Five Flaws of "Obamacare"

[veritas]

Okay, I'll reword it ... how is any other solution besides getting rid of the FDA mafia power going to help bring down medical costs?

That wasn't quite written for the purpose of answering that specific question, but it contains some of the information requested.

what?!?

The FDA is not the focus of this exercise.

 

[KittenKoder]

Okay, I'll reword it ... how is any other solution besides getting rid of the FDA mafia power going to help bring down medical costs?

That wasn't quite written for the purpose of answering that specific question, but it contains some of the information requested.

what?!?

The FDA is not the focus of this exercise.

So then you admit his bill will do nothing positive?

 

[veritas]

This was particularly timely and meaningful after having read the OP in this thread
http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...ce-reform-necessary-but-is-it-sufficient.html

Perhaps it will strike a chord for some others.

Obamacare’s five flaws
There is little disagreement among liberals and conservatives that America's current health care system needs serious reform. But the Left's plan is seriously flawed.

Heritage Foundation expert Nina Owcharenko dissects Five Major Faults with the Health Care Bills being pushed in the House and Senate.

1. The public "option." Both proposals would create a government-run insurance plan which proponents claim would foster honest competition among private insurers. But how can there be fair competition when one of the players -- Washington -- is both writing the rules and playing the game? What's more, this scheme could lead millions of Americans to lose their private health insurance.

2. Centralized regulation. Both the House and Senate bills would result in sweeping and complex federal regulation of health insurance. This would take oversight away from states and concentrate it in Washington -- and this oversight is best left at the state level.

3. Greater dependency on government. Both bills would expand existing government health care programs and introduce massive new taxpayer-funded subsidies to buy health insurance. This would leave millions of Americans dependent on government for their health care.

4. Employer mandate. The plans would force employers to provide coverage for all employees or face a massive tax. These "Play-or-Pay" mandates will raise prices, stifle economic growth and particularly hurt low-wage earners.

5. Individual mandate. Both bills require that all Americans purchase health insurance. Those without coverage or whose plans don't meet the new federal standards would face tax penalties. Special interests are sure to "lobby intensively to expand the legally mandated health benefits, medical treatments and procedures, and drugs that all Americans must buy under penalty of law."

Taken together or individually, these flaws would inflict serious damage on an industry that represents one-sixth of our nation's economy.

Instead, Owcharenko suggests the government refocus its efforts on incrementally introducing real, cost-effective reform. Such a reform would grant more autonomy to individual states; extend tax relief to everyone who purchases private health insurance, regardless of employment; and rein in runaway spending on programs like Medicare and Medicaid.

"Policymakers need to proceed slowly and deliberately," advises Owcharenko, "making sure that the initial steps they take are not disruptive of what Americans have and want to keep, actually work, and do not result in costly and damaging and unintended consequences." So far, they're on the wrong track.

* * * * *
And, as the "public option" debate continues to divide us

President Obama has decided to decided to ease up on his push to include a public "option" in the health care reform plan. While the Left insists on its inclusion, the President, whose approval ratings have plummeted lately, seems open to its removal.

Nowhere does Owcharenko mention the FDA.

 

[Annie]

LOL, The Heritage Foundation. Of course that wingnut group would oppose it.

Please explain where their thinking is wrong?

 

[KittenKoder]

No, the bill is suppose to magically lower the costs of healthcare so the government can afford to take over the industry ... hell, if at least that was true I could see a benefit, so ... if it can't lower costs then how is it a good bill?

 

[veritas]

No, the bill is suppose to magically lower the costs of healthcare so the government can afford to take over the industry ... hell, if at least that was true I could see a benefit, so ... if it can't lower costs then how is it a good bill?

We're not discussing the magical lowering of cost within the scope of Owcharenko's piece that allbiz posted.

Your brain does not work. If you don't like allbiz' thread, make your own.


When will it be cost effective for you to stop beating your cat?

^like your questions usually are

 

[KittenKoder]

No, the bill is suppose to magically lower the costs of healthcare so the government can afford to take over the industry ... hell, if at least that was true I could see a benefit, so ... if it can't lower costs then how is it a good bill?

We're not discussing the magical lowering of cost within the scope of Owcharenko's piece that allbiz posted.

Your brain does not work. If you don't like allbiz' thread, make your own.


When will it be cost effective for you to stop beating your cat?

^like your questions usually are

I hadn't originally focused on that, but meh. Fine then, prove that AllBiz's source is wrong, without using only opinion, since you are too scared to address the point you brought focus on.

 

[veritas]

That I brought focus on???

You crap on every thread with your FDA spam.

 

[REVxERIK]

read the bill not editorials before you come to these conclusions

 

[KittenKoder]

Seriously KK you have a disconnect in your brain. The FDA is in bed with with big pharma and all the other ancillary medical equipment providers and insurance. Kill big insurance and hobble pharma and problem solved. The FDA is only the way it is because of insurance.

You ARE advocating against your own interest.

Yes you focused on that one part, in response to my answering your question, lengthy as it was, you either didn't read the whole post you responded to with this, or you are just being dishonest again.

 

[gcomeau]

Okay, I'll reword it ... how is any other solution besides getting rid of the FDA mafia power going to help bring down medical costs?

That wasn't quite written for the purpose of answering that specific question, but it contains some of the information requested.

what?!?

The FDA is not the focus of this exercise.

Oops.

There was supposed to be a link in that pst, which would rather change the meaning of my statement. I fixed it.

 

[veritas]

That wasn't quite written for the purpose of answering that specific question, but it contains some of the information requested.

what?!?

The FDA is not the focus of this exercise.

Oops.

There was supposed to be a link in that pst, which would rather change the meaning of my statement. I fixed it.

Yeah that was a good post, all of your posts are. I think I repped you on that one.

 

[DamnYankee]

Frik and Frak appear to have a mutual admiration society going here.

Still no solid criticism of the OP author's critique or any indication that reform is actually needed.

All about the public option - First Read - msnbc.com
Public option battle hijacks health debate
First Read: The debate over health care has become all about the public option — and the president is right in the middle of it.

 

[veritas]

I answered each point in separate posts. Not my fault you didn't read it.

 

[veritas]

Because of a Supreme Court decision nearly 140 years ago, the states have sole regulatory authority of insurance. What has resulted since is a bureaucratic cluster of 51 different regulators (every state, plus the District of Columbia) overseeing their individual jurisdictions, punishing American consumers and insurance providers alike.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...of-insurance-is-bad-business.html#post1486548

 

[KittenKoder]

I answered each point in separate posts. Not my fault you didn't read it.

It was all opinion and "it's big pharma's fault" rhetoric with no actual proof or explanation of why it is.

 

[veritas]

The OP was pure opinion as well. More like propaganda.

 

[KittenKoder]

The OP was pure opinion as well. More like propaganda.

Obama spreads propaganda on it, using catch phrases is the worst kind of propaganda. I am guessing you don't even know what propaganda is. Everything in the OP is highly possible, and as history has taught us, extremely probable as well.

 

[veritas]

You don't actually read my posts, so I don't really care. I have indeed posted facts and logical arguments with facts. It has nothing to do with Obama. I just wrote him a letter telling him to get with the program and stop being a backslider.

 

[KittenKoder]

You don't actually read my posts, so I don't really care. I have indeed posted facts and logical arguments with facts. It has nothing to do with Obama. I just wrote him a letter telling him to get with the program and stop being a backslider.

Hello Pot, the Kettle called ...