I think 20 of the better thinkers from this site could design and fund a healthcare plan in a week

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

I really do. The major difference between us and Congress would be that we would have no underlying motive to maintain the status quo as a cash cow for campaign funds, letting that become the overriding concern that all current plans contort to allow (excluding the "off the table" single payer option).

[mmonk]

1. A truth based post.

Thank you.

[Mythsaje]

2. Probably right...

Particularly since that same group probably could've relieved NOLA in a matter of a few hours.

[hobbit709]

3. 20 of the better thinkers here

could come up with a better anything than congress does.

[el_bryanto]

4. Who gets to pick the better thinkers?

But other than that tricky question, you're probably right.

Bryant

[Orrex]

6. Ask everybody how to do it, and pick the 20 who give the best answer.

[Oregone]

14. I do, and I also get to pick the rest that stand in the corner with dunce caps

[Orrex]

5. It wouldn't even have to be twenty of the "better" thinkers

Hell, just get 20 people who can tie their own shoes, and they'd still come up with something better than what Congress is doing.

[hobbit709]

7. Or can count past 10 with their shoes on.

[Uben]

8. Or, just wear shoes! nt

nt

[HopeHoops]

9. I think it is simple - whatever Congress wants for themselves, everyone should be able to get.

If you're below a certain income level, then there are no premiums or deductibles. If Congress wants it, we should have it. If they want to fuck everyone with a bad plan, then they should get fucked by the same bad plan.

[UTUSN]

10. And it would take the rest of us a day!1 n/t

[SammyWinstonJack]

29. .

:spray:

[xchrom]

11. we have some brilliant people posting here -- so i concur.

:applause:

i know when i wander in the economy forum -- i am amazed at some who post there.

[Hydra]

12. I'll up the ante

I bet almost all of the real Dems we have on this site could do better, and it's for exactly the reason you say- Congress'(And quite possibly the Executive Branch's) first priority is to make the established system happy(By giving them a handout). We are definitely further down the priority list, since we don't have the kind of money to lobby for what we need, and elections are far off and can be won with the argument of "Sure we screwed all of you over, but are you going to vote for a Republican?"

[harun]

13. I was thinking exactly the same thing and would love to see us try.

[goclark]

15. I agree ~ Who will start the Post? nt

[unblock]

16. companies never end up marketing the engineering team's dream solution.

it is at times very unfortunate that the world is not as open to objectively superior solutions.
it often seems that eventually we get it right, but people die waiting.

[SoCalDem]

17. What you are missing is this:

Legislation (any legislation) MUST be convoluted, and complicated, so that there are enough loopholes in it for all the "donors" to drive their 18-wheelers though.

At the heart of almost any legislation, is opportunity for fat-cat donors to "game it". The more they make, the more they donate.

[Festivito]

20. So, make it simple.

Whereas the cost of covering everyone in America and its holdings for everything (ABOUT 3K PER CAPITA OR 0.9T$/YEAR) is far less than:

1. covering only the life and death health care situations, (as per hospital requirements, medicaid, ...)

plus

2. coverage for the rest of people that comes of private insurers for less than everything in coverages,

(ABOUT 8K PER CAPITA OR 2.4T$/YEAR)

And,
Whereas our leaders are paid campaign funding from the unnecessary private insurers in order to keep those private insurer's unnecessary positions, salaries, jobs and other compensations, unnecessary when we would be under the cheaper government paid plan, saving about 1.5T/YEAR cheaper plan, then of the people, for the people, and herein by the people,

Be it
Resolved that America shall cover everyone in the United States and its holdings for everything that is needed for each individual so covered to enjoy a healthy life as those individuals deem fit for themselves.

For inasmuch the good of the individual shall be deemed as the good of our nation.

AND INASMUCH AS IT COSTS A LOT LESS, LET'S JUST DO IT.

Oh, I'm just playing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. 18 wheelers? You kid me right

You surely mean the USS Enterprise (the starship), and a few other mythical ships from multiple settings.

Or if you want to keep it to present day... the USS Reagan, with the Nimitz, the G.Bush, the JFK and whatever other carriers I forget, lined abreast.

:-)

[Aviation Pro]

18. Here's one idea that will be immediately rejected....

...an income based system based on zip codes with enough of a margin to fund medical schools and reduce the cost of becoming a medical professional.

[timeforpeace]

19. There is no complex issue that a group from here could not solve.

[Vidar]

21. K&R

[Union Yes]

22. Legalize and Tax Marijuana.

[Mnemosyne]

23. Needs a kick! n/t

[ThoughtCriminal]

25. Two words

Copy Canada.

[smalll]

26. You are correct. I'm not really that lefty,but a nice simple single-payer ("nationalized" (gasp!))

is so doable.

In mid-20th-century days, when Atlee's government in Britain set up their national health service, they faced forces arrayed against them, as we do today. Not the insurancers, to be sure, but there were forces -- forces of stasis that fought against the change, powerful forces. So how did they do it?

A few years later, Aneurin Bevan was asked about it, and he explained: in essence, as long as you can placate the doctors, the people actually providing the healthcare (other than the nurses) you can succeed --

so as Aneurin said, "WE STUFFED THEIR MOUTHS WITH GOLD" ---

meaning, at the point of nationalization, they made sure to see to it that the actual doctors would continue to be paid well. And even today, doctors in Britain are paid well.

Here and now today in the USA, if we were bold enough to nationalize, and we could do it if we "stuffed their mouths with gold" (continued to pay the MDs the big bucks) we could strip the "insurance" vultures from the scene, save a lot of money, bring healthcare to ALL Americans AND reach the critical mass necessary to make the change possible.

[cali]

27. that's not the problem.

there's no dearth of congress people who can come up with a viable plan for single payer healthcare funding and implementation. The problem, as you note, is there aren't enough to pass it.

[OneBlueSky]

28. well, I'm certainly not one of the "better thinkers" here, but . . .

for those not wedded to the government/corporate oligarchy, it's really quite simple and straightforward . . .

Step 1: Enroll every American in Medicare (or some variation thereof) from birth (and employ some of those losing jobs under Steps 2 and 3 to help administer the program) . . .

Step 2: Cut out the middle men, i.e the insurance companies and HMOs -- and save the hundreds of billions of dollars they're currenly skimming off top for profits, marketing and advertising, executive bonuses and perks, administration and overhead, etc. . .

Step 3: End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- and save the hundreds of billions of dollars currently being poured down those particular sewers with no return on our massive "investments" in those wars . . .

Step 4: Legalize marijuana and hemp, and tax marijuana used for recreational purposes -- and bring in hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes while cultivating new hemp-based industries to help absorb employees of the insurance companies and the military who would lose jobs under Steps 2 and 3 . . .

Results

1) healthcare for every American -- and a significant surplus of funds resulting from implementation of Steps 2-4 . . .

2) finally ending two illegal, unethical, and immoral wars . . .

3) dramatically lessening the burden on our courts and prisons, which now hold tens of thousands of marijuana "offenders" . . . and

4) a range of new hemp-based industries that could greatly lessen our need for fossil fuels for things like energy and plastics . . . plus a revitalization of small family farms not controlled by multinational agribusiness corporations . . .