Scary Health Bill proposal

Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
Status
Not open for further replies.
workinforwood said:
Pretty sure page 331 in the bill is what you need to read. If your company wishes to maintain it's current health plan, that is acceptable. All companies that wish to maintain their current health plan WILL BE AUDITED.
Click to expand...

Section number please?

When they say audited, do you know what they mean? I'm the CFO and CAO (Chief Administrative Officer) of my company. Every year Travelers does and audit of our personnel records for the workman's comp insurance policy. Takes about 30 minutes to fill out the form and get the tax documents together so they can make sure that my policy premiums are right for the number of people in the company and the wages I pay. I have a feeling that the "audit" they are talking about in the legislation is this type and not the ever feared "financial audit" that any public companies would have done anyway (SEC regs you know)
 
Signed-In Members Don't See This Ad
Everyone should remember that millions of people that can afford to purchase healthcare choose not to do so for whatever reason. The current system is not perfect but everyone has access to healthcare. Everybody that currently pays for their healthcare through payroll deduction or out of pocket is covering everyone who cannot pay. That is why premiums are so high. Think about this, what happens when too many people become a burden to a public benefits system? Can anyone say Social Security? Think about it. I pay into Social Security and will probably never see a dime of it because I'm in my early 40's. I don't see this as fair. I wish the government would let me manage my own contributions.
 
Last edited:
I keep hearing about the millions of people who do not have health care by choice. Mostly young folks that choose not to be insured. Could it possibly be that these people can't afford it! How in the world is someone supposed to pay $500.00 to $700.00 a month for insurance if they make $10.00 an hour or worse minimum wage. So I guess by definition they are choosing not to be insured, but is it really a choice or a matter of survival?
 
I keep hearing about the millions of people who do not have health care by choice. Mostly young folks that choose not to be insured. Could it possibly be that these people can't afford it! How in the world is someone supposed to pay $500.00 to $700.00 a month for insurance if they make $10.00 an hour or worse minimum wage. So I guess by definition they are choosing not to be insured, but is it really a choice or a matter of survival?
Click to expand...

They can afford to pay it. Ever job I have had since I was 16 I have had health insurance by choice. It was available and I took it. Most of those jobs were minimum wage and back then I was lucky to get $4 something an hour. Was I forced to have that insurance, nope. I could have opted out. So yes everyone has a choice. Not everyone pays for it but they still have a choice.
 
workinforwood said:
Oh, actually, I'm sorry Ian but that is completely false information. Pretty sure page 331 in the bill is what you need to read. If your company wishes to maintain it's current health plan, that is acceptable. All companies that wish to maintain their current health plan WILL BE AUDITED. Says so right there. Any new employee can not be added to the existing health plan. If you leave your company and join a new company that has private insurance, you can not join their private plan. You must join the government plan. Therefore, eventually, all citizens must be on the government plan. This is because over time, with job switches, there will not be enough private plans in existance for the insurance companies to stay afloat. There will come a breaking point where they will fold. I know the President said that if you have a plan, you can keep the plan. Maybe he meant it or maybe he means you can keep it for now as to help the transition to 100% social medicine take place. If he meant it, he hasn't read the bill, which is 1000's of pages of very strange things. The most disturbing being the mandatory death counciling of senior citizens. Every 5 yrs the government will come to your house and tell you how you should kill yourself for the good of the country...how patriotic. :eek: I think that part is around page 1002.
I wish I was making this up.
Click to expand...

Okay, I did some digging, here is the section of the ACTUAL LEGISLATION that disputes this. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c1110snZej:e176424:

What it says in short is that the employer can do one of two things. Offer insurance or not. and that if they do they MUST automatically enroll any new employee unless they Opt-out of the plan. If they Opt out for any reason other than coverage under another persons plan as a dependent, then the employer pays to the government fund. And the Audit everyone is speaking of is a compliance audit, as I mentioned in my earlier post.

Please Guys, read the legislation for yourselves and stop depending on the fearmongering and bad translations of others (including mine :eek:).
 
rjwolfe3 said:
They can afford to pay it. Ever job I have had since I was 16 I have had health insurance by choice. It was available and I took it. Most of those jobs were minimum wage and back then I was lucky to get $4 something an hour. Was I forced to have that insurance, nope. I could have opted out. So yes everyone has a choice. Not everyone pays for it but they still have a choice.
Click to expand...

Rob times have changed a bit since you & I were 16. Premiums have gone up quite a bit since then. I personally know of at least three young family members who earn between $10.00 & $12.00 an hour with insurance premiums ranging between $300.00 to $600.00 a month plus deductable. If someone earns $1600.00 a month before taxes with $300.00 taken off the top for insurance and another 30% to 35% paid in taxes. His/her bring home pay is roughly $900.00 a month. I'm sorry but in my area you can get a two bedroom apt. for roughly $800.00 a month if your lucky. The person still needs to eat, have car insurance, elec. etc...etc...etc. Granted even without the $300.00 insurance premium he is struggling and he has a roommate. Unfortunately not everything fits neatly in a box, i suspect the majority of the un-insured are not un-insured by choice, they simply can't afford it.

Luckily I have insurance and I'm very grateful for it. If given the option I would probably maintain my current insurance, but there are some not as fortunate as I.

I don't have the answer, nor do I pretend to. I am thankful for open dialoge like this so I may better understand all points of view. Maybe a govt. run health care plan is not the answer, there have been some very good points made here. I just feel something needs to be done and not necessarily for me, but for my son and his generation.
 
I would suggest the real issue here is whether we the people wish to keep the America our forefathers created or if we wish to turn socialist (we've been heading down this road as fast as we can for the past 60-70 years). Is healthcare a "RIGHT" as one of my state's elected officials took the microphone and indicated (John Lewis in Atlanta)? If so, WHERE is that right. Last I checked our government is constrained by its creation document(s). Nowhere in the constitution is a "RIGHT" to healthcare. Many will bastardize, distort and otherwise make stuff up to find it but it ain't there. And for those who feel the government will not be taking over the health insurance industry, name me one major government program that has stayed the same size or decreased.

Mike, I do not know your wife's story but am sorry for your plight. However, if you think letting the government run this will help, you are sadly mistaken. One of my partners at work (who is also my second family) is a retired regional inspector general for HHS. He has followed every single porion of this bill in total fright. If this passes, it will be the beginning of the end of our country as we know it. The leviathon will continue to feed.

Everyone wants to blame insurance companies executive pay or med mal lawyers for the high cost of medical services but the simple truth is medicare sets its rates based on the private market by taking the private market and paying a percentage thereof. Private insurance then takes medicare's rates to negotiate the "in network" "reasonable" fees. The $11,000 billed surgery to insurance is actually written down substantially in the private insurance realm. Therefore, to make any money, the straight non-insured non-medicare rates have to be astronomical or the docs will end up making $15 an hour. There are those who believe they aren't better than anyone else and shouldn't make more than $15 an hour but I rarely see 10 years of post high school education and $100k+ student loans being compensated as such. We are a capitalist society. We encourage by rewarding. I would not go to college, med school and residency incurring $100k+ in student loans and pulling 18-20 hour days to make $15/hr.

So the question is do we stick to our country or create a new one?
 
insurance premiums ranging between $300.00 to $600.00 a month plus deductable
Click to expand...

If I had to pay that much for health insurance I would start looking for a new job. I have worked for many different companies and I can't ever remembering paying more then $100 a paycheck and that was for a family plan with dependents. Maybe I am just lucky or I live in a state where that is not allowed, I don't know. I could understand people not wanting to pay $600 a paycheck for insurance but the basic truth is they still have a choice to pay or not. If the government steps in, I personally believe that eventually we will lose that choice.
 
I live in Japan (as if you didn't know) and have some experiences that may and may not be relevant.

First thing I want to note is - in this long thread there are two themes going on at times.
1. Medicine
2. Doctor health care.
To me: National health plans tend to favor Medicine, But Personal health plans tend favor the Treatment Experience.

One major disadvantage of current medical state in the US: Medicine costs.
This medicinal cost in the US should NOT be equated with Health care as in Doctor care. There is an advantage to cheaper but quality medicines under socialized medicines, but there are distinct disadvantages to the (socialized) medical (doctor) care.


