The ongoing failure of Republican healthcare bills

[Mountain Man]

It should be clear by now that establishment Republicans never had any intention of repealing Obamacare.

The scam is that now the Republicans who voted in favor can campaign on the fact that they ostensibly fulfilled their promise even though it didn't accomplish a blasted thing, which I suspect was the goal from the beginning. And now you have Mitch McConnell out there saying it's time to move.

It's all political gamesmanship.

[Leonhard]

It should be clear by now that establishment Republicans never had any intention of repealing Obamacare.

The scam is that now the Republicans who voted in favor can campaign on the fact that they ostensibly fulfilled their promise even though it didn't accomplish a blasted thing, which I suspect was the goal from the beginning. And you have Mitch McConnell out there saying it's time to move.

It's all political gamesmanship.

Aye, though I kinda wish that Trump's original campaign promise of single-payer universal healthcare got through.

[Mountain Man]

Aye, though I kinda wish that Trump's original campaign promise of single-payer universal healthcare got through.

I still can't tell if you're being sarcastic when you say this.

Single-payer health insurance is one of the biggest power grabs. What better way to control the people than by having ultimate say over who is allowed to seek healthcare?

[Leonhard]

I still can't tell if you're being sarcastic when you say this.

Single-payer health insurance is one of the biggest power grabs. What better way to control the people than by having ultimate say over who is allowed to seek healthcare?

I am not sarcastic. I think its a good thing, and I also think you'll all come around to it eventually.

[Starlight]

Single-payer health insurance is one of the biggest power grabs. What better way to control the people than by having ultimate say over who is allowed to seek healthcare?

Leonhard and I live in two of the freest, happiest, countries in the world, both of which have single-payer healthcare. Are you expecting us to agree with you when you say that, or roll on the floor laughing at you? It just comes across as next-level dumb.

Perhaps you can explain how it is that you think that providing healthcare to everyone gives the government 'control' over the people?

Currently your government provides roads for everyone. Does that give them massive control over you? The stuff you say just comes across as Alex Jones level nuttery of "The World Government Controlled By Transdimensional Lizard Aliens Is Running A Pedophilia Ring Out Of A Pizza Shop On Mars!" kind.

[Sparko]

Which would take healthcare away from millions of americans.

no because they can keep the same plans. It doesn't eliminate the plans already in place. Heck right now there are millions who cannot afford healthcare BECAUSE of Obamacare. The prices have skyrocketed and the plans available have evaporated. That is why Obamacare is failing.

I think you mean to say that "you did just fine" without Obamacare.

I and everyone else. And I have existing conditions and am older and have several prescriptions. My insurance has gotten worse and cost more since Obamacare. Instead of a regular healthcare plan that starts working at day one, I am now on a high deductible healthcare plan where I have to pay out the first $3500 per year out of my own pocket before the insurance even cuts in. Yay.

No, overall Obamacare helped to insure millions of people who prior to its becoming law could not afford it. It stopped insurance companies from selling junk plans that covered basically nothing. It forced Insurance companies to cover those with pre-existing conditions. It allowed children to stay on their parents plan until age 26. Preventative care, yearly checkups, prostate exams, colonoscopy's, mammograms etc etc etc were free of charge. It slowed the rate at which premiums rose. It had problems yes, but many of those problems were the result of republican sabotage.

The plan I have now is a junk plan. And it only exists because of Obamacare.

[Sparko]

Aye, though I kinda wish that Trump's original campaign promise of single-payer universal healthcare got through.

I don't remember that one.

[JimL]

It should be clear by now that establishment Republicans never had any intention of repealing Obamacare.

The scam is that now the Republicans who voted in favor can campaign on the fact that they ostensibly fulfilled their promise even though it didn't accomplish a blasted thing, which I suspect was the goal from the beginning. And now you have Mitch McConnell out there saying it's time to move.

It's all political gamesmanship.

The problem MM is that the republicans are now in power and actually have to govern instead of being nothing more than obstructionists for purely political reasons as was the case in the Obama years. They now know that they will be held responsible for what they do and will have to answer for what they do, and they just have no clue as to what that should be, so they punted! Now the Democrats have control of the healthcare ball again, and if the republicans don't cooperate with them to fix Obamacare instead of sabotaging it like they have been doing, then who do you think will be seen as responsible?

[Bill the Cat]

It is the role of government to care for the most vulnerable in society,

Says who?

such as the elderly and those living in grinding poverty.

That responsibility should primarily fall on their own family.

Some people feel morally obliged to not passively watch people around them starve to death or die from some preventable disease.

Then they should do something about it. You should not be morally obligated to reach into MY wallet to pay for YOUR moral desires.

Most western nations, such as NZ and Australia, understand this and provide universal health care.

