Why don’t states implement their own individual mandate

Guilds · 2018-07-07T16:47:24.535Z

gooddad409:

Correction: you mean it is biased. Period. Certainly nothing to do with reality.

You’re closed view of the world, does not equate to reality. It is your created reality, that comforts you.

Enjoy the bubble.

MoleUK · 2018-07-07T16:49:31.473Z

WuWei:

You said “healthcare”. Pardon my confusion.

Why do you say “Republicans”?

Why are healthcare costs rising?

Because Democrats aren’t tied to preserving the insurance based system in the same way Republicans are.

Lots of factors. But you’re spending twice as much as every other developed nation in large part because you’re paying an unnecessary middle-man that screws with the system.

WuWei · 2018-07-07T16:50:16.627Z

MoleUK:

Because Democrats aren’t tied to preserving the insurance based system in the same way Republicans are.

Lots of factors. But you’re spending twice as much as every other developed nation in large part because you’re paying an unnecessary middle-man that screws with the system.

I disagree.

I agree.

Steel-W0LF · 2018-07-07T16:51:21.738Z

MoleUK:

WuWei:

I’m asking about the cost going up. I understand the illegal and unConstitutional mandate quite well.

You may consider it illegal and unconstitutional, but it did help keep prices down. The larger the insurance pool, the lesser the risk.

Not entirely accurate.

If you have a large pool, and then add the unhealthy to the pool, the costs for the pool don’t go down… they go up.

The costs for the unhealthy go down.

WuWei · 2018-07-07T16:53:18.764Z

I think you’re right.

MoleUK · 2018-07-07T16:53:53.947Z

Steel-W0LF:

Not entirely accurate.

If you have a large pool, and then add the unhealthy to the pool, the costs for the pool don’t go down… they go up.

The costs for the unhealthy go down.

In this case, you’re trying to get the healthy to join a pool they’re not already in. The sick are already there.

gooddad409 · 2018-07-07T16:54:24.025Z

Guilds:

gooddad409:

Correction: you mean it is biased. Period. Certainly nothing to do with reality.

You’re closed view of the world, does not equate to reality. It is your created reality, that comforts you.

Enjoy the bubble.

Pots vs Kettle.

Guilds · 2018-07-07T17:01:22.507Z

Nope.

First off…I am here. Trying to discuss debate with very conservative people.

I also have many conservative friends, and we discuss/debate.

I get my news from a wide variety of sources, including the national Review and Cato.

We are not even close to being similar. I welcome new ideas. You, avoid them, as they do not fit in to your version of reality.

Which is the basic difference between a liberal and a conservative. (although there are many thoughtful, curious conservatives, who follow the facts. Many are here, and i applaud them, even though we may disagree)

gooddad409 · 2018-07-07T17:07:56.329Z

Libs don’t follow follow facts…far from it.

LucyLou · 2018-07-07T17:08:36.620Z

altair1013:

"If you pay attention to the news." Did you know that you could make this point without being incredibly rude? And as a bonus, your point may even be considered. Just a little awesome advice from an awesome poster.

I didn’t read that as rude.

Guilds · 2018-07-07T18:17:33.023Z

You have yet to post any facts.
Only feelings and opinions.

Steel-W0LF · 2018-07-07T18:23:56.472Z

MoleUK:

Steel-W0LF:

Not entirely accurate.

If you have a large pool, and then add the unhealthy to the pool, the costs for the pool don’t go down… they go up.

The costs for the unhealthy go down.

In this case, you’re trying to get the healthy to join a pool they’re not already in. The sick are already there.

Change “get” to “force” and your statement is accurate.

MoleUK · 2018-07-07T18:38:04.034Z

Steel-W0LF:

Change “get” to “force” and your statement is accurate.

Certainly to punish them if they don’t.

TommyLucchese · 2018-07-07T18:43:57.612Z

Axxowiz:

It would seem easier at this point if it’s legal under state law? For individual states to try and make their own single payer system. If it works then other states I would assume would follow suit. I always have been a strong advocate for state rights and for instance if a state like California wanted to do this, and legally could why don’t they try?

It’s a crazy question, like asking why conservatives oppose the individual mandate but not the employer mandate that’s existed for seventy plus years.

kingarthur65 · 2018-07-07T18:47:44.409Z

It’s difficult for the GOP to advocate for states rights because the biggest part of their plan to reduce premiums is to allow insurance to be sold across state lines.
They could admit that their plan wouldn’t reduce premiums but I don’t see that happening.

MoleUK · 2018-07-07T18:56:16.746Z

kingarthur65:

It’s difficult for the GOP to advocate for states rights because the biggest part of their plan to reduce premiums is to allow insurance to be sold across state lines.
They could admit that their plan wouldn’t reduce premiums but I don’t see that happening.

Allowing it wouldn’t do jack ■■■■■ the insurance companies don’t want to operate across state lines.

You’d have to force them.

TommyLucchese · 2018-07-07T18:59:35.728Z

MoleUK:

Allowing it wouldn’t do jack ■■■■, the insurance companies don’t want to operate across state lines.

You’d have to force them.

It’s dumb for two major reasons, one, insurance one of the most heavily regulated industries in the country for a reason-the mortgage securities are an example of an unregulated insurance system-and two, they’ll all move to one state with the loosest laws like credit card companies did after deregulation.

kingarthur65 · 2018-07-07T19:07:47.822Z

It’s still a major part of their platform. I disagree with it as well, but I would hardly expect them to admit that it won’t work, and advocated for states right would directly conflict with this part of their solution.

reflechissez · 2018-07-07T19:15:37.528Z

MoleUK:

kingarthur65:

It’s difficult for the GOP to advocate for states rights because the biggest part of their plan to reduce premiums is to allow insurance to be sold across state lines.
They could admit that their plan wouldn’t reduce premiums but I don’t see that happening.

Allowing it wouldn’t do jack ■■■■■ the insurance companies don’t want to operate across state lines.

You’d have to force them.

This is correct. People seem to think that all you have to do is find an cheaper insurance policy in another state. That insurance policy would be useless unless the doctors/hospitals/etc are willing to accept it in your state. Setting up that network in 50 states would be cost-prohibitive.

johnrandolph · 2018-07-07T19:25:06.344Z

Axxowiz:

It would seem easier at this point if it’s legal under state law? For individual states to try and make their own single payer system. If it works then other states I would assume would follow suit. I always have been a strong advocate for state rights and for instance if a state like California wanted to do this, and legally could why don’t they try?

Those that are inclined to do so did some time back.