Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

  1. #21
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Buying insurance and consuming medical resources are not the same thing. Healthy people don't consume a great deal of such resources, because they're... well, healthy. And you still haven't explained what you mean by "rationing." Canada has socialized insurance, but you can get whatever treatment you need there.
    Sure you can... as long as you don't mind waiting on it.

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





  2. #22
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,803

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by Gill View Post
    Sure you can... as long as you don't mind waiting on it.
    So you define "rationing" as "waiting?"

    Are you aware that America's average medical wait times for a primary care physician are actually some of the longest?

    Article: Wait Times For Medical Care: How The US Actually Measures Up - Better Health
    Source of article's info: Access & Equity Charts - The Commonwealth Fund

    Canada had the highest percentage of patients (36%) who had to wait six days or more for an appointment with a doctor, but the United States had the second highest percentage (23%) who reported that they had to wait at least this long. New Zealand, Australia, Germany, and the U.K. all had substantially smaller numbers of people reporting waits of 6 days or longer. Canada and the United States, in that order, also had the lowest percentage of persons who said they could get an appointment with a doctor the same or next day.
    Meanwhile, our wait times for non-emergency or elective surgeries are pretty good.

    The U.K (60%) and Canada (57%) had the highest numbers of persons who had to wait four weeks or more to get to see a specialist physician. In the U.S., only 23% reported a wait of four weeks or more for specialty care.

    * The U.S. also did very well on measures of wait times for non-emergency or elective surgery. Only 8% of surveyed patients in the United States reported a wait time of four months or more for elective surgery, compared to 33% in Canada and 41% in the U.K. Germany scored the best, with only 6% reporting a long wait for elective surgery.
    Anyway, the point is that "government-mandated" health care does not necessarily lead to longer wait times. Several countries have just that and shorter wait times than the US. The US is not the shortest wait in any category, in fact. Waiting times are determined by the number of available doctors versus the number of patients, not the source of the money. If anything, the market will see a demand for more physicians and adapt to it by expanding medical practices and hospitals. Medical schools will up their enrollments to meet the increased demand.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  3. #23
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    rationing means that they will not PAY for the treatment. So, thanks to the ****tard government, I'm required to purchase insurance I don't want and don't need, and then will be required to pay out of pocket for the treatments the government decides they don't want to pay for, or don't want to allow the insurance companies to pay for. All the while, my FORCED insurance premiums go up along with my out of pocket expenses! Happy happy, joy joy.

    They can take their healthcare bill and shove it up their ass. All they did was take the worst aspects of healthcare and insurance and make them even worse. Yay for us.

  4. #24
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 10:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,766

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    I'm not going to get into the bickering over what political party lied or "fixed" the numbers, etc., etc. Unless you are an accountant and work in the health insurance/medical industry anything said concering the healthcare bill is pure speculation and political biasness.

    The only things that concerns me over health care legistlation are:

    1) How will it affect me in the short-term?

    2) How will it affect my daily life and the lives of my loved ones once the legistlation goes into full effect?

    3) How will the cost of health care affect my bottom line from now while part of the working class well into my retirement years?

    4) How will the government pay health care cost after once enacted and beyond 2020 when deficit figures are slated to go down?

    The health care industry will change; it's a given. How it will change will greatly depend on how well the medical and insurance industries adapt in the near turn and continue to make adjustments over the course of several years. Regardless of where you stand on the issue, the health insurance and medical industries did need to change. Too many people were either going without insurance (those who truly want it but can't afford it), getting denied health care or being gouged by the health care/insurance industries. You may not like what came out of the health care debate, but no one can deny that a major change was needed.
    Last edited by Objective Voice; 06-10-10 at 06:29 PM.

  5. #25
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by Gill View Post
    That's a good one coming from you.....
    You're right. Better to tackle me than the issue when you're in a weak position.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  6. #26
    Sage
    Gill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    The Derby City
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 10:39 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    8,686

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    So you define "rationing" as "waiting?"
    Nope.

    123...

    • "The America Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money." -- Alexis de Tocqueville





  7. #27
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,803

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    rationing means that they will not PAY for the treatment. So, thanks to the ****tard government, I'm required to purchase insurance I don't want and don't need, and then will be required to pay out of pocket for the treatments the government decides they don't want to pay for, or don't want to allow the insurance companies to pay for. All the while, my FORCED insurance premiums go up along with my out of pocket expenses! Happy happy, joy joy.

