Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.


1,901 topics in this forum

    • 257 replies
    • 1,421 replies
    • 66 replies
    • 14 replies
    • 828 replies
    • 55 replies
    • 10 replies
    • 0 replies
    • 4 replies
    • 1 reply
    • 7 replies
    • 4 replies
    • 11 replies
    • 13 replies
    • 11 replies
    • 84 replies
    • 1 reply
    • 5 replies
    • 26 replies
    • 51 replies
    • 17 replies
    • 3 replies
    • 12 replies
    • 4 replies
    • 1 reply
  • Posts

    • Def this one


    • 10 hours ago, Uncle Bill said:

      BTW ...


      Anyone heard of a better plan ??? (Than repeal and replace w/HSA)




      Anyone ??

      Only HSA's?

      We had them before the ACA and yet the system didn't work. Premiums were rising 10-20% a year every year with just that.


      Are you proposing there will still be insurance or no insurance?


    • 10 hours ago, Uncle Bill said:

      BTW ...


      Anyone heard of a better plan ??? (Than repeal and replace w/HSA)




      Anyone ??


      Libertarians believe that healthcare prices would decrease and quality and availability of healthcare would increase if providers were freed from government meddling and control.

      Virtually every person wants access to quality healthcare at an affordable price. Libertarians think the best way to achieve this is by removing government interference and enabling free markets.
      Government inappropriately controls in our healthcare in many ways:

      Government and a handful of insurance companies have a virtual monopoly as payers. Because of this, they make most of the decisions about what kinds of healthcare are available.

      Government regulates where, when, and who may open new healthcare facilities.

      Government agencies greatly slow development of and access to new medicines, devices, and technologies that may improve quality of care and reduce cost of care.

      Currently, the healthcare industry is virtually monopolized by the government and a handful of insurance companies. They hold the checkbook and wield it for their own benefit.

      Each year, the government sets prices that they will pay providers including doctors and hospitals. Each year, these payments increase at less than the cost of inflation, while the cost of providing medical care increases by a far greater amount. This has unpleasant consequences for everyone. Providers are incentivized to do what is quick and cheap, not what is in the best interest of a particular patient. Doctors are forced to reduce the time they spend with patients, and this reduces quality of care. Hospitals are discouraged from upgrading facilities, and this reduces quality of care. Worse yet, insurance companies often set their payments according to the government’s prices. This regular ratcheting down on payments to providers, while actual costs to provide care increases, makes providers less able to provide high quality healthcare.

      Government also regulates where medical facilities can be built, who can build them, and when. The process for applying for permission to build facilities is very costly and very slow, thus it favors the biggest corporations and prevents smaller organizations from opening new facilities that could serve patients. This greatly limits patients’ access to medical care and increases costs compared to a system where government permission was not required.

      Institutions such as the Food and Drug Administration also limit cost-effective access to quality care. The approval processes for new drugs and technology is lengthy and expensive. Because of this, the process favors the biggest companies with the most lawyers. There are many stories of patients dying while waiting for approval of a new device or medicine. Instead, Libertarians call for free-market testing which will be inherently incentivized to be efficient and fair in their processes. Additionally, Libertarians believe in the “Right to Try”, especially in situations with a terminal diagnosis. The government must not be permitted to deny patients access to new medical advances.

      Tort reform would also greatly reduce the cost of health care. The current tort system raises the cost of care by
      encouraging unnecessary testing and procedures which increase the cost of medical care by forcing medical teams to devote significant time and resources to preventing or defending against unwarranted legal actions. When legitimate claims arise, they should be taken seriously and resolved fairly through the courts. However, frivolous and fraudulent claims should not be tolerated, as our current system does. These disparage our healthcare providers and the quality of medical care they can provide and that we can receive. Libertarians oppose fraud in all forms.

      In short, Libertarians believe that each person has the right to make their own medical decisions. Libertarians support removing government meddling from healthcare. We think this and tort reform are the best ways to improve quality of healthcare, increase access to healthcare, and decrease prices of healthcare in our country.


    • interesting that one has figured out to pull on the bungee to get it closer. 

    • Seen 2 bucks this morning on my way to work.  They weren't chasing, but I haven't seen a buck on my way to work in months.

    • First, i am not a fan of that idea.

      My thought would be the purpose of managed and I.H. areas are to reduce the herd numbers.  The most effective way to that goal is to harvest more does.  For the most part harvesting more bucks would do little to reduce the herd.

      Also, I think the effectiveness would suffer from people waiting and passing on does to get that 2 or more buck.

      Wanderer likes this
    • 32 minutes ago, delcecchi said:

      So, how would you provide health care to the poor?    



      Why is it my problem to pay for health care for the poor?  Or a better question yet, when did it become a mandate for the federal government to provide health care for the poor?


      Or better yet, why is it my problem if the drug companies, healthcare professionals, and healthcare facilities do not want to provide their services for free to poor people?


      I can tell you why if you don't know..(hint: people were not dying in the streets at the time.    hint, hint: do you know of any drug company executives, healthcare professionals, or insurance company executives starving or dying in the streets?)




      As for the fire protection thing, it depends a lot on where you live whether your assumptions hold up or not.  Maybe fire protection is an entitlement in Rochester, in other places - not so much....


      But the topic here is the ACA, not fire protection, so let's just drop it, okay??

      Edited by swamptiger
    • *chuckle*

      Ya crack me up Mr. MAGOOgle. (TM)



    • I honestly have never patterned my gun. All I know is, I kill more birds DOI with Federals than anything else. like you said, I'll knock em down with anything, but it seems like the Feds hit harder, have a better pattern, whatever. I had almost 0 crips last year when I switched to those Fed red box's, and with how many divers I shoot, that's saying something

    • So, how would you provide health care to the poor?    


      And fire protection is provided by the government using some sort of tax dollars to pay for it.   So the poor get it cheap and the rich pay more.