Log in
The time now is Fri Dec 06, 2019 10:12 am
View unanswered posts
About the health care reform changes

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fantasy Freaks Forum Forum Index -> Hot Hot Hot
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Sarah0247



Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 219
Location: Utah

PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:40 pm
Post subject: About the health care reform changes
Reply with quote

Okay guys, lets hash the SAME old topic...

(Honestly, I'm really curious about opinions)

Recently, the Health Care Reform bill was changed slightly. A group of 5 liberal and 5 moderate democrats got together and threw out chunks of the bill, altering it. (You can google this anywhere if you don't know what I'm talking about).

Basically, instead of a public option, the government is going to negotiate with private insurance companies to secure low premiums on an insurance plan that is open to everyone (I'm probably understanding this wrong) and medicare is going to be expanded to cover people 55 years and older.

Two questions:

1. How do you feel about this?

2. Do you think this is going to affect the overall approval rating for Obama?
_________________
- Sarah

"Stories of imagination tend to upset those without one." — Terry Pratchett

www.bookwormblues.net
Twitter - @BookwormBlues
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Dudde
The Monster at the end of this Post


Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Location: Oklahoma!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:20 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

Approval for Obama is going to drop as the uneducated masses are misinformed until they see the positive results later on (or if it's altered too far, he'll be blamed for whatever went wrong, whether his fault or not) - no real questions there.

I think Obama may just be that slick of a card player, he's done stuff like this several times - announce something you know everyone will hate, make them debate on it, and in the end even if it isn't what you proposed, you still get what you want. It's basic sales - the negotiating price starts at $300 and your target price is usually $220-$200 - the other side sees themselves getting a fantastic bargain and coming out ahead, you get what you wanted the whole time

I think regulating private insurers to stop being D-bags about insurance and support themselves is vastly better than trying to support a healthcare measure on our anti-government take-over nation's government, because it would be destroyed from the inside out by haters and disbelievers over time anyway, or at least fall apart due to abuse. Private companies aren't as subject to those abuses because they can tell you "hey. Stop. Or we're uninsuring you."

I'm actually drastically curious as to what direction this stupid reform will take and when it plans on planting itself =0
_________________
Having a pet rat is like having a dance studio next to a marble factory; hilarity is bound to ensue...it's only a matter of time.
~ Blike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TamAlthor
The Zeppo


Joined: 09 Nov 2006
Posts: 713
Location: Alberta Canada

PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 3:15 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

why can't elective procedures be taxed and that money used to finance or assist public health care...I've always wondered about that.

I know it creates an issue with two teirs of healthcare but there must be a way to manage the doctors and or their salary to ensure everyone gets the best health care possible

_________________
"The truth is that our finest moments are most likely to occur when we are feeling deeply..unhappy, or unfulfilled. For it is only in such moments..we are likely to step out of our ruts and start searching for different ways or truer answers
-M. S. Peck
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address MSN Messenger
julie
Wicked Wisdom


Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1008
Location: Ohio

PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:09 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

This is a hard topic to discuss because it is so complex. I have read a lot on the subject over the past several months. Less than a decade ago I was a die-hard supporter of The American Way of health care and I thought it was far superior to that of socialized and semi-socialized countries. I thought that because my husband had a good job with good benefits and my previous employment was with the federal government, so I had outstanding benefits when I was working prior to the turn of the millennium.

Then I started working for small businesses and not so small businesses that were squeezed by rising health insurance premiums. I saw my insurance get less and less coverage for higher and higher premiums. I had gaps when I changed jobs due to most employers having waiting periods for health insurance. I had to be on COBRA coverage a couple of times. And all the while, I was getting older and gaining more of the annoying health issues that start to crop up as one ages. I reached the age of recommended mammograms and family history recommended other tests. I have a couple of maintenance meds I have to buy every month and until recently had a third one that was extremely expensive. I went through periods where I had to pay for those medications out of pocket or suffer the physical consequences of not having them - and trust me, they were not nice consequences at all.

I didn't change jobs for fun. I worked for two different companies that were sold and bought by totally horrible new owners. This past year, I was laid off along with a lot of other people because that company couldn't afford to pay all their staff anymore. When health insurance is tied to employment and you lose your job, you not only don't have the insurance anymore, you also don't have the income to pay for new insurance. And even if you are lucky enough to find new employment quickly, you still have a two-three month or more waiting period and the risk that your new coverage will not handle everything your previous coverage did. COBRA at least gives a stop gap - IF you can afford it. My COBRA premiums were at least double what was deducted from my paycheck on a monthly basis before I lost my job.

For the past several years I have shifted completely to the left of my prior opinion on health care insurance and the whole fee pay structure of the health care industry in general. Our current system is very flawed and it needs to be changed. Personally, I support a public option. But even without that, if something can be done to radically change how we pay for health care in this country, it will be a blessing.

My husband works in a health care related industry and has a financial position with his company. As such, he has access to a lot of interesting information about the health care insurance industry. He recently sent me a link to a very intriguing article written by a man who has made quite a study of the problems. It's very long, but worth taking some time to read if you have a chance. I do not agree with much of what this man proposes as solutions, but I did agree with a lot of his points about where the problems are originating and he brought up several points that had not even occurred to me. I can't find the link atm, of course, but I will post it here as soon as I do.

Our U.S. Constitution - the foundation of our system of government - has a pre-amble that goes like this:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

And just to be clear, the definition of 'welfare' is this:

welfare n. 1. health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being

I don't think we're doing a very good job as a country of promoting the general welfare these days. And that's every bit as important as providing for the common defence, establishing justice, and insuring domestic tranquility, imo. What point having a country full of a few happy, healthy, rich fat cats with botox and all the cosmetic surgery and personal trainers they could ever hope for and the rest of the populace being an angry, frustrated, poorly educated, and unhealthy mob of misery? We're supposed to be The Dream, not the nightmare.

Oh, and I almost forgot part 2. Yes, I'm sure it will affect Obama's approval rating, unless and until something good comes of it. But I really don't care if it does or not, because you can't get thrown out of office before your four years are up just for a bad approval rating (otherwise we'd have been rid of cowboy George a lot sooner).

I've read Obama's book, [i]The Audacity of Hope[/]. I believe that he's an intelligent man with high ideals and aspirations for our nation to be a shining world leader again, instead of the fat cat place that everyone else loves to hate. The hardline rightwinger hatemongers love to throw out the line that other countries hate the US because of its power and wealth and they are just jealous. Well let me tell you something. My life experiene has put me in situations where I've both mingled with and worked for and with people of all income levels, including the very wealthy. And being very wealthy does not, by default, make you hated by people who have less. Some very wealthy people are wonderful and compassionate human beings who are able to make themselves aware of other people's circumstances and feelings and beliefs and present themselves in such a way as to be admired and respected. Other very wealthy people are totally self-absorbed jackasses who might make lip-service to people of other economic situations if they feel it's good for the public image and, therefore, the bottom line, but they are hated and reviled by people because of their attitudes and behavior.

Obama's life circumstances have put him in a position to experience all manner of cultures, income levels, and status. He's a student of history - and not just American history. He's also smart enough to listen to people who he knows have more experience with various things than he does. I believe he is making every effort at true change in the policies and practices of our country and I believe that that is a good thing. If he has to give to get, then that's really to be expected. Otherwise we'd be living in a dictatorship.

Honestly, sometimes I think we'd be well served by a decade or so of benevolent dictatorship - from either side of the political aisle.

In the words of the fabulous SNL weekend update commentator, I just want someone to "FIX IT"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
julie
Wicked Wisdom


Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1008
Location: Ohio

PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:19 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

Aha! I found it!

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200909/health-care

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dudde
The Monster at the end of this Post


Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Location: Oklahoma!

PostPosted: Thu Dec 10, 2009 7:24 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

Julie brings up another good point however :

Quote:
The hardline rightwinger hatemongers love to throw out the line that other countries hate the US because of its power and wealth and they are just jealous.


Being the social butterfly that I am, I have numerous conversations almost daily with people from other countries - and man they've changed their opinions DRASTICALLY with the implementation of a new president. Our country seems to love to hate anything they don't understand, but from other country viewpoints, Obama is fantastic and someone is finally guiding this country.

I find global acceptance to be rather important, as we're obviously depending on it now by having them purchase our deficit, countries are less likely to help others they don't like -
_________________
Having a pet rat is like having a dance studio next to a marble factory; hilarity is bound to ensue...it's only a matter of time.
~ Blike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dudde
The Monster at the end of this Post


Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Location: Oklahoma!

PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:52 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

Thanks Julie, That was very interesting!

Also, now that congress has had a few days to destroy the good possibilities of the new proposal, I'm completely against it! It was a good idea from the start, but now it's almost a handout to the insurance companies - hopefully the more liberal of the bunch grow a spine, followed by a quick lesson in economics and running a country for the conservatives =D

I'm in kind of a rush, I'll post more about why I think that soonly
_________________
Having a pet rat is like having a dance studio next to a marble factory; hilarity is bound to ensue...it's only a matter of time.
~ Blike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Patrick
Sleepless Sonneteer


Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 1232
Location: Arkansas, USA

PostPosted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:09 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

More from here when I have a free minute from studying....
_________________


On a mountain of skulls in a castle of pain, I sat on a throne of blood. What was will be, what is will be no more. Now is the season of evil!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jade
Seven of Jade


Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 1000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 2:56 am
Post subject:
Reply with quote

Thanks for that link, Julie - long, but totally worth reading.

I disagree, somewhat, that insurance should only cover catastrophe, and on what he defines as catastrophe. I fully agree that visits to doctor's offices and tests and stuff would be more cost-effective if consumer-driven and if paid for up front by the customer. I went through a trial of my own when I tried to find out what an MRI cost and whether I could afford it, and then discovered that there are multiple prices, depending on whether you bill your insurance, pay up front and then submit to your insurance, or are uninsured, and it's VERY difficult to find out what all these prices actually are. (turns out, at this particular clinic, if you pay up front there is a substantial discount, and after being reimbursed by insurance the actual cost is lower than if you just bill the insurance. But not by very much.)

Anyway, I'm getting distracted... I agree in principle with many of these things. But the definition of catastrophe isn't quite right. Speaking as someone who's had 3 back surgeries, where technically the original injury was probably a sports injury which he doesn't categorize as "catastrophic", I beg to differ. My first two surgeries were in Canada, and were completely free. My last one, here in California, had a bill of over $120 000, my share of which was about $4000. That's not counting various things like physical therapy and MRIs, which have probably put me well over that number.

Anyway..... It's pretty absurd. I think the article does a really good job of outlining the biggest problems with the current system, but doesn't do nearly as well in offering solutions. Obviously health care costs world-wide are skyrocketing, and it's largely a result of an aging population, and a persistent trend toward newer, more expensive technologies and drugs to extend the lives of that aging population and give prolonged treatments to conditions that once would simply have killed people. I'm not trying to be insensitive to old people - I lost my grandparents not that long ago, after watching them go steadily downhill in a landslide of deteriorating fitness and one life-threatening condition after another. They both made comments that made me feel they weren't particularly happy about the way their health dragged out, and frankly I think I would vastly prefer to just drop dead of that first heart attack (or whatever). I think the huge percentage of our health cost aimed at dragging out a few more years from people with enormously expensive procedures and medicine is not appropriate... But like the writer of that article, I have to admit I can offer the criticism without having a solution to balance it. I mean, who's going to tell Grandma that we're just going to "pull the plug" because she's not cost-effective?

He makes an interesting point that all the levels of regulation and bureaucracy and patches the government has put on the system don't help. But on the other hand, the US pays vastly more than any of the countries with socialized medicine, so it's not just that the government is inefficient. Maybe Australia has the right idea, at least to some extent. There are problems in the Aussie system, and there's been a push toward increasing privatization that is very dangerous, but while health care is publicly funded, a trip to the doctor's office isn't usually free. The government pays a fixed amount to the doctor for appointments and procedures, and it isn't necessarily enough, so there is usually an extra charge paid by the patient directly to the doctor, up front usually - $20-$50 in my experience, depending on the doctor. If you have purchased private insurance in addition to the public health care that everyone has, they may cover some or all of this fee, I think. I can tell you for a fact that an MRI in Melbourne costs the patient pretty much exactly what an MRI in Santa Barbara does - roughly $250. But with WAY less paperwork and bureaucracy in Australia.

Anyway, the fact that a trip to the doctor or a procedure actually does cost something probably serves to reduce expenditure. I'd like to think so, anyway, but I don't know where I'd go to try and find that out *sigh*

Like I said, the Aussie system isn't perfect at all, and all the socialized systems are struggling to find enough money just like the US system is. But maybe they have the right idea.... Which brings us no closer to a solution in the US, because it's not possible to wipe the slate clean and start with a fresh system, which is the only thing that might *actually* fix the problem.

Wow, this topic just got on a train and ran totally away from me. I'm going to stop typing now and go to bed.

Jade

_________________
"But they have guns!"
"And I haven't - which makes me the better person, don't you think? They can shoot me dead, but the moral high ground is mine."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dudde
The Monster at the end of this Post


Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Location: Oklahoma!

PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 1:39 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

Quote:
I mean, who's going to tell Grandma that we're just going to "pull the plug" because she's not cost-effective?

I'd also like to point out that it's severely frowned upon to let people die if they're save-able as a medical practicioner, and in some cases criminally offensive.

Which is ridiculous, because if I have a heart attack that's going to kill me at 70 and someone revives me, we're goin' rounds when I can stand again, maybe the exertion will finish the job =D I know most of my family doesn't want to live off pills and machines when they get older
_________________
Having a pet rat is like having a dance studio next to a marble factory; hilarity is bound to ensue...it's only a matter of time.
~ Blike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jade
Seven of Jade


Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 1000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

PostPosted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 4:05 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

I think our attitude toward doctors and medicine has done a complete turnaround. It used to be (many decades ago) that a great many things out there could and would kill us, and those times when doctors were able to step in and save us from something or fix us up we were just really grateful. Now, because medicine has progressed so far, we view diseases and injuries as things that *should* be treatable or fixable, and if they're not we see that as a failure.

So costs have skyrocketed, because we're no longer just saving who and what we can, we are saying that no price is too high to extend someone's life, even just for a little while.

I'm not saying that's necessarily a bad thing - obviously it's fantastic for those people who would otherwise have died from some rare disease. I'm just saying our priorities have changed, and the current system of high prices (and lawsuits!!!) is a result of that.

Jade

_________________
"But they have guns!"
"And I haven't - which makes me the better person, don't you think? They can shoot me dead, but the moral high ground is mine."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dudde
The Monster at the end of this Post


Joined: 26 Nov 2008
Posts: 921
Location: Oklahoma!

PostPosted: Wed Dec 23, 2009 2:11 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

/le sigh

Quote:
Congress lacks "the legal or moral authority to force this mandate on its citizens," Ensign recently said. "Is it really constitutional for this body to tell all Americans that they must buy health insurance coverage?"

The Senate plan would require an individual to purchase health insurance coverage or face a fine of up to $750 or 2 percent of his or her income -- whichever is greater.


As a quote from Ensign, R-Nevada, I can't belieeeeeve I'm agreeing with a Republican - but if I get fined for not having health insurance, I'm gonna be ticked. Although it's the Republicans who derailed the Public healthcare option and put the coverage back into the pockets of the healthcare companies - so not only do I think the health insurance companies are stupid, but now they're trying to fine me for not paying them =\

yay..
_________________
Having a pet rat is like having a dance studio next to a marble factory; hilarity is bound to ensue...it's only a matter of time.
~ Blike
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Window Bar



Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 65
Location: Southern Oregon

PostPosted: Tue Dec 29, 2009 9:50 pm
Post subject:
Reply with quote

TamAlthor wrote:
why can't elective procedures be taxed and that money used to finance or assist public health care...I've always wondered about that.


You're pushing in the wrong direction.

It's all about face lifts. Back in the 60's Ladybird Johnson did a highway beautification thing. Now it's time to beautify those who drive on those highways.

Of course this should be a public expense.
_________________
"We Read for Light."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Fantasy Freaks Forum Forum Index -> Hot Hot Hot All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Guild Wars Alliance theme by Daniel of Gaming Exe
Guild Wars™ is a trademark of NCsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.