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.
So, despite the fact that prior to the ACA, medical expenses were the cause of the majority of personal bankruptcies in the US, you'd have us believe the US healthcare system was just fine & dandy until that damn Obama came along?
That hasn't changed. And there were LOTS of other things we could have done other than BarryCare. But the Democrats don't care about that... all they want is government run medicine.
I'll believe the government is actually interested in the interests of the country and its people when Congress allows MediCare to negotiate prescription drug prices, until then it's just the same old same old, special interests take precedence, been that way since long before Obama.
How about the US .gov start doing its job and protecting American intellectual interests and not allowing other countries to steal medical formulas and equipment blueprints for pennies on the dollar of development costs? Don't like the price, explain to your country how that cancer fighting drug with half the side effects isn't available anywhere but the States.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
No. Not a good idea. The Red State insurance companies would have a field day. Deny coverage for everything associated with female health and reproduction and let the bleeding heart Bule State liveral plans cover them. Who for their part would welcome the additional business. Win/win for the corps. but there would be a cost to users to access insurance from far flung carriers.
First: Funny, has have family in numerous "red states" before the ACA that were covered for all manner of OB/GYN care.
Second: That is the whole point of the system. If NY requires gender re-assignment surgery and boob jobs to be on their list of covered expenses and you want basic medical care for an affordable price then you buy another states plan that matches what you want.
Third: The ACA is already bankrupting people with plans that are more expensive then most peoples former plans.
Now I've said it numerous times to people in person, but I'll say it here: You are going to decrease costs in only 3 ways: Limit scope, limit age, or increase personal stakes. You can limit the scope by denying a morbidly obese person access to surgery because their outcomes are horrible (as an example). You can limit the age by denying elderly people open heart surgeries (as an example) because their outcomes are disproportionately lower. You can increase personal stake by increasing premiums on those people who have outrageously high effects on long term cost of care such as smokers, drinkers, drug abusers, and especially the obese to compensate for their poor choices leading to increased use of HC.
Until you do those things, your going to lose every time.
Personally, I would have implemented "Loser pays", increased stakes, and special pre-trial jury panels of medical care workers to check the validity of claims along with the protections for American pharmaceutical companies.
Nope, you've confused me with some other Liberal. No one could call me a staunch supporter of the ACA. That does not mean I was against it. I was, and am, an Obama supporter. My opinion then, and now, is that if Republican opponents had not fought the program so hard, it might actually have resembled something people could use. Republicans destroyed ACA even though its model was the Massachusetts system signed into law by Mitt Romney, who then had the enviable job of publicly fighting tooth and nail the efficacy of his own Romneycare. A trick only a Conservative could pull off.
When only Dems voted for it why then did they not put whatever the heck they wanted in it ?
It is bad Law and one Party is holding the bag.
When only Dems voted for it why then did they not put whatever the heck they wanted in it ?
It is bad Law and one Party is holding the bag.
Well according to Pelosi they didn't know what was in the bill until it passed. You've heard of things magically writing themselves in "Magic Ink", right?
Well according to Pelosi they didn't know what was in the bill until it passed. You've heard of things magically writing themselves in "Magic Ink", right?
She was right. Congress didn't write the bill, the insurance lobbyists did.
The biggest driver in HC costs is the 15% of the people using up 60% of the payments, usually due to personal stupidity (obesity, smoking, drinking, drugs).
The second biggest thing driving HC costs are the fact that people stopped "letting go" and now a 98yr old male with multi organ failure needs to be kept alive at the families insistence "Because he needs to live to 100". No I kid you not. That's what the family told us.
When I mentioned that in a previous post I was called a 'troll' and several members thought I was mean and judgmental.
She was right. Congress didn't write the bill, the insurance lobbyists did.
You don't think you enter congress then become a multimillionaire before retiring just by their salary, do you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by grampaTom
When I mentioned that in a previous post I was called a 'troll' and several members thought I was mean and judgmental.
They would be incorrect. Obfuscating the issues within medicine are part of the problem. We need to accept and deal with the issues. My oft-used example is a middle aged male. Obese, sleep apnea, smoker, with numerous other problems. Still smoking, not sticking to a diet, not taking medications, and not using his nocturnal CPAP machine as ordered. Whose problem is he? Mine and societies? Seems like he caused most of his problems and refuses to do anything about them. Personally, I say cut him off. "Sorry Mr. X, your on your 15th admission for the same problem because you refuse to help yourself. Medicine is obviously not working for you, we leave you to find alternative methods to deal with your illness' as you have skipped any and all medical advice, orders, and good sense. Our best wishes, America."
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 The biggest driver in HC costs is the 15% of the people using up 60% of the payments, usually due to personal stupidity (obesity, smoking, drinking, drugs).
The second biggest thing driving HC costs are the fact that people stopped "letting go" and now a 98yr old male with multi organ failure needs to be kept alive at the families insistence "Because he needs to live to 100". No I kid you not. That's what the family told us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by grampaTom
When I mentioned that in a previous post I was called a 'troll' and several members thought I was mean and judgmental.
When you are spending other people's money, there is no constraint on consumption of health care 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.
