88 posts
i'm interested in hearing thoughts on this. do you believe health care is a "right"? i personally don't. i also don't like the infringement on my privacy it will force.
after skimming it here's a few things i really don't like
Pg 58 HC Bill - Gov will have real-time access to individuals finances & a national ID healthcard will be issued
Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Gov will have direct access to bank accts. for electronic funds transfer
Pg 124 HC Bill lines 24-25 No company can sue gov on price fixing. No "judicial review" against gov monopolies
(these next 2 go together and piss me off)
PG 50 Section 152 HC bill - HC will be provided to ALL non US citizens, illegal or otherwise
Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill - Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual taxes
i hope congress will take the time to read this bill and make an informed decision. doubtful now after obama's last speech however in which he claimed that "without this bill the economy will not recover." sounds alot like the fear mongering bush used doesn't it...
and on a more basic point; we flat out cannot afford it. yet somehow obama claims that our current healthcare system is to blame for breaking our economy
"This isn't about me. This isn't about politics. This is about a health care system that is breaking America's families, breaking America's businesses, and breaking America's economy," Obama said on a visit to a Washington hospital
source
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.3accf76695529d0ed9d3824c1cc629f1.a11&show_article=1
The Taco Bell dog died. :'(
;D
wonder if it would have been covered?
Well, I don't know if fixing healthcare is essential to our economy recovering or not. But healthcare is a huge problem. The last time I checked medical bills were the number one cause of bankruptcy.
Also, all the people who don't have coverage, including illegal folk, are costing us a ton of money already because they can't possibly pay the huge bills. So, the hospital charges you and me, covered folk, $10 bucks for one aspirin to help pay for the people who can't pay. This drives insurance rates up and effects the quality of insurance.
One thing you must remember, just because a person isn't a legal resident of some sort, doesn't mean the illegal person isn't a human being. And if the person needs medical help, I think he or she should get it. People tend to forget that we are human beings first.
Our healthcare system is almost as messed up as our economy. One thing McCain wanted that I agree with is that medical coverage would be able to cross state lines. I have a son that lives in Louisiana from a previous disaster that I can't cover with my medical insurance in Alabama. This means that I now have to purchase another medical policy in Louisiana separate from the one I have now. If I could add him to my policy in Alabama, it would cost me nothing. As it is, it will cost me an extra $130 per month for the additional policy.
I haven't a clue as to how we can fix healthcare, it's going to be very difficult. But it does need work. So, I support Obama's efforts.
i wouldn't be so bent out of shape if we could afford it. clearly it isn't the case right now though.
take care of our tax paying citizens first, and if their is some money left over, we can discuss the other options when that time comes. unfortunately it won't be coming for a very long time
I think it's a great idea to put people who have proven themselves to be self-serving and highly ineffective in other areas in charge of healthcare. Hey, if people don't get the care they need in a timely manner, that could help with overpopulation too, right? Another bonus!
Yeah. I think it's a lot fucking better to wait until those people without health care are dying, then, pay to stick them in a hospital for a few months. Obviously, that works well now, chase. Preventive care, and education about lifestyle changes, are the best possible way to keep the population healthy. Without preventive care we are doomed to care for a population that is only getting sicker, whether they have healthcare or not.
If you have a viable alternative, by all means present it. Since I know you don't, why are you blathering? We've heard the same shit on healthcare for years and years. But the basic premise remains unchanged. Whether it is a "right" or not, unless our society is prepared to let the sick die in the streets, we need to do something. And it is way cheaper for us to care for people in the early stages of sickness, or before they get sick, then to pay for terminal illnesses and surgeries that are way down the line of triage.
State a fucking solution. Hearing you slag everything Obama says with no viable alternative is getting very old.
don't get me started on preventative healthcare, the government has shown time and again that it has no desire to provide that type of treatment. there are simple dietary interventions that could be performed for pennies on the dollar compared to what goes on now that will show a major reduction in healthcare expenditures NEXT YEAR. are we interested in this? sadly no
the main point is that the numbers just flat don't work. i don't give a fat flying fuck if it sounds good or not. with an estimated tab of 1 trillion on top of the already defecit bloated medicare medicaid system (nevermind that it will go bankrupt in the next decade without this extra trillion dollar tab tacked on). at some point obama needs to step back and say "yes this is a good idea worth planning for, but we can't afford it right now". i know good and well there is no easy answer, but this draconian bill is not any type of positive answer. telling people that the economy hinges on it's passing is a flat out lie.
State a fucking solution. Hearing you slag everything Obama says with no viable alternative is getting very old.
because i don't have the answer to the healthcare crisis we should all jump aboard this fucked up solution?
If you don't have a solution, then your solution is inertia. Inertia means we get what we have now. Everyone pays for the sick who have no healthcare. The states and the feds pay. But what we are paying is way more. The cost of a terminally ill patient or a patient with advanced cancer, versus the cost of an early cancer or a non-terminal illness, is orders of magnitude of cost difference.
As for me, I have healthcare. My doctors do give me preventive care information. I can see alternative doctors, nutritionists, chiropractors, acupuncturists, and see a doctor in any field I like, pretty much whenever I want. And I do, and have. I can afford to do this, because most visits cost between $15 and $50. I know people who have no health insurance, who never get any health information whatsoever. How much do you think my healthcare, in the long run, is going to cost compared to the person with no health care? Will they go to the doctor with something minor, or will they wait until they can't walk, or are in extreme pain? When a simple drop-in visit, a well-checkup, costs them $200 or more?
Given that we pay for them anyway, which do you think is a better idea? Pay for it when it's minor, or pay for it when it's critical? Or are you advocating just not paying for the critical care for the uninsured or underinsured that we pay for now?
Chase....Do you think our current healthcare system is better than the one Obama has plans for?
If so, you must not care about people, human beings, suffering needlessly. That pretty much sums it up.
Whatever Obama comes up with now will be a stepping stone to perfect, or better, the system down the road. I think we need to start improving right now.
People need proper healthcare and they should receive it.
Can you put a price tag on human suffering as you sit here typing with insurance and access to any doctor you choose at any time? I can't make myself care how much it cost.
We're also making money on our bailout investments. I heard yesterday that on the investments in the banks we bailed out that paid us back, we made an almost 12% rate of return. That's insane. That's money going right into the treasury, paying us back on our investment.
Hookbender — Jul 23, 2009Chase....Do you think our current healthcare system is better than the one Obama has plans for?
If so, you must not care about people, human beings, suffering needlessly. That pretty much sums it up.
Whatever Obama comes up with now will be a stepping stone to perfect, or better, the system down the road. I think we need to start improving right now.
People need proper healthcare and they should receive it.
Can you put a price tag on human suffering as you sit here typing with insurance and access to any doctor you choose at any time? I can't make myself care how much it cost.
i don't have health insurance currently, that should tell you how much i disagree with this plan. let me clarify my argument a bit as i haven't been very clear
1- WE CAN'T AFFORD IT. im coming across as in inconsiderate asshole, but i'm a realist. look at our bond situation and tell me that our foreign investors want us to add another trillion into the mix. as it is now the fed is the largest purchaser of government debt. that is a seriously fucked up situation.
2- its unconstitutional in its current state- it's damn near impossible to read it all, but do what you can. i devoted several hours to skimming it and what is inside scares me.
3- i have no faith in our governments ability to do a better job than the current free market system. does it have flaws? definitely
but lets fix the issues that need fixing NOW before dealing with things that are fucked up and broken, but can wait. if we don't fix our debt problem this healthcare reform won't get off the ground before people abandon the dollar. don't believe me? the fed has scheduled 235 BILLION in auctions THIS WEEK! thats on rate for 12 trillion in new debt in 1 year. medicare/medicaid is on rate for bankruptcy in a decade. how many trillions in new debt will our investors take on? not 10 years worth for damn sure
charger — Jul 23, 2009We're also making money on our bailout investments. I heard yesterday that on the investments in the banks we bailed out that paid us back, we made an almost 12% rate of return. That's insane. That's money going right into the treasury, paying us back on our investment.
cool. i'll give you a trillion dollar stimulus tab for your hypothetical 12 percent return on the whole thing, not just tarp funds
1000000000000 x .12 = 120,000,000,000 120 billion which isn't chump change. compare it to our deficit spending habits (completely ignoring our debt) and the scale of how broke we are begins to dawn on you.
2.3 trillion deficit THIS YEAR!!!!! the overstated hypothetical interest is roughly 5% of the amount that we are into the red.
i just don't get how people can look at these numbers and say we should start another trillion dollar social program.
I still don't see an answer to my main question. We pay for it anyway. Why pay for the more expensive critical care when we could pay for preventive and early care and save a shitload of money?
Are you proposing that we let the critically ill and uninsured die in the streets? If we are not willing to do that, it seems to me that we will save money under any plan that cares for people in the early stages of illness, or prevents illness by giving people the resources they need to make better health choices, rather than only caring for them when they are in the later stages of disease, and effectively beyond help.
Chase.....You keep saying the same thing over and over.
#1....We can't afford not to.
#2....It's unconstitutional and unfair to continue to ignore the problems healthcare has and to let people suffer.
#3....The free market will still exist. My insurance won't change at all. The point is to have insurance available for people who can't afford it, and offer an alternative which will increase competition.
So what's your problem?
The problem is, Chase doesn't believe the government should tax income, or pay for basic services.
charger — Jul 24, 2009The problem is, Chase doesn't believe the government should tax income, or pay for basic services.
wrong. gov should tax enough to pay for defense, judicial system, police. leave the rest to the states
Hookbender — Jul 24, 2009Chase.....You keep saying the same thing over and over.
#1....We can't afford not to.
#2....It's unconstitutional and unfair to continue to ignore the problems healthcare has and to let people suffer.
#3....The free market will still exist. My insurance won't change at all. The point is to have insurance available for people who can't afford it, and offer an alternative which will increase competition.
So what's your problem?
respond to #1 - sounds sexy, but you have no numbers or data to back up your point. i have provided plenty of examples of why we cannot afford this.
respond to #2 - show me where in the constitution it says we need a nationalized healthcare system
respond to #3 - your delusional. have you read any part of this bill? here's a few highlights if you think your policy won't change at all eventually.
pg 124 lines 24-25 No company can sue Government on price fixing. No "judicial review" against Government Monopoly. (gov can price fix and your fucked. how long can your private care plan sustian itself against a true monopoly?)
Pg 145 Line 15-17 An Employer MUST auto enroll employees into public option plan. NO CHOICE. (if you switch jobs you have no choice but gov care, or if you want to switch coverage your fucked)
Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with payroll $400k & above who does not provide public option pays 8% tax on all payroll. (how long will your company provide private coverage when they are paying an additional 8% tax ontop of what they already pay)
PG 265 Sec 1131 Government mandates & controls productivity for private HC industries. (yes, the government will control all private healthcare plans.)
Pg 341 Lines 3-9 Government has authority to disqualify Medicare Adv Plans, HMOs, etc., forcing people into Government plan. ( sounds fun huh?)
i can keep going. do you still really believe private healthcare will exist in 2-3 years?
Address this. Let's do one at a time.
47 million people.....47 million....have no healthcare in America. Why is that? Cost to much?
Who pays for their surgeries when they can't pay the bill? What about poor people who don't have jobs? Who pays for that? What about older people who can't work? Who pays for there're healthcare? What about all the small businesses who can't afford to offer any coverage for their employee's because of rising healthcare cost? Do these employee's just go without healthcare?
Is the healthcare plan written in stone that you read? Or, is it a work in progress?
What about people who have coverage and still go bankrupt because they have inadequate coverage....sorry insurance?
http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2009/06/bankruptcy_medical_costs.html
You say you want the free market to determine rates for healthcare, right? If so, if the government offers something cheaper than the current providers like, Blue Cross for example, ya think Blue Cross will shut it's doors or get competitive? And what if the governments plan happens to be less expensive....and better coverage to boot? Ever consider that?
Now, why don't you have healthcare?
I have to take Prevacid. $120 per month with no insurance, $25 a month co-pay with insurance. That's only one medication. I have to take high blood pressure medicine. The way I found that out is because a Doctor discovered it after I felt horrible and could hardly work or function. I guess I could have said fuck it, I don't have insurance and had a stroke or heart attack and died. But no, I had insurance, my doctor discovered it, I'm fine, and my medication is $10 bucks a month. People need medical care. It is a basic need, in my opinion. You need it, IMO. People without it can suffer needlessly and or, die needlessly. To provide the ability for every american to go to the doctor 1 or 2 times a year could save millions and millions of dollars. This alone could bring down medical prices, insurance prices, etc.
And your just guessing what may happen if we have some form of government healthcare.
No one in the world will come up with a perfect plan right away. But if we get something now, that insures everyone, we open the door to better it later. At least people's mind will be open to the challenge of bettering our healthcare system tomorrow, next month, next year, etc. We simply can do better than we have now and have done in the past. We can probably do better than what Obama is trying to do, but give the man some credit for taking on this challenge and at least caring about humans suffering needlessly. That's important to me, much more so than the COST of helping people in need. Let's give the man a fair chance.
I think life in this country would be a hell of a lot easier for EVERYONE if we didn't have to worry about whether we can afford to keep ourselves alive. Do I think it's a RIGHT? I don't know if I'd say that. I think it's the proper moral stance. Our goal as a nation should be to take care of one another, not protect our individual riches (however meager).
I don't believe the health of the American people should be at the whim of the free market. IT DOESN'T WORK! It hasn't gotten us anywhere except screwed over and over by insurance companies. The insurance industry is allowed to fuck us over, and they do. It's time that ends.
I think having a public option available forces insurance companies to figure out how to be profitable without fucking over Americans, but it's not the best way to stop this sort of crap. What insurance companies do (denial of care, etc.) should be criminal activity...much like making money from moving money around. For-profit insurance companies are the enemy of good care. Make enough money to expand and survive and provide great care, and be done with it.
I don't care how we pay for healthcare, whether it be a new tax or some sort of shared public/private fund we can all buy into.
Since I don't see the changes they're proposing as really all that much of a change, I'd like to see someone start a not-for-profit health care system - kind of like a health care credit union. No need for making profit, so care is cheaper.
All this said, I find the GOP's actions borderline deplorable on this subject though, talk about an endless stream of obfuscation and bullshit. I mean, not as bad as their behavior in the Sotomayor confirmation, but still pretty horrible.
Saying things like "do you want a government bureaucrat in between you and your doctor?" is just patently dishonest, considering the fact that I think most rational people can see that HMOs and PPOs put an insurance company bureaucrat in between you and your doctor - it's different because the government guy isn't trying to keep you from getting help or to pay for your care - it's the insurance company guy's job to figure out how to make YOU pay for it.
And I've had to change doctors numerous times because my preferred doc wasn't on a certain insurance. How is that choice?
Plus they spread myths about rationing care, etc. It doesn't add to the discussion, because it's bullshit. It's very easy to prevent that from happening.
The reality is, no one in Washington except the ones who aren't taking money from big health insurance companies really wants our healthcare system to change all that much. It's political posturing.
Single-payer (**when funded properly**) is the only efficient system that makes care of the patient paramount, and that's been proven in numerous countries over the past fifty years. It'd also save us money.
But you have to actually dig into the facts to understand that reality. Few in Congress are brave enough to acknowledge that.
The "freedom and nobility of the free market" is a myth. It's no more real than the Easter Bunny.
I think anyone working for (or recently fired by) a corporation these days understands this pretty clearly: When the bottom line is the only thing that matters, people no longer matter.
People should matter, and that's why I support universal health care, whether it's a right or not.
You trust your government for paying for national defense, paying for roads and infrastructure, and you wouldn't trust them with paying your doctor?
That's kind of fucked up. People are the real infrastructure. Keeping them healthy keeps them productive and the economy vital.
Tripper
I think universal healthcare is a great idea as long as it's not the only option. I certainly don't think Obama's plan is to take over healthcare, as most seem to think. It's a additional option that will provide healthcare for those without it...or who can't afford it.
I don't see why that is so hard to understand.
Well said Trip!
Interesting article, and true.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090724/pl_mcclatchy/3278757
Tripper — Jul 24, 2009 It's no more real than the Easter Bunny.
:(
You just need to have faith! ;)
Hookbender — Jul 25, 2009I think universal healthcare is a great idea as long as it's not the only option. I certainly don't think Obama's plan is to take over healthcare, as most seem to think. It's a additional option that will provide healthcare for those without it...or who can't afford it.
I don't see why that is so hard to understand.
Well said Trip!
Interesting article, and true.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090724/pl_mcclatchy/3278757
the current plan blatantly outlaws the writing of new policies! i'll repeat that again; it becomes illegal to start a new policy outside of the government option. that clause alone ensures that in 10 years .gov care will be the only provider of healthcare
Tripper — Jul 24, 2009
You trust your government for paying for national defense, paying for roads and infrastructure, and you wouldn't trust them with paying your doctor?
i don't want the government telling me when i can and cannot get care. check out the parts about end of life care. there will be a government position whose job it is to decide who gets to live and die. that's about as draconian as it gets
Chase, your argument is totally inconsistent. Under your plan, you would provide no healthcare money at all. You are only willing to pay for police, judges, prisons, and soldiers. Under your plan, old people without money and without private insurance would have no option but to not get sick.
I'm not sure how you can say any health plan at all is more draconian than your solution. A fucking free pack of band-aids is more than your plan would provide.
Chase
Why don't you have healthcare? Do you wish not to answer this?
Right now, insurance companies tell you you when and when you can't alter or add family members or remove family members from policies. My wife wants to remove me from my policy right now because I'm getting free insurance from my new employer. Removing me would make her policy less expensive. And, her employer is also dropping my son from her policy. Plus, trying to make us pay for 5 years of claims because he lives out of state and his shitty mother won't let him visit with me any longer. The child has to live with me a certain amount of time to be eligible. My new employers insurance won't cover out of state family members at all, period. So, the insurance companies are basically doing what you dislike. Do you have a problem with that? Or, is it just Obama you have a problem with?
Seems to me that you would be one of the supporters of this plan as you have no insurance at all.
I think I read that all children would be required to either have private insurance or be enrolled in this healthcare plan. Do you have a problem with irresponsible parents being forced to have medical coverage for children? Or, that children will now have access to doctors and regular visits to their doctors so they may be healthy? Could their be a few good things about this deal or is it all just bad?
chase — Jul 25, 2009[quote author=Hookbender link=1248309521/0#22 date=1248487389]I think universal healthcare is a great idea as long as it's not the only option. I certainly don't think Obama's plan is to take over healthcare, as most seem to think. It's a additional option that will provide healthcare for those without it...or who can't afford it.
I don't see why that is so hard to understand.
Well said Trip!
Interesting article, and true.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090724/pl_mcclatchy/3278757
the current plan blatantly outlaws the writing of new policies! i'll repeat that again; it becomes illegal to start a new policy outside of the government option. that clause alone ensures that in 10 years .gov care will be the only provider of healthcare
What makes you think government will be the only option in ten years? How can you predict the future? I would agree that the system will probably change, but that's just a guess on my part. And since our current system isn't working, why not try something different? America spends more on healthcare than any other country and yet we have 45 to 50 million people without coverage. That's a little fucked up, don't you think?
Are you pissed because government will make YOU get insurance? If you had a horribly serious illness right now, you'd probably go bankrupt and be unable to pay your bills. Then tax payers would have to pay them for you. You would be adding to the deficit you dislike so much. Now add 47 million others who are not insured and those possibilities.
I will say this. Our government has many countries to look at to determine what works and what doesn't. After this bill is final, which it isn't yet, we should have the better of all countries healthcare system. So, they damn sure need to take the time to do it correctly.
Maybe you should read this Chase. First the plan isn't a finished product. Second, small businesses will be able to not only afford insurance for their employees, but get a tax credit to boot. I think your criticism is coming a bit early. Even the penalties you spoke of are on the way out it seems.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090725/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_health_care
charger — Jul 25, 2009Chase, your argument is totally inconsistent. Under your plan, you would provide no healthcare money at all. You are only willing to pay for police, judges, prisons, and soldiers. Under your plan, old people without money and without private insurance would have no option but to not get sick.
I'm not sure how you can say any health plan at all is more draconian than your solution. A fucking free pack of band-aids is more than your plan would provide.
I'm just a cold hearted bastard
I was kicked off my parents plan after school. I can't get insurance from work because I'm not "full time" even though I work 45-50 hours per week. I'm still considered an hourly employee.
I would love to get a government handout, I just don't agree with it. Their is no question I would benefit from this Plan, but in my opinion it's wrong.
I think we all understand each other, I'm probably going to agree to disagree with you guys. We just have drastically different views on government and it's role. I prefer minimal gov presence in my life, and am not likely to change.
I'm way too fiscally conservative for some of the progressive ideas brought up
chase — Jul 26, 2009
I was kicked off my parents plan after school. I can't get insurance from work because I'm not "full time" even though I work 45-50 hours per week. I'm still considered an hourly employee.
I would love to get a government handout, I just don't agree with it. Their is no question I would benefit from this Plan, but in my opinion it's wrong.
If you work 50 hours a week you should be able to afford a individual policy from Blue Cross.
Government handout???? For what? You have a job. The goal of this plan is to make insurance affordable. If you can't afford insurance, this plan would make insurance affordable for you. How is that wrong? How is that a handout? I don't think you understand why this is being considered.
chase — Jul 26, 2009I think we all understand each other, I'm probably going to agree to disagree with you guys. We just have drastically different views on government and it's role. I prefer minimal gov presence in my life, and am not likely to change.
I'm way too fiscally conservative for some of the progressive ideas brought up
Agree to disagree.....that's cool.
But our views of government and it's role are really not 100% in question here. Affordable insurance and all people getting proper healthcare is. This plan won't be perfect if it goes through. But the system we have now is a failed, and unfair, system the makes some people unable to get proper healthcare. You probably work for a small business, is that right? This plan would make small businesses be able to afford to offer you insurance at a reasonable price.
My wife is a RN. The hospital she works for doesn't give her free insurance. She still has to pay a some every month. About $170 a month or something like that. Which is a bargain to cover the entire family.
We know your conservative, by the way. ;D Sit that aside for a moment and think with a clear, open mind. Now consider all the people who have to suffer because of lack of medical care. Just the basic doctor visits each year. I'm concerned about adults, but it would be great for families that can't currently afford insurance to now be able to.....and to get good care for their children. If a child is sick and needs to go to the doctor, I want that child to be able to go. To get the needed medication etc he or she needs without the parents having to worry so much about cost. Or, just not being able to bring the child period.
Hookbender — Jul 26, 2009[quote author=chase link=1248309521/25#32 date=1248587981]I think we all understand each other, I'm probably going to agree to disagree with you guys. We just have drastically different views on government and it's role. I prefer minimal gov presence in my life, and am not likely to change.
I'm way too fiscally conservative for some of the progressive ideas brought up
Agree to disagree.....that's cool.
But our views of government and it's role are really not 100% in question here. Affordable insurance and all people getting proper healthcare is. This plan won't be perfect if it goes through. But the system we have now is a failed, and unfair, system the makes some people unable to get proper healthcare. You probably work for a small business, is that right? This plan would make small businesses be able to afford to offer you insurance at a reasonable price.
My wife is a RN. The hospital she works for doesn't give her free insurance. She still has to pay a some every month. About $170 a month or something like that. Which is a bargain to cover the entire family.
We know your conservative, by the way. ;D Sit that aside for a moment and think with a clear, open mind. Now consider all the people who have to suffer because of lack of medical care. Just the basic doctor visits each year. I'm concerned about adults, but it would be great for families that can't currently afford insurance to now be able to.....and to get good care for their children. If a child is sick and needs to go to the doctor, I want that child to be able to go. To get the needed medication etc he or she needs without the parents having to worry so much about cost. Or, just not being able to bring the child period.
in my mind it comes down to this, picture America as a patient in an ER with a sucking chest wound and cancer at the same time. fixing the health care system right now is like attacking the cancer first, it just doesn't make sense. the chemo will probably kill the patient.
in my fun little metaphor the cancer is the health care system and the sucking chest wound would be our financial system. both of these problems are going to kill the patient, but you would think that the more pressing issue (chest wound) would get the attention first. for some reason attention is being diverted from the more glaring problem towards this health care reform. we can argue about the pro's and con's of nationalizing that when we take care of whats killing us RIGHT NOW.
watch what happens in the next 4 months to us financially. it doesn't take Nostradamus to see a trainwreck is coming if we don't stop issuing debt at this pace (we are set to auction off 250 billion just the last part of july!) if the last 2 weeks are an indication of pace we will auction off 13 TRILLION of new debt this year. the day is coming when bernake will be the only one left buying US debt, and the whole house of cards will collapse. unfortunately this will happen way before the medicare/medicaid system goes bankrupt
I can understand the fear of debt spiralling out of control.
But putting the financial crisis to one side for a moment.
On the question of comparative health systems
some basic data to illustrate
life expectancy at birth
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_lif_exp_at_bir_yea_tot_pop-expectancy-birth-years-total-population
health expenditure as % of GDP
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_exp_tot_of_gdp-health-expenditure-total-of-gdp
If the US could get these numbers to the average of European healthcare -
It would save 6% of GDP a year ($0.8 trillion) in health costs and improve life expectancy by 3 years.
It is pretty astonishing really, when you look around the web and watch Fox news shock jocks going at it and slamming Europe as some hell hole of socialist healthcare - don't get any sense of the facts here.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwO_iH3800k
The US is a truly poisonous place when it comes to debate.
I would love to know who is in the pay of lobbyists here - 15% of GDP is one huge slice of dough and represents some serious vested interest.
Attempting to slice a third off that will give a lot of powerful entities and people the shits.
So back to the financial storm - I think that Obama is saying that grabbing 6% of GDP away from this expenditure and releasing it for something more productive is a good thing financially and will help recovery.
In theory it will be but in practice it probably won't as will be sabotaged at every juncture by vested interests and their paid mouth pieces spewing ideological garbage.
Their aim will be to make it an expensive failure.
So you spend 1.5 trillion to try to sort it out and are still left spending 2.4 trillion a year and increasing.
Don't let that happen.
I think it would be equally as hard if not impossible to fix the shit we have now than to try our hand at Obama's plan. And, it would no doubt be as costly, I'm sure.
You see, Obama's fixing something, but he's really giving us options and affordability. Obama's trying to do what you want in your example. He's allowing the chest wounds to continue to be treated while trying to fix the cancer in the background. The cancer is people without coverage who get seriously ill when that illness could have been prevented. The cancer is the 47 million people who have no healthcare, and always has been. This cancer is exactly what drives up healthcare and insurance cost....people without healthcare can't afford the tab at the doctor or hospital. So, the insured and the government pay it.
Every argument you give Chase, leads right back to my last point. People who don't have insurance and healthcare are driving up the cost for everyone who has it. Now it's to the point where we can't hardly afford it anymore. So something has to be done. It's getting worse everyday. It's unfair for someone to get sick, through no fault of their own, and lose everything they have because of it. That shouldn't happen in America and children should get care period.
Could Obama's plan explode in our face? Hell yes. But the plan we have now has already exploded.
And if you really look at the whole picture, maybe healthcare should have been considered first, before we bailed out all the banks, car companies, and got rid of pig odor.
Hookbender — Jul 26, 2009
And if you really look at the whole picture, maybe healthcare should have been considered first, before we bailed out all the banks, car companies, and got rid of pig odor.
or we could have had a painful correction and moved on after TARP. instead now we have another huge bubble building that will eventually send us back to the stone age when it pops. what if we were to spend this trillion paying down the national debt and reassuring our investors that it won't take a wheelbarrow of greenbacks to buy a loaf of bread. get our feet on solid ground, and than when we have some sense of fiscal responsibility looking at what we can and cannot afford to do for our nation. it is a shitty realization to make, but at the rate we are going (california anybody?) we can't afford to take care of our citizens in that way, whether its deserved, constitutional, a right, etc.
in december resurrect this thread. if i'm wrong i'll eat my words, but healthcare is going to be on the back burner.
it's called a "suckers rally"
I got out of the hospital today. It was the first time I've been a patient aside from a cpl minor things as a child. I have no insurance. I'm looking at a $45,000+ bill coming my way any day now over most likely a spider bite. Seven days of iv antibiotics to keep the infection in my elbow from becoming septic and roaming my body to lodge in my heart or a major organ. 103 temperature for several days in county hospital with roommates like an autistic kid who got hit by a train, an old black guy who had dick cancer and had to have his cock removed and a gangbanging Latino heroin addict with infected abscesses in both legs while kicking the shit. I got really good treatment even though I had to be one of those people who goes to the emergency room, I guess I would be anyway as preventing a spider from biting me in my sleep isn't all that realistic. I will have to try to get medical, if tht doesn't work I have a cpl other options including a payment plan according to the hospital billing dept rep I talked to. She also told me it's $6,500 a day. I had a conversation with a nurse about healthcare while I was in there and she was so proud that the homeless could come in and get care. "They don't have an address to send the bill to" she said, "Well I do." I replied. Seems the wealthy and the very poor are ok under our current system.
Putting this aside, what have I always felt about "heathcare" in this country? I think basic heathcare is a right and when RICH people create, vote on and report on all the details of anything happening in regards to reform or whatever is going on I tend to think a shit sandwich is coming our way, too many on the take who have the pot of gold coverage already. Not to say that the shit sundae we have now is any good. I think health insurance is a disgusting notion because all insurance is a game where you bet against yourself. You bet that you will put less in than you will get out in time. The other thought is that paying for peace of mind is worthwhile but where it comes to people's basic health gambling is a shitty route. I keep hearing about how people should have/want more choice when it comes to insurance I don't know if I can believe this. I think people want to go to get help and not have to worry about studying bs plans all day long to find the differences ie whether they will get screwed later. They just want to be well. Insurance companies use the money given to them to make more money and to do this many people must neglect using the system while they also deny services to other people. There is no other way to be profitable and our problems come when like all other big businesses they want to keep being more and more profitable. This means costs go up while services go down and is truly macabre. Different levels of health insurance are just ways of manifesting "success" and keeping people in work and are similarly wrong. Cadillac plan should mean - includes elective plastic surgery only - I mean anything less than that for all citizens shows the nation to be less than most flag wavers' claims. btw What happened to the cute lil flag pins, only Bammer seems to wear it now, guess it just aint America anymore?
Getting back to our legislators and other rich gold covered people, If they would just be honest and say "In order for us to keep the health coverage we have come to expect for ourselves, the "successful" patriot's coverage with access to the doctors we know and love, many of you will have to die and it may be a horrible slow death", I would have more respect for them. The repeated Luntzisms of rationing and denial of services are meant to scare elderly voters who think the young will be saved first. What the rich are truly afraid of is a system by which they can't circumnavigate to the front of the line and that doctors will be forced to accept all with problems equally and not be able to cater to them, as we all know a good doc is hard to find right thats why you can keep what ya got if ya like it, right? This will never happen here anyway, there will always be a rich route.
Why will we get a shit sandwich? Because people aren't taking to the streets like they did against the war or other issues they care about, this is the only thing that could give the basic citizen something ok. Its all the Congress of idiots might listen to, and I say might. Why can't Obama get anything better? Because he too is wealthy and covered. I mean he did bail out exclusively rich people so far and now they all cry about how there is no money. Had he said healthcare first, bailouts second, we might even see some "bipartisan" efforts or whadevz they call their bs games.
If you don't have any insurance and don't think there should be basic life sustaining treatment available to all without the stress of your future being extremely fckd, you are a rose colored glasses type. I'm guessing Libertarian.
I think "Life" insurance is the funniest of all, in this game you bet you will die and they will give someone cash, but you'll never know if they actually did.
BINGEWOOD — Jul 27, 2009Seems the wealthy and the very poor are ok under our current system.
Bingo.
I get tired of the "socialist" medical system rants. It's silly.
We already have "socialist" medicine in this country. It's called the VA. Veterans don't have to pay for shit....and they shouldn't!
IF you really wanna bitch about governemnt money bitch at the stupid shit the government spends money on that it doesn't need.
RIGHT NOW....the senate is trying to keep the F-22 Raptor in the skies. Why? IT gives people across the US a job. Which is socialist thinking funny enough. This plane DOES NOT fly in the rain. The MILITARY doesn't even want this plane. Dick Cheney didn't want this plane. And yet they move it through anyway. That is bullshit. Billions of wasted dollars....for what? A plane that doesn't work and the hopes of a re-election?!?!1
come on Chase. There are tons of programs the government spends money on that WE the people don't need at all.
There is NOTHING wrong with Healthcare being paid for with taxes. We should do what is best for the most people. We are a free society that touts ourselves as the best and currently we don't have the best medical system. It is ludicrous to tout ourselves as the greatest society on Earth and we can't even take care of our sick and dying.
Now is Obama's system the best? I don't know. But the great thing about something NEW is that change normally scares the shit out of everyone. But change is GOOD. IF it's not the best solution we can CHANGE it and IMPROVE it. That's called PROGRESS. something need to get back into the business of doing like back when we actually WERE a great nation.
Think about this: Bingewood now owes maybe $45k for a hospital visit, because he was uninsured. Because we didn't insure him, at relatively low cost, spreading that 45k across 300 million people, that $45k bill now lands squarely on his shoulders. Like so many other people, an unexpected medical cost is going to fuck his shit up.
Does anyone truly believe that completely fucking people who don't have insurance is a better system than the one proposed? Chase, your solution is perfect as long as you never get sick or injured.
Bingewood - sorry to hear your story - that's tough to deal with.
It certainly illuminates this discussion.
Access to basic decent healthcare doesn't fit into a free market model.
When you need emergency care you are not the free market agent of theory - you are in a situation where the most extreme kind of monopoly applies and you are no position to haggle, take your business elsewhere or decline your purchase because you can't afford it.
You might not even be conscious.
It is closer to the "customer relationship" you would get purchasing a protection racket from the Mafia making offers you can't refuse.
The system can only work with compulsory insurance.
charger — Jul 27, 2009Think about this: Bingewood now owes maybe $45k for a hospital visit, because he was uninsured. Because we didn't insure him, at relatively low cost, spreading that 45k across 300 million people, that $45k bill now lands squarely on his shoulders. Like so many other people, an unexpected medical cost is going to fuck his shit up.
