The overwhelming issue with any Republican plan, is that they don't care about actual healthcare. They fought to kill ACA not because it didn't work. (of course, it never worked as planned as Congressional Republicans de funded key aspects of the program in year 2) They fought to de fund it because they didn't feel that billionaires should be paying a 3.8% cap gains tax on anything over $250k/year in investment income.
They never did, and never will care about healthcare. Why do you think they pushed the killing of ACA before they came up with their giant tax giveaway to billionaires/corporations?
Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.
Into the Night, you're correct, we all currently pay for catastrophic medical expenditures that occur in the USA.
To the extent those catastrophic costs are covered by insurance, they're passed on to those purchasing the insurance which increases prices to consumers, and/or employers, and/or unions, and/or non-profit organizations such as schools, charities, or governments.
To the extent those price increases don't recover the additional cost, the deficiency remains with the insurers, that are profit or nonprofit organizations such as schools, charities, or governments.
Who or whatever entities eventually pay those catastrophic costs are taxpayers or government agencies funded by taxpayers. Catastrophic medical costs consequentially reduce governments tax revenues or are direct costs to governments.
It would be to insurers benefit to insist their clients avail themselves at no additional costs to themselves, for reasonably conventional preventive or diagnostic service or procedure applicable to their conditions. If their clients do not comply, they may be charged additional increased fees because they're failing to prevent medical and financial risks. Regardless of whatever is or will be our nation’s medical policies, this policy would improve our nation’s economic and social condition.
The additional fees would be passed on to the government and thus absolve the insurers of any responsibility due in such cases to the patients refusing preventive diagnostic and preventive services.
Respectfully, Supposn
Last edited by Supposn; 06-11-2019 at 06:48 AM. Reason: grammer
Healthcare is not a right. Nor should it be
It is a scarce finite resource and responds to the law of supply and demand like all other resources.
That people think others should pay for their healthcare does not mitigate this important truth
Into the Night (06-11-2019)
But it does not. Only Into The Night imply that courts make law. No one else does; SCOTUS interprets the Constitution.
Scalia's material is clear enough that Into The Night's argument is a fallacy of the stone, fallacy of argument, and a fallacy fallacy that the Welfare Clause is not a power of authority.
Teflon Don, prior to D-day, families' wealth and contributions to tax revenues were not factors of consideration for determining which individuals would be among the earliest and riskiest waves of troops landing on the beaches. We hope that all contribute what they can for the benefit of our nation.
You're contending a nation which requires both the poor and the wealthy to risk and possibly pay with their lives should deny the benefits of medical technology to those unable to afford them. Dependent upon individuals' medical condition, medical care is more or less a necessity, but it is a necessity of life?
Respectfully, Supposn
CFM, Within the U.S. Constitution’s preamble:
“promote the general welfare”.
Within article 1, section 8:
“The Congress shall have power to … provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; … To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes; … fix the standard of weights and measures; … To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof”.
The Federal courts, and particularly the U.S. Supreme Court have thus far upheld this against opposition to federal acts, laws, or regulations such as Social Security retirement, minimum wage rate, mandated individual purchasing of medical insurance, and child labor laws.
Respectfully, Supposn
The concept of any insurance is you get a lot of people involved and few will need it. The ones who get in car accidents are financed by those who do not. Those who get in accidents or get ill are financed by those who do not. Insurance requires many people paying premiums and not using it. Insurance companies extract profits from that pool of money. Eliminate the profit motive and insurance is cheaper and less adversarial.It becomes much cheaper. The concept does not change.
Bookmarks