CDZ Ben Shapiro explains why healthcare is not a Right, it is a commodity, and subject to freedom...

NO ONE, EVER in the history of mankind, has recommended the government build hospitals that they run, for our health care.

Universal Healthcare is simply MEDICARE....you get to choose your hospital and doctors that are in the marketplace, and the gvt gives you a voucher/via a card, to pay for 80% of it and you pay the other 20%.


Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

That has been the pitch all along, and look where we are; the single most expensive healthcare system on the planet with some of the shittiest outcome metrics amongst advanced post-industrial nations. Sure, let's move everything over to for profit totally unaccountable private corporations. "Competition" is a lie, we've never had that in this healthcare system at all.


Nope...what has made it expensive is the government....they have created in state monopolies and forced insurance companies to do stupid things.......competition and freedom of child's....that improves everything...it will improve healthcare.......what is it about that that you guys don't understand...as you walk around with cell phones that are better, cheaper and more available than ever before....to the point that the poorest among us have personal phones even Captain Kirk didn't have........and yet you think those dynamics won't happen with healthcare.......

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, the gubment did it to ya.


Yeah....and what happened when Obamacare kicked in...that gave more control over healthcare to the government? People lost their plans and their doctors...premiums went up astronomically and deductibles became u payable...and oh yeah......if you don't get it, they fine you.......and if you have a business and don't have it...they fine you...unless you just don't give your employees health insurance, then they fine you less.....so they actually make it less punishing to drop your healthcare...and pay the lower fine, than to give your employees good health insurance....

And that is what you think is intelligent.....that is government handling healthcare?

Wow....

What happened when Obama attempted to implement the Heritage Foundation hatched plan that had been launched successfully by Romney in the state of MA was that he, Obama, caved on single payer, and secondly, allowed lobbyists from big pharma and the insurance industry in the room. Of course it ended up as those things always do; the US lagging behind the rest of the industrialized world.
 


The G.I.Bill...thanks for bringing it up since it doesn't support your side of the discussion and in fact supports my side.....

When the government wanted to help G.I.s get an education...did they build VA schools to educate them? Like they did with Healthcare for Vets? No.

What did they do.....

They gave vets School Vouchers for education.....the government gave them a school voucher, they took that voucher into the education market place and purchased their education...which meant those schools that were good, had vets go to them, the bad schools, didn't get vets.......

So you are wrong......the government here set up VA hospitals instead of giving Vets vouchers for healthcare, the result? A horrible healthcare system that kills vets.

The government can't run things....they can hand out checks.....the market place for education handled educating the Vets...not the government....

The road system.....they poured concrete.......and what is the state of our road system now?


I would bet you guys are against school vouchers for public school kids.......the very same voucher system that you are bragging about that was used to educate Veterans......

the government than can't run the VA system....can't run a healthcare system for 320 million people.
NO ONE, EVER in the history of mankind, has recommended the government build hospitals that they run, for our health care.

Universal Healthcare is simply MEDICARE....you get to choose your hospital and doctors that are in the marketplace, and the gvt gives you a voucher/via a card, to pay for 80% of it and you pay the other 20%.


Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

That has been the pitch all along, and look where we are; the single most expensive healthcare system on the planet with some of the shittiest outcome metrics amongst advanced post-industrial nations. Sure, let's move everything over to for profit totally unaccountable private corporations. "Competition" is a lie, we've never had that in this healthcare system at all.


Please...explain this to all of us....the government can't manage the VA system competently...a small, dedicated system of healthcare to handle the healthcare needs of a tiny population of Americans........who have patients dying on fake wait lists......

Please..tell us how the government that can't handle this tiny healthcare system can then go on and handle the healthcare of 320 million people.......

Please explain how that actually works...

This indoctrinated belief system that corporate bureaumania saves, and govt bureaumania winds up at different destination is fiction.
 
A question for the Libertarian/Conservatives.

Would you accept a universal healthcare system if it was cheaper/more cost efficient, as it's proven to be in almost every OECD country? In other words, would you accept it if it had ZERO impact on your life/financial expenses/overall economy?

There is no evidence that any government run program in the U.S. has ever been more (financially) efficient than private enterprise.

How about the G.I Bill which provided millions of Americans access to higher education, cheap housing, and healthcare, which also subsequently led to the creation of the largest middle class in the world? Or Eisenhower's programs to help build the international federal highway system? In fact it wasn't until the deregulation/semi privatization of major industry and banking, which occurred under the Reagan's administration, when wealth inequality started increasing and our infrastructure stagnated.

"Universal Healthcare" limits choice, by definition, limits incentives for innovation, and generally stifles growth. So yeah, I would reject it.

This is neoliberal nonsense. Growth and innovation in, which occurred most during the 1950s to 1970s, happened under governments that spent the most on social welfare programs. See above. There is ZERO evidence that a majorily privatized nation would spur "incentives for innovation." That's like saying that people won't invent anything if they don't get paid a lot of money (if you think that, you probably have never met artists, scientists, or entrepreneurs that hundreds of times more passionate about their craft/what they produce t than money, power, and status)


The G.I.Bill...thanks for bringing it up since it doesn't support your side of the discussion and in fact supports my side.....

When the government wanted to help G.I.s get an education...did they build VA schools to educate them? Like they did with Healthcare for Vets? No.

What did they do.....

They gave vets School Vouchers for education.....the government gave them a school voucher, they took that voucher into the education market place and purchased their education...which meant those schools that were good, had vets go to them, the bad schools, didn't get vets.......

So you are wrong......the government here set up VA hospitals instead of giving Vets vouchers for healthcare, the result? A horrible healthcare system that kills vets.

The government can't run things....they can hand out checks.....the market place for education handled educating the Vets...not the government....

The road system.....they poured concrete.......and what is the state of our road system now?


I would bet you guys are against school vouchers for public school kids.......the very same voucher system that you are bragging about that was used to educate Veterans......

the government than can't run the VA system....can't run a healthcare system for 320 million people.
NO ONE, EVER in the history of mankind, has recommended the government build hospitals that they run, for our health care.

Universal Healthcare is simply MEDICARE....you get to choose your hospital and doctors that are in the marketplace, and the gvt gives you a voucher/via a card, to pay for 80% of it and you pay the other 20%.


Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.
yes, medicare has bargaining power....they insure millions of clients and negotiate a better price with the market....when I was a Department store buyer, I negotiated with my vendors bulk discount prices because I purchased for 50 stores at once, my total corp. was buying for 250 stores, I was just buying for one division of the corp.

Were vendors happy? Heck no....!!! But if they wanted me to buy their product, they better darn well make a deal....and they did....because I gave them HUGE ORDERS, a lot of business.....kept their factory lines running.

Medicare gives the health care industry tons and tons of business, with only one insurance company/policy to deal with which saves the healthcare industry money on paperwork and processing labor!

When large businesses negotiate with insurance companies they get a better price per employee for insurance than a small company's group plan.....because insurance companies negotiate with hospitals and doctors in their network....the more people in the plan, the more potential business, the more business promised, the cheaper the prices negotiated....
 
Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

That has been the pitch all along, and look where we are; the single most expensive healthcare system on the planet with some of the shittiest outcome metrics amongst advanced post-industrial nations. Sure, let's move everything over to for profit totally unaccountable private corporations. "Competition" is a lie, we've never had that in this healthcare system at all.


Nope...what has made it expensive is the government....they have created in state monopolies and forced insurance companies to do stupid things.......competition and freedom of child's....that improves everything...it will improve healthcare.......what is it about that that you guys don't understand...as you walk around with cell phones that are better, cheaper and more available than ever before....to the point that the poorest among us have personal phones even Captain Kirk didn't have........and yet you think those dynamics won't happen with healthcare.......

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, the gubment did it to ya.


Yeah....and what happened when Obamacare kicked in...that gave more control over healthcare to the government? People lost their plans and their doctors...premiums went up astronomically and deductibles became u payable...and oh yeah......if you don't get it, they fine you.......and if you have a business and don't have it...they fine you...unless you just don't give your employees health insurance, then they fine you less.....so they actually make it less punishing to drop your healthcare...and pay the lower fine, than to give your employees good health insurance....

And that is what you think is intelligent.....that is government handling healthcare?

Wow....

What happened when Obama attempted to implement the Heritage Foundation hatched plan that had been launched successfully by Romney in the state of MA was that he, Obama, caved on single payer, and secondly, allowed lobbyists from big pharma and the insurance industry in the room. Of course it ended up as those things always do; the US lagging behind the rest of the industrialized world.


Does the VA work?
 
Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

That has been the pitch all along, and look where we are; the single most expensive healthcare system on the planet with some of the shittiest outcome metrics amongst advanced post-industrial nations. Sure, let's move everything over to for profit totally unaccountable private corporations. "Competition" is a lie, we've never had that in this healthcare system at all.


Nope...what has made it expensive is the government....they have created in state monopolies and forced insurance companies to do stupid things.......competition and freedom of child's....that improves everything...it will improve healthcare.......what is it about that that you guys don't understand...as you walk around with cell phones that are better, cheaper and more available than ever before....to the point that the poorest among us have personal phones even Captain Kirk didn't have........and yet you think those dynamics won't happen with healthcare.......

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, the gubment did it to ya.


Yeah....and what happened when Obamacare kicked in...that gave more control over healthcare to the government? People lost their plans and their doctors...premiums went up astronomically and deductibles became u payable...and oh yeah......if you don't get it, they fine you.......and if you have a business and don't have it...they fine you...unless you just don't give your employees health insurance, then they fine you less.....so they actually make it less punishing to drop your healthcare...and pay the lower fine, than to give your employees good health insurance....

And that is what you think is intelligent.....that is government handling healthcare?

Wow....

What happened when Obama attempted to implement the Heritage Foundation hatched plan that had been launched successfully by Romney in the state of MA was that he, Obama, caved on single payer, and secondly, allowed lobbyists from big pharma and the insurance industry in the room. Of course it ended up as those things always do; the US lagging behind the rest of the industrialized world.


Wow...
You need Tom do some research.......


This is what happened to Romneycare...the plan Obamacare mimics...they are getting rid of it....

Mass. ditches RomneyCare exchange

But officials aren’t sure it’s possible to make that happen in less than six months. Given the narrow timeframe, they intend to simultaneously start shifting the Massachusetts exchange, known as the Connector, to HealthCare.gov.

A move by Massachusetts to the federal exchange would represent a symbolic blow for local Obamacare supporters. Massachusetts built the model of a state-run exchange in 2006, a result of the health care reform effort by then-Gov. Mitt Romney. The RomneyCare exchange, which helped the state provide health coverage to more than 97 percent of residents, became the template for the Obamacare version.
 


The G.I.Bill...thanks for bringing it up since it doesn't support your side of the discussion and in fact supports my side.....

When the government wanted to help G.I.s get an education...did they build VA schools to educate them? Like they did with Healthcare for Vets? No.

What did they do.....

They gave vets School Vouchers for education.....the government gave them a school voucher, they took that voucher into the education market place and purchased their education...which meant those schools that were good, had vets go to them, the bad schools, didn't get vets.......

So you are wrong......the government here set up VA hospitals instead of giving Vets vouchers for healthcare, the result? A horrible healthcare system that kills vets.

The government can't run things....they can hand out checks.....the market place for education handled educating the Vets...not the government....

The road system.....they poured concrete.......and what is the state of our road system now?


I would bet you guys are against school vouchers for public school kids.......the very same voucher system that you are bragging about that was used to educate Veterans......

the government than can't run the VA system....can't run a healthcare system for 320 million people.
NO ONE, EVER in the history of mankind, has recommended the government build hospitals that they run, for our health care.

Universal Healthcare is simply MEDICARE....you get to choose your hospital and doctors that are in the marketplace, and the gvt gives you a voucher/via a card, to pay for 80% of it and you pay the other 20%.


Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.
yes, medicare has bargaining power....they insure millions of clients and negotiate a better price with the market....when I was a Department store buyer, I negotiated with my vendors bulk discount prices because I purchased for 50 stores at once, my total corp. was buying for 250 stores, I was just buying for one division of the corp.

Were vendors happy? Heck no....!!! But if they wanted me to buy their product, they better darn well make a deal....and they did....because I gave them HUGE ORDERS, a lot of business.....kept their factory lines running.

Medicare gives the health care industry tons and tons of business, with only one insurance company/policy to deal with which saves the healthcare industry money on paperwork and processing labor!

When large businesses negotiate with insurance companies they get a better price per employee for insurance than a small company's group plan.....because insurance companies negotiate with hospitals and doctors in their network....the more people in the plan, the more potential business, the more business promised, the cheaper the prices negotiated....


Medicare isn't negotiating in good faith, they don't have to...that is why Doctors are refusing it...which means people on it have less choice, not more, less healthcare, not more......government doesn't help...
 
The G.I.Bill...thanks for bringing it up since it doesn't support your side of the discussion and in fact supports my side.....

When the government wanted to help G.I.s get an education...did they build VA schools to educate them? Like they did with Healthcare for Vets? No.

What did they do.....

They gave vets School Vouchers for education.....the government gave them a school voucher, they took that voucher into the education market place and purchased their education...which meant those schools that were good, had vets go to them, the bad schools, didn't get vets.......

So you are wrong......the government here set up VA hospitals instead of giving Vets vouchers for healthcare, the result? A horrible healthcare system that kills vets.

The government can't run things....they can hand out checks.....the market place for education handled educating the Vets...not the government....

The road system.....they poured concrete.......and what is the state of our road system now?


I would bet you guys are against school vouchers for public school kids.......the very same voucher system that you are bragging about that was used to educate Veterans......

the government than can't run the VA system....can't run a healthcare system for 320 million people.
NO ONE, EVER in the history of mankind, has recommended the government build hospitals that they run, for our health care.

Universal Healthcare is simply MEDICARE....you get to choose your hospital and doctors that are in the marketplace, and the gvt gives you a voucher/via a card, to pay for 80% of it and you pay the other 20%.


Do you realize that many doctors no longer take Medicare patients...because the government does not reimburse for the services at the actual cost of the service....so that isn't the market place....and the medicare system is a mess.......as one healthcare expert said during an interview...people on medicare have healthcare, they just can't see a doctor...because too many doctors refuse medicare patients.....

The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

That has been the pitch all along, and look where we are; the single most expensive healthcare system on the planet with some of the shittiest outcome metrics amongst advanced post-industrial nations. Sure, let's move everything over to for profit totally unaccountable private corporations. "Competition" is a lie, we've never had that in this healthcare system at all.


Please...explain this to all of us....the government can't manage the VA system competently...a small, dedicated system of healthcare to handle the healthcare needs of a tiny population of Americans........who have patients dying on fake wait lists......

Please..tell us how the government that can't handle this tiny healthcare system can then go on and handle the healthcare of 320 million people.......

Please explain how that actually works...

This indoctrinated belief system that corporate bureaumania saves, and govt bureaumania winds up at different destination is fiction.


No....the free choice of people to buy their own goods lowers cost and increases quality......


In state monopolies created by the government limits the ability of people to lower healthcare costs...

So the VA didn't work...Romneycare doesn't work...the socialist countries are banckrupting their healthcare systems.....do you have any government controlled healthcare that is actually effective.......?
 
Many programs in the US start out badly because of our political system. One political party passes a program and the other party fights the program. If the voting public eventually supports the program the politicians that fought it will ease their fight and the program will be improved. Social Security is maybe the best example. SS was a program was fought with the charge that it would make America communistic, but as people saw its value, the program was enlarged and strengthened. Medicare; military integration; women voting, may be other examples.
 
Many programs in the US start out badly because of our political system. One political party passes a program and the other party fights the program. If the voting public eventually supports the program the politicians that fought it will ease their fight and the program will be improved. Social Security is maybe the best example. SS was a program was fought with the charge that it would make America communistic, but as people saw its value, the program was enlarged and strengthened. Medicare; military integration; women voting, may be other examples.


Social Security is going bankrupt, and can't be sustained.......they are taking money from this generation to pay for the retired people today...it is not sustainable.........not the program you want to cite to show that the government can run things....
 
Many programs in the US start out badly because of our political system. One political party passes a program and the other party fights the program. If the voting public eventually supports the program the politicians that fought it will ease their fight and the program will be improved. Social Security is maybe the best example. SS was a program was fought with the charge that it would make America communistic, but as people saw its value, the program was enlarged and strengthened. Medicare; military integration; women voting, may be other examples.

Social Security is going bankrupt, and can't be sustained.......they are taking money from this generation to pay for the retired people today...it is not sustainable.........not the program you want to cite to show that the government can run things....
Social Security is going bankrupt, and can't be sustained.......they are taking money from this generation to pay for the retired people today...it is not sustainable.........not the program you want to cite to show that the government can run things...

  • Social Security was created in August 1935 and has operated under pay-as-you-go financing since 1939.
  • You should be clear and accurate about the nature of "bankruptcy." It is the Social Security Trust Fund (SSTF) that is being depleted, not Social Security itself. The SSTF is wherefrom comes the money to pay the difference between the current sums collected by FICA taxes and the current total benefits payable in accordance with Social Security's benefit schedule.
  • The SSTF was built up by years of our nation having an excess of workers paying FICA taxes over the quantity of those receiving benefits. Baby Boomers made that happen by their sheer numbers. Their parents, the Silent Generation, essentially bred like rabbits and the Boomers typically came to earn more money over their lifetimes than did their parents. The SSTF is being depleted by the excess of workers currently receiving benefits over the quantity of those currently paying taxes.
  • Based on projections regarding mainly population size but also retirement ages and rates, disability and other factors, the SSTF is expected to drain to zero in 2035. At that point in time, Social Security's current collections, assuming no changes to the factors that determine the amounts paid in and amounts paid out, will be sufficient to cover ~75% of what is owed to then current and future benefit recipients.
  • The SSTF may develop a materially greater-than-zero balance again when Millennials dominate the workforce because there will be proportionally more of them paying FICA than there will be Generation X-ers and prior generations receiving the benefits.

    FT_16_04.25_generations2050.png


    (Note: I've used "generations" in this discussion because it's convenient to do so, not because generations are in fact comparable in population size. Gen X, for example, has about ten years fewer births than do Boomers or Millennials; thus it's no surprise that it is a smaller generation than are the ones adjacent to it. Generations are a useful metric at a very high level in this discussion, and they are useful for broadly categorizing and understanding the political sentiments of large swaths of populace. Actuaries do not use generations to calculate the future payment/receipts trends the Social Security program will face.)

  • You'll note I wrote "may develop." I wrote that because there are number of material factors affecting the earnings potential of Millennials as compared with the generations that precede them.
    • One factor is the single largest non-calamitous shifter of the demand for human labor: automation technology and capability. There is a risk -- I don't know what it is for I've not looked for a quantification of it -- that Millennials, though greater in number than preceding generations, during their careers will earn proportionately less than did Gen X-ers. If that risk materializes into reality, the SSTF may not build back up.
    • Another factor is birth rates. If Millennials don't produce enough children to sustain and continue the rebuilding of the SSTF, they must at least hope they've bred enough offspring to prevent the current account shortfall (again assuming no changes to current benefit/receipt schedules and rates) from increasing. Obviously, this cannot be easily predicted, but it's safe to say that a variety of political and economic matters that we today bicker about can have a material impact on how this factor manifests its impact on the longer term prospects of the Social Security program. Some of those politically controllable/manageable factors include:
      • Free trade and education --> Free trade has resulted in the U.S. having an economy where the "good" paying jobs are those that require more mental acuity and adeptness than physical ability. The quantity decently paying jobs that are just a step above what a trained monkey can perform is ever decreasing. That's not going to change. Indeed, that trend is going to make its way around the world relatively quickly as less developed nations "catch up" buy using capital in place of labor when they, like the U.S., see their cost of labor rise to the point that it's more economically/financially prudent to use equipment instead of humans to produce "whatever." How long will it take for that trend to spread around the globe? I don't know. Maybe a generation, maybe sooner, but not longer unless the price of capital/equipment rises really high really fast, and that's not proportionately what has happened ever.
        • Additionally, the U.S. is no longer the world's largest consumer economy, and there're no prospects for it becoming so in the foreseeable future. That's relevant because it means the U.S. cannot now, as it could and did in the past, arbitrarily use its trading position as a "big stick" in trade wars.
      • War and security --> For the first time in a long time, the U.S. has a hot tempered President who prizes creating a socio-political environment of uncertainty and discord and who has intimated a degree of advocacy for more nations joining the "nuclear armed club." Moreover, the man, by all appearances is less a fan of transparency, honesty, facts, and critical examination of facts and their impacts, preferring instead to "go with his gut" and superficial analysis as might any "Tom, Dick or Harry."

        He does not alone carry the burden for the increased risk of America's security and peaceful existence. We also have a egotistical saber-rattling dictator running a country that is very poor and that has nuclear weapons, which are sought by radical factions that have access to vast sums of money. That despot happens also to have a border, protected by U.S. resources. Any of those leaders could well catalyze a war the type of which we've never seen in the modern era: a war that has a physical impact on U.S. soil. If that happens, his goddamned "wall" won't matter.

      • Abortion --> Though not nearly as significant a factor, even this issue has an impact. Its impact takes hold when one considers what people who may see as bleak their economic prospects (see above) are to do: have children and bear them into a world and economy that cannot afford them or don't. The notion that one can control the sexual nature of humans who are by definition sexual beings is, quite simply, folly; people are going to have sex, and that means women will get pregnant, even if they don't want to. It happens. The question is what to do when it does. Given the role of population increase in the Social Security discussion, the abortion issue cannot be overlooked. Depending on how the other factors play, more children can be either a good thing or a bad thing.
The point of the preceding discussion is to illustrate some ways in which the "fix" to Social Security is not nearly as simple as adjusting the pay-as-you-go levers controlling receipts and payments. Social Security is a social program, and as such, whatever "fix" there is to be must, if it's to work for more than a short time before requiring another "fix," consider the major societal factors that drive the program's overall solvency and effectiveness. Those factors have to be managed in a way that doesn't worsen the "going concern" position of the program that provides the financial security net the vast majority of Americans depend (not necessarily entirely, but materially). The issues are all intertwined and merely taking an insular assessment of them, that is in their own right as discrete/abstract issues, is a sure way to increase the risk that the Social Security program becomes FUBAR'd.
 
The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

Are you suggesting the answer is to subsidize the purchase of private insurance for people who otherwise can't afford it? If so, what is that meant to be an alternative to?
 
The only way to fix the system is to get the government out of it.....Vouchers for healthcare would be one way to support people with pre-existing conditions and people who can't afford it...then they can buy their own plans or simply pay for their treatment directly.....that would increase competition and introduce more freedom into the healthcare industry.....improving it at all levels.

Are you suggesting the answer is to subsidize the purchase of private insurance for people who otherwise can't afford it? If so, what is that meant to be an alternative to?


Having the government control the payment process....since they refuse to pay the full price on medicare and medicaid and Doctors are refusing to accept those patients....if you have a pre-existing condition...why not simply give them a voucher to buy their insurance.....? That way if the policy is expensive there will be companies willing to create policies to get those dollars....you allow the free market to work...just like we did with the G.I. Bill...those G.I.s got vouchers....the government didn't build VA schools for them.....they did build VA hospitals.....and those are a mess since the government runs them...
 
Having the government control the payment process....since they refuse to pay the full price on medicare and medicaid and Doctors are refusing to accept those patients....if you have a pre-existing condition...why not simply give them a voucher to buy their insurance.....? That way if the policy is expensive there will be companies willing to create policies to get those dollars....you allow the free market to work...just like we did with the G.I. Bill...those G.I.s got vouchers....the government didn't build VA schools for them.....they did build VA hospitals.....and those are a mess since the government runs them...

If you're talking specifically about those currently insured under Medicare or Medicaid, the reason we don't do that is because it would be much, much more expensive (though at least on the Medicare side that is the GOP's desired direction).

That said, if you're going to give people more money on the basis of their condition, how exactly would you figure out how much to give them?
 

Forum List

Back
Top