RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance???

RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 12:37:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy I dont think the convoluted "monkey wrench" theory is needed. The express intent of Obamacare was to do exactly what the effect has been...termination of employer health coverage to drive people to the exchanges. Once the exchanges reach critical mass they become the only viable option remaning....ie single payer. I dont think 10% is what we can consider "termination". Those who offer it will have the upper hand in term of benefits over those who do not offer it. It becomes part of a premium employment package. Its just the beginning. And you are assuming anybody will offer it. The only companies that will continue to offer health insurance are those big enough to self insure, and as the exchanges grow the threshold number of employees that make self insuring viable rises. Since group plans are the bread and butter of the insurance industry... what will happen to them? Im confused...what have you been "hinting at" if you have to ask this question? They wont exist of course...the intention from the beginning.

tazzygirl -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 12:50:54 AM)
Uh huh. I don't necessarily see that as a good thing. The fat cats have been raking in the profits. Im sure their profit margin could undergo some adjustments... and I have no doubt that they will.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 12:55:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Uh huh. I don't necessarily see that as a good thing. The fat cats have been raking in the profits. Im sure their profit margin could undergo some adjustments... and I have no doubt that they will. 0 premiums means 0 profits, so yeah...there would be some adjustments lol.

tazzygirl -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 1:20:59 AM)
And you insist there wont be room for both. I dont see that happening, to be honest. Some will go under, if the mandate holds. Some wont. It will be a great perk for employment packages, not to mention there is still money to be made in the "luxury" division.

rulemylife -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 3:44:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Health care isn't a right... nor is it a privilege. Then what is it? Something you can do with or without? Something that if you lack you should just be left to die if you can't afford coverage?

joether -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 4:49:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Health care isn't a right... nor is it a privilege. Then what is it? Something you can do with or without? Something that if you lack you should just be left to die if you can't afford coverage? Health Care is neither a right nor a privilage; but rather a needed concept! A needed concept that should by all means, trump the right and the privilaged. Wishing ill on your fellow Americans is just bad karma down the pipeline.

Iamsemisweet -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 7:20:32 AM)
Ahh, a win/win then. quote: ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather quote: How would that work for a catastrophic illness or injury? i die.

EternalHoH -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 7:25:26 AM)
Obamacare was bill aimed at doing good for corporations - either by mandating new customers, or allowing employers who pay for plans to abandon their obligations to employees. At what point don't you all get that corporations rule this fucking government? And the assholes among us actually think Obama's a socialist.....

popeye1250 -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 7:49:24 AM)
I don't know a lot of people who can afford $1,500 per month for health insurance.

mnottertail -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 7:50:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I don't know a lot of people who can afford $1,500 per month for health insurance. Tell them about 1-800-COLLECT, and they can save a buck or two.

DecadentDesire -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 7:57:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH Obamacare was bill aimed at doing good for corporations Typically, complex issues boiled down into a single one-liner that can fit on my car's bumper is rarely ever a good thing. One, if you think that removing the ability for insurance companies to decline coverage based on age and medical condition and throwing in some half ass mandate that can't be be enforced is going to be a boon for the insurance industry, you don't understand how their basic business model works. Two, only small businesses can drop health insurance without facing fines, not large corporations.

EternalHoH -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 8:08:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DecadentDesire One, if you think that removing the ability for insurance companies to decline coverage based on age and medical condition and throwing in some half ass mandate that can't be be enforced is going to be a boon for the insurance industry, you don't understand how their basic business model works. If everyone who is off the roles was there because of their expensive pre-existing condition, I would agree with you. But that's not the case. There are plenty of people presently uninsured but relatively healthy The insurance cos gain much more than they lose. Otherwise, they (the insurance lobby) would not have written the bill the way it is.

tazzygirl -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 8:14:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Health care isn't a right... nor is it a privilege. Then what is it? Something you can do with or without? Something that if you lack you should just be left to die if you can't afford coverage? Think of all the "rights" you have. List them.

EternalHoH -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 8:30:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: popeye1250 I don't know a lot of people who can afford $1,500 per month for health insurance. What is the number 1 growth area for jobs? Healthcare. After all, manufacturing in this country has been read its last rites. Colleges are building nursing schools and medical schools at record pace, enrolling students who are in their chosen field of study for the money, not for the non-profit service or humanity aspects. Right now, healthcare workers (along with Wall Streeters) are living in their own little false prosperity bubble, while the affluence bubble has popped for the rest of the working people in this country, including others who have invested heavily in education. It is so hilarious to hear all the whining about doctors boycotting low medicare reimbursement, threatening to leave their profession. My response is to kick them in the ass and help them out the door. Anyone who thinks that a private medicine system can maintain its present day advantage going forward is nuts. Economics will dictate quality will go down under either public or private business models. We sorta do treat healthcare as a right, but only for those over 65. They get any procedure they want in their final hours, regardless of cost, and somebody else pays the bill. The other countries overseas, they invest public dollars earlier, getting a return on the investment, and apply cost-benefit analysis. We hold off until later, and then bury our public money in the coffin alongside the bodies. We get NO return on the public investment. Medicare was invented at a time when the elderly truly were the poor class among us. Today, they are the invested class, and wealtheir than the 30-somethings paying the elderly's bills. Anyone who thinks the current medicare system should not be changed because of these shifting demographics and the obvious looting of the wealth via "Wall Street welfare programs" is nuts. Like it or not, we are heading in the direction of these other countries, especially in terms of downgraded overall quality and applying cost/benefit in the 11th hour, whether we approve of the changes or not.

