Allow me to try to clear up a lot of misconceptions about the Affordable Healthcare Act

[patra_is_here]

this is a comment for everyone who already has insurance:

DO YOU REALIZE THAT OTHER PEOPLE IN THE SYSTEM ARE ALREADY SUPPORTING YOU??? it's a shared-load system BY DEFAULT. do you not understand that at any point, your money, and their money, is supporting any medical coverage, that actually costs MORE than the amount you've actually paid.

 

if you've had health insurance and say, paid $5000 in to the system and then get injured, your insurance covers MORE than that $5000 you already put in. it's NEVER just about "work and pay for what you need" and you're blind if you think it is. everyone else with insurance IS supporting your medical treatment, making you a 'taker'.

 

now, lets talk about the uninsured. the uninsured actually DRIVE UP insurance costs for the insured, because the uninsured use the emergency room more, and their long term injuries are usually at the 'expensive' state (post-preventative state), and that cost all get's passed on to the insured.

 

so simply the acting of covering the previously uninsured will ultimately bring costs down.

 

 

 

and for all the arguing going on here, NONE of you have offered a valid point against the original post which claims the program will pay itself off by 2021. you all post simple "belief" based claims, or post about how it's not "right" or "fair" and whatever ridiculous subjective topic you in your lack of depth feel provides a true counter-point.

 

 

YOU are a member of society. BY DEFAULT you want that society to succeed, because YOU are a member of it, and your well being relies on the success of your society. healthy people contribute to a successful society more than unhealthy people contribute to society.

[patra_is_here]

and guys if you think this insurance thing is the reason behind you insurance rates going up and companies laying people off

your so far off base it ain't worth talking about,,that has been quietly going on for 20 years now

 

yeah man, heck, probably longer

[Cloud81918]

this is a comment for everyone who already has insurance:

DO YOU REALIZE THAT OTHER PEOPLE IN THE SYSTEM ARE ALREADY SUPPORTING YOU??? it's a shared-load system BY DEFAULT. do you not understand that at any point, your money, and their money, is supporting any medical coverage, that actually costs MORE than the amount you've actually paid.

 

if you've had health insurance and say, paid $5000 in to the system and then get injured, your insurance covers MORE than that $5000 you already put in. it's NEVER just about "work and pay for what you need" and you're blind if you think it is. everyone else with insurance IS supporting your medical treatment, making you a 'taker'.

 

now, lets talk about the uninsured. the uninsured actually DRIVE UP insurance costs for the insured, because the uninsured use the emergency room more, and their long term injuries are usually at the 'expensive' state (post-preventative state), and that cost all get's passed on to the insured.

 

so simply the acting of covering the previously uninsured will ultimately bring costs down.

 

 

 

and for all the arguing going on here, NONE of you have offered a valid point against the original post which claims the program will pay itself off by 2021. you all post simple "belief" based claims, or post about how it's not "right" or "fair" and whatever ridiculous subjective topic you in your lack of depth feel provides a true counter-point.

 

 

YOU are a member of society. BY DEFAULT you want that society to succeed, because YOU are a member of it, and your well being relies on the success of your society. healthy people contribute to a successful society more than unhealthy people contribute to society.

 

Insurance is a wonderful thing and I'd certainly hope that anyone evolved in the discussion understands how it works.

 

I think the big concern is what are the government's tasks. I don't feel like its role is insuring it citizens. I also don't think it is positive for our government to support a hospital/insurance system which is showing a run way critical mass situation. Putting more money into the system is not going to help. While it is claimed that the program will pay for itself by 2021, I think that has a snowballs chance in hell. The program itself will have impacts on the market in way that can't be completely predicted. It also continues supporting a market that has shown massive price control issues. There is very little pressure to control price and if you think that pressure is going to come from a government lobbied by interest groups, your gonna have a bad time.

 

The fact is all insurances remove patients further from decisions on their care as the money involved isn't their money. That is not a negative as much as it is a factual statement. This makes decisions less your's and more of the collective's in both positive and negative ways. Rather take a pill than change your diet, you get to decide that and the cost is put on the collective. It get to pay for lifestyle choices of others. On the flip side though, your insurance decides where you go and who you see. It decides how much is paid for a procedure, and that many times decides where it will be done and who is going to do it. The whole procedure market is made by others and you are along for the ride.

 

In the end I see this as a step to a single payer system. Understand that I don't consider such systems "bad", I just start to wonder if we can really pull such a thing off and it do what we hope it will do. Government backed programs have a tendency to run away and reigning them in becomes a games of chicken. We are looking down the barrel of a Social Security system running out of funds. The system was designed based on what things looked like when it was drafted, but now we live in a different world and it is running dry. But you can't change the rules and expect to keep an elected office. You'll also have a hard time making up any funding difference out of a general fund once the SS system run negative as those are already being over spent. How can the ACA be any better? Without a crystal ball you can't tell that future. You can only make assumption based of the history of past programs.

 

I think we do healthcare wrong. I think it needs to be made better. But I think that adding more money to a failing system isn't the answer. I think it snuffs out innovation and inventive ideas and I think it is placing government is a role that it shouldn't be in.

[Fanta]

I think we do healthcare wrong. I think it needs to be made better. But I think that adding more money to a failing system isn't the answer. I think it snuffs out innovation and inventive ideas and I think it is placing government is a role that it shouldn't be in.

 

But it's changing the system. For starters, doctors will be getting paid based on the quality of healthcare provided, versus quantity as it currently stands. Whether it's better or not has yet to be determined. Below is a quote from an MD:

 

"What we have now

 

There are several groups that come by to certify and accredit hospitals based on a set of national guidelines. The major group for Hospital accreditation is the much-feared Joint Commission (http://www.jointcomm...tion/npsgs.aspx) who comes by every so often and performs an intensive review of the hospital and it's policies and outcomes which are then compared to their National Patient Safety Goals. Public quality reports are generated based on their results and accreditation is granted. Here is the public report for UCSF, for example: http://www.qualitych...095#comparative. They identify deficiencies and mandate swift policy changes to ensure adherence to guidelines.

Even more feared and applicable is CMS, The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (http://www.cms.gov/). CMS also comes by and performs an intensive review of the hospital's outcomes and adherence to nationally established safety guidelines. For example, as part of the SCIP (Surgical Care Improvement Project), they will look at how often patients received their dose of pre-operative antibiotics within 1 hour prior to incision. CMS knows what the national average adherence rate among hospitals is and thus, can quickly identify centers that are not compliant. Non-compliant centers are generally notified of their deficiencies formally and then must quickly remediate or risk losing Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements, the loss of which would essentially kill any hospital. The reason I mention these groups is because they are already beginning to extrapolate on their national data collection programs, as I will detail below.

 

What's to come

 

The nationalized accreditation and quality monitoring groups such as CMS and The Joint Commission already know how well hospitals are doing regarding established patient safety measures. What's next is the providers. Already, mandatory reporting regarding provider outcomes is beginning. For example, Dr. Johnson, who is a Surgeon, will have to report his average operative time for a cholecystectomy and his post-operative wound infection rate. If he falls below a certain percentile nationally, his reimbursement will be negatively affected. If he is in say, the top 10% nationally, he will receive a small bonus (this is the tentative plan as I've heard it from the higher-ups at my hospital).

 

How this will work for primary care is a little murkier. The general consensus seems to be that they will try to reimburse based on a similar set of nationally defined "quality measures" like they are using for hospital accreditation, Medicare center status, etc. For example, is Dr. Smith keeping his patient's HbA1C below 7.0%? (An indication of good long-term diabetes control). Is he keeping his patient's LDL less than 100? So on and so forth.

This all seems like a great idea on the surface, but without putting my own opinions into this, I offer the following scenarios for your consideration:

• 
  Dr. Smith and Dr. Johnson are both primary care physicians. They both have 10 identical patients with diabetes, for whom each physician prescribes the exact same, evidence-based, standardized diabetes protocol. 4 of Dr. Smith's patients are non-compliant with their insulin regimens, despite optimal counseling and the best efforts of Dr. Smith, thus their HbA1C values will be above the cutoff that qualifies them for a "good outcome." In the end, medication compliance is a patient choice which cannot be controlled by the physician and although Dr. Smith did everything right from a medical standpoint, those patients will be red-flagged and reimbursement decreased.
  
  
• 
  Dr. Unlucky is a cardiologist, and Bill is a patient of his with Congestive Heart Failure. Bill is receiving the evidence-based optimal medical management for his CHF (Carvedilol, ACE inhibitor, etc). Bill has been counseled extensively on the importance of a low sodium diet and careful fluid intake because of his CHF. Bill is a Cleveland Browns fan and they make it to the Superbowl for the first time since god only knows. Bill has a Superbowl party with his buddies and eats a ton of potato chips and drinks a few beers and ends up in the hospital with a CHF exacerbation. Dr. Unlucky is now dinged for a hospitalization for CHF exacerbation for a patient under his care, which will be reported and affect his pay.
  

It's situations like this that are worrying physicians. I urge you to remember these are just example scenarios, to give you, the reader, pause to consider what could be a greater problem.

What criteria will comprise these quality of care outcomes remains to be seen, so no one knows yet exactly how it will look, but believe me when I say that it's not the mandate that's the game-changer, it's what I've discussed above. This will fundamentally alter the face of the medical field, whether it's for better or for worse remains to be seen. Hopefully this was helpful."

Edited September 27, 2013 by Fanta

[BOHO]

Its just like a Canadian to try and make sense about this....I kid...I kid...

[mistapickles]

Ok, why did the supreme court say this act was constitutional to force everybody to have it?

 

What happens to people who don't have insurance through their job and can't afford the insurance on the exchanges?

 

Why and what companies and groups are exempted from this act?

 

Why is it that every union that supported this act now vehemently oppose this act?

 

I'll start with those, then I have some more if you seem so chipper to support this act.

[Fanta]

Ok, why did the supreme court say this act was constitutional to force everybody to have it?

 

Because people were yelling that it was unconstitutional. By that regard, the police department telling you can't go through a red light is unconstitutional. We live under mandats of what we can and cannot do, based on the general good of society. It's just some age old debate about whether everything should be private, or if it should be for the common wealth.

 

What happens to people who don't have insurance through their job and can't afford the insurance on the exchanges?

 

If you cannot afford it through the exchanges with the tax credits, you're exempt then.

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43628.

 

Why and what companies and groups are exempted from this act?

 

http://www.dailypaul.com/296870/list-of-729-companies-and-unions-with-obamacare-exemptions

 

They're not totally exempt. They recieved waivers from ACA's restrictions on annual benefit caps, which will become illegal in 2014. The waiver exemption allows them to keep their caps intact until the end of 2014. They stopped offering exemptions to companies because of backlash.

 

 

 

Why is it that every union that supported this act now vehemently oppose this act?

 

Good question. There's speculation that it'd wreck their benefits, but also fear about that 29 hour limit would break that 40 hour work week. To put it simply, they don't want their employers to put them part-time to avoid health coverage. What surprises me is that this is a recent event, instead of 2009 when it was known this would happen.

 

They're also pissy that it'd change up the Taft-Hartlley plans - and union workers will not be eligible for subsides because they'd have employer-sponsored coverage, and the Taft-Hartley plans for union members offer great and affordable coverage. That's gone, less people join unions, etc

 

I'll start with those, then I have some more if you seem so chipper to support this act.

 

I wouldn't say chipper, but it's highly likely it is going to pass, whether people like it or not.

Edited September 27, 2013 by Fanta

[jszucs]

if you've had health insurance and say, paid $5000 in to the system and then get injured, your insurance covers MORE than that $5000 you already put in. it's NEVER just about "work and pay for what you need" and you're blind if you think it is. everyone else with insurance IS supporting your medical treatment, making you a 'taker'.

 

Please explain how I am a taker paying into a HDHP, which I pay out of pocket or my tax defered saveings account which is part of my HDHP? This has also caused them to pass the stupid ruling I can't spend money (that I paid in) in my savings account for med costs other then say co pays, dr bills, or perscripitons.

 

Then explain why over the last 7 years working here it's gown up 1-3% a year and this year went up almost 43% in one year?

Edited September 27, 2013 by jszucs

[Burton]

This just gets better, and better... Got the bill for the most recent Dr visit for my daughters. Her most recent vaccines are going to cost us $400. All the ones before cost us nothing. This is insanity.

[kidjc]

I would like to ask this: Just who do you think is going to "PAY" for these ENORMOUS costs of trying to institute this "affordable healthcare act?" So appropriately named: using the words "affordable & act" in the same description? As well, do you really believe, that "any" of those "committees" formed will really "not be regulated by government interventions?" This is proven to be the "ball breaker" in costs to our already drained nation! Now... let's just consider this: Nearly 90% of our countries populace are "Totally Against" having this. They don't want it! So much for a Nation founded on "for & by the people!" This is really the issue for me, having something that the majority doesn't even want shoved down my throat, & being told I need it, will do it, & will be held accountable. Enough government/political intervention! Edited September 27, 2013 by kidjc

[Shelby]

This just gets better, and better... Got the bill for the most recent Dr visit for my daughters. Her most recent vaccines are going to cost us $400. All the ones before cost us nothing. This is insanity.

 

Burton none of that has any thing to do with Obama's program it has not even went into effect , even if Obama doid not have a new program in place your cost would have gone up

 

it seems a great many of you have no idea what insurance is ,, people sell you insurance hopeing you NOT need it , in fact they are beting you will NOT ,, lets say we have 10k people each paying in $500 a yr , out of those 10k we have 2 people that have medical problems , totaling $50k , the insurance co comes out ahead what $450k , thats just a small number and a drop in the hat , of the real figures,,,

 

what we have is huge multi billion $$ coorperations that do their best to insure they pay out the least posible amount ,, in fact most large insutrance companys have a policy to deney all claims untill they are apealed

 

not one of these insurance providers have your best intrest at heart ,, in fact they offer cash incenitives to employers to lower coverage and increase personal preimeums ,you Burton just found that out the hard way , it's to the point now where all involved partys are useing the system to screw the policy holder (you)

this includes the hospitals,,the doctors and the pharmisuticals companys all are in cohoots with each other

 

most of you have had little experiance with insurance companys and hospitals and how doctors realy operate , do you realy beleave that a short viest to the emergency room is worth $1500 even tho you did NOT see a real doctor nor recive any medical help , it's almost imposible to go to an emergency room and not recive a bill of at least $1000.00 , all due to over priced services and inflated drug charges like a $15 tyonal pill , $10,000.00 short

 

now you will say that is because they have to treat a huge number of non paying illeagles yes this is partialy true but, they do this in order to recive gov $$$ , $$ most times many times more then their actual cost , it's all part of a scam to defraud the gov out of moneys

 

now with medicare it's many times worse , in it's self medicare is a great program but the number of crooks with in it's service is imposible to beleave , even with in the medicare program there are people in bed with drug companys and doctors and service providers that their soul purpous is to bleed the system dry

 

this monster colection of crooks and companys set up to do nothing but defraud the goc medical programs are costing us many times more then what real service it provides to the point of draging the entire system down the tubes

 

now there are good people with in the medical profession that are not crooks but they have no choice but to follow the rules set up and placed in place by those in charge

now many of you are gona say i'm crazy and have no idea what i'm talking about , but if you think that ,,your the one thats crazy not me , in order to fix this it's gona take a huge effort and many people are not gona like what is gona be done for starters but in the end it'l be the best for all , you are the same pople that used to pay $.50 for a gal of gas but now cheer if the price drops $.05 from $4.00 a gal , do you realy beleave gas is worth $4.00 a gal , no but you pay it and do not say a word in protest

now the system is not able to police it's self so the gov has no choice but to step in and take control of it

[Burton]

 

 

Burton none of that has any thing to do with Obama's program it has not even went into effect , even if Obama doid not have a new program in place your cost would have gone up

 

 

 

 

Shelby, It has EVERYTHING to do with the ACA. When my wife went to the meeting about the changing insurance, the employees were told that the changes were coming because the ACA was going to make it too expensive to provide the same coverage they had been providing for the prices they were. They used to provide top notch coverage for less than what most people pay for average coverage. But, due to the costs, co-pays, deductibles, and the amount the employees had to pay went up, while coverage went down. Now we're stuck with coverage that is along the lines of the "average" insurance most employers provide, instead of the really good coverage we had before... and it costs more too!

 

 

Basically, the companies that have been providing coverage that was above and beyond the "average" coverage that most employers provide, won't be able to provide that great insurance anymore. I can't wait to see how this affects the UAW. Those employees get some of the best insurance coverage in the country for cheap. The big 3 will either have to keep the coverage, which they can't afford, or risk a strike, which they also can't afford.

[Shelby]

all of it has to do with unreasonal health care costs ,, and who sets those costs,,the doctors,, drug providers and hospitals set the prices , this is the problem , if costs were in line with reasonable figures you company could still provide you with great care policys .

 

as Fanta mentioned once the crooks are under control and costs are down to a reasonable level every ones insurance costs will go back down

 

as it stands now the insurace companys are makes huge proffets just like the oil companys

self regulation has not worked

[Burton]

all of it has to do with unreasonal health care costs ,, and who sets those costs,,the doctors,, drug providers and hospitals set the prices , this is the problem , if costs were in line with reasonable figures you company could still provide you with great care policys .

 

as Fanta mentioned once the crooks are under control and costs are down to a reasonable level every ones insurance costs will go back down

 

as it stands now the insurace companys are makes huge proffets just like the oil companys

self regulation has not worked

 

That's all fine and dandy, but that doesn't help us now. This 2nd baby that is gonna cost us so much money is happening now, not in a few years when things get hashed out. Of course, that's assuming you're correct about how things will turn out. More times than not, the things politicians say will happen don't, so forgive me if I'm skeptical.

 

Self regulation has not worked, but, I gotta believe there's a way for the Gov. to regulate them without such a broad change.

 

It is what it is, It's going to happen no matter how much I dislike it. With the baby on the way, it's happeneing at the worst time for us, but we'll make it work one way or another. I'm just afraid that will mean me having to get rid of my Starion to make it work

[Shelby]

not sure it's gona mean you'l have to get rid of your car but you may have to start doing more for cash work,,and

i have yet to find a hospital that would not set up payments they undestand very few run arround with thousands of extra $ in the bank , payments of $50 a month or even $100 a month should be posible , this is the same for doctors and most other health providers

 

on my last hospital stay i had a chat with the hospital finance officer , and i was straight up with her,, look you know i can't pay this $1100, and she smiled and said yes i know that ,we don't realy care , we have enought from your insurance company over the years we're fine , she'd never admit to saying that but she did

you know the funny part my share of the cost of a hospital saty is almost always the same between $900 and $1100 and it don't matter if the total stay was $30k or $100k , makes you wonder about that 20% huh

[duckheads]

edit

 

this shouldn't even be discussed here. edited my response as not to upset the cool aid drinkers!

Edited September 27, 2013 by duckheads

[Burton]

not sure it's gona mean you'l have to get rid of your car but you may have to start doing more for cash work,,and

i have yet to find a hospital that would not set up payments they undestand very few run arround with thousands of extra $ in the bank , payments of $50 a month or even $100 a month should be posible , this is the same for doctors and most other health providers

 

on my last hospital stay i had a chat with the hospital finance officer , and i was straight up with her,, look you know i can't pay this $1100, and she smiled and said yes i know that ,we don't realy care , we have enought from your insurance company over the years we're fine , she'd never admit to saying that but she did

you know the funny part my share of the cost of a hospital saty is almost always the same between $900 and $1100 and it don't matter if the total stay was $30k or $100k , makes you wonder about that 20% huh

 

Yes, I know they will work out payment plans and all that. My mom has even had some of her bills just thrown out by the doctors because they knew her situation and knew she'd never be able to pay them off.

 

Kate and I aren't needy like that, and don't like owing money. The Starion almost never gets driven and just sits, and could generate some cash to help us feel more comfortable about our financial situation.

 

And yes, the prices I charge for stuff has already been going up. That's great, but with my daughter getting around more, and me being a stay-at home dad, it's cutting into my shop time more and more. Add the fact that Kate's pregnancies are high risk and she's getting to the point where she can't even lift our daughter, that means I have to be in the house more during the evenings and weekends... those were the times I did the most work, and Kate would watch the baby then, but now she needs my help more, so my time out there gets less. About the only time I can get out there uninterrupted is from 10pm to 3am. Soon, even that will be tough because the temps are gonna start going down to the point where it will be too cold for stuff to cure at that time of night.

 

 

I say these things not for pity, but just to show how this ACA thing can affect people. Do I HAVE to sell my car? probably not... we could setup payments and find a way to squeak by, but that's not how we like to live. The health and financial well-being of my family will always be worth more than any car I own, no matter how much that car means to me.

 

 

In the end, these struggles are the result of the ACA... maybe not directly, but indirectly. I didn't ask for them or want them, but here we are.

[Cloud81918]

So after some thinking, the real issue with health insurance is that is is used completely unlike how every other insurance is used. Car insurance is there to cover large scale occurrences, same with home insurance. Under no circumstances would you end up in a situation where you require your car or house insurance to spend $1000 a month, month after month, with no perceivable end and you continue to pay your $100 payment. Insurance is a company gambling on things not happening to you. They are hoping not to have a payout. You pay your monthly insurance and rarely have anything pull out. If you pull out or have something increase you possibility of pulling out and your rates go up.

 

But we expect different from health insurance and that is the root of the problem. I have a friend on a medication that is $20K a year. He won't die without it and he is otherwise healthy and will be above ground for another 40 years barring anything else arising. Needless to say less than half of that amount is placed into the system for him in the same amount of time. This is how things break. This isn't how classical insurance works. Insurance is designed to cover broken arms, the flu, birth; Things that occur and then go away. It is not designed to buy daily doses of expensive cutting edge drugs forever. This is why insurance is broken and why the ACA won't fix it. It is also why we will not see the ACA be self supportive. It is also why private health insurance has been raising rates like crazy over the last 2 decades to try to support itself.

 

Insurance works because people put in more then they take out, but many are taking out far more then get put in continually. Rates go up to cover those that pay in less than they lay out. Healthy people are deciding to take risks instead of paying from something with a small possibility of return; Even if there is some inevitability of needing services at the end. The current risk is small. People make risk assessments all the time to decide what to do and here the price paid is measured as too high for the possible risk. It is market speaking and rather than allowing for correction we are forcing the round peg in to the square hole. People with issues need young healthy people to pay for their care and young healthy people can't afford it. As I said this is a program which will find itself screwed, just like the SSA.

 

The SSA and ACA will have no funding problems if we just force younger people to pay even more. Eventually this is what will have to happen to keep it floating. When that happens, when a young healthy person has to hand over more than 50% of their pay to support the old and the sick those programs will end in very destructive ways. That implosion will be very ugly. We will be early 90's Russia.

 

Seriously these programs no mater how well intentioned will be the inevitable death of our nation. I think it is wonderful that we want to do such great things, but actually doing them maybe going the wrong direction.

 

I will bet 32 Internets that the ACA will be a money pit by 2021. Wait, screw that 64 Internets.

Edited September 27, 2013 by Cloud81918

[psu_Crash]

It's all just a scam. In the end all of us who actually work for a living will be supporting a bunch of dead beat low lifes (mostly) the insurance company is there to make money, not to help us

[Cloud81918]

It's all just a scam. In the end all of us who actually work for a living will be supporting a bunch of dead beat low lifes (mostly) the insurance company is there to make money, not to help us

 

"Deadbeat low lifes"? I wouldn't say that at all. Like I said I've got a friend that has a 20K a year prescription. He is not a deadbeat, he is one of smartest people I know, a talented programmer with an amazing mind who does great work and works hard. But the system will pay for his prescription, which means every year he pulls more out of a system than I have pulled in my lifetime.

 

Some would argue, well isn't it great to know that the system will do that for you if you need it? Yeah there is some comfort there. But I'll tell you straight up if I didn't have children I'd probably only have major medical. We keep a full plan only because people look at you weird if you have children and don't have insurance.

 

My issue is we, as a nation, are looking down the barrel of a system that can't be made positive and bill that can't be paid by those asked to pay it. Making the pile bigger by forcing people to pay and adding more people doesn't make the problem smaller.

 

I'd say insurance is great, but it is bled dry by a society that treats it more like a Costco Club membership than a way to get through a rough patch. A system had been built that can make amazing drugs and procedures because the money is available and as more and more people want these expensive things the money gets tighter and tighter. I know they aren't in the ACA, but to keep the costs reasonable Death Panels sound like a pretty damn good idea, Hehe.

[Shelby]

death panels sound like a dam good idea ,, old people are dead beats ,,,, let me tell you one thing about those dead beat old people it was people like them that fought for this country,, if you want to talk about dead beats ,,well i leave it at that

 

one more thing every one GETS OLD , that fact may suprise some

 

there is no point is seting here geting all upset , what will happen will happen, you like it or not

but nothing will change the fact that COORP GREED put us where we are,,, plain and simple

[Burton]

death panels sound like a dam good idea ,, old people are dead beats ,,,, let me tell you one thing about those dead beat old people it was people like them that fought for this country,, if you want to talk about dead beats ,,well i leave it at that

 

one more thing every one GETS OLD , that fact may suprise some

 

there is no point is seting here geting all upset , what will happen will happen, you like it or not

but nothing will change the fact that COORP GREED put us where we are,,, plain and simple

 

 

Don't forget about the horrible politicians that have helped get us here too.

[Cloud81918]

death panels sound like a dam good idea ,, old people are dead beats ,,,, let me tell you one thing about those dead beat old people it was people like them that fought for this country,, if you want to talk about dead beats ,,well i leave it at that

 

one more thing every one GETS OLD , that fact may suprise some

 

there is no point is seting here geting all upset , what will happen will happen, you like it or not

but nothing will change the fact that COORP GREED put us where we are,,, plain and simple

 

Sorry you seemed to have missed the joke. I don't agree in the idea they are deadbeats. I also don't think death panels are truly good ideas. I'm just pointing out why health insurance is becoming unaffordable and that making it mandatory doesn't really fix that. It will make it a bigger issue, it will dig a bigger hole. The only way to avoid making that hole bigger is to force people to pay more or deny payment. I really don't think denying payment (Death Panels) will work and I think it is a bad idea. But I know in the end we will be paying even more, that it will happen. I have a 64 internets bet on that happening.

 

Corporate Greed? Sure businesses are setup to make money. But really, Is that how you think we got where we are? It really came from a disconnection of individual finances and heath care costs.

 

The blame belongs on a society refuses to stop acting like it is in its 20's and then demands that the pile of money be infinite to save their life when it is in the balance. We are obsessed with staying alive and not changing our practices and will spend any cent to protect those (especially it is isn't our pile of money). You have people take expensive drugs instead of change their diet. You have hundreds of thousands spent on individual people that will only get a year or 2 more and will have a massively affected quality of life. Nearly everyone's end game is spending more than it ever put in the system. They are doing that because it is 3rd party paid and when their ticket comes up they are maxing it out. You can't run a system like this.

 

We already have the SSA and it will soon be a nightmare. We just just went back to the bar and asked for a double-shot.

 

I know it sounds heartless, but this can't go on forever.

[vbrad511]

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/29/saturday-night-live-mocks-obamacare-in-hilarious-skit/

[IBSK8N]

Did I read the info right?....no more pre-existing condition clause? That would be nice, as I have been turned down for insurance because of that, and I have to pay in full because my current insurance does not cover pre-existing condition type tests or blood work...and I teach in a public school, yet my insurance is crap because they chose to outsource it to some janky company that authorizes all insurance activity....and it's costing the district a fortune to pay these retards. The insurance I have now is by far the most worthless insurance I have ever had. So, what's the difference, for me insurance can't get any worse......