Would Republicans Support Ending Medicare? (companies, dollar, program, state)

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by Mircea

You could not be more mistaken than you usually are.

The most you could whine about here like a small child
Foreseeing....

Mircea

Now I remember you. You're that poster that called Lincoln a bastard, wants to abort the homeless and writes like some HotAir poster.

Eyerolling...

[Delahanty]

Originally Posted by Goodnight

Medicare, Medicaid no problem, they just drew the line at ACA you have to wonder why they didn't take issue with the Medicare Prescription Program passed in 2003. Good question.

Anyone who thinks that's a good question, then proceeds to put Medicaid on par with Medicare has a strudel in his noodle.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Seacove

For the last six years, we have heard Republicans say government should not be involved in health care.

Can you post an image of your diploma from the Josef Göbbels School of Trolling, Propaganda & Disinformation? I've never seen one. I was just curious what they might look like. Are the school's colors black, red and white?

Let's start simple: When you say "healthcare," what exactly do you mean?

Do you mean medical care only? Do you mean health plan coverage? Or do you mean combined medical care and health plan coverage?

It's not rocket science. Just answer the question and we'll move on.

Originally Posted by Seacove

VA is government health care. We should probably look at getting rid of that as well.

Do you also intend to get rid of the Worker's Compensation Programs in all 50 States, plus the federal government?

Can you present a coherent reason why military members should be denied Worker's Compensation?

State and federal government Worker's Compensation Programs pay for the costs of all medical care for injuries sustained on-the-job. The VA Hospital system does exactly the same thing.

Why are you opposed to that?

A civilian injured in a helicopter crash gets Worker's Compensation. I get injured in a helicopter accident with bone chips at C4/C5 and what do I get?

Let me guess....I had it coming to me, right? I just fly in them, I don't know what makes them go. Like it's my fault we're on fire and flames are shooting out of the engine and Skydrol is squirting everywhere.

Did it ever read the 17-volume tome published by the US Army Medical Command after the Vietnam War?

Are you aware it includes data and studies from medics in the field to battalion aid stations to military hospitals to VA hospitals? Do you understand that the reason emergency rooms in the US are now categorized as Level I, Level II and Level III Trauma Centers is due to the information published in that set of works? Let's take traumatic amputations as an example. Are you aware that the treatment of traumatic amputations on the battlefield, in hospital and later in the VA system provided data that benefited civilians in the treatment of traumatic amputations, including post-recovery such as physical and occupational therapy and rehabilitation?

Do you not see an advantage to having a centralized method of collecting data and information about certain types of injuries sustained during military service, their care, treatment and rehabilitation?

The information the VA has obtained from veterans with PTSD such as myself, has helped these kids coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan.

Why would you not want them to be helped?

Originally Posted by Seacove

I'm with you. I want my money back too. I've been paying the maximum to Medicare for many years. But now, I agree, government health care is evil.

That's a fallacy...

Equivocation
Equivocation is the illegitimate switching of the meaning of a term during the reasoning.

Medicare does not provide medical care. It only pays for medical care. You might want to learn the difference.

The uneducated and uninformed don't understand that lobbying by the American Hospital Association, plus laws, regulations and policy decisions by the States and federal government disenfranchised Millions of Americans prohibiting them from accessing health plan coverage.

If your government had not made so many mistakes and bad decisions, then those Millions of Americans would never have become disenfranchised, and there would never have been a need for Medicare.

"Introduced by various House and Senate sponsors and subject to extensive hearings, the basic framework of part A began to reflect accommodations between the sponsors, the Administration and the American Hospital Association (AHA).

It ranged all the way from principles of institutional reimbursement, which has been pretty thoroughly already worked out in a general way for their own purposes between Blue Cross and the Hospital Association over a period of several years

The American Hospital Association has already nominated the Blue Cross organization for its membership, although some member hospitals will undoubtedly elect out of this arrangement. We have proceeded very far in the development of working arrangements with Blue Cross, although no formal approval as a fiscal intermediary has yet been given them."

Source: Report to Social Security Administration Staff on the Implementation of the Social Security Amendments of 1965, Robert M. Ball Commissioner, November 15, 1965

Originally Posted by Seacove

Republicans have demonized government health care for the past six years.

Again, what exactly do you mean when you say "health care?"

Originally Posted by Seacove

If that's what they really believe, then it should be consistent and Medicare should end right along with ACA. But I do not believe for one second that Republicans are less corrupt.

That's an incredible display of extraordinary ignorance.

Intelligent educated people understand that healthcare and the cost of healthcare consists of two components:

1] medical care/treatment and the cost of that medical care; and
2] health plan coverage and the cost of health plan coverage (which propagandists refer to as "health insurance")

Informed intelligent people also understand that it is the cost of medical care that determines/influences the cost of health plan coverage. Naturally, then, as every intelligent person knows, the only way to reduce the cost of health plan coverage is to reduce the cost of medical care.

The ACA does absolutely nothing to reduce the cost of medical care. In fact, the ACA does just the opposite: it increase the cost of medical care.

Note that reducing the cost of medical care, means that Medicare funds are used more efficiently and effectively.



Uninformed people are not aware that healthcare -- both medical care and health plan coverage -- are intra-State commerce.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly so stated, including its most recent decision on the ACA in Sebelius.

Intelligent educated people are keenly aware that since healthcare is intra-State commerce, that government has no power or authority to regulate it.

If the White House and Congress have no power, then who does?

Intelligent people know that Governors and State Legislatures have all the power.

Which brings us to "enabling laws."

Oh, that's right, you have no idea what those are.

Educated informed people know that to avoid regulation, skirt the laws and gain competitive advantages, the American Hospital Association started lobbying State legislatures for "enabling laws," to avoid being regulated by State insurance commissions, and give the American Medical Association an unfair advantage over any future competitors in health insurance:

NY Laws 1934, c. 595, adding Article 14, §§452-461, to the New York Insurance Law. The 1939 legislature adopted a new codification of the Insurance Law, effective June 15, 1939, in which Article DC-C, §§250-259, was substituted for Article 14, broadened to include non-profit medical indemnity
corporations, and amended in other respects.

Alabama: Acts 1935, act no. 544, amended. Acts 1936 (Ext. Scss.) act no.169, Acts, 1939;

California: Stat. 1935, c 386, amended, Stat. 1937, c. 881, Stat. 1939, A. B. 1712;

Illinois:Rev. Stat. (1937) §§551-562;

Mississippi: Laws 1936, c 177;

Georgia: Laws 1937, no. 379, p. 690;

Maryland: Laws 1937, c. 224;

Massachusetts: Annotated Laws (1938 Supp.) c 176A;

Pennsylvania: Stat. Ann. (Purdon, 1938) tit. 15, a 49A, §§2851-1301—2851-1309;

Kentucky: Acts 1938, c. 23;

New Jersey: Laws 1938, c. 366;

Connecticut: Laws 1939, S. B. 51;

District of Columbia: S. B. 497, 76th Cong. 1st Scss.(1939);

Iowa: Laws 1939, c. 222;

Maine: Laws 1939, c. 149;

Michigan: Laws 1939, H. B. 145;

New Hampshire: Laws 1939, H. B. 232;

New Mexico: Laws 1939, c. 66;

Ohio: Laws- 1939, S. B. 181;

Rhode Island: Laws 1939, c. 719;

South Carolina: Acts 1939, H. B. 845;

Texas: Laws 1939, Subst. H. B. 191;

Vermont: Laws 1939;

Wisconsin: Laws 1939, S. B. 288.

Note: The Iowa, Michigan, and Wisconsin acts were passed in 1939 after bills had been defeated in 1937.

These "enabling laws" or "enabling legislation" are prima facie evidence of the total absence of a Free Market.

As informed people know, the American Hospital Association formed a committee in 1933, which then began dictating to its member-hospitals the terms of service and prices of the pre-paid hospitalization plans that hospitals offered ---- since insurance companies did not offer them.

"...the opportunities for fraud [in health insurance] upset all statistical calculations ... Health and sickness are vague terms open to endless construction. Death is clearly defined, but to say what shall constitute such loss of health as will justify insurance compensation is no easy task."

Source: Insurance Monitor July 1919, vol. 67(7), page 38

That committee is proof of Soviet-style Command Market Economics.

"But the hospitals were often privately owned."

But, of course! Educated people know that Capitalism is a Property Theory, and in no way, shape or form implies Free Market Economics.

Capitalism and Command Market Economics are not mutually exclusive, as evidenced by the fact that your medical system has been exactly that since 1933.

Those "enabling laws" have since been amended and expanded.

"Health insurance" companies would love nothing more than to offer you exclusively Emergency Room only coverage. A young single person could purchase $50,000 to $1 Million worth of ER coverage. Suppose they had $250,000 in coverage, then if they went to the ER, they'd be covered up to $250,000.
The American Hospital Association has lobbied State legislatures to prohibit "health insurance" companies from doing that. I'm guessing "Community Rating Scheme" isn't part of your vocabulary.

The whole point is Congress has no constitutional authority to do anything.

What needs to be done is the implementation of Free Market reforms, but that can only occur at the State level executed by governors and State legislatures.

Each State must repeal and rescind all of the enabling laws that prohibit Free Market health plan coverage, and simultaneously, repeal all of the laws excluding non-profits from anti-trust actions, so that Free Market reforms can take place in the system of medical care.

Are $55,000 appendectomies and $117,000 assistant surgeon fees affordable?

Because the ACA did nothing do stop those.....in fact, it enables and encourages it.

The only thing that will stop hospitals from colluding, price-fixing, over-charging, over-billing and price-gouging is Free Markets reforms.

I'm not a Republican, but seeing how Free Market reforms will drive down the cost of medical care making it affordable for Americans, and the lower costs of medical care will in turn drive down the cost of health plan coverage making it affordable for Americans, and the elimination of the laws that bar access to health plan coverage, then I'm guessing Republicans would get rid of Medicare at that point, since there would no longer be a need for it.

See if you can get up to speed....

Mircea

[Seacove]

While

Originally Posted by Mircea

Let's start simple: When you say "healthcare," what exactly do you mean?

See if you can get up to speed....

Mircea

TLDR.

When I say government health care/health care coverage, and both terms have been used on this board (insert really long definitions of each) I mean specifically health care coverage. It is the Republican Party that has said the government fails at everything and most specifically health care (coverage). (Insert some historical reference involving communism).

ACA pays for health care coverage like Medicare pays for health care coverage. I find it amusing that you think Medicare is necessary because people need it (because they were disenfranchised) but those under 65 don't need it (because they're not?). Others might disagree considering millions lacked/lack coverage due costs, pre-existing conditions, maximums, some disclaimer on page 3 when they got sick, etc.

You can justify Medicare by saying those funds reduce costs but Medicare costs as much as three times the amount of the contributions. Time to end it.

You say, "Free Market Reforms!" Fine, let's put Medicare into the free market along with Medicare Part D, VA, TriCare and every other bit of government funded health care coverage. If government involvement in healthcare is bad, it should be dealt with equally.

You want states rights? That's fine too as long as there's a waiting period when people move to a (my) state before they are eligible so people can't game other state's coverage.

Good luck with your PTSD.

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by Seacove

Well since standing for nothing wins over standing for something, Democrats can just oppose everything Republicans do and then accuse them of accomplishing nothing. It's so easy to do that, I can see why Republicans played it. And for those that like crippled government, and many do, it definitely works for them. If both sides are constantly opposing and attacking the other side, nothing happens ever.

Isn't that what Dem's have been doing since the House was lost in 2010?

Reid has intentionally crippled government to protect Obama from actually having to sign anything.

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by steven_h

Isn't that what Dem's have been doing since the House was lost in 2010?

Reid has intentionally crippled government to protect Obama from actually having to sign anything.

Mitch McConnell may be the greatest strategist in contemporary politics - Vox

To prevent Obama from becoming the hero who fixed Washington, McConnell decided to break it. And it worked. Six years into the affair, we now take it for granted that nothing will pass on a bipartisan basis, no appointment will go through smoothly, and everything the administration tries to get done will take the form of a controversial use of executive power.

It's been ugly. But in most voters' mind, the ugliness has attached to Obama and, by extension, Democrats. It was a very counterintuitive strategy, but it was well-grounded in the best political science available. And it worked.

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by Seacove

You say, "Free Market Reforms!" Fine, let's put Medicare into the free market along with Medicare Part D, VA, TriCare and every other bit of government funded health care coverage. If government involvement in healthcare is bad, it should be dealt with equally.

You want states rights? That's fine too as long as there's a waiting period when people move to a (my) state before they are eligible so people can't game other state's coverage.

Good luck with your PTSD.

AMEN! All the bolded, and make insurance transportable! That would bring healthcare costs down like a bolder in Spring!!!

I love it! Another person who believes they know more than a learned professional. You do know she (Mircea) has degree in finance... right?

[Seacove]

Originally Posted by steven_h

AMEN! All the bolded, and make insurance transportable! That would bring healthcare costs down like a bolder in Spring!!!

I love it! Another person who believes they know more than a learned professional. You do know she (Mircea) has degree in finance... right?

I know it's very important to her that she convince people she does. I don't know that it's true at all.

But I assume you support abolishing Medicare (as we know it) along with VA, ACA, TriCare and all over public health care coverage programs. Correct? Medicare gone, yes?

I'm fine about making it a program by state. For those states that don't want health care coverage, good. Just don't come to my state when you get sick. I want a long wait period, like five years. That should be long enough that they just go back to their state.

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by totsuka

We are stuck with it but should try and get the costs down. The huge amount of fraud has never been seriously addressed or fixed and that needs to be taken care of pretty quickly.

Watch out... liberals don't care about fraud because "it's such a small percentage"

That's the way they do math. They never add everything up, preferring to be myopic in their tunnel vision.

What's a billion here, and 200 billion there? It's all small change in the scheme of things, right?


GWBs $6T was tyrannical and unpatriotic... while Obama's $8T (and climbing) is, well... GWB's fault!

It sounded as stupid when I wrote it, as when they claim it!

[steven_h]

Originally Posted by Seacove

I know it's very important to her that she convince people she does. I don't know that it's true at all.

But I assume you support abolishing Medicare (as we know it) along with VA, ACA, TriCare and all over public health care coverage programs. Correct? Medicare gone, yes?

I'm fine about making it a program by state. For those states that don't want health care coverage, good. Just don't come to my state when you get sick. I want a long wait period, like five years. That should be long enough that they just go back to their state.

You know what they say about assuming things right?

YOU have no idea what I wish, obviously.

I am the primary care giver for a 98 year old Grandmother. If she didn't have Medicare she wouldn't be able to survive.

So, in your fairy world I want my Grandmother to die, I suppose.

Originally Posted by Seacove

I'm fine about making it a program by state. For those states that don't want health care coverage, good. Just don't come to my state when you get sick. I want a long wait period, like five years. That should be long enough that they just go back to their state.

Who is the insensitive dolt in this conversation? Tolerant much? To reduce Americans to YOUR STATE and MY STATE? WTF is wrong with you?





.






.






Please come back to the adult table in a few years sweety