NY times: "Hillary Rodham Clinton is a suffocating presence..."

[Plane]

Saying no one is preventingAmericans from getting health care is like saying that no one is preventing them from driving Ferraris.

So President Obama got re-elected because he kept on promising that Ferrari to everyone.


Might as well be literal, what he promised is as likely to be given to everyone as a Ferrari.

[Xavier_Onassis]

The price of health care was formerly determined by the insurance companies,and many could not afford it, and many were unable to buy it at any price because of preexisting conditions. Everyone does not drive Ferraris because they cost too much. The same was true of health insurance. Medicine is not a product in which the price is driven by the market. Some hospitals charge four or five times as much for the same procedure. The patient cannot negotiate the price of such things and this must be done by the insurance companies.

[Plane]

  The forces of market are universal, they are not absent even when there is a lot of complexity hanging on and government manipulation.

    The cost of health care is not reduced by shifting the cost , and the availability of healthcare is not increased by the Affordable health care act.

    It is merely another Robin hood idea for robbing Peter to pay Paul getting Paul's support and Peters ire.

    If the government makes hospitals less profitable and becoming a Doctor less remunerative the market force will grind down the availability as fewer Hospitals get built and fewer bright young become physicians .

     There may be a time lag, but I don't expect a long one.

[Xavier_Onassis]

No one liked the idea that you could be denied insurance for previous conditions. No one liked the prospect of losing everything and being bankrupted for trying to stay alive.

[sirs]

That said, you don't destroy a system that worked for the vast majority of the country, and that they liked, to help a mere fraction.  You focus on that problem alone........IF THAT WAS THE GOAL.  Which it never was of course

[Plane]

No one liked the idea that you could be denied insurance for previous conditions. No one liked the prospect of losing everything and being bankrupted for trying to stay alive.

This is two good points.

The denial of coverage for previously existing conditions is a good thing to change , and the change it needs could be written on a single sheet of paper and passed into law.

I don't like the idea that we will all be bankrupted because some of us are trying to stay alive.

Insurance coverage could be improved , but the needed changes are not nearly so complex as the AHCA.

Each of the features that people like about Obamacare  could be passed as stand alone bills of great , laudable simplicity.

Leaving about 850 useless pages unsullied.

And the parts that people do not like , perhaps they do not like for good reason.

[sirs]

No one liked the idea that you could be denied insurance for previous conditions. No one liked the prospect of losing everything and being bankrupted for trying to stay alive.

The denial of coverage for previously existing conditions is a good thing to change , and the change it needs could be written on a single sheet of paper and passed into law.

EXACTLY!!  Not 2000, not 200, maybe 2 pages

[Xavier_Onassis]

No, all that would have done would have resulted in  hundreds of lawsuits by the insurance companies.

[Plane]

  Oh yes, like making it very complex helps keep it from the courts.

[sirs]

No, all that would have done would have resulted in  hundreds of lawsuits by the insurance companies.

That makes no sense.  The clearer and more concise the language,  the harder anyone could sue anyone.   The more elaborate and "tortuous" the language, the harder it is for the people to sue anyone, since the defendant can claim anything they want, not to mention how much easier it is to fool not just the people, but Federal agencies like the CBO.  2 pages is all that was needed as it relates to the supposed premise of Obamacare