    They can take their healthcare bill and shove it up their ass. All they did was take the worst aspects of healthcare and insurance and make them even worse. Yay for us.
    What makes you think that would happen because of this bill? Why are people under the impression that this bill was some massive, sweeping change? Do you not understand that your insurance company will still be a private company? "The Government" wont be in charge of denying or accepting a claim.

    Edit: And by "rationing" you seem to mean "exactly what we have right now."
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  8. #28
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    What makes you think that would happen because of this bill? Why are people under the impression that this bill was some massive, sweeping change? Do you not understand that your insurance company will still be a private company?
    A private company the government forces me to patronize.

    "The Government" wont be in charge of denying or accepting a claim.
    Oh but yes, they will. Just as they do now seeing that Medicaid and Medicare deny more claims than private companies.

    Edit: And by "rationing" you seem to mean "exactly what we have right now."
    Not at all. Not even close. If I have insurance and the company does something I don't like, I can drop them. Or, I can forgo having insurance at all and pay for everything out of pocket (my current choice). Nothing at all is rationed. But, when this bill goes into effect, I no longer have that choice. I'll be forced to purchse a product I don't want and don't need. For prices higher than they are now. And then be forced to pay out of pocket on top of that when they ration out what they will or will not pay for. I'll be forced to buy into one of the two worst aspects of our healthcare system: insurance or govt. I'll be losing more money and gaining nothing out of it.

  9. #29
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,803

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    A private company the government forces me to patronize.
    Which is still private.


    Oh but yes, they will. Just as they do now seeing that Medicaid and Medicare deny more claims than private companies.
    If you can't tell the difference between government regulating a business and a government body selling you that business' product, then I don't know what to tell you. Your insurance company will be a private company.

    Not at all. Not even close. If I have insurance and the company does something I don't like, I can drop them. Or, I can forgo having insurance at all and pay for everything out of pocket (my current choice). Nothing at all is rationed. But, when this bill goes into effect, I no longer have that choice. I'll be forced to purchse a product I don't want and don't need. For prices higher than they are now. And then be forced to pay out of pocket on top of that when they ration out what they will or will not pay for. I'll be forced to buy into one of the two worst aspects of our healthcare system: insurance or govt. I'll be losing more money and gaining nothing out of it.
    You will still have the option to drop them. There is more than one insurance company out there, you know. You will also have the ability to go without insurance, it will cost you $695 per year. Why pay that? Because if you happen to get cancer after dropping your insurance, the rest of us get stuck paying the bill when you declare bankruptcy. Yes, that happens now. Insurance companies get overbilled to help cover the cost of uninsured patients, because we need hospitals to stay afloat. Will premiums go up, on average? Maybe. I'm not convinced that they well, because a lot of young, healthy people will be joining the ranks of the insured to offset the more expensive patients. Also, I think the exchanges will promote better competition. Right now, there are a lot of areas with only one or two providers. As far as "buying into" the government, the government wont be selling any products. You literally cannot get health insurance from the government unless you qualify for Medicare or Medicaid.

    Seriously, this "rationing" freakout we see in this country is unwarranted. You claimed that "nothing at all is rationed" because you can pay out of pocket. That doesn't change with this bill. And again, the government will not be providing insurance to you. They will not be deciding what your insurance company does or does not pay for. Your insurance company does that now and they will continue to do so. Private companies are doing the rationing right now and will continue to do so. If you think otherwise, if you think a government panel will review case #2358u1, Rivrrat's Chest X-Ray, and approve or disapprove, you're wrong. There is no provision in the bill that allows for such a situation.

    Don't get the impression that I think the bill will fix everything. On the contrary, I think the bill fails to address the fundamentally flawed system we're working with. We've tried to run health care like any other private industry, except the usual market forces don't apply to health care the same way they apply to televisions.

    edit: Are people under the impression that we're going to "run out" of health care? That we'll have to start drawing lots for who gets their broken ankle wrapped up?
    Last edited by Deuce; 06-11-10 at 12:33 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #30
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Health Costs and the Federal Budget

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Which is still private.
    And even more heavily regulated and controlled by a governing body who does not have my best interest in mind.


    If you can't tell the difference between government regulating a business and a government body selling you that business' product, then I don't know what to tell you.
    Our govt does both

    You will still have the option to drop them. There is more than one insurance company out there, you know. You will also have the ability to go without insurance, it will cost you $695 per year.
    Precisely. I'm forced to pay the money regardless. For no benefit to myself.


    You claimed that "nothing at all is rationed" because you can pay out of pocket. That doesn't change with this bill.
    Yes, it does since I'm required to purchase a product I don't want. So on top of out of pocket expenses, I have to either pay a fine or pay for insurance. So yes, it most certainly does change.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •