Thanks to Obamacare Alive Today

[skypup]

Crazy, isn't it?

[robinkaye]

Why is our heathcare so expensive when othes pay so little? Could it be that more innovation came from the US in the 20th/21st centuries. Could others
be paying less as a result?

The MRI, Pet Scan, and chemotherapy were invented in the US. From 1906-2013 the US has 88 Nobel Prize winners in physiology and medicine. Switzerland (5), Sweden (6), Spain (2), Russia (1), Romania (1), Poland (1), Great Britain (26), Germany (22) Netherlands (3) and France(11) had a total of 75 prizes combined. (I counted from a long list so could be off on the negative side in the US.)

From a 'Neggo'...

We needed reforms to the whole whole industry. Instead we just expanded the insurance companies market - this was a giveaway to the insurance companies which so many people here excoriate on a daily basis and who makes (Ezra Klein, WP) 2.2% profit. Premiums are out of hand, rising from years of politicians paying off blocks of voters by instilling more and more requirements and regulations on insurance companies. Major medical insurance used to be cheap and we paid for office visits etc., insurance paid for the big stuff if you were sick or injured. I would much rather pay a small premium and cover the rest myself, would be much cheaper. It's really no different than the pet insurance I just purchased: no lifetime max, very cheap, I pay for all regular visits, vaccines etc. If my dog gets sick and needs testing and treatment all is covered after a small deductible. There is no pet lobby to insist that heartworm pills are covered, no votes to be gained by a politician. It's free market.

My hairdresser and her husband both own their own business, had great policies that they liked and both just received notice that their policy will be canceled because
it doesn't meet the new standards. Without a doubt this will cost them much more as people all over are finding out the hard way.
The policy we buy for our employees currently costs $1895 for an employee plus one and $2100 for family coverage per month. We don't have 50 employees (unless we open another
location...we won't) so we wouldn't face a penalty if we discontinue insurance and let everyone buy on the exchange. As the majority of workers are employed by small business what is
going to happen when they are all forced into the exchanges and also receive subsidies. Someone else is paying the bill and eventually we will run out of other people's money. Not to mention
that all of these additional costs: taxes, premium increases and so on are taking money directly out of the economy. The unintended consequences will be the lost of economic activity and loss of even more jobs. Currently we have a labor participation rate at 1979 levels.

We have a government that has spent three years getting ready for the roll-out and only one in ten can register for the exchange. This is not a glitch problem, it's a coding problem...hundreds of millions spent for a computer system that will not work. These are the very people along with the IRS that we just gave control of our entire healthcare system and our lives. Our personal information can be used by law enforcement or the IRS. Good luck fighting with the government when you find some drug or treatment you need is not covered. Anyone fight with the IRS lately, ever try getting the same information from two representatives. I've fought with insurance companies in the past and always won. My husband has not had one bill questioned and not paid in a timely manner in two years of treatment - I don't think that will be the situation going forward.

California will have only 55% of practicing physicians available through insurance purchased on the exchange. Cedars and major university hospitals will only be available to people in the immediate vicinity. Getting to pick and choose your hospital, go to MD Anderson or Sloan might be a thing of the past...and this is good? A lot of people will be able to get insurance but where are they going
to get their care? Yep, pre-existing coverage is great and I agree that someone that has been on insurance ( for example a child) should never be denied continuing coverage. However, what about the person who has elected to not have insurance choosing to take their chances. When they get sick they sign up (but it must be during open enrollment...not just anytime of the year) for insurance and the insurance company must cover - what's the difference between this and buying homeowners insurance as your house is burning down. It's no longer insurance - eventually the whole system will collapse and those that have money will be fine, they can pay cash and medical tourism may become a big industry...the rest of the middle class will be screwed.

The $400 subsidized policy mentioned earlier with a 5K deductible also will carry with it (assuming silver plan, according to Kaiser) will have a 12,500 out of pocket and only cover 70%. If it's a bronze plan then coverage is at 60% with a 12K+ out of pocket max - that's a lot of money for someone that can't afford insurance to begin with. A couple in NJ both 60 and making 80K jointly (Kaiser) will pay in excess of 16K for a silver plan with no subsidy a 5K deductible and a 12K out of pocket. I would have prefered a system which helps those who need help and left the rest of us alone.

