HappyJoy
Platinum Member
- Apr 15, 2015
- 32,056
- 5,943
- 1,140
- Banned
- #421
I said thats not fascist in nature,,do you have any ideas for people that dont want the governemnt involved in their private healthcare???Yes. But it doesn't seem logical or sustainable.This makes the argument for one health care for all! Of course those who want more can pay for it.Obama proposed the rise in SS retirement age. Pelosi screamed bloody murder.Republicans.everyone....You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days. Not that you can't, I just genuinely don't know what that means anymore.
I'd say someone who realizes that we need both tax increases and budget cuts; that we need to raise the retirement age for Social Security; that realizes that we need to de-couple health insurance and employers; that we need to come to terms with the shortcomings of the geniuses that founded our nation (both personal and civic-wise) and admit that our constitution is not built for 2020. That we need to take care of anyone under 18 and over 60 medically and give the youth a chance and the elders a dignified end.
That'd be a start to a platform I think most Americans would agree with.
I like that. Great , well thought out post. Who could disagree?
I'm not really for raising the retirement age either, but I'm not going to call you un-American or a traitor to the country for it. It's a debate wholly within the Democratic party.
And it shouldn't be. The science has people living to be older, more active, and incidentally...they want to work and often need the higher income. IT should guide the decision; not what life expectancy was in 1934.
Not everyone is living longer, the more well off someone is who doesn't depend as much on SS live longer, by about 14 years than poorer Americans.
Medicare Advantage is a good example. As one of the major Insurance companies advised everyone it took 3 years for them to adjust to the ACA.
Now they would be able to afford more benefits. They have done that every year. In most cases with zero costs. The ACA should have been amended 10 years ago to fix the problems as most programs do.
The ACA helped fill gaps for pre existing conditions and those who simply have no other options for healthcare while also helping to define what exactly health insurance should cover so people are paying premiums for not much more than a band aid.
I'm not really sure ultimately what the solution for health insurance is in this country but it's most likely going to involve public and private entities.
Tying it to your employer is something I don't see continuing for much longer.
I agree, however it's a huge step to separate insurance from employment.
Seems tough to me. Unless the government totally pays for everyone’s healthcare, it won’t happen. If the government did that, then there is no point in having insurance or private hospitals or doctors. I don’t think big insurance and pharma are going to go for that. That is the real issue. The big money controls Congress.
For starters I wouldn't think of private medical practices as the same as insurance. They are two different things. Also saying "government totally pays for everyone's healthcare" is not really how it works. Most people pay for their own healthcare. Either through premiums or if a government plan through some sort of tax.
Die young.
or are all you solutions fascist in nature??
Weird.
Nothing stated in this thread about healthcare is fascist. Maybe try being serious.