# Seniors, Are You For or Against the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare)?



## SeaBreeze (Dec 9, 2014)

Please take the poll and vote whether you are for or against the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as ObamaCare.

I have never been without health insurance, I obtained it through my employer during my entire adult life working full time for free or low cost to me.  When I retired, I paid the COBRA payments until that ran out, and then I paid for my health insurance completely out of pocket from my savings.

The costs kept rising every year in outrageous amounts, and I felt I was being drained of my hard earned savings for no valid reason.  I don't have medical issues, and rarely even go to see a doctor.  I no longer even go for the 'preventative' x-rays and tests yearly.  But I do want coverage in case I do get seriously ill, or am in a car accident or something like that.

I am for the Affordable Care Act, and the only thing IMO, that would be better at this point is a Universal or Single Payer Insurance.

Are you for or against the Affordable Care Act (ObamaCare)?


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 9, 2014)

Thankfully... I live in a state that allowed the Medicaid expansion throught the ACA...  My son is low income and applied and got Medicaid as well as his current VA benefits.   He had to be taken to the hospital emergently Sunday night...  NOT a VA hospital..  His ambulance bill came today.. $915   The Fire Department will submit that bill to Medicaid and will settle for what they pay..  Same with the hospital.   He also had to be transferred to a VA hospital yesterday.. That transfer will be covered by Medicaid.    If he did not have the ACA and the medicaid expansion, you can bet his portion of this bill would be over $10,000 and he would have to file medical bankruptcy.   So you ask if I approve of the ACA??   You bet your life..   It's helping to save my son.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 9, 2014)

Quicksilver, I'm so sorry to hear your son had to be rushed to the hospital like that, I hope he'll be okay.  The ACA is definitely helping, that's for sure.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 9, 2014)

Thanks Seabreeze.. The last time this happened, a 23 hr hospital stay cost $16,000.  We were able to get the VA to pick up some of that because it was an emergency..  The hospital granted him charity and wrote off the rest.   I was not certain he could get Medicaid as well as VA... but he did, and it has proven to be a God send.


----------



## Ken N Tx (Dec 10, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> Please take the poll and vote whether you are for or against the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as ObamaCare.
> 
> I have never been without health insurance, I obtained it through my employer during my entire adult life working full time for free or low cost to me.  When I retired, I paid the COBRA payments until that ran out, and then I paid for my health insurance completely out of pocket from my savings.
> 
> ...



Are you on Medicare??  (over 65?)  Medicare and a Supplemental Insurance is all you need..

Please correct me if I am wrong, I understand that Seniors over 65 do not need the Affordable Care Act..


----------



## rkunsaw (Dec 10, 2014)

My wife and I are on medicare with a supplement and drug insurance. When obamacare was passed our premiums went up 60%. I will be glad when obamacare is repealed.


----------



## Josiah (Dec 10, 2014)

While I would have prefered a single payer health care system, I've realized from the start that such a plan would never be passed by congress. The act that did pass despite its enormous complexity and the concessions that had to be made to many interest groups has worked far better than I ever thought possible. If the Supreme Court chooses to kill it now, I will view it as scotus' worst exercise of ideological vengeance ever. Count me as very much in favor of the ACA.


----------



## Jackie22 (Dec 10, 2014)

[h=1]Good News for Obamacare Is Bad News for Conservative Pundits[/h]There is a double standard in the media. When bad news comes up with respect to Democrats or liberals, the corporate media relentlessly plays this up. But when facts arise that contradict right wing talking points, the corporate right wing media, simply pretends that they do not exist. 

http://www.nationaljournal.com/poli...is-bad-news-for-conservative-pundits-20140418 

Conservatives were sure at every turn that Obamacare would fail, but as the numbers roll in, those convictions are looking increasingly ideological. 

First they said nobody would enroll. Then they said first-year premiums would be through the roof. And later, they warned of a "death spiral," wherein premiums would go up uncontrollably. My colleague Sam Baker has written an excellent analysis of the situation, the upshot of which is that Obamacare is on a winning streak. 

The next great frontier of conservative hyperbole concerns premiums for 2015, with critics warning that costs will double or even triple next year. 

As of this week, we have good evidence to the contrary. Health insurance premium rates are expected go up just 7 percent—a rate of increase much lower than what critics were predicting. And the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office is predicting that premium hikes will be relatively modest.​


----------



## Grumpy Ol' Man (Dec 10, 2014)

Respectfully, I resent a poll that simply "dumbs down" the members of the board just as partisan politicians have attempted to dumb down their constituencies.  Politicians and pundits attempt to break this down as "for" or "against".  This is a much more important topic than this.  This issue deserves an exhaustive disection and an equitable solution... without politics!!!  (As if that will ever happen in our partisan political clime.)

Something had to be done.  Presidents since Truman had attempted to get a handle on medical care for our entire citizenry.  The lobbyists of pharmaceuitcal companies and insurance companies are/were entirely too strong.  Finally, this POTUS decided something was going to get accomplished.
Before this POTUS was sworn into office in January 2009, the opposing Party took an oath to make certain his tenure was not a success.  Part of that plan was to not accept and not to pass any health care plan.  Attempts at bipartisan discussions were either disrupted by partisan hacks or stalled by partisan bickering.  The goal of the nay-sayers was to stall.... stall... stall.  When the roadblocks could not be removed, the plan was pushed through Congress. 
The ACA is a flawed plan.  There are monumental holes in the plan that need fixed/closed.  The Republicans have spent 6 years attempting to defund/derail/undo/defeat/stall the ACA.  NO ATTEMPT has been made, in a bipartisan manner, to find solutions or offer a workable alternative.  The battle cry has been "Defund Obamacare!".  All we've heard is "Repeal Obamacare!"  
Meanwhile, the roll out was rough.  Shoddy... somewhat typical... contracting of a software company to design the website.  But, the speed bumps were negotiated and the plan has had some successes.
Today, millions are enrolled and are insured through the ACA.  Now, to repeal or defund the plan would be devastating to those who have been encouraged to participate.  2015 will see significant posturing by the new majority in both Houses of Congress.  The Tea Party radicals will still attempt to shut down the ACA, no matter how many citizens are adversely affected.  The more commons sense Republicans will look for means of putting their own "fingerprints" on some modifications to the ACA. 
The discussion of the ACA is far from over.  The noise will ramp up significantly in the next six months.  The very first thing the new Congress will do is repeal the tax on medical devices.  That lost revenue stream will need to be made up elsewhere and it wont' be.  The plan will be financially starved until enough people cry "uncle" and real solutions are mandated by the citizens.


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 10, 2014)

There were are too many problems with health care and health insurance as far as costs go. The ACA has some good provisions such as pre existing conditions not excluding anyone. But the problem was COSTS which was gouging insurance companies and providers. You also had the sniffle patients wanting INSURANCE(concept ment for catastrophic events) to pay for routine maintenance.   They all gamed the system to their advantage. The ACA turned out mostly to be an INSURANCE bill, NOT a CARE bill. 

I don't want socialized medicine but it should be an option for those that cannot afford capitalist health care. The cheapest way I see administering health care to the poor or uninsured is clinic style medicine meaning if you have to go to a clinic and wait all day to see the doctor so be it. No you can't keep your doctor if you like your doctor you'll have to see the doctor the clinic provides you.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 10, 2014)

Ken N Tx said:


> Are you on Medicare??  (over 65?)  Medicare and a Supplemental Insurance is all you need..
> 
> Please correct me if I am wrong, I understand that Seniors over 65 do not need the Affordable Care Act..



Neither of us are on Medicare yet, my husband will apply next year.  I believe you're correct, those who have Medicare won't need the ACA.


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 10, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> *Good News for Obamacare Is Bad News for Conservative Pundits*
> 
> There is a double standard in the media. When bad news comes up with respect to Democrats or liberals, the corporate media relentlessly plays this up. But when facts arise that contradict right wing talking points, the corporate right wing media, simply pretends that they do not exist.
> 
> ...



"...premium hikes are expected go up JUST 7 percent..." Key word 'premium'. Insurance premiums are not care. If you have the metallic bronze plan you have high deductibles and co pays which negate any lower premiums.

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/h...ionhotel.com/hotel-brno-astorkaked-ATCHEN.TTF-

True, the lower premium plans would help in the event of a catastrophic illness but it does nothing for the sniffle people or routine maintenance/events.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 10, 2014)

rkunsaw said:


> My wife and I are on medicare with a supplement and drug insurance. When obamacare was passed our premiums went up 60%. I will be glad when obamacare is repealed.



So I guess you are telling me that you will be glad when my son has no healthcare??   What do republicans have against people having healthcare??  It amazes me.

My question is.... which one of the Republican leaders are going to tell people that they no longer can have healthcare..... that their kids under 26 have to be taken off their plan...... that their pre-existing condition will make them unable to buy insurance..... that their child with cancer has reached the lifetime limit and will no longer be able to be treated.....     Which one of them is going to break that news to the Americans who now.. some for the first time in years can see a doctor..  Tell me..


----------



## Josiah (Dec 10, 2014)

Flashback: Republicans Opposed Medicare In 1960s By Warning Of Rationing, ‘Socialized Medicine’


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 10, 2014)

From an older thread here:

The GOP has plans to not only gut Medicare benefits for seniors, but they also plan to cut Social Security Benefits in the future also...

_
*Republican Budget Creates a Fast Track to Cut Social Security and Ends Medicare as We Know It

*The House GOP’s FY2014 budget proposal, The Path to Prosperity: A Responsible, Balanced Budget, threatens the future of Social Security and Medicare, and the well-being of virtually all Americans. The Republican budget would expand tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, while pulling away critical Medicare and Social Security protections from the middle class.

*UNDERMINES SOCIAL SECURITY

*The Republican budget strikes three major blows to Social Security, a self-financed insurance program, which past Congresses have worked hard to keep out of budget discussions, in recognition that Social Security does not and, by law, cannot add to the federal debt of the United States. 

First, bucking legal and historical precedent, today’s Republicans make Social Security a major part of their budget proposal.1 In addition, the Republican budget, proposed by House Budget Committee Chairman Representative Paul Ryan (R, WI-1), would: Create an unprecedented new fast-track procedure to ram through Social Security benefit cuts. 

In a radical departure from the way Social Security changes have been legislated since 1935, the Republican budget would force Congress to fast-track legislation determining the future of Social Security.

As the following bullet describes, the Ryan budget moves the goal posts, adding a new test of whether Social Security needs reform and then forces the president to submit legislation whenever the new test is violated. Within two months of the president submitting Social Security legislation, Congress would have to consider it “under expedited procedures.”2

Every year, the Social Security trustees project Social Security’s income and outgo for a 75 year valuation period, far longer than used by private pensions and most other countries for their Social Security systems. 

Notwithstanding this already conservative practice, the Ryan budget requires the president and Congress to reform Social Security on an expedited, fast track basis, even if it is in 75 year actuarial balance—simply because it is found to be out of balance in the 75th year!3 

The new requirement that the Republicans seek to impose is simply another way of forcing draconian cuts that the American people reject. 

Projections over 75 years, by their nature, lack certainty. Projections of Social Security's solvency change every year, which means that Ryan's plan could force big changes to Social Security based on very short-term variations in the program's finances.

*BOTTOM LINE: 
*
Social Security affects virtually every American. Moreover, unlike many divisive issues, poll after poll shows that the American people are united and clear about how they want Social Security reformed. They do not want to see benefits cut and they favor asking all working persons and their employers to make payroll tax contributions on...

Read 6 page PDF with informative links here: http://www.strengthensocialsecurity....heet_FINAL.pdf
_


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 10, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> From an older thread here:
> 
> The GOP has plans to not only gut Medicare benefits for seniors, but they also plan to cut Social Security Benefits in the future also...
> 
> ...



So if I may be so bold to ask....Unless a Senior is extremely wealthy and does not need his SS check or Medicare to keep his health.... WHY would ANY Senior vote Republican??


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 10, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> So if I may be so bold to ask....Unless a Senior is extremely wealthy and does not need his SS check or Medicare to keep his health.... WHY would ANY Senior vote Republican??



They wouldn't.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 10, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> They wouldn't.




Yet it seems to me many do..  So the same puzzle remains..  Why do people consistantly vote against their own interests?


----------



## Josiah (Dec 10, 2014)

The Republicans are masters of demagoguery. Not only are they pretty good at it, they do it all the time 24/7. Tell people the same lie over and over again and they come to believe anything.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 10, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> Yet it seems to me many do..  So the same puzzle remains..  Why do people consistantly vote against their own interests?



Influenced by the media, as Josiah said?  That's why it's best to hear both sides, and add your own research when it comes to things that may affect you personally.  Not everyone does that, and some people just don't understand what's really going on.


----------



## ronaldj (Dec 10, 2014)

health care need fixing is the affordable health care act the way to go, I don't think so should we all care for ourselves that would be nice, will we can we no so what is the fix I do not know......what I know is I worked three full time jobs for 20 years then one full time and one part time....saved and paid my way now I am retired with four part time jobs....one two days a week one, one day a week and one, one day a month and one several days a month my time.....I still pay my way and one fellow I work with at the hardware who is almost my age having talked to him now gets health care paid for on my dime......having talked to him I have determined he has had some bad luck....mostly his own doing he is lazy and .....expects the world to care for him.....I don't like it......but I don't know how to fix it....more taxes sure why not


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 11, 2014)

When I hear that a Senior turns down their Medicare coverage and refuses to take a Social Security check, then they can talk demagoguey and crow about the government shouldn't "be involved" in our lives..   If you run to the bank to spend your SS money... I don't want to hear about how  great the Republicans are and how you voted for them.  

Note.... by "You".....  I mean the General YOU...  not anyone particular on this thread.


----------



## oakapple (Dec 11, 2014)

It seems amazing to me, as an outsider, to know that lots of people in the US don't want the plan, it seems to be the best thing that President Obama has done for the country.We have the NHS here [National Health Service] which means that we don't pay for the GP visit, or any hospital surgery or appointment at all, and for the over 60's free prescriptions as well.If we want to see a private consultant and then have a procedure done privately [and more quickly than the NHS can provide] then we have to pay for that, and a lot do.Nor do we pay for an ambulance, or anything at all. Of course we all do pay.... in  National Insurance payments which are taken from salaries at source, like income tax, but it's all very affordable.If you can't work or are retired, then you don't pay NI at all.


----------



## Josiah (Dec 11, 2014)

Thanks Oakapple for your perspective. Many of us admire your achievement especially when we consider that the NHS uses up less than 10% of your Gross Domestic Product whereas health care in the US costs us nearly 18% of our GDP.


----------



## catsndogs (Dec 11, 2014)

Every US citizen has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.   Life means that they can get medical care, good medical care.  Even if a person is poor they should still get equal medical care.   I don't think access to doctors should be only for the elite or even just for the middle class.  There are people who are less fortunate and they, too, are citizens and have the right to access to good health and life.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 11, 2014)

Josiah09 said:


> Thanks Oakapple for your perspective. Many of us admire your achievement especially when we consider that the NHS uses up less than 10% of your Gross Domestic Product whereas health care in the US costs us nearly 18% of our GDP.



Why do you suppose that is?   It's because instead of  following a National Healthcare program and giving Medicare to all... we have allowed the Big Insurance companies and Big Pharma to rape the American people with exorbitant costs, and denial of services,  in order to provide windfall profits to the private companies and their CEO's ..   Medicare only has a 3% overhead and is very efficient..   Private Insurance companies have had as much as 30% overhead or more and are far less efficient..


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 11, 2014)

catsndogs said:


> Every US citizen has a right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.   Life means that they can get medical care, good medical care.  Even if a person is poor they should still get equal medical care.   I don't think access to doctors should be only for the elite or even just for the middle class.  There are people who are less fortunate and they, too, are citizens and have the right to access to good health and life.



Not according to those who's only purpose in life is to repeal the ACA..


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 11, 2014)

Josiah09 said:


> The Republicans are masters of demagoguery. Not only are they pretty good at it, they do it all the time 24/7. Tell people the same lie over and over again and they come to believe anything.



The Republicons have been bringing up a ss catastrophe up for decades and it's mainly to show their constituents they are thinking about the budget and controlling spending. I remember hearing this from the pundits from the Contract On America days with Newt & company. Even health care when Hillary had her committee on health care.

 But just like ss nationalized health care would need funding, more funding the pre ACA days, best thing to do besides some cost controls & regulations is slap a minimal flat tax like 50 dollars on every single tax PAYING American and work on a separate unassociated health/clinic system alternative. Let the old private insurance or self pay system exist as alternatives as well. But taxing or rigging a the system to scarf up money to pay the old school system is fool hardy because it's simply throwing money and not solutions at the problem ie an insurance based system.


----------



## BobF (Dec 11, 2014)

I see the US mandatory health system to be nothing but a government controlled health insurance system.   Why did we have to hire so many more US government people to handle this system.   Their cost and wages are all because of this new mandatory government health system and I don't believe all that support is included in the cost for the medical system, and it should be all included if looking for facts.   Every governments cost for the program must be included in the total cost for the government demanded and run medical system.   Only then can any real comparisons on who is gaining and how much it is costing.   For many years that I am aware of the poor could get medical care and free if need be.   As long as the governments increased size to manage health care is ignored we will never have an honest way to compare before and after benefits for all.


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 16, 2014)

Too many still cannot afford insurance coverage because they make too much for a subsidy but don't make enough to buy insurance.

http://news.yahoo.com/uninsured-under-aca-millions-americans-cant-afford-coverage-201854260.html

This particular problem is an INSURANCE industry problem. But you need a cut off for subsidies somewhere. They need to come up with something just for children and not just the parents can insure them until 26. Most states have cheaper insurance just for kids.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 19, 2014)

WhatInThe said:


> Too many still cannot afford insurance coverage because they make too much for a subsidy but don't make enough to buy insurance.
> 
> http://news.yahoo.com/uninsured-under-aca-millions-americans-cant-afford-coverage-201854260.html
> 
> This particular problem is an INSURANCE industry problem. But you need a cut off for subsidies somewhere. They need to come up with something just for children and not just the parents can insure them until 26. Most states have cheaper insurance just for kids.



Just for the kids?   Not their parents?   So what happens to the kids when the parents get sick and perhaps die due to not having healthcare.   Healthcare is a RIGHT not a privilege..  EVERY single American citizen is entitled to it no matter what their income of circumstances are.


----------



## BobF (Dec 19, 2014)

The entire Obama care health program needs reviewed and many corrections or changes made.   Fire thousands of the new government workers and allow the medical system to go back to running its own business without political interventions.   This country would do better without half the government workers we now have that live off the taxes taken from those that are working to keep their families or businesses in good shape.

Health care was a right prior to the Obama care stuff.   Anyone, with or without health insurance could get taken care of by walking into a open hospital emergency room and asking for help.   First came help and then asked for ability to pay.   Even with health insurance that I have had prior to the Obama care, I and my wife have both used the emergency room for care on weekends when doctors offices are not opened.   We got signed in as we entered, each case was then given an urgency level and we were told to have a seat or immediately taken in for an exam.   As I see it, nothing better has come from the Obama care, as that still seems the way to get service on a week end or holiday.   Immediate service for the real sick ones, slower admission for the ill with insurance but not emergency, and for those without insurance and not an emergency, a longer wait till a doctor is free to take them in.    Not much changed that I can see before or now, without Obama care and with Obama care, but now we are paying thousands more government workers to do their unnecessary jobs that private businesses were doing before.

So we first need to rid Obama from the mix and then get a decent government, Democrat or Republican, that can see beyond the wish for all to be under socialism rather than a free republic format, and lower the government costs and debts and get the Republic of the Unites States back into business of doing the peoples wishes rather than demanding that the people all follow a messed up governments ideas and demands.


----------



## Don M. (Dec 19, 2014)

I am For Obamacare....because this program is going to screw up our entire medical system to the point where we will have little choice but to go to some form of a SP-UHC system...similar to that which most of the rest of the Western world uses.  For years, our health care has been held hostage by the Drug and Insurance companies, and the AMA.  Money and Profit are the driving forces, and patient care is secondary.  I Don't like Big Government, but the experiences of other nations clearly show that Health Care is One area that demands a more "socialist" approach.  We pay twice as much for health care as any other nation, and the WHO ranks the US around 35th in terms of quality of care and value received for our dollars.  

Most of the provisions of Obamacare were written by the Health Care Industry Lobbists, and it does a excellent job of protecting their profits.  Health care costs are already the single largest expenditure in our Federal Budget, and Obamacare will drive those costs even higher.  I predict that within 10 years, our system will be such an unaffordable mess that we will have little choice but to adopt many of the measures that have worked out so well for other nations.


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 19, 2014)

QuickSilver said:


> Just for the kids?   Not their parents?   So what happens to the kids when the parents get sick and perhaps die due to not having healthcare.   Healthcare is a RIGHT not a privilege..  EVERY single American citizen is entitled to it no matter what their income of circumstances are.



Right now the only affordable solution to find a way to deliver health care to children. That's one of the things many of these states are trying to prioritize and it's more obtainable than universal health care.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 20, 2014)

Don M. said:


> I am For Obamacare....because this program is going to screw up our entire medical system to the point where we will have little choice but to go to some form of a SP-UHC system...similar to that which most of the rest of the Western world uses.  For years, our health care has been held hostage by the Drug and Insurance companies, and the AMA.  Money and Profit are the driving forces, and patient care is secondary.  I Don't like Big Government, but the experiences of other nations clearly show that Health Care is One area that demands a more "socialist" approach.  We pay twice as much for health care as any other nation, and the WHO ranks the US around 35th in terms of quality of care and value received for our dollars.
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the provisions of Obamacare were written by the Health Care Industry Lobbists, and it does a excellent job of protecting their profits.  Health care costs are already the single largest expenditure in our Federal Budget, and Obamacare will drive those costs even higher.  I predict that within 10 years, our system will be such an unaffordable mess that we will have little choice but to adopt many of the measures that have worked out so well for other nations.




Except... going into year TWO of the ACA... all the things that the critics WARNED would happen... are NOT happening.   In fact.. Obamacare is WORKING.   People are getting insured..  Lives are being saved.  Healthcare cost increases are slowing..   There are no death panels.   But I agree  Don M.   I would like to see a USC system.  I'm afraid this may have been the best that could be gotten considering the opposition to any sort of healthcare reform.


----------



## BobF (Dec 20, 2014)

Well, fortunately for you, it seems to be a better deal than you had before.    Not so for me and the wife as we both pay more now for less than we had before in a company paid plan for the retirees that got put aside for this so called better way of doing things.

We have had a well run medical system and folks that needed special care could come to the US for these better services and did do just that.   Not so sure now as many doctors have said they will just shut down private health and go to work for agencies or retire.   I do not see why we, the US, should have to lower our health system to match what other countries are doing.

Low income, poor folks, could get medical care anytime prior to the Obama care just by entering a hospital emergency service area.   Which was the only way I or my wife can get service anyway as doctors are not available on weekends normally.   Enter the emergency room, sign in, get a quick interview, and be assigned to emergency or lessor position.    After the check up they ask for financing and if you have it that is great.   If you do not have it they still will care for you to a level where they can release you.   Both the wife and I have had to use this for help on weekends.   I see no improvement with the Obama care and likely some degradations are likely, as I mentioned above.    My new Obama care is less than I had before and costing more.

I think we have a long way till Obama care gets fully implemented and then challenged and corrected to make it a fair way for all.   I prefer to see government over-site but privately run by the medical folks   Then we might be able to get rid of thousands of government added positions to manage this unmanageable mess Obama care created.


----------



## Josiah (Dec 20, 2014)

The employer based plan that you lost was a decision made by your employer and follows a trend towards lower employer participation that has been going on long before the ACA came into existence. The ACA has provisions that encourage employer based plans, but since employers would rather improve their bottom line the ACA provides for the millions of Americans left on their own.


----------



## BobF (Dec 20, 2014)

You are so right.   Glad you are happy with BIG GOVERNMENT running everything.   We got along for over 200 years with small federal government but now we hear that we can no longer allow that to happen.   Such a sad situation that is for the US to have to overcome and get smaller government and get smarter ways of operating that hiring thousands to help spend our taxes and then telling us we are too dumb to live our own lives our way. Independence worked fine till the last fifty years and now is looked down on.   As I said in my previous post, we had a fine medical system as it was and it was taking care of those needing help.   So far I see only higher cost and fewer services from what we had prior.   Our medical system was working well, new ideas could have helped but never into a full blown government run, costly system, that does less for more money.   All this money wasted on government jobs and not really adding one good thing to our medical system at all.

Why has the medical system gotten so costly?   Far too much government interference with free enterprise and insisting on costly nonsense to please the government idea that they need to control everything and claim credit for improving things when actually things are getting to be far to overwhelmed with non producing people watching to see if their rules are getting done properly.   How about he patients getting more medical attention with fewer non medical folks watching.   Costs may go down.

Obvious that I do not want ever larger government actions that just cost money and do not really fix anything.   The US will end up just like Europe, all government and nothing great being done by anyone.   Let the people of the US continue to run things and get the government back down to maybe half he size it is today, or even less.

What happened to the doctors prior to all this government meddling came on?    Now the doctors have to have non medical staff on hand to help with all this recently created paper work.   I as a patient don't get to know anything till I get my report from those government medical folks.   Can barely figure it all out as to what was done, why, and costs, and what I might owe.

I would rather we could go back to a more direct system of personal wants and needs and get the federal government clear out of the picture.   Our local and state governments would be enough meddling in my life, and likely a lot better, and lessor cost than having so many thousands hired to spend my taxes and do little for the individuals.

Yes, a long rant.   And it is asked for by those that think our federal government must be ever bigger and ever more busy in our personal lives.   Closer and closer to full out socialism, one step short of communism.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 20, 2014)

Small government has failed, and those who insist on keeping things the way they were hundreds of years ago, and just holding onto the past and not acknowledging that things have changed since then. 

 The middle class citizen has had declining wages and higher health care costs with small government, it has only benefited the chosen few who are already wealthy or large corporations.  There had been increasing unemployment over the years too. 

 The system needs to change so the middle class doesn't all become too poor to even own their own homes, while the rich get richer and move all their money to other countries as tax shelters, and move their businesses overseas also.  That's my take on things, it something isn't working for America, then it needs to be changed.


----------



## BobF (Dec 21, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> Small government has failed, and those who insist on keeping things the way they were hundreds of years ago, and just holding onto the past and not acknowledging that things have changed since then.
> 
> The middle class citizen has had declining wages and higher health care costs with small government, it has only benefited the chosen few who are already wealthy or large corporations.  There had been increasing unemployment over the years too.
> 
> The system needs to change so the middle class doesn't all become too poor to even own their own homes, while the rich get richer and move all their money to other countries as tax shelters, and move their businesses overseas also.  That's my take on things, it something isn't working for America, then it needs to be changed.



Small governments hundreds of years ago?    How about just fifty years ago, when most of this socialism and such really got started?    Prior to recent years we all had jobs and pay was fair.    Now not so many get to work and pay is no longer fair as before.   Doctors were much cheaper then and not restricted to only certain insurances as they are these days.   Walk in, pay your $20 and you were done.   Now they don't want to touch you till we review and sign several places, and we still have to pay more than before.   Until Obama care you could always walk into a emergency room and get taken care of if rich or poor.    Not sure if you can still go that today. would hope so as that is real medical care, not Obama care.

Your second statement is true today.   Some,  not all, of the unemployment of the recent 6 years, beginning in the last two years of Bush's administration while Democrats held both houses and started wasting money like crazy, from 7 trillion on up to 10 trillion debt.    Prior to that the Clinton and Bush administrations had held the debt down into the 7 trillion level, even with two wars going on.   Several efforts were made to try to redo the tax codes under Obama but so far nothing has been allowed to get to Obama due to the far left Senate controlled by a twisted person.    The wealthy had no reason to worry about lower or higher medical cost or if the poor could get medical care less expensively than now, all this has become a politically involved and has not proven to be a good financial method at all.   Again it is the low income folks that have taken a beating and the middle income folks getting the worst of all.

Yes the system needs to change, we  need to get to where the states once again run things for their own situations and get away from the one size fits all socialistic way of living.   We need to go back prior to the ways that the 1960's and 1970's has started and continued to push.   We need to get our taxes back to where everyone is involved, no more of this 60% of us no longer pay much if anything at all.

To think that much of the US needs to run as they do in Europe is wrong.   The US has been a good example of how to best run a government until recent years.   Now we seem to be in a rush to change to the European ways and have high taxes, high cost, higher unemployment and higher medical costs due to new medical insurance demands and a no longer accepted or even considered, respect for our Constitution.    Now it is time for the current emperor to try to guide us through his last two years with some Congress folks that may want decision run through Congress for authorizations as they should have been for the last 6 years.

Hopefully, the next election will place a new president in that is aware of the purpose of the Constitution and how this government is supposed to be run through the use of the Congress and not through lots of Presidential demands and not debated or considered actions of far too much of the current Presidents ways.   Maybe we should also put a limit on the number of years our Congress people can stay and work.    Maybe some agreed on number for their total years of 20 or 30 years and an age limit of 75 or so for top age?    No large retirements for our Congress people, let it all be on years of service, starting rather low and slowly climbing. similar to those in industry.    We do need  change but definitely not into socialism, or worse, communism.

And I am not a far right politically either.    I am more of a centered type, some liberal stuff and some conservative stuff, but definitly want to see the US run within it Constitution guidelines and not so far off as the current government is running.


----------



## Davey Jones (Dec 21, 2014)

"decent government"...ROFL, not in your lifetime or anyone elses.


----------



## Blaze Duskdreamer (Dec 22, 2014)

I'm against the Universal Care Act because it doesn't even address the problem; I'm for universal health care.

Insurance companies are a huge part of why health care is so expensive and all this act does is hand them mandatory customers and doesn't even look at the issues of quality or cost control.  Frankly, health care needs to be regulated the way utilities are.


----------



## Blaze Duskdreamer (Dec 22, 2014)

I don't quite get all the praises for Medicare.  I have been forced on it instead of keeping my employer provided health insurance due to being retired for more than a year on disability.  I do get to keep that but it is secondary to Medicare and covers what they don't.  Thank my former union that I have it secondary because Medicare doesn't cover thousands of dollars of my health care every year.  Medicare is only good if you are not in poor health and don't need a lot of care.  What the patient is expected to pay out of pocket is ridiculous and they charge $100 a month for this non-coverage.  Thankfully, my former employers adds it back into my pension from them because my union negotiated health care in retirement.  If I had only medicare, I flat out wouldn't be seeing my doctors -- and I have left heart valve problems, an aortic aneurysm, IBS, 7 colon polyps removed this year, 9 last, crippling/degenerative arthritis caused by pseudo gout, and chronic pain.  Me not seeing my doctors is not a good idea but if I had only Medicare, I just plain couldn't afford to.  I'm pissed that I have to have them primary and wish I could just keep my secondary insurance, which is private and covers all but small copays for a smaller premium than Medicare.  If Medicare is how the government coverage would be then I don't want to see it happen.



oakapple said:


> It seems amazing to me, as an outsider, to know that lots of people in the US don't want the plan, it seems to be the best thing that President Obama has done for the country.We have the NHS here [National Health Service] which means that we don't pay for the GP visit, or any hospital surgery or appointment at all, and for the over 60's free prescriptions as well.If we want to see a private consultant and then have a procedure done privately [and more quickly than the NHS can provide] then we have to pay for that, and a lot do.Nor do we pay for an ambulance, or anything at all. Of course we all do pay.... in  National Insurance payments which are taken from salaries at source, like income tax, but it's all very affordable.If you can't work or are retired, then you don't pay NI at all.



Except Obama care is nothing like your NHS and neither is Medicare, you lucky stiff.  I wish we had that here!


----------



## Ameriscot (Dec 22, 2014)

IMO healthcare should be a right (like education) not a privilege, and I am extremely grateful that I am growing old with the NHS.


----------



## Don M. (Dec 22, 2014)

I can remember the days when doctors made house calls, drove a Buick, and lived in the same neighborhood as most of their patients.  Back in those days, we had a "Medical Profession".  Now, we have a "Health Care Industry", and the First Priority of any industry is to Make Money.  7 out of the top 10 highest paid careers are in the Medical arena.  Then, when you add in all the Insurance and Drug company BS, it's easy to see why we pay twice as much for health care as nations which have adopted a Universal Care system.  Now, with the advent of the ACA, and even Medicare/Medicaid, many of the doctors are trying to weasel out of taking patients under those plans.  The AMA lobbies the universities hard to limit the number of Med Students so as to keep the supply of doctors low, and thus stifle anything remotely resembling Competition.  

The ACA does Nothing to reduce costs...sure it offers some of those in the low income brackets a "subsidy", but WHERE is that subsidy really coming from?  It is just adding to this nations already ridiculous national debt, and protecting the profits of our Health Care industry.  When the Lobbyists wrote this legislation, they made sure that their special interests were well protected, and few, if any, in Congress ever read this bill before they signed it.  One of the Few things Nancy Pelosi ever said that was true was when she urged Congress to pass the bill, "so we can find out what is in it".  

It will take a few years for this ACA to rear its ugly head completely, but I feel quite sure that by the end of this decade, health care will become so expensive that only the upper crust can afford full care, and our government will have accumulated so much extra debt, that it will have no choice but to begin a serious move towards a SP-UHC system.


----------



## Jackie22 (Dec 23, 2014)

Early reports are showing that cost rates are slowing, the government is saving billions over the long term.  Room for improvement, yes, but nothing like what the GOP try to sell the public.


[h=1]Upside of Affordable Care Act: Health care costs down Savings estimated in billions of dollars[/h]Not long ago, the airwaves were filled with predictions that health-care reform would be a disaster for taxpayers and consumers. That hasn't happened. 

According to the Congressional Budget Office, the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, will cut the federal budget deficit by $100 billion despite adding health coverage for about 10 million people, by federal estimates. 

............... 

The overall federal deficit has dropped dramatically. It's now projected to total nearly $5 trillion less by 2020 than was expected just four years ago. Maybe more importantly, Van de Water says the ACA is improving the health of the vital Medicare program, which is threatened by an influx of millions of baby boomers. 
"Medicare will continue to need adjustments, but it's clear health reform has made Medicare's prospects better, not worse," he says. 

the rest: 
http://www.thecharlottepost.com/new...f-affordable-care-act-health-care-costs-down/


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 23, 2014)

Tsk tsk....Darn those pesky FACTS...


----------



## BobF (Dec 23, 2014)

I say wait and see what reality brings us.  So far all these Obama care predictions have proven to be false and misleading.


----------



## Don M. (Dec 23, 2014)

"Early reports are showing that costs rates are slowing". 

It is Far Too Early to predict just what the ACA is going to do to long term costs.  Any predictions, at this point, especially those coming from the Administration, are "iffy", at best.  Like any other government initiatives, those in charge will Always try to put lipstick on a pig.  Come back in 2 or 3 years, and we will have a far better idea of where rates and costs are heading.  Then, there is the upcoming Republican controlled Congress, which will be doing everything in their power to torpedo the bulk of this legislation.  Beginning shortly into 2015, we will see Congress consumed with this issue.  

The nations entitlement programs, including Medicare and Social Security will be coming under increasing pressure, as our retiree population continues to expand.  Without increased funding for these vital programs, their days, under present conditions, are numbered.  The First real test will come sometime in 2016 when the SSDI program is slated to go into the Red.  How that program is handled will speak volumes for the future of All of our entitlement programs.  

The biggest "bellwether" for health care costs, IMO, is prescription drug costs.  We pay 2 or 3 times what the costs in Canada or Mexico are, for the same drugs.  This is easily explained.  First, it seems that half the TV commercials are "Ask Your Doctor" ads for these drugs.  The drug companies add the hundreds of millions of dollars for these ads to the cost of the drugs.  Then, when the side effects of these drugs begin to start killing people, and the lawyers take over with their Class Action lawsuits, the drug companies have to have created a "slush fund" of hundreds of millions to pay for the lawsuits.  Therefore, when someone in the US gets "coaxed" into taking drugs, they are paying not only for the drugs, but also the advertising and legal fees, ahead of time.  If the ACA was "Really" concerned with lowering medical costs in this nation, this would be a Real good place to start.  However, given the millions of dollars the drug companies, and the Lawyers, donate to the political campaigns, any action in Congress to reduce this massive Scam, is highly unlikely.  

So....just wait.  Sometime in the latter half of this decade, we will have a far better picture of just where Health Care in this nation is headed.  Personally, I am not optimistic.  The next few years would be a Real Good time for people to concentrate on keeping healthy and utilizing diet/exercise/lifestyle changes, etc., so as to avoid becoming mired in our Health Care Industry.


----------



## QuickSilver (Dec 23, 2014)

Well... Republicans were against Medicare and Social Security also.. Need I say more?


----------



## Josiah (Dec 23, 2014)

BobF said:


> I say wait and see what reality brings us.  So far all these Obama care predictions have proven to be false and misleading.


It seems to me Bob that the predictions that have proven false are those offered by Republicans who predicted failure and calamity for everything connected to Obama Care.


----------



## BobF (Dec 23, 2014)

To those that seem to think Obama care is successful, you need to wait till it is all begun and then wait for some history to develop.   Right now neither has happened so no reason to be patting yourself on the back yet.   For Obama, our national debt has risen from the 10 trillion Pelosi and Reid left him to near 20 trillion today.   Pretty sad way for anyone to treat this nation and all the people that must pay those bills.

One thing I noticed just today is the 50% rise in the cost of one of my medical types of tooth paste, it went from $12 a tube to now $19 dollars a tube.    It has been $12 dollars a year for years but now this past year it jumped by 50%.  Has our new Obama care caused this?    I wonder why?    Could it be part of the Obama care interference with products?   What else could be causing such a rise in a medical suggested product.   I am going to check and see why it is so expensive if I can.   Maybe I just don't need a medically suggested product as badly as the doctor thought.


----------



## Blaze Duskdreamer (Dec 23, 2014)

Jackie22 said:


> Early reports are showing that cost rates are slowing, the government is saving billions over the long term.  Room for improvement, yes, but nothing like what the GOP try to sell the public.
> 
> 
> *Upside of Affordable Care Act: Health care costs down Savings estimated in billions of dollars*
> ...



The government may be saving billions of dollars.  Your average citizen isn't.  My daughter's been forced on to insurance.  She makes $250-$300 a week and as of the January 1st will be paying $70 a week for health insurance.  I think they're making the numbers look good by passing on the costs to the working poor.  No, she can't get the subsidy or buy the public option because her employer offers health care and if she doesn't sign up for it, she is fined.  She will be fined for 2014 even though she was changing jobs and missed the cut-off date for enrolling in her employer's health plan.

There are things your government isn't telling you.


----------



## Don M. (Dec 23, 2014)

The long term success of the ACA is predicated on getting large numbers of young healthy people, making a decent wage, to sign up, so as to bring more money into the system, and minimize the expenses.  Instead, the majority of those signing up are the poorer people who require substantial subsidizes to get insurance.  Many of the better off young are foregoing this insurance, and opting instead to pay the penalties.  Without the subsidies, and lacking employer coverage, these young people face costs in the many thousands per year to get health insurance...even under the ACA exchanges.  For them, the penalties, and the occasional out of pocket expenses if they do need to see a doctor are quite a bit less than buying insurance.  So the Net gain, or in this case, "reduction" in health care costs, is going to be very difficult to attain.  It may all work out in the long run, but I seriously doubt it.  I see nothing but continuing rising costs for health care that far outstrip inflation and wages....no matter what kind of spin the government tries to put on this program.


----------



## BobF (Dec 24, 2014)

That bit about doing her own medical payments is exactly what my daughter has chosen to do.   She went a bought a insurance for serious problems that require hospitalizations and extreme treatments but for daily doctoring she does her own or pays the bills.  She claims it to be much easier for her to afford than this Obama care stuff.   We will have too wait and see if the new Congress will help to fix some of the problems that began with the incomplete start of the Obama care we now live with.    Or maybe we have to wait and see if the next President will have a different view about really having a helpful health care plan that helps all the low income folks and allows the rest of the people to do as they can for themselves.   People working should have their own choices and those not working need a helping hand, more like they were getting prior to Obama care.   A friend of mine got a new heart through some mechanism as he certainly had not been working prior to that event.   Now with Obama care in place do we still have those old mercy missions working to pay for what the person could not?    If so, why the big need for Obama care as it is now going?


----------



## WhatInThe (Dec 28, 2014)

Apparently less than half of Obama Care enrollees have renewed their Obama Care plans.

I think many of realized the cost of deductibles, co pays and/or co insurance does not lead to health CARE. 

http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/16/o...ut-returning-customers-are-still-shying-away/

And yet renewing or re-enrolling is supposed to be so easy.

http://article.wn.com/view/2014/06/27/Administration_Renewing_Obamacare_easier_than_enrolling/


----------



## Denise1952 (Dec 28, 2014)

SeaBreeze said:


> They wouldn't.



My first instinct is no, I would never vote republican, but then the democrats are for abortion which I detest as much as I detested what hitler did.  Isn't there anyone out there that is "for" all the right things, or does it always have to be the lesser of two evils


----------



## BobF (Dec 28, 2014)

Why not just vote for the person whether they are Republican, Democrat, or independent.   Just voting for the party is a big mistake and not the way our forefathers had set it up at all.


----------



## Denise1952 (Dec 28, 2014)

BobF said:


> Why not just vote for the person whether they are Republican, Democrat, or independent.   Just voting for the party is a big mistake and not the way our forefathers had set it up at all.



Oh I agree, and that's what I've been doing, but it's hard to find someone I really feel good about voting for.  Everyone here knows I don't know a lot about politics, so I get focused on the biggest issues, the ones everyone talks about (newsies & people, candidates).  No, I haven't voted for anyone just because of their "party" for a long time.  I guess a lot of people do, but are they like me voting for the lesser of two evils, or just trust the BIG "R" or the BIG "D"


----------



## Sid (Dec 31, 2014)

How can anybody be for or against anything they can not possibly understand.
       How many pages is it?
       Don't forget, "We have to pass it before we know what is in it".

       How many can look me in the eye and say Yes I know and understand all about it.
       If I have a question about it can anyone give me the page the paragraph and the line that I can find the answer.


----------



## BobF (Jan 1, 2015)

I doubt if any of the normal voters know much about who or what they are voting for.   They can, at least, determine from the debates and from the election releases, at least a bit of the outline for the subject or the person being run for.    The published, and finalized opinion and release will not come till well after the election, just like Obama care has done, and is still doing.   It is for us, the electors to choose the general ideas and then hope the elected will do as the population has asked them to do.   Obama care was a good example of very improper ideas of actions and such.   As I have read the Obama care has never all been put together in clear and proper fashion and is still evolving.   Just vote for your very own position and don't sit their and wait for the party to tell you how to vote.   If they agree with you then vote your way, but it they disagree, study and agree or disagree.   That is the voters job in an election.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 1, 2015)

Everything can be simplified with universal/single-payer health care.


----------



## Don M. (Jan 1, 2015)

Be patient...we Will get there...And, when the full effects of Obamacare kick in, and are fully understood, the ACA will accelerate the process.  I fully expect a serious move towards SP-UHC by the end of this decade.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jan 1, 2015)

Baby steps.


----------



## QuickSilver (Jan 1, 2015)

Here's what I know....  The ACA is helping my son finally get the care he desperately needs..  and he would not get if it were not for the Medicaid expansion... despite his affliation with the VA... there are some things they cannot provide..  So.. For those who think my son, a veteran, should not be helped... I have two words... and they aren't "terribly sorry"..


----------



## Don M. (Jan 1, 2015)

I'm sure there are some people being helped by the ACA, but the Overall, Long Term success of this program is yet to be determined.  As of today, the reimbursement to physicians/hospitals, under both Medicare and Medicaid, is being reduced by a couple of percentage points.  Already, there is a growing number of doctors who are Not accepting new patients under these programs, and any cuts in their payments will only add to that number.  That, coupled with a growing shortage of doctors being graduated from Med School, and entering the field as Family Doctors/General Practitioners, does not bode well for most people.  Then, the almost certain battles coming in Congress, within weeks, in attempts to dismantle the ACA, will throw even more of our health care system into a state of limbo.  

Stay Healthy, my friends...things may get Very Interesting in coming months and years.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/brucejapsen/2015/01/01/multiple-pay-cuts-hit-doctors-in-2015/


----------



## WhatInThe (Jan 2, 2015)

Obama Care has it's issues to say the least but be glad it wasn't Hillary Care or that Hillary installs Hillary Care or Health if by some miracle elected. Hillary Health was much more 'coercive' if not draconian. One big difference it would've included rationing.

http://nypost.com/2014/12/25/how-hillary-could-make-obamacare-worse/


----------



## SeaBreeze (Oct 26, 2016)

:bump:


----------



## Knight (Oct 26, 2016)

QuickSilver said:


> Here's what I know....  The ACA is helping my son finally get the care he desperately needs..  and he would not get if it were not for the Medicaid expansion... despite his affliation with the VA... there are some things they cannot provide..  So.. For those who think my son, a veteran, should not be helped... I have two words... and they aren't "terribly sorry"..


Isn't the VA the closest thing there is to a single payer system? The gov. provides the funding, controls the care given.

You mention there are some things the VA cannot provide. What do you think would be different when the gov. controls all health care?


----------



## Ray (Oct 26, 2016)

What do republicans have against people having healthcare?? It amazes me.

The discussion is not about health care, it is about health insurance. People who can afford health insurance get it. The poor have Medicaid.

 Granted, there are problems that need fixing. For example, pre-existent conditions. there are two sides to that. One is people kicked off due to a condition and not able to get new insurance - that should be illegal. But, how about the 45 year old man who never had insurance and suddenly needs it? Should someone else pick up his tab after he never participated. I'd like to see how people see that situation.

The situation of the son who Republicans theoretically want to have no healthcare might also bring up issues needing to be addressed.

Considering the recent revelations about the VA and how everyone constantly complains about the inefficiency of bureaucracies, turning the whole thing over to the government hardly seems wise.


----------



## mathjak107 (Oct 26, 2016)

obamacare is a disaster .

health insurance works because the healthy folks pool the money to pay for the unhealthy folks .

well with premiums near 5k with no subsidy and first having a 2500 to 3k deductible and almost 7k out of pocket it is a better deal for healthy folks to pay the fine .

they can pay the fine , pay their usual yearly low medical bills and come out thousands ahead .   you can spend 2500 bucks in bills  and still not even count the 4-5k for premiums  nor the fact you got back zero because you did not meet your deductible .

according to the ny times that is what happened . younger healthy folks are opting for the fine leaving those who need care and expensive treatment left in the pool .

our aca insurer went bankrupt last year  sending us scrambling for coverage .


----------

