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 (1h) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.
Mucky Tundra (11h) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh
dfosterf (12h) : Happy Birthday Dave!
Mucky Tundra (13h) : happy birthday dhazer
TheKanataThrilla (15h) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later
buckeyepackfan (15h) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!
buckeyepackfan (15h) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.
buckeyepackfan (15h) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.
packerfanoutwest (15h) : well, he was
TheKanataThrilla (15h) : Eagles down by contact on the fumble....fuck you NFL
Mucky Tundra (16h) : I think this games over
beast (16h) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs
Mucky Tundra (16h) : This game looks too big for Washington
packerfanoutwest (20h) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns
packerfanoutwest (20h) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts
packerfanoutwest (20h) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,
beast (26-Jan) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
beast (26-Jan) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
Zero2Cool (25-Jan) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you. I rarely get sick, and even more rarely sick to the point I can't work.
wpr (22-Jan) : Beast- back to yesterday, I CAN say OSU your have been Michigan IF the odds of making the playoffs were more urgent.
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Glad to hear you are feeling a bit better.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : I've been near death ill last several days, finally feel less dead and site issues.
Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : It is a big deal. This host is having issues. It's frustrating.
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : just kidding...it was down
Martha Careful (22-Jan) : you were blocked yesterday, due to a a recalcitrant demeanor yesterday in the penalty box for a recalcitrant demeanor
dfosterf (22-Jan) : Was that site shutdown on your end or mine? No big deal, just curious
beast (21-Jan) : That way teams like Indiana and SMU don't make the conference championships by simply avoiding all the other good teams in their own confere
beast (21-Jan) : Also, with these "Super Conferences" instead of a single conference champion, have 4 teams make a Conference playoffs.
beast (21-Jan) : Also in college football, is a bye week a good or bad thing?
Martha Careful (21-Jan) : The tournament format was fine. Seeding could use some work.
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 / packerfanoutwest

1h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

17-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

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