Healthcare Reform

• LJ

  

  All Healthcare reform discussion will go here
• Cleveland Buck

  

  Disaster.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  The senate will be just as "dumb" as the House, only in a different way. I have no doubt that something of this proposed bill will go through. It might be smaller than 1,990 pages or the senate just may well add to those pages.
  
  Who the heck knows with our whacky government/electorates?
• insuranceguy

  I do Health insurance claims for a living. Healthcare industry is bad right now. This bill would make it worse.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  This bill would put you out of a job within a couple years.
• insuranceguy

  Not sure about that. Maybe. But it is not addressing the problem. The cost. I know we are in a free market but until the cost for medical care and insurance are driven down no plan will matter. I see everyday huge deductibles left. This bill does not address that. It does not address co insurance which is 20% or 30% depending on your policy left for the patient to pay. It does not address so called non covered services. Some services are covered but the insurance does not have the right diagnostic code in their system so the computer denies the claim. Those are the actual problems I see everyday.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  Here is what makes me mad about insurance companies (yes, I get mad at them too, not just our government)...
  
  They do not offer different/varying packages other than single and family. They would do themselves a huge favor by doing so. Something like that would blow the market wide open. Not to mention kick the government right in the teeth!
  They would still make their money, provide a useful service to the people who depend on them, and flip off the government at the same time!!!
  Insurance companies AND the people would end up in a win-win situation.
• majorspark

  

  Just got a call for a telephone town meeting on healthcare reform. I am listening to congressman Zack Space's BS right now. Not sure why they are doing this now he has already voted yes.
• I Wear Pants

  Healthcare should be considered a basic human right. As long as we agree upon that I'm happy for differences of opinion on how we best achieve it.
• CenterBHSFan

  

  What's the difference between the words "basic human right" and "entitlement" and "mooch"?
• tk421

  

  Shouldn't shelter be considered a basic human right? Where is my "free" government housing?
• I Wear Pants

  Yes, shelter should be considered a basic human right.
  
  What's funny is that some citizens have health care guaranteed them by the constitution. Do you know who they are?
  
  Prisoners.
• eersandbeers

  I Wear Pants wrote: Yes, shelter should be considered a basic human right.
  
  What's funny is that some citizens have health care guaranteed them by the constitution. Do you know who they are?
  
  Prisoners.

  
  Food and water also? Can you create a specific list of human rights that should be provided by the government?
• Cleveland Buck

  

  If the government provides me with everything I need, then I don't need to work anymore. If nobody worked, we would be in much better shape as a country.
• I Wear Pants

  So am I to understand that you believe we should provide no form of assistance to our citizens. I also assume you're against Medicare and Social Security because they are *gasp* socialism.
  
  Wanting to assist people in need doesn't mean I condone people who take advantage of a helping hand. The, relatively few, people who scam welfare and similar services are scum.
  
  I still think that we, the most prosperous society in history, could provide our citizens with some standard of living. Besides "tough luck".
• LJ

  

  While the healthcare debate is about the public assistance programs, lets keep this one strictly to healthcare.
  
  We can open up a basic public assistance topic if anyone would like.
  
  I want to keep this thread on track because I plan on moving non-newsworthy healthcare topics in here.
• eersandbeers

  This is going to be rough to keep all discussions on the same topic. I can't name a discussion that didn't branch into other discussions. I think it is natural.
• LJ

  

  eersandbeers wrote: This is going to be rough to keep all discussions on the same topic. I can't name a discussion that didn't branch into other discussions. I think it is natural.

  Good point. I think as long as the discussion moves towards something that is of value to the main topic I will let it go.
  
  I think we can all remember topics that started out about a great day on the dow, and ended in talking about Obama and his birth certificate. I want to stop things before they get there.
  
  Carry on with public assistance in general....
• I Wear Pants

  Also, I feel I should note that I wasn't really trying to discuss the other assistance programs but I was just seeing if the people currently debating with me had the same "handouts/moochers" feelings towards other programs based on the same principles.
  
  Because I've had several conversations with people who ballyhoo the ills of health care reform because it's socialism yet when I ask them if the oppose Medicare and Social Security it's a resounding "no". I just see conflicting ideals and I want to know why some forms of socialism are embraced while those people go nuts over the thought of any new policy that's social.
  
  Currently I think it's just a generational thing, people growing up with McCarthyism probably still see socialism the same way as communism and as such an evil. While I'm younger so I'm probably still a bit idealistic because I don't currently have the responsibilities that come with a family/career/etc.
  
  Anyway, I don't think this current bill will pass through the senate so we probably don't have too much to worry about.
• LJ

  

  Just to open up discussion a bit...
  
  What kind of healthcare reform would each of you like to see? If Obama came to you and said "FreeHuddle Member, I want you to draft a healthcare reform bill" what would it include?
• CenterBHSFan

  

  1. Insurance companies would be allowed to sell their product anywhere they wanted to, to whoever they wanted to.
  2. There would be some sort of major over-haul of torte reform.
  3. Since government is so interested in "nudging", they could "nudge" the insurance companies to offer up a much more varietous packaging deal, with no gaps or caps.
  4. Then the government would sit on its hands for the most part.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  I Wear Pants wrote: Also, I feel I should note that I wasn't really trying to discuss the other assistance programs but I was just seeing if the people currently debating with me had the same "handouts/moochers" feelings towards other programs based on the same principles.
  
  Because I've had several conversations with people who ballyhoo the ills of health care reform because it's socialism yet when I ask them if the oppose Medicare and Social Security it's a resounding "no". I just see conflicting ideals and I want to know why some forms of socialism are embraced while those people go nuts over the thought of any new policy that's social.
  
  Currently I think it's just a generational thing, people growing up with McCarthyism probably still see socialism the same way as communism and as such an evil. While I'm younger so I'm probably still a bit idealistic because I don't currently have the responsibilities that come with a family/career/etc.
  
  Anyway, I don't think this current bill will pass through the senate so we probably don't have too much to worry about.

  I oppose Social Security and Medicare. I oppose any government role in the economy at all except to regulate the size of companies via anti-trust regulation. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I don't look at socialism as 'evil', I look at it as unfair morally, and financially unsustainable economically.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  LJ wrote: Just to open up discussion a bit...
  
  What kind of healthcare reform would each of you like to see? If Obama came to you and said "FreeHuddle Member, I want you to draft a healthcare reform bill" what would it include?

  To paraphrase:
  1. Sell insurance across state lines.
  2. Slash the size and role of the FDA.
  3. Eliminate all tax breaks and subsidies for health insurance.
• I Wear Pants

  Before anything I feel we need tort reform in the medical sector. Something needs to be done about frivolous malpractice suits which drive up the cost of malpractice insurance and by proxy, our medical bills.
  
  The "network" system needs simplified or gotten rid of. It's confusing and stupid that sometimes you can't go to a doctor across the street because they don't have a deal with your provider.
  
  45,000 people die in the US each year from lack of health care. Compare that to the 16,204 murders per year and you can see why it's such a huge problem.
  
  Out of the proposed solutions I've seen I think the public option is the worst, it doesn't fix any of the problems we currently have. I think there's promise to a Single Payer system. Our Veterans Administration health care system is an example of a single payer system and from what I gather it works wonderfully.
  
  That's what I can think of right now. Good job pushing the topic in the right direction LJ.
  
  Edit directed at Cleveland Buck: You just got a bump up in my list now that I know your opinions, while I still disagree with some, are at least consistent.
  
  What benefits do we get from a smaller FDA? There are already plenty of faulty drugs that get approval, I'd think a smaller FDA would only add to that problem. That's just conjecture on my part though. Didn't know we had a big problem with the FDA. There's a phrase about learning things I could use here.
• Cleveland Buck

  

  What benefits do we get from a smaller FDA? There are already plenty of faulty drugs that get approval, I'd think a smaller FDA would only add to that problem.

  First of all, I should have added a 4th point. Break up the biggest drug and insurance companies (not a government takeover, but legally through our anti-trust laws) into smaller companies that will have to compete with each other.
  
  Now for the FDA. There is no reason it should cost tens of millions of dollars to get a drug approved especially when much of the time it is a dangerous or worthless drug anyway. I can't even understand why it costs that much. There isn't that much involved in testing a drug. Either the FDA is extremely wasteful (and I'm sure it is) or they jack up the cost so only the biggest drug companies get their drugs on the market. If it is the first problem, then you can afford to cut the fat there. If it is the second problem, then hopefully breaking up the big drug companies will solve that one.