Year of Republican failure on health care?

And the liberals see nothing wrong in passing damaging laws and requiring others, especially those who opposed the law to begin with to repair it.

Then they claim their failed ideas are someone else's fault.

 

BTW, to prove the GOP is bereft of workable solutions on health care....look at any Republican/rightwinger asked about it-

Questioner- "What is the GOP's plan for health care that would actually work to cover the uninsured and lower costs?"

Rightwinger- "Obamacare sucks....why don't you just admit that?"

Questioner- "But, what is the GOP's plan for health care?"

Rightwinger- "Obama lied about keeping your doctor!!!"

Questioner- "But again, what is the GOP's plan for health care?"

Rightwinger- "Obamacare is socialism. It'll destroy this country. We need it all repealed RIGHT NOW!!!!"

Questioner- "Fine....but, what is the GOP's plan for health care?"

Rightwinger- "You libs and your irrelevant questions. And what about Obama lying about Benghazi and Fast & Furious and not being born in Kenya??? Huh? HUH????"

 

Actually, three simple things would have fixed any problems we had with health care insurance. 1. Relax laws to allow interstate competition. 2. Mal practice insurance reform. 3. Tort reform.

Those three things would have solved all the problems, real and perceived.

 

Seeing that our legislative branch has been under Democrat control for most of the last fifty years, how can people blame a Republicans for every problem?

 

And that would cover the uninsured? Yes?

 

It's always funny to watch liberals have conversations with themselves.

There are a number of proposals from Republicans gathering dust on Democrat desks. Democrats just don't want to entertain them because they restrict the involvement of their big government funded noses, and limit their ability to channel taxpayer funds into the pockets of their friends.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapoth...o-health-plan/

 

Democrats can take 40 years to develop a screwed up system, then turn around and blame Republicans for not fixing it in a year.

 

"Cite the source" means provide a link to a credible source or article supporting your claim, as you apparently didn't understand it.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you have your names reversed.

Republicans can take 40 years to develop a screwed up system, then turn around and blame Democrats for not fixing it in a year.

That's far more accurate.

- - - Updated - - -

"We can’t find the page you requested"

 

Yes. The unisured could be taken care of because insurance would cost drastically less than it does now.

 

What "SEEMS" to be in your mind is one thing. What ends up being reality is another. Your fantasy that liberals are allergic to profit is your own dream that you need to wake up from.

Which is what it is doing. If companies make profits out of the process, good for them and the recipients of that health care. It's a win win for both sides. That is sort of the point of Capitalism, is it not? Where both sides benefit?

It's not that they're getting better healthcare. Previously, before Obamacare, many were getting zero health care. Surely you can understand the significance of having and not having, versus better health care? By using certain natural laws a child must make baby steps before he or she begins to go through hurdles. Our health care system sort of works the same way. As a matter of fact, most things in life usually work that way.

 

Why is it that people don't understand what insurance is? Insurance isn't health care. Insurance is risk management. It has nothing to do with health care.

If you want people to have better and greater access to health care, why would you make the focus on the management of risk?

Wouldn't you instead focus on reducing cost, increasing supply, and increasing quality of product?

It seems obvious.

But not to people who think that having insurance is the same as having health care.

 

http://www.philly.com/philly/health/healthcare-exchange/253765281.html

April Reference

 

This post gets five stars and nails what the Republicans are all about when it comes to health care. Questions they can't answer about it.

 

Thanks,

I'm tired of trying to beat this into their heads. Insurance is the problem..........not the solution.

 

The purpose of Obamacare is to shift the cost of risk to healthy young individuals. How does this benefit them? How do they win by enrolling in a program that will cost them more than if they simply pay for their own care out of pocket? Clearly they don't think they do win because they are just a small portion of the 10 million newly enrolled. Instead the people enrolling are the folks who think they are getting something out of it, namely the sick and high risk. So the question you should be asking is, who loses? Somebody has to pay and Obamacare guarantees that it's not going to post as a loss to the insurance companies that participate.

The "hope" of Obamacare is that people who are healthy will enroll and receive zero health care. The hope is that these people will dump enough money into the system to cover the cost of care for people who supposedly can't afford their own care. That's not how it's panning out though, is it?

The obvious flaw of Obamacare is that government boobs are not omnipotent gods that can make the trillions of decisions required to make sure every individual gets what every individual needs. These trillions of decisions need to be made by individuals, not by Obama...