I used to use the correct name, the Affordable Care Act but it is for most of the people in the country not affordable and it does not address the costs of care...just the cost of insurance and access to insurance does not guarantee access to care...just ask someone on Medicaid looking for a doctor. All of us are going to feel the affect of increases from taxes on real estate profits, more expensive medical devices, higher thresholds to deduct medical expenses from our income tax, more people without full time jobs, and a biggie for those who need their HSA accounts to fund care/education for a disabled child...they can now only contribute 2500 pre-tax to the accounts.

The White House bullet points on the ACA look great, who wouldn't think it's great but for all who like it so much have you looked at the 2200 page bill and the more than 10K pages of regulations governing the system. You have just guaranteed that you are no longer in control of your life...done...over. I don't look forward to the day in a few years when seniors with stage 4 cancer are told, as Obama once said in a Townhall, "just take a pain pill".

There have been many suggestions from the 'right' on how to cover more people and make the system more affordable but those suggestions would have meant more freedom for the individual, not a take over of the insurance industry by the government. If you haven't heard the many alternatives offered you haven't been listening.

No one wants to deny anyone care, we on the 'right' don't want children and cancer patients to go without excellent medical care - we have children and sick loved ones too, we like the 'talking points' just as much as you but we realize when it takes thousands and thousands of pages of law, rules and regs to accomplish the goal the system is broke and this isn't going to fix it.

[radnyc]

My rates will actually be lower now than they were, and i go to a top notch cancer center, MSKCC. In my opinion the Affordable Care Act will work in the long run, the issues with the website will soon be addressed and fixed. People have 6 months to sign up for coverage, plenty of time. People are riled up against it because they have swallowed the the propaganda and alarmist blabber given to them daily by certain people that profit from scandal and verbal bomb throwing. Remember, this is also ROMNEYCARE gone national. Millions will sign up and it will be a success, bet on it.

A

[robinkaye]

Rad, you are in one of two states who will have their rates go down, for the rest of us they are going up. Also, you are not getting your insurance on the exchange so of course MSKK is still
available to you, if you don't go to the exchange that won't change. However, if you don't live near Cedars in CA, it won't be available, that's just the hospital referenced in articles about how the networks are going to get very small. If you are one of the lucky 10% that have even seen an actual policy on the exchange and seen their network, you don't know what will be covered on your exchange. I know I've tried three times to sign up on the Illinois exchange to look at the small business exchange...always told they are too busy and will email log in information...nothing yet.

This from the 'right wing' New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/health/lower-health-insurance-premiums-to-come-at-cost-of-fewer-choices.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[annalexandria]

Actually, our rates are so insane, because there is no centralized bargaining power, and no set value for medical care.

For example, what is the "value" of a colonoscopy? Is it $500? A $1000? Who knows? Without centralized bargaining, the value becomes whatever the provider of that care says it is.
This may be the "free market" at its finest, but I don't think our health care belongs in the free market system 100%. That's where we are now for most people, and it's not working.
Why do the uninsured pay up to 10x more than those with insurance when they have to go to a hospital?
Well, because as an individual, you have no real bargaining power with that hospital. Your insurance company, which represents many people, can get a better deal, and does so.
In other countries (the rest of the first world...we are a third world country when it comes to our health care..highest costs, lowest outcomes, care not available to all citizens), the government is able to bargain for better rates for all its people. This is why Medicare tends to get some of the best rates, and oddly enough, has a very high rate of satisfaction amongst those who receive it.
My brother was able to get a good rate for this simple reason: he took part in an exchange that gave him, as an individual, the bargaining power of a large company.

But I've come to the conclusion that about 25% of this country is not interested in facts or reality. They wave their signs saying "Get Your Govt Hands Off My Medicare" without any sense of irony whatsoever. And for those of you who like to shout "Socialism!!" I do hope you will turn down Medicare when you come of age, and send back those SS checks after the first 5 years (which is about how long it takes to get back what you put in plus interest). Those programs are SOCIALISM at their finest, as are, for that matter, our roads, military system, national parks, and about a bazillion other things.

Anyway, this is a pointless rant, really. The ACA is law, and the temper tantrum being thrown by a bunch of sore losers looks like it's going to gain us Dems possible control of the House and a few governorships. it's just sad that so many people are going to suffer before we have a chance to get this country back on track.
PS I can guarantee you if a Republican Congress had passed a law, had Pres. Bush sign it, and then had it upheld by the Supreme Court, and then the Dems shut down the ENTIRE GOVERNMENT because they can't get their way, we would have Rush and those folks shrieking "Treason" all over the place.

[skypup]

Why is our heathcare so expensive when othes pay so little? Could it be that more innovation came from the US in the 20th/21st centuries. Could others
be paying less as a result?

The MRI, Pet Scan, and chemotherapy were invented in the US. From 1906-2013 the US has 88 Nobel Prize winners in physiology and medicine. Switzerland (5), Sweden (6), Spain (2), Russia (1), Romania (1), Poland (1), Great Britain (26), Germany (22) Netherlands (3) and France(11) had a total of 75 prizes combined. (I counted from a long list so could be off on the negative side in the US.)

From a 'Neggo'...

We needed reforms to the whole whole industry. Instead we just expanded the insurance companies market - this was a giveaway to the insurance companies which so many people here excoriate on a daily basis and who makes (Ezra Klein, WP) 2.2% profit. Premiums are out of hand, rising from years of politicians paying off blocks of voters by instilling more and more requirements and regulations on insurance companies. Major medical insurance used to be cheap and we paid for office visits etc., insurance paid for the big stuff if you were sick or injured. I would much rather pay a small premium and cover the rest myself, would be much cheaper. It's really no different than the pet insurance I just purchased: no lifetime max, very cheap, I pay for all regular visits, vaccines etc. If my dog gets sick and needs testing and treatment all is covered after a small deductible. There is no pet lobby to insist that heartworm pills are covered, no votes to be gained by a politician. It's free market.

My hairdresser and her husband both own their own business, had great policies that they liked and both just received notice that their policy will be canceled because
it doesn't meet the new standards. Without a doubt this will cost them much more as people all over are finding out the hard way.
The policy we buy for our employees currently costs $1895 for an employee plus one and $2100 for family coverage per month. We don't have 50 employees (unless we open another
location...we won't) so we wouldn't face a penalty if we discontinue insurance and let everyone buy on the exchange. As the majority of workers are employed by small business what is
going to happen when they are all forced into the exchanges and also receive subsidies. Someone else is paying the bill and eventually we will run out of other people's money. Not to mention
that all of these additional costs: taxes, premium increases and so on are taking money directly out of the economy. The unintended consequences will be the lost of economic activity and loss of even more jobs. Currently we have a labor participation rate at 1979 levels.

We have a government that has spent three years getting ready for the roll-out and only one in ten can register for the exchange. This is not a glitch problem, it's a coding problem...hundreds of millions spent for a computer system that will not work. These are the very people along with the IRS that we just gave control of our entire healthcare system and our lives. Our personal information can be used by law enforcement or the IRS. Good luck fighting with the government when you find some drug or treatment you need is not covered. Anyone fight with the IRS lately, ever try getting the same information from two representatives. I've fought with insurance companies in the past and always won. My husband has not had one bill questioned and not paid in a timely manner in two years of treatment - I don't think that will be the situation going forward.

California will have only 55% of practicing physicians available through insurance purchased on the exchange. Cedars and major university hospitals will only be available to people in the immediate vicinity. Getting to pick and choose your hospital, go to MD Anderson or Sloan might be a thing of the past...and this is good? A lot of people will be able to get insurance but where are they going
to get their care? Yep, pre-existing coverage is great and I agree that someone that has been on insurance ( for example a child) should never be denied continuing coverage. However, what about the person who has elected to not have insurance choosing to take their chances. When they get sick they sign up (but it must be during open enrollment...not just anytime of the year) for insurance and the insurance company must cover - what's the difference between this and buying homeowners insurance as your house is burning down. It's no longer insurance - eventually the whole system will collapse and those that have money will be fine, they can pay cash and medical tourism may become a big industry...the rest of the middle class will be screwed.

The $400 subsidized policy mentioned earlier with a 5K deductible also will carry with it (assuming silver plan, according to Kaiser) will have a 12,500 out of pocket and only cover 70%. If it's a bronze plan then coverage is at 60% with a 12K+ out of pocket max - that's a lot of money for someone that can't afford insurance to begin with. A couple in NJ both 60 and making 80K jointly (Kaiser) will pay in excess of 16K for a silver plan with no subsidy a 5K deductible and a 12K out of pocket. I would have prefered a system which helps those who need help and left the rest of us alone.

I used to use the correct name, the Affordable Care Act but it is for most of the people in the country not affordable and it does not address the costs of care...just the cost of insurance and access to insurance does not guarantee access to care...just ask someone on Medicaid looking for a doctor. All of us are going to feel the affect of increases from taxes on real estate profits, more expensive medical devices, higher thresholds to deduct medical expenses from our income tax, more people without full time jobs, and a biggie for those who need their HSA accounts to fund care/education for a disabled child...they can now only contribute 2500 pre-tax to the accounts.

The White House bullet points on the ACA look great, who wouldn't think it's great but for all who like it so much have you looked at the 2200 page bill and the more than 10K pages of regulations governing the system. You have just guaranteed that you are no longer in control of your life...done...over. I don't look forward to the day in a few years when seniors with stage 4 cancer are told, as Obama once said in a Townhall, "just take a pain pill".

There have been many suggestions from the 'right' on how to cover more people and make the system more affordable but those suggestions would have meant more freedom for the individual, not a take over of the insurance industry by the government. If you haven't heard the many alternatives offered you haven't been listening.

No one wants to deny anyone care, we on the 'right' don't want children and cancer patients to go without excellent medical care - we have children and sick loved ones too, we like the 'talking points' just as much as you but we realize when it takes thousands and thousands of pages of law, rules and regs to accomplish the goal the system is broke and this isn't going to fix it.

Thanks for highjacking a positive thread...

[annalexandria]

And remember folks, 32 states chose to flout the law and not set up the exchanges, which is putting major pressure on the federal site.
Here in WA, the glitches have been worked out, and I'm hearing from a lot of friends who have gotten insurance that it's going well.
10,000 people signed up in the first week, with 10,000 more in the works.'
That was last week, I have no idea how many more are signed up at this point.

[skypup]

Sorry guys, but I feel that is ridiculous,

This is ridiculous.

nice ways to start off your replies...

[annalexandria]

Why is our heathcare so expensive when othes pay so little? Could it be that more innovation came from the US in the 20th/21st centuries. Could others
be paying less as a result?

The MRI, Pet Scan, and chemotherapy were invented in the US. From 1906-2013 the US has 88 Nobel Prize winners in physiology and medicine. Switzerland (5), Sweden (6), Spain (2), Russia (1), Romania (1), Poland (1), Great Britain (26), Germany (22) Netherlands (3) and France(11) had a total of 75 prizes combined. (I counted from a long list so could be off on the negative side in the US.)

From a 'Neggo'...

We needed reforms to the whole whole industry. Instead we just expanded the insurance companies market - this was a giveaway to the insurance companies which so many people here excoriate on a daily basis and who makes (Ezra Klein, WP) 2.2% profit. Premiums are out of hand, rising from years of politicians paying off blocks of voters by instilling more and more requirements and regulations on insurance companies. Major medical insurance used to be cheap and we paid for office visits etc., insurance paid for the big stuff if you were sick or injured. I would much rather pay a small premium and cover the rest myself, would be much cheaper. It's really no different than the pet insurance I just purchased: no lifetime max, very cheap, I pay for all regular visits, vaccines etc. If my dog gets sick and needs testing and treatment all is covered after a small deductible. There is no pet lobby to insist that heartworm pills are covered, no votes to be gained by a politician. It's free market.

