“Senator, it was nice to see you at the Johnson’s BBQ last week. As we discussed, when you get back to Washington you need to see that we get government out of the healthcare business. We know you can do it. By the way, I forgot to tell you that the wife & I are turning 65 next month and finally retiring. We can finally quit paying those high health insurance premiums and use Medicare. What a blessing.” Signed, Agent
What is needed to lower the cost of health care services is increased competition in that market, and NOT an increased influence of Medicare on scheduled payments to providers. Paring back Medicare greatly or completely will increase competition, then innovation for expense reductions, thus lowering those costs. To replace or reduce Medicare, the associated regulations need to be revisited and repealed, if not revised substantially.
Government price controls, whether limits or floors, never results in market efficiency and adequate supply of services or goods. Medicare, Medicaid, and ACA are government controls on prices, as well as mandates on services provided and insurance purchase requirements in lieu of tax penalties.
Finally, an ACA choice between purchasing ineffective insurance, or paying a tax penalty with no insurance coverage obtained, is no choice at all. It is wealth redistribution with an associated economic loss to the entire system.
Polar, President Nixon was once faced with a dilemma on one of the energy emergencies and skyrocketing prices. He tried to implement price controls on gasoline. Didn’t work out so well since there was widespread shortages and the price did not come down. That was a good case of government interference in the price of goods and services. The solution was greater production and the price and supply came down.
He was once called Price-fixin’ Nixon. Many moons ago.
ACA, Medicare, Medicaid, and to some degree, the VA Healthcare System are examples of the adverse effects of price fixing on an economic system of disbursement of services. Congress hasn’t learned nuttin’ yet.
Anyhoo, one guy gets it, and should be immediately appointed as Ryano’s ‘replacement’ as SoTH after Ryano is ‘repealed’.
With the humiliating loss suffered by all 3 GOP controlled branches of the government and your blind and slavish endorsements of them, you need to step back from offering your commentary on what should be done. You blew it badly.
Celtica, you’re wasting your time. Polarbear is clueless and this post is the best evidence so far. Nothing but garbage statements – “paring back Medicare, blah, blah”. Oooh – sounds like Polarbear is advocating death panels to me.
Blah, blah, blah. Comments by you two snowflake Libitterals on Conservative commenters adds no value to these discussions. Try visiting a coffee shop to fill the time you spend here adding ‘no-value’ comments.
Irony: ranting about the sad state of the US while drinking $5 coffee-based drinks with enough calories to increase their BMI and push them into a higher health risk class.
March 27, 2017 at 5:38 pm
Bob Burke says:
Like or Dislike:
10
1
The solution to healthcare insurance is very simple:
1. Base all healthcare on the Medicare “Approved Amount” payment schedule and under the Medicare established billing codes.
2. Investigate and Eliminate insurance fraud … including taking away all federal and state funding and including the medical licenses of individuals and organizations convicted of medical insurance fraud and seize all related personal and business assets.
3. All private healthcare insurance companies should be made to operate as “non-profit” organizations.
4. The basis of payments to healthcare service providers should be on cures and not treatment. This includes the pharmaceutical industry.
5. No person in the USA should be provided with healthcare that is anything less than what the federal government provides to its employees and government officials.
6. Eliminate the medical industries procedure of “Balance Billing”.
The solution is simple! The issue will be in removing the profit incentive and focus of the medical and pharmaceutical industry.
Currently, there are no standards of service and cost in the medical industry and medical costs are out of control … with the only exception being Medicare. If the medical and healthcare industries cannot solve the service and cost issues for its customers, then everyone should be placed under Medicare and move the healthcare insurance industry revenues into Medicare.
The challenge is addressing the problems and the solution is simple!
The Medicare standards you support are absolutely the WRONG way to reform the healthcare and insurance industrial complex.
Medicare and Medicaid treatment rules are one reason for the current deficits and devastating decrease in supply of medical services at unnecessarily high costs.
Criteria 5. is also ridiculous. Imposing such criteria would only lead to higher costs for ALL.
Freedom of choice is the only acceptable and workable solution, for competition, innovation, cost control incentives, and avoidance of adverse selection and federal budget deficits.
The issue with healthcare is the same issue that we have with student loans: government money. With student loans, the government makes money easily available for people to attend college. The colleges realize “Hey, look how easy it is for them to get a loan! Let’s raise tuition!” Tuition goes up. Government says “Hey, tuition went up! We need to loan these people more money!” More money becomes easily available. Colleges raise tuition. More money is lent. Tuition goes up. Lather, rinse, repeat.
The EXACT. SAME. THING. has been happening with healthcare costs since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. The government doesn’t keep track of taxpayer money like health insurance companies keep track of their money. The more money Uncle Sam is willing to throw at the hospitals and clinics, the more money they decide to charge for services.
What happened to the feds being in charge of providing a military, ensuring inter-state commerce, defending our borders and anything not in that list of 3 is a right of the individual states? Get your obnoxious, ham fisted, Borg Collective federal fingers OUT of health care. Let each state handle things at a more local level. Make health insurance carriers compete without sweetheart deals for federal money. The problem will solve itself if we’d just let it.
The government’s limited role should be in repeal of unnecessary regulations that stifle competition among insurers as well as create barriers to entry of new medical service providers. Creating new regulations to allow writing insurance across state lines may be needed.
What if the government said something to the effect of, we will only provide and subsidize loans for students that attend schools with a maximum tuition of $xxxx?
You said, “Let each state handle things at a more local level.” Does this mean you are against insurance companies selling across state lines?
You said, “The problem will solve itself if we’d just let it.” That is how it was in the past and why we had so many problems.
Jeff, you’ve got some of it right but we need to take it a step further – arrive at the hospital and you don’t have insurance or you have a bare bones policy – then you should be asked to leave if you don’t have insurance or you only get treatment for the coverage you purchased. That’s the way every other business works. Only once doctors realize they aren’t going to get paid and patients don’t expect free treatment will prices fall. And while we’re on the subject of treating health care like a business, why do people over 65 get free health care? It’s inevitable they’re going to get sick and they’ve had all of those years to save up for their “end of life” health care expenses. Quite frankly, they should be in a better position to fund their own health care than a younger person who hasn’t had a lifetime of earnings. Eliminate Medicare and that would really drive down medical costs – Doctors would no longer have an instant client base. Now these are free market ideas.
Great points. Those who think the free market can solve the health insurance/care issues, are very short sighted and view health insurance the same as P&C. They are clueless.
Surprise, surprise, PolarBeaRepeal totally missed the point of the post. What SWFL Agent was saying is that for the free market to work in health care, they would have to treat it like any other business. Pay first or prove you can pay before receiving the product, service, or, in this case, treatment.
How does an incapacitated person ‘pay first’? duh!
This ‘pay first’ is a clue to one of the criteria I outlined several times in the past, but it is interpreted differently than your use of the term.
Another hint: PAYGO es enfeugo.
March 28, 2017 at 12:15 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
3
1
That is why the free market will not work with health care.
THAT IS THE POINT!!
March 28, 2017 at 2:51 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
No, Ron; I don’t ‘get’ YOUR scenario, which will be changed in the future because it doesn’t allow for the desired result.
Intelligent, creative people are devising new ways to write HI at this moment. If that’s unclear, Ron, you’re unable to think outside the box to do things in novel ways. Sigh.
March 28, 2017 at 3:29 pm
SWFLAgent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Polar, when will you get it? It’s not about “new ways to write HI”. Insurance companies can create plan after plan. The health crisis is not driven by insurance companies. It’s caused by the vast majority of the public not wanting to see babies & grannies suffer through medical disasters while we try to preserve the “free market” profits that pharmaceutical companies, medical suppliers, and doctors deserve in our great country (not meant to be facetious). Ever wonder why foreign doctors want to come to the US? Think about it.
March 29, 2017 at 1:19 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
No, SWFL Agent; that’s not it, either. If you can’t think of, or be OPEN TO, new ways to address problems in a market, you’re not going to make ANY helpful comments on the issue.
Other lines of insurance had issues that are similar to what you described and they FIXED THOSE PROBLEMS to make their insurance market stable again. Health insurance is not unique in that regard; it is insurance, and there is a hyuuuuge market for it that can be innovative and creative to satisfy the demand for coverage.
March 29, 2017 at 2:14 pm
SWFL Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Polar, yes open to ideas. Just don’t think it’s an insurance problem. It’s bigger than that. Yes, health insurance can be like other lines of insurance and quite frankly it probably should be. Price to the risk, create policies that have the coverage people can afford & will buy (that’s different than coverage they want or need), and let’s move on. No subsidies. If you die because you didn’t buy the right policy or coverage, then your time is up. That’s what happens in other parts of the world and it works fine. But my point is that the vast majority of the public doesn’t want this. US citizens want the same access and level of care for everyone, especially if it’s their family or friend, regardless of their ability to pay and this is not a free market concept. So now we’re back to the gov’t subsidizing health care and implementing regulations so they can straddle the middle ground. And for the far right and far left, this middle ground will not work.
March 29, 2017 at 2:23 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
PolarBeaRepeal,
Can you name any other line of insurance that pays first party benefits, without coverage?
March 30, 2017 at 11:30 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
@Ron; this discussion isn’t about INSURANCE INDEMNITY.
It is about TREATMENT GIVEN BY MEDICAL CARE PROVIDERS WHEN YOU SHOW UP AT A HOSPITAL.
Try to keep up with the discussion and not divert it away from the topic AFTER I REFUTED THE PRESUMPTION of the OP.
March 30, 2017 at 12:25 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Yogi: Other lines of insurance had issues that are similar to what you described and they FIXED THOSE PROBLEMS to make their insurance market stable again.
Ron:
Yogi: WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT INSURANCE! HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT INSURANCE! YOU CAN’T STAY ON TOPIC. I DON’T CARE IF I BROUGHT UP INSURANCE, YOU’RE OFF-TOPIC FOR ASKING ME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT!
“impressive” trolling at work right there
March 30, 2017 at 12:26 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
*Ron: (comment & question to Yogi about insurance)
March 31, 2017 at 9:33 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
@Confused: you can interject your copy and paste of comments if you want to try to point out that I am inconsistent. I am able to see through diversionary tactics of steering the discussion off topic AND also going off topic in a comment to refute SWFL’s scenario where the status quo on insurance policy forms must be assumed going forward.
The ARTICLE topic is SOLUTIONS to the Obamacare mess through unraveling it. One solution I suggested was coverage changes, and there are a few others not mentioned now.
The discussion got off topic via a scenario SWFL created about showing up for treatment without proper coverage. That is one of the most stupid diversions I’ve read this week on these pages. Then, others continued to play out that scenario as if it had validity.
My point on that OFF TOPIC scenario is NECESSARY treatment is ALWAYS available at an ER. If not an emergency, MEDICAL CARE PROS swearing to a Hippocratic oath MUST treat patients without INSURANCE coverage. If one providers doesn’t treat in violation of their Hippocratic oath, ANOTHER Medical Care provider can be found who WILL heed their oath.
So, the scenario suggested by SWFL is invalid and moot.
Your attempt to try to point out my inconsistency or hypocrisy failed… as you have many times in the past.
March 28, 2017 at 4:38 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
SW, what makes you think people over 65? Medicare charges premiums and Supplementals charge premium and Prescription Cards charge a premium. The only ones getting free care seem to be the Medicaid people.
I don’t forget about them or anyone else. So, what about the Congressmen who get subsidies? What would removing those subsidies do to resolve the problems in health insurance? They are wealthy enough to afford full premiums. Is your point an attempt to show a way to fix HI or just some form of shaming or jealousy?
My comment was a specific reply to Agent’s line that the ONLY ones getting free care are the Medicaid people. That is not true (subsidies don’t equal zero premium and zero deductibles) but more importantly — if our elected officials are going to take away subsidies for their constituents, then their subsidies should be taken away too.
March 30, 2017 at 11:31 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Our elected officials PAY with their public service. Got it?
March 30, 2017 at 12:30 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
2
0
No.
They GET paid for their public service.
Senators & Congressmen make ~$174,000 a year (others make more, e.g. speaker of the house & minority/majority leaders)
If you make $174,000 a year and get government subsidies for health insurance, then vote to take away health insurance subsidies for your constituents, your subsidy should also be taken away.
Do you agree with “if the senate & house votes to take away health insurance subsidies for their constituents, they should also lose their health insurance subsidy?”
That’s all I’m trying to get across. Do you agree with me?
March 31, 2017 at 9:39 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
@Rosenblatt;
Have you NEVER heard of employee BENEFITS other than monetary? If so, in what Country do you live?
Your implied opposition of the scenario of voting to ‘take away subsidies, etc.’ is a simplification meant to obfuscate the actual intended change to take away SOME subsidies of SOME current participants in Medicaid. Read the details and stop changing the wording to construe a different meaning.
March 31, 2017 at 9:41 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
PS I’d be OK with the Congress removing THEIR subsidies if their salaries were increased by a commensurate amount to pay for the subsidies. It would give them greater FREEDOM to chose their health care services.
March 27, 2017 at 8:35 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
2
Here we have the simple solution that evaded all of the ‘geniuses’ in Congress, except at least one;
This is just another political ploy. All he wants to do is expose those who understand that you cannot just repeal the PPACA as hypocrites and try force their hands. Did you even notice that he could not even get one co-sponsor.
LOL at Libitteral Schumer! He realizes the Republicans can’t be blocked indefinitely from putting Gorsuch on the bench, pipelines across several states, and a beautiful wall along the US-Mexico border, stopping the progressive / socialist agenda he thought would continue indefinitely.
Interesting you brought up the pipeline. It reminded me of another broken promise by President Trump, “Trump said as recently as last week that Keystone and the Dakota Access pipeline must use American steel ‘or we’re not building one.'”
Will you ever hold him accountable for his promises or just keep making excuses? Those are the only 2 options given during President Obama’s administration.
Here is your opportunity. In case you did not see most post in the comments of another article:
Here are several promises he has broken. Feel free to let me know for which one(s) are you willing to criticize President Trump:
1. “When we win on November 8th and elect a Republican Congress, we will be able to immediately repeal and replace Obamacare — have to do it. Obamacare has to be replaced and we will do it and we will do it very, very quickly.”
2. “I’m going to be working for you, I’m not going to have time to go play golf,”
3. Trump also vowed to, on his first day, “clean up the corruption” in Washington by proposing “a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress,”
4. Trump said he would on Day 1, begin working with Congress to introduce his “Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act.”
5. “I would rarely leave the White House because there’s so much work to be done. I would not be a president who took vacations. I would not be a president that takes time off.”
If you need more, please let me know.
Let me add one more, “This took place while I was getting ready to sign,” he told the CPAC conference last week. “I said, ‘Who makes the pipes for the pipeline?’ Well, sir, it comes from all over the world, isn’t that wonderful? I said, ‘Nope, it comes from the United States or we’re not building one.’ American steel. If they want a pipeline in the United States, they’re going to use pipe that’s made in the United States, do we agree?”
Not one of these requires time to determine whether or not the promise was kept. If your only defense is “Trumperbole”, you are making excuses for this con man.
March 28, 2017 at 2:55 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
3
Ron; you can hold TrumPresident accountable. I’ve got other important things to do with my time, like doing my part to MAGA.
Oh, and how do you hold him accountable? Can you impeach him? Run against him in 2020? Donate to Joe Biden to run against him in 2020? Donate to Al Franken, Lie-a-watha, or Schmucky Schumer to run against him in 2020?
Let us know how that ‘hold him accountable’ thing works out, ‘k?
March 28, 2017 at 2:58 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Oh, yeah; Ron; I need more of his promises for the first … 1460 days of his term in office. Four isn’t enough to adequately measure his performance over 4 years. Got any on building a wall and making Mexico pay for it (indirectly) or ending Sanctuary cities? Let me know by 11/1/2020, OK? Thanks!
March 28, 2017 at 3:10 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
PolarBeaRepeal,
Thank you for proving me right, again. You are just a sheep blindly following our president.
March 30, 2017 at 11:35 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
There’s only about 1400 days left for PresidenTrump’s agenda to be realized. Phew! He’s cutting it close by not getting EVERYTHING done in the first two months of his term in office.
March 28, 2017 at 11:17 am
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
Polar, do you know that Chucky Shmucky is Ron’s favorite Senator? He is what comes out of NY.
Upon what grounds should he be recalled? Did he violate a specific law, ethics rule or do something unconstitutional?
Or do you just want to recall every politician who does not agree with your ideology toward governance?
March 29, 2017 at 1:30 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
2
He should be ‘recalled’ for actions unbecoming of the US Senate minority leader. … at the restaurant when he restau-ranted at the Trump voter.
Agree?
If not, then the boorish behavior you criticize TrumPresident for should be ok with you, going forward. Right?
March 29, 2017 at 2:13 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
I agree that he should be removed right after President Trump since President Trump’s behavior came first. Fair enough?
If not, you are the hypocrite.
March 29, 2017 at 2:16 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
In addition, if you want to start removing politicians for actions unbecoming their office, there is an extremely long line that would also come before Senator Schumer.
March 29, 2017 at 2:18 pm
Confused says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
There were two witnesses with drastically different versions of what happened in the original report and every article thereafter.
Do you have actual proof which one is correct and which is false? Actual proof – not just hearsay from one of the people involved in the “incident”?
(1)
A witness of the exchange reports that Schumer made it a public spectacle, shouting, “she voted for Trump!” The couple reportedly tried to leave the restaurant after being publicly harassed by the senator, but Schumer followed them outside, continuing his provocations on the sidewalk.
(2)
Another witness tells a different version of the story, where the Califanos actually approach Schumer’s table. The witness described the conversation as pleasant, friendly, and continued outside only because both parties left at the same time.
March 30, 2017 at 11:38 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
What were the witnesses NAMES?
One is Liar. One tells the truth. Guess why their names aren’t provided by Confused people.
March 30, 2017 at 11:39 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
@Ron; OK, send a letter to the Leader of the US Senate to initiate impeachment proceedings against TrumPresident and Schumer. Let us know how that works out for ya’.
March 30, 2017 at 12:32 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
PolarBeaRepeal,
Agent is the one calling for the recall, not me. Direct your posts appropriately in the future.
March 31, 2017 at 9:51 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
@Ron; OK, I will if you RECALL your call for a similar recall, as you did above……..
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
Thumb up 0
Thumb down 0
I agree that he should be removed right after President Trump since President Trump’s behavior came first. Fair enough?
If not, you are the hypocrite……
I asked you to initiate the recall you suggested above. I won’t ask Agent to do anything you won’t do… Either you both, individually, ask for a recall of both Trump and Schumer… or no one at all.
Ready, steady, …. GO! Or not.
March 31, 2017 at 9:55 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
0
@Agent; you and Ron have to decide on a recall strategy; i.e. which of you two asks for a recall of both Trump and Schumer. Please coordinate this with Ron, ASAP…
March 31, 2017 at 10:31 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Again, I did not initiate any attempt at a recall. If you interpreted my post incorrectly, that is your fault.
All I said was that President Trump is first. If Agent has no interest in seeing him be removed, then I cannot justify recalling Senator Schumer.
Got it?
March 28, 2017 at 12:14 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
For someone who claims to be ‘independent’ and impartial, Ron has vociferous opinions on TrumPresident and Republicans. He may be the next in line to “Schumer” * on an diner at an adjacent table in a restaurant.
* To understand the use of the verb “Schumer” above, read the story about Schmucky’s behavior at a NYC restaurant last weekend.
Interesting that you guys conveniently ignore my criticisms of President Obama, Rep. Pelosi, Frmr Sen. Reid, Hillary Clinton, and the PPACA. In addition, you also fail to acknowledge when I have praised President Trump.
I’ll bet you praised Schmucky at home last night, after hearing about his ‘restau-rant’ against a TrumPresident voter.
March 28, 2017 at 3:05 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
You would have lost that bet…BIGLY!!
March 28, 2017 at 6:12 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Would you take payment of my wager debt in fresh fish?
March 28, 2017 at 6:15 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
PS please re-post 500 of your prior criticisms of the politicians you listed. And keep count while you are doing so. Ok? Thanks!
March 29, 2017 at 7:55 am
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
500? I haven’t even criticized Republicans that much.
March 29, 2017 at 1:34 pm
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
1
1
No, no, no! I’m referring to your 3/28/17 post at 12:37 pm wherein you mention criticizing Obama, PEE_LOW_SEE_IT_AFTER_WE_PASS_IT, Reid, Clinton, and ACA.
Please post 500 such critical posts.
Ready, steady,… GO!
March 29, 2017 at 2:21 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
I know to which post you were referring. I am trying to figure out where the number 500 came from.
If you are going to require me to provide an unrealistic way to prove my point, you are the troll.
Any intelligent person with a reading comprehension level above the 3rd grade who has been following IJ comments, would not need me to prove my criticisms of the Democrats I listed.
March 30, 2017 at 11:40 am
PolarBeaRepeal says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
OK, I’ll settle for 250 such posts. Ready, steady, … GO!
March 30, 2017 at 12:33 pm
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Thank you for admitting that your reading comprehension is below that of a third grader, troll.
March 28, 2017 at 4:33 pm
Agent says:
Like or Dislike:
0
1
Chucky Shmucky is as loony as Pelosi Galore. He should be asked to step down. He is a total embarrassment for the Democratic Party. Even Ron might agree.
I notice many comments suggesting the free market approach is the best for reforming health care. I happened to be reading the story about Citizens Property Insurance company, a non-profit established by the state of Florida to help homeowners unable to find insurance in the free marketplace, and wondered how the health care free market proponents feel about a government getting involved in any insurance products. What would the approach of free market proponents be to something like Citizens?
Just, I believe we just tried the mandated government sponsored program for 7+ years. Government programs are a huge liability on the citizens (Pun intended). How about another monstrocity, NFIP? How successful has that been in the long run?
“Senator, it was nice to see you at the Johnson’s BBQ last week. As we discussed, when you get back to Washington you need to see that we get government out of the healthcare business. We know you can do it. By the way, I forgot to tell you that the wife & I are turning 65 next month and finally retiring. We can finally quit paying those high health insurance premiums and use Medicare. What a blessing.” Signed, Agent
What is needed to lower the cost of health care services is increased competition in that market, and NOT an increased influence of Medicare on scheduled payments to providers. Paring back Medicare greatly or completely will increase competition, then innovation for expense reductions, thus lowering those costs. To replace or reduce Medicare, the associated regulations need to be revisited and repealed, if not revised substantially.
Government price controls, whether limits or floors, never results in market efficiency and adequate supply of services or goods. Medicare, Medicaid, and ACA are government controls on prices, as well as mandates on services provided and insurance purchase requirements in lieu of tax penalties.
Finally, an ACA choice between purchasing ineffective insurance, or paying a tax penalty with no insurance coverage obtained, is no choice at all. It is wealth redistribution with an associated economic loss to the entire system.
Polar, President Nixon was once faced with a dilemma on one of the energy emergencies and skyrocketing prices. He tried to implement price controls on gasoline. Didn’t work out so well since there was widespread shortages and the price did not come down. That was a good case of government interference in the price of goods and services. The solution was greater production and the price and supply came down.
He was once called Price-fixin’ Nixon. Many moons ago.
ACA, Medicare, Medicaid, and to some degree, the VA Healthcare System are examples of the adverse effects of price fixing on an economic system of disbursement of services. Congress hasn’t learned nuttin’ yet.
Anyhoo, one guy gets it, and should be immediately appointed as Ryano’s ‘replacement’ as SoTH after Ryano is ‘repealed’.
http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2017/03/rep_mo_brooks_files_bill_to_re.html
TrumpPolarBearRepeal:
With the humiliating loss suffered by all 3 GOP controlled branches of the government and your blind and slavish endorsements of them, you need to step back from offering your commentary on what should be done. You blew it badly.
Celtica, you’re wasting your time. Polarbear is clueless and this post is the best evidence so far. Nothing but garbage statements – “paring back Medicare, blah, blah”. Oooh – sounds like Polarbear is advocating death panels to me.
Blah, blah, blah. Comments by you two snowflake Libitterals on Conservative commenters adds no value to these discussions. Try visiting a coffee shop to fill the time you spend here adding ‘no-value’ comments.
Polar, SW and Celtica could meet at Starbucks and find like minded people so they can rant and rave about how bad this country is. MAGA
watch your punctuation
Irony: ranting about the sad state of the US while drinking $5 coffee-based drinks with enough calories to increase their BMI and push them into a higher health risk class.
The solution to healthcare insurance is very simple:
1. Base all healthcare on the Medicare “Approved Amount” payment schedule and under the Medicare established billing codes.
2. Investigate and Eliminate insurance fraud … including taking away all federal and state funding and including the medical licenses of individuals and organizations convicted of medical insurance fraud and seize all related personal and business assets.
3. All private healthcare insurance companies should be made to operate as “non-profit” organizations.
4. The basis of payments to healthcare service providers should be on cures and not treatment. This includes the pharmaceutical industry.
5. No person in the USA should be provided with healthcare that is anything less than what the federal government provides to its employees and government officials.
6. Eliminate the medical industries procedure of “Balance Billing”.
The solution is simple! The issue will be in removing the profit incentive and focus of the medical and pharmaceutical industry.
Currently, there are no standards of service and cost in the medical industry and medical costs are out of control … with the only exception being Medicare. If the medical and healthcare industries cannot solve the service and cost issues for its customers, then everyone should be placed under Medicare and move the healthcare insurance industry revenues into Medicare.
The challenge is addressing the problems and the solution is simple!
The Medicare standards you support are absolutely the WRONG way to reform the healthcare and insurance industrial complex.
Medicare and Medicaid treatment rules are one reason for the current deficits and devastating decrease in supply of medical services at unnecessarily high costs.
Criteria 5. is also ridiculous. Imposing such criteria would only lead to higher costs for ALL.
Freedom of choice is the only acceptable and workable solution, for competition, innovation, cost control incentives, and avoidance of adverse selection and federal budget deficits.
The issue with healthcare is the same issue that we have with student loans: government money. With student loans, the government makes money easily available for people to attend college. The colleges realize “Hey, look how easy it is for them to get a loan! Let’s raise tuition!” Tuition goes up. Government says “Hey, tuition went up! We need to loan these people more money!” More money becomes easily available. Colleges raise tuition. More money is lent. Tuition goes up. Lather, rinse, repeat.
The EXACT. SAME. THING. has been happening with healthcare costs since the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. The government doesn’t keep track of taxpayer money like health insurance companies keep track of their money. The more money Uncle Sam is willing to throw at the hospitals and clinics, the more money they decide to charge for services.
What happened to the feds being in charge of providing a military, ensuring inter-state commerce, defending our borders and anything not in that list of 3 is a right of the individual states? Get your obnoxious, ham fisted, Borg Collective federal fingers OUT of health care. Let each state handle things at a more local level. Make health insurance carriers compete without sweetheart deals for federal money. The problem will solve itself if we’d just let it.
Correct. Well stated!
The government’s limited role should be in repeal of unnecessary regulations that stifle competition among insurers as well as create barriers to entry of new medical service providers. Creating new regulations to allow writing insurance across state lines may be needed.
Jeff,
What if the government said something to the effect of, we will only provide and subsidize loans for students that attend schools with a maximum tuition of $xxxx?
You said, “Let each state handle things at a more local level.” Does this mean you are against insurance companies selling across state lines?
You said, “The problem will solve itself if we’d just let it.” That is how it was in the past and why we had so many problems.
Jeff, you’ve got some of it right but we need to take it a step further – arrive at the hospital and you don’t have insurance or you have a bare bones policy – then you should be asked to leave if you don’t have insurance or you only get treatment for the coverage you purchased. That’s the way every other business works. Only once doctors realize they aren’t going to get paid and patients don’t expect free treatment will prices fall. And while we’re on the subject of treating health care like a business, why do people over 65 get free health care? It’s inevitable they’re going to get sick and they’ve had all of those years to save up for their “end of life” health care expenses. Quite frankly, they should be in a better position to fund their own health care than a younger person who hasn’t had a lifetime of earnings. Eliminate Medicare and that would really drive down medical costs – Doctors would no longer have an instant client base. Now these are free market ideas.
SWFL Agent,
Great points. Those who think the free market can solve the health insurance/care issues, are very short sighted and view health insurance the same as P&C. They are clueless.
LOL at the lie that hospitals would turn away those without coverage or specific coverage.
What happens at ERs? Turn away or treat?
Libitterals are hypocritical regarding the Hippocratic oath sworn to by all medical care providers.
Surprise, surprise, PolarBeaRepeal totally missed the point of the post. What SWFL Agent was saying is that for the free market to work in health care, they would have to treat it like any other business. Pay first or prove you can pay before receiving the product, service, or, in this case, treatment.
Got it?
How does an incapacitated person ‘pay first’? duh!
This ‘pay first’ is a clue to one of the criteria I outlined several times in the past, but it is interpreted differently than your use of the term.
Another hint: PAYGO es enfeugo.
That is why the free market will not work with health care.
THAT IS THE POINT!!
No, Ron; I don’t ‘get’ YOUR scenario, which will be changed in the future because it doesn’t allow for the desired result.
Intelligent, creative people are devising new ways to write HI at this moment. If that’s unclear, Ron, you’re unable to think outside the box to do things in novel ways. Sigh.
Polar, when will you get it? It’s not about “new ways to write HI”. Insurance companies can create plan after plan. The health crisis is not driven by insurance companies. It’s caused by the vast majority of the public not wanting to see babies & grannies suffer through medical disasters while we try to preserve the “free market” profits that pharmaceutical companies, medical suppliers, and doctors deserve in our great country (not meant to be facetious). Ever wonder why foreign doctors want to come to the US? Think about it.
No, SWFL Agent; that’s not it, either. If you can’t think of, or be OPEN TO, new ways to address problems in a market, you’re not going to make ANY helpful comments on the issue.
Other lines of insurance had issues that are similar to what you described and they FIXED THOSE PROBLEMS to make their insurance market stable again. Health insurance is not unique in that regard; it is insurance, and there is a hyuuuuge market for it that can be innovative and creative to satisfy the demand for coverage.
Polar, yes open to ideas. Just don’t think it’s an insurance problem. It’s bigger than that. Yes, health insurance can be like other lines of insurance and quite frankly it probably should be. Price to the risk, create policies that have the coverage people can afford & will buy (that’s different than coverage they want or need), and let’s move on. No subsidies. If you die because you didn’t buy the right policy or coverage, then your time is up. That’s what happens in other parts of the world and it works fine. But my point is that the vast majority of the public doesn’t want this. US citizens want the same access and level of care for everyone, especially if it’s their family or friend, regardless of their ability to pay and this is not a free market concept. So now we’re back to the gov’t subsidizing health care and implementing regulations so they can straddle the middle ground. And for the far right and far left, this middle ground will not work.
PolarBeaRepeal,
Can you name any other line of insurance that pays first party benefits, without coverage?
@Ron; this discussion isn’t about INSURANCE INDEMNITY.
It is about TREATMENT GIVEN BY MEDICAL CARE PROVIDERS WHEN YOU SHOW UP AT A HOSPITAL.
Try to keep up with the discussion and not divert it away from the topic AFTER I REFUTED THE PRESUMPTION of the OP.
Yogi: Other lines of insurance had issues that are similar to what you described and they FIXED THOSE PROBLEMS to make their insurance market stable again.
Ron:
Yogi: WE’RE NOT TALKING ABOUT INSURANCE! HOW DARE YOU TALK ABOUT INSURANCE! YOU CAN’T STAY ON TOPIC. I DON’T CARE IF I BROUGHT UP INSURANCE, YOU’RE OFF-TOPIC FOR ASKING ME QUESTIONS ABOUT IT!
“impressive” trolling at work right there
*Ron: (comment & question to Yogi about insurance)
@Confused: you can interject your copy and paste of comments if you want to try to point out that I am inconsistent. I am able to see through diversionary tactics of steering the discussion off topic AND also going off topic in a comment to refute SWFL’s scenario where the status quo on insurance policy forms must be assumed going forward.
The ARTICLE topic is SOLUTIONS to the Obamacare mess through unraveling it. One solution I suggested was coverage changes, and there are a few others not mentioned now.
The discussion got off topic via a scenario SWFL created about showing up for treatment without proper coverage. That is one of the most stupid diversions I’ve read this week on these pages. Then, others continued to play out that scenario as if it had validity.
My point on that OFF TOPIC scenario is NECESSARY treatment is ALWAYS available at an ER. If not an emergency, MEDICAL CARE PROS swearing to a Hippocratic oath MUST treat patients without INSURANCE coverage. If one providers doesn’t treat in violation of their Hippocratic oath, ANOTHER Medical Care provider can be found who WILL heed their oath.
So, the scenario suggested by SWFL is invalid and moot.
Your attempt to try to point out my inconsistency or hypocrisy failed… as you have many times in the past.
SW, what makes you think people over 65? Medicare charges premiums and Supplementals charge premium and Prescription Cards charge a premium. The only ones getting free care seem to be the Medicaid people.
Don’t forget about our elected officials in the House and Senate who get government subsidies for their healthcare too!
I don’t forget about them or anyone else. So, what about the Congressmen who get subsidies? What would removing those subsidies do to resolve the problems in health insurance? They are wealthy enough to afford full premiums. Is your point an attempt to show a way to fix HI or just some form of shaming or jealousy?
My comment was a specific reply to Agent’s line that the ONLY ones getting free care are the Medicaid people. That is not true (subsidies don’t equal zero premium and zero deductibles) but more importantly — if our elected officials are going to take away subsidies for their constituents, then their subsidies should be taken away too.
Our elected officials PAY with their public service. Got it?
No.
They GET paid for their public service.
Senators & Congressmen make ~$174,000 a year (others make more, e.g. speaker of the house & minority/majority leaders)
If you make $174,000 a year and get government subsidies for health insurance, then vote to take away health insurance subsidies for your constituents, your subsidy should also be taken away.
Do you agree with “if the senate & house votes to take away health insurance subsidies for their constituents, they should also lose their health insurance subsidy?”
That’s all I’m trying to get across. Do you agree with me?
@Rosenblatt;
Have you NEVER heard of employee BENEFITS other than monetary? If so, in what Country do you live?
Your implied opposition of the scenario of voting to ‘take away subsidies, etc.’ is a simplification meant to obfuscate the actual intended change to take away SOME subsidies of SOME current participants in Medicaid. Read the details and stop changing the wording to construe a different meaning.
PS I’d be OK with the Congress removing THEIR subsidies if their salaries were increased by a commensurate amount to pay for the subsidies. It would give them greater FREEDOM to chose their health care services.
Here we have the simple solution that evaded all of the ‘geniuses’ in Congress, except at least one;
http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/index.ssf/2017/03/rep_mo_brooks_files_bill_to_re.html
Replace Ryano with Mo Brooks as the new Speaker of the House, ASAP!
PolarBeaRepeal,
This is just another political ploy. All he wants to do is expose those who understand that you cannot just repeal the PPACA as hypocrites and try force their hands. Did you even notice that he could not even get one co-sponsor.
Simple solutions do not solve complex problems.
Of course it’s a solution. You just don’t realize it because of your political preferences.
Parsimony is preferred by smart people, complexity by lawyers, and obfuscation by politicians and people named Ron.
RRROOOAAARRRRR!!!
Mo Brooks looks a lot like our VP, don’t you think?
A little like Crazy Joe Biden, too! Both are/ were VPs? Creepy!
Speaking of becoming unraveled, look at what happened last Sunday night in NYC:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/27/schumer-goes-off-on-trump-supporter-at-nyc-restaurant-witness-says.html
LOL at Libitteral Schumer! He realizes the Republicans can’t be blocked indefinitely from putting Gorsuch on the bench, pipelines across several states, and a beautiful wall along the US-Mexico border, stopping the progressive / socialist agenda he thought would continue indefinitely.
Interesting you brought up the pipeline. It reminded me of another broken promise by President Trump, “Trump said as recently as last week that Keystone and the Dakota Access pipeline must use American steel ‘or we’re not building one.'”
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/03/keystone-pipeline-wont-use-us-steel-despite-trump-pledge.html
Who cares about specific means and details if the END RESULT is achieved? Only you and Libitterals like you.
Pretty sure The United Steelworkers care about Trump not upholding his promise to use American steel to create the wall.
Will you ever hold him accountable for his promises or just keep making excuses? Those are the only 2 options given during President Obama’s administration.
They might care if they are completely shut out. Are they?
I’ll hold him accountable, or give him kudos, AFTER things happen.
Here is your opportunity. In case you did not see most post in the comments of another article:
Here are several promises he has broken. Feel free to let me know for which one(s) are you willing to criticize President Trump:
1. “When we win on November 8th and elect a Republican Congress, we will be able to immediately repeal and replace Obamacare — have to do it. Obamacare has to be replaced and we will do it and we will do it very, very quickly.”
2. “I’m going to be working for you, I’m not going to have time to go play golf,”
3. Trump also vowed to, on his first day, “clean up the corruption” in Washington by proposing “a Constitutional Amendment to impose term limits on all members of Congress,”
4. Trump said he would on Day 1, begin working with Congress to introduce his “Middle Class Tax Relief And Simplification Act.”
5. “I would rarely leave the White House because there’s so much work to be done. I would not be a president who took vacations. I would not be a president that takes time off.”
If you need more, please let me know.
Let me add one more, “This took place while I was getting ready to sign,” he told the CPAC conference last week. “I said, ‘Who makes the pipes for the pipeline?’ Well, sir, it comes from all over the world, isn’t that wonderful? I said, ‘Nope, it comes from the United States or we’re not building one.’ American steel. If they want a pipeline in the United States, they’re going to use pipe that’s made in the United States, do we agree?”
Not one of these requires time to determine whether or not the promise was kept. If your only defense is “Trumperbole”, you are making excuses for this con man.
Ron; you can hold TrumPresident accountable. I’ve got other important things to do with my time, like doing my part to MAGA.
Oh, and how do you hold him accountable? Can you impeach him? Run against him in 2020? Donate to Joe Biden to run against him in 2020? Donate to Al Franken, Lie-a-watha, or Schmucky Schumer to run against him in 2020?
Let us know how that ‘hold him accountable’ thing works out, ‘k?
Oh, yeah; Ron; I need more of his promises for the first … 1460 days of his term in office. Four isn’t enough to adequately measure his performance over 4 years. Got any on building a wall and making Mexico pay for it (indirectly) or ending Sanctuary cities? Let me know by 11/1/2020, OK? Thanks!
PolarBeaRepeal,
Thank you for proving me right, again. You are just a sheep blindly following our president.
There’s only about 1400 days left for PresidenTrump’s agenda to be realized. Phew! He’s cutting it close by not getting EVERYTHING done in the first two months of his term in office.
Polar, do you know that Chucky Shmucky is Ron’s favorite Senator? He is what comes out of NY.
Wrong. Try again.
Ron, let’s hear you call for Chucky’s recall. Would you sign a petition if offered to you?
Upon what grounds should he be recalled? Did he violate a specific law, ethics rule or do something unconstitutional?
Or do you just want to recall every politician who does not agree with your ideology toward governance?
He should be ‘recalled’ for actions unbecoming of the US Senate minority leader. … at the restaurant when he restau-ranted at the Trump voter.
Agree?
If not, then the boorish behavior you criticize TrumPresident for should be ok with you, going forward. Right?
I agree that he should be removed right after President Trump since President Trump’s behavior came first. Fair enough?
If not, you are the hypocrite.
In addition, if you want to start removing politicians for actions unbecoming their office, there is an extremely long line that would also come before Senator Schumer.
There were two witnesses with drastically different versions of what happened in the original report and every article thereafter.
Do you have actual proof which one is correct and which is false? Actual proof – not just hearsay from one of the people involved in the “incident”?
(1)
A witness of the exchange reports that Schumer made it a public spectacle, shouting, “she voted for Trump!” The couple reportedly tried to leave the restaurant after being publicly harassed by the senator, but Schumer followed them outside, continuing his provocations on the sidewalk.
(2)
Another witness tells a different version of the story, where the Califanos actually approach Schumer’s table. The witness described the conversation as pleasant, friendly, and continued outside only because both parties left at the same time.
What were the witnesses NAMES?
One is Liar. One tells the truth. Guess why their names aren’t provided by Confused people.
@Ron; OK, send a letter to the Leader of the US Senate to initiate impeachment proceedings against TrumPresident and Schumer. Let us know how that works out for ya’.
PolarBeaRepeal,
Agent is the one calling for the recall, not me. Direct your posts appropriately in the future.
@Ron; OK, I will if you RECALL your call for a similar recall, as you did above……..
Ron says:
Like or Dislike:
Thumb up 0
Thumb down 0
I agree that he should be removed right after President Trump since President Trump’s behavior came first. Fair enough?
If not, you are the hypocrite……
I asked you to initiate the recall you suggested above. I won’t ask Agent to do anything you won’t do… Either you both, individually, ask for a recall of both Trump and Schumer… or no one at all.
Ready, steady, …. GO! Or not.
@Agent; you and Ron have to decide on a recall strategy; i.e. which of you two asks for a recall of both Trump and Schumer. Please coordinate this with Ron, ASAP…
Again, I did not initiate any attempt at a recall. If you interpreted my post incorrectly, that is your fault.
All I said was that President Trump is first. If Agent has no interest in seeing him be removed, then I cannot justify recalling Senator Schumer.
Got it?
For someone who claims to be ‘independent’ and impartial, Ron has vociferous opinions on TrumPresident and Republicans. He may be the next in line to “Schumer” * on an diner at an adjacent table in a restaurant.
* To understand the use of the verb “Schumer” above, read the story about Schmucky’s behavior at a NYC restaurant last weekend.
Interesting that you guys conveniently ignore my criticisms of President Obama, Rep. Pelosi, Frmr Sen. Reid, Hillary Clinton, and the PPACA. In addition, you also fail to acknowledge when I have praised President Trump.
Also, where have I ever praised Sen. Schumer?
I’ll bet you praised Schmucky at home last night, after hearing about his ‘restau-rant’ against a TrumPresident voter.
You would have lost that bet…BIGLY!!
Would you take payment of my wager debt in fresh fish?
PS please re-post 500 of your prior criticisms of the politicians you listed. And keep count while you are doing so. Ok? Thanks!
500? I haven’t even criticized Republicans that much.
No, no, no! I’m referring to your 3/28/17 post at 12:37 pm wherein you mention criticizing Obama, PEE_LOW_SEE_IT_AFTER_WE_PASS_IT, Reid, Clinton, and ACA.
Please post 500 such critical posts.
Ready, steady,… GO!
I know to which post you were referring. I am trying to figure out where the number 500 came from.
If you are going to require me to provide an unrealistic way to prove my point, you are the troll.
Any intelligent person with a reading comprehension level above the 3rd grade who has been following IJ comments, would not need me to prove my criticisms of the Democrats I listed.
OK, I’ll settle for 250 such posts. Ready, steady, … GO!
Thank you for admitting that your reading comprehension is below that of a third grader, troll.
Chucky Shmucky is as loony as Pelosi Galore. He should be asked to step down. He is a total embarrassment for the Democratic Party. Even Ron might agree.
Pfft! You’re applying Conservative principles to a liberals’ behavior. It’ll never happen.
I notice many comments suggesting the free market approach is the best for reforming health care. I happened to be reading the story about Citizens Property Insurance company, a non-profit established by the state of Florida to help homeowners unable to find insurance in the free marketplace, and wondered how the health care free market proponents feel about a government getting involved in any insurance products. What would the approach of free market proponents be to something like Citizens?
Just, I believe we just tried the mandated government sponsored program for 7+ years. Government programs are a huge liability on the citizens (Pun intended). How about another monstrocity, NFIP? How successful has that been in the long run?