Is Obama Care Bull Shit? Are Death Panels Next?

[steve1 5]

For the first time in my life I've got some health problems. I thought I was well insured.....I found out differently. After a six month battle with my insurance company, they have concluded that they don't have to pay for a better treatment. Supposedly the cheap ones are just as good. I've talked to many, who say this is just a sign of things to come.

Will Obama Care be the ruin of our economy? Where else has socialized medicine worked?

I'm embarrassed to say that I voted for Obama twice. I've never thought of myself as a socialist. Why in the world did I vote for this sweet talking crook?

After an hour visit with my Dr. this morning, my eyes are now open.

I'd like to hear your opinions on this. It just seems to me that something here really stinks. I learn a lot from these forums.....tell me what you think! Yes, I deserve a good thrashing for voting for this idiot.

[quade 3]

From reading your story, I don't think you know what "Obamacare" is. It is specifically designed to prevent such nonsense as you've related. It doesn't take effect until next year. When it does, it will allow you to buy healthcare at a reasonable price and do away with lifetime limits which are the sort of thing preventing your treatment right now.

All the above said, it's to be seen how it will actually work out.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

quade

From reading your story, I don't think you know what "Obamacare" is. It is specifically designed to prevent such nonsense as you've related. It doesn't take effect until next year. When it does, it will allow you to buy healthcare at a reasonable price and do away with lifetime limits which are the sort of thing preventing your treatment right now.

All the above said, it's to be seen how it will actually work out.

And YOU do know what it is???

Well, the only thing we do know about Obamacare is that is not about health care, cause is it about control

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

Enough to know it isn't the cause of his insurance woes today.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[livendive 8]

How are you equating Obamacare with your current insurance problems? The former is not the cause of the latter, but rather a proposed solution to it.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[billvon 2,476]

>For the first time in my life I've got some health problems. I thought I was well
>insured.....I found out differently. After a six month battle with my insurance company,
>they have concluded that they don't have to pay for a better treatment.

Sounds like you have a problem with SteveCare.

[wmw999 2,176]

Quote

I thought I was well insured.....I found out differently

This is the case for lots and lots of people who discover that they actually need their insurance, and has been for years. No change from the past.

The insurance company is in the business of making money, not keeping you healthy. That their business provides insurance is true, but only through cost control (you being one of their costs) do they remain profitable.

And most companies are going to balk at what they consider to be more experimental treatments, with the amount of balking going down with the relative cost of the treatment, its perception as mainstream, and that specific insurer's familiarity with it.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[kelpdiver 2]

quade

Enough to know it isn't the cause of his insurance woes today.

This correct.

However, it's premature to believe that ObamaCare will prevent this from occurring in the future - the focus on cost containment seems just as likely to increase the frequency of such confrontations.

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Will Obama Care be the ruin of our economy? Where else has socialized medicine worked?

Not-for-profit socialist insurance (and sometimes socialist health care) for everyone works in most of the developed world, paying for everyone's insurance for less money than America spends covering the 25% of our population which wouldn't be profitable for private insurers.

Quote

I'm embarrassed to say that I voted for Obama twice. I've never thought of myself as a socialist. Why in the world did I vote for this sweet talking crook?

You've got your "isms" confused. Socialism had nothing to do with the ACA bill passed by Congress and signed by Obama beyond marketing for (lots of Democrats would love Socialist health care) and against (lots of Republicans despise the concept) the bill. It was about corporatism.

With capitalist health care when you have a minor problem you go to the nurse's office and pay him $15-$25 cash for fifteen minutes of his time as you do trades people like your mechanic or professionals like your accountant with moderate investment in training. You might get a recommendation for drugs which you fill yourself from the shelves of the local superstore at $8 for 25 pills or $15 for 250 if it is a recurring problem and you opt for the generic. In the unlikely event something is really wrong he refers you to a specialist medical doctor who charges you $150-$200 for a half hour of her time like lawyers and other professionals do after spending years training following their under graduate program. That doesn't happen because we don't have capitalist health care - the American Medical Association has arranged things so that there aren't low cost alternatives to their members' services via medical licenses requiring a MD and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) trade group prefers a world where you just see the $10 co-pay on a prescription and aren't worrying about medication's true cost.

With socialist health care you take your government insurance card to a government owned health care facility and are seen by doctors and nurses employed by the government. That doesn't happen because we don't have socialist health care except for veterans (with the VA). We also provide socialist health insurance for old people (Medicare) who wouldn't be profitable to insure and poor people (Medicaid) that couldn't afford to buy free market insurance with much of that spending ultimately becoming profit for private companies.

Obviously we don't have capitalist health care and most of us don't have socialist health care. Instead we have corporatist health care where the health and insurance industries get laws passed on their behalf maximizing profits at the peoples' expense.

Sometimes that comes in the form of redirected tax dollars, like Medicare, Medicaid, and the Obamacare subsidies. In terms of purchasing power parity the United States government spends more per capita on health care than ALL of the other OECD countries. That includes the Netherlands, France, Germany, Canada, Switzerland, Denmark, Austria, Portugal, Belgium, Greece, New Zealand, the United Kingdom. Spain, Sweden, Japan, Norway, Italy, Iceland, Ireland, Australia, Slovenia, the Slovak Republic, Finland, Chile, Luxembourg, Isreal, Hungary, the Czech Republica, Korea, Poland, Estonia, Mexico, and Turkey.

Sometimes it's just protection - only MDs can practice medicine, and the insurance industry is exempt from Federal anti-trust laws.

Somewhere between is the special tax treatment for employer provided group plans which allow them to collect up to twice as much from people for the same difference in after tax income.

Quote

I'd like to hear your opinions on this. It just seems to me that something here really stinks. I learn a lot from these forums.....tell me what you think! Yes, I deserve a good thrashing for voting for this idiot.

PhRMA bought a seat at the negotiating table with drug discounts and massaged ACA into a more palatable form (they got rid of things like the part allowing their drugs to be re-imported from lower cost markets). With that done they spun up a pair of 501(c)(4) groups and coordinated their $150 million advertising campaign with the White House to land millions of new consumers (many with tax subsidies) who'll see a substantial portion of their premiums go to buying products from PhRMA members.

PhRMA is also the organization which rewarded Representative Billy Tauzin with a seven figure salary as their president after he helped pass the Medicare Part D $1 trillion per ten year tax funnel to their industry. For the Republicans who've read this far he's a Republican, speaker Dennis Hastert (R) sponsored the bill, it passed the Republican controlled House and Senate, and Republican George W. Bush signed it into law.

This is because we have a corporatist government with corporatism at the core of both Democratic and Republican parties.

[Skyrad 0]

Quote

Where else has socialized medicine worked?

In the UK, the NHS for the most part works well.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[rushmc 18]

Quote

In the UK, the NHS for the most part works well.

Many would dispute that

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,176]

Quote

Many would dispute that

What percentage of those are actually in the UK? And is the definition of "works well" the same as "everyone loves it?" If so, why do you think that the US system works?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[jakee 1,280]

Quote

In the UK, the NHS for the most part works well.

You realise you've just invited a torrent of Daily Mail links asserting angrily screaming the opposite?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 18]

wmw999

Quote

Many would dispute that

What percentage of those are actually in the UK? And is the definition of "works well" the same as "everyone loves it?" If so, why do you think that the US system works?

Wendy P.

While the system in the US has its draw backs, it works. People get help when they need it
Obamacare was to give more people access while keeping costs lower
NO ONE is claiming that will happen now

As for your first question? Give me some numbers and I will give you an answer
Or, we can relate stories of those with money who come to the US to get care before they die waiting in line in the UK

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[quade 3]

rushmc

While the system in the US has its draw backs, it works. People get help when they need it

Please tell that to Steve, the original poster in this thread.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

quade

***While the system in the US has its draw backs, it works. People get help when they need it

Please tell that to Steve, the original poster in this thread.

This new format has its quirks.....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DrewEckhardt 0]

steve1

For the first time in my life I've got some health problems. I thought I was well insured.....I found out differently. After a six month battle with my insurance company, they have concluded that they don't have to pay for a better treatment.

Under Obamacare you may have been more likely to get the better treatment if it was more expensive.

Obamacare mandates (as in insurance companies have to refund the excess premiums) minimum medical loss ratios of 80 (individuals and small groups) and 85% which roughly means that insurance companies must spend that fraction of the total premiums collected on actual health care and they can't increase profits by denying claims and spending less.

With Obamacare earning more will require more spending on which they can make their 25% markup.

The caveat is that the companies which own insurance companies have been buying up hospitals which aren't subject to such limits on profits and an insurance company may insist you have the old high-margin procedure performed at their "in network" hospital for a small profit to them and big profit to the facility owned by the same share holders.

[ryoder 1,412]

quade

***While the system in the US has its draw backs, it works. People get help when they need it

Please tell that to Steve, the original poster in this thread.

IIRC, Amazon had a recent horror story about her health insurance.


Here is a set of articles comparing some socialized health care systems:

British http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-national/health-care-reform-series-the-british-health-care-system

Taiwan http://www.examiner.com/x-6665-Liberal-Examiner~y2009m7d23-Health-Care-Reform-Series-The-health-care-system-of-Taiwan

Canada http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-national/health-care-reform-series-the-canadian-health-care-system

Germany http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-national/health-care-reform-series-the-german-health-care-system

Japan http://www.examiner.com/liberal-in-national/health-care-reform-series-the-japanese-health-care-system

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Skyrad 0]

rushmc

Quote

In the UK, the NHS for the most part works well.

Many would dispute that

True and many would be wrong.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[LyraM45 0]

Quote

For the first time in my life I've got some health problems. I thought I was well insured.....I found out differently.

As many others have stated, this is the whole reason ACA has come about. These problems have been around forever and is not something that has just come up for you and millions of others because of Obama care. Been happening for a long time, and lucky for you, you didn't have to experience all of this at any point earlier in your life.

Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :)

[jclalor 12]

Quote

Are Death Panels Next?

It sounds as if Your insurance company's "death panel" decided against you based on what is best for their bottom line, and not your health. I would much rather have my healthcare in the hands of someone who has no financial interest on what may be the best course of treatment that I may need.

[rushmc 18]

jclalor

Quote

Are Death Panels Next?

It sounds as if Your insurance company's "death panel" decided against you based on what is best for their bottom line, and not your health. I would much rather have my healthcare in the hands of someone who has no financial interest on what may be the best course of treatment that I may need.

Wrong
there are articles out there where the republicans are refusing to name appointees to the panel

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wmw999 2,176]

Quote

there are articles out there where the republicans are refusing to name appointees to the panel

There are also articles saying that aliens have abducted people.

As far as I know, the only "death panels" are those for insurance companies, which review care plans to make sure they're consistent with people's policies, and with the company's definition of good medical practice. Do you have any links to such articles?

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[jclalor 12]

Quote

rushmc

***

***Are Death Panels Next?

It sounds as if Your insurance company's "death panel" decided against you based on what is best for their bottom line, and not your health. I would much rather have my healthcare in the hands of someone who has no financial interest on what may be the best course of treatment that I may need.

Wrong
there are articles out there where the republicans are refusing to name appointees to the panel

What are you talking about?

[jclalor 12]

Quote

rushmc

***

***Are Death Panels Next?

It sounds as if Your insurance company's "death panel" decided against you based on what is best for their bottom line, and not your health. I would much rather have my healthcare in the hands of someone who has no financial interest on what may be the best course of treatment that I may need.

Wrong
there are articles out there where the republicans are refusing to name appointees to the panel

I guess you must be talking about this;

http://www.businessinsider.com/obamacare-ipab-boehner-mcconnell-death-panels-2013-5


Did you even read it? This has to do with medicare cost reductions in the the future, and only if cost rise at a rate that is not expected to occur for some time.

If Grandma is given only 3 month to live do to her failing heart, but then her liver stops working and will be dead in a month, is medicare going to pay $300,000 for a liver transplant? Should they pay $300,000 for the transplant?

This all goes back to the provision in Obama care that was to reimburse doctors for discussing end of life decisions with medicare pt's, the one the GOP was gnashing their teeth over. Tens of billions of dollars are spent every year by medicare on the the last few months of life. Providing people with information about making out an advance directive is the grown up thing to do and would save us billions on wasted resources. OTOH, because of people unable to understand that at a certain point and time, that all future medical care is futile and only prolongs the suffering of their loved ones, keeps me employed.