Page 1 of 1 [ 13 posts ] 

ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,237
Location: Long Island, New York

18 Jul 2017, 1:49 pm

The effort to replace Obamacare is an epic fail. The backup plan to repeal Obamacare then replace it is on its way to failing also. You see Obama understood that once an entitlement becomes an entitlement there is no going back. Repealing Obamacare means going back to the old market based system, that means no kids on parents plans to age 26, no insurance for pre existing conditions, or any condition the insurance company does not feel like covering, no medicaid for the working poor. America lived with that until 2010 but rightly or wrongly woe the congressmen who votes to repeal that now.

We are stuck with health care reform by the same liberals/progressives that gave us Obamacare in the first place. There is no choice but to go with them. The conservatives/republicans have in 7 1/2 years been utterly unable to put together a replacement that is not worse then Obummercare. Why have any faith in them doing anything different but completely stalling out the government for the next 7 1/2 years?


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 18 Jul 2017, 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

18 Jul 2017, 1:52 pm

And why should people want to go back to that?

Why shouldn't citizens in this country be entitled to healthcare in this country?


_________________
We won't go back.


EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

18 Jul 2017, 7:49 pm

That's really lame that the US can't come up with an essential service like health care that works for everyone.

The health care business itself is a racket which doesn't help.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Jul 2017, 11:19 pm

If Obamacare gets replaced by anything, hopefully it'll be single payer.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,146

19 Jul 2017, 1:21 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:
The conservatives/republicans have in 7 1/2 years been utterly unable to put together a replacement that is not worse then Obummercare. Why have any faith in them doing anything different but completely stalling out the government for the next 7 1/2 years?


I would hazard a guess that the "entitled" republican ethos is diametrically opposed to any form of public welfare. This translates to "how do we pretend we care about the health of Americans" when actually they don't (unless you can pay for it)



Chronos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,698

19 Jul 2017, 2:07 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:
The effort to replace Obamacare is an epic fail. The backup plan to repeal Obamacare then replace it is on its way to failing also. You see Obama understood that once an entitlement becomes an entitlement there is no going back. Repealing Obamacare means going back to the old market based system, that means no kids on parents plans to age 26, no insurance for pre existing conditions, or any condition the insurance company does not feel like covering, no medicaid for the working poor. America lived with that until 2010 but rightly or wrongly woe the congressmen who votes to repeal that now.

We are stuck with health care reform by the same liberals/progressives that gave us Obamacare in the first place. There is no choice but to go with them. The conservatives/republicans have in 7 1/2 years been utterly unable to put together a replacement that is not worse then Obummercare. Why have any faith in them doing anything different but completely stalling out the government for the next 7 1/2 years?


I saw a physical therapist a few years ago. She made about $100,000 per year. The appointments were 30 minutes long. Assuming she worked 11 months out of the year, and worked 8 hour days, she made about $50 per hour. If we are generous and say she actually spent an hour with patient because she had to review their file, prepare a therapy plan, and type up notes, and she saw the patient once a week for four weeks, that totals $200.

The facility charged my insurance $14,000.

My insurance ended up paying $7000, I had a $1200 out of pocket responsibility and my insurance costs me roughly $550 per month, and I need it, because I don't have $14,000 or $7000 but I think I can come up with $200 plus a $100 facility fee if I didn't have to pay $550 per month to my insurance plus a $1200 out of pocket fee.

This healthcare crisis is caused by insurance companies inadvertently creating an environment in which large health care facilities can price gauge the consumer. If medical costs were really as high as these facilities claim, then we would expect the cost of veterinary care to not be significantly lower than the same treatments and tests rendered to humans. The blood panel that costs $600 at my health care provider costs $75 at my pet's vet. The only difference is, the vet has the testing machine on the premises and can have the results ready in 15 minutes, and the human lab typically has a backlog of three days.

My vet it ready to give me an estimate of prices for procedures, even emergency ones. Try to get that from your local hospital before a surgery. Will your appendectomy be $27,000 or $100,000? They will claim they really can't estimate because there are so many variables, but vets do this just fine and are typically pretty accurate. Hospitals won't tell you because they don't want you to shop around.

If republicans don't want socialized health care, fine, but they then need to reset the system such that single payer health care is within reach of the average American for most basic health care needs like GP visits, common tests, and common medications. The first step in making health care more accessible, if it isn't a socialized system, would be to require health care institutions to post their prices.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,237
Location: Long Island, New York

19 Jul 2017, 2:51 am

With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Chronos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,698

19 Jul 2017, 2:57 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:
With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


Why do you think a single payer system would increase wait times?

The wait time is shorter at my vet than it is at my doctor's office.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,237
Location: Long Island, New York

19 Jul 2017, 3:32 am

Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


Why do you think a single payer system would increase wait times?

The wait time is shorter at my vet than it is at my doctor's office.


Because wait times are often terribly long in countries that have adopted that system.

The costs have to be paid. Spending less often means less benifits. One problem with the Republican plan was that it got rid of individual mandates. The plan dealt with the loss of that revenue by radically cutting medicaid to a degree thst it was unpalitable to voters. With a lot of single payer systems little or no money is paid by those receiving care so often that loss of revenue is dealt with by rationing care or long wait times. WP's British members have reported they are rationing autistic diagnosis by not diagnosing "high functioning" autistics. The governments in single payer systems have the option of spending more not to have these problems. That has to be paid for by raising taxes and cutting other programs.

Single payer is not the panacea so many in America think it is. The cliche "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" applies here. I would expect if the US adopts single payer it would be out of desperation and because of the political situation would probably be considerably worse then the current disaster.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Chronos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,698

19 Jul 2017, 5:11 am

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


Why do you think a single payer system would increase wait times?

The wait time is shorter at my vet than it is at my doctor's office.


Because wait times are often terribly long in countries that have adopted that system.

The costs have to be paid. Spending less often means less benifits. One problem with the Republican plan was that it got rid of individual mandates. The plan dealt with the loss of that revenue by radically cutting medicaid to a degree thst it was unpalitable to voters. With a lot of single payer systems little or no money is paid by those receiving care so often that loss of revenue is dealt with by rationing care or long wait times. WP's British members have reported they are rationing autistic diagnosis by not diagnosing "high functioning" autistics. The governments in single payer systems have the option of spending more not to have these problems. That has to be paid for by raising taxes and cutting other programs.

Single payer is not the panacea so many in America think it is. The cliche "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" applies here. I would expect if the US adopts single payer it would be out of desperation and because of the political situation would probably be considerably worse then the current disaster.


By single payer, I mean the payer is the patient and the patient pays out of pocket.



ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,237
Location: Long Island, New York

19 Jul 2017, 7:54 am

Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


Why do you think a single payer system would increase wait times?

The wait time is shorter at my vet than it is at my doctor's office.


Because wait times are often terribly long in countries that have adopted that system.

The costs have to be paid. Spending less often means less benifits. One problem with the Republican plan was that it got rid of individual mandates. The plan dealt with the loss of that revenue by radically cutting medicaid to a degree thst it was unpalitable to voters. With a lot of single payer systems little or no money is paid by those receiving care so often that loss of revenue is dealt with by rationing care or long wait times. WP's British members have reported they are rationing autistic diagnosis by not diagnosing "high functioning" autistics. The governments in single payer systems have the option of spending more not to have these problems. That has to be paid for by raising taxes and cutting other programs.

Single payer is not the panacea so many in America think it is. The cliche "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" applies here. I would expect if the US adopts single payer it would be out of desperation and because of the political situation would probably be considerably worse then the current disaster.


By single payer, I mean the payer is the patient and the patient pays out of pocket.


That is not how it is defined
Single Payer Healthcare Wikipedia
Quote:
Single-payer healthcare is a healthcare system in which the state, financed by taxes, covers basic healthcare costs for all residents regardless of income, occupation, or health status


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Chronos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,698

20 Jul 2017, 7:06 pm

ASPartOfMe wrote:
Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


Why do you think a single payer system would increase wait times?

The wait time is shorter at my vet than it is at my doctor's office.


Because wait times are often terribly long in countries that have adopted that system.

The costs have to be paid. Spending less often means less benifits. One problem with the Republican plan was that it got rid of individual mandates. The plan dealt with the loss of that revenue by radically cutting medicaid to a degree thst it was unpalitable to voters. With a lot of single payer systems little or no money is paid by those receiving care so often that loss of revenue is dealt with by rationing care or long wait times. WP's British members have reported they are rationing autistic diagnosis by not diagnosing "high functioning" autistics. The governments in single payer systems have the option of spending more not to have these problems. That has to be paid for by raising taxes and cutting other programs.

Single payer is not the panacea so many in America think it is. The cliche "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" applies here. I would expect if the US adopts single payer it would be out of desperation and because of the political situation would probably be considerably worse then the current disaster.


By single payer, I mean the payer is the patient and the patient pays out of pocket.


That is not how it is defined
Single Payer Healthcare Wikipedia
Quote:
Single-payer healthcare is a healthcare system in which the state, financed by taxes, covers basic healthcare costs for all residents regardless of income, occupation, or health status


Maybe so, but single means unity (by the mathematical definition...the quantity 1), so anyone should be able to be the single payer. When I asked my grandmother how she and my grandfather paid for the cost of having her children in the hospital, she replied "With a check." My grandfather made a middle class income...maybe upper middle class at the time, and the cost of having a baby at a hospital without health insurance was low enough that an average family could write a check for it. Health care does not need to be as expensive as it is now.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

20 Jul 2017, 7:43 pm

Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
Chronos wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
With single payer the "payment" is often long waits and rationing.


Why do you think a single payer system would increase wait times?

The wait time is shorter at my vet than it is at my doctor's office.


Because wait times are often terribly long in countries that have adopted that system.

The costs have to be paid. Spending less often means less benifits. One problem with the Republican plan was that it got rid of individual mandates. The plan dealt with the loss of that revenue by radically cutting medicaid to a degree thst it was unpalitable to voters. With a lot of single payer systems little or no money is paid by those receiving care so often that loss of revenue is dealt with by rationing care or long wait times. WP's British members have reported they are rationing autistic diagnosis by not diagnosing "high functioning" autistics. The governments in single payer systems have the option of spending more not to have these problems. That has to be paid for by raising taxes and cutting other programs.

Single payer is not the panacea so many in America think it is. The cliche "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence" applies here. I would expect if the US adopts single payer it would be out of desperation and because of the political situation would probably be considerably worse then the current disaster.


By single payer, I mean the payer is the patient and the patient pays out of pocket.


That is not how it is defined
Single Payer Healthcare Wikipedia
Quote:
Single-payer healthcare is a healthcare system in which the state, financed by taxes, covers basic healthcare costs for all residents regardless of income, occupation, or health status


Maybe so, but single means unity (by the mathematical definition...the quantity 1), so anyone should be able to be the single payer. When I asked my grandmother how she and my grandfather paid for the cost of having her children in the hospital, she replied "With a check." My grandfather made a middle class income...maybe upper middle class at the time, and the cost of having a baby at a hospital without health insurance was low enough that an average family could write a check for it. Health care does not need to be as expensive as it is now.


Amen to that!


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer