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.
This is my idea for torte reform. After all is said and done find % of fault and every one pays the other based on % fault. If you are 99% at fault you would pay them. Brake into someone's house get hurt and sue you and your attorney would pay the person you broke into the amount of your injuries!!!
Well, some of the reasons people are screaming is heroes they have told flat out lies, and they just stick with that. Casing point Palin's whole death panel garbage, and pulling the plug on Granny. What that actually was, is to allow you and your family to be able to discuss all of your options with a doctor when a loved one is seriously ill, and allow that consultation(s) to be billed to the insurance company. It was actually modeled after language some insurance companies that allow this sort of thing have. Its pretty clear cut and transparent, you get to discuss with a doctor all of your options when a loved one was seriously ill, yet didn't stop Palin from screaming death panel, which is something that stuck.
You have many examples like that throughout the bill, where the language is pretty clear cut, but you have those such as Palin, some GOP leaders, or those like Hannity, Limbaugh, Beck, etc flat out lying about what is in there.
My father-in-law was gravely ill this past fall. We were able to sit and discuss (at great length) all of the options for treatment in addition to comfort care. This was considered part of his treatment and was billed to the insurance company. We didn't have Obamacare, only Medicare.
It is unfortunate that there are people out there, right and left, who insist that what is said by one dolt pertains to us all. Palin or Pelosi -- both are scary.
I'll repeat what I wrote before:
If it were transparent, and everyone could see what was in it, perhaps there wouldn't be any screaming? We are being told to buy something, but not being given a clear, concise, precise explanation. Speaking only for myself, I like to kick the tires before I buy the car, have a house inspected before I mortgage my financial future, try on the shoes before I am forced to wear them. No one likes wearing tight, blistering shoes.
My father-in-law was gravely ill this past fall. We were able to sit and discuss (at great length) all of the options for treatment in addition to comfort care. This was considered part of his treatment and was billed to the insurance company. We didn't have Obamacare, only Medicare.
It is unfortunate that there are people out there, right and left, who insist that what is said by one dolt pertains to us all. Palin or Pelosi -- both are scary.
I'll repeat what I wrote before:
If it were transparent, and everyone could see what was in it, perhaps there wouldn't be any screaming? We are being told to buy something, but not being given a clear, concise, precise explanation. Speaking only for myself, I like to kick the tires before I buy the car, have a house inspected before I mortgage my financial future, try on the shoes before I am forced to wear them. No one likes wearing tight, blistering shoes.
Caveat emptor
What you went through with your father-in-law and being able to charge the Insurance Company is exactly what the point of that legislation was. Not everyone has that option, and the legislation was to give everyone that option.
As far as it being transparent, the language on this as well as some other issues that have caused controversy is quite transparent and specific. However, unfortunately none of that will stop people who want this killed for whatever the reason from screaming and lying about it as we have seen in the case mentioned above with the "death panel" nonsense even though the language is extremely transparent to show that its nothing even remotely close.
Experts now saying we are overdoing it with preventative medical care.
Coincidence this is now coming out on the verge of government subsidized health insurance ? Could it alter coverage and treatment ?
From the link: "CHICAGO — Too much cancer screening, too many heart tests, too many cesarean sections. A spate of recent reports suggest that too many Americans — maybe even President Barack Obama — are being overtreated.Is it doctors practicing defensive medicine? Or are patients so accustomed to a culture of medical technology that they insist on extensive tests and treatments? A combination of both is at work, but now new evidence and guidelines are recommending a step back and more thorough doctor-patient conversations about risks and benefits."
The author leaves one very important factor out of this -- one which has helped increase costs as well -- malpractice insurance! Yes, doctors are practicing defensive medicine. Why? To avoid being dragged into court and sued for not catching an early stage cancer, for delivering a baby with problems, for not being more aggressive with a patient who refused to quit smoking and succumbed to lung cancer, etc.
Ignoring this aspect is like trying to ignore the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
Also, patients ask for particular drugs. Why? They are heavily advertised on TV and in print media. People want the purple pill for agita, the blue pill for flaccid frankie, and that birth control that stops Aunt Flo more often.
I saw the HMOs in their infancy strike blow after blow to the conventional health plan people once had. We would pay a premium, pay the doctor or specialist of your choice, submit your receipts and be reimbursed 75 or 80%. It was too much work for the simpletons. They traded a little paperwork, perhaps a paper cut or two, for the HMO plan which was cheaper and limited their access to doctors as well as reducing their paperwork. They struck a deal with the devil. The writing was on the wall 25 years ago, but people chose to ignore it in favor of the cheap price.
What you went through with your father-in-law and being able to charge the Insurance Company is exactly what the point of that legislation was. Not everyone has that option, and the legislation was to give everyone that option.
As far as it being transparent, the language on this as well as some other issues that have caused controversy is quite transparent and specific. However, unfortunately none of that will stop people who want this killed for whatever the reason from screaming and lying about it as we have seen in the case mentioned above with the "death panel" nonsense even though the language is extremely transparent to show that its nothing even remotely close.
Everyone who has Medicare has that option. Now that the government seeks to gut Medicare, fewer people will.
Put aside the death panel argument and please cite several instances from this 'transparent' bill which explain how medicine won't be further rationed.
Please cite where it says I won't actually end up paying more than I already do, because now I will be subsidizing more people.
And where does it address the fact that, should this pass and immigration reform follow, that we won't be further subsidizing the illegals who received amnesty?
I'm not looking to fight or dicker. I'm not pointing fingers and assigning blame. I just want someone to rise above the din and show me where to find these answers in all of the bureaucratice nonsense.
I saw the HMOs in their infancy strike blow after blow to the conventional health plan people once had. We would pay a premium, pay the doctor or specialist of your choice, submit your receipts and be reimbursed 75 or 80%. It was too much work for the simpletons. They traded a little paperwork, perhaps a paper cut or two, for the HMO plan which was cheaper and limited their access to doctors as well as reducing their paperwork. They struck a deal with the devil. The writing was on the wall 25 years ago, but people chose to ignore it in favor of the cheap price.
Now we are all going to pay.
So very true. When you had to lay out your own money you watched what was charged and asked questions. Now that you only pay $10-25 it doesn't matter what they do or how much the true cost is because it only costs you the co-pay now. I saw it coming too.
And we brought it on ourselves. I tried to stick it out as long as I could but then the PPO came in and did the same as the HMO.
Everyone who has Medicare has that option. Now that the government seeks to gut Medicare, fewer people will.
Put aside the death panel argument and please cite several instances from this 'transparent' bill which explain how medicine won't be further rationed.
Please cite where it says I won't actually end up paying more than I already do, because now I will be subsidizing more people.
And where does it address the fact that, should this pass and immigration reform follow, that we won't be further subsidizing the illegals who received amnesty?
I'm not looking to fight or dicker. I'm not pointing fingers and assigning blame. I just want someone to rise above the din and show me where to find these answers in all of the bureaucratice nonsense.
The plan is not going to gut medicare, it will cut waste and fraud in Medicare. Everyone will have that option on discussing the options for loved ones.
As far as subsidizing more people and the costs involved. Well repealing Bush's tax cuts for those making in excess of $250,000 will be part of that. Bush's tax cuts were a total of $1.3 trillion, 60% of that went to the top 1%. So repealing the cuts on incomes in excess of $250,000 will raise significant $$$.
Secondly you are already subsidizing the uninsured, and you are actually subsidizing them at a higher cost with them uninsured than if they were insured. The reason why that is the case is because those who are uninsured often get sicker than those with insurance. This is due to the fact the uninsured don't have the annual checkups, the do not have the cancer screenings, etc someone with insurance has. Well when someone doesn't have the annual checkups, the screenings and what not, potential illnesses and diseases that could have been avoided have a higher probability of occurring not only that, but when they do occur or often caught in later stages than it would with someone with insurance. The later something gets caught, not only the more serious something is, but it becomes much more expensive to treat. Well, when that person with insurance goes to the ER or Hospital to seek treatment , what do you think the chances are that they can actually afford it?? Its somewhere close to zilch. So what happens is the Hospital, ER, etc have to eat these costs. Well they don't exactly eat the costs, its gets passed on elsewhere, and who pays for that?? We do. The Hospital will charge the Insurance companies more money to recoup those costs, which in turn will charge Individuals and Business more. Not only that, but that often is not enough, Hospitals many times will need more state & local funding to recoup what they lose for services provided to the uninsured. Again, who do you think winds up footing that bill?
As far as illegals if they are eventually given a path to citizenship. Well a few things, first off many illegals actually have coverage through private insurers (something like 50% or so of them do). Secondly, not all of the remaining ones will qualify for subsidies. With that being said if this legislation, and path to citizenship does pass, keep in mind you are already subsidizing their care due to the Hospitals, ER's needing to recoup the $$$ they lose treating them (just like the example above with American citizens who lack insurance). Potential illnesses and diseases have a greater chance of being stopped and caught early, which means its much cheaper to treat.
The uninsured (and those without adequate insurance) also have a huge snowball effect on the entire economy. A ton of foreclosures happen as a direct result of medical expenses, not only that, by far and away the #1 reason for bankruptcies is Medical Costs, no other reason comes even remotely close. The more foreclosures, and the more bankruptcies will have a negative and snowball effect on every single facet of our economy. Making sure those who lack coverage and lack adequate coverage get quality healthcare will greatly reduce bankruptcies and foreclosures since so many of them are medical cost related.
I don't think torte reform is even in the bill. Although I could be wrong since there's been so many changes and so much misinformation and no REAL bill to read.
My previous comment was sarcasm. Guess I should have been more clear than just the eye-roll.
Once they pass the bill, they will start writing it!
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.
