Do Conservatives only hate the healthcare mandate because they didn't propose it?

Full laissez-faire is the absolute worst thing that can happen. Especially since big business is the primary reason our agricultural sector died in the mid to late 19th century. Mixed Economy > Full Capitalism

 

Yes they have - it's just been playfully re-labeled "Obamacare".

 

One question though ... forgive my ignorance here, but:

What is it exactly that prevents a sitting Democratic president from simply establishing a for-profit federal health insurance agency/organization by executive order? I know the obvious constraint would be getting congress to fund it, but if executed well enough (and treated like a startup of sorts), wouldn't there be a way to make it work?

Republicans keep shouting this mantra about how the government is always horribly inefficient and unable to run things better than the private sector, which flies in the face of a reality in which our private insurers spend more than 30% of premiums on administrative costs and yet healthcare costs continue to skyrocket indefinitely. A little public sector competition wouldn't hurt, no? It works for UPS and FedEx. And nobody would be able to piss and moan about how it is impinging on their freedoms.

 

Apparently, they can make sure I purchase financially-crippling wars that in the end make me look like an a-hole when talking to people of other countries. They can also make sure I purchase the ability to ensure old, retired people get such awesome health care for free. And yes, both of these things are for no reason other than the fact that I am alive and an American.

 

The uproar would be enormous. People call Obama a communist for trying to push it through Congress, imagine how they would react if he did it without congressional approval?

 

Absolutely.

Conservatives are nothing if not hypocrites.

 

This is the biggest red herring in the universe, and frankly kind of embarrassing for a professional economist to make this argument. Giving people a tax "credit", which means not charging them a certain tax, vs. charging them a certain tax, only differs in terms of semantics, insofar as ceteris paribas, the economic effect is identical.

Saying "I'll charge you $5 for not having health insurance, but give you a $5 credit if you have it" is the same as saying "I'll charge you $5 for not having health isurance, but nothing if you have it." - the former only adds more administrative costs on top (arguably).

And if you want to add in some behavioral econ on top of this, the latter approach is arguably *more* likely to result in universal participation (the ultimate goal of Hertage/Dolecare, Romneycare, Obamacare) since people tend to be more loss-averse than they are tax-credit friendly.

 

"There’s a reason every major industrialized country has national health care."

Yes there is because every other industrialized country has long come to the common sense conclusion that health insurance doesn't work because it doesn't follow the rules that makes insurance as a concept work. Problem is the black helicopter conspiracy theorists in this country are somehow missing this point.

I present exhibit A below:

 

They would hate Ronald Reagan were he running for President today.

 

Actually this is their healthcare proposal from the 90's

 

Let me attempt to scream to you lefties one more time:

OBAMACARE IS NOT ABOUT HEALTHCARE!

BTW- nobody is disputing the fact that out current system needs to improve so that it is available and affordable to everyone WHO WANTS IT !!!

 

So you are saying if they don't want it now they can join later when they get sick?

They should just make it so that if you don't want to pay, you cannot use emergency rooms if you get sick and you cannot afford it. You will not be able to join back in if you have preexisting conditions later in life.

 

Thank you for making my point. This is what I want, an honest debate and discussion about our healthcare. You put everything out on the table, make it simple with the least government involved, we all know anytime government is running something, they run it into the ground.

 

is this a law or something?

 

The biggest problem with health care is the out of control cost. Why is it out of control? Because everyone want to get paid. The doctors, the hospitals, the insurance companies, the drug and medical equipment makers. If you want to cut cost. These powerful groups will get hurt, and that is not going to happen in the US today, it is as simple as that.

 

LOL! Yes it is comrade.

 

I agree with you that costs are out of control, the patient often has no idea how much he/she is paying for a procedure or product under their insurance plan.

 

So how do you suggest we cut the cost, it will hurt the people who are making the money, there is no way around that. We only have this Obama care because no one on either party is willing to stand up to these powerful interest groups.

I am guessing this problem will not get solved until health care cost get beyond 30-40% of the GDP.

 

I'm a healthcare practitioner, my peers and I talk amongst ourselves all the time, this is not a simple problem to solve. One thing is crystal clear and we are in complete agreement: WE DO NOT WANT GOVERNMENT RUN HEALTHCARE!

 

Health care reform isn't govt. run healthcare. If you don't get that, you don't understand the HCR bill.