Politics Thread

[Juice]

I think you've come to the end of the libertarian/conservative rope. Many don't really believe in anything. They just want lower taxes, less government spending (except for military sometimes), and people to ditch all of the freeloaders. There's no end to those desires, it's always gotta be "less", "lower", etc. It's a special form of nihilism.

Must be nice to never consider solutions to problems and instead just rail on others'.

No we believe in things. We just don't believe that the government is the solution or the mechanism for them.

[boozehound]

I'm pointing out there are costs to what your advocating and I'm making sure you personally are willing to bear those costs. Sounds like you are and X-Man is not unless the President pays a slightly higher % of his income to govt regardless of the fact we know he already contributed more to the system in 2005 than X-man will make in a lifetime. Unfortunately most people who believe in govt run systems tend to think like X-Man.

Gotcha. Yes, there are costs. There are costs to our current system too, though.

Also what makes you think costs will go down and innovation will thrive in a govt run system? There's no real world example you can point to that illustrates that argument. Also, we have medical safety nets in Medicaid and Medicare so I'm not sure the argument being made is about helping those who can't help themselves but more about leveling the benefits for all regardless of what you contribute to the govt/system.

Costs going down and innovation thriving are two very different things. I feel pretty confident that costs will go down as evidenced by US Healthcare costs benchmarked against other developed nations with various versions of a single payer healthcare system. I would say that there is as much evidences to suggest costs would decrease as there is evidence to suggest costs would increase.

The innovation piece is a bit tougher for me, and I do worry about that. We do have some evidence that the government can foster innovation (Space Program, CDC, etc.) but whether or not it can do so as effectively as the free market I question.

You are correct that Medicaid already exists as a safety net for the very poor. I'm concerned with providing decent quality healthcare to the people above the income limits for Medicaid (generally between $24K and $45K per year depending on family size) that can't pay upwards of $1,000 per month in premiums for health insurance. If you make $50K, $60K, or even $80K per year $1,000 per month is A LOT of money. Even if you can pay that $1,000 per month you typically still have a deductible to meet (often north of $1K) and co-insurance on top of that. A family member getting seriously ill can, and frequently does, bankrupt those people even if they do have insurance. It's a lottery - you just hope it doesn't happen to you. I used to volunteer at the Ronald McDonald house from time to time. Many of those families had good jobs with health insurance and they still ended up financially devastated because their children got seriously ill. These people didn't make bad choices, they just had bad luck. Many lost their homes as they tried to keep up with their medical bills and care for their children. I don't view that as acceptable in a society as wealthy as ours.

Medicare is essentially single-payer healthcare for those over 65, with some stupid rules thrown in to drive costs up like the regulations that the government can't negotiate drug costs. I'm not even sure it's a 'safety net' program anymore. My Dad is on Medicare and is a retired executive from a large company with full retiree benefits - they just subordinate to Medicare.

Finally yes, sometimes we do work for others but in this country it should be voluntary.

I don't really know how that would work. Should we just totally abolish taxes and let people pay what they want? How much revenue do you think that would generate?

[Strange Brew]

I think you've come to the end of the libertarian/conservative rope. Many don't really believe in anything. They just want lower taxes, less government spending (except for military sometimes), and people to ditch all of the freeloaders. There's no end to those desires, it's always gotta be "less", "lower", etc. It's a special form of nihilism.

Must be nice to never consider solutions to problems and instead just rail on others'.

Predictable. Either the Fed govt does it or nihilism. I have no problem with the states setting up programs not enlisted to the Feds by the Constitution. I have a hard time believing a gov't system on that scale would drive down costs while maintaining the same level of innovation.

No, I don't believe in Progressive taxation in its current form as too many do not have skin in the game for most of our Federal programs. I'd like to see it challenged someday as a violation of the 14th Amendment (equal protection).

Couple of others who lean my way have offered changes/solutions and I'd like to add tort reform as well.

Maybe CA will figure out what VT and MA couldn't when it comes to healthcare. Glad I don't live there.

[Caf]

Predictable. Either the Fed govt does it or nihilism. I have no problem with the states setting up programs not enlisted to the Feds by the Constitution. I have a hard time believing a gov't system on that scale would drive down costs while maintaining the same level of innovation.

No, I don't believe in Progressive taxation in its current form as too many do not have skin in the game for most of our Federal programs. I'd like to see it challenged someday as a violation of the 14th Amendment (equal protection).

Couple of others who lean my way have offered changes/solutions and I'd like to add tort reform as well.

Maybe CA will figure out what VT and MA couldn't when it comes to healthcare. Glad I don't live there.

Question, do you think the state of insurance was broken before ACA or was that the ideal system to you?

And I agree, being against government intervention is not nihilism. Saying all "work for others should be voluntary" is. Saying that a country where people work for the benefit of others is equivalent to Venezuela or North Korea is nihilism.

[OH.X.MI]

"Hey, I know that guy, he's a nihilist. Karl Hungus."

[Strange Brew]

Question, do you think the state of insurance was broken before ACA or was that the ideal system to you?

And I agree, being against government intervention is not nihilism. Saying all "work for others should be voluntary" is. Saying that a country where people work for the benefit of others is equivalent to Venezuela or North Korea is nihilism.

The previous system worked better than the system post ACA. Not ideal but better.

If the goal was to provide BASIC coverage to those that didn't have insurance then that could've been done without roping everyone into a poorly designed system (ACA) more than half of them didn't want. This wasn't the goal. The goal was for the ACA to be painful so the Progressives could then say "we tried using the markets and they failed (b/c of govt intervention) so we must have single payer". Don't believe me? Listen to what Obama and others have said in like minded company.

My NK and Venezuela reference in in response to the other posters hyperbole.

No, I don't think people should be forced to work for others. There are certain things we as a people and states allowed/volunteered the Fed govt to spend money on. Other people's healthcare, housing and food were not any of them. Yes, any Fed program that does so should be struck down and the power to do so returned to the states until the Constitution is amended.

[LA Muskie]

Germany has a mostly (85%) single-payer, socialized healthcare system that is often considered the most innovative in the world. I too believe that profit and competition incentivize innovation at a macro level. But the assumption generalized elements always govern at the micro level is flawed logic.

On a similar note, while capitalism works at a macro level, human greed and dishonesty dictate that unregulated capitalism fails. This has been proven time and again. And industries like healthcare are hit the hardest because LIFE is nearly impossible to value and hence its commercial aspects are subject to corruption.

[LA Muskie]

The notion of a nation -- a society -- by definition requires a degree of commune. Saying that we as Americans shouldn't be compelled to serve, help, or contribute to one another is a false narrative. It's not and never has been an either/or. It's a matter of degree.

[Strange Brew]

Germany has a mostly (85%) single-payer, socialized healthcare system that is often considered the most innovative in the world. I too believe that profit and competition incentivize innovation at a macro level. But the assumption generalized elements always govern at the micro level is flawed logic.

On a similar note, while capitalism works at a macro level, human greed and dishonesty dictate that unregulated capitalism fails. This has been proven time and again. And industries like healthcare are hit the hardest because LIFE is nearly impossible to value and hence its commercial aspects are subject to corruption.

Are you saying the bureaucracy is not subject to the same level of human greed and dishonesty?

Actually Progressive intellectuals have found ways to value LIFE. Google The Complete Lives System.

[Strange Brew]

The notion of a nation -- a society -- by definition requires a degree of commune. Saying that we as Americans shouldn't be compelled to serve, help, or contribute to one another is a false narrative. It's not and never has been an either/or. It's a matter of degree.

No argument here and we as a people and states decided we do not want the Fed govt to compel us to pay for other people's healthcare.