News Count Me As Grateful For The Changes Coming In Us Health Care

[BloomInWinter]

I think a good economy means nothing to a nation which allows its children to go without basic medical care.

I don't believe it's being unduly burdened to be asked to contribute to making all our citizens healthier. I'll gladly pay more if it means others can get access to health care.

I do believe that it's morally wrong to allow our country to continue to lose $400 billion to tax evasion but choose to make it up by denying human beings access to healthcare, or food, or shelter, or education for that matter.

I believe that launching this will be challenging, but that by working together we'll figure this out. Yes, there is a lot that needs to still be fixed, but this was never meant to be the end-all, be-all. It's a work in progress. It's a much better effort than anything else that was tried before.

I think a system where surviving a heart attack today means a medical bankruptcy over the next year is cruel and costly to us all. Over 1/2 of all bankruptcies are medical bankruptcies. While Obamacare won't end all of these, it will do much to end many - if not most - of them.

I believe people battling cancer shouldn't have to hold bake sales and put donation jars out while they are trying to fight the disease. I believe they and their loved ones time should be spent fighting the disease, not the economic tidal wave.

If this is a train-wreck, it will only be due to the obstructing, lies, and distortions by the corporations and politicians who want to profit from the corrupt, ineffective private system we have now. If it works out, we can say that we made it work without any help from the Republicans, and despite their efforts to ruin it.

Paul Ryan accidently slipped and said "...we are not going to give up on destroying the healthcare system for the American people." Slip, or freudian? Because his behavior, and that of all the Republicans, matches this accidental statement. Source:
http://thehill.com/video/house/2876...slip-during-budget-announcement#ixzz2fiwEprPS
It will be interested to re-visit this issue in a year and see what happens. Train wreck, or new hope? I'm not just betting on new hope, I'm working hard to ensure this is the outcome.

 

[The Albatross]

Wrecking the economy "for the children" will effect more than just healthcare.

 

[The Albatross]

The first rule of economics is that when supply (medical professionals) stay constant, and demand increases (via an ageing population, adding approximately 30 million to the demand for medical services, and with the perhaps additional burden of the illegal aliens should the immigration bill pass) - costs increase.
.

Correcting myself as I was tired yesterday.

Also I was wrong about the amount of unfunded liabilities, I stated it way low. The amount of unfunded liabilities (depending on which economist you listen to is between $123 Trillion and $238 Trillion. I said up thread $90 trillion dollars.

Adding entitlements is a generally good thing for population, when you can afford it. You want to know what it looks like when you can't afford it? Look to Greece.

So far as the Ryan comment, I find it so nuanced I just decline to go there. Next thing you know you'll revive the myth that Republicans are going to push grandma off the cliff.

 

[BloomInWinter]

I don't see healthcare as an entitlement. I see it as a human right. I am not worried about Obamacare wrecking our economy. Wall Street Bankers, bureaucrats, and their cronies in congress already did that. ;)

Funny how the GOP is willing to wreck our economy to defund Obamacare because...wait for it...they're worried that Obamacare will wreck the economy? Really?

 

[Barberian]

IMHO,

I believe those who spend 8-12 years or more training for their trade that has an extremely high quality standard and accountability should be compensated accordingly. BUT, the biggest thing wrong with American health care system is the COST of health care. Yes, the uninsured is a huge problem, but if the cost of health care procedures, and psychiatric care was reasonable (the average American could afford it) it would be a self correcting problem. Because if the procedures were cheaper, the insurance would be cheaper.

Hospitals keep their prices (cost list) a VERY closely guarded secret. The odds of a random citizen being able to get a copy of a hospital cost list without a court order are pretty much - zero. This makes shopping for a medical center to perform non-emergency health care impossible. You have to go by word of mouth from others who have used a facility or doctor on how much it cost them for a procedure, whether or not it is even closely related to what you need to have performed and make a "best guess".

Links below:
Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us
[DLMURL="http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2013/08/01/why-non-profit-hospitals-are-so-profitable/"]Why Non-Profit Hospitals Are So Profitable[/DLMURL]
Hospital Prices No Longer Secret
Hidden Costs in Hospital Bills
Hospital Prices, Revealed! (Sort Of)
Hospital pricing gouges patients: Our view

I could go on and on about the cost of health care, but...

Essential services like utilities, communications, banking, all fall under government regulation. Health care is an essential service. The pricing should be transparent (by law). If I walk up to a car dealer and want to buy a car, the price is right there out in the open for all to see. The same should apply to health care. The WHOLE health care system needs to be overhauled and the regulation system scrapped and rewritten. And don't get me started on the insurance industry.

IMHO the hospitals are "in bed" with the insurance agencies. As one of the links above said, "The ones that can afford it the least, the uninsured are the ones who pay the most.". Insurance agencies negotiate prices. A procedure that could cost an uninsured person $100,000 is negotiated down substantially by an insurance company giving the average citizen pretty much no choice but to buy insurance if they can, "just in case", or risk financial ruin. Buying insurance can be a slow form of financial ruin also...

 

[The Albatross]

Funny how the GOP is willing to wreck our economy to defund Obamacare because...wait for it...they're worried that Obamacare will wreck the economy? Really?

You know if sometime in the past 33 months, congress and our president would have passed a budget, this wouldn't be happening. The last budget for our government was in 2007 under the Bush administration.

If this administration is incapable or unwilling to perform even the most basic function under it's mandate... a budget, and instead prefers to skitter along under reoccurring emergency measures then there's nobody to blame than themselves. It seems to me that if this legislation was to be protected at all costs, it would have been part of a budget that had been passed sometime in the last 3 years. But that didn't happen.

Having the majority in the Senate and Obama in the White House, doesn't mean that the House is obligated to continue writing blank checks to run our government for an administration that is so incompetent it can not perform it's most basic duty... a budget (God forbid a balanced one).

If anyone is willing to wreck the economy, it is the majority.

 

[The Albatross]

I don't see healthcare as an entitlement. I see it as a human right.

Health care is a commodity and a service. It was never put on to "the people" to vote up or down if health care should be an entitlement. I think that it should have been put on a ballot for our citizens to vote on before legislation was passed (of any stripe).

I think that a law of the magnitude and scope should not have been legislated. It should have gone to popular vote in a national election and been voted on by American citizens.

The Congressional Budget Office's latest report says maintaining current spending is unsustainable. That is significant and trumps, to me entitlement spending.

Predictably, I suppose, we do not agree that health care is a "human right".

 

[The Albatross]

I think a good economy means nothing to a nation which allows its children to go without basic medical care.

Gut check on the "it's for the children" argument... since Obamacare funds abortion services... it isn't "for the children". It's for the children in our country who are who are fortunate enough to be born.. It would seem to me that in the zeal to assert "human rights" arguments for Obamacare... you would first have to allow "humans a right" to life.

 

[BloomInWinter]

There was an election, and Mitt Romney lost. By a lot.

The thing is, we already DO provide the services, albeit too late for many. We already all pay for these. If we're going to pay for them anyway, let's pay for prevention to minimize the cost and the human suffering, I say.

So, if it's not a human right, do you believe that babies born into poverty should just be allowed to die? Because...they don't have a right to medical care? That if the poor get cancer, they should be denied care? If disabled, they should be left to fend for themselves? They should somehow have the "earn" it?

It's completely unacceptable situations like this that make me believe we must take action.

"Almost 13 million women aged 15–44, accounting for one in five (20.8%) women of reproductive age, were uninsured in 2012, according to a Guttmacher analysis of new U.S. Census Bureau data. Moreover, in that same year, almost four out of every 10 (39.1%) reproductive-age women living below the poverty line lacked insurance coverage. These bleak statistics not only underscore the urgent and ongoing need for safety-net programs such as the Title X national family planning program, they also demonstrate the significant potential gains to be made as the Affordable Care Act’s expansion of public and private insurance coverage gets underway on January 1, 2014." Source: http://www.guttmacher.org/media/inthenews/2013/09/20/index.html

The Affordable Care Act doesn't fund abortions. But, maybe all the info we're getting is inaccurate. Can you please post a reference for this? Some I have include:

"Planned Parenthood is regularly audited to ensure compliance with all restrictions, and as the International Business Times notes, it has been repeatedly investigated by anti-choice politicians, who have yet to find any instances in which the organization has used federal money to fund abortions."

Source: [DLMURL]http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2013/08/23/anti-choice-lawmakers-say-affordable-care-act-will-result-in-government-providing-abortion-coverage/[/DLMURL]

and

"Years of government audits show that Planned Parenthood has always complied with the Hyde Amendment. The federal funding it receives does not go toward abortions; it goes toward its other services, many of which actively prevent abortions.

But Stearns is still suspicious. Although Planned Parenthood is barred from using federal funds to perform abortions, these funds are fungible and allow the group to use funds from other sources ostensibly for abortions, he said in a statement. Also, with a national debt exceeding $14 trillion, funding of Planned Parenthood should be evaluated with other expenditures to reduce the deficit.

Ah, there's the truth.

This investigation isn't about enforcing the Hyde Amendment -- there is no evidence, nor has there ever been any evidence, that Planned Parenthood is misusing federal funds.

What it is actually about is conservatives' opposition to Planned Parenthood receiving those federal funds in the first place -- a battle the conservatives lost in April. And now Stearns is taking out his frustration on Planned Parenthood by lobbing malicious, unsubstantiated allegations, just like an elementary school bully who's angry that he lost a game."

Source: http://www.ibtimes.com/planned-parenthood-investigation-frustrated-bullys-malicious-attack-212031

 

[anthony]

BUT, the biggest thing wrong with American health care system is the COST of health care... ...Because if the procedures were cheaper, the insurance would be cheaper.

I think you are absolutely spot on. [DLMURL]http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-07-28/heart-surgery-in-india-for-1-583-costs-106-385-in-u-s-.html[/DLMURL]

In Australia, two heart surgeries in private hospital would have cost Nicolette $30,000+... that she had done. With her insurance it was nothing. It proves the point though that the US procedure costs are just ridiculous compared to other countries around the world, as two heart surgeries still doesn't come close to one in USA, however; your plastic surgery / cosmetic procedure costs are one of the cheapest in the world. It is cheaper to look better than be alive in the USA.

In most other countries, thats reversed... where cosmetic procedures are quite expensive compared to what you could have done medically that would be life saving / life preserving.

 

[BlackbirdSinging]

It is cheaper to look better than be alive in the USA.

It sure feels that way. What it cost my parents when my Dad had his triple bypass this past spring was incredible. Or the fact that my sister with stage 4 metastatic breast cancer was considering giving up one of her cancer medications at one point because the cost of all of her medications was so great. That makes me angry.

It also makes me angry that someone like me with chronic pain and injuries can't get help from a specialist because the required specialist ..an orthopaedic surgeon ..don't typically accept my bare bones coverage. And yet I can't work and get better coverage. It's no better with dental coverage either. It's horrible.

 

[The Albatross]

“Taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood reached a record of $542 million last year, almost half its $1 billion-plus budget,” said Jim Sedlak, vice president at ALL. “Yet, the number of female contraceptive clients is down 18 percent since 2006 and cancer screenings fell 29 percent over the last two years. Every delivery area is down, except one—-abortions.”

Sedlak says that the meta-study, conducted by ALL’s STOPP project, took many months to complete. The report, Planned Parenthood Federation of America: A 5-Part Analysis of Business Practices, Community Outcomes, and Taxpayer Funding, concludes that “Three primary rationales used for taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood—-women’s wellness, reduction of teen pregnancy, and serving the poor—-are invalid.”

The results of the report should not be surprising. Earlier this year, the annual report released by the national Planned Parenthood abortion business shows it did more abortions in its last year than ever before in its history."