APP - Republicans cant have it both ways! Or can they?

cawacko said:
One example, employeers. Ultimately employeers have to worry about their bottom line to stay competitive or to stay in existence. If the government 'tweeks' the market and thus makes it employeers choose the public option or just pay the penalty employees are stuck with it.
Click to expand...

And the Market will fix that because the better employees will go to employers who have better coverage!
 
Jarod said:
And the Market will fix that because the better employees will go to employers who have better coverage!
Click to expand...

Have you ever known anyone who changed jobs because of better insurance? Not going from none to having some, but to upgrade their coverage?
 
WinterBorn said:
Have you ever known anyone who changed jobs because of better insurance? Not going from none to having some, but to upgrade their coverage?
Click to expand...

Yes, I have, they were both single mothers with kids who came to work for the SAO because of the great insurance.
 
Jarod said:
Yes, I have, they were both single mothers with kids who came to work for the SAO because of the great insurance.
Click to expand...

Good insurance may be a reason to choose one job over another, but I have never known anyone to change jobs because the insurance was better.

These two single mothers had no insurance at their previous jobs? And the previous jobs paid as mcu or more than SAO?
 
WinterBorn said:
Good insurance may be a reason to choose one job over another, but I have never known anyone to change jobs because the insurance was better.

These two single mothers had no insurance at their previous jobs? And the previous jobs paid as mcu or more than SAO?
Click to expand...

I dont know the detales of the previous jobs, I know what they said about why they changed jobs. I also know that the SAO generally pays less than many such jobs in the private sector.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
what did they do? find the 5 vets that actually liked the VA? every vet that I know right now that has to use the VA hates it for the inefficiency alone.
Click to expand...


That’s because your friends are either already on gold plated government insurance, like Medicare or tricare, or they have a gold-plated corporate policy where the bargaining power of sheer size might (for a while) protect them from free market, profit considerations – like being denied for preexisting conditions, or getting denied care on a wonderful free market policy because they become unprofitable for the insurance monopoly.

The VA provides a niche service that your wonderful free market won’t. Period. It's a provider of last resort. Does Blue Cross want to cover a 70 year old quadriplegic Vietnam vet? Does Humana salivate at the prospect of making money off a vet suffering from neurological disorders and physical disability because of Gulf War syndrome? Is an 85 year old, infirm Korean War vet going to have much success surfing the internet to find an affordable and adequate private individual policy to cover his medical needs?

Of course not. Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck have so thoroughly propagandized you and lied to you that you are evidently unaware how the real world works. Sometimes I wonder if message board cons are overwhelmingly trust fund babies, who don’t have a freaking clue how the real world works for average people.

The VA is a niche service of last resort, to serve people, in large measure, who your wonderful internet free market of insurance products won’t fucking touch with a ten foot pole. And the VA isn’t as bad as Rush Limbaugh lied to you. Winterborn is right. The dude Clinton put in, made it a lot better. My stepdad would have died 15 years ago, without the VA. But, the point is, the VA is still a niche service provider. What liberals want is a cost effective, and high performing universal health care system, like the French, Australians, Germans, and Swedes have.
 
Last edited:
Cypress said:
But Jarod's point still stands.

We've been told by rightwingers that government insurance is a socialist nightmare, that will result in long lines, rationing, massive waiting lists, and atrocious healthcare.

If that's true, few people are going to choose the public option, no matter how much it costs, or how much the government "tweaks" the rules.


Not wanting government health insurance, is clearly about something else. There's some other agenda at play here.
Click to expand...

Bing bing bing!

If Alex's point wasn't valid, neighborhood free clinics would have driven doctors out of business a long time ago.

If the conservative bitching and moaning turns out to be legit and insurance companies end up being a better option, people will stay with them. END.OF.STORY. If you can get better service at a cheaper rate through the gov't you'll go with them.
 
WinterBorn said:
Good insurance may be a reason to choose one job over another, but I have never known anyone to change jobs because the insurance was better.

These two single mothers had no insurance at their previous jobs? And the previous jobs paid as mcu or more than SAO?
Click to expand...

People leave jobs all the time to receive better health Ins.

example .... state workers, they don't get paid a whole lot of money but have fantastic benefits

I worked for the State of NJ years ago and at least a 3rd of the people working there were there cause of the benefits

MY wife took a job for the state, she lost some money but the ins. she has far out weighs the loss she took
 
Cypress said:
But Jarod's point still stands.

We've been told by rightwingers that government insurance is a socialist nightmare, that will result in long lines, rationing, massive waiting lists, and atrocious healthcare.

If that's true, few people are going to choose the public option, no matter how much it costs, or how much the government "tweaks" the rules.


Not wanting government health insurance, is clearly about something else. There's some other agenda at play here.
Click to expand...
From what I read the employer is going to pick for you. The option is theirs, not yours. So long as it stays just an "option" there is a possibility that it won't turn into the mess we see elsewhere where there is no option.

Again, I support a program where only the people who do not get health care from an employer would be on any government insurance program and then only those who could not afford it would then be forced into government insurance. Otherwise centralizing regulation and making it easier to shop across state line, making it easier for small businesses to pool together for equitable insurance options... All of these are better than a government option. Government options should be the last resort, IMO. And they should be targeted and basic with a tiered pay system based on cost of living in each area. If you make too much, you will pay a premium for this basic insurance... If you make a lot, you will pay a larger premium... And if you can afford to supplement, then there should be options to supplement.
 
Damocles said:
From what I read the employer is going to pick for you. The option is theirs, not yours. So long as it stays just an "option" there is a possibility that it won't turn into the mess we see elsewhere where there is no option.

Again, I support a program where only the people who do not get health care from an employer would be on any government insurance program and then only those who could not afford it would then be forced into government insurance. Otherwise centralizing regulation and making it easier to shop across state line, making it easier for small businesses to pool together for equitable insurance options... All of these are better than a government option. Government options should be the last resort, IMO. And they should be targeted and basic with a tiered pay system based on cost of living in each area. If you make too much, you will pay a premium for this basic insurance... If you make a lot, you will pay a larger premium... And if you can afford to supplement, then there should be options to supplement.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a good plan to me... Why dont you debate some of your more conservative brotheren on this issue, see what supercandy thinks about it!
 
Jarod said:
On the public option I am hearing inconsistant arguments...

1) They say the government is inefficent and terrable at running things and having a government run health system will result in terrable medicine where people cant get the treatment they need and it will be so inefficent that it will waste way too much money!

2) They say we cant have a "public option" because private companies cant compete with the government program and will be run out of business because they have a government player in the arena...


How is an inefficent system that provides substandard health care going to run the "better" private insurance companies out of business?
Click to expand...

Its called SUBSIDIES Jarod. The government will subsidize its inefficient program to the point that it drives off private companies.
 
Superfreak said:
Its called SUBSIDIES Jarod. The government will subsidize its inefficient program to the point that it drives off private companies.
Click to expand...

unless the gov decides to regulate what minimum salaries are applicable for the subsidies, which would then leave the same large class of people making just over the threshold and still be unable to afford insurance, then to add salt to the wound, fine them the 1200 dollars for not having insurance.

hooray for government healthcare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top