User Tag List

First 1234513 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 365

  1. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    Theoretically, because if you suddenly have a heart attack and need hospital care for 3 years and extensive brain surgery and have no insurance to help cover those costs, taxpayers won't be forced to cover all your bills.

    It may be unlikely in your personal scenario but it happens to enough people that it's worth it to the average person to make everyone have coverage.

    In many ways it is really a fight over what is better for the all Americans versus what is better for the individual American. Personally I am willing to take a hit to help the average person, especially considering the extremely high likelihood that I will fall into the demographic of "average people" who will benefit from it.

    But others feel like they should not have to take the hit - which IMO would be fine if they agree to have no medical care provided for them if they get sick like that. Right now there's a safety net because hospitals care for people even if they can't pay.

    I think we should pull the safety net and see how everyone feels about no insurance then.
    Got a notification that you quoted me but you didnt quote me.

  2. #22
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    I'm in favor of what it's supposed to do. But we're unprepared, and the implementation sucks.

    The problem is that the domain is very murky and pretty important, and this has only made it murkier. And instantaneously, at that. I think, combined, the ACA and its regulations stack about 7 pages tall. Fun stuff.

    Among other things -- I find it disturbing that the cutoff is that businesses under 50 employees receive a tax break to help provide insurance. 50 employees equates to a chain of, say, two grocery stores or so. What if Ol' Uncle Al's Family-Friendly Butchery and Meatery wants to expand to a third location? Seems like it's much more difficult for him to succeed. Doubtful that he'll ever be able to become the Wal-Mart of animal slaughter and distribution.
    If the ACA prevents the development of additional Walmarts, that is a side benefit. Seriously, the ACA has many deficiencies, but the existing system is even worse. I agree with the members who have expressed support for implementing ACA, and then correcting and improving it as (real, not supposed) problems surface. The deliberate disinformation spread by opponents has naturally only made the issue murkier, and implementation more rocky.

    Quote Originally Posted by skylights View Post
    In many ways it is really a fight over what is better for the all Americans versus what is better for the individual American. Personally I am willing to take a hit to help the average person, especially considering the extremely high likelihood that I will fall into the demographic of "average people" who will benefit from it.

    But others feel like they should not have to take the hit - which IMO would be fine if they agree to have no medical care provided for them if they get sick like that. Right now there's a safety net because hospitals care for people even if they can't pay.
    I agree with the highlighted, even though I will not directly benefit from ACA at all - at least not at this point in my life. It is one thing for people to exempt themselves from the entire system - buy no insurance, and make no claims on a public safety net - but this should not exclude their children from the opportunity for medical care, both routine and catastrophic. I wonder also how many of these adults will flock back to the system when some unexpected injury or illness strikes. In the current marketplace, they would then be excluded or charged very high premiums based on preexisting conditions. The ACA addresses this, but the flip side is they must pay into the system even if they have no current need to draw out.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  3. #23
    garbage
    Guest

    Default

    Also, a (tangential) appeal to personal experience -- Around here, we're heavy in both healthcare and space, more the latter than the former. Project Constellation was very hot stuff for NASA and its contractors, what with its aim to replace the Shuttle and all. The whole thing got canned, and as soon as word got out that it was going to be canned, employers got all reactionary; they were very quick to lay off and very slow to roll out new contracts to *cough* consultants and the like. Took a while to recover, but the agency found itself a new toy and things picked up again for everyone.

    At least in my neck in the woods, now the healthcare folks are very much on the reactionary downswing as "word is getting out." They don't know how things are going to shake out, and it drives them insane. Doctors, high-level nurses, hospital managers and chief officers, and even researchers are getting all up in arms about the whole thing. I'm sure that the uncertainty itself is the driver--not the content--and that they'll calm down, too. From what I gather, the interim period seems like it's gonna be hell for them.

    Unlike space, healthcare is a field that's (of course) everywhere. Has anyone else seen a similar trend (among friends closely connected to the industry, etc.), or are we just a terrible outlier?
    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I agree with the members who have expressed support for implementing ACA, and then correcting and improving it as (real, not supposed) problems surface. The deliberate disinformation spread by opponents has naturally only made the issue murkier, and implementation more rocky
    I haven't heard that option (implement, correct) expressed at all (ignorance on my part), and I hope that it's possible. The alternative is to simply set the ball in motion and hope it knocks over some pins, which is bad news.

    I wonder how quickly problems could be foreseen and how long improvements could take. The only indicator I can think of is to the positive -- if there's flexibility to extend mandates (setting aside whether or not doing so is questionable), then there ought to be flexibility enough to make other adjustments. Gotta muse and learn some more about that one.

    Here's to hoping that ACA forms a pretty robust skeleton for the overall concept, even if the meat was all Frakensteinishly hacked together.

  4. #24
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,905

    Default

    I'd prefer a single payer, and I'd prefer some established means of setting prices for health care. These are huge elements for controlling costs and ACA doesn't have them.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  5. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I'd prefer a single payer, and I'd prefer some established means of setting prices for health care. These are huge elements for controlling costs and ACA doesn't have them.
    The Labour party in the UK is talking about price fixing and setting in the energy market as a competition policy should they be re-elected, the oligopoly which controls that market in the UK has been unresponsive to all other policy tools and irrespective of market performance etc. they've just increased bills year on year to make supernormal profits.

    It would be interesting to see what will happen should they be re-elected because the corporate barons have already threatened to put the power out and cause blackouts and power cuts but if it was a battle a democratically elected government was willing to have win it would surely be a precident for monopoly capitalists and plutonomies like the UK and US in particular.

    Like I think this should transcend partisan politics, the economic models are broken, or they were fantasy to begin with, but in any case that private interests can hold a people to ransom directly or via their political henchmen is a complete and utter embarassment. Especially in a democracy and especially in democracies which are prepared to try and challenge national elites abusing their power on the international scene.

  6. #26

    Default

    ACA sucks because it's the compromise we got when the conservative wing of the democratic party freaked the fuck out at the idea of universal health care. that's why it's flawed and kind of shitty. But it's still probably an improvement over the current system. Only time will tell.
    Masculine presenting transgender lesbian

  7. #27
    i love skylights's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 so/sx
    Socionics
    EII Ne
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark View Post
    Got a notification that you quoted me but you didnt quote me.
    Ah, I might have removed it in an edit. Just was commenting that I agreed with "plutonomy" more than democracy.

  8. #28
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,524
    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    Since it's just resulted in the US Government shutting down.

    Why is it so bad?
    Americans are a kind people in a cruel system.

    So Obamacare is so bad because it introduces kindness into the system.

    And just imagine if kind Americans lived in a kind system, the world would be thrown of its axis.

  9. #29
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    At least in my neck in the woods, now the healthcare folks are very much on the reactionary downswing as "word is getting out." They don't know how things are going to shake out, and it drives them insane. Doctors, high-level nurses, hospital managers and chief officers, and even researchers are getting all up in arms about the whole thing. I'm sure that the uncertainty itself is the driver--not the content--and that they'll calm down, too. From what I gather, the interim period seems like it's gonna be hell for them.

    Unlike space, healthcare is a field that's (of course) everywhere. Has anyone else seen a similar trend (among friends closely connected to the industry, etc.), or are we just a terrible outlier?
    What's an outlier - the space industry? I have several friends involved in health care - a physician for the VA, an audiologist, and several nurses. They have spoken mainly about the uncertainty, but all are in favor of anything that improves access for more people, even if there are growing pains in the process. The audiologist in particular is familiar with the billing nightmare of the current system, as she is involved in management of her practice as well. In fact, her education is in audiology and speech pathology, and she switched from the second to the first early in her career, because medicare/medicaid and many insurers were drastically cutting back the amount of speech therapy they would authorize. Another example of how in the existing system, decisions are made based on who pays what, not who needs what and who benefits. I'm not sure how if at all the ACA addresses this specific issue.

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    I haven't heard that option (implement, correct) expressed at all (ignorance on my part), and I hope that it's possible. The alternative is to simply set the ball in motion and hope it knocks over some pins, which is bad news.
    Several people on this thread have mentioned such a course of action. You must have your plane take off into the wind before it can turn one way or another. Many democrats have expressed the sentiment as well, most recently the president speaking about glitches in the websites of the insurance exchanges just opened. Kathleen Sibelius made the comparison with the latest Apple OS: no one expects Apple to delay release, or go out of the software business, just because its latest release is buggy. It issues patches and eventual upgrades. The same will happen to the insurance websites, and the ACA as a whole. Republicans, on the other hand, have been short on constructive criticism and long on scare tactics, disinformation, and anything designed to torpedo the whole law. This is unfair to the ACA, but also deprives the nation of their legitimate input and ideas that might help improve the system.

    Quote Originally Posted by bologna View Post
    I wonder how quickly problems could be foreseen and how long improvements could take. The only indicator I can think of is to the positive -- if there's flexibility to extend mandates (setting aside whether or not doing so is questionable), then there ought to be flexibility enough to make other adjustments. Gotta muse and learn some more about that one.

    Here's to hoping that ACA forms a pretty robust skeleton for the overall concept, even if the meat was all Frakensteinishly hacked together.
    I wonder if more of the cost cutting/limiting measures that might have been in the ACA fell victim to industry lobbying. The thresholds involved in the employer mandate may also need some adjusting. Some people - employers and others - however are just looking for ways to make the ACA fail, or trying to penny pinch vs. doing the right thing by employees. This is part of why the law was needed to begin with. It can be hard to deal with change, and one thing that won't improve anytime soon is the need to navigate a complicated patchwork of insurance plans, whether you are a patient, provider, or vendor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    I'd prefer a single payer, and I'd prefer some established means of setting prices for health care. These are huge elements for controlling costs and ACA doesn't have them.
    This would be a better solution. Unfortunately the congress would not even consider it. There is still too much of an "every man for himself" attitude, a refusal to acknowledge the broader social impact of individual choices and hardships. This is nothing but divide-and-conquer economics, when we need the economies of scale that collective purchasing bring.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Americans are a kind people in a cruel system.
    I would like to believe this, and many Americans are often kind. Just yesterday I was in the company of people who displayed the worst willful ignorance and apathetic lack of compassion I have witnessed first hand from my fellow Americans, discussing exactly the ACA and the government shutdown. They stated explicitly that they have no sympathy for people who choose not to buy insurance and then wind up with large medical bills. There was no understanding of exclusions for preexisting conditions, or the fact that for some people, it is buy insurance or pay for rent or groceries. Second, they said that the furloughed federal employees had nothing to worry about since they would all be paid retroactively in the end (possible but not guaranteed), and therefore were just getting a free vacation. These are not tea party types, or libertarians. They are educated professionals - teachers, office workers, etc. In short, just average folks with a disgustingly simplistic, knee-jerk reaction to our present troubles. They all consider themselves Christians to boot. I resisted the urge to ask them: what would Jesus say about the ACA, or the government shutdown? They should meet some of the truly kind Americans.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  10. #30
    movin melodies kiddykat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    ENFP
    Enneagram
    4, 7
    Socionics
    IEE
    Posts
    1,115

    Default

    The government shutting down... what does the gov do for it's people anyway but cater to pandering lobbyists?

    I wouldn't be surprised that these insurance companies are happy Obama is passing this law.

    Besides, their coverage is ambiguous. We're giving more to these privatized organization. It's not like Obama is de-regulating their criminal acts when health insurance companies do not provide proper medical attention people need when they have serious conditions like cancer.

    Repubs are pissed should people who cannot afford these so-called "affordable (care- uncare)" packages, they'd be subsidized by the government for the leftover charges (premiums, etc.) they can't afford.

    It's just like the bail-out where we dished out money to those crooks Layman Brothers. What happened to regulations? Besides the obvious adjustable rates being regulated? There's still a lot of shady business w/these money grubbing bankers. FDIC? Sure.

    Obamacare would be great if it was regulated under a non-privatized system where everyone had universal access, and HOMELESS people were considered "PEOPLE" so they can TOO receive coverage.

    I think this whole thing is a crock. Take those criminals out, and maybe I'd have faith we are moving towards a more humane healthcare system. But, when you put a price-tag on human life and call "individuals" "customers", I call B.S. all the WAY!

Similar Threads

  1. If the inferior function is so bad than what's made of the remaining four functions?
    By Willow Tree in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-18-2016, 07:31 PM
  2. What is so fascinating about gender politics?
    By Ingrid in grids in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 05-02-2016, 05:58 AM
  3. [ENTJ] ENTJ Ladies . . . what do you see is good/bad about being an ENTJ?
    By Windigo in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 46
    Last Post: 04-09-2012, 09:38 PM
  4. What's so bad about wanting a Union job?
    By miss fortune in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-18-2008, 11:35 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO