Posted on 01/08/2014 10:08:04 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Who says we have to have one? Only the lefty’s...
I didn’t read this yet, but I have to say that is quite a name the author has: Napp Nazworth, it’s like something out of a Damon Runyon story.
We don’t need a republican alternative to obama care!!!
AMEN TO THAT!!
ability to sell policies across state lines
portability
tort reform
One of the many problems is that this solution means LESS GOVERNMENT - MUCH less government. Seems that leaders on both sides of the isle don't like that answer. Both seem to have a personal stake in at least maintaining the level of government size and interference in our lives.
Nevertheless, free market capitalism is the subtle yet powerful and most effective solution to poverty known to man. Market and personal freedom should be shouted from the mountaintops these days as the absolute refutation to Socialism.
The whole justification for O’care was the idea that vast numbers of people are out there without insurance.
But insurance was always available if you could afford it. That was the rub.
Under O’care, prices are tripling and you get a policy that doesn’t actually cover anything. If you couldn’t afford it before, how do you afford it now?
Dems say, if you don’t like our wrecking ball, whats your alternative? My alternative is to repeal the wrecking ball.
Repeal Obama.
I’m so tired of hearing that there must be new legislation.
The government has no business being in healthcare to begin with.
STOP EXEMPTING THE HEALTHCARE INDUSTRY FROM LAWS THAT BAN RESTRAINT OF TRADE.
Here's an article on that very topic by Karl Denninger, from his Market Ticker blog:
An Example Of The Health-Care Rape
If you don't want to click and read, here's a worthy sample:
Those practices are supposed to be a felony. So says the Sherman and Clayton Act (15 USC §1-3). So says (in respect to commodities) Robinson-Patman (15 USC §13).
So where are the prosecutions? They're missing, because we also have McCarran-Ferguson that exempts insurance companies from most of the Sherman and Clayton act (explicitly!) and that, along with other laws, effectively exempts the medical industry from laws that prohibit this behavior in virtually every other line of business.
As a direct consequence these 4,000% price disparities exist.
As a direct consequence you pay 4,000% more, directly and indirectly, than you should.
Amen, Papa. See my post above.
Let the States control.
Don’t need one.
Things were fine before the Obamacare trainwreck.
But if I were going to do it about the only think I could thin of would be allowing insurance shopping across state lines.
I think you hit it on the head...
Everybody wants to find a way to keep their scam going for just one more election cycle.
How about freedom?
Who cares what the Republican alternatives are. What is the solution period?
The GOP proposal: A refundable tax credit for low income Americans to purchase health insurance and a tax deduction for health insurance for others.
Is this more freedom, or more government control?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.