Jump to content

Menu

Shall we try this again: health care Bill


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 457
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Even when I believed in Western Health Care I believed insurance was a huge rip-off. Now I think Western Health Care is a rip-off. I have to pay towards both with nothing in return. Gee thanks.

 

It scares me how quickly and quietly this all happened.

 

I also agree with Crissy.

 

I also think that if the government wants us healthier they will stop forcing people to grow, feed their animals and eat mostly soy and corn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are the rules? Besides being nice I mean.... No links to any news articles or blogs regarding health care?

 

http://www.welltrainedmind.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86733

 

Getting deleted was inevitable. But, I must say that I haven't enjoyed a thread so much that I sat and refreshed my browser over and over again in a really long time. I needed to go teach my kids something anyway. :tongue_smilie:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel frustrated the the real issues with our healthcare system were not addressed.

 

 

 

Yes, this. I hope, that as the details get hammered out, more issues will be addressed. However, I am realistic enough to know that there is going to be one big cluster for a really long time. I am making plans to be able to leave my current profession, as I will not continue to do what I do for a lesser wage. It is just not worth it to me, and I don't really see how they will be able to institute something on this large of a scale without it affecting those of us who are working in health care to a large extent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Hornblower, I'm really disappointed in you. With your love of animals, how can you let that poor thing fly without a parachute?

 

 

She's fine. She has a SAFETY NET.

:D

Also I'd like to add that she's free range, pasture farrowed, no artificial hormones, no routine antibiotics and she wallows in mud as much as she likes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also think that if the government wants us healthier they will stop forcing people to grow, feed their animals and eat mostly soy and corn.

 

Now that would solve A LOT of health problems in the US! Give us free-roaming organic meats that have been vegetarian/grass fed! And an end to toxic grains, legumes and dairy!

 

WOW! You can tell I'm a Paleo Diet advocate, huh?:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate to say, "I remember when...", because it can be so fruitless. However, I remember when my mother didn't have health insurance for my sister and I. We went to the doctor when we needed some kind of treatment or procedure, and it was affordable. I know it's delusional to think about it, but I wish we could go back to those days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had insurance for my pregnancy and newborn stage with my daughter. I did not have insurance for my pregnancy and newborn stage with my son. I got at least the same level of care, yes Western Medicine for both. I received more health care for my son because we needed more. Health care and health insurance are two different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that would solve A LOT of health problems in the US! Give us free-roaming organic meats that have been vegetarian/grass fed! And an end to toxic grains, legumes and dairy!

 

WOW! You can tell I'm a Paleo Diet advocate, huh?:D

 

:iagree::iagree:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's fine. She has a SAFETY NET.

 

:D

 

Also I'd like to add that she's free range, pasture farrowed, no artificial hormones, no routine antibiotics and she wallows in mud as much as she likes.

 

For now, but soon you'll have stiffer rules to follow. You might be given a "how to raise pigs" and "what to stuff in 'em"

 

I am so glad that she has a safety net, I was worried as well. I may have to come check on her, as you have a life displayed for her makes me worried you're not taking good enough care of her. I mean, what if she wants more antibiotics? Have you asked her? And free range? Does that mean you don't know where she is all the time?

 

Hmmmm... Free range... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm really excited about the pre-existing condition thing, having kids on parents' insurance until age 26, and people not getting kicked off the insurance after they get sick.

 

Beyond that I am sick.

 

The thing that scares me most is the gov't forcing everyone to buy health insurance. What's next? Oh, and 17,000 new IRS employees to zap us. {insert shiver}

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anybody actually read the bill? Because I have and frankly it scares me to death that how much health care you will actually get depends on how much you can contribute to society??? Are they kidding? And that it will be rationed?? So somebody who has a serious health issure will get so much health care a year and then they are done? This goes against EVERYTHING this country was founded on! I am scared to death. And it scares me how fast this is getting pushed through while they are keeping our focus on other petty issues.

 

 

God save us all!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have had a choice about where we will spend our days working. So far the government has not been able to threaten us to have to work where we are told. It is none of their **** business.

 

We have had a choice about where we will spend our hard earned money. So far we have not been threatened if we choose to spend against the tide. It is none of their **** business.

 

America has been about choice in the past, but when the government comes in and decides that we are no longer allowed to choose, America becomes a different place. ...

 

America has always (statistically) been generous in giving to those who are in need, both here and abroad. But this bill is not about that. This bill is about the government taking away essential freedoms, and doing it with money my grandchildren will one day work hard to earn.

 

I'm scared, that's what. These people are up to no good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anybody actually read the bill? Because I have and frankly it scares me to death that how much health care you will actually get depends on how much you can contribute to society???

 

Where did you find it? I thought it was supposed to be a "surprise" - even to those who voted on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find interesting (and I sincerely find it interesting, and frustrating, but I am being sincere and not snarky) is that when I have tried to talk to people (here and irl) about how to address health insurance in a way that will actually benefit my family and people I know who are in our situation (namely, having a child who has been deemed uninsurable), I get the same few answers: tort reform and eliminating restrictions on buying insurance across state lines (or a vague "less government regulation"). I'm completely in line with those things. I think they will do something to address costs. But no one has ever offered me a single solution on how to ensure that a person with a chronic illness is eligible for insurance that doesn't involve government mandates in some way. I understand that people don't want the government to tell them what to do with their money. I truly get that (now, whether I agree or not is a different story, but I understand that people think the government has no right to tax them for certain, or any, reasons). But what I don't understand is how people can basically be against everyone being eligible for health insurance. Because I have seen not one shred of evidence that a market-based solution is going to entice insurers into covering those who cost a lot of money. There seems to be an attitude of "do without" going around. That answer is not good enough for me. I would like to see universal healthcare, but I will (have to) be satisfied with less. If it takes government mandates to make sure that my child and others like her aren't blacklisted by health insurance companies, then I accept that. I would love the luxury of being able to consider this in a long-term, empires-rise-and-decline kind of way, with the benefit of historical hindsight and all, but right now, my concern is making sure that my child continues to have access to her lifesaving medications once we can no longer insure her.

 

Tara

Edited by TaraTheLiberator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad thing is, young and healthy people, who for whatever reason wouldn't choose to have health insurance, will now be forced to pay. By the time they are elderly and need it, the system will have gone bust. That's just my prediction, don't have stats to back it up, but I see what's happening with SS and get the same feeling on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it takes government mandates to make sure that my child and others like her aren't blacklisted by health insurance companies, then I accept that. I would love the luxury of being able to consider this in a long-term, empires-rise-and-decline kind of way, with the benefit of historical hindsight and all, but right now, my concern is making sure that my child continues to have access to her lifesaving medications once we can no longer insure her.

 

Tara

 

:iagree: This is one part that I truly support.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anybody actually read the bill? Because I have and frankly it scares me to death that how much health care you will actually get depends on how much you can contribute to society??? Are they kidding? And that it will be rationed?? So somebody who has a serious health issure will get so much health care a year and then they are done? This goes against EVERYTHING this country was founded on! I am scared to death. And it scares me how fast this is getting pushed through while they are keeping our focus on other petty issues.

 

 

God save us all!

 

The "cost efficiency panels" determine that the elderly, the chronically ill or those whose quality of life are suitable and are not deserving of medical treatment. The cost efficiency panels are the single scariest thing about Obamacare, scarier than the bankrupting costs, even. Do people REALLY want to give the federal government bureaucrats power over life and death when they've proven that they have utter disregard for human life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But what I don't understand is how people can basically be against everyone being eligible for health insurance.

 

I am not opposed to everyone being eligible for health insurance, but I do take issue with everyone being forced to purchase something they may not want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thrilled. Spinning, giddy, thrilled. My kid who is 19 and not 'in school' can have coverage soon (he's a walking disaster and needs it more than all of us put together), and all of my kids who are asthmatic won't be dropped (which was the sword of Damocles over our heads). It's not perfect, but it's a start. Hopefully as small business owners we won't have to pay Ungodly (you'd faint. Yes, you would) amounts of money to insure our workers.

 

Immigration? I love amnesty. Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses. I totally believe in amnesty and that it will be passed. Every itoa of my parentage came here on a boat. It's what America is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find interesting (and I sincerely find it interesting, and frustrating, but I am being sincere and not snarky) is that when I have tried to talk to people (here and irl) about how to address health insurance in a way that will actually benefit my family and people I know who are in our situation (namely, having a child who has been deemed uninsurable), I get the same few answers: tort reform and eliminating restrictions on buying insurance across state lines (or a vague "less government regulation"). I'm completely in line with those things. I think they will do something to address costs. But no one has ever offered me a single solution on how to ensure that a person with a chronic illness is eligible for insurance that doesn't involve government mandates in some way. I understand that people don't want the government to tell them what to do with their money. I truly get that (now, whether I agree or not is a different story, but I understand that people think the government has no right to tax them for certain, or any, reasons). But what I don't understand is how people can basically be against everyone being eligible for health insurance. Because I have seen not one shred of evidence that a market-based solution is going to entice insurers into covering those who cost a lot of money. There seems to be an attitude of "do without" going around. That answer is not good enough for me. I would like to see universal healthcare, but I will (have to) be satisfied with less. If it takes government mandates to make sure that my child and others like her aren't blacklisted by health insurance companies, then I accept that. I would love the luxury of being able to consider this in a long-term, empires-rise-and-decline kind of way, with the benefit of historical hindsight and all, but right now, my concern is making sure that my child continues to have access to her lifesaving medications once we can no longer insure her.

 

Tara

 

I can agree with some of the things mentioned in the bill, like regulating that insurance companies need to accept people with pre-existing conditions. However, premiums would NEED to be higher for those people. I can also see keeping adult children on a policy as long as they live with the parents still and the parents are willing to pay the premium required. This bill is complete garbage and does not really address the issues needing to be addressed. We need tort reform and the ability to buy insurance across state lines. Saying this bill is a "good start" is just bunk. I am reminded of the brownies that are pretty good except for the little bit of dog poop in them. Would you still eat them? No thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I find interesting (and I sincerely find it interesting, and frustrating, but I am being sincere and not snarky) is that when I have tried to talk to people (here and irl) about how to address health insurance in a way that will actually benefit my family and people I know who are in our situation (namely, having a child who has been deemed uninsurable), I get the same few answers: tort reform and eliminating restrictions on buying insurance across state lines (or a vague "less government regulation"). I'm completely in line with those things. I think they will do something to address costs. But no one has ever offered me a single solution on how to ensure that a person with a chronic illness is eligible for insurance that doesn't involve government mandates in some way. I understand that people don't want the government to tell them what to do with their money. I truly get that (now, whether I agree or not is a different story, but I understand that people think the government has no right to tax them for certain, or any, reasons). But what I don't understand is how people can basically be against everyone being eligible for health insurance. Because I have seen not one shred of evidence that a market-based solution is going to entice insurers into covering those who cost a lot of money. There seems to be an attitude of "do without" going around. That answer is not good enough for me. I would like to see universal healthcare, but I will (have to) be satisfied with less. If it takes government mandates to make sure that my child and others like her aren't blacklisted by health insurance companies, then I accept that. I would love the luxury of being able to consider this in a long-term, empires-rise-and-decline kind of way, with the benefit of historical hindsight and all, but right now, my concern is making sure that my child continues to have access to her lifesaving medications once we can no longer insure her.

 

Tara

 

How have corporate bureaucrats done better?

 

Tara

 

:iagree:We have government insurance. That's why my child receives treatment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so unhappy about this. They will be taxing me an additional 2.3% over the regular sales tax when I am finally unable to walk?????? Why/ So I can fund someone else's poor choices? I am all for tort reform, buying insurance across state lines, and a pool choice for those who normally can't get insurance. But this is not insurance- it is mandatory health pre-paid plans.

 

It won't hurt me personally that much, as long as they do adopt the military fic. Currently Tricare is NOT covered in the bill. Rep. Skelton is introducing legislation to correct that. But who will be hurt- those who are unemployed. This bill increases taxes in a recession- a very big no-no in macro-economics. Also hurt are the elderly and disabled. Also everyone who pays for insurance will see skyrocketing prices. That is what you get when you have to insure all comers at the same rate. How else can you cover very high medical expenses of diabetics, heart patients, cancer patients, etc, than by charging healthy more money. IF everyone pays the same price, the average price will be lower for the sick and higher for the healthy. I am one of the sick and yet I know this truth. It is very basic economics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A cut and paste from my facebook:

 

"You know, folks, I understand the love and care about humans that motivates some (many?) supporters of this healthcare legislation. I have a daughter who has a chronic illness and meds @ $1500 a MONTH. I am not coming frorm a place of comfort or luxury. I just don't believe that the US government is supposed to be taking the role they have in this Administration."

 

I'd add that you can be against this legislation and not a die-hard fan of George Bush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so unhappy about this. They will be taxing me an additional 2.3% over the regular sales tax when I am finally unable to walk?????? Why/ So I can fund someone else's poor choices? I am all for tort reform, buying insurance across state lines, and a pool choice for those who normally can't get insurance. But this is not insurance- it is mandatory health pre-paid plans.

 

It won't hurt me personally that much, as long as they do adopt the military fic. Currently Tricare is NOT covered in the bill. Rep. Skelton is introducing legislation to correct that. But who will be hurt- those who are unemployed. This bill increases taxes in a recession- a very big no-no in macro-economics. Also hurt are the elderly and disabled. Also everyone who pays for insurance will see skyrocketing prices. That is what you get when you have to insure all comers at the same rate. How else can you cover very high medical expenses of diabetics, heart patients, cancer patients, etc, than by charging healthy more money. IF everyone pays the same price, the average price will be lower for the sick and higher for the healthy. I am one of the sick and yet I know this truth. It is very basic economics.

 

 

:iagree:Fasten your seatbelts . . . this is just the beginning!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am hoping most of it gets repealed, except the few good things that some others have mentioned already, and hoping that it is replaced with a bill that will truly begin lowering the cost of health care, which would help everyone.

 

The joke that was made of our legislative process is very sad and disheartening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...