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.
Okay. But I disagree. I don't think the various ideas offered up are too little. I think they can and will be effective if we are able to implement them. One of us will be right and one of us will be wrong. I'm not trying to blow you off here but am also trying not to further derail the thread. I do think it's an important topic and think you should start a thread on it. Would be interested in seeing the numbers that project our healthcare costs to exceed 50% of GDP in the coming years as well.
Here's some numbers that compare the United States healthcare spending (note that it doesn't include the insurance costs which are intertwined with healthcare costs in the United States).
This should scare you, because it demonstrates just how a for-profit health system has negatively affected the United States. It's a big part of the reason that manufacturing has been driven off-shore. None of the solutions you offer up would have a meaningful impact on the problem.
ACA was supposed to cut premiums $2500 while insuring every american. Hows that working out?
Running away? you always do that when you lose don't you?
The $2500 was a bit of bad campaign nonsense though it never was premiums. I believe Obama dropped that claim in favor of some reduction in premiums eventually...a more reasonable though still unlikely outcome.
Republicans ran similar misleading ads on the subject.
Running away? you always do that when you lose don't you?
I have no idea what you are talking about, as usual
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
The $2500 was a bit of bad campaign nonsense though it never was premiums. I believe Obama dropped that claim in favor of some reduction in premiums eventually...a more reasonable though still unlikely outcome.
The justification to pass ACA was reducing costs while insuring all americans. Remember the babble about more people being added, spread out the risk?
So if you admit lower costs arent a likely outcome, WTF do you support it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
Republicans ran similar misleading ads on the subject.
I have no idea what you are talking about, as usual
The justification to pass ACA was reducing costs while insuring all americans. Remember the babble about more people being added, spread out the risk?
So if you admit lower costs arent a likely outcome, WTF do you support it?
Dont care..
Who said I supported ACA? You are filled with weird stuff. It is better than nothing but needs lots of fixing to be any good and it increases, overall, the cost of health care. If you were paying attention you would know that as it has been widely published. That is whqat happens when the political system actually does something.
I believe we need a health care system that covers all. Simple as that. Single payer or farmed out. Don't care. Medicare is probably a good model and works reasonably well. then we need a whole set of initiatives to lower the cost.
And it did add lots of people and spread out the risk.
Who said I supported ACA? You are filled with weird stuff. It is better than nothing but needs lots of fixing to be any good and it increases, overall, the cost of health care. If you were paying attention you would know that as it has been widely published. That is whqat happens when the political system actually does something.
its not better than nothing, here, backup that claim by listing for me the cost cutting measure in the bill..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
I believe we need a health care system that covers all. Simple as that. Single payer or farmed out. Don't care. Medicare is probably a good model and works reasonably well. then we need a whole set of initiatives to lower the cost.
Medicare contracts out much of its care to the private sector in order to save costs.. So does medicaid.
So you support government taking insurance out of the private sector, so they can contract it back out to the private sector. yeah, that makes sense..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc
And it did add lots of people and spread out the risk.
We went from 36 million uninsured to 46 million and back down to 41 million.
how does REMOVING 5 million insured, add people who are insured?
As a small business owner, I wish we were able to pool together with other small business via associations to negotiate better insurance plans like large employers are able to do. I really wish that was something included in the law. I think the idea that an individual mandate does so is naive because we have no negotiating power beyond what the government negotiates for us and clearly that is not working.
I am an evil conservative and I would prefer they make anyone who doesn't have private insurance go on some kind of national health with mandatory payroll deductions. Insurance would not be tied to the employer and anyone with the resources could purchase co-insurance or supplemental as needed. It doesn't have to be run by the governement - they could contract out and simply act as the collection agent. Liberals of course hate this idea because it results in a regressive system instead of free stuff paid by the evil 1%.
Everyone would be covered. Everyone would pay. By default, costs would drop. The ACA is just welfare for a few at the expense of others which still leaves 10% of the population uninsured. Nothing changed.
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.