Unprecedented

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/391206/unprecedented/20#post_3469515
Even if you bought the premise there is that much middle level fat in the system you run into the problem of trying to push the genie back in the bottle.
I am on Medicare. Instead of traditional medicare I am on a Medicare advantage account which is provided by United Health Care. I don't pay one nickle more than someone on traditional medicare. The government does kick in an addition 15 bux a month or so. By being on the advantage account I get the following services traditional medicare doesn't offer
Prescription drug coverage, (so much for the extra 15 LOL!)
Yearly wellness exam at no charge
Yearly physical at no charge
Gym Membership at no charge
More hospitalization days covered
Less out of pocket for the first days in the hospital
Cap on out of pocket expenses
Flat 15.00 office copay instead of 20%
50 ER fee which is waived if I am admitted
There are a lot more than that, those are just the one's I can think of. Seems to me that if a single payer system was so much better traditional medicare would be a better deal than the medicare advantage accounts which arte provided by the E vile insurance companies.
So wait. You have no problem with a taxpayer-assisted healthcare plan like yours, yet you have a problem with all these millions of Americans wanting essentially what you have for the same price you're paying. Isn't that a little hypocritical?

 

[darthtang aw]

So wait.  You have no problem with a taxpayer-assisted healthcare plan like yours, yet you have a problem with all these millions of Americans wanting essentially what you have for the same price you're paying.  Isn't that a little hypocritical?
All americans can have what Reef has...they just have to be of retirement age OR become disabled as ReefRaff is.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469524
So wait. You have no problem with a taxpayer-assisted healthcare plan like yours, yet you have a problem with all these millions of Americans wanting essentially what you have for the same price you're paying. Isn't that a little hypocritical?
I had money forcibly taken from my paychecks starting in 1977 to pay the insurance premium for what I have.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469530
I had money forcibly taken from my paychecks starting in 1977 to pay the insurance premium for what I have.
At what, 2.3% per paycheck? So over the course of 35 years, if you averaged $50K/year in pay, you put at little over $40K into your Medicare account. How much of that have you already eaten up? After that's gone, who's paying for your insurance? The taxpayers. So again, what's the difference between my taxes going towards paying for all these Medicare recipients and paying the same taxes for Obamacare?

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469630
At what, 2.3% per paycheck? So over the course of 35 years, if you averaged $50K/year in pay, you put at little over $40K into your Medicare account. How much of that have you already eaten up? After that's gone, who's paying for your insurance? The taxpayers. So again, what's the difference between my taxes going towards paying for all these Medicare recipients and paying the same taxes for Obamacare?
Point is I was charged for the services I now use.
Been on Medicare about 10 years. In that time I've had 2 doctor visits I used it for and will be doing a 3rd next week. I do have a prescription for blood pressure meds. It cost me 5.00 a month, Medicare's part is 1.00. I've been a cheap date.
In case you missed the news the Medicare system is going broke. You want the same people who can't make Medicare, The Post Office and Amtrack work choose how your healthcare is provided.

 

[jerthunter]

It is difficult to fix a system like healthcare when the people making decisions about it don't have to deal with the results. If the members of congress had to use the same system the rest of the country did I imagine this wouedenld go much smoother.
Back to the unpresedented comment. It seems to me that there isn't a great deal of presedent that deals with this specific situation.
Personally I think there is a good chance it will be overturned as unconstitutional for two reasons:
1. It is a deeply political issue and it seems like the courts tend to end in 5 - 4 results when it is a political issue with the 'conservative' justices winning, atleast in recent history.
2. My first thought when I read about this bill in its infant stage was that a univeral mandate would not be constitutional. Now everyone seems to be saying it and I think they could have avoided the issue were they to just impliment a new tax for everyone and then give a tax credit to anyone with private insurance. The result would have been the same except it would be more likely to get through the courts.
It almost seems like this was designed to fail, and if it does it will, in my opinion, benefit the democratcs by sparking their base while the republicans celebrate.
Interestingly, when it comes to health insurance providers, it seems like most have already priced the future costs into their earning forecasts and even the stock prices seem to reflect the impact of the bill.

 

[reefraff]

The Democrats are I am sure kicking themselves in the butt for ramming this mess through so fast. If the court tosses this they've lost credibility on the issue of health care for a generation.

 

[mantisman51]

Chief Justice Roberts is about to do a completely cowardly thing. He said he may not give the decision until January next year to avoid being partisan. When you have, by every poll, 68% of Americans saying they think it's unConstitutional, it is as gutless and cowardly as any politician to punt the decision down the road for later. If the decision is that it's unConstitutional then all he's doing is allowing billions more to be spent on something that's going to get tossed anyway. If he follows through with his threat, I will have lost 90% of my respect for him.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mantisman51 http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469698
Chief Justice Roberts is about to do a completely cowardly thing. He said he may not give the decision until January next year to avoid being partisan. When you have, by every poll, 68% of Americans saying they think it's unConstitutional, it is as gutless and cowardly as any politician to punt the decision down the road for later. If the decision is that it's unConstitutional then all he's doing is allowing billions more to be spent on something that's going to get tossed anyway. If he follows through with his threat, I will have lost 90% of my respect for him.
That's his decision, and you're just ticked because you disagree with his opinion. I'm curious. What type of healthcare plan do you have? Do you know anyone, or have family members that currently don't have insurance because they can't afford the outrageous premiums?
An individual who used to do contract work for me who found another job came by my office the other day. Hadn't seen him in 6 months. He told me he had gotten a double hernia lifting something wrong, and couldn't work for three months because of it. Since he was an independent contractor, he had no medical insurance, and because of a pre-exisiting heart condition, couldn't find a carrier that would write up a policy. He finally had a "friend of a friend" tell him about this doctor in Tijuana that could do the hernia surgery for $2400 cash. He went for it, and had the procedure done. A couple days after the surgery, a blood clot formed in the surgerical area of the hernia, and he had to go back and get that repaired by this same doctor. Spent 2 weeks sitting in a hotel in Tijuana to make sure the clot healed. He's fine now, but it could have turned out completely different. Could he afford medical insurance at today's rates? Sure he could. But no one will take him. That's one of the benefits of Obamacare.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469638
Point is I was charged for the services I now use.
Been on Medicare about 10 years. In that time I've had 2 doctor visits I used it for and will be doing a 3rd next week. I do have a prescription for blood pressure meds. It cost me 5.00 a month, Medicare's part is 1.00. I've been a cheap date.
In case you missed the news the Medicare system is going broke. You want the same people who can't make Medicare, The Post Office and Amtrack work choose how your healthcare is provided.
That irrelevent. Have one major medical incident (appendicitis, hernia, artery clog, hip replacement, knee replacement, etc.), and that $40K contribution you made is gone. I'd rather have someone provide some type of alternative to the current system, than no change whatsoever. We've been going on "status quo" for decades, and the Republicans could never come up with a viable alternative. You now have all these Baby Boomers looking for their Medicare piece of the pie, and the money isn't going to be there to fund it. At least with Obamacare, you're putting the onus of making people pay something towards their personal healthcare who don't have any other medium in which to obtain it. It's a false statement that this program is giving out free health insurance to all these individuals who have none. They will have to pay something.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mantisman51 http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469698
Chief Justice Roberts is about to do a completely cowardly thing. He said he may not give the decision until January next year to avoid being partisan. When you have, by every poll, 68% of Americans saying they think it's unConstitutional, it is as gutless and cowardly as any politician to punt the decision down the road for later. If the decision is that it's unConstitutional then all he's doing is allowing billions more to be spent on something that's going to get tossed anyway. If he follows through with his threat, I will have lost 90% of my respect for him.
I don't know where you heard that from, I can find nothing on it. It would be irresponsible considering the amount of money WE DON'T HAVE that is being spend setting up a program that might be thrown out I would say they owe it to the country to release the decision ASAP. Remember there are states dragging their feet implementing certain aspects of the program waiting for a decision.

 

[mantisman51]

I actually watched Fox News yesterday. It is the cheesiest of the broadcast news, so I rarely watch it. But on the program with the hot blonde in the late morning, she and a guest were taking about it. I'll see if I can find it.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469703
That irrelevent. Have one major medical incident (appendicitis, hernia, artery clog, hip replacement, knee replacement, etc.), and that $40K contribution you made is gone. I'd rather have someone provide some type of alternative to the current system, than no change whatsoever. We've been going on "status quo" for decades, and the Republicans could never come up with a viable alternative. You now have all these Baby Boomers looking for their Medicare piece of the pie, and the money isn't going to be there to fund it. At least with Obamacare, you're putting the onus of making people pay something towards their personal healthcare who don't have any other medium in which to obtain it. It's a false statement that this program is giving out free health insurance to all these individuals who have none. They will have to pay something.
Medicare works the same way as regular insurance, the healthy pay the costs of the unhealthy people's medical treatment. What it comes down to is somebody has to pay. The fatal flaw of 0bama care isn't the mandate, it's the total lack of any provisions to deal with the costs. They did things that will push costs higher, thus dealing with the wrong issues first. Tort and HIPPA reform would go a long way towards lowering costs. So would allowing us to buy insurance across state lines but none of that was included in this abortion.

 

[mantisman51]

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/28/justice-roberts-put-off-obamacare-decision-until-2013-please/
My bad. It is actually a dumbocrat wanting Roberts to hold off on the decision. I misunderstood them when they were talking about it. I generally like a pro-American, neutral news presentation, but some of their news readers think they're funny and charming and are just lame and grating.

 

[darthtang aw]

  Do you know anyone, or have family members that currently don't have insurance because they can't afford the outrageous premiums?
That irrelevent.  Have one major medical incident (appendicitis, hernia, artery clog, hip replacement, knee replacement, etc.), and that $40K contribution you made is gone.  I'd rather have someone provide some type of alternative to the current system, than no change whatsoever.  We've been going on "status quo" for decades, and the Republicans could never come up with a viable alternative.  You now have all these Baby Boomers looking for their Medicare piece of the pie, and the money isn't going to be there to fund it.  At least with Obamacare, you're putting the onus of making people pay something towards their personal healthcare who don't have any other medium in which to obtain it.  It's a false statement that this program is giving out free health insurance to all these individuals who have none.  They will have to pay something.
Hypocrisy in back to back posts. That is a first for you, even.
So any change is good change in your eyes? That is what you are also saying. Would you cut off your arm to address the tiny splinter in your finger. You statement suggests so.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469715
Hypocrisy in back to back posts. That is a first for you, even.
So any change is good change in your eyes? That is what you are also saying. Would you cut off your arm to address the tiny splinter in your finger. You statement suggests so.
How are my statements hypocritical? My first question was directed at mantis. He seems to be like you, and have this disdain for Obamacare. I'm just curious what type of health coverage he has. Are you saying that health insurance premiums aren't outrageously high? I know mine are.
What's your famous alternative? Don't give me the "let insurance companies sell insurance across state lines" mantra. My wife's insurance is with United Healthcare. However, when I go to my personal web site, it shows that it's UHC in MICHIGAN. I live in Texas. How is it UHC can sell me insurance in Texas, when their organization is based in Michigan if they aren't allowed to sell outside that state?
Yea, anything is better than the current system. Right now, I pay twice as much in premiums than I did 4 years ago, and my services have been cut due to tripling deductibles, and quadrupling out-of-pocket maxes. I used to get my normal scripts for a $5 co-pay. Now that same script costs me $25. The Republicans want to give me some BS voucher instead of MY Medicare that I've put almost 35 years worth of money into. There's no guarantee another plan will offer insurance regardless if you have pre-existing conditions. They want to throw the kids 26 and younger under the bus, and have them pay for their own health insurance while they're still going to college, or working a job that may or may not provide any health coverage plans.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by reefraff http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469708
Medicare works the same way as regular insurance, the healthy pay the costs of the unhealthy people's medical treatment. What it comes down to is somebody has to pay. The fatal flaw of 0bama care isn't the mandate, it's the total lack of any provisions to deal with the costs. They did things that will push costs higher, thus dealing with the wrong issues first. Tort and HIPPA reform would go a long way towards lowering costs. So would allowing us to buy insurance across state lines but none of that was included in this abortion.
Somebody has to pay? Sorry pay for it yourself. That's what I have to do. Why should my tax dollars fund your insurance? Have Medicare send you a statement listing the funds you put into that "account" while you were working. As soon as you've tapped that out, you're done. You get to figure out where to get healthcare insurance like the 45 million other Americans who have no coverage today.
As I told Darth, my UHC health plan is based in Michigan. I live in Texas. So exactly how am I able to purchase Michigan insurance if I live in Texas?

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469760
Somebody has to pay? Sorry pay for it yourself. That's what I have to do. Why should my tax dollars fund your insurance? Have Medicare send you a statement listing the funds you put into that "account" while you were working. As soon as you've tapped that out, you're done. You get to figure out where to get healthcare insurance like the 45 million other Americans who have no coverage today.
As I told Darth, my UHC health plan is based in Michigan. I live in Texas. So exactly how am I able to purchase Michigan insurance if I live in Texas?
Your tax dollars don't fund my insurance. I have already been taxed to pay for it. It was your beloved Democrat party that forced this system on us. If they want to refund my payments with compound interest I'll gladly jump on my wife's insurance. It's cheaper than medicare and the coverages are nearly as good.
UHC might be based in Michigan but they are required to follow Texas rules when they sell policies in your state. The reason being allowed to buy across state lines would drop the prices is because all states have mandated coverages. If we are allowed to shop we can purchase plans that make more sense for our particular situation. Let them who want or need additional coverages pay the higher premiums.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/391206/unprecedented/40#post_3469759
How are my statements hypocritical? My first question was directed at mantis. He seems to be like you, and have this disdain for Obamacare. I'm just curious what type of health coverage he has. Are you saying that health insurance premiums aren't outrageously high? I know mine are.
What's your famous alternative? Don't give me the "let insurance companies sell insurance across state lines" mantra. My wife's insurance is with United Healthcare. However, when I go to my personal web site, it shows that it's UHC in MICHIGAN. I live in Texas. How is it UHC can sell me insurance in Texas, when their organization is based in Michigan if they aren't allowed to sell outside that state?
Yea, anything is better than the current system. Right now, I pay twice as much in premiums than I did 4 years ago, and my services have been cut due to tripling deductibles, and quadrupling out-of-pocket maxes. I used to get my normal scripts for a $5 co-pay. Now that same script costs me $25. The Republicans want to give me some BS voucher instead of MY Medicare that I've put almost 35 years worth of money into. There's no guarantee another plan will offer insurance regardless if you have pre-existing conditions. They want to throw the kids 26 and younger under the bus, and have them pay for their own health insurance while they're still going to college, or working a job that may or may not provide any health coverage plans.
Your Medicare will be safe by the time they get around to saving the system. EVERY proposal the Republicans have proposed keeps the current system in place for anyone 55 and older. Just hope they don't kill medicare advantage. That's the only way you can find a decent doctor who will take on Medicare patients any more.

 

[darthtang aw]

Somebody has to pay?  Sorry pay for it yourself.  That's what I have to do. 
 
He did pay for it himself. How many years did he pay for the plan without access to it? Now he has access to it and is able to use it, and is still paying. on top of that, he is now paying about 96 dollars per month (I believe) to increase his coverage.
The average individual health insurance plan in the country runs 183 dollars per month, per individual.
Your 40K figure means That catastrophic event cant happen within 19 years of policy inception or insurance provider will lose money as well.
As to your hypocritical statements...nevermind...it isn't worth the effort.You would not see it even if I drew a picture.
You just want the system changed...you don't care how it is changed...just change it...oh, except tort reform and insurance competition across state lines....but it needed changed...anything...just not those issues.
You want the government to control health insurance...how has that added cost helped the EU? 1 country in default and several bailed out.....
There is no fix to this without changing how everyone does business. Period. There are ways to get your insurance cheaper. I work part time a couple nights a week and that covers my entire family's insurance as well as tucks a good portion away in a matching company 401 K.
You actually make more money than I do, based off your comments on this forum, and you whine about the premiums while I do not.
The reason....You outlook is a socialist mentality.