Mouth4Mistress -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 8:31:02 AM)
Health care is not a right. It's a combination of services rendered and products consumed. Like everything else in this world, that costs money. Why are health insurance companies in business? For the same reason that anyone else is in business - to make money. Not for personal entertainment, not for charity, but to make money. Saying that their profit margins have to be "adjusted" - saying that "at some point you've made enough money" (C) Obama - saying that we need to "redistribute the wealth a little" - is the first step toward the Socialist ideal of killing off independent businesses and making everyone depend on the government. Health care is not a right any more than cell phone service is a right, or car maintenance is a right.

Mouth4Mistress -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 8:32:50 AM)
Oh, and on a related note... at my workplace, the group health insurance provider sent us a letter a couple of weeks ago, detailing the changes that ObamaCare is forcing them to make - i.e. accept pre-existing conditions, kids are now covered up to 26, etc, etc., and an explanation of the cost increase... which of course ended with a note that our per-employee premiums are now $ 134/mo higher. Thanks, Obama! We had no idea what to do with those $ 134 per person!

EternalHoH -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 8:53:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mouth4Mistress Why are health insurance companies in business? For the same reason that anyone else is in business - to make money. Not for personal entertainment, not for charity, but to make money. Noboby disagrees with that. What is the bone of contention is whether the profit motive, or a non-profit motive, should apply to healthcare. The profit motive is good for many things. But there is a reason it didn't apply to everything. Used to be hospitals were simple, utilitarian, built by municipalities or associated with churches or charities or other non-profit causes, and built with municipal bonds. The only profit needed was to pay off the bonds (pay for the building) and pay the meager wages of those who were in healthcare for the humanity of helping people. The goal was less people hospitalized to hold down costs. Then these facilities were sold to the for-profits. Now you added the layer of shareholder dividend obligations that came with the access to private capital. That private capital renovated these facilities, turning hospitals into provincial palaces with gold-plated tools and diagnostic machines that needed to be kept busy at $4,000 per test procedure. Today, 30% of hospital stays are unnecessary, because a supply of rooms in the for-profit model drives its own demand. The goal today is obviously more people hospitalized to squeeze more profit out of more patients. It got so fucked up once the profit motive entered the healthcare scene. Costs have only gone up under the for-profit model, and that should not be a surprise to anybody capable of critical thinking. The only benefit of all that private money has been some state-of-the-art tools and talent needed for pretty costly and heroic procedures that feed the 11th hour patient's denial of pending death, with the tab picked up by the government, of course.

Louve00 -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 9:08:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mouth4Mistress Health care is not a right. It's a combination of services rendered and products consumed. Like everything else in this world, that costs money. Why are health insurance companies in business? For the same reason that anyone else is in business - to make money. Not for personal entertainment, not for charity, but to make money. Saying that their profit margins have to be "adjusted" - saying that "at some point you've made enough money" (C) Obama - saying that we need to "redistribute the wealth a little" - is the first step toward the Socialist ideal of killing off independent businesses and making everyone depend on the government. Health care is not a right any more than cell phone service is a right, or car maintenance is a right. I sort of do disagree with this...in a way. If insurance is banking to make its profits off of premiums, then they have to bank on the fact that their clients won't get sick, won't need tests, won't need treatments and desire not to have themselves treated. If they are willing to start up a business with all those "what-if's" more power to them. State Farm will no longer insure Florida homeowners because they don't want to take the risk of mother nature sending a hurricane to the state. If insurance companies don't want to cover people for certain illnesses, it should be stated so boldly and upfront...before they take the first premium from their potential client. If they want people to believe that they're covered...only to turn around and reverse that for care to be denied when care is needed, despite the agreement of paying a premium for that coverage, then its a bogus company and not deserving of any premiums. IMO. It's the gamble you make in business...and the reputation you make for yourself.

tazzygirl -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 9:46:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mouth4Mistress Health care is not a right. It's a combination of services rendered and products consumed. Like everything else in this world, that costs money. Why are health insurance companies in business? For the same reason that anyone else is in business - to make money. Not for personal entertainment, not for charity, but to make money. Saying that their profit margins have to be "adjusted" - saying that "at some point you've made enough money" (C) Obama - saying that we need to "redistribute the wealth a little" - is the first step toward the Socialist ideal of killing off independent businesses and making everyone depend on the government. Health care is not a right any more than cell phone service is a right, or car maintenance is a right. With the end result being life or death, instead of the smell of a new car. All your arguments are the same ones they made when SS went into effect. Look it up. And Im really glad you have the ability to maintain insurance at your place of work. At 28, you have a long way to go. Insurance companies are doing everything in their power to pump up their rates. http://www.factcheck.org/2010/11/the-truth-about-health-insurance-premiums/ Something for you to ponder.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Obamacare = Fewer people with health insurance??? (8/25/2011 9:55:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Health care isn't a right... nor is it a privilege. Then what is it? Something you can do with or without? Something that if you lack you should just be left to die if you can't afford coverage? Its a commodity. If you dont buy insurance when you can afford it too fucking bad.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875