CDZ What is Trump's health care plan?

[Vigilante]

When he was asked what he would do for people w/o insurance
And he answered: "I will take care of em..."

God know what he meant by that.....

He said he would work things out with hospitals and doctors....Why would he get more detailed than that when others aren't?

 

[320 Years of History]

Ever try a search engine?

Healthcare Reform

Okay, let's look at what's there....

• Completely repeal Obamacare. Our elected representatives must eliminate the individual mandate. No person should be required to buy insurance unless he or she wants to.

• Fine, but if you do so, it needs to be replaced with something. What is that something? What follows are some potential provisions that something may include, but it's incomplete. This and the following ideas -- because that's all they are, rough ideas -- are not a healthcare policy or platform.
  
  Mr. Trump has had since Mr. Obama's last election to put something together and what's below is all he's got to offer? Really? I'm supposed to trust my health and healthcare to the musings of a man who has no public policy making experience and who also has put forth such a thinly conceived and articulated plan on such a critical subject? Really? I'm supposed to feel good about it, no less? Really?
  
  Not in this lifetime I won't. I'm not a Missourian, but Mr. Trump needs to show me more than that.

• Modify existing law that inhibits the sale of health insurance across state lines. As long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements, any vendor ought to be able to offer insurance in any state. By allowing full competition in this market, insurance costs will go down and consumer satisfaction will go up.
  • This make sense. I support this provision. Alone it's not enough for me to "buy into" Mr. Trump, but it's a good idea all the same.

• Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system. Businesses are allowed to take these deductions so why wouldn’t Congress allow individuals the same exemptions? As we allow the free market to provide insurance coverage opportunities to companies and individuals, we must also make sure that no one slips through the cracks simply because they cannot afford insurance. We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.
  1. Why? Doesn't Mr. Trump also propose a flat tax? What's the point of an insurance deduction when he wants us to take our income, multiply by a rate and write a check for the product?
     
     This idea illustrates the lack of coherence in and among Mr. Trump's proposals. You and I both know damn well that were Mr. Trump implementing or proposing an initiative for Trump Organization, it would be synergistic across all the relevant business functions/areas. Why should I demand/expect less from his policy proposals? He doesn't get to "half step" on a national level proposal. And I'm sorry but neglecting to coordinate a major healthcare proposal with his proposed tax policies isn't the sort of oversight I'll tolerate from a Presidential candidate.

• Allow individuals to use Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Contributions into HSAs should be tax-free and should be allowed to accumulate. These accounts would become part of the estate of the individual and could be passed on to heirs without fear of any death penalty. These plans should be particularly attractive to young people who are healthy and can afford high-deductible insurance plans. These funds can be used by any member of a family without penalty. The flexibility and security provided by HSAs will be of great benefit to all who participate.
  1. This idea isn't terrible or good, but again, why the tax free aspect if he wants a flat tax?
  2. The part about the money put into an HSA not being lost if it's not used is reasonable
  3. If indeed he implements a flat tax as I described earlier, I'd shift my view to this being a good idea. Absent that sort of flat tax, however, I see this as just another tax shelter. We don't need more of those. (You want that, that's what Luxembourg was for until September 2015. Now, that's what Russian banks are for. LOL)
• Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
  1. WTH does "price transparency" mean in this context? Is there anyone who's asked a healthcare provider what "such and such" costs and not been told?
  2. One can already price shop among care providers. This is an "empty" proposal. In fact, depending on why the show up, when an ambulance shows up to take one to a hospital, they ask which hospital you want to go to as long as it's in their country/district.
• Block-grant Medicaid to the states. Nearly every state already offers benefits beyond what is required in the current Medicaid structure. The state governments know their people best and can manage the administration of Medicaid far better without federal overhead. States will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse to preserve our precious resources.
  • I haven't a strong view one way or the other on this.

• Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers.

1. Okay, tell me what barriers you want to remove. That isn't too much to ask is it?
2. You can call them barriers if you want to, but what provisions will drug companies have to meet to ensure their products are at least as safe to use as are the drugs offered for sale in the U.S. prior to Mr. Trump's policy being implemented?
3. Drug companies are not public service companies and public service isn't what they provide. That's a nice way to spin what they do, but it's not accurate. Drug companies provide a product that American consumers demand and that they (personally or via insurance) are willing and able to pay for. I'll believe drug companies provide a public service when they research, develop and distribute/offer their drugs in exchange for the goodwill of the American people.
   
   One example of a public service offered by a corporation: when the emergency broadcast network comes on radios and televisions to tell us a tidal wave is coming. In that situation, the communications industry is performing a public service. Drug companies don't to that or anything that in character is substantively like that.

So the preceding is your idea of a substantive healthcare platform that one can compare and contrast with the ACA or even with what predated the ACA? I don't know if it is or not. I realize you were responding to someone who asked what is Mr. Trump's vision.

You ever think that this is the basic outline of a healthcare plan that will be completed ONCE HE IS ELECTED... Any other Republican candidate have a more detailed plan? Or do you want a 2700 page bible like obamacare so you can read it from cover to cover over the next 2 months?...

Red:
It may be that's how he views it. The problem I have with that is that absent more details than he's provided, there's only one thing among all the ideas he's offered that I expressly like. Among the rest, there is one point on which I'm neutral, and four that are vague, and two of those four outright don't make sense given his tax proposals. There are only seven bullet points in total that he's offered.

So now do you realize what it is you've attempted to make fun of me for? Substantively, you're postulating that on the basis of liking one of the seven ideas he's put on his site, that I take a chance that "once he is elected," I get behind his healthcare plan on the hope that I'll like the details he may put forth after he's elected.

He also may not put forth any new details. He may just discard those ideas altogether. Remember, this is Mr. Trump, the man who's thinner on substance than any political candidate I've come by since middle school student government, and who changes his mind faster and more often it seems than a PMS-ing woman having hot flashes.

Blue:

1. Whether they have or have not has no bearing on whether he should or should not. Remember, he's promising us something new and different. Besting his competition on substance would be a good start in that vein.
2. Unlike his competitors, we don't have a legacy of political speeches, votes, policies made and or supported, etc. on which to "fill in the blanks" with regard to where they stand on the issue. Other than his reality show, Mr. Trump has been a private citizen. If you were running, I'd expect the same substance of you that I demand from Mr. Trump. Like Mr. Trump, I'm a successful businessperson (I happen to be a management consultant) which means I'm a very effective communicator.
   
   What that means in this context is that as a good communicator, I'm good at anticipating what my audience wants to know, so I'd know you'd expect the same of me that I'm demanding of Mr. Trump were I asking for your support. Consequently, I'm going to present that info/content before I'm prompted to do so by a question because I know that by doing so, you are subconsciously comforted when you observe that I correctly predicted your need for that information.
   
   That's part of how one builds trust in a relationship. Trust is not what Mr. Trump inspires, yet it's what we must give him if we elect him.

Pink:
Reductio ad absurdum

Of course I don't want 2700 pages of document. Something like a short scholarly article between 5 and 50 pages will be just fine and I want the policy approach in it to dovetail with his other proposals that'll necessarily be related to it -- tax policy, immigration policy, welfare policy, drug regulation and safety, etc. If I can toss together 3K - 5K word papers in an hour or less, and I can and do, Mr. Trump should surely by now have been able to find one or more people to research healthcare policy and put together a coherent and substantive plan....that or just say he only wants to alter the ACA on some several specific ways. Conceivably, either approach to communicating his intentions would be sufficient, but he's undertaken neither.

 

[Vigilante]

Ever try a search engine?

Healthcare Reform

Okay, let's look at what's there....

• Completely repeal Obamacare. Our elected representatives must eliminate the individual mandate. No person should be required to buy insurance unless he or she wants to.

• Fine, but if you do so, it needs to be replaced with something. What is that something? What follows are some potential provisions that something may include, but it's incomplete. This and the following ideas -- because that's all they are, rough ideas -- are not a healthcare policy or platform.
  
  Mr. Trump has had since Mr. Obama's last election to put something together and what's below is all he's got to offer? Really? I'm supposed to trust my health and healthcare to the musings of a man who has no public policy making experience and who also has put forth such a thinly conceived and articulated plan on such a critical subject? Really? I'm supposed to feel good about it, no less? Really?
  
  Not in this lifetime I won't. I'm not a Missourian, but Mr. Trump needs to show me more than that.

• Modify existing law that inhibits the sale of health insurance across state lines. As long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements, any vendor ought to be able to offer insurance in any state. By allowing full competition in this market, insurance costs will go down and consumer satisfaction will go up.
  • This make sense. I support this provision. Alone it's not enough for me to "buy into" Mr. Trump, but it's a good idea all the same.

• Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system. Businesses are allowed to take these deductions so why wouldn’t Congress allow individuals the same exemptions? As we allow the free market to provide insurance coverage opportunities to companies and individuals, we must also make sure that no one slips through the cracks simply because they cannot afford insurance. We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.
  1. Why? Doesn't Mr. Trump also propose a flat tax? What's the point of an insurance deduction when he wants us to take our income, multiply by a rate and write a check for the product?
     
     This idea illustrates the lack of coherence in and among Mr. Trump's proposals. You and I both know damn well that were Mr. Trump implementing or proposing an initiative for Trump Organization, it would be synergistic across all the relevant business functions/areas. Why should I demand/expect less from his policy proposals? He doesn't get to "half step" on a national level proposal. And I'm sorry but neglecting to coordinate a major healthcare proposal with his proposed tax policies isn't the sort of oversight I'll tolerate from a Presidential candidate.

• Allow individuals to use Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Contributions into HSAs should be tax-free and should be allowed to accumulate. These accounts would become part of the estate of the individual and could be passed on to heirs without fear of any death penalty. These plans should be particularly attractive to young people who are healthy and can afford high-deductible insurance plans. These funds can be used by any member of a family without penalty. The flexibility and security provided by HSAs will be of great benefit to all who participate.
  1. This idea isn't terrible or good, but again, why the tax free aspect if he wants a flat tax?
  2. The part about the money put into an HSA not being lost if it's not used is reasonable
  3. If indeed he implements a flat tax as I described earlier, I'd shift my view to this being a good idea. Absent that sort of flat tax, however, I see this as just another tax shelter. We don't need more of those. (You want that, that's what Luxembourg was for until September 2015. Now, that's what Russian banks are for. LOL)
• Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
  1. WTH does "price transparency" mean in this context? Is there anyone who's asked a healthcare provider what "such and such" costs and not been told?
  2. One can already price shop among care providers. This is an "empty" proposal. In fact, depending on why the show up, when an ambulance shows up to take one to a hospital, they ask which hospital you want to go to as long as it's in their country/district.
• Block-grant Medicaid to the states. Nearly every state already offers benefits beyond what is required in the current Medicaid structure. The state governments know their people best and can manage the administration of Medicaid far better without federal overhead. States will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse to preserve our precious resources.
  • I haven't a strong view one way or the other on this.

• Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers.

1. Okay, tell me what barriers you want to remove. That isn't too much to ask is it?
2. You can call them barriers if you want to, but what provisions will drug companies have to meet to ensure their products are at least as safe to use as are the drugs offered for sale in the U.S. prior to Mr. Trump's policy being implemented?
3. Drug companies are not public service companies and public service isn't what they provide. That's a nice way to spin what they do, but it's not accurate. Drug companies provide a product that American consumers demand and that they (personally or via insurance) are willing and able to pay for. I'll believe drug companies provide a public service when they research, develop and distribute/offer their drugs in exchange for the goodwill of the American people.
   
   One example of a public service offered by a corporation: when the emergency broadcast network comes on radios and televisions to tell us a tidal wave is coming. In that situation, the communications industry is performing a public service. Drug companies don't to that or anything that in character is substantively like that.

So the preceding is your idea of a substantive healthcare platform that one can compare and contrast with the ACA or even with what predated the ACA? I don't know if it is or not. I realize you were responding to someone who asked what is Mr. Trump's vision.

You ever think that this is the basic outline of a healthcare plan that will be completed ONCE HE IS ELECTED... Any other Republican candidate have a more detailed plan? Or do you want a 2700 page bible like obamacare so you can read it from cover to cover over the next 2 months?...

Red:
It may be that's how he views it. The problem I have with that is that absent more details than he's provided, there's only one thing among all the ideas he's offered that I expressly like. Among the rest, there is one point on which I'm neutral, and four that are vague, and two of those four outright don't make sense given his tax proposals. There are only seven bullet points in total that he's offered.

So now do you realize what it is you've attempted to make fun of me for? Substantively, you're postulating that on the basis of liking one of the seven ideas he's put on his site, that I take a chance that "once he is elected," I get behind his healthcare plan on the hope that I'll like the details he may put forth after he's elected.

He also may not put forth any new details. He may just discard those ideas altogether. Remember, this is Mr. Trump, the man who's thinner on substance than any political candidate I've come by since middle school student government, and who changes his mind faster and more often it seems than a PMS-ing woman having hot flashes.

Blue:

1. Whether they have or have not has no bearing on whether he should or should not. Remember, he's promising us something new and different. Besting his competition on substance would be a good start in that vein.
2. Unlike his competitors, we don't have a legacy of political speeches, votes, policies made and or supported, etc. on which to "fill in the blanks" with regard to where they stand on the issue. Other than his reality show, Mr. Trump has been a private citizen. If you were running, I'd expect the same substance of you that I demand from Mr. Trump. Like Mr. Trump, I'm a successful businessperson (I happen to be a management consultant) which means I'm a very effective communicator.
   
   What that means in this context is that as a good communicator, I'm good at anticipating what my audience wants to know, so I'd know you'd expect the same of me that I'm demanding of Mr. Trump were I asking for your support. Consequently, I'm going to present that info/content before I'm prompted to do so by a question because I know that by doing so, you are subconsciously comforted when you observe that I correctly predicted your need for that information.
   
   That's part of how one builds trust in a relationship. Trust is not what Mr. Trump inspires, yet it's what we must give him if we elect him.

Pink:
Reductio ad absurdum

Of course I don't want 2700 pages of document. Something like a short scholarly article between 5 and 50 pages will be just fine and I want the policy approach in it to dovetail with his other proposals that'll necessarily be related to it -- tax policy, immigration policy, welfare policy, drug regulation and safety, etc. If I can toss together 3K - 5K word papers in an hour or less, and I can and do, Mr. Trump should surely by now have been able to find one or more people to research healthcare policy and put together a coherent and substantive plan....that or just say he only wants to alter the ACA on some several specific ways. Conceivably, either approach to communicating his intentions would be sufficient, but he's undertaken neither.

Call Trump up and ask him!

 

[320 Years of History]

Ever try a search engine?

Healthcare Reform

Okay, let's look at what's there....

• Completely repeal Obamacare. Our elected representatives must eliminate the individual mandate. No person should be required to buy insurance unless he or she wants to.

• Fine, but if you do so, it needs to be replaced with something. What is that something? What follows are some potential provisions that something may include, but it's incomplete. This and the following ideas -- because that's all they are, rough ideas -- are not a healthcare policy or platform.
  
  Mr. Trump has had since Mr. Obama's last election to put something together and what's below is all he's got to offer? Really? I'm supposed to trust my health and healthcare to the musings of a man who has no public policy making experience and who also has put forth such a thinly conceived and articulated plan on such a critical subject? Really? I'm supposed to feel good about it, no less? Really?
  
  Not in this lifetime I won't. I'm not a Missourian, but Mr. Trump needs to show me more than that.

• Modify existing law that inhibits the sale of health insurance across state lines. As long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements, any vendor ought to be able to offer insurance in any state. By allowing full competition in this market, insurance costs will go down and consumer satisfaction will go up.
  • This make sense. I support this provision. Alone it's not enough for me to "buy into" Mr. Trump, but it's a good idea all the same.

• Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system. Businesses are allowed to take these deductions so why wouldn’t Congress allow individuals the same exemptions? As we allow the free market to provide insurance coverage opportunities to companies and individuals, we must also make sure that no one slips through the cracks simply because they cannot afford insurance. We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.
  1. Why? Doesn't Mr. Trump also propose a flat tax? What's the point of an insurance deduction when he wants us to take our income, multiply by a rate and write a check for the product?
     
     This idea illustrates the lack of coherence in and among Mr. Trump's proposals. You and I both know damn well that were Mr. Trump implementing or proposing an initiative for Trump Organization, it would be synergistic across all the relevant business functions/areas. Why should I demand/expect less from his policy proposals? He doesn't get to "half step" on a national level proposal. And I'm sorry but neglecting to coordinate a major healthcare proposal with his proposed tax policies isn't the sort of oversight I'll tolerate from a Presidential candidate.

• Allow individuals to use Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Contributions into HSAs should be tax-free and should be allowed to accumulate. These accounts would become part of the estate of the individual and could be passed on to heirs without fear of any death penalty. These plans should be particularly attractive to young people who are healthy and can afford high-deductible insurance plans. These funds can be used by any member of a family without penalty. The flexibility and security provided by HSAs will be of great benefit to all who participate.
  1. This idea isn't terrible or good, but again, why the tax free aspect if he wants a flat tax?
  2. The part about the money put into an HSA not being lost if it's not used is reasonable
  3. If indeed he implements a flat tax as I described earlier, I'd shift my view to this being a good idea. Absent that sort of flat tax, however, I see this as just another tax shelter. We don't need more of those. (You want that, that's what Luxembourg was for until September 2015. Now, that's what Russian banks are for. LOL)
• Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
  1. WTH does "price transparency" mean in this context? Is there anyone who's asked a healthcare provider what "such and such" costs and not been told?
  2. One can already price shop among care providers. This is an "empty" proposal. In fact, depending on why the show up, when an ambulance shows up to take one to a hospital, they ask which hospital you want to go to as long as it's in their country/district.
• Block-grant Medicaid to the states. Nearly every state already offers benefits beyond what is required in the current Medicaid structure. The state governments know their people best and can manage the administration of Medicaid far better without federal overhead. States will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse to preserve our precious resources.
  • I haven't a strong view one way or the other on this.

• Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers.

1. Okay, tell me what barriers you want to remove. That isn't too much to ask is it?
2. You can call them barriers if you want to, but what provisions will drug companies have to meet to ensure their products are at least as safe to use as are the drugs offered for sale in the U.S. prior to Mr. Trump's policy being implemented?
3. Drug companies are not public service companies and public service isn't what they provide. That's a nice way to spin what they do, but it's not accurate. Drug companies provide a product that American consumers demand and that they (personally or via insurance) are willing and able to pay for. I'll believe drug companies provide a public service when they research, develop and distribute/offer their drugs in exchange for the goodwill of the American people.
   
   One example of a public service offered by a corporation: when the emergency broadcast network comes on radios and televisions to tell us a tidal wave is coming. In that situation, the communications industry is performing a public service. Drug companies don't to that or anything that in character is substantively like that.

So the preceding is your idea of a substantive healthcare platform that one can compare and contrast with the ACA or even with what predated the ACA? I don't know if it is or not. I realize you were responding to someone who asked what is Mr. Trump's vision.

You ever think that this is the basic outline of a healthcare plan that will be completed ONCE HE IS ELECTED... Any other Republican candidate have a more detailed plan? Or do you want a 2700 page bible like obamacare so you can read it from cover to cover over the next 2 months?...

Red:
It may be that's how he views it. The problem I have with that is that absent more details than he's provided, there's only one thing among all the ideas he's offered that I expressly like. Among the rest, there is one point on which I'm neutral, and four that are vague, and two of those four outright don't make sense given his tax proposals. There are only seven bullet points in total that he's offered.

So now do you realize what it is you've attempted to make fun of me for? Substantively, you're postulating that on the basis of liking one of the seven ideas he's put on his site, that I take a chance that "once he is elected," I get behind his healthcare plan on the hope that I'll like the details he may put forth after he's elected.

He also may not put forth any new details. He may just discard those ideas altogether. Remember, this is Mr. Trump, the man who's thinner on substance than any political candidate I've come by since middle school student government, and who changes his mind faster and more often it seems than a PMS-ing woman having hot flashes.

Blue:

1. Whether they have or have not has no bearing on whether he should or should not. Remember, he's promising us something new and different. Besting his competition on substance would be a good start in that vein.
2. Unlike his competitors, we don't have a legacy of political speeches, votes, policies made and or supported, etc. on which to "fill in the blanks" with regard to where they stand on the issue. Other than his reality show, Mr. Trump has been a private citizen. If you were running, I'd expect the same substance of you that I demand from Mr. Trump. Like Mr. Trump, I'm a successful businessperson (I happen to be a management consultant) which means I'm a very effective communicator.
   
   What that means in this context is that as a good communicator, I'm good at anticipating what my audience wants to know, so I'd know you'd expect the same of me that I'm demanding of Mr. Trump were I asking for your support. Consequently, I'm going to present that info/content before I'm prompted to do so by a question because I know that by doing so, you are subconsciously comforted when you observe that I correctly predicted your need for that information.
   
   That's part of how one builds trust in a relationship. Trust is not what Mr. Trump inspires, yet it's what we must give him if we elect him.

Pink:
Reductio ad absurdum

Of course I don't want 2700 pages of document. Something like a short scholarly article between 5 and 50 pages will be just fine and I want the policy approach in it to dovetail with his other proposals that'll necessarily be related to it -- tax policy, immigration policy, welfare policy, drug regulation and safety, etc. If I can toss together 3K - 5K word papers in an hour or less, and I can and do, Mr. Trump should surely by now have been able to find one or more people to research healthcare policy and put together a coherent and substantive plan....that or just say he only wants to alter the ACA on some several specific ways. Conceivably, either approach to communicating his intentions would be sufficient, but he's undertaken neither.

Call Trump up and ask him!

Am I correct to infer from that reply that you don't feel the need for more substance than Mr. Trump's already provided?

 

[Vigilante]

Ever try a search engine?

Healthcare Reform

Okay, let's look at what's there....

• Completely repeal Obamacare. Our elected representatives must eliminate the individual mandate. No person should be required to buy insurance unless he or she wants to.

• Fine, but if you do so, it needs to be replaced with something. What is that something? What follows are some potential provisions that something may include, but it's incomplete. This and the following ideas -- because that's all they are, rough ideas -- are not a healthcare policy or platform.
  
  Mr. Trump has had since Mr. Obama's last election to put something together and what's below is all he's got to offer? Really? I'm supposed to trust my health and healthcare to the musings of a man who has no public policy making experience and who also has put forth such a thinly conceived and articulated plan on such a critical subject? Really? I'm supposed to feel good about it, no less? Really?
  
  Not in this lifetime I won't. I'm not a Missourian, but Mr. Trump needs to show me more than that.

• Modify existing law that inhibits the sale of health insurance across state lines. As long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements, any vendor ought to be able to offer insurance in any state. By allowing full competition in this market, insurance costs will go down and consumer satisfaction will go up.
  • This make sense. I support this provision. Alone it's not enough for me to "buy into" Mr. Trump, but it's a good idea all the same.

• Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system. Businesses are allowed to take these deductions so why wouldn’t Congress allow individuals the same exemptions? As we allow the free market to provide insurance coverage opportunities to companies and individuals, we must also make sure that no one slips through the cracks simply because they cannot afford insurance. We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.
  1. Why? Doesn't Mr. Trump also propose a flat tax? What's the point of an insurance deduction when he wants us to take our income, multiply by a rate and write a check for the product?
     
     This idea illustrates the lack of coherence in and among Mr. Trump's proposals. You and I both know damn well that were Mr. Trump implementing or proposing an initiative for Trump Organization, it would be synergistic across all the relevant business functions/areas. Why should I demand/expect less from his policy proposals? He doesn't get to "half step" on a national level proposal. And I'm sorry but neglecting to coordinate a major healthcare proposal with his proposed tax policies isn't the sort of oversight I'll tolerate from a Presidential candidate.

• Allow individuals to use Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Contributions into HSAs should be tax-free and should be allowed to accumulate. These accounts would become part of the estate of the individual and could be passed on to heirs without fear of any death penalty. These plans should be particularly attractive to young people who are healthy and can afford high-deductible insurance plans. These funds can be used by any member of a family without penalty. The flexibility and security provided by HSAs will be of great benefit to all who participate.
  1. This idea isn't terrible or good, but again, why the tax free aspect if he wants a flat tax?
  2. The part about the money put into an HSA not being lost if it's not used is reasonable
  3. If indeed he implements a flat tax as I described earlier, I'd shift my view to this being a good idea. Absent that sort of flat tax, however, I see this as just another tax shelter. We don't need more of those. (You want that, that's what Luxembourg was for until September 2015. Now, that's what Russian banks are for. LOL)
• Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
  1. WTH does "price transparency" mean in this context? Is there anyone who's asked a healthcare provider what "such and such" costs and not been told?
  2. One can already price shop among care providers. This is an "empty" proposal. In fact, depending on why the show up, when an ambulance shows up to take one to a hospital, they ask which hospital you want to go to as long as it's in their country/district.
• Block-grant Medicaid to the states. Nearly every state already offers benefits beyond what is required in the current Medicaid structure. The state governments know their people best and can manage the administration of Medicaid far better without federal overhead. States will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse to preserve our precious resources.
  • I haven't a strong view one way or the other on this.

• Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers.

1. Okay, tell me what barriers you want to remove. That isn't too much to ask is it?
2. You can call them barriers if you want to, but what provisions will drug companies have to meet to ensure their products are at least as safe to use as are the drugs offered for sale in the U.S. prior to Mr. Trump's policy being implemented?
3. Drug companies are not public service companies and public service isn't what they provide. That's a nice way to spin what they do, but it's not accurate. Drug companies provide a product that American consumers demand and that they (personally or via insurance) are willing and able to pay for. I'll believe drug companies provide a public service when they research, develop and distribute/offer their drugs in exchange for the goodwill of the American people.
   
   One example of a public service offered by a corporation: when the emergency broadcast network comes on radios and televisions to tell us a tidal wave is coming. In that situation, the communications industry is performing a public service. Drug companies don't to that or anything that in character is substantively like that.

So the preceding is your idea of a substantive healthcare platform that one can compare and contrast with the ACA or even with what predated the ACA? I don't know if it is or not. I realize you were responding to someone who asked what is Mr. Trump's vision.

You ever think that this is the basic outline of a healthcare plan that will be completed ONCE HE IS ELECTED... Any other Republican candidate have a more detailed plan? Or do you want a 2700 page bible like obamacare so you can read it from cover to cover over the next 2 months?...

Red:
It may be that's how he views it. The problem I have with that is that absent more details than he's provided, there's only one thing among all the ideas he's offered that I expressly like. Among the rest, there is one point on which I'm neutral, and four that are vague, and two of those four outright don't make sense given his tax proposals. There are only seven bullet points in total that he's offered.

So now do you realize what it is you've attempted to make fun of me for? Substantively, you're postulating that on the basis of liking one of the seven ideas he's put on his site, that I take a chance that "once he is elected," I get behind his healthcare plan on the hope that I'll like the details he may put forth after he's elected.

He also may not put forth any new details. He may just discard those ideas altogether. Remember, this is Mr. Trump, the man who's thinner on substance than any political candidate I've come by since middle school student government, and who changes his mind faster and more often it seems than a PMS-ing woman having hot flashes.

Blue:

1. Whether they have or have not has no bearing on whether he should or should not. Remember, he's promising us something new and different. Besting his competition on substance would be a good start in that vein.
2. Unlike his competitors, we don't have a legacy of political speeches, votes, policies made and or supported, etc. on which to "fill in the blanks" with regard to where they stand on the issue. Other than his reality show, Mr. Trump has been a private citizen. If you were running, I'd expect the same substance of you that I demand from Mr. Trump. Like Mr. Trump, I'm a successful businessperson (I happen to be a management consultant) which means I'm a very effective communicator.
   
   What that means in this context is that as a good communicator, I'm good at anticipating what my audience wants to know, so I'd know you'd expect the same of me that I'm demanding of Mr. Trump were I asking for your support. Consequently, I'm going to present that info/content before I'm prompted to do so by a question because I know that by doing so, you are subconsciously comforted when you observe that I correctly predicted your need for that information.
   
   That's part of how one builds trust in a relationship. Trust is not what Mr. Trump inspires, yet it's what we must give him if we elect him.

Pink:
Reductio ad absurdum

Of course I don't want 2700 pages of document. Something like a short scholarly article between 5 and 50 pages will be just fine and I want the policy approach in it to dovetail with his other proposals that'll necessarily be related to it -- tax policy, immigration policy, welfare policy, drug regulation and safety, etc. If I can toss together 3K - 5K word papers in an hour or less, and I can and do, Mr. Trump should surely by now have been able to find one or more people to research healthcare policy and put together a coherent and substantive plan....that or just say he only wants to alter the ACA on some several specific ways. Conceivably, either approach to communicating his intentions would be sufficient, but he's undertaken neither.

Call Trump up and ask him!

Am I correct to infer from that reply that you don't feel the need for more substance than Mr. Trump's already provided?

Of course I need no further SUBSTANCE until others offer more, or until he is the candidate running against that lying, corrupt, criminal, murdering bitch, Hellary!

 

[320 Years of History]

Okay, let's look at what's there....

• Completely repeal Obamacare. Our elected representatives must eliminate the individual mandate. No person should be required to buy insurance unless he or she wants to.

• Fine, but if you do so, it needs to be replaced with something. What is that something? What follows are some potential provisions that something may include, but it's incomplete. This and the following ideas -- because that's all they are, rough ideas -- are not a healthcare policy or platform.
  
  Mr. Trump has had since Mr. Obama's last election to put something together and what's below is all he's got to offer? Really? I'm supposed to trust my health and healthcare to the musings of a man who has no public policy making experience and who also has put forth such a thinly conceived and articulated plan on such a critical subject? Really? I'm supposed to feel good about it, no less? Really?
  
  Not in this lifetime I won't. I'm not a Missourian, but Mr. Trump needs to show me more than that.

• Modify existing law that inhibits the sale of health insurance across state lines. As long as the plan purchased complies with state requirements, any vendor ought to be able to offer insurance in any state. By allowing full competition in this market, insurance costs will go down and consumer satisfaction will go up.
  • This make sense. I support this provision. Alone it's not enough for me to "buy into" Mr. Trump, but it's a good idea all the same.

• Allow individuals to fully deduct health insurance premium payments from their tax returns under the current tax system. Businesses are allowed to take these deductions so why wouldn’t Congress allow individuals the same exemptions? As we allow the free market to provide insurance coverage opportunities to companies and individuals, we must also make sure that no one slips through the cracks simply because they cannot afford insurance. We must review basic options for Medicaid and work with states to ensure that those who want healthcare coverage can have it.
  1. Why? Doesn't Mr. Trump also propose a flat tax? What's the point of an insurance deduction when he wants us to take our income, multiply by a rate and write a check for the product?
     
     This idea illustrates the lack of coherence in and among Mr. Trump's proposals. You and I both know damn well that were Mr. Trump implementing or proposing an initiative for Trump Organization, it would be synergistic across all the relevant business functions/areas. Why should I demand/expect less from his policy proposals? He doesn't get to "half step" on a national level proposal. And I'm sorry but neglecting to coordinate a major healthcare proposal with his proposed tax policies isn't the sort of oversight I'll tolerate from a Presidential candidate.

• Allow individuals to use Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). Contributions into HSAs should be tax-free and should be allowed to accumulate. These accounts would become part of the estate of the individual and could be passed on to heirs without fear of any death penalty. These plans should be particularly attractive to young people who are healthy and can afford high-deductible insurance plans. These funds can be used by any member of a family without penalty. The flexibility and security provided by HSAs will be of great benefit to all who participate.
  1. This idea isn't terrible or good, but again, why the tax free aspect if he wants a flat tax?
  2. The part about the money put into an HSA not being lost if it's not used is reasonable
  3. If indeed he implements a flat tax as I described earlier, I'd shift my view to this being a good idea. Absent that sort of flat tax, however, I see this as just another tax shelter. We don't need more of those. (You want that, that's what Luxembourg was for until September 2015. Now, that's what Russian banks are for. LOL)
• Require price transparency from all healthcare providers, especially doctors and healthcare organizations like clinics and hospitals. Individuals should be able to shop to find the best prices for procedures, exams or any other medical-related procedure.
  1. WTH does "price transparency" mean in this context? Is there anyone who's asked a healthcare provider what "such and such" costs and not been told?
  2. One can already price shop among care providers. This is an "empty" proposal. In fact, depending on why the show up, when an ambulance shows up to take one to a hospital, they ask which hospital you want to go to as long as it's in their country/district.
• Block-grant Medicaid to the states. Nearly every state already offers benefits beyond what is required in the current Medicaid structure. The state governments know their people best and can manage the administration of Medicaid far better without federal overhead. States will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud, waste and abuse to preserve our precious resources.
  • I haven't a strong view one way or the other on this.

• Remove barriers to entry into free markets for drug providers that offer safe, reliable and cheaper products. Congress will need the courage to step away from the special interests and do what is right for America. Though the pharmaceutical industry is in the private sector, drug companies provide a public service. Allowing consumers access to imported, safe and dependable drugs from overseas will bring more options to consumers.

1. Okay, tell me what barriers you want to remove. That isn't too much to ask is it?
2. You can call them barriers if you want to, but what provisions will drug companies have to meet to ensure their products are at least as safe to use as are the drugs offered for sale in the U.S. prior to Mr. Trump's policy being implemented?
3. Drug companies are not public service companies and public service isn't what they provide. That's a nice way to spin what they do, but it's not accurate. Drug companies provide a product that American consumers demand and that they (personally or via insurance) are willing and able to pay for. I'll believe drug companies provide a public service when they research, develop and distribute/offer their drugs in exchange for the goodwill of the American people.
   
   One example of a public service offered by a corporation: when the emergency broadcast network comes on radios and televisions to tell us a tidal wave is coming. In that situation, the communications industry is performing a public service. Drug companies don't to that or anything that in character is substantively like that.

So the preceding is your idea of a substantive healthcare platform that one can compare and contrast with the ACA or even with what predated the ACA? I don't know if it is or not. I realize you were responding to someone who asked what is Mr. Trump's vision.

You ever think that this is the basic outline of a healthcare plan that will be completed ONCE HE IS ELECTED... Any other Republican candidate have a more detailed plan? Or do you want a 2700 page bible like obamacare so you can read it from cover to cover over the next 2 months?...

Red:
It may be that's how he views it. The problem I have with that is that absent more details than he's provided, there's only one thing among all the ideas he's offered that I expressly like. Among the rest, there is one point on which I'm neutral, and four that are vague, and two of those four outright don't make sense given his tax proposals. There are only seven bullet points in total that he's offered.

So now do you realize what it is you've attempted to make fun of me for? Substantively, you're postulating that on the basis of liking one of the seven ideas he's put on his site, that I take a chance that "once he is elected," I get behind his healthcare plan on the hope that I'll like the details he may put forth after he's elected.

He also may not put forth any new details. He may just discard those ideas altogether. Remember, this is Mr. Trump, the man who's thinner on substance than any political candidate I've come by since middle school student government, and who changes his mind faster and more often it seems than a PMS-ing woman having hot flashes.

Blue:

1. Whether they have or have not has no bearing on whether he should or should not. Remember, he's promising us something new and different. Besting his competition on substance would be a good start in that vein.
2. Unlike his competitors, we don't have a legacy of political speeches, votes, policies made and or supported, etc. on which to "fill in the blanks" with regard to where they stand on the issue. Other than his reality show, Mr. Trump has been a private citizen. If you were running, I'd expect the same substance of you that I demand from Mr. Trump. Like Mr. Trump, I'm a successful businessperson (I happen to be a management consultant) which means I'm a very effective communicator.
   
   What that means in this context is that as a good communicator, I'm good at anticipating what my audience wants to know, so I'd know you'd expect the same of me that I'm demanding of Mr. Trump were I asking for your support. Consequently, I'm going to present that info/content before I'm prompted to do so by a question because I know that by doing so, you are subconsciously comforted when you observe that I correctly predicted your need for that information.
   
   That's part of how one builds trust in a relationship. Trust is not what Mr. Trump inspires, yet it's what we must give him if we elect him.

Pink:
Reductio ad absurdum

Of course I don't want 2700 pages of document. Something like a short scholarly article between 5 and 50 pages will be just fine and I want the policy approach in it to dovetail with his other proposals that'll necessarily be related to it -- tax policy, immigration policy, welfare policy, drug regulation and safety, etc. If I can toss together 3K - 5K word papers in an hour or less, and I can and do, Mr. Trump should surely by now have been able to find one or more people to research healthcare policy and put together a coherent and substantive plan....that or just say he only wants to alter the ACA on some several specific ways. Conceivably, either approach to communicating his intentions would be sufficient, but he's undertaken neither.

Call Trump up and ask him!

Am I correct to infer from that reply that you don't feel the need for more substance than Mr. Trump's already provided?

Of course I need no further SUBSTANCE until others offer more, or until he is the candidate running against that lying, corrupt, criminal, murdering bitch, Hellary!

Well, that's a start seeing as just a post or two back in the conversation you were talking about " until he gets elected."

So let's say you wait until he gets either the nomination or the Presidency, then puts up more substance and you read it and think it's unacceptable. Then what?

 

[320 Years of History]

BTW, I should have mentioned this earlier, but lest "Trumpeteers" get on their "high horses" about the last provision of Mr. Trump's healthcare ideas about how great the idea is in principle, and it is a good idea in principle that I'd like to see come to fruition, it's just that Mr. Trump has not well enough "fleshed out" how he envisions its implementation, please note that the basic idea is precisely what Mr. Obama sought to include among the ACA provisions, but could not get it through.

Nevermind that Medicare cannot negotiate lower prices due to the "noninterference" clause in Medicare Part D. That clause essentially prohibits the government from using its buying power to negotiate lower drug prices. The Obama Administration tried to dispense with that clause, but could not due to the lobbying efforts of "Big Pharma." There are alternatives under consideration.

Buying some medications outside the U.S:
Another thing that I suspect many Americans don't realize is just how inexpensive drugs can be. I think they don't realize this because most Americans never leave the country long enough to have occasion to buy them or an alternative drug or homeopathic alternative while in a foreign country. I work in the PRC a lot, so much that I'm there more than I'm in the U.S. There are all manners of palliative treatments they have there that one can buy over the counter and that work.

For example, I can say that I surely think they've found what amounts to a cure for the common cold. I got a cold there last year and went to the corner drugstore. They gave me something -- I have no idea what it was -- and by the end of the day, I was fine. I realize that whatever it was truly only addressed the symptoms of the cold, but it beat the pants off of everything we have at the local CVS. I didn't see anything like Nyquil or Robitussin over there....then again, I can't read Mandarin, so maybe they do have that too. They have "social" drugs -- Viagra, and stuff like it -- and routine pain killers and so on, just like we do too. All of it is ten times cheaper than what we pay in the U.S.

Also, you can be sure that the Chinese government and pharmaceutical producers and merchants are just as concerned about drug safety as is the FDA, especially re: over the counter medicine....they have to be...the government can put down a rebellion in Tiananmen Square, but it can't have literally hundreds of millions of people pissed off and in public revolt over unsafe drugs.

Producers technically can "half step" on safety if they want to, I suppose, but their sales will plummet if they do. Remember, at the heart of nearly every Chinese consumer goods marketing strategy is the dependence not on high price, but on high volume. (~110M people in China are middle class.) Chinese people are culturally skeptical, risk averse and superstitious; word spreads quickly, and once it does, "that's it" for the merchant/maker. The Chinese people and government are many things, but stupid isn't among them.

FWIW, I haven't purchased over the counter meds anywhere other than the U.S., China (Shenzhen, Shanghai, Beijing, Dalian), Western Europe (London and Paris) and Canada (Montreal, Vancouver, and Toronto). OTC stuff in Western Europe I think is pricier than in the U.S....it's been a while since I needed any. Prescription meds may be cheaper; I don't know for I've not ever needed any. I've never gone to a doctor or hospital overseas.

 

[regent]

Not too worry, tonight Trump mentioned doing away with the IRS so it's possible that we will not be paying income tax anymore and that will take care of our medical needs. I wonder if Trump will do away with all medical programs and return it to the individual. It certainly is a cost to many businesses.

 

[320 Years of History]

Not too worry, tonight Trump mentioned doing away with the IRS so it's possible that we will not be paying income tax anymore and that will take care of our medical needs. I wonder if Trump will do away with all medical programs and return it to the individual. It certainly is a cost to many businesses.

I doubt that...a lot. Who that actually obtains medical care beyond a simple check up and routine care pays as much or more in annual income taxes as they would, absent insurance, for medical treatment and related medications? I'll tell you who. People who minimally are in the top 10% of wage/salary earners. Medical care and treatment is pricey enough that even if everyone were to create a sinking fund with the intent of self-insuring, for most folks, just one significant but not inherently fatal illness would be enough to wipe out decades of saving and still leave them in debt.

Average cost per day in the U.S. to be hospitalized:

• State/local government hospitals — $1,878
• Nonprofit hospitals — $2,289
• For-profit hospitals — $1,791

That's just for being there. Surgery, procedures, medications, and doctors costs, among other things, are additional.