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.
On top of demand increasing, you have to think about how much supply is going to decrease.
With the new mandates and regulations imposed by this bill on the health care industry we could see higher increase in premiums than currently exist. -Not good
People who couldn't afford health insurance before but don't qualify for medicare/medicaid benefits will still be neck deep in water, only they'll have no choice but to sink.
Yes, but the HCR bill cheerleaders haven't thought it through to that logical conclusion.
What further proof do you need that the HCR bill is a government wink-wink/nod-nod giveaway to profit-seeking insurance companies?
Go Obama!
You mean "Go Congress," and "Go Senate," too.
I am torn on this. I have worked with organizations that have pressed for reform since the Clinton administration.
What we have now is such a watered-down version of what this country really needs, it's almost as bad as having no reform at all. There was too much catering to special interests like insurance companies and the Roman Catholic Church.
The good thing is that insurance companies would not be allowed to deny coverage based on "pre-existing conditions," but in all honesty, I think we'd be better off annihilating the concept of health insurance entirely. Just get rid of all of that, and go to a single-payer system.
Why, yes, *gasp* the government *gasp* like the U.K.
I don't know anyone in the U.K., including U.S. ex-pats and native-born, who has dealt with one-tenth of the aggravation we deal with in the U.S.
And I personally would have no problem seeing my tax dollars go to a system like the U.K.'s. It sure beats paying for a war.
Just my opinion, and one that is based on a progressive ideology. For those who would be inclined to criticize, that's fine, but that does not make me unamerican, a commie, a socialist, a this, or a that.
It makes me someone who believes that it is unethical and barbaric for a country as well off, innovative, and gifted as the U.S. to let its sick and old die because of money, and it is morally reprehensible for some jerk with three houses and a yacht to place his personal wealth ahead of someone's need for life-sustaining care.
Do you think that the signing of this bill means that tomorrow morning 30 mil new people are going to descend on Doctors offices?
I think any immediate changes to the stock market can only be attributed to "hype" for the bill and reactions from people but can't really depict any long term effects, and with your own logical statement I'll assume you recognize that as well. The bill isn't going to change anything overnight. Nothing has even been implemented yet.
Which will make it more expensive because the demand for health care far exceeds the supply. That causes prices to rise.
The need for the care has always been there, what has been missing, is an effective system to pay for it. There will be more expenditures on health care, although less of it a triple the cost. There will be more people taking advantage of a new ability to get preventive care, which will increase the demand for Primary Docs. Young Med students see that, and there are now big jumps in schools, of those going into Primary care. When, as you say, "the demand for health care far exceeds the supply", the answer is not to exclude people from getting it, it is much better to provide means to increase the supply.
[quote=florida.bob;13415199]The need for the care has always been there, what has been missing, is an effective system to pay for it.
Absolutely what is wrong with the now law. The leaders didn't figure out what truly refroming the system and making insurance affordable would cost. Instead they picked a politically expedient figure (keep it less than 1 trillion) and rigged up a system of taxes and delayed benefits to get to that figure.
Yes, but the HCR bill cheerleaders haven't thought it through to that logical conclusion.
Yep. Everybody seems to think this is going to be some "free" health care system. Everybody think insurance companies are going to stop being greedy.
The biggest changes are that if you don't have health insurance, you'll have to pay, and insurance companies are being required to only offer top tier policies.
You want a better policy that covers more, you will pay more for it. As it's been said, supply and demand. You get what you pay for. Nothing about that is going to change. It's basic economics.
The need for the care has always been there, what has been missing, is an effective system to pay for it.
True. To pay for it, most individuals and families will now be forced to pay 12-19% of their annual incomes (CBO estimate) for for-profit health insurance that requires 30% co-pays for medical care and services.
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.
