Ronnie Speaks out on Health Care

[fab]

Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRdLp..._embedded#t=49

[Donald Aquilano]

Great video. Its amazing how far ahead Ronald Reagan was concerning this issue. Medicare was their foot in the door.

[500,000]

Now that GM is owned by Obama, the electric cars will put the ma and pop gas stations out of business.

Here in Michigan (democrat governor) the feds gave alot of money to start a car cell business that will produce batteries (Government Batteries)

Here in Michigan the state police main head quarters is being built by a no-bid company. The construction company is related to a democrat representative. This building will cost alot more then if is was a open bid contractor.

Fear, Fear the Democrats and most other political parties.

[jberryhill]

That's right, BD, the Reagan speech in question was about Medicare.

Because, you know, insurance companies would otherwise just fall all over themselves providing affordable health insurance to the segment of the population most prone to illness and most able to afford rate fluctuations.

But you get the gold star in this thread for correctly identifying the program to which Reagan was objecting.

[fab]

But you get the gold star in this thread for correctly identifying the program to which Reagan was objecting.

Did I have to to put that in the title. He was speaking about concepts.

Because, you know, insurance companies would otherwise just fall all over themselves providing affordable health insurance to the segment of the population most prone to illness and most able to afford rate fluctuations.

Free markets fluctuate by market factors. What causes fluctuation of bread prices? BTW, do you have any idea what doctors pay for malpractice insurance? Do you know how many medical students are accepted in the US?
BTW, what segment of society is most prone to illness?

[jberryhill]

Free markets fluctuate by market factors.

I see. And the annual demand for, say, appendectomies is determined by what?

It is determined by the number of people who get appendicitis. Raising the price of appendectomies does not reduce the demand for them. Lowering the price of appendectomies does not increase the demand for them either. It's not like there's a whole lot of people sitting around saying, "Gee, if they ever get the price down below $100, I'm gonna get me an appendectomy."

BTW, what segment of society is most prone to illness?

Newborns. And that risk is compounded by anti-vaccine conspiracy nuts. But the US ranks around 37th in infant mortality.

However, there are more people over 65 in this country than there are people under 1.

Do I understand correctly, though, that you are opposed to Medicare, and that those old freeloaders should buy their own insurance?

[fab]

I see. And the annual demand for, say, appendectomies is determined by what?

By doctors costs, hospital costs and insurance companies costs. One insurance company, no competition, no necessity to improve.

Do I understand correctly, though, that you are opposed to Medicare, and that those old freeloaders should buy their own insurance?

I thought you didn't like people reading into others words, why not try that yourself.

To answer your question though. Lets start with who has applied for and or used medicare. Lets start from me. Yes I've applied, and gone through the process, have you?

What do you think of Medicare, welfare?
How do they treat their applicants, what treatment do they get, is everyone who deserves it get it, and how economically efficient are they.

The answer is, the system is failing! Fix it before expanding it.
Try looking up Milton Freedman on youtube, to find an answer to some of these questions.

One things for sure. When I was a child my father had an excellent health coverage plan, that I highly doubt any socialist plan offers.

Choice of Doctor, free medical (with a small deductible), health care, dental care, including Orthodontics, and free glasses. Wow, what a luxury.

BTW, have you ever visited a county hospital.

Try doing some practical research!

Oh, I forgot lawsuits.

I should of said Medicaid instead medicare.

[INFORG]

I see. And the annual demand for, say, appendectomies is determined by what?

It is determined by the number of people who get appendicitis. Raising the price of appendectomies does not reduce the demand for them. Lowering the price of appendectomies does not increase the demand for them either. It's not like there's a whole lot of people sitting around saying, "Gee, if they ever get the price down below $100, I'm gonna get me an appendectomy."

I certainly hope your deconstructive logic is merely a debate tool and not how your mind truly operates. The quoted statement is beyond ridiculous. An appendectomy is not a commodity or physical good. The market object here is a "service", which equals the total value equation of the doctor's time plus expertise/skill divided by the market total of all doctor's time and skill in the market.

There are many things that are "must haves" that get priced accordingly by the free market. In a hypothetical free market, you would pay for your own care and because of the fact that you are trading your own money (earned through labor), you would make the best decision possible weighing all the factors. In the aggregate, prices would reach equilibrium.

I have a feeling that if this debate were about how the government was going to provide "legal service" insurance and start setting the rates you can charge, the clients you must take, and the services you must perform, you would be a HUGE free market advocate

While we may be stuck with Medicare in the short term, there are free market proposals in existence that could address and get us off of the government teet in the long term. I'll dig up some links, but I'm sure if you check the Cato website, you can find some ideas.

What about Mackey at Whole Foods and some of the ideas he is throwing out there?

Regarding mortality rates, you do realize that these numbers are self reported by countries and extremely suspect right? Do you really believe Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the US? I'll link to a blog post that has a variety of links regarding those statistics:
http://www.reason.com/blog/show/119199.html

One of the big factors on the life expectancy chart is the number of deaths from car accidents and homicides. If you factor that out, do you know where we stand?


I think we should all start going to town hall meetings and calling our representatives to get this new "Legal Care Reform" kicked off. I mean, if legal services are good, shouldn't they be free?

[fab]

Here's another link - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VW8Ko9EsMdU

I have a feeling that if this debate were about how the government was going to provide "legal service" insurance and start setting the rates you can charge, the clients you must take, and the services you must perform, you would be a HUGE free market advocate

Good to know someone else said what I'm thinking!

I certainly hope your deconstructive logic is merely a debate tool and not how your mind truly operates. The quoted statement is beyond ridiculous. An appendectomy is not a commodity or physical good. The market object here is a "service", which equals the total value equation of the doctor's time plus expertise/skill divided by the market total of all doctor's time and skill in the market.

Ditto!

[jberryhill]

I have a feeling that if this debate were about how the government was going to provide "legal service" insurance and start setting the rates you can charge, the clients you must take, and the services you must perform, you would be a HUGE free market advocate

Ummm... the things you don't know are sometimes breathtaking.

Do you know that a lot of states CAN and DO require attorneys to work for extremely low compensation.

Any attorney in NJ, PA, and a lot of other states, is subject to be called up for public defender service. It's a requirement for maintaining your bar license.

That's because anyone who gets arrested is Constitutionally ENTITLED to an attorney.

I'm sure you've seen the cop shows on TV. You know the part about "You have the right to an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you."

Where in Hell do you think those attorneys come from? Outer space?

You already have "legal service insurance" if you are arrested for a crime.

It's provided to you, free, by the government, because you have a right to it.

In some states, attorneys assigned to mandatory defense work are paid a small amount.

In other states, attorneys typically have to put in 50 hours of mandatory FREE work. (http://www.abanet.org/legalservices/...hicsrules.html)

So, here's the deal. If a doctor punches me and breaks my nose, he gets a free attorney. I don't get a free doctor.

But, you did make me laugh with that one. It would be helpful if you knew your rights as a citizen.

To answer your question though. Lets start with who has applied for and or used medicare. Lets start from me. Yes I've applied, and gone through the process, have you?

You are over 65? I had no idea.

I'm in my forties. I won't be looking at Medicare for another 20 years.

But I really had no idea you were that old. Most domainers are on the younger end of things.

[INFORG]

More deconstructive logic John?

Does the government currently set the rates you can charge all of your other clients?

Do I get a "free" lawyer regardless of my ability to pay?

Your hypothetical doctor absolutely WOULD NOT get a free lawyer - well maybe after Obamacare his income will qualify

Paying what amounts to a tax (via labor) in order to be licensed in some states is not the same as a "single payer" plan that you think is good for healthcare. Let's go single payer in legal care and let the government set all of your rates.

You don't detail the average amount of free hours those NJ and PA lawyers actually have to put in. Got a number?

Of those 50 hours in other states, how many are actually spent by the attorney and not staff? I've seen my legal bills, you guys charge an hour to refill your coffee mug.

[Gerry]

Yes, I would love to hear what a dead president has to say from the grave.

One who was known as the Teflon president and one who was known to strike a deal with a terrorist nation to trade arms for hostages and later to trade money for weapons to outfit another terrorist regime.

We can all learn something about detente, government spending, healthcare (God knows he needed that government healthcare policy when he was shot), and about welfare policy.

[fab]

I don't get a free doctor.

If you go to the hospital, are they allowed to refuse you admission, medicare, welfare, State plans, including but not inclusive of State subsidized universities providing health care, County Hospitals John, keep laughing. Try addressing some of the issues instead of bashing, and playing dodge ball.

[INFORG]

Fab,

JB prefers to present his arguments as red herrings, wrapped in canards, and served up as a non sequitur

I guess that's what makes him a good lawyer, and why all lawyers should be banned from politics

[fab]

Oh, and I forgot VA.

and why all lawyers should be banned from politics

The real reform should be Lawsuits. What country in the world has as many, and as costly lawsuits as the US does.

You are over 65? I had no idea.

I'm in my forties. I won't be looking at Medicare for another 20 years.

But I really had no idea you were that old. Most domainers are on the younger end of things.

No, I'm also in my forties, and this was a while ago. I was in college, and my wife had no health care. In California we had Medical (medicare in Ca.) for those unemployed, which was available through the welfare department. I remember how the agent tried convincing me to take food stamps, and whatever else they could offer, although I was only interested in health care. In the end, I was so disgusted we just lived without.

I should of said Medicaid instead medicare.

[INFORG]

Anyone who wants to read about real, free market reform proposals, here is a link:

http://healthcare.cato.org/

Cato is well regarded as a "small l" libertarian think tank and doesn't conform to the left/right dogma, so you heavily partisan folks on both sides may not enjoy.

a sample:

What Is the Free-Market Approach to Health Care Reform?
.

President Obama is right when he says that the U.S. health care system needs reform. Although this country provides the finest care in the world, our health care system has serious problems. It costs too much. Too many people lack health insurance. And quality can be uneven.

But a government takeover of the health care system, as proposed by the president and some in Congress, would be a step in the wrong direction. Instead, we should pursue a uniquely American solution, one that builds on free markets, competition and choice.

1.Let individuals control their health care dollars, and free them to choose from a wide variety of health plans and providers.
2.Move away from a health care system dominated by employer-provided health insurance. Health insurance should be personal and portable, controlled by individuals themselves rather than government or an employer. Employment-based insurance hides much of the true cost of health care to consumers, thereby encouraging over-consumption. It also limits consumer choice, since employers get final say over what type of insurance a worker will receive. It means people who don’t receive insurance through work are put at a significant and costly disadvantage. And, of course, it means that if you lose your job, you are likely to end up uninsured as well.
3.Changing from employer to individual insurance requires changing the tax treatment of health insurance. The current system excludes the value of employer-provided insurance from a worker’s taxable income. However, a worker purchasing health insurance on their own must do so with after-tax dollars. This provides a significant tilt towards employer-provided insurance, which should be reversed. Workers should receive a standard deduction, a tax credit, or, better still, large Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) for the purchase of health insurance, regardless of whether they receive it through their job or purchase it on their own.
4.We need to increase competition among both insurers and health providers. People should be allowed to purchase health insurance across state lines. One study estimated that that adjustment alone could cover 17 million uninsured Americans without costing taxpayers a dime.
5.We also need to rethink medical licensing laws to encourage greater competition among providers. Nurse practitioners, physician assistants, midwives, and other non-physician practitioners should have far greater ability to treat patients. Doctors and other health professionals should be able to take their licenses from state to state. We should also be encouraging innovations in delivery such as medical clinics in retail outlets.
6.Congress should give Medicare enrollees a voucher, let them choose any health plan on the market, and let them keep the savings if they choose an economical plan. Medicare could even give larger vouchers to the poor and sick to ensure they could afford coverage.
7.The expansion of “health status insurance” would protect many of those with preexisting conditions. States may also wish to experiment with high risk pools to ensure coverage for those with high cost medical conditions.

[fab]

Thanks for the link. Some of these suggestions I've heard before, especially from Hannity.

[INFORG]

Hannity tends to co-opt the libertarian viewpoint when it suits his ideology and gives him a club to wield on the other guys. Full disclosure, I despise most right wing positions as much as the left wing positions. Both sides seem to abandon the libertarian viewpoint whenever they have power and concentrate on pushing the socialist and fascist agenda - sometimes they even push the other guy's agenda (i.e. Bush's prescription drugs and no child left behind, and Obama's let's send some troops to Afghanistan and stay in Iraq forever).

I almost root for some of these agendas, if only to hasten the time we can push the "reset" button on our government.

Most people believe that the government that governs least, governs best. Unfortunately, they also believe that just means on stuff that doesn't benefit them personally. Republicans crying about constitutional limits is like Britney Spears crying about the tabloids.

[Raider]

Yes, I would love to hear what a dead president has to say from the grave.

Obama is living proof that we can learn more from a dead President, than from a live one.

[DomainsInc]

Now that GM is owned by Obama, the electric cars will put the ma and pop gas stations out of business.

Big oil already did that. Do you really see them anymore besides occasionally in the sticks?