Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take up to 48 hours. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Obama Care

I always wondered why the US does not have something like the NHS or what many other countries have setup, a free health care service, so I thought 'yea Obama care sounds good'. After watching this I have changed my mind, you guys still deserve free health care but not Obama care.
blu3reeNiesje

Comments

  • NirvanaNirvana aka BUBBA   `     `     ` `     ` Outa Range Fridays thru Sundays South Carolina, USA Veteran
    Bunks said:

    I haven't watched this video @ThailandTom (no You Tube access!) but whenever I see anything like this I ask:

    1. Who created this video?
    2. What is their agenda?

    1. Who created this video?
    ```Some Philistine paid to help derail the program by any means necessary.

    2. What is their agenda?
    ```To spread rumour and innuendo to obstruct the President and his administration if for no other reason than just spite.

    Never before in the history of the United States have so many members of one party in Congress sworn allegiance to anything but the Constitution of the United States. Now they put their agenda before the well-being of the country and have signed other instruments.

    It really sucks that we had to have a very urbane, smart guy elected to the highest office in the land. The country club types and their employees want someone they could warm up to at a barbecue.
    MaryAnneChazmatthewmartinNele
  • As a Brit, I have not fully briefed myself on "Obamacare". I am, however, aware that there is real opposition, even here, to the basic notion of health care free at the point of delivery. The present UK administration is working towards a system where corporate profits can be made out of the sick and the old. We even have a growing opinion that there is "deserving" and "undeserving" sickness, just as some seem to believe that there is the same distinction between the poor.

    For some, free healthcare is seen as "Socialist" and that it equates to some sort of communistic, anti-capitalist idea. The principles evinced in the report by Lord Beveridge, a Conservative of the pre-Macmillan school, that sickness and poverty are social evils to be fought against is being forgotten.

    The results are an increasingly sick and poor population. Reducing or eliminating care for the vulnerable is, to my mind, the result of a willful blindness towards the sacred nature of each human life and a deliberate redefinition of human rights, even those of the US Founding Fathers of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. These have been superceded by the pursuit of profit and self-serving pleasure. This, in the end, will result in the greatest misery for the greatest number but the greatest ease for the smallest number - umtil the revolution of course when all will suffer as in the Arab world.
    riverflowNirvanaMaryAnne
  • EvenThirdEvenThird NYC Veteran
    Youtube is blocked in my region, but I have mixed feelings towards Obama-care. I have many family members in the medical field and their jobs may become even more demanding, with much longer hours and more patients per physician. They are just worried about what the stress of having a job like that might do to what we call job performance. Except bad job performance(being overworked, sleep deprivation from night shifts or being on call) in this case puts people's lives at risk.

    I'm not sure we have the resources at the moment to implement Obama-care smoothly.
    (But maybe we do and I'm in the dark about it)

    I do agree that taking care of the sick should be a greater priority, regardless of the person's net value.. I just don't know if this is the way to do it. Maybe it is? I don't know too much about the issue honestly, just my thoughts after hearing what some people close to me had to say.
    Niesje
  • The problem is that "affordable care act" did not eliminate the health insurance companies from raping both the patient/consumer and the direct medical provider. It ought to be single payer system with out the insurance company acting as the middle man who skims off a large amount of money and who also gets to determine who meets the criteria to get medical care...this should be the direct medical provider not the actuarial insurance companies. But the general poplus is too damm dumb and lets their reprehensive politicians get away with this who are in the pockets of the corporatist.

    That is all so true! But many Americans realize that the single-payer/national health care program was never, ever, EVER going to see the light of day as a legitimate bill up for a vote from ANY democratic president during this decade - *especially* a black president!
    Many of us realize this was the next best thing. Baby Steps, as they say.... baby steps.
    :)

    BTW I have applied for the Affordable Care Act program.
    (I'll call it "Obamacare" when it succeeds- just to twist the knife of irony in the GOPs! LOL).
    I hope to be getting health insurance coverage for the first time EVER in my adult life.
    Even though I've worked, full time, for most of my adult life, even in the medical field as physician's assistant and hospital ER technician.... not one single employer I had ever offered health coverage.

    With ACA, because I'm still too young for MediCARE, and have a very low income level, it looks like I may be covered under an ACA expansion of my state's MedicAID program- not ideal, but better than nothing! Baby steps. :D
    I'll let you know how it turns out. I should be hearing something within a couple more weeks...
    riverflowChazNirvana
  • MaryAnne said:

    That is all so true! But many Americans realize that the single-payer/national health care program was never, ever, EVER going to see the light of day as a legitimate bill up for a vote from ANY democratic president during this decade - *especially* a black president!
    Many of us realize this was the next best thing. Baby Steps, as they say.... baby steps.
    :)

    I already knew when I voted for Obama that he was hardly the socialist that cowardly teabaggers were making him out to be (I wish!!!). I knew whatever healthcare reform we'd get from Obama would be watered-down.

    HOWEVER, this is an important step in the right direction, even if it has problems:

    The interesting thing to note is that the conservative leadership (and not just teabaggers) are dead set against even this. The reason why (at least for the Republican leadership) isn't just ideological opposition, but also that once people get a taste of this, we will be on our way to something more like Medicare for everyone. People will realize the US isn't going to fall off in the ocean (no other countries have). The avalanche will follow-- just as bigots were dead set against desegregation knowing it would lead to other things down the road. They are so desperate to stop it, to throw a monkey wrench in it somehow, because they don't want people to have a small taste of what other industrialized nations have had for some time.

    So I support the ACA, even if at the same time I don't agree with it. Its a damn sight better than what we have right now, which is NOTHING.
    MaryAnnematthewmartinNirvana
  • wrathfuldeitywrathfuldeity Veteran
    edited November 2013
    ^good point...

    and yes baby steps...but having worked in public health for 30 years...there is a lot of crap to be corrected.

    riverflow
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    MaryAnne said:

    The problem is that "affordable care act" did not eliminate the health insurance companies from raping both the patient/consumer and the direct medical provider. It ought to be single payer system with out the insurance company acting as the middle man who skims off a large amount of money and who also gets to determine who meets the criteria to get medical care...this should be the direct medical provider not the actuarial insurance companies. But the general poplus is too damm dumb and lets their reprehensive politicians get away with this who are in the pockets of the corporatist.

    That is all so true! But many Americans realize that the single-payer/national health care program was never, ever, EVER going to see the light of day as a legitimate bill up for a vote from ANY democratic president during this decade - *especially* a black president!
    Many of us realize this was the next best thing. Baby Steps, as they say.... baby steps.
    :)

    BTW I have applied for the Affordable Care Act program.
    (I'll call it "Obamacare" when it succeeds- just to twist the knife of irony in the GOPs! LOL).
    I hope to be getting health insurance coverage for the first time EVER in my adult life.
    Even though I've worked, full time, for most of my adult life, even in the medical field as physician's assistant and hospital ER technician.... not one single employer I had ever offered health coverage.

    With ACA, because I'm still too young for MediCARE, and have a very low income level, it looks like I may be covered under an ACA expansion of my state's MedicAID program- not ideal, but better than nothing! Baby steps. :D
    I'll let you know how it turns out. I should be hearing something within a couple more weeks...
    I think you've cut to the heart of the issue.

    President Obama and the Democrats bit off what could be chewed. To go to single payer in this country, politically, would have been like an old WWII movie I once saw -- a bridge too far. The choice was to do what can be done, or continue to do nothing.

    I don't expect a program this big to just be one smooth transition. Wish it was. But don't expect it. This is a MAJOR change in American life.

    I just received notice that my BCBS policy is being transitioned to Aetna by my pre-retirement employer (who still offers me and covers some of my health insurance). Raise in price = 11%...but that's after 3 years of very little price increase. It's a burden I'm willing to bear for the good of many people without insurance and for the country.

    riverflow
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    riverflow said:

    ...

    HOWEVER, this is an important step in the right direction, even if it has problems:

    The interesting thing to note is that the conservative leadership (and not just teabaggers) are dead set against even this. The reason why (at least for the Republican leadership) isn't just ideological opposition, but also that once people get a taste of this, we will be on our way to something more like Medicare for everyone. People will realize the US isn't going to fall off in the ocean (no other countries have). The avalanche will follow-- just as bigots were dead set against desegregation knowing it would lead to other things down the road. They are so desperate to stop it, to throw a monkey wrench in it somehow, because they don't want people to have a small taste of what other industrialized nations have had for some time.

    So I support the ACA, even if at the same time I don't agree with it. Its a damn sight better than what we have right now, which is NOTHING.

    Yes, exactly true. In the long run, it will become what Social Security became...a natural part of American life.

    riverflow
  • @vinlyn

    I don't know if you are old enough to qualify for medicare yet... but if that's the case then you only need supplemental health insurance coverage to pick up what medicare doesn't (co-pays, etc).
    Since you have coverage now, (unlike me) there is no rush, but eventually, when the ACA is running more smoothly and things have settled down, it might be a good idea to call /contact them and see what supplemental insurance you might qualify for - and at what price.
    Could end up being MUCH cheaper than what you pay now to continue coverage from a former employer... ya nevah know! :)

  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    MaryAnne said:

    @vinlyn

    I don't know if you are old enough to qualify for medicare yet... but if that's the case then you only need supplemental health insurance coverage to pick up what medicare doesn't (co-pays, etc).
    Since you have coverage now, (unlike me) there is no rush, but eventually, when the ACA is running more smoothly and things have settled down, it might be a good idea to call /contact them and see what supplemental insurance you might qualify for - and at what price.
    Could end up being MUCH cheaper than what you pay now to continue coverage from a former employer... ya nevah know! :)

    Not quite. Medicare will kick in this August, after which my school system insurance cost for me will almost drop in half.

    MaryAnne
  • the reason US dont have free healthcare is because
    the insurance companies and pharmaceuticals companies
    lobbies against it.

    I always wondered why the US does not have something like the NHS or what many other countries have setup, a free health care service, so I thought 'yea Obama care sounds good'. After watching this I have changed my mind, you guys still deserve free health care but not Obama care.

    MaryAnne
  • NirvanaNirvana aka BUBBA   `     `     ` `     ` Outa Range Fridays thru Sundays South Carolina, USA Veteran
    I think MaryAnne is spot-on with her "baby steps" paradigm. :bowdown:

    There is really so little difference between the two parties right now, except for a few issues. Therefore, I think the venom and the poison are simply inexcusable. They call themselves Christians and yet they exude none of the goodwill that is an essential component of the Christ-Mass tradition. If I were rich I'd rent a huge highway billboard or two and erect the words, "RUSH IS GOD" on them, with Rush Limbaugh prominently displayed. The guy is just phenomenally a pariah. His behavior reminds me, as I said before on NB, of the narrator of St. Luke's Gospel's words putting Jesus's parable of the Publican and the Pharisee in the Temple: "And to those who trusted in their righteousness and despised others, he told this parable..." (Lk 18)

    This rather mean-spirited political polarity is basically built on intolerance of the views of others. In the 70s and 80s I saw a lot of this spewing forth on the Left, now it's coming from the Right. Why all this hate? Politics is a Greek word and the English translation should be "Squabbling," for that is what is "done in the city" [polis]. Politics has always been about arguing for the best bargain. But this polarized situation here is disabling and dismantling the mechanisms of the compromises needed for resolution of the issues.

    Too many people thinking in deeply disturbed ways. And yoga and Eastern Wisdom traditions are just devilish options for many of them. That's too bad.

    I know lots of Northerners and Westerners think that we Southerners are just dumb, but at least until recently, we still called that period of war between the northern states and the southern (1861-1865) rightly as "The War Between the States." It was no civil war. It was a war between peoples who thought they belonged to two different nations. Unfortunately, in America, incorrect usage of our Mother English language usually wins out.

    I think that some of the Tea Party members have acted in a way that might well have fomented outbreaks of hostility that could lead to real civil war, a clash between partisans within a single nation. I definitely and absolutely IMPEACH all Congressional partisans of the Tea Party movement for their actions in putting their hands to instruments that did not firstly bow down to the primal authority of the constitution of these United States.
  • The US government does nothing well. I can't believe it will do any better managing the health care system in this country. We were all sold a false bill of goods with the Affordable Care Act. Yes the insurance companies are a bunch of profit hungry sheisters, but so are politicians.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Shak said:

    The US government does nothing well. ...

    That's a crock.

    riverflowNele
  • You're right. They do an outstanding job with the military. The Afordable Care Act will be a disaster.
  • It's always the end of America as we know it.... :orange:
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Shak said:

    You're right. They do an outstanding job with the military. The Afordable Care Act will be a disaster.

    Who knows. Maybe it will be. But I'd compare the program with Social Security, which sends out thousands and thousands of checks...every month...on time...and has since 1940.

    riverflow
  • I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be bitter about the ACA, but my wife is a clinical manager at a medium sized medical practice, and I get to hear about the compliance and reimbursement nightmares that it has created. They've had to eat up to 30% cuts in Medicaid payments that the govt shifted to cover ACA costs. The state we live in has had to ad more people to the Medicare rolls that they don't have the money to pay for. The state is currently a couple hundred thousand dollars behind in payments to this practice ( about $430 million to all providers statewide). These are not money grubbing quacks either, they're good compassionate doctors, at least four of them travel overseas to third world countries to treat people who have no access to healthcare, for free on their vacation time. And I forgot to mention they have to pay tens of thousands in malpractice insurance premiums because they get sued over the dumbest crap like refusing to prescribe pain killers to people who they suspect are abusing them. So what has the affordable care act done for my family? Reduced hours, reduced pay, increased medical premiums, and a group of good physicians who probably going to have to sell their practice to a local hospital because they are having a hard time running a viable business. The problems with health care go way beyond greedy insurance companies. Greedy politicians have done their fair share too. Sorry for the rant everyone.
    kayte
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    I personally support a single-payer, universal healthcare system rather than this 906 page giveaway to the insurance industry. Unfortunately, such things are unpalatable here, because of decades of 'red scare' propaganda, and despite the fact that place like France, Canada, Spain, and the UK have pretty awesome healthcare systems in terms of coverage and efficiency compared to our own bloated, for-profit system.

    According to the World Health Organization, for example, France has the best overall health care system in the world, excelling in 4 areas: (1) universal coverage, (2) responsive health care providers, (3) freedom of choice and (4) overall health and longevity of the population.

    In 2005, France spent $3,926 per capita on healthcare, and of that, approximately 80% was government expenditure. The US, in comparison, spent $6,347, and of that, approximately 45% was government expenditure. Yet France has a higher life expectancy and lower infant mortality rate than the US. (Although, to be fair, I've heard it mentioned that the US counts premature births whereas France doesn't, and these differences can't be attributed to the differences between the two systems alone as there are undoubtedly other factors involved, e.g., eating habits, stress levels, etc.)

    Spain's constitution guarantees the right to universal healthcare and requires the state to provide it, it's ranked 7th best by the WHO, and according to one study published last year in the US journal Health Affairs, there are a third fewer deaths caused by delayed access to health care than in the US.

    And then there's Canada's healthcare system, which was quite similar to ours before they adopted a single-payer system (with a 14 page bill, no less). It's not only ranked higher than the US system by the WHO (30th v. 37th out of 191 nations), but like France, Canada has a higher life expectancy and lower infant mortality rate than the US. (Again, these differences can't be attributed to the differences between the two systems alone, but I think it at least goes to show that Canadians seem to be doing OK with the system they've got.)

    In addition, a 2006 peer-reviewed study of healthcare access in Canada and the US done by the American Journal of Public Health concluded that "U.S. residents are one third less likely to have a regular medical doctor, one fourth more likely to have unmet health care needs, and are more than twice as likely to forgo needed medicines." Of course, every system has its problems, but I'd still say that Canada's system is pretty damn good considering it covers everyone and costs less per person than ours.

    (The VA itself is another example of a socialized healthcare system. While far from perfect, it's interesting to look at and compare to the broader, for-profit insurance system, e.g., this, this, and this.)

    But regardless of where one lives, progress itself is a never ending struggle, pushing to create something better from what we start out with. And looking at the facts, it's become my opinion that, among other things, we can do better when it comes to our healthcare system; and most of the arguments against a single-payer, universal system are simply fallacious.

    We could potentially have a better system here that covers everybody for less than we pay on average now, where an entire industry profits off of sickness and suffering and doling out care, and I think that's something worth debating as a community and working to fix, ultimately providing all Americans with access to healthcare like they do in every other wealthy, industrialized nation on Earth. Your mileage may vary, of course.
    riverflowMaryAnneVastmind
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Shak said:

    I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be bitter about the ACA, but my wife is a clinical manager at a medium sized medical practice, and I get to hear about the compliance and reimbursement nightmares that it has created. They've had to eat up to 30% cuts in Medicaid payments that the govt shifted to cover ACA costs. The state we live in has had to ad more people to the Medicare rolls that they don't have the money to pay for. The state is currently a couple hundred thousand dollars behind in payments to this practice ( about $430 million to all providers statewide). These are not money grubbing quacks either, they're good compassionate doctors, at least four of them travel overseas to third world countries to treat people who have no access to healthcare, for free on their vacation time. And I forgot to mention they have to pay tens of thousands in malpractice insurance premiums because they get sued over the dumbest crap like refusing to prescribe pain killers to people who they suspect are abusing them. So what has the affordable care act done for my family? Reduced hours, reduced pay, increased medical premiums, and a group of good physicians who probably going to have to sell their practice to a local hospital because they are having a hard time running a viable business. The problems with health care go way beyond greedy insurance companies. Greedy politicians have done their fair share too. Sorry for the rant everyone.

    In all fairness, why don't you mention greedy doctors? And greedy hospitals?

    Example 1: I needed refills on all my prescriptions. I go to the doctor about every other month as it is. But I had to go in for a "medication review". Translation: I (the doctor) want more money. Think not? Here's the way it went: "So Vince, let's start with Prinivil. Is it working okay for you?" "Perfect." "Okay. Now, how about Metoprolol tartrate? Is that working okay for you?" "Yes. No change needed." "Okay. How about the Cardura? Doing its job?" "Yes." "Okay." "Anything we need to change?" "Nope." "Okay, then we're done." (Translation: I just earned $120). Was there a little more chat than that. Yes, but nothing really significant that we hadn't already discussed at other appointments. And in case you're wondering, this is a multiple award-winning GP with a large practice with 3 doctors and 3 nurse practitioners who work for him...literally the most respected family doctor in the region.

    Example 2: I needed a heart scan. It looked as if it wasn't going to be covered by my insurance. So, the cardiologist told me to go down to the hospital and discuss the fee in advance. Bottom line: If I was billed for the procedure it would be $1,300. If I paid in advance, it would be $800. A $500 discount for cash in advance? That's some pretty expensive paperwork. And again, this is a highly respected hospital ranked higher on a nationwide basis.

    Example 3: Kidney surgery last June. Someone without insurance would have to have paid about $34,000. But under contract to a major medical insurance company, the surgeon performed the surgery for less than $1,000, and the total bill the insurance company and I paid was for less than $5,000. Now let's see, if it's a patient without health insurance the fee is $34,000, but with insurance the same operation and hospital stay is about $29,000 less.

    Counter-rant.

    riverflow
  • I failed to mention a lot of greedy bastards. Big pharmaceutical. I just paid $258 for Chantix to help me finally give up tobacco. I've had that monkey on my back for way too long and I want it gone. With all the health problems tobacco causes, that stuff should be free. Why are prescription drugs made in the US so much cheaper in places like Canada? Ambulance chasing attorneys are another. Sure, there are plenty of doctors in it for a buck. I've got a friend who's in a wheel chair and he pays plenty for those. Medical equipment manufacturers. I'm sure we could come up with a lot more. There are a lot of problems with our system, I just don't believe a 2000 plus page piece of legislation that nobody read is going to solve them. I hope you recovered well from your surgery. Going in for a cardio work up next week, and I'm not looking forward to the bills either...
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Shak said:

    I failed to mention a lot of greedy bastards. Big pharmaceutical. I just paid $258 for Chantix to help me finally give up tobacco. I've had that monkey on my back for way too long and I want it gone. With all the health problems tobacco causes, that stuff should be free. Why are prescription drugs made in the US so much cheaper in places like Canada? Ambulance chasing attorneys are another. Sure, there are plenty of doctors in it for a buck. I've got a friend who's in a wheel chair and he pays plenty for those. Medical equipment manufacturers. I'm sure we could come up with a lot more. There are a lot of problems with our system, I just don't believe a 2000 plus page piece of legislation that nobody read is going to solve them. I hope you recovered well from your surgery. Going in for a cardio work up next week, and I'm not looking forward to the bills either...

    Why would any company manufacture a drug to give away for free?

    I agree, to an extent, about drugs overseas being less expensive. A stomach medicine I use here is 4X as expensive as in Thailand...made by the same company. Obviously a case of what the traffic will bear.

    Yes, that surgery went quite well. Thank you!

  • vinlyn said:

    Shak said:

    Edited for Space

    In all fairness, why don't you mention greedy doctors? And greedy hospitals?

    Example 1: I needed refills on all my prescriptions. I go to the doctor about every other month as it is. But I had to go in for a "medication review". Translation: I (the doctor) want more money. Think not? Here's the way it went: "So Vince, let's start with Prinivil. Is it working okay for you?" "Perfect." "Okay. Now, how about Metoprolol tartrate? Is that working okay for you?" "Yes. No change needed." "Okay. How about the Cardura? Doing its job?" "Yes." "Okay." "Anything we need to change?" "Nope." "Okay, then we're done." (Translation: I just earned $120). Was there a little more chat than that. Yes, but nothing really significant that we hadn't already discussed at other appointments. And in case you're wondering, this is a multiple award-winning GP with a large practice with 3 doctors and 3 nurse practitioners who work for him...literally the most respected family doctor in the region.

    Example 2: I needed a heart scan. It looked as if it wasn't going to be covered by my insurance. So, the cardiologist told me to go down to the hospital and discuss the fee in advance. Bottom line: If I was billed for the procedure it would be $1,300. If I paid in advance, it would be $800. A $500 discount for cash in advance? That's some pretty expensive paperwork. And again, this is a highly respected hospital ranked higher on a nationwide basis.

    Example 3: Kidney surgery last June. Someone without insurance would have to have paid about $34,000. But under contract to a major medical insurance company, the surgeon performed the surgery for less than $1,000, and the total bill the insurance company and I paid was for less than $5,000. Now let's see, if it's a patient without health insurance the fee is $34,000, but with insurance the same operation and hospital stay is about $29,000 less.

    Counter-rant.

    Where is that *BOOM!!* button when you need it?? ;)
    riverflow
  • Shak said:

    You're right. They do an outstanding job with the military. The Afordable Care Act will be a disaster.

    Come now. The ACA aside, there are as many datapoints of people well-served by the government, as not. Here are a couple I know of: my mother, relatively poor, passed away recently after several years of poor health. Because of Medicare and Medicaid, we were able to keep her at my brother's home, where she eventually died. Medicaid paid for LPNs to come and assist her, as well as hospice and morphine at the end. She never had to pay a dime for that, and was able to leave her little decrepit house to my brother and his wife. Second case: my partner is a retired physician, who both worked as a VA doctor and now gets healthcare from the VA. He has nothing but good things to say about the care given and received by the VA. I'll throw in a 3rd case: coming from a poor family, I would have had much less chance of success had I not recieved a national merit scholarship, which is partly paid for by federal funds. 4th case: regulation of the meat industry, which should be stronger, protects both our health and reduces the horror of farm animals' lives. Remember The Jungle.
    MaryAnneriverflowvinlyn
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    And, in fact, the Republicans are trying to make government not work well...and then saying, "See, big government doesn't work."
    riverflowmatthewmartin
  • I guess my big beef with the ACA is it hurts as many people as it helps. There's an awe full lot of middle class people, myself included who are getting financially squeezed so others can get lower rates. There's got to be a better answer. Really though, our system worked well 40 years ago. What made it come apart?
  • riverflowriverflow Veteran
    edited November 2013
    Shak said:

    I guess my big beef with the ACA is it hurts as many people as it helps. There's an awe full lot of middle class people, myself included who are getting financially squeezed so others can get lower rates. There's got to be a better answer. Really though, our system worked well 40 years ago. What made it come apart?

    Answer: The very wealthy and corporations being taxed a LOT less than they once were. In fact, some corporations have paid ZERO taxes in the past several years. Well, if THEY aren't going to be made to pitch in then SOMEBODY has got to-- and that's where the middle class gets stuck with more taxes. The ultra rich have never had it so good in the US.
    vinlynJoyfulGirlJeffreyEvenThird
  • I always wondered why the US does not have something like the NHS or what many other countries have setup, a free health care service

    Racism. A lot of people don't want to pay taxes in order to give "certain people' a free ride. That's how it's perceived. This is an erroneous perception, but a strong one.

    riverflowEvenThird
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Dakini said:

    I always wondered why the US does not have something like the NHS or what many other countries have setup, a free health care service

    Racism. A lot of people don't want to pay taxes in order to give "certain people' a free ride. That's how it's perceived. This is an erroneous perception, but a strong one.

    I'm not sure it's properly called racism. I think it's more a class issue.

    I'd say the feelings are there toward "white trailer trash" just as much as Blacks and Latinos.

  • vinlyn said:

    I'm not sure it's properly called racism. I think it's more a class issue.

    I'd say the feelings are there toward "white trailer trash" just as much as Blacks and Latinos.

    Living in five southern states, I'd say no-- at least not in the south (Republicans called it the "Southern Strategy" for good reason). Everyone knows down here that a "welfare queen" is black wink wink nudge nudge.

    You'd have to live here for a while to pick up on the "code." I have a nurse friend here from Canada who was shocked but picked up very quickly on the "code" that whites here speak regarding black people. Non-southerners don't realize the extent of the cultural conditioning here.

    It isn't JUST a race issue, it isn't JUST a class issue-- what is strange about the history of the south is that the two elements are so intertwined with one another that it is hard to extricate the two.
    MaryAnneVastmind
  • VastmindVastmind Memphis, TN Veteran
    edited November 2013
    In the south..your class is usually pre-determined by your race.
    riverflow
  • ThailandTomThailandTom Veteran
    edited November 2013
    The US is so vast and even though it has less than 300 years history, it has so much crud going on. Maybe that is it, it is a country that has developed world technology but it is still in it's infancy with regards to evolving?

    I am not an idiot, I have seen so many well established documentaries from there, I have friends who have moved there, I have friends from there, there is something not right in society and I really cannot pinpoint it properly.

    The sheer size of the place plays a HUGE role, states have different laws and social norms etc, kinda like different countries, which makes things difficult. I dunno, something needs to change there and all over the west, also in parts of the east to of course, everywhere has it's faults. But at the end of the day, who has the power, who has the ability to destroy everything and cause the most suffering?
    riverflow
  • I always wondered why the US does not have something like the NHS or what many other countries have setup, a free health care service, so I thought 'yea Obama care sounds good'. After watching this I have changed my mind, you guys still deserve free health care but not Obama care.

    You are right. This law,how it was passed and what it is doing to people's health care costs is outrageous. It is not "free health care." At least not for most. If the ACA is so wonderful, why do certain people get a waiver on it? I'm not opposed to change, but this current situation is not the answer.
  • I'm really getting sick of the deliberate dis-information campaign by conservatives --and people just falling for it.... To correct some of the BS lies floating out there:

    How Insurers Are Hiding Obamacare Benefits From Customers

    The Uproar Over Insurance ‘Cancellation’ Letters

    'Winners And Losers From Obamacare'

    image

    It isn't the best solution, but it also isn't "outrageous." Just because talking heads and corporatists like to use irresponsible hyperbole doesn't mean we all should also.
    MaryAnnerobotEvenThirdperson
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Thank you Riverflow.

    Let me show you how they are twisting the data.

    I liked my BCBS coverage that I have had for the past 5 years. And now my company from which I retired (and still receive benefits) has dropped it. So, the conservatives would say, "See, he couldn't keep his health care." But the real truth is that my former employer simply switched companies to Aetna. Virtually the same coverage, and in fact, slightly better coverage.

    And then they will say, "But I bet your cost skyrocketed!" Well, it went up 10.7%. "Aha! See. What Obama did is costing you more money!" Well, the problem is that over the last several years...before Obamacare...my health insurance was going up, too...last year by 6.5%.

    Or you could take my mother. If she were still alive, she couldn't keep her lousy insurance...if she were still alive.
    riverflow
  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    edited November 2013
    I got Obamacare during Phase 1, when preliminary legislation was passed in 2010. It required states to create an insurance pool for individually-insured people who were difficult to insure (i.e. had been turned down by other plans). It also required states to offer subsidies to low-income applicants, up to 75%. The plan is much better and more comprehensive than the individual insurance I was paying through the nose for prior to that legislation passing, and I'm paying just a small fraction of what I'd been paying before. I love my Obamacare! :)
    riverflowvinlynrobot
  • Sure are a lot of negative consequences from such a wonderful law. No doubt change is needed, but this doesn't seem to be the way.http://www.nationalreview.com/article/359861/100-unintended-consequences-obamacare-andrew-johnson
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    edited November 2013
    When I go to find middle-of-the-road, realistic accuracy, I don't look up William F. Buckley's baby.

    Of course, if the Republicans came up with some realistic solutions it would be nice...but all they do is bitch.

    And in terms of what those companies "say", I remember when some companies said they might have to go out of business if they were required to print nutritional information on their labels. They didn't. I remember grocery stores that said if they had to put new shelf labels up that told the price per ounce or pound or whatever, that grocery prices would sky rocket. They didn't (in fact, it eliminated some cost because stockers no longer had to stamp a price on each package).

    And as I read through that list from National Review, some of it looked like a good consequence (e.g., "Earlier this month, the computer giant, once famed for its paternalism, announced it would remove 110,000 of its Medicare-eligible retirees from the company’s health insurance and give them subsidies to purchase coverage through the Obamacare exchanges").
    riverflow
  • Isn't National Review a conservative magazine?
  • riverflowriverflow Veteran
    edited November 2013
    vinlyn said:

    When I go to find middle-of-the-road, realistic accuracy, I don't look up William F. Buckley's baby.

    :lol:
  • Seemed like straight reporting to me.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    Straight reporting is when you give pros and cons on an issue.

    It's being able to recognize that FOX News is biased to the right, and MSNBC is biased to the left.
  • Most news outlets don't report both sides of a story. They're catering to target audience to generate the most advertising$$$. That's all journalism is. An advertising business. There's no higher purpose in it. The informed citizen gleans info from both sides and finds the truth somewhere in the middle.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    You said the article was "straight reporting". I can see it is biased on one side.

    Yes, it's yours and my responsibility to determine the truth. But you didn't even see the bias.
  • You're right, I don't see
    The bias in that story.
  • vinlynvinlyn Colorado...for now Veteran
    So the article -- published in a conservative magazine -- lists 100 consequences of Obamacare...and 100 out of 100 of the consequences they list are negative. They couldn't even a single positive.

    But let's see -- there are no more lifetime limits, people can no longer be denied insurance due to a preexisting condition, there will no longer be a need for uninsured people with a medical problem that is non-threatening to go to an emergency room for treatment. Gee, I came up with 3 consequences in 3 seconds without even needing to research anything.

    If you really can't see any bias in that article, then you're not looking.
    JeffreyMaryAnne
Sign In or Register to comment.