texaspackerbacker
10 years ago
The Democrats now seem to be jumping like rats off the sinking ship of Obamacare. Republicans, asked to present a "counter solution", declare "it ain't our mess". I said this would be "non-political", but it's a well known fact that I approach things - most things - from the Right. I hope, however, that gives me a degree of credibility in presenting a seemingly Left-leaning solution, a Single Payer system. "Single Payer" means basically the government is the provider of healthcare - owning the facilities and employing the medical personnel.

There is actually a MODEL for the solution I present already, and I have first hand knowledge of it. I refer to the VA Healthcare system. Basically expand from treating veterans to treating everyone. This, of course, would have the true stigma of being "socialized medicine" - free care to anybody needing it. The "facilities" would be all or most of the current hospitals and clinics - procured by Eminent Domain - at a fair and reasonable price, as the Constitution mandates. Doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel would be government employees - paid at something fairly close to what they make now. They, of course, could not be forced to participate - that would be a form of slavery, but if the pay was fair, I think enough would. In addition, there could be paying for the high cost of medical school - the string attached of government service - similar to what many small towns do now to procure a doctor.

In addition to the Single Payer system as I have described it, there would be a "shadow system" of private healthcare for anyone choosing not to partake of the free government provided care. This would be either paid directly by patients or paid by private insurance companies/policies without the burdensome Obamacare regulations that are driving up costs so much.

There is valid criticism of this from both directions: the left will say, truly, that patients in the government system will receive lesser care - delays and maybe even substandard treatment. The right will say, truly, that the costs will be tremendous.

To the left, I would say "live with it - it's decent and it's free, and anybody that doesn't like it has the option to pay" - if they can afford it.

To the right, I would say, if you don't want to accept what is free, then you have the choice to pay. And as for the "cost" to taxpayers, the SOLUTION would be NOT to raise taxes, but to continue what is already going on subtly - ever increasing deficits - repaid with dollars - the dollar that is the world's reserve currency, and which will remain so as long as we are the dominant military power of the world.

I don't expect this to happen - it's entirely too logical and even-handed a solution, and stubbornness on both sides would probably preclude it, but it would work.
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
10 years ago


There is actually a MODEL for the solution I present already, and I have first hand knowledge of it. I refer to the VA Healthcare system. Basically expand from treating veterans to treating everyone. This, of course, would have the true stigma of being "socialized medicine" - free care to anybody needing it. The "facilities" would be all or most of the current hospitals and clinics - procured by Eminent Domain - at a fair and reasonable price, as the Constitution mandates. Doctors, nurses, and other medical personnel would be government employees - paid at something fairly close to what they make now. They, of course, could not be forced to participate - that would be a form of slavery, but if the pay was fair, I think enough would. In addition, there could be paying for the high cost of medical school - the string attached of government service - similar to what many small towns do now to procure a doctor.

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Ah, the notion that the government should pay when it takes choices away. Never happen, alas.

Its too bad. 95% of what is wrong with American government today would disappear if, when government is asked by some of us to change the rules of the game for others of us, all in support of their newest and best "good idea for America no society, for the world, for the environment, for workers, for business, or for anyone and anything", in short whenever we ask government to do something, if we just insisted that those who have choices taken away by the changes in rules be compensated.

An amazing number of things now done by the state, and an amazing number of the things people might come up with, for health care or otherwise, would turn out to be bad ideas that cost too much.

Nope, never happen.



And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago
I really hate to be defending something that basically is socialism, but yes, there is choice in what I outlined. A person could take what is lesser but decent OR he could basically have the best of what we have right now - pre-Obamacare - private insurance with far less regulation that this clusterfuck called Obamacare, or just pay for treatment if someone prefers.

Is that not choice?
Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
10 years ago

I really hate to be defending something that basically is socialism, but yes, there is choice in what I outlined. A person could take what is lesser but decent OR he could basically have the best of what we have right now - pre-Obamacare - private insurance with far less regulation that this clusterf*ck called Obamacare, or just pay for treatment if someone prefers.

Is that not choice?

Originally Posted by: texaspackerbacker 



Yes. But it is not "free" to switch to that choice. It's the nature of rules: when you change them, you take away some of the choices people used to have under the old rules. And, IMO, those now-unavailable-that-were-available-before-the-change choices deserve compensation.




And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
DakotaT
10 years ago
We should be given a certain amount of medical insurance as legal citizens of this country - it can be part of the of the services package we currently enjoy. If people want more coverage, they have the right to purchase better policies outside of the given stuff. Unfortunately this will require an increase in taxes or a reduction in our "War Machine".
UserPostedImage
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

Yes. But it is not "free" to switch to that choice. It's the nature of rules: when you change them, you take away some of the choices people used to have under the old rules. And, IMO, those now-unavailable-that-were-available-before-the-change choices deserve compensation.

Originally Posted by: Wade 



HOW is it not free? What rules? Admittedly, this is all pie-in-the-sky, because extremists on both sides are not going to compromise enough to allow something this sensible. However, as I describe it, it's free. There is only copay or other cost to individuals if the law is written that way. I say DON'T write it that way - simply give EVERYBODY what veterans have now. And regarding the "pay for it" option, DON'T saddle the insurers with a lot of Obamacare type rules - as is driving up costs under Obamacare. What's wrong with that?

And yes, it would take ridiculous money to implement this, BUT use deficits - as our government is already so prone to do - and print print print - DON'T raise taxes.


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
texaspackerbacker
10 years ago

We should be given a certain amount of medical insurance as legal citizens of this country - it can be part of the of the services package we currently enjoy. If people want more coverage, they have the right to purchase better policies outside of the given stuff. Unfortunately this will require an increase in taxes or a reduction in our "War Machine".

Originally Posted by: DakotaT 



Yeah, it could be done that way, and because corrupt politicians and insurance companies would probably prefer something like that, it is probably a more likely final result. But WHY would you prefer something like THAT instead of direct single payer care provided to people - along with the choice of paying for it without government intrusion adding to the cost? How do you see what you describe as better for PEOPLE?

And hell no, there is no need for tax increases or defense cuts in any of this. Finance it with debt, and let the damn Chinese, Arab, German, etc. creditors pay for it - and repay them with dollars that are good because WE SAY they are good, and we are the biggest dog in the yard. What's wrong with that - from an AMERICAN point of view, not this silly crap you usually spew about how bad America is for taking advantage of those I mentioned above?


Expressing the Good Normal Views of Good Normal Americans.
If Anything I Say Smacks of Extremism, Please Tell Me EXACTLY What.
Dulak
10 years ago
I get the whole obama care thing ...

get healthcare to the masses ...

problem is 2 things:

1. HC prices are out of control ... medical professionals are paid to do services rather then to help sick people get better. What do you think your _____ will do as far as your HC goes?

2. other I dont know enough about ...
Fan Shout
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : Lions extend Penei Soul 4yrs - 112mil
buckeyepackfan (24-Apr) : Lions extend St. Brown 4 years 120mil and
Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : Now look, trading up to 13 to take a TE might not seem like a good idea later but it will be later!
dfosterf (24-Apr) : (Your trade up mock post)
dfosterf (24-Apr) : Mucky- The only thing fun to watch would be me flipping the f out if Gute goes up to 13 and grabs Brock Bowers, lol
beast (24-Apr) : DT Byron Murphy II, Texas... whom some believe is the next Aaron Donald (or the closest thing to Donald)
Zero2Cool (24-Apr) : What? And who?
Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : *sad Mucky noises*
Mucky Tundra (24-Apr) : @JoeJHoyt Murphy said he’s been told he won’t slide past pick No. 16.
wpr (23-Apr) : Just about time to watch Sonny Weaver stick it to the seahags. I never get tired of it.
Martha Careful (23-Apr) : *game plan
Martha Careful (23-Apr) : IMHO, not even close. He is not a guy you game play around.
Mucky Tundra (23-Apr) : is Aiyuk worth a 1st rounder?
Zero2Cool (23-Apr) : 49ers are seeking a 1st round pick in exchange for WR Brandon Aiyuk
Mucky Tundra (22-Apr) : Based on Gutes comments, now I don't feel as silly having 13 picks in my mock the other day
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Zach Wilson to Broncos.
Zero2Cool (22-Apr) : Gutekunst says he'd love to have 13 or 14 picks. He's trading back huh lol
beast (22-Apr) : Someday we'll have a draft betting scandal
beast (21-Apr) : Sometimes looking extremely amazing, sometimes looking extremely lost
beast (21-Apr) : I haven't looked into the QBs, but some have suggested Maye has some of the most extremely inconsistent tape they've seen
beast (21-Apr) : Well it also sounds like Patriots are listening to trade offers, not that seriously considering any, but listening means they aren't locked
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Maye needs to be AFC
Mucky Tundra (21-Apr) : Not liking the idea of the Vikings getting Maye
Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Vikings HC joked that he may or may not have sent flowers to Bob Kraft. That's where rumor came from.
beast (21-Apr) : Can't tell if this is real or BS, but some rumors about a possible Patriots/Vikings trade for #3 overall
dfosterf (21-Apr) : One playbook to my knowledge. I was shooting for facetious.
beast (20-Apr) : I'm not sure they have different playbooks for different OL positions, and Dillard run blocking is supposedly worse than his pass blocking..
dfosterf (19-Apr) : The only problem with that is he isn't a guard either.
dfosterf (19-Apr) : Put him at right guard. That is where he will be coached. That is where he will compete. He is not even allowed to look at the LT playbook.
dfosterf (18-Apr) : Kidding aside, I hope the best for him.
dfosterf (18-Apr) : Went to a Titans board. One comment there. Not very long. I quote: "LOL" They don't sound overly upset about our aquisition.
beast (18-Apr) : OT Dillard has been absolutely horrible... like OG Newman levels
dfosterf (18-Apr) : Suit him up and have him stand in front of the big board as a draft day cautionary tale.
Zero2Cool (18-Apr) : Packers sign T Andre Dillard.
Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : Adds most of the information this time of year comes from agents.
Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : @RealAlexBarth Bill Belichick says accurate draft information doesn't leak from teams until about 12 hours before the draft. Adds most of th
Mucky Tundra (18-Apr) : I am very happy that for moment, Jordan Love seems like a normal human being
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Belichick * whatever
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : "There's a lot of depth at Offensive Tackle and Wide Receiver." Bill Bellichick
Zero2Cool (17-Apr) : Thanks! I can't believe it's over haha
Martha Careful (16-Apr) : Congratulations
Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Boom. Student Loan. $0.00. Only took about 20 years.
Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : Packers DT Kenny Clark: New defensive coordinator Jeff Hafley will 'allow us to be way more disruptive'
Zero2Cool (12-Apr) : Saints have agreed to terms on a contract with former Packers wide receiver Equanimeous St. Brown.
beast (12-Apr) : No, but of it's for legislation, then half of the country will find it evil, not good, whatever it says....
Mucky Tundra (12-Apr) : Draft is still 2 weeks away. UGH
dhazer (11-Apr) : Does anyone know of a good AI generator to create letters of Support for legislation?
Zero2Cool (11-Apr) : Gordon "Red" Batty retires as equipment manager
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Sounds like that's pretty certain now.
Zero2Cool (10-Apr) : Packers "at" Eagles in Brazil. Week One
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2023 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 10 @ 3:25 PM
Bears
Sunday, Sep 17 @ 12:00 PM
Falcons
Sunday, Sep 24 @ 12:00 PM
SAINTS
Thursday, Sep 28 @ 7:15 PM
LIONS
Monday, Oct 9 @ 7:15 PM
Raiders
Sunday, Oct 22 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Sunday, Oct 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Nov 5 @ 12:00 PM
RAMS
Sunday, Nov 12 @ 12:00 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 19 @ 12:00 PM
CHARGERS
Thursday, Nov 23 @ 11:30 AM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 3 @ 7:20 PM
CHIEFS
Monday, Dec 11 @ 7:15 PM
Giants
Sunday, Dec 17 @ 12:00 PM
BUCCANEERS
Sunday, Dec 24 @ 12:00 PM
Panthers
Sunday, Dec 31 @ 7:20 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 7 @ 3:25 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 14 @ 3:30 PM
Cowboys
Saturday, Jan 20 @ 7:15 PM
49ers
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

7h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

20h / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

24-Apr / Random Babble / beast

22-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

21-Apr / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

19-Apr / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Apr / Random Babble / Mucky Tundra

18-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Apr / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.