As you know, prior to Obamacare, rates were escalating greatly, people were denied coverage for pre-existing conditions, children were denied care, insured could be kicked off if they reached their limit, and health care costs was one of the main reasons for bankruptcy and foreclosures.
Obamacare has had some tremendous problems in its roll out, though, and has come under a lot of criticism even as it addressed these problems.
Let’s now look at what the Republicans are offering as an alternative.
Oh. Right.
Part of the problem with the liberal-leftist mindset is that they keep thinking the answer to some problem is a program to address that problem. Thus, the knee-jerk reaction of “What’s your alternative solution?”.
Frequently, the proper method of addressing a problem (especially an economic one) is to get out of the way, and allow the people (producers and consumers) to come up with their own set of solutions.
Of course (OF COURSE), the U.S. health care mess was (and is) NOT a situation where the government can simply “do nothing”, or more to the point, “change nothing”: the institutional blocks against either doing without a coverage plan (provision of services is prohibitively expensive) or choosing a plan from an entire marketplace full of ever-evolving plans (the majority, if not all, of health care coverage plans were sold to employers, not consumers) were not going to allow anything resembling free motion.
But this brings us back around to the “Republican Alternative”: entrench the old way for greater profits for “insurance” companies by protecting them from doing their jobs. _This_ is how we got into this mess.
LikeLike
Not sure what you’re saying here. We should have let the market solve the problem? It clearly hadn’t for decades.
LikeLike
There’s a line from “The American President” that, if I remember correctly, is something like:
“They’re not interested in telling you how to fix things. They are only good at telling you two things – what to be afraid of and who is to blame.”
LikeLike