My hairdresser and her husband both own their own business, had great policies that they liked and both just received notice that their policy will be canceled because
it doesn't meet the new standards. Without a doubt this will cost them much more as people all over are finding out the hard way.
The policy we buy for our employees currently costs $1895 for an employee plus one and $2100 for family coverage per month. We don't have 50 employees (unless we open another
location...we won't) so we wouldn't face a penalty if we discontinue insurance and let everyone buy on the exchange. As the majority of workers are employed by small business what is
going to happen when they are all forced into the exchanges and also receive subsidies. Someone else is paying the bill and eventually we will run out of other people's money. Not to mention
that all of these additional costs: taxes, premium increases and so on are taking money directly out of the economy. The unintended consequences will be the lost of economic activity and loss of even more jobs. Currently we have a labor participation rate at 1979 levels.

We have a government that has spent three years getting ready for the roll-out and only one in ten can register for the exchange. This is not a glitch problem, it's a coding problem...hundreds of millions spent for a computer system that will not work. These are the very people along with the IRS that we just gave control of our entire healthcare system and our lives. Our personal information can be used by law enforcement or the IRS. Good luck fighting with the government when you find some drug or treatment you need is not covered. Anyone fight with the IRS lately, ever try getting the same information from two representatives. I've fought with insurance companies in the past and always won. My husband has not had one bill questioned and not paid in a timely manner in two years of treatment - I don't think that will be the situation going forward.

California will have only 55% of practicing physicians available through insurance purchased on the exchange. Cedars and major university hospitals will only be available to people in the immediate vicinity. Getting to pick and choose your hospital, go to MD Anderson or Sloan might be a thing of the past...and this is good? A lot of people will be able to get insurance but where are they going
to get their care? Yep, pre-existing coverage is great and I agree that someone that has been on insurance ( for example a child) should never be denied continuing coverage. However, what about the person who has elected to not have insurance choosing to take their chances. When they get sick they sign up (but it must be during open enrollment...not just anytime of the year) for insurance and the insurance company must cover - what's the difference between this and buying homeowners insurance as your house is burning down. It's no longer insurance - eventually the whole system will collapse and those that have money will be fine, they can pay cash and medical tourism may become a big industry...the rest of the middle class will be screwed.

The $400 subsidized policy mentioned earlier with a 5K deductible also will carry with it (assuming silver plan, according to Kaiser) will have a 12,500 out of pocket and only cover 70%. If it's a bronze plan then coverage is at 60% with a 12K+ out of pocket max - that's a lot of money for someone that can't afford insurance to begin with. A couple in NJ both 60 and making 80K jointly (Kaiser) will pay in excess of 16K for a silver plan with no subsidy a 5K deductible and a 12K out of pocket. I would have prefered a system which helps those who need help and left the rest of us alone.

I used to use the correct name, the Affordable Care Act but it is for most of the people in the country not affordable and it does not address the costs of care...just the cost of insurance and access to insurance does not guarantee access to care...just ask someone on Medicaid looking for a doctor. All of us are going to feel the affect of increases from taxes on real estate profits, more expensive medical devices, higher thresholds to deduct medical expenses from our income tax, more people without full time jobs, and a biggie for those who need their HSA accounts to fund care/education for a disabled child...they can now only contribute 2500 pre-tax to the accounts.

The White House bullet points on the ACA look great, who wouldn't think it's great but for all who like it so much have you looked at the 2200 page bill and the more than 10K pages of regulations governing the system. You have just guaranteed that you are no longer in control of your life...done...over. I don't look forward to the day in a few years when seniors with stage 4 cancer are told, as Obama once said in a Townhall, "just take a pain pill".

There have been many suggestions from the 'right' on how to cover more people and make the system more affordable but those suggestions would have meant more freedom for the individual, not a take over of the insurance industry by the government. If you haven't heard the many alternatives offered you haven't been listening.

No one wants to deny anyone care, we on the 'right' don't want children and cancer patients to go without excellent medical care - we have children and sick loved ones too, we like the 'talking points' just as much as you but we realize when it takes thousands and thousands of pages of law, rules and regs to accomplish the goal the system is broke and this isn't going to fix it.

Thanks for highjacking a positive thread...

And btw, the last time that" Obama says just take a pain pill" was brought up here, it was for knee surgery. Now it's stage 4 cancer? Interesting how facts are so mutable. I've also had three anti-ACA friends state that "someone" they know had their hours cut to "38 hours", in order to avoid paying for health care. It's almost as if they are repeating something they heard...somewhere.

[weisssoccermom]

I am going to ask (as a moderator) that, on BOTH sides of the issue, we remain respectful of each other, regardless of our opinions. Please.....the last time we had a long ongoing Obamacare thread, it ended up being locked because comments started getting out of hand. It is really rather simple....please keep politics out of the thread....refrain from calling one side or another names or referring to one political party or another in unkind terms. There is no need for that on this board and it won't be tolerated.
Thanks.

Jaynee

[robinkaye]

Obama brought up the pain pill in relation to treating an old person with heart disease, when asked by her daughter if she should be covered. He responded that at her age maybe she should
take a pain pill. I don't think it's much of a stretch to imagine the same words being said about old people with cancer.

Ten thousand people have signed up...even Saturday Night Live recognizes that this isn't good, " Why did a system meant to provide insurance to 50 million people not prepare for them to come for insurance...like 1-800 Flowers being surprised by Valentines Day". Sorry, but the tech world who are mostly on the left are the ones warning us that the system will not work. Have you read that most of the policies that have been received by the insurance company can't be processed they are so lacking in information. What about people getting fined for not buying insurance they can't buy on the exchange because it isn't working. The states that didn't create their own exchanges knew what they were doing - get paid on the frontside for setting up the exchange and screwed a few years down the road when the fed money dries up. It happens all the time and states know it: 100K for new teachers...well, what happens when the funds are gone, the teachers get fired or the state picks up the cost. It's what is called an unfunded mandate.

Companies are cutting hours, it's not a myth. 90% of the jobs added over the last two years have been part time. UPS, University of VA and a slew of other companies are dropping spouses, some with alternant coverage some without. IU just fired 50 people and they say because of the ACA...these are people who supported it prior to reading the fine print. Do you know that if one spouse has insurance that doesn't exceed 9.5% of his/her income then the uninsured spouse is not eligible for subsidies on the exchange. Nice part of the law a lot don't know. Also, companies have no obligation to cover anyone other than the employee.

My husband and I won't be sending back our ss checks, it will take us twenty years to get back what we put in without interest, it's not socialism...it's a Ponzi scheme.

As for the ACA being law...really. We can't fight it because it's law? If that were the way things worked in the US we'd still have Prohibition, women wouldn't be allowed to vote, Jim Crowe would still be the law of the land. And as for all those people fighting to get rid of Marijuana laws, they might as well stop because it's the law of the land. There is no such thing and I hope there never is.
Sore loser... sure maybe. But you reap what you sow. Shove a law down the American peoples throat, a law they didn't want, with zero support from the other side and only done because of breaking the Senate rules...yep, that does cause animosity. Keep something in mind, the tides will turn and power will shift...will you be so quiet if the same thing happens in reverse?

BTW, 83% of the government is still functioning, the entire gov't hasn't been shut down. I do remember though in 2006 when a debt ceiling vote came up it was voted on 52-48 with our current pres voting no - said that raising the debt ceiling was unpatriotic. So, people are shouting Treason...have you heard the dems...elected politicians calling the right terrorists, Obama says they have a bomb strapped to their waist, Jihadi's, and so on. Oh please... As for the Republicans passing a law...do you think when the dems don't like it they shut up, on what planet.
Maybe you should watch CNN, NBC and CBS all came out blasting the ACA and the governments poor handling this week.

There are others who disagreed with the premise of the thread, sorry didn't know that we weren't allowed to voice an opinion. In my first post I tried to offer a reasonable argument, I knew I would get flamed and nasty things would be said...I was right. So, what the heck, didn't see the need to temper myself in this post.

Lastly, we do not have a free market health care system now and it's been many years since we did. If it were free market it might just work but we'll never know. As for the states flouting the law and not creating an exchange...the law states that they don't have to set up an exchange and if they choose not to the feds will do it for them. They followed the law, just didn't do what the feds would have preferred.
If the law were so freakin' fantastic why are the unions in a tizzy, why have there been more than a thousand waivers granted and why did Obama break the law and let the employers off the hook on the tax (mandates). If it's so good why don't we just live by the law as written. I would be all for the House funding the ACA as written, no waivers, no special favors, no special groups...we all live by the law equally. I'm sure as knowlegable as everyone here is you do know about the waivers and executive orders...did you ever ask yourself why?

[Laurettas]

It should have been fairly obvious that this was going to be a contentious topic since it is throughout the country! I think we could put up one story of someone who was helped and one story of someone who was harmed and go on indefinitely because there are both situations occurring. I am anticipating being without healthcare after the first of the year if the premiums go up as much as they did last year. I am already paying almost half of my income into health insurance now. One more increase and I will have no money for food and gas.

I wish we would stop beating this topic to death and start focusing on the real problem--the horrendous costs of healthcare. THAT is the problem and that is what we should be working to change. I personally think that the main reason we have the costs we do today is BECAUSE of insurance. If people had to anticipate paying for healthcare procedures themselves or asking their family and friends for the money for the procedure, people would be a lot more conservative in their decisions and make sure they were charged correctly. Now it appears as though there is this philanthropist in the sky that just pours out money for any and every perceived need that a person has. And the converse is true also. A doctor or hospital or pharma company would have a much harder time charging what they do if they had to watch the effect on the individuals' lives as a result of their prices. Having the middleman present makes people able to avoid looking each other in the face when both asking for services and charging for services rendered. The only other solution is for massive government control which is beginning to happen under Medicare and Medicaid and many healthcare providers are just refusing to treat people under those programs. I don't see that working well for us either.

I have to respond to this as well:

and send back those SS checks after the first 5 years (which is about how long it takes to get back what you put in plus interest).

That statement is absolutely false for anyone Boomer age or younger. For the older generations, yes it is very true. I doubt that my parents paid in over one or two years of the benefits they have received. But I will give you actual numbers for me. My husband had $170,000 paid in to SS in his working career, according to the SS administration. If we had invested that money conservatively in the 40 years he worked, we could have easily doubled the amount. But let's say that with interest it is now $300,000. I will get a maximum of $1500 a month/$18,000 a year in SS benefits. $300,000/$18,000 = is over 16 years--without counting any interest on the money once I begin receiving it. With interest it would probably last my entire life. I fail to understand why that is being called an entitlement program--we paid in the money ourselves!! For the older generations, yes, is was entitlement, but not for anyone born since WWII.

[Voxx66]

This is going about as well as I thought it would. The real issue here is time and place. (EDIT - probably wrong here - the REAL issue is someone doing better regardless of the larger issues) I am a libertarian republican so you can bet I have strong feelings on the matter but I think maybe this isn't the best place for them. Yes, I know the thread title is like waving a red flag to many of us and yes as soon as I saw it I thought "oh this won't go well" but again - time and place. There is no way the members of this board are going to solve this or convince anyone of their respective positions. That is playing out in a larger forum. If the desired result is hurt and/or bad feelings then by all means everyone continue. And I direct that at almost everybody posting including myself.

[skypup]

Well the original post was about a success in our cancer world. Take a look at the rants, lectures, diatribes that followed. Rightwing, heartless, ignoring the fact that nothing was done about healthcare during the Republican years. You had your chance to try to help fix this broken system; now that the other side is trying to, you sure have a lot of mud to throw. I'm sick and tired of the selfish, "I've got mine because I worked for it" attitudes of the right on the matter of caring for our citizens. Those who claim it'll break the country, where was your voice crying "we can't afford it" when we were being thrown into a stupid, meaningless, unfounded war that cost us soooo much? And where have you been on demanding any kind of reasonable fee schedule? How can you be satisfied that this nation, that has so much, has the worst health care on many, many measures, starting with infant mortality and ending with longevity, of any of the developed nations--at the same time our health care costs are many times higher! Honestly... Repeal the ACA? What have you got in its place? What's that? I can't hear you... Why not be part of the solution, not part of the problem, oh government shut-downers?

[robinkaye]

Voxx...sorry!

Sky...I started to answer everything you brought up but it's just not worth the effort - it will fall on deaf ears and do nothing but
bring on more nasty retort. You obviously don't know what you don't know so what's the point. BTW, I'm sick of being called names, if you don't
like an argument just start name calling, trust me, we're used to it and it is getting real old real fast...some orginality please or at least attempt to make an
argument with facts.