1. PF has switched to Xenforo. Please see this post for more details. Search and other functions are still being worked on.
    Dismiss Notice

The U.S healthcare fiasco

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Mike12, Jan 4, 2017.

  1. Mike12

    Mike12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,799
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I'm personally sick of this topic and the misinformation out there.

    Yes ACA has problems but anyone who knows the facts understands that healthcare was a mess before ACA and ACA was never going to fix the many problems a privatized system offers. When healthcare submits to profits (privatized), sick people simply become unprofitable and trying to force insurers to insure the unprofitable at affordable costs is a no win crusade. It's obvious that for insurers to recoup costs of the sick, they must make up losses elsewhere - the healthy. To even suggest that we can solve these problems by not forcing everyone to pay insurance and having the healthy pay more, is stupidity. I have yet to hear a reasonable solution to this problem.. Why do you all think every MAJOR developed country has a nationalized healthcare system?

    Now... to those who say 'repeal', i ask 'for what?' because the healthcare before ACA was as bad or worse than it is now. Not only were costs the highest of any major developed country (by a lot), millions were discriminated against for having pre-existing conditions or for being sick. The costs were also increasing at the same rate (if not more) than they are increasing now. What i don't understand is how people forget that healthcare was a mess before ACA, ACA didn't make it a mess.

    So here we are, instead of trying to improve ACA (attempting to keep the good, solving the bad) here we are with the GOP trying to go back to a system was was arguably even worse. Can congress ever get together to try and improve things? This is embarrassing and just pathetic.

    Good luck trying to come up with a better healthcare plan under a largely privatized system, it is an unsolvable riddle. Healthcare is a right, not a privilege where having healthcare is viewed as the same as having a car, a yacht or a mansion. When sick people are unprofitable business, they need to be paid for by tax payers, end of story. So let's see what Trump and GOP come up with but i anticipate cold feet very soon, because if things get worse (which they probably will), TrumpRyanCare will be to blame and Trump will not want this to be part of his legacy.
     
  2. Seth Bullock

    Seth Bullock Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2015
    Messages:
    4,221
    Likes Received:
    242
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    It is too bad that politicians can't just use some common sense and easy math to put this problem to bed.

    For example ... Medicare Part A covers our elderly (65+) who represent 13% of the population. Part A is fully funded, mostly by our 2.9% payroll tax.

    But the elderly account for about 75% of health care spending. Everyone less than 65 account for about 25%. If you do the math you can see that if we raised the payroll tax to 5% we could provide the population with Part A Medicare.

    This would not provide totally free health care. There would still be deductibles and gaps in coverage. This is where insurance companies and employers could come in - to fill in those gaps.

    This is not rocket science. Politics and politicians are what make it hard.
     
  3. REALITY CHUCK

    REALITY CHUCK Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2016
    Messages:
    435
    Likes Received:
    32
    Trophy Points:
    28
    As I understand it, before Obamacare, it was claimed that 50 or 60 million people did not have healthcare. However, if you eliminated the people that were here illegally and the young people that could afford insurance but didn't get it because they knew they would live forever, you were down to around 12 million, or about 5% of the population. So, an industry that worked pretty well for 95% of the population was destroyed in a fit of political hysteria instead of working on the limited problems. Sorry, Obama and the Dems are not very smart and it will be a mess trying to fix this mess.
     
  4. fizbo

    fizbo Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2015
    Messages:
    818
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    28
    The bolded portion is true. The fact that Pelosi proudly proclaimed that we had to pass it to know what's in it tells it all.

    The problem was that Obama and his cronies sold the program on false and arguably dishonest points: If you like your doctor, you can't keep your doctor. If you like you existing plan, you can't keep your existing plan. Premiums were supposed to go down an average of $2500 per family. Instead, they continued to climb through the roof.

    Under the ACA, the average bronze plan deductible is roughly $12,000 per year. What kind of affordability is that?

    The bottom line is that Obamacare is broken and has been since day#1. Instead of (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)ing about what the Republicans can and can't do, we owe it to give them a chance. The status quo is completely unacceptable.
     
  5. Mircea

    Mircea Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,250
    Likes Received:
    29
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Only the UK, Sweden, Spain and Portugal have nationalized healthcare systems.

    The rest have single-payer systems.

    When you learn the difference, and when you come to the realization that it is the cost of medical care that drives the cost of health plan coverage, get back to us.
     
  6. Mike12

    Mike12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,799
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    i'm not democrat nor republican on this subject, i just want them to come together to address the problems. You are right that Obama oversold ACA and he fell short but truthfully speaking, it wasn't better beforehand either. Costs before ACA were outrageous, continuing to skyrocket and insurance companies had life time caps and discriminated against the most in need (an amoral practice in the name of profits). Reality is that ACA failed to address many of the problems but at least it did some good things (eliminated discriminatory practices against the most in need and lifetime limits etc..). Obviously, i agree that ACA was a failure in some areas (addressing costs, ensuring people kept their plans and doctors etc...) but if i compared pre-ACA vs post-ACA, i would argue post-ACA slightly better.

    The problem here is that the ACA was never really a democratic idea to begin with, it was a republican idea. It was republicans who first came up with a similar plan as ACA many years ago (Romney even put it in place in MA) but the minute Obama jumped on it, it became a democrat plan. Republicans many years ago came up with a plan very similar to ACA to counter democrats who wanted a single payer system. How ironic that what republicans today claim failed, was largely their creation to begin with. Man, we forget history quick!

    as far as giving GOP a chance, sure i would but the problem is they HAVE NO PLAN... What is their plan? REPEAL? so we go back to a system that was arguably worse than today? seriously? plus, it would chaotic to just repeal the legislation to begin with, millions would be dropped from coverage. I'm still waiting to hear their plan, remember, republicans once advocated something similar to ACA many years ago. This is all political games...
     
  7. Mike12

    Mike12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,799
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    when i say nationalized, i mean both - nationalized (socialized medicine) and single payer (socialized health insurance). They are indeed different but have one thing in common - who pays. Whether medical services themselves are private or not, isn't my issue.

    So let me rephrase - wonder why all major developed nations have a socialized medicine or single player systems? ask your self this question but you know the answer - IT'S MUCH MORE COST EFFECTIVE.

    There is a reason that US health care costs are A LOT higher than nationalized or single payer systems. So trying to bring costs down without moving so socialized medicine or socialized health care, is an unsolvable riddle.
     
  8. Lesh

    Lesh Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2015
    Messages:
    9,920
    Likes Received:
    175
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Mike...are there two people posting under this nic?

    We agree completely on this issue
     
  9. Mike12

    Mike12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,799
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    why is it so shocking when you come across a true independent? sometimes i side with democrats, sometimes with republicans. This two party system has so engulfed this country that it seems inconceivable that someone doesn't have his head buried somewhere in far left or far right.
     
    Seth Bullock likes this.
  10. mbk734

    mbk734 Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    664
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Everyone needs and should be required to have catastrophic health insurance. Basic care should not be free unless you are disabled, poor, or elderly. Catastrophic care should just be funded through income tax, property tax, and possibly a national sales tax.
     
  11. Mike12

    Mike12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,799
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    well this is a start but IMO, there should be lots of incentives for people to get preventive care. I would imagine that the medical costs resulting from undiagnosed problems or issues left to brew inside people's bodies for too long is astronomical. I actually think that drug companies and doctors don't mind sick people, it makes them rich. Good preventive medicine is something that needs to be pushed hard... we have way too many costs resulting from people that simply never get checkups until it's late or never consult a dietician regarding healthy habits. Obesity and diabetes is an epidemic... it doesn't need to be with good preventive care. Waiting for the catastrophe is very very expensive...
     
  12. Belch

    Belch Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 4, 2015
    Messages:
    6,595
    Likes Received:
    131
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Why should there be incentives to get preventative care?

    Yes, in a socialist society, undiagnosed problems do cost, but socialist societies suck, so forget them., You can die, and nobody will care.

    Drug companies and doctors make money off of getting people healthy, so of course you are wrong.

    We currently have too many costs associated with unhealthy people. Let's just jettison them and let them figure out how to stay alive on their own. If they wait for a catastrophe, well... the worst that can happen is that they die...

    Who cares?
     
  13. slackercruster

    slackercruster Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2011
    Messages:
    1,129
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Yes op, good points Don't think things will ever change. Dems had the chance, Reps will never go for an add on socialized option.
     
  14. thinkitout

    thinkitout Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,880
    Likes Received:
    44
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Cost of medical care IS the primary driver, so before dismantling the entire system, try fixing the broken parts

    8 years spent planning to repeal the ACA without a thought on how to replace it? And we pay these people a $174,000 salary? Congressional Republicans now find themselves between a rock and a hard place as they are forced to choose between broken promises and breaking our healthcare system further.

    Perhaps we should first concentrate on bringing down out-of-control costs . . . such as pricing of cancer medications. Pharmaceutical companies are no longer obligated to justify pricing by associated cost of development and production and are given the unlimited latitude to arbitrarily decide their own profit margins; Medicare is required to pay the asking price WITHOUT NEGOTIATION.

    Organized medicine has historically condemned the use of alternative therapies as “quackery”, and not surprisingly, ALL promising cancer treatments have been put in this category and outlawed, summarily disposing of them without a trial. The healthcare hierarchy prefers to treat symptoms rather than underlying causes, since chronic conditions are far more profitable than cures. This has led to the popularity of such books as Kenny Ausubel’s best-seller, “When Healing Becomes a Crime”.

    Since we are paying as much as $500 per pill/daily to increase life expectancy 42 days, why not make a small investment in investigating some of these passed-over treatment that were rejected despite favorable clinical evidence. . . . We might get lucky.

    How can we lower medical costs when the medical sector is holding us hostage, using our infirmities to bleed us dry?
     
  15. Johnny Brady

    Johnny Brady New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2016
    Messages:
    3,379
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As a Brit I don't know much about US healthcare, so can somebody explain why Don called Obamacare "a disaster"?
    Is it really as bad as that?
     
  16. TCassa89

    TCassa89 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2013
    Messages:
    4,015
    Likes Received:
    87
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I could be wrong, but I believe there are actually more first world countries with the insurance mandate system than single payer healthcare. Switzerland, Germany, and Netherlands are a few examples of first world countries that operate on the insurance mandate system. However, the US's is the only one that allows the mandated insurance plans to be for profit, in every other country that uses the mandate, only the supplemental plans are for profit
     
  17. SillyAmerican

    SillyAmerican Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2016
    Messages:
    2,009
    Likes Received:
    107
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Gender:
    Male
    That's correct. Instead of focusing on solving the problems that existed in the healthcare system, Obama and friends went and created a bloated program which didn't solve any of the existing issues, and in fact created yet more problems. And yes, some very smart people told President Obama that this would happen, and he was very good about ignoring them. So here we are...

    The Dems were given a shot. Instead of listening to the legitimate concerns being raised by the GOP, they rammed this piece of brilliant legislation down our collective throats. Now it has to be ripped out, and the original problems need to be properly addressed. Obamacare: an appropriate centerpiece for a failed presidency.

    Exactly right. Hopefully the folks representing us can be made to listen...

    Yes, it really is. But repealing it is the easy part. After that comes the work of trying to address the problems that the ACA was meant to address. Can the GOP and Dems work together to get something workable in place? Or will the dumb Dem solution be replaced by an equally dumb GOP solution? Time will tell...
     
  18. Deckel

    Deckel Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2014
    Messages:
    13,404
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    63

    The pre-existing condition stuff was the only attractive thing about the PPACA. Everything else was pandering to women because most of the poor were still either left out or forced into policies that are practically worthless just because that is all they could afford. A $5K deductible is as good as no insurance for someone making $25K a year.
     
  19. maat

    maat Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2010
    Messages:
    6,283
    Likes Received:
    56
    Trophy Points:
    48
    We are a capitalist country because submitting our commodities to profit promotes innovation and affordability. There is a reason we should not submit them to government. Housing bubbles and massive cost increases in healthcare and education prove this. Modern health innovations are luxuries that enhance and extend life, they are not rights.
     
  20. Mike12

    Mike12 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2012
    Messages:
    1,799
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    if there were no sick people who would need doctors or drugs? doctors and drug companies go out of business, you do know this right? So tell me, if drug companies are making insane profits from treating sick people, do they really want these people to get healthy? Imagine if all of sudden everyone with cancer, aids, diabetes were miraculously cured today when they woke up? this is like armageddon for the drug companies who sell the drugs and treatments that treat these diseases. IMO, preventive care is at odds with pharmaceutical industry, they hate the idea of less sick people... it's not good business.

    and when you say who cares, well you should care because one of the reasons healthcare costs (including premiums) are so high is the amount of sick people in this Country and in the majority of cases, i would argue, it can be better managed or prevented with a system of more regular and more rigorous checkups.

    In my own experience i have seen how inadequate the system is. One time some doctor told me i had moderate to severe asthma and told me i had to take steroids every day for rest of my life. I know my body well and i had never had big problems with my breathing until one spring and it felt like allergies. I told him 'f-ck no, thank you'.. This was like 10 years ago and i'm fine. This mofo tried to hook me up with steroids! why? cause this is what they are taught - push drugs. There is money here...

    also, the yearly physical seems like doing the least possible.. the doctor quickly checks me and does some basic blood panel. This is better than nothing but it feels as if the physical can be much more rigorous as these checkups may not catch anything until it's too late.
     

Share This Page