How health care reform really could get repealed—and why the repercussions would go well beyond health care.

[james&olya 1,121]

No, but I like the idea of a government-run health insurance company

even less.

You realize we already have this and it consistently gets higher satisfaction scores in surveys than any private insurance. But I guess you don't plan on using medicare?

[mawilson 2,133]

You realize we already have this and it consistently gets higher satisfaction scores in surveys than any private insurance. But I guess you don't plan on using medicare?

No, we don't. Medicare is a single-payer system, not a government-run insurance company.

Medicare doesn't use risk assessment models to decide whether or not to raise premiums

the way private insurance companies do.

Edited January 23, 2011 by mawilson

[james&olya 1,121]

No, we don't. Medicare is a single-payer system, not a government-run insurance company.

Medicare doesn't use risk assessment models to decide whether or not to raise premiums

the way private insurance companies do.

Yes, you are right. But the new health insurance law is even much less than that. I did not realize you had sufficient understanding of the nuances as your post seemed a more generic bashing of anything connected to government. I personally would like to see a medicare for all system. Others on the left would like to see a national health 'system' where the providers are employed by the government. This could be modeled after the VA system or the military medical system. I think this type of system is what most people are thinking of when they rant about government run health care. The current law is a giant government subsidy to private insurance companies. While better for the consumer than what it replaces it does not go nearly far enough.

Many people are opposed to 'Obamacare' in polls. What is usually not mentioned is that a significantly larger percentage are opposed because it does not go far enough rather than it does too much!!! Many of those opposed are nonetheless big supporters of medicare, even those that think this bill does too much! It would have been a much easier sell to the american public had they proposed the much simpler concept of just extending medicare to everyone. It is Obama's huge mistake thinking that by compromising with the republicans on keeping the insurance in private companies that he could achieve consensus. This is where we needed someone with the political savvy and skills like LBJ!!

[mawilson 2,133]

I personally would like to see a medicare for all system.

Sure, why not. You'd have to raise the Medicare tax from its current

rate of 1.45 percent (2.9% if you're self-employed) to something like

10 percent to make it work.

Others on the left would like to see a national health 'system' where the providers are employed by the government.

That would be terrible. Even in the UK, most GPs are private practices

which have contractual arrangements with the NHS, but they are not "employed"

by the NHS.

[mawilson 2,133]

I did not realize you had sufficient understanding of the nuances as your post seemed a more generic bashing of anything connected to government.

I'm curious, did you even read the rest of my post? Or did you read the

first sentence and hit 'reply'?

Why do you assume that someone who doesn't embrace all things government is

necessarily an ignoramus who does not know what he is talking about?

[Pooky 3,825]

I'm curious, did you even read the rest of my post? Or did you read the

first sentence and hit 'reply'?

Why do you assume that someone who doesn't embrace all things government is

necessarily an ignoramus who does not know what he is talking about?

Because he's still a n00b?

[james&olya 1,121]

an ignoramus who does not know what he is talking about?

Sometimes it does seem that way.

[mawilson 2,133]

Sometimes it does seem that way.

You're one arrogant piece of work.

[james&olya 1,121]

You're one arrogant piece of work.

Most people, intelligent people, would define medicare as a 'government run insurance plan'. Obviously that depends on how you define insurance plan. You resort to using an obscure line of reasoning to back away from your statement about not liking government run health insurance when I bring up medicare. So if that makes me arrogant for being willing to point out to you, what does it make you? I didn't call you an ignoramus, those were your words. Why not we stay on topic instead of the silly ad hominem BS?

[mawilson 2,133]

Most people, intelligent people, would define medicare as a 'government run insurance plan'.

There you go again with your insults.

[james&olya 1,121]

There you go again with your insults.

Now come on ma, I said most! Let me grant that you are intelligent, OK?

[Ban Hammer 13,476]

Now come on ma, I said most! Let me grant that you are intelligent, OK?

something you'll learn the longer you're here: there's a few people on vj that are regarded as the "guru" in certain topics. mawilson is the "guru" in all things financial.

[^_^ 5,021]

[james&olya 1,121]

something you'll learn the longer you're here: there's a few people on vj that are regarded as the "guru" in certain topics. mawilson is the "guru" in all things financial.

Are we mere peasants ever allowed to disagree? Especially if we may have a bit of expertise in other fields germane to the topic under discussion? Just curious.

[^_^ 5,021]

Are we mere peasants ever allowed to disagree? Especially if we may have a bit of expertise in other fields germane to the topic under discussion? Just curious.

You're allowed to disagree. mawilson can be very agreeable if you're not snarky.