Health Care II

[dave lackey]

For all of those wishing to discuss the post-mortem issues of the Health Care bill that was passed by our government, please use this thread, if you so desire. The first thread was rendered invalid by our cynical humor, so I deleted it as part of history, I suppose, and it is just as well.

Freedom died a little bit yesterday, but the court challenges are about to begin.... welcome to the world of politics in the US.

I have no desire to continue in this discussion, so I will leave it intact, if for no other reason, than I think a lot of us have no other outlet for discussing anything like this. I would be interested in your viewpoints, though...thanks to all who posted in the first thread.🙂

 

[antiquark]

Congratulations America for joining the rest of the industrialized world and providing health care for all!

 

[40oz]

Freedom died a little bit yesterday

Well at least you resisted using over-heated partisan hyperbole.

It's far from a done deal anyway.

And antiquark, that's not exactly what has been done. There isn't any provision to pay for healthcare for every American out of their taxes. And we already provided nationalized healthcare to senior citizens, veterans, the disabled, and women with children (including the children). Some states further subsidized health insurance for low income individuals and families. The fact that not every state did is the root issue behind the current bill, as well as the rather spotty record of states to ensure access to health insurance plans that actually provided a benefit. In our country it's left to the states to oversee insurance. And not every state delivered regulations that ensured health insurance plans actually provide useful covereage - IOW in some states you could think your employer group plan covered hospital stays only to find it only covered the first few days or stays for a limited number of conditions. Or you were inelegible for your employer plan due to not being 100% healthy, i.e. you actually needed insurance.

Since most insurance companies in this country conduct business in many states, and given that our constitution specifically tasks Congress with governing interstate commerce, the door is open for Congress to address the situation.

The big fight over this is merely partisan politics, it has little to do with the actual details. Republicans want a Republican President next election. If they block the current President from accomplishing anything during his term, they can pretend Democratic Presidents don't help the country. Apparently having a Republican President means more to American Republicans than doing their job and actually serving their country.

 

[jky]

40oz: Though I'm in no position to comment about the state of affairs down south.... I personally think that our healthcare system up here is pretty decent.

Your Joe-blow peddling for money at your neighborhood's 7-11 is pretty much entitled to the same things Mr. Upper-middle class has with repsect to health care.

I can comment a little more on Asia....
For example:

Hemodialysis (for people with kidney failure) 3 times per week can cost approx $1000.00 USD/week. That's just to stay alive. Add to this medications, doctor's visits and follow ups, diagnostics....
Here in Alberta, Canada.... it's free.

Another example:

In Manila, blood transfusions can cost up to P 80,000 each (approx $ 1500 USD for each therapy). If a patient had a condition that required this on a weekly or biweekly basis, the cost is unamiginable... and again add the meds, Dr's visits, etc....
Up north here... free.

Now "free" means that the public gets taxed a little more.... But working in healthcare and seeing patients get the treatment they require without having to remortgage their home or worry about feeding their kids ... I don't mind the taxes so much.

Who know... I might need all of this in the future....

 

[FS Vontz]

Heaven forbid that one of the world's wealthiest countries should look after all its sick

 

[splitimageview]

Congratulations America for joining the rest of the industrialized world and providing health care for all!

Myth.

with no health care bill, 54 million uninsured as of 2019
with the bill, 24 million uninsured as of 2019

Source: Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Myth.

with no health care bill, 54 million uninsured as of 2019
with the bill, 24 million uninsured as of 2019

Source: Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation.

Good start, though.

Most people would regard it as progress to reduce the number of uninsured by over 50%.

My own suspicion is that once people realize there aren't death squads prowling around and murdering people, a further expansion of the American national health service is inevitable.

Cheers,

R.

 

[DNG]

Well at least you resisted using over-heated partisan hyperbole.

It's far from a done deal anyway.

And antiquark, that's not exactly what has been done. There isn't any provision to pay for healthcare for every American out of their taxes. And we already provided nationalized healthcare to senior citizens, veterans, the disabled, and women with children (including the children). Some states further subsidized health insurance for low income individuals and families. The fact that not every state did is the root issue behind the current bill, as well as the rather spotty record of states to ensure access to health insurance plans that actually provided a benefit. In our country it's left to the states to oversee insurance. And not every state delivered regulations that ensured health insurance plans actually provide useful covereage - IOW in some states you could think your employer group plan covered hospital stays only to find it only covered the first few days or stays for a limited number of conditions. Or you were inelegible for your employer plan due to not being 100% healthy, i.e. you actually needed insurance.

Since most insurance companies in this country conduct business in many states, and given that our constitution specifically tasks Congress with governing interstate commerce, the door is open for Congress to address the situation.

The big fight over this is merely partisan politics, it has little to do with the actual details. Republicans want a Republican President next election. If they block the current President from accomplishing anything during his term, they can pretend Democratic Presidents don't help the country. Apparently having a Republican President means more to American Republicans than doing their job and actually serving their country.

Well said, and it reads like you did your research to cut through all the GOP fairy tails...And truly understand Regulating out of control insurance policies (Companies), that want huge premiums paid, but, won't honor the policies they wrote, and do anything they can to cancel your insurance plan. IE: in Buy a policy from me, But, you'll never get 100% delivery on it when needed the most! Yes, they need to profit... But, the promise of paying the big bills is their end of the "Contract". Yes, it is a contract!, and should be 100% binding. This New Health Care Bill address some of these main issues.

 

[crawdiddy]

One of the Big Lies that opponents have been repeating, is that the majority of Americans are opposed to Health Care Reform.

The truth is a majority are in favor of reform, even including a public option. That's why Democrats won big in 2008.

Just as the Republicans did what they were elected to do in 2002 -- start 2 wars -- the Democrats have done what we elected them for in 2008 -- reform Health Care.

The tea baggers don't seem to understand the majority-rule part of democracy. Or maybe they believe they are the majority, simply because they shout louder than everybody else.

 

[DNG]

One of the Big Lies that opponents have been repeating, is that the majority of Americans are opposed to Health Care Reform.

The truth is a majority are in favor of reform, even including a public option. That's why Democrats won big in 2008.

Just as the Republicans did what they were elected to do in 2002 -- start 2 wars -- the Democrats have done what we elected them for in 2008 -- reform Health Care.

The tea baggers don't seem to understand the majority-rule part of democracy. Or maybe they believe they are the majority, simply because they shout louder than everybody else.

A lot of "tea party" roots are in very "White GOP" sectors.
I believe the GOP is mad as hell that they stone walled for 16 years out of 24 years (GB41 & GB43 with Clinton between them for 8 years) by doing nothing for health care reform. And even though these VERY RIGHT sectors -- including a militia group from the 90's that had such people as Timothy Mekfay and other "anti government folks-- are not, for the most part a part of the GOP, but, they do have common goals.. to STOP the President from doing what he was voted in to do. So the GOP tolerates them. The Stone throwing and racial slurs and death threats are not going from the more moderate GOP, but from the far right.

The GOP has had one year to help with the HCR, but, because they were not "In-Power", they'd be damned if a Democratic President would do it! (and when they had 2 GOP presidents in office, what did they do for HCR? NaDa !!! And they still continue to block everything they can even though they were "VOTED INTO OFFICE" to do all they can for all Americans. IT WILL BACKFIRE IN NOVEMBER. IMO....We shall see

 

[chris00nj]

The poor, disabled, and elderly already have Medicare and Medicaid, so the US already looked after its sick.

The statistics that 30 million didn't have health insurance were fradulent. They included non-citizens, and people who went without insurance for even one day during the year. In 2008, I changed jobs and for one weekend, I didn't have health insurance, so I was in that statistic.

I think most Americans were in favor of reforming the healthcare industry, but people's view of what reform is, is different. Most Americans do not want a national healthcare system. We go to the post office and the DMV and we don't want that same experience when we need surgery. All monopolies stink, including ones that are government run. We see what's happened in the UK where it takes two years to have surgery.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The poor, disabled, and elderly already have Medicare and Medicaid, so the US already looked after its sick.

The statistics that 30 million didn't have health insurance were fradulent. They included non-citizens, and people who went without insurance for even one day during the year. In 2008, I changed jobs and for one weekend, I didn't have health insurance, so I was in that statistic.

I think most Americans were in favor of reforming the healthcare industry, but people's view of what reform is, is different. Most Americans do not want a national healthcare system. We go to the post office and the DMV and we don't want that same experience when we need surgery. All monopolies stink, including ones that are government run. We see what's happened in the UK where it takes two years to have surgery.

Highlight 1: another denial of democracy. If 'most Americans' don't want it, why did they vote for a president who did?

Highlight 2: Unless it's serious. Frances was on the operating table about 10 days after the initial diagnosis of breast cancer. And in France I had my appendix out about 18 hours after I was diagnosed with appendicitis.

Cheers,

R.

 

[chris00nj]

Highlight 1: another denial of democracy. If 'most Americans' don't want it, why did they vote for a president who did?

Highlight 2: Unless it's serious. Frances was on the operating table about 10 days after the initial diagnosis of breast cancer. And in France I had my appendix out about 18 hours after I was diagnosed with appendicitis.

Cheers,

R.

Re Highlight 1: I think people voted in Obama because of the financial crisis and he promised a new era of politics: one of openess, transparency, and bipartisanship. He campaigned on a unspecific idea of healthcare reform, but it's the details that emerged that many didn't like.

Re Highlight 2: I'm glad your procedures worked out well. When I lived in the UK, I noticed general emergency care worked out well, but more complex surgeries caused serious delays. Every time I picked up a paper, there was some report about how surgery kept getting delayed. Blair was promising to reduce waits to 6 months from about 18 months. I thought that was ridiculous.

I think health care reform was needed, but they didn't reform any of the underlying causes as to why health care costs are out of control. All the government did was to assume more control. Of course, the proponents of the bill made it seem like anyone who opposed any aspect of the bill was opposed to some child's mother getting care. Orwell would have been proud.

Additionally, if the bill was so good, why is Congress exempt from participation? Some Senators tried to recently add an amendment requiring Congress to use their new system, and it was voted down by the majority.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Re Highlight 1: I think people voted in Obama because of the financial crisis and he promised a new era of politics: one of openess, transparency, and bipartisanship. He campaigned on a unspecific idea of healthcare reform, but it's the details that emerged that many didn't like.

Re Highlight 2: I'm glad your procedures worked out well. When I lived in the UK, I noticed general emergency care worked out well, but more complex surgeries caused serious delays. Every time I picked up a paper, there was some report about how surgery kept getting delayed. Blair was promising to reduce waits to 6 months from about 18 months. I thought that was ridiculous.

I think health care reform was needed, but they didn't reform any of the underlying causes as to why health care costs are out of control. All the government did was to assume more control. Of course, the proponents of the bill made it seem like anyone who opposed any aspect of the bill was opposed to some child's mother getting care. Orwell would have been proud.

Additionally, if the bill was so good, why is Congress exempt from participation? Some Senators tried to recently add an amendment requiring Congress to use their new system, and it was voted down by the majority.

Fair points, though equally, quite a few opponents of the bill refused to accept that there was any need for reform, and surprisingly many started foaming at the mouth at the very idea that the poor deserve to live. Both sides sometimes took a fairly Newspeak approach to their campaigning. Perhaps this was why the bill did not address the fundamental problems: it was faced with a stone wall of vested interests and doctrinare beliefs.

Frances's sister is a doctor in the US, and has a number of ideas on how useful reform might have been effected.

My own view, as I've said elsewhere, is that it's going to be very hard to get this particular genie back in the bottle. Rather than the law being overthrown or repealed, my suspicion is that its manifest shortcomings will lead to its being replaced with a better bill. But we'll see.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Olsen]

What on earth are insurance companies role on health care? Get them out of the loop! Pay doctors, hospitals and health care companies directly!

 

[Sparrow]

What on earth are insurance companies role on health care? Get them out of the loop! Pay doctors, hospitals and health care companies directly!

ya right … then what would happen to all the medical lawyers, contract lawyers, pharmaceutical salesmen and executives, that are so essential to good healthcare?

bugger I said I wouldn’t get involved in this

 

[Ronald M]

Well we will have insurance, not health care.

Yesterday I was read a list of all the medicare cuts and the program is being gutted. Shame they forced us into it by law 40 years ago, and then they don`t want to fund it. Social Security is the same thing.

All nice programs. All broke. The US has multi trillion annual defficits as far as the eye can see. The congressional budget office has said we need to do something very soon.
It will be steep tax increases and a new VAT.

Guess the new VAT will start out small like income tax did, but then explode when nobody is watching just like income tax.

So much for taxing the rich for benefits to the poor. You all really did not believe this before O Bama was elected did you? I sure as hell did not.

 

[dfoo]

What on earth are insurance companies role on health care? Get them out of the loop! Pay doctors, hospitals and health care companies directly!

Good point Olsen! All the insurance companies do is suck money out of the system. What value do they add?

 

[dfoo]

...
So much for taxing the rich for benefits to the poor. You all really did not believe this before O Bama was elected did you? I sure as hell did not.

The problem isn't a lack of funding. The problem is where the funding is spent. Health care is more important than wars in foreign countries, and bailing out crooked banks.

 

[splitimageview]

Heh. Who is sucking more money out of the system? The good ol' government.

You're right it's not health care, it's health control. And in short order, it will be called 'bankruptcy.'