Universal Health care: What does it mean for us a citizens?
-
Lets take a look at what the health care reform does and the up and downsides of it...
So from what I can tell, there are a few major changes that will be evident to all of us pretty quickly.
Students 26 and under can stay on thier parents health care plan for an additional fee (from my understanding of this, it was 24 previously)
Health insurers can't drop people for getting sick
Creation of a health care exchange to HOPEFULLY increase competitveness in health care options available to people.
If somebody looses thier job and has previously had health benifits, insurance companies can't reject them for pre-existing conditions.
Health insurance becomes mandatory, with annual fines to the government if you do not have it (anybody read about what these fee's are?)
With mandatory heath insurance, is the younger generation going to be subsiziding those with chronic disease and older people?
Alot of the ideas in the health care legistation seem to make sense to me, but the thing that worries me, is what the fuck is going to be done to address the actual cost of the health insurance to the average person? Health insurance is stupid expensive for those of us who need to pay for it by themselves (self employed, etc...), for me to fully support this it would need to include a wide range of cost measures.
I dont know... this is just the ground work and I suspect alot of work will be done in the upcoming years. It seems to me though, that while some of the ideas are good, the health insurance companies and providers are the ones coming out on top, yet again.
Chuck, Thrash? Anybody else willing to discuss this as an issue without just straight obama hating without justification?
-
Here's a breakdown from the AP:
Breaking down the health-care bill
By Associated Press | Monday, March 22, 2010 |Here’s a rundown of the health care overhaul bill approved yesterday:
COST: $940 billion over 10 years.
COVERAGE: 32 million more covered starting in 2014.
MANDATE: Starting in 2014, everyone must have insurance or pay a fine. The poor are eligible for subsidies.
REFORMS: Starting this year, insurers barred from capping lifetime payouts, denying coverage to children because of pre-existing conditions, and canceling policies because someone gets sick. Parents can keep kids on their coverage up to age 26. Insurers can’t deny coverage to people with medical problems or charge them more. Insurers cannot charge women more.
DEALS: “Cornhusker kickback” is out, while “Louisiana purchase” is in.
TAXES: Tax on high-cost insurance plans would be delayed until 2018. Lost revenue made up by a 3.8 percent Medicare payroll tax on investment income and wages of individuals making more than $200,000, or married couples above $250,000.
PRESCRIPTION DRUGS: Gradually closes the “doughnut hole” coverage gap in Medicare for seniors.
EMPLOYERS: Hit with a fee if the government subsidizes their workers’ coverage.
SUBSIDIES: Tax credits for purchasing insurance.
CHOICE: Small businesses, the self-employed and the uninsured could pick a plan offered through new state-based purchasing pools called exchanges, opening for business in 2014. The exchanges would offer the same kind of purchasing power that employees of big companies benefit from. People working for medium-to-large firms would not see major changes. But if they lose their jobs or strike out on their own, they may be eligible for subsidized coverage through the exchange.
PUBLIC OPTION: No government-run insurance plan but people who sign up for state-run exchanges could purchase plans available to members of Congress. Those plans would be private, but one would have to be nonprofit.
ABORTION: In plans that cover abortion, policyholders would have to pay for it separately, and that money would be kept in a separate account from taxpayer money.
GOP INPUT: Increases in payments to primary-care physicians under Medicaid.
-
Jim:
The problem is that we have the greatest health care system in the world, period. Yes it has it's issues but those could have been remedied without a government takeover, and really without a whole pile of money as well.
What needs to be done:
- Tort Reform
Doctors should not be responsible for carrying the level of insurance that is required today. I fully agree that a surgeon who leaves a scissors in someone who dies as a result of the surgery should be responsible for their actions. However, I do not believe that this person should be able to be sued for an unlimited amount of money. Furthermore a general practicing doctor should not be able to be sued for a 'misdiagnoses.' This is why there are second and third opinions available. This simple fix would also cause the numbers of unneeded medical tests to drop dramatically, which in turn would lower insurance premiums, because doctors wouldn't have to worry about having all of their bases covered in the event of a potential problem.
- Purchasing of health insurance across state lines
This is still not covered in Obamacare. These 'exchanges' from my understanding are still state based and not national. If you or I were able to purchase coverage from a national Blue Cross Blue Shield vs. BCBS of ND rates would be dramatically lower.
- Minor adjustments to existing insurance coverage
People need to understand the value of health care. If you go to the doctor for every cough, every ache, every pain, simply because you have insurance and pay a $25 co-pay you'll never realize what the cost of that visit really is. If you've ever gone to the doctor and paid cash you'll realize there is a quite a discount for doing so. By saving the hospital the overhead of doing the paperwork they are able to pass those savings on to you. Crazy how that works!
Now for preexisting conditions; insurers are evaluators of risk. Your payment is hedged against the idea that they will pay out less over the course of you being a customer than you have paid in. This is how they make a profit and why they are in business.
If you are uninsured for extended periods of times (not talking when switching jobs) and are diagnosed with cancer you should be denied health insurance. It is insurance policy, not a 'pay for everything' policy. How is a company supposed to stay in business if all of it's customers are able to only sign up when necessary to have them pay hundreds of thousands of dollars medical bills, for only hundreds of dollars a month?
If you look at this like car insurance, you don't put full coverage on an already totaled vehicle and expect them to fix it, do you?
I do agree that something should happen with preexisting conditions when someone who is working changes jobs. How to fix this other than saying "Use COBRA dummy" I do not know. Maybe requiring employers to provide coverage to employees on day 1 of employment vs day 90 would solve this. There are plenty of people who have been affected due to a lapse in coverage caused by a job change that should not have been. The key is to find a balance between regulation and common sense to make sure that all parties have a system that works well and provides the necessary coverage.
-
One last thing...
NO hospital is going to turn a patient away who cannot pay for their services. If you walk into a hospital ER with a broken leg and up front tell them that you have no way to pay for the service, they are not going to turn you away.
However, I do see the future of private hospitals refusing to accept various forms of insurance based on the amount it will cost them to do so. I fear that this will be cause for the dems to seek more control and lead to a total nationalization of the health care system and a single payer system. It really is pretty scary.
-
I'll be curious to see what happens in the coming months. My current health insurance is one of the ones that is going to get rape-taxed for being too awesome. My employer has a few options
- drop health ins alltogether
- reduce benefits until it is "compliant", shifting costs onto me
- pay the huge fine/tax on continuing to providing awesome benefits
Nobody knows what all of the bill really says. The general dynamics of it have some problems though.
Personally, I think it's both unethical and unconstitutional. I also think that it has a pretty obvious "backdoor" that is designed to destroy private insurance... to setup the "2nd wave" catastrophe that will have voters clammoring for a complete government take over.
The basic deal is this: the bill makes it illegal for underwriters to do their job [assessing risk]. If people don't buy insurance, they get fined and that revenue goes to uncle sam. But the fine is cheaper than buying insurance. And if they do ever get sick, then they can buy in at that point. The ins co cannot deny them and cannot refuse to pay. So the company gets left holding the bag for the big costs, which fucks all of the other people that depended on that company for their doctor bills to get paid. And so the company folds and the feds take your money and my money and bail that company and those people out. And somehow the CEO of each folded insurance compnay won't get murdered because they always have their assets protected and what not, and people will be outraged that they lost their insurance but the CEO still has a house and a boat.
And so in a few years, people will be wanting a full government takeover and the elimination of remaining private insurance, because the government cannot "afford" to keep "bailing out" these companies.
-
I don't like how its going to be mandatory to have insurance by 2014 or pay a fine. My current job has such a shitty deal on insurance that i will be working just for coverage. A second job to pay the rest of the household bills. Correct me if i'm wrong please.
I was reading the opinons in the paper last week a lady used food stamps to buy cigarettes got cash back and then bought a few lottery tickets. THATS where the tax payer money is going. Helping the lazy float through life on our dime. Anyone else read that section?
Understeer is when you hit the wall with the front of the car
Oversteer is when you hit the wall with the rear of the car.
Horsepower is how fast you hit the wall
Torque is how far you take the wall with you -
What it means:
Democrats are going to lose hardcore in midterm elections, and Obama is out after his first term. Republicans will repeal/legislate away most of the crap from this bill. (Hopefully)
There are also several lawyer groups and state Attorney Generals that have been waiting for it to pass so they can bring the Federal Gov. to court over the legality of the bill anyways. The Fed uses the commerce clause to prove the legality of the bill because nowhere in the Constitution does it allow the Feds to FORCE you to buy a service. They use the commerce clause to work their way around the lack of that wording, yet, health insurance cannot be bought across state lines...not very interstate.
-
torbs;303903 wrote:
If around $940B is the down payment, what is the final price going to be, and what is the end goal?This is my fear...
940B is the amount of spending over 10 years, not just a down payment.
You cant hold that 940 accurate... There is no way of really predicting how much this is going to cost.
I personally think congress is being naive about the cost of all of this....
Its just scary. Too much government....
Nothing in life has ever been free, since the dawn of time, health care shouldnt be any different..
Socialists will feed us sob stories all day about the soul who was dropped coverage in the midst of a cancer battle or someone who cant afford it to start, but where do we draw the line? Its a harsh world, there are always going to be horrible things happening.. Do we let our government take car of us and lean on them for our issues as persons??? When we stop pity?
Government is in place to protect us and keep order... We should never look at the government for free hand outs.
I have always been less than opinionated about political affairs that take place on a day-to-day basis, but this bothers me. It will destroy a large amount of power that the people have in this industry. Frankly, its a gateway to a realm of government control... and that simply scares the shit out of me.
Edit: I have heard that the decision by congress has neglected to reflect the will of the people, reason more to fear this thing...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/18/fox-news-poll-oppose-health-care-reform/
http://www.gallup.com/poll/126521/favor-oppose-obama-healthcare-plan.aspxWhy do we as citizens have no say in something so radical. Granted, they are elected officials.. but whats keeping them from listening?
-
-
ruthless351;303909 wrote:
I don't like how its going to be mandatory to have insurance by 2014 or pay a fine. My current job has such a shitty deal on insurance that i will be working just for coverage. A second job to pay the rest of the household bills. Correct me if i'm wrong please.I was reading the opinons in the paper last week a lady used food stamps to buy cigarettes got cash back and then bought a few lottery tickets. THATS where the tax payer money is going. Helping the lazy float through life on our dime. Anyone else read that section?
I'm not a fan of the healthcare reform that passed, however I don't think it is the doom/gloom that the Republicans are making it out to be either.
Basically, by 2014 your employer will have to provide you with a healthcare plan or pay a penalty. I THINK there are provisions on basic coverage that must be included in the insurance they must offer. If they don't, you would be required to purchase your own insurance off of one of the exchanges/private market. If your income is such that you cannot afford a policy, there will be subsidies to help you along.
As for the lady buying cigs w/ her food stamps, I'm not sure how that is possible UNLESS the grocery store/convenience store keyed the cigarettes as food, and even then w/ the EBT system, there shouldn't be any money coming back to her to buy lotto tix. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but if it did, there was a flaw on the part of the store and the individual, the system, though imperfect, has taken numerous measures to ensure that this doesn't happen so long as the retailers are honest.
-
Trafik Jamz;303917 wrote:
I'm not a fan of the healthcare reform that passed,** however I don't think it is the doom/gloom that the Republicans are making it out to be either. **Basically, by 2014 your employer will have to provide you with a healthcare plan or pay a penalty. I THINK there are provisions on basic coverage that must be included in the insurance they must offer. If they don't, you would be required to purchase your own insurance off of one of the exchanges/private market. If your income is such that you cannot afford a policy, there will be subsidies to help you along.
As for the lady buying cigs w/ her food stamps, I'm not sure how that is possible UNLESS the grocery store/convenience store keyed the cigarettes as food, and even then w/ the EBT system, there shouldn't be any money coming back to her to buy lotto tix. I'm not saying it didn't happen, but if it did, there was a flaw on the part of the store and the individual, the system, though imperfect, has taken numerous measures to ensure that this doesn't happen so long as the retailers are honest.
that is the best part in all of this. -
integra_gsr98;303899 wrote:
Jim:The problem is that we have the greatest health care system in the world, period..
really?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login