• 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!

SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758, 1205]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

"In reality, both data and anecdotes show that the American people are already waiting as long or longer than patients living with universal health-care systems."
The Doctor Will See You??n Three Months - Businessweek

AdamT you AGAIN prove your yourself simply to be an Obama cheerleader arguing the IMPOSSIBLE. Same health care providers + more patients = shorter wait times? From your own source, that is NOT a true "conclusion" see my snipette from it:

{There is no systemized collection of data on wait times in the U.S. That makes it difficult to draw comparisons with countries that have national health systems, where wait times are not only tracked but made public. However, a 2005 survey by the Commonwealth Fund of sick adults in six nations found that only 47% of U.S. patients could get a same- or next-day appointment for a medical problem, worse than every other country except Canada.

The Commonwealth survey did find that U.S. patients had the second-shortest wait times if they wished to see a specialist or have nonemergency surgery, such as a hip replacement or cataract operation (Germany, which has national health care, came infirst on both measures). }

Oh my! In the U.S. only HALF can get a same or next day APPOINTMENT! Help us please, oh mighty Obama, so that the other HALF of us do not have to wait 2 whole days for that NON-EMERGENCY doctor appointment!

We KNOW that adding 30 to 45 million people to the SAME number of health care facilities is NOT going to CUT WAIT TIMES, so please AdamT explain to us just how ObamaCare will NOT increase our wait times? Crickets...
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Actually it's only supposed to be used if it reduces the deficit, but continuing on...



Very little of the ACA was passed via reconciliation. The bulk of the bill (including the individual mandate) was passed normally, with 60 votes in the Senate. Only a few changes were passed via reconciliation, and those few changes did not increase the budget deficit.

Link please? And I will use the same principle for evaluation as you adopted when I tried to use PJM as a source. I won't accept a leftist or liberal source.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Isn't this a worse case scenerio?

Yes. The whole point of health insurance is to plan for the worst-case scenario.

I have insurance and have had a few surgeries and had not one bit of trouble with the insurance company. I happen to be very, very satisfied with my health insurance.

Do you have an individual policy or does your employer cover you? If your employer covers you, your insurance is probably OK. If you have an individual policy, chances are your insurance is less good than you think it is. The thing about insurance is that most people are satisfied with their policies because they don't need them that often. They're satisfied right up until the moment the insurance company tries to screw you out of a $100,000 bill. Fortunately the ACA has eliminated most of the worst abuses.

But now I think those days are gone. And I realize you're going to tell me that's not going to happen, but in my experience with any govt program, eventually it goes to hell in a handbasket and cost twice as much as it should.

Will you be switching over to Medicaid when the provisions take effect? If not, it isn't a "government program." Unless you're referring to the subsidies you'll receive (if your income is less than 400% of the poverty line). But in that case, all the government is doing is cutting you a check. You'll still have private insurance.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Not sure whom it is you're talking to, but they dont speak for the majority of people in Canada:

Canada
Main article: Health care in Canada
Health Canada, a federal department, publishes a series of surveys of the health care system in Canada based on Canadians first hand experience of the health care system. The following data are from the latest report.[64]
Waiting times
Although life threatening cases are dealt with immediately, some specialist services needed are non-urgent and patients are seen at the next available appointment in their local chosen facility.
The median wait time in Canada to see a specialist physician is a little over a month with 89.5% waiting less than 3 months.[64]
The median wait time for non-urgent diagnostic services such as MRI and CAT scans[65] is about two weeks with 86.4% waiting less than 3 months.[64]
The median wait time for elective surgery is a month with 82.2% waiting less than 3 months.[64]
Prescription drug costs
Although Canadians get the services of their physicians and hospitals included, they do have to meet the cost of prescription drugs themselves. Many take out insurance for this but this is not compulsory. Some people do meet some expenses themselves out of pocket.
34.3% of adults reported having no out of pocket costs for prescription drug costs. 96.2% of adults pay less than 5% of their disposable income on prescription drugs.[64]
Overall satisfaction rate
85.2% of Canadians reported that they were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the way health care services are provided in their country and an even higher number (89.8%) rated their physician in the same way though slightly lower ratings were awarded to hospitals (79.9% being "satisfied" or "very satisfied").[64]

You can also find information for several other countires here Socialized medicine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How many Canadians come to America to get health care? Not too many...how many Americans go to Canada to get health care? Plenty.

Link [64] to http://healthcoalition.ca/index-eng.pdf "Error 404 - Not Found" Do you have another link to Canada wait times under 3 months.

try this link it works.

http://www.fraserinstitute.org/publicationdisplay.aspx?id=2147484001
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Nor will we until 2014. Waiting times certainly will get worse. We have too many specialists and not enough primary care physicians.


There are no primary care physicians because they have all been run out of the profession as they can't even pay their medical school loans with their pathetic pay as "doctors".
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

A good step toward thinking independently would be to actually learn what's in the law you hate so much. The fact that you thought you would be on the hook for the mandate for health insurance you can't afford, and that you didn't know what a health insurance exchange is, suggests that you are not aware of the main provisions of the law. Therefore it makes me wonder how you could have possibly come to hate it so much when you don't even know what it is. The only possible answer to that question is that you have allowed right-wing pundits to whip you into a frenzy. :roll:

Whats got me whipped up has to do with the backdoor policy now in effect thanks to SCOTUS. I actually support healthcare reform and believe that parts of Obamacare is good. But that does not mean that I am for the mandate or what it does politically.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

The Commonwealth Fund (a nonpartisan health care policy thinktank) studied the health care systems in seven countries and compared the quality. The seven countries were the US, Canada, UK, Netherlands, Germany, Australia, and New Zealand. They compared them across 11 different variables that measured the quality of their health care systems. On 8 of the 11 variables, the US ranked sixth or seventh among the seven nations...and didn't rank better than fourth on any of them. The US also came in dead last for overall quality. But there is one variable where the US came in first: money spent. The US spends far more per capita ($7,290) on health care than any of the other countries. The runner-up, Canada, spent only $3,895.

Perhaps this suggests that there is something that we could be learning from these other countries, which spend less and (your anecdote about dissatisfied foreigners notwithstanding) have better quality.

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: How the Performance of the U.S. Health Care System Compares Internationally, 2010 Update - The Commonwealth Fund

you refuse to read certain links, yet call the commonwealth fund non partisan.

bwahahaha.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

That only works if your bills are small enough to make it relatively affordable, and if you can't afford health insurance then you certainly can't afford a big bill. What are you going to do if you get hit by a bus tomorrow and spend six months in the hospital? Probably stick the hospital with the bill.

Nope, I'd do what I could to pay it off. Again the whole idea of personal responsibility seems to escape you even though i've mentioned it several times already.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

If you've been getting good service from the current system, you are in a small minority.

Or maybe the ones that haven't been are actually in the minority and those with political agenda's have blown it all out of proportion. Much like they did with ciggarettes.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

AdamT you AGAIN prove your yourself simply to be an Obama cheerleader arguing the IMPOSSIBLE. Same health care providers + more patients = shorter wait times? From your own source, that is NOT a true "conclusion" see my snipette from it:

{There is no systemized collection of data on wait times in the U.S. That makes it difficult to draw comparisons with countries that have national health systems, where wait times are not only tracked but made public. However, a 2005 survey by the Commonwealth Fund of sick adults in six nations found that only 47% of U.S. patients could get a same- or next-day appointment for a medical problem, worse than every other country except Canada.

The Commonwealth survey did find that U.S. patients had the second-shortest wait times if they wished to see a specialist or have nonemergency surgery, such as a hip replacement or cataract operation (Germany, which has national health care, came infirst on both measures). }

Oh my! In the U.S. only HALF can get a same or next day APPOINTMENT! Help us please, oh mighty Obama, so that the other HALF of us do not have to wait 2 whole days for that NON-EMERGENCY doctor appointment!

We KNOW that adding 30 to 45 million people to the SAME number of health care facilities is NOT going to CUT WAIT TIMES, so please AdamT explain to us just how ObamaCare will NOT increase our wait times? Crickets...

I was arguing national health care vs what we have NOW -- which is what the article discusses. I'm sure that wait time will increase in 2014 and beyond. That's life. We will have to encourage the training of more doctors and allow physicians assistants to do more, which they are very capable of doing. The AMA, like the ABA, is all about maintaining a monopoly for MDs.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Actually it's only supposed to be used if it reduces the deficit, but continuing on...



Very little of the ACA was passed via reconciliation. The bulk of the bill (including the individual mandate) was passed normally, with 60 votes in the Senate. Only a few changes were passed via reconciliation, and those few changes did not increase the budget deficit.

Are you kidding me? The cost of ObamaCare, as allowed by the SCOTUS, without requiring MANDATED increased Medicaid "contributions" by the states will be HUGE, since the states NOW do not have to PAY FOR 1/2 of that amount.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Link please? And I will use the same principle for evaluation as you adopted when I tried to use PJM as a source. I won't accept a leftist or liberal source.

You can see the roll call vote for yourself:
H.R. 3590 (111th): Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (On Passage of the Bill) -- GovTrack.us

The ACA passed the Senate with 60 votes, which contained all of the major provisions such as the individual mandate. A few minor changes were then made via reconciliation after the fact.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Nor will we until 2014. Waiting times certainly will get worse. We have too many specialists and not enough primary care physicians.


If Massachusetts is any example, your not getting anymore either.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

That may be the technical definition of government assistance.

Possible. :doh
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

I was arguing national health care vs what we have NOW -- which is what the article discusses. I'm sure that wait time will increase in 2014 and beyond. That's life. We will have to encourage the training of more doctors and allow physicians assistants to do more, which they are very capable of doing. The AMA, like the ABA, is all about maintaining a monopoly for MDs.

That indeed was what you were "arguing" but in response to a post claiming that ObamaCare would increase wait times, which is MY POINT. You should simply have said "yep" and given that post a "like".

Pay more to get less is "life"? That may be "life" in Obama dream land, but this is still the USA. This madness, does not become "life" until 2014, that gives the NEXT president and congress time to "fix" the ObamaCare law or replace it entirely.
 
Last edited:
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Yes. The whole point of health insurance is to plan for the worst-case scenario.



Do you have an individual policy or does your employer cover you? If your employer covers you, your insurance is probably OK. If you have an individual policy, chances are your insurance is less good than you think it is. The thing about insurance is that most people are satisfied with their policies because they don't need them that often. They're satisfied right up until the moment the insurance company tries to screw you out of a $100,000 bill. Fortunately the ACA has eliminated most of the worst abuses.



Will you be switching over to Medicaid when the provisions take effect? If not, it isn't a "government program." Unless you're referring to the subsidies you'll receive (if your income is less than 400% of the poverty line). But in that case, all the government is doing is cutting you a check. You'll still have private insurance.



I think you're trying to explain this as you see it, but as I stated before, when the government gets involved in any program, it always costs more and in many cases is a botch up. IMO, it's because the govt has never had to actually produce a product or run a business on a budget.

They are famous for "sending" out for products and services.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

If Massachusetts is any example, your not getting anymore either.

Is it really that big a deal to wait a few extra weeks for non-emergency care?
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

You can see the roll call vote for yourself:
H.R. 3590 (111th): Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (On Passage of the Bill) -- GovTrack.us

The ACA passed the Senate with 60 votes, which contained all of the major provisions such as the individual mandate. A few minor changes were then made via reconciliation after the fact.

Would you please point out the provisions of the legislation that were passed through the Budget Reconciliation process and the provisions that weren't passed through that process? Thanks.
 
Obama Care hidden costs. As we move toward a Canada health care system, we will experience the pit falls rarly considered.

Sick health care system made Canadians lose more than $3-billion in economic activity in 2011: Fraser Institute

June 26, 2012

So says a study released this morning by the Fraser Institute, which estimated that last year Canada lost $1.08-billion in business-day economic activity due to excessive wait times at hospitals and time gaps between visits to specialists and receipt of treatment.

Long waits in emergency rooms and forcing Canadians to take time out their work days to visit multiple doctors has a cumulative effect not only on the quality of their care but on the overall productivity of the workforce, says the report.

“Rationing health care in Canada doesn’t just deprive patients of timely access to necessary medical treatment… it also causes them to lose out on wages, productivity and enjoyment in life while they wait,” he says.

The study estimates each patient loses about $3,490 each year as a result of having to wait 9.5 weeks between the time they see a specialist and the time they are able to receive care.

Sick health care system made Canadians lose more than $3-billion in economic activity in 2011: Fraser Institute

What a disaster for America following in these same footsteps..
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

I think you're trying to explain this as you see it, but as I stated before, when the government gets involved in any program, it always costs more and in many cases is a botch up. IMO, it's because the govt has never had to actually produce a product or run a business on a budget.

They are famous for "sending" out for products and services.

Problem is, our private health system is 100% more expensive than government run systems elsewhere. And our 100% socialist health system -- the VA -- is more efficient than our private system.
 
Obama Care hidden costs. As we move toward a Canada health care system, we will experience the pit falls rarly considered.



What a disaster for America following in these same footsteps..

Yep, it's much more efficient to overpay by hundreds of billions every year.
 
Re: SCOTUS LIVEBLOG - Obamacare Mandate Survives [W:125, 384, 635, 652, 758]

Is it really that big a deal to wait a few extra weeks for non-emergency care?

Tell that to the guy or gal with the pinched Sciatic Nerve.
 
Yep, it's much more efficient to overpay by hundreds of billions every year.


"each patient loses about $3,490 each year as a result of having to wait 9.5 weeks between the time they see a specialist and the time they are able to receive care". Is it more efficient to get reduced premiums at the expense of reduced wages?
 
"each patient loses about $3,490 each year as a result of having to wait 9.5 weeks between the time they see a specialist and the time they are able to receive care". Is it more efficient to get reduced premiums at the expense of reduced wages?

And you're assuming that the wait time here is zero?

'fraid not.

And to repeat -- HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS A YEAR is what we overspend relative to other OECD countries.
 
Last edited:
"each patient loses about $3,490 each year as a result of having to wait 9.5 weeks between the time they see a specialist and the time they are able to receive care". Is it more efficient to get reduced premiums at the expense of reduced wages?

Every Canadian is off work for 9.5 weeks every year due to having to wait for health care?

No kidding?

Then, Canadians should be chomping at the bit to get a US style of health care, correct?

OK, Canadians, I know that there are some on this board. How many would trade health care systems with the USA?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom