TXMomof4 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Hey' date=' I'll go for it if Congress opts out of its cushy congressional health plan and puts itself at the mercy of the system they are creating. Of course, this will never happen - with a few exceptions, they can't even be bothered to read the thing.[/quote'] Amen. How many stories do we hear decrying the quality of treatment for seniors on Medicare, how substandard care is on Medicaid and the poor quality of military medical treatment (i.e. long waits, things that are covered or not, etc.). So we all get that? Except for Congress - right? AND we get to pay through the nose with a 56% tax? I think I'll pass. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shenan Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Wow! I'm surprised no one else has quoted this before me. Excellent video!! This whole healthcare reform bill seems to simply be a ruse for taking all our freedoms away eventually. Of course, no one wants anyone to suffer and not get medical care just because they cannot afford it. That is why instituting socialism with socialized medicine is the preferred method. Who can argue with taking care of poor sick folks? Only problem is, socialized medicine leads to socialized everything else and that is exactly what it is meant to do. If you haven't listened to this 10-minute youtube video, please do so now. I CAN'T WATCH the video or my satellite company will FAP me!! :banghead: But if Ronald Reagan says anything like this, I am sure I would LOVE it!! "Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free." ~ Ronald Reagan OR "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are... I'm from the government and I'm here to help." ~ Ronald Reagan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMomof4 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 There's nothing in that article about giving shots without parental consent. I'm assuming Perry was talking about that, not the act of giving shots. I don't believe a school could legally give them without permission, so I doubt the story about the school debating alerting parents. They can take underage girls for abortions and provide birth control pills now, what's to stop shots? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TXMomof4 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I think it's a hoot when people use the words socialism, communism, marxist, etc interchangeably. You'd think they'd care enough to figure out which one they're talking about, since it seems to bug the living daylights out of them. However, there are people that would have no problem with all the things you mention privatized- schools, libraries, roads, prisons, fire departments, etc. Schools may have federal standards, but they are run at the state and local level. Libraries are run at the local level. The interstate highways are maintained by the federal government, but county roads, city roads etc. are maintained at the local level. Fire depts. are run locally. Does this bill provide funding and allow us to choose how to handle medical issues at a local level? Nope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elaine Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I like Clark Howard's plan: He also believes in medical cost transparency (posted prices) so you can comparison shop. I love Clark Howard! He's so wise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elaine Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Maybe you and I can put our heads together and come up with the perfect plan. I've always wanted to march up the steps of the capitol and demand something. It just feels so radical.;) Sounds good, I have been doing a lot of protesting lately.:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BalanceSeeker Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I have very serious concerns about this plan. One of the biggest is what this will do to my income. I am sole supporter and am an RN. Dr.s will definitely feel the pinch, and I'm sure the nursing pay is going to plummet, too. Translation = more people out of their homes, etc...and the downward spiral continues. I just think the govt is biting off more than they can chew with all the take overs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vida Winter Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I have not read the previous posts and have not had the time to read the bill since I have been volunteering at summer camp all week. From what I have heard, it is a power grab that will not allow one to keep private insurance if there is any change - such as addition of a dependent. As if private insurance has any chance anyway if this thing passes. All I can say is make sure you have a physician in your family. You will need one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I need a lawyer just to read this thing.:svengo: Before this country was founded, laws were so convoluted & complex that common people couldnt' understand them. Some were even excluded from them based on social class, etc. Our country was supposed to be different. Lawyers! I heard a guy on the radio say that we need to move to have legal care a RIGHT also & that lawyers should be regulated, cases analyzed by gov't to see if worthy of representation & lawyer pay CAPPED to keep cost down and make them affordable to every person..... this was sarcasm... but how "to the point". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shenan Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 There's nothing in that article about giving shots without parental consent. I'm assuming Perry was talking about that, not the act of giving shots. I don't believe a school could legally give them without permission, so I doubt the story about the school debating alerting parents. Actually the article also DOES NOT state that parental consent will be asked for. You can easily google mandatory swine flu vaccinations and come up with a dozen articles. But since that article wasn't good enough here are a few more: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/07/04/Warning-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Coming-Soon.aspx Quote from this article: "Many do not realize that such laws even exist. But the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA), which was passed by many states in 2002, includes provisions that would allow state health officials to use the state militia to: Take control of all roads leading into and out of cities and states Seize homes, cars, telephones, computers, food, fuel, clothing, firearms and alcoholic beverages for their own use (and not be held liable if these actions result in the destruction of personal property) Arrest, imprison and forcibly examine, vaccinate and medicate citizens without consent (and not be held liable if these actions result in your death or injury) " Here's another article: http://www.examiner.com/x-6495-US-Intelligence-Examiner~y2009m7d7-Swine-flu-Vaccine-risks-and-dangers Quote from this article: "States Enact Stronger Quarantine & No Free Assembly Laws In some states, like Massachusetts, public health doctors have persuaded legislators to quickly pass pandemic influenza legislation that will allow state officials to enter homes and businesses without the approval of occupants; to investigate and quarantine individuals without their consent; to require licensed health care providers to give citizens vaccines and to ban the free assembly of citizens in the state. [23][24] What Can You Do? What does this declaration of a public health emergency in the U.S. mean for you and your family? It means that, right now, you need to become educated about vaccination, influenza, vaccine risks, and the public health laws in your state. You need to find out what your rights and options are under new public health laws that may require you and your children to get vaccinated or be quarantined. [25] Take Action Now Go to www.NVIC.org and learn more. Register now to attend the Fourth International Public Conference on Vaccination Oct. 2-4, 2009 in Washington, D.C. and help organize in your state to protect your right to informed consent to vaccination. Call and write the state legislators you elected to make public health laws that govern you and your family. Make your voice heard." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mommyof4ks Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I have not read the previous posts and have not had the time to read the bill since I have been volunteering at summer camp all week. From what I have heard, it is a power grab that will not allow one to keep private insurance if there is any change - such as addition of a dependent. As if private insurance has any chance anyway if this thing passes. All I can say is make sure you have a physician in your family. You will need one. Thank goodness we know some good docs. ;) I just need to meet a allergy specialist and we should be good. *sigh* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KnightMaiden Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 thanks for passing on this information...a little overwhelming and scary! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mama Bear Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 I suspect the legislation will please neither the liberal /progressives nor the conservatives/traditionals. Perhaps that is a good sign ........... It will be interesting to see where the chips will fall. I agree. Thought this was interesting: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/profile2.html#stats His testimony before Congress: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/potter_testimony.html Video clips concerning the same: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07102009/watch.html Veddy, veddy interesting. I tend to be suspicious of endorsements and wish mostly to hear things from the horse's mouths, so to speak. It's imperative that each of us pay attention and form opinions on the facts, as we understand them, rather than on inflammatory rhetoric and lies. For example, I've reinforced with my kids that every time they hear a campaign ad, they need to find out who funded it. Not just the name of the organization, but where the actual cash came from. It's my experience that nine out of ten times, "Consumers for _______" are funded by shadows within the wildly wealthy industry most likely to take a hit as a result of that particular piece of legislation. (We've particularly enjoyed the Art of Argument with this -- lots of good info to use as a springboard with the punkins.) It would be nice to not be paranoid, yes? ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barb_ Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Don't look to the government for compassion. It has never happened in the history of the country or of mankind. :001_huh: Hyperbole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Nobody's going to be forced to do abortions. From WSJ: You know, you say this NOW and I agree...for now. It is not what Obama is going to do now...this second. It is what he is going to do over his 4, possibly 8 years in office. Did you know that, in Minnesota, they are regulating the number of DOGS people are allowed to own. No more than 2. Freedom is going out the window...today dogs...tomorrow what? Children? China does it. Do we really think it could never happen to the US? If not, then perhaps we could have re-thought electing a man who stands for socialism, unified health care - who is openly for abortion..even in the late term. Ugh. And what is mind-blowing to *me* is that people in this country seem blind to these facts. Suddenly, my best friend is telling me socialism would be fine and that universal healthcare would be great. What the H*LL is happening to this country? How are people missing the boat here? I guess it is like MJ's journey into sainthodd after death...people wear blinders and follow the crowd to the slaughter. I suppose I have said enough on this topic and likely should not even read further topics on this subject here... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funschooler5 Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Many people opt to purchase policies for catastrophic events such as the one you mentioned. Many other people don't like that idea because it requires putting money away or budgeting for healthcare. When my husband and I were first married, we didn't have health insurance. We paid cash for doctors visits and medications, and we received discounts from the doctors for doing so. We also only went to the doctor when we were really sick. The problem is that the free market has been removed from health care. If people actually had a voice and were able to choose to go to Dr.Smith who charges $100 for an exam or Dr.Jones who charges $75 for the same service, who would you choose? The real change, IMO, should be this. If you saw this scenario, health care costs would come down to where we could actually afford to pay cash again. We haven't had insurance for about five years now. We pay cash for everything. Our hospitals and doctors take payments. Our eye doctor and dentists want money up front, so anything over what we can afford goes on our credit card. We only go to the dentist for toothaches, and the eye doctor because our older DC both have glasses. We're self-employed, and we had private insurance for a couple of years (Regence BlueCross BlueShield). It was ridiculous. They raised the premiums on us every few months, and the plan didn't cover anything needed it for. We only went to the doctor when absolutely necessary (still do, due to money). When my oldest was four, she had a UTI, but the dr wanted to take her to the hospital to do some tests. Our plan didn't cover any of it. We had to pay our hospital $100/ month for over a year...in addition to our rising monthly premiums.:glare: After that, we decided since we were already paying out of pocket for everything, why pay the insurance company too? I'm going to look into getting a health care savings account, and/or a catastrophic health plan. I really hate to give ANY insurance company my money though. :mad: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Here is an excerpt from the transcript of the above Bill Moyer's show that can viewed online which describes the outllandish behavior of health insurance companies: "SEN. JAY ROCKEFELLER: I'm pleased to welcome Mr. Wendell Potter to the committee today. He is a former insurance executive who is going to tell us about some of the tactics insurance companies use to keep insurance in the dark. I have a special respect for him, simply because he's doing something I think very courageous and very brave. WENDELL POTTER: Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to be here this afternoon... BILL MOYERS: Until last year, Wendell Potter was head of corporate communications for Cigna — the country's fourth largest health insurance company. Altogether Potter spent nearly 2 decades playing for the side that has opposed health care reform from the Clintons forward... he sat on policy committees, crafted executive messages, cajoled the press and witnessed firsthand the promises made... and broken... Take the case of Nataline Sarkisyan... HILDA SARKISYAN: The insurance company is denying our case. She needs a liver transplant... BILL MOYERS: At the end of 2007, Potter defended Cigna when it refused to pay for the 17-year-old's transplant surgery, claiming the procedure was experimental. Protests at a regional headquarters created a public relations nightmare. CROWD: Health care for all! Health care for all! BILL MOYERS: Cigna reversed its decision, but by then, it was too late. Nataline died just two hours after her surgery was approved. Early last year Potter left Cigna. This summer, before the Senate Commerce Committee, he went public for the first time. WENDELL POTTER: Recently it became abundantly clear to me that the industry's charm offensive, which is the most visible part of a duplicitous and well-financed PR and lobbying campaign, may well shape reform in a way that benefits Wall Street far more than average Americans. The industry and its backers are using fear tactics, as they did in 1994, to tar a transparent and accountable, publicly accountable health care option as, quote, "government-run health care." What we have today, Mr. Chairman, is Wall Street-run health care that has proven itself an untrustworthy partner to its customers, to the doctors and hospitals who deliver care and to the state and federal governments that attempt to regulate it." I pray that no one has to deal with health insurance companies denying coverage, droppping you as a customer , or jacking up your premiums due to illness. I think all of us should ask if they really believe that they will be able to obtain or afford their current health insurance in 5 years from now. Insurance rates have gone up several times the inflation rate every year. Also, I know that as an RN for 22 years that I have seen the health insurance available to me through my employers offering less benefits every year and higher deductibles and co-pays and out of pocket expenses every year. Just my 2 cents. Again, no matter what side you are on, the Bill Moyer's show on pbs.org is a must see for a truly informed opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tree House Academy Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Actually the article also DOES NOT state that parental consent will be asked for. You can easily google mandatory swine flu vaccinations and come up with a dozen articles. But since that article wasn't good enough here are a few more: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/07/04/Warning-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Coming-Soon.aspx Quote from this article: "Many do not realize that such laws even exist. But the Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MSEHPA), which was passed by many states in 2002, includes provisions that would allow state health officials to use the state militia to: Take control of all roads leading into and out of cities and states Seize homes, cars, telephones, computers, food, fuel, clothing, firearms and alcoholic beverages for their own use (and not be held liable if these actions result in the destruction of personal property) Arrest, imprison and forcibly examine, vaccinate and medicate citizens without consent (and not be held liable if these actions result in your death or injury) " Here's another article: http://www.examiner.com/x-6495-US-Intelligence-Examiner~y2009m7d7-Swine-flu-Vaccine-risks-and-dangers Quote from this article: "States Enact Stronger Quarantine & No Free Assembly Laws In some states, like Massachusetts, public health doctors have persuaded legislators to quickly pass pandemic influenza legislation that will allow state officials to enter homes and businesses without the approval of occupants; to investigate and quarantine individuals without their consent; to require licensed health care providers to give citizens vaccines and to ban the free assembly of citizens in the state. [23][24] What Can You Do? What does this declaration of a public health emergency in the U.S. mean for you and your family? It means that, right now, you need to become educated about vaccination, influenza, vaccine risks, and the public health laws in your state. You need to find out what your rights and options are under new public health laws that may require you and your children to get vaccinated or be quarantined. [25] Take Action Now Go to www.NVIC.org and learn more. Register now to attend the Fourth International Public Conference on Vaccination Oct. 2-4, 2009 in Washington, D.C. and help organize in your state to protect your right to informed consent to vaccination. Call and write the state legislators you elected to make public health laws that govern you and your family. Make your voice heard." THIS is totally and completely insane. We should just resurrect Hilter and invite him to come run the USA. :ohmy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJN Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 need to hear that WE THE PEOPLE are not interested in this kind of health care reform. They plan to vote on it before the leave for their August break. SOUND THE ALARM AND MAKE YOUR VOICE KNOWN! We have to stand up for what is right and wrong. This is not the path America needs to take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shenan Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 You know, you say this NOW and I agree...for now. It is not what Obama is going to do now...this second. It is what he is going to do over his 4, possibly 8 years in office. Did you know that, in Minnesota, they are regulating the number of DOGS people are allowed to own. No more than 2. Freedom is going out the window...today dogs...tomorrow what? Children? China does it. Do we really think it could never happen to the US? If not, then perhaps we could have re-thought electing a man who stands for socialism, unified health care - who is openly for abortion..even in the late term. Ugh. And what is mind-blowing to *me* is that people in this country seem blind to these facts. Suddenly, my best friend is telling me socialism would be fine and that universal healthcare would be great. What the H*LL is happening to this country? How are people missing the boat here? I guess it is like MJ's journey into sainthodd after death...people wear blinders and follow the crowd to the slaughter. I suppose I have said enough on this topic and likely should not even read further topics on this subject here... I agree! Everyone's jumping off the bridge and I DON'T WANT TO GO!! Why are they making me jump off the bridge with them? Help! Someone's got ahold of my ankle! Ahhhhhh.........:D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perry Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) Did you know that, in Minnesota, they are regulating the number of DOGS people are allowed to own. No more than 2. Do you have a reference for this? I googled, and found an old case (1995) where a city limited families to 2 dogs. It was eventually found invalid. There are some local ordinances limiting number of pets. I can't find anything statewide though. Edited July 17, 2009 by Perry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My3Boys Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 Exactly! I am terrified, because my 4 year old son is in treatment for cancer. As it stands now he can see the doc anytime day or night, no waiting, and tests are done as soon as it is deemed necessary to hopefully catch relapse or illness which can kill him. All I have to do is call and an hour later we are getting a test done. If the gov't takes over he may not have that kind of access and it may take a few days or longer to get xrays and such ordered that could literally save his life. Now if the gov't lets him die they would not have to worry about the ongoing problems he will have his entire life, but I will miss my baby. Who will decide if he is 'worth' it. Relapsed leukemia is hard to treat, but we know many kids who were given less than a 5% chance of survival who are doing well years later. Our current private ins has allowed that, and I thank them. My dh has worked very hard to get ins that we have now and it pay SO WELL that we are not sinking even though our son has been in treatment for 2.5 years and is not yet done. Those with medicaid don't get nearly the help with side effects and such that we do and it is sad to watch those kids suffer while my son looks so healthy even on such harsh treatment. Just my own frustration. :D I just wanted to say, I'm so sorry your son is going through something like that. I can't imagine how difficult it must be for your family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacy in NJ Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) I am going to make this one post, then leave the thread, because I find arguing my corner on this issue so frustrating. The NHS, like all systems, is imperfect, however during my father's final illness his treatment was exemplary, and my mother's care is wonderful. Since arriving in the UK last year, my own treatment for various illnesses, and my son's orthodontic treatment, have been superb. The NHS has a history of long waits for treatment. Enormous sums have been poured into the system over the last ten years and waiting lists have been slashed. Health care in the UK costs the country enormously less than the service does in the US, and life expectancy is slightly longer. When stories come up of people being denied treatment under the NHS, there is widespread misunderstanding of what that means. The NHS functions like one enormous insurance programme, but whilst there are no pre-existing condition exclusions, treatments are given based on evidence of their efficacy, which is reviewed constantly. If one in a million people with a particular condition will benefit from a certain treatment, then it will not be authorised, because the money would be better spent elsewhere. There is nothing stopping an individual or their family from taking out top-up insurance to cover an unproven treatment, or buying it privately with cash, but the NHS will not cover it. I have no problem with that. A friend of mine worked on the cancer policy for the NHS. She visited various countries around the world, including the US, investigating how many lines of treatment would be tried in order to save a life, and what effect this had on the patients. Her impression was that the US was too wedded to heroic medicine, and that the patient's interest, in most cases, was not served by line after line after line of treatment, when the likelihood of recovery was vanishingly small. My father died of cancer in the UK five years ago, and I think the balance between treating him and allowing him to fade in peace was well struck. I will not be reading the detail of the proposed US policy, so I don't know if it is well designed. I do hope that someone reading this can consider the issue with an open mind. Laura I've lost both of my parents, so I understand that pain. Responding to your post, though, I have 4 numbers for you: The cancer survial rates of the U.S. vs. Europe For US Men: 66.3% For US Women: 62.9% For EU Men: 47.3% For EU Women: 55.0% The cancer survial rates for UK residents are the lowest in the EU. I'm glad you had a good experience with the NHS. I would suggest the 15-20% of UK/EU residents who died from under treated cancers may disagree, if they were able. ETA: These figures come from a 2007 edition of Lancet, a well respected medical journal. Here's a link:http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/561737 Edited July 18, 2009 by Stacy in NJ more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BalanceSeeker Posted July 17, 2009 Share Posted July 17, 2009 (edited) Where's the part about no consent? This was an interesting clip: http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/07/04/Warning-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Coming-Soon.aspx ETA: If our govt doesn't scare you...yet, wake up! Edited July 18, 2009 by BalanceSeeker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretchen in NJ Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 My husband and I were watching CSpan last night. The republicans were outraged at this bill because there is no mention of abortion coverage in it. They said that when a bill specifically does not mention something then the courts can rule in favor for it. Their bottom line was that we as tax payers will be paying for federally funded abortions and also that we will see an increase in abortions because of this. Well sort of. Actually, the bill has written in it that there be a panel commisioned to decide what all health plans must cover and what they cannot cover. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 You do what those of us did during the Dubya years- grit your teeth and wait it out until the next election. Self-medicating can help, too. Amen to that!!! It is really funny to see all the disrespectful comments about this administration after having accused those of us who disagreed with policies of the Bush Administration of being unAmerican or not patriotic for simply disagreeing with policy decisions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kalanamak Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 To be honest, I am so opposed to this bill (and many of the other things that Mr. Obama stands for and wishes to implement in this country) that it makes me sick to my stomach to even think about it. I find myself wishing I could move out of the country right about now. Not to pick on any side in this, but I get a chuckle over how I've been hearing wishes/threats to move to another country since I can remember (1968, to be exact). I've only felt that way once, and wild horses couldn't drag just "when" out of me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CatMomof3 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 I agree! Everyone's jumping off the bridge and I DON'T WANT TO GO!! Why are they making me jump off the bridge with them? Help! Someone's got ahold of my ankle! Ahhhhhh.........:D Don't worry I've got your hand ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kari C in SC Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Honestly, selling some assests might be needed to cover health cost. They should not be free & no person should expect others to cover their costs in order for them to not do all they can first. I know it sounds hard, but you have to pay your bills & be blessed that you have the healthcare in this country where you can get better... and not be told you are too old, too unnecessary to society, or wait 9 months & come back. When I say assets - I mean that you are not covered by medicaid if you have more than $3000 in your savings. We have set up an emergency fund that is over that. Sure, I could transfer it to my mom, but that would be unethical. We also own a house in Florida that we have tried to sell for some time. You can't sell if there are no buyers unless you sell it for a crazy price. Basically, you have to be very low income (not working middle class), without savings, fairly decent vehicles or property to qualify for medicaid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catherine Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Hospitals get money to cover the uninsured patients they care for--your tax dollars at work. It's a myth that we will suddenly be paying a fortune for some other person's medical care--believe me, every time you pay taxes (state and federal) every time you buy private insurance, every time you go to a store and buy something, you are paying money for another person's health care. Any system of universal coverage shifts costs that already exist. Our current system incentivizes the wrong things. We docs get paid to hospitalize people, to do surgeries and procedures. What happens when you pay for sickness? More people are sick. It's capitalism 101. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elw_miller Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Quote: Originally Posted by Perry Nobody's going to be forced to do abortions. From WSJ: You know, you say this NOW and I agree...for now. It is not what Obama is going to do now...this second. It is what he is going to do over his 4, possibly 8 years in office. Did you know that, in Minnesota, they are regulating the number of DOGS people are allowed to own. No more than 2. Freedom is going out the window...today dogs...tomorrow what? Children? China does it. Do we really think it could never happen to the US? Perry--While I agree with you--I, too, doubt anybody is going to be forced to do abortions--I am appalled that the President would choose a man as his Science "czar" who once once advocated it in a book he co-authored. John Holdren did such a thing: "Internet reports are now circulating that Obama's Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John Holdren, penned a 1977 book that approved of and recommended compulsory sterilization and even abortion in some cases, as part of a government population control regime. Given the general unreliability of Internet quotations, I wanted to go straight to this now-rare text and make sure the reports were both accurate and kept Holdren's writings in context. Generally speaking, they are, and they do." http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamas-science-czar-suggested-compulsory-abortion-sterilization-50783612.html Here is a direct quote (there are plenty of others cited on the page) from Ecoscience, the book Holdren co-authored: "Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society." http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/ Definitely an unnerving passage. It may be a 30-year-old book that did not get many reprintings, but unless he recants, that writing still stands as a testament to his beliefs. Very sad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kari C in SC Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 You wil not be allowed to select your own health insurance with the gov't (if you are not covered when law becomes effective)... the government will select for you. Actually, if it is modeled after SCHIP (state health care for children) - you do get to choose from several different insurance companies. Here in SC, you get to choose from about 6 different insurance options. I went online and viewed the benefits and doctors on each plan. I made my decision on the one that had the best (that I had been told) orthopedic surgeon because my dd may need future surgery on her ankle. When I first enrolled, they gave me an insurance. I was told I had 90 days to change plans. I did my research and submitted my change online. I had a new insurance card within a week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elw_miller Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 It would be nice to not be paranoid, yes? ;) "Oh, no. That's just perfectly normal paranoia. Everyone in the universe has that." Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretchen in NJ Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Again, it's the worst-case scenarios that make national and international headlines. And again, it's NOT TRUE all across the nation that cancer isn't found early and treated right away here. Gosh, my dr. is right on top of me every year, making sure I get whatever cancer-screening procedures done! Every year. What happens when you don't go to your doctor for your yearly check-up? How about if you don't believe being vaccinated? Are they going to deny you treatment because you should have been vaccinated and/or seen your doctor every year? When we were in England, they were discussing a case of a woman who was denied treatment because she hadn't been to her doctor in 5 years. I don't go to the doctor just for a check up. I would wonder which Canadians he is talking to - the ones with higher income who want to complain about every little glitch in the system, or the ones like us with very low income (and doing all we can to raise our kids with a good education so they won't have to struggle as much as we do) who are just extremely grateful to have one less thing to worry about? Their income level shouldn't matter. These are not little glitches in the system. People are dying at a higher rate in the EU, then here in the US. I like my freedom. My husband and I come from very very poor families and we have worked hard to get where we are today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretchen in NJ Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 We educate our own children because we don't trust the government's ability to do it, but we are going to trust this same government to manage our health and the health of the children we don't trust them to for their education? Logic? Hello? :iagree:Nicely stated. It is odd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kari C in SC Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 I am sickened by this proposed government insurance bill. It's not healthcare. Everyone has access to healthcare, not everyone has access to health insurance to which I say, it's your responsibility to obtain. Obviously, you - nor anyone in you family has a pre-existing condition. After my very generous severance package ran out in 2007, I tried to obtain health insurance for my dh. I called agents, filled out things online, everything. Tried everywhere. Denied for high cholesterol and sleep apnea. Denied. No matter what I tried. Denied. He is a mechanic. At the time, he worked for a shop with 4 employees. They did not offer health insurance. We made $35000 a year, but had $10,000 in the bank. We did not qualify for medicaid. So, where, exactly would we get insurance for him? If you are uninsurable, work for a living and have a savings account - you are pretty much out of luck. Sure it is our responsibility. As with anything else in our 20 years of marriage - we did our best to figure it out. In the end, he went without insurance for over a year until we moved and he found a small shop with insurance. That small shop laid him off in May. He has Cobra until November. Then he will most likely be back in the same place as before. Working for a small shop with no insurance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perry Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Perry--While I agree with you--I, too, doubt anybody is going to be forced to do abortions--I am appalled that the President would choose a man as his Science "czar" who once once advocated it in a book he co-authored. John Holdren did such a thing: "Internet reports are now circulating that Obama's Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, John Holdren, penned a 1977 book that approved of and recommended compulsory sterilization and even abortion in some cases, as part of a government population control regime. Given the general unreliability of Internet quotations, I wanted to go straight to this now-rare text and make sure the reports were both accurate and kept Holdren's writings in context. Generally speaking, they are, and they do." http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Obamas-science-czar-suggested-compulsory-abortion-sterilization-50783612.html Here is a direct quote (there are plenty of others cited on the page) from Ecoscience, the book Holdren co-authored: "Indeed, it has been concluded that compulsory population-control laws, even including laws requiring compulsory abortion, could be sustained under the existing Constitution if the population crisis became sufficiently severe to endanger the society." http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/ Definitely an unnerving passage. It may be a 30-year-old book that did not get many reprintings, but unless he recants, that writing still stands as a testament to his beliefs. Very sad. I agree that those comments are appalling. Fortunately, he appears to be distancing himself from that position. From The Washington Times When asked whether Mr. Holdren's thoughts on population control have changed over the years, his staff gave The Washington Times a statement that said, "This material is from a three-decade-old, three-author college textbook. Dr. Holdren addressed this issue during his confirmation when he said he does not believe that determining optimal population is a proper role of government. Dr. Holdren is not and never has been an advocate for policies of forced sterilization." Sen. David Vitter, Louisiana Republican, did ask Mr. Holdren during his confirmation whether he thought "determining optimal population is a proper role of the government." Mr. Holdren said he did not. The White House also passed along a statement from the Ehrlichs that said, in part, "anybody who actually wants to know what we and/or Professor Holdren believe and recommend about these matters would presumably read some of the dozens of publications that we and he separately have produced in more recent times, rather than going back a third of a century to find some formulations in an encyclopedic textbook where description can be misrepresented as endorsement." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeacherZee Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Like Laura I am going to post once and then leave because I find beating my head against this particular wall very unproductive. Yes healthcare in my country (Sweden) has problems. No system is perfect. But my family has always had great care in Sweden and we have never had to worry about the cost. It just isn't debated. Here is my story: My dad was diagnosed with septicaemia in the beginning of June. He received excellent care at the local hospital. When it became clear that the infection had gone to his heart and damaged it he was moved to the large teaching hospital two hours from our home where he was operated on by one of the top surgeons in the country. He is going to be fine. His 3 week stay in hospital, most of it in the ICU cost $10/night. He is still on sick leave. He is not worried about loosing his job. He is taking the time he needs to get well. Government mandating what treatment you can get: My dad had a physical a few months ago. They offered him help to stop smoking should he want it. At the time he declined. End of discussion (he is now quitting smoking as a result of his heart problems which were NOT related to smoking). Vaccinations: The Swedish government does not require it's citizens to be vaccinated. No school district requires its students to be vaccinated before they can enter the school (before I went to school in the states I had to have both a TB vaccination and a Hepatitis B vaccination, neither which were required for me to enter school in Sweden). In fact the language on the Swedish governments health site states that NO vaccinations are ever required. I can choose which doctor I see in the county in which I live. I can see any one I want. I feel that I have more choice than many of my American friends who cannot see doctors out of network. Yes we pay higher taxes than in the US but that is not necessarily because of health care. We pay for other things that are not covered in the US, plus in the US you have larger economies of scale than we can ever hope to achieve in a country of 9 million. As for care for the elderly and disabled, I take great offence to the statement that we do not offer the best care to these people. My mum works in palliative care. She gives these patients her all. They get the same treatment that someone who is young would get. She sits with people when they die. She is a hero and to say that we do not give these people the best care they can possibly get is an insult to her and her colleagues! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gretchen in NJ Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 It was recently on a news article about vaccinations. I am sorry to not remember author. They were discussing the ways the vaccination program could be implemented in high risk areas. Several options were discussed...but the common thread was do it at the school. The bigger shock (for me) was one part about not worrying about consent. That is why the article stuck in my "craw". I am hopeful that nonsense was abandoned. BUt people need to be on their toes. Now I think this would not hold up in court... but by then, your poor child, has had the shot. Just like the poor kids who have gotten gynecological exams in elementary grades.... then parents found out & tried to take action. Didn't help the trauma for those babies! Well, whoever said it was wrong. It would be against the law. I can assure you there are no plans to vaccinate without parental consent. I read an article about plans to go house to house to "educate" people. These people would have the vaccines with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 (edited) I think all of us should ask if they really believe that they will be able to obtain or afford their current health insurance in 5 years from now. Insurance rates have gone up several times the inflation rate every year. Also, I know that as an RN for 22 years that I have seen the health insurance available to me through my employers offering less benefits every year and higher deductibles and co-pays and out of pocket expenses every year. Just my 2 cents. Again, no matter what side you are on, the Bill Moyer's show on pbs.org is a must see for a truly informed opinion. BUT.... I have a CHOICE with insurance companies. DH can change jobs... we can buy supplemental insurance, etc. I will have NO CHOICE in this goverment chaos. Today, I can even do without insurance & pay my own way (as other person mentioned on this thread). Do folks realize the reason we can't buy catastrophic insurance is because of gov't regulation. That is all most of us need. I can pay for simple visits, shots, or a CAT Scan... I may not be able to pay for a long hospital stay or major illness. But my gov't in all it's loving, compassionate wisdom, will not let those wicked power hungry businessmen offer me a simplier plan to meet my needs & at a reasonable rate... if they are allowed to be competitive & if I am not mandated to buy their product. Capitalism works & gives me choices. Gov't tells me what to do and I had better be quiet or just deal with it. Big difference. Edited July 18, 2009 by Dirtroad Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Amen to that!!! It is really funny to see all the disrespectful comments about this administration after having accused those of us who disagreed with policies of the Bush Administration of being unAmerican or not patriotic for simply disagreeing with policy decisions. Ah, but is also sounds like those who disagree with BHO liked GWB... NOPE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elw_miller Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 I agree that those comments are appalling. Fortunately, he appears to be distancing himself from that position. From The Washington Times Glad you're more up-to-date on the news! :) I'm still bothered by the idea that he has "distanced" himself rather than fully recanted. "Dr. Holdren is not and never has been an advocate for policies of forced sterilization." --except when he allowed his name to be connected to the assertions in Ecoscience. I hope he has recanted and that the journalists have just done a shoddy job of conveying that information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sara R Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 When I say assets - I mean that you are not covered by medicaid if you have more than $3000 in your savings. We have set up an emergency fund that is over that. Sure, I could transfer it to my mom, but that would be unethical. If you have the assets, why wouldn't you use them to pay for your care? Our family was in this position (attempted home birth/hospital transport/unexpected medical bills for DS's birth with a very low income). We had some money in savings and used it to pay towards our bills to Medicaid. Medicaid picked up the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirtroad Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Actually, if it is modeled after SCHIP (state health care for children) - you do get to choose from several different insurance companies. Here in SC, you get to choose from about 6 different insurance options. I went online and viewed the benefits and doctors on each plan. I made my decision on the one that had the best (that I had been told) orthopedic surgeon because my dd may need future surgery on her ankle. When I first enrolled, they gave me an insurance. I was told I had 90 days to change plans. I did my research and submitted my change online. I had a new insurance card within a week. But it is not. And if you are covered before the date the law goes into effect... but your policy changes (in anyway) you are automatically forced into the federal program... and THEY pick. It is a huge disaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertechmom Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 Actually, if it is modeled after SCHIP (state health care for children) - you do get to choose from several different insurance companies. Here in SC, you get to choose from about 6 different insurance options. I went online and viewed the benefits and doctors on each plan. I made my decision on the one that had the best (that I had been told) orthopedic surgeon because my dd may need future surgery on her ankle. When I first enrolled, they gave me an insurance. I was told I had 90 days to change plans. I did my research and submitted my change online. I had a new insurance card within a week. They chose the plan for us to begin with. I wasn't given a choice. Sure I can go change it but the differences are minor making changing it worthless. I was also assigned a dr again no choice. And of course the dr is a newbie. I had to go change it. How many people will really go change it before the deadline? I'm still "assigned" a dr and plan with the option to change it before the 90 days. I'm sure a lot of people never do. That's a different turn then being allowed to pick first or have choices up front. Many of the more experienced better qualified drs are either not listed online or not in the handbook. None of mine are. I had to call and check with them and then get their number and then call and change it with SCHIP before we could continue to use our drs. I doubt many in my area would have access to them thru SHCIP if they were not all ready patients to begin with. the provider directory they send out had mostly newbie drs and newbie practices actively seeking patients. Not established medical professionals who have been around the block a few times. Neccessary in the illness that nearly killed my child and took a team of 3 specialist to dx. Here's the link to the policies http://www.scchoices.com/SCSelfService/en_US/5%20plans.html The differences are minor with the only real major changes under extra benefits. Our ped admits that having to use this insurance severely limits the quality of care we are used to receiving. Her hands are tied very tightly in how she can practice medicine under this plan. You are not receiving the same level of care you would with the same dr under private or self pay. I can testify directly to that because I have had all three options with the same dr. This type of insurance is truly a stop gap for families and kids that have fallen on rough times (like losing half their income and a job) It is not designed for long term care of people. Sure I am getting medical care for NOTHING. I'm also getting what I paid for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kari C in SC Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 If you have the assets, why wouldn't you use them to pay for your care? Our family was in this position (attempted home birth/hospital transport/unexpected medical bills for DS's birth with a very low income). We had some money in savings and used it to pay towards our bills to Medicaid. Medicaid picked up the rest. Sure, if I had enough assets to cover it. When my dd broke her ankle the two surgeries and office visits topped $50,000. At the time, we probably had $6000 in the bank. Where would I get the other $44000? When my dh had a kidney stone - the bill topped $28000. At that time we probably had less that $3000 in the bank, but we made about $35000 a year. We didn't qualify for medicaid because we made too much. Currently, my dh is laid off. He gets unemployment equal to half of his salary. We knew a lay of was possible and put savings away. We have more in savings than medicaid allows. We are using that savings to pay our bills and eat. Of course, we will have to use that money to pay for meds if he can't find employment with insurance. His meds run about $500 a month. Medicaid will not cover you if you make anything over poverty level or have more than $3K in the bank. If you are uninsurable, you just have to go without insurance. If you need care, you may not be able to get it unless you go to the ER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orthodox6 Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 The problems involve more than medical insurance companies. I don't know whether the life insurance racket -- err, industry -- has changed about one particularly ugly feature: If someone has been under the care of a psychiatrist within a set number of "previous years", and sometimes if someone has been under the care of such a specialist EVER -- then life insurance can be denied. Maybe not admitted bluntly, but denied by a behind the scenes decision. This is but one more example of a general public which is unforgivably ignorant about mental health conditions. I pray that no one has to deal with health insurance companies denying coverage, droppping you as a customer , or jacking up your premiums due to illness.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 By Dirtroad BUT.... I have a CHOICE with insurance companies. DH can change jobs... we can buy supplemental insurance, etc. I will have NOT CHOICE in this goverment chaos. I can even do without insurance & pay my own way (as other person mentioned on this thread). Currently you may have a choice but that does not guarantee that you always will or that your dh will be able to get a different job should the need ever arise. There are many, many Americans who do not have a choice of healthcare or jobs. Many of us are just one job loss or illness away from lack of choices and healthcare and disaster.:sad: Also, I would think twice and read the fine print if one thinks that catastrophic health insurance will be fine. Chronic illnesses such as diabetes, asthma, heart disease, COPD can rack up bills in the thousands of dollars without hospitalizations. I know that despite being frugal, my family would be hard pressed to come up with that kind of money. I do believe in personal responsiblity and being frugal. My family is trying to amass a big emergency cushion, but it is difficult. There are millions of families that would be hard pressed as well and I do not think they are all slackers. As a society we cannot turn our backs on those in need and leave them to fend for themselves or to just die. I realize that there are abusers, but do we need to punish the non-abusers as well:confused: I also know that every human on earth is not exempt from making mistakes. Just my 2 cents:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kari C in SC Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 They chose the plan for us to begin with. I wasn't given a choice. Sure I can go change it but the differences are minor making changing it worthless. I was also assigned a dr again no choice. And of course the dr is a newbie. I had to go change it. How many people will really go change it before the deadline? I'm still "assigned" a dr and plan with the option to change it before the 90 days. I'm sure a lot of people never do. That's a different turn then being allowed to pick first or have choices up front. Many of the more experienced better qualified drs are either not listed online or not in the handbook. None of mine are. I had to call and check with them and then get their number and then call and change it with SCHIP before we could continue to use our drs. I doubt many in my area would have access to them thru SHCIP if they were not all ready patients to begin with. the provider directory they send out had mostly newbie drs and newbie practices actively seeking patients. Not established medical professionals who have been around the block a few times. Neccessary in the illness that nearly killed my child and took a team of 3 specialist to dx. Here's the link to the policies http://www.scchoices.com/SCSelfService/en_US/5%20plans.html The differences are minor with the only real major changes under extra benefits. Our ped admits that having to use this insurance severely limits the quality of care we are used to receiving. Her hands are tied very tightly in how she can practice medicine under this plan. You are not receiving the same level of care you would with the same dr under private or self pay. I can testify directly to that because I have had all three options with the same dr. This type of insurance is truly a stop gap for families and kids that have fallen on rough times (like losing half their income and a job) It is not designed for long term care of people. Sure I am getting medical care for NOTHING. I'm also getting what I paid for. When I took my ds in a few months ago for a suspected UTI, I mentioned to my doctor that my dd would be needing an x-ray of her ankle soon. She is supposed to have one every 6 months. I asked if I needed to make an appointment. She said that she would just write the prescription and I could take her right over to the hospital that day. I am seeing the same pediatrician that several of my friends see. Their husbands are state employees with BCBS. I got the same doctor and the same care. My dd's ankle was x-rayed with no questions asked. I took them to the fancy shmancy dentist with all the cool video games and safari decor last month. They got full exams and cleanings just like the other kids in the big room where everything is visible. Honestly, I don't think the actual dentist has any clue as he walks from chair to chair which kid is on SCHIP, which kid is self pay or on BCBS. He greets them all the same and does the same exam all within view of the parents sitting in the area. Maybe I am not getting the same level of care that I would on private insurance, but so far I am not seeing that. My dd had the BEST care for all of her medical problems last year. I would not have asked for any one thing to be different. It was all paid for by SCHIP. I wish I could say the same for my dh's BCBS. The policy stinks! I made him an appointment for a "physical" only to find his plan doesn't cover preventative visits. Oh, that makes sense. Wait till he is sick and then go - don't try to prevent it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theresatwist Posted July 18, 2009 Share Posted July 18, 2009 This question of CHOICE that Dirtroad mentions confuses me. I don't understand how you can simultaneously believe that the government-run insurance option will be awful and that people will be denied the treatments they want/need under such a program, and at the same time believe that this government-run program is going to drive your private options out of business. If the government-run program is so awful, why would people choose it? I would just like to understand how you reconcile what I see as a serious contradiction here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.