Question about GOB stance on healthcare

[Anonymous]

So I get that the GOP is not in favor of Obamacare, and I believe I understand why.

My question: if they aren't in favor of Obamacare or universal healthcare, what ARE they in favor of? What do they think is the solution to unaffordable healthcare expenses?

And second question: Why are businesses (who bear a huge burden for healthcare costs which is then reflected in prices, helping to make U.S. goods and services much more expensive in the international marketplace) NOT infavor of universal healthcare? Even if we had to tax more to pay for it, it would still be cheaper for businesses than the way we do it now.

[Anonymous]

I'm not conservative, but I'll repeat what my conservative family says.

People need to be personally responsible for their health care. People who don't have health insurance have misplaced priorities. They'd rather have a big screen TV than pay for a policy. Or they don't care enough to go seek out a job that provides coverage (even though many don't). They do not think this is an issue that needs to be fixed. They all have health insurance and fault the uninsured for their own predicament.

[Anonymous]

Really? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So I get that the GOP is not in favor of Obamacare, and I believe I understand why.

My question: if they aren't in favor of Obamacare or universal healthcare, what ARE they in favor of? What do they think is the solution to unaffordable healthcare expenses?

And second question: Why are businesses (who bear a huge burden for healthcare costs which is then reflected in prices, helping to make U.S. goods and services much more expensive in the international marketplace) NOT infavor of universal healthcare? Even if we had to tax more to pay for it, it would still be cheaper for businesses than the way we do it now.

Is not that simple. The US pays more for health insurance, prescription drugs etc... because we are the richest nation in the world and are basically subsidizing poorer nations. If it were flat a lot of people would be dying in Africa because they could not afford medications. For example if you buy a text book int he US it will always be 20 bucks more than the exact same one in India because of cost of living.

Creating a government mandate will actually drive up prices because now there is an artificial element, a good example of this is cost of college tuition soaring after student loans availability. It's supply and demand more supply of people that want a service the higher the cost.

[Anonymous]

Insurance is a little different, though. It's supposed to spread the cost across the entire population, which means healthy people who rarely use services would be subsidizing the heavier users. That is supposed to mitigate costs.

I wish we had gone to a 100% government single payor plan, personally, and removed the profit motive. It's wrong in so many ways to make a profit off of health care decisions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I get that the GOP is not in favor of Obamacare, and I believe I understand why.

My question: if they aren't in favor of Obamacare or universal healthcare, what ARE they in favor of? What do they think is the solution to unaffordable healthcare expenses?

And second question: Why are businesses (who bear a huge burden for healthcare costs which is then reflected in prices, helping to make U.S. goods and services much more expensive in the international marketplace) NOT infavor of universal healthcare? Even if we had to tax more to pay for it, it would still be cheaper for businesses than the way we do it now.

Is not that simple. The US pays more for health insurance, prescription drugs etc... because we are the richest nation in the world and are basically subsidizing poorer nations. If it were flat a lot of people would be dying in Africa because they could not afford medications. For example if you buy a text book int he US it will always be 20 bucks more than the exact same one in India because of cost of living.

Creating a government mandate will actually drive up prices because now there is an artificial element, a good example of this is cost of college tuition soaring after student loans availability. It's supply and demand more supply of people that want a service the higher the cost.

I don't know where you get your "information" but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Literally every sentence in your post is a false statement.

For starters, the people constitute the "demand" side of healthcare, not the supply. That's econ 101, lesson one.

[Anonymous]

What is GOB?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So I get that the GOP is not in favor of Obamacare, and I believe I understand why.

My question: if they aren't in favor of Obamacare or universal healthcare, what ARE they in favor of? What do they think is the solution to unaffordable healthcare expenses?

And second question: Why are businesses (who bear a huge burden for healthcare costs which is then reflected in prices, helping to make U.S. goods and services much more expensive in the international marketplace) NOT infavor of universal healthcare? Even if we had to tax more to pay for it, it would still be cheaper for businesses than the way we do it now.

Is not that simple. The US pays more for health insurance, prescription drugs etc... because we are the richest nation in the world and are basically subsidizing poorer nations. If it were flat a lot of people would be dying in Africa because they could not afford medications. For example if you buy a text book int he US it will always be 20 bucks more than the exact same one in India because of cost of living.

Creating a government mandate will actually drive up prices because now there is an artificial element, a good example of this is cost of college tuition soaring after student loans availability. It's supply and demand more supply of people that want a service the higher the cost.

You fail to grasp two things.

1. Everyone gets treated.
2. Uninsured people don't get treated until their problems ate severe and expensive to fix.

The point of the mandate is to make sure everyone gets routine care so they make fewer visits to the ER and so their diabetes gets managed to avoid a lifetime of govt paid dialysis and their blood pressure is treated before they need a bypass. We pay for those bypasses.

[Anonymous]

OP here. So really, the GOP doesn't have a plan.

Just saying that people should pay for their own isn't a plan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So really, the GOP doesn't have a plan.

Just saying that people should pay for their own isn't a plan.

12:12 again. Again, my conservative family says cutting taxes will free up money for (responsible) people to purchase their own insurance. For my family, at least, it really turns on personal responsibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. So really, the GOP doesn't have a plan.

Just saying that people should pay for their own isn't a plan.

12:12 again. Again, my conservative family says cutting taxes will free up money for (responsible) people to purchase their own insurance. For my family, at least, it really turns on personal responsibility.

Yeah, that "personal responsibility" goes flying out the window as soon as someone has a heart attack. Have you ever heard of an uninsured person say "y'know what? I really should have paid for insurance, bad call on my part. Guess I'll just sit here and die. Tell the kids not to be like me."

[Anonymous]

Well, not only that, but you can be very responsible and always get insurance but if you become unemployed you are screwed.

[Anonymous]

Risk is the price of freedom. Socialism leads to poverty.end of story.

[Anonymous]

A nation of wimps makes for small dreams, frustration, boredom and low sex-appeal

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Risk is the price of freedom. Socialism leads to poverty.end of story.

Socialist democracies have the highest standard of living across the globe.