BUt who determines what is affordable?

BUt who determines what is affordable? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

GreedyTop -> BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 12:48:51 AM)
OK, I'm all for everyone having health coverage (god knows I don't have any)... but who is going to decide what the word 'affordable' means? I'm in the limbo-land of the national income designations: I make to much to fall into poverty, but I don't make enough to live on.... http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/03/senate-health-care-plan-impose-fines-refusing-coverage/

HatesParisHilton -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 1:08:10 AM)
excellent query. PLus the question, WHAT medical complaint would qualify for coverage? the teeth for you to get a job, \ or breast implants for an ex-governatrix TRYING to get a job ( [;)] ) ?

HatesParisHilton -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 1:10:41 AM)
I didn't mean YOUR teeth, by the way; I was using the genitive, as in "anyone's teeth" since we have socialized medcare here but dental is not covered even when "fixed teeth" are required for someone to get the job to get off welfare that the conservatives hawk at people to get.

GreedyTop -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 1:31:55 AM)
teeth is an issue for me, as well as vision. Oh yeah.. and basic healthcare. Let's not forget preventative medicine.

HatesParisHilton -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 1:50:45 AM)
see THAT'S the issue, right there, which is were "debate" in your Senate and Congress is going to break down. I am an ex smoker after being a smoker from HELL. And I have VERY destinct notions on "preventative" that would lose MILLIONS of $$ from lobbying $$ into the pockets of folks that can vote for Bills to Pass. There are 2 sides of affordable: the "obvious" affordable, and what blood $$ the scumbag Parliamentarians are willing to go without. Or forced to go without.

housesub4you -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 4:20:11 AM)
The whole make you pay if you refuse coverage is only being tossed about and covered by FOX news and GOP nay sayers, it was Clinton's idea to have the type of coverage that is offered in her state where you are fined if you turn down coverage. O'bama has said he does not support that concept and won't sign a bill with that included, he said this during the election and he has not chaged his position. He just gave a townhall meeting on this issue the other day and c-span covered it, I think if you go to their web site you can find the meeting. It is easier to toss out old talking points then to address the problem, which is health care is becoming unaffordable to most small business and working people. Our health insurance cost have gone up about 300% in the last 5 years and my wifes employer just sent a letter out saying they will no longer offer health insurance because of the costs. She worked at a firm that had about 15 employees. A recent survey done in our town by a local newspaper found that less than 15 % of small business in our area offered health insurance to it's employees, because of the high cost. In the article small business whas defined as a business with less than 20 employees. So the response get a job for your insurance is losing ground as many employers can't afford to offer it any longer.

Aneirin -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 5:08:04 AM)
I suppose what should be asked, is what is basic medicine and what is enhancing medicine, anything that keeps a person alive is basic, anything to improve a person's prospects, is enhancing, but there is a blur between the lines, as what is one thing to one, is something else to another. Basic healthcare I believe should be available to all no matter what their status, as without basic healthcare, how are there going to be people available to work,to stimulate business and industry, to pay taxes, and there pay for the healthcare and other things our lords and masters want. Preventative falls in with basic health care as to prevent a thing stops a thing happening, or even getting worse. We have a national health service in the UK, but though in theory it is available to all, often the case is, it's not. Dental care being one of the biggest bugbears, no one can get a health service dentist, they have all gone private. Most parts of the UK, you might get to see your doctor within fourteen days, and any specialist treatment, you wait weeks for that. Although we have a system of sorts, it is far from satisfactory for the poorest members of society. Perhaps the reality is free healthcare is an ideal, but not a viable possibility. Edited to add, Cuba is supposed to have the best national healthcare system, perhaps we should all look at them, to see what they are doing right and we can all learn from.

MmeGigs -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 5:26:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GreedyTop OK, I'm all for everyone having health coverage (god knows I don't have any)... but who is going to decide what the word 'affordable' means? I'm in the limbo-land of the national income designations: I make to much to fall into poverty, but I don't make enough to live on.... This is my concern about the "individual mandate" health insurance idea. There are a lot of folks in your situation - working but not making enough to pay the bills. The income levels for health care assistance now are unrealistically low, particularly for single adults. I suspect that what's going to happen is that folks who can't afford insurance will join the ranks of the underinsured and will be essentially no better off than they are today. They'll be pushed into low-premium, high-deductible plans and basic health care will still be an out-of-pocket expense. No one making $10/hr is going to spend $400 or more on an annual physical. The only real difference will be that if they have a serious accident or illness, most of the hospital bills will get paid. I guess that's something, but it's more loss-prevention for hospitals than it is health care coverage for individuals. It's not going to save any money in the health care system, just shift it around to different pockets. I've seen quite a few ideas that involve shifting costs to other pockets, but I haven't seen much put forward that's actually going to save health care dollars. I imagine that's because saving money means that someone somewhere along the line will be getting less, and hospitals, insurers, etc. and the folks who invest in them don't get behind ideas that might take money out of their own pockets any more than anyone else does.

rulemylife -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 5:48:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you The whole make you pay if you refuse coverage is only being tossed about and covered by FOX news and GOP nay sayers, it was Clinton's idea to have the type of coverage that is offered in her state where you are fined if you turn down coverage. O'bama has said he does not support that concept and won't sign a bill with that included, he said this during the election and he has not chaged his position. He just gave a townhall meeting on this issue the other day and c-span covered it, I think if you go to their web site you can find the meeting. Edited because apparently Obama is re-thinking the issue, though his statement on it is somewhat contradictory: ABC News Exclusive: President Obama Shares His Health Care Vision Acknowledging that his thinking on the issue has "evolved," President Barack Obama says he could support a law mandating that individuals purchase health care coverage, with fines for those who do not, but he stressed that there must be some kind of waiver for those who are simply unable to afford it. quote: It is easier to toss out old talking points then to address the problem, which is health care is becoming unaffordable to most small business and working people. Our health insurance cost have gone up about 300% in the last 5 years and my wifes employer just sent a letter out saying they will no longer offer health insurance because of the costs. She worked at a firm that had about 15 employees. Mine has gone up 70% in two years after having remained relatively stable for a long time. I can understand increases for inflation, but 35% per year is ridiculous.

servantforuse -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 6:11:49 AM)
The answer to the O P's question is simple. The federal government will decide what is affordable. They will also decide what Dr. you see, when you can see them and set rules as to why you see them. Lets fix health care, not ruin it by giving government contro of your medical history..

rulemylife -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 6:30:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The answer to the O P's question is simple. The federal government will decide what is affordable. They will also decide what Dr. you see, when you can see them and set rules as to why you see them. Lets fix health care, not ruin it by giving government contro of your medical history.. Yes, I know this is what the insurance and hospital conglomerates want you to believe. They have been stepping up their media campaign since March. But other than their attempts to exaggerate and instill fear to protect their profits, do you have any facts to prove that will be the case? Do you have anything to say that government control of health coverage will be any more stringent than the insurance companies, because everything you mentioned as a negative of government health care already occurs with the private system, unless you pay out-of-pocket. An option that won't be removed.

MasterG2kTR -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 6:31:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The answer to the O P's question is simple. The federal government will decide what is affordable. They will also decide what Dr. you see, when you can see them and set rules as to why you see them. Lets fix health care, not ruin it by giving government contro of your medical history.. Congratulations, you have just given the textbook definition of an HMO......[:'(]

HatesParisHilton -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 6:48:04 AM)
"The answer to the O P's question is simple. The federal government will decide what is affordable. They will also decide what Dr. you see, when you can see them and set rules as to why you see them. Lets fix health care, not ruin it by giving government contro of your medical history.. " as the poster above said, and when I lived in CA, this was the status quo at Kaiser. Any patient was a lab rat at best. One time I was dying of salmonella and they were getting ready to cut out my appendix. and that was back in the GOOD OL' DAYS. Under Bush Sr., I might add, before anyone gets dickless with a "Well, that's Clinton for ya" jibe.

DarkSteven -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 7:38:54 AM)
Bass-ackwards. During the Democratic primary, Obama said something that impressed the hell out of me. While everyone else said that health care is a basic right and we simply needed to figure out who pays and how, he said that the first step was to find out why it's so expensive. If the cost of good health care can be reduced, it makes it more accessible to companies that pay health care, to individuals, and to any government program. AFTER the costs get reduced, we worry about who pays what. I really wish he would go back to that.

UncleNasty -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 9:21:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: housesub4you The whole make you pay if you refuse coverage is only being tossed about and covered by FOX news and GOP nay sayers, it was Clinton's idea to have the type of coverage that is offered in her state where you are fined if you turn down coverage. O'bama has said he does not support that concept and won't sign a bill with that included, he said this during the election and he has not chaged his position. He just gave a townhall meeting on this issue the other day and c-span covered it, I think if you go to their web site you can find the meeting. It is easier to toss out old talking points then to address the problem, which is health care is becoming unaffordable to most small business and working people. Our health insurance cost have gone up about 300% in the last 5 years and my wifes employer just sent a letter out saying they will no longer offer health insurance because of the costs. She worked at a firm that had about 15 employees. A recent survey done in our town by a local newspaper found that less than 15 % of small business in our area offered health insurance to it's employees, because of the high cost. In the article small business whas defined as a business with less than 20 employees. So the response get a job for your insurance is losing ground as many employers can't afford to offer it any longer. My question: Will her employer now be giving her the funds they were previously spending on health insurance? I've contracted with companies several times in the past few years and had them give ME the funds they usually spend on health insurance for their employees. It generally takes a bit of cajolling but they are usually willing. Uncle Nasty

housesub4you -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 10:12:50 AM)
NO Illinois is a fire at will state, so they have no reason to offer her the money. She is an employee, there is no contract, as with most people in this country there is no signed contract for work. She is an Architect and with the slow/stop in basically all building the unemployment rate in that career is soaring. Basically they are saying, well if you don' like it quit, there are people walking in everyday asking for jobs at less money who are not asking about insurance The fact is insurance rates are skyrocketing. How can a industry whose sole purpose is to create profit really offer insurance that will cover people who are sick and will drive down profits?. Everyone bitches NO National Health plan, yet we have one already medicad, which the insurance compaies love because they can drop people who are terminal or when they reach a certain age and not have to cover them. So they can charge and cover people who are healthy. When you turn 65 Medicad becomes your primary insurer. and private becomes secondary. Hell even China anounced they will have a national health plan to cover all of their people by the end of this year. But we can't not because of our government, but because of big business and corp profit at the expense of everyone living here.

thornhappy -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 11:23:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven Bass-ackwards. During the Democratic primary, Obama said something that impressed the hell out of me. While everyone else said that health care is a basic right and we simply needed to figure out who pays and how, he said that the first step was to find out why it's so expensive. There's a fantastic article in the New Yorker by Atul Guwande titled "The Cost Conundrum." He found that spending did not correlate with quality of care. It's a good read. thornhappy

awmslave -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 12:24:03 PM)
US government spends 16% (2007 estimate) on health care that is higher than most industrial nations. Canada spends 10%. Canadian health system has some problems that could be fixed by adding spending (estimated 12% would fix the delays of care). If US would adopt Canadian system and continue spending 16% GDP everybody would have good health care. Take the above just as an irony. Obama-Dodd health care proposal has an additional goal to increase health care industry profits (at least not to reduce the profits) and the last sets the limits.

Lorr47 -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/4/2009 2:31:25 PM)
quote: Most parts of the UK, you might get to see your doctor within fourteen days, and any specialist treatment, you wait weeks for that. Although we have a system of sorts, it is far from satisfactory for the poorest members of society. Even then your system is much better than what the U.S. has at the present time. As far as financing it, nationalize such industries as the oil industry and use the profits.

MmeGigs -> RE: BUt who determines what is affordable? (7/5/2009 9:28:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse The answer to the O P's question is simple. The federal government will decide what is affordable. Most likely federal and state governments will decide. This is something they've been doing for as long as there have been programs that have income limits. They'll get input from all kinds of people - government agencies, industry representatives, advocacy groups - each with their own particular area of concern, and come up with some number. quote: They will also decide what Dr. you see, when you can see them and set rules as to why you see them. Lets fix health care, not ruin it by giving government contro of your medical history.. There is no reason to believe that this will happen. It's not the way that govt paid health care programs (Medicaid, Medicare) are run now. I have really good insurance, and my plan has more rules about who, when and why and how much than the public plans do. That's not to say that the public plans are ideal, but their problems have nothing to do with intrusiveness into individual health care decisions. They're more about low reimbursement rates causing problems with access to care and raising costs to other payers.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.152344E-02