soccerboy22
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2010
- Messages
- 10,721
- Reaction score
- 4,120
- Location
- A warm place
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Conservative
WWI and WWII. Korea and 'Nam were unnecessary, as was "The War on Drugs".
Edit- I have no idea how this double posted.
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.
I probably wasn't clear in the interest of brevity. WWII was absolutely necessary. I meant to say that most wars after were debateable.I am curious on why you think WWII was unnecessary. I know it is off topic, but I am interested in your reasoning.
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?
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?
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.
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.
Those 30 million already see doctors... when it is absolutely necessary. They use the emergency room and then, don't pay.
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.
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.
Those 30 million already see doctors... when it is absolutely necessary. They use the emergency room and then, don't pay.
WWI and WWII. Korea and 'Nam were unnecessary, as was "The War on Drugs".
Edit- I have no idea how this double posted.
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.
FYI, there is no tort reform in the bill.Well you make it not suck to work in the field. Like dealing with greedy ambulance chasers. That will probably do the most good.
True but not to this level.
It sets a new precedent.
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?
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 old enough to remember the Medicare debate. It was at least this bad.
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.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.
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 don't agree. Increased regulation needs to occur, not only around safety/quality, but around efficiency and abuses. The industry needs HUGE reforms.
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.I agree completely with the first sentence. The second I think is doctors being over dramatic. Not going to happen.
We'll have to play the waiting game I guess, but I think this will be bad.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.
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.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.
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.
I understand, I'm talking about the level of manipulation.
It has increased a lot now.
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
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?