Trump praises Australia's universal health care after Obamacare repeal

moe

Sophomore
May 29, 2001
32,565
152
63
(CNN)Hours after scoring a victory in the House to effectively kill Obamacare, US President Donald Trump praised Australia's universal health care system during a press conference with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull.
"It's going to be fantastic health care," Trump said, referring to his new health care plan. "I shouldn't say this to our great gentleman and my friend from Australia because you have better health care than we do."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/04/politics/trump-us-australia-health-care/index.html
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
I thought the highjacking of healthcare was SOCIALISM and unAmerican? I guess if Trump does it, nothing is wrong.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
I thought the highjacking of healthcare was SOCIALISM and unAmerican? I guess if Trump does it, nothing is wrong.

No one said that, (at least no one I've read on this board who's on the Right)

We still have concerns about this bill, and folks on the Right who distrusted Trump have their reasons especially when he makes comments like this.

Trump is not Conservative, and his lack of a philosophical core leads him to make these types of comments. A single payer health delivery system only looks good on paper.

There isn't a model out there among many that we'd be willing to say "works" or works better than free market choice.

We don't have that now, so that's why our system is screwed up too. Our solution is put patients and Healthcare providers in total charge of healthcare purchasing and delivery.

Government distorts that relationship, and cannot work as well as free individuals & service providers working in their own best interests.
 

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
I thought the highjacking of healthcare was SOCIALISM and unAmerican? I guess if Trump does it, nothing is wrong.

Who said that that path would be ok? I didn't even hear/read that Trump said it, only that their's is better than our's right now. Just because it's good for Australia doesn't make it good for us.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
Who said that that path would be ok? I didn't even hear/read that Trump said it, only that their's is better than our's right now. Just because it's good for Australia doesn't make it good for us.

There should be 3 overriding principles underpinning our Healthcare reforms

1) affordablity...drive out the costs that are driving up Health care..the more freedom you allow, the more you drive those costs down

2) portablity...force as much competition between health care providers as you can. Stop subsidizing costs, and mandating care, and allow consumers to make those choices and health care providers to meet them at market prices

3) scalbility (choice) Consumers should be trusted to select the types of health plans they need, want or desire. Everywhere else in a dynamic free market (automobiles, housing, food, clothing, entertainment) Consumers drive the choices and the prices of goods & services offered.

If service providers are not meeting market demands profitably, they have no customers and eventually go out of business.

People need health care, but most folks can't afford the care they need. Instead of not choosing the care they need, they either get subsidized for care they can't afford, or they get charged paying for care they don't need.

Flip that formula. Allow people to decide how much care they need, and allow health care providers the flexibility to design cost effective services to meet those needs. They have no incentive to lower their costs when care is mandated, and payments for it are subsidized by the Government.

Freedom of choice is a perfect equilibrium, driven by the free market that operates perfectly when it is allowed.
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
No one said that, (at least no one I've read on this board who's on the Right)

We still have concerns about this bill, and folks on the Right who distrusted Trump have their reasons especially when he makes comments like this.

Trump is not Conservative, and his lack of a philosophical core leads him to make these types of comments. A single payer health delivery system only looks good on paper.

There isn't a model out there among many that we'd be willing to say "works" or works better than free market choice.

We don't have that now, so that's why our system is screwed up too. Our solution is put patients and Healthcare providers in total charge of healthcare purchasing and delivery.

Government distorts that relationship, and cannot work as well as free individuals & service providers working in their own best interests.

Bottom line Health Care should NOT be for profit. Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief.
 

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
30,216
846
113
Bottom line Health Care should NOT be for profit. Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief.
LMAO.....You actually think doctors,nurses and anyone in the field should not profit from their expertise and work?
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
Bottom line Health Care should NOT be for profit. Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief.
This isn't the vision of most in America unfortunately. Healthcare is seen as a commodity like everything else. Resources and competition for resources is all everything is about for many Americans. Many people do not want to pay higher premiums or taxes for something they don't DIRECTLY benefit from themselves. Forget that there would be less disease in general, less likelihood that their children would be exposed to dangerous sicknesses, less major (uncovered) procedures being performed in major hospitals, less emergency room costs for hospitals, and a more knowledgeable public. It's all about money. The American way
 

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
Bottom line Health Care should NOT be for profit. Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief.

Well if you can apply that to healthcare, you can apply that to anything. Fire trucks and police cars shouldn't be for profit. Nor any government agency vehicle. Defense contractors shouldn't be for profit. Country's work for the feds shouldn't be for profit, he should do it for free. We should just all be wards of the state and take whatever they give us.
 

bornaneer

Senior
Jan 23, 2014
30,216
846
113
No one is saying that at all.
Yes he did. After the insurance companies are removed from the mix......those greedy millionaire surgeons and overpaid nurses would be next up, especially if they were GOPers..... thats the way this clown thinks. BTW.....I'm for a single payer system.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
Bottom line Health Care should NOT be for profit. Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief.

Why would you even need Insurance Bulya if "health care" is your objective? Insurance is for devastating or catastrophic financial loss, not getting your teeth cleaned or a gall bladder removed. You don't use your automobile insurance policy to get a tune up for your car or your brakes changed!

The reason relatively routine health care procedures cost so much is people are using their "insurance" to pay for normal health care maintenance. If it were a market driven health care delivery system, most routine services consumers need and desire could be paid for directly out of pocket and their "insurance" policies could be used to cover major expensive emergency care if needed.

The terms and the nature of health "care" delivery have been so distorted by big Government that no one understands what a true free market solution should look like or even what it is.

Your post to me with the same asinine statements you made in it are proof of that.

I bet you're "pro choice" yet you posted this:

"Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief"

So I gather you're all for cutting off taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood which is nothing more than subsidized "insurance" for killing innocent little Babies?
 

Boomboom521

Redshirt
Mar 14, 2014
20,115
6
0
Some people on here are just fvcking ideologically entrenched idiots, who have no clue what America is
 
Sep 6, 2013
27,594
120
0
Well if you can apply that to healthcare, you can apply that to anything. Fire trucks and police cars shouldn't be for profit. Nor any government agency vehicle.

 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
This isn't the vision of most in America unfortunately. Healthcare is seen as a commodity like everything else. Resources and competition for resources is all everything is about for many Americans. Many people do not want to pay higher premiums or taxes for something they don't DIRECTLY benefit from themselves. Forget that there would be less disease in general, less likelihood that their children would be exposed to dangerous sicknesses, less major (uncovered) procedures being performed in major hospitals, less emergency room costs for hospitals, and a more knowledgeable public. It's all about money. The American way

You don't work for free.
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
LMAO.....You actually think doctors,nurses and anyone in the field should not profit from their expertise and work?

You missed the point Leroy. You cut out the insurance company profits and their CEO's ridiculous pay packages and the Doctors and Nurses get a nice pay raise and the rest goes into lower costs of health care services. Win win for everyone except Big Insurance. Lastly you don't think Doctors and Nurses have had their incomes stunted by Insurance companies?
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
Why would you even need Insurance Bulya if "health care" is your objective? Insurance is for devastating or catastrophic financial loss, not getting your teeth cleaned or a gall bladder removed. You don't use your automobile insurance policy to get a tune up for your car or your brakes changed!

The reason relatively routine health care procedures cost so much is people are using their "insurance" to pay for normal health care maintenance. If it were a market driven health care delivery system, most routine services consumers need and desire could be paid for directly out of pocket and their "insurance" policies could be used to cover major expensive emergency care if needed.

The terms and the nature of health "care" delivery have been so distorted by big Government that no one understands what a true free market solution should look like or even what it is.

Your post to me with the same asinine statements you made in it are proof of that.

I bet you're "pro choice" yet you posted this:

"Human health is more important than profits for Big Insurance. They can continue to rape the public with home, life, auto rental, etc.. but not the human body. If you believe otherwise you should end up in Hell with that kind of disturbing belief"

So I gather you're all for cutting off taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood which is nothing more than subsidized "insurance" for killing innocent little Babies?

There you go with your right win nutsense. When they overturn Roe v Wade your point will have merit until then it still legal whether you or I believe in it. Planned Parenthood is 99% non-abortion services. Stupid question for you wouldn't it be easier to give free contraception to low income people than putting more children on WIC for 18 years?

Show some common sense for once.
 

TarHeelEer

Redshirt
Dec 15, 2002
89,286
37
48
You missed the point Leroy. You cut out the insurance company profits and their CEO's ridiculous pay packages and the Doctors and Nurses get a nice pay raise and the rest goes into lower costs of health care services. Win win for everyone except Big Insurance. Lastly you don't think Doctors and Nurses have had their incomes stunted by Insurance companies?

