inherit
I need a new CT, thinking.... [insert Jeopardy theme song here]
110769
0
Aug 21, 2021 0:07:21 GMT -8
Tumbleweed
20,825
September 2007
tumbleweed
|
Post by Tumbleweed on Oct 18, 2017 1:23:12 GMT -8
The only reason people won't be covered under most of the republicans plans is because they so choose not to be covered. No one should ever be forced to get health insurance. I think it's the fairest trade off on the planet (some lose their insurance or subsidies for whatever reason) because those of us paying through the nose can maybe finally afford to go to the doctor. You know, actually use our health insurance. I just recently fought off what was some weird kind of virus, I guess, but I was scared because my right gland under my ear was so swollen and hurt like ****!!!, I was taking pain pills like candy. I just flat out could not afford to go to the doctor. I was lucky this time around as I beat it on my own but next time I might not be so lucky. And 📚 Dianne 📚, I totally agree with you that a 26 year old should be working and paying their own way. You want to go back to college then do it the hard way and work your butt off so you can afford to keep your health insurance and go back to college, like I did. Obamacare is just about the unfairest bill every signed into law and I can't wait for it to be gone or fixed.
|
|
inherit
130636
0
Oct 14, 2023 4:16:06 GMT -8
ukschalke
11,848
September 2008
ukschalke
|
Post by ukschalke on Oct 18, 2017 2:27:11 GMT -8
I won't comment on Obamacare or Trumpcare because I don't know enough about US insurance/healthcare to back up my opinions, but I can comment on the National Health Service in the UK. You'll find hardly anyone who would complain about paying taxes for the NHS, and many would even pay more if they knew it was going to healthcare. The NHS is flawed (and I know this more than most because I work for it) but ask almost any Brit and they absolutely believe in it as the right way to provide healthcare.Again, not saying you should want to emulate us, but that's how we feel about it over here. i normally i dont responds to political threads but as for healthcare....i think it sucks in the usa and i am glad that we have the NHS here in the uk and i agree with Shady . besides looking at other countries in my opinion the NHS is the best in the world and eveyone here in the uk can access it even the poor who normally couldnt afford treatment or whatever
|
|
inherit
PBS Oscars: Best Debater 08 Oscars: Best New Member 2007
86462
0
Apr 24, 2024 6:39:42 GMT -8
HoudiniDerek
Capital Idea!
33,291
August 2006
houdiniderek
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Oct 18, 2017 11:43:30 GMT -8
One of the most worrisome things for me is my family's healthcare future, especially with the constant talking point of repealing the Affordable Care Act. My wife and three sons have Celiacs disease. As it is a genetic marker and passed down through generations, it's considered a pre-existing condition. Before the Affordable Care Act, our insurance premiums and deductible were through the roof because of these pre-existing conditions. However, after the Affordable Care Act, they stabilized. No, they did not go down as was predicted, but they did stabilized and only increased for two reasons: 1. We added another member to the family. 2. The uncertainty over the future of the Affordable Care Act. Had President Trump come to office and agreed to give a year of payments to the Affordable Care Act with a mandate to Congress to fix or replace it by the end of the year, I think we would have seen the market stay stabilized. Additionally, it might have given Congress a more bipartisan solution than what is currently raging there. Like the Affordable Care Act and its provisions or not, it did do a lot of work to help people, especially those that were getting priced out. Even something like a flu shot was costing my family more than someone else because our insurance premiums had the "pre-existing conditions" clause on it. With the Affordable Care Act, that was not taken into account. Moving forward, I think a stabilization for a couple years ( as is being discussed) gives some hope, even though it's being blasted by both President Trump and Paul Ryan. I still think some tenets of the Affordable Care Act are beneficial, as my family has seen, but I think some of the claims made by those against it are just as strong, such as it being an insurance company bailout. I would love to see true bipartisan talks about a healthcare law that impacts the people of the country, even those too poor or at odds with their job situation like Rick mentioned, but does so in a way that does not add to the deficit or cut necessary services elsewhere such as Medicare and Medicaid. I believe there is a way to do so if everyone in Washington could realize for a minute that their political affiliation does not save lives.
|
|
inherit
28486
0
May 18, 2024 9:49:04 GMT -8
Artemis
20,776
August 2004
lray2
|
Post by Artemis on Oct 18, 2017 14:53:25 GMT -8
I would love to see true bipartisan talks about a healthcare law that impacts the people of the country, even those too poor or at odds with their job situation like Rick mentioned, but does so in a way that does not add to the deficit or cut necessary services elsewhere such as Medicare and Medicaid. I believe there is a way to do so if everyone in Washington could realize for a minute that their political affiliation does not save lives. Well, they've already got their healthcare (government healthcare, no less), so I'm cynical. I think there are some people there who really care, but also many who want a system that goes back to being more about the profit than the people. And unfortunately, this "I got mine" attitude extends to many of the voters as well. That's why conservative takes on healthcare make me nervous; however misguided, the ACA's goal was to offer healthcare to more people. The other side seems to be "I got mine, and if you can't, well that just sucks dunnit?" With my own chronic health issues, it's not a pleasant thought. Then again, my view is that a system that's supposed to take care of our lives shouldn't be subjected to the whims of free market capitalism. If the answer to getting healthcare is something about bootstraps, it's a terrible system imo. Save it for other industries where people's lives aren't on the line.
|
|
inherit
(?)?
188910
0
Jan 26, 2013 13:30:48 GMT -8
♥ ℒʊ√ ♥
Clouds float into my life no longer to carry rain or usher storm but to add color to my sunset sky.
10,458
January 2013
luv
|
Post by ♥ ℒʊ√ ♥ on Oct 18, 2017 15:18:37 GMT -8
Well, they've already got their healthcare (government healthcare, no less), so I'm cynical. I think there are some people there who really care, but also many who want a system that goes back to being more about the profit than the people. And unfortunately, this "I got mine" attitude extends to many of the voters as well. That's why conservative takes on healthcare make me nervous; however misguided, the ACA's goal was to offer healthcare to more people. The other side seems to be "I got mine, and if you can't, well that just sucks dunnit?" With my own chronic health issues, it's not a pleasant thought. Then again, my view is that a system that's supposed to take care of our lives shouldn't be subjected to the whims of free market capitalism. If the answer to getting healthcare is something about bootstraps, it's a terrible system imo. Save it for other industries where people's lives aren't on the line. The first thing we, the public, should demand is that any system enacted on us, must include those who do the legislating ~ no exceptions. But they always exclude themselves from what they legislate.
And secondly, health insurance is a system that relies on the young paying for the older. For years, we pay into a system and never need it (if we're lucky). So year after year, we pay into a system that we rarely, if ever, take from.
Then as we get older, we start to use that which we've put in, as a new generation steps in and starts the process over again.
The problem with the US is many are only concerned with themselves. It's one reason many in the US bulk at the what the majority of other developed countries have (including China), a national health system. That mindset is far different than that in the US where many are only concerned about themselves.
We'll allow corporate entitlements, but rail at those put in place for those who live at or below the poverty level always thinking they're scamming us, when the majority are not.
|
|
inherit
17836
0
Apr 29, 2024 15:20:43 GMT -8
daniel
27,203
December 2003
danielsmith
|
Post by daniel on Oct 18, 2017 15:37:33 GMT -8
local10.com/news/politics/trump-speaks-to-widow-of-sgt-la-david-johnsonFour Americans died in Niger recently. Trump tried to score some political points, making a big deal out of him calling the families. Well, he apparently told one widow, " he knew what he signed up for ... but when it happens, it hurts anyway." That's your fearless leader, Trump fans, once again needlessly antagonizing people by his sheer incompetence at the basic skill of being a decent human being.
|
|
inherit
(?)?
188910
0
Jan 26, 2013 13:30:48 GMT -8
♥ ℒʊ√ ♥
Clouds float into my life no longer to carry rain or usher storm but to add color to my sunset sky.
10,458
January 2013
luv
|
Post by ♥ ℒʊ√ ♥ on Oct 18, 2017 15:58:12 GMT -8
local10.com/news/politics/trump-speaks-to-widow-of-sgt-la-david-johnsonFour Americans died in Niger recently. Trump tried to score some political points, making a big deal out of him calling the families. Well, he apparently told one widow, " he knew what he signed up for ... but when it happens, it hurts anyway." That's your fearless leader, Trump fans, once again needlessly antagonizing people by his sheer incompetence at the basic skill of being a decent human being. Adding insult to injury, he politicized the entire thing by bringing up President Obama and past presidents trying to make it appear he was outdoing them. Why is it always about him?
But the additional disgrace that just makes one shake their head? He goes on a round of conservative talk radio shows and drags his poor Chief of Staff, Kelly's loss of his son in battle into the fray.
He has no shame. Even during the campaign saying he always wanted a Purple Heart ~ yet he never served to earn one ~ to calling out a Gold Star family (the Kahns) who lost their son who dared to support Hillary, to shaming Senator McCain for being captured.
All this from the man who makes it such an issue when the NFL players are following their constitutional right. Why should we take him seriously?
And top that off with not knowing that when Taps plays on a military base, you show the same respect you demand from others during the playing. Who doesn't know the sound of taps and what it represents. We learn that as young children attending Memorial Day parades.
|
|
inherit
PBS Oscars: Best Debater 08 Oscars: Best New Member 2007
86462
0
Apr 24, 2024 6:39:42 GMT -8
HoudiniDerek
Capital Idea!
33,291
August 2006
houdiniderek
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Oct 18, 2017 15:59:34 GMT -8
Well, they've already got their healthcare (government healthcare, no less), so I'm cynical. I think there are some people there who really care, but also many who want a system that goes back to being more about the profit than the people. And unfortunately, this "I got mine" attitude extends to many of the voters as well. That's why conservative takes on healthcare make me nervous; however misguided, the ACA's goal was to offer healthcare to more people. The other side seems to be "I got mine, and if you can't, well that just sucks dunnit?" With my own chronic health issues, it's not a pleasant thought. Then again, my view is that a system that's supposed to take care of our lives shouldn't be subjected to the whims of free market capitalism. If the answer to getting healthcare is something about bootstraps, it's a terrible system imo. Save it for other industries where people's lives aren't on the line. The first thing we, the public, should demand is that any system enacted on us, must include those who do the legislating ~ no exceptions. But they always exclude themselves from what they legislate.
And secondly, health insurance is a system that relies on the young paying for the older. For years, we pay into a system and never need it (if we're lucky). So year after year, we pay into a system that we rarely, if ever, take from.
Then as we get older, we start to use that which we've put in, as a new generation steps in and starts the process over again.
The problem with the US is many are only concerned with themselves. It's one reason many in the US bulk at the what the majority of other developed countries have (including China), a national health system. That mindset is far different than that in the US where many are only concerned about themselves.
We'll allow corporate entitlements, but rail at those put in place for those who live at or below the poverty level always thinking they're scamming us, when the majority are not.
That's the argument for Social Security too. Everyone pays into it and you get it when you retire. It should be self-sustaining if politicians wouldn't steal from it to pay for other legislation. I agree that politicians should be subject to the same rules that they legislate. I have always wondered how that's not an ethics violation...
|
|
inherit
17836
0
Apr 29, 2024 15:20:43 GMT -8
daniel
27,203
December 2003
danielsmith
|
Post by daniel on Oct 18, 2017 16:06:02 GMT -8
But the additional disgrace that just makes one shake their head? He goes on a round of conservative talk radio shows and drags his poor Chief of Staff, Kelly's loss of his son in battle into the fray. Oh yeah. I heard about the "ask General Kelly" thing a few days ago. That sort of comment is just so awful. I can't imagine continuing to work for someone who was that flippant about a family member dying, using that horrible incident as a political jab.
|
|
inherit
(?)?
188910
0
Jan 26, 2013 13:30:48 GMT -8
♥ ℒʊ√ ♥
Clouds float into my life no longer to carry rain or usher storm but to add color to my sunset sky.
10,458
January 2013
luv
|
Post by ♥ ℒʊ√ ♥ on Oct 18, 2017 16:41:07 GMT -8
And Dianne -"The Lethal Librarian" , I totally agree with you that a 26 year old should be working and paying their own way. You want to go back to college then do it the hard way and work your butt off so you can afford to keep your health insurance and go back to college, like I did. Why in the heck would this bother you? Many employer plans offer the same thing.
No one is paying for the child but the parents. It's not anyone's concern but the person(s) footing the bill.
Just like you pay for your own health insurance, so do the parents who may choose to keep their child on their plan.
What does it matter to anyone who someone has on their policy that they alone are paying for?
In this scenario, single people should complain that married people have two people on their policies. Or that someone has a minor child on their policy but you have none on yours.
This simply makes no sense.
If someone chooses to cover their non-minor child and they alone pay for their policy, just like you alone pay for yours, it shouldn't matter in the least.
My daughter purchased her own home, on her own, at the age of 22. But I can assure you, if I chose to keep her on my policy and I was paying for it, it would be no one's concern but my own. No matter her age and how independent she is (and she is ~ that home was purchased in a state hundreds of miles away from here}, if help was needed and I could do so, I would. My child, always.
|
|
inherit
151420
0
Nov 20, 2016 8:21:30 GMT -8
Ajay
8,969
January 2010
socomfb
|
Post by Ajay on Oct 18, 2017 17:24:46 GMT -8
And 📚 Dianne 📚 , I totally agree with you that a 26 year old should be working and paying their own way. You want to go back to college then do it the hard way and work your butt off so you can afford to keep your health insurance and go back to college, like I did. I don't see why you are worried if their own parents are paying for their kid's health insurance. Most college students don't pay for their own insurance right now btw. If they should be able to afford it and pay it off, should be up to them, that is not your decision. And btw, many states do offer subsidized health care coverage if you can't afford to pay for health insurance.
|
|
inherit
PBS Oscars: Best Debater 08 Oscars: Best New Member 2007
86462
0
Apr 24, 2024 6:39:42 GMT -8
HoudiniDerek
Capital Idea!
33,291
August 2006
houdiniderek
|
Post by HoudiniDerek on Oct 19, 2017 8:09:39 GMT -8
The only reason people won't be covered under most of the republicans plans is because they so choose not to be covered. No one should ever be forced to get health insurance. I think it's the fairest trade off on the planet (some lose their insurance or subsidies for whatever reason) because those of us paying through the nose can maybe finally afford to go to the doctor. You know, actually use our health insurance. I just recently fought off what was some weird kind of virus, I guess, but I was scared because my right gland under my ear was so swollen and hurt like ****!!!, I was taking pain pills like candy. I just flat out could not afford to go to the doctor. I was lucky this time around as I beat it on my own but next time I might not be so lucky. And 📚 Dianne 📚 , I totally agree with you that a 26 year old should be working and paying their own way. You want to go back to college then do it the hard way and work your butt off so you can afford to keep your health insurance and go back to college, like I did. Obamacare is just about the unfairest bill every signed into law and I can't wait for it to be gone or fixed. Tumbleweed, my main question deals with your first statement up there regarding that no one should be forced to get health insurance. Do you have auto insurance? If so, is that unfair as well? It's a mandate that if you have a vehicle, you have to have insurance. Why should healthcare really be any different? *Genuinely curious*
|
|
inherit
245985
0
Oct 29, 2017 12:01:00 GMT -8
private
85
June 2017
private
|
Post by private on Oct 19, 2017 9:20:48 GMT -8
The only reason people won't be covered under most of the republicans plans is because they so choose not to be covered. No one should ever be forced to get health insurance. I think it's the fairest trade off on the planet (some lose their insurance or subsidies for whatever reason) because those of us paying through the nose can maybe finally afford to go to the doctor. You know, actually use our health insurance. I just recently fought off what was some weird kind of virus, I guess, but I was scared because my right gland under my ear was so swollen and hurt like ****!!!, I was taking pain pills like candy. I just flat out could not afford to go to the doctor. I was lucky this time around as I beat it on my own but next time I might not be so lucky. And 📚 Dianne 📚 , I totally agree with you that a 26 year old should be working and paying their own way. You want to go back to college then do it the hard way and work your butt off so you can afford to keep your health insurance and go back to college, like I did. Obamacare is just about the unfairest bill every signed into law and I can't wait for it to be gone or fixed. Tumbleweed: I have read about those Republican plans. You can have Trump Care. I have also read a bit about market place insurances. Nobody has to sign up for government insurance. There are plenty of private insurance companies. Prior to Medicare I was using Blue Cross Blue Shield. Under Medicare I remain with Blue Cross Blue Shield.
Perhaps there are some legitimate medical places that will accept a patient not having health insurance. One of the first questions that a hospital or doctor's office wants is a patients insurance information.
Health insurance serves an important purpose. Why would anyone not want to have health insurance?
|
|
inherit
I need a new CT, thinking.... [insert Jeopardy theme song here]
110769
0
Aug 21, 2021 0:07:21 GMT -8
Tumbleweed
20,825
September 2007
tumbleweed
|
Post by Tumbleweed on Oct 19, 2017 10:27:23 GMT -8
The only reason people won't be covered under most of the republicans plans is because they so choose not to be covered. No one should ever be forced to get health insurance. I think it's the fairest trade off on the planet (some lose their insurance or subsidies for whatever reason) because those of us paying through the nose can maybe finally afford to go to the doctor. You know, actually use our health insurance. I just recently fought off what was some weird kind of virus, I guess, but I was scared because my right gland under my ear was so swollen and hurt like ****!!!, I was taking pain pills like candy. I just flat out could not afford to go to the doctor. I was lucky this time around as I beat it on my own but next time I might not be so lucky. And 📚 Dianne 📚 , I totally agree with you that a 26 year old should be working and paying their own way. You want to go back to college then do it the hard way and work your butt off so you can afford to keep your health insurance and go back to college, like I did. Obamacare is just about the unfairest bill every signed into law and I can't wait for it to be gone or fixed. Tumbleweed, my main question deals with your first statement up there regarding that no one should be forced to get health insurance. Do you have auto insurance? If so, is that unfair as well? It's a mandate that if you have a vehicle, you have to have insurance. Why should healthcare really be any different? *Genuinely curious* It's a little something called freedom of choice. If I don't want to pay car insurance I don't buy a car. If I don't want to pay home insurance I don't buy a home. If I'm healthy and young, I should be able to choose not to get health insurance. That said, I don't think it is smart to not have health insurance.
|
|
inherit
231551
0
Apr 26, 2024 15:17:14 GMT -8
smiling
A smile is a curve that sets everything straight.
543
April 2016
smiling
|
Post by smiling on Oct 19, 2017 11:09:21 GMT -8
Tumbleweed, my main question deals with your first statement up there regarding that no one should be forced to get health insurance. Do you have auto insurance? If so, is that unfair as well? It's a mandate that if you have a vehicle, you have to have insurance. Why should healthcare really be any different? *Genuinely curious* It's a little something called freedom of choice. If I don't want to pay car insurance I don't buy a car. If I don't want to pay home insurance I don't buy a home. If I'm healthy and young, I should be able to choose not to get health insurance. That said, I don't think it is smart to not have health insurance. I like freedom of choice, but the comparison here doesn't work. "If I don't want to pay car insurance I don't buy a car." "If I don't want to pay home insurance I don't buy a home."
Following this logic, it would be: if I don't want to pay health insurance I don't live. You can't compare not buying a car because you don't want to pay for car insurance to I'm healthy and young so I should be able to choose not to get health insurance. Following this argument, if my car was new and operating great I should be able to choose not to get car insurance. The requirement to have car or house insurance is not dependent on the condition of the car or house but the ability to cover any unforeseen events. For instance, if one can demonstrate the financial ability to cover the liabilities associated with operating a car, then they do not have to purchase car insurance.
|
|