Dem Governor Sees the Truth About Obamacare

[hal lillywhite]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/10/12/dem-governor-makes-damning-obamacare-admission-amid-health-care-emergency-in-his-state/

He initially supported it, but now sees the reality it is.

[Bill Shatzer]

hal lillywhite wrote:
> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/10/12/dem-governor-makes-damning-obamacare-admission-amid-health-care-emergency-in-his-state/
>
> He initially supported it, but now sees the reality it is.

But he wants to fix it, not junk it.

http://www.startribune.com/dayton-says-affordable-care-act-has-become-unaffordable-needs-reforms/396864871/

peace and justice,

[hal lillywhite]

Standard statist reaction. If you are in a hole, dig faster. Most of us prefer
to stop digging. I must admit that I cannot see how an entity that cannot manage
Obamacare or the VA system can be expected to do a better job of managing what
would be an even bigger system. In fact, I do not believe it within human
ability to manage effectively a system the size of a national health care
system. Then, even if we found someone with the ability, what assurance would
we have that he would be honest rather than line his own pockets and those of
his cronies?

This is an imperfect world, populated by imperfect people. That includes those
running government. Yeah, I know, private business people are also imperfect
but we do not ask them to run health care for the entire country, and if we
don't like one business, we can go elsewhere.

[Bill Shatzer]

hal lillywhite wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 8:42:13 PM UTC-7, Bill Shatzer wrote:
>> hal lillywhite wrote:
>>> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/10/12/dem-governor-makes-damning-obamacare-admission-amid-health-care-emergency-in-his-state/

>>> He initially supported it, but now sees the reality it is.

>> But he wants to fix it, not junk it.

>> http://www.startribune.com/dayton-says-affordable-care-act-has-become-unaffordable-needs-reforms/396864871/

> Standard statist reaction. If you are in a hole, dig faster. Most of us prefer
> to stop digging. I must admit that I cannot see how an entity that cannot manage
> Obamacare or the VA system can be expected to do a better job of managing what
> would be an even bigger system.

One word: Medicare.

Oh alright, three words: Medicare, Social Security.

In fact, I do not believe it within human
> ability to manage effectively a system the size of a national health care
> system. Then, even if we found someone with the ability, what assurance would
> we have that he would be honest rather than line his own pockets and those of
> his cronies?

We have occasional instances of medical service providers phonying up
Medicare billings and from time to time folks are caught collecting
social security checks for a long departed relative but by an large
those programs are relatively scandal free.

Unlike say Volkswagen or Wells Fargo.

> This is an imperfect world, populated by imperfect people. That includes those
> running government. Yeah, I know, private business people are also imperfect
> but we do not ask them to run health care for the entire country, and if we
> don't like one business, we can go elsewhere.

Not if you've got a pre-existing condition, you can't. At least you
couldn't before the Affordable Care Act.

And CMS seems to be doing a pretty good job of administering Medicare
for the entire country,

peace and justice,

[hal lillywhite]

On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 4:31:05 PM UTC-7, Bill Shatzer wrote:

> >> But he wants to fix it, not junk it.
>
> >> http://www.startribune.com/dayton-says-affordable-care-act-has-become-unaffordable-needs-reforms/396864871/
>
> > Standard statist reaction. If you are in a hole, dig faster. Most of us prefer
> > to stop digging. I must admit that I cannot see how an entity that cannot manage
> > Obamacare or the VA system can be expected to do a better job of managing what
> > would be an even bigger system.
>
> One word: Medicare.

Expensive to the taxpayers and restricts treatment. An example of why
government should not meddle in health care.

> Oh alright, three words: Medicare, Social Security.

Had I put my 15-16% SS money in a private account, I'd have more money today.

> In fact, I do not believe it within human
> > ability to manage effectively a system the size of a national health care
> > system. Then, even if we found someone with the ability, what assurance would
> > we have that he would be honest rather than line his own pockets and those of
> > his cronies?
>
> We have occasional instances of medical service providers phonying up
> Medicare billings and from time to time folks are caught collecting
> social security checks for a long departed relative but by an large
> those programs are relatively scandal free.
>
> Unlike say Volkswagen or Wells Fargo.

Two examples? Two? Out of all the private enterprises out there?

> > This is an imperfect world, populated by imperfect people. That includes those
> > running government. Yeah, I know, private business people are also imperfect
> > but we do not ask them to run health care for the entire country, and if we
> > don't like one business, we can go elsewhere.
>
> Not if you've got a pre-existing condition, you can't. At least you
> couldn't before the Affordable Care Act.

Which in general is reasonable. Now, many young people are not buying
insurance since they know they can do it if they develop a chronic condition.
That puts the burden on the rest of ratepayers to cover those free-loaders.
The people who buy insurance when they are healthy get ripped off.

> And CMS seems to be doing a pretty good job of administering Medicare
> for the entire country,

It is another layer of bureaucracy on top of the insurance companies, that
adds expense, even if they do a good job. And I'm not convinced they are doing
all that great.

[Bill Shatzer]

hal lillywhite wrote:
> On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 4:31:05 PM UTC-7, Bill Shatzer wrote:

>>>> But he wants to fix it, not junk it.

>>>> http://www.startribune.com/dayton-says-affordable-care-act-has-become-unaffordable-needs-reforms/396864871/

>>> Standard statist reaction. If you are in a hole, dig faster. Most of us prefer
>>> to stop digging. I must admit that I cannot see how an entity that cannot manage
>>> Obamacare or the VA system can be expected to do a better job of managing what
>>> would be an even bigger system.

>> One word: Medicare.

> Expensive to the taxpayers and restricts treatment.

-Every- insurance company restricts treatment.

> An example of why
> government should not meddle in health care.

>> Oh alright, three words: Medicare, Social Security.

> Had I put my 15-16% SS money in a private account, I'd have more money today.

Two points. Or rather three.

1) The combined SS/HI rate has only been that high since 1980. Prior to
that you would have been putting away considerably less if you were
matching the SS rates.

2) SS is not exclusively a retirement plan - it's a retirement plan plus
an insurance plan. Fully a third of social security recipients are -not-
retirees; they are disabled workers and the spouses and children of
disabled or deceased workers. This would have been of real benefit had
you been run over by a bus at, say, age 30 before you had an opportunity
to amass significant funds in a retirement IRA or the like.

3) You can't outlive social security. Any privately amassed pot of money
can run out if you live too long while social security continues to
provide benefits even if you live to 101.

(Personal aside: My sister died at age 24 some six weeks after the
birth of her second child. Social Security survivors benefits were
about all that allowed my brother in law to hold the family together and
raise and educate the two kids.)

>> In fact, I do not believe it within human
>>> ability to manage effectively a system the size of a national health care
>>> system. Then, even if we found someone with the ability, what assurance would
>>> we have that he would be honest rather than line his own pockets and those of
>>> his cronies?

>> We have occasional instances of medical service providers phonying up
>> Medicare billings and from time to time folks are caught collecting
>> social security checks for a long departed relative but by an large
>> those programs are relatively scandal free.

>> Unlike say Volkswagen or Wells Fargo.

> Two examples? Two? Out of all the private enterprises out there?

You should have little difficulty coming up with additional examples.

Off the top of my head, I'll give you a head start: Enron, Countrywide,
Bernie Maddoff. AIG, Lehman Brothers, Silverado S&L, Takata, Michael
Milken ..... You take it from there.

>>> This is an imperfect world, populated by imperfect people. That includes those
>>> running government. Yeah, I know, private business people are also imperfect
>>> but we do not ask them to run health care for the entire country, and if we
>>> don't like one business, we can go elsewhere.

>> Not if you've got a pre-existing condition, you can't. At least you
>> couldn't before the Affordable Care Act.

> Which in general is reasonable. Now, many young people are not buying
> insurance since they know they can do it if they develop a chronic condition.

Provided they get sick during an open enrollment period. If they miss
that opening, it's a year before they can apply.

In the meantime, they're paying a yearly penalty for being uninsured.

> That puts the burden on the rest of ratepayers to cover those free-loaders.
> The people who buy insurance when they are healthy get ripped off.

>> And CMS seems to be doing a pretty good job of administering Medicare
>> for the entire country,

> It is another layer of bureaucracy on top of the insurance companies, that
> adds expense, even if they do a good job. And I'm not convinced they are doing
> all that great.

CMS deals only with medicare payments. Insurance companies aren't
involved. If you opt out of Medicare and go with one of the Medicare
Advantage programs, you're dealing with the insurance company sponsoring
you're particular program and CMS isn't involved.

peace and justice

[a425couple]

"Bill Shatzer" <ww...@NOcornell.edu> wrote in message...

> hal lillywhite wrote:
>> http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/10/12/dem-governor-makes-damning-obamacare-admission-amid-health-care-emergency-in-his-state/

>>Re: Dem Governor Sees the Truth About Obamacare

>>
>> He initially supported it, but now sees the reality it is.
>
> But he wants to fix it, not junk it.
> http://www.startribune.com/dayton-says-affordable-care-act-has-become-unaffordable-needs-reforms/396864871/
> peace and justice,

The Democrats had the POTUS, the Senate, and the House,
and they insisted against many CORRECT warnings that the
OBAMACARE Bill had too many problems.
Why did they not 'fix it' before it caused many problems?

Instead Pelosi said in 2010:
“But we have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out
what’s in it....”

And POTUS Obama knowing lied repeatedly when he
said, "If you like your health care plan, you can keep it,
PERIOD!"

And so the comlicated flawed bill was impemented and
it was a real flawed pile.
So the voters took away your Democrat majority
(for at least years so far).

Bill Clinton was correct "It's the craziest thing!"

[hal lillywhite]

On Friday, October 14, 2016 at 9:47:14 PM UTC-7, Bill Shatzer wrote:

> hal lillywhite wrote:

> >> One word: Medicare.
>
> > Expensive to the taxpayers and restricts treatment.
>
> -Every- insurance company restricts treatment.

But free enterprise insurance allows choice of which plan and which treatments are to be
restricted. Government likes one size fits all (or one size fits nobody)

> > An example of why
> > government should not meddle in health care.
>
> >> Oh alright, three words: Medicare, Social Security.
>
> > Had I put my 15-16% SS money in a private account, I'd have more money today.
>
> Two points. Or rather three.
>
> 1) The combined SS/HI rate has only been that high since 1980. Prior to
> that you would have been putting away considerably less if you were
> matching the SS rates.

Less, but I'd not consider it considerably less. I'd still have more.

> 2) SS is not exclusively a retirement plan - it's a retirement plan plus
> an insurance plan.

Insurance is also available through the private sector.

>Fully a third of social security recipients are -not-
> retirees; they are disabled workers and the spouses and children of
> disabled or deceased workers. This would have been of real benefit had
> you been run over by a bus at, say, age 30 before you had an opportunity
> to amass significant funds in a retirement IRA or the like.

Or if you wanted to claim that a bad back made it impossible for you to work, even if
you had no bad back but knew that it is nearly impossible to prove that you are
capable of working. And there are people who retire to other countries, then acquire a
bunch of new “dependents” and we have no way of knowing if those dependents really
exist, or if they are really dependent. That part of SS is badly abused, to the detriment
of the rest of us.

> 3) You can't outlive social security. Any privately amassed pot of money
> can run out if you live too long

Not so. You can live off the income if you have enough. Plus there are annuities available
that last as long as you do.

> (Personal aside: My sister died at age 24 some six weeks after the
> birth of her second child. Social Security survivors benefits were
> about all that allowed my brother in law to hold the family together and
> raise and educate the two kids.)

You, and especially her husband and children, have my sympathy. That is a tough row to hoe
even without the financial problems. Though again, private insurance is available.

…

those programs are relatively scandal free.
>
> >> Unlike say Volkswagen or Wells Fargo.
>
> > Two examples? Two? Out of all the private enterprises out there?
>
> You should have little difficulty coming up with additional examples.
>
> Off the top of my head, I'll give you a head start: Enron, Countrywide,
> Bernie Maddoff. AIG, Lehman Brothers, Silverado S&L, Takata, Michael
> Milken ..... You take it from there.

Still a miniscule part of the private sector. And some of them (eg. Countrywide) benefited from an
unholy alliance with government officials so the scandal was hardly just private enterprise.

…

> >> Not if you've got a pre-existing condition, you can't. At least you
> >> couldn't before the Affordable Care Act.
>
> > Which in general is reasonable. Now, many young people are not buying
> > insurance since they know they can do it if they develop a chronic condition.
>
> Provided they get sick during an open enrollment period. If they miss
> that opening, it's a year before they can apply.
>
> In the meantime, they're paying a yearly penalty for being uninsured.

Which of course misses the point. The point is that those who live providently and buy
insurance when they don't need it end up subsidizing those who do not buy until they
need it. The penalty hardly makes up for that.

eg. Joe refuses to buy insurance for ten years, then develops a chronic disease. Jim bought insurance
before he needed it, starting just when Joe needed his. Jim pays a good chunk of Joe's medical bills.

> > That puts the burden on the rest of ratepayers to cover those free-loaders.
> > The people who buy insurance when they are healthy get ripped off.
>
> >> And CMS seems to be doing a pretty good job of administering Medicare
> >> for the entire country,
>
> > It is another layer of bureaucracy on top of the insurance companies, that
> > adds expense, even if they do a good job. And I'm not convinced they are doing
> > all that great.
>
> CMS deals only with medicare payments. Insurance companies aren't
> involved. If you opt out of Medicare and go with one of the Medicare
> Advantage programs, you're dealing with the insurance company sponsoring
> you're particular program and CMS isn't involved.

But there is still the overhead of government costs. Let's dispense with the fiction that
government support does not cost us, it does. Every government employee needs to be paid,
gets benefits, and has to have a place to work, same as in the private sector.