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.

 

If healthcare is important, shouldn't it be bi-partisan?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Mach2


a guy who can afford it, doesn't want it, but wants to have an honest discussion. jesus..




posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:23 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

We have a government that is trying to eliminate a government-run healthcare program and replace it with . . . . wait for it. . . .a government-run healthcare program.

The problem is that we have government running our healthcare program. Government IS the problem!

30 million lost their insurance when Obamacare came to be.

180 million will lose their insurance if the democrats have their way.

JESUS!

GOVERNMENT! Leave our healthcare alone!

STOP regulating!
Stop mandating!

Healthcare is not a government right or entitlement.

It is a purchased service!


/RANT



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: network dude

They will have to meet in the middle if obamacare is struck down. And fast.



you mean strick it down than build it back up with trump's name on it, right? hilarious.


If the resulting plan is bipartisan it will be better than Obamacare. Not a single Republican voted yes for Obamacare.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Mach2


a guy who can afford it, doesn't want it, but wants to have an honest discussion. jesus..



What's that even mean?

Just because I can afford it, doesn't mean i should be required to buy it, does it?

I admit, I was very fortunate in the gene pool lottery. I have never had a hospital stay, or even an ER visit. It's not like I've ever gamed the system.

How does that make me dishonest? If you circumvented paying your "share", by lying, you are the cheater, not me.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:46 PM
link   
The only thing I can think of that is openly bipartisan is tyranny and oppression. Even when they claim they are working together for better healthcare, it ends up being oppressive. Healthcare is one of the few areas where you can screw people a lot and give them a tiny bit of security in return and they'll love you for it.

It's kind of like feeding your horse that you ride every day. Sure. The horse gets fed and gets all the other things that come with being owned but it's still just a piece of property.
edit on 29-3-2019 by BrianFlanders because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:49 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Yes sir. This is why I say let's cut down on calling for investigations over and over. Let's face it politicians are not qualified to be unbiased judges or are even very good investigators. I mean the Google hearings were pretty embarrassing to see how few people had an awareness of technology at all.

Call me crazy but the representatives should be consulting with medical establishments and looking at global models to see what we can do and mistakes we can already recognize.

I personally think the swiss model of healthcare can not be traded publically and must be non profit is a simple regulation that takes care of fleeces the public and a lot of conflict of interest.

Can still compete choose a provider but no trading and profit building. Take your 1.4 million salary and call it a day. Dont RIP off the public for a bunch of shareholders.

I mean we have what seems like dozens of brand name drugs getting recalled because they get contaminated in India and Chinese factories. For profit.

While generics made in Canada are cheaper.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: Nyiah

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Mach2


i'd love to know what trumps plans are this time around, but haven't heard any specifics, have you? isn't that odd to you?



Obamacare was never a viable solution. It is not right to force me to pay a penalty (tax), to not have coverage, while subsidising coverage for another, period, and I don't care if a Democrat, republican, or Santa Claus came up with the plan.

Uh, if people actually read the law instead of just bitching about it, you'll find there's a Get Out of Jail Free card built right in, in the form of "No plans available in my area or via my employer were affordable enough". You don't have to prove s#, just claim that reason, and boom, you're fine -- totally exempt from the tax.

Only stupid people who didn't bother to thoroughly check the list of reasons out and pick that one if the others didn't apply paid the tax. I did call more than a few of my friends stupid f's for skipping over it.


Uh...what if I just don't want insurance smart guy?


What part of "don't have to prove s#" did you miss there? You don't have to WANT insurance, just claim you can't afford any available plans. Hence, the government did think to give people smart enough to choose it a viable Get Out of Jail Free card on the tax penalty.


But that's not true. I could afford it, I just dont want, or need it. Are you suggesting I should lie? I don't like being put in that position.

I guess you think the plan was acceptable because you could get around it by false statements.

You must be a lefty.


Guess you don't want to keep your money that bad then. If you're going to willingly give it up anyway when you have a legal no questions asked out, who's the fool?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: network dude

We have a government that is trying to eliminate a government-run healthcare program and replace it with . . . . wait for it. . . .a government-run healthcare program.

The problem is that we have government running our healthcare program. Government IS the problem!

30 million lost their insurance when Obamacare came to be.

180 million will lose their insurance if the democrats have their way.

JESUS!

GOVERNMENT! Leave our healthcare alone!

STOP regulating!
Stop mandating!

Healthcare is not a government right or entitlement.

It is a purchased service!


/RANT



Its actually both. There is no public without health. I hope you would be pissed if they made the vaccine for a life threatening plague 2 million dollars and its plentiful and cheap to produce.

There is also a particularly high cost to letting people rot on local municipalities.

And because they are drugs those need to be regulated because fraud =death in many cases.

On the other hand it is a service and forcing someone to serve is not a good option. Which is why a mixed system is necessary depending on what is covered.

Personally I think the pharma bro belongs in jail and am glad the feds did it. But I admit it may be more unethical than illegal.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Everyone forgets that the price of Healthcare in America is primarily driven by demand and ability to pay.

If health insurance companies would start paying less, prices would go down. That is one reason why an MRI cost less for a person on Medicare then it cost for a person with health insurance.

What would happen if the government put a price ceiling on every medical procedure?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 01:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Mach2


a guy who can afford it, doesn't want it, but wants to have an honest discussion. jesus..



What's that even mean?

Just because I can afford it, doesn't mean i should be required to buy it, does it?

I admit, I was very fortunate in the gene pool lottery. I have never had a hospital stay, or even an ER visit. It's not like I've ever gamed the system.

How does that make me dishonest? If you circumvented paying your "share", by lying, you are the cheater, not me.


Unfortunately if you dont buy the cost will be more when you need it. The only way to control cost is to split the risk between the population.

Or get ready to pay more if you have something happen. And then be dropped.

The only way you can force a comapany not to drop someone if they get cancer is if they split the risk with the healthy population as well.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Everyone forgets that the price of Healthcare in America is primarily driven by demand and ability to pay.

If health insurance companies would start paying less, prices would go down. That is one reason why an MRI cost less for a person on Medicare then it cost for a person with health insurance.

What would happen if the government put a price ceiling on every medical procedure?



Price controls never work. Only competition lowers prices. Government should be doing everything to encourage competition and transparency.

Healthcare is the only service where you don't know what it costs going in. The reason is because the end user is not the one paying. In addition, there is no incentive for shopping around.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

What would happen if you told every doctor and hospital in America that they cannot charge any more than what Medicare would pay them?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Edumakated

What would happen if you told every doctor and hospital in America that they cannot charge any more than what Medicare would pay them?


Ultimately, service and quality would go down as the best doctors in the business would leave the industry. Many doctors already don't take Medicare because it barely covers their costs.

The industry needs to be split between routine care and emergency care. Right now, there is too much overlap. For example, I take my kid to the pediatrician about five or six times a year. There is NO REASON whatsoever insurance should be involved in routine care. I should know going in this visit is going to cost me $75 or whatever the doctors time cost.

On the other hand, my wife's appendix burst and she had to go to the ER, have surgery, and spent almost two weeks in hospital. This is what insurance is supposed to cover, not my kid's visit to an Urgent care facility to have a splinter removed from his thumb.

I have a CPAP machine. I can buy my replacement parts cheaper than what the insurance company appears to be paying. Why? Why do I need insurance to purchase cheap replaceable hoses I can order on Amazon?



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:28 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Nothing matters except scoring political points, certainly not us peons.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: Mach2

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: Mach2


a guy who can afford it, doesn't want it, but wants to have an honest discussion. jesus..



What's that even mean?

Just because I can afford it, doesn't mean i should be required to buy it, does it?

I admit, I was very fortunate in the gene pool lottery. I have never had a hospital stay, or even an ER visit. It's not like I've ever gamed the system.

How does that make me dishonest? If you circumvented paying your "share", by lying, you are the cheater, not me.


Unfortunately if you dont buy the cost will be more when you need it. The only way to control cost is to split the risk between the population.

Or get ready to pay more if you have something happen. And then be dropped.

The only way you can force a comapany not to drop someone if they get cancer is if they split the risk with the healthy population as well.


I agree with everything you stated. My comment was directed at a specific issue I had with the way Obamacare was financed.

If you truely want everyone covered, and treated equally, single payer is the way to go. What is the value of having insurance companies at all, unless only for supplemental policies?

Like I said earlier, I think a wealthy nation such as ours should be able to provide basic healthcare for all citizens. I don't beleive, however, our goverment is competent to oversee a fraud free, corruption free, efficient program.

Where does that leave us? IDK, there are definitely no easy answers that everyone will like.

If my employer provided coverage (he doesn't), I wouldnt want the government involved.

If I were low income, I would be in favor of single payer, or government subsidies.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

I am all for single payer, and remove access to anyone not here legally. Add some personal responsibility by penalizing those who do not take proper care of themselves.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

The best option then would be to get rid of Obamacare open up the free market, and anyone who is turned down for health insurance by that free-market can enroll in Medicare. If they cannot afford Medicare they can enroll in Medicaid.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Mach2

I think the purpose of insurance in a universal coverage system is they compete against each other to keep a marketplace from becoming a slow beurocratic train. Swiss makes them non profit. It allows different plans without having one giant monster.

Drug companies would be the remaining problem. They should have a restriction on public trading but that monster is out of the bag.

We have a replication crisis in medicine because of conflict of interest problems with profit.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Mach2

I am all for single payer, and remove access to anyone not here legally. Add some personal responsibility by penalizing those who do not take proper care of themselves.


Seems reasonable to me.

What are the chances that politicians are going to go along though?

Many are in the pocket of insurance companies, and that would put the entire industry out of business, probably damaging the economy, and stock market in the short term.

The anti corporation crowd on the left would be happy about that, but no way in hell are the going to be on board with a system that leaves illegals out of the deal.



posted on Mar, 29 2019 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Edumakated

The best option then would be to get rid of Obamacare open up the free market, and anyone who is turned down for health insurance by that free-market can enroll in Medicare. If they cannot afford Medicare they can enroll in Medicaid.


Another valid idea, worth exploring. Kind of a mini Medicare I guess, but I could see insurance companies being very choosy about who they cover, thus leaving tax payers to foot the bill for the most costly cross section of the public, at large.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join