texaspackerbacker
11 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
11 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
11 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
11 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
11 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
11 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
11 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
11 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
Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers shopping Jaire Alexander per Ian Rapoport
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst and Jaire Alexander’s agent, John Thornton, are meeting this week in Indianapolis to determine the future of the Packers’ 28-year-
Zero2Cool (25-Feb) : Gutekunst says Mark Murphy told him he can trade their first-round pick despite the draft being in Green Bay.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : Packers. 🤦
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team.
Zero2Cool (24-Feb) : One team petition NFL to ban Brotherly Shove.
beast (23-Feb) : Seems like he was just pissed because he was no longer the starter
beast (23-Feb) : Campbell is right, he's rich and he doesn't have to explain sh!t... but that attitude gives teams reasons to never sign him again.
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I have some doubt about all that
dfosterf (22-Feb) : I read De'Vondre Campbell's tweet this morning (via the New York Post) Florio says that if he invested his earnings wisely, he will be good
beast (20-Feb) : I haven't followed, but I believe he's good when healthy, just hasn't been able to stay healthy.
dfosterf (20-Feb) : Hasn"t Bosa missed more games than he has played in the last 3 years?
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : He hasn't been too bad when healthy but I don't feel like I ever heard much about when he is
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Felt like he was more interested in his body, than football. He flashed more than I expected
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : When he was coming out, I thought he'd be flash in pan.
Mucky Tundra (19-Feb) : Joey seems so forgettable compared to his brother for some reason
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : NFL informed teams today that the 2025 salary cap will be roughly $277.5M-$281.5M
Zero2Cool (19-Feb) : Los Angeles Chargers are likely to release DE Joey Bosa this off-season as a cap casualty, per league source.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : If the exploit is not fixed, we'll see tons of "50 top free agents, 50 perfect NFL team fits: We picked where each should sign in March" lo
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Issue should be solved, database cleaned and held strong working / meeting. Boom!
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : It should be halted now.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : usually spambots are trying to get traffic to shady websites filled with spyware; the two links being spammed were to the Packers website
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : you know when you put it that way combined with the links it was spamming (to the official Packers website)
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yep. You can do that with holding down ENTER on a command in Console of browser
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : even with the rapid fire posts?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I'm not certain it's a bot.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I've got to go to work soon which is a pity because I'm enthralled by this battle between the bot and Zero
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, I see what that did. Kind of funny.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : now it's a link to Wes Hodkiezwicz mailbag
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Now they're back with another topic
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : oh lol
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : I have a script that purges them now.
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : 118 Topics with Message.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : what's 118 (besides a number)?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : They got 118 slapped in there.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : that's why it confused the hell out of me
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Yeah, but this is taking a headline and slapping it into the Packers Talk
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Wasnt there a time guests could post in the help forum?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : lol good question, kind of impressed!
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : So how is a guest posting?
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Tell them its an emergency
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Working. Meetings.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Lots of fun; the spam goes back 4 or 5 pages by this point
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I thought you'd look for yourself and put 2 and 2 together lol. I overestimated ya ;)
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : I thought Guests couldnt post?
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : And gosh that's gonna be fun to clean up! hahaa
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : Oh. Why not just say that then? Geez.
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : check the main forum, seems a spam bot is running amok
Zero2Cool (18-Feb) : What?
Mucky Tundra (18-Feb) : Is the Packers online game "Packers Predict" now available for 2024? I can't tell
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
Eagles
Recent Topics
1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

2h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

6h / Green Bay Packers Talk / buckeyepackfan

24-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

24-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

23-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

22-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / TheKanataThrilla

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / MintBaconDrivel

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

18-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Feb / Around The NFL / beast

16-Feb / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

Headlines
Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.