So you thought Obamacare will give you insurance well guess again

Why don't you blame the REPUBLICAN governor of your state instead.   Instead of hating gays, passing stupid religious laws, and giving tax breaks to the rich, maybe they would spend more time working FOR the WELFARE of EVERYONE in the state

 
Finger_Shocker said:
Why don't you blame the REPUBLICAN governor of your state instead. Instead of hating gays, passing stupid religious laws, and giving tax breaks to the rich, maybe they would spend more time working FOR the WELFARE of EVERYONE in the state
Click to expand...
lol more welfare maybe instead how about getting them OFF and making them find jobs instead of sitting on their asses.

 
slidecage said:
lol more welfare maybe instead how about getting them OFF and making them find jobs instead of sitting on their asses.
Click to expand...
:shock:

If-Youre_TPBO.jpg


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E73IQx21DEo

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well that would mean if you GET OF YOUR ASS and WORK MORE AND HARDER, you could pay for the cost of your health insurance instead of bitching about Obama right?

Are you going to blame Obama for rising cost insurance prices, how about the continual rise of food and rent.

I bet its Obama fault too that bread is no longer 10cents like it was in the 30's too

Plane tickets used to cost under 100 bucks, I bet its Obama fault too for the yearly rise in flight cost as well.

Maybe if America isn't full of stupid uneducated people, stupid immigration policies, not allowing monopolization of the drugs/health care/ industries  we would have more doctors and health professionals, which actually will lower costs. 

We have a gov't who don't even care about funding to stop diseases like Zika, Ebola, Drug-resistant bacteria, all that affects health cost.  Once you are sick it cost more to resolve than if there is preventive measures already in place

 
Finger_Shocker said:
Well that would mean if you GET OF YOUR ASS and WORK MORE AND HARDER, you could pay for the cost of your health insurance instead of bitching about Obama right?

Are you going to blame Obama for rising cost insurance prices, how about the continual rise of food and rent.

I bet its Obama fault too that bread is no longer 10cents like it was in the 30's too

Plane tickets used to cost under 100 bucks, I bet its Obama fault too for the yearly rise in flight cost as well.

Maybe if America isn't full of stupid uneducated people, stupid immigration policies, not allowing monopolization of the drugs/health care/ industries we would have more doctors and health professionals, which actually will lower costs.

We have a gov't who don't even care about funding to stop diseases like Zika, Ebola, Drug-resistant bacteria, all that affects health cost. Once you are sick it cost more to resolve than if there is preventive measures already in place
Click to expand...
obama wants to take credit for everything else so might as well give them credit for this. He told people its FREE and people think its free cause they are not paying their monthly bills (look at how much insurance companies have lost since taking these people)

also is the fault of any person who allowed this fucking insurance companies to merge

why the fuck should i work harder when the people who sit on their asses are given more free stuff. That is why another war civil war is civil war is coming laugh all you want but in the next 100 years or less you will see this nation split

 
slidecage said:
why the fuck should i work harder when the people who sit on their asses are given more free stuff. That is why another war civil war is civil war is coming laugh all you want but in the next 100 years or less you will see this nation split
Click to expand...
Practice what you preach

Lead by example

This is the reason why America is a failure of a nation and will fail, the gov't is great at punishing people but fail to hold itself accountable.

 
So ehh...his poorly worded, rambling post is at least rooted in reality.  We were told all along that those dirty, miserable, uninsured people were driving up healthcare costs by going to the emergency room and never paying their bills, and if only they were insured, then we could start driving down healthcare costs. In a vacuum, that might work.  The problem is that nobody is going to offer their money as the pool to take away from.  So healthcare providers are more likely to get paid.  You think they'll respond by dropping rates for services?  Of course not.  At least in Oregon, many of the large providers hate working with the government insurance programs, and have banned new Medicare/caid customers and Oregon Health Plan families because the process is so undesirable. 

Well, then maybe the health insurance companies will lower their premiums because they have been handed millions of new customers, while losing some of their restrictions of pre-existing conditions and insurance caps?  That's been completely disproven, with states across the country reporting that the insurance companies operating out of their states are submitting premium increases of 20+ percent. So they haven't elected to take less money (not to mention the clause in the ACA that was supposed to grant them government money if they found a way to lose money - so as a business, they literally cannot lose money.  Surely lobbyists weren't involved in this altruistic legislation). 

Then lastly, the consumers...us.  Are we willing to pay a bunch more in health costs and premiums to close the gap on increasing healthcare costs?  Well...guess what...we don't have a choice, so there's the answer. We no longer need to pay higher rates and costs because those terrible uninsured wretches...we need to pay it because they have insurance now from the government.  

So at least in my household, the Affordable Care Act has made healthcare less affordable for my family, and it appears that unless you're eligible for free healthcare, your costs have gone up too. 

 
berzirk said:
So ehh...his poorly worded, rambling post is at least rooted in reality. We were told all along that those dirty, miserable, uninsured people were driving up healthcare costs by going to the emergency room and never paying their bills, and if only they were insured, then we could start driving down healthcare costs. In a vacuum, that might work. The problem is that nobody is going to offer their money as the pool to take away from. So healthcare providers are more likely to get paid. You think they'll respond by dropping rates for services? Of course not. At least in Oregon, many of the large providers hate working with the government insurance programs, and have banned new Medicare/caid customers and Oregon Health Plan families because the process is so undesirable.

Well, then maybe the health insurance companies will lower their premiums because they have been handed millions of new customers, while losing some of their restrictions of pre-existing conditions and insurance caps? That's been completely disproven, with states across the country reporting that the insurance companies operating out of their states are submitting premium increases of 20+ percent. So they haven't elected to take less money (not to mention the clause in the ACA that was supposed to grant them government money if they found a way to lose money - so as a business, they literally cannot lose money. Surely lobbyists weren't involved in this altruistic legislation).

Then lastly, the consumers...us. Are we willing to pay a bunch more in health costs and premiums to close the gap on increasing healthcare costs? Well...guess what...we don't have a choice, so there's the answer. We no longer need to pay higher rates and costs because those terrible uninsured wretches...we need to pay it because they have insurance now from the government.

So at least in my household, the Affordable Care Act has made healthcare less affordable for my family, and it appears that unless you're eligible for free healthcare, your costs have gone up too.
Click to expand...
also the insurance companies are lairs.. My mother has insurance though her work Right on the card it says

IN NETWORK.... 1000 Dec. max out of pocket 2000..

about a month ago she was thowing up all day every 2 hours and then at night she started throwing up every hour so we took them to the ER (got to love the people in the ER, 2 people were they cause they had colds another person was there cause their foot did not feel right , like they really paid the 5000 bucks it cost to be in there) Well after sitting in the er for 5 hours they come back and said she had the flu and sent us home.. She goes to work monday and is sick but works, She goes to work tuesday and passes out and starts throwing up again so back to the er she goes and find out she has kindey stones and maybe a blockage... total bill was like 3000 bucks after insurance If you had none the bill was like 18,000 (like i said like these people who are going in with a cold paid it) Well we call up the insurance company to see what is going on since MAX out of pocket was 2000, They go O we up that to 5000 but we did not want to make up new cards WTF

Also when i signed up for my insurance they got my DEC is 2000 and max is 7500.. I call them up after getting sick and now are told my dec is 1200 and my max is 5000. Everytime i call them up asking a question they say i need to get a referal to see a doctor (what i dont)

it just shows you how fucking stupid these people are

i been told to go to HIP here in the state but good luck finding any doctors that will accept it that is why im going to the doctor to get my knee. leg back shoulder and heart taken care of this year Before im forced to move to hip next year

also this does not add up they told me to stay away from MDWISE cause its nothing but medicade? Yet the amount is the same 415 a month for it>

i found my old bills

2013 my health was 250 a month

2014 it jumped to 320

2015 it jumped to 400

if i stayed it it would of been 460

that is doubled within 3 years

 
Last edited by a moderator:
slidecage said:
also the insurance companies are lairs.. My mother has insurance though her work Right on the card it says

IN NETWORK.... 1000 Dec. max out of pocket 2000..

about a month ago she was thowing up all day every 2 hours and then at night she started throwing up every hour so we took them to the ER (got to love the people in the ER, 2 people were they cause they had colds another person was there cause their foot did not feel right , like they really paid the 5000 bucks it cost to be in there) Well after sitting in the er for 5 hours they come back and said she had the flu and sent us home.. She goes to work monday and is sick but works, She goes to work tuesday and passes out and starts throwing up again so back to the er she goes and find out she has kindey stones and maybe a blockage... total bill was like 3000 bucks after insurance If you had none the bill was like 18,000 (like i said like these people who are going in with a cold paid it) Well we call up the insurance company to see what is going on since MAX out of pocket was 2000, They go O we up that to 5000 but we did not want to make up new cards WTF

Also when i signed up for my insurance they got my DEC is 2000 and max is 7500.. I call them up after getting sick and now are told my dec is 1200 and my max is 5000. Everytime i call them up asking a question they say i need to get a referal to see a doctor (what i dont)

it just shows you how fucking stupid these people are

i been told to go to HIP here in the state but good luck finding any doctors that will accept it that is why im going to the doctor to get my knee. leg back shoulder and heart taken care of this year Before im forced to move to hip next year

also this does not add up they told me to stay away from MDWISE cause its nothing but medicade? Yet the amount is the same 415 a month for it>

i found my old bills

2013 my health was 250 a month

2014 it jumped to 320

2015 it jumped to 400

if i stayed it it would of been 460

that is doubled within 3 years
Click to expand...
$10 says that you don't read any of the insurance documents that you get in the mail outside of pre-estimates and hospital bills.

berzirk said:
So ehh...his poorly worded, rambling post is at least rooted in reality. We were told all along that those dirty, miserable, uninsured people were driving up healthcare costs by going to the emergency room and never paying their bills, and if only they were insured, then we could start driving down healthcare costs. In a vacuum, that might work. The problem is that nobody is going to offer their money as the pool to take away from. So healthcare providers are more likely to get paid. You think they'll respond by dropping rates for services? Of course not. At least in Oregon, many of the large providers hate working with the government insurance programs, and have banned new Medicare/caid customers and Oregon Health Plan families because the process is so undesirable.

Well, then maybe the health insurance companies will lower their premiums because they have been handed millions of new customers, while losing some of their restrictions of pre-existing conditions and insurance caps? That's been completely disproven, with states across the country reporting that the insurance companies operating out of their states are submitting premium increases of 20+ percent. So they haven't elected to take less money (not to mention the clause in the ACA that was supposed to grant them government money if they found a way to lose money - so as a business, they literally cannot lose money. Surely lobbyists weren't involved in this altruistic legislation).

Then lastly, the consumers...us. Are we willing to pay a bunch more in health costs and premiums to close the gap on increasing healthcare costs? Well...guess what...we don't have a choice, so there's the answer. We no longer need to pay higher rates and costs because those terrible uninsured wretches...we need to pay it because they have insurance now from the government.

So at least in my household, the Affordable Care Act has made healthcare less affordable for my family, and it appears that unless you're eligible for free healthcare, your costs have gone up too.
Click to expand...
The problem is that states with these crazy increases tend to have healthcare systems that are run like shit. Why's that? Because the states are the ones that run the exchanges.

Even then, 99.99% of people have no idea how much insurance used to cost, especially if you got in on a group policy-rate through the employer. At $250 a month, slidecage has a high deductible disaster policy that covered maybe half of what's being covered now. His current plan as an individual would've cost at least twice as much as it currently does if it weren't for PPACA.

What PPACA does is put everyone into a group policy-rate. My insurance cost me about $60 a month, but it costs my employer about $600, which is a decent plan. A Cadillac Plan would cost maybe $700. On the MA state exchange, a similar plan costs about the same. Sure, it's a shit ton of money, but like I said, a vast majority of people are completely ignorant to how much insurance actually costs and for those that were unable to get on a group policy prior to PPACA, it provides massive savings...unless of course you're slidecage and paid $250 a month only to enjoy a $10k deductible with barely any coverage.

It's the same shit with cellphones and car repairs...drives me fucking batty.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dohdough said:
$10 says that you don't read any of the insurance documents that you get in the mail outside of pre-estimates and hospital bills.
Click to expand...
$10 says he can't even read.

There's a good chance he's just smashing his face into the keyboard to respond to people, and random words are coming out as a result of it.

Would explain a lot actually, now that I think about it...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
And 10 years ago was better regarding health insurance? The only reason Obamacare exists is because of the colossal fuck up that happened beforehand, people went bankrupt trying to get heart surgery or cancer treatments, and if you could afford it but shown to have one of a long list of diseases like a yeast infection, you're sol.  People are complaining now because they're not the same young invincible bucks they were in 2006, Insurance IS expensive, and if people actually gave a crap we'd have something better than this barely of an improvement ACA. Nope, we're wasting our tax monies on a bunch of overgrown children in Washington who promise to repeal Obamacare over and over and over, instead of providing real solutions.

 
It would be wonderful to get to the bottom of why medical procedures cost so much more in the US than anywhere else, but that's damaging to both Republicans AND Democrats, and they can't hide behind their lobbyists.  In summary, the government inflates medical costs by requiring that Medicare/caid cannot be charged a higher rate than anyone else, even though they are shitty to work with, so they have set the price floor. There (to my knowlege) is no price ceiling, so you have these various not-for-profit (HA!) insurance companies working with the not-for-profit (HAAAA!) clinics on figuring out how much a person should have to spend out of pocket. 

And on the topic of reading insurance forms, claims, and "This is Not a Bill, This is Not a Bill, THIS ONE IS A BILL" forms, I'm moderately well educated, fairly old, and have a fundamental understanding of the process, and I find medical bills and insurance statements horribly confusing, misleading, and a pain in the ass to decipher. Asking for a detailed bill after a medical procedure (pregnancy) is about as offensive to clinics, as fisting the Pope would be to Catholics.  Reading through that shit and seeing that an extra-strength Advil is $10 a pill in the post-partum room?  You'll learn the true meaning of rage.

 
dohdough said:
$10 says that you don't read any of the insurance documents that you get in the mail outside of pre-estimates and hospital bills.

The problem is that states with these crazy increases tend to have healthcare systems that are run like shit. Why's that? Because the states are the ones that run the exchanges.

Even then, 99.99% of people have no idea how much insurance used to cost, especially if you got in on a group policy-rate through the employer. At $250 a month, slidecage has a high deductible disaster policy that covered maybe half of what's being covered now. His current plan as an individual would've cost at least twice as much as it currently does if it weren't for PPACA.

What PPACA does is put everyone into a group policy-rate. My insurance cost me about $60 a month, but it costs my employer about $600, which is a decent plan. A Cadillac Plan would cost maybe $700. On the MA state exchange, a similar plan costs about the same. Sure, it's a shit ton of money, but like I said, a vast majority of people are completely ignorant to how much insurance actually costs and for those that were unable to get on a group policy prior to PPACA, it provides massive savings...unless of course you're slidecage and paid $250 a month only to enjoy a $10k deductible with barely any coverage.

It's the same shit with cellphones and car repairs...drives me fucking batty.
Click to expand...
Ummmm shows you have no clue what your talking about ONE the 250 a month was a single person plan (my job never offered health insurance) My De. was 1500 and 3000 Out of pocket and COVERED everything ... it was the same 1500 and 3000 out of pocket and it went up to the 400 per month 3 years later (that is with not seeing the doctor at all in those 3 years)

the insurance i have now though the marketplace Im paying the same 400 a month.. DE is 1200 out of pocket is 5000 or so and covers a lot lot less (no x rays until i pay the first 1200,... no lab test until i pay the 1200... no rehab until i pay the 1200) ect

i get 0 tax credit per month

so im payin the same for less covarge

 
Last edited by a moderator:
berzirk said:
It would be wonderful to get to the bottom of why medical procedures cost so much more in the US than anywhere else, but that's damaging to both Republicans AND Democrats, and they can't hide behind their lobbyists. In summary, the government inflates medical costs by requiring that Medicare/caid cannot be charged a higher rate than anyone else, even though they are shitty to work with, so they have set the price floor. There (to my knowlege) is no price ceiling, so you have these various not-for-profit (HA!) insurance companies working with the not-for-profit (HAAAA!) clinics on figuring out how much a person should have to spend out of pocket.

And on the topic of reading insurance forms, claims, and "This is Not a Bill, This is Not a Bill, THIS ONE IS A BILL" forms, I'm moderately well educated, fairly old, and have a fundamental understanding of the process, and I find medical bills and insurance statements horribly confusing, misleading, and a pain in the ass to decipher. Asking for a detailed bill after a medical procedure (pregnancy) is about as offensive to clinics, as fisting the Pope would be to Catholics. Reading through that shit and seeing that an extra-strength Advil is $10 a pill in the post-partum room? You'll learn the true meaning of rage.
Click to expand...
why it cost so much cause people have colds and runs to the ER runs up 5000 bucks and goes Im not paying for it they said it was free. Was talking to the doctor when was waiting for my mother to come back from her test and they said over 40% of the people they see in the ER never pay their bills that is why it cost so much. Now if this is true i have no clue.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think slidecage is starting to overheat, and burn out.

His text is starting to randomly change sizes within the same post.

Capitalizations seems to be optional.

Single spaces between words in a sentence just aren't enough anymore.

Appears to have parrot syndrome, and starting to repeat himself over and over again.

Coherency is at an all time low, even for slidecage standards.

Total meltdown is imminent, people.  RUN!

 
berzirk said:
It would be wonderful to get to the bottom of why medical procedures cost so much more in the US than anywhere else, but that's damaging to both Republicans AND Democrats, and they can't hide behind their lobbyists. In summary, the government inflates medical costs by requiring that Medicare/caid cannot be charged a higher rate than anyone else, even though they are shitty to work with, so they have set the price floor. There (to my knowlege) is no price ceiling, so you have these various not-for-profit (HA!) insurance companies working with the not-for-profit (HAAAA!) clinics on figuring out how much a person should have to spend out of pocket.
Click to expand...
Just remember folks, just because it's not-for-profit doesn't mean the CEO and top execs aren't making a fat payday...
 
RedvsBlue said:
Just remember folks, just because it's not-for-profit doesn't mean the CEO and top execs aren't making a fat payday...
Click to expand...
Absolutely. It's a balance sheet thing to be not for profit. If you made too much, you need to spend more. I'd love to see that status be audited thoroughly. Talk about places that need government intervention - not for profits, religious tax exempt, public funding of private companies. That needs some real oversight.

 
The problem with Obamacare is that is a completely self-defeating system which disregards the whole concept of insurance coverage and risk pools.

In order for insurance coverage to work, the majority of people that pay into it have to take out less than they pay in.  The point is that it is a safety net so for most things (auto insurance, homeowners insurance, life insurance especially) we hope that never have to use it and don't mind paying into it for the peace of mind of having that safety net.  Likewise, the insurer can adjust your premium based on your risk.  Shitty drivers should have to pay more to get insurance coverage compared to someone with a spotless driving record.  People who have risk factors for early death (obesity, smoking, high blood pressure) should have to pay more or even be denied life insurance coverage compared to a fit, non-smoking person with no health issues.

The problem with Obamacare is that it explicitly prevents insurers from making these adjustments in regards to health insurance.  Everyone in a given health plan pays the same regardless of health status.  As a result, healthy people will pay more than they normally would, sicker people will pay less.  So the moral hazard is that as premiums climb, healthy people will forgo insurance, leaving only the sicker member buying insurance.  In turn, this leads to costs for the insurer to increase since the risk pool is sicker, premiums go up driving out healthier members continuing this vicious cycle.  Even worse, Obamacare has loopholes that permit people to wait until they get sick, enroll for insurance, then cancel once they no longer need it which exacerbates this problem.   The nominal penalty is not enough to discourage this type of behavior and this is why premium increases have actually accelerated compared to before Obamacare.  And I won't even get into how Obamacare screws over providers.....

And why medical care costs more in the US than other countries?  Easy.  It's the toxic medicolegal environment of medical practice that hangs over the system.  If we simply employed a loser pays system, that would greatly alleviate health care costs off the bat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, if you're going to talk legal reform ("tort reform"), there is a problem with "loser pays" wherein legitimate cases may not be brought for fear of losing. I have what I think is a better solution: don't give the winner these astronomical judgments, particularly the punitive damages part of the award. Instead, give the person only reimbursement + pain and suffering + maybe a small multiplier of some sort... and the rest of the money goes to a charity or something. (But not for executive salaries at the charity!!) Then you calculate the attorneys' portion based off of that smaller amount and not the entire judgement. That would cause fewer lawsuits to be brought--particularly frivolous ones--where the plaintiffs are seeing the court system as a potential lottery payout.

As far as the insurance costs being out of whack, alot of that has to do with government being involved in the process as well as people not having to pay directly for things. I realize you can't shop around when you go into cardiac arrest, but many other Dr. visits and other non-essential care are not comparison shopped just like other things so there are no market forces that can bring down the costs. Imagine if every hotel had to offer the same level of accommodations to everyone... we'd need hotel insurance!

 
United healthcare has just said they are LEAVING The market place   BUT you can still buy  insurance though they  by yourself.    Reports of up to 80% of the people who have went though the market place to buy united health care    have not  paid a single payment in  2015 and they have lost over 500 million dollars.   So if your lose your insurance you can thanks the sob  who  want it and think they dont have to pay for it... Then again  you really cant blame them when obama was on tv every day saying this insurance was going to be  FREE 

 
slidecage said:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/obamacare-worries-largest-texas-insurer-191310560.html

so i pay 400 a month for my health insurance and they are now demanding 20 to 40% jump rate in indiana meaning my health care will be next year

480 to 560 PER MONTH...

seems i will be going to the doctor every day this year cause next year i will not have insurance.
Click to expand...
Guess it's time to make the USA a socialist nation where health care is free for all and paid for by taxes on the wealthy.

 
dopa345 said:
The problem with Obamacare is that is a completely self-defeating system which disregards the whole concept of insurance coverage and risk pools.

In order for insurance coverage to work, the majority of people that pay into it have to take out less than they pay in. The point is that it is a safety net so for most things (auto insurance, homeowners insurance, life insurance especially) we hope that never have to use it and don't mind paying into it for the peace of mind of having that safety net. Likewise, the insurer can adjust your premium based on your risk. Shitty drivers should have to pay more to get insurance coverage compared to someone with a spotless driving record. People who have risk factors for early death (obesity, smoking, high blood pressure) should have to pay more or even be denied life insurance coverage compared to a fit, non-smoking person with no health issues.

The problem with Obamacare is that it explicitly prevents insurers from making these adjustments in regards to health insurance. Everyone in a given health plan pays the same regardless of health status. As a result, healthy people will pay more than they normally would, sicker people will pay less. So the moral hazard is that as premiums climb, healthy people will forgo insurance, leaving only the sicker member buying insurance. In turn, this leads to costs for the insurer to increase since the risk pool is sicker, premiums go up driving out healthier members continuing this vicious cycle. Even worse, Obamacare has loopholes that permit people to wait until they get sick, enroll for insurance, then cancel once they no longer need it which exacerbates this problem. The nominal penalty is not enough to discourage this type of behavior and this is why premium increases have actually accelerated compared to before Obamacare. And I won't even get into how Obamacare screws over providers.....

And why medical care costs more in the US than other countries? Easy. It's the toxic medicolegal environment of medical practice that hangs over the system. If we simply employed a loser pays system, that would greatly alleviate health care costs off the bat.
Click to expand...
You should leave your business office affairs to your office manager, human resources, or whoever handles the billing because you clearly have no idea how enrollment periods work or frankly, anything remotely related to billing.

I have to admit, reading someone touting tort reform as a solution gave me a giggle.

 
mrsilkunderwear said:
Or you know, get the government out of it.
Click to expand...
Yes because I want a private company deciding if my health care is worth the cost.

Not.

Every other modern country on the planet has a one payer system, a government system. Yet the USA doesn't because we are full of dumbness.

 
The Green Giant said:
Yes because I want a private company deciding if my health care is worth the cost.

Not.

Every other modern country on the planet has a one payer system, a government system. Yet the USA doesn't because we are full of dumbness.
Click to expand...
Sorry, you are right. Obamacare improved the quality and cost of healthcare. Why not continue with the expansion of government intervention.

 
mrsilkunderwear said:
Sorry, you are right. Obamacare improved the quality and cost of healthcare. Why not continue with the expansion of government intervention.
Click to expand...
Do you honestly believe this version of the ACA is the one Obama and others who came up with the idea want? Do you not remember how many times it was rejected and the concessions that had to be made to get it to pass?

It's crazy to me that people act so shocked that it didn't work out exactly as intended considering the amount of obstruction that took place and the endless scrutiny it's under.

When people have a mindset of never letting it pass or turning it into something unrecognizable that is destined to fail, why would you expect any different?
 
The Green Giant said:
Yes because I want a private company deciding if my health care is worth the cost.

Not.

Every other modern country on the planet has a one payer system, a government system. Yet the USA doesn't because we are full of dumbness.
Click to expand...
Kind of like what they have been doing now? Its funny that the rich in the socialist nations fly to neighboring countries to get private treatment and yet we expect top notch quality as soon as healthcare is socialized here in USA.

detectiveconan16 said:
Government had a hands off approach before Obama. That's why insurance companies had a thing called death panels.
Click to expand...
I do not know much about that but is that not what is going on right now with ACA?

TheN8torious said:
Do you honestly believe this version of the ACA is the one Obama and others who came up with the idea want? Do you not remember how many times it was rejected and the concessions that had to be made to get it to pass?

It's crazy to me that people act so shocked that it didn't work out exactly as intended considering the amount of obstruction that took place and the endless scrutiny it's under.

When people have a mindset of never letting it pass or turning it into something unrecognizable that is destined to fail, why would you expect any different?
Click to expand...
If it is destined to fail then what was the point of pushing it through? Of course this is not what the Obama administration wanted and yet they rolled with it. So in the end it is still considered a failure by the free market people and those who advocate for a single payer system. Nonetheless ACA proves that continued government intervention leads to decrease in quality and price hikes. It is clear that a free market system would improve on that. Would it be perfect? No, but it would give people a choice to take care of themselves and not be entitled to other people's services and products.

 
mrsilkunderwear said:
If it is destined to fail then what was the point of pushing it through? Of course this is not what the Obama administration wanted and yet they rolled with it. So in the end it is still considered a failure by the free market people and those who advocate for a single payer system. Nonetheless ACA proves that continued government intervention leads to decrease in quality and price hikes. It is clear that a free market system would improve on that. Would it be perfect? No, but it would give people a choice to take care of themselves and not be entitled to other people's services and products.
Click to expand...
Again, this logic is so flawed. This is like me chaining a 40lb kettlebell to your leg and then saying "See! You lost the race! You must suck at running!" Getting the ACA through at all was a foot in the door. It was a starting point. It sure as hell was better than giving up and going back to having nothing. Even calling it a "failure" isn't fair. 16.4 million people have health insurance that didn't have it before. Now, I guess to you those are people who are just "entitled to other people's services and products".

But until Libertarians (and Republicans) actually come out and suggest that these people lay in the corner and die, they're going to go somewhere. These are the people who were going to emergency rooms because they had a cold. Then when they couldn't pay, they went to the hospital financial advisors, showed their lack of income, and got it written off. That is the reality of what was happening and what would still be happening without ACA.

As for free market healthcare, I actually talked about that in my response in the Gary Johnson thread before I even read this one. So, see my thoughts there.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
TheN8torious said:
Again, this logic is so flawed. This is like me chaining a 40lb kettlebell to your leg and then saying "See! You lost the race! You must suck at running!" Getting the ACA through at all was a foot in the door. It was a starting point. It sure as hell was better than giving up and going back to having nothing. Even calling it a "failure" isn't fair. 16.4 million people have health insurance that didn't have it before. Now, I guess to you those are people who are just "entitled to other people's services and products".

But until Libertarians (and Republicans) actually come out and suggest that these people lay in the corner and die, they're going to go somewhere. These are the people who were going to emergency rooms because they had a cold. Then when they couldn't pay, they went to the hospital financial advisors, showed their lack of income, and got it written off. That is the reality of what was happening and what would still be happening without ACA.

As for free market healthcare, I actually talked about that in my response in the Gary Johnson thread before I even read this one. So, see my thoughts there.
Click to expand...
TheN8torious said:
My biggest concerns are Johnson's belief in a free market system in areas where "goofs" are not acceptable. He's talked about healthcare and how we need competition and a legitimate marketplace.

The problem is, that generally leads to people cutting corners to reduce their costs as much as possible so their profit can be as large as possible. So, as much as he can declare "government healthcare is insanity", having a system that equates to direct from China goods on eBay is much, much worse.

And it's one thing to say "make the prices competitive". But eventually, you hit a wall where the question is "what about people in poverty who get sick?" and the answer is "Well...you're fucked!" To me, Libertarianism feels like Darwinism politics. It's survival of the fittest. And if you can't cut it, your evolutionary line just dies off because that's for the betterment of the species anyway.

Oh, but wait...he thinks the states should handle it themselves. Cool. So, you get states who feel sympathetic of people in unfortunate situations, that offer healthcare options...everybody in need moves to those states...the states get overloaded...the system fails...and Libertarians get to gloat "See! See! We told you government fails at everything." How is that any less rigged?
Click to expand...

Perhaps we should make it clear that healthcare is not a right. It is an entitlement or a positive right. A negative right would be something like freedom of speech or freedom to defend oneself. A right does not infringe upon your freedom. A positive right or an entitlement does, as it must be taken from person or a group and given to the other. Therefore while I agree that the intent of universal healthcare is a kind one it actually hurts the very people it is supposed to help.

Now for companies cutting corners. This is acceptable as the hospitals provide a service for which it must receive something in return. It is like an exchange of goods at a local supermarket or taxi ride. Both are not rights and therefore no one is obligated to do anything unless its agreed by both parties.

Libertarian philosophy can be interpreted as Darwinism but that would be wrong, instead it is about maximum freedom and responsibility for oneself. The people who cannot take care of themselves are again not entitled to services of others. Yet, prior to government intrusion many were taken care of free of charge or for a small cost. You can do the research yourself and see that prior to 1960s many were cared for in private and non profit institutions. Today we see the same ranging from organizations such as Saint Jude and large drug companies who hold experimental trials. There are many other examples where people provided kindness but are now barred due to regulations. I think therefore people need to think hard before asking for continued government intervention.

Now in regards ACA. ACA is a failure as it was marketed as a solution to rising prices and instead it did nothing to combat that. Prices instead rose and people are losing insurance, I myself chose to no longer get coverage due to a 40% price hike. So old and sick people in, young and healthy out. Using a similar example we can say that Activision chose to release COD Ghosts which turned out to be shit because the developers rushed the product instead of polishing it for another year. Perhaps a valiant effort for their efficiency but still a shit game.

States can go ahead and provide a healthcare service (which I am against) but you say they can get overloaded. Well in that case they can probably need to come up with better laws where healthcare is provided to the residents only or after a certain income threshold is met. Countless ways where they can make it work. If they choose to just give it away then why would anyone be surprised to the failures of such a service? Its like if Uber decides to provide only free rides and then be surprised they are not making any profit. Its not rigged, its basic economics.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrsilkunderwear said:
Perhaps we should make it clear that healthcare is not a right. It is an entitlement or a positive right. A negative right would be something like freedom of speech or freedom to defend oneself. A right does not infringe upon your freedom. A positive right or an entitlement does, as it must be taken from person or a group and given to the other. Therefore while I agree that the intent of universal healthcare is a kind one it actually hurts the very people it is supposed to help.

Now for companies cutting corners. This is acceptable as the hospitals provide a service for which it must receive something in return. It is like an exchange of goods at a local supermarket or taxi ride. Both are not rights and therefore no one is obligated to do anything unless its agreed by both parties.

Libertarian philosophy can be interpreted as Darwinism but that would be wrong, instead it is about maximum freedom and responsibility for oneself. The people who cannot take care of themselves are again not entitled to services of others. Yet, prior to government intrusion many were taken care of free of charge or for a small cost. You can do the research yourself and see that prior to 1960s many were cared for in private and non profit institutions. Today we see the same ranging from organizations such as Saint Jude and large drug companies who hold experimental trials. There are many other examples where people provided kindness but are now barred due to regulations. I think therefore people need to think hard before asking for continued government intervention.

Now in regards ACA. ACA is a failure as it was marketed as a solution to rising prices and instead it did nothing to combat that. Prices instead rose and people are losing insurance, I myself chose to no longer get coverage due to a 40% price hike. So old and sick people in, young and healthy out. Using a similar example we can say that Activision chose to release COD Ghosts which turned out to be shit because the developers rushed the product instead of polishing it for another year. Perhaps a valiant effort for their efficiency but still a shit game.

States can go ahead and provide a healthcare service (which I am against) but you say they can get overloaded. Well in that case they can probably need to come up with better laws where healthcare is provided to the residents only or after a certain income threshold is met. Countless ways where they can make it work. If they choose to just give it away then why would anyone be surprised to the failures of such a service? Its like if Uber decides to provide only free rides and then be surprised they are not making any profit. Its not rigged, its basic economics.
Click to expand...
Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. I can't even process that somebody could believe half of that. All I see is "I've got mine. Good luck to the rest of you." If that's how you want to live, so be it. The fact that you believe not having insurance is a sound strategy just to put a little more "freedom" in your wallet shows where your priorities are. But God forbid you end up on the downside of luck one day. Pride comes before a fall.

Clearly, we're at an impasse here. Good luck to you in your method of thinking. But no thank you to any of that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If you got your jack, you'd better go live far away from civilization. The roads you drive on, the water you drink, the air you breathe, the electricity that fuels your home, the games you play were all paid for everybody else so people could have access to them. The government should have a vested interest in making sure people don't die of starvation, sickness, and poverty, especially if its denizens constantly talk about following the word of Jesus Christ.

 
TheN8torious said:
Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. I can't even process that somebody could believe half of that. All I see is "I've got mine. Good luck to the rest of you." If that's how you want to live, so be it. The fact that you believe not having insurance is a sound strategy just to put a little more "freedom" in your wallet shows where your priorities are. But God forbid you end up on the downside of luck one day. Pride comes before a fall.

Clearly, we're at an impasse here. Good luck to you in your method of thinking. But no thank you to any of that.
Click to expand...
It has more to do with cost than freedom. The last two tax periods it was cheaper for me to pay cash and the penalty then the monthly payment + ridiculous deductible. This will probably change this upcoming year as the penalty does get steeper.

Maybe you will change your mind like I have one day, going from a left leaning socialist to free market libertarian. It certainly took real life experience with corrupted government and a book on economics to push me in the right direction.

detectiveconan16 said:
If you got your jack, you'd better go live far away from civilization. The roads you drive on, the water you drink, the air you breathe, the electricity that fuels your home, the games you play were all paid for everybody else so people could have access to them. The government should have a vested interest in making sure people don't die of starvation, sickness, and poverty, especially if its denizens constantly talk about following the word of Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...
What you just described could all be accomplished with a free market, where self interest actually leads to efficiency and cooperation. Do you think many of today's great inventions were created out of goodwill? No.

I agree that the government plays a part in the life of the people but it should let them decide to make their own choices, good or bad. If you start thinking that healthcare or education is a right then that only means you want to legally steal from the others when instead it should be done voluntary.

 
Wait, so you're telling us you don't carry health insurance of any kind? What do you plan on doing if you have a sudden need for medical care? I mean, you can take care of your health ally you want but something appendicitis can hit even the healthiest person out of nowhere. Do you plan on paying out of pocket for it? I mean, even if your surgery goes off without complication you're talking a minimum of $10k. Do you have $10k just laying around to pay for that?

mrsilkunderwear said:
What you just described could all be accomplished with a free market, where self interest actually leads to efficiency and cooperation. Do you think many of today's great inventions were created out of goodwill? No.
Click to expand...
Uh, NASA?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrsilkunderwear said:
It has more to do with cost than freedom. The last two tax periods it was cheaper for me to pay cash and the penalty then the monthly payment + ridiculous deductible. This will probably change this upcoming year as the penalty does get steeper.

Maybe you will change your mind like I have one day, going from a left leaning socialist to free market libertarian. It certainly took real life experience with corrupted government and a book on economics to push me in the right direction.
Click to expand...
Doesn't this statement imply that I have neither life experience nor education? How much more condescending do you want to get? Why not just accept that for the things I value, your method of thinking doesn't work for me?

And like RedvsBlue said, you talk about insurance as though the only cost is the coverage. You won't have so much fun paying cash the day you get sick and actually need it. If you still possess the feeling of invincibility that comes with youth, then maybe your life experience isn't quite where you think it is. At the very least, you're willfully choosing to play a dangerous game, and gambling the entirety of your assets, just based on the premise "it won't happen to me".

Again, no thank you. I'll pass.

 
RedvsBlue said:
Wait, so you're telling us you don't carry health insurance of any kind? What do you plan on doing if you have a sudden need for medical care? I mean, you can take care of your health ally you want but something appendicitis can hit even the healthiest person out of nowhere. Do you plan on paying out of pocket for it? I mean, even if your surgery goes off without complication you're talking a minimum of $10k. Do you have $10k just laying around to pay for that?

Uh, NASA?
Click to expand...
Of course I understand that an accident can happen. If it is something that I can't cover then I can negotiate the cost of the treatment due to inflated pricing. I can hire a patient advocate to help and I can also apply for financing through the hospital if it offers it.

TheN8torious said:
Doesn't this statement imply that I have neither life experience nor education? How much more condescending do you want to get? Why not just accept that for the things I value, your method of thinking doesn't work for me?

And like RedvsBlue said, you talk about insurance as though the only cost is the coverage. You won't have so much fun paying cash the day you get sick and actually need it. If you still possess the feeling of invincibility that comes with youth, then maybe your life experience isn't quite where you think it is. At the very least, you're willfully choosing to play a dangerous game, and gambling the entirety of your assets, just based on the premise "it won't happen to me".

Again, no thank you. I'll pass.
Click to expand...
My post was not meant to be condescending. I do accept the opinion of others which is fits with my libertarian philosophy and unlike some other members I am usually pretty open to good discussions. I was merely saying that my personal experience with a corrupted government helped me move away from socialism. I come from a third world country which used to be a soviet satellite. I have seen first hand how a government can go after its own people just for opposing it, imprisoning or even killing the citizens. My parents told me of stories how they would be waiting in food lines for hours and how life changing it was when USSR fell and capitalism spread among the nations. This is why I have a problem with people like Bernie Sanders who obviously have good intentions but never really experienced big government. This is why I am very pro 2nd amendment as I understand the reasoning behind it. As the government keeps growing, getting more intrusive, waging foreign wars and spying on its own people I am sometimes baffled that we still have people who advocate for continued expansion.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
mrsilkunderwear said:
Of course I understand that an accident can happen. If it is something that I can't cover then I can negotiate the cost of the treatment due to inflated pricing. I can hire a patient advocate to help and I can also apply for financing through the hospital if it offers it.

My post was not meant to be condescending. I do accept the opinion of others which is fits with my libertarian philosophy and unlike some other members I am usually pretty open to good discussions. I was merely saying that my personal experience with a corrupted government helped me move away from socialism. I come from a third world country which used to be a soviet satellite. I have seen first hand how a government can go after its own people just for opposing it, imprisoning or even killing the citizens. My parents told me of stories how they would be waiting in food lines for hours and how life changing it was when USSR fell and capitalism spread among the nations. This is why I have a problem with people like Bernie Sanders who obviously have good intentions but never really experienced big government. This is why I am very pro 2nd amendment as I understand the reasoning behind it. As the government keeps growing, getting more intrusive, waging foreign wars and spying on its own people I am sometimes baffled that we still have people who advocate for continued expansion.
Click to expand...
Socialism doesn't equal the USSR. I mean, our neighbors to the north enjoy every bit of freedom as ourselves (and in this day and age of government surveillance, maybe even more...) and they have more government programs and socialized medicine than we do. I get that your bad experience can color your future outlook but you're looking at one of the worst implementations of big government in modern times meanwhile creating a false equivalency between communism and socialism.

And the 2nd amendment as a deterrence for big government? Come on man, the federal government has access to grenades, grenade launchers, rocket propelled grenades, fully automatic assault weapons, mini guns, tanks, drones, laser guided smart bombs, tactical nuclear warheads, and the list goes on. Do you honestly think handguns, shotguns, and rifles are really a deterrence in the face of that kind of firepower?
 
I don't really understand the rebel thing. Didn't anybody learn what the first President did during the Whiskey Rebellion? Washington stared down those b-es.
 
RedvsBlue said:
Socialism doesn't equal the USSR. I mean, our neighbors to the north enjoy every bit of freedom as ourselves (and in this day and age of government surveillance, maybe even more...) and they have more government programs and socialized medicine than we do. I get that your bad experience can color your future outlook but you're looking at one of the worst implementations of big government in modern times meanwhile creating a false equivalency between communism and socialism.

And the 2nd amendment as a deterrence for big government? Come on man, the federal government has access to grenades, grenade launchers, rocket propelled grenades, fully automatic assault weapons, mini guns, tanks, drones, laser guided smart bombs, tactical nuclear warheads, and the list goes on. Do you honestly think handguns, shotguns, and rifles are really a deterrence in the face of that kind of firepower?
Click to expand...
I don't know about that, they have less economic freedom and probably a bit less individual liberty. I think you confirmed it when you say they have more socialized programs which of course requires money. Government does not produce money which means it must be acquired by taking it from the people. Good citizens of Canada do choose to give up their money so its their choice and if they are happy then good for them. Like Thatcher once said "the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money". This is why many European nations are doing worse than before. Healthcare quality is decreasing in countries like Sweden and France. Welfare systems are hurting under increased pressure due to unemployment and immigration. Looking at a pattern, its clear that all those governments are getting more intrusive on individuals and businesses therefore I think we should expect these countries to get worse when it comes to freedoms. USA is also problematic in many areas and I never called it a free country, as a matter of fact we are probably in much worse shape than people expect.

Yes, guns are a deterrent. It might not be enough but if we decide that to just roll over then we might as well give up the rest of the liberties including freedom of speech. Then again we already see the constitution trampled and it is hard to answer if United States is still the land of the free.

 
I voted "what have you been smoking" because Im always looking to cruise new storefronts. Brian. I never knew

Anyway.

If you were a robot, and I knew, but you didnt, would you want me to tell you?

Trick question. Just install upgrades and were fine.
 
this is a question that i will answer after i die... then, if i can answer the question after i die, that means there is after life. unless, of course i dont answer it after i die, then, there is no after life. or it could also be both. who knows? somebody who has already died... so?...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top