Public Option.

[AvgMSUJoe]

Watching the Sunday morning shows, something occurred to me...

If the Govt is ALWAYS inefficient and the worst possible option as most publitards say, AND this public option will be set up as an independent company who would need to be self sufficient or else it would go away... Wouldn't you think they would want a private companies to put them out of business promptly to prove this point? Wouldn't they welcome this as to show proof of their theory/hypothesis/ethos...whatever?

Or is this more hypocritical BS from the right?

I haven't been bothering with wells lately for obvious reasons, so forgive me if this was already brought up.

[Redwingenator]

Originally Posted by AvgMSUJoe

Watching the Sunday morning shows, something occurred to me...

If the Govt is ALWAYS inefficient and the worst possible option as most publitards say, AND this public option will be set up as an independent company who would need to be self sufficient or else it would go away... Wouldn't you think they would want a private companies to put them out of business promptly to prove this point? Wouldn't they welcome this as to show proof of their theory/hypothesis/ethos...whatever?

Or is this more hypocritical BS from the right?

I haven't been bothering with wells lately for obvious reasons, so forgive me if this was already brought up.

Wait, so the government wants to make an insurance company that is allowed to cross state lines that is not subject to all of the individual state mandates that private insurance is subject to? There is no competition when the deck is stacked.

[AvgMSUJoe]

Originally Posted by Redwingenator

Wait, so the government wants to make an insurance company that is allowed to cross state lines that is not subject to all of the individual state mandates that private insurance is subject to? There is no competition when the deck is stacked.

So yes?

[RQA]

Originally Posted by AvgMSUJoe

Watching the Sunday morning shows, something occurred to me...

If the Govt is ALWAYS inefficient and the worst possible option as most publitards say, AND this public option will be set up as an independent company who would need to be self sufficient or else it would go away... Wouldn't you think they would want a private companies to put them out of business promptly to prove this point? Wouldn't they welcome this as to show proof of their theory/hypothesis/ethos...whatever?

Or is this more hypocritical BS from the right?

I haven't been bothering with wells lately for obvious reasons, so forgive me if this was already brought up.

Think about it, how do you put the government out of business?

[Zakath]

Originally Posted by RQA

Think about it, how do you put the government out of business?

Beyond a revolution, it's a bit tough.

If we want to put the private companies in the same boat as the federal government will be in, give them the right to print money, vote themselves an automatic rate increase without the threat of ever losing customers, and give them their own version of tIRS to go out and collect from the insurance evaders.

[WixomSpartan]

Originally Posted by AvgMSUJoe

Watching the Sunday morning shows, something occurred to me...

If the Govt is ALWAYS inefficient and the worst possible option as most publitards say, AND this public option will be set up as an independent company who would need to be self sufficient or else it would go away... Wouldn't you think they would want a private companies to put them out of business promptly to prove this point? Wouldn't they welcome this as to show proof of their theory/hypothesis/ethos...whatever?

Or is this more hypocritical BS from the right?

I haven't been bothering with wells lately for obvious reasons, so forgive me if this was already brought up.

Assuming yours is a sincere question, I would expect the answer is no. If someone truely believes in the Thoreau principle of 'that governs best which governs least', you most likely already have seen enough to convince you. You don't need to see another failure and resulting suffering to prove what you already know. There's nothing hypocritical about it.

[IndoSpartan]

YouTube - McConnell: End Federal Gag Order on Medicare Cuts

I want to know why there is a gag order.

[Bob Sakimano]

I like how conservatives like to say that the government can't run anything efficiently and then jump up and cheer the government-run military at every opportunity..

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by Bob Sakimano

I like how conservatives like to say that the government can't run anything efficiently and then jump up and cheer the government-run military at every opportunity..

I thought the government military contracts out their work to private companies like Blackwater and Halliburton, or are the lefties now dropping that talking point?

[MSchott]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

I thought the government military contracts out their work to private companies like Blackwater and Halliburton, or are the lefties now dropping that talking point?

Are you just acting dumb or are you trying to be stupidly provocative? If you have a decent argument make it. Don't troll with this kind of garbage.

[Bob Sakimano]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

I thought the government military contracts out their work to private companies like Blackwater and Halliburton, or are the lefties now dropping that talking point?

let me listen to country music while wearing my American flag t-shirt, pledging allegiance to the government-run military...

[Booyah]

Originally Posted by Bob Sakimano

I like how conservatives like to say that the government can't run anything efficiently and then jump up and cheer the government-run military at every opportunity..

....or the 'I don't want the government to touch my medicare!" rhetoric.

[AvgMSUJoe]

Originally Posted by RQA

Think about it, how do you put the government out of business?

Hasn't it always been stated that this will be self sufficient?

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

The federal government would create a health insurance plan financed entirely by premiums, to provide citizens not covered by employer or other state insurance plans an option for health insurance that would compete with private insurers. There are no subsidies set aside exclusively for a public health insurance plan in any of the bills currently before Congress.^[1] The plans stated in the Senate HLP Committee and H.R. 3200, the two that contain clauses establishing a public insurance option, require the repayment of "seed money" to the Treasury over a ten year period.

Seems like the only one's who wouldn't want this are those who don't want competition in the local monopolies... (or those politicians the local monopolies bought)

[Bob Sakimano]

Originally Posted by Booyah

....or the 'I don't want the government to touch my medicare!" rhetoric.

yeah.. that was a popular refrain from the highly intellectual crowd screeching at the town hall meetings over the summer...

[lars]

Ummm.so the govt who gets to set the rules in which insurance has to compete also gets to compete against those same insurance carriers? Plus the govt doesn't have to make a profit nor even be accountable to anyone. And they are the only competitor who can just print their own money when they aren't making enough. Sounds fair to me.

You see the govt doesnt have to be efficient, nor profitable, nor even good at what they do to stay in the game.

[Vlad_the_Impaler]

Originally Posted by Redwingenator

Wait, so the government wants to make an insurance company that is allowed to cross state lines that is not subject to all of the individual state mandates that private insurance is subject to? There is no competition when the deck is stacked.

Just curious, how does the current antitrust exemption play into your "deck stacking" theory?? How do you feel about the competition that exists today, given the industry's exemption?

[IGGcitable]

See, if you have the public option, the government coverage will not be able to deny coverage for preexisting or highly-expensive conditions, so the poor billion-dolllar private companies would not be able to compete, so in order to preserve the truly American principle of denying health coverage to anybody with preexisting or expensive health conditions, THE PUBLIC OPTION MUST BE DEFEATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[lars]

Originally Posted by IGGcitable

See, if you have the public option, the government coverage will not be able to deny coverage for preexisting or highly-expensive conditions, so the poor billion-dolllar private companies would not be able to compete, so in order to preserve the truly American principle of denying health coverage to anybody with preexisting or expensive health conditions, THE PUBLIC OPTION MUST BE DEFEATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Newsflash..private insurance will not be able to deny those with preexisting conditions either. With or without the public option.

[Papa Chubby]

I don't believe that the public option will be economically viable if it is really self-sufficient, must compete with private companies on a level playing field, and is not massively subsidized with taxpayer money.

I also don't believe that democrats will allow the public option to die gracefully if it is unviable. This is the critical centerpiece of their program. They will find a way to throw trillions of taxpayer dollars at it, which will in turn drive private insurance companies out of business.

On a more philosophical level, I think the reason why healthcare spending is spiraling out of control is that insurance has pretty much socialized the american healthcare market. If the objective of healthcare reform is to get costs under control, creating a new insurance program which will allegedly cover tens of millions of people is no way to do it. As far as I can tell, even government accountants are starting to agree: the public option will significantly increase healthcare spending in America.

[GRR Spartan]

All the conservative whine about government programs as they drive down the interstate highways, a government program conservative fought tooth and nail.

If you dopes think rising premiums, fewer services and massive pay for Ins. CEO's and their executive cronies is a wise way to suck money out of the economy I think you are either crazy or well vested in the current system.

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by GRR Spartan

All the conservative whine about government programs as they drive down the interstate highways, a government program conservative fought tooth and nail.

oh thats awesome, that must mean the Indiana Toll Road is nice and quiet since Dems wont be driving on that privately operated road

[Redwingenator]

Originally Posted by Vlad_the_Impaler

Just curious, how does the current antitrust exemption play into your "deck stacking" theory?? How do you feel about the competition that exists today, given the industry's exemption?

I hate the current antitrust and feel its elimination should be a major part of any logical health care reform bill.

[WavSpartan]

Originally Posted by tuff bob

oh thats awesome, that must mean the Indiana Toll Road is nice and quiet since Dems wont be driving on that privately operated road

Oh! So there can be a private and a public option? Nice to know

[Vlad_the_Impaler]

Originally Posted by Redwingenator

I hate the current antitrust and feel its elimination should be a major part of any logical health care reform bill.

So you agree that the deck was stacked in their favor for the past 70 years anyway?

And now you're complaining about the deck being stacked with a govt option??

[tuff bob]

Originally Posted by WavSpartan

Oh! So there can be a private and a public option? Nice to know

A public option that is subsidized by taxpayers?