ObamaCare and Healthcare.gov

[stephenrc]

I do have a big problem when people are forced to purchase a product they may not need or want, regardless of the "social good".

What about car insurance? AFAIK, every state requires some in order to drive a car.

[joshh]

What about car insurance? AFAIK, every state requires some in order to drive a car.

Every single person will need medical care in their life. Without insurance, tax-payers and hospitals are on the hook. This is why Obamacare claims not to add a cent to the deficit...it's true. We already spend double what universal healthcare would cost us.

I'm fine with people who want to pay their own bill, if that's possible. While people could pay for basic office visits, nobody could pay a million dollar trauma bill. This isn't an exaggeration. I have to confirm radiology charges at my hospital upon discharge and have yet to see a total bill less than 400k for a 2+ week stay. And that's at Medicare rates. Non-insured rates are much higher. This doesn't even count the bill from the trauma hospital before we get them, and it doesn't count the rehab care afterwards.


I do agree that this is best left to states BUT states have failed miserably at fixing this and have no ideas on a real fix. Texas for example has 34% of working adults without any health insurance. How long do we put up with a system that is a complete failure?


If there was a REAL alternative, I think everyone would listen and prefer that. The only alternative I have heard from either side is single-payer (from the left) and allowing bad doctors to butcher people and putting a cap on damages (from the right). Tort reform is like cutting down a single tree in the forest and then declaring the forest has been cleared.


For those who say repeal and replace...great...replace with WHAT? Where is the comprehensive bill that will cover anyone who wants insurance and keeps cost down? Please direct me to the Republican HR bill that will do this... It has been 4 years since the healthcare bill debate started. Isn't that long enough to come up with an alternative to Obamacare? Worse yet, it's been 2 decades since the previous push for healthcare overhaul. 2 decades isn't enough time to come up with a plan?!


Anytime I complained about anything as a kid, I had to tell my parents a REAL solution for what I was complaining about. If I had no ideas, I got spanked for being a whiner... Congress could definitely use an ass-whooping.

[fredsheldon]

Every single person will need medical care in their life. Without insurance, tax-payers and hospitals are on the hook. This is why Obamacare claims not to add a cent to the deficit...it's true. We already spend double what universal healthcare would cost us.

I'm fine with people who want to pay their own bill, if that's possible. While people could pay for basic office visits, nobody could pay a million dollar trauma bill. This isn't an exaggeration. I have to confirm radiology charges at my hospital upon discharge and have yet to see a total bill less than 400k for a 2+ week stay. And that's at Medicare rates. Non-insured rates are much higher. This doesn't even count the bill from the trauma hospital before we get them, and it doesn't count the rehab care afterwards.

I do agree that this is best left to states BUT states have failed miserably at fixing this and have no ideas on a real fix. Texas for example has 34% of working adults without any health insurance. How long do we put up with a system that is a complete failure?

If there was a REAL alternative, I think everyone would listen and prefer that. The only alternative I have heard from either side is single-payer (from the left) and allowing bad doctors to butcher people and putting a cap on damages (from the right). Tort reform is like cutting down a single tree in the forest and then declaring the forest has been cleared.

For those who say repeal and replace...great...replace with WHAT? Where is the comprehensive bill that will cover anyone who wants insurance and keeps cost down? Please direct me to the Republican HR bill that will do this... It has been 4 years since the healthcare bill debate started. Isn't that long enough to come up with an alternative to Obamacare? Worse yet, it's been 2 decades since the previous push for healthcare overhaul. 2 decades isn't enough time to come up with a plan?!


Anytime I complained about anything as a kid, I had to tell my parents a REAL solution for what I was complaining about. If I had no ideas, I got spanked for being a whiner... Congress could definitely use an ass-whooping.

Welcome back to the discussion Josh, your views are always refreshing and usually spot on.

Fred

[Gene Howe]

You made my point!

What about car insurance? AFAIK, every state requires some in order to drive a car.

[Ed in Tampa]

Every single person will need medical care in their life. Without insurance, tax-payers and hospitals are on the hook. This is why Obamacare claims not to add a cent to the deficit...it's true. We already spend double what universal healthcare would cost us.

I'm fine with people who want to pay their own bill, if that's possible. While people could pay for basic office visits, nobody could pay a million dollar trauma bill. This isn't an exaggeration. I have to confirm radiology charges at my hospital upon discharge and have yet to see a total bill less than 400k for a 2+ week stay. And that's at Medicare rates. Non-insured rates are much higher. This doesn't even count the bill from the trauma hospital before we get them, and it doesn't count the rehab care afterwards.


I do agree that this is best left to states BUT states have failed miserably at fixing this and have no ideas on a real fix. Texas for example has 34% of working adults without any health insurance. How long do we put up with a system that is a complete failure?


If there was a REAL alternative, I think everyone would listen and prefer that. The only alternative I have heard from either side is single-payer (from the left) and allowing bad doctors to butcher people and putting a cap on damages (from the right). Tort reform is like cutting down a single tree in the forest and then declaring the forest has been cleared.


For those who say repeal and replace...great...replace with WHAT? Where is the comprehensive bill that will cover anyone who wants insurance and keeps cost down? Please direct me to the Republican HR bill that will do this... It has been 4 years since the healthcare bill debate started. Isn't that long enough to come up with an alternative to Obamacare? Worse yet, it's been 2 decades since the previous push for healthcare overhaul. 2 decades isn't enough time to come up with a plan?!


Anytime I complained about anything as a kid, I had to tell my parents a REAL solution for what I was complaining about. If I had no ideas, I got spanked for being a whiner... Congress could definitely use an ass-whooping.

I agree everyone that needs health care should be able to get healthcare.

But why do I have to pay for others care? I was taught from the youngest age to work, and store up money for a rainy day. I did that. Why can't everyone? Why must I be made to feel like I'm doing something wrong when I ask why didn't they store up money for a rainy day?

You mention malpractice caps. I agree lousy doctors should be trimmed out. But how does suing the do this? They get malpractice insurance and consider a cost of doing business.

Stop the lawsuits. If a doctor screws up and is proven guilt in criminal trial then pull his license to do business.
You know what will happen most doctors at are sued today will never be sued because people won't be able to make a buck on them. Also the lousy doctors will be out of the business.

With car insurance that you pointed to I don't have to pay for someone else's insurance but they must have it. If that is what you want fine make everyone have insurance or proof of the ability to pay for medical attention.

The problem is this Doctors and Hospitals prices have going through the roof. An operation in the US cost nearly 10 times what the same operation with the same results does in another country.

My wife has problem with her foot and the lady was working for was from Britain. The lady gave me wife a tube of Ibuprofen gel to rub on her foot. It worked like magic.

I went to the pharmacy to get another tube only to learn it isn't sold in the US. And a similar product being tested costs $300 an oz and can only be gotten by prescription if you qualify for the test. Pharmacist just shrugged his shoulder and said the company is getting rich hiding behind the FDA.

The people my wife worked for were going to Britain so she asked them to buy another tube and she would pay for it. They brought back two 24oz tubes and didn't want any money because it only cost $8 a tube.

You know what US taxpayer dollars are being used by Pharmaceutical companies as research grants. Then when the research is successful the new drug is offered at high marked prices justified by high research costs.
We paid twice for the same research once with out taxes going to reseach grants and again in product costs that include "R&D costs".

So our answer is get insurance make others pay for and make the Doctors, hospitals and drug companies rich and offer poor service because none of the resources were increased with the new medical care plan.

Sounds like a plan to me.

[joshh]

I agree everyone that needs health care should be able to get healthcare.

But why do I have to pay for others care? I was taught from the youngest age to work, and store up money for a rainy day. I did that. Why can't everyone? Why must I be made to feel like I'm doing something wrong when I ask why didn't they store up money for a rainy day? I don't think you are wrong for asking. The sad reality is, we all pay for people without insurance already and we pay significantly more than the cost of providing them insurance. Lack of insurance is the single largest driver of healthcare costs. People either use the ER as their primary care doctor, or they wait until their condition is REALLY bad which explodes the cost.

You mention malpractice caps. I agree lousy doctors should be trimmed out. But how does suing the do this? They get malpractice insurance and consider a cost of doing business.
Stop the lawsuits. If a doctor screws up and is proven guilt in criminal trial then pull his license to do business.
You know what will happen most doctors at are sued today will never be sued because people won't be able to make a buck on them. Also the lousy doctors will be out of the business. Criminal lawsuits are a sticky issue. If it's intentional...hell yes. If it's not intentional, do we put them in jail for it? I don't see malpractice suits as a tool to weed out bad doctors as much as reimbursing someone or making them "whole". How much is a leg worth? Or permanent paralysis? It's not much comfort for someone to be told, "well, you are paralyzed forever...but hey...the doctor is in jail."

With car insurance that you pointed to I don't have to pay for someone else's insurance but they must have it. If that is what you want fine make everyone have insurance or proof of the ability to pay for medical attention. I agree I shouldn't have to pay for someone's medical care, but I do already. What's the alternative?

The problem is this Doctors and Hospitals prices have going through the roof. An operation in the US cost nearly 10 times what the same operation with the same results does in another country. This is the single best example of the need for universal coverage and is a side effect of the non-insured. Hospitals only get a portion of the bill paid via tax-money. The rest they have to recoup somehow. This cost (along with greed) is passed onto the patient.

My wife has problem with her foot and the lady was working for was from Britain. The lady gave me wife a tube of Ibuprofen gel to rub on her foot. It worked like magic.

I went to the pharmacy to get another tube only to learn it isn't sold in the US. And a similar product being tested costs $300 an oz and can only be gotten by prescription if you qualify for the test. Pharmacist just shrugged his shoulder and said the company is getting rich hiding behind the FDA.

The people my wife worked for were going to Britain so she asked them to buy another tube and she would pay for it. They brought back two 24oz tubes and didn't want any money because it only cost $8 a tube. I think their lower prices are a combination of not having the FDA scam and the fact that everyone has insurance there.

You know what US taxpayer dollars are being used by Pharmaceutical companies as research grants. Then when the research is successful the new drug is offered at high marked prices justified by high research costs.
We paid twice for the same research once with out taxes going to reseach grants and again in product costs that include "R&D costs". Yep! Huge scam and made legal by our corrupt politicians because they get kickbacks.

So our answer is get insurance make others pay for and make the Doctors, hospitals and drug companies rich and offer poor service because none of the resources were increased with the new medical care plan. Universal healthcare solves this (Obamacare definitely does NOT). The only reason I don't want to see universal healthcare here is because America would never adopt a version the politicians couldn't scam. The rest of the world offers universal healthcare to all citizens and do it in a way that the government is simply a bank account for the funds before they are used to pay the actual healthcare costs. Healthcare decisions are made by the doctor and patient. "Administrative" decisions are made by panels of doctors.

Sounds like a plan to me.

See blue text above.

Welcome back to the discussion Josh, your views are always refreshing and usually spot on.

Fred

Thanks =)

[heathicus]

What about car insurancece? AFAIK, every state requires some in order to drive a car.

If someone chooses to own and drive a car, they need a minimum amount of insurance to cover damage or injury to OTHER people (the specifics vary from state to state). Nobody is forced by law to own and drive a car as a consequence of being an American citizen.

The Obamacare individual mandate to buy insurance, or suffer the consequences of law, is a requirement of simply being a citizen. It's not a result of a choice that any citizen is free to make or not make.

[joshh]

If someone chooses to own and drive a car, they need a minimum amount of insurance to cover damage or injury to OTHER people (the specifics vary from state to state). Nobody is forced by law to own and drive a car as a consequence of being an American citizen.

The Obamacare individual mandate to buy insurance, or suffer the consequences of law, is a requirement of simply being a citizen. It's not a result of a choice that any citizen is free to make or not make.

You are 100% correct, which is exactly why the supreme court ruled it as a tax. As an American citizen, I am required to buy (via taxes) all kinds of things or suffer the consequences of law.

To me this is analogous to the abortion debate (not in substance, but in method). I am anti-abortion, but I understand the reality that laws upheld by the supreme court rarely change. Even if I'm successful in getting abortion banned, how many abortions would have happened in the years/decades it would take to overturn? So do I focus my energy on trying to ban abortion, or do I focus my energy on reducing unwanted pregnancies? Would I prevent more abortions by "accepting" (used VERY loosely) the law and pushing contraception and education instead?

This article claims the efforts to repeal Obamacare have cost tens of millions. I know this figure is wildly exaggerated, but aside from the cost...how much else could have been accomplished with their time?

Obamacare has been shoved through congress and upheld by the supreme court. Repealing it will not happen without major changes to the current make-up of congress (that takes elections). There have been 40+/- failed votes to repeal it. I think that time would have been better spent taking an item they hate about Obamacare, explain that individual piece to the public, and vote on removing / changing that specific item. They would get much more into law that way and a lot of independents would swing back to the right.

[BuckeyeDennis]

You are 100% correct, which is exactly why the supreme court ruled it as a tax. As an American citizen, I am required to buy (via taxes) all kinds of things or suffer the consequences of law.

To me this is analogous to the abortion debate (not in substance, but in method). I am anti-abortion, but I understand the reality that laws upheld by the supreme court rarely change. Even if I'm successful in getting abortion banned, how many abortions would have happened in the years/decades it would take to overturn? So do I focus my energy on trying to ban abortion, or do I focus my energy on reducing unwanted pregnancies? Would I prevent more abortions by "accepting" (used VERY loosely) the law and pushing contraception and education instead?

This article claims the efforts to repeal Obamacare have cost tens of millions. I know this figure is wildly exaggerated, but aside from the cost...how much else could have been accomplished with their time?

Obamacare has been shoved through congress and upheld by the supreme court. Repealing it will not happen without major changes to the current make-up of congress (that takes elections). There have been 40+/- failed votes to repeal it. I think that time would have been better spent taking an item they hate about Obamacare, explain that individual piece to the public, and vote on removing / changing that specific item. They would get much more into law that way and a lot of independents would swing back to the right.

Hallelujah! A pragmatist. That kind of thinking will get some useful things done, and also minimize the damage from the lunatic fringe of the (pick your least favorite) party!

[heathicus]

I agree that the game the Republicans are playing right now is a pointless waste of time. However, the Supreme Court was wrong. How is it a "tax" to force me to buy a service from a private company? Sorry, but it was a very bad decision - the Supreme Court does make bad decisions from time to time.