It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

'American' Health Care Bill

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

The system needs to crash.
It has to, the greed and never ending and ever increasing profit based system is not suitable to affordable care. Our system is gamed and the owners will not let it go until it is ripped from their fingers.

Is this going to be Trumpcare lying just as Obama care did?
edit on 23-3-2017 by seasonal because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: reldra

Sure helped cut down those costs for the rest of us, all those folks having insurance.

*eyeroll*


It reduced prescription costs. It reduced more expensive care for those who were once uninsured because they could get preventitive care.

Even if you didn't notice, if reduced costs in almost every facet of healthcare and municipal services.

Hospitals were paid prices that were approved, not $70 for a medicine cup with a Tylenol in it. Many things changed.
edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Those little "extras" would be optional I thought.




posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: reldra

The system needs to crash.
It has to, the greed and never ending and ever increasing profit based system is not suitable to affordable care. Our system is gamed and the owners will not let it go until it is ripped from their fingers.

Is this going to be Trumpcare lying just as Obama care did?


Whatever the new on is..Trumpcare or 'American Health Care Bill', it is worse.

Therefore, I say if they are serious about replace, really make a good one. Sadly, they made one that will increase current premiums and leave the most vulnerable without care.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Yea they're prospering because Obama made it mandatory to buy health insurance (unless you can't afford it).

The federal government shouldn't be able to force me to use a private product or service.

That being said I don't care if it's good for insurance companies. I care if it helps me, and in this case it didn't. It hit me pretty hard actually.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: reldra

Those little "extras" would be optional I thought.



What 'little extras'?



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Less addiction treatment means more dangerous streets, which equals more crime, which means more prisoners, which means Trump's private prison donors make more money. It makes sense given the Trump admin also rolled back a plan to scrap private prisons. Add the mental health issue to that as well.

Maternity benefits and abortion- what's a republican that doesn't try to control what others do with their body?

I'd look to how the donors of the Trump campaign stand to benefit from the new prescription guidelines as well.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: reldra

Yea they're prospering because Obama made it mandatory to buy health insurance (unless you can't afford it).

The federal government shouldn't be able to force me to use a private product or service.

That being said I don't care if it's good for insurance companies. I care if it helps me, and in this case it didn't. It hit me pretty hard actually.


If you can't afford it, you can get medicaid, if you are in a state that thought ahead and expanded it.

The reason to require it was so people weren't using the ER as a doctor, passing on costs to taxpayers and the insured. They surely could not afford to payb for the ER visit, which often has multiple bills. So, someone was paying and it wasn't the hospital, wasn't the ambulance company....hospitals were reimbursed in tax dollars and raising prices for services.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: reldra

Less addiction treatment means more dangerous streets, which equals more crime, which means more prisoners, which means Trump's private prison donors make more money. It makes sense given the Trump admin also rolled back a plan to scrap private prisons. Add the mental health issue to that as well.

Maternity benefits and abortion- what's a republican that doesn't try to control what others do with their body?

I'd look to how the donors of the Trump campaign stand to benefit from the new prescription guidelines as well.


Absolutely correct on all counts.

And as a side note...private prisons have gotten into another business..as 90% of inmates normally leave prison. They didn't find it sustainable. They started making private Psychiatric Holding Centers.
edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)

edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

None of which refutes my statement that it didn't cut down costs for "the rest of us" does it?



Even if you didn't notice, if reduced costs in almost every facet of healthcare and municipal services.
is sort of the important aspect of it when you're trying to sell people on how great something was: whether they're going to notice how great it is or not. Something like a whopping 3% more people were covered thanks to Obamacare last year than eight years ago. More people have significantly higher deductibles now than they did pre-Obamacare. Costs have continued to rise.

Don't get me wrong, the Republicans' response to the ACA is not some miracle piece of legislation but I couldn't give a rat's hindparts about money being "saved" if I never see any benefit to it thanks to Obamacare.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

A $20,000 a year salary makes insurance unaffordable.

The deductibles will kill.




posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:58 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Its not the position of the government to dictate how a private institution conducts business, nor how we as citizens use or consume.

As long as we have our obesity problem and our obsession with military intervention all over the world the government and people can't afford Obamacare.

I remember saying you wanted us to intervene with Ukraine, how on earth could we do something on that scale and also overhaul health care? Just print more money?



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: reldra

None of which refutes my statement that it didn't cut down costs for "the rest of us" does it?



Even if you didn't notice, if reduced costs in almost every facet of healthcare and municipal services.
is sort of the important aspect of it when you're trying to sell people on how great something was: whether they're going to notice how great it is or not. Something like a whopping 3% more people were covered thanks to Obamacare last year than eight years ago. More people have significantly higher deductibles now than they did pre-Obamacare. Costs have continued to rise.

Don't get me wrong, the Republicans' response to the ACA is not some miracle piece of legislation but I couldn't give a rat's hindparts about money being "saved" if I never see any benefit to it thanks to Obamacare.


It was much more than 3% and on top of that, expanded Medicaid caused more people to have basic care. If you look closely, other costs for you went down as hospitals lowered prices for services (almost by force) and then could ask for less tax reimbursement.

It was more like 10% more people were insured under the ACA. Kaiser Fouyndation
edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: reldra

Those little "extras" would be optional I thought.



What 'little extras'?


The minimum "essential" coverage.




posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: reldra

A $20,000 a year salary makes insurance unaffordable.

The deductibles will kill.



People with a family making 20k a year are eligible for Medicaid.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: reldra

Those little "extras" would be optional I thought.



What 'little extras'?


The minimum "essential" coverage.



I would imagine Addiction Care, Mental health Care, Maternity Care and Prescriptions are essentials.

Ask any other developed country if they feel those things are essential.
edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:06 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

No, costs did not go down for me. I paid more for medical coverage and care in the last few years than in any point before that. Don't presume to explain my bank account and finances to me.

And no, it wasn't "much more than 3%" if you compare the years I'm comparing. It was about 14% of people in 2008 and as of last year it had dropped to about 11% of people. The number of uninsured went up and down between those two points, spiking at about 18% of people. But I'm not cherry picking the highest numbers and lowest numbers to inflate my argument like proponents of Obamacare like to do, right before they start explaining to me all the ways (except financially) the Affordable Care Act really, really did benefit me. Totally.

ETA - your edit and source is cute and all but, as I just pointed out, you're cherry picking the highest year and the lowest year and using those numbers and I'm not. Even taking into account data that's wasn't fully fleshed out at the time of my article, at best 6% more people have insurance than not in the years I'm talking about. Non-cherry picked numbers
edit on 23-3-2017 by Shamrock6 because: edit for edit



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: reldra

Its not the position of the government to dictate how a private institution conducts business, nor how we as citizens use or consume.

As long as we have our obesity problem and our obsession with military intervention all over the world the government and people can't afford Obamacare.

I remember saying you wanted us to intervene with Ukraine, how on earth could we do something on that scale and also overhaul health care? Just print more money?


Obesity is a great concern, but is not in the list of things conservatives want to cut.

If there is a healthcare problem in the country, a government can certainly make laws in which insurance companies need to follow to stay in business. Many private businesses have to follow certain guidelines to remain licensed.



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: reldra

No, costs did not go down for me. I paid more for medical coverage and care in the last few years than in any point before that. Don't presume to explain my bank account and finances to me.

And no, it wasn't "much more than 3%" if you compare the years I'm comparing. It was about 14% of people in 2008 and as of last year it had dropped to about 11% of people. The number of uninsured went up and down between those two points, spiking at about 18% of people. But I'm not cherry picking the highest numbers and lowest numbers to inflate my argument like proponents of Obamacare like to do, right before they start explaining to me all the ways (except financially) the Affordable Care Act really, really did benefit me. Totally.


I quoted a reasonable source about the numbers.

This would have effected your taxes. Your local hospital claims less in reimbursements for uninsured patients and certain taxes go down.

Regardless, if you don;t like the premiums for this one, you will see red with the premiums for the next.
edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)


I don;t know your age. My aunt buys the 'gold plan' and she complains about the price. She is a staunch conservative. I am worried for her for when she sees premiums if this 'American health Care Bill' passes.
edit on 23-3-2017 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 08:13 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

I'm not affiliated with either party. Both are poison IMO, full of puppets for other agendas but I digress.

If liberals had their way government spending would be out of control. If conservatives had their way the government would offer very little to the people.

The only way America gets health care for all is if we bring the military back home. We stop meddling in Gdamned everything and we focus on ourselves.







 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join