jump to last post 1-7 of 7 discussions (28 posts)

Health Care Reform- Can We Afford What's In It?

  1. leeberttea profile image60
    leebertteaposted 6 years ago

    http://www.marketwire.com/press-release … 303313.htm

    An independent study of compliant and non- compliant insurance companies has found that compliance with the new health care reform laws could lead to bankruptcy of insurers.

    Ah! Everything is going according to Obama's plans!

    1. Shawn Scarborough profile image84
      Shawn Scarboroughposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You are correct in your assertion that Obama's plan is to bankrupt the insurers.  Then the government will come to the rescue will the public option, which will be the only option at that point.  Health care reform is not about providing health care, it is about control. 

      Instead of passing this complicated health care reform bill, all that congress had to do was expand the Medicaid system to cover the uninsured.  Congress and the White House want to be able to control us.  Once we are dependent on them we will continue to send them to Washington.   Health care is an important part of our lives so if they control health care they are almost guaranteed to control us.

      Let's hope this nightmare will be repealed after the 2012 election boots Obama out of office.  Nobama 2012!

    2. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Right.  Every other civilized country can afford this, but we can't.

      1. 60
        C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Our private system helps pay for theirs........

        1. Pcunix profile image89
          Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Really?  You think our health system pays for health care in other countries????

          1. 60
            C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Do the research....See what companies do the most medical research and pharma development. Ever wonder why drugs are so much cheaper in Canada/Mexico? Because Canada regulates the price. We pay the difference. It's indirect of course, but yes Americans help fund Canadian, UK, French, etc public health care.

            1. Pcunix profile image89
              Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              This says otherwise: http://bioethics.net/journal/j_articles.php?aid=61

              But you will just say what conservatives always say: "We don't believe any left wing propaganda lies you find on the Internet"

              Because that is what you always say.  All studies that contradict you are flawed, biased or fake.  Always.

              1. 60
                C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks for trying to group me with everyone else. Read that article carefully. Note it say's the FDA is incorrect but provides UK/Canada based research companies as examples.

                Now, lets drop the spin and put things in perspective. Who's who in Biomed Research....

                1 Novartis Switzerland
                2 Pfizer USA
                3 Bayer Germany
                4 GlaxoSmithKline United Kingdom
                5 Johnson and Johnson USA
                6 Sanofi-Aventis France
                7 Hoffmann–La Roche Switzerland
                8 AstraZeneca UK/Sweden
                9 Merck & Co. USA
                10 Abbott Laboratories USA
                11 Wyeth USA
                12 Bristol-Myers Squibb USA
                13 Eli Lilly and Company USA 
                14 Amgen USA
                15 Boehringer Ingelheim Germany
                16 Schering-Plough USA
                17 Baxter International USA
                18 Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Japan
                19 Genentech USA
                20 Procter & Gamble USA

                Now, to be fair, lets see where the top UK company gets their money...(NOTE: No Company from Canada made the top 20....).

                Hmm all I could find was this:

                "On 12 September 2006 GSK settled the largest tax dispute in IRS history agreeing to pay $3.1 billion. At issue in the case were Zantac and the other Glaxo Group heritage products sold from 1989–2005. The case was about an area of taxation dealing with intracompany "transfer pricing"—determining the share of profit attributable to the US subsidiaries of GSK and subject to tax by the IRS. Taxes for large multi-divisional companies are paid to revenue authorities based on the profits reported in particular tax jurisdictions, so how profits were allocated among various legacy Glaxo divisions based on the functions they performed was central to the dispute in this case."

                In other words they got caught lying about where their profits came from. So any information from them would be suspect.

                Now you may say well that's just one company. True, however GSK is the 2nd Largest overall Biomed company in the world. It's hardly logical to believe that they only make money in the UK. Its even hard to believe that they make the MOST of their money in the UK. I can find that they tried to make that claim, but were caught by the IRS.

  2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago


    1. Shawn Scarborough profile image84
      Shawn Scarboroughposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I love that picture. LOL

  3. Ralph Deeds profile image68
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    That's a fair question, but we certainly couldn't afford going on with the 10% increases year after year that we've been experiencing. The truth is that the reform bill will help, but additional cost saving measures will be needed to keep the country being eaten up by the health care costs of an aging population. Too bad Obama didn't grab the parasitic insurance companies and profiteering drug companies by the balls and squeeze instead of compromising with them.

    1. Doug Hughes profile image59
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Can someone explain the contradiction - after Health Care Reform passed, the stock prices of Medical Insurance Companies spiked. But the wingnuts are predicting wint an 'independent' study the demise of insurance companies. Investers don't believe it for a minute.

      1. Michael Willis profile image77
        Michael Willisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I saw that also Doug.  There will be no demise of the Insurance Companies, just the demise of the American citizen who needs coverage.
        Did anyone see the news report of the family who was denied insurance of an infant with an illness because of the Obamacare sometime back? it was on the evening news. The insurance company said they could not afford to add a new coverage since they would not be able to deny coverage in the future.
        Oh well, being optimistic, I am hoping something will change or someone will lead a way to help us with health insurance. But, i doubt it will happen in my lifetime. We can say or think or hear what we want to believe...but it is all about "profits."
        I think I should go out and buy health insurance Stocks! That would be the best investment in my healthcare!

        1. Doug Hughes profile image59
          Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          If you want to cite something specific, I will look into it and reply as the facts take me.  The FACTS about Obamacare is that it will reduce the deficit by a HUGE amount and extend coverage to 95% of Americans,

          1. Michael Willis profile image77
            Michael Willisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            I wish I could remember the exact date of the report, (I know you would research it)but it was at least a few months ago. The News report even cited the anger of Obama about what had happened in this instance and how he wanted to intervene and stand up against the denial of coverage. But...I have heard nothing since then about the story. It shows the stupidity and arrogance of the Insurance companies. They are the real problems.
            I do disagree with most of the Obama  health care plan by what I have read in the plan and from what I have discussed with my personal Dr on it and his take on it. He hates it also.
            But it is ok we can just agree to disagree. The future will tell the results. I hope an pray I am not right in what I see in this. No sense in people fighting over it yet. We all believe what we believe and for the facts we see.

            1. Doug Hughes profile image59
              Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              Michael Willis said - "But it is ok we can just agree to disagree."

              I can agree with that.

              1. Michael Willis profile image77
                Michael Willisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                Yes sir we can. It is a respect for others. We can respect each other's point of view.  Have a good evening.

                1. Pcunix profile image89
                  Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  No, I can't.

                  I cannot respect points of view that are selfish and greedy.  I can not respect points of view that turn a blind eye to suffering.

                  I can't respect people who don't care about others.  I can't respect them on moral grounds and I cannot respect an intelligence that cannot see the dangers in a society of haves and have-nots.

                  I can't respect people who cannot see the benefit of a healthy society.  I can't respect people who don't see that ignoring basic health needs leads directly to more societal problems and more costs to their precious pocketbooks.  I cannot respect the views of those who are not smart enough to see the long term consequence of their greed.

                  So no, you are wrong:  I cannot respect everyone else's views.

                  1. Doug Hughes profile image59
                    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Michael Willis is an honest conservative. He didn't try to bully me with his postion - he gracefully allowed me mine. He reads what I write - he considers what evidence I offer in support of my position.

                    I would like to think I grant him the same. We butt heads pretty hard at times. We don't agree on much. I would venture to guess he's cussed me out a few times. But I think he's honest - and he disagrees honestly in an environment where Limbaugh tactics dominate.

                    There will be conservatives and liberals in America, I hope. It's always been that way. There was a time when conservatives coould approcah a subject with an open mind - it's an approach we should encourage.

                  2. Pcunix profile image89
                    Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    Let me just make this crystal clear:

                    I will be polite here because those are the rules of HubPages.

                    I will be polite in real life because nobody needs a fist fight.

                    But I do not respect most conservative viewpoints. I understand that they are not evil, that they just want a better world.  I understand that they are fearful and I understand that distrusting change is sometimes exactly the right thing to do.

                    But on certain issues, like health care, like gay rights, womens rights and wealth inequality, their views deserve no respect at all.  As I have said before, conservatives are always on the wrong side of history and in cases like this, it is the ugly side, the side without compassion, the side thaf only sees selfish greed.

                    I cannot respect that in any sense of the word.

        2. thisisoli profile image72
          thisisoliposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          While it may be causing a few problems now, in the future it will not only ensure this baby gets coverage, but it will also help ensure that the children of teh poor families get covered as well. This will not affect the insurers because it will be covered by governement credits.

          Personally after just having moved to America from Britain, I do not even dare go and play 'soccer' right now because I know that If I am injured I do not have the cash to pay for health care right now, even if I get put on a payment plan.

          It astounds me that a country such America, supposedly one of the worlds largest economic powers, still hasn't managed to implement a healthcare system that allows people to live their lives to the full, without worry of accidental injury, where people can go to the doctors to check a suspicious lump without breaking the bank, and catching cancer early.

          It astounds me, and most of the western world, that national healthcare does not exist here.  It astounds me even further when I hear people talk about a national healthcare system as a bad thing, and whats worse is that there is a discussion about the future of Health insurers which is being given priority over the actual health of Americans!

          I mean seriously, a healthcare system which could help reduce deaths, spread of communicable disease, and help people who are injured, and your worry is that some of the insurance companies who have a weak business might go under?

          Just so you know, the insurance companies who are most at risk of healthcare reform are the ones who currently overcharge for healthcare insurance. Because they are the ones who have business models which cannot be supported by insurance credits.

          1. 0
            sandra rinckposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            That is true. In 2014, anyone who doesn't get health insurance through work will be able to get a tax credit to pay for the insurance.   It's not an out of pocket expense that the conservatives want you to believe.

            They are also giving tax credits to small businesses to help pay for the cost of insuring their employees.

  4. Doug Hughes profile image59
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    I want to quote Ezra Kline - March 18, 2010

    "Washington has spent the past week or so waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to release its preliminary estimate of the Senate bill with the reconciliation fixes...

    But here are the basic numbers: The bill will cost $940 billion over the first 10 years and reduce the deficit by $130 billion during that period. In the second 10 years -- so, 2020 to 2029 -- it will reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion.

    The legislation will cover 32 million Americans, or 95 percent of the legal population."

    And the wingnuts STILL don't get it.

  5. mable cellphone profile image61
    mable cellphoneposted 6 years ago

    there is no that kind of insurance yet.any way,we wish that the insurance company will be strong enough to safeguard people's health

  6. Greek One profile image80
    Greek Oneposted 6 years ago

    I can afford it.. but then again I have extra money lying around because I live in a place that has public healthcare smile

  7. Misha profile image76
    Mishaposted 6 years ago

    No, you can't. smile

    And other nations are going broke, too - partly because of a public health care IMO. smile

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image68
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      True. But also because of too generous and too early retirement programs which result in a shrinking ratio of workers to retirees. Also, too short working hours and too many holidays and vacations, and government regulations which prevent companies from adjusting their work forces (i.e., laying off un-needed workers so that they can find jobs elsewhere where they can be productive). For example, last I heard employers in Spain have to be bankrupt before they can lay workers off.