I don't think it was poorly thought out. ER has to treat everyone whether they have insurance or not, as it should be. It just follows naturally that we need to make sure as many people have health insurance as possible. Do you have a better idea?
I have a number of ideas, but I don't know what is best because I do not have all the resources, the proper people, and the time to do a proper job. I know what health care is, and it's not Obamacare. What you have done is fixed a mechanism which does nothing but create an impediment to reform because once a thing takes hold it becomes entrenched in bureaucracy. Show me a major program undone of this magnitude in the last three decades.
Why it does not look bad to you is that you don't know what you are looking at. Tell me that what is happening with companies opting out of covering insurance was a planned consequence of the ACA. That everyone was supposed to pay more, not less.
If this is "not bad" I'd hate to see what you think is ill considered. Did you read my post elsewhere about how to go about making true reform? Which of your politicians can do better than such a construct? Which has more expertise, which has more time, which has undivided attention to spend?
I would never claim that all Republican ideas are bad. Just offering examples of times when Dems reached across the aisle under pressure to "work with the other team," those ideas turned out to be detrimental, and surprise surprise, Dems are blamed for them. How many times have you seen righties blame Clinton for NAFTA and repeal of GS in here? The two biggest examples of Democrat "failure" in the past 30+ years are Republican legislation. The biggest objection to Obamacare is the individual mandate. Again, Republican idea.
Again you default to partisan solutions and blame. We need answers based on problems WHICH HAVE NO POLITICAL INPUT. What needs to be done is to find solutions, not make hay. You offer craft and guile and gain, claim that Republicans wanted it first, then co-opt foolishness and say that is what is important. It is surely not, unless partisan considerations come first. Then it's a matter of bowing to your wolf, thinking you are one, but you are meat for the table. Neither you, nor the knowledgeable, nor wise men, nor fools have any say unless they are by, of and for the Party. Pick one.
I disagree with the bolded. I think investing heavily in cutting edge technology and education is needed. I think investment in infrastructure is needed. I think foreign aid is necessary to speed up the process of raising third world countries up so there isn't ANY cheap labor to exploit anywhere.
__________________
I think you sincere and of good will. I also think you have not seen enough years, people or places. You speak in generalities. I could say "How do we make health care better" One might reply "improve it" or "we need technology" or "education is good"
If I asked you to design an airplane you might reply "improve on one, add technology, learning about airplanes are good." Ok, now put that on your blueprint and go. Well instead let's have the Democratic party build one. They can draft a 2k document with all the regs and legal language to build a plane. Take that and build one. Why not? Airplane design is far easier than that, in fact almost everything is. Manned Mars mission? Piece of cake. We have all the generalities lined up for that. Merely build a big rocket that flies really fast. Make the equipment so it doesn't break, and make sure the astronauts don't get sick. Done.
That's the approach in a relative sense given to health care reform, which we've had none of. You have come up with a funding mechanism, pronounced it good and that's it. The real issues I'd wager you can't define, and Congress doesn't have the time to learn the most basic things in order to ask the right questions, but a Faith that surpasseth all understanding replaces that which is needed, an atheistic apolitical understanding and solution. Never going to happen. "I have not seen so great a faith, no not in all Israel".
Unacceptable.
As far as labor goes, other markets will always be cheaper because they do not have the standard of living we do. If they had there would be no resources left. Consequently I believe a policy which encourages a return to an economy not so heavily supported by service industries are necessary are needed. A reform of mechanisms to increase board room accountability to a greater number of shareholders, who tend to live in this realm, not those of Romney or Soros or any other billionaire. Real and substantial tax cuts to those who return vital infrastructure to the US, like fabs. The same for companies who do not outsource. A stick for those who do so, coupled with accountability from the "peasant" stockholders would hold corporations more accountable. A system of tariffs which are based on the market as it changes, brought in gradually so not to completely throw off markets. In the meantime we end private exploitation of private lands for energy production. From this moment production is leased out to bidders on a cost plus fee basis, and ALL energy so produced is dumped into our market at that plus a percentage to create new energy sources which do not rely whatsoever on foreign nations. That technology is licensed domestically at no charge. It cannot be hidden by IP. I cannot be held hostage. Foreign nations we are favorably disposed to pay a fee. Other nations more. Any company who deals with a foreign nation or representitive shall be considered to have committed treason, with the maximum penalty as a result. If a Company is a person, then their boards shall be considered the head of that body, and if it's cut off so be it. Yes, rather draconian.
In this way we bring back jobs, eliminate dependence on foreign nations, become a leader in a very important field, hold corporations to a higher standard, force backwards elements in the ME who fund their terror to modernize their thinking. Their oil buys them neither prosperity nor power nor impunity. They must come forward and accept peaceful ways or starve. They will pick the latter, though not easily.
Where is your leader Democrat? Who is the one who speaks with such a plan, a scope of action? Who is the voice of those you consider so wise that they can embrace all that is required and is so wise that can plan without knowledge?
Show me him and his works.
Facebook
Twitter