First of all, I am not on Japan's national health insurance plan. I pay and get re-imbursed. Doctors here will basically treat me better than many nationals (Japanese) get treated. I get far more choice than nationals because I pay. Japanese that "pay" get the choice also. Those that use the full national plan do not get as much choice. From my experience in talking with middle and lower middle class Japanese, these people do NOT get to challenge the doctor on an issue, ask for a second opinion or get a choice in doctors.


Major disadvantage of Socialized Medical service (in Japan):
Many many dental plans here do not cover (or the dentists do not provide) for pain killers for tooth fillings - and often even during root canals. If the complaints are too much the doctors will stop and leave the hole unfilled. I have personally seen this happen - which in the US would have resulted in a law suit for sure. You don't challenge a doctor here. In talking with Internationals from socialized medicine countries (Germany, France, specifically) the same is basically true there also.

Two of my co-workers broke their arms and had to have metal screws and braces holding the bones in place during healing. Adjustments and removal of said screws were done without pain killing medicines of any kind. This was their doctor's way. Tears and LOUD moans are common! You don't challenge the doctor's choice! (But My wife and I do, :rolleyes: or we go to another doctor, which most nationals can't!)

Numerous newspaper articles over the years report how "Doctor choice" and "hospital choice" is much better for the patient than the national plan provides. If your local hospital is famous for internal medicine and you need heart surgery, you will be treated by internal medicine 9 times out of 10. It the hospital is famous for its heart surgery staff and you need a medicinal treatments for your heart, you will probably get surgery.

I can't tell you the number of times per year that we read of a person dying as they are picked up by an ambulance and refused by hospital after hospital here. This happens in the US on occasion, but the outrage is enough that changes come about. But the outrage by people here does not change the system.

Under national health plans, law suits are all but gone when the doctor doesn't use pain killers, does the wrong thing, or refuses to take you in emergencies. There are lots of "outs" for not treating even in emergency situations. On paper and in national laws, these exclusions don't exist, but in reality, they do. Suing for malpractice is very difficult under national health plans because the system is built to protect the plan - and doctors are part of the plan.

Here, if you pay, you get choice. If you don't pay, the results is often worse than not going at all - becoming a crapshoot at best, as we used to say in the south.

My opinion:
For Medicines - it is MUCH cheaper outside the US.
For medical Treatment, if affordable, the overall Experience is MUCH better in the US - as it is now.

Socialized medicine here almost killed my wife 14 years ago even though we were paying. We had to fly back to the States (Emory Medical, Atlanta) for emergency surgery when LOML was well enough to be moved by wheel chair to the plane. One young doctor at the hospital here - who graduated from a respected California medical school - told us the system does not favor the individual but the promotion and protection of the health system. Go to the US for the correct medical care he told us.
Socialized dental here had the dentist remove a filling (that he thought the tooth was abscessed) in my 6 year old daughter without medicine. Then the dentist said he was mistaken, it was not abscessed. Since she would loose the tooth when she became 9 or 10, so there was no need to put a filling back in. We traveled to a US dentist in Tokyo (from Osaka) for correction. For me, I could stand the pain, but not for my family.
 
Last edited:
The Twitter post said: "Pg 30 Sec 123 of HC bill - THERE WILL BE A GOVT COMMITTEE that decides what treatments and benefits you get"

The bill actually says in Section 123 that an exchange plan has to meet certain minimum requirements and they will be on several levels.

The exchange plan is what you would have instead of the plan thru your job or other private insurance. It was already said a couple of times, you need to read it for yourself to see what it really says.

When I finish reading it, it will be time to write my congressmen. They haven't heard from me in a while.
 
My wife and my daughter both work for the same restaurant chain, My wife is a manager at one store and daughter is just an employee at another location, My wife gets 48 to 50 hrs a week, and has insurance through her company, my daughter is supposed to get 40 hrs but has been getting 28 to 35 hrs since it's summer time and both of these places rely on schools and colleges for a majority of their business, she will be eligible for insurance after 90 days, she's been there two months, But my wife's insurance costs 166.00 a month and is a pretty standard Bluecross Blueshield thing. My daughter makes Minimum wage, How in the world will my daughter be able to afford insurance? her car insurance will go to 60.00 a month she's only 20, her rent will be 150.00 a month her soon to be live in boy friend (wimp) no job, no prospect either. He may qualify for food stamps, their utilities will cost them average of 120.00 a month, her fuel for her car will be about 30 or so a week, (she drives 28 miles each way) so basics we are looking at 450 a month not counting what lover boy can pitch in. I haven't even thought about her food or clothing, add another 150 a month for that so we are up to 600.00 a month then add the 166.00 for her insurance if it's the same as her mothers, and she's going to need a second job just to survive.
So I can see why young people are not getting health insurance, same reason old people that have little or no retirement or Social Security eat cat food so they can afford medicines.
I hate to ever say anything nice about Wal-Mart but they have at least offered 4.00 prescriptions for many medicines and even ones that medicare doesn't cover they have a better price on, my alprazolam costs 34.00 at the pharmacy, Wal-Mart or Krogers I get it for 15.00.
A very good friend and my wife's former business partner has had to sell his greenhouse, and a lot of their things to prepare for his wife's deteriorating Alzheimer's disease, the man is 74 years old, worked hard all his life and has had to give up his income, his Greenhouse to comply with some stupid part of getting long term care for his wife of 50 years.
Fortunately I had well paying jobs and although not getting rich off my Social Security, I get considerably more than he does, mainly because I worked in California, Boston, and Texas, until I moved here, all were good paying areas, this poor guy was making 1.25 an hour as recently as the mid 1970s If this is going to be mandated as it's supposed to be I pray to (insert deity's name here) I hope there is some degree of equality,
 
As a "foreigner" I hope I may allowed to add a different perspective to this debate.

This debate reminds me very much of what we went through here in Australia in the 70's when a Labor government introduced universal health care/insurance, up to that point we had to have private health insurance.

The Medicare scheme (or Medibank as it was known at the time) introduced a levy on your salary, currently 1.5% of your taxable income, and through this every citizen was covered for health care in a public hospital.

So if you don't pay tax, as a lot of pensioners and low income earners don't, you don'y pay the levy but are still covered.

You could still still take out, or keep your existing, private health insurance over and above the basic government provided services which would cover your private hospital, dental and other ancilliary medical services (eg physiotherapy).

Over the years, more and more people dropped out of private health insurance, putting more pressure on public hospitals. To alleviate this, the government (a Liberal government, or what you guys would call Republican), introduced a 30% subsidy if you chose to have private health insurance in the form of a reduction of you tax. This was followed with a Medicare surcharge for high income earners, to force them to take out private health insurance, in general the surcharge would cost them as much or more than the private health insurance.

In general the whole thing works reasonably well and most of the early detractors have had to admit that most people, particularly middle and low income earners, are better off.

I am not of a left leaning disposition, never have been and never will be, but I do believe that certain services should be there to cover everyone. Health is one of those services, education is another.

Just relate this new health initiative to schools, would all the people that oppose universal health cover want all education to be private? I am not sure how all your schools are funded, but I'm sure that most funding would come either directly or indirectly from one level of government or another.

No one would seriously suggest that education should be left entirely to private initiatives, nor should health services.
 
Last edited:
jimbob91577 said:
hewunch said:
The bigger question is what is the purpose of government?
According to the constitution, our Federal Government has only two responsibilities: Infrastructure and National Defence. All other responsibilities fall to the states and/or to the people.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this is completely false. Please Google "US Constitution" and read it. There are 3 branches of the federal government -- each with its own list of powers and responsibilities.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Didn't read all the posts so this may be redundant.

The health care system in the US is not very good and in fact we rank number one in spending but mostly it is average to less then average to the rest of the first world countries.

I wasn't slandering anyone right wing I was making the point if you really want people to make their own decisions then give them information and not ideology.

Health care is important but I do not believe that finding the best solution is either in the politicians, media or industries interest. Their interest is purely self interest and not public interest.

I encourage people to be interested in health care and I can only hope it does get better. But I also encourage people to search out infomration and do not let it get pushed to you.

I believe this to be an interesting source of information but it is only one source and other sources should be considered.

http://www.consumerreports.org/health/home.htm

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/he...omic-cooperation-and-development-data-he.html

Dan
 
Last edited:
Well, since Jeff gave it the OK, I'll toss my two cents in here too...

Each person in a given society will likely have a different opinion based on his or her experience. I, personally, have had excellent medical care thus far.

As one of the Canadians on this board, I come from a country that has already socialized medicine. I don't see the need for fear toward the idea of socialized medicine, as long as it's done right. As Hank showed, there is certainly a flip side to the coin - some systems definitely do not do it right!

Canadians, for the most part, are very proud of our system. Now one must always remember that not everyone will be pleased 100 percent of the time. There are certainly disadvantages - I cannot jump the line, so having extra money does not help me jump ahead of someone less fortunate than me who needs the same treatment...not sure this is a bad thing...

Consequently, some Canadians tend to go South and pay for treatment if they want faster service. Those are the few cases that you hear about. I have never had to wait to see a specialist, and I can get in to see my family doctor the same day if I call early enough in the morning.

Every Canadian, regardless of income, job, or lack thereof, has the right to treatment at any hospital. You cannot be denied care because you don't have an insurance card...the only insurance you need is for services like chiropractic, pharmacy, or other tertiary services.

So the advantages are:
1. universal coverage - every person has the right and ability to see a doctor whenever it's needed
2. quality service - Canadians are at least as healthy as our neighbours to the south
3. competent doctors
4. no need to pay high insurance premiums
5. no payment for most hospital procedures (things like liposuction, etc. are not covered, I don't think, unless medically necessary)

disadvantages:
1. cost - we pay much higher taxes
2. wait times are higher - significantly higher in some cases

Now in Canada, if you're not happy with a doctor's opinion, you can go get another one...but you cannot really tell him what to do. If you want a knee operation, he or she will probably give you one if it's a legitimate complaint/need, but you cannot just tell him to give you one because you're paying for it...not the case!

In short, our system has it's flaws and advantages. I personally think that the advantages outweigh the flaws tremendously. I don't mind paying higher taxes if it means that it'll keep more people alive and healthy.

Each country is different, however, so the US will have to decide on its own. I certainly don't think socialized medicine is something to fear, however...
 
maxwell_smart007 said:
1. universal coverage - every person has the right and ability to see a doctor whenever it's needed

disadvantages:
2. wait times are higher - significantly higher in some cases
Click to expand...

Andrew,
Your post is appreciated. I would like some clarification on the two statements above, if you have time. I have heard that before from several people and even saw it mentioned on TV news, but it was never explained clearly and I hate trying to read between the lines for the meaning.
What is the "wait time" concerning - if you get to see a doctor whenever it is needed?
See a specialist? Get surgery? Medical testing?


On my post, Paying and changing doctors or hospitals doesn't mean that they will do what we ask, it means that they consult us and offer us options that is often the doctor's decision under the national plan - as in Dental: Do you want a local spray/wipe anesthetic or a shot, or none? Orthopedic: Do you want cortisone shots, injections or surgery? Options are explained.
 
I just dont like the fact that it sais everyone is covered, legal or not. That bothers me on so many levels. It is one thing that I have to pay for dead beats and what not, but to pay for illegals is just down right stupid. Now I know my solution for this will never happen, that is the thing that bothers me most. Alot of that stuff is over my head, but I get that part and think it sucks.
 
To me, this should be a message as to where our leaders are taking us.

"Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual
taxes. (Americans will pay)"

How much do we have to go in debt before the government realizes that we need help here first, instead of making sure the rest of the world is comfortable?
When I heard the other day that we were giving Palestine $200 million to fix their economy, it made me want to throw up.

Tom/oops99
 
John the folks that are not "illegals and deadbeats" are already covered---it's the small guy/gal who is working that has to do without.
Those folks are on every hand out line in the country and most wouldn't work if you gave them a good job-----why should they----?????
But this becomes a whole new tread and we don't want to go there.
 
I want to thank snowman56 for bringing up this topic. It is a very important issue with long lasting consequences regardless of the final bill or non-bill thats passed. These are issues that will effect all of us at some time in our lives. It is great to be able to obtain info/others viewpoints in a positive safe environment. Well done IAP, thank you.
 
I know they are covered now, but just wish that if they are going to redo the whole system, they should make it fair to the tax payer, and then.........man, for a second there I was dreaming, must be time to go to bed.
 
Same reason that their exempt from SS, they've got much better coverage the greedy SOB's. Why would they want Social Security or universal health for them selfs when they have their own plan that WE pay for that pays them their salary plus cost of living adjustments and their health and meds are free.
You want to fix Social Security and health care ? If congress had to rely on SS and the same health care we do both would be fixed in one session of congress.

Douglas Feehan said:
If this bill is so great why are the politicians exempt from this health plan?
Click to expand...
 
OKLAHOMAN said:
Same reason that their exempt from SS, they've got much better coverage the greedy SOB's. Why would they want Social Security or universal health for them selfs when they have their own plan that WE pay for that pays them their salary plus cost of living adjustments and their health and meds are free.
You want to fix Social Security and health care ? If congress had to rely on SS and the same health care we do both would be fixed in one session of congress.
Click to expand...

Roy, it's too bad we would never get a chance to vote on a proposal like that
 
Ok...I'm going to provide facts for you all, since some have been diving into non-factual speak again

Fact #1.

Illegals cannot get Medicare or Medicaid period...end of sentence. Immigrants can get medicare or medicaid after showing they have worked for 40 quarters and paid taxes and social security on those 40 quarters, however these people are not "illegals" since they have a SSN and pay taxes, so that's a moot point. I can provide links to the specific laws if you still don't believe me. If I were to offer medicaid to an alien I would be committing fraud.

Fact #2.
This is not socialized medicine! This is an OPTION that people will have. Seems some people cannot tell the difference between the two.

Fact #3.
Again..I reiterate that this is just a version of the bill submitted to the house for a vote. It is not the senates plan, it is not the final combined subcommittee version that will be submitted to the president for his signature.


Here is an interesting little aside that you may want to consider as well. Currently in Ohio, Anyone receiving Medicaid is placed in an HMO. Caresources is the primary HMO here, but lately there have been other new comers to the game. Every time the state Medicaid benefit has been cut, the HMO has not cut services simply because they do a better job of managing Medicaid than the government ever could. Their costs are about 36X lower than what it costs the state to administer Medicaid.

The difference between this HMO and a regular HMO? They are Non-Profit.
 
gov

i just think the price of health care needs to go down i also dont think the government should keep putting there hands in everyones pockets and trying to run everything just look how stupid they are already they jack up anything they try to do except for taking my money
 
OKLAHOMAN said:
Same reason that their exempt from SS, they've got much better coverage the greedy SOB's. Why would they want Social Security or universal health for themselves when they have their own plan that WE pay for that pays them their salary plus cost of living adjustments and their health and meds are free.
You want to fix Social Security and health care ? If congress had to rely on SS and the same health care we do both would be fixed in one session of congress.
Click to expand...

That would be a dream come true..........

Maybe a group as big as ours should designate a day and time and all of us email our Reps and complain. All across the country we could have an electronic revolution. The older I get, the more I dislike politicians, sorry, JMHO!
 
oops99 said:
To me, this should be a message as to where our leaders are taking us.

"Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual
taxes. (Americans will pay)"

How much do we have to go in debt before the government realizes that we need help here first, instead of making sure the rest of the world is comfortable?
When I heard the other day that we were giving Palestine $200 million to fix their economy, it made me want to throw up.

Tom/oops99
Click to expand...

$200 million wouldn't pay for a single day of the proposed health care program. 1.75 Trillion over 10 years is roughly 14.5 Billion per month, which is roughly 400 Million per day, which is roughly 15 million per hour. And all of that assumes that the program actually costs what it is planned to cost, which has never happened with any government program. It certainly does not count the cost of adding to the coverage all of those who choose to take the government freebie when their insurance company and/or employer go out of business. So, is it worth covering the 30-50 million uninsured at such a cost? Just to put it in a different perspective, that's more than twice the cost of the Iraq War (recent reports show Iraq war has cost about 700 Billion to date). And it is 100% debt spending -- on top of the other 1 trillion per year in debt spending which is going up each year, at least until our taxes are substantially increased.

Again, it's not so much an issue of "do we want to insure everyone." It's an issue of whether the federal government needs to undertake such a massive, costly program and take over an entire industry to provide insurance to the less than 10% of our population who aren't already insured. According to the congressional budget office (two separate reports), the program is not going to do a single thing to reduce existing costs. So how is the price tag of this program in any way sensible or responsible?
 
Last edited:
oops99 said:
To me, this should be a message as to where our leaders are taking us.

"Pg 170 Lines 1-3 HC Bill Any NONRESIDENT Alien is exempt from individual
taxes. (Americans will pay)"

How much do we have to go in debt before the government realizes that we need help here first, instead of making sure the rest of the world is comfortable?
When I heard the other day that we were giving Palestine $200 million to fix their economy, it made me want to throw up.

Tom/oops99
Click to expand...
The line you are wuoting is angain being completely taken out of context, which seems to be par for the course for this author.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111:1:./temp/~c111oyCjOD:e176486:

About 2/3rds of the way down the page. This tax they are speaking of is the 2.5% tax on people who do not have insurance acceptable under this legislation. NOT federal income taxes. Non-resident aliens are still required to pay income tax on all earns made in the US and certain other income.

The healthcare card they are planning to issue to people on this would likely point out to hospitals that this person needs to pay for services directly, or have other insurance, since a non-resident alien wouldn't have one of these cards. (My guess)
 
leehljp said:
Andrew,
Your post is appreciated. I would like some clarification on the two statements above, if you have time. I have heard that before from several people and even saw it mentioned on TV news, but it was never explained clearly and I hate trying to read between the lines for the meaning.
What is the "wait time" concerning - if you get to see a doctor whenever it is needed?
See a specialist? Get surgery? Medical testing?
Click to expand...

I honestly don't know, Hank, because Iv'e never had to deal with it. If I want to see a specialist, I can usually get in within a month...if I want to see a doctor, I can get in the same day...

If my local hospital can handle the surgery, they can schedule it very quickly. If, however, I have to go in for a heart operation, it can take up to a month (my dad was on the wait list for a month for a non-critical heart stint operation)...after seeing a cardiologist the next day after the doctor referred him

The doctors and specialists do a TRIAGE system, in which they see the most critical cases first - you won't get denied care, but they see those more pressing cases first. If that means that one out of a million dies later on because they weren't seen fast enough, I think that's just the result of everyone having access to care, and the most pressing cases being seen first).

So in all honesty, I think the 'wait time' debate is just the naysayers who don't like the system...it works wonderfully for me and I don't know a single person personally who's ever been adversely affected by 'wait time'...like I said, it's a Triage system, so it's all based on urgency of need...
 
My thoughts

Having worked in healthcare for the last 22 years, here are my suggestions on what needs to happen. I know that no system will ever be perfect in this world, but here are some thoughts from the trenches:


  1. Tort reform - we desperately need to get a grip in America on frivolous lawsuits that drive up costs for both physicians and hospitals. Think in terms of pen making/selling in our current economic condition: If we can decrease overhead for the "production team" (think doctors and hospitals), then we can decrease the prices for the consumer. I know that there will be cases of "lower overhead increase profits", but it will be a start.
  2. Restructure the FDA - companies can get drugs and technology to market quicker in other countries. Why does the FDA delay life-saving measures for us? I know that we need to make sure that the drugs an technology are safe, but we needs FDA reform.
  3. SIGs/PACs/Lobbyists - embedded shock collars for ALL of them that can be controlled by the voters. Either this or run them all out of Washington.
  4. Congressional term limits - this does not just apply to healthcare, but all government aspects. As we have seen, Congress rarely reads all of the bills presented, but rely on others to let them know what is going on.
  5. Line-item veto - this one scare me, due to abuse potential, but we need to do something about the pork barrel that drives up the cost for all taxpayers. Again, not just about the current healthcare bill, but there will be much pork involved.
Again, these are just my thoughts, but this is how I see it.

Brad
 
OK, now we've gone off track. Lobbyists, Congressional term limits, Line-item veto, while related to health care have pushed us into a clearly political discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom