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
packerfanoutwest (10-Jul) : Us Padres fans love it....But it'll be a Dodgers/Yankees World Series
Zero2Cool (9-Jul) : Brewers sweep Dodgers. Awesome
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : And James Flanigan is the grandson of Packers Super Bowl winner Jim Flanigan Sr.
Mucky Tundra (6-Jul) : Jerome Bettis and Jim Flanigans sons as well!
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Thomas Davis Jr is OLB, not WR. Oops.
Zero2Cool (6-Jul) : Larry Fitzgeral and Thomas Davis sons too. WR's as well.
Mucky Tundra (5-Jul) : Kaydon Finley, son of Jermichael Finley, commits to Notre Dame
dfosterf (3-Jul) : Make sure to send my props to him! A plus move!
Zero2Cool (3-Jul) : My cousin, yes.
dfosterf (3-Jul) : That was your brother the GB press gazette referenced with the red cross draft props thing, yes?
Zero2Cool (2-Jul) : Packers gonna unveil new throwback helmet in few weeks.
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : I know it's Kleiman but this stuff writes itself
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : "Make sure she signs the NDA before asking for a Happy Ending!"
Mucky Tundra (2-Jul) : @NFL_DovKleiman Powerful: Deshaun Watson is taking Shedeur Sanders 'under his wing' as a mentor to the Browns QBs
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Dolphins get (back) Minkah Fitzpatrick in trade
Zero2Cool (30-Jun) : Steelers land Jalen Ramsey via Trade
dfosterf (26-Jun) : I think it would be great to have someone like Tom Grossi or Andy Herman on the Board of Directors so he/they could inform us
dfosterf (26-Jun) : Fair enough, WPR. Thing is, I have been a long time advocate to at least have some inkling of the dynamics within the board.
wpr (26-Jun) : 1st world owners/stockholders problems dfosterf.
Martha Careful (25-Jun) : I would have otherwise admirably served
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Also, no more provision for a write-in candidate, so Martha is off the table at least for this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : You do have to interpret the boring fine print, but all stockholders all see he is on the ballot
dfosterf (25-Jun) : It also says he is subject to another ballot in 2028. I recall nothing of this nature with Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy is on my ballot subject to me penciling him in as a no.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : I thought it used to be we voted for the whatever they called the 45, and then they voted for the seven, and then they voted for Mark Murphy
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Because I was too lazy to change my address, I haven't voted fot years until this year
dfosterf (25-Jun) : of the folks that run this team. I do not recall Mark Murphy being subject to our vote.
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Ed Policy yay or nay is on the pre-approved ballot that we always approve because we are uninformed and lazy, along with all the rest
dfosterf (25-Jun) : Weird question. Very esoteric. For stockholders. Also lengthy. Sorry. Offseason.
Zero2Cool (25-Jun) : Maybe wicked wind chill made it worse?
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : And then he signs with Cleveland in the offseason
Mucky Tundra (25-Jun) : @SharpFootball WR Diontae Johnson just admitted he refused to enter a game in 41° weather last year in Baltimore because he felt “ice cold”
Zero2Cool (24-Jun) : Yawn. Rodgers says he is "pretty sure" this be final season.
Zero2Cool (23-Jun) : PFT claims Packers are having extension talks with Zach Tom, Quay Walker.
Mucky Tundra (20-Jun) : GB-Minnesota 2004 Wild Card game popped up on my YouTube page....UGH
beast (20-Jun) : Hmm 🤔 re-signing Walker before Tom? Sounds highly questionable to me.
Mucky Tundra (19-Jun) : One person on Twitter=cannon law
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Well, to ONE person on Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : According to Tweeter
Zero2Cool (19-Jun) : Packers are working on extension for LT Walker they hope to have done before camp
dfosterf (18-Jun) : E4B landed at Andrews last night
dfosterf (18-Jun) : 101 in a 60
dfosterf (18-Jun) : FAFO
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : one year $4m with incentives to make it up to $6m
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Or Lions
dfosterf (18-Jun) : Beats the hell out of a Vikings signing
Zero2Cool (18-Jun) : Baltimore Ravens now have signed former Packers CB Jaire Alexander.
dfosterf (14-Jun) : TWO magnificent strikes for touchdowns. Lose the pennstate semigeezer non nfl backup
dfosterf (14-Jun) : There was minicamp Thursday. My man Taylor Engersma threw
dfosterf (11-Jun) : There will be a mini camp practice Thursday.
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2025 Packers Schedule
Sunday, Sep 7 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Thursday, Sep 11 @ 7:15 PM
COMMANDERS
Sunday, Sep 21 @ 12:00 PM
Browns
Sunday, Sep 28 @ 7:20 PM
Cowboys
Sunday, Oct 12 @ 3:25 PM
BENGALS
Sunday, Oct 19 @ 3:25 PM
Cardinals
Sunday, Oct 26 @ 7:20 PM
Steelers
Sunday, Nov 2 @ 12:00 PM
PANTHERS
Monday, Nov 10 @ 7:15 PM
EAGLES
Sunday, Nov 16 @ 12:00 PM
Giants
Sunday, Nov 23 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Thursday, Nov 27 @ 12:00 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 7 @ 12:00 PM
BEARS
Sunday, Dec 14 @ 3:25 PM
Broncos
Friday, Dec 19 @ 11:00 PM
Bears
Friday, Dec 26 @ 11:00 PM
RAVENS
Saturday, Jan 3 @ 11:00 PM
Vikings
Recent Topics
10-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

10-Jul / Around The NFL / Zero2Cool

6-Jul / Random Babble / Martha Careful

4-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

2-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

2-Jul / Fantasy Sports Talk / dfosterf

1-Jul / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

29-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

25-Jun / Around The NFL / Martha Careful

23-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

20-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

18-Jun / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

16-Jun / Green Bay Packers Talk / dfosterf

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