In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On February 08 2017 11:55 biology]major wrote: This debate in the absence of any political reward is so much more chill and they are actually agreeing on things. I think Cruz is much better than Sanders at debating, he is more articulate, has stats, and is thorough and convincing. Sanders is very genuine though so that helps his overall charisma. Gonna have to say Lyin ted is winning though by my super objective standards!
Oh my friend, there is so much political reward going on.
Sanders wants to pull the dems left and needs to keep his base on his side (needs the face time/seen fighting for the people)
Cruz needs back in GOP good graces (after the whole thing at the convention)... maybe just get points with the hardcore republicans instead of the GOP
Cruz is a better debater/ was smart enough to bring stats Bernie just does this crap where he says rich people boogie man all the time (true or not)
Can someone explain to me how buying insurance across state lines would make it cheaper? How would me buying an insurance plan in a different state help me?
On February 08 2017 12:09 IyMoon wrote: Can someone explain to me how buying insurance across state lines would make it cheaper? How would me buying an insurance plan in a different state help me?
Inter-state markets would honestly be extremely useful for low population states like Alaska. However, I vaguely recall something like there are some constitutionality issues that are the reason why it wasn't part of the initial plan.
Also, ew, that samson/delilah incest joke by cruz.
Why are there even state barriers to begin with? In what way does insurance benefit from being localized or confined to certain areas? Its not like there is some kinda transportation component.
On February 08 2017 12:09 IyMoon wrote: Can someone explain to me how buying insurance across state lines would make it cheaper? How would me buying an insurance plan in a different state help me?
breaks state level monopoly
But don't states have competition within them? I mean I don't see how opening up my care to a company in another state is going to bring me down. Won't the price for my care be the same? Meaning itll cost the insurance company around the same? And then they charge the same?
On February 08 2017 12:14 Mohdoo wrote: Why are there even state barriers to begin with? In what way does insurance benefit from being localized or confined to certain areas? Its not like there is some kinda transportation component.
This claims that the issue is that health insurance companies would have to set up networks of doctors on a local level, and none want to go to that effort (they point to the states that have legalized this having 0 takers). I'm not entirely swayed by the argument, though.
When I started watching I thought, you know Cruz is actually doing pretty well.
Then Bernie started talking and he's a lot more convincing here.
Their tasks aren't exactly equal, it's much easier to defend single payer than it is to defend the american health care system. Bernie has sounded at his weakest when he was defending Obamacare directly. His heart didn't really seem in it (it was mostly "it was worse before it", which while true, is not a great argument).
On February 08 2017 12:14 Mohdoo wrote: Why are there even state barriers to begin with? In what way does insurance benefit from being localized or confined to certain areas? Its not like there is some kinda transportation component.
I'm not that familiar with it. there are a fair number of legal issues though, each state has its own rules and regulations about what insurance has to do and cover, and some details differ in the laws on the practice of medicine between states. and of course insurance often has to make deals with all the local hospitals and other providers, so you really gotta know who's who and what's what locally to do that well.
some systems that try to force the breaking of state barriers would bypass those rules, forcing states to accept other states laws on the matter. not sure at all about the system they're discussing here.
On February 08 2017 12:09 IyMoon wrote: Can someone explain to me how buying insurance across state lines would make it cheaper? How would me buying an insurance plan in a different state help me?
breaks state level monopoly
But don't states have competition within them? I mean I don't see how opening up my care to a company in another state is going to bring me down. Won't the price for my care be the same? Meaning itll cost the insurance company around the same? And then they charge the same?
well for much of the country, especially low density places, insurances have local monopoly, including the local provider network.
basically obamacare's premise was never to change the power structure of the healthcare market and that's how it will fail in the end. had hrc been elected there would be the possibility of pushing it further, but right now lol.
anyway the aca is also a decent tax raise on wealthy people, mainly for the benefit of the very poor.
On February 08 2017 12:14 Mohdoo wrote: Why are there even state barriers to begin with? In what way does insurance benefit from being localized or confined to certain areas? Its not like there is some kinda transportation component.
This claims that the issue is that health insurance companies would have to set up networks of doctors on a local level, and none want to go to that effort (they point to the states that have legalized this having 0 takers). I'm not entirely swayed by the argument, though.
When I started watching I thought, you know Cruz is actually doing pretty well.
Then Bernie started talking and he's a lot more convincing here.
Their tasks aren't exactly equal, it's much easier to defend single payer than it is to defend the american health care system. Bernie has sounded at his weakest when he was defending Obamacare directly. His heart didn't really seem in it (it was mostly "it was worse before it", which while true, is not a great argument).
So true. Very easy to defend "health care is a human right" in a town hall type setting. It's what people want to hear. Every question Cruz gets along the lines of "what will happen to me once obamacare is gone, will I still get coverage for contraceptives etc etc" is so much harder to defend and Cruz is going through some olympic level verbal gymanstics to ultimately say "tough luck".
Sanders' heart is in the right place with regards to single payer, but he's out of his depth when it comes to the details of the ACA, providing Cruz with the opportunity to mislead the audience on its costs and disadvantages. If Anthony Weiner had never joined twitter, he'd be wrecking Cruz right now.
The ACA is a failure because it doesn't recognize the fundamental flaw with all of these systems: They are a tradeoff between cost, coverage, and innovation. You only get 2. A real free market would have bad coverage, but low cost and high innovation. The traditional single payer model sacrifices innovation (and basically free-rides on the American market for it). The American system has paid a very high cost for decent coverage and decent innovation.
He's gonna be extremely disappointed when the economist he asks doesn't give him a straight answer (as in, no competent economist should ever answer that with a straight up "weak" or "strong").
If he actually asks, of course. And if this tidbit is actually true
EPT
