Your opinion on USA Free Health Care

digital_blue · Mar 30, 2010

I can't speak as to the "Obama health care bill" but I do believe that something needs to change...

In my opinion, health care is like education; it should be free. If you're asking yourself "why should I pay for someone else's health expenses?", you should also ask "why am I paying for someone else's kid's education?"... IMO, the current health system is very "commercialized/ industrialized"; you are handing over your right to health care to a company; who as far as I know, are "in the market" to make money. Also, companies are tied to the economy; if your economy takes a nosedive, companies can go under and you can kiss that "insurance" and all those premiums goodbye...

Insurance companies also work on the obvious principle that the profits on the premiums are higher than the payouts. Now, let's say (god forbid) there's a major epidemic which causes a sizable number of the population to be hospitalized... Just some food for thought...

Then again, I may just be another overly polite Canadian who doesn't know squat about America

pullbangdead · Mar 30, 2010

digital_blue said:
I can't speak as to the "Obama health care bill" but I do believe that something needs to change...

In my opinion, health care is like education; it should be free. If you're asking yourself "why should I pay for someone else's health expenses?", you should also ask "why am I paying for someone else's kid's education?"... IMO, the current health system is very "commercialized/ industrialized"; you are handing over your right to health care to a company; who as far as I know, are "in the market" to make money. Also, companies are tied to the economy; if your economy takes a nosedive, companies can go under and you can kiss that "insurance" and all those premiums goodbye...

Insurance companies also work on the obvious principle that the profits on the premiums are higher than the payouts. Now, let's say (god forbid) there's a major epidemic which causes a sizable number of the population to be hospitalized... Just some food for thought...

Then again, I may just be another overly polite Canadian who doesn't know squat about America

You can say all that...But the healthcare bill just signed does absolutely ZERO of what you suggest should happen. This bill increases the number of people buying insurance from insurance companies, it doesn't no anything to replace them. It will actually grow the insurance companies.

digital_blue · Mar 30, 2010

pullbangdead said:
You can say all that...But the healthcare bill just signed does absolutely ZERO of what you suggest should happen. This bill increases the number of people buying insurance from insurance companies, it doesn't no anything to replace them. It will actually grow the insurance companies.

As I stated previously, I am not defending or criticizing the current bill. To be honest, I haven't done much reading into it so I cannot comment. My little "blurb" was meant to be directed at the "Screw health care, just buy insurance and you'll be okay" type people. No offense intended or implied.

mfo · Mar 30, 2010

I look at it like this.

1) zaery is a tool.

2) The health care bill isn't perfect, but what is? One thing I can say for sure is the health care system definitely needed reform. Was Obama's move the right move? Who knows, only time will tell. All I know is this. Republican's always bitch at everything Democrats do, and vice versa. Personally I see Republican's as money hungry people that only care about the rich, but that's just me. This is supposed to be the greatest country in the world (yeah right) yet we have to struggle just to get health care or a college education. Other countries provide this stuff for free to it's citizens. Now we need to change the labor laws to impose mandatory vacation time from work like some countries in Europe have, but you could bet your ass Republican's would bitch about losing a few dollars.

Long story short, I welcome change.

Hemlock_Mike · Mar 30, 2010

In a nutshell ----

Either we the people get what congressmen get for health care or they accept for themselves what thay are dictating to us the taxpayers. Simple.

HMike

I hope all you younger members are going to get good jobs so you can pay high taxes. There are now more people riding the wagon than pulling it and I'm about to give up pulling. Remember, only manufacturing jobs create wealth. Government does NOT create wealth -- only takes and distributes it. Socalism has not survived anywhere with success.

pseudolobster · Mar 30, 2010

pullbangdead said:
You can say all that...But the healthcare bill just signed does absolutely ZERO of what you suggest should happen. This bill increases the number of people buying insurance from insurance companies, it doesn't no anything to replace them. It will actually grow the insurance companies.

On the other hand, it's tightening up regulations on denying people care based on pre-existing-conditions, as well as implementing guaranteed payouts, so that if you have insurance, and you've been paying it all this time, the private corporations can't just drop you anymore like they currently do. I also heard about imposing limitations on the amount of profit these insurers can make, that rates will eventually drop.

Again, it's not perfect, by a longshot, but it's still the first major step in the right direction the US has taken in the last century. With the amount of controversy this has caused, and the amount of angry right-wingers shouting "socialism", I'm surprised this even passed at all. I can't even begin to imagine the outrage if a truly fair system was established. As it stands, this bill is a bit of a compromise; it gives the private insurance corporations a lot more paying customers, while limiting how badly they can fleece them. At least on the surface, it appears to please big business while helping the poor afford at least basic coverage.

KiLLrB · Mar 30, 2010

mfo said:
I look at it like this.

1) zaery is a tool.

2) The health care bill isn't perfect, but what is? One thing I can say for sure is the health care system definitely needed reform. Was Obama's move the right move? Who knows, only time will tell. All I know is this. Republican's always bitch at everything Democrats do, and vice versa. Personally I see Republican's as money hungry people that only care about the rich, but that's just me. This is supposed to be the greatest country in the world (yeah right) yet we have to struggle just to get health care or a college education. Other countries provide this stuff for free to it's citizens. Now we need to change the labor laws to impose mandatory vacation time from work like some countries in Europe have, but you could bet your ass Republican's would bitch about losing a few dollars.

Long story short, I welcome change.

you know what im going to say...

Insert smiley here ____

Moebius · Mar 30, 2010

pullbangdead said:
There is a very large bloch of opinion out there who believe that this bill, as passed, will hurt those covered by Medicare and lower their standard of coverage.

You cannot add millions of new baby boomers now retiring to the Medicare rolls and at the same time cut Medicare by $500 billion ... without cutting their benefits.

f22warzone · Mar 30, 2010

Hemlock_Mike said:
In a nutshell ----

Either we the people get what congressmen get for health care or they accept for themselves what thay are dictating to us the taxpayers. Simple.

HMike

I hope all you younger members are going to get good jobs so you can pay high taxes. There are now more people riding the wagon than pulling it and I'm about to give up pulling. Remember, only manufacturing jobs create wealth. Government does NOT create wealth -- only takes and distributes it. Socalism has not survived anywhere with success.

Smartest man alive right here

If us Americans weren’t so fat and dam lazy and stop living off of my paycheck then we would all be ok but you get these people that sit around all day and pop out kids to get a bigger weal fare check to go buy that flat screen then complain when one of their 20 kids get hurts and they have no money to pay for it

That’s the bottom line it’s the rich man having to give to the poor guy because he doesn’t want to work for his dollar

Be interesting to see who I make upset with that statement but it’s the truth as any legitimate working man has the option to go buy a health care plan with their company or some smaller company. Unless they have been smoking for 50 years and killed them else’s then it’s their own dam fault and we need to practice Darwinism quit helping all the helpless who down want to help them self’s and are dragging us down ….. it’s cold hard truth but it needs to be done otherwise there’s no point for me to go to college theses years just to make as much as the burger flipper down the road in a few years with our great political moving

pullbangdead · Mar 30, 2010

Moebius said:
You cannot add millions of new baby boomers now retiring to the Medicare rolls and at the same time cut Medicare by $500 billion ... without cutting their benefits.

EXACTLY. The baby boomers are aging, fast.

And this bill, as written and as codified into law, expands Medicare coverage to new more people (in addition to the baby boomers becoming eligible for Medicare/Medicaid), while simultaneously cutting money from Medicare/Medicaid and slowing future growth in Medicare/Medicaid spending (while Medicare/Medicaid recipients will increase in number at faster rates). They are lowering doctor reimbursements, and lowering prescription coverage as well. Don't believe it? Believe Walgreens, a business who just announced that it will no longer be accepting ANY new Medicaid patient prescriptions in the entire state of Washington, because reimbursements have been cut to the point that Walgreens is losing money on Medicaid patients. Tip of the iceberg.

This bill will be doing the same thing to doctors all over the country.

If you like your Medicare/Medicaid now, you shouldn't like this bill. Medicare/Medicaid are in BIG trouble anyway, and this bill not only doesn't help, it makes it worse.

Of course, these cuts aren't likely to happen. They'll reinstate the "doc fix", they reinstate the Medicare/Medicaid spending most likely. BUT, it'll show up in a spearate bill, so they can keep up the lie that this healthcare overhaul "saves money" because they're not including any of the spending that they're going to be adding back to Medicare/Medicaid later.

Meatball · Mar 30, 2010

So does that essentially make it harder for both younger AND older people to get decent coverage for a reasonable price? Just trying to wrap my head around this bill...

pullbangdead · Mar 30, 2010

Meatball said:
So does that essentially make it harder for both younger AND older people to get decent coverage for a reasonable price? Just trying to wrap my head around this bill...

Not sure what you mean. In theory, EVERYONE will be able to get coverage much easier than ever before. More people will get Medicare and Medicaid, and everyone will be not only able, but required to get health insurance one way or another. It will be much easier than ever before to get health insurance if you're, for instance, self-employed or unemployed.

The problem isn't WHETHER you can get coverage, it's what coverage you can get.

It limits your choices. 1, you can't choose "none" (which wasn't a good choice anyway). 2, you can't choose "catastrophic only" (which was a GREAT option for some people). 3, you can't can't choose "super-extreme platinum" (not without paying a nice big tax on it, unless you're in a union, thanks to shady political deals with big labor). This "exchange" isn't a bad idea, because it allows people to form risk pools for lower costs and easily compare and shop. But it limits your choices because it limits the types of plans available, and it still doesn't allow true competition between the companies.

Then, as passed, it severely cuts Medicare/Medicaid availability. It expands Medicare/Medicaid coverage, so more people than ever will be able to get coverage. BUT, all those people getting Medicare/Medicaid will be splitting a smaller pie than how big the pie is now.

Finally, it's not quite clear how the "average" plan price will shake out with the insurance companies, you can guess how it'll affect you. Insurance companies will get bigger and have more customers, but those customers will cost them a heck of a lot more money, so it's tough to see how their average prices will change. This is not only because they can't deny pre-existing conditions, they also can't PRICE based on pre-existing conditions. The 55-year-old on 2 packs a day gets the same price as the 55-year-old marathon runner. The 45-year-old with a brain tumor gets the same price as the 45-year-old vegan organic nut. So average price, it's tough to say where that'll go. But clearly, if you're healthy, you'll be paying more than you are now, and if you're sick, you'll be paying less than now, whether that sickness was self-inflicted or not.

And how will that coverage be for you, if the companies can't define their own risk pools, and can't control their own costs by pricing based on the actual risk of an insured person? Auto insurance companies charge people more money if they've had accidents or gotten speeding tickets, but medical insurance companies won't be able to charge more for smokers or drug addicts. Therefore, EVERYBODY'S rates have to go up to cover lung transplants for the smokers that are paying the same amount as the marathon runners. If insurance companies can't control their costs from that end, they can only control costs on the paying end, which is what Medicare/Medicaid are doing right now by cutting doctor and prescription reimbursements, lowering the availability and quality of patient care.

Make any sense?

Scotty 757 · Mar 30, 2010

pullbangdead said:
Not sure what you mean. In theory, EVERYONE will be able to get coverage much easier than ever before. More people will get Medicare and Medicaid, and everyone will be not only able, but required to get health insurance one way or another. It will be much easier than ever before to get health insurance if you're, for instance, self-employed or unemployed.

The problem isn't WHETHER you can get coverage, it's what coverage you can get.

It limits your choices. 1, you can't choose "none" (which wasn't a good choice anyway). 2, you can't choose "catastrophic only" (which was a GREAT option for some people). 3, you can't can't choose "super-extreme platinum" (not without paying a nice big tax on it, unless you're in a union, thanks to shady political deals with big labor). This "exchange" isn't a bad idea, because it allows people to form risk pools for lower costs and easily compare and shop. But it limits your choices because it limits the types of plans available, and it still doesn't allow true competition between the companies.

Then, as passed, it severely cuts Medicare/Medicaid availability. It expands Medicare/Medicaid coverage, so more people than ever will be able to get coverage. BUT, all those people getting Medicare/Medicaid will be splitting a smaller pie than how big the pie is now.

Finally, it's not quite clear how the "average" plan price will shake out with the insurance companies, you can guess how it'll affect you. Insurance companies will get bigger and have more customers, but those customers will cost them a heck of a lot more money, so it's tough to see how their average prices will change. This is not only because they can't deny pre-existing conditions, they also can't PRICE based on pre-existing conditions. The 55-year-old on 2 packs a day gets the same price as the 55-year-old marathon runner. The 45-year-old with a brain tumor gets the same price as the 45-year-old vegan organic nut. So average price, it's tough to say where that'll go. But clearly, if you're healthy, you'll be paying more than you are now, and if you're sick, you'll be paying less than now, whether that sickness was self-inflicted or not.

And how will that coverage be for you, if the companies can't define their own risk pools, and can't control their own costs by pricing based on the actual risk of an insured person? Auto insurance companies charge people more money if they've had accidents or gotten speeding tickets, but medical insurance companies won't be able to charge more for smokers or drug addicts. Therefore, EVERYBODY'S rates have to go up to cover lung transplants for the smokers that are paying the same amount as the marathon runners. If insurance companies can't control their costs from that end, they can only control costs on the paying end, which is what Medicare/Medicaid are doing right now by cutting doctor and prescription reimbursements, lowering the availability and quality of patient care.

Make any sense?

Meaning for people like me who are fit, don't smoke, and hardly get sick are going to get screwed.

ElektroFreak · Mar 30, 2010

*sniff* anyone else need a tissue? I'm up to my elbows in the tears of the anguished ones here. I know we're looking at literally THE END OF THE WORLD here with this bill, but really how is that any different from any other time? A black hole could appear and swallow the earth whole later this afternoon..

In some other countries people have to worry about bad people coming, raping and killing their wives and daughters and taking over their land, but here in the USA we'll complain just as loudly, we'll go on the defensive, hell we'll even threaten to kill you... over whether or not everyone in this country should have gov't healthcare. Woo hoo for us!!!

Tech_Junkie · Mar 30, 2010

f22warzone said:
That’s the bottom line it’s the rich man having to give to the poor guy because he doesn’t want to work for his dollar

Wow, that's straight propaganda right there, and is the most ridicules comment I've read so far. We are talking health care and not welfare. And the bill effects everyone, not just the rich. Stay on topic, and spare the propaganda.

We've needed a change for decades. People keep putting it off. Well not anymore. We can all sit here and preach flaws, but at least a change is in progress. You could spend 50 years drafting a bill, and it will never please everyone.

And for everyone talking about government spending, lets all reflect back to Bush's open check book to get Sadam. Who, had 0 to do with al qaeda, or weapons of mass destruction. There was no spending caps at all, and a shit load high wealth companies made multi-billions. At least this is directed at the public. And if some of the rich, that raped the American public, has to give some back, then oh well. I have no pity for these people.

Moebius · Mar 30, 2010

Obama said if you currently have health care provided by your employer, that will not change.
Since around 1996 my employer provided health insurance has steadily gone up
in price and down in quality/coverage. (especially over the past 5 years)
I'm hearing that this bill would make it even more expensive for employers to insure their employees at all.
So he's saying it's no problem, you can continue to get employee provided healthcare. We won't take it away from you.
What he's not saying is, your employer probably won't be able to afford to give it to you.
Not to mention that he said you will be able to keep your current doctor.
Now i'm hearing that almost 50% of us won't be able to keep our current doctor.
And don't forget about the thousands of doctors who will simply stop practicing medicine because
they will refuse to have their treatments controlled by the federal government.

Pass me one of those tissues :cryyy:

Your opinion on USA Free Health Care

digital_blue

0

pullbangdead

0

digital_blue

0

mfo

0

Hemlock_Mike

0

pseudolobster

0

KiLLrB

0

Moebius

0

f22warzone

0

pullbangdead

0

Meatball

0

pullbangdead

0

Scotty 757

0

ElektroFreak

0

Tech_Junkie

0

Moebius

0

Online statistics

Forum statistics

Share this page