Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Republican Lack of Health Care Act Redux

Matata

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
9,927
jordyonbass said:
The day that happens is the day they become the old, the sick and the poor by default.
Click to expand...
They don't have to worry about it because they'll be sure they are exempt from anything detrimental to their well-being or wealth. Totally corrupt.
 
Matata said:
They don't have to worry about it because they'll be sure they are exempt from anything detrimental to their well-being or wealth. Totally corrupt.
Click to expand...

They sure do have to worry about it; if they intend to try eliminate the populations that make up those demographics and are successful then they are not actually removing the demographic, but rather will be filling it with people from other demographics or even their own. Unless there is revolution which they could potentially cause here as well, the demographics are then re-defined and would contain some members of the GOP that tried their best to get rid of that population, something I find to be ironic.

What I am trying to get at here is that in order for there to be old, sick and poor people then there needs to be a point of reference i.e. young, healthy and rich people. Here is the major issue I am seeing; there is no difference between the demographic with a population of zero and a demographic that doesn't exist, and demographics is core to Republican values from what I can see. When you remove the people, the social demographics will be redefined to include a portion of those who weren't part of that group. If you remove the demographics then you end up with a bastardized version of Marxist Communism, something else that Republicans are staunchly against. So this actually confuses me because the end results are not pretty for them at all.

I hope I made my point effectively, I have trouble expressing what I think and feel into words sometimes.
 
Last edited:
Don't be fooled in to thinking our NHS is the be all and end all. There are lots of problems here, and if you're old, basically you'll be on the waiting list for anything non urgent in the hope you'll die before getting to the top of the list and needing treatment!

Emergency care is good, but a lot will depend on where you live whether you'll get the treatment you need. We've had private healthcare for years.
 
Thank you John McCain for voting your conscience or whatever drove you to vote "no" on the sneaky skinny repeal.

Now senators should propose changes to the ACA to help lower premiums and improve choice to help even more.
 
I'm just glad it didn't pass. I thought they would listen to Paul Ryan and pass this bill. Thank godness they didn't. My wish is that whatever they decide that will be the health care they get. As taxpayers we pay for their healthcare. They should get exactly what they want for the American people.
 
I was glued to the television last night. Even after I knew the result of the vote, I watched a tape of it all unfolding that MSNBC played so that I could watch the Senators move around and talk prior to and during the vote. Never have I been more impressed by Senator McCain. I wish red were posting here. I am so glad that he has not, yet, retired as she wanted him to do. He is still capable not only of sound reasoning, but of thoughtful and productive action. As others have pointed out, it is ironic that it was McCain who preserved the legacy of his rival for the presidency in 2008!

I have felt that Senator Chuck Schumer has done a great job in trying to promote bipartisanship in the senate since the health care vote. I hope that the Senate can regain some of its former dignity.

AGBF
 
Don't like the ACA, don't like McCain.
Admire him and the other 2 republicans for having the guts to tank another health careless bill that sucked.
 
Thrilled that this didn't pass. I was so worried--watched C-SPAN until 11:15pm PST when it was over. 16mil people being kicked off insurance is not a "plan" anyone wants.
 
Karl_K said:
Don't like the ACA, don't like McCain.
Admire him and the other 2 republicans for having the guts to tank another health careless bill that sucked.
Click to expand...

I find your point of view interesting, as I often do, Karl. You think for yourself. I believe that Senator McCain thinks for himself, too, and I often disagree with him. I voted against him when he ran for president. But I never said anything disparaging about him as I did about George W. Bush or Donald Trump. I feel that the United States would have been in capable hands had he become president. He was experienced and knowledgeable when he ran for that office.

Some television commentators have said that Senator McCain voted as he did to restore the Senate, not to save the health care bill. I am not sure that saving the Senate was his only motive, but I am sure that it played a part in his decision to vote as he did. He is a conservative; he might have been able to live with cutting funding for health care. He was clearly unable to see the United States Senate make a mockery of itself by voting on a bill that was written in invisible ink.

Deb/AGBF
 
IMG_5414.JPG

(Per a Reddit comment that I saw circulating on twitter).

I have to admit that I greatly underestimated McCain. I've never been able to like him after he opened the gates to hell by putting Palin on his ticket (I think we can draw a direct line from that to the disgusting idiot currently posing as "president"), but he has my respect and gratitude today.
 
