I see a lot of people complaining and crying about how it will destroy America etc. What I don't see are logical arguments against it or any evidence that said people are making educated and informed opinions - and not merely regurgitating tea party talking points. Should one not familiarize themselves with the law before being so melodramatic about it? What happened to reason and logical, well-informed debate? Hate for Obama is what is fueling it and not reason - I find this sad. That being said, I disagree with PARTS of the bill myself - but I know what's in it!
sort by best latest
I totally agree! In fact many parts of "Obamacare" were directly taken from "Romneycare" People get so caught up in the us vs them of politics they can't think critically about problems and solutions.
Since Romneycare has proven to be too costly why is the left insisting on pointing to it as a model for supporting Obamacare? Is it based on the brilliant premise that two negatives equal a positive? So dumb+dumber=smart? Who knew!?:))
you can stop being insulting with your comments Lions den - the point is the hypocrisy of Romney who supported now opposes healthcare.
some might argue with healthcare in its current state it is a must. Govt funds roads, schools, fire, police, medicare, social security etc. This is by no means a govt. run system - you choose insurer, physician etc. it's about consumer protections.
I am not trying to be nosy, and I understand the $5,600 in premiums is more that the average family would spend in a year. Do you have a backup plan for emergency surgeries. I needed colon surgery and the final cost was more than $100,000.
Larry, usually we keep our insurance even though the high premium. When we don't and we have medical bills that cost more we set up a payment plan through our local hospital. Most hospitals offer this option.
Thank you for your response. You are right about hospitals. Not all doctors and labs are so agreeable.
I respect those who don't criticize without knowing all the facts. If we all could do more of that the world would be a better place and we'd solve a lot more problems :). I agree all people should be covered medically
I agree, but there are ways to get to the facts of what is actually in it people are just lazy. As for wanting insurance, Many people, like me, want it but can't afford due to preexisting condition. Now there are caps on what can be charged! yay :)
I agree, people need to stop cheering for their teams and think independently for themselves. People don't value educating themselves and forming their own opinions, it's easier for talking heads to tell one what to think I guess... sad.
Its a mixed bag. Go back to when I was under a group policy. You go to the doctor and the cost is $100. I go for the same reason. I pay $15 co-pay and insurance pays $45. Is the Dr. losing $40. Is his price to high. Are you subsidizing my health cost
Because doctors and hospitals have to employee so many people just to sort out all the regulations. My medications cost $4,000.00 plus a month for my MS. Guess what the government won't pay that, I get assistance right from the pharmacuitical compan
Sports - you're right...way too much gov and not enough private free market competition - it works every time its tried. So now the gov has the solution to healthcare - more gov, less competition + fines and threat of jail!? Genius in minds of idiots
Making MS Work: The situation you mentioned will hopefully be addressed in the bill so that people with long-term catastrophic illnesses can get the coverage they need and deserve.
Uninsured go to the ER and have to be treated. Insured go to the urgent care clinics, which require insurance or payment up front. If more people had ins. the ER would be less crowded and cost to general public would be less.
I understand your concerns but disagree. you have your choice of doctors, insurance plans etc. I agree with being forced to purchase - I don't like that. Also protections offered to those with preexisting conditions, no lifetime caps are pluses.
While I understand your concerns and I too share some of them, one thing I am 100%, hands down in favor of is no one being denied coverage for preexisting conditions. With a health history and over $7,000 yr. premiums that has always concerned me.
In Texas there has always been insurance available for those with catastrophic/ongoing illnesses. It's an insurance pool, basically for the otherwise uninsurable.Premiums are astronomical -- will this Bill correct that?
Angela, in 2014 higher premiums due to preexisting conditions will be prohibited due to the new law, it does appear to be helpful to those of us who can't get coverage now due to outrageous rates. I understand your concerns there for sure!
I just want to comment here because none of you have mentioned the increases that have already occured with many companies due to the lack of being able to charge accordingly in 2014. They are raising regular rates now to prepare.
I pray your expectations will be met Christin as ongoing illness with no insurance is frightening. I found out about Texas' insurance pool when my brother suffered a massive stroke -- and we couldn't afford the premiums to insure him thereafter.
Angela-good point, which is where we can do something regarding "catastrophic illness" solutions. The gov is forcing 320 million Americans into the same coverage. Its like forcing everyone to wear mittens to prevent frostbite-its 110 degrees in AZ!
I just did a Google check and in Louisiana health insurance rates are regulated by the Louisiana Department of Insurance. However, they only regulate the major medical carriers, which is the kind of insurance you want.
I do find that funny seeing as how Canada has socialized healthcare lol. People are afraid of a "socialism" demon like communists back in the 50's & 60's. These same people drive on roads, collect "social security" - hello! it's laughable.
Canada has a workable system, but as I understand it some choices are not under your control. That would bother me.
lack of choices would trouble me too Larry, but what troubles me more is an accident or catastrophic illness being able to ruin a family. Socialized healthcare that's not a problem so surely we can make something work right here in the US?
You put the truth very succinctly -- thank you.
this is emotional and not rational. No one claimed it was "free" ever. I can understand some of your concerns with how it will be funded and enforced. the rest is speculation and scare tactics and not factually based. No one said it's utopia either.
Thanks Angela. Christin - how can facts be emotional? Yes there are "free" breast exams, pap smears, cancer screening, birth cntrl etc. None of what I stated is speculation. And the Utopian comment is called - sarcasm. http://lionsdenmedia.hubpages.c
Lions Den Media: Good point, nobody in their right mind will read 2700 pages of legal nonsense but there are several good websites that give an unbiased summary of the bill. I encourage you to read them and see that:
Nicely put. Also, the IRS will now have access to every American's health insurance so that they can be sure you bought the proper coverage; this is how they will decide who will be penalized, which will come straight out of tax refunds.
Christin - I wanted to inform everyone that a government commercial aired stating - NOW Seniors can access "FREE" health care benefits,like cancer screenings. And is HC not free if people up to age 26 are on their parents plan?
without hearing it myself, I cant comment on a commercial and no to the 26 year olds because the parents are paying for the health insurance. It means kids can be covered on their parents plan until age 26 helps college kids imo.
Medicine Cabinet Tax ($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insu
Alan - FANTASTIC POINT!! Why eliminate health savings account when they could actually be an additional retirement acct if structured where the amount not used each yr is rolled over and at retirement what is not used is tax free retirement income?
If they would just cut out the bull that doctors go through to get you MRI, bloodwork etc. they could cut their overhead and cost might, just might go down. They should have started there.
Health Savings Accounts still exist. There are not as attractive because people abuse them by trying to claim dandruff shampoo and baby wash as medical expenses. If working, you can still run your premiums through the HSA and pay no taxes on it.
I understand what you're saying too big = room for confusion etc. absolutely. I don't think it's anywhere near a perfect bill - far from it. Rather than "fight" it though wouldn't it be more prudent to improve it?
CS how many times do you go to the store & buy clothes that are: too big, wrong color, wrong style, and far too costly as well as having defects you don't know about yet-on the basis you'll "fix them" later? Is it too hard to do it right first?
comparing clothes shopping to a major country wide overhaul is overly simplistic. Large projects require time to iron out. If you wait for "perfect" nothing ever gets done.
Improvement would be better. However, only Congress can improve it. You can fight it in the Courts and hope to get the sought-after improvements there through interpretation. I do not think Congress is going to touch that bill. Repeal is unlikely.
Never will be! Physicians and staff spend more time figuring out all the insurance issues now, driving the cost up. They will have to ad more employees to sort through the billing issues. Make it simple or don't do it at all. That will cut costs
MS - this is speculation and not fact. We can speculate all day long, the question here is about people knowing the FACTS about what is in the bill and most arguing do not.
As I said, I have not read the bill. However, standardized rates can be established for procedures and then a prevailing cost factor developed for each area that would allow adjustment of the fees. Problems like that can be solved.
I'm sure no one would take your antique guns if you become senile. I'd also like a reference as to where this is in the bill - sounds like scare tactics to me sorry. Also govt already pays for uninusured
2 answers hidden due to negative feedback. Show
2 answers hidden due to negative feedback. Hide