Obamacare
Replies
-
You all realize that the health care bill was passed and not one person in Congress actually read the whole bill, not even the person who wrote it! You all get that right? Nancy Pelosi said that we "Have to pass the bill so that you can find out what's in it." Really? Seriously???
There's a reason why Healthcare is offered as a BENEFIT and a reason why some businesses don't offer the BENEFIT to their employees: They can't afford it. I'm a small business and if I were to have employees and be forced to provide them with healthcare I wouldn't be in business any longer because I can't afford it. I think it is absolutely ludoucris that I can be fined for not carrying health insurance. What happens if I don't pay the fine, are they going to put me in jail?
I think the whole bill should be kicked out.
It shouldn't be kicked out -- it should just be written with more thought than.. OH ****, Let's put this out and pass it NOW.
Healthcare is a benefit that every human being should have, not a luxury.0 -
Your brother can defer his loans for the time he's still in school/doing his residency. You realize that; right?
And the interest still is charged at that time, leaving an even larger debt.
The point appears to be missed, however. (Calling him a "poor victim" gets a big eyeroll from me!) Because of the astronomical costs involved, he cannot work with an underserved community, as his first choice would have been. This hits back on the original topic as well.
Yes, as I said, it turns out that having the government pay up front for your education carries a trade-off. If he could've afforded to pay his tuition when it was due, instead of having the luxury of being able to pay it off years afterwards, then he would've also had the luxury of choosing his specialty.
What's the problem here?0 -
Everyone can receive care for their health. You don't need health insurance for that. It may be less convenient, but there is care for the uninsured.Healthcare is a benefit that every human being should have, not a luxury.0 -
Everyone can receive care for their health. You don't need health insurance for that. It may be less convenient, but there is care for the uninsured.Healthcare is a benefit that every human being should have, not a luxury.
But then when somebody goes to the hospital without health insurance and it turns out that they cannot pay for it, the tax payers pay for it. We're paying for it one way or another.0 -
Or, you know, making colleges be more responsible with the money they do get.
since the government is granted the right to control how responsibly colleges spend their money right? Where in the constitution did you find that part?
I'm not saying that it is in the Constitution. But, when the federal government grants a college money, they can put mandates in it so that all of the money doesn't go to the people at the top; so it goes to them along with the teachers, scholarships, things that the classrooms need, and things like that.0 -
Exactly. When will it end with the government taking over our healthcare?It would be cheaper for all of our healthcare if nobody were obese. So tomorrow, the government is going to decide how many calories you can consume. What foods you can eat. How many hours of gym time you must rack up. Because if we were all thinner it would eliminate so many diseases. And if you fail to comply with these requirements, we are going to fine you. If you don't pay your fine, we can reach right into your bank account and get it.
Debates would be better if people would stop using fallacies.0 -
Obamacare is over expansive. It's not that I don't want everyone cared for. This just isn't the way.0
-
Obamacare is over expansive. It's not that I don't want everyone cared for. This just isn't the way.
I agree. I don't like Obamacare either, but there are better options out there. Ones that aren't going to be as expensive as Obamacare would or the healthcare system we have now is. As I mentioned earlier in the thread, Germany's system is one of those. As is Japan's.
Like I have mentioned, when somebody goes to the emergency room and cannot pay for their treatment, the cost goes to the taxpayers because the hospitals have to get the money for their supplies in some way. This means that we actually pay more of a per cent of our GDP than countries like Germany and Japan. These places also have private insurance companies that people can opt into, which takes down the waiting times for doctors visits, and Japan does better than us when it comes to technology and innovation, while Germany is on par with us.
I'm not saying that Obamacare is the way to go, because I believe that it is not. I'm saying that there are cheaper, more efficient systems. I'll post a link to some figures that show what America pays of their GDP for healthcare compared to other countries.
http://www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/oecd042111.cfm0 -
How do we decide if you 'need' the expensive treatment or the cheaper one? Because if the government is paying, it puts them squarely in charge of what gets paid for. It's my understanding that socialized medicine is OK at responding to everyday conditons and preventative services, but when it comes to specialized services/treatments/care, many people travel to the US for superior care, because their socialized medicine either can't or won't pay for such things.
Not exactly. Speaking of the UK's National Health Service, specifically, the vast majority of specialized care is covered by the system, albeit not always close to home, and sometimes not as quickly as is desired by the individual. Certain medications and treatments may not be available in a certain locality, but are almost always available in others, requiring patients with certain conditions to travel or occasionally, move, to follow a treatment plan.
I think you are speaking here of those who travel to the US, among other countries(Switzerland, Italy, France, Germany, the UK, Japan) , to pursue highly-specialised or experimental treatments which are unavailable in their home countries through lack of local expertise, or because they are still being developed. If someone's last chance is represented by a single doctor in a foreign country, of course they will travel, if they can, to pursue this option. It's not generally about socialised medical systems' willingness to pay, but actually about the availability of a certain treatment, equipment or expertise, which in many cases, is only available in one place in the world. I have heard of cases in the UK where the costs of such travel have been partially or wholly borne by the NHS in the pursuit of the health of all citizens.
A question for LuckyLeprechaun, re. your first post - please could you explain to me how the Obamacare bill has affected your student loan payment system? Not sure I follow!
As for this...
Ummmm...if they wrote it, by definition they read it! I can quite believe that individual members of Congress may not have read the whole thing in detail, but this hyperbole is self-evidentially fallacious!You all realize that the health care bill was passed and not one person in Congress actually read the whole bill, not even the person who wrote it!
For what it's worth, I'm not sure that a mandate for individuals to buy private health insurance is the way to achieve universal healthcare in the US either (the models seen in the UK and Europe, whilst imperfect, are infinitely more efficient in the first place, and vastly more affordable and equitable). What I find utterly incomprehensible is the idea that seems to be prevalent here that healthcare is a privilege, rather than a basic human need. In the modern world, every Western nation is capable of providing medical care to all its' citizens, provided that caring for the ill is not seen as something to be exploited for immense profits by a bewildering armada of corporate interests. To my mind, it is a fundamental moral duty of care to our fellow human beings that we do so.0 -
I don't have an informed opinion about Obamacare; however, I think there are a lot of misconceptions about "socialized" medicine. I live in Canada, and in my experience the people who complain about healthcare here are those who don't get exactly what they want, right when they want it. Some of those people will chose to go south of the border and pay cash for what they want. On the other hand, through three very serious health issues with close family, (brain cancer, catastophic accident, child with encephalitis which turned out to be a metabolic disorder that is now being treated by the chief neurologist at Sick Kids hospital in Toronto) I have seen excellent care and access to top specialists without having to clear everything done through an insurance company. I am aware of at least one medical specialist from here who was courted for many years by an American hospital and finally went, but lasted only a few months because he quickly became frustrated by dealing with HMO's and insurance people. Yes, sometimes more serious problems will bump elective procedures, and there are problems, as with any system, but like the poster from the UK I believe the system here is better than some would have you believe. I have a GP with whom I can get an appointment easily, a walk in clinic where I can get help (like a tetanus shot when I stepped on a nail a couple of weeks ago) quickly, and no worries about pulling out a credit card to pay for it. I know, I know, I do pay through my taxes. I just wanted to dispel some of the notions people seem to get about how our system works.0
-
Upheld.0
-
Individual mandate was struck down.0
-
Saw this on one of my student's facebook pages this morning:
The Ultimate Hypocrisy:
Demanding that the government stay out of your bedroom and your womb while simutaneously demanding they pay for your birth control and abortions.0 -
I'm so confused. One news station is reporting it was struckdown, one news station says upheld...0
-
Individual mandate was struck down.
No, it was upheld--just that it's a tax, not a penalty. SCOTUS sorta called BS on the semantic attempt to get support from republicans, but it was upheld.
Some news orgs jumped the gun and called it wrong. Good thing I was watching MSNBC.0 -
I'm trying to sort out the SCOTUS now! I'm also confused.0
-
It goes to show the nature of politics that I would be happy seeing the SCOTUS uphold a law that I felt lukewarm about when it was passed (I'm a single-payer guy).0
-
Great, the feds can force us to do anything they choose now as long as they attach a tax to it. Might as well throw the Constitution in the fire, it obviously means nothing.
Thomas Jefferson is rolling over right now0 -
They pretty much upheld the entire thing but limited the medicaid expansion.0
-
Good thing I was watching MSNBC.
Ah yes, the liberal version of Fox news.
0 -
I'm trying to sort out the SCOTUS now! I'm also confused.
Banner on CNN: Correction: The Supreme Court backs all parts of President Obama’s signature health care law.
I think some people had their stories pre-written and got itchy trigger fingers.0 -
Good thing I was watching MSNBC.
Ah yes, the liberal version of Fox news.
You are 100% wrong, but that's a topic for another thread. And, in this case, they exercised restraint and were absolutely correct the first time.
Sorry, forgot my
And also my :bigsmile:0 -
This is a good move for Romney.0
-
Random disorganized thoughts from a layman. Blow this full of holes, I don't care.
Here's reality folks - every human being in the united states already has medical coverage for life threatening medical issues. Here's how:
If you are a homeless unemployed troubled etc.etc.,,, and you're chilling out at Walmart soaking up some free A/C, and you have a massive coronary and hit the linoleum - they will call the squad. (Whether you can afford to pay for treatment or not. They have to, it's the law).
The squad will come and get you, put you in the back of a half million dollar truck and do everything in their power to keep you alive. (Whether you can afford to pay for treatment or not. They have to, it's the law).
These folks will haul you to the nearest hospital, where they will do whatever is needed to keep you alive, possibly including open heart surgery that costs more in 4 hours than you earned in the whole 42 years you worked before your world exploded and you wound up on the streets. (Whether you can afford to pay for treatment or not. They have to, it's the law).
Folks with their breastbones wired together can't sleep in bus terminals, they'll get infected and die. You'll be kept for some reasonable period of convalescence. (Whether you can afford to pay for treatment or not. They have to, it's the law).
SO - a month after your heart attack, you get released from the hospital in the Salvation Army clothes you were wearing on the big day, and you wander off to continue waiting out the clock. You have a $280,000 hospital bill in your pocket. You can't pay it - you know it and the hospital knows it. They'll keep it on the books for a while, make sure you lose the last few points you might have had on your credit rating,,, and then they'll write it off and shift the costs over to other folks, insured customers, and gov't programs. They have to, that's reality. This is why a Tylenol costs $63 at the hospital.
We the fortunate and insured - along with the taxpayers - are paying for everybody else. We're already paying it. We have to, it's the law. The alternative is fairly unthinkable to most people. "Thank you for dialing 911. May I have your insurance policy number or a major credit card please?".
So the real question is, how do we pay for all this in a more intelligent manner? The sad fact is that all the poor schmuck needed was $20 a month worth of Plavix. $300 a year in preventative care would have saved us all that $280K. We can't make sure everybody has a very basic preventative care plan (and nobody's calling for free boob jobs for bag ladies people, we're talking about basic care) so instead we wait 'til little problems are life threatening and then we let the Doctors doctor.
This is a huge part of why our care is so expensive - and why we pay more money for worse care than the rest of the civilized world. Another issue is each Doctor needing a staff of 6 to wrestle with all the claim forms and paperwork needed to wrangle payment from a plethora of different insurance companies, state programs and federal programs - none of which use the same system.
And enough about tort reform, that's a non-issue dreamed up by Doctors who don't want to be held responsible for their mistakes. In 2004, the CBO calculated malpractice costs amounted to “less than 2 percent of overall health care spending. Thus, even a reduction of 25 percent to 30 percent in malpractice costs would lower health care costs by only about 0.4 percent to 0.5 percent, and the likely effect on health insurance premiums would be comparably small.”
http://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/downloads/tables.pdf
Obamacare sucks. It was an attempt to get some folks some insurance, but it's a clunky nightmare that nobody likes. It's also a huge giveaway to private insurers, which is why they supported it. The right hates it now (they loved it when Mittens did it in Mass, and when it was the Heritage Foundation's response to HillaryCare back in 1994) and the left may settle for Obamacare but they (we?) really want Canadacare but they don't want to move to Canada to get it. It's a turkey that nobody really likes, but I believe it is better than the nothing we had before. And yes, my family and I pay dearly for good insurance and have for years.
Basically our choices are 3: we need to either find an intelligent way to get everybody a basic package of coverage - ORRRR - we need to start letting uninsured people die on the hospital steps - ORRRR - we can continue on our current path of covering everybody by the most expensive, painful and stupid method imagineable until the med monster completely destroys our economy, our society, and mom's apple pie.
So what's the right answer?0 -
This is a good move for Romney.
It is in two ways. Ignorant Republicans will think he will want to reverse this and secondly, Romney supports socialized medicine. Its a win-win for him.0 -
This is a good move for Romney.
I agree, but it's bad for us all.
The feds can force us to do anything they deem now as long as they *kitten* a tax. I want everyone who was for this abomination to let that sink in.0 -
This is a good move for Romney.
It is in two ways. Ignorant Republicans will think he will want to reverse this and secondly, Romney supports socialized medicine. Its a win-win for him.
Yep!
Also I am pretty sure he will use it as a base for his campaign! I foresee a lot of "ONLY BY ELECTING ME WILL YOU BE ABLE TO GET RID OF OBAMACARE"!0 -
The scariest part is, there are so many people who are considered "poor" that make too much to qualify for medicaid (such as myself) yet don't make enough to pay for insurance. So now they get to chose to have money to eat or pay their 'government required insurance bill'. If the choose to eat, the IRS will take what they need to cover their healthcare tax.
I'm glad I only pay $30 a month for my basic medical. Are they going to require that I get dental and vision now?0 -
Hold on Mandy,,, clarify this please. You say:
And then you say:The scariest part is, there are so many people who are considered "poor" that make too much to qualify for medicaid (such as myself) yet don't make enough to pay for insurance.I'm glad I only pay $30 a month for my basic medical. Are they going to require that I get dental and vision now?
Do you have insurance or don't you? And if you have basic medical for $30 a month, who is your carrier. I got to get on that one.0 -
Who is your carrier, I agree! I get insurance through work and Tricare (military) but pay 197.00 for tricare.Hold on Mandy,,, clarify this please. You say:
And then you say:The scariest part is, there are so many people who are considered "poor" that make too much to qualify for medicaid (such as myself) yet don't make enough to pay for insurance.I'm glad I only pay $30 a month for my basic medical. Are they going to require that I get dental and vision now?
Do you have insurance or don't you? And if you have basic medical for $30 a month, who is your carrier. I got to get on that one.0
This discussion has been closed.