Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

"conservative" Republicans Put your money where your mouth is.


osusev

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

A first party purchase is when you buy something that you will consume with your money. You're very concerned about cost and price.

 

A second party purchase is when you buy something that you will either a) consume, but its not your money - so you're still concerned about quality, but not so much the cost, or b ) its your money, but you won't consume it - so you're concerned about the price, but not so much the quality.

 

A third party purchase is when someone buys something that they won't consume and with money that isn't theirs. They have virtually no concern about price or quality.

 

By definition all government purchases are third party purchases. That's the way government works. In a free society where people are allowed to freely purchase things with their dollars, they will always use their own money to the maximum benefit.

 

When the government comes in and says: You must use this government healthcare plan for the elderly, they have lost their freedom to choose a competitive healthcare system because the government prohibits a private system from being started up to compete. Since the government neither uses that Medicare healthplan, nor pays for it themselves (see: tax dollars), they care very little about the quality of medicare or how much it costs.

 

If the government would get OUT of healthcare and allow the free market entrepeneurs to compete, literally within weeks, we'd see valid, viable, legitimate companies spring up offering affordable health insurance to the elderly, and to low income families, etc., and the social program would be obsolete.

 

If the government is allowed to take over the healthcare system, like Obama would like to do, we'll have all the great people from the DMV and the Post Office running our hospitals that's out of supplies and we'll find ourselves being turned down for medical treatment because we're too old/young/fat/ugly/wrong race/etc.

 

If you learn nothing else: Government control = BAD, Freedom = GOOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just figured as an older self-employed guy you must be paying through the roof, or not have any coverage at all. Just think what you'd be paying if you'd let that policy lapse and then tried to get back in the individual market with a pre-existing condition.

 

I have a hard time imagining that the public plan, should there be one, won't be a better option for you. I would think it'd be cheaper than $650 a month and cover more. But who knows what will emerge from all of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bigger question Steve is,

As a society should we keep paying for the uninsured to go to the emergency room for their sniffles or should we get them on some sort of healthcare that costs all of us less? Dan

*************************************

 

I pretty much agree with you, Dan. It just amazes me, though...

 

 

why not JUST have a gov plan for the uninsured? Why all this dramatic expansion of gov control, and

 

 

regs to put private med insurance out of business? When even Ted Kennedy admitted there will be rationing,

 

 

who supports rationing?

 

 

I keep saying, just FIX the PROBLEMS, and I'm on board. GET THE UNINSURED HEALTH CARE. Just

 

stay the hell out of the rest of America's lives in that regard.

 

 

But a whole new GOV system, to REPLACE what we have now? That isn't just fixing the problem.

 

 

Sounds to me, like using imperfections in our med system and uninsured Americans, to warrant a gov

 

 

takeover of a sizeable portion of this entire country, including all citizens in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and, DAYUM, Steve, you pay that much for health insurance?

 

That is crazy, a gov program should be available to you for that.

 

I'm just talking about FIXING problems, and leaving legacies, political power,

 

ideological agendas out of it.

 

Just get a gov program that makes inexpensive, solid med insurance coverage available.

 

That's all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heck: "

I have a hard time imagining that the public plan, should there be one, won't be a better option for you. I would think it'd be cheaper than $650 a month and cover more. But who knows what will emerge from all of this. "

 

I bet we'd both be appalled if that wasn't the case.

The public option would likely have a huge pool and no need to show a profit.

 

And if it was a better deal than mine I'd take it gladly.

Personally I think a lot of the dire threats raised by the protestors are already happening.

 

But:

 

 

Here's where some of my cynicism comes in.

 

I've heard from the presidents supporters that the public option is expendable and so it seems likely to be a pawn in the game to get a bill to sign.

 

There are a lot of ideas that would make this bill a good compromise (IMO) but I have yet to see a real willingness to work together. From either side.

 

But for years one party or the other has used the excuse (for any failed attempt of something or other) that they didn't have the numbers to stop a filibuster.

Now......

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...