*****So if healthcare reform is back to square one...***** (Representatives, economy, carry)
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.
Not sure why you think it was directed at your post, which was a nice post.
Because my post was quoted. Thank you.
Quote:
The post spoke of taking care of people, and reminded me of how hateful some posts can be when people disagree without being agreeable, and by making cutting remarks that actually end up hurting people. That's all.
My husband and I pay for our policy and we are both 57 years old, non smokers, in good health. We pay $525 a month for the both of us and think that is very reasonable. It will be going up again this year and yes, we are very tired of insurance companies. Our deductable is $5,000 so when it goes up so will our deductable. Something needs to be done, but the bill that died would have doubled our insurance premiums. I would like to see tort reform and I do think the lower malpractice insurance that the doctors pay would eventually help the consumers. The insurance companies could renegotiate what they pay the doctors for services perhaps.
Little did Obama realize that when he promised the nation that ObaCare negotiations would be televised on C-SPAN that Brian Lamb of C-SPAN would one day call him on it and that the public would pile on too. That's just what happened and one would reasonably observe that a halfway intelligent person just might learn from that experience. That remains to be seen, but he does have the 'second chance' to go legitimately and openly bi-partisan and start from scratch.
NOT with a new bill that throws out the baby with the bathwater for the sake of a greater socialist agenda, but one committed to instituting creative positive changes/improvements to what we currently have in place.
If anything is to be accomplished though, the Oba-maniacs must relinquish their attempt to demonize the private insurance marketplace as an excuse to exert MORE government control in our lives. The American people have effectively spoken. Stridently in many forums they said that THEY GET IT and if the demonRATs opt to hold to their old game plan and ignore the voice of the majority of the people it is THEY, NOT US who'll pay the price come November.
To the end of constructive and positive suggestions I wanted to make a suggestion and encourage others to do similar. Here goes.
I personally believe as I think many, if not most, Americans do that health insurance is a "personal responsibility" and NOT a right one expects an expanding government to satisfy. I think this country needs a few things that private insurance can provide. I'll open up with one.
A Catastrophic Major Medical Expense policy. There may still be some of these stil about, but not quite what I'm thinking of. One that could be offered on a group and personal/family basis also and that would be standardized as to coverages. The government could offer a tax incentive to encourage private companies to 'pool' into consortiums for the express purpose of providing such a policy. The consortium idea gives them an avenue of risk-sharing protection against losses for which no "reasonable" and "reliable" statistics are available yet. As it would be what the title intends it could have a choice of large deductibles, from say $5,000. up to as high as $25,000 or even more. For most people that may seem shocking, but this policy is intended to use insurance to cover the very high runaway costs that treatment of serious diseases can incur over great time periods. It's intent is as a disaster event SUPPLEMENT to other coverage/s. It also acknowledges that between personal fund allocations and assets and other forms of insurances most smaller expenses used to satisfy these deductibles would come into play. Wide ranges of deductibles allow for great flexibility to the premium choice. Co-insurance could be used to spread potential liability for the insurance companies out wherein the greatest risk occurs only for the MOST expensive health issues of longest duration. An example could be 80% coverage for the first $30,000, of covered expenses; 90 % for the next $50,000. and 100%; thereafter, up to a selected maximum limit of coverage of $1 million (with options to increase that limit). To control costs certain internal policy limits would have to be established (e.g. - avg daily room charge allowed, et al) and these should be based upon regional statistics for a geographical area of residence as cost vary greatly by location for the same provided service/s. To encourage people to buy into this all premiums should be made fully tax deductible, but people need to understand that to keep costs down certain "routine care" obligations must be accepted by them. If I need to make an initial appointment with my doctor, because I have a cold or bronchitis or suspect the flu that visit should be paid for by ME. It's a primary and basic responsibility and one if we assumed, could greatly impact a reduction in Medicare/other insurance costs. After a specific diagnosis and if additional visits or referral visits are required they, the office visit charge ONLY, could be on a flat rate coverage by insurance with the patient assuming the excess. My point here is that WE have an obligation to assume some basic cost responsibility to keep costs down. Not being willing to do that opens the door for the socialist advocates to come in and satisfy our desire for SOMETHING FOR NOTHING, always a sucker's bet! There is no free-ride in life. You pays your money and takes your choice. The coverage on this form of insurance would go a long way to lessening the Medicare/Medicaid tax-revenue burden on all of us. These are just a few thoughts. Hope you have others.
If anything is to be accomplished though, the Oba-maniacs must relinquish their attempt to demonize the private insurance marketplace as an excuse to exert MORE government control in our lives. The American people have effectively spoken. Stridently in many forums they said that THEY GET IT and if the demonRATs opt to hold to their old game plan and ignore the voice of the majority of the people it is THEY, NOT US who'll pay the price come November.
Keep in mind that many of those you people erroneously call names like "Oba-maniacs" are among those people who have "effectively spoken" against the Senate insurance welfare bill (written by a former insurance industry executive). That majority of people opposed is made up of left wingers as well as right wingers.
One thing seems to be missing in this debate and that is the impact of illegal immigration and now the 400,000 Haitian refugees that will be coming here and the impact that it has on our resources. Do you think if we were not importing more and more poverty, we may actually have enough money to have some kind of policy for those who need it and can't afford it? It is simply too much to ask of taxpayers to continue the drain without addressing our population. I know there is another forum but I see this as a huge impact on our ability to provide care for our own poor.
When our government plays the "Humanity" card we all loose. Who on this board wants to be the *****hole who says "let'm die!" I really feel we all want to help those in need but lets get real, if one more person will sink the boat and that person is trying to climb on board WTF do you do? Here we are, what do we do? I say we stop the government from throwing these people our way (in the water). As long as our government keeps changing the rules to suit them we will never have any kind of reform.
Hell folks, I can look real fricking good to my neighbors if I use your money to build there house!
Comment noted, but I was being obvious using "Oba-maniacs" to reference; specifically, those politicos appearing to push against all logic their failed agenda.
These same people, even after acknowledging they do not have the votes to ram it through, STILL insist in their public pronouncements a dedicated advocacy for pushing for the same basic content that got it rejected in the first place. Dame Pelosi is a prime example. That is not rationale and reasonable behavior. Thereby the "-maniac" reference. I also refer to those of the failed overly-aggressive strategy as Oba-maniacs as they are to close to the flame to perceive the fire. An example of one of those is The Rahm Man, who lashed out at the Massachusetts loser for not having tried hard enough. That is not why she lost in a state dominated by Independents, but Emanuel is a pit bull on a short leash with distemper and cannot help himself. For him it's not the healthcare issue, it's all mortal combat.
Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd said today that Democrats may need to take more than a month off from the health care debate to regroup, saying it is up to President Obama to lead the way.
Dodd is the first congressional Democratic leader to suggest such an extended break, signaling that Democrats’ may be much further from a workable endgame strategy than they have suggested in the days since Republican Scott Brown won the Massachusetts Senate seat and ended the Democrats’ 60-vote majority.
So far, he's let the congress put their necks on the chopping block, waiting for passage of his signature issue so he could then take credit.
Seems the democrats in congress are tired of that game...and I imagine they smell his political weakness...sharks in the water and all that stuff.
I went through a very similar experience. Multiple surgeries due to Diabetes(gangrene removal), Lung Cancer surgery nd Chemo and a Bypass. I wish I had the awareness that this man had. I had a Cadillac plan thru work and it paid a huge portion of the bills, but there were limits. The result virtually wiped out my retirement savings. But, because of the diseases, I had to retire. Decades of preparing for that all the time thinking I was doing it right, were essentially wasted. Luckily, I was able to get into a business of my own, that is doing very well. But, I fear for others that find themselves faced with the reality that their comfortable blanket, has a huge hole. Many may not be as lucky as I. The experience I had is why I am so concerned that this country recognize the reality and prepares for it.
Glad you are doing well now. I can't imagine what it would be like to be sick and have to worry about fighting with the insurance company or watching a loved one and not having insurance to pay for. Unless it happens to some of these people they just won't get it . they are too concerned about a tax on a "cadillac" plan or a tax on people making over $250,000. Sad part is it could happen to them.
Good luck .to you in your health and in your business
Unless there is a major medical problem or a high cost chronic condition, it's cheaper to pay for medical care out of pocket than it is to pay for a high coverage insurance policy.
Not if you are $90,000 in debt, have just started a job and are just beginning to save money, and you get part of your premium paid for by your employer. Many of us look at this issue from the perspective of a middle-aged, middle class person, but the young have a different perspective. My DD is a skiier; a skiing accident could put her $90.000 further in debt.
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.
If it's broke so how about fixin' it!
