Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) ruled constitutional - strong reactions abound

[Greenday]

I cannot combine these two statements of yours as being anything other than contradictory. One says you're for a system where you think there's an ideal situation, and yet that actually goes against what you say now.

I am confused.

Rapscallion

Well, we aren't getting universal health care. We are getting "Some people get health care without paying for it, some get health care and pay for it, and some pay for it but don't get it." That doesn't fly with me. Nor is that really "universal" health care.

[Duelist925]

Well, we aren't getting universal health care. We are getting "Some people get health care without paying for it, some get health care and pay for it, and some pay for it but don't get it." That doesn't fly with me. Nor is that really "universal" health care.

Except thats not the case. Thats what we had. We had a system where insurance companies could screw the customer over, and often did, vigorously, with sandpaper condoms.

We are getting a system wherein everyone must purchase health insurance in some way (with provisions that help keep the insurance companies from donning said sandpaper condoms to begin with) and those who do not, and are able to, will pay a fine/penalty/tax/whatever. Which they should, to help cover the cost when they eventually DO get sick.

Seriously, where did you get "Some people get it without paying, some pay and dont get it, some pay and get it" from?

[Greenday]

Except thats not the case. Thats what we had. We had a system where insurance companies could screw the customer over, and often did, vigorously, with sandpaper condoms.

We are getting a system wherein everyone must purchase health insurance in some way (with provisions that help keep the insurance companies from donning said sandpaper condoms to begin with) and those who do not, and are able to, will pay a fine/penalty/tax/whatever. Which they should, to help cover the cost when they eventually DO get sick.

Seriously, where did you get "Some people get it without paying, some pay and dont get it, some pay and get it" from?

Health insurance companies aren't changing anything. We are still going to overpay and still get crap service.

Where did I get it? Well, this act means that poor people will get free health care. If you can't afford it, the government just gives it to you. That leaves the people who "can" afford it. So either you purchase health insurance and then you are insured. Or you don't purchase it, pay anyway, and still don't receive health insurance.

[Crazedclerkthe2nd]

Health insurance companies aren't changing anything. We are still going to overpay and still get crap service.

Where did I get it? Well, this act means that poor people will get free health care. If you can't afford it, the government just gives it to you. That leaves the people who "can" afford it. So either you purchase health insurance and then you are insured. Or you don't purchase it, pay anyway, and still don't receive health insurance.

I think that is a gross oversimplification. Yes, you can get care at an ER without having insurance and, in some cases, if you are poor enough you can qualify for state medicaid but it's not like anyone who is poor just gets awesome free health care courtesy of the U.S. government.

[Rapscallion]

Well, this act means that poor people will get free health care.

A tragedy in and of itself, right? No money? Go and suffer! Die younger and don't take your pension from those hardworking corporations who won't make enough profits this year from your lower life expectancy. Boohoo and sob and all that.

Rapscallion

[Andara Bledin]

The main argument against universal health care is being able to spend our own money the way we want. I earned my money so why does someone else get to spend it the way they want?

This is exceedingly short-sighted and quite naive.

You don't get to keep everything you earn because you are part of a society. If you don't like that, you really need to go be a hermit in some third world nation. After a while, I'm sure you'll figure out that you get a lot more out of modern civilization than you give up.

Also, the cost of caring for people who need emergency service because they don't have any preventive care costs a lot more than just taking care of them at the early stages of pretty much any issue.

Anecdote time!
My boss had breast cancer. Since she has health care, she had regular checkups. During a regular checkup, they found something. It was cancerous. So she had surgery and radiation treatment, and today she's fully healthy.

My old boss, who had health care also had cancer. But he didn't go in for regular checkups (the situation forced on those without insurance) and by the time he actually did get it looked at, it was too late. He was in stage 3 and heading quickly to stage 4. We lost him less than 2 years later. If the current boss was not in a position to buy and take over the company, fourty people would have lost their jobs.

There are hundreds of small businesses that are exactly one medical emergency away from disappearing and the entire community loses.

We don't live in vacuums, and our health affects a lot more than just our immediate circle of family and friends.

^-.-^

[Duelist925]

Health insurance companies aren't changing anything. We are still going to overpay and still get crap service.

Where did I get it? Well, this act means that poor people will get free health care. If you can't afford it, the government just gives it to you. That leaves the people who "can" afford it. So either you purchase health insurance and then you are insured. Or you don't purchase it, pay anyway, and still don't receive health insurance.

health care companies are changing--there are laws within obamacare that force them to use the majority of money given to them on actual health care, rather than lining golden parachutes, as well as making it easier to call them out on actual dickery, as well as outlining what constitutes "dickery".

And...where did you get THAT info? Please, cite your sources dude.

For starters, to be poor enough that the "not buying health insurance" fee kicks in, you have to make a rediculously low amount of money. Are you honestly bitching that people making THAT little aren't going to be hit by more taxes?



Here, read.

Or here

[AdminAssistant]

Die younger and don't take your pension from those hardworking corporations who won't make enough profits this year from your lower life expectancy. Boohoo and sob and all that.

"If they had rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population!"

[HYHYBT]

Letting someone die with no treatment at all is horrible, but it's cheaper than trying to cure something like cancer.

Cheaper is not always better.

A cartoon I saved a while back that's buried somewhere deep in my hard drive comes to mind. I don't remember whether it was Bizarro or Pardon My Planet, but it's an exam room scene, and the doctor says "Good news! Your insurance company says they'll cover you. Unfortunately, they also say it will be with dirt."

[Panacea]

This is fascinating. It truly is.

From what I've gathered from watching all of this from afar is that Obama went down the route of forcing people to purchase health insurance as a promotional tool - how could the right wingers protest if corporations were having income thrust upon them?

The insurance mandate is actually a REPUBLICAN idea. It was first introduced to counter Hilary Clinton's health care reform ideas when Bill was President. The mandate was the GOP tool to stop Hilary cold, and it worked.

When Massachusetts introduced health care reform, the mandate was included. The PPACA is modeled on the Mass. bill, and uses a lot of Romney's arguments from the time.

The GOP may as well run campaign ads that read, "We're not willing to let you get health care until we get this guy out."

That's essentially it. Even hard core conservatives understand we need to reform health care in this country. It currently takes up about 16% of the GDP, and was on track to hit 20% in a few years until the PPACA provisions started being implemented. This year, for the first time ever, that increase halted.

When Obama made health care reform his signature issue, the GOP gleefully latched on to it, anticipating a repeat of what happened with Clinton. One of them made the bold proclamation, "This will be his Waterloo." It was never about the law. It was always about preventing Obama from achieving anything. Republicans are genuinely afraid of him because he's smart and is able to engage the American people.

I've seen economic arguments brought up. How many think that having a less-ill population will harm the economy more than it assists it? How many businesses are forced to make less profit when their employees are missing work?

Rapscallion

It always astounds local conservatives when I say this, but I'm actually a fiscal conservative (and a social liberal). Modern economics are too closely intertwined between the private and public sectors to ignore the widespread repercussions our skyrocketing health care inflation. 80% of all medical bankruptcies are actually occurring to people WITH insurance. The nation cannot sustain this. In order to stabilize our economy we have to do something about public health.

If that means supplying free health care to a handful of people, so be it. I can live with that small cost given that the majority of people will pay their fair share.

The main argument against universal health care is being able to spend our own money the way we want. I earned my money so why does someone else get to spend it the way they want?

I cannot combine these two statements of yours as being anything other than contradictory. One says you're for a system where you think there's an ideal situation, and yet that actually goes against what you say now.

I am confused.

Rapscallion

I don't think Greenday is saying he actually agrees with that argument, at least not entirely, not if I understand his other posts correctly.

However, his assessment is correct. It's very childish really; "I've got mine, to hell with you," is the basic response . . . from the same people who loudly (and incorrectly) proclaim that Christianity is the basis of American law.

Seriously, where did you get "Some people get it without paying, some pay and dont get it, some pay and get it" from?

Oh, I agree with Greenday. He's right. Some people DO get it without paying. I see this all the time with some of the Medicaid bottom feeders (the jackasses who complain about a $5 co pay or that they can't afford Children's Tylenol while reeking of cigarettes. Or the illegals who borrow the Medicaid cards of legal residents, "Oh, that's my work name." Riiight.

Some who need it, but don't qualify for programs and don't have access to insurance die because they don't seek care until it is too late. I see that all the time.

Those who are able to pay, pay out the nose. Americans pay more for their health care, and get lower quality of care, than Europeans do with their single payer systems.

It's stupid.

but it's an exam room scene, and the doctor says "Good news! Your insurance company says they'll cover you. Unfortunately, they also say it will be with dirt."

I like it. I'll have to steal it.

[Duelist925]

*snip*
Oh, I agree with Greenday. He's right. Some people DO get it without paying. I see this all the time with some of the Medicaid bottom feeders (the jackasses who complain about a $5 co pay or that they can't afford Children's Tylenol while reeking of cigarettes. Or the illegals who borrow the Medicaid cards of legal residents, "Oh, that's my work name." Riiight.

Some who need it, but don't qualify for programs and don't have access to insurance die because they don't seek care until it is too late. I see that all the time.

Those who are able to pay, pay out the nose. Americans pay more for their health care, and get lower quality of care, than Europeans do with their single payer systems.

It's stupid.

Oh, I completely agree with you--there are bottom feeders who abuse the system, there are people who need aid and don't get it, and there are people who pay through the nose. and the american health care system severely needs an overhaul.

I just don't see how Obamacare will create more of this kind of thing (people abusing the system, etc)--which is what I'm fairly sure Greenday was saying.

Not saying it doesn't happen--just saying it's wrong to say that Obamacare will make such a situation worse.

[Racket_Man]

Try being someone like me:
I work at a job that is not the best paying in the world
I am over 50
I DO have problems that I have not been able to address in the last 10 years or so mainly because I can not afford the rising cost of even the basic good coverage health/medical insurance (company offered or private insurance).

I make enough in annuola salary to NOT qualify for my states Medicaid program even if there is a premimum and I have a little too much in assets (can not have things like a retirement account or savings)


I work at a job that does, however, offer "health" insurance @ $1300 per year in premimums with some "restrictions":
1. 2 or 3 doctor visits a year capped at $75 per visit. the rest is out of pocket
2. a couple of "allowed" lab tests per year. the rest out of pocket.
3. no ER coverage so all out of pocket if say I break my arm
4. no drug coverage
5. no surgery coverage
6. no wellness ocverage
7. no annual physical converage
8. no women's specific comverage
9. no big "ticket" item coverage like MRI/CAT/cancer tests

I opted not to get this "coverage" becasue is was basically worthless as I would have to pay out of pocket for most medical expenses.

two cases in point:

I finally finished (about 7 months ago) paying off an ER visit (I detailed that situation in a previous post some months ago) that all told cost me around $5000. NOW if I had opted to get my company's health coverage my bill STILL would have been $5000 and that would have still come out of my pocket.

My GF who did opt in to this "coverage" had this happen every year for the last how ever many years:

GF goes to the doctor for annual checkup. office does some bloodwork and other test to check to make sure the hypertention drugs she is taking are not doing her any damage.

office submits paperwork to the insurer. insurer pays office paltry sum as per the policy. GF is out-of-pocket for $700 - $800 for ONE SINGLE VISIT NOT including $50 or $60 per month for the drugs she need to take.

This woman is/was not a moucher or a leach off of the government and niether am I. she worked (sometimes 2 jobs) for the last 28 years until something else happened (degenerative brain disease) that forced her out of the workforce.

[Panacea]

Jester, I'm confident that in 18 months when the exchanges start taking effect, that you will be able to find affordable coverage that actually covers you. I expect it to cost you around $400/month without the subsidy (don't know if you'll qualify, but you may) since you are single.

Florida won't have an exchange; Scott Walker (who perpetrated the greatest fraud on Medicare in US History when he ran HCA) has publicly said there will be no exchange in Florida that is state run. But the Feds will step in and start one.

Oh, I completely agree with you--there are bottom feeders who abuse the system, there are people who need aid and don't get it, and there are people who pay through the nose. and the american health care system severely needs an overhaul.

I just don't see how Obamacare will create more of this kind of thing (people abusing the system, etc)--which is what I'm fairly sure Greenday was saying.

Not saying it doesn't happen--just saying it's wrong to say that Obamacare will make such a situation worse.

The abuse to the system will come from people who refuse to buy insurance until they get sick. Which is what the penalties are intended to prevent. The penalties are actually too low to cover the costs such people put on the system.

The PPACA is not a perfect law. It is primarily insurance reform, even though there are health care reforms within the law. Specifically, the emphasis on preventative and primary care, and the change in focus from interventional care (ie care only when you get sick) to prevention in reimbursement and the focus on evidence based care and outcomes in reimbursements.

[bara]

Im really hoping this opens up avenues of health care for me. Ive been without since I got out of the Army since the premiums were just way to expensive for me. Not to mention the trend of premiums going up and benefits going down.

My options for insurance also mimicked Rackets, in that it covered very little. Luckily, Ive been healthy, but a 10,000 emergency room would have cost me 10,000.

[bex1218]

I am actually thankful I have insurance through my parents even though I don't talk to them. Before I had to pay for mine and it screwed me over many times. So expensive... I hope some other good will come out of it.