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.
byTM: There was a study done a law review team on the living will. It was found that when Doctors or medical personnel learned the patient had such a document...they suspended treatment at the earliest point in the death trajectory fearing that they would be sued for not carrying out the mandate in the document. So even that carefully written law has its deficits.
When this issue was debated in my state...several testimonies included that emergency room personnel would take care of the person without a living will or health care proxy...because they would not sued for doing too much for the patient. i would rather hit the emergency room without a living will than with one....that is a headline....if you think i have been injured badly...do not perform miracles...take care of the others. you can doubt what I say and ridicule but the truth of these testimonies remain the same.
What part of that bill t hat says it's VOLUNTARY do you not get?? Gov't isn't forcing anyone to do it.
and there is a section in the bill that addresses when the living will takes affect. Also, when you have a health care proxy.. THEY are the ones that make the decisions for you.. hence having someone in charge of your decisions on when/how to carry out your living will. I was a proxy in my grandmothers case.
You make my point...You didn't need another law to do the right thing for your grandmother.
You make my point...You didn't need another law to do the right thing for your grandmother.
and you make my point.. if it's already in there paid for by medicaid..t hen why is all this fuss about death panel killing granny stuf even being talked about..
Because people wnat ratings and American's are too stupid to realize they are just being used as pawns in some insane game.
AND at the end of it all we all get screwed when we wind up with a mod cut health care reform bill that basically changes nothing and leaves everything status quo.
God..we are just giong to DUMB ourselves into our own destruction.
And the rest of the world can look at us, scratch their heads and wonder how the hell we got so stupid..
Last edited by Reads2MUCH; 08-16-2009 at 12:37 PM..
> Pg 59 HC Bill lines 21-24 Govt will have direct access to your bank accounts for direct funds transfers.
>
NO.. it talks about standardized electronic Adminstrative Transactions.. in otherwords the Dr.s office and/or insurance company will automatically deduct your copay from your card. If you are on a government plan, then the government plan will withdraw your funds electronically ( ore really the doctor will at the point of transaction) this also eliminates paperwork.
BTW.. the DR. is the one who collects the copays NOT the insurance company be it a private or public company. AND. FYI .. most likely any insurance company ALREADY knows your bank account numbers etc… because it is there whenever you pay your bill!!
Do I have any choice in this matter, or will the government force me into giving them complete access to the money in my bank account? Or, when this bill gets signed, will everyone in the plan be forced to allow government access to your bank?
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy
> Pg 29 lines 4-16 in the HC bill - YOUR HEALTHCARE IS RATIONED.
Rationed? NO. .this sets a STANDARD of CARE for the ESSENTIAL BENEFITS Package as defined in another section.. in otherwords.. a level of insurance that is the MINIMUM acceptable to be considered GOOD coverage and NOT underinsurance. As a matter of fact.. here is a line from the previous page under that section
But this is the panel that decides what is considered “acceptable coverage,” and if you do not have acceptable coverage, the government will punish you by taxing you up to 2.5% of your income.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TristansMommy
> Pg 149 Lines 16-24 ANY Employer with a payroll of $400,000 will have an 8% tax levied on all payroll.
Again.. this is the option if a company does not want to provide insurance.. and yes, it means either buy insurance or pay what amounts to a fine. Mandation of coverage…
>
It’s not that a “company does not want to provide insurance “, it means if a company creates a private healthcare plan for its employees, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that that insurance does not meet government new standards of considered “acceptable coverage,” then the government will tax the employer.
The government has a similar plan to tax the individual for daring to have a private healthcare plan that the government does not like:
Quote:
`SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
`(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of--
`(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
`(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.
Quote:
`(d) Acceptable Coverage Requirement-
`(1) IN GENERAL- The requirements of this subsection are met with respect to any individual for any period if such individual (and each qualifying child of such individual) is covered by acceptable coverage at all times during such period.
`(2) ACCEPTABLE COVERAGE- For purposes of this section, the term `acceptable coverage' means any of the following:
`(A) QUALIFIED HEALTH BENEFITS PLAN COVERAGE- Coverage under a qualified health benefits plan (as defined in section 100(c) of the America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009).
When you read these bills from the government, realize that sometimes their good intentions end up really screwing things up, or making these types of grand plans economically unsustainable.
I'll agree with you that some people are reading this bill and envisioning nefarious motives lurking behind every word and syllable. But other people are reading this bill and seeing perfection, and the good intentions of government coming to rescue humanity from the evils of the current status quo.
The correct way to read any bill from congress is with a little of both, and to realize that some people feel you and I are basically stupid, and incapable of knowing or even deciding what is best for us, and they see it as their duty in life to decide what is in our best interest, whether we agree with their decisions or not.
John Conyers (D) Michigan, said we should not criticize the members of congress for not reading this bill, claiming it would take them two days to read it, and two lawyers to explain to them what they just read. It's ironic to me that these people think we are the ones who are incapable of knowing what is good for us, when they tell us the bill is too complicated for them to comprehend, and yet they think we need them to decide what's best for us.
What part of that bill t hat says it's VOLUNTARY do you not get?? Gov't isn't forcing anyone to do it.
Yes, I understand what you are trying to say, but the foot in the door approaches leads to other changes you may not have anticipated. I remember, in my state, a great statute was written to protect the pension plan...and overnight...a legislator went to the Speaker of that House and had the law changed...with legalese that went unnoticed until the time came to use the law.
Now, that was about a pension...money...we are talking about life and death...people have been borne and died for thousands of years without the kinds of laws coming out of Washington
Joseph Califano, Sec, Health and Human Services under President Johnson wanted statutorily enforced living wills to......save millions in Medicare dollars. How do you suppose that would happen? His suggestions went down in flames then and let's hope there are enough of us who remember and refuse to walk into the horizon.
After watching Dick Armey today it's apparent Freedomworks wants to do away with Medicare and Social Security. These are the people who are organizing the Astroturfers
Do I have any choice in this matter, or will the government force me into giving them complete access to the money in my bank account? Or, when this bill gets signed, anyone in the plan will be forced to allow government access to your bank?
Then make the language more specific. That is basically what you are saying is needed.
do you understand how health insurance/payments work, BTW. You don't pay the government for the service rendered at your copay. You pay the provider. the DR. This is about having that information at your PROVIDERS fingertips anyway. Just by swiping the card the Dr. will know what your plan covers, doesn't cover, what labs it can /can't use and what your copay is to the provider for such services. Has nothing to do with the government.. the government is not at the point of service.. AND the government is NOT the payor of the service.. unless you are on the "public" option that is in this bill.
Quote:
But this is the panel that decides what is considered “acceptable coverage,” and if you do not have acceptable coverage, the government will punish you by taxing you up to 2.5% of your income.
By acceptable it is setting a minimum standard. Part of the problem is that while American's have health insurance, coverage is compltely inadequate. 60% of Bankruptcies were from medical bills and 3/4 of those had insurance. If you DONT have the minimum standard of insurance.. then you are NOT adequately covered. There are minimum standards of insurance for cars so that you and other drivers are adequately covered. If you dont' have the state minimum requirement you are considered not to be sufficiently insured and are fined by the state. HOW is this any different?
Also.. the bill outlines what is considered "acceptable coverage" .
Quote:
It’s not that a “company does not want to provide insurance “, it means if a company creates a private healthcare plan for its employees, and the Secretary of Health and Human Services determines that that insurance does not meet government new standards of considered “acceptable coverage,” then the government will tax the employer.
Absolutely right.. again.. minimum standards.. if it doesn't adequately cover the insured than it's just a bull**** policy that protects no one, leaves individuals and families vulnerable to financial ruin from a medical condition AND a higher possibility of uncompensated care. It makes sense to have MINIMUM standards..
Quote:
The government has a similar plan to tax the individual for daring to have a private healthcare plan that the government does not like:
AGain.. if it meets the outlined criteria for coverage.. then it will be liked. I don't see what hte problem is in having a minimum standard of adequate coverage!
There are so many crap plans out there that are "cheap" and ap erson thinks they are covered only to find out that their "coverage" covered absolutely SQUAT. THIS puts an end to that nonsense.
Quote:
When you read these bills from the government, realize that sometimes their good intentions end up really screwing things up, or making these types of grand plans economically unsustainable.
I believe the government intentions are good. It's the others that get in there and twist it to their own way that screws teh pooch.
For example, Clintons' initiative (dont know what it was called) that was designed to end red lining in poor neighborhoods. What did the mortgage industry do.. they went nuts and turned a good intended thing into their own money making playground. But that is for another thread.
The system can not get more screwed than it is now, IMO.. This is a huge step forward to unscrewing it.. and will probably meet with some problems an hiccups along the way that will need to be fixed... no doubt.
Quote:
I'll agree with you that some people are reading this bill and envisioning nefarious motives lurking behind every word and syllable. But other people are reading this bill and seeing perfection, and the good intentions of government coming to rescue humanity from the evils of the current status quo.
I don't profess that the bill is perfect by any means.. I don't think it is. The point of this post, however, was to illustrate how completely insane some are about believing what some nutjob says it says vs. it's actual wording.
Quote:
The correct way to read any bill from congress is with a little of both, and to realize that some people feel you and I are basically stupid, and incapable of knowing or even deciding what is best for us, and they see it as their duty in life to decide what is in our best interest, whether we agree with their decisions or not.
John Conyers (D) Michigan, said we should not criticize the members of congress for not reading this bill, claiming it would take them two days to read it, and two lawyers to explain to them what they just read. It's ironic to me that these people think we are the ones who are incapable of knowing what is good for us, when they tell us the bill is too complicated for them to comprehend, and yet they think we need them to decide what's best for us.
Again.. agreed. I don't think IT or the government is perfect.. far from it.. but it certainly isn't the fascist machine that many have made it out to be.. and the rest are buying into. THAT is what drives me insane.
Yes, I understand what you are trying to say, but the foot in the door approaches leads to other changes you may not have anticipated. I remember, in my state, a great statute was written to protect the pension plan...and overnight...a legislator went to the Speaker of that House and had the law changed...with legalese that went unnoticed until the time came to use the law.
Now, that was about a pension...money...we are talking about life and death...people have been borne and died for thousands of years without the kinds of laws coming out of Washington
Joseph Califano, Sec, Health and Human Services under President Johnson wanted statutorily enforced living wills to......save millions in Medicare dollars. How do you suppose that would happen? His suggestions went down in flames then and let's hope there are enough of us who remember and refuse to walk into the horizon.
So its your opinion that since it is possible for the government to change the health care bill in the future, that we should just never try to improve it? What exactly are you afraid of? I mean this is the problem that we keep running into, conservatives have these paranoid, baseless fears based on nothing but speculation and lies, and its stopping us from trying to make actual progress in our country. You are holding us back, and you can't even tell us why.
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.
