No One Has a Right to Health Care

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

It's the role and responsibility of government to provide for the common defense. Nowhere in the Constitution is it written that it's the responsibility of the Federal government to provide for health care. Do we find auto insurance classified as an "entitlement" that someone ELSE has the responsibility to pay for your coverage? Yes or no? If not, then health care has been wrongfully classified as such. In fact ... name just one particular coverage, outside of this healthcare mandate, that is the sole legal responsibility of another to pay and supply FOR you in order that you may have the self assurance that you require.

. You say that as if it is free ? It's not or would not be free. Everyone would pay into the basic plan. It's just that in the plan offered, the government would have no profit incentive involved... It would give everyone the same plan, and the same options in the basic plan to cover all Americans....
If anyone wants more than that, then they would purchase extra for themselves in the free market place.

HUH?

There is NO free market place in health care. It has been under government control since the mid 1800's.

.

. Follow me here... We're talking about having new idea's or new ways that it could or should work. It is why everyone is trying to come up with a better system of doing things, and not sticking with the way things were. Do you want a system that goes all the way back to the 1800's or would you rather someone trail Blaze a new one that could benefit all ?

The problem is that health care costs have not gone down in Great Britain's NHS, nor has Canada's quality of health care improved with expected wait times. There hasn't been this drastic improvement by going to a national government system. The only supportive argument supporters of the system eventually defaults to is, "well now everyone has health care".

. The governments shouldn't be providing the actual healthcare system, but only the insurance to their citizens. The healthcare industry needs to be run by the free markets. Everyone could be granted a healthcare insurance card that insures a basic coverage to all citizens. It could cover basic life sustaining healthcare needs and check ups, and if people want to purchase plans beyond the basic, then go for it. Everyone deserves to walk in the front door of a health provider by appointment, and not have to go to the backdoor of an ER in an emergency when it becomes to late for them. I would proudly join the nation in a plan that would deduct $5.00 dollars a week from my income, if it put a healthcare card into everyone's pocket because it would be cheap enough to all citizens at that rate to be covered. Like I say, if people want extra coverage, then why not, and it would be offered by the free markets at an affordable rate also, because they wouldn't have a monopoly in their areas any longer.

The problem is that treatment and care has always been regulated and run through a government system. You are in need of certain medications? You need approval for a specific treatment? The doctor and healthcare nurses have to submit specific forms, go through hoops of using predetermined wording, while the patient is required to go through specific "alternate" venues before attaining approval of the one procedure they seek. This is all the result of a government regulated and controlled system. Obamacare, and other MORE government seeking alternatives, only tightens the noose in who is controlling what procedures, prescriptions, and the type of treatment avenue you are allotted to take. The primary responsibility of a government run system is in seeking to control the overall COSTS, while dictating the treatment plan of a patient. A plan where the one seeking medical attention, must first go through a predetermined course of action to satisfy a required series of "check-off" lists in order to be qualified for further treatment. All this of course, takes precedence over the extensive medical training a doctor has obtained in what a patient really needs to sustain a better quality recovery. In the end we find the concerns that are being raised is one that government seeks to solve, costs.... when what people should really be asking for is better quality of care.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

As long as I don't have to pay for it.

However if you and those like you should pool your money and pay for it. After all bleeding hearts have to bleed.

Carry on.

Should you have to pay for schools?
How about police?
Why should you have to buy the Navy a new aircraft carrier?

Let those who want it pay for it

It's the role and responsibility of government to provide for the common defense. Nowhere in the Constitution is it written that it's the responsibility of the Federal government to provide for health care. Do we find auto insurance classified as an "entitlement" that someone ELSE has the responsibility to pay for your coverage? Yes or no? If not, then health care has been wrongfully classified as such. In fact ... name just one particular coverage, outside of this healthcare mandate, that is the sole legal responsibility of another to pay and supply FOR you in order that you may have the self assurance that you require.

. You say that as if it is free ? It's not or would not be free. Everyone would pay into the basic plan. It's just that in the plan offered, the government would have no profit incentive involved... It would give everyone the same plan, and the same options in the basic plan to cover all Americans....
If anyone wants more than that, then they would purchase extra for themselves in the free market place.

Everyone does not pay into the plan, it's only a mandate that requires everyone to have coverage, some can't afford to pay the premium and that's where the government "taxpayer" steps in. The givernment option is not not proven to lower health care costs. Name for me just one government program that is run more cost efficient than you'd find in the private sector.

. Obamacare was and is a disaster. Wasn't the answer at all, because it takes from the taxpayer to provide for the poor, but it causes the taxpayer to pay double or tripple because they are in a system that is unfair for them. My idea would be fair for all.. Just saw on Fox news where a beautiful young woman died of melanoma skin cancer, because she had shoulder pain that was found to be the cancers return after having a mole removed but the surgeon didn't get it all. HER HEALTHCARE PROVIDER wouldn't agree to the added treatment that she needed according to the report, and she died.

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

 

[beagle9]

Should you have to pay for schools?
How about police?
Why should you have to buy the Navy a new aircraft carrier?

Let those who want it pay for it

It's the role and responsibility of government to provide for the common defense. Nowhere in the Constitution is it written that it's the responsibility of the Federal government to provide for health care. Do we find auto insurance classified as an "entitlement" that someone ELSE has the responsibility to pay for your coverage? Yes or no? If not, then health care has been wrongfully classified as such. In fact ... name just one particular coverage, outside of this healthcare mandate, that is the sole legal responsibility of another to pay and supply FOR you in order that you may have the self assurance that you require.

. You say that as if it is free ? It's not or would not be free. Everyone would pay into the basic plan. It's just that in the plan offered, the government would have no profit incentive involved... It would give everyone the same plan, and the same options in the basic plan to cover all Americans....
If anyone wants more than that, then they would purchase extra for themselves in the free market place.

Everyone does not pay into the plan, it's only a mandate that requires everyone to have coverage, some can't afford to pay the premium and that's where the government "taxpayer" steps in. The givernment option is not not proven to lower health care costs. Name for me just one government program that is run more cost efficient than you'd find in the private sector.

. Obamacare was and is a disaster. Wasn't the answer at all, because it takes from the taxpayer to provide for the poor, but it causes the taxpayer to pay double or tripple because they are in a system that is unfair for them. My idea would be fair for all.. Just saw on Fox news where a beautiful young woman died of melanoma skin cancer, because she had shoulder pain that was found to be the cancers return after having a mole removed but the surgeon didn't get it all. HER HEALTHCARE PROVIDER wouldn't agree to the added treatment that she needed according to the report, and she died.

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

It's the role and responsibility of government to provide for the common defense. Nowhere in the Constitution is it written that it's the responsibility of the Federal government to provide for health care. Do we find auto insurance classified as an "entitlement" that someone ELSE has the responsibility to pay for your coverage? Yes or no? If not, then health care has been wrongfully classified as such. In fact ... name just one particular coverage, outside of this healthcare mandate, that is the sole legal responsibility of another to pay and supply FOR you in order that you may have the self assurance that you require.

. You say that as if it is free ? It's not or would not be free. Everyone would pay into the basic plan. It's just that in the plan offered, the government would have no profit incentive involved... It would give everyone the same plan, and the same options in the basic plan to cover all Americans....
If anyone wants more than that, then they would purchase extra for themselves in the free market place.

Everyone does not pay into the plan, it's only a mandate that requires everyone to have coverage, some can't afford to pay the premium and that's where the government "taxpayer" steps in. The givernment option is not not proven to lower health care costs. Name for me just one government program that is run more cost efficient than you'd find in the private sector.

. Obamacare was and is a disaster. Wasn't the answer at all, because it takes from the taxpayer to provide for the poor, but it causes the taxpayer to pay double or tripple because they are in a system that is unfair for them. My idea would be fair for all.. Just saw on Fox news where a beautiful young woman died of melanoma skin cancer, because she had shoulder pain that was found to be the cancers return after having a mole removed but the surgeon didn't get it all. HER HEALTHCARE PROVIDER wouldn't agree to the added treatment that she needed according to the report, and she died.

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

 

[beagle9]

. You say that as if it is free ? It's not or would not be free. Everyone would pay into the basic plan. It's just that in the plan offered, the government would have no profit incentive involved... It would give everyone the same plan, and the same options in the basic plan to cover all Americans....
If anyone wants more than that, then they would purchase extra for themselves in the free market place.

Everyone does not pay into the plan, it's only a mandate that requires everyone to have coverage, some can't afford to pay the premium and that's where the government "taxpayer" steps in. The givernment option is not not proven to lower health care costs. Name for me just one government program that is run more cost efficient than you'd find in the private sector.

. Obamacare was and is a disaster. Wasn't the answer at all, because it takes from the taxpayer to provide for the poor, but it causes the taxpayer to pay double or tripple because they are in a system that is unfair for them. My idea would be fair for all.. Just saw on Fox news where a beautiful young woman died of melanoma skin cancer, because she had shoulder pain that was found to be the cancers return after having a mole removed but the surgeon didn't get it all. HER HEALTHCARE PROVIDER wouldn't agree to the added treatment that she needed according to the report, and she died.

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period Their are to many people holding back until it's to late, and even when they have coverage or they don't have coverage they are doing this.. It is wrong, and hell is gonna be mighty hot for those who refused to try and fix the problems. Don't anyone want to leave their children better off than what they went through in life, not to forget to mention actually getting to be there for them as well ?

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Everyone does not pay into the plan, it's only a mandate that requires everyone to have coverage, some can't afford to pay the premium and that's where the government "taxpayer" steps in. The givernment option is not not proven to lower health care costs. Name for me just one government program that is run more cost efficient than you'd find in the private sector.

. Obamacare was and is a disaster. Wasn't the answer at all, because it takes from the taxpayer to provide for the poor, but it causes the taxpayer to pay double or tripple because they are in a system that is unfair for them. My idea would be fair for all.. Just saw on Fox news where a beautiful young woman died of melanoma skin cancer, because she had shoulder pain that was found to be the cancers return after having a mole removed but the surgeon didn't get it all. HER HEALTHCARE PROVIDER wouldn't agree to the added treatment that she needed according to the report, and she died.

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

 

[beagle9]

. Obamacare was and is a disaster. Wasn't the answer at all, because it takes from the taxpayer to provide for the poor, but it causes the taxpayer to pay double or tripple because they are in a system that is unfair for them. My idea would be fair for all.. Just saw on Fox news where a beautiful young woman died of melanoma skin cancer, because she had shoulder pain that was found to be the cancers return after having a mole removed but the surgeon didn't get it all. HER HEALTHCARE PROVIDER wouldn't agree to the added treatment that she needed according to the report, and she died.

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

 

[Contumacious]

regardless of how people purchase healthcare, through the ACA or private, this sort of preventable tragedy is still going to happen. There is no way to fix this.

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

Again , there is NO free market in health care. If the government - coercion --is involved in any way shape or form there is NO free market.


Free Market
¶

In a free economy, where no man or group of men can use physical coercion against anyone, economic power can be achieved only by voluntary means: by the voluntary choice and agreement of all those who participate in the process of production and trade. In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of a free market reflects and sums up all the economic choices and decisions made by all the participants. Men trade their goods or services by mutual consent to mutual advantage, according to their own independent, uncoerced judgment. A man can grow rich only if he is able to offer better values—better products or services, at a lower price—than others are able to offer.


Ayn Rand

 

[beagle9]

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

Forget the ACA.. It should be repealed and replaced.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

Forget the ACA.. It should be repealed and replaced.

it should be repealed and we should go back to what we had. It worked.

 

[dblack]

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

Forget the ACA.. It should be repealed and replaced.

it should be repealed and we should go back to what we had. It worked.

What we had should be repealed as well.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

Forget the ACA.. It should be repealed and replaced.

it should be repealed and we should go back to what we had. It worked.

What we had should be repealed as well.

what we had was working just fine for me and my family

 

[dblack]

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

Forget the ACA.. It should be repealed and replaced.

it should be repealed and we should go back to what we had. It worked.

What we had should be repealed as well.

what we had was working just fine for me and my family

Lots of other people were getting screwed, and it was driving ridiculous healthcare inflation. The problem is "group" health insurance, the government complicity in herding everyone into such plans will dumb tax are regulatory policies. ACA accelerates the same stupidity, forcing everyone into group insurance plans.

 

[beagle9]

The healthcare provider that denide her the treatment needed, should be investigated by the government, and this would be in order to make sure that it wasn't profit scare that held them back or was it just that it would have done no good anyway? Someone needs to follow up on the situation whenever there is a death involved that is a possible result that could have been prevented if treatment were given. When ever there is a coverage denial, there should be a 1-800 number to call that will investigate as to why a critical treatment is being denide someone.

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

Again , there is NO free market in health care. If the government - coercion --is involved in any way shape or form there is NO free market.


Free Market
¶

In a free economy, where no man or group of men can use physical coercion against anyone, economic power can be achieved only by voluntary means: by the voluntary choice and agreement of all those who participate in the process of production and trade. In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of a free market reflects and sums up all the economic choices and decisions made by all the participants. Men trade their goods or services by mutual consent to mutual advantage, according to their own independent, uncoerced judgment. A man can grow rich only if he is able to offer better values—better products or services, at a lower price—than others are able to offer.


Ayn Rand

OK and the free market system is flawed as we have learned over time, and so what is the answer to that ? According to some nothing should be the answer when it does go wrong, but isn't that foolish thinking? Isn't there always room to tweak and correct things that go wrong in order to make it all go better? We should be able to fix things without causing major problems to arise. If we can't then we are fools.

 

[Contumacious]

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

Again , there is NO free market in health care. If the government - coercion --is involved in any way shape or form there is NO free market.


Free Market
¶

In a free economy, where no man or group of men can use physical coercion against anyone, economic power can be achieved only by voluntary means: by the voluntary choice and agreement of all those who participate in the process of production and trade. In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of a free market reflects and sums up all the economic choices and decisions made by all the participants. Men trade their goods or services by mutual consent to mutual advantage, according to their own independent, uncoerced judgment. A man can grow rich only if he is able to offer better values—better products or services, at a lower price—than others are able to offer.


Ayn Rand

OK and the free market system is flawed as we have learned over time, and so what is the answer to that ? According to some, nothing should be the answer when it does go wrong, but isn't that foolish thinking?

The Free Market is flawed because __________________________________________________________.


.

 

[beagle9]

If I buy a plan outside of the government plan, why should I have to pay for the government plan too?
the only people that want the ACA are those that want free insurance. I say leave the ACA for them and let them fund their own program. no tax dollars taken from those that prefer to have good insurance at an affordable price.

Forget the ACA.. It should be repealed and replaced.

it should be repealed and we should go back to what we had. It worked.

What we had should be repealed as well.

what we had was working just fine for me and my family

Lots of other people were getting screwed, and it was driving ridiculous healthcare inflation. The problem is "group" health insurance, the government complicity in herding everyone into such plans will dumb tax are regulatory policies. ACA accelerates the same stupidity, forcing everyone into group insurance plans.

. Herding people into plans that were pure trash just so it could be claimed that people have coverage, was like leading the blind to the poison stream that others new was poison.

 

[beagle9]

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

Again , there is NO free market in health care. If the government - coercion --is involved in any way shape or form there is NO free market.


Free Market
¶

In a free economy, where no man or group of men can use physical coercion against anyone, economic power can be achieved only by voluntary means: by the voluntary choice and agreement of all those who participate in the process of production and trade. In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of a free market reflects and sums up all the economic choices and decisions made by all the participants. Men trade their goods or services by mutual consent to mutual advantage, according to their own independent, uncoerced judgment. A man can grow rich only if he is able to offer better values—better products or services, at a lower price—than others are able to offer.


Ayn Rand

OK and the free market system is flawed as we have learned over time, and so what is the answer to that ? According to some, nothing should be the answer when it does go wrong, but isn't that foolish thinking?

The Free Market is flawed because __________________________________________________________.


.

of greed mainly.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

and how many billions will that program end up costing the taxpayer.
Since the ACA started up, the care has really gone down in hospitals for the responsible individuals that actually pay for their coverage and health care.
We cant take much more of this. The next step is drive through ERs

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

Again , there is NO free market in health care. If the government - coercion --is involved in any way shape or form there is NO free market.


Free Market
¶

In a free economy, where no man or group of men can use physical coercion against anyone, economic power can be achieved only by voluntary means: by the voluntary choice and agreement of all those who participate in the process of production and trade. In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of a free market reflects and sums up all the economic choices and decisions made by all the participants. Men trade their goods or services by mutual consent to mutual advantage, according to their own independent, uncoerced judgment. A man can grow rich only if he is able to offer better values—better products or services, at a lower price—than others are able to offer.


Ayn Rand

OK and the free market system is flawed as we have learned over time, and so what is the answer to that ? According to some nothing should be the answer when it does go wrong, but isn't that foolish thinking? Isn't there always room to tweak and correct things that go wrong in order to make it all go better? We should be able to fix things without causing major problems to arise. If we can't then we are fools.

The government has never made anything better, what is it about insurance that makes people think the government is suddenly going to get something right

 

[beagle9]

. Profits over care seems to be what has driven the train far off the rails, so if somehow this nation can seperate profit from life or death situations, we would be much better off. Money should never come between whether or not a human being lives or dies all because of... Period

take away the opportunity for profit and you take away then incentive to work in the field.
Profit drives innovation

. The incentive will remain, but the system will be just set up differently. The basic insurance side of it will be a non-profit, but the provider side of it will remain free market in order to create, motivate, compete, and keep prices in line just as it should be. Now additional insurance can be purchased outside the government plan, in which is how it should be. No government interference between you and your doctor (you will keep your own doctor if you want). You can purchase healthcare from a provider of your choice with your government health card, as long as the provider is legit, and has a good grade with no past history of being a criminal set up or has been involved with fraudulent behavior or etc.

Again , there is NO free market in health care. If the government - coercion --is involved in any way shape or form there is NO free market.


Free Market
¶

In a free economy, where no man or group of men can use physical coercion against anyone, economic power can be achieved only by voluntary means: by the voluntary choice and agreement of all those who participate in the process of production and trade. In a free market, all prices, wages, and profits are determined—not by the arbitrary whim of the rich or of the poor, not by anyone’s “greed” or by anyone’s need—but by the law of supply and demand. The mechanism of a free market reflects and sums up all the economic choices and decisions made by all the participants. Men trade their goods or services by mutual consent to mutual advantage, according to their own independent, uncoerced judgment. A man can grow rich only if he is able to offer better values—better products or services, at a lower price—than others are able to offer.


Ayn Rand

OK and the free market system is flawed as we have learned over time, and so what is the answer to that ? According to some nothing should be the answer when it does go wrong, but isn't that foolish thinking? Isn't there always room to tweak and correct things that go wrong in order to make it all go better? We should be able to fix things without causing major problems to arise. If we can't then we are fools.

The government has never made anything better, what is it about insurance that makes people think the government is suddenly going to get something right

. Well I don't believe your take on the government not ever making anything better, so do you want to stick with that broad brush your using when you say that ? Be as honest as you can, and lets discuss the issues.