Do you think they will expand medicaid in FL?

[vanguardisle]

Originally Posted by Fl1150

Some people just wont get that in a civilized nation their are essential services you have to provide and healthcare is one of them. We are not living in a country at least for now where the rich are only able to afford it. I guess when these people get sick they expect us the taxpayers to be paying for their healthcare but yet refusing to give us common folk any.

Thank you yes my feelings exactly.

[vanguardisle]

Originally Posted by Travelassie

Repeal and replace. And I doubt seriously Romneycare has all those regulations meant for total control of the healthcare industry, as well as the populace, hidden in its contents the way Obamacare has.

That is interesting to me . I would like more details about what regulations are hidden in there?

[vanguardisle]

Originally Posted by Restrain

Given that the taxpayer of Florida has to pay for the expansion, I don't see expansion coming. Too many elderly who don't want their taxes increased, especially with illegals being made eligible for Medicade.

The fact that a poster would vote for Crist just to get more benefits paid by the taxpayer is just a sad commentary on the voters.

As an aside as to how Obamacare is affecting people, the Broadway actors Equity-League Health Plan is removing those over 50 from its plan as Obamacare is driving up costs to the point it is unsustainable, losing millions last year. It is not all roses, no matter how they dress it up.

Are they allowed to do that?

[annerk]

I have a big problem with illegals getting any type of care that they can't pay for. I don't think tax dollars should ever support them AT ALL.

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by Fl1150

You guys are looking at it from a fiscal conservative viewpoint but guess what not everyone believes you should cut services just so you can keep taxes low. Healthcare is something in my opinion very important aspect of government should provide. I respect you guys viewpoints however I don't agree that is not needed for everybody.

I'm not advocating cutting medical services for people who need it. However, the money has to come from somewhere, and in reality, I figure we "ain't seen nothing yet" when it comes to the availability of medical care to everyone under Obamacare, especially when all the regulations hidden in the law surface within the next couple years. We're already seeing higher insurance premiums, increased out of pocket expenses with insurance programs in the Health Care exchange- and there are numerous reports of people who have been unable to get care for these reasons, or their doctors and healthcare facilities are not in the network any longer- I have family members in that boat. And the employer-provided insurance mandates under Obamacare have been postponed until after the midterm elections, so the effects of those changes aren't here yet, other than employers who cut back their employees to part time less than 30 hrs to circumvent having to provide those employees with insurance.

And if you figure that a single, government run program is the answer to healthcare, I can assure you that with the regulations, and provisions built into Obamacare, it's anybody's guess as to whether anyone, except maybe those deemed the elite, or close supporters of the administration will get anything close to decent healthcare. One has to wonder how much of that healthcare dollar collected by CMS will actually go towards paying for healthcare, when so much of it is directed towards federal administrative costs, special projects ( including pushing Obama's amnesty program for illegal aliens), and Lord only knows what else. And who's going to decide who gets their healthcare paid for, or even if they get it, when those healthcare dollars left for actual healthcare ( instead of some pet project set up by the administration) must stretch to cover the costs of how many millions of people. Like every other single party healthcare system out there, those dollars will necessarily have to be rationed. As we all have had many occasions to observe, the government, being as large as unwieldy as it is, bloated with too many bureaucrats whose main mission is to 1) make themselves look good and 2) cover their butts, 3) not make any waves or piZZ off their superiors, and a few 5) getting off on their 15 minutes of power, and no accountability to anyone for any SNAFUs that come up, no matter who gets hurt, is not the most efficient entity around. I shudder to think about the consequences of their ambition to control our healthcare system, using/misusing it to control every aspect of the lives of Americans when they control not only the dollars to healthcare, but who gets those dollars, based on anybody's guess as to what criteria? With no accountability because after all, they ARE the guv'mint and they say what goes. And we can be taxed in ever increasing amounts, to the point where they take it all, and it won't change anything because there is not enough money in this world for the federal government and its spending.

Another maybe not so unintended consequence of that bloated government bureaucracy controlling the healthcare system has to do with reimbursements. Starting in 2015, I think it is, doctors and other healthcare providers for Medicare will be reimbursed not for the number of patients, or cases they see, but for the "quality of healthcare" they deliver. Sounds reasonable, eh? Except, "quality" is a subjective term, who decides what constitutes quality? Right now, it looks like that "quality" entails a number of very intrusive questions on a form that doctors, healthcare intake folks and nurses in hospitals are required to ask of patients, regardless of what the purpose of the patients' visit might be. I don't know all the questions, but I've seen a few on those forms- not just the patient's medical history, past and present complaints and diagnoses, or their physical findings- height, weight, etc etc, or even their smoking or drinking history, but also their sexual preferences, who they live with, any history of or predispositions to depression or mental illnesses. It seems that "quality" involves asking patients over and over again, at subsequent visits too, about these issues and offering them counseling or programs to address these issues. It's likely that a doctor could be considered derelict in his care of a patient who hasn't shown enough of a decrease in their BMI, just for an example, but it doesn't take too much imagination to see where all that could lead- lower or no reimbursement. Because of course, all this information is part and parcel of a patient's electronic medical records, accessible to Lord only knows who, including the federal government.

So faced with the spectre of increased government oversight and nitpicking, lower reimbursements ( they're doing that anyway, even before the "quality issues" affect that) discourage doctors and other healthcare providers from getting into, or remaining in medicine, so wallah, a decrease in the number of those folks available to take care of patients. With a single payer system, and in some cases with the current third-party payer system, government oversight and approval needed for new facilities, new equipment, and so on, the government can decide not to approve a much needed hospital, or medical equipment ( such as PETscans, MRI instrumentation, etc), so less of all this stuff makes the availability less, and patient waits even longer. This is reportedly the main problem with the Canadian health system, and likely the reason we here in snow-bird land see lots and lots and lots and lots of Canadians who wait till they winter here to get their medical procedures done, see doctors and have their surgeries.

Bottom line, I guess, is that I don't see a large bureaucratic wasteful, inefficient government, whose motives for doing so, IMO are highly suspicious, taking total stewardship of our healthcare system. I'll be the first to admit both the insurance industry, as well as the healthcare system in our country, need quite a few fixes, but the government taking total control of the system for its own motives, IMO will only break it altogether.

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by vanguardisle

One good thing about Obama care is that there is a cap on the amount of medical expenses a person can be forced to pay each year isnt there? That way families will no longer be bankrupted by huge medical bills if one of them becomes very sick. And a person cannot be canceled for health reasons or be denied coverage for pre existing conditions.

That is a step in the right direction. It makes me angry just thinking about the way insurance companies used to be able to treat people .

Please lets discuss all the positive changes you would like to see in Obamacare that would make you like it and not hate it? It is here to stay so lets work on making it much better for everyone.

Actually, that limit on the amount of "out of pocket" expenses has been a part of every health insurance policy I've ever seen, for a long time. It's nothing new. Ours has been around $5000 for a family, I've seen individual policies that have that limit for individual coverage. The amount has always depended on the type of coverage one selects. However, many of those amounts for both deductibles, and copays, as well as the maximum out of pocket amounts have increased since the inception of Obamacare, and many of the insurance policies offered on the exchange also have high out-of pocket expenses. Insurance companies inform their customers that this is necessary to meet the demands of Obamacare.

And actually, some states, Florida included, have had laws in place before Obamacare prohibiting insurance companies from dropping individual patients from coverage because they've gotten sick and cost the insurance company too much.

[Travelassie]

Originally Posted by vanguardisle

That is interesting to me . I would like more details about what regulations are hidden in there?

Have you read the law? It's all there.

[vanguardisle]

Originally Posted by Travelassie

Actually, that limit on the amount of "out of pocket" expenses has been a part of every health insurance policy I've ever seen, for a long time. It's nothing new. Ours has been around $5000 for a family, I've seen individual policies that have that limit for individual coverage. The amount has always depended on the type of coverage one selects. However, many of those amounts for both deductibles, and copays, as well as the maximum out of pocket amounts have increased since the inception of Obamacare, and many of the insurance policies offered on the exchange also have high out-of pocket expenses. Insurance companies inform their customers that this is necessary to meet the demands of Obamacare.

And actually, some states, Florida included, have had laws in place before Obamacare prohibiting insurance companies from dropping individual patients from coverage because they've gotten sick and cost the insurance company too much.

I do not understand how it could have already been in place that a family cannot be bankrupted . What about all the families who have obscenely high medical bills how did they happen?

What I cannot understand is how a healthcare system modeled after Romneycare which is a big success, became to many such a failure? I believe that if Romney had won he would have loved to take the Obamacare idea and tweek it a little .

I do admit that since Obama did promise lower costs for policies he should have found a way to deliver . I can certainly understand people not liking their costs going up when he said they would go down. I still believe that future changes in it will make it better.

I do hope the Republicans work towards that goal and stop trying to take obamacare away. I hate the fact that they continue to want healthcare to remain as it used to be which is broken with millions of uninsured Americans suffering. Have they no heart?

[vanguardisle]

Originally Posted by Travelassie

Have you read the law? It's all there.

I have read articles describing the law but not the law itself no.

[chopchop0]

Originally Posted by Travelassie

Have you read the law? It's all there.

No one has really probably the read entirety of the law. Certainly congress didn't with the 3 days they had to decide before they passed it