So back to the unsustainable insurance market that existed before the ACA. Freedom of choice to get fucked and likely end up in bankruptcy court because your insurance doesn't cover shit, that's the system you're waxing poetically about?
LOL. It's low cost compared to ER services but it ain't a $15 trip to the doctor. Anyways, you're just taking an obtuse shit in this thread so not worth engaging.
A larger proportion wanting ACA or single payer only makes my proposal even more viable. The more people that choose the "sick" pool, the lower the costs for those with expensive medical needs.
Yeah but if someone gets a major disease they pay more until they can't afford it and then they go to the high needs companies then they're no longer my problem. I'm healthy and I don't need to go to the doctor. You're out of my pool for making me pay more with your doctor visits.
In your scenario, self selection is going to lead to the sickest people being in the government group while the healthiest folks aren't. That limits the effectiveness of the government group.
do you have a citation? anything that says 50%? you said its 50/50 and have yet to provide anything to substantiate that.
came across a Trump thread that may move as quick as tmb's http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=271589&start=22650
I'm sure you have better data than I do. Seriously. What's the proportion? Again, the larger the number that want universal healthcare, the more viable my idea becomes.
I don't want to fund wars in the Middle East. Why doesn't the government have a government based national defense system that wages wars while allowing people that don't want to contribute to that opt into private security firms if they want? Freedom of choice.
Half the country is a bunch of paste eating morons who thought it was a good idea to elect Donald trump as president. I guarantee 95% of those people would love socialized medicine if they actually saw it in practice. The other 5% wouldnt like it because they might not be able to buy a second yacht this year.
Sounds like you need some health education. That's where I think the government and the insurance companies could share a common goal.
[Some undefined proportion of the country] do not consider healthcare to be a national problem. Let individuals decide what is important, and let them act accordingly.
I don't care about "your" idea that isn't yours. It seems like you're describing the parameters of the British marketplace. Universal Healthcare + Supplemental Private. I care that you throw out fake stats and made up #s to prove a wrong point. ACA approval is likely between 55-to-60% at the moment (it will collapse once the GOP intentionally orchestrates the ACA's failure). Somewhere between 20-to-25% want repeal of the ACA. Nothing in the polling suggests its split evenly at 50%, which is why I knew what you posted was wrong. Saying 50/50 only served your purposes of making it a "both sides equal" argument, when the GOPers wanting the days of the old system are a minority view.
[Some undefined proportion of the country] do not consider Afghanistan to be a national problem. Let individuals decide what is important, and let them act accordingly.
Huh? The whole country knows health care is a problem. They might disagree on the solution but they certainly understand it's a national problem.
I don't think I should pay for police because I can take care of myself. Let me be free. I don't have kids why am I paying for schools. REEEEEE
Poorly worded by me then. Yes, it's a national problem. The country is divided on whether the solution is a national responsibility or not.
Pretty much, freedom of choice means freedom to go without insurance or freedom to go with an insurance that covers nothing.
No, was there a company whose business was modeled around providing the most affordable healthcare possible to those with extensive needs? One that disproportionately charged healthy individuals in order to defray medical costs for others?
Due to an irresponsible message from the Republican Party that everyone should just take care of themselves at all times as if we aren't all in this together. Obamacare was a good idea from their own think tank that basically allowed the government to act as an insurer. If you don't want socialized medicine, that's the solution. Now they don't know what the fuck to do politically. I don't expect the American public to understand this problem, but it's the republicans responsibility to embrace the policy they developed then decried for 8 years.
Why not have both options in the marketplace and let the American people decide on an individual basis?
No, but there was a system that allowed insurance companies to decide what they would cover and what they would not cover. Your entire premise of customized healthcare is just reverting back to the the pre-ACA policies that governed insurances.
If everyone would take some personal responsibility and pay for your routine visits out of pocket like I suggested then you wouldn't be passing along those costs to those of us that are healthy and keep ourselves in shape without needing to see the doctor all the time. I'm not using those services so I should have the freedom to not pay for it.
Insurance companies defray the costs of coverage for their sick patients by charging healthy people that don't use the system
There is zero logical reason for someone healthy to join your insurance plan, so give it up. The purpose of insurance as a healthy person is to have it when I need it. Your program literally stacks all the risk into one plan, which increases the risk that I will not have health insurance when I go to the doctor because the company went bankrupt. For the same price as your health insurance plan, I can get health insurance at a normal place and donate the extra money to a sick person. People don't make huge financial sacrifices without meaningful reward unless they have to which is why basic healthcare inherently has to be run by the government.
Because again, we're all in this together. The entire concept is based on people who make a lot of money helping make sure that people with no money can have health care in a nonemergency situation. Right now they still have health care, but it's in an emergency situation which costs a fuckload more. Your insurance is paying for that shit whether you want it to or not because the hospitals pass on that cost through increasing the prices to insured customers.