Obama Care Could Be Deadly

Off topic, but that's okay given the caliber of most of the posts here likening health care to other absurdities as "rights."

Isn't it "Down's Syndrome" and not "Down Syndrome"? The latter looks peculiar to me - I could swear it's the former.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I think it is perfectly acceptable to deny services to individuals who cannot afford them.[/quote]

Bob, you aren't exactly a millionaire.

The insurance that goes along with retail jobs isn't exactly Cadillac.

There is no reason why you couldn't end up with a health care horror story like millions of other Americans.

Would you be singing the same tune if that happened?
 
There's a difference between right to owning things and having a right to things like health care. If you said "housing" or "shelter" I'd agree. And we do provide those two people who can't afford them be it public housing, welfare, homeless shelters etc.

Health care should be a basic human right, and no one should be denied needed services. And we shouldn't be paying the amounts we pay for insurance, co-pays, prescriptions etc. when many other countries have much cheap access to these things and have higher ratings on health care satisfaction.

Just too many Americans are selfish pricks who don't give two shits about others and just want to hoard their money and don't give a crap as long as they have the quality of life they want. So you have all these debates bitching about socialized medicine etc. when if done right it won't impact our taxes much and can cut what we pay in premiums. Again I do get the skepticism people have that our government can do it right.

I'm all for it, my premiums have more than doubled for pretty much the same insurance with my change of jobs as the University I work for now has cut back how much of the premiums they pay and put more burden on the employee. And mine is still cheaper than a lot of peoples at around $120 a month for medical, vision and dental.

A lot can be done just by having more government regulation of the medical system, what can be charged, what insurance companies have to pay, findings ways to cut back on wasteful use of expensive tests and procedures that aren't really needed, and having a good public option so there are fewer uninsured driving up costs for all of us when they need emergency services they can't pay for.

But I'm already getting into a debate I don't want to as it's one where I really have little respect for the other side so I try to stay away from. People that only care about their own bottom line and couldn't care less about less fortunate people who can't afford medical care etc. aren't worth my time.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']Not at all. What some people want is for the government to force private businesses to take up clients that the private businesses do not want to associate with.

Do we really want a government that forces association?[/QUOTE]

Not really, but I think the government is supposed to promote the general welfare of its owners.

If there is a situation that ruins the general welfare of many of its owners such as runaway costs for an essential good or service, shouldn't the government attempt to rectify the situation?
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Not really, but I think the government is supposed to promote the general welfare of its owners.

If there is a situation that ruins the general welfare of many of its owners such as runaway costs for an essential good or service, shouldn't the government attempt to rectify the situation?[/QUOTE]

It's a tough line to follow - but, quite frankly, I don't think the answer is to force association on private companies and I don't think the answer is more taxes or more deficit spending. None of those three options will promote the "general welfare" of the citizenry.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']People that only care about their own bottom line and couldn't care less about less fortunate people who can't afford medical care etc. aren't worth my time.[/QUOTE]

You complain about people who only care about their own bottom line, then your answer is to have the government do something. Why aren't you doing something? How many video games have you bought this year? You pay up to $50/year to play video games online! That money could have went toward helping the less fortunate.

It's not charity when you're spending someone else's money.
 
^ I don't follow your logic that take an argument such as "health care costs are rising out of control" as well as dmaul's prior points that a profit motive in the health care industry is one that is contrary to the very idea of health care to be properly retorted to with "donate your own money, charity case!"

It's a false solution to a false premise. But a nice Lib talking point.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']How in the world does that work logically?

"I want insurance, but I only want it to cover the crazy shit that y'all don't profit off of like major surgery and treatment. So let's take away office visits and things like that - it should be cheaper."

If you undercut profit from insurance companies, they'll find another way to soak it out of you. That's the beauty of the free market.[/quote]
Competition. That's the beauty of the free market. If you repeal all of these regulations that allow companies to basically have a monopoly over certain areas of industry, then competition will pop up. Competition lowers prices, and results in better products. It won't matter if insurance companies are making less off of lesser plans. People will still go into that market because of a lower start up cost, if they can make a profit. Plus, companies still cheap bare minimum auto insurance plans don't they?
Think of how banks reacted to the increase in bankruptcies and defaults on credit - for Chase users, virtually everyone experienced a damn-near catastrophic increase in their APR rates. Even if you paid on time every time. Because other people fucked it up for you.
Click to expand...
I also remember a very large interest increase after the credit card bill was passed this year.
Likewise, you would be the ones fucking up insurance companies by undercutting their profits.
Click to expand...
More people are able to afford insurance=more customers
Also, cheap minimum coverage auto insurance works.
It's absurd. You want the market to bend to your whim, failing to realize that you would break the market.
Click to expand...
It won't break it.
I want a $50 Rolls Royce, in other words, is not a sensible solution to the woes of the auto industry.
Click to expand...
A $50 Rolls Royce would be a money loser. Offering cheap minimum health care is possible, without going into the red.

Anyone think state and city health care co-ops are a good idea?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']^ I don't follow your logic that take an argument such as "health care costs are rising out of control" as well as dmaul's prior points that a profit motive in the health care industry is one that is contrary to the very idea of health care to be properly retorted to with "donate your own money, charity case!"

It's a false solution to a false premise. But a nice Lib talking point.[/QUOTE]

The point being, we've got a bunch of internet-armchair experts decrying those who work for personal gain, expecting these people to just give away what they've worked for - all while playing their video games. You want me to believe you're really concerned about greed? Why don't you give up what you own and live a life of poverty and charity, then come back and talk to me.

[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Competition. That's the beauty of the free market. If you repeal all of these regulations that allow companies to basically have a monopoly over certain areas of industry, then competition will pop up. Competition lowers prices, and results in better products.[/QUOTE]

NO! COMPETITION BAD! UGH! That's why Obama wants to create a "public option".... to compete with the private companies. Because competition won't solve the problem.

err...
 
Bob and FMF are poster children for why a basic economic education should be mandatory starting at elementary school (when they both either dropped out or stopped paying attention).

There is no market cure for our healthcare problems.
 
I think the uninsurable Joliet Jake wrote it best when he posted he has nothing to lose.

...

I think of where my dad is in this situation. He has made six figures for several years, has a $30-40K pension waiting for him, has put away 20% of his pay for over a decade, owes nobody any money ... and he doesn't think he can afford to retire because of health care.

If he does retire, he is dependent on the current workers of the company to continue paying for his health insurance. Sure, he did it for 30+ years for the company's retirees, but the company keeps bribing the current workers to forego that obligation.

If he has to pay for health care, it is at least $1600 per month for him and my stepmother.

If he loses his health care, he can't be insured because of her high blood pressure and his previous prostate cancer.

Of course, he is just a loser. I'm sure the vast majority of Americans are in a better financial shape than him.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']The point being, we've got a bunch of internet-armchair experts decrying those who work for personal gain, expecting these people to just give away what they've worked for - all while playing their video games. You want me to believe you're really concerned about greed? Why don't you give up what you own and live a life of poverty and charity, then come back and talk to me.[/QUOTE]

That's still guilty of a false premise. Life is not a matter of being Michael Douglad from Wall Street or Mother Teresa. You know that. But yet you argue this point like it's valid.

Given the premise of your argument, we should have no government whatsoever, as their only purpose in this world is to sever profit from the hands of those willing to work hard to get it. We should privatize police (Blackwater Xe Local PD!), fire, water, air, courts, prisons, and nature. Anything that is considered "free" or a "right" fights your philosophy...

...that is, so long as you're willing to hide behind absurd arguments you don't agree with on your own...

...you're a savvy person, you know better. "why don't you do something instead of playing video games" is the kind of post that happens when you have nothing to say, but, by gum, you're going to say something anyway. I expect that from evanft, not you.

In the meantime, we can draw up plans for "Monday Night Rehabilitation," brought to you by Carl's Jr.
 
[quote name='ninju D']You can't talk about the issue without talking about R&C and balance billing. If the insurance cos are paying at 80% on a anesthesiologist, who pays the other 20%? You do. Cause they don't belong to the network. That's why we need reform.

I'm not even going to get into the fact that hospitals and medical providers are allowed to charge any amount they see fit for their servers...
(I used to work at a major health insurer and I've seen it all. I could go on for days about how effed the current system is. And the docs are as much at fault as the insurance cos.)[/QUOTE]

I am still thrown off on your comments on R&C, it is not coinsurance. the other 20% is coinsurance and it exists on more than health insurance its also there on commerical property insurance, even residential insurance to some degree.

Now if you are saying the reform needs to target the ass raping doctors charge $5000+ for an MRI, yes thats what it needs to be doing.. how you expect them to force doctors onto networks, and therefore agree to carriers discounts if you will, is beyond me. They do not have to join the network. Some doctors wont even bill, you pay them and manually turn in the claim to whomever your carrier is... if you dont like that see another specialist... the thing is people are flocking to the ones I know like that, must be for a reason.

The cost is huge for Drug companies, doctors, assistant charges, room charges $100 to sit in the room for 30 minutes while I can hear the doc chit chat outside the door... no thanks. But thats the room charge.

I just dont know how there is a simple answer, or one that will be understood by people outside the industry.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']The point being, we've got a bunch of internet-armchair experts decrying those who work for personal gain, expecting these people to just give away what they've worked for - all while playing their video games. You want me to believe you're really concerned about greed? Why don't you give up what you own and live a life of poverty and charity, then come back and talk to me.
[/QUOTE]

I've not bought a single video game this year, just got a couple of Goozex. I barely touch them as I don't have much free time and just don't dig gaming much anymore.

And I have always donated to charitable causes.

And this is just typical, conservative hyperbole. No one is asking anyone to give up huge portions of their money. Just to be willing to pay a little more tax (if even necessary if the needed cut backs in medical care spending and wasteful spending in other areas are made) to ensure that everyone can have access to health care.

No one needs to give up everything, or even a lot for others and the general welfare of the country. But people shouldn't be so self centered that they're opposed to maybe paying some more taxes so everyone can have the access to health care that they enjoy.
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I think it is perfectly acceptable to deny services to individuals who cannot afford them.

You may call me a monster, but when was the last time you gave away your property/time to take care of those less fortunate than you? And here, you expect others to do it non-stop.

And my question is valid - do you want a government that forces association?[/QUOTE]

Such a caring response...a Christian man are you?

On that note, I find it baffling that in a nation supposedly built upon Christian values (you know, the stuff Christ preached) it's so much easier to sell war than it is healthcare reform.

Right Wing "Christian" perspective:

killing people = DO IT! DO IT! SPEND ALL THE MONEY YOU NEED!

helping fellow citizens and making the country a better place for all = NO WAY! SOCIALISTS! EVIL!
 
[quote name='mykevermin']How in the world does that work logically?

"I want insurance, but I only want it to cover the crazy shit that y'all don't profit off of like major surgery and treatment. So let's take away office visits and things like that - it should be cheaper."

If you undercut profit from insurance companies, they'll find another way to soak it out of you. That's the beauty of the free market.

[/QUOTE]

Myke,

You must not know of how, or what is available out there. Its funny you have so many opinions, but this response leads me to believe that you have not had to shop for insurnace that much.

It does exist as mentioned. Its major medical, or catastrophic, or sometime short term coverage.

I want a $5,000 -$10,000 deductible (self insurance portion), no rx, no office copays. But if I get in a car accident, have a heart attack, etc I want coverage and to not go bankrupt. Normally its cheap and sometimes its guaranteed issue.

Statistically you are not going to have a problem. Statistically 90+% of the insured americans dont even use their deductible up.

Saying this doesnt exist is like saying life insurance doesnt exist. It does I can put policies on 75 year old's.

However your point holds true on all insurance. I recently worked with a guy, we insure his business, and provide him group health coverage as well. He wanted me to look at his daugthers coverage in Texas as she has 3 children and had an ER trip with his Grandaughter.

The premium on 3 females 17 yo or less.... $270 a month. It was pretty good coverage... the bill from a hopsital for the ER visit. $28,000. Yeah in about 103 years she will have paid them back for that one trip that was covered...

Thats the problem with health insurance. Everyone acts like these carriers are only making money. Its not always true. The ones banking are the facilities and doctors, as well as the carriers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='lawdood']On that note, I find it baffling that in a nation supposedly built upon Christian values (you know, the stuff Christ preached) it's so much easier to sell war than it is healthcare reform. [/QUOTE]

Let's start spreading rumors ...

I believe Saddam and Osama were in favor of private healthcare companies.

I also think the health care benefits for Al Queda are currently a HMO.

Go, Internetz, do your thing!
 
[quote name='Snake2715']Myke,

You must not know of how, or what is available out there. Its funny you have so many opinions, but this response leads me to believe that you have not had to shop for insurnace that much.

It does exist as mentioned. Its major medical, or catastrophic, or sometime short term coverage.

I want a $5,000 -$10,000 deductible (self insurance portion), no rx, no office copays. But if I get in a car accident, have a heart attack, etc I want coverage and to not go bankrupt. Normally its cheap and sometimes its guaranteed issue.

Statistically you are not going to have a problem. Statistically 90+% of the insured americans dont even use their deductible up.

Saying this doesnt exist is like saying life insurance doesnt exist. It does I can put policies on 75 year old's.
[/QUOTE]

If you're going to try and prove something exists and you're right with such detailed information, your argument would be helped tremendously if you actually linked to the facts and insurance programs which actually back up your claims, otherwise your supposed claims and opinions on Myke's wrongness hold no weight.

[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']Let's start spreading rumors ...

I believe Saddam and Osama were in favor of private healthcare companies.

I also think the health care benefits for Al Queda are currently a HMO.

Go, Internetz, do your thing![/QUOTE]

Your claims will be taken as fact only once Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin repeat them as such...which should be by tomorrow...oh wait, that would go against everything their private insurance company overlords have taught them, DOH! ;)
 
[quote name='Msut77']Bob and FMF are poster children for why a basic economic education should be mandatory starting at elementary school (when they both either dropped out or stopped paying attention).

There is no market cure for our healthcare problems.[/QUOTE]
You say I am so bad at economics....... Then you won't even comment on the fact that the poor and a large amount of the middle class will not be afford this government option health care. Yet, they will still be forced to buy it. Yeah, I'm really bad at economics.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']I think the uninsurable Joliet Jake wrote it best when he posted he has nothing to lose.

...

I think of where my dad is in this situation. He has made six figures for several years, has a $30-40K pension waiting for him, has put away 20% of his pay for over a decade, owes nobody any money ... and he doesn't think he can afford to retire because of health care.

If he does retire, he is dependent on the current workers of the company to continue paying for his health insurance. Sure, he did it for 30+ years for the company's retirees, but the company keeps bribing the current workers to forego that obligation.

If he has to pay for health care, it is at least $1600 per month for him and my stepmother.

If he loses his health care, he can't be insured because of her high blood pressure and his previous prostate cancer.

Of course, he is just a loser. I'm sure the vast majority of Americans are in a better financial shape than him.[/QUOTE]

How many independant insurance agents has he called to get this $1600 figure?

Does he have medicare parts A & B?
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']...the fact that the poor and a large amount of the middle class will not be afford this government option health care. [/QUOTE]

I missed this in the 41 pages. How much is government option health care again?
 
[quote name='Snake2715']How many independant insurance agents has he called to get this $1600 figure?

Does he have medicare parts A & B?[/QUOTE]

As far as the independent insurance agents, I don't know. I know that is how much he says the company pays for his insurance.

Medicare won't work. He is 58 and she is 63.
 
[quote name='Snake2715']The premium on 3 females 17 yo or less.... $270 a month. It was pretty good coverage... the bill from a hopsital for the ER visit. $28,000. Yeah in about 103 years she will have paid them back for that one trip that was covered... [/QUOTE]

:rofl: if you think an insurance company pays the amount stated on a medical bill.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']I missed this in the 41 pages. How much is government option health care again?[/QUOTE]
At least 11% of your income. More based on how much you make over the poverty line.
 
[quote name='lawdood']Such a caring response...a Christian man are you?

On that note, I find it baffling that in a nation supposedly built upon Christian values (you know, the stuff Christ preached) it's so much easier to sell war than it is healthcare reform.

Right Wing "Christian" perspective:

killing people = DO IT! DO IT! SPEND ALL THE MONEY YOU NEED!

helping fellow citizens and making the country a better place for all = NO WAY! SOCIALISTS! EVIL![/QUOTE]

If the people had reason to believe the government was capable of running anything else as well as they do the military the attitude might be different. We have a long list of good humanitarian ideas on paper we were asked to help fund through taxation that have turned into massive cluster fucks.

Edit: Actually if there were a proposal out there that had the military running the new healthcare system, you'd probably have more support.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='lawdood']If you're going to try and prove something exists and you're right with such detailed information, your argument would be helped tremendously if you actually linked to the facts and insurance programs which actually back up your claims, otherwise your supposed claims and opinions on Myke's wrongness hold no weight.
[/QUOTE]
First I have no issue with Myke. I rarely get into these political debates really because I am pretty new to the scene. I do read them off and on and have my own opinions on certain things.

To answer your question or comment on your point of me having to support it with facts.

Thats the problem here. Let me give you an example. "there is no way I can get games for less than retail" yet when they find sites like CAG, they are blown away. Until they knew about it, it might as well have not existed.

Funny, most people treat their health insurance like that. If they hear one thing, thats the fact, or if a family member has a story, thats how it is in all situations, across all state lines, for everyone.

I would almost guarantee there are "non Profit" (dont let this fool you as the money gets funnelled), guaranteed issue plans for individuals in almost all, if not all, states.

You need to do your work and call local agents and shop around a little. Not take the HR's word at you employer as the final answer. Not listen to a family member or friend and call it quits.

This stuff exists. There are plans out there that do not look at PRE X, there are major medical or consumer driven health plans, there are limited payment or calander year max plans. All of them are different approaches to keeping costs down. Some work perfectly for some people.

Here are a few off the top of my head. There are so many more its not even funny.


http://www.assuranthealth.com/corp/ah/

https://www.aetna.com/iqs/aimquote.do

http://www.goldenrule.com/health/short-term-health.shtml

http://www.goldenrule.com/health/high_deductible.shtml

http://www.celtic-net.com/short-term-medical-insurance.aspx

http://www.aimhealthplans.com/

http://www.humana-one.com/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What people have to realize is that the tax increase for a public options (or a full public system) could be partly off set by other factors.

Your taxes go up, but hopefully your insurance premium (if there is one depending on system, your income etc.) goes down as needed cuts to wasteful healthcare costs are made going forward. Hopefully co-pays for office visits and drugs goes down. If it was a full public system, hopefully wages would go up if employers weren't contributing.

But it's all up in the air as to how that pans out.

I just see nothing wrong with paying a bit more taxes in each income bracket to be sure everyone has good coverage. Any of us never know what could happen to us health wise or with our jobs etc. so we could end up benefiting from it down the road. It's not just something that benefits the working poor.

And honestly, it could probably be paid for with minimal tax increases if the government could make needed cuts in areas like defense, foreign aid and so on. So I do share the frustrations of the conservatives on that front as I'd rather see universal health care paid for with cuts in other wasteful spending and minimal tax increases.

It just rubs me the wrong way when people are thoroughly opposed to paying any more taxes to help everyone have health care, and even more when they come back with silly retorts asking people to give up everything they have--like that's some how comparable with asking people to be willing to pay a few % more of their income in taxes to ensure that themselves, there families and everyone else always has health coverage.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']If the people had reason to believe the government was capable of running anything else as well as they do the military the attitude might be different. We have a long list of good humanitarian ideas on paper we were asked to help fund through taxation that have turned into massive cluster fucks.[/QUOTE]

Yes, because the Iraq war was run perfectly wasn't it? Got some examples and facts to back up your claims of the long list?

Here's an idea, if you don't want the public insurance option, you don't pick it. It is certainly better than nothing for many people and the fact that it has worked successfully in most other countries around the world seems to suggest it should work here.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']At least 11% of your income. More based on how much you make over the poverty line.[/QUOTE]

How much for a family of four making $50-70K?
 
[quote name='lawdood']Yes, because the Iraq war was run perfectly wasn't it? Got some examples and facts to back up your claims of the long list? [/QUOTE]

Dear obama. GTFO of Iraq and Afghanistan already.
 
[quote name='lawdood']Yes, because the Iraq war was run perfectly wasn't it? Got some examples and facts to back up your claims of the long list?

Here's an idea, if you don't want the public insurance option, you don't pick it. It is certainly better than nothing for many people and the fact that it has worked successfully in most other countries around the world seems to suggest it should work here.[/QUOTE]

Humans are geared towards more than two choices.
 
[quote name='fatherofcaitlyn']How much for a family of four making $50-70K?[/QUOTE]
No one will say. I would assume that it would be similar to the cost of private insurance, simply because there aren't any magical things the government to make health care suddenly cheap.
[quote name='lawdood']Yes, because the Iraq war was run perfectly wasn't it? Got some examples and facts to back up your claims of the long list?

Here's an idea, if you don't want the public insurance option, you don't pick it. [/quote]
Sure you can not pick the public option, but you would have to pick something else from a limited pool.
It is certainly better than nothing for many people and the fact that it has worked successfully in most other countries around the world seems to suggest it should work here.
Click to expand...
Yes, taking away 11% of a poor person's income to give them crappy health care is better than nothing. Does the public option include free food?
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']Dear obama. GTFO of Iraq and Afghanistan already.[/QUOTE]
Yes please. And while you are at it, pull the troops out of Japan, Germany, South Korea, and such. We really don't need to be there.
 
[quote name='perdition(troy']Dear obama. GTFO of Iraq and Afghanistan already.[/QUOTE]
I am unsure as to whether or not this is totally serious. I am aware of the fact that you want troops out of both countries, but do you actually expect a withdrawal from Afghanistan? Obama promised to stay in Afghanistan very early on in the whole election thing. I do not know why this seems like such a shocking betrayal to some people.
 
[quote name='lawdood']Yes, because the Iraq war was run perfectly wasn't it? Got some examples and facts to back up your claims of the long list?
[/QUOTE]
You really should pay more attention.
I specifically said "Military" instead of "War" for a reason.

And even though it's off topic, it's not even debatable that our military is capable of winning pretty much any war with any other country right now, as long as the goal for winning is the traditional pure and simple subjugation. Unfortunately that's not the goal, so it's hard to call Iraq a war. It's a political operation using the military with with an impossible number of PC constraints to navigate through successfully. It's an attempt at brain surgery with a forklift.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Yes please. And while you are at it, pull the troops out of Japan, Germany, South Korea, and such. We really don't need to be there.[/QUOTE]

I agree with that statement. If we reduced our military down to just doing what it was originally intended to do: protect our borders, we'd have enough money for free health care for everyone in the country; and we could even provide healthcare to mexico "officially".
 
[quote name='Snake2715']yeah then what would happen with the new influx of jobless soldiers?

Would it be worse then the mexican "takeover" we have now?[/QUOTE]

One thing's sure, they'd all have great, government run healthcare under the VA.
 
http://www.cjr.org/the_audit/investors_business_daily_short.php

Here’s the original line, which is now stricken from the editorial:

"People such as scientist Stephen Hawking wouldn’t have a chance in the U.K., where the National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."
Click to expand...

But IBD’s correction creates another problem. Here is its entire text:

"Editor’s Note: This version corrects the original editorial which implied that physicist Stephen Hawking, a professor at the University of Cambridge, did not live in the UK."
Click to expand...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
[quote name='UncleBob']I think it is perfectly acceptable to deny services to individuals who cannot afford them.

You may call me a monster, but when was the last time you gave away your property/time to take care of those less fortunate than you? And here, you expect others to do it non-stop.

And my question is valid - do you want a government that forces association?[/QUOTE]

I've volunteered at schools, i've volunteered at retirement homes, i've given more money than i can remember to local charities.

Health care helps society as a whole. A healthy population is happier and more productive than they would be sick.

You're just a greedy bastard who would sooner let people die than be relieved of a single penny.
 
[quote name='lawdood']One thing's sure, they'd all have great, government run healthcare under the VA.[/QUOTE]

i dont know about great... i deal with veterans regularly through me job (i work in health insurance) and most of them arent happy. my buddy is in the army right now stationed in germany, his wife just had a baby. ask her what she thinks of their insurance coverage, i can assure you it wont be positive.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']No one will say. I would assume that it would be similar to the cost of private insurance, simply because there aren't any magical things the government to make health care suddenly cheap.[/QUOTE]

My family of four already pays a pretty penny for health care from the money explicitly withheld from my wife's check and from the money my wife's company can't pay her because it is paying a significant chunk of the health care plan.

The public option removes the possibility of bankruptcy due to medical bills. I'm going to spend the next two decades paying off credit card and student loan debts, putting two kids through a middle class lifestyle and state college, paying off a mortgage and socking away 10-15 years of living expenses in a variety of investments. If medical expenses continue to grow faster than GDP like they have since the 70s, what will be enough in 2029, 2049? Should I be like my father and work until I'm eligible for Medicare or should I move to any of the 3 dozen countries where I could just retire when I have no debts and a modest nest egg?
 
Doesn't really matter if you get a serious disease and die before it is your turn to get adequate care for it, now does it?

Perhaps they could try restricting private health insurance companies from being publically traded, that would take some focus off of profit and perhaps improve things. Reform COBRA and pre-existing conditions coverage. Allow the public to select less extensive private coverage. A public option, however, is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 
[quote name='RAMSTORIA']i dont know about great... i deal with veterans regularly through me job (i work in health insurance) and most of them arent happy. my buddy is in the army right now stationed in germany, his wife just had a baby. ask her what she thinks of their insurance coverage, i can assure you it wont be positive.[/QUOTE]

How many people honestly 'rave' about their healthcare, private or public? The costs and copays alone for private keep skyrocketing, while fewer and fewer procedures are covered for many.

I know firsthand that the VA provides pretty damn good healthcare coverage, esp. for the price.
 
[quote name='Ruined']Doesn't really matter if you get a serious disease and die before it is your turn to get adequate care for it, now does it?[/quote]

Oh, stop.

Perhaps they could try restricting private health insurance companies from being publically traded, that would take some focus off of profit and perhaps improve things. Reform COBRA and pre-existing conditions coverage. Allow the public to select less extensive private coverage. A public option, however, is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Click to expand...

:lol: Give the customers more choices! Take away the public option!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top