Study suggests that people have few problems interacting and associating with people who differ from them on issues but attach a political label to the other person that is different from the one you identify with then there are problems.

Donald Trump managed to flip a party from support of free trade to opposition to it by merely taking the opposite side of the issue. Democrats, meanwhile, mocked Mitt Romney in 2012 for calling Russia the greatest geopolitical adversary of the United States, but now have flipped and see Russia as exactly that. Regarding health care, the structure of the Affordable Care Act was initially devised by the conservative Heritage Foundation and implemented in Massachusetts as “Romneycare.” Once it became Obamacare, the Republican team leaders deemed it bad, and thus it became bad.

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/03/poli...epublican/

(04-04-2018 12:21 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Study suggests that people have few problems interacting and associating with people who differ from them on issues but attach a political label to the other person that is different from the one you identify with then there are problems.
Donald Trump managed to flip a party from support of free trade to opposition to it by merely taking the opposite side of the issue. Democrats, meanwhile, mocked Mitt Romney in 2012 for calling Russia the greatest geopolitical adversary of the United States, but now have flipped and see Russia as exactly that. Regarding health care, the structure of the Affordable Care Act was initially devised by the conservative Heritage Foundation and implemented in Massachusetts as “Romneycare.” Once it became Obamacare, the Republican team leaders deemed it bad, and thus it became bad.
https://theintercept.com/2018/04/03/poli...epublican/

I've noted this phenomenon several times.

I do take issue with the Obamacare comments. The Heritage proposal was a loose adaptation of Bismarck principles. I would kinda sorta go along as far as the idea that Romneycare borrowed some ideas from the Heritage, but Romneycare was a product of compromise between a heavily democrat legislature and republican Romney. And Obamacare may ave retained some words (exchanges, mandates) from earlier proposals, but not with the same meanings, and is not really the same concept. Obamacare could be turned into a Bismarck system, but right now it isn't. It leaves millions uninsured. It ratchets up the price of health insurance to unaffordable levels for millions. It contains far more layers of government bureaucracy, and imposes additional ones, on our health care system than any Bismarck system. It excludes or prohibits several elements that were essential to republicans. The Heritage proposal was a 4-page pamphlet, Romneycare was a 100-page bill, Obamacare was a 2000-page bill. Those are not the same.

(04-04-2018 09:01 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-04-2018 12:21 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  Study suggests that people have few problems interacting and associating with people who differ from them on issues but attach a political label to the other person that is different from the one you identify with then there are problems.
Donald Trump managed to flip a party from support of free trade to opposition to it by merely taking the opposite side of the issue. Democrats, meanwhile, mocked Mitt Romney in 2012 for calling Russia the greatest geopolitical adversary of the United States, but now have flipped and see Russia as exactly that. Regarding health care, the structure of the Affordable Care Act was initially devised by the conservative Heritage Foundation and implemented in Massachusetts as “Romneycare.” Once it became Obamacare, the Republican team leaders deemed it bad, and thus it became bad.
https://theintercept.com/2018/04/03/poli...epublican/

I've noted this phenomenon several times.

I do take issue with the Obamacare comments. The Heritage proposal was a loose adaptation of Bismarck principles. I would kinda sorta go along as far as the idea that Romneycare borrowed some ideas from the Heritage, but Romneycare was a product of compromise between a heavily democrat legislature and republican Romney. And Obamacare may ave retained some words (exchanges, mandates) from earlier proposals, but not with the same meanings, and is not really the same concept. Obamacare could be turned into a Bismarck system, but right now it isn't. It leaves millions uninsured. It ratchets up the price of health insurance to unaffordable levels for millions. It contains far more layers of government bureaucracy, and imposes additional ones, on our health care system than any Bismarck system. It excludes or prohibits several elements that were essential to republicans. The Heritage proposal was a 4-page pamphlet, Romneycare was a 100-page bill, Obamacare was a 2000-page bill. Those are not the same.

Agree. Borrows some ideas but the result was a mess designed to insure price controls wouldn't impact the doctors, hospitals, drug companies or medical equipment providers.

Nixon had a plan closer to Romney that Ted Kennedy killed believing that he could get single payer after the 1976 elections.

The interesting thing to me about the Bismark model was he had a newly united nation and saw that as an essential feature to bring the disparate regions together.

A Bismark model would feature
Tight regulation of insurance. We have 51 regulators of insurance that vary widely (52 if you count Puerto Rico)
Claims paid without challenge. Uh. HAHAHAHA. Just shelled out $85 for a prescription because the insurer wanted a pre-approval on the renewal of an expired prescription. Also had to go to war over a night stay after wife had spinal surgery.
No exclusion for pre-existing conditions. Finally have that. Basically only positive achievement of ACA.
Prices for most procedures fixed by the state. Only fixed for Medicare and Medicaid.
•Private hospitals and physician practices

(04-04-2018 12:07 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Claims paid without challenge.

I'm triggered pretty badly by this. Everybody I've ever had or the family has ever had, which is a BROAD swath including CIGNA, AETNA, BCBS, and United has been ticky tack and denial over random crap.

(04-04-2018 08:00 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(04-04-2018 12:07 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  Claims paid without challenge.

I'm triggered pretty badly by this. Everybody I've ever had or the family has ever had, which is a BROAD swath including CIGNA, AETNA, BCBS, and United has been ticky tack and denial over random crap.

United especially.

Its fraud. But its a common practice in other branches of insurance, such as fraud insurance. You almost have to hire an attorney to get them to pay a fraud claim. It seems to be heading into consumer insurance. We need to start throwing insurance execs into jail.