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.
So, are you advocating ending the insurance industry?
yes big time
insurance (private or government) is the problem...not that its real insurance anyhow..............
........do you expect your homeowners insurance to pay the bill when you get new windows, or a new roof, or a new furnace, or paint your daughters room....nope insurance is for CATASTROPHIC stuff...not the everyday basics......
.......do you expect your autoinsurance company to pay for new tires, or an annual checkup( tune up, or inspection)....nope its for CATASTROPHIC stuff...not everyday wear and tear
its your body, your health, your bill...pay your own bill
insurance (private or government) is the problem...not that its real insurance anyhow..............
........do you expect your homeowners insurance to pay the bill when you get new windows, or a new roof, or a new furnace, or paint your daughters room....nope insurance is for CATASTROPHIC stuff...not the everyday basics......
.......do you expect your autoinsurance company to pay for new tires, or an annual checkup( tune up, or inspection)....nope its for CATASTROPHIC stuff...not everyday wear and tear
its your body, your health, your bill...pay your own bill
Insurance and healthcare costs are out of control because government mandated care without the ability to pay. They've gotta make up the difference some how, or go out of business.
True, but the government is mandating people buy insurance or they will be fined. BUT they have made exceptions for certain groups. If the government is telling the companies what they can and can't do, telling the people who must and who doesn't have to buy a product, it might not be a government takeover, but it is governmental interference.
I am glad that you agree that the OP is way off-base with his preposterous thread.
Interference is what the government does and it's perfectly legitimate. Government interferes with the cocaine dealer's ability to make a living; A few weeks ago, a mail order python dealer testified before Congress complaining that new regulations are "job killing" because they will stop him from shipping pythons to individuals. I say, GOOD! Gov't makes rules that interfere with coal mine companies to strip the land bare and create an ecological hazard.
The bottom line is that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is neither a government takeover of health care, a takeover of 16% of the economy nor more expensive for the taxpayers -- facts which completely refute the points of this thread.
That is funny! "eliminating 16%" etc. Hey, if Hannity and company had said '98 %' would you be quoting that?
Anyway, I am tired of paying the health care costs of those millions who have no insurance, and have no intention of getting insurance. Our property tax here in Tarrant County, to pay for the county hospital, is sky high.
You see, if you have some 40-50 million people who refuse to have health insurance, and refuse to pay for their own health care, said millions will nevertheless go to emergency rooms, clinics, etc, demanding health care. Said health care may be 'free' to them, but not 'free' to the rest of us.
Why so many people want to continue providing 'free' health care to a bunch of uninsured people is beyond me. I want them to pay.
I am a true Conservative. I do not want to pay for uninsured people's health care.
Nail on Head! Why do you think healthcare premiums are exponentially higher then 10-20 years ago? You used to get "free" healthcare with employment. Now your part of the cost can be hundreds of dollars a month plus co-pays. Go back 30 years and look at the healthcare inflation rate. Why do you think that is?
It's because we already have socialized medicine. We just do it differently.
You are effectively eliminating 16% of the private sector and the tax revenues on the profits that go with it. So how do we fund public health care while maintaining your beloved military industrial complex, corporate welfare, bailouts, and pro-war agenda?
Single Payer.
Because of our complex system of multiple private health insurance, we spend on average 32 cents out of every healthcare dollar on administration. Single payer systems all over the rest of the globe average 16 cents. Recovering that difference would free up (based on 2008 healthcare expenditures of $2.3 Trillion) almost $360 billion dollars that could go to actual care.
At current rates, such savings could also fund insurance for 123 million Americans at a time when there are only 51 million currently uninsured.
And why do patients that run to the doctor for every sniffle get care? Because they are required to get that care by law, regardless of their ability to pay.
. Please show me the law citing people with sniffles have to see the doctor, thank you.
Quote:
So when you go to the hospital, they see "insurance" and they give you extra tests you don't need, charge you more, and then pass that cost onto your insurance provider. They, in order to keep profits up, have to raise your premium every year, or require you to pay more out of pocket at the doctors visit.
Hospitals aren't the only place where this is happening. Doctors are so afraid of being sued OR want to pay for the new equipment so they are running tests on anyone with decent insurance. I have worked for an internist and watched him check the front of patient's charts before ordering tests. I've had my own doctor ask if I was insured before adding additional tests to a lab slip. Are they doing it to better diagnose, or to better diagnose and cover their derrieres from litigious patients?
In states where malpractice premiums are through the roof, we are seeing the loss of obstetricians.
There has to be tort reform to contain costs, too. I can't imagine what a large, hospital pays out in malpractice after seeing my former employer's bill.
Quote:
People say they don't like government healthcare all the time. But we've had government mandated healthcare, with no way to pay for it, since 1986. Its the reason why healthcare costs are so high.
Please tell me what program this was so I can get on the same page. Thanks.
Quote:
And when your premiums get to a place where you can't afford them, then you'll get free care at no cost, which will cause my rates to go up.
Sooner or later no one can pay for it.
We should either have a single payer, or mandate that everyone carry some form of insurance to mitigate costs.
If not everyone can afford it in the first place, how can we make them carry some form of insurance?
Quote:
I'd prefer the single payer system for life threatening ailments, but Republicans don't want that.
They want to keep the cycle going, and are unwilling to say they want to throw those who can't pay out in the street, so they are not only stupid, but hypocrites.
I feel that both parties are looking at a portion of the problem and not the entire picture. Reducing costs (premiums, tests, prescriptions, etc.) and tort reform need to be addressed first before mandating people to buy health insurance. Big pharma is too deep in all of the politician's pockets, politician/attorneys don't want to shut down a revenue source (medical damages suits) for their brethren.
If serious efforts were made and instituted prior to the implementation of Obamacare, I would be more open to it.
Don't sell the public a broken down car under the premise it will run if they buy it.
I am glad that you agree that the OP is way off-base with his preposterous thread.
More butt-hurt comments. You don't have an answer for me. There is no way for us to pay for public health-care. "End wars" is laughable because it will never happen. Do you understand that the Democrats are now a pro-war party? Be realistic.
Because of our complex system of multiple private health insurance, we spend on average 32 cents out of every healthcare dollar on administration. Single payer systems all over the rest of the globe average 16 cents. Recovering that difference would free up (based on 2008 healthcare expenditures of $2.3 Trillion) almost $360 billion dollars that could go to actual care.
At current rates, such savings could also fund insurance for 123 million Americans at a time when there are only 51 million currently uninsured.
the taxpayer couldnt afford singlepayer
singlepayer (covering everyone(320 million and rising) at 80-100%) would cost between 2.6 trillion a year...that would be over 30k per taxpayer...can you afford that
the answer is pay your own way..its the only way to keep prices(costs) in check...having someone else paying will ALWAYS cost more
Right....because our federal government does a great job at everything they get involved with. No waste, fraud or abuse in Medicaid, Medicare, SS, etc.
More butt-hurt comments. You don't have an answer for me. There is no way for us to pay for public health-care. "End wars" is laughable because it will never happen. Do you understand that the Democrats are now a pro-war party? Be realistic.
To repeat for the third time, we don't have public health care. We have private insurance and private medical care. This fact completely undercuts the theory behind this thread.
If you are seriously interested in lowering HC costs, you should want public health insurance, such as exists in most other developed nations. Their costs are half ours, cover everyone and have better medical results.
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.
