Under GOP control, Senate finally passes bill to repeal Affordable Care Act

a reply to: amazing
Ok. Please don't flame me for this, it's an honest question. I don't know you, your situation, how old you are, how long you've had insurance, etc. My question is this:

If you had back all the $ you've paid out over the years in premiums, would you have been more than covered?

Also, did you get to shop around for the best price(s)? Or were you just stuck with whatever the people in your "network" charged, even if someone else offered the same service/procedure for 80% less?

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Agreed to a point. But you seem to think it's only the Democrat party and Obama involved. That is a ridiculous ans silly assumption on your part. The GOP Senators and Reps. are some of the worst offenders on this subject and often champion Wall St. causes. My State Senator Roy Blunt proved my point when he replied to my email concerning the plot of ComCast to control the internet. Obviously they wanted, and gave large lobby money to Blunt, to get the same advantage of cable companies. To gain "regions" with no competition and regulate what you pay for service. Of course his reply was a form letter supporting ComCast and showed no interest of the public. His response was what i expected. The overwhelming public reaction caused a retreat among the GOP because the average consumer is waking up from the GOP and Wall St. infection and coma that started under Reagan. Only after realizing supporting ComCast intentions would result with unwanted political exposure, GOP congressional members abandoned the plot and on a rare occasion defied their anti-regulations platform. However, other cases that defy rational explanations such as Private Correctional Institutions has blossomed nation-wide. Now America holds the record of "incarcerated" persons for non-violent crimes and while taxpayers lose, Wall St. and investors gain.

Most, if not all, attacks on the individual (consumer) are championed by the GOP. They either authored legislation or co-wrote and sponsored anti-consumer Laws to date. They overwhelmingly supported "free trade" policies and are responsible for NAFTA and GATT policies. They are heavily involved in the latest "behind closed doors negotiations" of Pacific trade deals in Asia. The slogan platitudes by the GOP in the eighties which is now enforced and part of daily American life, is the result of the 1933 coup attempt by Wall St. entities during FDR's administration. That plot exposed the elites dream of a fascist state in America mirroring Italy's fascist govt.

To those who poo poo this information, academic sources are quite aware and have the data to prove the case. Many years of propaganda attacks by the elite has taken it's toll. Americans no longer think in logical terms. This psych-ops program the past forty years has rendered the population ineffectual in making sound and logical decisions in areas where their self- interests lay. This "my political party vs yours" attitude is only the tool to use to divide. It's a tool utilized by an unknown (to people asleep) group to divide two or more groups to achieve their desired effect(s). While anger and hostility causes hate and blood in the streets, fascists in govt. positions manage situations that grant their prominence in power. Living in America now one can see fascist tactics to control the masses. Camera monitoring of all public areas and NSA programs with communications are key if you are aware of state control practices.

In other words, we are the victims of fascist control sociopaths. However, these vermin are armed with state authority and funded by tax dollars to force their agenda on the American public. And for those who can not imagine how they have been played, both parties in American politics are involved and work together to gain this control. America is the hostage of the Eastern Establishment. Every successful victory by either the far right or the far left is only the camouflaged result that plays into the hands of controllers. No more is America a force of righteous intent,...too be the city on the hill for all other countries to look upon, but a empire run by thugs for person gain who openly talk America's ideals from the past no-longer exists. That America has evolved and they are the only answer to managing our republic. Individual rights fade and corporations rank above all. It's a marriage of Govt. and corporate power that is planned to infect the whole planet.

So, Occamsrazor04, although you seem to live by your user name, problems we all face are complex and requires one to use abstract reasoning to understand the obvious. You're simple assessment is only a moment snap-shot too many people are relying on. Simple and silly assumptions block out reason. If you take the blue pill, you can go through you're life being a pawn and ignorant of reality. However, taking the red pill will send you on a path of conscious living. Be warned, once you do you can not come back to a simple world you live in now.

Now, for all who I've offended, I apologize. Expressing this knowledge is not popular. However, raised in a country that showed so much promise and potential only to see it's decline due to fascist sociopaths is beyond any reasonable expectations. The decline of America is not the result of some weird biblical prophesies where Satan takes whats ours, but occult figures brainwashing the public to hand over whats ours by consent. God gave Man the brains to confront all offenders and waiting for Jesus to sit on a cloud with a magic wand to make bad things go away is not part of Mans further existence. Only when Man fails in his God-giving intelligence will he will interfere according to the good book. I personally don't want to see Man fail when solutions are available.

originally posted by: riiver
a reply to: Aazadan
Exactly. A huge chunk of the insane cost of things isn't that they really, truly cost that much. Insurance isn't the solution, it's part of the problem.


Edit to add: and NOT allowing catastrophic policies is also part of the problem. I would love to have a catastrophic policy, in case I have a car wreck and chop my leg off or something, or fall down the stairs and break both bones in my arm, or some other unforseeable thing. However, instead I have nothing. If something like that happens I'll be paying forever because I'm not ALLOWED to get the coverage that's actually what I need rather than what Big Brother thinks I should have.

And to hell with everyone that says, "oh, but some day you WILL get cancer/heart disease/some other catastrophic thing." That's bull#. That's the mindset that got us in this mess. It's NOT inevitable that you'll get desperately sick some day unless you don't take care of yourself. And taking care of yourself has a lot less to do with going to the doctor than with eating well, getting off your butt, etc etc.

You probably will get sick though. Cancer alone is a 60% chance on top of everything else. Very few people don't wind up with one catastrophic illness or another.

What got us in this mess is a logical path that I struggle to find the flaw in, but the result is clearly flawed.

The economics of illness are such that it's MUCH cheaper to prevent a disease than to treat it. So rather than treat something like diabetes the focus has shifted to identifying it's causes and changing peoples lifestyles so that it doesn't show up in the first place. The insurance company has a reason to pay for this because it means fewer payouts for them. Of course, this also means that the doctors are dealing with the insurance companies much more often and they have to raise their base rates in order to be compensated a fair value by insurance. The customer on the other hand doesn't care what the doctor charges, they only care about their copay, premium, and deductible so there is no balancing factor through market forces.

The whole thing makes me think that the concept of medical insurance is unworkable. We can't be using insurance for everything, but the economics of the situation demand that we do use insurance for everything. There are only two solutions I can think of:
1. Insurance companies don't cover doctors visits but still mandate that the person goes in every few months for a checkup in order to maintain catastrophic coverage. This could bring routine costs down, but routine costs are only a fraction of the issue.

2. We move to single payer.

originally posted by: dagann
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Agreed to a point. But you seem to think it's only the Democrat party and Obama involved. That is a ridiculous ans silly assumption on your part.

No I don't. Both parties are the problem. As are the people who think their guy is great it's everyone else who is wrong.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

This election we really do have some great people though. Sanders has some radical ideas to try something different and he's a man of great integrity. Rand also has some radical ideas if looking for something new. Kasich is a guy that both sides will work with. Those are all great candidates representing very diverse plans.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: OccamsRazor04

This election we really do have some great people though. Sanders has some radical ideas to try something different and he's a man of great integrity. Rand also has some radical ideas if looking for something new. Kasich is a guy that both sides will work with. Those are all great candidates representing very diverse plans.

The problem is many of them have some great ideas, and some TERRIBLE ideas. Where are the great leaders of old?

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
This election we really do have some great people though. Sanders has some radical ideas to try something different and he's a man of great integrity. Rand also has some radical ideas if looking for something new. Kasich is a guy that both sides will work with. Those are all great candidates representing very diverse plans.

The problem is many of them have some great ideas, and some TERRIBLE ideas. Where are the great leaders of old?


The leaders of old also had both great and terrible ideas. Just look at our Founding Fathers, every single one of them individually was found to have bad ideas that couldn't stand up to the majority. As a result our Constitution is a work of immense compromise. Our most popular recent president, Reagan also had great and terrible ideas. He set in motion what caused the banking collapse, started Al Qaeda, and reformed CPI which is responsible for declining purchasing power. On the other hand he made people feel good to be American, he ended the Cold War, and he was likable. Most people truly enjoyed the Reagan presidency.

On that note the president is merely one cog in the machine, if you want their ideas to be given a chance it also requires electing people who will do so. In my case that means refusing to elect anyone who runs on a platform of wanting to make government more dysfunctional. It's only through having a functional government that we can debate the ideas of elected officials and temper them from election rhetoric to workable solutions.

originally posted by: Aazadan
The leaders of old also had both great and terrible ideas. Just look at our Founding Fathers, every single one of them individually was found to have bad ideas that couldn't stand up to the majority. As a result our Constitution is a work of immense compromise.

And that is the difference. That's what a leader does. We have no leaders right now.

There is an element to obamacare that I have not seen mentioned on this thread yet.

Dave Cote, CEO of Honeywell, was part of the blue ribbon panel that created obamacare. He was not the only major corporate figure on that panel.

As soon as obamacare was passed, fully two years before it was even implemented, Cote used it as an excuse to raise the premiums on his own employees saying that the new healthcare legislation made it impossible for companies like Honeywell to maintain the level of coverage they offered for that price.

He helps to create legislation that 'forces' him to raise the premiums on his own employees. What he doesn't mention is that Honeywell is self-insured. The premiums are paid directly to Honeywell. They use insurance companies to coordinate the care but they underwrite the policy.

The premise that obamacare would lower health care costs and allow people to keep their own doctors and insurance if they wanted to was false from the very start. The corporations behind it were the ones who got to make those choices. And as Honeywell demonstrated, two years before the law took effect, the savings were for the corporations not the general public.

Big business is a prostitute that will hop in bed with anyone willing to pay the price, party allegiance notwithstanding. Repealing it is necessary, but not without undoing the damage done by the corporations who created it.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Yo, before you try and get Obamacare repealed you might want to set your sights on stopping the TPP. Which is trying to slink by right now.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Yo, before you try and get Obamacare repealed you might want to set your sights on stopping the TPP. Which is trying to slink by right now.

And multitasking works. On this thread though, its obamacare.

a reply to: Vroomfondel

Maybe you should look into single-payer healthcare? I heard it works pretty well. I mean, Congress has it...

The alternative, if you see single -payer as scary and "SOCIALISM!", think it's going to ruin the economy somehow, etc, etc, is probably to force medical institutions to actually list their damn prices so people can search for the lower ones, thereby creating market competition and driving them down. It's not a sure bet, but it's probably better than what you have now.

originally posted by: AazadanThe economics of illness are such that it's MUCH cheaper to prevent a disease than to treat it. So rather than treat something like diabetes the focus has shifted to identifying it's causes and changing peoples lifestyles so that it doesn't show up in the first place.

And therein lies the problem. For most of the real scourges of the modern world, prevention=lifestyle changes. And the most effective treatment for many of our biggest problems is ALSO lifestyle changes. What need has insurance to be involved in this? When the prescription is--as it is for so many things--stop eating junk, lose weight, get some exercise, and don't smoke--what is there that insurance needs to "cover"?

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: Vroomfondel

Maybe you should look into single-payer healthcare? I heard it works pretty well. I mean, Congress has it...

The alternative, if you see single -payer as scary and "SOCIALISM!", think it's going to ruin the economy somehow, etc, etc, is probably to force medical institutions to actually list their damn prices so people can search for the lower ones, thereby creating market competition and driving them down. It's not a sure bet, but it's probably better than what you have now.

If costs are getting out of control on the little things what you do is simple. You call the office you are going to visit and ask them how much it will cost for an office visit if you have no insurance. You don't have to tell them much at this point. If the price is reasonable and you don't think there will be a lot of follow ups, just take the no insurance price which will be much lower. It doesn't count toward your deductible but it saves money on small visits that don't do much for the deductible anyway.

The issue isn't with my insurance, but the idea that corporations are allowed to participate in the creation of the legislation. They save money or make money on the insurance when the rest of us have to make up the difference. And when corporations pass those costs on to their own employees in the form of higher premiums, then those same employees end up paying more for the actual healthcare too, it does threaten the economy. You cant impact the net income of that many people without impacting the economy.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Man...you got that right! It's been my mission over the years to convince others that "blaming the other" is a tool used at our detriment yet it's apparent most are under the spell. It's sad to see so many who will not think in logical terms.