The Biggest Threat to Obama's Health Care "Reform" - Reality - Page 54

Are you honestly trying to make the argument that a prisoner is free?

jazz, I would actually disagree that there not degrees of freedom and liberty. I think there are.

In the US, broadly speaking, there are varying degrees of liberty and not-liberty depending on what we're talking about. Sadly the trend, broadly speaking, has been toward much less liberty over time.

With regard to the specific topic here, I would argue that the US healthcare market is not more free than other countries it is differently unfree. Meaning that there is the same (or probably even less) market freedom in the US, it is simply structured differently than the unfreedom in other countries. Is it much worse? In some wasy yes and in other ways no. It is different though. But this difference does not amount to an actual free market (or really even close to one) in the US which is the error "I used to be brussell" is making.

I do see your point, here. If you are able to do a certain thing you want to do, that means you are free in that particular instance, right? Let's turn this concept on its head. Are there degrees of slavery? Can slavery and freedom truly coexist?

Or is the idea that we are "free by degrees" just an illusion?

Sure, you're free to drive a car, start a business, or travel to other countries...until the State says you aren't. If the State can arbitrarily limit our freedom whenever it wants, are we truly free?

Yes.



Certainly.



I think they do...but not well...and probably not long term.



I don't think it's just an illusion.



So that's a fair question. I would say you are free up to that point but living in a precarious state of freedom.

I suppose from the perspective that our natural state is freedom and it is only limited by the aggression of others (or our own stupidity), that would make sense.

So yes, tonton, you are right. A prisoner who has grounds privileges does have more freedom than a prisoner in solitary.

But still, is he free?

The U.S. healthcare system may or may not me more free-market than others. But is it free-market?

Yeah...and I'd argue that it is so far from freedom that it would an insult to the word to even call it that.

Wow I feel like I just walked into a Ron Paul for President meeting. Are you guys going to start debating the morality of zip codes next?

Look, people in the US rely more on private health insurance than in other countries, but we have the most expensive health care and yet poorer health outcomes than most other countries. That doesn't speak well to the efficiency of private health insurance.

We can also look at variation in existing systems. For example, Switzerland has a private insurance system, whereas many other European countries have a public system. And yet Switzerland is one of the least efficient of the European countries, and the most efficient ones are the most socialized.

Now, you guys always say that we need an even more pure free-market system to really see how great it can be. But of course there aren't any examples of such a system. So we're left with the fact that the only actual existing evidence is overwhelmingly negative, and the only positive evidence is purely hypothetical.

But they're not relying on a freely competitive market, which where this discussion with me started.



So what? We have both reasoning and (many) examples from other market sectors to guide us.



That's not what we have at all. That situation only exists in your imagination.

Right, the conservative evidence is "von Mises wrote a paper."

Why don't you just admit it if you're unable to contribute something useful to the discussion. Oh wait, you just did.

Most "conservatives" don't know who von Mises is.

Libertarians are neither conservative nor liberal (at least in the modern senses of the words), and I would say libertarians are far more familiar with von Mises.

Libertarians are not conservative....

Do mainstream conservatives advocate legalization of all drugs?

Do mainstream conservatives advocate bringing our troops home and a non-interventionist foreign policy?

Libertarians do.

I could go on.

Do Libertarians ever, ever, EVER vote for a Democrat?

I don't speak for all libertarians. Not all libertarians vote because they believe it's just validating a corrupt/rigged system.

I do vote, but not according to party. I vote according to principle. If Ron Paul ran as an Independent, Democrat, Libertarian, or whatever, I'd vote for him all the same.

In the 2012 election, If Dr. Paul doesn't win the GOP nomination, I'll be voting 3rd party.

As far as Democrats go, I think one of the most prominent Dems I agree with on more than one issue is Dennis Kucinich. But I don't know that I would vote for him.

It just not ok to pick on certain professionals. To say "You are a doctor, therefore you have to become servant of the state, accepting whatever money we say, and delivering whatever treatments we say." What about me? I am a software developer, and more and more critical systems are controlled by software, am I next?

No, all men should be free, including doctors. Especially doctors in fact, because I don't want someone bitter and disenchanted operating on me.

How about lawyers?

Yes, lawyers should be free also. Well except, maybe, those who ask for our votes by promising to make others less free.

Why do you hate the constitution?

I don't. Why do you?

Try the Sixth Amendment.

Yes, and?

Never mind.

No problem.

Employers could save billions by dropping workers from health plans, report shows

 

 

 

 

Surprise, surprise.

Hmm...maybe a good reason to get some single payer going.  Healthcare should be decoupled from work, anyway.  It keeps people in jobs in which they are mistreated or under-appreciated out of fear of losing their healthcare.  Decoupling healthcare from employment will help level the playing field for the workers.

 

Well that was the plan all along. They knew this would be the side-effect. It was their backdoor way to single-payer.

 

 

 

Absolutely agree. We disagree on the means however.

Yes, you would prefer to throw everyone to the lions.  Christian revenge?

 

No.

 

*sigh*

 

Really, BR.  Really?  You are constant as the Northern Star.  

 

 

 

Right, because gee....you guys....awww shucks....didn't see this coming.  Also, no.  

 

 

 

Agreed there.  But while we're on the topic, do you know how we got here?  Wage controls.  That's how.  During WWII, FDR's wage controls prompted companies to start offering fringe benefits, one of which was company paid medical.  Over time, most employers adopted this to attract workers.  Eventually it became an expectation to have benefits.  And now...gee...we're going a step further:  Now it's "right" to have insurance.  

 

 

 

That's your concern?  That might be an issue, but it also: 

 

1.  Is costing employers dearly, causing them to make employees contribute more and cut coverage. 

2.  Means that when one gets fired or quits, health insurance virtually disappears as COBRA is unaffordable for most.  

 

 

 

 

Oh boy, the Workers of the World speech.  No, BR.  It's not about "leveling the playing field" for the poor little union factory worker or laborer.  You always portray work as if it's the 1920's, with lines of coal-faced men lining up with their tin pails and hard hats, just trying to earn a decent wage from the greedy, big oil/coal/random-evil-business.  Please.

 

Decoupling is the way to go, but as MJ notes we disagree on the why and how.  First, we should do it to let individuals make their own decisions, not force them into the Borg-like collective you apparently support.  

 

Secondly, we should open competition in the market while preserving some basic protections for consumers (e.g. opening competition across state lines, preserving pre-existing conditions protections for those that are currently insurable/insured).  

 

Third, we need to change our entire mindset of what medical insurance is for.  We expect it to pay for everything. This has made healthcare the racket it is. I don't care about cost a consumer of healthcare, because I pay $5-15 for a doctor's visit, $10-$35 for a script, and $40 for major surgery.  In turn, this means my doctor gets to get paid his insurance co-pay (and mine) every time he sees me, which of course includes authorizing a prescription I've been on for 6 years.  The whole system makes demand skyrocket and supply stay the same or get smaller.  One of the best illustrations of our flawed mindset is the following:  "Imagine how expensive your car insurance would be if, in addition to collision and liability, it covered gas, tires, oil changes and car washes."   Yet that's exactly what we expect our health insurance to do.  

 

Or, I suppose we could go the way you propose:  Free unlimited healthcare for all!  Weeeeeeee!    

More ways to make money off the sick and injured-

"When Ray White’s son was about 9 years old, he struck a tree branch while riding his bike. Within minutes, an ambulance whisked him off to the emergency room. The boy recovered, but many months and phone calls later, Mr. White’s insurance company still had not paid the $200 ambulance bill, even though the insurer had assured him it was covered. He finally decided it was easier to pay it himself.

But by then, it was already too late. Unbeknown to Mr. White, the debt had been reported to the credit bureaus. It was only when he and his wife went to refinance the $240,000 mortgage on their home in Lewisville, Tex., last month — nearly six years after the accident — that he learned the bill had shaved about 100 points from his credit score. Even with no other debts, a healthy income and otherwise pristine credit, the couple had to pay an extra $4,000 to secure a lower interest rate."
~ http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/your-money/medical-debts-can-leave-stains-on-credit-scores.html?_r=1&hp

Please explain in detail how ObamaCare fixes that? 

 

Good question.  Also, I'd love to know why a $200 bill can't simply be paid or explained.  Usually when these things come up they can be dealt with pretty quickly without a major impact on settlement.  Sounds to me like it was the mortgage broker or bank doing the exploitation!  Also, has anyone asked why this family hasn't seen the freecreditreport.com commercials?  ;)  

Ready for more reality?

 

 

"In Britain, the government itself runs the hospitals and employs the doctors. We’ve all heard scare stories about how that works in practice; these stories are false." - Paul Krugman NYT 

 

Just saw that story.  Yup. 

"Why Life Expectancy Will Decline Under ObamaCare"

 

"What DC Schools Can Teach Us about Obamacare"

 

Well, maybe there's a chance that someone will get elected and repeal it.

 

Interestingly, Democrats voted for a Republican. Twice. Gary Johnson.

I do not believe this. Everything you read in the media is not true all the time.
 

Robert Reich on government-run healthcare