Bird
Rest in Peace
Yeah, but if you're busy, you can leave them sitting in the waiting room for 24 hours until they die or get up and leave, as has been done in Dallas.
health insurance bill
- Thread starter tglass
- Start date
- Views: 14352
Yeah, but if you're busy, you can leave them sitting in the waiting room for 24 hours until they die or get up and leave, as has been done in Dallas.
Bedlam
Veteran Member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2005
- Messages
- 1,883
Good point Bird...Ive heard of that happening even saw a video once. Sad all around ..
tulenutn2o
Platinum Member
History has shown us that nothing the Government does ends up costing less. Ours is just as corrupt as all the others around the world. We are like the frog in the pan of water, they are turning up the heat a little at a time so we will not jump out. Not too much longer and we'll be cooked. Every system has to have winners and losers, we can't all be rich at the same time, can't all have the same pay, etc. If we did, wouldn't that be socialism?(It's been many years since school). All I know is, It is costing me more money for sure in 2011-. You cannot add 30 million or more to the system, subsidize their insurance and have it NOT cost more money. Insurance companies are the BIG winners. They get 30mil. more customers. On the taxpayer's dime. Those taxes are coming from a dwindling source-WORKING people, who by the way, are making LESS money than they did before. Math does not point to the system costing less, improving care,anything. My .02 + a dime for inflation.
bschopf2280
New member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 10
If I remember correctly, there's in the neighborhood of 34 million folks that are going to be newly insured (whether they like it or not, because it appears the government is going to punish those who'd chose to not have it).
With large areas of this country having a provider shortage, where do you think they're going to end up?
I work in the health care field, paramedic. We, the tax payers and health insurance owners, have been paying for what this bill will cover all along. Do you think the 34 million folks that will now have to get health insurance never got sick before? They did. They would just go to the ER where they would be treated, then either forgo there medical bills or make payments. So to cover these costs and also the lost revenue from medicare, hospitals raise the cost of health care to the individuals with health insurance.
What this bill does for individuals that currently have health insurance is hopefully lower the increases in our health insurance premiums. It does this by adding 34 million paying customers to the health care pool. Now many of the 34 million uninsured are the healthy young people that have never been sick, so in the past they have not gotten health insurance. Problem is they eventually get sick or injured and incur medical bills that they are unable to pay. For those that say it is unconstitutional to force these individuals to purchase health insurance I offer these two thoughts. Governments have forced individuals to purchase services they don't necessarily want or use since the inception of governing, this is called taxes. Also in many states the government has forced drivers to purchase car insurance if they want to drive.
The bill also insures everyone, regardless of past medical history, the inability for health insurers to deny you coverage or drop you from your current plan. This came too late for a pt I had that had passed out in her bathroom from severe dehydration. She was battling her third bout with cancer. She was a successful business women when she got cancer the first time and her insurance company dropped her. Since then she lost her house, her car and many of her personal belongings had to be sold to pay medical bills. Currently she was living above the garage of a friend. Even though she had no clue how she was going to pay for this trip to the hospital, she was still trying to smile.
Although not perfect, we need to give this health care bill a chance. America needs this.
LostInTheWoods
Platinum Member
OK. I tried to let this pass. Please, forgive me in advance.
I truly don't look to offend or cross into politics. I think I did OK keeping out more than just generalizations about politics. And yes, some of this is oversimplifying things, but the point is made...
I work in the health care field, paramedic. We, the tax payers and health insurance owners, have been paying for what this bill will cover all along. Do you think the 34 million folks that will now have to get health insurance never got sick before? They did.
I also work in the healthcare field. I have some insight into the current healthcare bill. In all honesty, I have not read through the monstrous collection of legalese that is our new healthcare bill. In fact, I would propose that most of us haven't. Legislators from both sides of the aisle have been cornered into admitting they have some, let me paraphrase, "incomplete information" on all the details therein.
Governments are like people. I never seen on that's perfect, including when I look in the mirror. With this particular bill, I fear, as others have posted, government will have as much success with this as it typically does with most things better left to the market. How successful do you believe the government has been with Amtrak? The Post Office? Social Security?
Unless I am misreading your intention, you contradict yourself. In the first paragraph,you question "Do you think the 34 million folks that will now have to get health insurance never got sick before? They did". In the second, you imply that most of these newly insured are "healthy young people that have never been sick". That's a bit like having your cake and eating it too.
Problem is they eventually get sick or injured and incur medical bills that they are unable to pay. They would just go to the ER where they would be treated, then either forgo there medical bills or make payments.
I speak from personal experience that making payments on medical bills is not fun. Been there and done that. Never did I think I could "forgo" paying my medical bills. My bills, my responsibility. Make payments on healthcare? Great! My health is way more valuable to me that anything else I have ever made payments on. If I buy the services of anyone else, be they plumber, accountant, or automobile mechanic, am I entitled to "forgo" payment to them if I don't have the cash? But healthcare is different, some say. Why? Without the plumber, my house would flood and I wouldn't have decent shelter. I NEED it. Therefore, if I feel I can't afford to pay him after the job's done, so be it. If I can't pay the mechanic after my car's fixed, tough luck. I NEED it to get back and forth to work. I can't figure my way through all the tax laws by myself, I NEED the accountant to do it for me, even if I can't pay for it.
For those that say it is unconstitutional to force these individuals to purchase health insurance I offer these two thoughts.
I would expound a bit more on the constitutionality of forcing something like healthcare onto citizens who would otherwise choose not to have it, but I suspect this would cross the "no politics" line our moderators ask us to oblige.
Also in many states the government has forced drivers to purchase car insurance if they want to drive.
If someone does not pay for his/her own healthcare, then they own all that goes with that. If someone injures another without the means to duly compensate them, there is a difference.
Governments have forced individuals to purchase services they don't necessarily want or use since the inception of governing, this is called taxes.
According to what I have seen in the Constuition and Bill of Rights, this government is intended to provide for the common defense, and for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. (Before anyone writes, yes there are other things, but you get my drift). There are reasons for any tax or program. But are they the right reasons?
She was battling her third bout with cancer...
No one wants to see someone's grandmother be denied care. Or little children. There are always "I know this guy..." stories that both sides use. There IS ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT in our current system. And I've seen some of the rankings by the World Health Organization and others that say the US healthcare is on par with, I don't know, Paraguay or some such. If you watch the news, however, three or four times a year you will catch a blurb about some sheik or other foreign dignitary that can choose basically anywhere on the planet for care, but where did they end up? Must be something good here. I don't think anyone should be denied emergent health care. There are programs already in existence to help with those costs, just ask anyone in hospital admissions.
Although not perfect, we need to give this health care bill a chance. America needs this.
I would like (if it doesn't displease the moderators) to see more of our friends on TBN from other countries weigh in on rationing healthcare and the other malfunctions we hear of from other places...
While lip-service was given to other needed changes like tort reform (have you SEEN what doctors have to pay for malpractice?), I don't know that any such changes were ever included.
And for anyone who believes the line about this program being "budget neutral" and/or not dramatically increasing the burden on the taxpayer to the tune of billions, let me tell you about this oceanfront time share condo I have in KY...
brin
Super Member
Just great - You say we need this...So my question is ..Have you read the Bill ? All 2,000 + pages of it because the congress has not and yet they voted for it. Does that make sense ? Would you sign any contract with anyone for anything without reading it completely ? I think not.
The proper way to fix health care, in my opinion, would have been to fix only what was wrong - cover pre-existing conditions etc. but not take over 1/6 th of our economy and add 30 Million to the health care rolls without the docs or facilities which will only lead to rationing and long waits for an appointment and long waits at the docs office plus bankrupt our country. Think it over !
arrow
Super Member
The proper way to fix health care, in my opinion, would have been to fix only what was wrong - cover pre-existing conditions etc. but not take over 1/6 th of our economy and add 30 Million to the health care rolls without the docs or facilities which will only lead to rationing and long waits for an appointment and long waits at the docs office plus bankrupt our country. Think it over !
Exactly... what also might have been adopted
1. Establish an insurance pool that all without prior health care would have to pay into.
2. Institute tort reform to help lower litigation and insurance fees for medical profession.
3. Lower health care provider cost.
It is ludicrous to have to pay $15300 per year for 3 people in a family and then be charged an additional $400 for a colonoscopy. If we were not paying for 3 other people who did not have it along with massive litigation liabilities, then perhaps #3 could more easily be done.
The largest problem with this bill? no one hardly knows what's in it. Add to that as to where it is coming from...pretty scary a proposition.
bschopf2280
New member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2010
- Messages
- 10
First my motivations are not political. I am only interested in living a good life and doing what I can to make others lives good too. I have not read the Bill. Lostinthewoods, I do agree with you that government is not perfect. The list goes on and on, school systems, social security, medicare. That being said, I am not perfect, but I do have ideals and lofty goals. I know that I will never reach those goals, but I try and every day I get a little better. Maybe health care is that for the government. Everybody can agree the bill is flawed, but hopefully with time what works will stay and what doesn't will get reworked or taken out completely. This post and my last were opinion only. Although I am a health care professional, I am in no way an expert in billing or cost analysis.
I also want to apologize to Lostinthewoods about my comment on medical bill payments. I was not putting those down that make payments on medical bills or even the ones that don't. Just merely stating that when medical bills aren't paid in a timely fashion, the cost is shifted to those, mostly the insurance companies and self insured companies and individuals, that can. I could not pay a large medical bill out of pocket myself. I would have to make payments like all others.
Again this is all in my opinion. I wish that I could look in the future and say that this will work, I can't. I also can't look in the future and say it won't.
I also want to apologize to Lostinthewoods about my comment on medical bill payments. I was not putting those down that make payments on medical bills or even the ones that don't. Just merely stating that when medical bills aren't paid in a timely fashion, the cost is shifted to those, mostly the insurance companies and self insured companies and individuals, that can. I could not pay a large medical bill out of pocket myself. I would have to make payments like all others.
Again this is all in my opinion. I wish that I could look in the future and say that this will work, I can't. I also can't look in the future and say it won't.
LostInTheWoods
Platinum Member
I also want to apologize to Lostinthewoods about my comment on medical bill payments.
No apology necessary. I never felt like you were trying to offend anyone, anymore than I want to appear insensitive to those without the means to afford health insurance. I HAVE BEEN unable to afford insurance. I empathize.
Although I am a health care professional, I am in no way an expert in billing or cost analysis.
I've been practicing medicine for ten years. If I ever figure it out, I'll let you know. :laughing:
That being said, I am not perfect, but I do have ideals and lofty goals. I know that I will never reach those goals, but I try and every day I get a little better.
Worthy goals for everyone.
Maybe health care is that for the government. Everybody can agree the bill is flawed, but hopefully with time what works will stay and what doesn't will get reworked or taken out completely.
What separates you and I is outlook. You (at least when it comes to healthcare) seem to be an idealist. You see a problem and want to make it better, even if comes down to "hoping". You are willing to roll the dice to see what happens. As a realist, I see that by looking at the facts as I know them, and tempering them against the known history of our government...well I'm expecting the worst. I'm not trying to bash our government. I would't wish to have been born anywhere else.
Respectfully,
Lost
LostInTheWoods
Platinum Member
I think this is a pretty good summary, Arrow. It boggles the mind sometimes when you pay THOUSANDS all year, and still have to dig deeper all too often.
And you are right, tort reform would be huge. Look at the list of top ten donors to the current ruling party, and I think you can figure out why that wasn't included. Not a political statement, only a statement of fact. You can do the same for the other major party and find out who's pulling their strings, as it were.
2manyrocks
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2007
- Messages
- 9,528
Forget politics and look at the economics.
There's a study that estimates that the premiums of the young are going to increase 17%. I don't know how they arrived at this number, but think about what they have to forecast.
This is a huge actuary computation to undertake because you're forecasting costs for a larger group and forecasting to cover conditions that insurers used to be able to not cover because they eliminated them with the preexisting conditions exclusion. Maybe insurors benefit because everyone has to participate, but then what costs do they get stuck with now that they have to cover preexisting conditions? So they make all these calculations and now how much premium do I pay and how much premium do you pay and how much does the next guy pay?
A car accident or an unexpected illness can certainly result in huge medical bills at any time, but I think the statistical norm is that the bulk of healthcare costs come late in life for most people.
I tend to think overall the economic effect is that you'll see some cost shifting from the unhealthy onto the healthy. The heaviest users of healthcare will pass on a portion of their costs to the less heavy users. That's what I think---but if I could do the statistical computations to prove it all, I'd be making a bunch of money selling the numbers to the insurance companies.
dmccarty
Super Star Member
This is exactly what the health bill does. There is a limit on how much more a senior can pay for premiums over a young person. I think it is three times as much. But the elderly are the major consumer of health care. The elderly are also the richest part of the population. And the receive the most government benefits.
The young in this country will be paying more to support the elderly. I guess having kids is so the children can pay for their parents and grandparents in retirement.
People say they spend too much on health care. But what they do not say is they want cheaper health care. There is a difference. In the UK the deaths for Prostate and Breast cancer is 30-40% higher than in the US because they do not use the latest drugs and treatment. Is this really what people want?
Do people really want CHEAPER health care?
We just had the head of Canada come to the US for health treatment. *** HE *** said he came to the US because he could get the treatment faster and with better quality than in Canada. :confused2: This is not the first time a leader of Canada came to the US for treatment.
In MA preconditions cannot stop someone from being covered. Insurance companies are seeing people get a policy. Keep it for a few months, rack up big bills, and then drop coverage. One company said that 40% of its new enrollees kept there coverage for less than five months and incurred costs of 600% more than expected.
Who will pay the higher costs of the people who jumped? The people who hold the insurance.
The head of the IRS and Congress critters who voted for the health care bill have said the IRS will NOT go after people who do not maintain coverage.
They are either fools or liars. Ok, they could be both.
If the IRS does NOT go after people for not maintaining coverage then the premiums WILL go up faster. If they do go after people this mean the IRS will have to monitor your health care policy coverage just like DMV does for car insurance. BUT DMV can pull your registration in NC. What will the IRS do?
The statements I have read said that the IRS will "bill" you based on your tax refund. But if you are half of the population that does not pay Federal Income tax this will be interesting. Will the IRS be putting tax liens on people for not having health care coverage?
The answer is that the IRS will have to go after non payers or policy rates will increase faster than claimed.
Later,
Dan
Exactly right...with 30 Million more folks getting insurance and not enough doctors...look for long waits for an appointment and then long book reading waits in the reception room at the doctors office. Look for rationing as well !
Yes just for the 15 seconds that you see them!:laughing:
brin
Super Member
That's the absolute truth !! Exactly right.:thumbsup:
Take a look at the criteria "The Who" used to rank the systems (who pays the bills gets quite a bit of weight in their ranking system). France's system is in trouble (cost)--do a simple search in google.
Compared to Italy, the U.S. has twice as many MRI units and 25% more Cat Scan units per million people. In Italy, the average waiting time for a mamogram is 70 days and for an endoscopy it's 74 days.
You can limit law suits, limit coverage. limit payments to providers and change behavior (lifestyle choices) in an attempt to help everyone become healthier as a means to control costs. The new bill/law (in my opinion) does very little in these areas. Under the new law an employer can choose to pay a $2000 per employee penalty for not offering insurance. Most employers spend much more than $2000 per employee to provide insurance--how many will dump their plans and pay the penalty?
MikePA
Super Moderator
Almost every one of them will dump their plans and pay the fine, it's a simple business decision. This will achieve the primary purpose of the bill which is to make the federal government the single payer and thereby make a huge number of people new dependents of the federal government.
2manyrocks
Super Member
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2007
- Messages
- 9,528
If you take an already inefficient market and then add more demand while imposing restraints on the market to adjust itself, one has to wonder where it ends up and how quickly it takes to get there.
I say the market is already inefficient because of the lack of consumer information. In many cases, the patient goes in not fully knowing (a) what's wrong with them (b) which service provider can best help them or (c) what it's going to cost. Even after identifying what's wrong and what service provider you want to use, I find it impossible to get a straight answer about what the services are going to cost.
What other business is run this way?
I say the market is already inefficient because of the lack of consumer information. In many cases, the patient goes in not fully knowing (a) what's wrong with them (b) which service provider can best help them or (c) what it's going to cost. Even after identifying what's wrong and what service provider you want to use, I find it impossible to get a straight answer about what the services are going to cost.
What other business is run this way?
Maybe if we Americans weren't a bunch of lazy slobs that never think about prevention and just want a doctor to fix us with a pill or a knife all the time, health care wouldn't be such a big industry and would be affordable for everyone and the government wouldn't have to get in it. Sure there's accidents and people that exercise and eat right have heart attacks too but come-on we are a lazy overweight country as a rule. No offense to anyone with a weight problem that is trying or can't help it.
Of course I am just an idealistic dreamer though, it will never happen - so we will just have to throw some more money at the insurance companies and cut the physical ed or nutrition programs in the schools. **** of a country ain't it?
Of course I am just an idealistic dreamer though, it will never happen - so we will just have to throw some more money at the insurance companies and cut the physical ed or nutrition programs in the schools. **** of a country ain't it?
How can anyone know this when there are hidden expenses everywhere? The federal government just dropped $1.5 billion on the H1N1 scare alone. Is there any reliable third party source that can tell us what the actual per-capita spending really is? All we have so far is reports written by lying weasel funding ******. They always say there is insufficient spending to deal with the current crisis no matter how much money they receive.
Finding the total cost of health care is like trying to figure out how much Nixon's "War on Cancer" has cost to date. The best estimates I have seen are between $1 and $2 Trillion worldwide, public and private. Amazing since the war was supposed to be won by 1981. Today it would take an entire army of forensic accountants to figure out what happened to all that money over the last four decades.
Anything less is just a guess just like the ones published about Canadian per-capita health spending.
