Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Happy Mother`s Day to all Moms!
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:20 AM
 
21,989 posts, read 15,722,939 times
Reputation: 12943

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
None of that is Obamacare.

Obamacare was the lie.

It was a deliberate and outright lie designed to screw up America's healthcare so badly that single payer would look good in comparison.


In that sense, it was a spectacular success.
Yet Trump supporters chose a guy that wants single payer!!! Or at least TRUMP LIED and said he did.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQFItVBKlAU
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:32 AM
 
18,805 posts, read 8,479,367 times
Reputation: 4131
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
Despite the Left's infatuation with single payer, many Americans didn't want it.

They were too skeptical about things like long wait times, lack of choice and some government bureaucrat deciding what treatments they can or cannot have.

Obamacare's mission, aside from being a giant gift to insurance companies (to get them to endorse it and therefore endorse their own eventual demise) was to throw a monkey wrench into America's healthcare system and change peoples attitudes about accepting single payer.

Basically it had to make our existing system look bad enough to the average American that single payer would eventually look good in comparison.

It's the "frog in a pot of boiling water" method if winning people over to what you want them to do.....

You have to turn the heat up slowly.
If you still think Obamacare was created to promote single payer, I can't help you. Because it specifically went out and engaged the private sector who were willing with the Mandate.

IMO we are inexorably headed toward more universal coverage whether we go more or less private or central. So you could raise that issue with any system trying to cover us all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:32 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,462 posts, read 7,096,830 times
Reputation: 11708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seacove View Post
Yet Trump supporters chose a guy that wants single payer!!! Or at least TRUMP LIED and said he did.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQFItVBKlAU
I don't necessarily disagree with the concept of nationalized healthcare.

But it would have to be done a certain way.

Fist off participation has to be optional.

It can be done as a supplement to private health insurance.

This is how I would go about doing it.


The public option only covers the big stuff.....emergency situations and life saving treatments and procedures.

Everything else such as routine health care, checkups, and non life threatening conditions are covered by the individual through private insurance or things like health care co ops.

No elective surgeries or Viagra prescriptions would be covered on the public dime.

Costs would drop on both sides because each side is only responsible for one or the other.....not the whole enchilada.

Yes, this would mean that when your hypochondriac Aunt Betsy wants to go to the doctor 5 times a month over something like a common cold....she'd be on the hook for it herself....... but that's a small price to pay.

Exceptions for the truly indigent who need routine care can be worked in as well.

Healthcare savings accounts may also be used tax free in and tax free out.
Anything an individual doesn't use in their lifetime goes into their families accounts, or if they have no family, into a general fund to help fund the public option.

There are more ways to provide people with healthcare than a free for all on one side and full on socialzed medicine on the other..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:34 AM
 
Location: Dangling from a mooses antlers
7,308 posts, read 14,697,869 times
Reputation: 6238
Quote:
Originally Posted by ambient View Post
It is so great not to be forced to have health insurance. I don't know about you, but I really value my right to go bankrupt if I get seriously ill!

You should value your right to choose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:41 AM
 
16,376 posts, read 22,497,010 times
Reputation: 14398
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
Forcing insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions is like forcing car insurance companies to cover people who crash their car and then limp to the insurance company office to buy a policy.

What kind of insurance model would allow after the fact coverage without raising premiums and deductibles?

A not for profit one (at best).......which we don't have.
For medical insurance, it's considered a pre-existing condition even if you were sick before but now are 100% healthy. It would be like auto insurance turning you down or charging you higher because your car had a radiator hose break 3 years ago but it's fixed now. Or because you took your car to the mechanic because it was making a knocking noise but nothing was ever found to be wrong and the noise went away on its own after you switched to a different gas. Or because you had a flat fixed last year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:43 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,462 posts, read 7,096,830 times
Reputation: 11708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hoonose View Post
If you still think Obamacare was created to promote single payer, I can't help you. Because it specifically went out and engaged the private sector who were willing with the Mandate.

IMO we are inexorably headed toward more universal coverage whether we go more or less private or central. So you could raise that issue with any system trying to cover us all.


It may not have started out that way at first....

But that's what special interests and Washington style sausage making turned it into.

They knew that the insurance lobbies and the public wouldn't go for single payer right off the bat.

So they decided that if things had to get worse before America would accept single payer.......so be it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:44 AM
 
18,805 posts, read 8,479,367 times
Reputation: 4131
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
I don't necessarily disagree with the concept of nationalized healthcare.

But it would have to be done a certain way.

Fist off participation has to be optional.

It can be done as a supplement to private health insurance.

This is how I would go about doing it.


The public option only covers the big stuff.....emergency situations and life saving treatments and procedures.

Everything else such as routine health care, checkups, and non life threatening conditions are covered by the individual through private insurance or things like health care co ops.

No elective surgeries or Viagra prescriptions would be covered on the public dime.

Costs would drop on both sides because each side is only responsible for one or the other.....not the whole enchilada.

Yes, this would mean that when your hypochondriac Aunt Betsy wants to go to the doctor 5 times a month over something like a common cold....she'd be on the hook for it herself....... but that's a small price to pay.

Exceptions for the truly indigent who need routine care can be worked in as well.

Healthcare savings accounts may also be used tax free in and tax free out.
Anything an individual doesn't use in their lifetime goes into their families accounts, or if they have no family, into a general fund to help fund the public option.

There are more ways to provide people with healthcare than a free for all on one side and full on socialzed medicine on the other..
If only it was this simple.

The problem with your solution is that the bulk of serious HC costs are in the public option. The little and easy stuff covered by private entities is relatively meager. And as the public option covers the big stuff, more patients will wait until the biggie hits.

Then there will be 10 years in the making as to what is 'routine' or 'life saving'.

Is a Q 3mo office visit for a diabetic patient routine?

Is a gall bladder operation 'life saving'?

This solution might certainly be in the right direction, but its effect not large enough to change our HC conundrum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 10:49 AM
 
Location: Just over the horizon
18,462 posts, read 7,096,830 times
Reputation: 11708
Quote:
Originally Posted by sware2cod View Post
For medical insurance, it's considered a pre-existing condition even if you were sick before but now are 100% healthy. It would be like auto insurance turning you down or charging you higher because your car had a radiator hose break 3 years ago but it's fixed now. Or because you took your car to the mechanic because it was making a knocking noise but nothing was ever found to be wrong and the noise went away on its own after you switched to a different gas. Or because you had a flat fixed last year.
I think it really depends on the condition.

Just like with a car warranty they can't turn you down for a blown engine because you had a flat tire last year.

Same thing with preexisting conditions.

Dead men don't pay premiums.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 11:06 AM
 
18,805 posts, read 8,479,367 times
Reputation: 4131
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatBob96 View Post
I think it really depends on the condition.

Just like with a car warranty they can't turn you down for a blown engine because you had a flat tire last year.

Same thing with preexisting conditions.

Dead men don't pay premiums.
Meager pre-existings are meager.

It is the major ones that cost the big money, have the big and expensive risks.

Only the rich could afford major medical insurance with major HC problems.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-30-2018, 11:10 AM
 
18,805 posts, read 8,479,367 times
Reputation: 4131
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
It was designed to fail so President Hillary could lead us into single payer.
Hillary was never into single payer. Where do you hear or read this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top