Health Care changes

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 361 - 380 of total 1119 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 11:51am PT
In retrospect, given that almost no Republicans voted for the ACA, the Democrats might as well have voted for single payer. They should have also framed single payer as "Medicare for all". Medicare works, everybody nows what it is, it would have certainly received broad public support.

That would have been impossible. In fact, to get the necessary votes in the Senate, the public option that existed in the ACA had to be deleted.

Curt
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:02pm PT
What does it tell you, Curt, when single-payer can't even get the undivided support of Democrats in Congress?

Obamacare passed with zero Republican votes.
Srbphoto

climber
Kennewick wa
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:19pm PT
For example, cigarettes, alcohol, red meat, ice cream, whole milk and cream, full-fat anything, etc., etc., all should have taxes added to the base purchase price relative to the known health-risks these things represent.

What happens when your ox gets gored?

For example, exercising. A lot of people have to go the Dr because of exercise.

Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:21pm PT
There are too many rolling and coming catastrophes caused by ObamaCare to keep track of. Just wait until the employer market is hit late next year. But within a few weeks, a humanitarian crisis is about to hit millions who could find themselves without health insurance. Millions who had their insurance policies cancelled are now unable to re-insure themselves on the broken ObamaCare websites. In liberal Massachusetts alone, only 1% of those cancellations have re-enrolled.
The Boston Herald reports that ObamaCare and the president's broken promise have already cost 150,000 Bay Staters their health insurance plans. But of those 150,0000, only 549 are in the Massachusetts Health Connector to be re-enrolled on time. Even that small number are not officially enrolled.
Overall, only 47,781 total accounts have been created and a paltry 16,282 applications have been completed.
What you likely have here is a toxic mix of people who either can't access the state site due to the technical problems, or those who have decided not to re-enroll. There is still 32 days to sign up in time, but it is obvious many are in no hurry.
Most of the people in the White House, including the president, have never had any real experience outside of government or academia, so they probably didn’t know that betrayal and frustration combined with rate shock is no way to attract customers.
For those who are already ill or might get ill early next year, this is no laughing matter. How many of the millions who had their policies cancelled have scheduled surgery or chemotherapy in early January. And how many of those, through no fault of their own, won't be covered because they can't access the ObamaCare site or afford the ObamaCare-approved plan?
On top of that, if a large portion of the millions who had their insurance cancelled simply refuse to re-enroll, you can bet that those refusing will be the young and healthy needed to keep ObamaCare financially viable. The result of an insurance pool filled with the sick and elderly would be skyrocketing premiums; which means more healthy people drop out, which mean prices go even higher.
That is called the death spiral.
It is becoming more and more likely that by this time next year, ObamaCare could result in an increase in the number of Americans who are uninsured.


We are Fu**ed
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:35pm PT
... IF the revenue to fund it came directly from lifestyle choices.

I'm all in favor of everybody paying to some extent just for "normal" purchases. We all engage in "lifestyle choices" that affect our need for health-care. NP!

I'm just emphasizing a "vice tax" to ensure that the subset of purchases that are known to be health-endangering should be taxed more heavily.

Really, the sole principle I care about in funding priorities is that people should be responsible (pay the price) for their lifestyle choices. So, yeah, single-payer system WITH funding tied to lifestyle choices: there are all sorts of models by which that can be made to work in harmony with American founding principles.
Snowmassguy

Trad climber
Calirado
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:44pm PT
and what was/is the Republican healthcare plan?

I guess we will find out as this is clearly a MASSIVE failure.

Once again, we see partisan politics working to the detriment of the American people.

Democrat, Republican blah blah blah




Cragman

Trad climber
June Lake, California....via the Damascus Road
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:48pm PT
^^^^Snowmassguy TOTALLY nails it!!!!!!
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
What does it tell you, Curt, when single-payer can't even get the undivided support of Democrats in Congress?

It tells me that Joe Lieberman is beholden to the insurance industry in Hartford.

Curt
Chaz

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Nov 13, 2013 - 12:58pm PT
Whatever happened to the purpose of government being the securing of our liberty?

Now, its "everyone's ox SHOULD get gored".

Time has long passed to start scaling back the power of the government.
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:01pm PT
Norton, in all fairness, as I recall the days when the bill was being formulated and subsequently passed, it was done in closed-door sessions wherein the GOP was specifically excluded. Over and over, I heard that info reported directly from on the scene interviews. I don't believe their input was wanted or permitted. Now those were more "naive" times with a less experienced president (than now is the case) wherein I believe he felt that "might ruled" i.e. "might makes right." As a result of what transpired subsequently, he may have mellowed somewhat and come to a greater realization that there is a need for both parties to work together. The Dems were pretty heady in those days with the notion that they were in charge and "others need not apply" so to speak.

Working together sounds great until your opposition won't even support their own ideas. It's been said before, but let's be really clear about this: Obama assumed that the ACA would get some Republican support because it was based on their own plan--first envisioned by the very conservative Heritage Foundation and first enacted on a statewide basis by a Republican governor.

Curt
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:04pm PT
the millions who had their policies cancelled


anybody have personal experience with this? Vs. 'millions' of anecdotal talking points?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:11pm PT
anybody have personal experience with this? Vs. 'millions' of anecdotal talking points?

As I posted up-thread. Yes.

It's ironic that now even the Dems are starting to realize that this mess wasn't ready for prime time and are advocating the exact same delay in roll-out as the Rebumblicans pressed for in the shut-down.

Republicrats. Dembumblicans. Same thing. Same joke.

Except that tens of millions are not laughing.

Shiloh, you and I could in a couple of days hammer out a better plan than ANYTHING Congress has dreamed up. And it would be a fair and principled compromise that would appeal to the VAST majority of Americans (rather than this present 50.5/49.5 split we presently see). I like how you think and appreciate your refinements to the single-payer idea.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:18pm PT
even Medicare is a 12 month policy, for Christ's sakes

So, let me be sure I'm understanding what you're floating....

The widespread cancellations of small-group and personal plans, followed by NO comparable plans being made available at ANY cost, is comparable to the annual "cancellation" of Medicare?

Am I reading you right? Is this REALLY your comparison?
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:42pm PT
But now when someone gets a particular policy canceled and replaced by another one that offers more coverage and better value, I'm supposed conclude that our president is Satan himself.

Tens of millions are finding that they can NOT get their existing policy "replaced by another one that offers more coverage and better value." But, I guess that this fact is just "anecdotes" that are really no "evidence" of a problem at all.

Perhaps you'll take as "evidence" that the President himself is embattled and apologizing for this FACT, because the Dems are running scared of serious backlash at this point.

It is now widely known and demonstrable FACT that what you are saying is simply false. Rather than to pretend that tens of millions are not being screwed by this debacle, you could legitimately continue discussion by at least having the intellectual honesty to acknowledge facts as facts.

You COULD legitimately argue that tens of millions were getting screwed prior to Obamacare, and I would instantly agree. You COULD argue that the President could hardly have been expected to foresee all the side-effects that would emerge from this law, and I would instantly agree (after all, they had to "pass it to know what it really says"). I could agree on all sorts of points.

But we would have to first agree to agree on the FACTS. You get nowhere by denying the facts. And it is FACT that tens of millions are having their policies CANCELED with NO comparable-valued policies available anywhere.

Not "more coverage." Not "better value." Nope! Simply not the case, and I've seen it first-hand, as I posted up-thread. And when the President himself is apologizing for the very FACT that you now deny, well, that indicates that you are not taking the facts very seriously.
Larry Nelson

Social climber
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:48pm PT
J.Shiloh and madbolter1 are making some excellent points.

Single payer may be a way to go, but funding it is where the rubber meets the road.
I like vice tax ideas, but everyone will have to have some minimal skin in the game.
I know there are many advocates of Canadian, French and other healthcare systems and I have heard many good things about them. There are also the anecdotal stories of someone coming to America from those countries to have procedures done. Clearly no one system is perfect.

I may be wrong, but I have also read that in Europe they use VAT (consumption tax) to fund their programs. Without researching it, does anyone know if that is true?
VAT's are somewhat regressive tax systems that hit the poor the hardest.
(Inflation is the most insidious regressive "tax"...watch out for that soon).


As far as our current partisan stalemate in the corrupt Imperial city of DC, someone once wrote:
The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work, and then they get elected and prove it.
Wade Icey

Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:53pm PT
it is FACT that tens of millions are having their policies CANCELED with NO comparable-valued policies available anywhere.

source?
Marlow

Sport climber
OSLO
Nov 13, 2013 - 01:56pm PT
"A group of Occupy Wall Street activists has bought almost $15m of Americans' personal debt over the last year as part of the Rolling Jubilee project to help people pay off their outstanding credit.

Rolling Jubilee, set up by Occupy's Strike Debt group following the street protests that swept the world in 2011, launched on 15 November 2012. The group purchases personal debt cheaply from banks before "abolishing" it, freeing individuals from their bills.

By purchasing the debt at knockdown prices the group has managed to free $14,734,569.87 of personal debt, mainly medical debt, spending only $400,000.

"We thought that the ratio would be about 20 to 1," said Andrew Ross, a member of Strike Debt and professor of social and cultural analysis at New York University. He said the team initially envisaged raising $50,000, which would have enabled it to buy $1m in debt.

"In fact we've been able to buy debt a lot more cheaply than that."

The group is able to buy debt so cheaply due to the nature of the "secondary debt market". If individuals consistently fail to pay bills from credit cards, loans, or medical insurance the bank or lender that issued the funds will eventually cut its losses by selling that debt to a third party. These sales occur for a fraction of the debt’s true values – typically for five cents on the dollar – and debt-buying companies then attempt to recoup the debt from the individual debtor and thus make a profit."

....

""Our purpose in doing this, aside from helping some people along the way – there's certainly many, many people who are very thankful that their debts are abolished – our primary purpose was to spread information about the workings of this secondary debt market."

The group has focussed on buying medical debt, and has acquired the $14.7m in three separate purchases, most recently purchasing the value of $13.5m on medical debt owed by 2,693 people across 45 states and Puerto Rico, Rolling Jubilee said in a press release.

“No one should have to go into debt or bankruptcy because they get sick,” said Laura Hanna, an organiser with the group. Hanna said 62% of all personal bankruptcies have medical debt as a contributing factor."

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/12/occupy-wall-street-activists-15m-personal-debt
Curt

climber
Gold Canyon, AZ
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:08pm PT
I may be wrong, but I have also read that in Europe they use VAT (consumption tax) to fund their programs. Without researching it, does anyone know if that is true?

In England the National Health Service is primarily funded through an income-type tax--not sure about other countries

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Insurance

Curt

Srbphoto

climber
Kennewick wa
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:15pm PT
In Canada, they originally taxed beer but it brought in too much money so I believe they changed it to an income tax.
madbolter1

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Nov 13, 2013 - 02:30pm PT
Even if the number were thirty million (and you've provided no evidence that it is), that's still less than 10% of the US population.

What percent of the population had NO insurance before ACA?

Now you're making a totally different argument from your earlier ones. This one is just Norton's et al, and it is back to the side of this discussion that I said I wouldn't debate anymore. I've said my piece on this, as it is really about the difference between political philosophies. I am libertarian and believe in people's freedom to choose AND to pay their own price for their choices. Obamacare is at the opposite end of the spectrum of solutions from the MANY other possibilities that would be based upon CHOICE, as Shiloh and I have been noting.

I'm not going to debate you about the obvious facts. That's a fool's errand. And I'm not going to debate political philosophy any more. On this thread, it's a waste of my time.

ALL I will say at this point is that your argument amounts to saying: "MANY were getting screwed before, and we don't even KNOW how many people (but it's a large enough number that even the President is back-peddling, and the Dems are now sounding like the Rebumblicans of a month ago) are getting screwed by the current approach. So, somebody is going to get screwed no matter what we do or don't do. Thus, it's FAR better to intentionally and ACTIVELY screw people by DOING something than it is to unintentionally screw people by doing nothing."

But there are FAR better alternatives than DOING Obamacare or doing nothing. That is ALL I intend to argue going forward.
Messages 361 - 380 of total 1119 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews