• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Health Care Bill has passed

WWI and WWII. Korea and 'Nam were unnecessary, as was "The War on Drugs".

Edit- I have no idea how this double posted.

I am curious on why you think WWII was unnecessary. I know it is off topic, but I am interested in your reasoning.
 
With all the fact-check sites, and all the breakdowns of the bill that are out there and available to anyone interested in this issue, it is absolutely astounding that there are still people who actually believe this bill represents socialism or a government take-over...

It just shows you want an effective job the GOP has done with misinformation and negative spin and what a piss-poor job the Dems have done on selling the bill to moderates and independents...

I encourage anyone who really wants to know what's in this bill to find some honest conservative sources, some honest liberal sources, and some objective breakdowns and read them ALL.

If you're only getting your news from Fox you're handicapping yourself in the same way someone who only watches MSNBC and reads Mother Jones...

As a reasonable, logical person I know:

(1) The people who wrote this legislation believe it will be effective in solving many complicated health policy problems. In other words, they would not set out to write policy that would fail or bring down the country.

(2) The Dems that voted on this are putting themselves at risk, Politically speaking, given the current division in the country on this issue. I can not believe that entire party would commit political suicide, they must believe there is potential for success here.

(3) Given the current mood in the country and the timeline for the bill to kick in, a 'No' vote is a pretty safe vote for Republicans.


Just answer this Hazel,

How are you going to add 30 million people to healthcare and not hire a single doctor when we are already in a crisis for doctors?
 
I am curious on why you think WWII was unnecessary. I know it is off topic, but I am interested in your reasoning.
I probably wasn't clear in the interest of brevity. WWII was absolutely necessary. I meant to say that most wars after were debateable.
 
Just answer this Hazel,

How are you going to add 30 million people to healthcare and not hire a single doctor when we are already in a crisis for doctors?

Those 30 million already see doctors... when it is absolutely necessary. They use the emergency room and then, don't pay.
 
Just answer this Hazel,

How are you going to add 30 million people to healthcare and not hire a single doctor when we are already in a crisis for doctors?

Well you make it not suck to work in the field. Like dealing with greedy ambulance chasers. That will probably do the most good.
 
We are talking about cost control here. The reason health care costs so much, no matter who foots the bill as a third party payer, an individual, or contributing employer, is because of lifestyle choices.

Using your logic, everybody dies, so why should we bother with healthcare at all? You can't save lives in the end.

Quite simply: quality of life.
Statistically, except for infant, maternal, and child mortality, our average lifespan isn't much improved from a century- even two centuries- ago.
Most people in the 1800s who survived childhood and childbirth could expect to live to be around 70, as we do today.

But their quality of life was very poor, compared to what we take for granted.
Physically, they were absolutely ruined by the time they were forty or so. They were in shambles by the time they were 50, and bedridden for the rest of their lives shortly after that.
Something as simple as arthritis, which effects so many Americans, could really make life a living hell if untreated, without shortening your life one bit.
There are many chronic illnesses that are like that.
In the past, old age was simply a time of extended misery... and it began when you were about 30.

Who needs that? We're living in 2010. We don't have to live like primitives.
 
So what do you think of that link I gave you Lerxst? There is a section or two dedicated specifically to the credits you would receive depending on your size and scope of a company, as well as penalties if somehow providing insurance were to become unaffordable as an employer.

as Harry Guerrilla said long ago in this thread, supporters need to show how they think this bill will help rather than just believing it will. All i have seen thus far is that "it will make everybody healthier", with nothing to back that up substantially.

IMO, the root cause of health problems in this country(or the majority of them) come from lifestyle choices rather than this perceived lack of healthcare access. This bill, and I am sure the supplemental ones to follow do not adequetly address this. Much like our pharma companies(whom I disdain), we have treated the symptoms of health issues in this country rather than found a cure.

I've been reading some of it and I can't quite tell you what I think to be honest. Since I have no idea what the government plans will consist of, nor do I have any idea what they will eventually cost I can't say how it will help or hurt me. I see that my business will not qualify for the tax credits they are proposing as we pay more than $50K a year annually to our employees. I don't know, I need to read some more and make sure I am understanding what I'm looking at.

At this point it's still a case of wait and see for me.
 
Those 30 million already see doctors... when it is absolutely necessary. They use the emergency room and then, don't pay.

Exactly. That's been my family's health care plan for years and years.
If there were any other way, we wouldn't do it that way. We know the ER is for emergencies.
But, for instance, when my husband was bitten by a feral cat we were trying to rescue: he needed rabies shots. They cost $7,000. We got them all at the ER. he had to go back every week for a month.
He almost didn't, but the doctor in the ER convinced him that he had to, and insisted that he didn't care whether or not we could pay.
 
Last edited:
I don't have a link yet. It just happened. Will provide a link as soon as one is available.

The next bill to be voted on is the Reconciliation bill.

EDIT: Link is here.

The way I see it, Republicans should not have gone down the road of misrepresentations and attacks. IMHO, this is what killed their attempts to stop this bill, which I agree is bad. Also, IMHO, the Tea Partiers are an albatross around the neck of the GOP, and tonight's vote is proof of that.

Will post the results of the Reconciliation vote in this thread, just as soon as they come in.

Well this just sucks. Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail when it gets dragged through the court system with Constitutional challenges. If it can just be held off long enough for a Republican controlled house and Senate, then it can finally be put down like a lame horse.
 
That is what bothers me because I support these cuts and it is what makes the bill sustainable. Medicare advantage has been shown to be more expensive than traditional medicare.

At least the "donut hole" got closed. I feel the multitude of insurance plans for this only worked to confuse people rather than hold costs down.

That's the moral of this "story."

Liberals/Democrats forget that Republicans will take control again, they will screw with this just as bad as Democrats have and not in ways that will make them happy.

To the supporters, congratulations.
You just opened a new can of worms that both parties can mess with and at your expense.
 
Those 30 million already see doctors... when it is absolutely necessary. They use the emergency room and then, don't pay.

This may be true but dont you think that if people are now covered that alot wont go alot more frequently?

Most people will not go to the ER for a cold but many will go to the doctors office. I suspect doctors will have alot more business once people are covered.
 
That's the moral of this "story."

Liberals/Democrats forget that Republicans will take control again, they will screw with this just as bad as Democrats have and not in ways that will make them happy.

To the supporters, congratulations.
You just opened a new can of worms that both parties can mess with and at your expense.

The can of worms was opened long before the Obama administration.
 
Just answer this Hazel,

How are you going to add 30 million people to healthcare and not hire a single doctor when we are already in a crisis for doctors?

For payments related to medicare:

Provide a 10% bonus payment to primary care physicians and to general surgeons practicing in health professional shortage areas, from 2011 through 2015.

Also in the bill:

Increase the number of Graduate Medical Education (GME) training positions by redistributing currently unused slots, with priorities given to primary care and general surgery and to states with the lowest resident physician-to-population ratios (effective July 1, 2011); increase flexibility in laws
and regulations that govern GME funding to promote training in outpatient settings (effective July 1, 2010); and ensure the availability of residency programs in rural and underserved areas. Establish Teaching Health Centers, defined as community based, ambulatory patient care centers, including federally qualified health centers and other federally-funded health centers
that are eligible for Medicare payments for the expenses associated with operating primary care residency programs. (Initial appropriation in fiscal year 2010)
 
Just answer this Hazel,

How are you going to add 30 million people to healthcare and not hire a single doctor when we are already in a crisis for doctors?

Your question is based on a partisan talking point, one not vaguely true -- you only reveal a complete lack of understanding for the complexity of the issues and the approach taken in the bill...

You add 30 mil by (1)requiring everyone to have some minimum insurance while (2)changing certain conditions/rules to make the market more completive in pricing and service.
 
We are very different, philosophically, on this, LMR. I support most social programs as a necessary evil so that society does not crumble. I do not support social darwinism, which to me, is the opposite. How we take care of the weakest and neediest members of our society, defines our society. I do think a lot of these social programs need streamlining and a lot of reform. But society has modernized and changed dramatically from the 19th century. And government needs to change with society.
Here's my take on social programs. We have them, but they are prone to abuse and waste. Waste is easy, going overbudget means something for once. Currently all one has to do to increase their fiscal budget for the next year is find a way to overspend the current one, well, when you reward overspending of course you will get more overspending. Hold people to a solid budget and punish any intentional malfeasance to the fullest extent of the law. Waste should be reduced. To eliminate abuse, simply up the standards and set a timeline for benefits to expire. Allow for exemptions and temporary extensions for those who are able bodied, and I think those tweaks would work.





I don't agree. Increased regulation needs to occur, not only around safety/quality, but around efficiency and abuses. The industry needs HUGE reforms.
I think instead of creating more regulatory conditions, we could just enforce fraud laws. Much of the inefficiencies today come from having so many compliance angles, this applies to both my field and the provider field as well. If.....say the HHS was the singular authority, but if you overcharge, double-dip bill, or misrepresent services then I see no reason why state financial regulatory authorities cannot simply have expanded capablities. In other words, I think we get it as far away from the feds as possible.



I agree completely with the first sentence. The second I think is doctors being over dramatic. Not going to happen.
I don't know about that Cap. There were quite a few doctors who retired in La. to get insurance licenses around the late '80s and early '90s when the state regulations became too burdensome. There is only so much a professional can take before saying it isn't worth the trouble.



Yes, reforms that could have been put in place, weren't. As far as costs go, I think we'll see some slight increases. Unsure if it will be more than that.
We'll have to play the waiting game I guess, but I think this will be bad.



The insurance industry needs to lose a lot of influence in legislative matters. I may not agree with some of the things that the AMA advocates (and no, I am not a member), but it's a drop in the bucket compared to insurance abuses that I have encountered.
Insurance companies vary in coverage models and customer models honestly, it's kind of like agents. When one company gets a bad satisfaction rating it makes all the news servers, but when a company gets it right we hear nothing, kind of like doctors, lawyers, and every other professional. Much of the insurance problem in health is twofold, it works similarly to auto insurance being the main problem, and as well, prices are skyrocketing through little fault of the actual service providers but as a direct result of staff shortages, regulatory compliance costs, and CYA medicine due to tort abuse.
 
This may be true but dont you think that if people are now covered that alot wont go alot more frequently?

Most people will not go to the ER for a cold but many will go to the doctors office. I suspect doctors will have alot more business once people are covered.

Overall, that should keep health costs DOWN. If people went to the doctor more often at the first sign of trouble, "big ticket items" could be minimized, and the overall expense would go down.

Let me give you an anecdotal example from my own practice. One of my specialty areas is treating clients with eating disorders. If you send me someone who has just started their eating disorder within the past month or so, I can usually arrest it and get it under control inside a year or two (YMMV). If, however, I start seeing someone who has had an untreated or poorly treated eating disorder for SIX YEARS, I can pretty much guarantee a 5-7 year recovery time, including at least one hospitalization, if not more. Now, there are lots of reasons for folks to not go see a practicaner, but lack of coverage and/or lack of money are huge reasons. And then they wait and then the problem is bad enough that more money needs to be used... insurance money, tax money, charity money, all of it.

Early intervention beats everything. If this bill helps people see doctors quicker and more often, costs should go down.
 
Regarding the doctors who are threatening to quit

What are they going to do should they quit?

Flip burgers at Burger King, become engineers (dont have the training) become vetenarians (possible).

Move to another country that doesnt have socialized medicine like Somalia (as every major economy other then the US has it)

It is just hyperboyle by those doctors, a few will quit, the vast majority will not
 
I understand, I'm talking about the level of manipulation.

It has increased a lot now.

Well let me ask you this. If one party becomes arrogant during the term of it's president, don't you think that the other party, once in power, will do the same thing.

It takes two to tango, and the Donkeys and Elephants are perfect dance partners.
 
Last edited:
Regarding the doctors who are threatening to quit

What are they going to do should they quit?

Flip burgers at Burger King, become engineers (dont have the training) become vetenarians (possible).

Move to another country that doesnt have socialized medicine like Somalia (as every major economy other then the US has it)

It is just hyperboyle by those doctors, a few will quit, the vast majority will not

Why would they quit when they will be getting a bonus for treating people on medicare? Plus, with everyone insured I would think it would be easier for them to get paid by everyone else.
 
Back
Top Bottom