How Massachusetts Voters Killed National Healthcare

Yes surely the government is trying to take all of those from you.

 

With the supreme court deciding that corporations are now free to donate as much as they want to political candidates be prepared to lose the two parties we have. This basically means that the government will be run but whatever corporation wants to spend the most money.

Example: Congressman A from California votes no on a bill to limit pollution by factories.

Acme widgets wants to pollute with no restrictions and regulations.

Acme then puts millions behind a candidate of their choosing who will take the positions they want him to take.

Congressman A loses the next election because he is outspent 100-1 in advertising, etc.

This is actually going to change the entire way politics works in this country and means the every day person like you and me will have even less say than we do now. Both parties will cease to exist if this isn't over turned.

Health care will surely not be fixed now if ever. The health care companies (and I use that term loosely) can put whatever candidate they want in office that suits their own needs. Sounds like a great plan. NOT!

 

I agree 100% with the first part of your statement, as Lee has pointed out they do need to make profits. But the biggest thing our system is lacking is competition.

Recently I’ve been talking to people, and I created a thread to find out more about HSA plans and very few people even had a clue what they were, and I asked a lot of people. The issue is that most employer plans have very low deductibles. It’s good and bad. It’s good because a lot of people cannot manage/save money very well so they need a low deductible. But, in the case of HSA plans they have a much higher deductible ($3,500 to $6,000) and the premium is much lower. I was paying $200 a month for a $1,000 deductible HMO and now I pay $62 a month for a $4,000 deductible PPO. They great thing about the HSA plans is that your money is put into a HSA account at your bank of choice and it’s not taxed. So you get more for the money. But the best part is the money in my account is spent by me and to whom I chose. So for anything under the $4,000 mark I will make sure I get the best doctor for the money. Why? Because it’s my money and I don’t want to overpay! Most people that have low deductible plans (like my mom’s $250 deductible HMO) don’t really care where they go and what they cost, because the insurance is footing the bill. This will happen for issues higher than $4,000 in my case, but with most people’s low deductibles they don’t care, because most procedures are much more than $250 or $500 deductibles. If you start making people pay part of the bill they will then shop around and bring competition to the table.

Think about the last time you or someone close had foot issues, headaches, or back problems. Did they call around to get the best quote? I bet if they have a low deductible they didn’t. But if they had to pay the bill or part of it then they did. Think if you had a ingrown toenail, and one doctor quoted $650 and the other was $950. If you had a deductible of $500 it wouldn’t matter which one you went to, because you would pay $500. Although with the higher deductibles people would then chose the lower priced doctor and have money left over for a new crankset or something.

Look how many people on here complain about there LBS prices being too high so they order online. We need that kind of competition in America’s health industry.

I would like to see more employers offer their employees higher deductible HSA plans and add money to their HSA accounts too. I think they could do this and save money yet provide excellent healthcare for their employees.

 

Actually you will find Medical tourism has grown exponentially in the last few years. Americans are going to Mexico, Thailand, etc. to get things they can't afford here. People used to come here to see specialists of all sorts but that has dropped off and people now look to Europe and Asia for those same services. It's rare these days to hear about Europeans coming here for anything other than sports injuries.

 

This is why we have a Constitution, in case any of you forget. This is what happens when government tries to control every aspect of your life.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/jan/15/france-moves-closer-to-banning-full-muslim-veil/

Europe is like 30 years from being a Muslim continent, just from rate of births and immigration. I see this kind of law swinging in the opposite direction and now every female needs to wear a full veil.

 

You CANNOT insure a family of 4 for 200 a month and have any sort of decent coverage. The average US income is approximately $50,000. When you factor in taxes, food, clothing, a mortgage/rent, transportation, etc. then that 100 to 200 you speak of becomes huge. It's hard enough for people making that much to afford to live day to day much less afford insurance. that extra 100 sometimes means the difference between paying rent and having a roof over your head or getting health care. Guess which one is more important.

Huh? What does this have to do with health care? Do you have something against Muslims? I must be missing your point?

 

I'm saying what France is doing is completely messed up. They are basically saying that Muslims cannot wear their veil in public because they are a secular country. My example with the future possibility of everyone being required to wear a veil is to make the point that one could easily be on the other side of that law. For example, there's nothing really to stop the French government from banning people from wearing crosses around the neck.

My whole point in throwing that in the debate is, I do not want the government telling me what my care should be. I guess that's the same argument that some of you are using that big business should not be telling me what my care should be like. Either way, both will have restrictions on care. The government already restricts how much they pay doctors for services for Medicare. At least if I had private options, if I feel like my healthcare sucks, I can go to another provider, just like I recently did, switching from Kaiser to Blue Cross. If a bunch of people left Kaiser because they started sucking, then it's an incentive for them to get better.

However, if the government starts controlling everything, there is no competition, they would be the sole provider, and I don't think that would end well for anyone.

 

True, true. Look at Rachel Atherton.......#-o

 

Brock Lesner came back from Canada because his care sucked.

 

and he has the money.
I'm not sure you got my comment: http://www.pinkbike.com/news/rachel-atherton-car-accident-2009.html

 

So where did she get her care?

 

Initially, the same area she was hit by a car, I should think:?:.
I mean, she may have insisted on getting full value for her tax money and flown all the way home on that 11-hour flight, bleeding and in pain. What do you think?

On the other hand, maybe France. She does ride for Comencal and she doesn't wear a vail so..?

Joke too (two??)

 

Actually if you listen to his latest interviews it sucked because he was out in the middle of nowhere. The same as if you were out in the middle of the Ozarks and needed emergency care. If you are going to compare something make sure you have all of the facts.