free health care

[LizMac]

not to mention your entire premise makes no sense...... you cant afford to pay any more now that you have a plan than you could before........

youre still going to leave everyone else on the hook for your medical bills

and since deductibles have gone through the roof (especially for those with pre-existing conditions).... my guess is you wont even be able to cover that

so $400 a month for the ability to get $20 physicals and routine services like flu treatment seems a bit steep doesnt it?

when you consider if something catastrophic happens youre in no better financial position than you were before

youll probably fair worse with insurance than you would have without..... when you consider what 03bluecoupe stated

without insurance..... you go to the ER .... theyll give you treatment and send you on your way

with insurance.... you go to the ER...... sorry your insurance company says they wont pay for arm reattachment because youre an at risk customer already..... hope it wasnt your sex arm

I'm so sorry, I finally got a chance to read this thoroughly. I think you might be confused on a few things. Pre-existing conditions are what the insurance companies used to use to deny or raise the rates of those (like me) who had an illness or in some cases being a female (pregnancy is expensive). Under the ACA also called "Obamacares", insurance can no longer do this. From Healthcare dot gov:

Health insurance plans can't refuse to cover you or charge you more just because you have a pre-existing health condition.

And $20 does NOT at all seem steep to get a physical (which for a woman means quite a lot more than for a man). A physical is an all over body exam, head to toe - not a "routine" service that one gets. Usually, you only do it once a year. Flu shots are now free for me.

Is it worth me paying $400/month for it? Yes, because I am taking responsibility for myself and my own health and not being a burden to my fellow citizens. Since I work freelance, I don't have an employer to provide this for me as part of my salary/benefit.

 

[copestag]

I'm so sorry, I finally got a chance to read this thoroughly. I think you might be confused on a few things. Pre-existing conditions are what the insurance companies used to use to deny or raise the rates of those (like me) who had an illness or in some cases being a female (pregnancy is expensive). Under the ACA also called "Obamacares", insurance can no longer do this. From Healthcare dot gov:


And $20 does NOT at all seem steep to get a physical (which for a woman means quite a lot more than for a man). A physical is an all over body exam, head to toe - not a "routine" service that one gets. Usually, you only do it once a year. Flu shots are now free for me.

Is it worth me paying $400/month for it? Yes, because I am taking responsibility for myself and my own health and not being a burden to my fellow citizens. Since I work freelance, I don't have an employer to provide this for me as part of my salary/benefit.

I think you may be a little confused yourself here...

we all know what a pre-existing condition means and how insurance companies have treated it in the past

however.... your confusion comes in what you think that means now....

no they cannot refuse to offer you a policy........ and no they cannot charge you a higher rate for that policy than someone else who is otherwise equal

but they can still deny coverage for any specific treatment they want...... they can do that for anyone pre-existing condition or not

the only difference is now that they are losing money on you.. as well as everyone else.... they are more likely to deny services that they would have covered 5 years ago

its even spelled out very clearly in the law..... in fact its much worse now through the health exchanges.... because not only can the insurance company deny coverage for a specific treatment....... a government panel can also determine you arent worth treating and deny you....... this is where the infamous "death panel" arguments all came from...... something even the regime has admitted (once the law was enacted) can and will occur

so if they were looking at 2 cases.... and only planned on treating 1..... both for the same exact problem...... who do you think they are going to choose? someone who has a myriad of other health issues in their past..... or the otherwise healthy person? sorry bout your bad luck is what theyll tell you..... and theres nothing in the law that prevents that...... in fact the law prescribes it

as for the physicals......... you must be using some Chicago math if you think an annual physical @ $20 or free $10 flu shots is worth paying $4800 a year for

 

[saptech]

One exception: Grandfathered individual health insurance plans

The only exception is for grandfathered individual health insurance plans -- the kind you buy yourself, not through an employer. They do not have to cover pre-existing conditions.


Pre-existing conditions with Medicaid and CHIP

Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) also can't refuse to cover you or charge you more because of a health condition.

 

[LizMac]

I think you may be a little confused yourself here...

we all know what a pre-existing condition means and how insurance companies have treated it in the past

however.... your confusion comes in what you think that means now....

no they cannot refuse to offer you a policy........ and no they cannot charge you a higher rate for that policy than someone else who is otherwise equal

but they can still deny coverage for any specific treatment they want...... they can do that for anyone pre-existing condition or not

the only difference is now that they are losing money on you.. as well as everyone else.... they are more likely to deny services that they would have covered 5 years ago

its even spelled out very clearly in the law..... in fact its much worse now through the health exchanges.... because not only can the insurance company deny coverage for a specific treatment....... a government panel can also determine you arent worth treating and deny you....... this is where the infamous "death panel" arguments all came from...... something even the regime has admitted (once the law was enacted) can and will occur

so if they were looking at 2 cases.... and only planned on treating 1..... both for the same exact problem...... who do you think they are going to choose? someone who has a myriad of other health issues in their past..... or the otherwise healthy person? sorry bout your bad luck is what theyll tell you..... and theres nothing in the law that prevents that...... in fact the law prescribes it

as for the physicals......... you must be using some Chicago math if you think an annual physical @ $20 or free $10 flu shots is worth paying $4800 a year for

I've never been to Chicago. Don't know how they do math differently. And I live in the USA; so not under a 'regime'. I'm happy to pay the $4800/year because I'm patriotic and take responsibility for my needs. I live in a country where we take care of each other through our government; and have a social net for those that have hit on hard times (often our military veterans).

My physical would have cost me well over $400 for that 5 hour visit; and I paid $0. If I'm in a serious accident or have an illness, I will be paying for it, not the taxpayers.

I pay less taxes than I have since I was old enough to vote (Reagan) and even though work has been tighter - I still take care of my own. I wish more people would think about being responsible and stop complaining.

I still hope and pray that we will one day repeal this law to replace it with Universal HC.

 

[SiempreTuna]

How about we take these issues OUT of the Washington idiot's realm and put them on National Referendum Votes. Show up and vote or don't complain and the vote is final. Then we'd see what the majority of Americans really want

Good luck with that

What you're asking for is precisely what representative democracy is supposed to do and look how well that has worked out: a small minority actually caused the government to shut down and risked a default because they refuse to accept that they have lost on the healthcare issue.

Not just lost a vote but lost the subsequent election where healthcare had been a primary issue. Basically, they lost about as clearly as you possibly can in a democracy.

And did they accept the result? Of course not.

These people have spent the last 6 years doing everything they possibly could to destroy the country simply to make an elected president they don't like, look bad. You really think they're going to accept healthcare - or anything this president does - simply because they also lose a referendum?

Don't get me wrong: it would be great if they would. But given their rejection of democracy so far, I see absolutely zero chance of that happening.

 

[dibblebill]

As if the Democrats are any better than the republicans- you could've stopped at "a minority runs the country". Many on BOTH sides of the aisle have expressed their contempt for their constituents.

That being said. There's an increasing number of "Pay As You Go" style clinics that, while they can't provide in-depth healthcare, can provide physicals and basic prescriptions independent of insurance (Target/Walmart), for example.

 

[SiempreTuna]

I don't recall last time the democrats shut down the government .. ever

The dems are far from perfect, but compared to the current batch of republicans, they're practically saints

 

[03bluecoupe]

Both sides of the isle are at fault because they're simply interested in undermining the other side of the isle instead of actually REPRESENTING what the people want. They have their own interests (read as how can the put more money in their bank accounts and keep getting elected at the same time). They are ALL a bunch of egotistical, unethical, blowhards that like to hear themselves talk but say and do nothing unless forced into it. This country is in bad shape and is swirling around the drain. I only hope I don't live to see the final flush, but I don't think it's far off. The majority of the people ( ), with the exception of the far left AND far right, are getting seriously fed up with these bozos and sooner or later, all h*** is gonna break loose.

But back to the topic, there ain't no free lunch. "Free health care" is a total myth. Someone is going to pay for it and that's those of us who aren't freeloaders and are, or have worked for a living. Free healthcare for illegal aliens is absolutely stupid. Don't people understand what ILLEGAL means any more? Welfare is stupid! It doesn't encourage people to work, it encourages people to have more dependents so their monthly paycheck goes up. BS - bring back WPA - you need help? That's fine and we're willing to help; do something to EARN what the PEOPLE give you. Pick up trash along the roads, plant trees, work on road crews, DO SOMETHING. Wanna bet you'd see people suddenly finding jobs who "couldn't" before?

I'm sorry for the rant. I really try and not get involved in this crap but sometimes I just can't stop my fingers. It's just so sad to see the idiots "in charge" trying to pull the flush handle - The other problem is; I'd bet you could take the most honest people in the country and replace the current idiots and within 6 months - they'd all be corrupt. It's called greed and everyone today has a bad case of it.

 

[SiempreTuna]

But back to the topic, there ain't no free lunch. "Free health care" is a total myth. Someone is going to pay for it and that's those of us who aren't freeloaders and are, or have worked for a living

I don't think anyone (serious) is talking about "Free" health care. The discussion has been around how to pay for healthcare (I'm sure I've said all this before ).

There are better and worse, fairer and less fair, ways to pay for healthcare.

The current Romney/ObamaCare approach is a right wing solution - remember it was Republican policy right up until the Democrats embraced it - that prioritises minimising government involvment.

If that's your key concern, it ought to be something you support, given that the current approach with even less - though still some - government involvment has failed spectacularly: Americans pay roughly double what people in other advanced economies do for healthcare.

Welfare is stupid!

See if you still feel that if you're ever unfortunate enough to need it

 

[03bluecoupe]

I don't think anyone (serious) is talking about "Free" health care. The discussion has been around how to pay for healthcare (I'm sure I've said all this before ).

There are better and worse, fairer and less fair, ways to pay for healthcare.

The current Romney/ObamaCare approach is a right wing solution - remember it was Republican policy right up until the Democrats embraced it - that prioritises minimising government involvment.

If that's your key concern, it ought to be something you support, given that the current approach with even less - though still some - government involvment has failed spectacularly: Americans pay roughly double what people in other advanced economies do for healthcare.

If I wanted to live in a socialist country, I'd move to Sweden. I do support change in the medical industry but Oslamacare is simply a disaster waiting for somewhere to happen. Plus the fact that with thousands of pages in the writeup I seriously doubt that anyone understands it all. Most of it's probably "pork" of some kind anyhow. Law makers are NOT the appropriate people who should be re-writing the healthcare system, that's for sure.

See if you still feel that if you're ever unfortunate enough to need it

No, I've never needed it. You see I was taught/brought up to realize that there is always something you can do to EARN a living if necessary. Shovel snow, mow lawns, anything. The problem is the "ME ME ME" society that's been slowly created. Everyone wants everything but a lot of people don't think that they should need to do anything for it. As I eluded to earlier, I'm fine with helping people if they need it on a temporary basis but there is enough to do in this country to ensure that they EARN it; pick up trash along the roadways is just an example
as opposed to sitting around drinking, doing drugs, playing on the Xbox 360 on bigscreen tvs with 500 cable channels.

If people need a hand, fine, let them earn it. I bet you'd be amazed how low the unemployment numbers got REAL fast. There are jobs out there, people just think they are too good to do them.

 

[sntaylor]

So I've yet to actually hear a decent reason for why universal health care is such a bad thing. Funded through taxes of course. No insurance premiums required, no excess to be paid prior to treatment and no risk of being told no your not getting cover/ treatment. No fear of how x,y,z are going to be paid for the list goes on about why healthcare system (NHS) in the UK beats the crap outta the current American structure.

My son is only 13 months old and has had to be treated in hospital twice now, currently into his third night, hopefully out tomorrow, the last time he stayed a total of 5 nights between two hospitals, and included transfer between then in a neonatal ambulance (25-30miles). He underwent an operation.

This time he has spent his full stay so far on oxygen, and just this afternoon went through half a big tank that can be transported around (let him go and play for a bit). He has had all meals given to him, TV and round the clock care. My partner has slept on a temporary bed each night right next to him...

How much do you think we have had to pay for us to receive this treatment. How much our insurance is? Deductible/excess? Even the prescription for the inhaler he will get to take home with him? That's right, nothing. All paid for out of my taxes, which really aren't that high when you consider what else we get with it!

The bigger point is the lack of stress and hassle caused, we went to gp Wednesday and she called hospital where we drove straight to. And this could be done as often as needed. I can't imagine having to worry about payments etc. Girl in the bed next to by son has spent months in and out of hospital and will undergo heart surgery at some point.

Basically i just can not get my head around not wanting this kind of system, even if you never use it, chances are someone you know, family or friend will! As will so many other people

 

[03bluecoupe]

You're talking about a totally different system than what Oslama is shoving up our... ok make that down our throats. Unless you're poor, chances are you're like us; our premiums went up, our deductibles went up, and they (the insurance companies) can still say we don't need the tests/treatment that our doctors say we need. Or, you're in the filthy rich class like our "representatives" and have access to whatever health treatment services you want. (Paid for by us peons of course)

 

[sntaylor]

Right, i know it's what you guys don't have, but throughout this thread, three general consensus has been that what we have isn't something you lot would want? I don't understand what is perceived to be so bad about It... Though it does tend to be republicans who don't want it, as it's too socialist an idea.

 

[03bluecoupe]

Well now you're into a socialism vs. capitalism discussion. I'm not "going there" ;-)

I think one of the reasons that there is such a big uproar is that what's going on here really isn't making things any better for the people who are having their bills go up and quality of service decline. Most would probably agree that our healthcare system needs fixing, but that this isn't doing it. There are people however that do think it's a wonderful thing. Illegal aliens, insurance companies, people who just flat don't want to work, et al.

Something including deregulation would probably have been a better starting point but the insurance companies wouldn't like that. And they have both the dems and reps in their pockets and on the payroll so that will never happen.

 

[dibblebill]

Well now you're into a socialism vs. capitalism discussion. I'm not "going there" ;-)

I think one of the reasons that there is such a big uproar is that what's going on here really isn't making things any better for the people who are having their bills go up and quality of service decline. Most would probably agree that our healthcare system needs fixing, but that this isn't doing it. There are people however that do think it's a wonderful thing. Illegal aliens, insurance companies, people who just flat don't want to work, et al.

Something including deregulation would probably have been a better starting point but the insurance companies wouldn't like that. And they have both the dems and reps in their pockets and on the payroll so that will never happen.

Pretty much

 

[03bluecoupe]

To insure the uninsured, we make the insured uninsured. Then we make the formerly insured pay more to become reinsured, so we can insure the uninsured for free.

 

[copestag]

very reassuring

 

[dibblebill]

My fiance has basically been told that if she wants to get any healthcare assistance, she needs to either get pregnant or have an income in a VERY specific range. Since she has no income and nobody will insure her because of that (despite being able to outright buy it), she'll start accruing the penalties. Love this system.

 

[03bluecoupe]

dibblebill; I don't understand, if she has no income she should fit right into BO's pocket - she should get it for free! Oh, wait, she's probably not an illegal alien - bummer

 

[pckarma112]

If you and everyone pay taxes on your guns? Can everyone get a free one? Ridiculous statement, right? So is the comparison you made...

 

[03bluecoupe]

If you and everyone pay taxes on your guns? Can everyone get a free one? Ridiculous statement, right? So is the comparison you made...

To whom are you replying/talking to? It's tough to tell

 

[pckarma112]

If I wanted to live in a socialist country, I'd move to Sweden. I do support change in the medical industry but Oslamacare is simply a disaster waiting for somewhere to happen. Plus the fact that with thousands of pages in the writeup I seriously doubt that anyone understands it all. Most of it's probably "pork" of some kind anyhow. Law makers are NOT the appropriate people who should be re-writing the healthcare system, that's for sure.



No, I've never needed it. You see I was taught/brought up to realize that there is always something you can do to EARN a living if necessary. Shovel snow, mow lawns, anything. The problem is the "ME ME ME" society that's been slowly created. Everyone wants everything but a lot of people don't think that they should need to do anything for it. As I eluded to earlier, I'm fine with helping people if they need it on a temporary basis but there is enough to do in this country to ensure that they EARN it; pick up trash along the roadways is just an example
as opposed to sitting around drinking, doing drugs, playing on the Xbox 360 on bigscreen tvs with 500 cable channels.

If people need a hand, fine, let them earn it. I bet you'd be amazed how low the unemployment numbers got REAL fast. There are jobs out there, people just think they are too good to do them.

May we just get this out of the way. The racism and prejudice is showing here. This is just pure unadulterated hate and arrogance.

 

[03bluecoupe]

May we just get this out of the way. The racism and prejudice is showing here. This is just pure unadulterated hate and arrogance.

Racism? Where in the world in my post did you conjure up that? One heck of a stretch! I'll refrain from commenting further on this so I don't get censored again.

Prejudice? That one may apply. I absolutely despise anyone who is too lazy to get out and put the effort into providing for themselves and their families but would rather lay around all day and suck off of the people. So if you define that as prejudice, then yup - spot on.

 

[dibblebill]

dibblebill; I don't understand, if she has no income she should fit right into BO's pocket - she should get it for free! Oh, wait, she's probably not an illegal alien - bummer

Actually, she's been told a LOT that if she wasn't white, she'd get certain benefits (scholarships, government help, job preference when applying, etc.), or if she were pregnant. It's really stupid.

 

[03bluecoupe]

Actually, she's been told a LOT that if she wasn't white, she'd get certain benefits (scholarships, government help, job preference when applying, etc.), or if she were pregnant. It's really stupid.

Wow, if someone actually said that - that's amazing. Now, if you had that recorded wouldn't that apply as racism?