Thoughts on the passage of the health care bill?

[GoUSC]

[quote=briansd1][quote=air_ogi]Rushed into passage? It took more than a year to get the bill passed. How much time do you need?[/quote]

Yes, well said.

How much more debate should we have?[/quote]

Really? Debate? What debate was there. Let’s see…the polling states that the majority of America’s were AGAINST this bill. How is the right thing to do to pass it because “it’s better than nothing”.

[Coronita]

You know, considering I have a preexisting condition that requires yearly medical treatment, you would think I would be happy about this. I’m not… I don’t know… I smell a rat.

*You think this is going to accelerate some companies from just hiring more employees overseas to cut down on costs?

*And last time I checked, those limits for “Cadallac health plans” aren’t exactly that low…And this plan is going to be paid for by folks on the definition of wealthy being $200k/individuals $250k/family (estimated 3.5% tax increase).

*How do doctors feel about this? I know a few doctors that already refuse to take anymore Medicare people…Won’t this make it worse?

*Doesn’t this impact folks who have health coverage from an employer..Couldn’t in theory the company just tradeoff what they are paying for health coverage and pay the fine with no health coverage?

[Coronita]

You know, considering I have a preexisting condition that requires yearly medical treatment, you would think I would be happy about this. I’m not… I don’t know… I smell a rat.

*You think this is going to accelerate some companies from just hiring more employees overseas to cut down on costs?

*And last time I checked, those limits for “Cadallac health plans” aren’t exactly that low…And this plan is going to be paid for by folks on the definition of wealthy being $200k/individuals $250k/family (estimated 3.5% tax increase).

*How do doctors feel about this? I know a few doctors that already refuse to take anymore Medicare people…Won’t this make it worse?

*Doesn’t this impact folks who have health coverage from an employer..Couldn’t in theory the company just tradeoff what they are paying for health coverage and pay the fine with no health coverage?

[Coronita]

You know, considering I have a preexisting condition that requires yearly medical treatment, you would think I would be happy about this. I’m not… I don’t know… I smell a rat.

*You think this is going to accelerate some companies from just hiring more employees overseas to cut down on costs?

*And last time I checked, those limits for “Cadallac health plans” aren’t exactly that low…And this plan is going to be paid for by folks on the definition of wealthy being $200k/individuals $250k/family (estimated 3.5% tax increase).

*How do doctors feel about this? I know a few doctors that already refuse to take anymore Medicare people…Won’t this make it worse?

*Doesn’t this impact folks who have health coverage from an employer..Couldn’t in theory the company just tradeoff what they are paying for health coverage and pay the fine with no health coverage?

[Coronita]

You know, considering I have a preexisting condition that requires yearly medical treatment, you would think I would be happy about this. I’m not… I don’t know… I smell a rat.

*You think this is going to accelerate some companies from just hiring more employees overseas to cut down on costs?

*And last time I checked, those limits for “Cadallac health plans” aren’t exactly that low…And this plan is going to be paid for by folks on the definition of wealthy being $200k/individuals $250k/family (estimated 3.5% tax increase).

*How do doctors feel about this? I know a few doctors that already refuse to take anymore Medicare people…Won’t this make it worse?

*Doesn’t this impact folks who have health coverage from an employer..Couldn’t in theory the company just tradeoff what they are paying for health coverage and pay the fine with no health coverage?

[Coronita]

You know, considering I have a preexisting condition that requires yearly medical treatment, you would think I would be happy about this. I’m not… I don’t know… I smell a rat.

*You think this is going to accelerate some companies from just hiring more employees overseas to cut down on costs?

*And last time I checked, those limits for “Cadallac health plans” aren’t exactly that low…And this plan is going to be paid for by folks on the definition of wealthy being $200k/individuals $250k/family (estimated 3.5% tax increase).

*How do doctors feel about this? I know a few doctors that already refuse to take anymore Medicare people…Won’t this make it worse?

*Doesn’t this impact folks who have health coverage from an employer..Couldn’t in theory the company just tradeoff what they are paying for health coverage and pay the fine with no health coverage?

[blahblahblah]

Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.

The Swiss system has several provisions that our new system does not. Without these provisions we will still be getting expensive, crappy care. The only difference will be that more of us will have it and those that don’t can be thrown in the pokey. What are the differences?

1) The Swiss government defines what a health insurance policy is, what it will pay for (almost everything BTW), and how much it costs.

2) The Swiss government will revoke the license of an insurance company for denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, for revoking the policy after someone gets sick, etc…

Essentially, the Swiss system is an extremely highly regulated private system. Health insurance provider profits (for the baseline policies) are regulated by the Swiss government and are kept quite low. It is IMO the best private system in the world. The best public system? The French IMO. Either would be a good model depending on your political bent. Ours will be neither, the insurance companies will continue to do as they please, they will continue to price however they see fit, they will continue to deny you service if you get sick, they will continue to charge you and arm and a leg if you have any sort of pre-existing condition, etc… I’m sure the bill will say they can’t do some of these things but if you believe they’re going to stop, you’ll believe anything. They run the show and they’ll get what they want.

[blahblahblah]

Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.

The Swiss system has several provisions that our new system does not. Without these provisions we will still be getting expensive, crappy care. The only difference will be that more of us will have it and those that don’t can be thrown in the pokey. What are the differences?

1) The Swiss government defines what a health insurance policy is, what it will pay for (almost everything BTW), and how much it costs.

2) The Swiss government will revoke the license of an insurance company for denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, for revoking the policy after someone gets sick, etc…

Essentially, the Swiss system is an extremely highly regulated private system. Health insurance provider profits (for the baseline policies) are regulated by the Swiss government and are kept quite low. It is IMO the best private system in the world. The best public system? The French IMO. Either would be a good model depending on your political bent. Ours will be neither, the insurance companies will continue to do as they please, they will continue to price however they see fit, they will continue to deny you service if you get sick, they will continue to charge you and arm and a leg if you have any sort of pre-existing condition, etc… I’m sure the bill will say they can’t do some of these things but if you believe they’re going to stop, you’ll believe anything. They run the show and they’ll get what they want.

[blahblahblah]

Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.

The Swiss system has several provisions that our new system does not. Without these provisions we will still be getting expensive, crappy care. The only difference will be that more of us will have it and those that don’t can be thrown in the pokey. What are the differences?

1) The Swiss government defines what a health insurance policy is, what it will pay for (almost everything BTW), and how much it costs.

2) The Swiss government will revoke the license of an insurance company for denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, for revoking the policy after someone gets sick, etc…

Essentially, the Swiss system is an extremely highly regulated private system. Health insurance provider profits (for the baseline policies) are regulated by the Swiss government and are kept quite low. It is IMO the best private system in the world. The best public system? The French IMO. Either would be a good model depending on your political bent. Ours will be neither, the insurance companies will continue to do as they please, they will continue to price however they see fit, they will continue to deny you service if you get sick, they will continue to charge you and arm and a leg if you have any sort of pre-existing condition, etc… I’m sure the bill will say they can’t do some of these things but if you believe they’re going to stop, you’ll believe anything. They run the show and they’ll get what they want.

[blahblahblah]

Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.

The Swiss system has several provisions that our new system does not. Without these provisions we will still be getting expensive, crappy care. The only difference will be that more of us will have it and those that don’t can be thrown in the pokey. What are the differences?

1) The Swiss government defines what a health insurance policy is, what it will pay for (almost everything BTW), and how much it costs.

2) The Swiss government will revoke the license of an insurance company for denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, for revoking the policy after someone gets sick, etc…

Essentially, the Swiss system is an extremely highly regulated private system. Health insurance provider profits (for the baseline policies) are regulated by the Swiss government and are kept quite low. It is IMO the best private system in the world. The best public system? The French IMO. Either would be a good model depending on your political bent. Ours will be neither, the insurance companies will continue to do as they please, they will continue to price however they see fit, they will continue to deny you service if you get sick, they will continue to charge you and arm and a leg if you have any sort of pre-existing condition, etc… I’m sure the bill will say they can’t do some of these things but if you believe they’re going to stop, you’ll believe anything. They run the show and they’ll get what they want.

[blahblahblah]

Switzerland, which has a system the most similar to the proposed reform, has neither one of those problems.

The Swiss system has several provisions that our new system does not. Without these provisions we will still be getting expensive, crappy care. The only difference will be that more of us will have it and those that don’t can be thrown in the pokey. What are the differences?

1) The Swiss government defines what a health insurance policy is, what it will pay for (almost everything BTW), and how much it costs.

2) The Swiss government will revoke the license of an insurance company for denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, for revoking the policy after someone gets sick, etc…

Essentially, the Swiss system is an extremely highly regulated private system. Health insurance provider profits (for the baseline policies) are regulated by the Swiss government and are kept quite low. It is IMO the best private system in the world. The best public system? The French IMO. Either would be a good model depending on your political bent. Ours will be neither, the insurance companies will continue to do as they please, they will continue to price however they see fit, they will continue to deny you service if you get sick, they will continue to charge you and arm and a leg if you have any sort of pre-existing condition, etc… I’m sure the bill will say they can’t do some of these things but if you believe they’re going to stop, you’ll believe anything. They run the show and they’ll get what they want.

[air_ogi]

[quote=GoUSC]
Really? Debate? What debate was there. Let’s see…the polling states that the majority of America’s were AGAINST this bill. How is the right thing to do to pass it because “it’s better than nothing”.[/quote]

Obama electoral platform included a medical reform significantly to the left of the passed law. And he won.
After a year of socialism, communism, kill grandma and all the other crap claims, it was time to vote. Even after a year of debate 95% of tea baggers can’t articulate a logical disagreement with any specific points in the bill. They just repeat Fox News talking points.

America is a representative democracy, not direct democracy. If the American people don’t like the bill, the will replace their representatives with the ones who will repeal the bill. Easy as that.

[air_ogi]

[quote=GoUSC]
Really? Debate? What debate was there. Let’s see…the polling states that the majority of America’s were AGAINST this bill. How is the right thing to do to pass it because “it’s better than nothing”.[/quote]

Obama electoral platform included a medical reform significantly to the left of the passed law. And he won.
After a year of socialism, communism, kill grandma and all the other crap claims, it was time to vote. Even after a year of debate 95% of tea baggers can’t articulate a logical disagreement with any specific points in the bill. They just repeat Fox News talking points.

America is a representative democracy, not direct democracy. If the American people don’t like the bill, the will replace their representatives with the ones who will repeal the bill. Easy as that.

[air_ogi]

[quote=GoUSC]
Really? Debate? What debate was there. Let’s see…the polling states that the majority of America’s were AGAINST this bill. How is the right thing to do to pass it because “it’s better than nothing”.[/quote]

Obama electoral platform included a medical reform significantly to the left of the passed law. And he won.
After a year of socialism, communism, kill grandma and all the other crap claims, it was time to vote. Even after a year of debate 95% of tea baggers can’t articulate a logical disagreement with any specific points in the bill. They just repeat Fox News talking points.

America is a representative democracy, not direct democracy. If the American people don’t like the bill, the will replace their representatives with the ones who will repeal the bill. Easy as that.

[air_ogi]

[quote=GoUSC]
Really? Debate? What debate was there. Let’s see…the polling states that the majority of America’s were AGAINST this bill. How is the right thing to do to pass it because “it’s better than nothing”.[/quote]

Obama electoral platform included a medical reform significantly to the left of the passed law. And he won.
After a year of socialism, communism, kill grandma and all the other crap claims, it was time to vote. Even after a year of debate 95% of tea baggers can’t articulate a logical disagreement with any specific points in the bill. They just repeat Fox News talking points.

America is a representative democracy, not direct democracy. If the American people don’t like the bill, the will replace their representatives with the ones who will repeal the bill. Easy as that.

[Author]

Posts