• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

What is the GOP plan for healthcare reform?

Biscuit said:
But back to my question - what should someone like me do if the ACA is dismantled? Am I just SOL?
Click to expand...

As an outside observer with some interest in US politics, this seems to be exactly their plan.

At the kinder end of the party, the idea seems to be : Allow insurance companies to do what they will; those who can't get/afford healthcare wait until it gets serious, then go to emergency. Never mind that this costs far more, it's a matter of principle.

At the nastier end of the party it's more like : Allow insurance companies to do what they will; those who can't get/afford healthcare should just suffer and/or die. If life was that important to them then they would have gotten healthcare somehow.

Oh... and the crucial aspect of it seems to be the "allow insurance companies to do what they will" part. A nasty suspicious mind might think that the whole aim of their policy was to maximise the profits of insurance companies.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
Sadly I don't speak for the GOP, but here's my plan, in three easy steps:

1. Don't just do something, sit there!

2. If something must be done, let each state experiment with its own solutions. If Massachusetts-care works so well, let California decide whether or not to adopt it. Fifty social laboratories for the win!

3. If the federal government must step in, let it do the least amount necessary to address the most dire needs. Let it take great care not to impose sweeping changes that risk costly, irreversible unintended consequences.
Click to expand...

To do this shouldn't we start by axing medicare? If the states feel the elderly need care let them fund it.
 
Seismosaurus said:
At the nastier end of the party it's more like : Allow insurance companies to do what they will; those who can't get/afford healthcare should just suffer and/or die. If life was that important to them then they would have gotten healthcare somehow.
Click to expand...

That's just it. I can get health insurance, I can afford it. It will not cover my pre-existing condition. Tomorrow all that changes (well Jan 1st anyway). What do those who wish to get rid of the ACA suggest I do instead?
 
Magyar said:
Why dont we have 50 armies, i mean surely kansas knows far better then MA as to what it needs to protect itself?
Click to expand...
That this is so blatantly wrong is one of the few really good roles to have a federal government in the first place.

Though, NATO seems to get by just fine with a coalition of independent armed forces, without needing a North Atlantic Federal Nanny State. So your straw man may not be all chaff...

Funny how the whole free market horse manure is always the fall back of the corporate appoligists when it comes to doing something for the middle and lower class, but goes right out the window when its in the interest if said corp overlords.

"obamacare" is socialist. But a 100% republican backed law making it ILLEGAL to negotiate on the open market to buy medicine is A OK with rightwing nuts
Click to expand...
Funny how none of that addresses anything in my post. (ETA: Not meant as a criticism; we're obviously both riding our respective hobby horses, and I'm as little interested in jousting with you as I am in dismounting. Carry on!)
 
Last edited:
sir drinks-a-lot said:
Not sure what the official GOP plan is, but I do know that ACA will be a complete and utter failure.

Prestige makes some good points above.
Click to expand...

OK. The ACA is defunded and the rules are thrown out. We are back to pre ACA days. What next? What should someone in my situation do?
 
theprestige said:
Sadly I don't speak for the GOP, but here's my plan, in three easy steps:

1. Don't just do something, sit there!

2. If something must be done, let each state experiment with its own solutions. If Massachusetts-care works so well, let California decide whether or not to adopt it. Fifty social laboratories for the win!

3. If the federal government must step in, let it do the least amount necessary to address the most dire needs. Let it take great care not to impose sweeping changes that risk costly, irreversible unintended consequences.
Click to expand...

I travel through 19 states a year & spend significant time (a month or more) in 4 of them as part of my job. Most of the time my family is with me. How would your plan help?
 
theprestige said:
That this is so blatantly wrong is one of the few really good roles to have a federal government in the first place.
Click to expand...
Says you. Others think the health of it's citizens is indeed the role of a federal government.
Though, NATO seems to get by just fine with a coalition of independent armed forces, without needing a North Atlantic Federal Nanny State. So your straw man may not be all chaff...
Click to expand...
Wow, that's so out in left field, an example so divorced from reality, I'm not sure how to respond.
 
The GOP intent in a nutshell:

Bankrupt all the old folks and take their money.

The GOP's been doing their best to raid the boomer generation for the last 20 years, and funneling it through their for-profit hospitals is just another part of it.
 
Biscuit said:
That's just it. I can get health insurance, I can afford it. It will not cover my pre-existing condition. Tomorrow all that changes (well Jan 1st anyway). What do those who wish to get rid of the ACA suggest I do instead?
Click to expand...

Die.
 
As far as I can tell, the GOP has no plan. They have an ideology. They want to minimize the role of the gov't and let the private sector meet the economic needs of society. That model is successful in many industries, but it doesn't work well for health care. But the GOP rank and file don't seem to understand this, and their elected leaders are pandering to their ignorance instead of presenting rational policy options.

Maybe hospitals should refuse to treat anyone who shows up in the ER without money or insurance. After all, people don't have a right to plumbing services just because a pipe breaks. They have to fix it themselves, or come up with the money to hire a plumber. That's how a market economy works. Why should health care be any different?

If we had a system like that for a year or so, teabaggers might start to wise up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom