Posted on 07/28/2017 6:25:40 AM PDT by Colonel Kangaroo
When all else fails, change the definition of “conservative”.
How the hell is single payer “conservative?”
The author of this piece must be kidding himself.
Rationing, death panels, and everyone under the thumb of the fascist government.
Thumb up, you live, thumb down, you die.
Just like a Roman emperor.
Two words for the author of this piece (besides the obvious FU).....those words: Charlie Gard.
Well, duh, if you are denied care of course it's not going to cost you anything. Am I right, Charlie Gard? Up high!
What about a Conservative Case for HEALTHSHARE?
Yesterday,, listening to Rush talk about football injuries, I wondered whether the government would ban football once it takes over "healthcare" because of the financial burdens it places on everyone else. Certainly cigarettes would be out, and maybe skiing too? Everything except anal sex.
ML/NJ
Somehow, methinks the Juan McCainezes of the future will still receive better and more timely care than we mere peons.
That was my point. The author’s whole argument
is that we need to change what “conservative” means
to something it has never meant.
I will no longer be reading anything from “The American Conservative”. This is outright Communist Propaganda here...
Single payer would be a catastrophe. Why not regionalize health care into pseudo-autonomous ‘Fed’ like regions that provide Insurance. With no Federal money going to or from the general funds of the government.
The only way a state sponsored Insurance program would work is to keep politicians hands off it.
No. The left, no matter what party they inhabit, want to make it appear so. It’s after the pattern of Marx’s postulate, that mankind was “progressing” from feudalism through bourgeois capitalism into totalitarian socialism (and then his imaginary and undefined “communism”); so like the Shi’ite Twelver Mahometans who believe they must hasten the return of the Mahdi by instigating nuclear war, the left believes they must push headlong into socialism by any means at their disposal, particularly the most mendacious and violent means.
I can state for a fact that if I have no cost for healthcare other than the taxes that I already pay, then my wife and I will go to the doctor a LOT more than we do now. The torn cartilage in my knee? Fix it doc. That major dental work she’s been putting off? Get er done. And on and on.
A few questions. Throughout the campaign, the President repeated how terrible Obamacare was.
Did he ever actually mention a policy within the ACA that he believed needed to be fixed?
During the campaign he said he wouldn’t touch Medicaid, so he supported the expansion.
We know he supports providing insurance for those with pre-existing conditions.
Does be oppose the subsidies to help people buy insurance?
Does he oppose the minimum coverage requirements?
Does he oppose the individual mandate?
Does he oppose the business mandate?
Does he oppose the medical device tax?
Do you think the skinny repeal complies with his vision of repeal and replace?
Perhaps he could provide Congress with a better idea of what be thinks healthcare reform should look like.
If the Liberals in California who have been chomping at the bit to do Single Payer for decades can’t figure out a way to pay for it, my sense is that NOBODY will figure out a way to pay for it.
May sound good to them on paper, but won’t survive First Contact with reality in a country of 330 million.
Myth Romney paid the Heritage Foundation to write a pro-government health so he could pass it in Mass.
Most republicans are NWO SOCIALISTS. they don’t caveto Democrats they are Democrats.
Wow, so much stupidity crammed into one short article. The government’s interference with the free market results in “obnoxious complexity and added paperwork”, so the answer is more government involvement, in fact complete government control. Riiight.
The author also fails to compare the level and quality of medical care available in those enlightened countries that spend a smaller fraction of their GDP on healthcare with that available in the U.S.
My socialist father believes that healthcare cost should be dependent on your income level, rather than your risk level.
With single payer, he gets what he wants. Sure the out of pocket may be less as this author claims. But it is propped up by progressive taxes
Oh, there will be costs. One of them will be freedom.
These “conservative cases” for left-wing government control of all things are pure lies.
The NHS in the UK is the largest financial entity in Europe. It has more cash flow than Siemens, Fiat, Bayer or Daimler-Benz and it’s a government agency that takes money.
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.