ObamaCare - exchanges ,report your states options!

[mrswdk]

Socialism = being bankrupt but alive? Yeah, okay.

[Night Strike]

Socialism = being bankrupt but alive? Yeah, okay.

Well, in the two worst case scenarios, being bankrupt but alive is what people claim is the worst scenario under the pre-Obamacare system. That's still better than the worst scenario under socialist health care: leaving money to heirs since you'll be dead due to long wait times and refusal to treat (whole life system, etc.).

[AndyDufresne]

Socialism = being bankrupt but alive? Yeah, okay.

Well, in the two worst case scenarios, being bankrupt but alive is what people claim is the worst scenario under the pre-Obamacare system. That's still better than the worst scenario under socialist health care: leaving money to heirs since you'll be dead due to long wait times and refusal to treat (whole life system, etc.).

--Andy

[jj3044]

Socialism = being bankrupt but alive? Yeah, okay.

Well, in the two worst case scenarios, being bankrupt but alive is what people claim is the worst scenario under the pre-Obamacare system. That's still better than the worst scenario under socialist health care: leaving money to heirs since you'll be dead due to long wait times and refusal to treat (whole life system, etc.).

Continual reforms are needed, but there are a few reasons to believe that the doctor shortage wont be as bad as some think. There is legislation at the state level to allow more retail clinics (like CVS Minuteclinics) and allow certain practitioners to practice at the top of their license. Another words, if you have the sniffles, strep throat, or even need to check to see if your BP meds are working, maybe you have an appointment with a nurse practitioner or physician's assistant instead of a PCP. Certainly more needs to be done in this area, but at least the wheels are turning.

Care to elaborate on "refusal to treat"?

[mrswdk]

Rivers of blood..

Dial it down a bit.

[PLAYER57832]

Okay, first, uninsureds' hospital bills were not totally paid with tax dollars dudemeister. Charitable care is a regular expense for hospitals.

And where do you think the bulk of that funding is from?

Hint-- it is not voluntary donations.

It comes from church groups, etc. who run non-profit hospitals and want to keep their non-profit status. A certain amount of their care must be charitable rather than for charge.

WRONG -- and PLEASE note, I am in no way, shape or form guessing or exaggerating or going on misinformation.
Some of the cost is paid through tax supports, some does come from charitable giving, however a lot of that is targeted toward capital investment, updating structures and buildings.

The bulk of excess charges are "eaten", but what that really means is that costs overall have to increase to pay for charity care. THAT is the real TRUTH!

But Obamacare severely limits the amount of charitable care that can be given out, which will only work to RAISE health care prices and limits the ability of those hospitals to care for those in need.

How so?
Obamacare limits the NEED for most charity care, because everyone is supposed to have insurance now.

Blurring your data, what makes it seem as if you are speaking the truth is the fact that healthcare costs will increase, as they always have, because levels of care keep improving and technology advances cost a LOT.

Second, who do you think is going to pay for the previously uninsured hospital bills now? The magic money tree?

The BIGGEST savings, by far comes because those with insurance (now supposed to be everyone) don't use emergency rooms as primary care facilities.

And where will those people go when the lines for primary care physicians are too long? Or when the issue they want to talk about is not included in the "free" yearly visit and they have to schedule another visit?

Nice try.
There is some reality to physician shortages in SOME areas. Though plenty of naysayers are quick to point to Obamacare, the problem well predates it. There are solutions. Obamacare should help this, not hurt.

Second, costs will be more spread out. Not everyone enrolling is sick or will get sick. Their funds are combined -- insurance, instead of just those who get sick going bankrupt or falling onto charity.

Socialism is great! Make EVERYONE pay more so that a few people don't have to. Is it better to be bankrupt but alive or leaving the heirs a bunch of money after death? Because those are the two extremes under the free market vs socialist systems.

Nice try at rhetoric.

Obamacare is hardly socialism, though the entire idea of insurance is perhaps related to the idea of socialism.

Yep, the REAL truth is that expecting everyone to never make financial mistakes, to always "win" financially, to even make the best decisions medically is not possible. NO ONE, is perfect. Your "choice" to think you can just do without real insurance, as you have repeated proclaimed you feel is your "right", REALLY means that you are expecting the rest of us to carry your burden, your gamble if you don't happen to stay healthy until you reach the agewhen Medicare kicks in. Obamacare forces you and some others like you to contribute now, when you are healthy, in return for payment later when you are no longer healthy. Should you be the rare individual that never needs further healthcare.... count yourself LUCKY! Stop moaning about paying a few extra cents to ensure the health security of ALL, including you.

And... for all the problems with Obamacare, the "sharing burden" bit is definitely NOT one. Nor are there simply 2 choices.. socialism or fully free market. But, you have proven yourself unwilling to look at options. You prefer the rhetoric.

[PLAYER57832]

That's still better than the worst scenario under socialist health care: leaving money to heirs since you'll be dead due to long wait times and refusal to treat (whole life system, etc.).

[/quote]
The trouble is your "doomsday" scenario IS NOT reality in any country that really has socialized medicine. Sure, you can bring up a few examples of errors and tragedies, but the numbers and severity of problems in other countries is MINIMAL compared with what happens here. That is, it is the US, not those countries that have the highest infant mortality rates, other negative health indicators.

You want to compare the few worst examples (mostly from the UK and Canada) to only the best areas here. That's not honesty ,that's flat lying.

Ironically enough, though you keep claiming"socialism is ruining" the system, market forces are what will ensure more physicians are trained and available. To the extent they are not, it is failure to support education,training of physicians in this country..not Obamacare, that is the problem.

[mrswdk]

Insurance is not related to Socialism.

[Phatscotty]

The trouble is your "doomsday" scenario IS NOT reality in any country that really has socialized medicine. Sure, you can bring up a few examples of errors and tragedies, but the numbers and severity of problems in other countries is MINIMAL compared with what happens here. That is, it is the US, not those countries that have the highest infant mortality rates, other negative health indicators.

You want to compare the few worst examples (mostly from the UK and Canada) to only the best areas here. That's not honesty ,that's flat lying.

Ironically enough, though you keep claiming"socialism is ruining" the system, market forces are what will ensure more physicians are trained and available. To the extent they are not, it is failure to support education,training of physicians in this country..not Obamacare, that is the problem.

Which countries are the best?

Is access to healthcare really the only thing to consider concerning infant mortality rates? Since you brought it up, tell us what the reasons are for the infant mortality statistic, instead of just throwing out the statistic.

btw, it's government intervention that has ruined the system and driven prices up so high that health care and health insurance are now inaccessible and unaffordable. Everything the government touches explodes in price. You demand the government guarantee payments for people who can't afford healthcare, but you don't think about it past that. Whenever a payment is guaranteed to be made from the government, the people who are in charge of pricing ask for more than what it really costs, they certainly do not ask for less. That's what happens, just like college tuition. Students don't care how much it costs when they aren't paying, and that goes for people in general (most don't even look at or know the prices anymore), so that government guarantee to help people actually turns into people not caring how much something costs, which means they aren't trying to get a deal or a discount and probably not even shopping around for prices. So the government steps in to 'help' but really they are just taken advantage of.

Unless you are going to make a case that the government is efficient and accountable.

[mrswdk]

it's government intervention that has ruined the system and driven prices up so high that health care and health insurance are now inaccessible and unaffordable

And yet government intervention in central and northern Europe has not produced this result.

[Phatscotty]

it's government intervention that has ruined the system and driven prices up so high that health care and health insurance are now inaccessible and unaffordable

And yet government intervention in central and northern Europe has not produced this result.

Not like I would know. Can you share some examples what you are talking about?

I haven't really heard very many good things about Spain, Greece, Italy, Great Britain. I heard France has some serious issues but idk about if that affects their healthcare or not. I have read stories about Europeans purposefully contracting AIDS so they can qualify for benefits. I have read stories about patients at hospitals being thrown into the streets because they are not legal residents. I remember the reports about running out of bandages. How much is a gallon of gas?

[mrswdk]

Greece, Italy, Spain, the UK and France are not in central or northern Europe. I'm talking about Norway, Sweden, Germany, Denmark, Switzerland etc.

I have read stories about Europeans purposefully contracting AIDS so they can qualify for benefits.

I have no words, dude... Are you one of those people who thinks The Onion is real news?

[Phatscotty]

Greece, Italy, Spain, the UK and France are not in central or northern Europe. I'm talking about Norway, Sweden, Germany, Denmark, Switzerland etc.

I have read stories about Europeans purposefully contracting AIDS so they can qualify for benefits.

I have no words, dude... Are you one of those people who thinks The Onion is real news?

Oh, I guess I missed the part where you carved out a certain small piece of Europe.

You could have just said "there are a few exceptions"

idk about the onion, but you are getting all crazy again. You need to stay in your lane. I was wondering if you had some words about the point you made. Which countries are you talking about, and why is it the case that government spending does not jack up their prices? and btw, when I was talking about gov't intervention jacking up prices, I was talking about my own country, not every country in the world. Since countries are different and stuff, results aren't always the same. You would do well to not try so hard to make points that only have value if every country in the world was the same.

[mrswdk]

My original response was a 14-word sentence and you missed the part where I specified 'central and northern Europe'? At a boy.

My point is that you're quick to blame 'government intervention' as if government intervention is, in itself, always going to produce disastrous results. If we look at countries like Sweden, Norway and Denmark then we can see countries with a high level of government intervention in all areas of life and also some of the world's highest standards of living.

Maybe the US government has so far failed to intervene in any constructive way, but there are models out there for highly effective intervention. No need to go all 'miniscule government' just yet.

[BigBallinStalin]

it's government intervention that has ruined the system and driven prices up so high that health care and health insurance are now inaccessible and unaffordable

And yet government intervention in central and northern Europe has not produced this result.

Prices aren't the only form of rationing. You could cut quality, impose queues, curtail options, etc.

[Metsfanmax]

it's government intervention that has ruined the system and driven prices up so high that health care and health insurance are now inaccessible and unaffordable

And yet government intervention in central and northern Europe has not produced this result.

Not like I would know.

Then you should probably refrain from making comparisons between the healthcare systems of the U.S. and other countries. You say:

Since countries are different and stuff, results aren't always the same. You would do well to not try so hard to make points that only have value if every country in the world was the same.

But if you are not using other data points for comparison, how can you have any idea how a different system will work? Phatscotty's magic powers of economic prediction?

[Phatscotty]

My original response was a 14-word sentence and you missed the part where I specified 'central and northern Europe'? At a boy.

My point is that you're quick to blame 'government intervention' as if government intervention is, in itself, always going to produce disastrous results.If we look at countries like Sweden, Norway and Denmark then we can see countries with a high level of government intervention in all areas of life and also some of the world's highest standards of living.

I'm not quick to blame all governments in the worldz. I'm quick to blame MY government. But perhaps that's part of being an American and living here and being familiar with my government and it's history, especially at the Federal level.

Hopefully that addresses your point.

I'm aware that the Swedes and Finns and Dennyzenz have government intervention in all areas of their lives, if that's what they want, fine by me, more power to them. I'm the last person gonna try to tell someone from another country what's right or wrong with them or how they should live. I'm also aware it's much MUCH easier to do those kinds of things in smaller less populated, more homogenous countries. And 1,000 other variables that need to be factored in before such a black and white comparison can even be attempted.

Did you know that all 3 of those countries can fit inside 1 U.S. state?

teehee

[mrswdk]

McDonald's and Coca Cola are capable of running global operations in an efficient manner. Let's not use the US's relatively large size to justify managerial ineptitude.

[Night Strike]

McDonald's and Coca Cola are capable of running global operations in an efficient manner. Let's not use the US's relatively large size to justify managerial ineptitude.

They also have to be successful to turn a profit. Governments just take the money anyway, regardless of the value of their product.

[Night Strike]

Put all of your personal information on a government website that has next to no security or be punished with higher taxes. Welcome to the government's monopoly of health insurance!

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101225308

[spurgistan]

For everybody who put biggest domestic policy failure in American history - you remember how we had human bondage slavery for almost 80 years after our formation of an independent state, right? Not to mention the whole systematic genocide of the First Nations, thing. But yeah, a badly programmed website though, inconveniencing people for as much as hours. Waaaay worse. Not saying that we should paper over this, or that enough people have been fired for it. But jeez, even on the internet, gotta be a line between hyperbole and insanity.

[Phatscotty]

For everybody who put biggest domestic policy failure in American history - you remember how we had human bondage slavery for almost 80 years after our formation of an independent state, right? Not to mention the whole systematic genocide of the First Nations, thing. But yeah, a badly programmed website though, inconveniencing people for as much as hours. Waaaay worse. Not saying that we should paper over this, or that enough people have been fired for it. But jeez, even on the internet, gotta be a line between hyperbole and insanity.

I think you are missing A LOT of context there. That's basically an introductory paragraph on what students learn in college their freshman year.

seriously though, slavery was here for centuries before the formation of this Independent state, and slavery did not last very long at all after the formation of this Independent state.

Sorry there wasn't twitter and telephones and electricity and stuff to speed the process along. In fact, all our founders knew that slavery would need to be dealt with, but the centuries old institution in the British and French and Spanish colonies was just too big to for any brand new government that does not even have a court system set up yet and wouldn't be for a decade.

I'm sure you expected that there was a switch that could just be flipped, and whoolah! Abolition! Or did you expect the slave holding states to be invaded and razed? Oh, more 'genocide' then?? HMMMMM see what the problem is there? Or wait, are you one of those people who feel like if it happens to white people, that doesn't qualify as genocide? serious question

But I did change the poll option

[Night Strike]

For everybody who put biggest domestic policy failure in American history - you remember how we had human bondage slavery for almost 80 years after our formation of an independent state, right? Not to mention the whole systematic genocide of the First Nations, thing. But yeah, a badly programmed website though, inconveniencing people for as much as hours. Waaaay worse. Not saying that we should paper over this, or that enough people have been fired for it. But jeez, even on the internet, gotta be a line between hyperbole and insanity.

You think the only problem with Obamacare is a faulty website and that its fix will cure all of its woes?

Slavery was started before the US was a nation, and the US would not have ratified the Constitution if they had attempted to abolish it at the start of the nation. So to claim it was a domestic policy created by the US government is disingenuous. And the actions taken against the Native Americans were definitely horrible and are worth your mention. But don't forget that Obamacare isn't over. There are still MANY facets of it that have yet to take effect, such as the IPAB that will limit health care, most likely following the Whole Lives system of recommendations.

[mrswdk]

I'll have one of whatever Phatscotty's having.

edit: Since I posted this Phatscotty has edited his post to remove the part where he said that genocide and slavery used to be 'the way of the world'

[mrswdk]

the actions taken against the Native Americans were definitely horrible and are worth your mention. But don't forget that Obamacare isn't over

Dear Lord, just imagine what lies around the corner!