Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by mia767ca 4 years, 8 months ago
    if Ayn Rand could she would roll over in her grave...govt has no business in health care...it is business between to private individuals...period.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 4 years, 8 months ago
    Individually Rand Paul's proposals are in the "mainstream" of public discussion. I think he would get more attention if he came out with a few more "radical" fixes, such as: (1) End state licensing of doctors and medical schools, (2) allow doctors and patients to enter into contracts limiting doctors' malpractice liability, and (3) repeal "certificate of need" requirements and other anti-competitive restrictions on providing new hospitals and medical equipment.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 4 years, 8 months ago
      "Individually Rand Paul's proposals are in the "mainstream" of public discussion."
      If it's already mainstream, why does it need radical elements to get more attention?
      I don't think it really is mainstream. I'd like to know how to get it there.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ CBJ 4 years, 8 months ago
        By "mainstream" I mean they are at least known about and being considered, not that they are accepted by the majority. More radical (meaning fundamental) solutions are more likely to gain attention because they are novel, people may not have thought about them before, and also because they are more likely to spark debate and focus attention on the person that introduces them. Example: How many presidential candidates suggested "build a wall" as a fix for our immigration problems? Was this proposal "mainstream" or "radical"? How did it work out for that candidate?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by CircuitGuy 4 years, 8 months ago
          "Was [building a wall along the US borders] "mainstream" or "radical"? "
          I would say very mainstream since it was already happening for decades and illegal immigration by sneaking over the border was declining. By carrying on about it without specifics, though, it was a symbol for we're going to start taking our immigration laws seriously (which I think is good) and a way to give the low-lives false hope that it was a real policy change that would solve their problems (which I think is bad).

          "More radical (meaning fundamental) solutions are more likely to gain attention because they are novel"
          Selling it will be politicians' sausage-making work. I would be thrilled if they can pull it off.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 4 years, 8 months ago
    Rand Paul's health plan is being ignored because a) it is coming from Rand Paul instead of Paul Ryan; b) Donald Trump wanted to take out Rand Paul early on because both were going after the nontraditional Republican vote; c) Rand is a senator, not a House member (and bills are supposed to be introduced in the House); d) all of the above.

    ANSWER: D
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 4 years, 8 months ago
    Rand Paul wants a total repeal, then a debate on replacement and oh by the way, here is how simple that could be------4 damn pages!!! No one in government (except Paul) would do such a rational thing. They are also cowards that do not believe in the free market that they give lip service to. Trump should have one of his Industry Barons meetings with health care executives and tell them he is getting out of the market and turning it over to them and if they don't pick up the ball or try short-term, unsustainable profit grabs he will mulch them.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 4 years, 8 months ago
    It or the Cato plan, they are not that far apart. But, to answer the question, because power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely --- the establishment does not want to give power.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 4 years, 8 months ago
    Trump has the opportunity to prove he is a leader by supporting all the components of Rand Paul's plan.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 4 years, 8 months ago
      I agree. The Paul Ryan plan is just Obamacare V2, patches to Obamas takeover of medical care. I hope he will do it. The problem is that a majority of congressmen is needed, and I think thats 60 in the senate. Democrats will never vote for Rand Paul's plan.

      In the meantime, let Obamacare just fail.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by fosterj717 4 years, 8 months ago
        Perhaps it might be about time that Trump shows the same disregard for Congress that Obama had! If the D's continue to obstruct and obfuscate, then let Trump treat them to the same disrespect the Obama showed. Perhaps with the next election, we should start by going after all of the spineless skunks by primarying them all (both R's and D's)! It is time that the Establishments start running scared.....
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 4 years, 8 months ago
    It's like when they kidnapped Galt and said we trust your leadership completely. Whatever you say, we'll do. He said, fine do nothing.
    No, no, they said, tell us what to do within the framework of you and politically connected people managing things, so we can get a cut and special favors.

    I think the situation is somewhat similar when they refused Galt's suggestion. All of these people have careers and staffs managing complicated proposals. They have an incentive to discount a simple solution, a solution that lets people solve their own problems.

    I think PPACA was a mixed bag, maybe 50% of what I believed in. Rand Paul's suggestion is revolutionary, like 95% of what I would enact if I were in charge of it. It hands people $400 per month, which is close to what PPACA does, but then does its best to get out of the way.

    If Republicans tried for something like this and got something even close, I'd be Republican. They won't though. Gov't cost, intrusiveness, and borrowing will increase. And they'll pander to low-lives who want to feel less pathetic by making people who are different feel uncomfortable.

    I want Rand Paul's 4-Page Plan!!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Abaco 4 years, 8 months ago
      Yes, I remember that now that you mention that. Great point. Some leadership is more welcome than others. Want to restrict, tax and fine? You're in! Want to get out of the way? What does that mean?...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 4 years, 8 months ago
        "What does that mean?"
        Once you create an agency or give the gov't a power, even if it's supposedly for a narrow particular problem, it's very hard to undo. My theory on why is the person who's getting a paycheck from it has a strong incentive to lobby to keep it, while the millions paying one cent don't have an incentive to lobby to get their cent back. If you say you want to cut across the board, people still have the incentive to keep it going for a few areas dear to them and their constituents: keeping a base open, Medicaid for the elderly, anything for the children, fighting evil-doers, and so on. Cutting gov't comes off an a justification for doing what benefits particular politicians. So the effort fails.

        AS hit you over the head with in, in what for me was dark comedy with the politicians struggling to say without saying it aloud, "no, no, give us a plan that we and our cronies can benefit from."

        I suspect that influences healthcare legislation. Health insurance companies have huge buildings full of employees doing a current system. Any plan that shakes up what those people are doing and who's doing it faces resistance. Politicians have to be mindful of their lobbyists concerns. The politicians often don't have a philosophical or economic mind. Their mind is remembering names and helping make connections. They have to hire wonks for the nuts and bolts.

        I see this as part of a broader problem of gov't not having limits that it must obey regardless of what voters, politicians, and lobbyists may want. I see blaming it on "moochers" as simplistic. We have a system that's dependent on people always doing the right thing, even if it's an unpleasant decisions, and when they do the wrong thing it's hard to undo. Such a system can't work. I do not know exactly how to fix it, how to give the Constitution teeth.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Susanne 4 years, 8 months ago
    My question is this - and it's really a simple one:

    WHY do they call it a "health care plan" when it's really a Health Insurance Company subsidy program? It has less to do with taking care of people and providing them health CARE (which is not the same as "health coverage', a convenient insurance industry mind training wordswap) than guaranteeing a big fat permanent and unearned payola to a few big companies.

    Damn... if THAT'S supposed to be a "conservative value", then by gum, I want to start a company like that, where I'm the biggest fat recipient in front of the Government Payola line getting that guaranteed dole from the government..

    Sure beats having doctors charge normal fees (not inflated payola-based ones) to make sure they all suckle off the fattened teat of the dotgov... to where we could PAY for our health care, not have Holy Mommy Insurance keep us cuddly and warm...

    So yeah... if you believe INSURANCE SUBSIDY is the same as Value Earned - then you really are your brother's keeper. And like it that way.

    /rant...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 4 years, 8 months ago
      I'd say you have a pretty good handle on the scam that we are being subjected to! It is really little more than a shell game for the "Rubes" (who are legion).

      PT Barnum said that there is one born every minute! I'd say his estimate was way too conservative! Our all but defunct educational system along with the rest of our Hegelian based society is turning out Rubes by the millions.........And unfortunately, they all vote!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 8 months ago
      Everyone gets CARE., MY wife, RN, working in an ER in Bakersfield THAT would handle up to 280!! intakes in a 12-hour shift, No one would be turned away.

      IT is HEALTH INSURANCE, not HEALTH CARE.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by TheRealBill 4 years, 8 months ago
    Regarding item #2 in the article (unlimited HSA). I'd prefer to see "universal savings account" instead. Pigeonholing money for one and only one purpose is not only rather inelegant it is unwise from an economic perspective.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 8 months ago
      I agree inelegant but with 100% being deductible, I think the economics will work out
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by TheRealBill 4 years, 8 months ago
        Sorry, I meant on a personal economics level. By setting money aside I can only use for medical, I limit the money I can se aside for there types of emergencies. I see that as a disincentive - especially for the young and healthy. Generally, if we accept the notion of tax favoring for saving, a large "universal" account where you move retirement, medical, and education (to name but three) into one is far more incentivizing.

        Still, it would be better than what we have now (as someone who personally chooses the HSA every chance he has had).
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 4 years, 8 months ago
    What do you mean, why? Don't you know that it
    is a sacred obligation, and in the Constitution, that
    every health-care bill has to be at least 2,000
    pages long?! Only 4 pages?! Isn't that an insult to the American people?! Why then, maybe Congressmen could actually read the bill and understand what was in it before passing it! We can't have that, can we?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tohar1 4 years, 8 months ago
    Four Pages vs. 2500 in the current RINOcare proposal. Let me guess which one them has more special interests in mind. I guess it'll be another Nancy Pelosi and her "Pass It To See What's In It" situation. Bloated bureaucracy at its finest!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 4 years, 8 months ago
    Much of Rand Paul's plan was in Trump's campaign platform, and Trump even went further in the direction of freedom on a couple of issues. If Trump would simply push Congress to enact the steps outlined in his platform, it would go a long way toward undoing the damage that Obamacare has caused.

    Relevant Trump platform sections below:

    "5. Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure

    --and--

    "7. Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers."

    https://trumpcare.org/

    (The above statements are not 100% consistent with the free market philosophy, but the proposed policies would constitute a major move in that direction.)
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 4 years, 8 months ago
      RE:
      "5. Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure."

      You CAN shop around.

      My wife needed a hiatal hernia surgery. I called her favorite surgeon (she's worked with him, she's an RN), was told $1800. Called the local hospital, was told no way to determine the final cost but between $10,000 and $20,000. Called two surgical centers, both, total cost, barely $5000,
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by fosterj717 4 years, 8 months ago
    Simple! The Establishment Republicans don't want to give anything to real Conservatives and/or Libertarians. Acknowledging that the Paul bill answers questions and makes hard decisions inescapable, it us anathema to the "Go along to get along" gang just wanting to sit back and enjoy their perks, become millionaires and go to really cool cocktail parties!

    These folks have absolutely no interest in making the hard decisions that must be made if we, as a Republic are to survive. It is also because they fear someone might not like the fact that they are actually making real decisions that will fix this mess we are careening towards! These clowns want to spend the rest of their lives living on the government taxpayers dime but they don't want to do what we are paying them to do. To the contrary, they will do anything to keep from rocking the boat and upsetting their Beltway Bandit "gravy train".

    So much for the pretense of representing the people! So much for the citizen politician going to DC to make a difference and then returning to private life. Once so many of them get down there, they soon see themselves as the privileged ruling class that means that they can now rule (forever!), just by playing the game......That is the reason that the clowns like Pelosi, Ryan, McConnell, Graham, McCain, Reid and the rest of the "professions" do not allow the Freedom Caucus any voice (or respect)! For what its worth!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rbunce 4 years, 8 months ago
    Have to let the process play out, the "compromise plan" must fail first, then the Rs have a decision to make... principles or re-election.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ CBJ 4 years, 8 months ago
    As it stands now, all the Democrats are likely to vote against the "official" Republican plan, and probably there will be enough Republicans voting "no" to defeat it. If this happens, the real negotiating will begin, and other proposals (hopefully including Rand Paul's) will be in play.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by fosterj717 4 years, 8 months ago
      Otherwise, which version of Obama-Care lite will be decided upon? A real fix is no longer in the cards. It is a shell game and the "oligarchs" of the Beltway have it already figured out. Obama-Care stays, a real fix is dealt a deathblow by the Republican Establishment. There will be no meaningful negotiations! Only the Democrat/Pelosi monstrosity will survive, until that is the only answer remaining to the Obama-Care intentional failing mess is the "Single Payer" stupidity that the D's wanted in the first place. The Obam Poison Pill is working exactly as planned because they knew the R's did not have the heart for a real fight or to make real decisions! Only a handful get it and they won't (barring a miracle) get their day in the sun!
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo