1 Oh good.



*hands out rifles and ammo*

2

The old idea was to let everyone else get insurance through the market, with a small, subsidized high-risk pool for the limited number of folks who can't find or afford insurance in the market. Now, I'm not sure what conservatives want.

 

------------------

 

I think you'll find that conservatives don't want government further distorting the healthcare market.  If anything, it's government involvement in the name of "fixing" the market that has pretty much ruined it.

 

Those fucking fucks.

3 You know, I'd just kind of like Government OUT of the health care system entirely. 

4 Yeah God forbid people in high risk lifestyles have to pay for their lifestyle choices.

5 Let the shit sandwich be tasted in all it's corny glory so they can own it I say.

6

Why do conservatives always have to repair the Democrats fuck ups?  That is why the low information voter has no idea that lefty positions are incredibly harmful. 

 

Republicans are always patching up their ridiculous laws and programs. 

7 I have such a man-crush on Jeb!

8 LULZ.

Love the umpteenth iteration of "you rube conservatives just aren't smart enough to understand us Washington insiders. We're smart; yer dumb."

I've lost count of the number of bad bills, bad ideas and silly strategery the "leadership" has foisted under the "trust us, we're playing 16th dementia chess here."

There was TARP, there was the Obamacare Christmas Eve ploy, every debt ceiling hike vote, the sequester, and on and on and on.

9 The problem is communication and nothing else. While the strategy is understandable, the caucus is NEVER on the same page. Cripes, they can't even have a meeting without some people leaking it.

I've grown extraordinarily tired of an us vs. them within the party. You can blame whoever you want, but it's ultimately the job of leadership.

What you've (and Ben) explained here is completely understandable and transparent. The problem is that conservatives have looked for the big bang solution (as they continually do) and completely reject gradualism. That's going to be Conservatives  Achilles Heel as it continually frustrates the electorate that nothing is being done. The bitching and complaining about nobody "cooperating" and the internal witch hunt is only making things worse.

IF you want to look at the wisdom of gradualism, look no further than across the aisle to see it works.

10 I dont want a partial repeal. Better to let it burn.

11

Oh,  yeah.  Boner  and  Cantor  are  such  great  strategists.  They  constantly  sell  out  the  Conservatives  with  their  too-clever-by-a-half   mechanations.  Boner  is  always  involved in  four-way  negotiations  with  Pelosi,  Reid  and  Obama,   instead  of  following  the  proper  order  of  debate  in  the  House.  He  has  abandoned the  "Hastert  Rule"  and  expends  political  capital  on  legislating  the  Left's  Agenda.

 

 

I  have  no  idea  what  some  commenters'  beef  is  with  DrewM,  but  I  appreciate  his  consistancy  and  his  principled  positions  even  when  I  don't  necessarily  agree.  He  makes  me  think  I  may  learn  something  from  what  he  writes.   Gabe,  not  so  much.

12

This was a good plan. It showed that Republicans were serious about addressing actual healthcare problems

 

Only if the MFM says so. 

13 Conservative health policy used to recognize that there is a problem getting health coverage for high-risk health care consumers with preexisting conditions.

Holy fuck.  It's not insurance if it covers pre-existing conditions.  To pull out the usual analogy: you can't wreck your car and then buy insurance on it.

14
This was a good plan. It showed that Republicans were serious about addressing actual healthcare problems and it was another step on the way to repeal, which conservatives claim to want.

When are you gonna admit you're a liberal?

btw, why don't you remind the new folks here that you're pro-amnesty

15

"I think you'll find that conservatives don't want government further distorting the healthcare market. If anything, it's government involvement in the name of "fixing" the market that has pretty much ruined it."

-

THIS.  What I want is the market to decide.  Show me the relevant passage in the constitution that applies to my tax dollars being spent on someone else's healthcare.  If people had to pay    their   cash to the doctor   on delivery, they would spend    less, go less often,  and probably lead a healthier lifestyle.

16
Our very own David Frum, right here.

17

The true idiocy is sitting on our hands for 4 fucking years and not coming up with any realistic alternative idea to control healthcare costs.

 

It is fucking insane.  ZeroCare might suck ass, but for somebody who just lost their job or is worried about it, a shitty safety net is better than fucking nothing.

18 Why do conservatives always have to repair the Democrats fuck ups? That is why the low information voter has no idea that lefty positions are incredibly harmful.

Republicans are always patching up their ridiculous laws and programs.

Posted by: polynikes at April 25, 2013 12:12 PM (m2CN7)

Exactly; Gabe is being, as usual, obtuse about this.

19 Brb, booking a trip to Malaysia

20 My name is Gabe, and I don't want egg on my face, I just want white protein on my face, so keep your eggs ladies! Jeb for prez!

21 No one trusts the Rep leadership because they constantly get basic policy wrong - example numero uno, Amnesty - so why do they expect us to trust them on their 13 dimensional chess moves?

22 That is all find and well Gabe if that hadn't passed that Ocare fucking fuck in the fucking first place.

23
4 Yeah God forbid people in high risk lifestyles have to pay for their lifestyle choices.

Posted by: sven10077@sven10077 at April 25, 2013 12:09 PM (LRFds)

I don't think that's what he meant. I think he meant, well, people like me actually. I'm a Type 1 diabetic. Nobody will touch me insurance wise. The only way I have insurance was through my parents when I was a kid and then through my wife's work health care plan.

That being said, I have ZERO desire to see the govt involved in healthcare to the extent they are. Knock the idiotic interstate restrictions and let the free market decide what's available and what's not.

24 - "I can't help but wonder if conservatives want that more than they want Obamacare gone." I can't help but wonder why these need to be mutually exclusive. The GOP deserves to have egg on its face: it doesn't represent conservative values, certainly not in this case, and that should have consequences. The pre-existing issue is a sad fact of life. It is also only a tiny portion of the health care issue, and should not be a significant facet of ANY federal health care policy. This idiocy demonizing anyone who doesn't fall for the Appeal to Emotion fallacy that I'm somehow responsible for helping fund health care for someone with a pre-existing condition gets old when it comes from the socialized medicine crowd. It's far more distasteful when it comes from people who I would have thought knew better.

25 Regarding the Transom, I'm not paying to read RINO when I can get that shit all over the internet for free. Just saying.

26

Posted by: Gabey Baby at April 25, 2013 12:37 PM (REmGm)

 

Give it a rest. We know Malor's gay. So what?

27 That being said, I have ZERO desire to see the govt involved in healthcare to the extent they are. Knock the idiotic interstate restrictions and let the free market decide what's available and what's not.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at April 25, 2013 12:39 PM (da5Wo)

Yes, you and polynikes have already exceeded the cumulative knowledge of the House Repubs on what needs to be done.

28 This is not hard, people. All we have to do is refuse to fund it. The House can do that UNILATERALLY. We don't need the President or the Senate. Just refuse to accept any continuing resolution or budget that funds Obamacare. Period. And yet we keep nibbling around the edges instead of striking at the Obamacare monstrosity's heart. Will Dems whine, stamp their feet, and almost certainly shut down the government? Yes. But they can't hold out forever. To many of their favorite programs are dependent on the federal money spigot staying open.

29 So who do we take out after Assad? Mugabe in Zimbabwe will be dead soon. He's almost 90. Takes a while for any dictator to really get on the nerves of the American public enough for us to bomb him. We're running out of foreign leaders to hate.

30

BCochran,

 

sorry to hear that.  But what you just said in that last comment is why we need to address the situation, not just bitch at how horrible ZeroCare is, which everyone knows.

 

Govt. needs to offer incentives to spur private enterprise, not mandates to impose its will.

31 Conservative health policy used to recognize that there is a problem getting health coverage for high-risk health care consumers with preexisting conditions. The old idea was to let everyone else get insurance through the market, with a small, subsidized high-risk pool for the limited number of folks with preexisting conditions who can't find or afford insurance in the market. Why the hell am I paying anyone else's health insurance premiums? Why?
No, seriously, why? Is it a problem? Oh, it is absolutely and utterly a terrible problem for the person facing that situation. But unless and until I am the person with that problem, it's not my problem. So why should I pay for someone else's insurance?
Please do not bother with but but but someday that might be you and then you would need the help! Guess what? I am a grownup (dammit) who takes responsibility for her own life. I am not responsible to pay for you and you are not responsible to pay for me. I'm sorry but I utterly reject the entire premise underlying this attempt at a "win".

32 First, the "high risk pool" is greatly underfunded because the idiotic Obamacare ASSumed people would rush out to buy 'supplemental health insurance policies' that would fund the "high risk pool".

Second, was furious that a hugely failed component of Obamacare was to be propped up, but when discovering the "prop up" was only till 2014 and it stripped the Obamacare slush fund, thought it was better to prop up a failed program for one year, than to allow billions be blown  "advertising Obamacare," while cronies made big bucks, more indebtedness created, all while tax payers funding free advertising for Democrats who should be in trouble for voting for O-care in 2014 election cycle. 

33 >> I thought seeing that the Obamacare rollout is a disaster is something conservatives would want.

Not if the disaster is blamed on the Republicans.

The GOP need to be very careful.  Right now a lot of Democrats are realizing what a mess ObamaCare actually is, and they're coming up with strategies to shift the blame.  Democrats are very skilled at this sort of thing; they can and will turn the ObamaCare disaster into the Republicans' fault.

34 OT/

I checked my bank account and Obama today cashed my check to the IRS.  I'm practically emptied out.

35 Any dumb ass who thought Obamacare was going to be great needs to see and feel exactly how bad it is.  Lib friends on Facebook are really starting to squeal over the insurance premium increases.  Could be a teaching moment.  But probably not.  Anyway,  I enjoy their tears.

36 To many of their favorite programs are dependent on the federal money spigot staying open.

Posted by: MikeJ at April 25, 2013 12:42 PM (Us4M2)

 

---

 

More than that, the dems' very jobs depend upon the spigot being wide open. 

37 The GOP deserves to have egg on its face: it doesn't represent conservative values, certainly not in this case, and that should have consequences.

So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?

Yeah, you go ahead and run for office touting that line.

38

"Now, I'm not sure what conservatives want"

Government out of operating health care.

Government out of operating private health insurance.

Pretty much covers it.

39

"It's not insurance if it covers pre-existing conditions. To pull out the usual analogy: you can't wreck your car and then buy insurance on it."

 

Why not? You dumb fuckers bought me a new house!

40 O/T to follow up on the Top Headlines thread:


"..FOX News afternoon host Megyn Kelly broke the news this morning that – FBI agents were “shocked” to see a judge “waltz in” and read Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda rights this week. According to Kelly, Dzhokhar was giving the agents crucial information before the judge, at the request of the Obama Administration, put a stop to it..."

41
Even the stupidest conservative understands the only way to lower costs are

1) Tort reform
2) End all government interference and meddling in the health care sector.

Free and open market solutions are what conservatives, you friggin ninny.

42
Even the stupidest conservative understands the only way to lower costs are

1) Tort reform
2) End all government interference and meddling in the health care sector.

Free and open market solutions are what conservatives want, you friggin ninny.

43 The heirs of Breitbart have taken turns shitting on his legacy, some of the "writers" on this site included.  Knee-jerk reaction has surpassed logic by a mile.  MARCOPHONES LOL!!11

What else is new?

44

"So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?"

This may come as a shock to you, but forcing the entire population to buy into an overpriced scheme =/= covering the medical costs of long term illness and support.

45 Skin for skin! All that a man has will he give for his life.

46

Love the umpteenth iteration of "you rube conservatives just aren't smart enough to understand us Washington insiders. We're smart; yer dumb."

***

 

Conservatives have ceertain in herehnt disadvantages.  One is that conservatives tend to trust peopoe, even people they shouldn't trust.  See e.g. Chuckie Schumer reference Marco Rubio.  They are then astounded when they are lied to and betrayed.  Another is that they are not willing to actually harm the country for the sake of political advantage.  Conservatives would never do what Obama is currently doing in punishing the country for sequestration by furloughing air traffic controllers.

47

Serious Cat, LOL, me too!!

 

I still think leadership did a good job on the fiscal cliff and the sequester.  We only hold one fucking house of congress.

 

If they hold the line on amnesty and guns, and offer alternatives to ZeroCare, there's a possibility of an even bigger repeat of 1994.

 

ZeroCare will start firing on all cylinders for a year until that election.  Exactly.

48 Remove the laws that prevent actual competition in the medical space and costs would drop by at least half. Look at the pricing for the place in my link. Listed prices. I have two cochlear implants. They charge $8800 for a CI. Each of mine cost my insurance company at least $40k.

49 OT - Speaking of Good News/Bad News

Female US sailor in Dubai defeats would-be rapist by knocking the knife out of his head, beating him into submission, and and finally restraining him with her thighs.  Bad news, why the heck was she traveling alone on shore leave in Dubai?  Worse news for the attacker, he is probably everyone else in jail's favourite.

http://tinyurl.com/cljns62

50 So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?

Yeah, you go ahead and run for office touting that line.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 12:44 PM (SY2Kh)

-

 

That right there is the reason this country is dying.

51

Fiddles  and  matches  for  everyone  in  DC!  Drink!

52
Its really not that hard, get the govt totally out of the health insurance business.  That's what conservatives want.

Not practical or pragmatic you say?  Neither is obamacare, nor was the repub "fix".

53

Soothsayer:

 

You bet your ass.  CA - liberal bastion - has tort reform.  How in the fuck is not that federal.

 

It's a perfect political point.  Zero is in the pockets of trial lawyers so we all pay more.

 

Indeed.  Have you heard that mentioned once??  Fucking of course not.

54 You have to fund it to ......?

55 This type of strategic idiocy has been the mark of conservatives throughout the process of ObamacareÂ’s passage and implementation

wut?

Really?

Huh.

56 Yeah. Bla, bla, bla. Bullshit. Nobody is watching. Nobody cares. The MSM is not going to explain it. Can the whole mess and start over.

57 Let them die.

58

We're running out of foreign leaders to hate.

 

***

 

I'm not.  I've got more than enough to spare.

59 23 BC1981,

and there are and have been programs to aid you...further a program geared to aiding those who have not incurred increase cost through behaviors would be an easy sell....

Having to pay for the entire nation's Hepataitis C protocols for whores IV drug users etc etc

Not so much.

My mom's side is almost 80% diabetic....

No I'm pretty sure that like a lot of Gabe's FABULOUS agenda this is driven by trying to force the system to absorb the health costs of some people who have big diseases with little names based on lifestyle choice.

You and I have had enough back and forth for you to know i want the govt out of healthcare as much as humanly possible period and to allow the market to set price structure.

60 Govt. needs to offer incentives to spur private enterprise, not mandates to impose its will.

Posted by: Prescient11 at April 25, 2013 12:43 PM (tVTLU)

Bullshit. Govt needs to get the fuck out of the way of private enterprise. The govt has repeatedly shown that it has not one donkey dick sucking clue about unintended consequences of fiscal policy. Or any policy for that matter.

Get out of the way and let the market decide. Life isn't fucking fair. It was never intended to be. People need to grow the hell up and deal with that fact. Is it fair that through no fault of my own I have a disease that raises my risk of heart attack, stroke, renal failure, nerve damage, blindness, ED and just about everything else you can think of? Is it fair that it'll likely either kill me younger than I'd like or make my end of life miserable? No, it's not motherfucking fair. Guess what? I made my peace with that a long time ago and I don't need some nanny state to hold my hand and walk me through life. I'm my own damn man and I can deal with my own damn shit.

/rant off

61

"Remove the laws that prevent actual competition in the medical space and costs would drop by at least half"

You mean forcing my health insurance company to cover "maternity costs" is somehow a bad idea? Whodathunkit?

(hint - I'm very, very unlikely to become pregnant anytime soon)

62 So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket? Yeah, you go ahead and run for office touting that line. Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 12:44 PM (SY2Kh) Because there are absolutely and utterly no other options between health insurance and personal out of pocket payments. Not. A. Single. One. Oh. Hey. I better go tell those people organizing the charity run for the little girl in my church who needs treatment for leukemia that what they are doing is completely worthless. Man, I bet they'll be glad someone told them that before they got all embarrassed!

And, my God, St. Jude's! It better shut down right this very second! I mean, since the only options are insurance and out of pocket personal payment and all of that. Man. What a relief, no more need to worry about running that place.

63

Nobody I know is actually advocating the "let them die" position, but  it's not  "insurance"  when  the  benefits  are unlimited  and  the  risks  can't  be  limited.  

 

Avoiding  personal  bankruptcy by  bankrupting  the  nation  is  unsustainable.  

64 OT/

I checked my bank account and Obama today cashed my check to the IRS. I'm practically emptied out.

Posted by: Serious Cat at April 25, 2013 12:43 PM (UypUQ)

Serious Cat, LOL, me too!!

....

Posted by: Prescient11 at April 25, 2013 12:46 PM (tVTLU)

* laughs * — http://tinyurl.com/cbtb8sc

65

I checked my bank account and Obama today cashed my check to the IRS. I'm practically emptied out.

 

***

 

Michelle needs a spring vacation.

66 26 TroyRiser,

Agreed, I don't have issue with gabe being gay my best Tweep is probably Richard Grennell I do have issue with gabe trying to pretend he is pushing certain agenda items from any perspective beyond his lifestyle choices at times but I am not trying to be hateful.

Gabe is undermining the entire fabric of the actuarial pool chasing after an agenda item.

67
Obamacare will soon enough (just like Britain) force death, not just let people die, but make them by actual starvation and thirst and neglect.

But ya know... politicians care (TM).

68 What was missing from bigger-media coverage of this story was contemptuous sniping at powerless conservatives by people who despise them.

69 >>>That right there is the reason this country is dying.

Okay.  So I'm seeing a "let's sit back and lament that we don't live in a different universe" statement here, not an attempt to engage with Hollowpoint's argument. 

Anyone want to try doing that?

70 The GOP need to be very careful. Right now a lot of Democrats are realizing what a mess ObamaCare actually is, and they're coming up with strategies to shift the blame. Democrats are very skilled at this sort of thing; they can and will turn the ObamaCare disaster into the Republicans' fault.

Posted by: sandy burger at April 25, 2013 12:43 PM (4dy3y)

That is why it is important to strip the money from O-care that funds free commercials for the democrats.  People that have insurance will be forced to pay even more and will be pissed.  That piss-ness deserves to be directed at dems.  But the ignorant electorate are gullible and easily influenced by barrage of tax payer funded commercials that would blame GOP for O-care not being the panacea everyone expected it to be. 

71 sounds like the rank and file don't trust leadership

72

"No I'm pretty sure that like a lot of Gabe's FABULOUS agenda this is driven by trying to force the system to absorb the health costs of some people who have big diseases with little names based on lifestyle choice."

PEOPLE SHOULD PAY FOR HIV TREATMENT. IT'S A DISEASE OF LOVE! Jeb for prez!

73 Will Dems whine, stamp their feet, and almost certainly shut down the government? Yes. But they can't hold out forever. To many of their favorite programs are dependent on the federal money spigot staying open.

That's where you're wrong, as is everyone else who keeps pushing this delusional line.

The Dems would hold out longer, because they could.  Those federal programs are favored among Dems because they're a means to an end- getting votes.  Power.

Government shutdowns are unpopular, and the GOP would take the blame- not merely due to media bias, but because they really would be to blame.

74 The brilliant political move to fix Obamacare backfired. What a surprise.

75 Gabe,  I don't buy it.  I'm tired of trying to "outsmart" the donks and hoping to send messages...etc.  The messages don't get through because the media will turn everything against the GOP and their motives.   If the war in Iraq and the 2008 clusterfuk summer of financial fail wasn't enough, I don't know what could convince.  CONSERVATIVES will always being framed as idiots and heartless.  Period.  Obamacare should be left to sink and we should do everything in our/their power to UNDERMINE it and ultimately over-turn it... you guys

76 64 beagle,

correct and not having personal pain for lifestyle choices is also idiocy.

I remember when Evel Knievel couldn't get health or life insurance....

same thing you choose to jump enough buses you're gonna break your pelvis at some point

77

So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?

Yeah, you go ahead and run for office touting that line.

 

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 12:44 PM

 

Were it not for government interfering in the market to begin with and divorcing people from costs, you wouldn't need a great deal of wealth.  Milton Friedman pointed out that when you're spending someone else's money, you really don't give a shit about cost (I'm paraphrasing, but I bet he totally said that verbatim in private).

 

Hell, removing the prohibition against insurance companies to compete in the national market would do more to expand risk pools than anything Obamacare can even hope to achieve. 

78 So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?

Yeah, you go ahead and run for office touting that line.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 12:44 PM (SY2Kh)

That's utter crock and you know it.

79
since someone invoked Star Trek...

remember the episode when a crewman acquired intense ESP?

He became so powerful, that he became a danger to the ship and her crew. Spock immediately told Kirk to kill him. Kirk refused and the crewman became even more powerful, more dangerous.


That's government.

80

"Avoiding personal bankruptcy by bankrupting the nation is unsustainable"

Greece? Italy? France?

 

81 It showed that Republicans were serious about addressing actual healthcare problems Which is where I reject the premise. Why would I want politicians creating and "addressing" healthcare problems?

82 70 >>>That right there is the reason this country is dying. Okay. So I'm seeing a "let's sit back and lament that we don't live in a different universe" statement here, not an attempt to engage with Hollowpoint's argument. Anyone want to try doing that? Posted by: Jeff B. at April 25, 2013 12:51 PM (/Rmj0) I find it interesting people are arguing this was a smart political move when the result was a political failure.

83

Captain Hate:  Thanks for the update.  That would be fucking crazy if the administration brought a judge in to interfere with an FBI investigation.  I have never, ever heard of any such thing, even in high profile cases.

 

 

Look, Ronnie Reagan put it best in a fantastic radio address where he opposed Medicare.  He said, there was a bill in Congress to take care of all indigent seniors.  This bill would completely cover old people who couldn't afford coverage.  Like a Medicaid-Medicare.

 

So why in the fuck were we creating this monstrosity for all seniors, he asked.  And the answer which he couldn't say but which is abundantly clear is that all these programs are not about "coverage" or "healthcare" it is about putting government in charge of all the individuals they can.

 

Beg the government for scraps and benefits and you are not a citizen.  You are a subject.  And that is exactly the fucking point.

84 If the leftards like it, alarm bell should be going off in everybodies heads, and with the leadership the GOP seems to want to keep, trust is a hard (read stupid) thing to come by.

85 The cost of a birth with a 3 day stay in the hospital from the 60's, before the great insurance shitstorm, adjusted for inflation, would be like $2000 today. Most people could pay that out of pocket, especially given the 9 months notice.

86 Has there been an RNC insurgency @ the AoSHQ? We lose Miranda Nicepost into the Abyss, and we get a lecture from our betters? Who gave Karl Rove the keys again? How many times has the House expressed their true feelings (and those of their constituents) about the turd sandwich known as Obamacare (which neither protects patients, nor makes care affordable)? All of this while they try to exempt themselves, and their staffs? The entire thing must be defunded and flushed.

87 People in this country illegally will be automatically enrolled in Obama care as soon as my amnesty bill passes. Their votes count more than yours, they outnumber you. Suck it.

88 I am far from this leaderships biggest fan. In fact, I am not a fan at all.

But you need to start somewhere. What's happening now is not working. This issue is just leaderships latest gaffe because once again, they failed to communicate.

But that being said, now that I've read it. the strategy was fairly solid.

And "let it burn" doesn't work in this case guys. It's the law and they will continue to implement it until it is so far ingrained, it is next to impossible to repeal. Time, and a dismantling strategy are necessary to success.

89

"Hell, removing the prohibition against insurance companies to compete in the national market would do more to expand risk pools than anything Obamacare can even hope to achieve. "

Can't have competition, you know, as someone might get something better than another...

90 How was this going to get out of the HoR and become law?  Did I miss that?  I thought  there  was  no Democrat support. 

91 Queers as get AIDS should die.

92 Anyone want to try doing that?

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 25, 2013 12:51 PM (/Rmj0)

AtC's response. Your move.

93 78 Mr Tant,

Precisely.  Not all my posts are of the "get decoder ring insert code DEP" variety.  I went on at length with examples about the Saturn V rocket boost of govt funding disequlibrium in the health market.  Further destabilizing price/cost interaction without tort reform is folly.  The answer is not more govt stirring the pond to see the bottom tactics.

We should be weaning the feds of "protected" not increasing their rolls.

94 Okay. So I'm seeing a "let's sit back and lament that we don't live in a different universe" statement here, not an attempt to engage with Hollowpoint's argument.

Anyone want to try doing that?

Posted by: Jeff B. at April 25, 2013 12:51 PM (/Rmj0)

--

Sure.

1. End legal prohibition of interstate insurance

2. Allow insurance companies to charge more for pre-existing conditions

3. Insist that hospitals compete on price.

95 - "Were it not for government interfering in the market to begin with and divorcing people from costs, you wouldn't need a great deal of wealth." I can't help but wonder why this isn't Gabe's - and every other self-described conservative's - first thought. Health care is the one and ONLY consumable necessity of life that we pay for through the ABUSE of (comprehensive) health care insurance. This idiocy has been driving skyrocketing costs since the mid-60s. http://bit.ly/ziaEkz

96 34 OT/ I checked my bank account and Obama today cashed my check to the IRS. I'm practically emptied out ---- I put mine in the mail on a wednesday, and on friday it was deducted from the account. They one thing they do quick is cash that check.

97

"Which is where I reject the premise"

Exactly so. What part of healthcare is better due to govenment controls?

98 Why do you pimp that claymation dude?

99 I keep checking the url and its says minx.cc not hotair.com...is the interwebs having problems?

100 And the fact that I agree with you 100% is why I can never run for office. Rugged Individualism and A Truly Free Market just isn't popular anymore.

Makes me more than a bit sad.

Posted by: The Obsidian Owl at April 25, 2013 12:53 PM (tWmgi)

It doesn't make me sad, it makes me angry. But I will say, what makes me angrier is that when was the last time we saw a politician run AND GOVERN based on the ideals of Individualism and Free Market?

101
t-bird sums it up

Government created the problems, and now we're supposed to look to govt to fix them?

Gabriel Malor has learned nothing in the few years he's been here. He's actually become more liberal.

102 If government hadn't exploded the costs and taken away the preferability of people to pay out-of-pocket, we wouldn't need to argue about 'letting people die.' If the reason we can't pay for ourselves is the fact that it's $12 for an aspirin pill, then we need to look at the reasons an aspirin pill is $12, not set up a program for aspirin insurance.

103 It doesn't make me sad, it makes me angry. But I will say, what makes me angrier is that when was the last time we saw a politician run AND GOVERN based on the ideals of Individualism and Free Market? Posted by: BCochran1981 at April 25, 2013 12:57 PM (da5Wo)
Stephen Harper?

104 RE: Insurance

Could you make a scheme work where it was pretty much like life insurance?  Where you get insured in the event you contract a specific disease or among a list of diseases, the insurance company releases a lump sum of monies into the bank account of the patient?  The patient is free to then spend the money however they wish.  Shopping thier own treatment plans and docs or even to forgo treatment and pay for hospice care, or spend it on a bucket list, or to leave it to their survivors.

It seems like the 3rd party, intermediary payer system, whether it be the ins. company or a Govt. bureaucracy, is what prevents the costs of healthcare from getting under control.

105

BCochran:

 

I hope that let out some steam!  But I think you're missing what I am saying.  There are things the govt can do and can do well. 

 

Consider the Bayh-Dole Act.  I guarantee you half the prescriptions you will take resulted from just that one law.  And what did it do, it RESTRAINED govt. overreach and encouraged private development.

 

What the Bayh-Dole Act said was that if companies, mostly pharma, came up with patents that was done in conjunction with govt. grants (almost always happens) then they could keep the IP rights (patent rights were in the air before this law).  That's pretty much it.

 

This spurred so much innovation it's unbelievable.  New medicines, trillions to GDP, at least a million new jobs.  Boom!!!

 

And all from the government respecting private enterprise and protecting and expanding intellectual property.

 

Mandates are evil.  Incentives can be very very good and at least, if ineffective, are not orders enforced with the barrel of a gun.

106

"Were it not for government interfering in the market to begin with and divorcing people from costs, you wouldn't need a great deal of wealth"

THIS TIMES 10,000 PEOPLE!!!

Us oldsters recall a time when one actually paid for medical services. We shopped for prices, got quotes, and wrote checks, and those of us with long term issues were able to cover them.

Today, after four decades of "help", we can't. Yet when those of us point out such facts, we're "unhelpful" or "internet blustering".

Feh.

107 heard a blurb on local radio this morning....glen campbell's daughter asking the gov't to do something about alzheimer's.....and she started to cry because her dad barely remembers her name and loses track when playing guitar while she pics the banjo....that was sad to listen too....however....what is the gov't supposed to do? and how have we reached the point of expecting the gov't to handle any and every illness out there? i lost my aunt last year to alzheimers, i lost a dear friend last year to kidney failure, i lost my dad to multiple myeloma 16 yrs ago, i lost my grandma to old age......when are we going to do something about old age? seriously? i feel horrible about all the illness out there and empathize with people who are ill or family members who lost someone to an illness.....CANCER SUCKS, HEART DISEASE SUCKS, CPOD SUCKS, LYME SUCKS...YOU NAME A KILLING DISEASE AND IT SUCKS but why are we expecting the gov't to step in? there but for the grace of God go all of us.....but it's not up to your neighbor to bail you out unless they WANT TO.....it shouldn't be mandatory.....and it shouldn't be expected.....

108 Why, when people get on their high horse about letting people die, don't they spend their own damn money to help those people? Why use government to confiscate money to pay for your charity?

109

Conservative health policy used to recognize that there is a problem getting health coverage for high-risk health care consumers with preexisting conditions. The old idea was to let everyone else get insurance through the market, with a small, subsidized high-risk pool for the limited number of folks with preexisting conditions who can't find or afford insurance in the market.

 

Yes, that used to be the  conservative  approach to health care coverage. I remember advocating it myself. (Additionally, part of the sales pitch for Health Care Savings Accounts as an alternative to government health insurance was that people would  buy high-deductable catastrophic coverage and use the HSAs for routine health care needs.)  We actually had a somewhat coherent  alternative to government health care.

 

Now, I'm not sure what conservatives want.

 

Many of them simply want to look more conservative  than the conservative next to them.  

110 111 Bevel Lemelisk,

Well Bevel then JWest doesn't get his dream job of "non market based Solomonic decider of life worthiness"

You "govt can do things well" types are in for a shock.

111 I would like both BCochran and alexthechick to marry me. Right. Now.

112 Yes, that used to be the conservative approach to health care coverage So were individual mandates.

113

"I am a grownup (dammit) who takes responsibility for her own life. I am not responsible to pay for you and you are not responsible to pay for me."

 

This would be great, except for civilization.

 

If we could go back and train everyone to step over people dying on the hospital steps, without thinking "Gee, there ought to be some mechanism in place so that this decaying piece of humanity doesn't offend my senses", everyone could just be responsible for themselves.

 

The mistake that was made was when everyone decided that everyday, easy to anticipate medical expenses were something "insurance" should pay for.  

 

Catastrophic illness and injury, that which is not anticipated - like totalling your car or your house burning down - is what either private insurance or a public pool is for.  This type of thing only works when you have thousands paying in for each one taking out.

 

Until the concept of what is normal expenses and what is extraordinary expenses is understood, we will suffer shit like Obamacare. 

114 Because there are absolutely and utterly no other options between health insurance and personal out of pocket payments. Not. A. Single. One.

Enlighten us then.  Somehow I doubt that your church has enough runners to solve the problem nationwide.

I understand why neither you or anyone else is able to offer a politically plausible solution.  It's because there isn't one- we're discussing an unsolvable problem.

Playing the "hear no evil see no evil" game isn't going to get us anywhere though.  If the Right doesn't step up, the Dems will be all too happy to fill the gap.

115 104 t-bird sums it up Government created the problems, and now we're supposed to look to govt to fix them? Gabriel Malor has learned nothing in the few years he's been here. He's actually become more liberal. Posted by: soothsayer at April 25, 2013 12:58 PM (FC8Yl) Me and him will switch parties together after the ass whopping in 2016. You know the one that will be blamed on conservatives even though Boner will have spent 4 years passing Obama policy items and appealing to moderates? Yeah well I figure after I either lose the presidential primaries or the general I'm out. After my bill passes Florida will be a deep blue state by 2020 anyway.

116

"Where you get insured in the event you contract a specific disease or among a list of diseases, the insurance company releases a lump sum of monies into the bank account of the patient"

Used to have such "catastrophic plans". I know, I had one, thru NYL. Modestly priced, thus affordable, and covered diabetes treatments.

Said plan is illegal in the US today.

 

117 "Conservative health policy used to recognize that there is a problem getting health coverage for high-risk health care consumers with preexisting conditions."

You and Ben left out an important caveat...at the state level.

"It showed that Republicans were serious about addressing actual healthcare problems and it was another step on the way to repeal, which conservatives claim to want."

Sure if you think the argument is about whether the GOP or the Democrats have the better federal program. Personally, I don't want the GOP to it's own, "friendlier" version of national healthcare.

Once you accept the idiotic notion that people who currently have an aliment can get "insurance" against that aliment then you've committed to some kind of ridiculous market distorting government program.

"I thought seeing that the Obamacare rollout is a disaster is something conservatives would want."

And it's going to be one no matter what. But now the GOP is conceding that the federal government has to have it's own plan and is willing to accept the Democrats idiotic notions of what the parameters of that plan will be.

Again, I get why the GOP would want to do this. I don't get why conservatives would want to help them.

118 Medical costs could be reduced 90% if all the federal laws dealing with health care were deleted from the books, including the ones giving the AMA a monopoly on who gets to be a doctor, and who gets to teach them. No exaggeration.

119 Health care is the one and ONLY consumable necessity of life that we pay for through the ABUSE of (comprehensive) health care insurance. This idiocy has been driving skyrocketing costs since the mid-60s.

Posted by: goy at April 25, 2013 12:56 PM (QsFws)

---

It is also one of the few programs, along with public school, where the recipient of the program does not see the bill.  When you have a third party payer system, there will never be cost control outside of brute force rationing.

120

Pay for my condoms people.

Jeb for prez!

121 112 CJ,

Yeah pardon me if I don't break out my fiddle for the high riskers anymore....

You know why we have the shit punch bowl of BarryCare?  This song and dance....and now Gabe wamts the GOP to save the high risk pool from the very turd punch the high risk pool allowed itself to be used to pass...

"keep the change"

122 It's not very amusing those who argue that keeping gov't out of health insurance is tantamount to letting people die, when the reality is getting gov't involved in it is far more likely that people will be left to die, IPAD anyone? Liverpool Care Pathway?

123 Posted by: phoenixgirl at April 25, 2013 01:00 PM (GVxQo)


That Glen Campbell story is a real pull to the heartstrings.  The best we can expect the government to do is get the hell out of the way as far as impeding drug companies to engage in R&D and bringing the results to the market and earn a decent return on it.  And by that I definitely mean tort reform.

124 How does that "subscribe via Amazon" work? I've never seen that before. I DO want to subscribe, just for one month to see if it's worth 1/3 pack of smokes a day, but being all irresolute and paranoid and such, I'm just curious how Ben gets paid by having my email address and meat-space name.

125

You people just don't get it. More government programs is the answer.

 

Why isn't everybody a homosexual is the question.

 

 

126 114 DangerGirl,

You'll need to wait another decade...maybe 5 if Gabe is made reince's asst....

Heh

127 Hollowpoints argument as always is to determine what the position is of most posters and then taking the opposite position with some ridiculous strawman.

128 So were individual mandates. The only individual mandate that makes sense is 'You get what you pay for.'

129 "Why isn't everybody a homosexual is the question." ...    THIS!

130

"It's because there isn't one- we're discussing an unsolvable problem"

If by "problem" you mean "coverage for long term illness/conditions", then yes, it's solvable. Read what I posted before. Or not.

131
Cooter pills are an entitlement, no matter what George Bush says.

132 125 KG,

No that is *exactly* the point JWest lays awake at night enthralled with being "the decider"


well the *market* without the $uper$tate interfering would decide quite ably and allow people to try to pay out of their own life's work to dodge those bullets

133 Stephen Harper?

Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Please? at April 25, 2013 12:59 PM (VtjlW)

I think that you having to go there, is possibly the biggest indictment on the R party that's been mentioned so far.

OT - So, the idiot secretary just left to get lunch for the office. Wanna guess what the dumbass left half hidden on her desk?

Her resignation. Effective in 60 days. Which makes me happy in part. And then I think of what a monumental pain in the ass it was the last time we had to replace our secretary/bookkeeper.

Fuck.

134 Posted by: Gabe Malor's Dildo (A71EA)

Dude, give it a rest.

135

"The mistake that was made was when everyone decided that everyday, easy to anticipate medical expenses were something "insurance" should pay for"

You're making it tough to dismiss you with sensible commentary such as this.

136

Quoting Peter Fisher, George W. Bush's Undersecretary of the Treasury, Paul Krugman said, 'The United States is an insurance company with an army.' Part of that is wishcasting, of course, but the point is valid to a degree, especially now, with the implementation of ObamaCare underway.

 

Such a state of affairs is unsustainable because the underlying assumptions--the bedrock assumptions--don't hold up. No government, no matter how wealthy or powerful, can take on the healthcare obligations of an entire people--not for long, anyway, and especially not when the replacement birthrate is less than required to support such a system over time.

 

Obamacare will fail. Attempts will be made to salvage the good bits, if there are any good bits, but that effort will fail, as well. Truth is, I suspect it was meant to fail and was intended from the start as a placeholder for a single payer system, which has been what the Left has been striving for all along. After all, progressives had decades to formulate and draft a coherent 'Affordable Health Care Act' and yet put forward this tangled mishmash instead, thousands of pages of legislation done on the fly and shoved through without serious debate. You can't tell me that wasn't deliberate.

137 It wasn't going anywhere in the Senate; and regardless of its practical merits, the chances of the media correctly representing what they were doing was nil. If they couldn't convince policy professionals who they could speak directly to, how can we expect the media to explain it to the masses. Obamacare has a problem, the fix is to repeal Obamacare, not fix Obamacare. Parting out the problem will take years to fix.

138 106 AlexTheChick,

yes...

depending on your specialty ma'am you can migrate fairly easily...

ponder this EVERY other nation in Pan-Anglia is running AWAY from this shit....

but we're running towards it.

139
114 I would like both BCochran and alexthechick to marry me. Right. Now.

Posted by: DangerGirl at April 25, 2013 01:02 PM (wzmJ0)

Lol. I'm honored. However, I don't think my wife or your husband would be amused.

140 I understand why neither you or anyone else is able to offer a politically plausible solution. It's because there isn't one- we're discussing an unsolvable problem.

Playing the "hear no evil see no evil" game isn't going to get us anywhere though. If the Right doesn't step up, the Dems will be all too happy to fill the gap.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:02 PM (SY2Kh)

Bullshit it's unsolvable, it only seems so now because gov't has made it that way. Once upon a time, America had civil institutions that took care of these problems, but gov't doesn't like competition...

141

This was a good plan. It showed that Republicans were serious about addressing actual healthcare problems

 

But that assumes the loudest conservative critics want to attract voters. Many of them hate voters.

 

Homer: [melancholy] My campaign is a disaster, Moe. [angry] I hate the public so much! [melancholy] If only they'd elect me. [angry] I'd  make 'em pay! [melancholy] Aw, Moe, how do I make 'em like me?

142 "The mistake that was made was when everyone decided that everyday, easy to anticipate medical expenses were something "insurance" should pay for"
You're making it tough to dismiss you with sensible commentary such as this.

Posted by: Jess1 at April 25, 2013 01:07 PM (lbiWb)

Yeah I noticed that too.  It was like a blast from the past.

143 142 BC1981,

Well....why not have your wife, her husband, my wife, Alex et al all get married in a plygamy klastch and use my wife's Tricare to pay for all our care?

PROBLEM SOLVED!

I'll make y'all a good husband....I plan to be on the road a bunch so just leave some birch beer in the fridge....

Fucking retards in the media

144 Were it not for government interfering in the market to begin with and divorcing people from costs, you wouldn't need a great deal of wealth.

There are things the government could do to bring down costs.  Removing interstate barriers would help.  So would malpractice reform.

However, those things would still not be enough to bring health care into the realm of the affordable.  The reason health care is more expensive now isn't just government interference, it's the fact that it's more advanced now.

Of course the "take two aspirin and call me in the morning" days were cheaper.  The downside is that shit that would've killed your ass 30 years ago is now treatable, but at a cost.

145 Posted by: Jess1 at April 25, 2013 01:02 PM (lbiWb) You can buy cancer policies today that will cover almost everything and if after 20 years you receive all of your premium back even if unfortunately you had to use the insurance. Very affordable. Problem is people don't like to purchase insurance.

146 Reminder High risk pools are budgetbusters.

http://tinyurl.com/38h3nwq

147 Seriously, if government had its way, none of our shits would be tapered.

148 125 It's not very amusing those who argue that keeping gov't out of health insurance is tantamount to letting people die, when the reality is getting gov't involved in it is far more likely that people will be left to die, IPAD anyone? Liverpool Care Pathway?

Posted by: KG at April 25, 2013 01:03 PM (p7BzH)

Oops, IPAB...

149

Yeah pardon me if I don't break out my fiddle for the high riskers anymore....

 

That's fine.  Has merit. But it's a minority opinion for a minority  party.

150 @122 Vashta Nerada Exactly. I've been trying to get this point across to people for years. But too many folks are otherwise occupied (obsessed?) with reforming the GOP or other pointless nonsense. I can tell anyone what I spent last year on utilities, gasoline, food, water (taxed) and pretty much any other necessity of life - close to the penny. I have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE what was spent on my behalf for health care. So I don't even know if the $$ I contributed to my ins. policy was a good deal or not. This is the problem, not pre-existing conditions. http://bit.ly/ziaEkz

151 Why in the world do the Repubs want Obamacare implementation to go smoothly? The GOP would get zero credit. Let the Dems and the Administration fix their own problems. Not like 0 is afraid of breaking the law by exec order or anything. OK, then you say, well the GOP should do the right thing. Hmm, why out of all the opportunities that they could "do the right thing" like closing tax loopholes for favored constituencies, not voting themselves insider trading priviledges, or getting the feds out of the pot law enforcement business, do they pick this one? They don't call it the stoopid party for nothing

152 153 CJ,

have fun fucking the republic into the ground bud.....

You simply cannot defeat King math...if you hide cost no one has incentive to trim...so then Jwest is in charge of Granny.

Have fun with IPAB...

153

You and Ben left out an important caveat...at the state level.

 

Do most voters understand, or care about the distinction? Until  we can answer Yes  on those questions, don't expect federal politicians to put their seats on the line for  10th Amendment values.

154 A list of ten things that could be done. All but #8 makes sense to me, and wouldn't cost anyone a dime.

155 Bullshit it's unsolvable, it only seems so now because gov't has made it that way.

Awesome.  I eagerly await hearing your solution.

I didn't anticipate that you had all the answers for us.  Please share.

156 oops http://www.tothepointnews.com/content/view/3642/2/

157 Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:10 PM (SY2Kh)

Interstate barriers that were originally put up by the gov't itself....

158

"The reason health care is more expensive now isn't just government interference, it's the fact that it's more advanced now"

No. Not even close. "More advanced" means lower prices to the end users. My 60" Samsung is far more advanced than my 13" MonkeyWards special, and costs (in list price $$) about the same - thus far, far less than that black and white set.

Same in health care. A Toshiba Titan XGV is cheaper than it's 20 year old cousins...

159

have fun fucking the republic into the ground bud.....

 

It's not me, sven. It's liberals who sell snake oil and those  conservatives who  aid them by making the alternative so pathetically unattractive.

160 If you want to make a political firestorm, defund Obamacare by moving to money back into Medicare. Simple bill, simple language. Let the Dims defend it. You want a Federal health care bill, start with a simple fix: return health Insurance to a personal vice corporate expense. Unravel to New Deal, evaluate what happens, then consider further changes. First do no harm, should be the policy.

161 I didn't anticipate that you had all the answers for us. Please share.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:15 PM (SY2Kh)

I take it you didn't read Vashta's comment. Also, nice attempt to redirect the conversation.

162 "Gabey Baby" and "Gabe Malor's Dildo" just got nuked. You want to argue about the issue, fine. But, guess what, we know *shock* Gabe's gay. It has zero to do with the topic at hand. Give it a rest already.

163

  "Problem is people don't like to purchase insurance"

True, especially after four decades of "someone else will handle it"

164 But that assumes the loudest conservative critics want to attract voters. Many of them hate voters. To be fair, they've been given ample reason of late. Honestly, moving into an abandoned missile silo sounds better and better these days.

165 I would also like to see insurance kick in only after a set dollar amount PER VISIT, say $250 or $500.  If you want to drive down healthcare costs, let the customer see the bill.  No more $10 copay to tie up the emergency room for a sore throat.

166 Government gives tax benefits to employers for health insurance, then people who lose their job lose their insurance. Government cost shifts, via EMTALA, and Medicare/Medicaid. Government blocks competition with insurance, and blocks catastrophic policies. Government is the avenue for lawsuits. A lawyer-friendly system raises both insurance and operating costs. Government wants a certain effect, occasionally to solve some problem, so it distorts the market. The more it distorts it, the more distorted it gets, both in ways intended by government and in ways that aren't. Finally it's so distorted it can't function.

167 IF you want to look at the wisdom of gradualism, look no further than across the aisle to see it works.

Oh bullshit!  The Democrats pulled every dirty  trick in the books to get this thing passed right then and there including dragging Kennedy off his death bed and buying off entire states.  There was no gradualism, there was no moderation, there was no compromise, there was no slow accretion of power over time or even a desire on the part of the electorate to see anything done immediately while the economy was in the shitter... where it still is in large part due to this abomination.

If you really want to know what works it is standing up for principle and making a distinction between your party and the other one.  People will forgive a lot of shit if they think you are sincere.  When you try to get too clever by half then the electorate knows you for the fools you are.

What we have are a bunch of dumb-asses who think they are smarter than everyone else running around endorsing open borders, gun control and various flavors of meddling in the health care industry.  These are very stupid people doing these things and no amount of running in here after the fact to cover their thousandth fuck up is going to save their reputations. 

They are ruining the Republican brand for everyone.  Hell, can anyone even name anything these establishment guys stand for?  I can' think of a single principle they have other than having the opposition praise them.

168

So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?

Yeah, you go ahead and run for office touting that line.

 

So much wrong with this. People are going to die, period. They died before we had health "insurance" and they die even though they have health "insurance". People just die, period. It's a fact of life. No one wants to die, but you're going to whether you want to or not, in the manner you want to or not, at the time you want to or not.

 

And there are certainly ways to deal with high-risk pools, that involve incentives for insurers, reinsurance, etc, that the marketplace constantly deals with in non-health segments of the economy, and can certainly deal with in the health segment as well.

169 But, guess what, we know *shock* Gabe's gay. It has zero to do with the topic at hand. Give it a rest already.

Posted by: Andy at April 25, 2013 01:18 PM (rt5Xa)

Wait....Gabe's gay?!?!?!?! When did that happen????

170

"The reason health care is more expensive now isn't just government interference, it's the fact that it's more advanced now"

 

No. Not even close.

 

Actually, there is merit to that view. Forget about  TVs  and technology making EXISTING products cheaper. We're talking about medical technology  introducing new, life-improving and life-extending medicines and devices  that didn't exist. Spending opportunities that  didn't exist.   Health care "cost" is not interchangable with healh care "spending."

 

In many cases we spend more on health care  because we can. People seem to like living longer and in less pain.

171 156 CJ,,

the alternatives are not unattractive when explained...too many in the GOP are McCain types...

"uh er ah bi-partisan" with Bi-partisan defined as making Schumer smile...

fuck it no more do it on someone else's dime

172 I can see Hollowpoint if the Internet had been available in the 50's. HP: Going to the moon is impossible. Other poster: no it's not HP: didn't know you were a rocket scientist. Care to share just how this can be done?

173 Andy... seriously?   Did not know

174 I almost forgot the all-important #4:   Any medical treatment mandated under federal law to be given regardless of ability to pay is limited to US citizens only.

175 @155 Jess1 - "A Toshiba Titan XGV is cheaper than it's 20 year old cousins.." Precisely. Yet the starting salary for an orthopaedic surgeon is on the order of >$500k, where the starting salary for the engineer who designed the XGV is probably about the same as it was 20 years ago, accounting for inflation. http://bit.ly/17ZzvPd Only one thing drove that surgeon's salary to skyrocket, along with the cost of every "advanced" aspect of health care: an open-loop system where the consumer doesn't have a fucking clue what they're paying for anything and insurance companies simply keep raising reimbursement while raising premiums because it increases their cash flow. There is an alternative to this. http://bit.ly/ziaEkz

176 Same in health care. A Toshiba Titan XGV is cheaper than it's 20 year old cousins...

If your answer is to compare the relative price of televisions to health care, forgive me if I fail to take you seriously.

177

the alternatives are not unattractive when explained

 

How  much time do we spend  explaining  them vs. how much time we spend  opposing the Democrat approach?  A ratio of about 1:99.  That's  not appealing.

178 166 BC1981,

Not only that but trying to paint gabe as some sort of Captain Flamer of the San Fran Haight-Ashbury Assless Chap Corps undermines the ability to call him out at all when he is making policy choices based on his advocacy for his special interest desires.

There is no "gay economics" just like there is no "gay foreign policy" there is economics and foreign policy....

reduced to its core on healthcare and marriage policy Gabe's argument is 'what makes my life easier"...

well my life would be a lot easier if I legislated Sven j olafson day had special set aside level federal protections and was jedi hand Waved away actuarial risk factors based on my status as well...


let's get past that and make sensible policy for the whole.

179 I remember the days of Charity Hospitals and free clinics. Now everyone wants what they can't afford or in the alternative want everyone to be equally miserable.

180 How much time do we spend explaining them vs. how much time we spend opposing the Democrat approach? A ratio of about 1:99. That's not appealing.

Posted by: CJ at April 25, 2013 01:24 PM (9KqcB)

Hence the moniker, stoopid party. Instead of coming up with those solutions, they want to "fix" Obamacare.

181

"In many cases we spend more on health care because we can"

Exactly so. The reality is that many of the components of HC are now less costly than four decades back, but we can afford to purchase more today. I chuckle at the constant comparison of US vs. ___ (fill in W. European state here) healthcare spending per capita. News flash - we also spend more, per capita, on wide screen TVs. And PCs. And cars.

The response to "we spend more on HC" is "good for us, we can afford it".

182 Lasik. Not covered by insurance, prices came down. Why? Because people paying out of pocket cared about what it cost. When was the last time you saw any other medical procedure running ads showing their rates and claiming to be lower than their competition?

183 "Gabey Baby" and "Gabe Malor's Dildo" just got nuked.

Good riddance.

184 If your answer is to compare the relative price of televisions to health care, forgive me if I fail to take you seriously.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:23 PM (SY2Kh)

-

 

Have a look at cosmetic procedures, then.  Every single   cosmetic medical procedure (not covered by insurance) has decreased in price  relative to inflation in pretty much each of the last 30 years.  Now, review the cost for covered procedures during that time frame.   The difference:  price competition.

185 161 Cavil,

if you're serious stay in touch....

I may try to lease one after we retire.

186

If your answer is to compare the relative price of televisions to health care, forgive me if I fail to take you seriously.

And if you don't know what a Toshiba Titan XGV is, but claim knowledge of healthcare, then I know I don't have to take you seriously.

187 So much wrong with this. People are going to die, period. They died before we had health "insurance" and they die even though they have health "insurance".

HOLD THE PRESSES.  We need this on a bumper sticker:

VOTE REPUBLICAN.  YOU'RE GOING TO DIE ANYWAYS.

Victory is ours!!!

188 183 Jess1,

game set and match....

it is like when some idiot tried to explain you can use .357 in a .38 special but not the other way around b/c I swear to God....

".357 is smaller than .38special"

uh "no"

189

179, 181...

Exactly. Look at the functions of "uninsured" procedures - low costs, servicible quality, easy availability... wouldn't it be great if healthcare functioned in such a fashion?

190 184 Hollopoint,

Vote D for Dumbass...IPAB will make you die quicker!

//DNC

191 62 Yes, thank you. So the establishment is set to fix Obamacare? NO NO NO

192 26 This is not hard, people. All we have to do is refuse to fund it. The House can do that UNILATERALLY. We don't need the President or the Senate. Just refuse to accept any continuing resolution or budget that funds Obamacare.

So they refuse to fund it. Then what? Also, your plan fails to address ObamaCare's mandatory spending, taxes, etc.  

193 Enlighten us then. Somehow I doubt that your church has enough runners to solve the problem nationwide. Oh, so you are granting that the concept of private charity exists? How very gracious of you. Your position, to the extent that it is a position rather than merely a snotty statement masquerading as ever so much more enlightened political acumen, takes as a given that the primary source of responsibility for the health and well being of the individual lies with the State rather than with that individual. For your position to be coherent, it must be the State who is primarily responsible for provision of the payment of health care costs. Lest you argue that is not the case, remember, the matter under discussion is the provision of subsidized high risk insurance premiums. That subsidy comes from government coffers. Those coffers are filled by tax receipts. Those tax receipts are taken from citizens at the threat of incarceration or worse should the taxes not be paid. So your position appears to be that it is somehow conservative to remove responsibility from the individual and place it with the State. I would hope that it goes without saying that I find such a contention to be less than persuasive. Let's alter the question slightly to put forth what I think you may be ever so inelegantly attempting to state. The question is from what source should funds be found to pay for health care for those without the means to pay for it themselves. My contention is that it is up to the individual, the individual's family and then private charity. This places autonomy and agency back within the sphere of the individual rather than the state. You disagree. Fine. So be it. As far as the problem of scarcity, yes, I agree, that is a problem. There are those who will not have family members who can help. There are those who will not have a community to provide support. That is terrible. But that does not justify the State placing a barrel at my temple and saying "You pay for it". I understand why neither you or anyone else is able to offer a politically plausible solution. It's because there isn't one- we're discussing an unsolvable problem. Politically plausible to whom? You did hit the nail on the held, it's an unsolvable problem. That's because life is unfair and unkind and cruel. However, that does not justify accepting the Left's contention that if there are just enough laws, just enough regulations, just enough of the correct people making the proper decisions, then bad things won't happen. No. Sorry. Life doesn't work like that. Playing the "hear no evil see no evil" game isn't going to get us anywhere though. If the Right doesn't step up, the Dems will be all too happy to fill the gap. Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:02 PM (SY2Kh) Who is doing that here? It's simply that our definitions of what constitutes the "evil" differs. I believe that conceding ground that the individual is not responsible for his/herself is the "evil". Thus, I will push back against that. If you wish to argue that it is "evil" that people get ill without the means to pay for treatment, I agree. That's awful. But that still does not grant the State the right to place a barrel to my temple and say "You pay for it."

194

#185,

Yeah, easy target was... easy.

195

Hence the moniker, stoopid party. Instead of coming up with those solutions, they want to "fix" Obamacare.

 

Posted by: KG at April 25, 2013 01:25 PM (p7BzH)

 

Don't blame the party. The party just counts votes. We haven't provided enough cover for them.  Because we've gotten away from selling ideas. In the 1990s, the GOP/conservatives  sold ideas.  Now we just bitch about Obama. 

196

"HOLD THE PRESSES. We need this on a bumper sticker:

VOTE REPUBLICAN. YOU'RE GOING TO DIE ANYWAYS.

Victory is ours!!!"

 

Way to miss the point, Mr. Low Information Voter. Could you be any more obtuse?

197 "Do most voters understand, or care about the distinction? Until we can answer Yes on those questions, don't expect federal politicians to put their seats on the line for 10th Amendment values. Posted by: CJ at April 25, 2013 01:15 PM (9KqcB)" It would be better for such "civic leaders" to be thrown out on their ass.

198 Have a look at cosmetic procedures, then. Every single cosmetic medical procedure (not covered by insurance) has decreased in pricerelative to inflation in pretty much each of the last 30 years. Now, review the cost for covered procedures during that time frame. The difference: price competition.

And still reserved for those who can afford it.

You can live without a $10,000 nose job.  $300,000 Surgery to remove a cancerous tumor?  Not so much.

199

Even if we bust the budget and eventually default, it is better that GOP does whatever is necessary to get votes. Didn't we learn anything in the bush years?

200 Hollowpoint is hoplessly trapped within a Möbius strip of self-enforced igorance. Healthcare isn't more expensive because it's "more advanced". Everything was, at some point, "more advanced" than what came before. It's more expensive because it's been shielded, largely for selfish political reasons but also from well-meaning stupidity, from the levelling effects human nature inevitably brings about in every other field of endeavour. The iterative cycle of supply-profit-improve that we shorthand as "market forces".

201 195 Hollowpoint,

it is 300,000 to remove the cancerous tumor because of 1) liability, 2) EPA/OSHA/DoE guidelines on Hazmat and fields 3) divorce of price structure from ability to pay for way too fucking long, 4) Uncle Sugar's bankroll for seniors.....

for fuck's sakes get the goddamned Xerox money machine out of competition with individuals.

202 $300,000 Surgery to remove a cancerous tumor? Not so much.

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:36 PM (SY2Kh)

--

1. If hospitals had to compete, the tumor removal wouldn't cost $300K

2. Healthcare is a good, not a right, so some people get better things than others.

3. If people can pay for a degree over 15 years and a house over 30, a payment plan for a surgery is perfectly feasible.

203
Gabe and Ben left out alot more than the state level.  Like a marxist federal govt that will implement whatever the hell they want, a senate that will not even take up a house bill (despite the house bending over for the senate) and lets not forget death panels.  Does anyone think this govt will actually follow the law?  Does anyone think this petulant child president would not slow boat bureaucrat anything that was a repub idea?  The dems play hard ball, the repubs watch in the stands.

204

"You can live without a $10,000 nose job. $300,000 Surgery to remove a cancerous tumor?"

The questions you're ignoring is why should the presumptive prices be set at those levels, and why can't I purchase coverage precisely for such catastrophic coverage from competitive sources?

BTW, back to the MRI machine example - the reason I brought up the Toshiba line is that they were the first to heavily market their refurb program (yes, I know, GE does it too - but I never saw them pushed until T started), offering devices at surprisingly low prices to healthcare providers - until judicious lobbying prompted some places in the US to not allow the use of such machines...

But sure, the solution is more government. And taxes.

205 Hollowpoint is hoplessly trapped within a Möbius strip of self-enforced igorance. Healthcare isn't more expensive because it's "more advanced".

There is no one reason.  That is my point.

You can't just claim that costs could be dramatically reduced with a few painless steps though.

206 Yeah, the actual cost to remove the tumor is much less. Some anesthtetic, and half a day for a guy with a good knife. According to my scientific study on the matter.

207 "IF you want to look at the wisdom of gradualism, look no further than across the aisle to see it works. Posted by: Marcus at April 25, 2013 12:15 PM (GGCsk)" Its failure is apparent from this thread. If the operating premise is, we can't challenge the public opinion of the program, we can't kill the program, we are just making a temporary shift to demonstrate we agree with the public that there's a problem and the federal government must solve it, and it's temporary because the money runs out next year... what do you think the GOP would do a year from now? They'll extend it. Temporarily. They will continually extend it temporarily. Until they decide its not worth fighting for at all.

208 "You can live without a $10,000 nose job. $300,000 Surgery to remove a cancerous tumor? Not so much. Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:36 PM (SY2Kh)" So? File bankruptcy.

209
Obamacare in any form is a purposeful malignant cancer.  That is why Congress wants to exempt itself.

Obamacare will make you less healthy as long as it exists.

Obamacare hates children and especially hates the elderly.

Obamacare will take care of pre-existing conditions by euthanasia.

Do those statements seem over-the-top?  Just look at socialized medicine the world over.  Just look at what happened when the mentally ill were institutionalized.  Caring government?

210 Here is my take on today's GOP: It is the team and coach who not only will never get you to the big bowl, but will give you 5W-6L seasons year after year, while demanding you pay seat licenses on top of season tickets. In the real world, coaches like that get fired because everyone knows they will never get the job done. But in Washington-world, Karl Rove and Lindsey Graham think that they will fire the fans instead.

211 capt hate agree

212 Good plan (maybe) -- but did the oh-so-vaunted Republican Leadership clue in the conservatives new to the game?  My guess is not.  There is infighting going on, and it starts with the old guard defending their turf from the upstarts.  There's plenty of evidence that the old comfortable crony capitalists "let's get along" with Democrats so we can all get rich and go home style republicans are busily cutting out the new comers who still have some honor and values left.  Then they can say, "see what the silly newbies did?"

213 "I agree with Ben."

of course you do, so do all the other RINOS who fail to understand that government control of the healthcare industry is the problem, not the solution.

214

So "conservative values" include letting people die if nobody will insure them and they aren't wealthy enough to pay out of pocket?

 

It's true.  I had to step over bodies in the street back in 2008.

215 Do most voters understand, or care about the distinction? Until we can answer Yes on those questions, don't expect federal politicians to put their seats on the line for 10th Amendment values. Shorter CJ: Convincing voters is haaaaard, you guys. So until then we need to just cave in and give them what they think they want. Then we can win elections and . . . ?

216 Once again ,fuck off EE & Redstate. I wish I could c$&t punch him.

217 I like the idea of something along the lines of what Indiana did in their health-care policy reform: individual health savings accounts with tax benefits that cover up to a certain amount of costs, with full coverage after a certain $$ point (I think $8k a year or something similar based on income). Thus, people have an incentive to use healthcare judiciously when they're healthy and take responsibility for their own health, but they're covered in the event that something catastrophic happens so that they don't have to go bankrupt. I'd also note that the problem with relying on employer-covered health insurance (as the ACA does) is that it makes it much tougher for employees to move around and thus negatively affects the dynamism of the labor market because the high costs of non-employer-backed health care add to the risk of changing jobs or going into business yourself.

218 You can live without a $10,000 nose job. $300,000 Surgery to remove a cancerous tumor? Not so much.

 

Posted by: Hollowpoint at April 25, 2013 01:36 PM (SY2Kh)

 

Dude.  Jess already schooled your feeble ass.  Just stop digging.

219 I haven't read the comments, so if this has been brought up I apologize, but you're an idiot. I work in the insurance field and have specialized in health insurance for more than 15 years. I really wish people would talk to those who know what they are doing before spouting off. I don't try to pretend I know the law, I talk to a lawyer, see how that works? Here's a brief tutorial:

First of all, the "problem" that high risk pools address is tiny. How many people are A) responsible for buying their own coverage and B) uninsurable for health reasons? Top end estimates suggest 6 million, it's probably a lot less. That's less than 2% of the population. You don't need a federal solution to help <2%, you need state solutions. That is, you need state solutions if you're even within shouting distance of conservative. If you're a Lib, absolutely, moar fed contrl pls! Second, the Federal pool did a lousy job at it. You had to be uninsured for at least 6 months to qualify. I'll just put off my chemo for 6 months and hope I'm not dead by then. There are state solutions that work, Maryland has one that works quite well with their BCBS MHIP high risk pool. Finally, and most importantly, attempting to craft policy, or more exactly, spend money, to show that Republicans "care" is a gambit that we lose every. single. time. It's playing the Dems game, on their home field, with a bunch of Pop Warner kids against the Baltimore Ravens. Craft policy that works, hammer home why it works, and go from there.

220 - That's less than 2% of the population. Exactly. Know who else is less than 2% of the population? Gays who actually want to marry. Know who else is less than 2% of the population? People whose health and lives are threatened due to overconsumption of Big Gulps. Know who else is (way) less than 2% of the population? Whack-jobs who commit mass murder using hi-cap magazines and so-called "assault weapons". Similarly, people murdered by such whack-jobs. Know who else is less than 2% of the population? Voting citizens who understand that it's socially suicidal to center the national discussion on wedge issues that affect less than 2% of the population instead of actually, you know, centering discussion and policy on that which will accomplish the greatest good for the greatest number of people.

221 Cheerleaders add so much to a conversation, don't they?

222   And if you don't know what a Toshiba Titan XGV is, but claim knowledge of healthcare, then Iknow I don't have totake you seriously. 

Posted by: Jess1 at April 25, 2013 01:27 PM (lbiWb)


[epic AtC rant]
 
Posted by: alexthechick - SMOD. Please? at April 25, 2013 01:30 PM (VtjlW)


/applaud

223 "15
Our very own David Frum, right here.
Posted by: soothsayer"

Exactly.  The HQ is the last place I expect or want to read progtard bullshit written to make some supposedly-enlightened "moderate" feel validated about calling conservatives idiots.  Gabriel does this silly shit all of the time, posing as a conservative while sounding remarkably like a leftist.  I think that he thinks that being a squishy "moderate" (which is simply a word standing in for the phrase "too goddamned intellectually dishonest and/or too stupid to have formed an actual stance on issues") is somehow seen as an elevated form of existence.  It ain't.  He and his ideological fellow travelers clamor for cooperation, concessions, and the waste of political and financial capital in the quest of "making OzeroCare work!!1!" or something equally retarded.

They don't get it...we WANT OzeroCare to fail. We want it to go away.  We (meaning true conservatives that loathe a larger and intrusive federal goobermint) don't want to help "fix" diddly shit.  Speaking for myself, I distrust the motives of anybody that advocates for the bullshit that Malor just babbled about.

224 Ok, one thing here. Brent Bozell is most ASSUREDLY NOT a "Tea Party" anything. Brent Bozell is a nanny-state busy body religious douchebag. Whose sole concern is smut on TV and radio (especially Howard Stern). He is the LAST thing the Tea Party is about.

225 UP WITH SMUT.

226
"I agree with Ben..."




and whoever he plagiarized the original article from.....

227
Also:

The far right, beacuse it refuses to work with their Republican colleagues on a compromise, will once again have impelled final legislation that is further to the left than would otherwise be the case.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor



All your fault, all the time.

228 Gabriel and his lefty henchmen are all about compromise.  Of course, their retarded definition of that word only means that Rethuglicans have to knuckle under to the Dimocraps.  That;s the main thing that makes progtards sleep like potatoes at night.

229 What an utter colossal stupid assload of dumbfuckery. Yes, clearly it is "proper conservatism" to spend ourselves into bankruptcy transferring all our wealth to lawyers in the hopes that no acorn will ever fall unattended. Or, you know, people could actually do simple, focused things to help AFTER we get rid of the fucking giant life-crushing infinitely-expanding bureaucracy that is preventing us from doing so. Kind of like the whole border security *then* immigration reform thing the Dems and the RINOs are *locked* in opposition against. I guess people really are just too stupid to have anything good.

230 "The far right, beacuse it refuses to work with their Republican colleagues on a compromise, will once again have impelled final legislation that is further to the left than would otherwise be the case." The only thing making it the final bill is dozens of Republicans voting with Democrats for it. If dozens of Republicans are willing to vote with Democrats to enact bad law, the problem is NOT that they didn't get bought off by the far right. The problem is, they're in Congress.

231 Gabe, The daily beast is hiring. GTFO

232 I love that Obama got elected twice yet True Cons still insist on living in their bubble. 

I think some of you have read too many "Why America is Totally Right-of-Center, You Guys!" books and blogs.  We aren't going anywhere until the Right starts treating politics as politics and not as a family squabble.


P.S.  Many of the cobloggers share these heretical thoughts, but Gabe gets singled out, because...