A man you can bait with a Tweet

[BigRedBuster]

I feel like you just need to get a little dig in at the ACA every time it's brought up -- which is fine. Healthcare is complicated, and the ACA was always an incomplete and compromise "bridge" solution. And we agree that it made significant improvements globally, while also agreeing there are areas for serious improvement.

 

My larger point was that the best way to foist horrendous and irresponsible solutions upon us is to make sure the status quo is terrible for people.

 

Hence the pulling of enrollment ads, etc. And the branding war. Obamacare is hardly government-supplied universal health care. Get people to buy into that branding, then destroy it, then unleash the Freedom Caucus dream.

I'm assuming this was towards me.

 

I fail to see how I "need to get a little dig in at the ACA" when I'm pointing out real problems that still exist within our healthcare.

 

The comment you made was...."the ACA is on track to work well". THAT statement is sticking your head in the sand.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

 

BRB, as a man who is staunchly against government regulations, how do you propose Obamacare or any replacement law addresses the rampant costs of our healthcare system? Wouldn't any bill that directly addresses costs necessarily entail greater regulations?

 

 

First off, the bolded is not an accurate description of my views.

 

I understand need for regulation. Even when developing a pro business environment, some regulation is needed to form a stable and healthy market place. When that happens, it's a benefit to both the consumer and producer of goods and services.

 

My problems with regulations are when they are unreasonable or put in place with no regard for if the regulation makes sense or actually helps. On the flip side, I have a real problem with people who claim all regulations are bad.

 

I had a conversation with our local hospital administrator the other day. I expressed my frustration in all of this and he came up with a couple excuses. I point blank told him that if facility administrators and providers don't get on board with a solution to control costs, ultimately we will end up with a single payer plan and it will be FORCED on them what they are paid. He obviously didn't like that comment.

 

There is a big part of me that doesn't like a single player plan. However, I'm becoming more and more open to it if the powers in Washington and the market place do not come up with a solution to control costs.

 

 

The problem with controlling costs with most market-based solutions is that it necessarily entails stripping a bunch of people of their healthcare when they try to dismantle Medicaid, removing pre-existing conditions protection and defunding agencies like Planned Parenthood.

 

As much as Repubs talk about wanting to control costs, they're not willing to pay the political price of doing the above. They'd get raked over the coals rather badly.

 

We've seen the result when they half-ass it and throw together something like the AHCA - millions lose insurance but no notable reduction in premiums.

 

I'm glad you're open to more gov't intervention - I think we're going to need it.

 

NO.....

 

This is exactly why this never gets fixed.

I'm not talking about fixing costs at the insurance level. I'm talking about fixing costs at the provider level. A knee replacement in the US should not cost $100,000 when the same procedure costs $15,000 somewhere else. That has absolutely nothing to do with pre-existing conditions, dismantling medicaid.....etc.

 

If we do what we need to do, those pre-existing conditions and medicaid become much less of an issue because they cost much less.

 

 

Oh, then yeah, I agree. That's the bugaboo with why healthcare costs so much in the first place. That's pretty much what resulted in BCBS dropping their network with CHI a few years back.

 

Driving down costs of actual healthcare is extremely tricky. Do you think a viable free-market solution exists for that, though? And if so, what would it look like?

[QMany]

[Moiraine]

More on the drug company funding idea. It will never happen because they have $ and $ is power, but here is what I think should happen.

 

 

Let's say on average a drug costs $500 in Canada and $1,200 in the U.S.

 

If 5,000 people buy that drug in the U.S., the drug companies who sell it should pay a tax of $3.5 million unless there is some legit reason to charge us more. For example maybe the drug is produced in Canada and shipping cost is more expensive to get it to the U.S. They should have to prove they're charging us more for a real reason and not "because they can." Health care isn't just some random business. People's lives are at stake.

[ZRod]

Is that his real account?

[Whistlebritches]

 

Is that his real account?

 

Yep, it has the blue check mark next to the name.

[NM11046]

 

 

Is that his real account?

 

Yep, it has the blue check mark next to the name.

 

 

Look at the date though - he wrote this about obama.

[NM11046]

[NM11046]

[Moiraine]

He wants the ACA to fold because he hates Obama. No other reason.

[Danny Bateman]

Commander in Chief deflecting so hard on his Twitter I can feel the breeze from here.

 

Sad!

[QMany]

 

 

I've seen that this guy also guys by Ken, which seems odd, but I just found this exchange funny.

[NM11046]

I'm pretty shocked that a post writer cancelled their subscription to the Times.

 

And guess he's home alone tonight:

[NM11046]

[NM11046]

 

And I think this is the second time he's tweeted out this article.