national healthcare

[geiger]

i've been watching some videos about this infamous healthcare  issue.

don't really know exactly what's going on, so fill me on the detail. from what i've gathered

-it is going to be completely optional and not mandatory. which means, if you don't like it you won't pay a dime for it.
-it will abide by the same rules as private companies do and not have uncompetitive prices
-it will simulate competition so private companies will get more affordable and fair towards their consumers

sure alot can go wrong but for now it doesn't seem to catastrophic, so why all the fuss about it?

i've even heard private companies are paying selected people to disturb town hall meetings all over the country and it's always the same people riding on buses from town to town. pretty dishonest tactics if you ask me.

[HNT5]

It may be voluntary to accept the insurance, but I doubt paying for it will be voluntary. Since when have federal taxes been voluntary : )  The only way the Gov't could fund such a thing is to tax everyone (or use the taxes we are already paying). I see more new taxes coming, because this plan is so expensive and given the Gov't is so far in debt now. So even though you or I may not use the plan, either because we choose not to or don't qualify, we will still pay for it, directly or indirectly. I doubt it will stimulate competition and lower overall cost for everyone's health care. I doubt my doctor/ hospitals and labs will lower their fees if and/or when this Nationalized health care plan passes.  In fact I think there is a good chance they will go up for those of us that still use private insurance.
Just my $.02

Nathan

[MarkS34]

According to page 19 of one version of the bill, the only options will be Federal options.  If you have private insurance now, you will be grandfathered in, but if your insurance company fails, or you want a new policy... Fed options only from that point forward.

[North Pack]

There are no REAL long-term options. I posted a link below which covers quite a bit of it, - take the time to read it, you'll learn something. ...
.
No system is free, - it's beyond belief that some people still think like that in this day & age.
.
The ONLY long-term "option" (it's not really an option - when there is NO other choice btw) - is we're ending up with BO & friends nationalizing the health care industry, which is about 17% of the total economy. ... Once this POS kicks in, if it does, - there's law against private insurers enrolling any NEW customers after that date. Without the ability to enroll new customers, and older ones dieing off or leaving, - private health insurance is done/finished!! ...
.
Take the time to read the posted proposed regulations, - then you'll know what's going on, and can ask smarter questions.

[TCups]

"-it is going to be completely optional and not mandatory. which means, if you don't like it you won't pay a dime for it.
-it will abide by the same rules as private companies do and not have uncompetitive prices
-it will simulate competition so private companies will get more affordable and fair towards their consumers "

_____________

You won't pay a dime for it -- if you don't pay taxes, maybe.  Don't kid yourself.

It will not abide by the same rules as private insurance -- the government run plans don't have to show a profit and can never go bankrupt.  Medicare and Medicaid are glaring examples of failed government medical programs that are titanic Ponzi schemes.  They are unfunded entitlements, and in the business world, even the business world of Enron or GM, they would have been bankrupt and out of business long, long ago.  And it is Medicare and Medicaid which are fundamentally responsible for out of control costs in the medical marketplace today.

No private insurance company can compete with a government run program that can fund itself by taxing  citizens and printing money.  Most employers will immediately opt out of the cost of insurance coverage in favor of having the government pick up the tab.  Yes, you get to keep your current insurance, but only until your employer decides that they shouldn't have to pay the cost.  But even that doesn't work, because then the business will be taxed at a much higher rate.

If your current insurance policy changes in any way -- levels of coverage, deductibles, etc., you will lose it and be put in the "public option"  This effectively prohibits anyone from competitively shopping for the lowest cost insurance coverage in the private market.  In a very short time, the public option will be your only option.  The only thing this will stimulate in the private market is the total demise of the medical insurance industry and escalating business and personal taxes to cover the government's costs.  BTW, how many folks will that put out of work?

Ultimately, the politicians are promising something today that they have no hope of providing tomorrow.  But that's the way of politics.  If you trust that the government will always do the right thing and that government run health care will be more efficient, less costly, and just as good as the current medical care system, and more fanciful still, that none of us will have to pay for it, then it is patently obvious I am totally wasting my time typing this.

[geiger]

HNT5 - 8/12/2009  6:30 AM

It may be voluntary to accept the insurance, but I doubt paying for it will be voluntary. Since when have federal taxes been voluntary : )  The only way the Gov't could fund such a thing is to tax everyone (or use the taxes we are already paying). I see more new taxes coming, because this plan is so expensive and given the Gov't is so far in debt now. So even though you or I may not use the plan, either because we choose not to or don't qualify, we will still pay for it, directly or indirectly. I doubt it will stimulate competition and lower overall cost for everyone's health care. I doubt my doctor/ hospitals and labs will lower their fees if and/or when this Nationalized health care plan passes.  In fact I think there is a good chance they will go up for those of us that still use private insurance.
Just my $.02

Nathan

partially agree. i think to start the whole program they'd need some initial investment that will probably come from other taxes, but probably only till they get a large enough base.
prices going up? hmm tough to judge but it's a valid concern, i'd like to see how will they manage this.

TCups - 8/12/2009  9:15 AM

"-it is going to be completely optional and not mandatory. which means, if you don't like it you won't pay a dime for it.
-it will abide by the same rules as private companies do and not have uncompetitive prices
-it will simulate competition so private companies will get more affordable and fair towards their consumers "

_____________

You won't pay a dime for it -- if you don't pay taxes, maybe.  Don't kid yourself.

It will not abide by the same rules as private insurance -- the government run plans don't have to show a profit and can never go bankrupt.  Medicare and Medicaid are glaring examples of failed government medical programs that are titanic Ponzi schemes.  They are unfunded entitlements, and in the business world, even the business world of Enron or GM, they would have been bankrupt and out of business long, long ago.  And it is Medicare and Medicaid which are fundamentally responsible for out of control costs in the medical marketplace today.

No private insurance company can compete with a government run program that can fund itself by taxing  citizens and printing money.  Most employers will immediately opt out of the cost of insurance coverage in favor of having the government pick up the tab.  Yes, you get to keep your current insurance, but only until your employer decides that they shouldn't have to pay the cost.  But even that doesn't work, because then the business will be taxed at a much higher rate.

If your current insurance policy changes in any way -- levels of coverage, deductibles, etc., you will lose it and be put in the "public option"  This effectively prohibits anyone from competitively shopping for the lowest cost insurance coverage in the private market.  In a very short time, the public option will be your only option.  The only thing this will stimulate in the private market is the total demise of the medical insurance industry and escalating business and personal taxes to cover the government's costs.  BTW, how many folks will that put out of work?

Ultimately, the politicians are promising something today that they have no hope of providing tomorrow.  But that's the way of politics.  If you trust that the government will always do the right thing and that government run health care will be more efficient, less costly, and just as good as the current medical care system, and more fanciful still, that none of us will have to pay for it, then it is patently obvious I am totally wasting my time typing this.

Medicare/Medicaid, don't really know enough to comment, but i suspect they sucked even form the beginning. Altough i hear the satisfactory rate is higher in this program.

As for your employer dumping your health care bill. can they force you to change?

I seriously doubt such a large industry such as the insurance industry will go out of business. Even in my country where we had socialized insurance since the beginning private insurance companies are up and running, and pretty well off they are. So i doubt that in the USA something like that could happen.

[North Pack]

Like I said - if you're going to post about something, you should know something about it, ...
.
Pg 16: SEC. 102. PROTECTING THE CHOICE TO KEEP CURRENT COVERAGE. lines 3-26 of the HC Bill – OUTLAWS PRIVATE INSURANCE by forbidding enrollment after HR 3022 is passed into law.

[TCups]

"So i doubt that in the USA something like that could happen."

I am a 56 year old physician.  I have dealt with Medicare and Medicaid for more than 25 years now.  I have a P.A. and an LLC with about 20 employees who receive corporate employment benefits.  I pay personal taxes, corporate taxes and payroll taxes on an all too regular basis.  Please take my solemn word on this -- any employer can change employee's benefits at any time.  I am wondering if you ever had a job that provided medical benefits.  And size is no assurance that any corporation or an entire industry can't fail.

Perhaps the last line of your says everything you need to tell anyone about your position most succinctly.  Your doubts certainly give me no comfort or assurance.  And sadly, history is full fallout that is the consequence of that attitude.  God help us.  The last line of my post also sums it up nicely, geiger.  Adios.

[shearload]

I agree, if you're going to post about something, you should know something about it.

Here's how I understand the section that you "summarized".  Of course I read the rest of the bill, so I may have been confused by all the proper context.  And my legal education and all those years practicing aviation law probably didn't help, either.

As I understand Section 102:  If and insurance company offers a plan that does not meet the minimum requirements set out in the bill, then the company cannot enroll new members in that plan after the date the bill is passed.  It may continue to serve those already enrolled in the plan, if policyholders want to stay enrolled.  Dependents of policyholders may also be enrolled. Other conditions and restrictions are also placed on these "grandfathered" plans.  The intent is to require, eventually, that the old  plans be phased out and replaced by private and employer-sponsored plans that meet the requirements set out in the bill.

The bill then sets out all the requirements that new health care insurance plans must meet after bill passage.  The requirements, for the most part, address the most common complaints we hear about current insurance company practices.  

If your argument is that no private insurance companies will offer plans that meet the bill's requirements, then make that argument.  Don't make things up.

The tactics of some opponents of health care reform remind me, to some extent, of the tactics the radical left used back in the '60s.  We'll see if they work any better this time.

[TCups]

My argument, of course, is that we are on the road to serfdom, that politicians have no chance of getting this right, that health care costs will actually go up, and that the government will soon, by design and by absolute necessity, ration our health care and consolidate their power over us and the power to tax us like never before in the history of our country.  And why I don't profess to know or have read page by page the hundreds (thousands?) of pages of the House Bill, but I do know, first hand, about dealing with patients, Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance companies, health care delivery, cost containment, employee payrolls and benefits, and attorneys who make their livelihood from the health care profession.  All the more reason I urge everyone to dig our heals in and absolutely refuse to let this legislation be rammed down our throats, like the other "emergency" legislation that has so vividly characterized this current administration.

The most fundamental principle of economics is that scarce resources can be allocated in one of two ways -- in a free market economy without price controls, or by some type of  government intervention and central planning.  Medical care is a scarce resource.  The cost of medical care will not go down, it will go up.  Barack Obama's intentions are very clear here.  He has stated them very clearly.  He wants squeeze doctors and hospitals to reduce costs. It is unstated, but those hardest squeezed will be health care consumers.  He wants to slash any profits made by evil insurance companies.  He want a single payor option, government run health care system.  He wants to shift control of the health care system from the private sector and freedom of choice to the "public option" and government control.  "Public" medical care (don't you love government speak) will soon be the same as Public Schools and Public Housing - a juggernaut government bureaucracy with quality of the lowest common denominator.

The result will be the destruction of the current American medical system as we know it and will be bad for the great majority of people.  Medical care will have to be rationed.  Those who will suffer most will be the very young, the elderly, and the chronically ill, as they are the largest consumers of health care and the greatest cost to the system (or burden to society, depending on your viewpoint).  Physicians, particularly medical specialists, will become more scarce and extremely difficult to get to see.  CT scans, PET scans, MRI, expensive medications, and cutting edge medical treatments and technologies will be severely limited.  Your primary care physician will likely be from another country very soon if not already - India, Pakistan, China, etc.  There will be little incentive for the best and brightest Americans to take on the debt and difficulty of training to be a doctor, let alone a specialist, when the government controls medicine and sets physician's salaries and dictates standards of care.

Sorry -- no amount of argument, reasoning, reassurance, propaganda or policy rhetoric (especially from any lawyer or politician) will ever convince me that socialized medicine will be good for this country or its citizens.  It is a power grab by a government intent on limiting our personal freedoms and controlling our very lives like never before.  Ridicule and attempt to marginalize me and call my reasoning flawed, greed-driven, ill-informed "scare tactics" if you wish (Saul Alinsky would be proud of you!).  The irrefutable evidence of history and the consequences of socialized medicine clear to see in other countries .  I counter and call any attempt at vacuous reassurances to the contrary damned lies and anyone who promotes the socialistic government take-over of private medicine as something to be desired and good for the people of the USA a damned liar, or a fool, or both -- the two not being mutually exclusive.  

God please spare me and this great country from the evil and stupidity of liberal do-good-ers, socialists, and power-hungry politicians.  Whoever first penned the phrase "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." obviously understood liberal socialism and its consequences.  I hope Saul Alinsky is burning there now and that all "Community Organizers" of his political ilk join him very soon. Clear?

[North Pack]

God please spare me and this great country from the evil and stupidity of liberal do-good-ers, socialists, and power-hungry politicians. Whoever first penned the phrase "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions." obviously understood liberal socialism and its consequences. I hope Saul Alinsky is burning there now and that all "Community Organizers" of his political ilk join him very soon. Clear?
.
Couldn't agree more TCups, - regardless of what side you're on, the minute wording is meaningless, eventually this, (what's known so far) - will lead to nationalized health care. There is NO other option or choice, a couple of nice quaint words.  Large government programs grow exponentially over VERY short time periods. In 5-10-15 years this monster will be 10x's what's proposed today. The bureaucracy behind it will be totally mind boggling. Spare me the "cost saving's" bs, - it simply adds more lies this monster. "BO & friends" (Kennedy ring a bell?) have said they strongly favor a "single payer system" - this is nothing more than putting a foot in that door. Anyone naive enough to think this, "to be completed" program is the start & finish of this idea, has to be a strong believer in the Easter Bunny too.

[MarkS34]

shearload - 8/13/2009  12:40 AM

...snip...

If your argument is that no private insurance companies will offer plans that meet the bill's requirements, then make that argument.  Don't make things up.

...snip...

My argument is the Govt is creating the conditions that will make it impossible for Insurance Companies to stay in business and therefor force all into Fed "options".  Private insurance doesn't meet the bill's standards because those standards are cost prohibitive.  I don't believe for a second that the institution that brought us Amtrak, Social Security, & the Post Office even understands that concept.

[geiger]

well you're right, i don't know enough about the US health care plan to make credible arguments. but my gut feeling tells me everything is a bit exaggerated.
we shall wait and see.

i won't start this debate but TCups mentioned something about the free market...well it's not that free as you think it is. a free market is a fairytale, just like working communism. but ok enough of that.
i do have to say that since being in this forum section i did change stance a bit about  gov control...but still keep the stance that a middle way is the right way to go

[MarkS34]

Read the bill for yourself and make up your own mind.  Don't take my word for it, don't take the News' word for it.  Everyone has a bias.  There are a couple of copies online, and here's a link to one of them.

http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf

Please, never trust your gut when it comes to Govt.

- Mark

[TCups]

The middle way?  What a pusillanimous statement of [lack of] principle.  Perhaps governments have hamstrung free market economy, but that hardly discredits the principles of free market economy, much less individual responsibility & personal liberty -- it only discredits an ever expanding, intrusive government bureaucracy and those content to depend to some degree, more or less, on a nanny State.  Grow a pair, take a stance, and at least have the intellectual fortitude to say without ambiguity where you stand and why, sir.

Here is mine:  Big government is the enemy of freedom loving, God fearing Americans who put credence in the principles upon which this great nation was founded and for which generations of patriots have pledged sacred honor, fortunes, and lives.  There is no "middle way" that guarantee freedom, only some "other way" which sacrifices it for the short term promise of something better or more enlightened  or more fair for everyone.  And the "other way" is anathema to me and the indifferent death watch of those who stand idly by, looking on as our Freedom dies at the hands of the State's political garrote.  

Hell, I'd respect you more if you at least clearly articulated a belief in some tangible political principle -- Socialism, or Marxism, or Communism, or whatever you perceive to be the better alternative to Capitalism, free market economy, and individual freedom and responsibility.  But Saul Alinsky had it right.  That is a debate the left will never have and can never win.

Rules for Radicals:

Alinsky codified and wrote a clear set of rules[3] for community organizing. His rules for radicals are now used as key tactics to learn in the training of new community organizers.
He suggests that the perennial question, "Does the end justify the means?" is meaningless as it stands: the real and only question regarding the ethics of means and ends is, and always has been, "Does this particular end justify this particular means?"
Alinsky continues by stating several rules of the ethics of means and ends:

The judgment of the ethics of means is dependent upon the political position of those sitting in judgment.
In war the end justifies almost any means.
Judgment must be made in the context of the times in which the action occurred and not from any other chronological vantage point.
Concern with ethics increases with the number of means available and vice versa.
The less important the end to be desired, the more one can afford to engage in ethical evaluations of means.
Generally, success or failure is a mighty determinant of ethics.
The morality of a means depends upon whether the means is being employed at a time of imminent defeat or imminent victory.
Any effective means is automatically judged by the opposition as being unethical.
You do what you can with what you have and clothe it with moral garments.
Goals must be phrased in general terms like "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," "Of the Common Welfare," "Pursuit of Happiness," or "Bread and Peace."

http://blog.mises.org/archives/004185.asp

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slouching_Towards_Gomorrah

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals