If the US healthcare system is the best and socialism is the worst

[dblack]

All you are doing now is defining a very broad statement of party politics. Both sides are lobbied because hedging the bets is a good Capitalist method. I know I hedge mine.

Democrats and Republicans have far different political platforms.

And enact far different policies? Seriously?

Of course they put forward far different policies which is why majorities are mostly necessary and why the fight over a legislating judiciary.

Enacting policy is a horse of a different color.

Well, I simply don't see a dime's worth of difference between Obama and Romney, and I think it's fairly funny (in a mostly depressing way) that the people who so virulently want Obama out, are being offered up a virtual clone as his replacement.

 

[Foxfyre]

And enact far different policies? Seriously?

Of course they put forward far different policies which is why majorities are mostly necessary and why the fight over a legislating judiciary.

Enacting policy is a horse of a different color.

Well, I simply don't see a dime's worth of difference between Obama and Romney, and I think it's fairly funny (in a mostly depressing way) that the people who so virulently want Obama out, are being offered up a virtual clone as his replacement.

If you're not seeing any difference, you aren't looking. And I'm not a Romney fan.

 

[dblack]

Of course they put forward far different policies which is why majorities are mostly necessary and why the fight over a legislating judiciary.

Enacting policy is a horse of a different color.

Well, I simply don't see a dime's worth of difference between Obama and Romney, and I think it's fairly funny (in a mostly depressing way) that the people who so virulently want Obama out, are being offered up a virtual clone as his replacement.

If you're not seeing any difference, you aren't looking. And I'm not a Romney fan.

What do you see? If you really expect Romney to make a serious effort at repealing ACA, well - that's pretty hard to take seriously.

 

[Ropey]

It's the HC individual mandate that is the proof of the political agenda (serious difference) and not the attempt to repeal the policy which is the reactive process. That's the horse of a different color.

 

[Foxfyre]

Well, I simply don't see a dime's worth of difference between Obama and Romney, and I think it's fairly funny (in a mostly depressing way) that the people who so virulently want Obama out, are being offered up a virtual clone as his replacement.

If you're not seeing any difference, you aren't looking. And I'm not a Romney fan.

What do you see? If you really expect Romney to make a serious effort at repealing ACA, well - that's pretty hard to take seriously.

Why would I not take him as seriously as any other candidate running who says they will make a serious effort to repeal ACA? Why is he less believable than anybody else? At last he has a proven track record of being able to create consensus within widely diverse groups and bring people to a meeting of minds to get something done. Does anybody else still running who has a chance to win have that good a track record? Gingrich is the only one who has a similar track record but he was working with mostly like minded Republicans. A President doesn't always have that luxury.

And mind you, I am not a Romney fan. There are others I would have much preferred to get the nomination. But to suggest that there is no difference in his perspective, approach, and world view than that of Barack Obama is ludicrous.

 

[dblack]

It's the HC individual mandate that is the proof of the political agenda (serious difference) and not the attempt to repeal the policy which is the reactive process. That's the horse of a different color.

I'm not clear. Are citing that as proof of the similarity of their agendas, or a difference?

 

[dblack]

Why would I not take him as seriously as any other candidate running who says they will make a serious effort to repeal ACA? Why is he less believable than anybody else?

Well, apart from his 'proven track record' of saying pretty much anything a given audience wants to hear, it's particularly hard to believe he has any principled objection to the ACA. He signed, and takes credit for, the law that the national program is modeled on.

At last he has a proven track record of being able to create consensus within widely diverse groups and bring people to a meeting of minds to get something done.

So does Obama. This is one of the primary ways I see them as the same, and why I'm opposed to both of them. They aren't leaders. They're facilitators and corporatists. Despite their campaign rhetoric, neither of them govern by pursuing principled goals. They govern by cutting deals with all the 'vested interests' effected by a given policy, assigning special privileges, offering exemptions - even crafting law specifically as a reward for the cooperation of certain groups. This is the worst kind of lawmaking in my opinion, and each of their respective health care laws were replete with it.

 

[Ropey]

It's the HC individual mandate that is the proof of the political agenda (serious difference) and not the attempt to repeal the policy which is the reactive process. That's the horse of a different color.

I'm not clear. Are citing that as proof of the similarity of their agendas, or a difference?

State vs Federal legislative differences. The States have the right. The Federal Government does not.

 

[Foxfyre]

It's the HC individual mandate that is the proof of the political agenda (serious difference) and not the attempt to repeal the policy which is the reactive process. That's the horse of a different color.

I'm not clear. Are citing that as proof of the similarity of their agendas, or a difference?

State vs Federal legislative differences. The States have the right. The Federal Government does not.

Exactly. I would admire Romney more if he would admit that Romneycare in Massachusetts is not delivering exactly as promised, but he is as human as the next person and that would be a bigger admission and swallowing one's pride more than most of us would probably willingly do. I can even forgive him for at one time believing in it so much he might have thought something similar could work at the federal level. He almost certainly now knows better.

But a state program of any nature--and probably EVERY state has at least one that has not delivered according to its advertising or expectations--is a much different animal than is a federal program. And while state entitlements are becoming a huge issue in state after state after state, a state program has nowhere the potential of becoming a national, revenue devouring, unsustainable national albatross such as Social Security has become, as Medicare has become, and which Obamacare will certainly become if it is not stopped.

So long as the GOP candidates understand that and recognize that and pledge responsible action on that, I'm good with it. And all four still in the running do.

Obama, if he understands it at all, is not going to recognize that and/or do any responsible action on that.

 

[dblack]

Exactly. I would admire Romney more if he would admit that Romneycare in Massachusetts is not delivering exactly as promised

I would admire him more if he recognized that it's a fundamental violation of individual rights, regardless of whether it's at the state or federal level.

... but he is as human as the next person and that would be a bigger admission and swallowing one's pride more than most of us would probably willingly do. I can even forgive him for at one time believing in it so much he might have thought something similar could work at the federal level. He almost certainly now knows better.

But a state program of any nature--and probably EVERY state has at least one that has not delivered according to its advertising or expectations--is a much different animal than is a federal program. And while state entitlements are becoming a huge issue in state after state after state, a state program has nowhere the potential of becoming a national, revenue devouring, unsustainable national albatross such as Social Security has become, as Medicare has become, and which Obamacare will certainly become if it is not stopped.

So long as the GOP candidates understand that and recognize that and pledge responsible action on that, I'm good with it. And all four still in the running do.

Obama, if he understands it at all, is not going to recognize that and/or do any responsible action on that.

Well, no offense, but either you're leaning gullible, or I'm too cynical. If I thought Romney had a chance in hell of getting elected, I'd offer a wager on him pushing for repeal, because I'm pretty damned certain it wouldn't happen. He's in bed with the insurance industry every bit as much as Obama is.

 

[Vidi]

The Bush 43 administration's energy program was about as ghastly as it gets and was something only a radical flaming raging liberal could love. I believe history will show that it was that, plus other not-at-all-conservative programs and initiatives pushed, that cost the GOP their majorities in both houses of Congress in 2006, what sent President Bush's approval ratings into the basement. and what started the first stirrings of what has become the Tea Party movement. But that's another story.

Cap and trade is NOT a conservative concept and never was. It is one of the worst examples of inappropriate government meddling, interference, and imposition of power enabling those in government to exercise the worst kinds of cronyism and thus further enhance their personal power, prestige, influence, and wealth.

You're incorrect, Fox.

The Political History of Cap and Trade


Cap and trade, then called emissions trading, was originally brought up to the White House by C Boyden Gray, who served as White House council to George HW Bush and was a member of the Federalist Society.

You can't get anymore Conservative than that.

The fact that a horse sometimes acts like a jackass doesn't make the jackass a horse. President George H.W. Bush's tax increase on the 'rich' wasn't a conservative concept either and cost him the 1992 election.

I don't judge concepts by how people identify themselves. I judge concepts on the principles that define modern American conservatism and liberalism. Cap and Trade, no matter how it is dressed up or who proposes it or who supports it, is not a conservative concept.

Fair enough. I can accept that as a viable definition.

 

[Vidi]

Exactly. I would admire Romney more if he would admit that Romneycare in Massachusetts is not delivering exactly as promised

I would admire him more if he recognized that it's a fundamental violation of individual rights, regardless of whether it's at the state or federal level.

... but he is as human as the next person and that would be a bigger admission and swallowing one's pride more than most of us would probably willingly do. I can even forgive him for at one time believing in it so much he might have thought something similar could work at the federal level. He almost certainly now knows better.

But a state program of any nature--and probably EVERY state has at least one that has not delivered according to its advertising or expectations--is a much different animal than is a federal program. And while state entitlements are becoming a huge issue in state after state after state, a state program has nowhere the potential of becoming a national, revenue devouring, unsustainable national albatross such as Social Security has become, as Medicare has become, and which Obamacare will certainly become if it is not stopped.

So long as the GOP candidates understand that and recognize that and pledge responsible action on that, I'm good with it. And all four still in the running do.

Obama, if he understands it at all, is not going to recognize that and/or do any responsible action on that.

Well, no offense, but either you're leaning gullible, or I'm too cynical. If I thought Romney had a chance in hell of getting elected, I'd offer a wager on him pushing for repeal, because I'm pretty damned certain it wouldn't happen. He's in bed with the insurance industry every bit as much as Obama is.

Dont listen to the far left hype. Romeny has as much a chance of getting elceted as Obama ( and Im supporting Obama ) But so does Gingrich and Santorum and even Paul.

Once the nomination is decided the sides will fall into place and the few true independents out there will decide if they like gas prices or who ever looked better in a debate and decide the next president.

This election will be close.

 

[dblack]

Exactly. I would admire Romney more if he would admit that Romneycare in Massachusetts is not delivering exactly as promised

I would admire him more if he recognized that it's a fundamental violation of individual rights, regardless of whether it's at the state or federal level.

... but he is as human as the next person and that would be a bigger admission and swallowing one's pride more than most of us would probably willingly do. I can even forgive him for at one time believing in it so much he might have thought something similar could work at the federal level. He almost certainly now knows better.

But a state program of any nature--and probably EVERY state has at least one that has not delivered according to its advertising or expectations--is a much different animal than is a federal program. And while state entitlements are becoming a huge issue in state after state after state, a state program has nowhere the potential of becoming a national, revenue devouring, unsustainable national albatross such as Social Security has become, as Medicare has become, and which Obamacare will certainly become if it is not stopped.

So long as the GOP candidates understand that and recognize that and pledge responsible action on that, I'm good with it. And all four still in the running do.

Obama, if he understands it at all, is not going to recognize that and/or do any responsible action on that.

Well, no offense, but either you're leaning gullible, or I'm too cynical. If I thought Romney had a chance in hell of getting elected, I'd offer a wager on him pushing for repeal, because I'm pretty damned certain it wouldn't happen. He's in bed with the insurance industry every bit as much as Obama is.

Dont listen to the far left hype. Romeny has as much a chance of getting elceted as Obama ( and Im supporting Obama ) But so does Gingrich and Santorum and even Paul.

Once the nomination is decided the sides will fall into place and the few true independents out there will decide if they like gas prices or who ever looked better in a debate and decide the next president.

This election will be close.

And pointless.

 

[Greenbeard]

Exactly. I would admire Romney more if he would admit that Romneycare in Massachusetts is not delivering exactly as promised, but he is as human as the next person and that would be a bigger admission and swallowing one's pride more than most of us would probably willingly do.

Some observations from an analysis of the reforms published in Health Affairs earlier this year:

In 2010 Massachusetts adults reported sustained gains in health care access and use relative to 2006 (Exhibit 2; additional measures can be found in Appendix Exhibit 2; simple [unadjusted] estimates are in Appendix Exhibit 6).9 For example, in 2010 compared to 2006, nonelderly adults were more likely to have a usual place to go when they were sick or needed advice about their health (up 4.7 percentage points), and were more likely to have had a preventive care visit (up 5.9 percentage points), a specialist visit (up 3.7 percentage points), multiple doctor visits (up 5.0 percentage points; Appendix Exhibit 2),9 and a dental care visit (up 5.0 percentage points; Appendix Exhibit 2).9

In addition to examining health care use, it is important to consider barriers to obtaining needed care. Nonelderly adults in Massachusetts were less likely to report that they did not get some of the types of care they needed in 2010, compared to 2006 (Appendix Exhibit 3; simple [unadjusted] estimates in Appendix Exhibit 7).9 The share of adults reporting that they did not get needed care was down for doctor care, medical tests, treatment or follow-up care, and preventive care over this five-year period.

The share of nonelderly adults who reported high levels of out-of-pocket health care spending (10 percent or more of family income) was lower in 2010 (6.1 percent) than in 2006 (9.8 percent). Consistent with the lower burden of out-of-pocket expenses, the share of adults reporting unmet need for care because of cost was down in 2010 relative to 2006 for all of the types of care examined except prescription drugs and dental care (Appendix Exhibit 4).9

Health insurance coverage and improved access to care are interim goals of the 2006 reform initiative; the ultimate goal is improved health for the population in Massachusetts. The survey used for this study had a single question about health status: “In general, would you say that your health is excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor?” Although self-reported health status has limitations, it is often used as a proxy for clinical measures of health when such measures are not available, as was the case here. We found strong and sustained gains in the share of nonelderly adults in Massachusetts who reported their health as very good or excellent, with an increase from 59.7 percent in 2006 to 64.9 percent in 2010 (data not shown).7

Romney should be proud of his achievement.

 

[dblack]

Exactly. I would admire Romney more if he would admit that Romneycare in Massachusetts is not delivering exactly as promised, but he is as human as the next person and that would be a bigger admission and swallowing one's pride more than most of us would probably willingly do.

Some observations from an analysis of the reforms published in Health Affairs earlier this year:

In 2010 Massachusetts adults reported sustained gains in health care access and use relative to 2006 (Exhibit 2; additional measures can be found in Appendix Exhibit 2; simple [unadjusted] estimates are in Appendix Exhibit 6).9 For example, in 2010 compared to 2006, nonelderly adults were more likely to have a usual place to go when they were sick or needed advice about their health (up 4.7 percentage points), and were more likely to have had a preventive care visit (up 5.9 percentage points), a specialist visit (up 3.7 percentage points), multiple doctor visits (up 5.0 percentage points; Appendix Exhibit 2),9 and a dental care visit (up 5.0 percentage points; Appendix Exhibit 2).9

The share of nonelderly adults who reported high levels of out-of-pocket health care spending (10 percent or more of family income) was lower in 2010 (6.1 percent) than in 2006 (9.8 percent). Consistent with the lower burden of out-of-pocket expenses, the share of adults reporting unmet need for care because of cost was down in 2010 relative to 2006 for all of the types of care examined except prescription drugs and dental care (Appendix Exhibit 4).9

Health insurance coverage and improved access to care are interim goals of the 2006 reform initiative; the ultimate goal is improved health for the population in Massachusetts. The survey used for this study had a single question about health status: “In general, would you say that your health is excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor?” Although self-reported health status has limitations, it is often used as a proxy for clinical measures of health when such measures are not available, as was the case here. We found strong and sustained gains in the share of nonelderly adults in Massachusetts who reported their health as very good or excellent, with an increase from 59.7 percent in 2006 to 64.9 percent in 2010 (data not shown).7

Romney should be proud of his achievement.

I'm sure he is.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Or maybe it's because, when the pretense is peeled away, they're all corporatists with essentially the same goals.

The only commonly shared goal among most is their addiction (created by the ability) to use the people's money to increase their personal power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth. Obama's healthcare reform package takes over 1/6th of the U.S. economy to address a very small fracition of chronically uninsured people. And it gives unprecedented power to the federal government to control all our lives.

Cap and Trade is another program that will further tighten the chains around all our choices, options, opportunities, and freedoms.

For the life of me, I can't understand why this is not alarming to ALL freedom loving Americans.

But too many Americans are now addicted to the free stuff they get or hope for from the government. And are willing to sell their very souls to get it.

And yet, cap and trade worked when George HW Bush enacted it to deal with the emissions causing acid rain.

It's a good, free market idea that lets private industry actually profit by trading emissions they are no longer using.

And it's a true Conservative idea.

And please tell me where all this "free stuff" can be loaded into my van. If its as prevalent as you all claim, then I a fool working as many hours as I am, paying my bills and building my business.

The important difference is that acid rain caused quantifiable damage, CO2, not so much.

 

[starcraftzzz]

The important difference is that acid rain caused quantifiable damage, CO2, not so much.

Yep hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts cause no damage

 

[Vidi]

The only commonly shared goal among most is their addiction (created by the ability) to use the people's money to increase their personal power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth. Obama's healthcare reform package takes over 1/6th of the U.S. economy to address a very small fracition of chronically uninsured people. And it gives unprecedented power to the federal government to control all our lives.

Cap and Trade is another program that will further tighten the chains around all our choices, options, opportunities, and freedoms.

For the life of me, I can't understand why this is not alarming to ALL freedom loving Americans.

But too many Americans are now addicted to the free stuff they get or hope for from the government. And are willing to sell their very souls to get it.

And yet, cap and trade worked when George HW Bush enacted it to deal with the emissions causing acid rain.

It's a good, free market idea that lets private industry actually profit by trading emissions they are no longer using.

And it's a true Conservative idea.

And please tell me where all this "free stuff" can be loaded into my van. If its as prevalent as you all claim, then I a fool working as many hours as I am, paying my bills and building my business.

The important difference is that acid rain caused quantifiable damage, CO2, not so much.

Now THAT, sir, is a matter of opinion.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The important difference is that acid rain caused quantifiable damage, CO2, not so much.

Yep hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and droughts cause no damage

Yeah, we didn't have those before we used fossil fuels.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

And yet, cap and trade worked when George HW Bush enacted it to deal with the emissions causing acid rain.

It's a good, free market idea that lets private industry actually profit by trading emissions they are no longer using.

And it's a true Conservative idea.

And please tell me where all this "free stuff" can be loaded into my van. If its as prevalent as you all claim, then I a fool working as many hours as I am, paying my bills and building my business.

The important difference is that acid rain caused quantifiable damage, CO2, not so much.

Now THAT, sir, is a matter of opinion.

Please quantify the damage.