A couple questions for those against the health care bill..

Dixie said:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/123149/cost-is-foremost-healthcare-issue-for-americans.aspx


Gallup... are they considered reputable and reliable enough for you Libtards these days?

According to a Sept. 11-13 USA Today/Gallup poll, the 85% of Americans with health insurance coverage are broadly satisfied with the quality of medical care they receive and with their healthcare costs. At 79%, satisfaction with costs among Medicare/Medicaid recipients is particularly high.
Click to expand...

Again where does it say 85% are against the Health Care Bill?
 
so whats up with this?
van001.jpg
 
I dont know if it gives this type of flexability. I am for higher deductables to a point, once you go past a point, its kinda like having no insurance at all, which is the problem. Too many dont have insurance. What are your other issues?
 
Jarod said:
I dont know if it gives this type of flexability. I am for higher deductables to a point, once you go past a point, its kinda like having no insurance at all, which is the problem. Too many dont have insurance. What are your other issues?
Click to expand...

dude, should I get a spoon and feed it to you as well?.......they are in the thread, stop trying to come up with excuses.....
 
SmarterThanYou said:
these have been asked and answered. Unfortunately, SM parrots the old 'tort reform' canard. Tort reform will do nothing to lower health costs, despite his willingness to demand that it does.
Click to expand...

Alone it does not. Combined with other reforms it does help. Here is how: It lowers malpractice insurance to doctors which creates an atmosphere that will attract doctors to open up shop; more dcotors more competition better for the consumer. Combine it with interstate competition amongst health insurance providers and you will see the kind of free market pricing that can be passed onto consumers.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Alone it does not. Combined with other reforms it does help. Here is how: It lowers malpractice insurance to doctors which creates an atmosphere that will attract doctors to open up shop; more dcotors more competition better for the consumer. Combine it with interstate competition amongst health insurance providers and you will see the kind of free market pricing that can be passed onto consumers.
Click to expand...

you're missing the entire problem and that is the insurance companies. you're removing the risk of their investment. you're guaranteeing them a profit instead of using regular free market capitalism.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
you're missing the entire problem and that is the insurance companies. you're removing the risk of their investment. you're guaranteeing them a profit instead of using regular free market capitalism.
Click to expand...

Allowing insurance companies to gouge doctors with pricing is certainly unfair. We lost about 1/3 of our obgyn's due to the cost of malpractice insurance for that field. This hurts consumers. With competition for both insurance companies, lawyers, pharma companies, and doctors being made more fair you create the best kind of free market. I am not against regulating their, the insurance compaines, behavior to keep them honest, I also want to regulate trial lawyers as well. Both entities are profit driven by self serving motives and need a check.

Tort reform does not mean an inability to make a righteous claim of malpractice.
 
Ice Dancer said:
Allowing insurance companies to gouge doctors with pricing is certainly unfair.
Click to expand...
I cannot disagree with you here.
Ice Dancer said:
We lost about 1/3 of our obgyn's due to the cost of malpractice insurance for that field. This hurts consumers.
Click to expand...
nor here.

Ice Dancer said:
With competition for both insurance companies, lawyers, pharma companies, and doctors being made more fair you create the best kind of free market. I am not against regulating their, the insurance compaines, behavior to keep them honest, I also want to regulate trial lawyers as well. Both entities are profit driven by self serving motives and need a check.

Tort reform does not mean an inability to make a righteous claim of malpractice.
Click to expand...

so, my suggestion, is tort reform does not need to include any sort of damages cap. Instead, if we're going to regulate the insurance companies, is we have to set the price for their rates. It's akin to how the current democrats want to set up individual health insurance. if we need 'pools' of high risk insurance, make the insurance companies accept their risk as well.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
I cannot disagree with you here.

nor here.



so, my suggestion, is tort reform does not need to include any sort of damages cap. Instead, if we're going to regulate the insurance companies, is we have to set the price for their rates. It's akin to how the current democrats want to set up individual health insurance. if we need 'pools' of high risk insurance, make the insurance companies accept their risk as well.
Click to expand...

I have no problem on not setting caps on awards. The best way to regulate attorney's would be to set caps on their tort percentages. Let them have 5% instead of 35%. Also, sanction them heavilly when the lawsuits are judged frivolis.

The "not here" argument is not an argument. Not knowing what state you live in I can't say it has affected your state like it has mine...but I'll look ifin you want me to.
 
I know. My point was that how much have you looked into it what with you being a guy? OBGYN is considered a high rish specialty field and all the data out shows that the high premiums they have to pay has caused a decrease in doctors. There are other high risk fields as well that have taken a hit. It really is a consumer issue.
 
disappointing, jarod.....really disappointing....you can ask questions but you don't know what to do if someone answers them......typical liberal.....
 
Jarod said:
THis is getting silly, Ive discussed the questions Ive been asked.
Click to expand...

of course you haven't.....I asked three, I reminded you I asked three, all you have to do is look at my posts to find three....for you to make that comment without going back to look for them (a rather simple matter) shows that you don't have the balls to answer the other two.....for that matter, the answer you gave to one was half assed....you've admitted you're in favor of higher deductible.....why do you defend a bill that requires deductibles to be the same in both private policies and the government policy.....
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top