Quote:
Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind
i don't see how you don't see the link, republicans have taken the federal government hostage and are threatening economic disaster if democrats don't defund policies that were passed legislatively, upheld by the supreme court and ratified by a national election. republicans are using unconventional means to effect policy that wasn't enacted through traditional constitutional procedures. republicans are causing hardship to federal workers and threatening hardship to millions of Americans as the means to achieve their policy goals. that is Un-American and deserves the label of political and economic terrorism. how else can you explain the republicans means of achieving their objective?
|
I understand what has happened in the medical industry. Our medicine is distinctly different and more expensive per capita than much of the rest of the industrialized world. In our healthcare system, providers are incentivized to do the wrong thing, i.e., surgeons are not paid for their outcomes, they are paid for how many surgeries they perform. Patients with poor outcomes can then become profit centers, because they will end up requiring additional care.
There are also very strong incentives to produce biased research. We all know medical research has a history of bias, i.e. the tobacco industry, the pharmaceutical companies, the medical device companies, etc.
Because of these factors, I personally do not believe the healthcare industry can reform itself. It will take some regulatory guidance simply because the medical inflation is unsustainable in this country.
I believe that the government is inherently less efficient than business, and while it might a good idea and even necessary for parameters to be set by the government, that supervision needs to be minimal and relegated to the states as much as possible. Other than setting loose rules, they ought to get out of the healthcare industry.
What I don’t like about Obamacare is that the bill was not bipartisan. This is a major overhaul of the American medical industry. Not having bipartisan support is just not acceptable. And I especially do not like the government intrusion and lack of freedom.
The Supreme Court ruling is also something to argue about – Roberts says a mandate is unconstitutional, yet, he upholds the law as a tax and not a penalty. I don’t really see the difference.
Doing research at the outset until today, all I read over and over is this – Is this law good or bad? Is the Supreme Court decision a good one or a bad one? The response - It depends on your insurance and your political affiliation.
Yes, we knew when the IRS became involved it was going to be political. This fight is not over by a long shot.
Lastly, the troubling part is that the law has been changed by both Obama and Holder. Changed since the Supreme Court ruling. That means what we are being handed is NOT the original law, which makes me side with Rand Paul’s words - "The president’s been modifying his own plan over the last several months. Should Congress not be part of that? Some of us think it’s illegal for the president to do it without our authority.” He is right.
Linear Mode
