Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm ALL FOR universal healthcare coverage, but personally I'm glad the whole country's healthcare isn't run like Massachusetts' and I hope the current reforms don't model it too closely. We also need comprehensive food industry reform to get people healthier and bring healthcare costs down. Basically, if this healthcare reform isn't done right (or should I say "left," wayyy left) then it might as well not be done at all because we'll all just be worse off.
I'm insured through work... life, dental, health, vision etc etc.
But I have to be insured because of my disorder, there is no way I'd be able to afford my medication otherwise, and without my medication I'd be pretty much worthless. It's a big stress point for me.
People need to understand that the Healthcare Reform law in Massachusetts is only 3 years old, and the next phase of reform is being tackled (Cost Control) right now. I personally think it is admirable that Massachusetts was the first State to take on this huge issue.
Is it perfect? Of course not, but it is something that many of us in this State and the Healthcare Industry are proud of.
Unless you are just barely getting by, but still make over what Medicaid will accept. Then it is yet another mandated expense that takes more from the personal bottom line. And a very expensive mandate at that. Health insurance prices are hellish if you have to pick up a policy yourself.
Bingo. And unfortunately in today's economy, there are more and more people who are in this "between" state. Unfortunately for myself, I have been in that position and a mandate like that would have put us under...
Since I'm a teacher in NYC, I get all healthcare for free, even if I were to cover a family. I consider myself lucky/grateful compared to the economy today.
Bingo. And unfortunately in today's economy, there are more and more people who are in this "between" state. Unfortunately for myself, I have been in that position and a mandate like that would have put us under...
I agree that serious Healthcare reform is needed for people in this situation. My father is self-employed so I know how expensive health insurance is to those who do not receive employer sponsored or purchased Insurance.
On the flip side though I believe everyone has the responsibility to Insure themselves with at the very least Catastrophic Health Insurance. If there is no mandate for you to carry health insurance then there should be no mandate for hospitals to treat all patients regardless of if they are uninsured or not.
Only 26% of all uninsured care is paid out-of-pocket each year. The remainder is paid by either the Hospital, Private Insurance companies (costs are passed down to the insured) or the Government (taxpayers).
The article's implicit arguement is that coverage should not be expanded to all citizens because there wouldn't be enough physicians to treat them is predictable from this conservative professional journal. Many doctors do not want to share their turf, when in actuality, nurse practitioners are growing in thier ranks and are able to pick up much of the health care services and procedures that are today relegated solely to MDs. Educating nurse praticitoners takes much less time and is much less expensive than educating MDs. Study after study has shown that the quality of the care provided by NPs is equal to that of MDs. In addition, the development of the "medical home" care model is also reducing the burden placed on primary care docs, while their patients get more quality time with them.
Ben, you know how high their taxes are? This is one of many reasons.
Do you know this for a fact, or are you shooting from the hip? Regardless of tax rates, I am guessing the NYC school system represents a pretty big and powerful buying pool. I wouldn't doubt that they were able to cut themselves a sweet deal with the insurance companies. But I suspect there are co-pays and deductables for non-preventive services which Rachel has never seen because she's never needed that type of care.
Rachel, please weigh in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
