcare* should just be given away?
Do you think the government should just pay for more indigent care?

What exactly do you think the reform should have been?

I have been opposed to Ocare since the inception. Boil it down and the cost of 1.7 trillion dollars to provide care for 30 million more people is just... ridiculous.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers
Your insistence on painting everything liberal talking points or not, is a false premise and shows you ignore the post and its meaning. It is about markets and profits...not reform.

Mr. Rodgers I question the meaning of the word "reform". What exactly are we supposed to reform here. Under the previous system, we had doctors providing a service for a fee. Customers were entitled to buy insurance if they wanted to protect themselves against unexpected health care costs.

Of course that original idea of health care devolved into where all costs were passing through insurance middlemen.
Terrible idea.

So I agree wth you that we have not reformed health care in any meaningful way - although it is managed care in that the government put limits (that don't actually matter) on the expenses that must be medicine related.

I say it doesn't matter because contrary to liberal rantings, health insurance profit margins are fairly low - they are certainly lower than most other industries - software, contracting, manufaturing, etc. The last figure I saw was 7% but *meh*.

Back to the point: Do you think *healthcare* should just be given away?
Do you think the government should just pay for more indigent care?

What exactly do you think the reform should have been?

I have been opposed to Ocare since the inception. Boil it down and the cost of 1.7 trillion dollars to provide care for 30 million more people is just... ridiculous.

Govt. run, single payer insurance the same we have for bank deposits, crops, overseas investors for starters. In Germany the have a free market in insurance, single payer health care coverage and have 200 for-profit, insurance companies competing for business.

And think about this, even after the ACA takes full effect, most red states will leave 10's of million uninsured, so the rest of the marketplace will still pay for their emergency care.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Contrary to imbecilic rantings, the admin costs are high, there are billions in lobbyists, and billions in upper managment bonuses and perks.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

K, aint you va?

Yes - the VA won't authorize the procedure which has adverse effects like sunburn (but they will do the procedure which has a whole list of nasty adverse effects including death.)

Isn't government managed healthcare grand?

Yes it is and after watching the bang up job they do with the limited participants they have to deal with now, I can hardly wait until they get us all on the rolls. I bet that will really make them more efficient.

Who's they ? I guess you and those who agree won't be happy until the medical industrial complex tells you it is your money or your life.

Of wait, in some cases...they already do.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux
Here's a fact or two that disputes your particularly rosy view:

Second. And the federal debt wasn't, in fact, paid down. Clinton took Social Security offbook, for the first time, making the Social security obligations disappear overnight. *poof*. Of course, our social security obligations are still there.

Factor them back in, and the story looks quite a bit different.