John Deering by John Deering

John Deering

Comments (12) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 1 year ago

    They are one in the same….

  2. mskemple

    mskemple said, over 1 year ago

    Don’t worry Mr. President you won’t need to take off you shoe’s for either!

  3. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 1 year ago

    The numbers published by the HuffPost, Reuters, et al, are truly pathetic. Admittedly there are probably many that have not even tried because of the web site debacle. Even with that considered, the numbers shouldn’t be as low as they are.

  4. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 1 year ago

    “Republicans kept saying that the majority of Americans didn’t want obamacare.”

    And my radio station tells me that the songs they play are my favorites. And every phone bank in the world tells me my call is very important to them.

    Talk is cheap. If the Republicans had worked half as hard to make a better system than to trash-talk this one, perhaps the country, and the Republican party, would both be better off.

  5. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 1 year ago

    @I Play One On TV

    Got news for you I Play One, by the Republicans doing nothing they would be light years ahead of the disaster the Democrats made by doing something.
    .
    That said, the fix is NOT to just change who pays but to change the system itself. Our current reliance on insurance for all medical care costs is a mistake. By prolonging that system as Obamacare does we just compound that mistake with myopic managerial thinking. What we need is leadership that can move us towards an alternate system that combines free market choices and payment with insurance for major costs only.
    I doubt politicians will do this as they are rarely leaders and usually poor managers.

  6. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 1 year ago

    @Enoki

    I mostly agree. I still believe that free-market capitalism is not the proper framework for health-care decisions. As long as profit is considered as the main (and perhaps only) factor in determining whether the patient lives or dies, the system is doomed to failure.

    To be fair, the plans market their positions well. I have a newsletter from one of my insurance overlords stating that, when they deny payment for a patient, they are not saying the patient should not have that treatment. It’s just that they won’t pay for it.

    Death panels, anyone?

  7. eugene57

    eugene57 said, over 1 year ago

    @Enoki

    Please, give us more info on these alternate systems.

  8. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 1 year ago

    No Mr. King Obamacare is not a set of free market choices. If we look at the federal site that covers the majority of states there is essentially just one plan with four levels of deductable available: Platinum, gold, silver, and bronze. You get the same coverage in each with a varying deductable.
    Costs are roughly the same too varying some state by state depending on the companies participating.
    It is also not “free market” that you are compelled to have health insurance that meets the Obamacare standard and that both better and worse plans than that standard are either made illegal or heavily penalized.
    A free market for routine care would have you simply paying for incidental and common medical care out of pocket without an insurer and only resorting to insurance for large infrequent expenses like a hospital stay.

  9. Enoki

    Enoki said, over 1 year ago

    @eugene57

    One would be to simply return to a system where common and routine expenses were paid out of pocket entirely and insurance was used for only infrequent and high expense occurances like a hospital stay. No co-pay or insurance for a check up. Just pay out-of-pocket. Negotiate the rate with the doctor of your choice.
    .
    .
    Another is to make ALL health care expenses 100% tax deductable. Then allow people to open individual accounts much like a 401K that will cover their health care expenses.
    Allow employers to open similar ones for their employees with an upper limit of say $5,000 (the amount could be different). These would work as before tax dollars and the employee simply is reimbursed for any expense incurred for medical care they show a receipt for.
    To sweeten the deal for employers allow them at the end of their fiscal year to split the remaining funds in the account with their workers 50-50 as taxable income. This is an incentive for employers to participate, and for them and their workers to stay healthy.
    Next, you institute a national catastrophic health care plan with a $5,000 to $10,000 yearly deductable into which individuals and every employer pays an amount (employers paying by the number of employees they have). This covers 100% above the deductable for catastrophic health events like a major hospitalization. It replaces in its entirety Medicare / cade.
    This gives employers another reason to have those split fund accounts as they can easily fund their share out of their 50% yearly return once they get things going so they never even really see the hit on income.
    Individuals can pay out of their individual account pre-tax money so they make out having an account too.
    The government is limited to just paying out for the catastrophic plan expenses and can only limit the amount of pay out as would any insurance company. They would work as a PPO and you could go to anybody for service you wanted.
    .
    Your doctor, your plan, your money. No government intrusion into your personal life. That works and it could be done on two sheets of paper.
    .
    Obamacare is WORTHLESS.

  10. mskemple

    mskemple said, over 1 year ago

    And that is where Obama and his socialist agenda plan to keep you. Churchillwasright turned me on to some knowledge on another strip , google Cloward-Piven strategy and at the very least you’ll gain some insight , that is if you are not privy already.

  11. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 1 year ago

    Maybe because Obamacare is not the best answer? I don’t know; I suggest you ask the Dems themselves, rather than assuming they will blame the Repubs.

    As I have stated in the past, I have no love for Obamacare, other than the fact that I admire the fact that he is the first president since Mr. Nixon to actually institute changes to a failing system. Mr. Nixon tried mightily. Mr. Ford tried a little. Mr. Reagan and Mr. Bush the Elder, and Mr. Bush the Lesser…..well, just die already. Mr. Clinton….well, we all know where Hillarycare went.

    Having said that, change is not always progress. Single payer, single payer, single payer……

  12. mskemple

    mskemple said, over 1 year ago

    @I Play One On TV

    I keep hearing the term single payer system and have found a couple of definitions. Please provide yours so I can better understand just how this might work. As near as I can tell the term is just as flexible as an Obama promise!

  13. Refresh Comments.