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.
You do realize not every European country has the same health care system?
Can you be more specific about in which country you had this "nightmare" experience?
What was so bad?
No system is perfect but we have a lot to learn from other countries.
Oh for crying out loud. Look at the actual title of that piece.
Insurance industry assails health care bill
Of COURSE they're going to be fighting this bill.
And then the very first line: "Insurance companies aren't playing nice any more on the health care overhaul." When were they ever????
"The industry put out a report Monday concluding that the Senate's health care legislation would drive up costs to consumers. . . " And you'd rely on any report being put out by the very industry that stands to lose big time when this reform passes? Are you serious? GMAB.
How far down the article did you bother to read? This is only the 3rd full paragraph:
AARP loves this bill as it curtails Medicare advantage programs(thereby increasing out of pocket expenses and decreasing benefits), forcing seniors to buy supplemental plans which......AARP just happens to sell. Gee, think they've got a financial interest in this as well?
Common sense would tell you that a bill which will greatly reduce the number of people buying private health insurance will make the inusurance companies jack up the premiums for the next 3 years they will actually be in business. They are going to look to make as much money as possible. The big question is why didn't our leaders have enough sense to include a provision which gives the govt the right to cap the increase in premium the companies could raise each year?
Poorly written bill with many unintended consequences to follow. Huge increases in premiums for the next 3 years. Big time cuts to Medicare from next year on. No prexisting conditions means we'll ALL pay the highest premiums. Just look at NY and MA; that is EXACTLY what has happened when they eliminated preexisting conditions. They are now 2 of the worst states to purchase health insurance in.
What proof do you have that Stephen Hawking would have been instituitionalized under the American Health System? I work with the disabled. People with Mr Hawking's disability (ALS or generally Motor Neuron Disease) are quite commonly provided care at home with the same communication device and power wheelchairs he currently uses. Mr Hawking has been relatively lucky that his disease hasn't progressed as rapidly as other cases of ALS.
************************************************** *********
Stephen Hawking was born in 1942; the marvelous wheelchairs that enable him to lead as normal a life as he does weren't around. Physical rehab was
virtually unknown, and the medicines which Dr. Hawking takes were undiscovered for the greater part of his life. He would have had a wooden
wheelchair and would have been unable to communicate. It's highly possible that he would have been institutionalized in the U.S. However, by the time he was 6 England had adopted cradle-to-the-grave health care, and from that point to the present he has had quality treatment. In the U.S., in contrast, he would have had to belong to a very wealthy family indeed to receive what was routine in England.
I am wondering how many insurance related jobs will be lost when they go out of business trying to compete with the government. We have 8 million jobs lost since the beginning of the recession, why not make it 16 million.
Somebody is going to have to administer benefits under any system. Do you support buggy whip manufacturers, too?
************************************************** *********
Stephen Hawking was born in 1942; the marvelous wheelchairs that enable him to lead as normal a life as he does weren't around. Physical rehab was
virtually unknown, and the medicines which Dr. Hawking takes were undiscovered for the greater part of his life. He would have had a wooden
wheelchair and would have been unable to communicate. It's highly possible that he would have been institutionalized in the U.S. However, by the time he was 6 England had adopted cradle-to-the-grave health care, and from that point to the present he has had quality treatment. In the U.S., in contrast, he would have had to belong to a very wealthy family indeed to receive what was routine in England.
Have any links to substantiate your opinion?
Physical Rehab started after WWI, and while it wasn't as advanced as it is now, it was available. BTW Hawking was diagnosed with ALS in 1963 at the age of 21. Stephen Hawking
Physical Rehab was able to provide appropriate (and similar to England )wheelchairs and other equipment for those who suffered from another motor neuron disease that was far more prevalent than ALS. Ever hear of polio?
Only 5% of people diagnosed with ALS liveup to 10 years with the disease. Prof. Hawking is clearly an positive abnormality. BTW he was getting in and out of bed independemtly 16 years after diagnosis and was talking up to 1985 when he had to undergo a tracheostomy. He has used a ventilator since then.....something many of my patients here in the US use as well.
His story is inspirational. His case is excellent to study to see why he was able to last this long with having this horrible disease. But to claim the only reason he has lasted this long is because of the NHS is disingenuous.
AARP loves this bill as it curtails Medicare advantage programs(thereby increasing out of pocket expenses and decreasing benefits), forcing seniors to buy supplemental plans which......AARP just happens to sell. Gee, think they've got a financial interest in this as well?
Common sense would tell you that a bill which will greatly reduce the number of people buying private health insurance will make the inusurance companies jack up the premiums for the next 3 years they will actually be in business. They are going to look to make as much money as possible. The big question is why didn't our leaders have enough sense to include a provision which gives the govt the right to cap the increase in premium the companies could raise each year?
Poorly written bill with many unintended consequences to follow. Huge increases in premiums for the next 3 years. Big time cuts to Medicare from next year on. No prexisting conditions means we'll ALL pay the highest premiums. Just look at NY and MA; that is EXACTLY what has happened when they eliminated preexisting conditions. They are now 2 of the worst states to purchase health insurance in.
As far as I know, there is a provision in one or two of the bills that caps premium increases and there is a provision that caps out of pocket costs.
Reviewing the issue leads me to simplify my opinion down to the following: Who's for a Public Option: AMA, AARP,DEMS Who's against a Public Option:PHARMA,INS COS,REPS We can throw out the Reps and Dems as we pretty much all know that their ONE, and ONLY, objective is to do whatever they think will help them keep or gain seats in the next election. As for the others, well, just think about where their respective objectives lie. In my mind, that kind of boils it down and makes it simple to form an opinion.
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.
