U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nebraska
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-12-2010, 03:42 PM
 
Location: Western AZ
209 posts, read 366,288 times
Reputation: 214

Advertisements

This healthcare bill was never about increasing accessibility or lowering costs as it was sold. In reality in will decrease accessibility through rationing and increase costs due to the federal bureaucracies. Politico just reported that congress miscalculated (who’d of thunk it) their original costs and that the IRS is estimating at least an additional 15,000 agents are necessary, just the enforcement arm of the IRS, not administration.

This is an out and out power grab by the socialists in an effort control another huge sector of the economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-24-2010, 12:24 PM
 
Location: Western AZ
209 posts, read 366,288 times
Reputation: 214
Oh my. From the New York Times:

As the new coalition government said it would make enormous cuts in the public sector, it initially promised to leave health care alone. But in one of its most surprising moves so far, it has done the opposite, proposing what would be the most radical reorganization of the National Health Service, as the system is called, since its inception in 1948.
Practical details of the plan are still sketchy. But its aim is clear: to shift control of England’s $160 billion annual health budget from a centralized bureaucracy to doctors at the local level. Under the plan, $100 billion to $125 billion a year would be meted out to general practitioners, who would use the money to buy services from hospitals and other health care providers.
The plan would also shrink the bureaucratic apparatus, in keeping with the government’s goal to effect $30 billion in “efficiency savings” in the health budget by 2014 and to reduce administrative costs by 45 percent.

$30 billion in "efficiency savings". WOW
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2010, 08:28 AM
 
Location: Western AZ
209 posts, read 366,288 times
Reputation: 214
Just reported by the UK Sunday Telegraph:

Some of the most common operations — including hip replacements and cataract surgery — will be rationed as part of attempts to save billions of pounds, despite government promises that front-line services would be protected.

Patients’ groups have described the measures as “astonishingly brutal”.

* Restrictions on some of the most basic and common operations, including hip and knee replacements, cataract surgery and orthodontic procedures.

* Plans to cut hundreds of thousands of pounds from budgets for the terminally ill, with dying cancer patients to be told to manage their own symptoms if their condition worsens at evenings or weekends.

* The closure of nursing homes for the elderly.

* A reduction in acute hospital beds, including those for the mentally ill, with targets to discourage GPs from sending patients to hospitals and reduce the number of people using accident and emergency departments.

* Tighter rationing of NHS funding for IVF treatment, and for surgery for obesity.

* Thousands of job losses at NHS hospitals, including 500 staff to go at a trust where cancer patients recently suffered delays in diagnosis and treatment because of staff shortages.

* Cost-cutting programmes in paediatric and maternity services, care of the elderly and services that provide respite breaks to long-term carers.

This is our future !!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2010, 01:56 PM
 
Location: Western Nebraskansas
2,707 posts, read 5,345,980 times
Reputation: 2406
How on earth is that our future??

How are you still missing this?
WE DO NOT HAVE A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

(I'd make it blink, too, if I thought you might finally get it. lol)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2010, 09:42 PM
 
3,204 posts, read 2,464,644 times
Reputation: 1544
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsMeFred View Post
How on earth is that our future??

How are you still missing this?
WE DO NOT HAVE A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

(I'd make it blink, too, if I thought you might finally get it. lol)
Did you hear Reid at the meetings in Vegas this weekend? They're still working on it. This administration will do anything to push this monstrosity through with public option.

Power To The People! ha
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-30-2010, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Western AZ
209 posts, read 366,288 times
Reputation: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by itsMeFred View Post
How on earth is that our future??

How are you still missing this?
WE DO NOT HAVE A UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEM.

(I'd make it blink, too, if I thought you might finally get it. lol)
I said "THIS IS OUR FUTURE". If I could make it blink I would. Open your eyes and ears Fred, to what those D.C. bureaucrats are saying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-06-2013, 02:53 PM
 
Location: Western AZ
209 posts, read 366,288 times
Reputation: 214
Well, well, well. Thought I'd revive an old thread from 3 years ago. Much discussion and lively debate at the time over the new healthcare law. As Nancy Pelosi said "we have to pass it to find out what's in it".

Well, now we have it and we're sure finding out what's in it. Just wondering what some of your thoughts are now. Has anyone changed their mind - for or against? Has anyone been directly effected positively or negatively?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Nebraska
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:21 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top