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.
Fear death? Humans strive to survive otherwise we'd go the way of the Dodo. TristansMommy has diabetes and apparently since she was a child. My hunch is it was much easier to treat years back but now it isn't a picnic in the park for the same treatment from years back. What would you have her do? Leave her family, fly to the antarctic and wonder off on an ice sheet?
Of course we do, and now the people have figured out a way to do that without actually paying for it....
I'm not AFRAID of death.. but I'm 35 years old with a three year old child.. I"m not READY to die.. I have too many things left yet to do.. including raising my child.
Just like anyone else..I know I will die.. but if I can live a long, happy and productive life with my disease then I deserve to just like anyone else
You have ignored many of the posts with information provided to show that it gets cheaper.. you just don't want to hear it. Rather than actually educate yourself on it and look at it honestly you just want to spew utter nonsense and right wing rhetoric.. because you obviously do not care anything for your fellow man.. and fellow citizens.
Do children who could otherwise live happy and productive lives DESERVE to die. We have the medicine available to save them.. GOD designed us with a high intelect for just that purpose....
Again your attitude is disgusting.. thank you again for affirming the selfish attitude and utter nonsense of the right wing argument
307 million Americans. How much would you say the average person spends a year if they had no insurance were single and paid out of pocket? $2,000 would be fair IMO, it's probably higher. 9 years ago it was around $8-9,000 per year per family, it's likely higher now.
Health spending in the United States has grown rapidly over the past few decades. From $27.5 billion in 1960, it grew to $912.6 billion in 1993, increasing at an average rate of 11.2 percent annually. This strong growth boosted health care’s role in the overall economy, with health expenditures rising from 5.2 percent to 13.7 percent of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) between 1960 and 1993.
Between 1993 and 1999, however, strong growth trends in health care spending subsided. Over this period health spending rose at a 5.6-percent average annual rate to reach nearly $1.3 trillion in 1999, and the share of GDP going to health care stabilized, with the 1999 share measured at 13.7 percent. This stabilization reflected the nexus of several factors: the movement of most workers insured for health care through employer-sponsored plans to lower-cost managed care; low general and medical-specific inflation; excess capacity among some health service providers, which boosted competition and drove down prices; and GDP growth that matched slow health spending growth.
Between 1999 and 2002, growth picked up, averaging 8.2 percent annually. During this period, the share of GDP devoted to health care increased from 13.7 to 15.3 percent. Health spending grew more slowly after 2002, averaging 7.0 percent annually from 2003 to 2006, and its share of GDP remained more stable over this time period, increasing from 15.8 to 16.0 percent. In 2006, health spending reached $2.1 trillion, or $7,026 per person.
Public spending represents expenditures by Federal, State, and local governments. A significant portion of public health spending can be attributed to the programs administered by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)—Medicare, Medicaid, and the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Together, Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP financed $718 billion in health care services in 2006—slightly more than one-third of the country’s total health care expenditures and almost three-fourths of all public spending on health care. Since their enactment, both Medicare and Medicaid have been subject to numerous legislative and administrative changes designed to make improvements in the provision of health care services to our nation’s aged, disabled, and disadvantaged. A recent significant example is the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108-173), which created the Medicare Advantage program and provided Part D prescription drug coverage for Medicare beneficiaries beginning in 2006.
I'm a conservative and I can attest when it pertains to the health care insurance industry there is a big gorilla in the closet. And it aint going away soon unless something is done. If not then kingkong is going to outgrow his closet and that's a fact.
guess what, as soon as congress said I can not buy health insurance that is cheaper in Alaska or Montana for myself in Wisconsin, it stopped becoming a federal issue and is only a state or individual issue.
If congress wants health insurance to be cheaper and affordable, then open up who I can buy insurance from and stop limiting my insurance to only my state.
guess what, as soon as congress said I can not buy health insurance that is cheaper in Alaska or Montana for myself in Wisconsin, it stopped becoming a federal issue and is only a state or individual issue.
If congress wants health insurance to be cheaper and affordable, then open up who I can buy insurance from and stop limiting my insurance to only my state.
What ever it takes to get this beast under control I'm all for it. Cross state lines is one way and putting folks into large pools not a million tiny ones for crying out loud and stop this loophole game and make the process simpler. If not then these health insurance companies can insure cars as far as I'm concerned. The whole thing reeks of greed to the hilt. Nothing wrong with a profit but what I've seen these last few years it seems those things that are a necessity, not just insurance, are jacked way out of price. Alot of mumbo jumbo is then fed to the people but if you do a little searching you'll find that the people are being exploited to fill the coffers of just a few.
Let's not be constitutional fools. The constitution enumerates the federal power of raising a military and waging wars. It does not impute the right for nanny government to provide your health care.
Your statement is a false statement. Congress in Article I Section 8 is given the power to levy taxes, charge fees and raise tariffs or duties to provide for the Defense and General Welfare of American citizens. Republicans seem to forget the part about General Welfare. If Congress decides providing general welfare is taking action by taxing you to ensure Americans are healthly and can get treatment if they are sick it is constitutional. If Congress decides that general welfare is best served by universal health care, Article I Section 8 gives it the power to make the decision and levy the needed funds. Congress was given this nanny power in 1789 and people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson or James Madison signed off on it.
What ever it takes to get this beast under control I'm all for it. Cross state lines is one way and putting folks into large pools not a million tiny ones for crying out loud and stop this loophole game and make the process simpler. If not then these health insurance companies can insure cars as far as I'm concerned. The whole thing reeks of greed to the hilt. Nothing wrong with a profit but what I've seen these last few years it seems those things that are a necessity, not just insurance, are jacked way out of price. Alot of mumbo jumbo is then fed to the people but if you do a little searching you'll find that the people are being exploited to fill the coffers of just a few.
And when you question the schemes of the do'gooders your labeled anti life.
Quote:
Howard learned that for delivering a healthy baby, she would receive between $20,000 and $25,000 from the parents, plus money for food and maternity clothing. Having healthy twins would add another $5,000.
Howard registered with a surrogate agency called Extraordinary Conceptions in San Marcos, Calif., which matched her with a gay couple in France. Under the terms of their contract, the couple agreed to buy eggs from a donor and pay to have them fertilized with their sperm and transferred to Howard's uterus. After two failed attempts, Howard became pregnant with twins.
Howard's situation is far from unusual. Military wives are often considered ideal surrogates, with their access to outstanding health care and tendency to be resilient people, the Times said. But the practice is not without controversy. Military wives have caught criticism for using their insurance to profit as surrogates.
Fully respectable people making a buck off health care, octomom on a smaller scale. You and I paying for her to make money to sell a baby to a couple in France. I'm sure UHC would never be used for that. People can capitalize on anything. You'll never stop it with regulations without forcing everyone into a extraordinarily tiny box. Plenty more examples of this...
307 million Americans. How much would you say the average person spends a year if they had no insurance were single and paid out of pocket? $2,000 would be fair IMO, it's probably higher. 9 years ago it was around $8-9,000 per year per family, it's likely higher now.
It would greatly depend on whether or not they had any health problems during that year. If you needed to be hospitalized, you could easily spend $100,000 (say for an appendectomy, when all was said and done).
Fully respectable people making a buck off health care, octomom on a smaller scale. You and I paying for her to make money to sell a baby to a couple in France. I'm sure UHC would never be used for that. People can capitalize on anything. You'll never stop it with regulations without forcing everyone into a extraordinarily tiny box. Plenty more examples of this...
Wow, what a brilliant idea! So if you are a self-employed woman without maternity insurance it may actually be cheaper for you to hire a surrogate 'military wife' for 25K than to risk getting yourself exposed to the unpredictable costs of uninsured pregnancy/complications or trying to get one of these exorbitantly expensive maternity plans that still limit you in the amount of coverage and make you wait for several months to pay into these outrageous premiums before you can get pregnant. At least hiring a surrogate your costs are somewhat controlled
If you are an honest small business owner that can't afford to buy business health insurance that includes maternity or you are working for one of these small businesses that don't provide maternity insurance and you are not completely impoverished to qualify for the government subsidy you are pretty much going to pay through the roof and may expose yourself to outrageous costs way beyond 25K. Surrogate mother maybe a way to go - at least the most you will pay is 25K and if you are willing to shop around for 'rent-a-womb' all over the world, there are countries where you can get your baby incubated and delivered for mere 10K!! Wow, why bother with health insurance and delivery/complications costs in the US, just take your 'business' elsewhere Who needs healthcare reform, phew
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.
