Posted on 05/05/2017 7:24:38 AM PDT by Rockitz
I guess we should expect someone with a last name of Hurt to be a whiner.
The ACHA bill throws control mostly to the individual states. If premiums go up, states will be to blame, since states will negotiate rates with the ins. companies. If people are ‘kicked off’ insurance, they will have their own state to blame for mismanaging the funding the feds will provide to assist with pre-existing, etc, and not adequately funding their own programs.
Time to stop looking to and blaming the feds and time to start getting our own states into line taking care of their own citizens - starting with state level legislators.
# 10,
You are right,Obamacare took few years to sink in. He gave subsidized to lot of organizations like union....besides rationing healthcare,no one will tell you the real costs on different situations. Why do we need to subside 26 years old adults. If he/she reaches legal age to drink,he/she should be treated as an responsible adult. Lot of couch potato & iresponsible (bad habit)individuals drain out the health care resourse,as well as illegal....
By demanding quick perfection, what we otherwise ought to know as a conservative faction has thrown the game.
Frankly I hate that holier-than-thou approach. Not that it’s bad to become holier and holier as Christ bestows it, but that it wasn’t meant to be a selfish bragging show. It was meant to be integrated into God’s love.
By showing off how wonderful they supposedly were in quick drive-by retorts and the like, “conservatives” threw the game.
Badoom tish! :-)
The divesting of Federal control is Yuge, and it's probably worth the lukewarmness elsewhere. The real fires need to get going in states. Why should we care a lot about the terms of a nanny who is getting ready to retire soon?
I thank -- we all ought to thank -- the Lord that it's gotten even this far.
The thing that is greater will win. If you focus on inert molehills when mountains are jumping, you have become a force for the distracting and irrelevant.
And so don’t misphrase either the issue or the thing worthy of supreme attention.
And don’t quibble to defend yourself when you know you have been giving voice to the small and petty in the face of the great.
Your condescension suits you, FRiend.
Excellent
is there anything good about it?
Don’t know that’s why I was asking. Since everyone is matching the narrative put out by the mainstream media that hates Trump and the Republicans. If the mainstream don’t like it then something good must be in the bill.
Instead of me replying to your questions one by one, take a few minutes and listen to this. She is the first guest and I think she is finished in 15 mins. She explains why the states will take the deal, etc. There is a chunk of commercials 2/3 of the way thru ...about 3 mins worth, so listen until she is finished. http://iotwreport.com/keep-calm-and-listen-to-dr-betsy-mccaughey-talk-about-ahca/
You wondered if they lied when they passed all those Obamacare appeals. Well, to me, they were nothing but a show vote, knowing Obama would veto.
I’m not willing to take the kind of chance that you are with a pure conservative full repeal. DJT wisely didn’t run on that or he would have been crushed. If that were to pass and he somehow signed it, he’d be stuck with a Democratic house in January of 2019 and the first order of business would not be health care...it would be drawing up Articles of Impeachment. Remember, we are dealing with people who were ready to impeach him on inauguration day...stark raving mad lunatics.
We have to be strategic.
Republicans took the Obamacare Crap Sandwich, disassembled it, put their own special sauce on it, slapped it back together and called it gourmet cuisine. America has to eat it. Bon Apatite.
1) AMA and their member doctors,
2) Big hospital and medical device corporations,
3) Big Pharmaceutical Companies
4) Politicians who take campaign contributions from these 3
This combination sometimes helps quality, but most times just makes these special interests a lot of money. Changing the momentum of these special interests would be like turning an aircraft carrier on a dime.
There are good things about the Chinese implementation of single payer health care
1, An oversupply of doctors there, whereas here the AMA and medical schools severely restrict the number of new doctors produced each year.
2. Inexpensive doctors and medicine compared to here, although training is limited and medicines are many times limited to those that were developed years ago.
3. Significantly more availability of IV medicine which is the best way to receive many medications. (visualize rooms full of people seated, getting their medicine by IV)
4. Doctors eventually get very well trained, due to the shear volume of patients they see.
...and there are drawbacks
1. Training of doctors is not as extensive as here so some new doctors are very inexperienced.
2. Lines for everything- specialists, medicine, paying the bill (it's a whole day process)
3. There appear to be limits on the types of procedures, medicines, and specialists available to the common man.
We had connections since both my in-laws are doctors and my wife is trained as an anesthesiologist. Accordingly, we got special treatment (at times) in the form of skipping lines, access to specialists, and medicines that others didn't. They have doctors who will accept a red envelope (cash payment) in exchange for preferred treatment. It is illegal, but that's how the wealthy get past the lines.
OK, so I took your advice and listened to her. She offers opinion and nothing to support it and falls into the same traps she accuses other of.
She did go off on a rant about the media's claim that this bill will gut coverage for people with pre-existing conditions and said they offered no proof for their claims. Well she offers none for her claims as well. She says premiums will be cut in half for healthy people. I don't see how she can promise that. The two major reasons why premiums have gone through the roof are requirement that pre-existing conditions be covered and a prohibition on capping the amount the insurance company has to pay over the life of the premium. Trumpcare keeps both requirements.
Unless, of course, a state establishes a high-risk pool and gets a waiver. And she makes the blanket statement that almost every state will establish such a pool. How can she say that? Why should they? Because it lowers premiums? That's nice, but why should a state take on the financial responsibility for the pool just so what she admits are a minority of people who buy their insurance individually? We're talking about an open-ended and possibly very expensive program that states are taking responsibility for. In this day when many states can't cut spending fast enough to keep up with their deficits where are they supposed to get the money?
Ah, she says, the government has $13 billion per year for the next ten years to fund it. But how does she know that $13 billion will be enough? And that $13 billion was supposed to cover other things as well as high-risk pools - insurer incentives for smaller markets, promoting access to preventive services, helping with patient out-of-pocket costs, and the like. So how much will really be available for state high-risk pools? And remember, the legislation also talks of a federal high-risk pool and I assume that would have to be funded from the same $130 billion.
She goes on how the Senate will fall all over itself to pass the bill, probably won't make many changes, is totally on board, and other claims that have already been shown to be inaccurate.
Your expert really isn't much of an expert. She's just making claims and expecting everything will be just great now. Just like the Democrats were doing 8 years ago.
I’m not willing to take the kind of chance that you are with a pure conservative full repeal. DJT wisely didn’t run on that or he would have been crushed.
So instead he's over-promised on Trumpcare and what do you think is going to happen when and if those promises don't come to pass? What do you think is going to happen at the polls then?
(not too much more on this; worked over this entire weekend and my head may hit the keyboard before long)
Dr. McCaughey isn’t (and we shouldn’t) rely on opinions whether HRP work or not, they do. The variable will be on how much funding they get. This is why I keep reminding that passing a repeal only bill will cost us the Congress. At least if the GOP holds congress, they can tinker with the $$ to fix it. But this is solid math. When all the experts who are not running for office or running ideology based think tanks come up with similar numbers regarding which % of people are using which massive % of insurance dollars, it’s no longer politics. Then it is simple math, which can be addressed.
But this is an interesting thread, not sure if you spotted it or not. Good ideas, bad ideas, individual experiences, etc. As you’ll be able to see, there is even much disagreement amongst FReepers. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3550819/posts?q=1&;page=1
All the best..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.