$12,000 voucher?

[Brutus]

So instead of eliminating competition the bill promotes competition by eliminating the monopoly that existed when the bill was written.

Too stupid and of course perfectly, exactly liberal!! Are you saying we have competition in health care and so all the Republicans calling for interstate competition are mistaken about the need for more capitalist competition to drive down costs and to drive quality up? Yes or No???

See why we are 100% positive a liberal will have a low IQ??

 

[Greenbeard]

Why does it need to be "governed" at all?

All markets are governed. That's why "free market" is not generally synonymous with "anarchy."

 

[Trajan]

$12,000 VOUCHER?

GOP has a lot of explaining to do on how a private healthcare provider can insure a senior for a $12,000 voucher and provide affordable and efficient healthcare. And how seniors can afford it. For instance, a senior who gets $1,000 a month in Social Security and cannot pay premiums, co-pays and deductions for medical service. If a senior make a trip to ER for a fall it can cost $10,000, Rehab stay, $25,000 after a costly hospital and hip surgery. Plus a walker and other medical supplies. Seniors have healthcare problem that younger people do not have. A senior getting $1,000 in Social Security qualify for Medicaid assistance that pay Medicare premiums, co-pays, deduction, a power chair, hip replacements, MIRs, Rehab straw with physical therapy, home health nurse, etc. In other words low income senior do not pay anything for medical care except for co-pay for prescriptions. Medicaid pays the 20% that Medicare do not pay. Seniors make lots of trips to ER.

Private Healthcare Providers cannot afford to insure senior for a $12,000 voucher without going bankrupt or charging senior high co-pays and deduction, etc. And most senior will not be able to afford private healthcare insurance.

Voucher program for seniors is a joke that private healthcare cannot afford and seniors cannot afford either.

What is the advantage of being able to choose which private healthcare provider you want? Is one be able to provide more benefits than the other? Will one cost more depending on the benefits it provide? What do a senior get for $12,000? Will all the vouchers be for $12,000?

I would like to here the GOP explain how the voucher will work beside being able to choose the plan they want. That is all I have heard so far and I cannot see the advantage is doing that. There are two kind of seniors. Low income and higher income depending on their Social Security. Will a voucher cover long term healthcare in a rest home, etc?

I'd like you to explain how, if Private Health Care Providers will go bankrupt by providing care to seniors for $12,000 a year premiums, how our country will not go bankrupt if we provided unlimited care for free?

as it applies to long term care I think ( class), if I recall correctly Sibelius has some trouble convincing anyone that they didn't have to rework it from the git go?



The final area of Obamacare that Sebelius was questioned on was the Community Living Assistance Services and Support (CLASS) program, a new government-run entitlement for long-term-care insurance. The Secretary agreed that CLASS—as written in the law—is fiscally unsustainable and would require a massive infusion of taxpayer funds. She mentioned that the law allows HHS discretion in changing the program’s design, mostly through tightening eligibility, to prevent an adverse-selection death spiral. Skepticism abounds, however, that HHS can actually find the right formula to fix CLASS, given the program’s fundamentally flawed structure.

Moreover, Sebelius’s interpretation of the CLASS program is confusing. She remarked that “the program is designed for people to set aside their own money and then draw out their own money with no taxpayer support. The framework is not perhaps designed to mandate that only a few options could be available since people are basically spending their own money.” She makes CLASS sound like a government savings program rather than what the law says it is—a government insurance program that collects premiums and then pays claims to beneficiaries that meet the qualifications. The CLASS program represents government overreach and is a potential threat to taxpayers regardless of the Secretary’s apparent misunderstanding of it. But to inform the debate going forward, this misunderstanding needs to be resolved.

Secretary Sebelius Questioned Before the Senate Finance Committee | The Foundry

 

[Brutus]

GOP has a lot of explaining to do on how a private healthcare provider can insure a senior for a $12,000 voucher and provide affordable and efficient healthcare.

12,000 is the amount health care costs per year so a 12k voucher should pay for it just fine. Of course the huge advantage is that with customers shopping, price will be cut in half; perhaps even to European levels and our standard of living will go way up!!


It would be another capitalist miracle; sort like what China experienced when it switched to capitalism.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why does it need to be "governed" at all?

All markets are governed. That's why "free market" is not generally synonymous with "anarchy."

What entity governs the book market?

 

[Greenbeard]

Depends what aspect you're referring to. Are you asking about copyright law, publishing contracts, digital rights, the legal obligations of a vendor who accepts payment as a part of a transaction, etc? If a some governing entity is recognizing property rights or contract rights or enforcing rules of transaction, or anything like that (i.e. the things that make markets possible), you've got governance.

 

[The Rabbi]

Depends what aspect you're referring to. Are you asking about copyright law, publishing contracts, digital rights, the legal obligations of a vendor who accepts payment as a part of a transaction, etc? If a some governing entity is recognizing property rights or contract rights or enforcing rules of transaction, or anything like that (i.e. the things that make markets possible), you've got governance.

OK. I'd settle for the same level of governance for health insurance.
Care to explain why that isn't workable?

 

[Greenbeard]

You'll have to clarify what you mean. The "level" of governance as I've been using it and as it's generally used refers to where the authority sits (e.g. at a federal level, a multi-state non-federal level, the state level, etc). That is, what is the scale of the decision-making authority held by whatever the governing body turns out to be.

When it comes to health insurance, many liberals and conservatives alike seem to prefer a federal-level governance.

 

[Brutus]

When it comes to health insurance, many liberals and conservatives alike seem to prefer a federal-level governance.

1) conservative philosophy does not care much where the governance is so long as it is slight, although, the preference is always for state control since the power then would be split among 50 states as opposed to concentrated in one dangerous place where abuse would then be catastrophic for the entire country.

2) much of the action now will affect Federal governance since so much power has already been dangerously concentrated there by liberal who lack the IQ to see the danger our Founders saw.

 

[Greenbeard]

they made interstate competition illegal. Imagine how much toothpaste would cost if each state had its own requirements!!!!!

1) conservative philosophy does not care much where the governance is so long as it is slight, although, the preference is always for state control since the power then would be split among 50 states as opposed to concentrated in one dangerous place where abuse would then be catastrophic for the entire country.

Do you want a uniform national market or do you want state-level control and the state-to-state variation that implies?

 

[Zona]

Can someone explain what happens to a person who has diabetes or cancer and that 12k voucher gets used up in a month. Then what happens to them?

They should have the courtesy to just die?

What is your plans republicans?

 

[Zona]

Let me get this right...give vouchers to people (what happens when the vouchers are depleted by the way), cut the part that takes away the donut hole, so that affects the 65 and over cowd immediatly, LOWER taxes on the rich and de regulate wall street even more.

Great plan republicans. Lets see how this works out.

 

[Brutus]

Do you want a uniform national market or do you want state-level control and the state-to-state variation that implies?

conservative intellectuals want international free trade based on Republican capitalist principles

 

[Brutus]

Can someone explain what happens to a person who has diabetes or cancer and that 12k voucher gets used up in a month. Then what happens to them?

They should have the courtesy to just die?

What is your plans republicans?

actually the 12k is for insurance. Sorry!!! A liberal will be so desperate to demonstrate his moral superiority that he will forget to think!! Liberals are really morality bigots

 

[Brutus]

Great plan republicans. Lets see how this works out.

The Republican plan is designed to control costs and increase quality by introducing capitalistic competition to health care.


Imagine someone who jogs for fun and someone who races in life and death competition? Who would be a faster runner? Now you understand competion and how it makes us better. Not so hard was it?

 

[Greenbeard]

conservative intellectuals want international free trade based on Republican capitalist principles

What are you talking about? It may have slipped your mind but we're discussing health insurance here, not international trade.

The Republican plan is designed to control costs and increase quality by introducing capitalistic competition to health care.

What Republican plan? Are you referring to Ryan's Medicare proposal. That's based on a "tightly" regulated, federally-administered exchange subject to guaranteed issue and community rating rules, as well as benefit standards. This, of course, is a concept you've already denounced ("an insurance exchange is not a free capitalist market because it is mandated and managed by the government! Is that really over your head?").

Now it's a prime example of "capitalistic competition"?

 

[Brutus]

conservative intellectuals want international free trade based on Republican capitalist principles

What are you talking about? It may have slipped your mind but we're discussing health insurance here, not international trade.

the principles are the same. Republicans want a uniform national or international market for health care and automobiles, not one where each state requires its own products and where competition is, in effect, illegal.

The Republican plan is designed to control costs and increase quality by introducing capitalistic competition to health care.

What Republican plan? Are you referring to Ryan's Medicare proposal. That's based on a "tightly" regulated, federally-administered exchange subject to guaranteed issue and community rating rules, as well as benefit standards. This, of course, is a concept you've already denounced ("an insurance exchange is not a free capitalist market because it is mandated and managed by the government! Is that really over your head?").

Now it's a prime example of "capitalistic competition"?

too stupid!! 1) No one said it was a prime example. It is a modest example at best. 2) When BO denounces it he denounces it as a voucher plan because that is its most salient point. As a guy with 2 communist parents who votes to the left of Bernie Sanders and supports single payer he lacks the IQ to understand voucher competition, as do all liberals. BO really wants all industries socialized. Why would he stop at one???

 

[Zona]

AFter the 12k is spent, then what? Die?

 

[Brutus]

AFter the 12k is spent, then what? Die?

its guaranteed issue so would cover all. Its so good to have a liberal morality bigot looking out for old folks

 

[Greenbeard]

the principles are the same. Republicans want a uniform national or international market for health care and automobiles, not one where each state requires its own products and where competition is, in effect, illegal.

Indeed, so when you said "the preference is always for state control," you were a bit confused. Federal legislation is what you seek. That puts you in good company with the liberals.

too stupid!! 1) No one said it was a prime example. It is a modest example at best.

By "modest example," I take it you mean it "is not a free capitalist market because it is mandated and managed by the government"?

2) When BO denounces it he denounces it as a voucher plan because that is its most salient point.

He denounces it as a plan that leaves seniors without coverage in order to make the federal balance sheet look better. That's its most salient point.

its guaranteed issue so would cover all. Its so good to have a liberal morality bigot looking out for old folks

Guaranteed issue means exclusions on the basis of medical history aren't allowed; it doesn't mean seniors can magically afford the premiums. So no, it doesn't cover all.