Does anyone truly believe that completely fucking people who don't have insurance is a better system than the one proposed? Chase, your solution is perfect as long as you never get sick or injured.
it would probably be best if we did that for income as well. think about all those people who work full time yet still can't make ends meet. the government should take all the money and distribute it fairly amongst everyone. sort of a "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" type thing.
draw the fucking line somewhere people.
chase — Jul 28, 2009"think about all those people who work full time yet still can't make ends meet. "
They should fcking die horrible deaths. We all know it, let's just not talk about it.
What it comes down to is if you don't have insurance and say some criminal shoots you or you get creamed by an uninsured drunk driver there is no justice to pay the bill. They will send it to you. I had a silly lil spider bite which required only sustained antibiotics. This was the only treatment I got. If you have something like cancer which may go into hundreds of thousands or millions, most people aren't going to make that in their lifetimes. If they have insurance they are using money from those who dont need help right now to pay for those who do. The insurance companies redistribute the money while taking profit. Record profits at that.
What kind of health plan do you want? One in which you are healed or is there something else?
i know that is being extreme and alarmist and all that other bullshit but i really don't care. anyhow, this is an argument i'm bound to lose anyways. unfortunately half this country has figured out they can vote in somebody that will drain all of us dry with stupid bullshit programs. i think a quote is appropriate here
"When the people find they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic."
I've been reading this thread the last few days... and since I'm pretty drunk tonight, I thought I'd post! woo!
Here's the thing that bothers me about this, taking Bingewood as the example (I hope you got to kill that spider! slowly!)
$45k bill.
I have insurance (I have no employer, I pay for it myself)... 80/20. I'd pay around $9k with the rest on the insurance company.
Thing is, the insurance company will reimburse the hospital, probably, about $10.8K of the remaining $36k and say "heh, sucks to be you, Medicare guidelines say this is the price. Nice try assholes!"
In all likelihood, the $45k bill is for services that actually cost the hospital around $20k - so they break even.
It's an evil system - hospitals are getting screwed by insurance companies so they have to jack prices up to stay alive. If you aren't in the insurance game when you arrive, they can't give you the "real" price because then the insurance companies would demand that rate too! You get the jacked up rate with no way to say "sucks to be you!" unless you just default and screw your credit rating for life.
It's a real mess and I don't think that "reforming" insurance, or making government the insurer, is going to cut it since insurance is like... the whole problem.
I think there are only two potential ways out and neither is really on the table.
One is to get government and insurance companies out of the transactions entirely. This is too radical - might lead to price competition or might not... most people will see it as far too risky and not even worth considering. This is my favorite option, but what can I say, I'm a "rose colored glasses" kinda guy. I'm also in touch with reality so I'll move on to...
The other is to nationalize the health care system outright. This could solve the cost problems, but will likely have loads of unforeseen consequences (both political and sociological). In the end, this won't work here because we don't have the political tradition to make it possible. If we had a 75-25 electorate in favor, maybe. But we just don't. The current effort would put us on the road to nationalization but it's an ass backwards approach. It's hard for "stealth" socialism to succeed if you tell people you're doing it. If the work had been done since 1993 to get the country, as a whole, behind this.. it would surely happen now and be a big success. That work just wasn't done.
I don't know... it's a big problem and a solution isn't really apparent right now.
Great time for a really good new idea... :\
fingers... regarding lobbyists - think about who is -not- facing a government reaming right now and that's your answer... trial lawyers. Oh, and the ubiquitous Goldman Sachs. GE too... heh.
and on a closing note... USA totally OWNS on this chart!! http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/hea_pla_sur_pro-health-plastic-surgery-procedures
USA! USA!
hehe.
chase — Jul 28, 2009i know that is being extreme and alarmist and all that other bullshit but i really don't care. anyhow, this is an argument i'm bound to lose anyways. unfortunately half this country has figured out they can vote in somebody that will drain all of us dry with stupid bullshit programs. i think a quote is appropriate here
"When the people find they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic."
You can't really lose an argument you don't make. You just keep saying something about debt and stupid draining programs. I don't think Americans being healed would amount to a bullshit program. I think going into Iraq was a bullshit program and the nation not really feeling war daily, by say taxes going up not down, created something ugly and festering and might I add not paid for.
I take it you feel quality healthcare is for those who are successful only. I have always found it strange that those who make less money usually pay more for less while those who enjoy higher incomes pay less for more while often not needing help at all but accepting it wif a big smile and still crying that the have nots are complainers.
"think about all those people who work full time yet still can't make ends meet. " Sounds like yer one of 'em.
Once again what would your healthcare plan be?
chase — Jul 28, 2009i know that is being extreme and alarmist and all that other bullshit but i really don't care. anyhow, this is an argument i'm bound to lose anyways. unfortunately half this country has figured out they can vote in somebody that will drain all of us dry with stupid bullshit programs. i think a quote is appropriate here
"When the people find they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic."
Your shitting conservative smelly stuff big time. If your bound to lose this argument, why not consider the argument? Think some.