My Friend Needs HealthCare.

reply to post by Doc Velocity

I suspect, however, that your friend is not so desperate for healthcare as you claim.

Easy to say that when you aren't the one facing the illness.

Even with fast-track federal legislation, the so-called "healthcare reform" (socialism) movement in America would not actually see any reform until about 2013. That's right, even if every American was in favor of "healthcare reform" and there was no opposition to the legislation and President Hussein signed the thing into law today, the actual reform would not even begin for another 4 years.

Even I am not for the current legislation. I prefer that an actual health bill be compromised and address all issues. In the meantime, government should pass the necessary legislation to provide immediate healthcare to those who are without and pass regulations to prevent the health insurance companies from taking advantage of Americans..

Seeing how you point out socialism and Hussein, it highly suggests that you are not in favor of any healthcare bill, compromised or not.

I ask you, if tomorrow you were to become disabled or come down with a life threatening illness, how will you provide for your healthcare?

Will you totally depend on charitable hospitals? What will you do when those charitable hospitals run out of funds?

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by Doc Velocity

 

Seeing how you point out socialism and Hussein, it highly suggests that you are not in favor of any healthcare bill, compromised or not.

I would expand a say this is indicative of why this issue is nearly impossible
to address... The last part is also very important...

All the talk, partisanship and even attempts to discuss are simply masking this point. I have had pages worth of back and forth only to find that lo and behold, the person really does not really want to change anything in any form or for any reason.

This is likely at the very core of this efforts futility -

been my experience here.

Basic problem identified indeed

I would prefer a simple NO, NOWAY right off the bat



[edit on 7-9-2009 by mental modulator]

reply to post by dodadoom

Obama just addressed the insurance debacle on a live broadcast on CNN.
(if anyone even noticed)

Addressing the issue is not the same as getting everybody to compromise on a solution.

Just look at this thread, everybody has a different idea on how to solve this problem. IMO, nobody has offered a wrong solution. However, the solutions must be debated and compromised on.

I really don't want a one sided piece of legislation passed that will merely be transformed later when the Republicans take power.

Send them to the UK where they will get fixed first (after a bit of a wait) and asked questions later.

Originally posted by TheRedneck
Insurance is the problem, not the solution.

Well, this subject i can comment on, since i work for one of the largest health insurance companies in the U.S.

Insurance allows hospitals to get by with charging $20 for an aspirin.

Allows? We don't make laws, so we can't not allow it. The government does make laws though, and they do make laws in regards to what providers can bill them (Medicare, Medicaid plans). That's why providers hate government plans. Most of those hospital claims are entirely automated, since asprin doesn't require any kind of clinical need review. The computer will pay whatever contracted percentage of the claim that is billed, providers very often charge patients with insurance far more than those without. They are JUST as responsible for the high costs as insurance companies and lawyers.

Insurance forces doctors to run tests they would otherwise deem as unnecessary simply to make sure their malpractice rates don't go up.

That's not correct. We don't force anybody to do anything, we are very clear in all our dealings that we do not make treatment decisions, those are made between patients and their doctors. We have nurses that follow patients who are IN hospitals, since inpatient costs are by FAR the highest, to ensure they are being given standard of care treatment, and to ensure the providers are not just racking up bed days because the member has insurance.

Insurance regulates who gets into a hospital and who doesn't.

Not at all, unless you mean they regulate it indirectly in that many hospitals won't admit somebody without insurance or somebody with government insurance. See above.

There are many aspects of the health insurance industry that can be changed, but insurance is NOT the only or main problem. It's EVERYBODY in the industry.

[edit on 7-9-2009 by 27jd]

reply to post by jam321

Very true and fantabulistic point! Star!
It is up to US to fix it, no one else.
I think if people understood the bill better, they would
realize there are some good points to it.
No its not the end all to be all, but at least someone is trying something....

We have no lobbyists though, so this will be real hard work......
are we up to it?
Or will we decide the status quo is fine?
I imagine it will be the latter.


[edit on 7-9-2009 by dodadoom]

For those who don't think Obama wants to reform health insurance here is a snippit of what he said at a town hall in Montana:

And when you hear about these experiences, when you think of the millions of people denied coverage because of preexisting conditions, when you think about the thousands who have their policies cancelled each year, like Katie, I want you to remember one thing: There but for the grace of God go I. (Applause.) Most of us have insurance. And most of us think, you know, knock on wood, that we're going to stay healthy. But we're no different than Katie and other ordinary Americans, no different than anybody else. We are held hostage at any given moment by health insurance companies that deny coverage, or drop coverage, or charge fees that people can't afford at a time when they desperately need care.

It's wrong. It's bankrupting families, it's bankrupting businesses. And we are going to fix it when we pass health insurance reform this year. We are going to fix it.

(Maybe redundant to keep saying it but it doesn't seem to be heard.)

source

Jam, I am glad to finally see that you understand how much of a problem this is.

As one of the many die-hard Democrats and avowed liberals, if we're able to somehow work with the GOP on this to come up with a plan beneficial for the entire country, let's do so.

Though, we need to be reminded here. Insurance companies, lobbyists of insurance companies, and politicians who have a stake in these companies are only going to bring one thing: negativity.

These people will never change, and they want to keep the old system running.

Jam, I actually have a thread that could work out well for ATS. I'll email you about it.

reply to post by mental modulator

I would expand a say this is indicative of why this issue is nearly impossible
to address... The last part is also very important...

I think it boils down to the fact that change is scary. I can accept that some people prefer the current way. But when it comes down to paying your hospital bill, neither the Republican nor the Democratic party will mail you a contribution to apply towards your medical bill. Medical costs are not going down. If there isn't some kind of change for the better, this problem will continue to grow and affect more Americans.

Originally posted by jam321
I ask you, if tomorrow you were to become disabled or come down with a life threatening illness, how will you provide for your healthcare? Will you totally depend on charitable hospitals? What will you do when those charitable hospitals run out of funds?

I have all the health insurance I need. But, more than that, I will not nor ever would become a ward of the state, even if I was dying. I do not fear death, I don't fear illness, and that makes me a stronger person, both mentally and physically.

If I had no insurance and I contracted a "life threatening" illness tomorrow, there is no way in hell that any "healthcare reform" passed in 2009 would help me in any way. My point is that, if your friend has no health insurance, he should take advantage of the services that are available to him right now, one of which is the charity hospital system.

If you are using your friend's "possible brain hemorrhage" as a battering ram to make a case for "healthcare reform," then you're being rather disingenuous. Your friend needs help now, and he can't depend on some pie-in-the-sky legislation that hasn't been proven to help anyone, either now or in the future. There is no way in hell that "healthcare reform" will ever help your friend — however, there is a way for the charity hospital system to help him. Right now.

So far, charity hospitals have been independently running in America for many, many decades, and they haven't "run out of funds" yet. Nor will they "run out of funds" as long as Americans exercise their liberty to make charitable donations.

When the government removes our Liberty and starts demanding that we pay for indigent healthcare, starts taking it out of our paychecks to finance "socialized healthcare," THEN you will probably see the charity hospitals "run out of funds" rather quickly, because we won't be able to afford making charitable donations.

— Doc Velocity

Sorry, Doc, but that's not a plan. Running on charities is not stopping people from dying, and we both know that if everyone who didn't have insurance turned to charities, they'd be dried up in a second.

We need real change, not the same system.

I'm sorry, but the system we have now SUCKS.

EVERYONE agrees that it SUCKS!

reply to post by anyone


See, i don't know why everybody brings up the pre-existing clause. Employer based insurance plans have NO such clause, at all. I've never in my almost decade in the health insurance industry seen a plan with that exclusion in it. I think that is in effect for private plans, in which somebody decided to go SO long without insurance or well-checks, then all of the sudden is hit with a catastrophic illness and wants insurance to pay their bills, and them only pay a small premium. How is that AT ALL fair for the rest of the members? It doesn't work that way in ANY other industry, if you ignore your vehicles maintenance schedule, and the engine blows, it's not gonna be covered under the warranty.

Originally posted by 27jd
reply to post by anyone

 

See, i don't know why everybody brings up the pre-existing clause. Employer based insurance plans have NO such clause, at all. I've never in my almost decade in the health insurance industry seen a plan with that exclusion in it. I think that is in effect for private plans, in which somebody decided to go SO long without insurance or well-checks, then all of the sudden is hit with a catastrophic illness and wants insurance to pay their bills, and them only pay a small premium. How is that AT ALL fair for the rest of the members? It doesn't work that way in ANY other industry, if you ignore your vehicles maintenance schedule, and the engine blows, it's not gonna be covered under the warranty.

And the reason why many people go with their own private health care is that many times, employer based health care SUCKS. It's bad health care to work with.

I don't see a lot of employers getting major health care plans for their employees.

Has anyone thought about doing healthcare reform without socialism? Anything is possible. Right?

reply to post by Doc Velocity

When the government removes our Liberty and starts demanding that we pay for indigent healthcare, starts taking it out of our paychecks to finance "socialized healthcare," THEN you will probably see the charity hospitals "run out of funds" rather quickly, because we won't be able to afford making charitable donations.

Thats kind of backwards thinking Doc.
Other countries do pay a SMALL fee(15 euros a month for instance)for their health care!
This also includes welfare if they are laid off!
Dont fall for the fear mongering....we can acheive even better here!
Read their stories on here on Sanchos threads!
If this was properly funded there would be no need for charitable
contributions to these charity hospitals you speak of, because there
would be no need for charity hospitals in the first place!
For instance, here one would have to travel hundreds of miles to get to
one of these hospitals you are talking about.
Is that even realistic if you need to go to one in the first place? C'mon.



[edit on 7-9-2009 by dodadoom]

Originally posted by Mak Manto
I don't see a lot of employers getting major health care plans for their employees.

I do, I see it all day every day. The employers choose the plans, there many different plan options and the larger employers actually pay the claims themselves (self funded), they just hire insurance companies to manage the benefits. They choose what they will and will not cover.

reply to post by 27jd

There are many aspects of the health insurance industry that can be changed, but insurance is NOT the only or main problem. It's EVERYBODY in the industry.

Bingo. It's not just the insurance company. It is everybody. The insurance companies are being viewed as the villains right now. But what about the people who have insurance and abuse the system with constant minor visits? What about the doctors who milk the system for patients they don't even see? There are many contributing factors.

reply to post by Doc Velocity


Isn't the quite sizeable standing army when our Constitution calls for militias and allows for every citizen to be armed, socialized defense?

I mean, if I truly love my way of life and someone invades why am I not responsible for picking up my gun and fighting for my way of life with my own two hands? Do we really need that army? Aren't the US servicemen and women actually working their butts off so that the rest of us can sit at home and relax?

Isn't the occupation of another nation at the expense of US taxpayers, socialized imperialism?

I am working my buns off so that Iraqis have electricity, running water, police officers, right?

We're always paying for crap we don't want to pay for. If you ask me where I'd rather my tax dollars go I'd say 1) not to the irresponsible businesses who crashed our economy to begin with--but I had no say in that, they already gave it t them last fall; 2) not to Iraq to provide them with healthcare, power, schools, etc., 3) not to the Department of Homeland Security so they can spy on me.

I'm just less concerned with the debate over this issue than I am with the loss of rights we've been facing for the last 30 years.

reply to post by anyone

We are held hostage at any given moment by health insurance companies that deny coverage, or drop coverage, or charge fees that people can't afford at a time when they desperately need care.

I think it's more enjoyable for some to freak out and scream at
each other than actually hear what he is really saying.
I wonder if all these people have a vested interest in the health
industries profits? Seems so sometimes.

reply to post by 27jd


Exactly, and they choose not to pay for major health care.

Do you honestly think that a company will pay for one person's operations to remove a tumor, when they understand that all of the money for these operations will come close to a million dollars?