So, you pay substantial taxes to support both the indigent AND the freeloader. Looking at Canada's system, this Canadian who works for the Frasier Institute wrote the following for HuffPost:

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/nadeem-esmail/canada-free-health-care_b_3733080.html

In 2013, a typical Canadian family of four can expect to pay $11,320 for public health care insurance. For the average family of two parents with one child that bill will be $10,989, and for the average family of two adults (without children) the bill comes to $11,381. As a result of lower average incomes and differences in taxation, the bills are smaller for the average unattached individual ($3,780), for the average one-parent-one-child family ($3,905), and the average one-parent two-child family ($3,387). But no matter the family type, the bill is not small, much less free.



And the bill is getting bigger over time. Before inflation, the cost of public health care insurance went up by 53.3 per cent over the last decade. That's more than 1.5 times faster than the cost of shelter (34.2 per cent) and clothing (32.4 per cent), and more than twice as fast as the cost of food (23.4 per cent). It's also nearly 1.5 times faster than the growth in average income over the decade (36.3 per cent).



And what did these substantial funds buy?

Despite talk of wait times reduction initiatives (backed with substantial funding), Canadians face longer wait times than their counterparts in other developed nations for emergency care, primary care, specialist consultations, and elective surgery. Access to physicians and medical technologies in Canada lags behind many other developed nations. And things have improved little since 2003. For example, the total wait time in 2012 (17.7 weeks from GP to treatment) is every bit as long it was back then.

© Copyright Original Source

More like "help who you can - when you can".

[Leonhard]

I don't remember that one.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#782a96055a9c


And you see him saying it should be replaced, with that.

"There are many ways to fix it. Everyone's gonna get covered. This is a very unrepublican thing of me to say."

[Sparko]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot.../#782a96055a9c


And you see him saying it should be replaced, with that.

"There are many ways to fix it. Everyone's gonna get covered. This is a very unrepublican thing of me to say."

thanks.

I am starting to think a single payer system might not be so bad, as long as the government doesn't start using it to deny procedures or create huge delays. The problem is I don't trust the government and think they if they can't even get the insurance regulations right, how the heck will they institute a single payer system that is not a bureaucratic nightmare.

[Mountain Man]

Leonhard and I live in two of the freest, happiest, countries in the world, both of which have single-payer healthcare. Are you expecting us to agree with you when you say that, or roll on the floor laughing at you? It just comes across as next-level dumb.

Perhaps you can explain how it is that you think that providing healthcare to everyone gives the government 'control' over the people?

Currently your government provides roads for everyone. Does that give them massive control over you? The stuff you say just comes across as Alex Jones level nuttery of "The World Government Controlled By Transdimensional Lizard Aliens Is Running A Pedophilia Ring Out Of A Pizza Shop On Mars!" kind.

Health insurance is not healthcare.

You're fortunate to have a benevolent government who has not (yet) taken advantage of the control they have over you. But will that always be the case? History, unfortunately, has long taught the lesson that one should be wary of one's government.

Roads are in no way equivalent to health insurance, so your analogy fails. Think about it: you show up with your government insurance card, the hospital scans it, and you're informed what procedures you're approved to receive. If the government decides you're not worth the expense then you're screwed. But don't worry, it will never come to that. Just ask Charlie Gard.

[Mountain Man]

The problem MM is that the republicans are now in power and actually have to govern instead of being nothing more than obstructionists for purely political reasons as was the case in the Obama years. They now know that they will be held responsible for what they do and will have to answer for what they do, and they just have no clue as to what that should be, so they punted! Now the Democrats have control of the healthcare ball again, and if the republicans don't cooperate with them to fix Obamacare instead of sabotaging it like they have been doing, then who do you think will be seen as responsible?

Like I said, it's nothing more than political gamesmanship.

[mikewhitney]

There may be more latitude for state governments to do that "care for the most vulnerable" however the federal government, which has no personal care for the vulnerable, has not been granted authority by the US Constitution to impose an illegal, confiscatory, pharmaceuticals-enriching, power-grab by the federal government.

We simply haven't even seen any guileless altruistic behavior by the government thus far and certainly haven't been able to expect this in the last 200 or so years.

Some people feel morally obliged to not passively watch people around them starve to death or die from some preventable disease.

Too bad you don't have Christian organizations there who have a heart for taking care of people. There are other ways to care for people than having a government confiscate your property to hand it out to other people. But if your government is given power to enslave you to their will yet does it nicely, then enjoy it. Also, you should welcome the sick uninsured people from here into your medical system. Send a medical ship to transport them to your shores.

[EvoUK]

I still can't tell if you're being sarcastic when you say this.

Single-payer health insurance is one of the biggest power grabs. What better way to control the people than by having ultimate say over who is allowed to seek healthcare?

The idea is that everyone gets healthcare free at the point of use. And if you want/can afford it, you still have the option of going private.