What is it going to take to bring about healthcare reform?

Libertas

Administrator
Staff member
How many millions of people have to die before the United States brings about meaningful healthcare reform? We have some of the most expensive healthcare in the world, yet have some of the highest infant mortality rates in the developed world.

We were promised affordable healthcare when obama was elected, but that turned out to be a pipedream. Health insurance companies proposed making everyone buy their product, and that is what the democrats did.

President Trump has fared no better than obama. Insurance rates and hospital costs continue to go up and with no relief in sight.

So much for a government being by the people and for the people when congress will pass laws companies propose.
 

IamZeke

Member
The problem with healthcare is both simple to understand, but almost impossible to deal with.

There is always someone wanting to hold the money and controls in between you and your doctor.

The government and insurance are ruining healthcare. They both feel they have the right to manage medicine, but the patient or doctor have little say.

So both .gov and insurers get between and start loading on the warm bodies to manage it .

There is nothing in our nation's founding documents that permits the government to have any say, much less control, of healthcare. They should only be allowed one final act before exiting the process. That act being to outlaw every form of health insurance beyond medical self saving accounts and catastrophic health insurance. The average person should have no standard health insurance. Cash and carry only. Unless you need your chest cracked open and organs sewn on then you should write a check from your tax free health savings account, or go to a charity hospital for more mundane stuff.

Healthcare is not a fundamental right. Food, clothing, housing, healthcare, none of these should the government have any involvement other than setting standards, prosecuting malpractice, and taking charge of contagion.
 
Healthcare is not a fundamental right. Food, clothing, housing, healthcare, none of these should the government have any involvement other than setting standards, prosecuting malpractice, and taking charge of contagion.

The term "Fundamental right" is a red herring. Road's are not a fundamental right either.

You may not agree with single payer, but the Dems seem willing to do it and there's literally no other ideas from the other side of the aisle. If I were a conservative I'd be pissed about that, the GOPs refusal/inability to provide innovative policy to address our problems is exactly their job. If you don't want socialized medicine, then they need to get their act together.
 

IamZeke

Member
The term "Fundamental right" is a red herring. Road's are not a fundamental right either.
Speaking of red herrings, you just made one and a strawman too.

I never said that roads are a right.

Roads are a right for the government to conduct business -- not automatically for the people. Roads create commerce that is taxable and keeps communication open. So let's move past this diversion.

Of course, you will likely never hear the conservative politicians speak up on the matter. Anyone with an understanding that the only proper move that is economically viable is to trash the insurance and Medicare game knows that the AARP would have a screaming hissy fit. So all they can do is nibble the edges by limiting benefits and trying to streamline this bulky bureaucracy. Let's face it, many so-called older conservatives are holding onto their freebies too. It's cases like this that makes Libertarianism a tough sell even to many conservatives. Camps on both sides of the main dual party aisle have their fingers in the pot.

So it is pretty obvious which party has more leeway to exploit the healthcare topic and will always get more useful from PR on the topic.

Leftists created the entire Social Security system too, but do you see the right establishment fighting against it like when it was original proposed? Nope, too late. Horses are out of the barn and bringing them back by force will mean a hoof blow or two to the head. Best they can do is coax the herd closer to the barn door and pray that serendipity gets the herd to realize they might just want to walk back in the barn of their own accord.
 
Speaking of red herrings, you just made one and a strawman too.

I never said that roads are a right.

Roads are a right for the government to conduct business -- not automatically for the people. Roads create commerce that is taxable and keeps communication open. So let's move past this diversion.

Of course, you will likely never hear the conservative politicians speak up on the matter. Anyone with an understanding that the only proper move that is economically viable is to trash the insurance and Medicare game knows that the AARP would have a screaming hissy fit. So all they can do is nibble the edges by limiting benefits and trying to streamline this bulky bureaucracy. Let's face it, many so-called older conservatives are holding onto their freebies too. It's cases like this that makes Libertarianism a tough sell even to many conservatives. Camps on both sides of the main dual party aisle have their fingers in the pot.

So it is pretty obvious which party has more leeway to exploit the healthcare topic and will always get more useful from PR on the topic.

Leftists created the entire Social Security system too, but do you see the right establishment fighting against it like when it was original proposed? Nope, too late. Horses are out of the barn and bringing them back by force will mean a hoof blow or two to the head. Best they can do is coax the herd closer to the barn door and pray that serendipity gets the herd to realize they might just want to walk back in the barn of their own accord.

If the essence of a fundamental right is everyone gets access and it's paid for by taxes, then roads are a fundamental right. Which is a silly statement, which is why I said "Fundamental right" is a meaningless red herring.

The real reason you don't want single payer healthcare is you've been conditioned by the people who stand to lose money for something that doesn't directly benefit them. If you owned a factory and began paying higher taxes to cover healthcare costs, there would be no real benefit on your productivity. Much in the same of roads, they're necessary, but they don't get fixed until their condition affects business. Access to free college educations doesn't improve profitability, so no on that one too.

Lower taxes on the wealthy? That's like increasing profitability without having to compete in the market place. Conservatives love it. Under fund public education and if people want a good education they have will use vouchers for private schools, profiting with tax money! Everything the GOP does is to take the benefit of public funds and direct it in their own pockets and things like healthcare for all isn't conducive to that.

Meanwhile you've been tricked in to thinking you're fighting socialism but you're just legitimizing the corrupt use of public fund to keep concentrating wealth at the top.
 

IamZeke

Member
If the essence of a fundamental right is everyone gets access and it's paid for by taxes, then roads are a fundamental right. Which is a silly statement, which is why I said "Fundamental right" is a meaningless red herring.

The real reason you don't want single payer healthcare is you've been conditioned by the people who stand to lose money for something that doesn't directly benefit them. If you owned a factory and began paying higher taxes to cover healthcare costs, there would be no real benefit on your productivity. Much in the same of roads, they're necessary, but they don't get fixed until their condition affects business. Access to free college educations doesn't improve profitability, so no on that one too.

Lower taxes on the wealthy? That's like increasing profitability without having to compete in the market place. Conservatives love it. Under fund public education and if people want a good education they have will use vouchers for private schools, profiting with tax money! Everything the GOP does is to take the benefit of public funds and direct it in their own pockets and things like healthcare for all isn't conducive to that.

Meanwhile you've been tricked in to thinking you're fighting socialism but you're just legitimizing the corrupt use of public fund to keep concentrating wealth at the top.
Oh really now.

The wealthy only pay whatever taxes they want to pay. This is a fact since the dawn of commerce. The wealthy are merely willing to spend money on taxes to get something they want. If the government wants more then they actually have to kill them because they will simply go somewhere else that taxes at a rate that gives them what they want. Greece is flat bloke and all the wealthy shipping magnates are just fine because they simply quit being Greek citizens. Rich Asians and Euros have been jumping nation status for the last century to avoid what they consider unreasonable taxation. You can't stop it without a world government that ends up owning everyone as paper slaves. So instead the governments make noise about taxing the wealthy to sound good to the masses, then taxing middle class and the poor for most of the money. This kills the immobile middle class and stifles new innovation and new companies.

People must be responsible for all their own personal needs. Food, clothing, medicine, shelter, etc. The government can't do it with any hope of efficiency. The universe owes you nothing material. Nor do I either. If you can't take care of your needs then you should walk to the beach and just keep walking because you failed life. If you try to use the voting booth to get someone to put a gun to my head to get what is mine then I will consider you a legit target.
 
Oh really now.

The wealthy only pay whatever taxes they want to pay. This is a fact since the dawn of commerce. The wealthy are merely willing to spend money on taxes to get something they want. If the government wants more then they actually have to kill them because they will simply go somewhere else that taxes at a rate that gives them what they want. Greece is flat bloke and all the wealthy shipping magnates are just fine because they simply quit being Greek citizens. Rich Asians and Euros have been jumping nation status for the last century to avoid what they consider unreasonable taxation. You can't stop it without a world government that ends up owning everyone as paper slaves. So instead the governments make noise about taxing the wealthy to sound good to the masses, then taxing middle class and the poor for most of the money. This kills the immobile middle class and stifles new innovation and new companies.

People must be responsible for all their own personal needs. Food, clothing, medicine, shelter, etc. The government can't do it with any hope of efficiency. The universe owes you nothing material. Nor do I either. If you can't take care of your needs then you should walk to the beach and just keep walking because you failed life. If you try to use the voting booth to get someone to put a gun to my head to get what is mine then I will consider you a legit target.

It's basic economics man. Money moves up the ladder via the free market. The only money that trickle's down are wages and entitlements. When wages stagnate (last 40 years) what do you think happens with entitlements? That's right, they sky rocket because the middleclass is being sucked dry to maintain economic growth for the top wealth holders.

So what if wages kept rising with productivity in the 80s? That means that money would have been spent in the marketplace and businesses would have to compete for it. What actually happened is that money was just shoveled in to private coffers in the form of tax breaks starting with Reagan under the guise that it would trickle down. It doesn't and wont. Even Trumps tax break largely went to share buy backs which artificially inflated the market values. Now we're seeing "Growth" leveling off and they're pushing for another break.

I'm just not buying the poor people are lazy and the wealthy deserve to keep the money they siphoned out of the middleclcass excuse.
 

IamZeke

Member
You still don't get it. Nothing short of a global government is ever going to tax the rich beyond what they are willing to pay. That money is just plain gone.

So all you have left is the middle class and poor to rob for your socialist schemes.

But if socialism is about helping the lower classes then why are you trying to rob them?
 
You still don't get it. Nothing short of a global government is ever going to tax the rich beyond what they are willing to pay. That money is just plain gone.

So all you have left is the middle class and poor to rob for your socialist schemes.

But if socialism is about helping the lower classes then why are you trying to rob them?

Historically, socialism is a reaction to the wealthy ruling class economically oppressing the lower classes. If that's where the country is headed then you've placed blame on the wrong people.
 

IamZeke

Member
Historically, socialism is a reaction to the wealthy ruling class economically oppressing the lower classes. If that's where the country is headed then you've placed blame on the wrong people.
Remember that "historically" is but a century. Russia started their revolution in 1917. So socialist rebellions are new. Before that, most were simple rebellions against autocratic governments and lone tyrants. Getting into the habit of calling a new phenomenon old is an attempt at legitimizing it.

The rebellions of history are not about the rich taking their profit. They have been about TPB oppressively taxing them and controlling the lower and middle classes movements/actions either socially or physically. As we are seeing now it ends up being the failed socialist states that start doing that. In the past it was monarchy. When there is no ruler oppression and the poor dislike what they earn the poor simply use their feet to move. The voting of feet solves the problem of the rich being too stingy by leaving them without a work force. The creating of guilds and fraternal organizations helped solve the problem too. Sadly, these were supplanted by overtly political unions that try to force social changes with law instead of mere refusal to supply the necessary workforce. You merely need to see what the masons of Europe did to see a solution in action.

The lower classes can get what they want from the rich without socialism. Denial of a workforce, economic migration, and consumption taxation of premium goods fixes the problem of greedy rich without needing to stuff in a merely century old and already proven failed idea about governance.
 

Libertas

Administrator
Staff member
It's basic economics man. Money moves up the ladder via the free market. The only money that trickle's down are wages and entitlements. When wages stagnate (last 40 years) what do you think happens with entitlements? That's right, they sky rocket because the middleclass is being sucked dry to maintain economic growth for the top wealth holders.

You speak the cold hard truth.

The middle class is being turned into wage slaves working for shelter, food, and just enough healthcare to keep them alive.
 
Top