Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is The Alternate To The ACA?  
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7980 posts, RR: 51
Posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2799 times:

I'm really not trying to stir the pot or piss anyone off and start a thread that'll get locked after 20 replies, I'm really interested in this question. I'd love to hear from the US conservatives of this board as well as liberals that understand the alternatives (even if they disagree with those alternatives.) I'm more interested in the "Repeal Obamacare and then ______ crowd," not those that thing Obamacare is a step in the right direction but would prefer to go further. I know there are many out there and I respect your opinions, but the point of the thread is to analyze what could be done by the GOP if they did somehow repeal the ACA and if they have any real plan

I ask this because I keep hearing repeal repeal repeal, but I haven't heard of a good, detailed plan out there from the GOP. I stress that word because it makes a world of difference to me and many others. All I've heard is vague mutterings of the free market and capitalism but that tells us nothing IMO. Maybe there is some great GOP plan I've never heard about.

I think I already know the answer to my question but I'm doing all I can to keep an open mind and listen to the other side.


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8965 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2768 times:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...-file-promote-alternative-obamaca/

Quote:
The Republican Study Committee on Wednesday unveiled a 181-page alternative to the massive federal health care law passed in 2010, touting their “market-focused” reforms as a viable way to fix the nation’s broken health care system without imposing mandates and taxes on Americans.

Seven House Republicans said they are ready to push the American Health Care Reform Act through committee and accept ideas from Democrats during the legislative process, noting they were shut out from debate over the Affordable Care Act.

Not that I agree with it. I've put my proposals here before. Individual mandate for Minimum Insurance Coverage (MIC) catastrophic health and accident insurance. $2000 deductable (nobody will go broke because of $2000). Covers 90% of all hospitalization and other out-patient treatments and all FDA-approved prescription drugs. Insurance companies to be required to set a single price for all customers, existing or new, valid from age 18 and over, and another price for ages 0-17. They can set the price themselves, whether $50 per month or $1000, but they can only change prices once per year on Jan 1st. Any applicant MUST be accepted for MIC by the insurance company. If your insurance jacks up your price on Jan 1st, you may jump to another one, regardless of pre-existing conditions.

Any Insurance riders on top of that will be free-market based. You want a lower deductable, private room, dental care, mental health? That will be extra, and the insurance company is free to do whatever it likes in terms of pricing etc. Many Insurance companies will likely offer a very low, attractive price for MIC, in the hopes they can upsell you with policy upgrades. But whether you accept them is completely up to you.

I think such a system would easily result in insurance rates of well under $100 per month. If you want more, you can get it, but it's up to you.

And finally - The complete dismantlement of Medicare and Medicaid at a federal level. If individual states want to help their poor with their MIC payments, leave that up to them.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineAesma From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 6959 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2744 times:

181 pages, to be sure nobody will read it either 

To give you an idea, health care spending in the US at the moment is at more than 8000$ per inhabitant per year. So I doubt 100$/month for good coverage can work.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7980 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2742 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):

I will have to look at that when I have more time. I should have added in my original post is "if they have indeed come up with something detailed, why do we never hear of it, and why aren't the GOP politicians saying 'Repeal Obamacare and replace it with ______' ?"

If they have a great idea no one has really heard of, I don't blame that on "the liberal MSM" I blame it on the GOP for not putting forth their ideas better.

Like I said, I'll look at it later, but if it was such a good alternative (or even halfway decent) I think the GOP would be toting it around

Edit: Is your idea similar to Switzerland's? I know you used to live there. Also, call me crazy, but I think if you had put your plan before Congress before anyone even heard of the ACA, you'd be called a liberal socialist  Wink

[Edited 2013-10-10 13:56:19]


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8965 posts, RR: 24
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2720 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 2):
To give you an idea, health care spending in the US at the moment is at more than 8000$ per inhabitant per year. So I doubt 100$/month for good coverage can work.

It can if it is limited. Mend your broken bones, treat your cancer, cure your pneumonia. But having going to the doc for a cold, or remove a wart - sorry, I don't consider that essential health care requiring a national law. That's up to you.

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 3):
Edit: Is your idea similar to Switzerland's? I know you used to live there.

It is very similar, but I've simplified it even more, like the flat deductible. Make it simple and easy to understand, and people will buy into it. Obamacare biggest problems are that A) it includes too much (like dental), 2) it requires insurance companies to continue to be involved with small transactions - which increases administrative costs for the doctor and for the insurance company, and 3) nobody can understand it. Even an Ace Attorney would have a difficult time truly understanding a 2000+ page law and tens of thousands of pages of regulations. Simplify it!



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineAesma From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 6959 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2676 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
It can if it is limited. Mend your broken bones, treat your cancer, cure your pneumonia. But having going to the doc for a cold, or remove a wart - sorry, I don't consider that essential health care requiring a national law. That's up to you.

What you consider non essential is not what costs much anyway (except dental surgery maybe).

To give you another idea my parents pay 100€/month each for a mutuality insurance, and that's only for non essential stuff, because the national system pays very little for glasses, complicated dental stuff, etc. With that investment my parents get better reimbursements plus things like single room at the hospital. But the cancer treatment or the operating room equipment and staff are not paid with that, nor their family doctor, or specialists. I mention my parents because as state employees their employer doesn't help to pay that complimentary insurance, unlike many private employers.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineflydeltajets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1938 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 2629 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Even an Ace Attorney would have a difficult time truly understanding a 2000+ page law and tens of thousands of pages of regulations. Simplify it!

Generally laws become complex because the people working on it narrow it's scope to exempt things that they want or cover things that they want so that everyone that had a hand in the law gets that one thing that they want in order for it to pass. Simple bills never pass.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20362 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2584 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
(nobody will go broke because of $2000).

Wow, you really are out of touch with the masses.

MOST of the people I work with every day would find a $2000 bill to be catastrophic to their finances. In this current economic climate of stagnant wages with rising cost of living, $2000 is a lot more...and a lot less than it used to be.

The ACA is a very good idea, for the most part, especially on the patient side. It's a CONSERVATIVE law. It was basically designed by Congressional Republicans in the 1990's and Governor Mitt Romney.

And the ONLY reason you oppose it is because Mr. Obama likes it. If a GOP President had gotten an identical law passed, you would be cheering it.


User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11806 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2582 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
I keep hearing repeal repeal repeal, but I haven't heard of a good, detailed plan out there from the GOP.

I want to hear it too. I don't think any sane person would disagree to compromise. That is great. That is what this country is about: Everyone giving up a little something so everyone wins.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
nobody will go broke because of $2000

Really? When a person can not even afford to pay rent because their good paying job was shipped overseas so they had to get a Wal-Mart or McDonalds job. That's what you are saying.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8483 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2568 times:

I consider a conservative/capitalist position would first be to get the exploding costs of employer nanny care off of their P&L. We certainly don't need health insurance costs to be included in the products we buy - it is simply an ignorant approach to health care.

Some people consider me a "liberal" because I want to end employer nanny care and deliver a Medicare for all to cover core health care in the country. I consider that a conservative position because I've seen companies operate in other countries without that burden.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
$2000 deductable (nobody will go broke because of $2000).

Right. Except for those good folks out of a job because of the GReat Recession, shrinking buying power of minimum wage, etc.

But it's good to see you doing well enough not to be worried about a $2,000 medical bill.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
Insurance companies to be required to set a single price for all customers, existing or new, v

If you look at MediGap policies on the internet you will see that there are various options available at various prices. One size does not fit all, especially at the lower economic range.


Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
it includes too much (like dental),

Nothing wrong with dental. My Aussie policy (that was a fifth the price of my US policy) included dental when the US policy didn't.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
nobody can understand it.

People can understand Medicare Gap policies - no reason to believe that they can't understand the ACA.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Simplify it!

With Medicare for All and no dead albatross around the employer's neck.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
MOST of the people I work with every day would find a $2000 bill to be catastrophic to their finances. In this current economic climate of stagnant wages with rising cost of living, $2000 is a lot more...and a lot less than it used to be.

Ain't that the truth!


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8965 posts, RR: 24
Reply 10, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2541 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
Wow, you really are out of touch with the masses.

MOST of the people I work with every day would find a $2000 bill to be catastrophic to their finances.

Here's the choice. The numbers are illustrative, but you should get the idea.

A) $75 per month insurance premium, and a $2000 deductible

B) $150 per month premium, and a $500 deductible

C) $250 premium, and no deductible.

You cannot have no deductible and a $75 premium. You may bounce up and down in rage and say that is not fair, but in reality, it IS fair. You can't expect the insurance company to take all the risk and not cover that risk with premiums.

You want lower deductibles, fine. But don't bitch at the premiums (and I know you will).

As for $2000, if you get out of the hospital, after the insurance paid the vast bulk of your expenses, I would think that you would be happy to beg or borrow $2000 from someone, or negotiate a payment schedule with the hospital. As I said, nobody will go to bankruptcy court for $2000. Hell, I've seen college students with no job and no credit get a credit card with such a limit.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11806 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2538 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10):
C) $250 premium, and no deductible.

People who are now faced with minimum $2000 premium and $5000 deductible and death panels and extra cost for Medicare D would gladly go with your plan C! But, your plan C is not "republican" enough.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8965 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2536 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
Some people consider me a "liberal" because I want to end employer nanny care and deliver a Medicare for all to cover core health care in the country.

Then why do you support Obamacare, which is pushing for more employer nannycare? At the same time they have the individual mandate. The law is schizophrenic.

And by the way, I agree with you that employee health care should not be the responsibility of an employer.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
Nothing wrong with dental.

Nothing wrong with it. But if your teeth fall out, you can still live. There is a big difference between using a legal mandate to ensure that nobody dies in the streets because they can't afford a doctor, and using it for stuff that is nice to have, but you can live without.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineAesma From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 6959 posts, RR: 12
Reply 13, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2490 times:

Quoting flydeltajets (Reply 6):
Generally laws become complex because the people working on it narrow it's scope to exempt things that they want or cover things that they want so that everyone that had a hand in the law gets that one thing that they want in order for it to pass. Simple bills never pass.

And don't forget that lobbyists hand pages of customized laws to the politicians in their pockets to just pass.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
We certainly don't need health insurance costs to be included in the products we buy - it is simply an ignorant approach to health care.

Actually I think you do, but it should be a consumer tax. That way it doesn't impact exports, and imported goods pay into the system too, making local production less at a disadvantage.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13202 posts, RR: 16
Reply 14, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2483 times:

I would have liked to see a system like Australia and a number of other countries have, one where you can buy into a government run 'Medicare' program where one pays a premium based on a fixed percentage deduction from their income and those of higher incomes can buy a supplemental policy in the private market with more options as to doctors and ranges of services.
My suggested plan would also include:
A ban or very strict limits on drug, hospital, medical product and services marketing, ending the waste of billions of dollars taxpayers and consumers have to pay for.
Cap or otherwise limit the compensation lawyers get from winning lawsuits or settlements for their clients. Mandate a formula of compensation values for medical malpractice, bad drugs and so on.
Subsidize the costs of becoming a doctor so they don't end up with massive debts and the need for higher incomes to repay them.
Create subsidized 'prompt care' clinics open 24/7 or with extended hours, adjacent to hospitals or in communities, to cover non-emergency care instead of people having to go to very expensive emergency rooms.
Find ways to incentivize healthier living and discourage unhealthy lifestyles. That could mean taxes on 'junk' foods, limits on marketing of bad foods, subsidies to encourage good foods and exercise.
Reduce the violence from guns and other weapons, domestic violence, with their huge costs.
Improvement of community and government health departments to improve access to health care services, gathering information to look for short and long term health issues and deal with them, strong enforcement of food and related health safety.
Decriminalize and limited legalization of pot, some tightening up of laws to discourage the misuse and abuse of alcohol and other drugs. Encourage more 'drug courts' that get those using illegal hard drugs into rehab, not jail.
A major rethink on how we deal with mental/psychological health issues, instead of just giving pills that just make the drug companies rich but have terrible side effects or limited benefits.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4796 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2454 times:

I don't think we need an alternate to Affordable Care. We all need Affordable care.

The currently laws and those implemented by the ACA need tweaking to solve some very big issues.

1. Price Transparency-- How many folks know going into the doctor's office how much their services will cost? How much the Doctor charges? How much insurance will cover? How much of a discount the insurance company has on the doctor's prices? I think their needs to be a list in hospitals offices of their top 25 - top 50 procedures, and how much they charge, with a comparison to the insurance companies.

2. Eliminate state restrictions on insurance companies. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NC and Horizon Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NJ are different companies with different plans. We need to eliminate these differences. There is too much paper pushing at this level.

3. Cover plans of care and not individual visits. If the doctor screws up, they shouldn't get to charge you three times for the same cause that they didn't fix.

4. More over the counter remedies for items such as ear infections, and antibiotics. or at least make it so your CVS pharmacist can look at you and advise it, or if it is something real bad ,direct you to the hospital.

5. Better databases that require less staffing in doctor's office. It is a bad thing when there are more admins than their are doctors in a practice.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineosubuckeyes From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 871 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2417 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
Eliminate state restrictions on insurance companies. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NC and Horizon Blue Cross and Blue Shield of NJ are different companies with different plans. We need to eliminate these differences. There is too much paper pushing at this level.

I would argue that these restrictions were some of the driving forces that ran up healthcare costs before ACA. If they are eliminated I think the ACA just becomes a more attractive and affordable option. The whole concept of the exchanges is to promote competition in offering healthcare, but if you restrict who can offer it or how they can offer it the cost of business goes up sometimes to the point where a business will leave the marketplace. Hence why some insurance companies only choose to operate in certain states.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
More over the counter remedies for items such as ear infections, and antibiotics. or at least make it so your CVS pharmacist can look at you and advise it, or if it is something real bad ,direct you to the hospital.

The biggest problem I see is that many people go to their doctor or hospital for things like this, which drives up wait times and costs etc... Urgent care, or even a new "Non-Urgent" care would be a starting point for this where they would offer these types of things over the counter.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
Price Transparency

I agree with this, but generally speaking I feel like most people don't know how they are paying for service before they are presented with the option on arrival. Basically what I am getting at is that a ton of people in this country shop for products and service by impulse buying. Obviously you cannot really do that with healthcare, but I think this ties into the insurance company restrictions. Price transparency can be a product of a competitive state marketplace (exchange).


User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7975 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2396 times:

My ideas: I'm not good at this type of stuff but it's sure as hell better than ACA:

Have medicare reformed so it's a need-based only system. Any abuses result in arrest and prosecution. Thorough examinations determine if people over a certain income level who aren't currently insured are eligible, and these examinations would have a lot of leniency.

Have a regulatory board established to oversee the private industry to make sure price-gouging doesn't exist. A law should be passed prohibiting the pre-existing conditions of a patient from affecting the service.

No medical device tax.

Private hospitals should be subject to legislation separate from public hospitals, as to not infringe on First Amendment rights to religious freedom.

All hospitals and doctors must MEET healthcare standard levels set by a team of 15 doctors, at least 5 from Mayo clinic, 3 from the Houston center, and the rest from around the country. Hospitals will nominate the advisory panel and will be voted on in Congress. This vote will be highly watched as to avoid favoritism. These doctors will be rotated in and out in groups of 5 every year, serving a 3-year seat.

No mandate. If you are healthy and don't need insurance, then you're not required to sign up. However, a good portion of spending will be on advertising encouraging people to be insured.

And this would be one small proposal that would borderline throwing me off the Libertarian train: Have the government establish a company in which the government has a 48% stock share in, and regulated by aforementioned 15-member panel. This will be an insurance company funded completely by payers, and it's an emergency safety net company for those who do not have insurance but suddenly need it. They are only allowed to be on this system's plan for 1 year, and can request a 6 month extension, afterwards they need to find their own insurance or apply for medicare, if they qualify.

What y'all think?



Follow me on twitter: www.twitter.com/phx787
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8483 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2379 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10):
You want lower deductibles, fine. But don't bitch at the premiums (and I know you will).

I don't bitch about those premiums - they are lower than my Medicare and Medicare Gap combined.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 10):
A) $75 per month insurance premium, and a $2000 deductible

B) $150 per month premium, and a $500 deductible

C) $250 premium, and no deductible.

Deductibles are only one part of the cost equation - the real killer can be the do-pays. If you have a common rate, like 20% and get hit with an expensive medical problem the deductible can be trivial. My wife's 18 months of treatment for acute leukemia (ALL) was based on a pretty successful protocol out of Stanford included around 100 days in the hospital, transfusion of blood and a bill that exceeded $500,000. We had two policies (one was a cancer policy) and both worked really hard to avoid payment - thus a trial lawyer was needed to clean up the mess they left us in.

Sadly, the older you get the more expensive your medical needs become. Inflation is a killer for older people as it wipes out the "nest egg" they worked hard to build.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12):
Then why do you support Obamacare, which is pushing for more employer nannycare? At the same time they have the individual mandate.

ObamaCare is a step in the right direction because the mandate helps reduce cost shifting and gets people into the Doctor's office before a problem gets too bad.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 12):
But if your teeth fall out, you can still live.

Think about how close your top teeth are to your brain. Am infection not treated with antibiotics and a root canal treatment can easily blow through the sinus into the brain. Other problems can hit all over the body. Patrick Swayze had an abscess when he was a starving actor and couldn't afford to go to the dentist. The infection ended up in his knee and almost resulted in an amputation.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 13):
Actually I think you do, but it should be a consumer tax.

my preference is a tax for both individuals and companies. That way costs are lowered in a bad year when they need to be lower, and increase when times are better. That type of approach supports the economic environment better than a consumer tax.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):

I would have liked to see a system like Australia and a number of other countries have, one where you can buy into a government run 'Medicare' program where one pays a premium based on a fixed percentage deduction from their income and those of higher incomes can buy a supplemental policy in the private market with more options as to doctors and ranges of services.

Australia has mandatory Medicare and that eliminates cost shifting totally. It also makes ti very profitable for private insurance companies - so profitable that the government set up a private insurance company to compete in the market.

Amazing. Employers not burdened with nanny care costs, private insurance companies making a lot of money, everyone having access to a doctor at a minimal (or zero) costs. Lots of good stuff there.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
A ban or very strict limits on drug, hospital, medical product and services marketing, ending the waste of billions of dollars taxpayers and consumers have to pay for.

Sadly the USSC would knock that down based on Freedom of Speech.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Cap or otherwise limit the compensation lawyers get from winning lawsuits or settlements for their clients.

There are sufficient laws protecting the medical community in states like Texas, with no noticeable savings. Lawsuits do not dramatically increase the costs of health care - not near the level that health insurance profits do. But legal actions can push the profession to clean up their act from time to time. It also

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Mandate a formula of compensation values for medical malpractice, bad drugs and so on.

The problem is how to address various costs, and how long they will last. It's cheaper in the middle of the country.
There is also a need to have a variation based on age, or life expectancy

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Subsidize the costs of becoming a doctor so they don't end up with massive debts and the need for higher incomes to repay them

Might be best to write off costs for primary care physicians - an encouragement to motivate doctors to work in that area.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Find ways to incentivize healthier living and discourage unhealthy lifestyles.

Like a tax on sugar drinks and fast foods. It would only reduce consumption a small amount, but would provide to treat patients as well as increase funding to school PE program - much needed

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Reduce the violence from guns and other weapons, domestic violence, with their huge costs.

Not possible, we are the US of the NRA and our politicians do what we are told

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Decriminalize and limited legalization of pot,

Which is only going to increase costs in other areas. Like increased head & neck cancers in young people.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
How many folks know going into the doctor's office how much their services will cost?

I know my costs: zero. But then I pay for a MediGap policy that protects me.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
I think their needs to be a list in hospitals offices of their top 25 - top 50 procedures, and how much they charge, with a comparison to the insurance companies.

That gets hospitals fighting to cut costs - reduce the nurse count (increasing the number of patients a nurse takes care of), lower the number of days you get for various conditions, shift to a non-private room (or ward), etc.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
Eliminate state restrictions on insurance companies.

That works as long as you nave a national bad faith law. Right now some states do not have a bad faith law, leaving the consumer totally shafted.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
Cover plans of care and not individual visits. If the doctor screws up, they shouldn't get to charge you three times for the same cause that they didn't fix.

That keeps people with limited income away from the doctor - not desired. It also depends on what medical condition the patient has and how they actually need to be monitored.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
More over the counter remedies for items such as ear infections, and antibiotics. or at least make it so your CVS pharmacist can look at you and advise it, or if it is something real bad ,direct you to the hospital.

There are a lot of conditions that a nurse practitioner, a physicians assistant or a pharmacist can advise on. In terms of drug interactions I would put the pharmacist at the top of the list. In terms of knowledge of medical conditions and differential diagnosis you need to see a good doctor IMO.


User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2845 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2342 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Thread starter):
I ask this because I keep hearing repeal repeal repeal, but I haven't heard of a good, detailed plan out there from the GOP.

That's because they haven't put anything out with any substance. That's coming from a conservative too.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 4):
Mend your broken bones, treat your cancer, cure your pneumonia. But having going to the doc for a cold, or remove a wart - sorry, I don't consider that essential health care requiring a national law. That's up to you.

I probably would have agreed with you up until a couple months ago. I was coughing uncontrollably and having trouble breathing. I went to the doctor hoping to just get some stronger cough medicine, but they couldn't figure it out. When they heard I was having trouble breathing they made me get x-rays and were concerned I may have a tumor in my lung. Turned out to be nothing serious. Now because I have a good health plan there was no serious charges. But if I had a 2000 dollar deductible I would have been screwed. It would take a lot of time for me to gain that kind of cash to pay for my expenses for my "cold."

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
And the ONLY reason you oppose it is because Mr. Obama likes it. If a GOP President had gotten an identical law passed, you would be cheering it.

I don't have a problem with the ACA because of Obama. I have a problem with it because of people like Nancy Pelosi who say we should pass it and then learn about it. A bill the politicians are voting on should be understood before they decide it should be passed. Especially a bill the size of the ACA. My frustration is with the blinders Congress put on, not Obama.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
nobody will go broke because of $2000

Absolutely disagree with you there. By the time my bills are paid and I get groceries I'm lucky to have enough left over to buy a candy bar.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
We certainly don't need health insurance costs to be included in the products we buy - it is simply an ignorant approach to health care.

It's a cost of doing business.

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 17):
No medical device tax.

Couldn't agree more. I can not for the life of me figure out why we pass a bill that is supposed to control costs, and then throw a tax on top to increase those costs. This is hurting the people the bill is supposed to help.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 14):
Subsidize the costs of becoming a doctor so they don't end up with massive debts and the need for higher incomes to repay them.

Why not subsidize my costs for becoming a pilot then? My buddy goes to medical school and his costs for schooling is going to be a couple grand less than what mine are. That is an education issue, not a healthcare one. Doctor pay is not an issue. Even if you subsidize their schooling they should still be able to demand the rates they do because they earned them.

There is no alternative to the ACA, period. It is here and the GOP need to suck it up and move on. They are only shooting themselves in the foot by continuing to make this a big deal. Yeah there are elements that are not desirable. Then fix those problems. Don't burn the bill because you lost. I'm a conservative, but I can accept when there is something I'm not the largest supporter of being implemented. It passed and we have to move on. If it is so bad then tweak it.
Pat



All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
User currently offlinejohnboy From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 2602 posts, RR: 7
Reply 20, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2304 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 18):
That gets hospitals fighting to cut costs - reduce the nurse count (increasing the number of patients a nurse takes care of)

Speaking as a nurse, you lost me right there.


User currently offlinegarnetpalmetto From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 5426 posts, RR: 52
Reply 21, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2288 times:

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 19):
I have a problem with it because of people like Nancy Pelosi who say we should pass it and then learn about it. A bill the politicians are voting on should be understood before they decide it should be passed.

Pelosi's quote was taken horribly out of context through death by soundbite. What Pelosi meant is that Senate would have to pass its bill to get something substantive out so that the rumors and outright lies being told about what would ultimately be in the legislation - abortion, death panels, etc., could be debunked.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...rk/2012/06/20/gJQAqch6qV_blog.html

As it points out, the quote that came immediately before Pelosi's infamous comment is what provides the context:

"You’ve heard about the controversies within the bill, the process about the bill, one or the other. But I don’t know if you have heard that it is legislation for the future, not just about health care for America, but about a healthier America, where preventive care is not something that you have to pay a deductible for or out of pocket. Prevention, prevention, prevention—it’s about diet, not diabetes. It’s going to be very, very exciting."



South Carolina - too small to be its own country, too big to be a mental asylum.
User currently offlineseb146 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 11806 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

Quoting casinterest (Reply 15):
I don't think we need an alternate to Affordable Care. We all need Affordable care.

Why not both? I don't have a problem with private health care. As long as working people can afford health care as well. With the privatized system only, the rich can afford health care and the working class just better pray they don't get sick. If they do, they get the death panel.



