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.

 

1,000+ page bill would make health care a right in the USA

page: 2
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse



Really? It is absurb to you that under the Obama healthcare the STATE, and not doctors, will decide if patients can have certain treatments, and operations onlly if they are cost effective, and if there is no doubt the treatment or operation will work?


Proof? Not your opinion but PROOF that this is how it is going to work. Thanks...



Is it absurb that doctors who don't follow the new policies by the STATE will be fined? Even if the doctors think a treatment, or operation can help a patient, but the STATE decides is too expensive, or the treatment, or operation might not work so it is better if this is not done?


Again some proof?



Is it absurb to not want to pay a hefty sum of $1,000 U.S. dollars if we do not have, or even can't pay for healthcare insurance?

Is it absurb that in a time of ECONOMIC CRISIS when Americans are losing 500,000 + jobs a month every month, many Americans can't even buy meals for their families, yet they HAVE TO pay for healthcare insurance, or they will have to pay a fine?


This is interesting, I would like to see where those who are unemployed are going to be responsible for making payments they cannot.



Is it absurb not to want the government in control over healthcare when the government is in control of Veteran hospitals, and there are horror true stories as to what happens in government run hospitals?

What is absurb is that someone who obviously hasn't even bothered to research the topic, is calling Americans absurb because we don't want this Socialist dictatorship to shove down our throats a healthcare policy that is going to be a lot worse than the healthcare we have had until now....


Funny. The DOCTORS I have talked to disagree with you. You are also mistaken on who is going to be in charge of health care.
But I know when the only perspective you have is he spin you hear from your 'team' that this is the type of response we get.

The USA is unable to cover nearly 50,000,000 citizens and yet we still pay almost 200% of what other nations pay, per capita, to cover EVERYONE.

Buckle up because health care is about to become a RIGHT whether you like it or not.

Currently our health care providers are determining who can and can not get treatment. first by charging so much for coverage and secondly by doing everything in their power to NOT pay out when the time comes.

I welcome the change ahead.


[edit on 15-7-2009 by Animal]




posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 08:03 PM
link   
You know, I was trying to eat dinner when I came across this thread....

maybe I'll lose weight.... it will be a new diet craze.... The Disgust Diet!

They have already decided what is going to happen. The voting is more Madison Avenue - Hollywood Kabuki Theater to make us think we're being 'represented' instead of 'disrespected'.

How soon before we have to "bail-out" the Health Care Industry?

Let's start a pool.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 09:32 PM
link   
The 1000+ page claim is deceptive. Yes, it is 1018 pages, but there is very little content on each page. I just found it and plan on reading through a big chunk of it tonight because I got an unexpected dayoff from work tomorrow.


Here is the link with the full text of the bill:edlabor.house.gov...



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 10:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by dolphinfan

What are the rights of the folks who are paying for these rights of others and what about their "right" to keep the current insurance they have, which ultimatelyt they will not be able to as this will mean the demise of private insurance.


I don't know why people are so worried about the "poor insurance companies." There will still be private insurers and people can keep their insurance if they're happy with it. The insurance companies will just have to compete with the government plan. That means they will have to offer competitive rates and coverage. That's all.

I'm sorry if Blue Cross might not make the ginormous profits they do now but I'm not going to give up my right to health care in order to make them happy.



posted on Jul, 15 2009 @ 11:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
reply to post by Solomons
 


Is it absurb not to want the government in control over healthcare when the government is in control of Veteran hospitals, and there are horror true stories as to what happens in government run hospitals?


My father was a military officer and after he retired from the service was a federal employee.

We had excellent health care coverage and access to Veterans' hospitals. V.A. hospitals are some of the best in the country.

Sure, there may be some horror stories but I've heard of terrible things happening in every hospital I know about or have been treated in.

Wherever there is medical care there is waste, mismanagement, errors and abuse.

It's not limited to government facilities.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 06:47 AM
link   
There are so many good points in this thread is was very tough to be selective as to which got stars, but flagged indeed.

This is obviously a two edged sword, IMHO. On one hand you have the people who can't even afford insurance premiums finally getting attention that's most likely built up for quite awhile. But on the other hand, the Government is "taking" control. It seems inevitable that it's going to be pushed through, just as all the bailouts have been - whether 80% of the population disagrees or not.

This one fact alone leads me right to a gigantic red flag. We must keep in mind that this is being done whether we want it or not. I would even go as far to say you can rest assured that we are not getting a say in it at all - the corporations who pay for and dictate 'our' congressman's vote (or 'sway') are all who are being considered. In other words, the corporations who supply the rancher with the cheapest feed are who controls the livestock's well-being - as well as what we eat btw (*cough* Monsanto! *cough*). Anyway, it's a easy precept to understand...go where the money goes for any real predictability, let alone an ample measure of the consideration within.

I'm an American, so my only portal to other country's health care is pretty much just Micheal Moore's "Sicko. It simply leads me to this conclusion:

If a government is afraid of their people's will, then this National Health System has a real chance of being a huge benefit to most involved (this wouldn't necessarily exclude decision makers), but if the government controls 'its' people, I'd have to say that the corporations will be in total control of their livestock.

I guess the only question left is, "What kind of government do we have here? One in Full Control of its people, or one where The People control what happens? Do we have a government with good intentions, or do we have a government with self-serving corporate agendas?"

Hmm...seems I've always known there was a good reason not to like Capitalism. In my opinion, we have them right where they want us.

We honestly deserve everything we get, I believe.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:07 AM
link   
reply to post by dolphinfan
 


US Health Care is pathetic. Of course it should be a right! Are you kidding me? The richest country in the world cant even take care of its sick people properly. If you think the US people dont deserve health care as a right then go look at the bankruptcy court lineups.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:42 AM
link   
Forgive me for not reading many of the preceding posts, BUT

I believe health care should be a right. And why the hell not? If humanity has progressed to a point where, if you ignore the financial implications for a minute, there IS enough healthcare to go round, then why shouldn't it?

Is it because YOU don't want to pay a few more dollars a year to keep fellow people in health? I just don't buy that. The work of all humans should be spread evenly amongst all, if you're not happy about the fact that some people don't work then that's your problem, you chose to work so hard so you could have a fat car that billows out poisonous gas, and so you could pay other people to make your food all the time.

People should be working together for the betterment of everyone, not isolating themselves in their own little fairytale world. Every person on this planet is only as well off as the least well off really, I can't believe the sheer bloodymindedness of people who would happily see another man suffer whilst they enjoy abundance (and then some) of everything they WANT.

Human NEEDS should come before human GREED.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Blaine91555
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


Nothing is free. The money came out of taxes. The taxes come from the citizens.


We all pay taxes...just depends what we get for it. It's not like we have a lower standard of living that you guys...in fact, with guaranteed universal health care and stable banks, it is better to some extent.


The best MD's will always go were the best money is or they will move on to other more lucrative endeavors. That leaves the bottom of the barrel to service medical needs.


Nonsense...I get first rate service from world-class physicians and specialists. The biggest problems we had came from a neo-con 'common sense revolution' that was elected and gutted services and cut off welfare to give tax cuts to the rich...sound familiar? Threw their butts out and we're still recovering.


Are we to believe that Canadians overwhelm our medical system along the border because health care is adequate?


Elective treatment can get in line in some places...I've heard...never experienced it or known anybody who did. Always first class treatment when you need it.


The fellow I met in Whitehorse who had to wait for 18 months for a simple hernia surgery while he and his family went broke was a real person.


Can't answer that, except to say that WH is not exactly the centre of the universe, and I'm sure there is a back story there. Bottom line is that we get our health care...and it is first rate...and nobody is sent away or has to put a second on the house, or sacrifice their kids education for an operation.

Can't see much wrong with that.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 08:12 AM
link   
I am at a loss in understanding why Americans are afraid of a universal health care system.
Here in the UK the NHS runs alongside private health insurance with no problems.
I have had thousands of pounds spent on my health, have never had to wait more than two weeks for a hospital appointment and the two cancer scares I had I was seen within days. Six times an in-patient in the last four years including a cardiac arrest and my appendics out and now a three monthly infusion for fibromyalgia.
In the USA my insurance premiums would have hit the roof, far beyond my pocket.
It may not be a right but in a rich civilised country everyone should be entitled to decent health care be they rich or poor.

After watching 'Making a Killing' I would say the drug companies have far more power in the USA than they do here in the UK.

Part one of Making a Killing.
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Once again the NHS topic..
Its completely FALSE that a government runned NHS ruins the private health sector..
Its a big LIE shoving down your throats!! Reality is not equal to any economic theory.. There is life beyond it!
There are many countries in the world that have a NHS and the private health sector is thriving! Portugal is one of those..
It is completely possible for both to co-exist!
You know why?
Because health is not a damn product that you buy on a supermarket, at the lowest price!
Health is a high importance service that people that can, WILL PAY more to get a faster, better, personal and nicer service!



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by lagnar
There are so many good points in this thread is was very tough to be selective as to which got stars, but flagged indeed.

This is obviously a two edged sword, IMHO. On one hand you have the people who can't even afford insurance premiums finally getting attention that's most likely built up for quite awhile. But on the other hand, the Government is "taking" control. It seems inevitable that it's going to be pushed through, just as all the bailouts have been - whether 80% of the population disagrees or not.

This one fact alone leads me right to a gigantic red flag. We must keep in mind that this is being done whether we want it or not. I would even go as far to say you can rest assured that we are not getting a say in it at all - the corporations who pay for and dictate 'our' congressman's vote (or 'sway') are all who are being considered. In other words, the corporations who supply the rancher with the cheapest feed are who controls the livestock's well-being - as well as what we eat btw (*cough* Monsanto! *cough*). Anyway, it's a easy precept to understand...go where the money goes for any real predictability, let alone an ample measure of the consideration within.

I'm an American, so my only portal to other country's health care is pretty much just Micheal Moore's "Sicko. It simply leads me to this conclusion:

If a government is afraid of their people's will, then this National Health System has a real chance of being a huge benefit to most involved (this wouldn't necessarily exclude decision makers), but if the government controls 'its' people, I'd have to say that the corporations will be in total control of their livestock.

I guess the only question left is, "What kind of government do we have here? One in Full Control of its people, or one where The People control what happens? Do we have a government with good intentions, or do we have a government with self-serving corporate agendas?"

Hmm...seems I've always known there was a good reason not to like Capitalism. In my opinion, we have them right where they want us.

We honestly deserve everything we get, I believe.


Stared!! Excelent Post!
Dont attack the National Health Service as a concept because it works!
Attack the extreme capitalistic and neo-conservatice approach that you always supported!



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
As a business owner, I want to see the cost differential.

To be honest the healthcare costs we pay for our employees have shot up astronomically since we started our company in 2004. It's to the point where it's becoming a huge problem. Something has to be done about it. And if "making it a right" comes in at a much better cost... then I'm all for it!




Im with you there. My husband is a business owner as well. The cost of insurance is insane. Anyway I watched them debate this with Geithner. It was stated that if this goes through, there will be a new tax added on to everyone's paycheck, a bit like the social security. I didnt hear what was expected of the employers, only that if they dont pay they will be fined. So, we are not very excited to see the the bottom line on this one.


Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Don't know why you folks need to fight that kind of logic.


Here are some reasons.
For one, they have not proved themselves financially responsible.
Two, our government has a history of practicing euginics.
Three, they have always done what was best for them, not us.
Four, they feel it is their responsibility to controll everything they touch.
Last but not least, they destroy everything they touch.

I dont want them touching me or my health care.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 09:56 AM
link   
I really can't understand the logic in any of this really.

We have people saying, "Why not let your government take care of your health care?" When you can do a search about these same people talking bad about our government about how they are raping us and the likes.

The thought pattern is like this, the government is evil and is ruining everything they can across the globe. Then health care gets brought up, and the government can't do any wrong.

You know what I want? I want the straight story that is what I want. I want all the details with no spin good the bad and the ugly before I make a decision on whether this is good or not.

They are about to shove another 1000 page bill down our throats without even reading it. That right there is enough for me to say no to this.

The socialized medicine in other countries we know for a fact are long wait lines and on a regular basis it takes months and years to see a specialist. There are numerous articles about it.

What we also know, is that health care costs are going to rise whether it is government run or not. We also know for a fact the socialized medicine in other countries deal with cost overruns every year. We also known that they ration care.

We also know what the problems here in America are with the health care system, mainly insurance companies refusing to accept or charging outrageous prices to people with pre-existing conditions.

We already know that the government only pays 20% of the bill for people on medicaid. Which means that the doctors office and hospitals end up passing on that other 80% to the patients that have insurance. Which means insurance companies pick up the tab and causes everybody else health care costs to go up. Also doctors have to care multi-million dollar insurance coverage for their practice because of mal-practice suits. When somebody sues a doctor his lawyer cost gets past on to the consumer.

That is what we know as fact. Now the government wants to come and take over a problem that they themselves helped create. This is the way it has always been through out history, the government creates a problem then people want them to come in and "fix" the problem that they themselves helped create.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


Well here is a nice passage from the text of the House version of the bill.

It will outlaw private coverage


(a) Grandfathered Health Insurance Coverage Defined- Subject to the succeeding provisions of this section, for purposes of establishing acceptable coverage under this division, the term 'grandfathered health insurance coverage' means individual health insurance coverage that is offered and in force and effect before the first day of Y1 if the following conditions are met:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

(1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

(A) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in this paragraph, the individual health insurance issuer offering such coverage does not enroll any individual in such coverage if the first effective date of coverage is on or after the first day of Y1.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

(B) DEPENDENT COVERAGE PERMITTED- Subparagraph (A) shall not affect the subsequent enrollment of a dependent of an individual who is covered as of such first day.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

(2) LIMITATION ON CHANGES IN TERMS OR CONDITIONS- Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink

(3) RESTRICTIONS ON PREMIUM INCREASES- The issuer cannot vary the percentage increase in the premium for a risk group of enrollees in specific grandfathered health insurance coverage without changing the premium for all enrollees in the same risk group at the same rate, as specified by the Commissioner.


Yea, so much for "choice" and such I'm about to start a thread on this since it is a little hard to decipher.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


Could you be more specific where it does say that it will outlaw private coverage? i cant seem to find it on that passage..

Off-topic: GOD, and i thought portuguese legislation was hard to decipher!
That wall of text makes me wanna


[edit on 16-7-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:17 AM
link   
"Haste makes waste" it's an old addage,yet very timely. Congress is considering a thousand page bill,that I venture to say less than 1% have bothered to read. They seem to be rushing head long toward passage.
Congress needs to take these words to heart. "Don't just do something, stand there" Take a breath!!! Let the American people digest some of the finer points of this bill. I agree that our health cars system needs reformation. However I believe we should err on the side of caution.

I would lean more toward cost regulation on meds and proceedures, than a single payer insurance system that would force black market medical care into being.

This is simplistic I know: If you have a tree that the limbs have out grown the root system. You trim the limbs back to a managable proportion. You don't plant a strangleing vine to inhibit the trees growth. That is potentially what this health care plan would do,strangle our health care choice.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 


Here I just started a thread on this here.

I started the thread because my "legalese" is not very good. What you also have to remember is that these things are not going to be written as you would expect them to be written. They will be coded in legalese.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
People need to wake up to the fact that the government is NOT going to take control of health care.

They are not going to own the hospitals, they are not going to manage the doctors.

What they ARE going to do is collect money (like the insurance companies only without all the over head) and pay it out to the hospitals for the care they provide to members of the PUBLIC OPTION.

This is not socialized medicine because the government will not OWN he hospitals.

These above ideas are the insurance industry hard at work with their supporters in government trying to scare you out of something that is in fact good for you.

Lets look at some facts:



PNHP Co-founders Drs. Steffie Woolhandler and David Himmelstein published this definitive study of the administrative costs of the U.S. health system in the August 21, 2003 edition of the New England Journal of Medicine. After analyzing the costs of insurers, employers, doctors, hospitals, nursing homes and home-care agencies in both the U.S. and Canada, they found that administration consumes 31.0 percent of U.S. health spending, double the proportion of Canada (16.7 percent)
link



WASHINGTON (Reuters) - France, Japan and Australia rated best and the United States worst in new rankings focusing on preventable deaths due to treatable conditions in 19 leading industrialized nations, researchers said on Tuesday...The researchers compared these rankings with rankings for the same 19 countries covering the period of 1997 and 1998. France and Japan also were first and second in those rankings, while the United States was 15th, meaning it fell four places in the latest rankings.
link

Well there goes the MYTH that the USA has the BEST health care in the world. While it is not the worst in the world the notion is the best is plain ignorance sold by those who don't want to loose money when they are forced ot actually be competitive.



More than 18,000 adults in the USA die each year because they are uninsured and can't get proper health care, researchers report in a landmark study released Tuesday.
link



In reality, both data and anecdotes show that the American people are already waiting as long or longer than patients living with universal health-care systems.
link

Another common myth debunked.

The USA spends twice as much on health care as OECD countries, an amount that equals $480 BILLION dollars. link

Just of taste of the reality out there that refutes the common arguments against a public option. educate yourself, and you may just end up saving a few of your family members lives.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 10:43 AM
link   
The Government in this country could care less about health care.

It's not about health care or the uninsured it's about medicaire costs. The Democrats want to control the health care system in order to artificially bring down health care costs because of Medicaire.

See, when health care costs go up then the Government has to pay more for Medicare. Instead of the Government living within their means and controlling spending, they just want to spend and waste trillions and tax people to death.

We have a 13 trillion dollar GDP with over 11 trillion dollars in debt. Obama said on C-Span that we are out of money and yet everytime you look around Obama and the Democrats want to spend a trillion dollars.

Who's going to pay for this? In a global economy with cheap labor, Americans can't sustain and pay for all of this borrowing and spending in Washington.

So it's not about Health Care but Prevention. Everytime I see a Doctor on TV they talk about Prevention. Americans health care system is fine and the uninsured has access to health care. The problem is Prevention and you don't need to give the Government 1.5 trillion to take over the health care system.

You can have a Nationally recognized Health Care Charity that gives out 2-3 free physicals per year to the uninsured and if the Doctor feels a follow up is needed, you create a catostrophic fund to handle severe problems.

You can do this and there would be no need to give this wasteful Government that already has us in 11 trillion dollars in debt another 1.5 trillion to waste and spend.

The Government wants to ration out health care in order to control cost and this will lead America down the road to Cuba or Canada.

I was just watching a woman from Canada who had to fly to America to get an MRI because she was put on a waiting list. Well she had a tumor and if she would have waited to get the MRI, she might not be alive today.

The last thing we need is a Government takeover of the Health Care system. This is not Cuba. People risks there lives to get to America from Cuba and we don't need Government controlled Health Care.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Matrix Rising]



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join