 

Why haven't they been "dusted off" ...and being used on the campaign trail by Republicans running for office this November???

 

It seems you need to have literally everything spelled out for you.

A large number of the people who purchased ACA plans did so because their health plans were cancelled by the ACA after Obama repeatedly promised that would not happen. According to the California Insurance Commissioner (a Democrat), over one million Californians lost the health plans due to the ACA. Since about 12% of the country's population lives in California, we can extrapolate out a fairly reasonable approximation as to how many people lost their plans nationwide and were thus forced into ACA plans since there was no alternative.

It is truly comical that you are attempting to celebrate the numbers as a success when so many of those people were forced into ACA plans by having their plans taken away. Yet you clearly didn't take that into account, which verifies your complete ignorance on the subject.

 

So we keep going with the pre-Obamacare system of....no preventative care for the uninsured and Emergency Rooms cover all those who show up and pass the costs along?

But again, if the GOP has all these "great ideas"...why is it the GOP candidates aren't RUNNING on those ideas....just vague platitudes about "making health care more affordable" (but no specifics) and "Elect me and I'll repeal Obamacare....but not the parts you like"?

- - - Updated - - -

BTW, how about this for a way to prove it?

If the GOP gets the House AND Senate this November....if they DON'T repeal Obamacare and replace it with an equally (or even better) plan to cover the uninsured.....

it indicates they never had any workable plans? In fact, in not repealing Obamacare...it'll prove that.

 

The Democrat's can't come up with a single person who's death certificate reads "Lack of insurance" under cause of death. I don't know a single health care provider that would refuse a patient that can pay in cash. The problem isn't insurance. The problem is cost of care.

Democrat's solution to the cost of care problem is wealth transfer. Their idea is for this wealth transfer to be managed ultimately by elected officials. What a terrible idea to put such incredible power over the health care choices of people who can't pay on their own into the hands of people they have such limited influence over. Will they care about a needs of every individual, or will they simply care about their own interest? Why are Democrats always so consumed with private greed, and so blind to political greed?

 

Touche

 

What's even more frustrating is Obama understood this problem. In at least one of his pre-election round tables he spoke about how the problem isn't how to pay for health care, it's the cost of health care. He even made a comment that "unless we can reduce the cost of health care in (forgot how many) years, it will bankrupt American business."

I remember that round table vividly, I was traveling when it was televised. I stopped at a public TV screen and stood and listened to Obama for about a half hour. When I walked away, I was very hopeful for his candidacy. I thought "he's so inexperienced, but if he get's that he actually could do a lot of good." Instead we got Obamacare.




​

 

When the cost curve of technology is always downward, why does medical technology cost so much? What does Obamacare do to address this problem? What does Obamacare do to drive innovation, and efficiency?

Why is it that my $200 phone is a million times more advanced than the space shuttle, but an MRI still costs me 7 grand a visit?

 

The one thing you seem to conveniently leave out is the same thing your crowd always leaves out. Private pay for insurance was not possible for the millions before Obamacare. That is why it was started to begin with. You are doing nothing but recycling the same old tired idea of health care where you invent the idea in your head that everyone can afford health care. This same tunnel vision view of health care is why it needed changing. Because millions cannot afford to play in this game you believe they can play in. Somebody has to pay is right. I also have to pay for football players, football stadiums, a farm bill that pays politicians subsidies on their own farms and a host of other nonsense we shouldn't be paying for. So to single out health care is just a cop out for addressing the whole gov.pay for subsidy baggage we currently pay for. We pay for a lot of things we don't care to pay for. Selective outrage on paying for health care while not addressing the other elephants, doesn't boast well for your argument. We've been paying for stuff for decades. Why should health care be any different?

 

Please provide proof?? Loll just because you say it does not make it true

 

It's almost insulting how stupid Democrats think people are with these arguments.

How is it that someone who previously couldn't afford care, can get care when the average bronze plan family deductible is 10 grand? I feel a Democrat delusional conversation coming on..

Doctor: "Ma'am, the good news is that your $100 mammogram is covered under your insurance as preventive care."

Patient: "Phew. What's the bad news?"

Doctor: "The results are positive. You're going to need $100k in chemo and possibly a mastectomy after your yearly out of pocket cost resets next year."