Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Click Here to Login

Reply
Old 01-22-2011, 07:11 PM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
costs will go down because more people are paying in, instead of receiving free health services, as int he people who just chance and if something happens they just declare bankruptcy and/or the hospital writes it off
If you think the health care industry will not take advantage of the huge influx of new money, you're naive; recent history has shown that this happens. If you advocate allowing the government to cap salaries, determine costs for procedures, etc. then you're very sadly wrong in your thinking.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 07:21 PM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
There are two things that strike me as interesting in threads related to Obamacare.

First, we are seeing socialism come to fruition in Europe in many countries. Austerity measures -- that is, the government cutting back on promised hand-outs -- are causing people to riot and strike. The notion that getting something for nothing is deeply immoral is lost on them. The idea that in order for the government to redistribute wealth, someone has to actually be producing wealth is also lost on them.

One observation rings true: No matter what kind of society you live in, there will always be poor people. But there don't necessarily have to be any rich people. Think about that.

Second, we're getting wound around the axle arguing whether or not Obamacare is a good idea that will save us money or a lousy idea that will kill our health care industry, but the discussion of whether or not the law is constitutional doesn't seem to be on many folks' minds. It is absolutely not constitutional, despite the efforts of some to misapply 'General Welfare' and 'Necessary and Proper' to this law.

It would not have been difficult to propose an amendment to the constitution to require national health care coverage. But the significant percentage of Americans who oppose the idea would have made amending the constitution impossible and our legislators (many of whom have been shown the door as of November's election) knew that. They opted instead to break the very law they swore an oath to uphold.

Another observation rings true: When the rule of law is replaced by good intentions of men, a society will not last much longer.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2011, 10:24 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian View Post
If you think the health care industry will not take advantage of the huge influx of new money, you're naive; recent history has shown that this happens. If you advocate allowing the government to cap salaries, determine costs for procedures, etc. then you're very sadly wrong in your thinking.
hence why that is accounted for in the plan, where a certain percent must go to patient care
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 01:10 PM  
Junior Member

brigham city, utah
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 21 | Kudos: +11
I will start out by saying I dont agree with the health care bill. I think it should be repealed if not more for the premise that they are going to try and force everyone to have health insurance.

A little background...I put myself through college busting forms and working on road crew when I was a kid...on my own I paid for all of it. I got my associates degree and I got a decent job. I could have taken a different route and not progressed and I could still be a form buster making maybe $15 an hour right now but I put the extra work in and bettered myself and I earn a decent wage, and I am getting ready to go back and get my BS. I have been working my way up from the bottom of the proverbial ladder and in comparison I make a decent living and I earned every penny of it.

When I was 18 I could barely afford to live and work much less pay for health insurance, I didnt need it, I never went to the doctor, I didnt want it. And my parents were both retired on a fixed income so they couldnt pay for it either even if I lived at home. So why are they trying to take that choice away why are they going to force it on people who cant afford to pay for it anyways..., it sounds like they are punishing us for being an American.


But then again I have a little bit different perception on what the government shoud do with the issue. I think we should institute a government based health care for those that want/or need it yet cant afford it. But we add a stipulation that they have to work for it...(we can do this for food stamps and housing assistance too)... Basically all the people that want federal/state benefits be it food stamps, be it health care whatever, can report to their local federal office and be put on a work detail. And that work detail can go out and clean grafitti up, pick up litter, ect ect. You know do all the work that the government doesnt have enough funds to do on a regular basis. Even the people that are handicapped can go down to the local Job service and answer phones all day.
This could be effectual in several ways. The deadbeats (like my neighbor I had when I was 18 who lived off the state because he got stoned with his buddies, decided he was going to go flying so he climbed up to the roof of his house and jumped off screwing up his back so he couldnt stand for more then a few min at a time.) anyways the deadbeats would start to filter out of the system moving on to bigger and better things if they are able to, the people that need the help would get it, and government spending might get curtailed a little because people that they are already paying to support would be doing something to contribute to society, and also this might curb the Illegal immigrants staying under the radar and living of federal benefits for any period of time.

Since Obama has become president there has been two drastic changes in my life. Now I have to go to work every day worrying about my job because I am in the aerospace field but so are the hundreds of former Thiokol employees who got laid off within the last two years due to the Nasa cutback Obama signed(yet we pay russia hundreds of millions of dollars to put our astronauts in space now) and they are all willing to work for less then I am making right now.
And the second change is my Health insurance has incresed 26% across the board. The out of pocket expenses, the copay everything has gone up 26% and its going to get worse all thanks to this bill. So it will get better for the bottom what 10%. It wont be much of a change or even effectual for the top 10% Its the 80% stuck in the middle that are having a hard time balancing the budget each month that are having to eat the extra cost..

I have to pay for my house, pay my bills, pay my health insurance, pay for my 3 kids and my wife because she is unable to find a job in this area and all that is happening is my paychecks keep getting smaller because of the government, but then again what do I know I just work for a living
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 01:15 PM  
Senior Member
 
Jake7's Avatar

Honolulu, Hawaii
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,294 | Kudos: +135
Images: 45
Thanks for your thoughts, Mark. I'm sure someone will argue with you, and probably try to play down your problems - but we appreciate you telling us your story as related to Obamacare.
__________________
Discover Scentsy at Lucky Lucy Scentsy Products - an independent Scentsy consultant!


https://luckylucy.scentsy.us/Scentsy/Buy
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 01:22 PM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
Well done, Markso. That's the way we're supposed to succeed -- through our own effort and hard work.

I appreciate the modification to existing plans you put forward. Provided there is minimal or no additional cost to taxpayers for these folks to be put to work in exchange for the benefits they receive, I'm all for it.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 01:50 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Markso, so you are upset about the government spending money where you don't want it and upset they are not spending money where you do want it?

health insurance IS NOT just for visiting the doctor when you get a cold, I hate it when people act like the health care argument is all about that, it's absurd. Health care issues revolve around the big serious issues, our health care costs are not so high because of ppeople going in every time they get a cold, they are high because of the newer expensive medicines and procedures combined with the very high overhead. cancer for one can easily hit a million dollars during the treatment for example.

you said you didn't need health insurance when you were 18? so what was your plan if something major happened? such as a car hitting you? or some disease rearing itself? certainly if you couldn't afford insurance you certainly could not afford the medical costs? Or were you depending on the government to force the hospital to treat you for free if that happened?

he gambled and won in that respect, that doesn't work for everyone

Brian I know you think that is awesome that his story turned out ok, but what if it hadn't, what if something did happen and he depended on someone else (the insured people) to pay for his medical bills?
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 02:42 PM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJeepXJ View Post
Brian I know you think that is awesome that his story turned out ok, but what if it hadn't, what if something did happen and he depended on someone else (the insured people) to pay for his medical bills?
Well, I guess that's the difference between some people, isn't it? I don't care what my medical state is; I don't "depend" on the general public to pay for my bills. Friends and family are who I might lean on if I needed to. Then again, I've got some wealth stored and wouldn't impose on them unless I exhausted what I've saved.
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 03:20 PM  
Senior Member

Bristol, Tennessee
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,062 | Kudos: +48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian View Post
Well, I guess that's the difference between some people, isn't it? I don't care what my medical state is; I don't "depend" on the general public to pay for my bills. Friends and family are who I might lean on if I needed to. Then again, I've got some wealth stored and wouldn't impose on them unless I exhausted what I've saved.
you are deflecting....

Family is great but the injuries from being hit by a car can easily reach $200k or more, now especially considering he was a student at the time that generally means little to no savings, if he did get into trouble would you really expect the family to pitch in 200 grand to pay for his care? or would they say just file bankruptcy?

It's not a matter of love and being able to borrow money, it's a matter of intelligence. no one in the position would not just say "I can't pay" and/or file bankruptcy.

even still, most people cannot just call up family members to borrow a couple hundred grand for medical bills. it's irrational and illogical to even pretend that is anyway valid to make up for not having health insurance.

generally everyone says they will do the right thing, until it doesn't work out in their favor to do so. So if you are going without insurance and don't have a couple hundred grand in the bank you are essentially saying I expect the insured people to pay more to cover my risk....
Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2011, 03:43 PM  
Senior Member
 
Brian's Avatar

Rochester, New York
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 262 | Kudos: +47
I thought I explained this before, but let's have one more go-round.

1. If you can't afford it, you don't get it. Period. Caveat: if your family and/or friends are able to and wish to loan you what you need, wonderful! Pay them back and be prepared to help them in their time of need.

2. Costs would be lower if government was entirely removed from the health-care equation. The $200k medical bill might be a quarter or less and many families could indeed afford to cover the cost. It wouldn't be easy, but it would be possible.

3. I advocate having health insurance. It's smart. Get it. One way to make it more affordable is to, again, get government regulations out of the friggin' way. Let insurance companies do business over state lines. Let them set their graduated rates. A non-smoking young person with a good driving record will be charged a good deal less than a 50 year old smoker with a DUI.

But in order to bring insurance costs down, you MUST get government pay-outs out of the entire system first.

4. Overhaul the litigation industry of this country. If you spill hot coffee on your nethers or break a leg while trespassing, that's no one's problem but yours. You eat the cost. That means serious tort reform. Doctors should be able to tell patients "No, I won't prescribe these meds you're asking for" without fear of a suit.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   CityProfile.com Forum - Local City and State Discussion Forums > General Discussion > National Politics / Debate
Bookmark this Page!

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Suggested Threads

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.