By the way, no one is saying the system is perfect. There should changes made. But since most of the problems we have today are caused by government intervention, the last thing we need to do is add even more government intervention. The reform being talked about today has nothing to do with fixing the system, it has to do with putting government in charge of the system. And some people are ok with that because for some warped reason, they believe they aren’t supposed to pay for their health care. I suspect you’re one of them.

xblade on August 3, 2009 at 5:39 PM

FYI, I’ve been paying for my own health insurance for 5 years now, ever since leaving my job and starting my own business. As I have stated over and over here at HA, I don’t want “free” healthcare, because I know there is no such thing. I’m stating that it needs reform.

How presumptious of you to state that if I wanted a new boat or car tomorrow, I would find money for that. You know nothing about my lifestyle. Heck, I don’t even own a car right now. I’ve had many years in my life where I was raising children and had to make the decision to seek medical care, knowing that I didn’t have the money to pay – that it would have to come out of the grocery budget. All I’m saying is, medical care is not affordable for many (yep, there’s those strawmen again) I’ve been on both sides of this situation and feel empathy for those who aren’t receiving employer funded healthcaare.

time to drop medicare. Government can’t run healthcare

liberal343 on August 3, 2009 at 1:28 PM

Medicare is technically insolvent now, and getting worse all the time. So yes, Medicare is a perfect example of how incompetent the federal government is, and why it should not be permitted to run the health care system.

And yet, if you woke up tomorrow and wanted a new car, or a new boat, you could find money for that likity split, without having to lose everything in the process.

How? Money you don’t have is money you don’t have, wether you want to spend it on healthcare or a new car or an Xbox 360.

…or was that just a grade-school character insult?

Back to the point – opposition to gov run healthcare needs to include admission that our health system as it is now is not working/affordable for many people, and offer ways to fix that.

I guess you haven’t been paying attention then, have you?

Utopia doesn’t exist. There is no system that works for every person. As many issues as the current system has, it’s better to maintain the status quo than to adopt obamacare.

Getting more and more tempting to dump the health insurance.Yet, if I do dump it and something happens to me healthwise, I lose everything.

And yet, if you woke up tomorrow and wanted a new car, or a new boat, you could find money for that likity split, without having to lose everything in the process. It’s amazing how much people can buy without needing insurance to fund the purchase, but when it comes to health care, they suddenly can’t find the money. Want to know why? Because they don’t want to pay for it.

By the way, no one is saying the system is perfect. There should changes made. But since most of the problems we have today are caused by government intervention, the last thing we need to do is add even more government intervention. The reform being talked about today has nothing to do with fixing the system, it has to do with putting government in charge of the system. And some people are ok with that because for some warped reason, they believe they aren’t supposed to pay for their health care. I suspect you’re one of them.

Then I have the right to demand that the US Government not interfere with my healthcare plan, my insurance company, and my doctor.

I think conservatives/libertarians/republicans – anyone opposed to gov’t run healthcare – needs to examine that and be really honest; don’t just say you dont want gov run healthcare and that everything is peachy the way it is – because it isn’t!

Has a familiar ring.

simply capping the maximum number of dollars a lawyer could claim from a malpractice and/or class action settlement,

Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner folks.

Not obamacare, not the current employer-based nightmare, but a combination of vouchers and HSAs that require insurance carriers to compete and patients (and parents) to exercise personal responsibility. The very poor would still end up with something roughly similar to Medicaid to cover their copays, but still, why not?

Tort reform is the answer. The costs of health care will diminish almost overnight as soon as it becomes unprofitable to be dishonest and/or greedy.

Mr. Grump on August 3, 2009 at 2:29 PM

Yep. I’d even be interested in the implications of simply capping the maximum number of dollars a lawyer could claim from a malpractice and/or class action settlement, and not even touch the total amount awardable. If a person is a genuine victim of debilitating malpractice, I’m all for him being compensated in the millions. But when the John Edwardses of the world can’t expect to clear more than, say $250k no matter how big their clients’ awards, I expect the lust for trolling will drop precipitously, and practitioners’ grueling insurance premiums will follow shortly.

Hell, I can even make a fairly libertarian argument for it, as those lawyers necessarily exploit government functions to make their money, which justifies their regulation. But why do I expect all the lawyers in congress would never consider this kind of idea?

DrSteve on August 3, 2009 at 2:49 PM

Don’t put words in my mouth. Do not dare to say I have adopted the president’s view. I do not agree with him on anything.

Hostility to those with opposing views – not so much.

As I labored to point out, mine is not an opposing view. What I objected to was the inaccuracy of your post. Every health care topic around this site gets dozens of non-trolls talking about concrete, substantial opportunities for reform. You chose instead to adopt the President’s view, which is that anyone who doesn’t want his approach must stand foursquare for the status quo.

How else am I supposed to make my point? If I am going through this, surely there are others? I can’t be the only one?

If you were paying attention at all around here I think you’d find that the people registering a desire for some change or another (tort reform, interstate competition, etc.) far outnumber the people supporting the status quo (if you can even point to anyone doing the latter).

DrSteve on August 3, 2009 at 2:16 PM

I do pay attention around here – I’ve been reading HA almost daily. I don’t comment much. I like open debate. Hostility to those with opposing views – not so much.

You can Google “Paul Ryan” and “Health Care Reform” for exactly what you’re asking for. The alternatives are out there and with the Internet you have no excuse to be uninformed. The simple fact is that the MSM has no interest in exploring alternatives to ObamaCare.

PackerBronco on August 3, 2009 at 2:30 PM

Yes thank you. I was talking about what I’ve seen here at HA.

Back to the point – opposition to gov run healthcare needs to include admission that our health system as it is now is not working/affordable for many people, and offer ways to fix that. Perhaps if we did that, we would win over some of those liberal thinking folks to our side, instead of labeling them trolls and libtards.

fullogas on August 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM

You can Google “Paul Ryan” and “Health Care Reform” for exactly what you’re asking for. The alternatives are out there and with the Internet you have no excuse to be uninformed. The simple fact is that the MSM has no interest in exploring alternatives to ObamaCare.

Tort reform is the answer. The costs of health care will diminish almost overnight as soon as it becomes unprofitable to be dishonest and/or greedy.

1) Tort reform will lower health costs for everyone. Obama won’t touch this issue because he’s bought and paid for by trial lawyers who are the only ones happy about the unbelievable cost of malpractice insurance and king’s ransom mega-million-dollar malpractice settlements.

2) Affordable catastrophic health insurance that allows people to opt out of regular small-scale health insurance but be covered for larger-cost medical events. Tax breaks for insurers who provide such a product.

Back to the point – opposition to gov run healthcare needs to include admission that our health system as it is now is not working/affordable for many people, and offer ways to fix that. Perhaps if we did that, we would win over some of those liberal thinking folks to our side, instead of labeling them trolls and libtards.

fullogas on August 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM

I understand where you are coming from, but the reason that you are finding it unaffordable is because of the current government run programs. Your costs are increasing because the government programs are underpaying, so medical establishments are using you to subsidize those on the government programs. If we cancel the government programs, your costs would decrease.

fullogas on August 3, 2009 at 2:08 PM

Well, I certainly hope all those straw men in your post will be covered by the proposed reforms.

For the record, I completely support the idea that reform is necessary. I’d love to see association plans able to form nationwide pools and compete across state lines. I’d love to see more independent nonprofit participation in insurance. Eliminate some of the ridiculous and completely artificial barriers to cost-reducing competition. I’m not thrilled about an individual mandate, but I think it’s a fair trade for reform of pre-existing conditions (in fact you don’t want the latter without the former, or people will just sign up once they’ve been diagnosed!).

If you were paying attention at all around here I think you’d find that the people registering a desire for some change or another (tort reform, interstate competition, etc.) far outnumber the people supporting the status quo (if you can even point to anyone doing the latter).