Life in the wall is a drag.
User currently offlinejetblueguy22 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 2845 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2253 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting seb146 (Reply 22):
As long as working people can afford health care as well. With the privatized system only, the rich can afford health care and the working class just better pray they don't get sick. If they do, they get the death panel.

I don't know why you feel the need to exaggerate, but the rich are hardly the only ones who can afford health care. This isn't class warfare here. The rich may have these amazing plans that cover anything. But it doesn't mean middle class America can't afford any form of insurance. Grew up with a single mother with a normal middle class job in a high cost of living part of the country. Yet I still had health insurance my entire life. It isn't hard to find an employer that gives you the option of healthcare coverage either. I work part time at UPS, I can get health coverage if I wasn't still under my mother's.
Pat



All of the opinions stated above are mine and do not represent Airliners.net or my employer unless otherwise stated.
User currently offlineflydeltajets From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 1938 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2245 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jetblueguy22 (Reply 19):
I don't have a problem with the ACA because of Obama. I have a problem with it because of people like Nancy Pelosi who say we should pass it and then learn about it.

I agree completely. I believe that a terrible job has been done toward educating people about this law, before and even now after it has passed. Even today people who support and don't support the law have little idea on what they are supporting or disagreeing with, it does the public no good whatsoever.



The only valid opinions are those based in facts
25 seb146 : Because working people today have to pay thousands a month and have a huge deductible and pay out of pocket for prescriptions. The wealthy don't give
26 WarRI1 : I do think it is well past time to have affordable healthcare here. The ACA fills a need, which has been stopped for too many years here by special in
27 jetblueguy22 : I've said it in other threads, but I will say it again. I might think that this is the best piece of legislation passed since the Civil Rights Act. B
28 seb146 : I know there are reasonable Republicans in the ranks who want to give business what they want and give the American people what they want. Even if I
29 Ken777 : There were ongoing negotiations on the bill and, like other bills on different issues, were subject to last minute changes to get that last (and very
30 LittleFokker : You would be amazed at how much one's overall health is connected to proper oral health. Dental care is every bit as important as the rest of your bo
31 einsteinboricua : Legislation on PRIVATE hospitals? Socialism!!! You're healthy today. What about tomorrow? It's like car insurance. You don't know when an accident mi
32 par13del : My biggest question, what is there in all the health care debate geared towards addressing the high cost of health care, most of what is being debated
33 seb146 : Unfortunately, yes. Why? Medicare is fine the way it is. ACA addresses private insurance. I am a good driver, so I don't need auto insurance. Just li
34 Dreadnought : You did not read my position. I do support an individual mandate (one with teeth in it, so that it is not cheaper to pay the fine, as it is under Oba
35 RyanairGuru : I have nothing constructive to add about the alternative to ACA, but of the several countries that I've lived in I think that Australia has the best
36 Post contains images Ken777 : Reread what I wrote and you can see that I was making comments on what hospitals would do to make their numbers look good IF they had to compete by p
37 Post contains links pu : While it is ideologically appealing to the Right to imagine that doctors treating warts and colds for those dreadful inner-city uninsured (or suburba
38 Pellegrine : I have my own company (no FT employees). My healthcare insurance went from ~$450/month (BCBS great coverage) (27yo, non-smoker, with a pre-existing no
39 PHX787 : Apples to oranges: There would not be any issue with covering emergency patients. The separate legislation would cover sensitive topics to religious
40 Dreadnought : Not to mention ACA is designed to add a huge burden on top of Medicare/Medicaid on top of what they already have.
41 jetblueguy22 : There is a difference. You choose to drive a car. You don't choose to be born. The union helps, but I was more demonstrating the fact that it isn't r
42 Post contains images caliatenza : well it might be critical when you get bacterial endocarditis from a Streptococcus that is normally present in your mouth .
43 LittleFokker : That the states don't have to pay for. The extra Medicaid coverage is paid for under the ACA plan. For the states that refuse to accept the federal m
44 Post contains images WarRI1 : Three years of lies, distortions, and you come along to testify that the ACA has worked for you. How can this be? There must be a mistake. You mean t
45 DeltaMD90 : Yes, health insurance only covers you, and lack of it doesn't cover you, ie: me and other hard working Americans have to foot the bill because you do
46 Ken777 : Actually treating the elderly is a lower profit operation (per treatment) because Medicare places caps on what is paid per treatment. With the ACA it
47 PHX787 : Oh trust me, I have coverage. I have all I really need, especially siince i've had ear isssues for a long time. But don't MANDATE those who can't aff
48 RomeoBravo : Barring 2 exceptions below (and maybe a few other minor areas), I would have a largely unregulated free market system. No more regulations on insuranc
49 Aesma : How do you expect drug companies to spend money on R&D if there are no patents ? Already they're scaling down research because it takes so much t
50 RomeoBravo : I don't expect them to stop spending as there would still be money to be made though market behaviour would likely adjust. I would expect them to sto
51 Ken777 : Mandating is fine if there is a government support for those in lower incomes. One of the core reasons why our costs are so high is that we have cost
52 DeltaMD90 : Again, I said "you" but I didn't mean PHX787, I meant you in general. And like Ken777 said, I'm for the individual mandate but obviously I'm for supp
53 RomeoBravo : Indeed so after failing to spot a dangerous drug they now delay the introduction of useful drugs. A very good argument for it to be abolished or grea
54 DeltaMD90 : So I have to be libertarian in every single aspect? Or can I be libertarian in wanting gay marriage legal, legalizing soft drugs, decriminalizing har
55 Post contains links WarRI1 : http://hosted2.ap.org/RIPRJ/APNewEng...d-323263baa2594319be612edec85d5117 Colorado releases figures on ACA, see link above.[Edited 2013-10-14 17:50:24
56 Ken777 : The problem is finding the right balance. You don't want to have a rush to judgement on drugs that might cause great damage. On the other hand there
57 Post contains images johnboy : Thanks for the clarification, I've always respected your arguments and was worried you were veering into the wacko camp.
58 kent350787 : Just to correct this one about Medicare Private (currently government owned). Universal health cover was introduced by the Labor Government in 1972/7
59 Ken777 : What's changed with Medicare Private? I used it for years (unit 2005) when going there on business. It was teh best deal for me when I compared the p
60 kent350787 : No, still reasonably profitable. But Governments of either persuasion have been selling major assets for years now, and MB Private is the only signif
61 Ken777 : Nothing turns me off faster than a government selling off major assets. It's worse than outsourcing. Basically the money is grabbed, rapidly spend an
62 Post contains images RyanairGuru : Just in case any non-Australian was getting confused between Medicare and Medicare Private ... they are different things. Medicare is basically our un
63 kent350787 : Medibank was the 1970s universal healthcare scheme, canned by the conservatives. Medibank Private was created from its carcass Medicare was the new s
64 Post contains links flydeltajets : The medical device tax is overblown, it is a key part of paying for the ACA and will have little to no inpact on the general public cost wise. http:/
65 Dreadnought : From your link: Note the perverted logic of a pro-government writer - a tax = revenue (good), repealing a tax = cost (bad). Back to the issue - their
66 flydeltajets : So the US made about $17 billion in taxes from tobacco The tobacco companies made about $300 billion Tobacco companies spend about 17 billion in adve
67 Ken777 : You didn't factor in the competitive pricing that Medicare is moving towards. That will more than offset the DME Tax. No, new levels of competitive p
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Is Wrong With The French? posted Sat Jul 17 2010 14:24:49 by Springbok747
What Is Wrong With The Youth Of The World? posted Sat Oct 11 2008 01:56:30 by PilotNTrng
What Is An American? The Quintessential List. posted Thu Sep 11 2008 00:52:26 by LOT767-300ER
What Is Wrong With The US posted Thu Mar 13 2008 06:35:32 by PAHS200
What Is Up With The People Of CA (Gov Arnold) posted Thu Nov 3 2005 15:59:20 by Matt D
What Is The Best Affordable, Functional Pda? posted Mon Sep 12 2005 17:45:59 by Keesje
What Is The Name Of This Song? posted Tue Sep 6 2005 03:47:28 by BR715-A1-30
What Is The Role Of The U.S. Marshals? posted Tue Aug 30 2005 16:20:56 by Duke
What Is The UK Rebate? posted Sat Jun 18 2005 20:00:44 by Luisde8cd
What Is The Predominant Religion In You Country? posted Tue May 17 2005 13:07:22 by ConcordeLoss