Maybe that would work, the market would have to adapt to it.

"Maybe that is what all employers should provide and you pay the smaller stuff,"
If it's employer-linked, it ought to be structured so it doesn't discourage people from changing jobs, going from a job to owning a business and vice versa, and doesn't make employers worry about paying for potential employees health problems. I think it should be separated from employment. It's only linked because during WWII employers offered it to get around gov't wage controls. The link between employers and medical purchases is as problematic as it would be if employers had to help employees buy housing, transportation, or food.

It was a difficult position for people as the system had reached a monumental peak of corruption in giving us a choice between an established criminal or a "want to be". I saw an article last night on a new movement trying to create a "centrist Party" that has no affiliation but would seek to get a few senators in who would be neutral parties to try to control the 2 zealot parties from doing their crazy crap.

Both Trump and Ryan have proven why I didn't vote for one and wouldn't have voted for the other.

That is the conumdrum and it is a moral and ethical, as well as social issue. There are probably many options, but I would think a catastrophic health plan that is government funded, is about the only way out, and everything else is on your dime. Maybe that is what all employers should provide and you pay the smaller stuff, but you always have the issue of the poor and unemployed etc. It is a very complicated issue and NOT one our incompetent stooges in DC (both parties) are even remotely fit to take on.

They are like chameleons blending all the crap into a verbal soufflé.
I wondered if the people could not afford the shoes filling the warehouses because there was noooooo prosperity in the Soviet Union, he claims it was the fashion design.

" CEO should not be a get rich scheme for CEOs in health care, despite being a "for profit" business, it is hinged on something people do not have a choice in getting."
Yes. I think the only determiner of whether you get rich should be if you provide value to people and then invest/save it wisely instead of blowing it.

The thing about not having a choice is more complicated than it sounds. With healthcare, our society appears to be unwilling to let someone die/suffer because they cannot afford a proven treatment. So responsible people not looking for a handout should build up wealth and/or buy insurance to pay for an expensive injury or illness. You can't insure against them once they happen, so everyone who doesn't have the wealth to self-insure should buy insurance before they're sick. If they don't, though, then we have a problem. Typically other people get roped into paying anyway. So why not admit it aloud, I think, and just make people buy the insurance rather than getting a free ride and roping others into paying.

The answer why not is when gov't gets involved it gets very messy. If we get gov't mostly out with a four-page plan that hands money to the poor as Rand Paul's plan does, most people will rise to the occasion. People who (unlike me) don't like even the modest handouts to the poor can debate them at a future date. They're much easier to change than a big "system" like PPACA.

Ha! Sounds like he would fit right in with Ryan, maybe be his spokesman....I had flashbacks to last week and Healthcare....

Ha, yes, I believe he was a regular on Ted Koppel's "Nightline" back in the 80's. Roll eyes and barf.

BOHICA! Ouch!

Bend Over, Here It Comes Again. As in when a politician starts promising even more free stuff, the working folks think BOHICA.

Hard to tell when the only Trump can do is what Executive Orders allow, as his gang is certainly screwing him daily, and looking all sheepish afterwards...

The problem is he represents the Establishment Republicrats, who are just the polar opposit brothers of the Dumbocraps, leading us to the ultimate conclusion no matter which of the 2 parties are in power, the results are doomed to be the same: Skewed laws to their special interests and contributors, and NO concern for the public opinion or well being. Therefore, the system and them must go. I keep going back to the Convention of States as the only remote possibility to break their grip on power.

No argument here....

The biggest problem is that U.S. health care is too expensive, and the cure is radical deregulation and introduction of competition in all health-related goods and services, not just insurance. This includes ending state and federal licensing of medical schools, hospitals, doctors, pharmacists; removing most of the power of the Food and Drug Administration; and enabling doctors and patients to freely contract on issues such as malpractice limits. Reallocating existing costs and benefits is a zero-sum game that plays into the hands of the Democrats, since they will never run out of “victims” to parade throughout the mainstream media. If the Republican Party is serious about fundamentally reforming health care, now is the time to show it.

https://youtu.be/is7N-WMibME

Right-o CG!

Screw Ryan. He had his chance. I'm giving up on getting rid of this concrete block around our necks.

Oh yes, Vlad Posner. The way things are going, I thought you might have resurrected Vlad The Impaler also known as son of the Dragon, or as we know him; Dracula . Historians seem to indicate he could be quite a charmer just before he shoved a sharpened pole up your butt.

Get the government out of the healthcare (insurance) business anyway. Free enterprise is the only thing that can eventually start to bring it back into affordability.

A funny thing happens in my mind when I hear Paul Ryan speak. I get a flash back to that old Soviet mouthpiece Vladimir Posner who smilingly tells us something while knowing full well "that ain't it" and there's really a different game afoot. I get an even worse feeling in my gut because I'm thinking that about a Republican. Here, in the Gulch, I'm supposed to be rational even in my attempts at humor/satire, but this is a genuine feeling we're screwed - again.

Oh, does any of the more seasoned in the Gulch remember ol' Vlad besides me?

He "voted against him before he voted for him".

I don't think anyone who supports Trump can continue to use RINO as a pejorative.
Seems part and parcel for the new day, don't you think?

Ryan opposes Trump even when it appears he's with Trump.

I do not trust snake in the grass RINO Paul Ryan any more than a poll put out by the (C)ommunist (B)roadcasting (S)ystem.
Rand Paul I do trust.
https://www.paul.senate.gov/imo/media...

I have a lot of respect for Rand Paul, he has never appeared to be a "my party only" guy, his proposals have always been seemingly based on facts, and consider the best case deals that can be made in a bad situation. His problem has always been he never seems to want to throw in the sink, kitchen and RV for the Republicrat special interests, like they did with their last attempt, where they removed the limits on Health Insurance CEOs and removed the rules that made them tax excessive compensation. CEO should not be a get rich scheme for CEOs in health care, despite being a "for profit" business, it is hinged on something people do not have a choice in getting.