Who would do a better job of running the USA? Topic

Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2013 8:58:00 PM (view original):
The source is the ACA itself.  Read it and prove me wrong.

The ACA, as "an incremental step", is ill-conceived and completely ignores the real problem with healthcare in the U.S.  It is on that basis that it should be repealed.

It is utterly retarded to demand, or even accept, that the federal government subsidize "private businesses with runaways costs".

If you're going to fix the problem, fix it the ******* right way.  Identify and address the root cause, not the symptom.  That's "Problem Solving 101".
Ok bis. If you think the ACA does or doesn't do something, make an argument.

What subsidy?
10/1/2013 9:59 PM
You're joking, right?

ACA Subsidies
10/1/2013 10:07 PM
It's subsidizing low income people so they can buy insurance. It's not a subsidy to hospitals.
10/1/2013 10:43 PM (edited)
And where does the money eventually end up?
10/1/2013 10:23 PM
It's not a subsidy to hospitals, though. At least not more than your health insurance is a subsidy to the "price gouging corrupt system." You pay for a necessary service. Is that service a cog in the wheel of an inefficient, corrupt, bloated system? Sure. But it's still necessary. The ACA is designed to allow more people to access that necessary service.
10/1/2013 10:42 PM
What's a better way to make healthcare more affordable?

A) Cut out the economic inefficiencies in the system, including systemic price gouging, and let costs fall naturally.  Lower costs = more affordable.

B) Have the federal government subsidize a broken, bloated, corrupt and economically inefficient system.
10/1/2013 11:08 PM
Posted by tecwrg on 10/1/2013 11:08:00 PM (view original):
What's a better way to make healthcare more affordable?

A) Cut out the economic inefficiencies in the system, including systemic price gouging, and let costs fall naturally.  Lower costs = more affordable.

B) Have the federal government subsidize a broken, bloated, corrupt and economically inefficient system.
Let costs fall naturally? We've had a free market health care system forever. Have prices ever fallen?

The Feds aren't subsidizing a system. The ACA is granting people access to a system. I'm waiting for you to volunteer to cancel your health insurance so that you aren't paying into the inefficient system.
10/1/2013 11:16 PM
Have the inefficiencies been addressed?  Has the price gouging been curtailed?

The two highest spending industries for political lobbies over the past 15 years have been (1) pharmaceuticals / health products, and (2) insurance.

So why do you think healthcare costs have not fallen?

http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?showYear=a&indexType=i
10/1/2013 11:30 PM (edited)
No ****. Regardless of what happens with the ACA, that doesn't change. Again, it's like you're complaining about reformed high school curriculum not addressing the rising cost of college tuition.
10/2/2013 12:36 AM
ACA = the wrong "fix" to the wrong problem.

Yet Obama and his lackeys are all patting themselves on the back and congratulating themselves for a job well done.
10/2/2013 5:54 AM
Posted by dahsdebater on 10/1/2013 4:11:00 PM (view original):
I'm not rich and I hate universal healthcare...

And I still maintain it's distinctly unconstitutional.  But I don't oppose it for that reason, some other modern changes are also unconstitutional but necessary.  Gun control is unconstitutional and I think we need more of it.

But universal health care decreases quality of care on the high end on any number of metrics.  Success rates of complicated surgeries are an easy one to look up - check out rates in the US vs. countries with socialized health care programs.  It's no surprise the best doctors from around the developed world have slowly migrated here, one of the last places where they can make more money for having greater skill.

when I say rich I don't mean the top 1%, should have been more clear, I mean a lot more ppl than that. basically if you have household income of more than $100K/yr (maybe a bit more if you live in high cost of living area) then you are richer than most ppl and prolly have no problem getting/paying for health coverage on your own. truly rich ppl - those top 1-2% - also obviously have no problems there, but all these ppl do not have much incentive to want the playing field to be leveled as they do not benefit from it.

as to the drs coming to USA to make more, just eliminate anyplace in the world where they can do that and it solves the problem. greater skill should make you more money but only after you prove yourself, and it should not just be rich ppl who get access to those with better skill.

10/2/2013 8:19 AM
1.  You must buy our product
2.  You must use our product at a place we do not regulate
3.  If you cannot fully afford our product, we will help you pay for it


So what is being subsidized?   The kids at the AT&T roundtable can answer this one.

10/2/2013 8:37 AM
I'd like to believe that the government will reject the $16 Advil charge and work on that problem but does anyone think that will happen?   If it does, it will likely be akin to the current system where insurance companies direct you to "in network" facilities to control costs.    If you choose "out of network", the excessive costs are your responsibility.   

How do the ACA supporters see this playing out?
10/2/2013 8:46 AM
GREATEST ACHIEVMENT IN AMERIKA SINCE SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICARE, AND SLICED BREAD!
10/2/2013 8:52 AM
Posted by MikeT23 on 10/2/2013 8:37:00 AM (view original):
1.  You must buy our product
2.  You must use our product at a place we do not regulate
3.  If you cannot fully afford our product, we will help you pay for it


So what is being subsidized?   The kids at the AT&T roundtable can answer this one.

Your pronoun usage is confusing. Maybe intentionally since I doubt you really understand who is doing what.
10/2/2013 9:04 AM
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...57 Next ▸
Who would do a better job of running the USA? Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2016 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.