Obama Care Could Be Deadly

Msut77 said:
So then why do entirely government run systems spend less than us for equal or better outcomes?
Click to expand...
I assume this is directed at me. Problem with your question is that it does not necessarily challenge my point which is prices are going up and have been for years. Other nations see increases as well even though they have "better" run healthcare. In Sweden, I think, they had to implement a few free market policies in early 2000s. Something about making private insurance more competitive and relieving stress of the public system. In France, they have made some cuts including to switching from name brand drugs to generic. And do not forget as I told you this before, France's health care system is in the red and has been for years prior to the 2008 financial crisis. They are facing billions of dollars in deficit.

 
mrsilkunderwear said:
They have been going up because the government keep getting more involved in the healthcare industry. I have already stressed this a few times. So thank you for backing up my point.
Click to expand...
Actually, I'm genuinely curious about this. Could you give a couple examples of government getting more involved with private insurance, causing the prices to rise? (There's about 174 pages of anger and insults I have no desire to dip my toe into)

 
Rasen said:
Actually, I'm genuinely curious about this. Could you give a couple examples of government getting more involved with private insurance, causing the prices to rise? (There's about 174 pages of anger and insults I have no desire to dip my toe into)
Click to expand...
I was talking about the health care industry in general. For example ACA which sets a standard and any private insurance which does not meet the requirements is invalid. Good intentions from Obama (I hope) but obviously creates a problem for many as not everyone needs to meet all these points. Marijuana is another example where it has shown to help many people with pain, depression and etc. For many that is the only way as of this moment which relieves of their problems but the government is of course still outlawing it. I can talk about VA hospitals and treatment, I am pretty sure everyone here knows how it is with them.

 
Just throwing this in there.........the cost will also rise and be tied to supply and demand for medical care.

More people requesting care.....less doctors to provide the care and higher costs because of this.

The American Government is too bloated to run anything effectively (See anything) and the cost will rise because of this.

 
We are in so much debt already, this just seems like a poor time to expand the gov't's responsibilities and control. $4.1 billion of the $10 billion we spend per day to run the gov't is borrowed money. What did the supposedly unbiased CBO report that Obamacare would cost? We seem proper fucked already, I guess we might as well go down in the biggest fire ball possible....

 
Msut77 said:
So then why do entirely government run systems spend less than us for equal or better outcomes?
Click to expand...
Americans live different lifestyles and are less of a homogeneous population than most European "utopias". We are more stressed, more obese, and generally less healthy due to lifestyle, not choice of healthcare system. Socialized healthcare may still be our best option. Can you please post some links that support that socialized healthcare is better? Outcomes, budgetary, etc?

I hear the Repubs offering up very little in the solutions dept. Tax free health savings plans? Great for people that are responsible and smart enough to save. The idiot population will still fail to utilize the program, and will expect everyone else to pay for their care. Drink all you want, smoke all you want, have unprotected sex as much as you want, abuse your health any way you choose; the taxpayer will always be there to pay for your selfish ass. All this "civilized social evolution" will be the end of us..... :dunce:

PS: I only want the gov't to step in and curb private citizen's behaviors only when they voluntarily latch themselves onto the taxpayer's teat. Freedom, coupled with gov't entitlements, is too.......expansive for some people. They never learn from their poor choices because we have removed most of the repercussions. It is funny to see how hard we make it to self destruct in this country.... ;)

 
mrsilkunderwear said:
I was talking about the health care industry in general. For example ACA which sets a standard and any private insurance which does not meet the requirements is invalid. Good intentions from Obama (I hope) but obviously creates a problem for many as not everyone needs to meet all these points. Marijuana is another example where it has shown to help many people with pain, depression and etc. For many that is the only way as of this moment which relieves of their problems but the government is of course still outlawing it. I can talk about VA hospitals and treatment, I am pretty sure everyone here knows how it is with them.
Click to expand...
Ok, but the part I'm curious about is that when someone else posted a graphic of rising insurance premiums from 1999, you said that was because of government meddling. So I'd really like to know of an example of government regulation/policy/or whatever, that is responsible for the rising premium trend from 1999-2009. I doubt it's the ACA, as it did not exist up to that point.

(I'm guessing the graphic posted is actually an old one, because it has projected costs for 2010-2012, which are long past by now.)

 
The gov't requires that all people be treated at hospitals with no regard to their ability to pay. 911 ambulance rides for headaches, colds, jammed toes, etc add up. Expensive tests given just to protect hospitals from lawsuits add costs. The costs are passed on to insurance companies. Premiums rise. It seems pretty socialized already as long as you are on gov't assistance.

 
Rasen said:
Ok, but the part I'm curious about is that when someone else posted a graphic of rising insurance premiums from 1999, you said that was because of government meddling. So I'd really like to know of an example of government regulation/policy/or whatever, that is responsible for the rising premium trend from 1999-2009. I doubt it's the ACA, as it did not exist up to that point.

(I'm guessing the graphic posted is actually an old one, because it has projected costs for 2010-2012, which are long past by now.)
Click to expand...
Ok sure. Simple example about regulations which were passed to require insurers to cover health care services which were routine such as office visits. Low out of pocket costs went down but overall price went up. Its like imagine if law was passed to require all car insurance companies to cover oil changes. Would price go up?

 
I can think of some regulation that increased healthcare costs and it just saved my life a week ago. I've been going back and forth about whether to post this but why not.

Anyway, last Monday I started feeling some pains in my lower abdomen which I figured was just some cramping from having too greasy of a meal. It continued for 2 days to the point that I couldn't even walk more than a few steps. By the time I got to the ER on Wednesday night the pain had gotten so bad that I was almost passing out in the examination room. Nevertheless the question I was dreading came, "Do you have insurance?"

I could have told them how I graduated from law school 6 months ago and still haven't been able to find work yet. I could tell them that for the entire 30+ years of my life I had either been covered by my own health insurance or my parents before that but now I was out of luck in a spot where the only part time work I could find didn't qualify for insurance and the student insurance I had been paying for had run out. Instead I just simply told them no.

You see I expected the doctors and nurses to stop working and figure out the bare minimum they had to do. They didn't, my answer didn't even faze the administrative person in he room gathering my information. He gave me a packet to apply for MN healthcare assistance, finished up, and gave me my wristband. The doctors and nurses never once mentioned insurance after that. They gave me morphine for the pain, brought me for a CT scan, determined I had appendicitis, and I was in surgery less than an hour and a half later.

Surgery went well but after discharging me a day later I was developing complications. I called in to the number they gave me and they told me to come right back in to the ER because they wanted to run more tests. I ended up spending another 5 days in a hospital room as well as getting a second CT scan because I wasn't recovering normally and they wanted to be absolutely sure I was recovering properly before they discharged me again.

They could have flagged me or treated me differently given my lack of insurance but they didn't. The best part? This was a Mayo clinic owned hospital in Rochester, MN. One of the best (and most expensive) healthcare systems in the world.

What's the point of my story? Well it's two fold. The first is that no matter how hard people work or try to make their way in life their gonna hit a pothole. I've been busting my butt to find work and do well in law school but here I am still struggling to get on my feet. The second point I want to make is that it isn't always about money. The doctors and nurses of the hospital never once brought up my insurance status. The only time i even talked about it the entire week I was in the hospital was when I brought it up with the chaplain who came to visit me one of the days I was in. I was never treated differently or lesser than other patients in the hospital.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RedvsBlue said:
I can think of some regulation that increased healthcare costs and it just saved my life a week ago. I've been going back and forth about whether to post this but why not.

Anyway, last Monday I started feeling some pains in my lower abdomen which I figured was just some cramping from having too greasy of a meal. It continued for 2 days to the point that I couldn't even walk more than a few steps. By the time I got to the ER on Wednesday night the pain had gotten so bad that I was almost passing out in the examination room. Nevertheless the question I was dreading came, "Do you have insurance?"

I could have told them how I graduated from law school 6 months ago and still haven't been able to find work yet. I could tell them that for the entire 30+ years of my life I had either been covered by my own health insurance or my parents before that but now I was out of luck in a spot where the only part time work I could find didn't qualify for insurance and the student insurance I had been paying for had run out. Instead I just simply told them no.

You see I expected the doctors and nurses to stop working and figure out the bare minimum they had to do. They didn't, my answer didn't even faze the administrative person in he room gathering my information. He gave me a packet to apply for MN healthcare assistance, finished up, and gave me my wristband. The doctors and nurses never once mentioned insurance after that. They gave me morphine for the pain, brought me for a CT scan, determined I had appendicitis, and I was in surgery less than an hour and a half later.

Surgery went well but after discharging me a day later I was developing complications. I called in to the number they gave me and they told me to come right back in to the ER because they wanted to run more tests. I ended up spending another 5 days in a hospital room as well as getting a second CT scan because I wasn't recovering normally and they wanted to be absolutely sure I was recovering properly before they discharged me again.

They could have flagged me or treated me differently given my lack of insurance but they didn't. The best part? This was a Mayo clinic owned hospital in Rochester, MN. One of the best (and most expensive) healthcare systems in the world.

What's the point of my story? Well it's two fold. The first is that no matter how hard people work or try to make their way in life their gonna hit a pothole. I've been busting my butt to find work and do well in law school but here I am still struggling to get on my feet. The second point I want to make is that it isn't always about money. The doctors and nurses of the hospital never once brought up my insurance status. The only time i even talked about it the entire week I was in the hospital was when I brought it up with the chaplain who came to visit me one of the days I was in. I was never treated differently or lesser than other patients in the hospital.
Click to expand...
Glad you ended up Ok. Everyone has healthcare in the US, not health insurance. What system can we implement that doesn't punish people by making them pay for others? Would single payer, gov't run healthcare require a 52% tax rate like in the Netherlands? Things that bring prices down are innovation, less demand, and competition. Innovation is possible in the field. Unfortunately, with the aging baby boomers, demand will only increase. Competition versus gov't regulation/ rationing to lower prices would be an interesting research project. I think only competition would lead to better customer service and outcomes. In the end, we are left with a segment of the population that is irresponsible, selfish, unlucky, and/or stupid that will expect taxes to pay for their healthcare.(along with other necessities...) Limiting their reproduction is quite logical. Aren't social security and medicare wayyyy over budget? Do we really think that a program as big as healthcare would be run any better?

As far as your situation, they should be able to "write off" a large portion of your bill. The rest can probably be paid off in very small monthly increments. Please share how it is resolved. It will enlighten many of us as to how the process works.

 
egofed said:
Glad you ended up Ok. Everyone has healthcare in the US, not health insurance. What system can we implement that doesn't punish people by making them pay for others? Would single payer, gov't run healthcare require a 52% tax rate like in the Netherlands? Things that bring prices down are innovation, less demand, and competition. Innovation is possible in the field. Unfortunately, with the aging baby boomers, demand will only increase. Competition versus gov't regulation/ rationing to lower prices would be an interesting research project. I think only competition would lead to better customer service and outcomes. In the end, we are left with a segment of the population that is irresponsible, selfish, unlucky, and/or stupid that will expect taxes to pay for their healthcare.(along with other necessities...) Limiting their reproduction is quite logical. Aren't social security and medicare wayyyy over budget? Do we really think that a program as big as healthcare would be run any better?

As far as your situation, they should be able to "write off" a large portion of your bill. The rest can probably be paid off in very small monthly increments. Please share how it is resolved. It will enlighten many of us as to how the process works.
Click to expand...
Thanks.

Everyone has access to emergency healthcare based on the emergency healthcare act. Regular care is where the problem is. The part I forgot to mention in my post is that I spent 2 days trying to figure out what to do. It didn't seem like an emergency issue on Monday or Tuesday. Had I actually had insurance though I would have been able to visit urgent care for a small co-pay and receive some piece of mind. Instead I had to wait until I was facing the most excruciating pain I've ever felt in my life. Worse yet what if my condition worsened faster than I could take any action on it.

Yet this is the exact same situation people are put into every day in this, the supposed most prosperous and greatest nation in the world. We can do better, we need to do better.

The simple fact of the matter is that nearly every other first world nation in this world has made government run healthcare work, why can't we? Why is competition this magic bullet that is supposed to make everything better? In my mind competition leads to nothing except greed, price-gouging/fixing, and significant income disparity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrsilkunderwear said:
Ok sure. Simple example about regulations which were passed to require insurers to cover health care services which were routine such as office visits. Low out of pocket costs went down but overall price went up. Its like imagine if law was passed to require all car insurance companies to cover oil changes. Would price go up?
Click to expand...
That makes sense, but was that actually a regulation? That sounds like the bare minimum of what can even be called health insurance, and in fact those are the plans that disappeared with ACA: plans that basically only covered routine costs.

I will say that egofed's example of required emergency room care makes sense to me, as a reason for why costs go up, but not about why costs kept going up. Unless more and more people were going to the emergency room for care, either because of actual emergencies, or because they don't have health insurance. (and then hospitals, not able to recoup their costs from government reimbursements, start charging the insurance-holding patients more and more)

 
Thanks for that link, I didn't see any data about outcomes though. Americans consume more sugar and carbs than most other populations, hence the diabetes and obesity spikes. I think that we are just more unhealthy as a people, and that drives our costs up. Add in the ability to choose doctors and when to have surgeries, and of course our costs are gonna be greater than places with gov't rationing of healthcare. Are you counting on preventative health check ups to lower costs if we go to socialized care? We can't even get people to use free condoms or take their prescribed meds on a regular basis. We need to make personal accountability for one's own health a priority. Do you have some data about outcomes that you could share? Thanks in advance.

 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/deane-waldman/universal-health-care-sav_b_99885.html

"Bottom line:
Universal health care funded through some form of a single payer-type system could save huge sums of money if and only if:
• The new system is uncharacteristically simple, not overlaid with complexities, extraneous issues and separate agendas;
• We are willing to give pink slips to tens of thousands of US workers;
• We implement an effective national health information sharing system;
• We scrap the present medical negligence tort system and create something that actually works;
• We accept some form of care rationing; and,
• We are prepared for a powerful backlash from numerous special interests.

Central Planning
All countries with universal health care systems use central planning to control costs. They either limit the services offered or the payments to providers or both. Controlling services is effectively rationing health care, such as age limits on kidney dialysis, joint replacements, or open-heart surgery. Are you prepared to have your mother rejected for a life-saving bypass operation or forced into a wheelchair for lack of a hip replacement, because she is over a certain age?

In Japan and Israel, doctors are paid less than auto factory workers. In this country, a pediatrician gets paid less than the man who delivers the Enfamil. If the market determines value, then apparently health care providers have very little value in these countries."

I don't think the US gov't does "downsizing bureaucracy" very well. Keeping out "agendas" would be very difficult also.

I'm all for tort reform. Care rationing does concern me a great deal. Does socialized healthcare charge more to smokers and the obese? I'm all for penalizing people who make selfish, stupid decisions that affect everyone's healthcare costs. I take sore throats to the ER very often. They want to go via ambulance even though there are able bodied adults with vehicles of their own living in the home. The added costs are extreme, yet why should they care when they will not have to pay? They already live in subsidized housing and are living off of welfare and SNAP. No repercussions for selfish, stupid choices....

 
egofed said:
"Bottom line:
Universal health care funded through some form of a single payer-type system could save huge sums of money if and only if:
• The new system is uncharacteristically simple, not overlaid with complexities, extraneous issues and separate agendas;
• We are willing to give pink slips to tens of thousands of US workers;
• We implement an effective national health information sharing system;
• We scrap the present medical negligence tort system and create something that actually works;
• We accept some form of care rationing; and,
• We are prepared for a powerful backlash from numerous special interests.
Click to expand...
Aside from the "Care Rationing" (which is inherent in any system) and, to some extent, the "national health information sharing system" (which I'm okay with to a degree...), every one of those sounds spectacular to me.
 
ego:

None of your links even begin to claim what you are implying they do, I doubt you even read them (or mine).

Also, there is no conceivable system that provides all the care anyone could want I am not engaging the word "rationing". Even an incredibly generous system would not pay for  heart transplant for a 98 year old with terminal cancer.

Remember the previous system and something you support turned down basic medical for people who couldn't afford it and led to tens of thousands of deaths per year.

 
  1. The United Sates (U.S.) has the 3rd largest number of confirmed diabetes cases in the world: 17.9M. Undiagnosed cases add another 5.7M.
    www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-statistics/
  2. 1 in 10 U.S. adults has type 2 diabetes.
    www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2010/r101022.html
  3. 1 in 400 to 600 children and adolescents in U.S. have type 1 diabetes.
    www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-statistics/
  4. 1.6 million new cases of diabetes are diagnosed in the U.S. each year.
    www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-statistics/
  5. The cost of diabetes in the U.S. is $220 billion a year and rising.
    www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-statistics/
  6. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or CDC, projects that if trends continue, 1 in 3 Americans will have diabetes by 2050.
    www.cdc.gov/media/pressrel/2010/r101022.html
  7. UnitedHealth Group projects that half of Americans could have diabetes or prediabetes by 2020, costing $3.35 trillion over the next decade.
    www.unitedhealthgroup.com/newsroom/news.aspx?id=36df663f-f24d-443f-9250-9dfdc97cedc5
Obesity became a global concern as it took the shape of an epidemic in most developed countries. According to the latest OECD report, the obesity epidemic has slowed down in several countries since 2009. However, in the top five countries mentioned here, the disease continues to grow.

The survey projects that women in these countries are more often obese than men, but male obesity rates have surged higher than female rates in most of these countries.

Interestingly, obesity in countries such as Korea (where obesity rates have stabilised at 3-4 percent), Switzerland (7-8 percent), Italy (8-9%), has successfully come to a halt for the past ten years.

1: The United States

So the data showing we are number 1 in obesity and number 3 in diabetes with growing rates doesn't support my hypothesis that we are very unhealthy people versus the world?

The flawed system we had before allowed for citizen's to choose the level of care and coverage that they wanted, as long as they could afford it. A socialized system has the gov't dictating what is covered and allowed, even though they tax for services throughout your life. Someone stated that the solutions to our problems should always be sought by asking, "does this allow more freedom or less freedom?" Unfortunately, we seem to be breeding stupider, more selfish generations by the minute, and they are more than willing to exchange freedom and independence for gov't handouts and control. Maybe most people can't handle true freedom anymore and need a nanny state to instruct and guide them. It just seems like a sad situation to acknowledge.

What tax rate would we have to go to to support a socialized healthcare system? Please go back through my posts and you will see that I acknowledge the weakness of our pre ACA system several times. I also acknowledge that socialized healthcare may be a better option. What I can not agree with is the gov't forcing citizens to buy a product from a private industry like the ACA does. That sets a very dangerous precedent.

I also disagree with you that our old system "turned down basic medical for people who couldn't afford it and led to tens of thousands of deaths per year." Hospitals are required by law to treat life threatening injuries regardless of payment. Please explain in more detail what you meant.

Did you have a chance to find any of that "better outcomes" data yet?
 
egofed said:
I also disagree with you that our old system "turned down basic medical for people who couldn't afford it and led to tens of thousands of deaths per year." Hospitals are required by law to treat life threatening injuries regardless of payment. Please explain in more detail what you meant.
Click to expand...
I believe, and I could be wrong, that when he said the old system, he was referring to the insurance companies, and not the hospitals in particular. Part of the old complaints about them were that if you had a pre-existing condition of some sort, you couldn't get insurance at all.

As for the hospitals:

1. I think it's only hospitals that accept federal money that are required

2. We can die from things other than life-threatening injuries. I don't believe emergency rooms can or will treat cancer, for instance.

Only if you're lucky enough to have insurance before you get diagnosed, and have a good plan, will you be able to get coverage (pre-ACA). Once you get diagnosed, no company would sell you a policy, and unless you also happened to be a millionaire, it's almost a guarantee the cost of treatments would be prohibitive.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
egofed said:
So the data showing we are number 1 in obesity and number 3 in diabetes with growing rates doesn't support my hypothesis that we are very unhealthy people versus the world?
Click to expand...
Math and Logic dont support what you are saying.

1) We have a problem in America with obesity and diabetes 2) We spend 2.5 times the average as OECD countries on healthcare.

Your links arent claiming we have 2.5 times the obesity or diabetes of other countries that spend that much less than us who cover every person.

You are focusing on these things and ignoring (im saying intentionally) outsized administration costs and that many procedures not related to obesity cost so much.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/26/21-graphs-that-show-americas-health-care-prices-are-ludicrous/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/in-rural-kentucky-health-care-debate-takes-back-seat-as-people-sign-up-for-insurance/2013/11/23/449dc6e0-5465-11e3-9e2c-e1d01116fd98_story_1.html

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Last edited by a moderator:
Purple Flames said:
It's amazing what can happen once you work the kinks out. Now let's sit back and wait for the right to puke up more anecdotal evidence that Obamacare is a complete and total failure: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/12/04/more-people-signed-up-for-obamacare-in-the-last-three-days-than-all-of-october/

For the record I'd much prefer single-payer or outright socialized healthcare, but this is a start.
Click to expand...
I guess conservatives that were faking outrage at people not being able to sign up despite that they dont even want people to have to sign up can go back to just complaining that people have to sign up.

I think the bottom line, in a weird bizarro world way, is that the conservatives are in a way correct. ACA will fail - because a private, for profit health insurance system has to fail, therefore ACA will fail. There is no other alternative. Whether it is because single payer in Vermont displaces the current system or because it just outright collapses is irrelevant.

I will be doing my part to sink the system. I've got so many procedures lined up for Jan 1+ that it would make your head spin. Actually having insurance makes me feel like a conservative. I've got mine, so fuck you. It feels kinda good.

 
Some real fuckwads in the Government. I can't see how Liberals can dispute that. I mean you felt this 101 Dalmatians lady was gonna bring in the best of Silicon Valley? fuck no because they're idiots and they are not like us, especially us, frequenters of a gaming message board.

 
My premiums went up $71.76 for 2014. That's a whopping $1.38 a week and 6% increase! Thanks Obummer! :rofl:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh I linked websites (Not Right Sided) which talked about your type of healthcare while you on the other hand only commented. Debate is a two way street, if you can't handle it on your side then kindly escort yourself out. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You showed a country with a working "libretarian" healthcare plan that covered every person?

Must have been a different thread.

 
I showed you that your healthcare in socialist countries does not work. It is in inefficient and creates a huge burden for the people, and the economy. Many people actually suffer within this type of system. Now try to actually debunk the things I have been saying over and over again instead of leaving stupid little comments. They just make you look thick. 

 
I dont know if you actually believe what you are typing.

These "socialist countries" have healthcare systems that spend less than us to cover everyone.

They are more efficient and they spend less overall.

If this is what you think you have been "arguing" all this time then I see the problem.

BTW I considering this moving the goalposts, because it went from "I have an awesome plan" to "socialism sucks" with no thought in between.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You do realize we had this exact conversation before. Yes they spend less, yet it does not mean they are efficient in general even though they might be "better" than what we have today. Why do you keep stating this over and over again just baffles me. Try actually arguing why this system will be the best possible approach when it comes to dealing with healthcare.

Frankly I used to be a socialist and now realize its a great system on paper only. In reality, it is shit. 

 
Define terms? Yeah your gonna need to explain to me what you mean by that.

I am pretty sure I have linked several sources before and maybe they just werent targeted at you so here you go. 

France:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB124958049241511735

Obamacare:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/26/obamacare-medical-claims-costs_n_2956986.html

Sweden:

http://www.thelocal.se/20131204/swedens-health-system-worst-in-the-nordics

Germany:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-06/merkel-raises-german-health-premiums-to-15-5-of-gross-pay-to-plug-deficit.html

Less than 2 minutes of googling. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top