View Poll Results: Would You Rather Have Obamacare or a System of UHC?

Voters
54. You may not vote on this poll
  • "Obamacare"

    8 14.81%
  • Universal Health Care

    46 85.19%
Page 10 of 23 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 228

Thread: "Obamacare" or UHC?

  1. #91
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    They should have been advocating for death panels, not freaking out about them.
    We already HAVE Death Panels. We call them "insurance companies". If it looks like profits might be unduly impacted or if a particular adjuster hasn't denied enough claims this month to earn his quarterly bonus, the patient is SOL.

    Meanwhile, if you want to restrict services, how be we start with the ones we know full well are unnecessary echos of the inane fee-for-service model. Suppose we also start consolidating your medical records and making them available to any doctor who treats you so that unnecessary diagnostics aren't performed at all and others aren't performed over and over and over again. How be if we track data on patient-centered outcomes and make that info available so that doctors in Boston won't have to wait for years to read about this cheaper treatment that's working so well in Houston.

  2. #92
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Everyone has to be brought along. Starting from where they are right now. You cannot kill the insurance companies. You cannot kill major drug and device manufacturers. Without them, people die. The boon for the industry is in those up to 30 million new people with health care coverage. That's a lot of potential new profit, and to help try to get the law passed that would create access to that new profit, they have agreed to and accepted new rules and new cost structues that share the boon with the taxpayer. Has it all been done exactly right? Of course not, but where there once was nothing to work with at all, there are now all those terrible thousands and thousands of pages to go to and make the necessary adjustments. This is a HUGE step forward.
    My point was that had the Public Option survived, that would have been the true first step to UHC (via government insurance) other than Medicare without damaging the insurance companies. Without the Public Option, the insurance companies get all of the benefit (all the new insureds) without any of the pain (some of the new and current insureds may have instead gone to the Public Option).

    Same with the drug companies -- new insureds without any new group to negotiate pricing (the Public Option group), although I'm uncertain of the amount of negotiating power that a Public Option group would wield (from what little I've read, Medicare does not use its buying power to negotiate drug prices).

    I don't know where the insurance companies would fall under UHC... haven't really thought that far ahead.
    Last edited by Karl; 07-17-12 at 08:08 PM.

  3. #93
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by pilot16 View Post
    I think a tax on medical devices will be way bigger than people realize and it could be a jobs killer. We have an aging population and there are all kinds of "devices" people need from replacement hips, knees, joints etc plus combined with all the devices found in hospitals and doctors offices, x-rays, cat scans, mri's to name a few. Also I have heard this tax is only placed on American made devices (not sure if true) but if it is, how long before those jobs at Hill-Rom, GE, Strycker will be sent overseas?
    It's an excise tax of 2.3% and it applies to any manufacturer, producer, or importer of covered devices.

  4. #94
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    I know of no name of any legislation that is not an enormous deception.
    Apparently you've not heard of the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge Act. It renames the Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge as the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge. That's all. Enormous deception not detected.

  5. #95
    Sage
    Karl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    12-18-14 @ 09:35 AM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    5,561

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    Apparently you've not heard of the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge Act. It renames the Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge as the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge. That's all. Enormous deception not detected.
    Shouldn't it have been titled the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge Renaming Act?

    The best one I've heard of, and I can't link it so it may be urban legend, is that the Senate took a House revenue bill and removed all language except for the title. They then totally rewrote the bill from scratch -- but with the original House title and bill number -- with their own revenue language, passed it, and sent it back to the House. So much for constitutional checks

  6. #96
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    While I disgree with your intial statement, I mostly agree with your analysis that followed. I think that Obama's ultimate goal was and is UHC...
    Yes, he stated as plain as day that he personally felt that a single-payer system would ultimately be the best option, but that he understood that many people had objections and reservations about that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    ...and that Obamacare -- which I don't think turned out exactly as he envisioned, especially with the missing Public Option -- was envisioned as a currently politically palatable precursor to UHC.
    There are these examples of failed efforts to accomplish HCR in the past to learn from. Obama took the opposite tack from Clinton, letting Congress sit most of the time in the driver's seat, and Job-1 from start to finish was to craft and then keep a bill that could get 60 votes in the Senate. For a while Reid thought he could include a limited public option and still get there, but he soon had to change his mind about that. Would have been nice to get, but at least all the right-wing howling about how the private sector could never compete successfully against the big, bad bureaucrats was good for a laugh given all the lean, mean private sector efficiency hoopla that they more tpyically over-provide.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    He's taking the long view, moving the ball down the field in a game that I think he realizes will continue beyond his term in office. If I am correct, then that is a refreshing approach for a politician.
    I think that's absolutely correct. Okay, the Pentagon is a big ship that's hard to steer, but health care is a much larger ship and has never so much as had a bridge for the captain to steer from before. In my view, he clearly sees this as a work that he will start but that will be left to likely more than one successor to finish, if indeed "finish" is even an appropriate word with respect to in such an undertaking.

  7. #97
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Sure, why not? Maybe I should specify further, how many health care dollars are spent on people with very low chances of survival even with the treatments/procedures?
    More health care dollars are spent on sick, injured, and deteriorating people than on people in other groups. Then again, people who are sick, injured and deteriorating today were in those other groups perhaps not all that long ago, and many in those other groups today will soon be graduating. Be very clear that it is YOU we are talking about here, not THEM.

  8. #98
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,180
    Quote Originally Posted by Cardinal Fang View Post
    More health care dollars are spent on sick, injured, and deteriorating people than on people in other groups. Then again, people who are sick, injured and deteriorating today were in those other groups perhaps not all that long ago, and many in those other groups today will soon be graduating. Be very clear that it is YOU we are talking about here, not THEM.
    I recently signed a will and advanced directives. I had an option to select "keep me alive indefinitely" in case of unconsciousness an questionable/doubtful chance of full recovery. Not even death can scare me into thinking its financially sustainable to give people that option. But that's only one little example of waste in our free-for-all health care system. No one gets a tough answer, thus expenditures have no ceiling. "Affordable Care" my ***. Straight up doublespeak.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 07-17-12 at 09:45 PM.

  9. #99
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    My point was that had the Public Option survived, that would have been the true first step to UHC (via government insurance) other than Medicare without damaging the insurance companies.
    I understand the point and would have liked to see a public option make it through. But it wasn't in the cards and at that point, you play the hand you hold the best you can. VA care and Medicaid might need to be added to Medicare as already existing public systems, but I think one of the plusses of the public option would have come simply in showing people how easy and not un-American such an arrangement could have been. The fabricated horror stories would have been left looking a little silly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    Without the Public Option, the insurance companies get all of the benefit (all the new insureds) without any of the pain (some of the new and current insureds may have instead gone to the Public Option).
    Well, the French have one of the premier national health care systems in the world, and they have a vibrant health insurance industry. It's just a lot smaller than ours and doesn't have anything like the dollars and influence. So, in the beginning we can't, and in the end, we don't need to kill the insurance industry. We need to allow and even help it to shrink down to an appropriate size slowly so as to keep dislocation effects at a manageable level. They are on the hook to stop doing some things and start doing others, and they can't just invent premium hikes anymore. Right now, we have to finish off all the parts so that the whole thing can be in effect in 2014. There will be time after that to see what else the insurance industry can chip in.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    Same with the drug companies -- new insureds without any new group to negotiate pricing (the Public Option group), although I'm uncertain of the amount of negotiating power that a Public Option group would wield (from what little I've read, Medicare does not use its buying power to negotiate drug prices).
    Part-D prohibits Medicare from negotiating drug prices. The VA does, and the effects are quite noticeable. But agreement not to axe the prohibition within PPACA was part of the package that brought $80 billion worth of funding through cuts and concessions, so they do have a good bit in the pot.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    I don't know where the insurance companies would fall under UHC... haven't really thought that far ahead.
    It would have to depend on how the UHC system was structured.
    Last edited by Cardinal Fang; 07-17-12 at 10:37 PM.

  10. #100
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    02-15-14 @ 04:49 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    5,939

    Re: "Obamacare" or UHC?

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    Shouldn't it have been titled the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge Renaming Act?
    No, that would have implied that the Sam D. Hamilton Nonuxee National Wildlife Refuge was being renamed, which of course would have been an enormous deception.

    Quote Originally Posted by Karl View Post
    The best one I've heard of, and I can't link it so it may be urban legend, is that the Senate took a House revenue bill and removed all language except for the title. They then totally rewrote the bill from scratch -- but with the original House title and bill number -- with their own revenue language, passed it, and sent it back to the House. So much for constitutional checks
    There's no insult to the Constitution there. The Senate can clearly amend a House-originated bill and return it, whether the amendment is a single word or every word. It's not uncommon at all, as followers of H.R. 3590 would have noted.

Page 10 of 23 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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