So, uh, the health care bill passed.

Quote
Arikado
So how about doing something similar on the federal level by requiring that everyone has health insurance but only people who need government health insurance (because private companies won't accept them) pay for it?

Quote
Crisco
lol, I have an Uncle at the top of an insurance company, makes 7 digits every year, if things go to the worse we'll move our insurance to him. But he doesn't seem worried, those with private health insurance get better coverage, and doctors don't deny them service (medicade).

According to me, equality between each and everyone is one of the most important things there is. Therefore each and everyone should have the best health insurance there is. If health industry is ran by private companies, they, as dancinninja claims, primary goal will be profit and they'll try to avoid giving out health care as much as possible and they'll trick you if they get the chance to do it unnoticed. On the other hand, if it is ran solely by the government there will be next to no profit, and the profit there is goes to the state which means it goes back to the people. Still the government will do what ut can to give the best health care to as many people as possible.

I agree that the guys with all the money and great insurances will possibly get worse health care and have to wait to get what they need, but that's beacause of only one reason, namely the fact that there is a huge demand on health care by the people. Espesially the poor ones needs it, and they're not getting any because they can't afford the insurence. If a rich guy would have to wait, that's because someone else who needs the care more has to go first.

Despite all of this, as my first post insuniated, health care is an investement. Healthy people work more, get wealthier, commits less crimes, and becomes kinder overall.

@Scanff: How would heart bypass demand be lowered if british public health care was made private?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2010 12:06PM by profetylen.

Quote
dancinninja
Has anyone ever had to deal with an insurance claim before? I have, and I know a LOT of people who have been through much, much worse. Suffice it to say, private health insurance is fundamentally a flawed concept, much like banks.

Yeah, I had to deal with an insurance claim before. Our private insurance spent nearly one million dollars to save my Dad's life. No one besides the insurance company ever paid a cent. The entire process was quick and completely painless.

As I said before, there are bad and misleading (lets just call them scams) insurance policies. It's honestly no different than the people who try to make money selling guides to homebrew. It's the downside to a capitalist society (if people use their heads though, it's not a problem). New laws for a health care reform could have made the scam policies illegal and fixed this. Instead, our country now descends into a hell for freedom thanks to comrade Obama's perverse form of health care reform.

Quote

According to me, equality between each and everyone is one of the most important things there is.

I have no money on me atm. I'm broke. Give me half of the money you have. Okay, now we're equal. What do you mean you're not happy?

Quote

If health industry is ran by private companies, they, as dancinninja claims, primary goal will be profit and they'll try to avoid giving out health care as much as possible and they'll trick you if they get the chance to do it unnoticed. On the other hand, if it is ran solely by the government there will be next to no profit, and the profit there is goes to the state which means it goes back to the people.

If there's no profit, (which there won't be as you've pointed out) then the government loses money which hurts the people. I fail to understand your logic here.

Private insurance on the other hand, the money is only exchanged between the people and never lost. Private insurance companies can make profit while providing great health care. Many do.

Quote

I agree that the guys with all the money and great insurances will possibly get worse health care and have to wait to get what they need, but that's beacause of only one reason, namely the fact that there is a huge demand on health care by the people.

So if you agree that health care is only going to get worse for people then why would you support this? And yeah, of course there will be a huge demand as every person is going to qualify ....

Quote

Espesially the poor ones needs it, and they're not getting any because they can't afford the insurence. If a rich guy would have to wait, that's because someone else who needs the care more has to go first.

Not really. It's usally a case of who gets in line first. The rich people will still get care first because they will be paying it out of pocket.

Quote

Despite all of this, as my first post insuniated, health care is an investement. Healthy people work more, get wealthier, commits less crimes, and becomes kinder overall.

I agree. People should invest in it. The government however has no reason to.

BTW, profetylen, I still and always will love you <3 Please, no hard feelings outside of this topic =)

Well my work provides my health insurance, but from what i understand, they are making it mandatory that you have to have insurance, if you don't have it you are fined for not haveing. Its going to cost the middle class working people like me. So its fair I get taxed, and have to work even harder to pay for somebody elses health insurance, even after years of crap they tell you to stop smoking. Or stop eating too much because your fat is costing the health care system. So is all that fair? Hell no, is it fair that my tax dollars pays for lazy ass white, black, mexican, asian to get welfare, never have to work, get there house payed for why I struggle to pay my house and bills, its bullshit and so is this health care reform. You can't fix a problem with a problem. If they want to provide health care for those that can't afford it, fine great go ahead, and revamp medicaid and medicare, but don't tax and force somebody to get health care. I pay enough for my health insurance from work, and it keeps going up so now I have to be taxed 40% more to pay for government crap. Plain and simple, if you want people to live healty lives tax the shit out of tobacco, make fast food heathy, make people live healthy lives instead of forceing people into helath care or makeing me have to pay for it. Go tax the rich they can afford it 250K a year, hell tax them 40%, tax me .5%. I hope in the end this comes to head real quick and all you people that are for it when you start paying taxes, or have to pay a fine because you don't have health care, or maybe your old grandma sitting on ssi, and gets a fixed check and has to depend on medicade then you will think twice.

Why does everyone keep talking about the government public health care plan?

The bill that passed doesn't include one.

EDIT: Also, if you make about $13K or less a year right now, you can get Medicaid. If you make about $41K or less a year right now, your care is subsidized.

If you have religious reasons that you don't want to buy insurance or you don't have the money, you don't have to buy it.

Employers with over 50 employees that don't provide health insurance are penalized.

EDIT2: Okay, yes, there is government health care, but it isn't a default. It's just a choice that isn't available until 2014, and is only available to people who spend around 10% or more of their income on health care.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2010 01:42AM by WikiFSX.

Quote
Crisco
So how about doing something similar on the federal level by requiring that everyone has health insurance but only people who need government health insurance (because private companies won't accept them) pay for it?

Wat? I never said that...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2010 01:42AM by Crisco.

Quote
Arikado
It's simple really. Many people can't afford government and private health insurance so they have to drop paying for the private one because they can't drop paying for the government one. This results in at best downsizing of insurance companies and thus cutting jobs. Also, only the people at the top of the insurance companies make 6 digit salaries.

In general, as far as I know, people paying for a private insurance plan are not paying anything extra under this bill. (If I'm wrong, I'd like a source with the relevant details.) There are increased Medicare taxes for those making more than $200,000 and a bunch of other provisions but nothing amounting to requiring people to buy two plans.

see also: [www.reuters.com]

Quote
profetylen
@Scanff: How would heart bypass demand be lowered if british public health care was made private?

Probably not, however there's not much in the way of preventative medicine in the UK.

My point is if I have a heart attack today and need the surgery I get it today and hopefully it saves my life. Not so in the UK because there are waiting lists.

The main problem with Nationalized medicine is lack of money, lack of doctors and nursing staff. Why? well because there's no motivation for someone to spend eight years in medical school and be making less money than a software engineer. Doctors are paid a flat rate. They don't get paid more if they bust their ass and see twenty patients, opposed to a doctor who sees one.

Take Medicare and Medicaid as examples. Say a doctor does an appendectomy he may bill $2000 and maybe will get paid $1200 depending on the contract he/she has with the insurance company. For the same procedure Medicare and Medicaid would pay $200. You may think $200 is fair but you also have to consider their overheads, they have to pay for the operating room, instruments and staff, so overall their probably making a loss on the surgery. In the end doctors just stop accepting Medicare and Medicaid, I've seen plenty of offices stop accepting Medicare and Medicaid where I live. Funnest thing about this is Doctors were paid more by Medicare/caid for the same surgery back in the 1970's.

Yes there are problems but I don't think any form of Nationalized medicine will fix these. In my option the costs are driven up by the Pharmaceutical and Insurance companies. how to fix it? I have no idea.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2010 02:43AM by scanff.

One word:

Australia.

If memory serves, they have an awesome system that provides for basic care for everyone, (yay), but also allows you to go "above" that as well, for more expensive/better treatment (yay). This way, the good doctors get paid the big bucks, and therefore will stay in the country, and everyone at least gets something.

Quote
dancinninja
One word:

Australia.

If memory serves, they have an awesome system that provides for basic care for everyone, (yay), but also allows you to go "above" that as well, for more expensive/better treatment (yay). This way, the good doctors get paid the big bucks, and therefore will stay in the country, and everyone at least gets something.

How is this even relevant? It has nothing to do with the state of the US right now...

BTW I <3 you too!

Does it now? It was my understanding that there is a fear of a dramatic drop in the quality/speed of health care in the United States and/or dramatic increase in taxes. Scanff brought up an excellent example: the government doesn't pay that much. A question arises, where do all the good doctors go? Where does anyone go, really? Where the money is. It's not evil or malicious, it's simply a matter of fact. If you could make more money elsewhere (a LOT more) you would be more inclined to move.

So, where do all the good doctors go? Without as many doctors, this creates a strain on those who stay, and the cycle feeds itself. With the ability to make more money (with the "additional" health care) the good doctors/practitioners/companies will be more inclined to stay and keep the benefits the way that they are.

I'm taking a more "economics" stance on this issue, if you don't mind (got to put all that studying to use somehow!).

Wow! A thousand posts! I really need to study all day because of an exam tomorrow! I'll read and reply to all of this probably tomorrow or the day after that!

@Arikado: Of course there's no hard feelings outside of this :P I'll always love you too :D :D :D :D

@Crisco: Sorry for messing up the quoting. Too much ctrl+C, ctrl+V. Intented to quote Arikado. It's fixed now, however.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/23/2010 12:07PM by profetylen.

Quote
Arikado
I have no money on me atm. I'm broke. Give me half of the money you have. Okay, now we're equal. What do you mean you're not happy?

No that wouldn't make me happy. But if you, me and everone else would take what they have put it in a big pool and then share it equally with everone in the world, that would make cry of happyness for years. Or, even better, destroy it all (provided we're only talking about money and not actual property) and become 100 % unegoistic and share everything with whoever wants a share of whatever it is to be shared. That's as close economy can get to perfect, in my eyes.

Quote
Arikado
If there's no profit, (which there won't be as you've pointed out) then the government loses money which hurts the people. I fail to understand your logic here.

The eventual loss the government will suffer is a result of the better health care they can give to the people. (If there even will be a loss. Publicly employed bosses tend to not have as shameless salaries as private ones. At least, that's the case in Sweden, I really don't know about the U.S.)

Quote
Arikado
Private insurance on the other hand, the money is only exchanged between the people and never lost. Private insurance companies can make profit while providing great health care. Many do.

Some money is indeed exchanged by the people. The problem is, there are some black holes of people with too many digits in their salary (runners of health insurance companies is an example) which only gives back some of the money they earn, making the rich richer and the poor poorer. As to many black holes grow big enough, people lose their understanding of how much money is worth and economy colapses. We saw this happen the last time in 2008. One of the first big ones in modern time was in 1929.

Quote
Arikado
So if you agree that health care is only going to get worse for people then why would you support this? And yeah, of course there will be a huge demand as every person is going to qualify ....

It's getting way better than it gets worse and the rich gives of their wealth to the poor, making the world more equal.

Quote
Arikado
Not really. It's usally a case of who gets in line first. The rich people will still get care first because they will be paying it out of pocket.

Then, another reform is needed :)

Quote
Arikado
I agree. People should invest in it. The government however has no reason to.

But people don't because they can't afford it or doesn't realize they should, so the government has to do it for them, especially because they'll get the money back in forms of decreased criminality, healthier workers e.t.c.

---

Another thing: Money is not happyness (well, small amounts for those who owns nothing can be, but not for the already rich, they'll just get greedier and feel worse). Friendship are happyness (among other things). You don't make friends by not sharing what you have. If this is true (is it?), which is the better alternative, publicly financed health care or privately? (As you might have guessed, I'd vote for the former.)

Quote
Scanff
Yes there are problems but I don't think any form of Nationalized medicine will fix these. In my option the costs are driven up by the Pharmaceutical and Insurance companies. how to fix it? I have no idea.

Global maximum salary. Not just in one country because then, the professionals will move, but I think global will solve it quite well.

Also, Scanff, the state should pay doctors well, so they don't choose another profession or move. They do pay them well in Sweden, and IMO, we have a very, very good health care (for everyone).

On a side note: What I hate the most with capitalism is that it is based off egoism and so endorses it. Egosim(!), IMO the most dangerous propery of man. And we endorse it and let it grow. Socialism, on the other hand, endorses and is based off solidarity and the good will of man, two of the best properties (IMO). It is together we build our society, not alone. It is together we have built this society and gotten as far as we have. Unfortunately, of wealth comes greed, and as global wealth has increased, global greed has increased, summoning more egoism, resulting in more frequent and more devestating economic collapses and more bad deeds overall.

@profetylen,

If you work above and beyond, progress your career and play the game I don't see any problem with getting paid huge amounts on money that's how capitalism works.

Socialism gives equal treatment to those with no ambition and contribute nothing to the rest of society, that just sits wrong with me. Call me conservative, a republican or a right-winger but I'm not happy that my tax dollars are going to people who don't contribute, illegals, losers and leachers ...etc...etc. You see where I'm coming from. For those of you who think a national health system is free take a look at the tax rates for countries who have it. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_rates_around_the_world) and compare those to the US.

it's easy to call people illegals when you acquired the right to live here just by being born

Quote
comex
it's easy to call people illegals when you acquired the right to live here just by being born

Like.

Quote
comex
it's easy to call people illegals when you acquired the right to live here just by being born

I was not born in the US. I was born in the UK and went through a grueling 5 year immigration process which cost me thousands of dollars in fees. But I did it the legal way.

Quote
profetylen

Quote
Arikado
I have no money on me atm. I'm broke. Give me half of the money you have. Okay, now we're equal. What do you mean you're not happy?

No that wouldn't make me happy. But if you, me and everone else would take what they have put it in a big pool and then share it equally with everone in the world, that would make cry of happyness for years. Or, even better, destroy it all (provided we're only talking about money and not actual property) and become 100 % unegoistic and share everything with whoever wants a share of whatever it is to be shared. That's as close economy can get to perfect, in my eyes.

It's a beautiful notion, but at that point, leadership would become the new currency. People will never be equal in every way. So let's work with what we have, and try to make it better. The new American health care bill only makes things worse for everyone in a hope to benefit not the people, but the government (the vast majority of my country agrees with me).

Quote

Quote
Arikado
If there's no profit, (which there won't be as you've pointed out) then the government loses money which hurts the people. I fail to understand your logic here.

The eventual loss the government will suffer is a result of the better health care they can give to the people. (If there even will be a loss. Publicly employed bosses tend to not have as shameless salaries as private ones. At least, that's the case in Sweden, I really don't know about the U.S.)

I stick to my original comment. For the record, the salaries of these health care company heads are less than many of the government officials (including those in state governments -- My state governor of NY has a salary of a whopping $179,000 a year -- but its not close to the governor of California who makes an insane $206,500 a year). Health care companies also regularly donate to medical research which is something the government certainly does not do. If anything, out government restricts research. Look at what they're doing to NASA: [www.washingtonpost.com]

Quote

Quote
Arikado
Private insurance on the other hand, the money is only exchanged between the people and never lost. Private insurance companies can make profit while providing great health care. Many do.

Some money is indeed exchanged by the people. The problem is, there are some black holes of people with too many digits in their salary (runners of health insurance companies is an example) which only gives back some of the money they earn, making the rich richer and the poor poorer. As to many black holes grow big enough, people lose their understanding of how much money is worth and economy colapses. We saw this happen the last time in 2008. One of the first big ones in modern time was in 1929.

I stick to my original comment. Also, please see the last big block of text I wrote. In short: Good for business men if they're smart enough to make loads of money meanwhile doing good for millions of people. I've never had a problem with them, only been saved by them.

Quote

Quote
Arikado
So if you agree that health care is only going to get worse for people then why would you support this? And yeah, of course there will be a huge demand as every person is going to qualify ....

It's getting way better than it gets worse and the rich gives of their wealth to the poor, making the world more equal.

1)Thats not what you said before
2)How does the policy of one nation make the world more equal?

Quote

Quote
Arikado
Not really. It's usally a case of who gets in line first. The rich people will still get care first because they will be paying it out of pocket.

Then, another reform is needed :)

Yay, we agree :D I was screaming for reform like everyone else, but this was not the change anyone had in mind.

Quote

Quote
Arikado
I agree. People should invest in it. The government however has no reason to.

But people don't because they can't afford it or doesn't realize they should, so the government has to do it for them, especially because they'll get the money back in forms of decreased criminality, healthier workers e.t.c.

I'm going to go back to my analogy of NY State auto insurance. Everyone has to have it. But the government offers a plan for anyone who can't afford it or get accepted for it privately. Anyone who doesn't use the government plan doesn't have to pay for it. People who work hard and are accepted on to private plans actually pay less. Furthermore, laws are in place in ensure that no one is abused by any private policies. If only the government had taken a similar approach with health care on a federal level as was hoped, things would be all good.

Quote

Another thing: Money is not happyness (well, small amounts for those who owns nothing can be, but not for the already rich, they'll just get greedier and feel worse). Friendship are happyness (among other things). You don't make friends by not sharing what you have. If this is true (is it?), which is the better alternative, publicly financed health care or privately? (As you might have guessed, I'd vote for the former.)

If your friends are only your friends because they expect you to share what you have, then I regret to inform you that your friends are using you like a tool and you should go look for some new friends. Of course in essence, this health care reform bill is only exploiting people too ...

Profetylen, the United States is not a country of equality, but instead of equal opportunity. Each person, no matter where they came from, has the ability to achieve anything. Barack Obama is actually a perfect example of this: Despite growing up in a third world country, he was able to return to where he was born (if you believe he was born in Hawaii at least) and become president. Under no other political system today is this even conceivable. The more socialist our society becomes, more and more opportunity is taken away -- stories like this which our culture is based around will cease to exist if we continue on the socialist tract we are on.

Fun facts regarding the health care bill:
[www.sfgate.com] -- Unsurprisingly, Comrade Obama forgot to put promised components into the health care bill which sold some people on it. Of course, he made sure to remember to exempt himself and the rest of corrupt friends from having to abide under the bill. Most of the rest of his promised acts in the bill that we'll all be paying for soon won't even start happening until 2014 (hopefully he will not be re-elected and a new president can kill the bill by then)

Quote
comex
it's easy to call people illegals when you acquired the right to live here just by being born

It's just as easy to justify not paying for them when we look at people like scanff.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/24/2010 09:11PM by Arikado.

I suspect that most illegal immigrants did not have any reasonable opportunity to "do it the legal way".

Arikado, I'm sorry if I missed it, but I haven't seen you address this post. Under what terms of the new bill do taxpayers have to (effectively) pay for two plans?

Quote

I'm going to go back to my analogy of NY State auto insurance. Everyone has to have it. But the government offers a plan for anyone who can't afford it or get accepted for it privately. Anyone who doesn't use the government plan doesn't have to pay for it. People who work hard and are accepted on to private plans actually pay less. Furthermore, laws are in place in ensure that no one is abused by any private policies. If only the government had taken a similar approach with health care on a federal level as was hoped, things would be all good

Aren't conservatives usually against a public option?