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.

 

Health Care Bill will Outlaw Private Insurance

page: 2
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Not really certain where you're getting your information re: outlawing private insurance.

What is of concern to me in regards to the recent bill is there has been no clear indication of how the competing government insurance plan will work to reduce medical costs in general. The battle cry is that costs must be reduced. What is more likely to happen is that corporations will drop private insurance citing inability to pay and opt for the government backed insurance plan.

The real benefit all in all will be outlawing exclusions for pre-existing conditions.




posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


Perhaps if you did not skip over first pieces of the section in question you would not be assuming that this bill is a 'trojan horse' that will end private health care. What I am saying is that the the text on page 16 is misleading is taken OUT OF CONTEXT.


Pages 14 - 15:



TITLE I—PROTECTIONS AND STANDARDS FOR QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLANS
Subtitle A—General Standards SEC. 101. REQUIREMENTS REFORMING HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETPLACE.

(a) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this title is to establish standards to ensure that new health insurance coverage and employment-based health plans that are offered
meet standards guaranteeing access to affordable coverage, essential benefits, and other consumer protections.

(b) REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLANS.
—On or after the first day of Y1, a health benefits plan shall not be a qualified health benefits plan under this division unless the plan meets the applicable requirements of the following subtitles for the type of plan and plan year involved:
(1) Subtitle B (relating to affordable coverage).
(2) Subtitle C (relating to essential benefits).
(3) Subtitle D (relating to consumer protection).

(c) TERMINOLOGY.—In this division:

(1) ENROLLMENT IN EMPLOYMENT-BASED
HEALTH PLANS.—An individual shall be treated as being ‘‘enrolled’’ in an employment-based health plan if the individual is a participant or beneficiary (as such terms are defined in section 3(7) and 3(8), respectively, of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) in such plan.

(2) INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.—The terms ‘‘individual health insurance coverage’’ and ‘‘group health insurance coverage’’ mean health insurance coverage offered in the individual market or large or small group market, respectively, as defined in section 2791 of the Public Health Service Act.


So we see that what is being discussed is a new set of standards that will be required of Health Insurance Providers after this bill goes into law. What you have posted, the content on page 16, is a discussion of 'Grandfathered Policies'. Meaning policies that were in existence PRIOR to the instatement of this bill and that DO NOT meet the new standards of coverage.

Page 16:



SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT 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:

1) LIMITATION ON NEW ENROLLMENT.—(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.

....
link

So ya, no trojan horse here. You can still get private health care, no doubt about it. this is just a bit more deception from those who dont want health care to actually have to be competitive and quality.

I suggest you try reading the bill before commenting on it.


[edit on 16-7-2009 by Animal]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 



Sorry but dont the companies in USA pay already their workers insurance??


It is not mandatory. You can also turn down the business provided insurance and get your own if that is what you want, and you also don't have to have any insurance if you don't want.



At least that was one of the BIG THINGS promoted about living in USA..


I already live here so I don't know how people promote it overseas.


If it IS like this.. whats the difference? Companies will still have to pay.. and LOWER..


Companies currently do not have to provide health insurance, so how is making companies provide insurance is the cost going to be lower? It isn't its going to put many many people out of jobs and cause people to have to take a pay cut.


And dont tell ME i dont see things on the all perspective.. Im a Urban and Regional Planner (NO its not only things like urban design).. I think about those stuff everyday.. Its just that the european model IS working..


I guess if you consider health care rationing and the system always going bankrupt every year "working", then our system is working too.


Beside, companies will ALWAYS move to places where labour is cheaper.. With that justification, to maintain jobs on USA you would advocate doing the same stuff as China, like putting children working..


No, we just have to get rid of NAFTA and lower business taxes, the business tax rates in America is the second highest in the world. It is cheaper for companies to open a factor in China or India and ship the product all the way across the pacific and all the way across the US then it is to open a factory here.

Hrmm, who's fault is that? That would be a government created problem.


Now its me who says you have to move into the 21st century.. Where the value is NOT on things like "context costs", but on "context potential", like the qualification of human resources and HEALTH..


This system you are advocating is as old as the theory of socialism. More government control is moving backwards.

Moving forward would be personal responibility where common everyday people dictate how the market operates. But as long as people have the mentality that people "deserve" stuff just for being born we will never progress, government entitlements only creates dependency. Dependency is morally and ethically wrong.


a strong, healthy and educated population is what attracts the jobs THAT MATTER and that enrich a country!


Nope, low taxes and the ease of making money is what attracts jobs. It has nothing to do with the health and education of a country. Look at India and China. The only thing that matters is the bottom line.

Corporations can import the strong, healthy and educated from anywhere they want.

The things that enrich a country is Personal responsibility and independence. Don't believe me, then why is America the most powerful country in the world? Of course we are losing our status, but look at the programs we have enacted over the past 50 years. Socialist programs.

When people can fend for themselves the world is a much better place.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


I guess you didn't read the article either? You would have seen the part where they contacted the House Ways and Means committee and they verified their thoughts.

I guess you also need to learn how to read, because no where in those sections does it say anything about "private insurance companies".

The sections you listed describe the health plans the government is going to offer.

The last section that the article states, that you can keep your current insurance if not then you have to get a new government sponsored plan.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Animal
 


I guess you didn't read the article either? You would have seen the part where they contacted the House Ways and Means committee and they verified their thoughts.

I guess you also need to learn how to read, because no where in those sections does it say anything about "private insurance companies".

The sections you listed describe the health plans the government is going to offer.

The last section that the article states, that you can keep your current insurance if not then you have to get a new government sponsored plan.


Wow, I now you can read, I know you can think, so what prevented you from being able to understand the pieces of the bill I pasted in for you?

What do you think this means:


(page 16) The purpose of this title is to establish standards to ensure that new health insurance coverage and employment-based health plans that are offered
meet standards guaranteeing access to affordable coverage, essential benefits, and other consumer protections.

(page 15) (2) INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.—The terms ‘‘individual health insurance coverage’’ and ‘‘group health insurance coverage’’ mean health insurance coverage offered in the individual market or large or small group market, respectively, as defined in section 2791 of the Public Health Service Act.
?

Read the bill, it is PAINFULLY obvious they are not going to make private insurance illegal. PERIOD.

Also, I didnt comment on your article because is is drivel.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Animal]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 



The purpose of this title is to establish standards to ensure that new health insurance coverage and employment-based health plans that are offered
meet standards guaranteeing access to affordable coverage, essential benefits, and other consumer protections.


And where does it say anything about private insurance companies? It doesn't.

This bill is establishing government run health insurance.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Animal
 



The purpose of this title is to establish standards to ensure that new health insurance coverage and employment-based health plans that are offered
meet standards guaranteeing access to affordable coverage, essential benefits, and other consumer protections.


And where does it say anything about private insurance companies? It doesn't.

This bill is establishing government run health insurance.


(page 15) (2) INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.—The terms ‘‘individual health insurance coverage’’ and ‘‘group health insurance coverage’’ mean health insurance coverage offered in the individual market or large or small group market, respectively, as defined in section 2791 of the Public Health Service Act.

[edit on 16-7-2009 by Animal]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Picao84

This system you are advocating is as old as the theory of socialism. More government control is moving backwards.

Moving forward would be personal responibility where common everyday people dictate how the market operates. But as long as people have the mentality that people "deserve" stuff just for being born we will never progress, government entitlements only creates dependency. Dependency is morally and ethically wrong.


Where did i talk about government control? Where did i talk about "deserve"? Where did i talk about dependency?

You are putting words on my mount with your "fixed" ideas! One more time you are seeing the world has black or white.. left and right..


Nope, low taxes and the ease of making money is what attracts jobs. It has nothing to do with the health and education of a country. Look at India and China. The only thing that matters is the bottom line.


Yeah.. you are right.. For low payment and low technology jobs!
And you are forgetting that both India and China have National Health and Education Systems! EPIC FAIL!
You can bet that if education and health were only for the wealthy things would be way different..
Look at Africa! Its the most poor continent on the world! I bet they would kiss enterprises asses for them to go there.. Why dont they??


Corporations can import the strong, healthy and educated from anywhere they want.


Yes they can.. But have you heard about a phenomenon called glocalization? In a global economy, the local caracterisctics are very important! If you have a good university there and that matters to your enterprise you will not leave.. GOOGLE Tampere (Finland) and NOKIA.. you will learn a thing or two..


The things that enrich a country is Personal responsibility and independence.


I agree 100% with you.. but i have to ask.. where did i say the contrary?
I dont advocate NHS and NES for the sake of equality.. I advocate them for economy related reasons!
As for the demise of USA, IMO you spoiled your kids.. And thats the reason of too much wealth and the easyness (lazyness) related to it.. They dont have to fight for anything.. What you are advocating.. you did not do.. It has nothing to do (or few) with government.. Just look at yourselfs..

Again (uff).. stop thinkind black or white.. left or right..



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


The section you mention only points to where "Large Market" and "Small Market" is defined in that section of the bill they are referencing.

There is no need for a grandfather clause if they are only going change the regulations to the current bill.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 12:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 



Where did i talk about government control? Where did i talk about "deserve"? Where did i talk about dependency?

You are putting words on my mount with your "fixed" ideas! One more time you are seeing the world has black or white.. left and right..


You are advocating a Government Run Insurance plan aren't you? You are advocating a socialized health plan aren't you? Government is control.

No you are looking at the world in a left vs. right issue, it isn't I. My idea's aren't fixed. You are just trying to force your socialist ways upon me by using irrationality and no logic.

I've had this conversation many many times with socialist, and it never goes anywhere because the socialist is fixated on pushing their big government ideas upon me.

We need Health Care reform, but you feel that government run health care is the best and only option.


Yeah.. you are right.. For low payment and low technology jobs!
And you are forgetting that both India and China have National Health and Education Systems! EPIC FAIL!


The only failure is on your part, China is a Communist Country, and India is a Socialist country and the government dictates just about everything they can do. Oh what was that again, yep Dependency.


You can bet that if education and health were only for the wealthy things would be way different..
Look at Africa! Its the most poor continent on the world! I bet they would kiss enterprises asses for them to go there.. Why dont they??


Private enterprise is already in Africa they are exploiting the continents resources, causing and funding various conflicts in the region to install governments that will allow them to operate unabated.

Look at Zimbabwe and South Africa, both countries have gone to hell since the adaptation of Marxism.



[edit on 16-7-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
reply to post by Picao84


You are advocating a Government Run Insurance plan aren't you? You are advocating a socialized health plan aren't you? Government is control


Im not advocating a single player system! European countries dont have a single player system! The things is that you DONT NEED private insurance to go to private hospitals! Government is not mandating anything! (And we do have private insurance if we want yes). We are a balanced system. We are not State controlled.



The only failure is on your part, China is a Communist Country, and India is a Socialist country and the government dictates just about everything they can do. Oh what was that again, yep Dependency.


What does this have to do with the context? We were talking about where companies go and why! It was you that presented India and China as good! Not me! You presented them like a good example, because enterprises were flying there! Not me! EPIC FAIL again!


Private enterprise is already in Africa they are exploiting the continents resources, causing and funding various conflicts in the region to install governments that will allow them to operate unabated.

Look at Zimbabwe and South Africa, both countries have gone to hell since the adaptation of Marxism.


Exactly! You keep reenforcing my points! Private enterprises are pludging resources! Not "making business", not making the country developing.. Precisely because there are NO BASES for development there, aka as an educated and healthy population... Thats what you get with a dumb and fragile population..

Are you listening me? Im not advocating marxism! How can i be advocating marxism when im talking about globalisation? Globalisation equals FREE MARKET! Im talking about development factors that exceed the classical monetary ones.. Im not saying the monetary one isnt relevant.. but its not the ONLY factor! There are plenty of examples of it! Hell you have a place called Silicon Valley on USA! Study its history! Why did it appear? It was not only because of low taxes


Thats why i say again that you only see left or right, black or white..


[edit on 16-7-2009 by Picao84]



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   
according to the CBO, the measure Congress wants to pass will increase the cost of healthcare, not lower them.


The director of the Congressional Budget Office issued a warning to Democrats Thursday that their health care proposals would raise costs, not lower them.

One day after a Senate panel approved its version of the health care reform plan, the first committee to do so, CBO Director Doug Elmendorf gave a dose of bad medicine to a separate committee.

Asked by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., whether costs would be lowered -- also known as "bending the curve" -- Elmendorf responded: "The curve is being raised."


www.foxnews.com...



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


How sweet of you! Usually you suspect of government.. Its full of lobbyists and such..
But when it fits your bill.. LOOK someone from government says this!


You are no different from those you point the finger at..



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 


You seem to take pride in finding contradictions in what people post.

Didn't know it was such a crime to post the latest news over this subject?

Kinda strange that the Democrats control the Congress and White House but can't seem to get this guy to play ball with them. Furthermore, I posted that because I believe what the guy says is true.

Anytime the government steps in you can expect things to cost more.

Anyway, carry on with your crusade.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by Picao84
 


You seem to take pride in finding contradictions in what people post.

Didn't know it was such a crime to post the latest news over this subject?

Kinda strange that the Democrats control the Congress and White House but can't seem to get this guy to play ball with them. Furthermore, I posted that because I believe what the guy says is true.

Anytime the government steps in you can expect things to cost more.

Anyway, carry on with your crusade.


Really its not something i take pride of.. Just wanted to help get you free of the left-right box you are in. But proceed.. Be happy inside your box



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Picao84
 



m not advocating a single player system! European countries dont have a single player system! The things is that you DONT NEED private insurance to go to private hospitals! Government is not mandating anything! (And we do have private insurance if we want yes). We are a balanced system. We are not State controlled.


Can you opt out of the taxes you pay to maintain the cost of the health care system? No, I didn't think so. It's single payer. Even the people with private insurance are paying for everybody's health.

So what you have private hospitals, that doesn't make it any less a "single payer system". It's all double speak. You just get wrapped up in what people in the Ivory towers tell you and can't see through all the propaganda and see that things in reality are not what some academic that has never worked a real job thinks.



What does this have to do with the context? We were talking about where companies go and why! It was you that presented India and China as good! Not me! You presented them like a good example, because enterprises were flying there! Not me! EPIC FAIL again!


Yeah.. you are right.. For low payment and low technology jobs!
And you are forgetting that both India and China have National Health and Education Systems! EPIC FAIL!


That is what you said, this is what I said


Look at India and China. The only thing that matters is the bottom line.


Just about all of the manufacturing has moved from America to China and India, I said nothing about them being good. You pulled, as the term you use, an "EPIC FAIL" on reading comprehension.

In business there is only one thing that matters and that is the Bottom Line, business will go where ever they need to in order to increase their profit. That is the way it works that is the way it will always work.


Exactly! You keep reenforcing my points! Private enterprises are pludging resources! Not "making business", not making the country developing.. Precisely because there are NO BASES for development there, aka as an educated and healthy population... Thats what you get with a dumb and fragile population..


Your comprehension on world affairs is astoundingly lacking. The people not being educated and healthy has nothing to do with it, ITS THE FREAKING GOVERNMENT THAT WONT GET THE BOOT OF THEIR NECK!


Are you listening me? Im not advocating marxism! How can i be advocating marxism when im talking about globalisation? Globalisation equals FREE MARKET! Im talking about development factors that exceed the classical monetary ones.. Im not saying the monetary one isnt relevant.. but its not the ONLY factor! There are plenty of examples of it! Hell you have a place called Silicon Valley on USA! Study its history! Why did it appear? It was not only because of low taxes


Globalization is the precise reason why the corporations are looting and pillaging the African countries. Globalization is not "free market" Globalization is corporate domination of the world that's sole purpose is to create economic dependency.

Silicon Valley appeared because a university had financial problems and they leased the land to high tech companies. They built houses for cheap. In an effort to spur economic growth for the university and area. Once again they created the conditions that increased the profit margins of these companies.


Thats why i say again that you only see left or right, black or white..


No, you only see the world in black and white and left in right.

You fail to see that there are economic factors that are hard cold proven tried and true and are reality. You refuse to accept that.

The fact is the USA can not afford any kind of government run anything. The country is already at a trillion dollar deficit, we are 12 Trillion dollars in debt and it is only rising.

We have the second highest business tax rates in the world. We do not have socialized medicine, or insurance, or what ever kind of double speak term you want to use for it, and our taxes are not that much less than the rest of the world.

What you don't get is that when it comes to finance, there are things that work and things that don't work, it isn't about left and right, it is black and white.

Either works or it doesn't work. It's as simple as that. You cannot seem to differentiate the fact that not everything is right or left. There are something that are just black and white, there is no political ideology involved. But there are people that try to make it a political issue. Then you have the people that buy into it, because they reuse to learn from history.

If you look at the history of medical cost in the US up until Nixon made sweeping reforms our cost of GDP for health care was not the most expensive in the world. The government has went and created all this mess and now they want to go and take control of our health care.

They created it and now they want to fix it putting more power in their hands. I already know what is going to happen this is going to get rushed through and this is going to screw everything up and then the government is going to take over all of health care. Everybody that is for this bill has said at one point or another that they want a single payer system.

The people in government do not work for us they work for themselves. I am not so naive to believe that government run anything is the best way to go when history tells me our private system worked very will up until the government got involved and screwed everything up.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Awesome find!

I've passed this information on to my legislators. They probably haven't figured it out yet. Not that they care.

I got an email about the legislation this morning:

Can you believe this B.S.!



Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2009, 6:09 PM

NEW HEALTH CARE BILL


FINALLY...THE $50,000 QUESTION WAS ASKED !!!!!.....

YESTERDAY ON THE "ABC, BETTER KNOWN AS THE ALL BARRACK CHANNEL, THE
OBAMA SPECIAL ON HEALTH CARE"......OBAMA WAS ASKED

"MR. PRESIDENT WILL YOU AND YOUR FAMILY GIVE UP YOUR CURRENT HEALTH
CARE PROGRAM AND JOIN THE NEW "UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE PROGRAM" THAT THE
REST OF US WILL BE ON ????.....

OBAMA IGNORED THE QUESTION AND DIDN'T ANSWER IT !!!...A NUMBER OF
SENATORS WERE ASKED T HE SAME QUESTION AND THERE RESPONSE WAS...WE WILL
THINK ABOUT IT !!!! AND THEY DID.

IT WAS ANNOUNCED TODAY ON THE NEWS THAT THE "KENNEDY HEALTH CARE
BILL"... HAS WRITTEN INTO IT THAT CONGRESS WILL BE EXEMPT
( FROM THIS GREAT HEALTH CARE PLAN)..

HOW ABOUT THOSE APPLES...NOT GOOD ENOUGH FOR OBAMA OR CONGRESS.. BUT
"OK" FOR THE REST OF US ????????

WE..THE AMERICANS NEED TO STOP THIS ...ASAP !!!!... AND REVOLT..

THIS IS WRONG !!!!!

IF YOU AGREE PLEASE PASS THIS ON ....IF NOT PLAN
TO SUFFER ( WITH THE
OBAMA HEALTH CARE PLAN ....FOR FREE....WHILE OUR POLITICIANS MAKE SURE
THAT THEY TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAT OVER STUFFED AS##ES


I did forward this on to the few people I know who care and my legislators.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Hastobemoretolife
 


Wait, so you are implying that the average tax bill for a middle class american will go up by more than 10,800? I understand you are very emotional about this issue, but is that a fact you are pulling from somewhere or just your opinion?

I personally think the whole thing is broken. They tried to appease everyone, which frankly never works. If you make the republicans happy, the democrats are upset, and visa versa. And the libertarians are ticked off no matter who comes up with the law.

Incidentally, I have a friend who is already on "socialized medicine". She makes 12,000 per year and pays $90/mo through Humana which is managing her medicare/caid plan. They have been government paid, but PRIVATELY managed for a few years now. She never has to wait for treatment, she goes to great hospitals and awesome doctors. Her copay is usually $5 per month and she just went in for major surgery today and her copay was $170. Seems to work great for her.

Insurance companies are in the business of SELLING insurance. The only way that is profitable is if they can keep claims to a bare minimum. This does not show any sort of concern for the well being of their customers. Therefore the $1100 or so I pay a month ($500 out of my paycheck and $600 the company pays directly) ends up providing me with less than 10% return on my investment. (in other words, I pay roughly $13K per year in premiums for my family and we end up getting only about $1300 in net benefit from it.)

The government route is pricey too, especially when all the special interest groups get their mits on what they deem "free money". That and the fact that they don't have to answer to anyone, even the taxpayers, since the chances of a taxpayer revolt putting enough people into office to fix a broken system is miniscule.

The best answer is probably something like no insurance at all or a very tightly regulated insurance market that has to meet federal standards for coverage or whatever. So government controlled but privately managed.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   
reply to post by sad_eyed_lady
 


You know it's this kind of stuff that people just completely ignore when it comes to this health care bill.

Is it really that good if the politicians and their families are going to be exempt from participating? No it is nothing but a power grab that is only going to benefit the corporations and government officials.

This is BS.

Good info to add.



posted on Jul, 16 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 



Wait, so you are implying that the average tax bill for a middle class american will go up by more than 10,800?


Yes, because it is going to kill small business. Which means less jobs, which means all that money has to come from somewhere. It might not go up immediately, but as inflation progresses the increase of the tax will go up. Because of the lack of economic growth taxes will be raised to compensate.


I understand you are very emotional about this issue, but is that a fact you are pulling from somewhere or just your opinion?


It's fact. The tax burden just keeps rising. Not strictly due to health care, but we still have state and local taxes to pay. There are many other social programs that still require funding, through taxes

It is the whole tax burden put together, not just the tax burden for health care. Then there will also be the number of people that don't have health care will be burdening the system even more, more people means the more money it is going to cost.

I'm emotional about this subject because the government is trying to engineer a takeover of the health care system when the government is the ones that screwed up in the first place. But people are too ignorant to understand that.


I personally think the whole thing is broken. They tried to appease everyone, which frankly never works. If you make the republicans happy, the democrats are upset, and visa versa. And the libertarians are ticked off no matter who comes up with the law.


I agree in a sense. It is not totally broken the special interest has just been allowed to run wild and people keep voting in self serving politicians that refuse to reign them in. That goes for Dem's and Repub's. And I agree the libertarians don't ever seem to be happy about anything.


Incidentally, I have a friend who is already on "socialized medicine". She makes 12,000 per year and pays $90/mo through Humana which is managing her medicare/caid plan. They have been government paid, but PRIVATELY managed for a few years now. She never has to wait for treatment, she goes to great hospitals and awesome doctors. Her copay is usually $5 per month and she just went in for major surgery today and her copay was $170. Seems to work great for her.


Guess who makes up the cost that she doesn't pay? Everybody else that doesn't have government provided insurance. Also that increases the tax burden of everybody else. The doctors and hospitals make up the cost by raising their rates and cost of supplies, because the government only pays 20% of the cost to the doctors and hospitals.

Also Medicaid is bankrupt. Because of people cheating the system. This is like everything else, you will find some people that it works for and other that it doesn't work for. Also there are a bunch of doctors that quit taking medicaid patients because the government is not paying them.


The best answer is probably something like no insurance at all or a very tightly regulated insurance market that has to meet federal standards for coverage or whatever. So government controlled but privately managed.


I would go for the option of no insurance. Or more specifically insurance that you get on your house or whatever something like that.

This idea I read somebody else mention in another thread, but you can buy an insurance plan that covers like heart attacks or whatever. I don't know if that would work.

But despite everything we would need government regulation, I'm not so keen on price controls, but also tort reform would go a long way in reigning in the cost of health care. Every time a doctor has to go to court and their malpractice insurance has to defend him his premium goes up. Which that cost gets passed on to the patient.

I know Nixon is the one that did something to the health care industry that allowed the health care costs to run wild. I've looked at it, and our private system was inline with all the socialized systems all around the globe before Nixon screwed it all up.

That is why I'm emotional about this issue because we don't have to spend any money to reform health care, its just a matter of undoing what Nixon did. It's a simple fix of course there would be other things the need to be reformed also, but it would go along way.

It would just be nice if people actually just took the time and find out what the problem with the system is. They keep saying cost. But they never say what causes the cost. Mainly because they would be exposed.

I really feel like we are not getting all the facts. One thing I do know though is that everybody's tax burden is going to go through the roof.




top topics



 
6
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join