Streamlining Goverment

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
61

[quote]Michael Crehan wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
I would imagine that even yourself, Beans, would admit that there are checks and balances required even in the free market.

[/quote]

I’d be the first to say clear, simple regulation that prevents irrational behavior becomes needed as the market becomes larger.

But, the point I was making to pitt is that, once you regulate a market it isn’t free. Regulation prevents freedom. There is a difference between what you said and what he said. [/quote]

With out laws what would prevent some one from stealing ?[/quote]

Somebody blowing your fucking head off if they catch you.
[/quote]

I would say that is a romantic notion that is not well reasoned

62

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
People pay for their own health care now. When I go to the hospital and see fat nurses I know there’s no way we are going to be able to make a good case for taking care of yourself.

james[/quote]

I know. But when/if mandatory health care is implemented, that isn’t going to be the case. As an individual, you/me/whoever will pay a price based on how much the average person needs in healthcare, which is BS. I take care of myself so I won’t be sick/spend a bunch of money on healthcare. Jackass next to me eats donuts all day and gets diabetis, so essentially we will split the price of his meds, even though it is entirely his fault that he got diabetis in the first place.

I know you can never force the whole population to take an active approach like people on this board do, but there are a lot of things that could be done to help. An example that I wrote a pretty in depth report/suggestion on is redefining the importance of physical education, putting it on the same level with all the other academic classes. I wrote an 8 page paper about how I would set it up at every level, there would be requirements that much be met (for high school) in order to graduate. Failing PE (either by not meeting the standards or participation) would me failing the grade, etc.[/quote]

So, you don’t have any private health insurance?[/quote]

What? I am in favor of private insurance, not government insurance[/quote]

With private insurance you are already paying a price based on what the average person needs in health care. [/quote]

It seems that you and the poster above you are saying opposite things.

With the current model, either everyone is paying the price for an average person, or the prices are different depending on risk factors.

I am almost certain that it is currently the first, which I am not in favor of.

63

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
People pay for their own health care now. When I go to the hospital and see fat nurses I know there’s no way we are going to be able to make a good case for taking care of yourself.

james[/quote]

I know. But when/if mandatory health care is implemented, that isn’t going to be the case. As an individual, you/me/whoever will pay a price based on how much the average person needs in healthcare, which is BS. I take care of myself so I won’t be sick/spend a bunch of money on healthcare. Jackass next to me eats donuts all day and gets diabetis, so essentially we will split the price of his meds, even though it is entirely his fault that he got diabetis in the first place.

I know you can never force the whole population to take an active approach like people on this board do, but there are a lot of things that could be done to help. An example that I wrote a pretty in depth report/suggestion on is redefining the importance of physical education, putting it on the same level with all the other academic classes. I wrote an 8 page paper about how I would set it up at every level, there would be requirements that much be met (for high school) in order to graduate. Failing PE (either by not meeting the standards or participation) would me failing the grade, etc.[/quote]

So, you don’t have any private health insurance?[/quote]

What? I am in favor of private insurance, not government insurance[/quote]

With private insurance you are already paying a price based on what the average person needs in health care. [/quote]

It seems that you and the poster above you are saying opposite things.

With the current model, either everyone is paying the price for an average person, or the prices are different depending on risk factors.

I am almost certain that it is currently the first, which I am not in favor of.[/quote]

Admittedly, I wasn’t too clear on that.

I was merely reacting to the statement that under mandatory health insurance you will be paying for the average person’s health care costs. Under a system of private health insurance, healthy people are already paying the health care cost of other individuals within the insurance pool. I’m not arguing for or against either option.

64

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]jonzy91 wrote:

[quote]Chris87 wrote:

[quote]atypical1 wrote:
People pay for their own health care now. When I go to the hospital and see fat nurses I know there’s no way we are going to be able to make a good case for taking care of yourself.

james[/quote]

I know. But when/if mandatory health care is implemented, that isn’t going to be the case. As an individual, you/me/whoever will pay a price based on how much the average person needs in healthcare, which is BS. I take care of myself so I won’t be sick/spend a bunch of money on healthcare. Jackass next to me eats donuts all day and gets diabetis, so essentially we will split the price of his meds, even though it is entirely his fault that he got diabetis in the first place.

I know you can never force the whole population to take an active approach like people on this board do, but there are a lot of things that could be done to help. An example that I wrote a pretty in depth report/suggestion on is redefining the importance of physical education, putting it on the same level with all the other academic classes. I wrote an 8 page paper about how I would set it up at every level, there would be requirements that much be met (for high school) in order to graduate. Failing PE (either by not meeting the standards or participation) would me failing the grade, etc.[/quote]

So, you don’t have any private health insurance?[/quote]

What? I am in favor of private insurance, not government insurance[/quote]

With private insurance you are already paying a price based on what the average person needs in health care. [/quote]

It seems that you and the poster above you are saying opposite things.

With the current model, either everyone is paying the price for an average person, or the prices are different depending on risk factors.

I am almost certain that it is currently the first, which I am not in favor of.[/quote]

Admittedly, I wasn’t too clear on that.

I was merely reacting to the statement that under mandatory health insurance you will be paying for the average person’s health care costs. Under a system of private health insurance, healthy people are already paying the health care cost of other individuals within the insurance pool. I’m not arguing for or against either option.[/quote]

Oh ok. I understand that, and I think they should use a model similar to life or auto insurance. People with obvious lifestyle risk factors should pay a higher price to offset those risks.

65

Currently, under private insurance, yes you pay based on individual risks. Under company sponsered insurance, as mentioned, you pay a reduced group premium based on aggregate risk. In my workplace, there are lots of older people. Thus their proportion of risk relating to cost is greater than mine.Costs are rising year on year as a result. The question is, does the offsetting group subsidy mitigate the difference between my most likely lower marginal rate, and the higher marginal rate, but lower group rate of my workplace.

Either way, you are paying for it. Without employer health insurance, perhaps they could pay me more. Those factors are already priced in to your compensation when you get hired.

Similarly, with a public mandate, the aggregate risk is pooled once again, and the corresponding cost is calculated. Based on population proportions, young people will pay too much, and old/obese/sickly people too little relative to their condition. I understand the rationale for protecting people with pre-existing conditions, as they are not profitable to insure. I think this aspect could have been handled better than a healthcare law. Furthermore, there is no disincentive towards unhealthy behavior, in those that can control it.

Perhaps an idea would be something like a living social for private healthcare insurance, mimicking the auto market. You pay premiums based on individual health. You are welcome to find similar individuals to sign up and reduce overall cost.

66

[quote]666Rich wrote:
Perhaps an idea would be something like a living social for private healthcare insurance, mimicking the auto market. You pay premiums based on individual health. You are welcome to find similar individuals to sign up and reduce overall cost. [/quote]

Good post. And this would be perfectly acceptable under the Affordable Care Act. So if the free market decides it is a good idea, it will happen. You could start your own company!