What Obama care looks like in the real world.

[GandD 5,966]

I agree. If a Republican said "let's play Russian Roulette" and then said "no, that is a terrible idea" after thinking about it for a minute, would it then be ok to blame a Republican when a Democrat killed himself playing it?

That works both ways.

[GandD 5,966]

Its amazing just what hypocrites they all are,

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Funny, I was thinking the same thing.

The problem with our government, IMHO, is that it is no longer "by the people, for the people".

It is for a select few.

[deleted-05292014 331]

I'm starting to wonder about you... you claim you word in the insurance industry and you seem to lack an understanding of how it works.

When I buy an annual insurance policy for my car or home or computer, I am not 'investing into a system" that should be there for me for life.

I am simply buying a certain level of coverage for a certain time period.

It is baffling that you think other wise considering your claims.

The best things in life are provided under a for profit motive... even if that profit comes in the form of a political payout.

The reason we have so many medical advances, the reason you have a computer (so cheap) the reason you can buy a gallon of gas for a mere $3.89 is because there is a profit motive. The reason so many people are being lifted out of grinding poverty in the part of the world you like to mention is.... the profit motive.

This country catapulted to such rapid wealth because - the profit motive was available to a much wider number of people and everyones standard of living increased.

Now the rest of the world has caught on and the second rule is coming into play.... COMPETITION.

Affordable CARE act, I knew when Obama's dream started to tank, you followers would retort.... "We just didn't go far enough" LOL

This is always the refrain when Gov;t fails, laying of course the ground work for more of their solutions.

It was more or less a tongue in cheek comment, of course I understand how the health insurance industry works probably more than you do but in your rush to attack me you completely miss my point. Which is to say that unlike you, I do not feel that peoples lives and health should be quantified on the same level as the examples you gave of property ie: house, car, computer. I strongly believe, unlike you, in Christian values that the measure of how great a nation is is not how big the monuments or structures are, rather how we take care of the least of those in our society. You and me? We're different, I don't expect you to agree with me and I am not here to try and convince you to change. I'm only sharing my opinion.

I'm not a communist. I am not against making profit. I am not against capitalism either - provided there are safeguards in check to protect the common person and consumer from exploitation. I would call it responsible capitalism. If we didn't have checks and balances in place when it came to capitalism well we would have widespread cronyism and corruption which we see in so many countries around the world. George W Bush eased a lot of those protections when he came into office and nearly crashed the world economy because of your profit motive scheme from financial institutions and mortgage lenders greed.

I never said I was a health care executive. I've worked in a number of different industries, so now you can stop "wondering" about me..or not.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

That maybe true, but then again no one cares about the poor.

Forcibly sterilising poor people is not in the best traditions of democracy now is it.

[deleted-05292014 331]

The PPACA was not a compromise with Republicans. The only compromises made were the vote-buying, horse-trading and under-the-tabling deals done with other Democrats, to arm-twist them into voting for this measure, in spite of the obvious risk to their Congressional future in the 2010 mid-terms.

The Democrats didn't have the stomach to do the right thing when they could have passed anything, regardless of Republican opposition. They bickered amongst themselves, screwed each other and the electorate to get as much pork as they could in return for their votes and ended up passing whatever they could in a Bill so monstrously unwieldy we still don't know everything they hid in it, rather than the measure they should have passed.

The Democrats ensured President Obama got his legacy. We will be paying the price for that for years to come.

Half of what you said I think is true. Democrats in the healthcare debate are like all politicians they care more about self-preservation than doing the right thing....that's why I said if true liberals had their way, notice I did not say democrats.

I knew when the ACA passed my healthcare stocks in my portfolio would bounce, and they sure did many paying dividends. This was a gift to the health care insurance companies. Requiring people to buy their products. It's the epitome of capitalism, which always gets a tickle out of me when the low hanging fruit Palins of the country say it's "socialism" lol.

Unfortunately both sides can't come to the table and compromise to improve ACA. One side just wants to repeal repeal repeal. Like I said we need leaders, I don't care the party, who are practical in resolving issues.

[Danno 1,228]

It was more or less a tongue in cheek comment, of course I understand how the health insurance industry works probably more than you do but in your rush to attack me you completely miss my point. Which is to say that unlike you, I do not feel that peoples lives and health should be quantified on the same level as the examples you gave of property ie: house, car, computer. I strongly believe, unlike you, in Christian values that the measure of how great a nation is is not how big the monuments or structures are, rather how we take care of the least of those in our society. You and me? We're different, I don't expect you to agree with me and I am not here to try and convince you to change. I'm only sharing my opinion.

I'm not a communist. I am not against making profit. I am not against capitalism either - provided there are safeguards in check to protect the common person and consumer from exploitation. I would call it responsible capitalism. If we didn't have checks and balances in place when it came to capitalism well we would have widespread cronyism and corruption which we see in so many countries around the world. George W Bush eased a lot of those protections when he came into office and nearly crashed the world economy because of your profit motive scheme from financial institutions and mortgage lenders greed.

I never said I was a health care executive. I've worked in a number of different industries, so now you can stop "wondering" about me..or not.

Wait a minute,

It was you who reasoned -due to the nature of healthcare.... no one should make a proffit in providing it..... ostensibly so it will be more affordable.

"I" tried to show how affordability has so often followed the profit motive.

Imagine if you could that rather than Apple of Bill Gates we had the Gov't hiring people who worked for a salary to develop computers and programs, in fact they were the only ones doing it..... what do you think you would be typing on right now?

Housing is a "human right" no?

Should those companies in the housing industry also work in a non-proffit mod so that all might have suitable housing?

My bottom line is, innovation, lower costs and availability are best produced when there is a profit motive and competition is available.

​Your concept might best be considered when we talk about education.... and the quality, affordability of it.

[Pooky 3,840]

Half of what you said I think is true.

Which half?

The half that is true, or the other half, which is also true?

[deleted-05292014 331]

Wait a minute,

It was you who reasoned -due to the nature of healthcare.... no one should make a proffit in providing it..... ostensibly so it will be more affordable.

"I" tried to show how affordability has so often followed the profit motive.

Imagine if you could that rather than Apple of Bill Gates we had the Gov't hiring people who worked for a salary to develop computers and programs, in fact they were the only ones doing it..... what do you think you would be typing on right now?

Housing is a "human right" no?

Should those companies in the housing industry also work in a non-proffit mod so that all might have suitable housing?

My bottom line is, innovation, lower costs and availability are best produced when there is a profit motive and competition is available.

​Your concept might best be considered when we talk about education.... and the quality, affordability of it.

I disagree. I think if you look around the world, where profit is not the central motive when it comes to providing health care, you have populations of people who are more healthy than Americans and live longer than Americans. Once again I am not talking about products, I don't view human lives as products or property. Every American, in one of the most advanced and richest nations in the world, should have a right to if not free but affordable healthcare and medicine. I am talking about a great transformation in thinking and values, to put peoples lives ahead of profit. Is that so evil of a goal to seek?

I agree 100% with your bottom line - but that same thinking has been done without denying people healthcare and treatment. It's being done now around the world. You think every medical breakthrough comes out of profit motive solely? Governments/tax dollars can fund innovation just as much as private businesses - the later may do it better in OUR system but not necessarily across the board.

The bottom line is this....Healthcare companies make money by denying people coverage and care.

I repeat

Healthcare companies make money by denying people coverage and care.

Is that ok with you? It's not like you file a claim for your roof after a recent storm and have the jerkoff insurance guy come to your house and say, "Well those shingles and that part of the roof was already damaged so we're not responsible for paying your claim" - even though you have been a member and paying monthly payments for 10 years. So you say ok screw you I'm switching insurance companies and going with X brand.

You can't do that with healthcare. Before ACA you couldn't say to your healthcare provider who said they weren't going to pay for your lung transplant because you were a smoker that you will give them the finger and go to brand X because brand X will say hahaha Fug you, you have a pre-existing condition.

[deleted-05292014 331]

Which half?

The half that is true, or the other half, which is also true?

...about democrats fighting each other. Although no republicans voted for the ACA I remember at one point in time during the debate, single payer had a strong public following and the republicans rallied against it so hard it scared a lot of democrats from supporting it. You're right about the backroom deals and Obama inviting the healthcare execs into the White House for discussions - no argument from me there, like I said I was not a fan of ACA. However it's here to stay so I am in favor of improving it and long term I would love to see single payer or some type of system in place that eliminates the health care for-profit system completely.

Anyway as far as backroom deals go that is how things get done in D.C. Both parties do it, all Presidents do it, all Congressman do it. So bringing it up as an attack against democrats and Obama is not exactly fair heh. Lets just keep it real, none of us are auditioning for guest appearances on Fox or Msnbc.

Edited February 2, 2014 by Jinx614

[Danno 1,228]

I disagree. I think if you look around the world, where profit is not the central motive when it comes to providing health care, you have populations of people who are more healthy than Americans and live longer than Americans.

Every American, in one of the most advanced and richest nations in the world, should have a right to if not free but affordable healthcare and medicine. I am talking about a great transformation in thinking and values, to put peoples lives ahead of profit. Is that so evil of a goal to seek?

I agree 100% with your bottom line - but that same thinking has been done without denying people healthcare and treatment. It's being done now around the world. You think every medical breakthrough comes out of profit motive solely? Governments/tax dollars can fund innovation just as much as private businesses - the later may do it better in OUR system but not necessarily across the board.

The bottom line is this....Healthcare companies make money by denying people coverage and care.

I repeat

Healthcare companies make money by denying people coverage and care.

Is that ok with you? It's not like you file a claim for your roof after a recent storm and have the jerkoff insurance guy come to your house and say, "Well those shingles and that part of the roof was already damaged so we're not responsible for paying your claim" - even though you have been a member and paying monthly payments for 10 years. So you say ok screw you I'm switching insurance companies and going with X brand.

You can't do that with healthcare. Before ACA you couldn't say to your healthcare provider who said they weren't going to pay for your lung transplant because you were a smoker that you will give them the finger and go to brand X because brand X will say hahaha Fug you, you have a pre-existing condition.

One of the problems with comparing our health and longevity is , the comparisons are not apples to apples. The demographics of the USA is much different than say Japan, I would wager if you compared American Japanese with those in Japan, you would find a similar outcome in health and longevity, we see the same things concerning test scores in education.

Also many such healthcare systems are actually paid for (in part) by the USA. We provide a military and they there fore have a funds bunch of social goodies and pretend they are paying for it.

Imagine if South Korea were paying for their defense alone. (or Germany or France).

-----------------

FREE HEATHCARE

Those things which are true or natural RIGHTS are things you don't require others to pay for such as Speech, assembly, religion, arms, the right To own property.

No one says someone should provide my gun or print my opinion or buy me a ticket so I can exercise my right to free-movemnt.

Yet under your concept, person A has a Right to demand person B provide a doctor. (That used to be called slavery, when you are "forced" to work for the benefit of another)

-------

Insurance companies are bound by the agreement they have with the customer concerning the limits of the policy.

Your odd logic about making a proffit by not proving coverage could be used with any company or service, but in all cases the customer can find relief through our court system.

To pretend a car or heath insurance Company can disregard their contract is silly, what is more likely is people don't know what is in their policy and they "assume" they have unlimited coverage at a really cheap price.

[deleted-05292014 331]

Another thing Danno.....healthcare companies aren't innovating $hit. They might be innovating new ways to charge you $20 for a fuggin Q-Tip thats about it.

[Peikko 1,575]

One of the problems with comparing our health and longevity is , the comparisons are not apples to apples. The demographics of the USA is much different than say Japan, I would wager if you compared American Japanese with those in Japan, you would find a similar outcome in health and longevity, we see the same things concerning test scores in education.

Also many such healthcare systems are actually paid for (in part) by the USA. We provide a military and they there fore have a funds bunch of social goodies and pretend they are paying for it.

Imagine if South Korea were paying for their defense alone. (or Germany or France).

-----------------

FREE HEATHCARE

Those things which are true or natural RIGHTS are things you don't require others to pay for such as Speech, assembly, religion, arms, the right To own property.

No one says someone should provide my gun or print my opinion or buy me a ticket so I can exercise my right to free-movemnt.

Yet under your concept, person A has a Right to demand person B provide a doctor. (That used to be called slavery, when you are "forced" to work for the benefit of another)

-------

Insurance companies are bound by the agreement they have with the customer concerning the limits of the policy.

Your odd logic about making a proffit by not proving coverage could be used with any company or service, but in all cases the customer can find relief through our court system.

To pretend a car or heath insurance Company can disregard their contract is silly, what is more likely is people don't know what is in their policy and they "assume" they have unlimited coverage at a really cheap price.

People are not born equally healthy, it's a simple fact. Making money out of the fact that some people get sick and others have accidents is a desperately illogical thing to do if you place a value on being human. As a result you get people justifying the unjustifiable with trash like this.

[Danno 1,228]

Another thing Danno.....healthcare companies aren't innovating $hit. They might be innovating new ways to charge you $20 for a fuggin Q-Tip thats about it.

First you peeps complain there is not enough people with heath care insurance then you vilify the industry.

Just pay for it on your own..... no one is forcing you to do business with them..... oh wait, ... Obama is doing that exact thing now.

[Peikko 1,575]

First you peeps complain there is not enough people with heath care insurance then you vilify the industry.

Just pay for it on your own..... no one is forcing you to do business with them..... oh wait, ... Obama is doing that exact thing now.

No, what people with a moral compass complain about is that health care is too expensive, not available to everyone and impossible to navigate in a way that makes clear how much you will be charged for any particular treatment that might be prescribed. That is a nonsense.