10 words: Government bureaucracy, a billion times worse.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
There you go with your right win nutsense. When they overturn Roe v Wade your point will have merit until then it still legal whether you or I believe in it. Planned Parenthood is 99% non-abortion services. Stupid question for you wouldn't it be easier to give free contraception to low income people than putting more children on WIC for 18 years?

Show some common sense for once.

We're already giving away the free contraception Bulya, and Planned Parenthood is 99% Abortion services. (see video link below exposing their scams and lies)

You're the one who equated Human Health as the ultimate priceless protection so I was simply asking if you are as consistent when it comes to Human Life itself?

So according to you there is no cost we should bear to keep people Healthy, but there is a price we can pay to kill them at their most innocent & healthy stages?

And you claim I lack common sense? I'm right wing "nutsense"?

OK, and I say you have your priorities confused.

(link to Planned Parenthood video)

http://assetsvideocmcigroup-29b4.kxcdn.com/videos/551/360.mp4

 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
For the Leftists on this board (and in this thread) please explain if you have automobile Insurance, why don't you use it to get a tune up, or an oil change, or your brakes repaired?

If you have homeowner's Insurance, why don't you use it to replace a busted water heater, or to remodel a room, or repair a busted garage door opener?

So, (to complete our analogy) if you have Health Insurance, why do you use it to pay for routine care like check ups, or appendix removal, or other simple routine minor procedures?

What is the purpose of your health Insurance and why is it so different from your car or home Insurance?

Feel free to justify your answer when it comes to routine care to maintain your "health".
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
We're already giving away the free contraception Bulya, and Planned Parenthood is 99% Abortion services. (see video link below exposing their scams and lies)

You're the one who equated Human Health as the ultimate priceless protection so I was simply asking if you are as consistent when it comes to Human Life itself?

So according to you there is no cost we should bear to keep people Healthy, but there is a price we can pay to kill them at their most innocent & healthy stages?

And you claim I lack common sense? I'm right wing "nutsense"?

OK, and I say you have your priorities confused.

(link to Planned Parenthood video)

http://assetsvideocmcigroup-29b4.kxcdn.com/videos/551/360.mp4



First of all I didn't say where I stand on abortion I said it is a small part of planned parenthood you believe what you want but I will NEVER believe something posted on the Internet and especially THIS message board. I am a 100% believer though in civil liberties and what you do is your business and what I do is my business as long as neither can cause direct harm to the other by our actions.

Pretty simple
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
10 words: Government bureaucracy, a billion times worse.

Somehow the government spends $650 Billion a year on defense and keeps us safe. It would be considerably less to run a healthcare program but will never happen until term limits. Big Insurance and Big Pharma OWN Capital Hill.
 

WVU82_rivals

Senior
May 29, 2001
199,095
686
0
Trump says Australia's health care beats the U.S.'s: He's right

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-says-australias-health-care-beats-the-us-hes-right/

Just hours after House Republicans moved forward with their new health plan, President Donald Trump took a moment to praise a completely different health-care system. Australia, he said, has "better health care than we do."

Mr. Trump's assessment of Australia's health-care system came as he also promised the American Health Care Act (ACHA) would be "fantastic health care." Republicans in the House on Thursday voted to repeal the Affordable Care Act andreplace it with the ACHA. The president's statements beg two questions: just how does Australia's health-care system compare to the current U.S. system, and will the ACHA help raise U.S. standards?

By many measures, Australia's health-care system provides better outcomes at a lower cost than the U.S. system, according to data tracked by the Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker. Australia's government provides free or subsidized health care for Australian citizens as well as those with permanent visas, providing what's considered universal health care. In the U.S., about one in 10 residents lacks health insurance, according to the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

The U.S. has the lowest life expectancy and the highest disease burden among comparable developed countries, including Australia, the Peterson-Kaiser Health System Tracker notes. The U.S. spends about $8,745 per capita on health care costs, compared with less than half that -- $3,997 per person -- in Australia.

"The U.S. has the highest disease burden rate among comparable countries," said Cynthia Cox, an associate director for health policy and economics research at the Kaiser Foundations. "That's a sign the health-care system is working better in Australia than the U.S."

To be sure, the statistics on Americans' shorter life spans and higher rates of disease could be tied to behaviors or other issues, such as pollution or income inequality. America's high level of income inequality is tied to stark disparities in lifespans between the rich and poor, with researchers finding that the richest 1 percent of U.S. men now live14.6 years longerthan the bottom 1 percent.

A majority of Americans believe the federal government has a responsibility to ensure health-care coverage, according to a January poll from Pew Research Center. The Affordable Care Act, which is now in jeopardy, was the closest the country has ever gotten to universal health care, Cox said.

"If anything, we would be going back to the way things were before the Affordable Care Act" if the ACHA becomes law, Cox said.

Australia pays for its health-care plan by taxing its residents between 2 percent to 3.5 percent of their income. Almost six out of 10 adult Australians also carry private health insurance, which covers treatment that's not included in the public insurance, such as dental care, while also providing more options for hospital choice and doctors.

In a 2014 Commonwealth Fund study of health care in 11 countries including Australia and the U.S., the U.S. ranked last. American also ranked last in 2010, 2007, 2006 and 2004. Australia was No. 4, while the top-rated healthcare system was in the U.K.

Boosters of America's health-care system sometimes point to the longer wait times for treatment that some patients can encounter in countries with universal health-care plans. About three-quarters of Americans are able to see a specialist within four weeks, compared with 80 percent of U.K. residents. About 51 percent of Australians are able to see a specialist within four weeks.

The ACHA may lead to lower health-care spending, but not because the law would make the American system more efficient. The Congressional Budget Office examined the original version of the House bill, but hasn't yet analyzed the version just passed. It estimated that 24 million Americans would be without health coverage a decade after the ACA's repeal.

"A large part of it would be fewer people are insured, so they don't have access to health care and aren't spending a lot on health care," Cox noted. "Health outcomes is a bigger question that would take a longer time to see."
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
Yes he did. After the insurance companies are removed from the mix......those greedy millionaire surgeons and overpaid nurses would be next up, especially if they were GOPers..... thats the way this clown thinks. BTW.....I'm for a single payer system.

Help me connect these dots I'm a clown and you are for single payer? Did I miss something? Love single payer insurance companies are out. Doctors and nurses should be paid as much as they can get I never said otherwise.
 

WVU82_rivals

Senior
May 29, 2001
199,095
686
0
Sanders: 'Trump is right' on Australian healthcare system

http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/332223-sanders-trump-is-right-on-australian-healthcare-system

Sen.Bernie Sanders 'Trump is right' on Australian healthcare system (I-Vt.) said Saturday that President Trump "is right" to praise Australia's healthcare system compared to the United States.

"President Trump is right," Sanders tweeted. "The Australian health care system provides health care to all of its people at a fraction of the cost than we do."

The Vermont senator shared a video along with the tweet, which begins with a clip of Sanders suggesting that when the healthcare bill gets to the Senate, "We should start off with looking at the Australian health care system."


The video then shows a clip of Trump from Thursday saying that Australia has a better healthcare system than the U.S.

Trump made the comments during a meeting with Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. The White House said Friday that Trump was merely "complimenting" the Australian leader, but Trumpdefended his comment in a tweet later Friday, asserting that "everybody" has better healthcare than the U.S.

"And President Trump is right," read text in Sanders' video. "In Australia, everyone is guaranteed healthcare as a right, not a privilege."

In the video, the Independent senator touted the Australian healthcare system over the healthcare system in the U.S.

Australia’s system consists of both a private market and a government-run option. Conservatives in the U.S. have long pushed back against moving to a universal healthcare system.

"While the U.S. has the most expensive & ineffective healthcare system in the world, Australia ranks 6 out of 55 in efficiency," read text in the video.

At the end of the video, Sanders was seen saying: "Well, Mr. President, you're right."

Sanderspreviously seizedon the president's compliments of Australia's universal healthcare system, saying Democrats will remind the president of the comments from the Senate floor.

The House this week narrowly passed legislation aimed at repealing and replacing ObamaCare, sending the bill to the Senate.
 
Last edited:

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
First of all I didn't say where I stand on abortion I said it is a small part of planned parenthood you believe what you want but I will NEVER believe something posted on the Internet and especially THIS message board. I am a 100% believer though in civil liberties and what you do is your business and what I do is my business as long as neither can cause direct harm to the other by our actions.

Pretty simple


I agree with you Bulya about our civil liberties and actually never suggested otherwise. I also agree it is always best to verify whatever claims are made on this message board. However, I simply asked if your expressed stance on the supremacy of human health over Insurance company profits translated into the same desire for protection of human life itself at taxpayer expense?

It's OK if you don't want to answer that question for me, and if you can justify an answer to yourself where human life is less important than health, have at it.

I don't think like that, but for the record you're the one who called my thinking "nutsense"

I do have one final question for you though Bulya. If Planned Parenthood is not all about abortions as you claim, can you cite for me some statistics on how often they actually recommend "planning for Parenthood" due to unexpected or unwanted pregnancies?

Which do they stress more, termination of a growing unborn child in the uterus or planning for Parenthood in the event of unexpected pregnancies?

Back up your own claim posted on this message board Bulya that abortion is only a small 1% fraction of Planned Parenthood's otherwise 99% mission.

You too are equally free to justify what you say as easily as you dismiss what you either don't like or don't agree with.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
Somehow the government spends $650 Billion a year on defense and keeps us safe. It would be considerably less to run a healthcare program but will never happen until term limits. Big Insurance and Big Pharma OWN Capital Hill

This is actually true because they have portions of the private insurance market set aside for them with no competition (which is why we can't buy Insurance across State lines) and they have certain services they offer mandated by the Government. For instance under the ACA, you had to buy specific insurance products regardless of your need for them or ability to pay for them.

So I agree, we need Government mandates and restrictions and directives and set asides on Insurance companies removed. We need a true free market where patients and providers dictate what is offered or purchased, and we need fierce competition for health care delivery services that will drive costs down and quality of care up.
 
Last edited:

PriddyBoy

Junior
May 29, 2001
17,174
282
0
There you go with your right win nutsense. When they overturn Roe v Wade your point will have merit until then it still legal whether you or I believe in it. Planned Parenthood is 99% non-abortion services. Stupid question for you wouldn't it be easier to give free contraception to low income people than putting more children on WIC for 18 years?

Show some common sense for once.
Planned Parenthood gave 38 Million to the Clinton campaign.
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
Planned Parenthood gave 38 Million to the Clinton campaign.

LOL! Hillary's biggest contributors for the 2016 election were:

Paloma Partners $21 Million
Priztger Group $16 Million
Renaissance Technologies $14 Million
Saban Capital Group $12 Million
Newsweb Corp $11 Million
Soros Capital $10 Million

I could not find Planned Parenthood on the donation list if they did anything they were WAY below $1 Million which is where the list started.

As a side note overturn Citizen's United and it will fix part of this problem. Corporations ARE NOT people contrary to the late Anton Scalia's idiot belief.
 

Bulya

Senior
May 29, 2001
10,579
471
0
I agree with you Bulya about our civil liberties and actually never suggested otherwise. I also agree it is always best to verify whatever claims are made on this message board. However, I simply asked if your expressed stance on the supremacy of human health over Insurance company profits translated into the same desire for protection of human life itself at taxpayer expense?

It's OK if you don't want to answer that question for me, and if you can justify an answer to yourself where human life is less important than health, have at it.

I don't think like that, but for the record you're the one who called my thinking "nutsense"

I do have one final question for you though Bulya. If Planned Parenthood is not all about abortions as you claim, can you cite for me some statistics on how often they actually recommend "planning for Parenthood" due to unexpected or unwanted pregnancies?

Which do they stress more, termination of a growing unborn child in the uterus or planning for Parenthood in the event of unexpected pregnancies?

Back up your own claim posted on this message board Bulya that abortion is only a small 1% fraction of Planned Parenthood's otherwise 99% mission.

You too are equally free to justify what you say as easily as you dismiss what you either don't like or don't agree with.

I was wrong it is 3% for abortion services not 1%. I made this up myself so you know it is accurate.

 

MountaineerWV

Sophomore
Sep 18, 2007
26,324
191
0
For the Leftists on this board (and in this thread) please explain if you have automobile Insurance, why don't you use it to get a tune up, or an oil change, or your brakes repaired?

If you have homeowner's Insurance, why don't you use it to replace a busted water heater, or to remodel a room, or repair a busted garage door opener?

So, (to complete our analogy) if you have Health Insurance, why do you use it to pay for routine care like check ups, or appendix removal, or other simple routine minor procedures?

What is the purpose of your health Insurance and why is it so different from your car or home Insurance?

Feel free to justify your answer when it comes to routine care to maintain your "health".

Funny you used those as your examples......[laughing][laughing][laughing].......because those two are MANDATED (if you owe on your automobile or have a mortgage). And you all ***** that people under Obama Care were being forced to pay for insurance.....

Secondly, depending on a person's home insurance, a ruptured pipe or busted water heater and the damage it creates can be covered under the home insurance plan......just saying.

I bought a new car not too long ago. Got free oil changes and checkups for 2 years. Wonder why? Perhaps because they wanted to do the preventative work to ensure that the car doesn't have a problem and they will be on the line to replace it? Perhaps.

And finally, you think that people paying for checkups (Doctor's visit for a routine checkup would cost between $200-500.....been there, done that) or a small procedure (you used appendix removal....costing between $10,000-$20,000.....been there, done that) is something that the regular Americans can "afford" to pay for? You have lost your mind........[thumbsup]
 

dave

Senior
May 29, 2001
60,573
756
113
Before peope go too crazy about Australia and Canad they need to realize that Aussie is about 25 million people and I think Canada is about 35 million.
 

atlkvb

All-Conference
Jul 9, 2004
80,033
1,974
113
Funny you used those as your examples......[laughing][laughing][laughing].......because those two are MANDATED (if you owe on your automobile or have a mortgage). And you all ***** that people under Obama Care were being forced to pay for insurance.....

Secondly, depending on a person's home insurance, a ruptured pipe or busted water heater and the damage it creates can be covered under the home insurance plan......just saying.

I bought a new car not too long ago. Got free oil changes and checkups for 2 years. Wonder why? Perhaps because they wanted to do the preventative work to ensure that the car doesn't have a problem and they will be on the line to replace it? Perhaps.

And finally, you think that people paying for checkups (Doctor's visit for a routine checkup would cost between $200-500.....been there, done that) or a small procedure (you used appendix removal....costing between $10,000-$20,000.....been there, done that) is something that the regular Americans can "afford" to pay for? You have lost your mind........[thumbsup]

Good points! So let's address that one by one since we're talking about Insurance costs vs care.

You are correct, homeowner's and automobile insurance are indeed mandated by the government but in order to protect who?

Not you if you owe money on either asset. It is there to protect the lenders (lien holders) who hold the notes on your property that you are paying them interest on borrowed funds to own.

They are protecting themselves against loss, or at least recovery of their asset if you either default on their loan to you or you destroy their property.

If you build your own home, you are not "required" to hold a homeowner's insurance policy unless you want to protect yourself from sudden catastrophic loss. The bottom line is there are many choices among insurers to buy the exact coverage homeowner's need, and competition drives those prices down while maintaining quality policies at affordable prices despite the mandates to protect lien holders in most cases.

Much the same scenario in automobile Insurance. I own an older vehicle. I am required to carry basic liability on it but not to protect myself comprehensively from it's loss unless I choose to. (It's worth roughly 1500.00) but I do carry enough liability coverage to protect myself against the damage I may cause to someone else's asset should I damage their property.

I would be financially responsible for replacing their damages and my automobile insurance would then be used for that purpose, however if I destroy that 2000 Nissan Sentra, my insurance policy would not replace my loss.

That is why my premium from Traveler's Insurance purchased through Triple AAA only costs me less than 100.00 a month. I essentially carry only the insurance I need to replace my loss, and I found a policy that I can afford that fits the exact type of coverage I need, yet maintains my mandate under the law to have my vehicle insured.

I had choices in the free market to select my insurance coverage, and many other low cost options to choose from.

I pay out of pocket for my routine maintenance on that vehicle, and I do not use my auto insurance to maintain the vehicle, or pay for repair needed on it.

Health insurance should be made available in the same fashion, because essentially it is to offset sudden or long term high expenses maintaining your health, or treating you if you are ill or injured.

Not everyone needs the same type of coverage, and not everyone desires to pay for what someone else needs in order to be covered. Flexibility is the key here in both providing coverage, and factoring in costs to policyholders.Under a free market where consumers are driving options for costs and coverage, a routine operation for a gall bladder would not cost 10,000. Why? Because no one could afford it, or there wouldn't be a policy available to pay for that unless an underwriter decided it was a profitable part of a policy to offer.

Health care providers responding to market demand for individual services can tailor their offerings to collect those dollars consumers are both willing and able to pay without insurance, and can afford using their specific policy coverages if needed.

When consumers make those decisions rather than the Government, both costs for providing coverage and quality care go down.

The key is competition, and freedom of choice in a free market as it is in homeowner's and automobile insurance.