Early studies estimating cost of healthcare.

Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (Full Version)

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

Message

RottenJohnny -> Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/4/2013 10:37:48 PM)
Here's another blurb from my homepage... http://home.core.com/home/article.php?category=breaking&article=ecb484bc967a49da976019e5b2a40c3c This is some data I've been waiting to see regarding how much we might end up actually paying out of our pockets for the new healthcare system. I was sort of surprised at just how high some of the numbers get. I will say again that I'm totally opposed to this new system. No matter how anybody may try to defend it I will always view it as a violation of my right of choice so I'm not posting this to debate the merits of the system. I'm posting it so people can get an idea of what it's going to cost them and see who thinks they can or can't afford it. For myself, I'm self-employed. My income can be very sporadic. I can go months, or even years, without getting a decent contract. That sometimes leaves me living on as little as $1000 a month to pay my mortgage, student loans, and other bills. So you can expect I often have to be quite a penny pincher. Even the lowest numbers I see in this report make me worry if I can afford this. I also have to contend with the idea of how a fluctuating income is going to affect what I pay. I hate everything about this plan.

tazzygirl -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/4/2013 11:09:03 PM)
Silver seems to be the way to go. For example, someone making $23,000 would pay no more than 6.3 percent of his or her annual income — $1,450 — for a benchmark silver plan. The amount you pay stays the same whether the total premium is $3,000 or $9,000. 70% covered. Four levels of plans will be available under Obama's law: bronze, silver, gold and platinum. Bronze plans will cover 60 percent of expected medical costs; silver plans will cover 70 percent; gold will cover 80 percent and platinum 90 percent. This law isnt what I wanted or was hoping for either. But the system we had was unsustainable.

joether -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 12:34:48 AM)
Before you start basing your fear on something you hate (politically speaking); why not GET SOME INFORMATION about it? You can find out what things are taking place for EACH YEAR. While your at it, get some ACTUAL INFORMATION ON THOSE MARKETPLACES. An if your having trouble sleeping at night, I've found The Affordable Care Act to not only be informative but put me to sleep. It can be dull in places but much of the 'guts' of the act is decent. Frankly I feel the whole thing could be improved upon. Oh, one final note on the OP's article: The Obama Administration is NOT running the markets or taking the lead in 35 states. That is the US Federal government! As for the rest of the article, its really chalked full of 'fear cards' and misinformation. The misinformation comes in the form of speculation rather than actual concrete numbers.

Edwynn -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 12:41:12 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny Here's another blurb from my homepage... http://home.core.com/home/article.php?category=breaking&article=ecb484bc967a49da976019e5b2a40c3c This is some data I've been waiting to see regarding how much we might end up actually paying out of our pockets for the new healthcare system. I was sort of surprised at just how high some of the numbers get. I will say again that I'm totally opposed to this new system. No matter how anybody may try to defend it I will always view it as a violation of my right of choice so I'm not posting this to debate the merits of the system. I'm posting it so people can get an idea of what it's going to cost them and see who thinks they can or can't afford it. For myself, I'm self-employed. My income can be very sporadic. I can go months, or even years, without getting a decent contract. That sometimes leaves me living on as little as $1000 a month to pay my mortgage, student loans, and other bills. So you can expect I often have to be quite a penny pincher. Even the lowest numbers I see in this report make me worry if I can afford this. I also have to contend with the idea of how a fluctuating income is going to affect what I pay. I hate everything about this plan. So then, should the entire national healthcare regime, whichever proposed method, be tailored to your own sporadic income regime? Or rather to another's differently aperiodic income regime? It's all about you. Or all about me. Or is it actually all about the fact that the US healthcare system as it stands both before and after 'Obamacare' has been and will continue to be 50% higher than the next costly HC system of the top 30 OECD countries? Do you think that there is perhaps a better question to be asked, here? "WTF is it half again more expensive for HC in this country vs. almost any other literate country?", for starters.

Zonie63 -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 4:47:30 AM)
The solution to the cost of healthcare is really quite simple: Price controls.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 7:57:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 The solution to the cost of healthcare is really quite simple: Price controls. Yeah. Price controls always work. [8\|]

JeffBC -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 8:16:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny I hate everything about this plan. You know what's really sad? What's sad is that there is plenty to hate about that plan. Even sadder is that the real solution is prevented from happening. So here's a recent story from my "socialist health system" -- you know... the one in Canada where it's impossible to find a doctor and impossible to gain timely access to health care. I called my doctor Friday about 2pm on a long weekend with sleep problems... not a stroke... not a broken limb... not cancer. I got an appointment for 11:15am tuesday... the next business day... roughly 7 business hours after I asked for the appointment. I went into the doctor and we had an unrushed discussion about my problem from which I came away with a valium prescription. On the way out I asked them how much I owed for the doctor's visit -- nothing. So I went over to the pharmacy and got the 30 pills. They asked if I had supplemental insurance. I had it but couldn't find the proper card in my wallet and I NEEDED to sleep so I told them just run it without. I need the pills. I paid $6.83 for that. So the total tab, counting co-pays and prescriptions for the entire thing was $6.83. For that, I pay about $68/mo. There is no general tax subsidy so that $68/mo pays for me in it's entirety. Not only that, but it pays for some people less fortunate than me who pay less... some of whom pay zero. That's what a real health system looks like. America could have that also, except for our corporate masters won't allow it and our right-wing leaders denounce it as "socialist". I wish my American friends who think that "sociailzed medicine" is bad could live here for a year... no threats... no pre-existing conditions... no waffling... no nothing. You need care and you get it and it costs you a max of $68/mo. The right way to fix the ACA is to go all the way with it and then use that collective buying power to crush the fucking pharmaceutical companies.

RottenJohnny -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 8:59:52 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RottenJohnny ...I'm not posting this to debate the merits of the system. I'm posting it so people can get an idea of what it's going to cost them and see who thinks they can or can't afford it. Note to self: Perhaps I should have posted this as a poll. BTW...thank you for your response, tazz.

Zonie63 -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 5:40:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 The solution to the cost of healthcare is really quite simple: Price controls. Yeah. Price controls always work. [8\|] Not always, but if done properly, I think they can work. I suppose we could try an opposite solution, the laissez-faire capitalist/globalist method. Of course, that would mean deregulating the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries and opening it up to more global competition, just as other U.S. industries have had to contend with.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 9:07:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 The solution to the cost of healthcare is really quite simple: Price controls. Yeah. Price controls always work. [8\|] Not always, but if done properly, I think they can work. I suppose we could try an opposite solution, the laissez-faire capitalist/globalist method. Of course, that would mean deregulating the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries and opening it up to more global competition, just as other U.S. industries have had to contend with. Oh, yeah, the FDA would let that happen. lol Can you imagine how long it would take for a Chinese drug to get through the FDA process to be allowed to be sold in the US? Fuckin' A, it would take forever!

Zonie63 -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 9:35:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 The solution to the cost of healthcare is really quite simple: Price controls. Yeah. Price controls always work. [8\|] Not always, but if done properly, I think they can work. I suppose we could try an opposite solution, the laissez-faire capitalist/globalist method. Of course, that would mean deregulating the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries and opening it up to more global competition, just as other U.S. industries have had to contend with. Oh, yeah, the FDA would let that happen. lol Can you imagine how long it would take for a Chinese drug to get through the FDA process to be allowed to be sold in the US? Fuckin' A, it would take forever! If the law was changed, then the FDA would have nothing to say about it. It would take an act of Congress, of course.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Early studies estimating cost of healthcare. (9/5/2013 9:45:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Zonie63 The solution to the cost of healthcare is really quite simple: Price controls. Yeah. Price controls always work. [8\|] Not always, but if done properly, I think they can work. I suppose we could try an opposite solution, the laissez-faire capitalist/globalist method. Of course, that would mean deregulating the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries and opening it up to more global competition, just as other U.S. industries have had to contend with. Oh, yeah, the FDA would let that happen. lol Can you imagine how long it would take for a Chinese drug to get through the FDA process to be allowed to be sold in the US? Fuckin' A, it would take forever! If the law was changed, then the FDA would have nothing to say about it. It would take an act of Congress, of course. FDA would still need to approve the drugs, which tends to be a long drawn out process already (which is not necessarily a bad thing, mind you).

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125