It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Economists have found that rising health care costs correlate with significant drops in health insurance coverage, and national surveys also show that the primary reason people are uninsured is due to the high and escalating cost of health insurance coverage.8
A recent study found that 62 percent of all bankruptcies filed in 2007 were linked to medical expenses. Of those who filed for bankruptcy, nearly 80 percent had health insurance.9
According to another published article, about 1.5 million families lose their homes to foreclosure every year due to unaffordable medical costs.10
Without health care reform, small businesses will pay nearly $2.4 trillion dollars over the next ten years in health care costs for their workers, 178,000 small business jobs will be lost by 2018 as a result of health care costs, $834 billion in small business wages will be lost due to high health care costs over the next ten years, small businesses will lose $52.1 billion in profits to high health care costs and 1.6 million small business workers will suffer “job lock“— roughly one in 16 people currently insured by their employers.11
Creating a public option CREATES MORE BUREAUCRACY. The fact that I actually have to point this out to anyone is rediculous. Having too much bureaucracy in the health care system now IS the problem so do yourself a favor (along with everybody else that actually wants reform and not to just swing from Obama's, well, you get it) and help get rid of the bureaucracy instead of adding to it. Start by looking past everything that you are given as a little hot topic issue and actually do some research and above all, use some common sense. Adding something to something doesnt get rid of something, it only makes more of something.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by Mak Manto
Let me give you a story...
This was given to Obama, and you probably know of it about the Texan woman who had breast cancer. Now, she had insurance, and was going to get a double mastectomy.
Why did she lose her insurance? Because of acne she had in the past and her weight being wrong...
Do you understand where that pre-existing clause is at? It's insane, and it's used by insurance companies to weed out thousands of people...
Did you know that "story" is A LIE! The "woman" went on to get all her benefits and her treatment. She survived another 5 years before she died from a DIFFERENT condition.
Look it up, genius, instead of spouting false propaganda. I'm "calling you out" on this.
You take everything Obama says as the words of the messiah. He lied.
Want the truth?
Robin Lynn Beaton, 59, of Waxahachie, Texas had her insurance suspended because she failed to own up to a previous heart condition and did not list her weight accurately.
In Beaton’s case, the insurance company opened an investigation after her visit to a dermatologist and just before her scheduled breast cancer surgery, forcing postponement of her operation almost on the eve of it. The earlier problems on her enrollment form were discovered and her coverage was canceled.
Rep. Joe Barton, Beaton’s [conservative] Republican congressman in Texas, assisted her in her appeal and the insurer restored her coverage, enabling her to get the surgery 10 weeks after it was postponed. She told The Associated Press she owes Barton and his aides her life.
Get your facts straight, if you want any credibility.
But you don't, and I know why:
"Anonymous Obama Blogger Campaign Attacks Media and Critics
Friday, October 2, 2009
YOU are a disinfo agent!
I've got you pegged.
I'll be watching you, Fed.
Originally posted by jdub297
To think you have to explain such simple things here boggles the mind.
I came to this forum looking for new and creative thinking.
Now, I just don't know.
I believe that the health care system truly needs to be reformed. There are many sad cases out there, not only the fact that some people cant afford it. I just dont understand how so many people dont see the reaccuring history that happens when the government gets involved with something...it never turns out good what so ever in the long run.
Unlike those bills, though, the Senate Finance bill won't have a public insurance option to compete with private insurers. Nor does it allow Medicare to use its bargaining power to negotiate lower drug prices, or adequately subsidize millions of middle-class families who will be required to buy health insurance that will be hard for them to afford. In short, it's a great deal for private insurers and Big Pharma but not such a great deal for middle-class Americans.
Originally posted by jdub297
reply to post by NorEaster
I think insurance and government have a place in healthcare, but only as backstops for catastrophic illness and accident s that would overwhelm averasge people.
For routine care, basic preventive services, maintenance and minor injuries/illnesses, people should be able to selct from competing providers with their own tax-free dollars.
A doctor in New York tried this and was attacked by liberal press, organized health care, and the State of New York for unfairly competing. He offered such services for a small monthly fee, like a subscription, and was CRITICIZED for it!
"NY regulators frown on doctor's flat-fee system"
Dr. John Muney is negotiating with state insurance regulators to maintain the system he arranged with patients who pay $79 a month for unlimited office visits
THAT'S the problem with American health care.
"Why Health Insurance Doesn’t Work, and How to Fix It"
Health insurance has failed because it underwrites basic certainties, rather than risks. What risk is there that an average working adult will need medical attention in a 12 month span? Probably 50%; maybe better. Thus, a third party guarantor betting against the attendant expenses must be able to charge an inflated "premium" for his promise to pay the bet if he loses. The amount of his payment does not matter as long as his margin, the difference between the premium and the payment ( and the XX% risk-factor), is carefully maintained.
Since the need for some medical attention by a "fee for service" provider is high, the insured risk is not really a risk at all, but an eventual certainty. Over a 5 year period, the insurer/guarantor/bettor will almost certainly be called upon to pay. And, since the bettor does not barter or receive the services, he is mostly excluded from the base transaction. Attempts to inject himself into the purchase and provision of the services skews the focus of the underlying relationship away from the consumer and toward the guarantor, usually without consideration of the medical necessity or efficacy of the services sought, and more importantly to him, toward the cost/return on investment calculations vital to his success.