Guys, I am in the US and have NEVER waited more than a week for my many MRI, MRCP and CT tests and results. In support groups that include people from the U.K., Australia and Canada, I have never seen a person get their test and results in less than 3 months! Their surgeries are usually 6 month waits. I have never waited more than 3 weeks for my SEVERAL surgeries in very busy hospitals all through the US. These are not isolated cases, I see it all the time. All I can say is living with constant nausea and pain with regular hospitalizations, waiting 3 weeks for surgery is agonizing, there is no other way to put it. I could not imagine waiting longer than I wait now.
 
Also, Mayo Clinic quit taking out of state Medicare patients and limit the in state number. They simply couldn't afford to continue being number one when the government paid them so little. I only know this because I am on Medicare and had to get on my hubby's insurance just to be seen there at Mayo. They would only take me because Medicare is now my secondary insurance.
All I can say is, anyone who wants single payer needs to reconsider. The chronically ill will be who suffers the most.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/t...n-medicare-and-medicaid-alone/article/2617455
 
lovedogs said:
Thrilled that this didn't pass. I was so worried--watched C-SPAN until 11:15pm PST when it was over. 16mil people being kicked off insurance is not a "plan" anyone wants.
Click to expand...
Soon there will be more than 16 million people off health care b/c of the raising premiums. The young and the middle class can't afford to pay the skyrocketing premiums for much longer. Like I have been saying..."neither side have any solutions on health care".
 
Mrs2Ouch said:
Also, Mayo Clinic quit taking out of state Medicare patients and limit the in state number. They simply couldn't afford to continue being number one when the government paid them so little. I only know this because I am on Medicare and had to get on my hubby's insurance just to be seen there at Mayo. They would only take me because Medicare is now my secondary insurance.
All I can say is, anyone who wants single payer needs to reconsider. The chronically ill will be who suffers the most.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/t...n-medicare-and-medicaid-alone/article/2617455
Click to expand...

So...you would rather hospitals totally refuse care than wait 3 weeks for surgery? From what you write, the only reason you were seen by Mayo is because you have private insurance. Well, you can get private medical insurance (either purchased individually or via your job) in the UK (and Australia, etc...) and you will be seen sooner there as well.

From the Guardian, written in Jan 2017 (click on the title to go to the article):
Private health insurance sales surge amid NHS crisis
The number of people in Britain taking out private medical insurance has risen significantly for the first time since 2008, amid fears about the ongoing crisis gripping the NHS.

After falling steeply between 2008 and 2011 and then staying flat, demand for private medical insurance cover in Britain rose by 2.1% in 2015 with just over 4 million people insured.

The figures, compiled by healthcare consultancy LaingBuisson, account for the period until the end of 2015. Figures for 2016 are not yet available.

Philip Blackburn, an economist at LaingBuisson, said: “There has been a clear rise in interest in private healthcare recently as more and more people are dissatisfied with higher waiting on the NHS and increased restrictions on NHS treatment. Private medical cover will benefit from this, and there is a wide choice of policy options at different prices to attract customers.”

The rise in sales of private medical insurance (PMI) comes despite increases in insurance premium tax (IPT) during the period from 6% to 9.5%, which has made policies more expensive. But the private medical industry is still far below its peak in 2008, when 4.35 million people – 12.4% of the UK population – had private cover. After the rise in 2015, a total of 4,022,000 people have cover, or 10.6% of the population.

All of the rise in private cover is coming through company schemes, where the number of employees with medical insurance rose by 3.4% to 3,070,000 people, or 76.3% of the total. This suggests that the increased popularity of PMI may be down to a recovery in the economy and companies taking more staff, rather than fears about the state of the NHS.

The number of individual subscribers to private medical insurance continued to decline, dropping by 1.7% to 952,000.

Most are put off by the rising cost of buying cover independently. A typical PMI policy for a healthy 35-year-old costs about £650 a year, but this rises steeply to £2,300 for those aged 70, when claims are far more likely. (Wow, I'm sure people would kill for individual insurance that costs so little.)

But the LaingBuisson data suggests that the companies and private hospitals selling cover are enjoying bumper profit margins. Companies and individuals spent £4.7bn on private medical insurance in 2015, but the total value of claims was £3.6bn, leaving the providers with a gross profit of £1.1bn.

LaingBuisson estimated that the total gross profit margin for PMI providers rose from 25.9% in 2014 to 26.7% in 2015. But it added that further tax rises and Brexit may make 2017 a tough year for the industry.

“A sharp increase in IPT from 6% to 9.5% effective from November 2015, and further rise to 10% from November 2016 has loaded significant additional cost for all medical insurance customers. A further hike to 12% in June 2017 will tighten this ‘taxation straitjacket’, and in an industry where affordability has been identified as the primary reason for a lack of growth in demand, this hefty additional burden is likely to mean demand for PMI is vulnerable going forward,” said Blackburn, adding that “the medical cover sector faces further uncertainty from the UK’s impending exit from the European Union.”​
 
Last edited:
I said, I would rather not wait 6 months for surgery.
Also, it is clear that to keep up with providing the best care they HAVE to refuse patients with government insurance. Yes, I do want the best care possible, thank you.
Also, why should anyone HAVE to pay for private if they are forced to pay for government run healthcare, too? What if they can't?!
Your whole reply is odd. You basically proved my point. Government run healthcare is inefficient.
 
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Mrs2Ouch said:
I said, I would rather not wait 6 months for surgery.
Also, it is clear that to keep up with providing the best care they HAVE to refuse patients with government insurance. Yes, I do want the best care possible, thank you.
Also, why should anyone HAVE to pay for private if they are forced to pay for government run healthcare, too? What if they can't?!
Your whole reply is odd. You basically proved my point. Government run healthcare is inefficient.
Click to expand...

You are currently paying for government insurance (Medicare) and private insurance (your husband's plan). What happens when your husband retires and he no longer has private insurance?

Right now, administrative costs for US healthcare system run about 30% of total cost. The amount of money, effort, and time spent trying to get insurance companies to pay is insane. In Switzerland where they have single payer, it is in the single digits. I don't have numbers for the other countries but I would bet their administrative costs are much lower than ours as well. So, it goes against your contention that government-run healthcare is inefficient. We just never had a system that is comprehensive in the US so we don't know any better.

Hospitals don't HAVE to refuse Medicare or Medicaid patients, many just choose to. Medicaid/care patients can be profitable, but hospitals just choose to reject them because they want to keep a high reimbursement rate (and want to be able to negotiate for that rate with insurance companies) so hospitals and doctor groups are willing to sacrifice volume for higher payments. This is especially true for major hospitals that have a big pool of patients to "choose" from. If a hospital is actually financially hurting, it wouldn't be so quick to reject Medicare patients.

I know someone who was hit by a truck when he was in school in the U.K. He was immediately treated and it cost him nothing. In the U.K., if there is an acute need (i.e. appendicitis or broken bone) you are seen to immediately. If you have a chronic illness you have your primary doctor that you see regularly -- just like here. (Although, frankly, when I tried to get an appointment with the rheumatologist I wanted to see, I was told there was a 4-month wait. I had to pull strings to be seen the next week.)
 
As a new patient waiting to see a specialist you will usually have to wait months in the US but as a regular patient only weeks. On the NHS even as an established patient you wait months.

If my husband retires we can still get private insurance. We live beneath our means like people who care to take care of themselves should.

If you get hit by a truck or any other emergency you will also be taken care of in the US, with or without insurance. Many people don't even pay. This is why our healthcare is expensive (or a big reason). We have millions of illegals having children in our hospitals and using the ERs as doctors offices. Add that to the legal citizens that don't pay and it adds up. You can not compare us to other nations. We have very unique issues.

You are very wrong about Mayo not needing to stop taking Medicare patients. They absolutely only way they could have kept taking them was to lower the quality of care. They wished to remain the best, so they did. You want to blame private insurance but Medicare is the insurance that hasn't paid my bills yet. The offices keep resubmitting the codes for payment, they haven't paid, then I get billed and have to call back up there again. I am running in circles because of Medicare. BCBS had already paid. Go figure. And, 25 percent is the average administrative cost in healthcare in the US, not 30.
 
Mrs2Ouch said:
As a new patient waiting to see a specialist you will usually have to wait months in the US but as a regular patient only weeks. On the NHS even as an established patient you wait months.

If my husband retires we can still get private insurance. We live beneath our means like people who care to take care of themselves should.

If you get hit by a truck or any other emergency you will also be taken care of in the US, with or without insurance. Many people don't even pay. This is why our healthcare is expensive (or a big reason). We have millions of illegals having children in our hospitals and using the ERs as doctors offices. Add that to the legal citizens that don't pay and it adds up. You can not compare us to other nations. We have very unique issues.

You are very wrong about Mayo not needing to stop taking Medicare patients. They absolutely only way they could have kept taking them was to lower the quality of care. They wished to remain the best, so they did. You want to blame private insurance but Medicare is the insurance that hasn't paid my bills yet. The offices keep resubmitting the codes for payment, they haven't paid, then I get billed and have to call back up there again. I am running in circles because of Medicare. BCBS had already paid. Go figure. And, 25 percent is the average administrative cost in healthcare in the US, not 30.
Click to expand...

Wait, didn't you just write one post ago "why should anyone HAVE to pay for private if they are forced to pay for government run healthcare too"? And now you write that you are willing to pay for private when you have paid and are paying for Medicare / Medicaid with your taxes already. You're a walking contradiction, you are.

If someone gets hit by a truck in the US, he gets treated, and then the hospital goes after him for payment. If he doesn't have the money, the account goes to collection or the patient files bankruptcy. Medical debt is the leading reason for bankruptcies in the US. Guess how many people go bankrupt in the single payer countries because of medical bills?

Illegals don't go to ERs. They're too afraid -- they want to stay off the system. Many go to free clinics. Oh, and before you say another word about illegals using our services, find out how much NET contribution they make to social security per year. Never mind, I'll do it for you. From the NYTimes:
Stephen Goss, chief actuary for the Social Security Administration, told me that undocumented workers contribute about $15 billion a year to Social Security through payroll taxes. They only take out $1 billion (very few undocumented workers are eligible to receive benefits). Over the years, undocumented workers have contributed up to $300 billion, or nearly 10 percent, of the $2.7 trillion Social Security Trust Fund.
Click to expand...

The US does not have unique issues. We have the same issues as other countries but on a bigger scale. But then we have money on a bigger scale as well.

That Mayo thing is BS. Often in teaching and research hospitals, the interesting / unusual / severe cases come from the poor / indigent -- those who get really sick. Perhaps if the Mayo took more Medicare patients they would know how to bill Medicare better.

:eek2:, I was off by 5%!
 
t-c said:
The US does not have unique issues. We have the same issues as other countries but on a bigger scale. But then we have money on a bigger scale as well.
Click to expand...
Oh really?? So I guess our $20 trillion debt is "fake news too "?..:whistle::roll2::wall:
 
The US spends around 17% of GDP on healthcare and the UK 10% (according to WHO). Despite that the US consistently scores much lower in terms of outcomes. I read quite recently that maternal mortality is increasing in the US, which is an absolute disgrace. Why is that? Could it be because much of the money pays the costs of the insurance companies and you pay your doctors huge salaries (at least double those in the UK)?

The NHS is not perfect but I wouldn't describe it as inefficient. There is a maximum 18 week wait for surgery and actually most surgery does not need to be done any quicker. Surgical intervention is a very small (and expensive) part of what a healthcare system provides.

No one in the UK gets bankrupted because they need to pay for treatment.
 
Healthcare here in the U.K. is a lottery. We live in an affluent area, and for as long as I can remember, I've never been able to get an appointment with a GP sooner than 3 weeks. If I'm in pain, waiting 3 weeks is unacceptable. My DH saw a GP recently who diagnosed his skin cancer as impetigo! He's had to have 2 surgeries to remove it, which is why we have Medical insurance.

My mother waited years for surgery on a hernia, by which time it was extremely large and encapsulated. After the surgery, she was left with her oesophagus in a sling and hardly able to eat. By that time, they then said due to age, she was too high risk fur further surgery.

For us, having medical insurance is a necessity not a luxury. However, it's considerably cheaper here for full coverage compared to the US. I pay £700 a year.
 
Austina said:
Healthcare here in the U.K. is a lottery. We live in an affluent area, and for as long as I can remember, I've never been able to get an appointment with a GP sooner than 3 weeks. If I'm in pain, waiting 3 weeks is unacceptable. My DH saw a GP recently who diagnosed his skin cancer as impetigo! He's had to have 2 surgeries to remove it, which is why we have Medical insurance.

My mother waited years for surgery on a hernia, by which time it was extremely large and encapsulated. After the surgery, she was left with her oesophagus in a sling and hardly able to eat. By that time, they then said due to age, she was too high risk fur further surgery.

For us, having medical insurance is a necessity not a luxury. However, it's considerably cheaper here for full coverage compared to the US. I pay £700 a year.
Click to expand...

I see you complain about the U.K. Healthcare system. But I'm curious, which would you rather have: the UK system (NHS + private medical insurance) or the US system (mostly private insurance)?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top