OBAMA/TRUMPCARE MEGATHREAD

[caulfield12]

56 minutes ago, greg775 said:

I think we should have a discussion of medical horror stories and elderly assisted care living horror stories. I am a hater of our current healthcare system, so much I only want Bernie to win so we can get everything for free in the future. My contention is the insurance companies, even if you get the max coverage at work, don't pay squat and they are putting any middle class person who needs work done on the streets, in the poorhouse.

 

Latest story: A woman I know lost 40 pounds and her blood pressure went back to normal so they took her off the pills. The doctor office said "feel free to come in and get BP readings the next month and see if your readings remain good." She gets a bill today. 60 bucks each time she went in for a one minute blood pressure reading from the nurse. Appalling. America ... land of the way too expensive education system; land of the ripoff health care system!!! Land of the ripoff daycare system (TOO EXPENSIVE!) and land of the ripoff assisted living home system (TOO EXPENSIVE!). What happens is the elderly person gets to stay in assisted living til their funds run out, their savings run out, the $$ they were gonna give to their kids upon death runs out, and the person is kicked to the curb. People like Trump don't care; it's gonna take somebody like Bernie, folks.

The ONLY thing I can tell you about that Greg is that if you helped your parent/s invest their money wisely....there should be around $1-1.5 million to work with at this late/r point in their lives.

They can't force that older person to sell their house...or it's a complicated process in many states to go after those assets before Medicaid will kick in.

At any rate, if you have a pension/partial pension and some SS, the money generated there (let's say $2-3K per month) combined with a nest egg of $1 million would be creating another $50,000 (pre-tax), which is basically enough to meet assisted living care costs in most parts (not the coasts) without touching that principal of $1-1.5 million.

Now I realize that's not possible for every family...but the fact of the matter is that it's not hard, you don't even have to have a combined household income of over $50,000 if you invest your money into the VFINX (Vanguard 500 Index) every month or year (or Berkshire Hathaway B Shares) and let compounding work in your favor.

 

Of course, if we privatized Social Security and everyone started Medical Savings Accounts, I'm curious how many Americans would end up losing all their money or withdrawing it earlier for emergencies....the government programs basically exist to protect the greatest number of Americans from themselves (their poor decisions about finances/debt/spending.)

[caulfield12]

OMB Director Mick Mulvaney: "Mick Mulvaney. He's got two hats on now, right, Mick? You've got two hats, not just one. And you're doing great at both. But Office of Management and Budget has been good, and our budget this year will be -- there will be a lot of cutting, because we want to cut. You know, Mick is really more of a cutter than the other. But we had to get the military through. We got $700 billion approved for military. We needed that. And in order to get that done, we had to do some things for the Democrats that we would normally not do -- because we consider a lot of it waste and a horror show. But in order to get our military and $6 billion for opioid. So we got the -- which Melania is so heavily involved in -- and we got that taken care of. And very importantly, next year, $716 billion for military. So, Mick, great job. And this time, you can start cutting, OK? Because we have our military taken care of now, so you can start really cutting." (185 words)

https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/06/politics/donald-trump-jeff-sessions/index.html

 

[StrangeSox]

Texas is asking the courts to enjoin the entire ACA, and the department of Justice is now refusing to defend the law.

 

[StrangeSox]

Really, really bad

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Can't get your policies through fair democratic elections, or even through Congress despite unfair elections? Turn next to the courts you spent years blocking the previous administration from staffing!

 

 

[BigSqwert]

Greatest healthcare system in the world!

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/28/17506232/emergency-room-bill-fees-health-insurance-baby

Quote

A baby was treated with a nap and a bottle of formula. His parents received an $18,000 bill.

 

Edited June 28, 2018 by BigSqwert

[greg775]

50 minutes ago, BigSqwert said:

Greatest healthcare system in the world!

https://www.vox.com/2018/6/28/17506232/emergency-room-bill-fees-health-insurance-baby

 

I encourage everybody to read that story. This is what I'm talking about. I mean person breaks her foot, it's $110,000. The baby goes to hospital and they do nothing for the baby except say the baby is OK and it's $20,000. Our healthcare is a scam and there's nothing we can do. Nobody in government cares. This is an outrage. I wonder if the politicians and their families don't have these problems when they or their relatives go to the hospital. There have to be some scandals out there because even politicians could be wiped out by a simple 3-day hospital stay.

Is anybody else concerned about this or do you all have money to burn? Major purchases in life - cars, hospitals, boats, vacation homes are considered a big deal. A hospital stay, albeit a short one, has become a major deal. All because of rejected charges by the insurance companies if you happen to have insurance.

Edited June 28, 2018 by greg775

[Jenksismyhero]

I wonder if anyone has been successful suing hospitals for fraudulent billing. 

[caulfield12]

I thought the GOP talking point was tort reform...too many frivolous lawsuits driving up the costs of doing business?

Well, this is one case where hospitals/insurance company are accruing too much power, and the obvious direction of the SCOTUS is to pretty much do anything to protect corporate interests against individual consumers.

Edited June 28, 2018 by caulfield12

[StrangeSox]

Lots of bad reporting today on a libertarian think tanks study in the cost of m4a that misses the context that by their own accounting, m4a is cheaper than our garbage private system

 

 

 

 

Edited July 30, 2018 by StrangeSox

[Jenksismyhero]

3 hours ago, StrangeSox said:

Lots of bad reporting today on a libertarian think tanks study in the cost of m4a that misses the context that by their own accounting, m4a is cheaper than our garbage private system

 

 

 

 

Isn't that savings they found on the cost of drugs/administration, not the actual system? So yeah, drugs are cheaper and going to a doctor is cheaper, but you're adding 30 million more people onto the system that are not currently insured, among other things, so it would still cost whatever they find - 36 trillion over ten years - to fully fund it.

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/study-medicare-bill-estimated-326-trillion-56906940

Quote

 

The study found that the plan would reap substantial savings from lower prescription costs — $846 billion over 10 years — since the government would deal directly with drugmakers. Savings from streamlined administration would be even greater, nearly $1.6 trillion.

But other provisions would tend to drive up spending, including coverage for nearly 30 million uninsured people, no deductibles and copays, and improved benefits, including dental, vision and hearing.

After taking into account current government health care financing, the study estimated that doubling all federal individual and corporate income taxes would not fully cover the additional costs.

 

No thanks.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Jenksismyhero

[GoSox05]

We can just make the rich pay for it.

[Jenksismyhero]

Having seen how the VA is run and how Medicare is run....even if it can be done without a dollar increase in my taxes, I still say no thanks.

[caulfield12]

“Enacting something like ‘Medicare for all’ would be a transformative change in the size of the federal government,” said Charles Blahous, the study’s author. Blahous was a senior economic adviser to former President George W. Bush and a public trustee of Social Security and Medicare during the Obama administration.

Responding to the study, Sanders took aim at the Mercatus Center, which receives funding from the conservative Koch brothers. Koch Industries CEO Charles Koch is on the center’s board.

“If every major country on earth can guarantee health care to all, and achieve better health outcomes, while spending substantially less per capita than we do, it is absurd for anyone to suggest that the United States cannot do the same,” Sanders said in a statement. “This grossly misleading and biased report is the Koch brothers response to the growing support in our country for a ‘Medicare for all’ program.”

Sanders’ office has not done a cost analysis, a spokesman said. His 2016 presidential campaign website cites an estimated price tag of $1.38 trillion a year for an earlier version of the plan, but other studies have projected much higher costs.

Sanders’ staff found an error in an initial version of the Mercatus report, which counted a long-term care program that was in the 2016 proposal but not the current one. Blahous corrected it, reducing his estimate by about $3 trillion ($29-30 trillion) over 10 years. Blahous says the report is based on his own work, not the Koch brothers’.

https://apnews.com/09e06d686a1a481fa76e3fd91f3fcbc2/Study:-'Medicare-for-all'-projected-to-cost-$32.6-trillion

[GoSox05]

1 hour ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Having seen how the VA is run and how Medicare is run....even if it can be done without a dollar increase in my taxes, I still say no thanks.

Have you seen how private insurance is run?

[Jenksismyhero]

2 hours ago, GoSox05 said:

Have you seen how private insurance is run?

Yeah for the vast majority of people it works just fine. 

[Balta1701]

1 minute ago, Jenksismyhero said:

Yeah for the vast majority of people it works just fine. 

And there we have it - the Republican Definition of Freedom is the hours spent on the phone fighting to get your insurance company to cover something.

[Jenksismyhero]

33 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

And there we have it - the Republican Definition of Freedom is the hours spent on the phone fighting to get your insurance company to cover something.

It's not perfect, changes can and should be made, but a single payer system run by the government would be a gigantic diasaster. Literally look at the VA and Medicare. The VA is so fucked up the private system is the preferred alternative.

I've never had to fight an insurance company anymore than I've had to "fight" my cell phone company, my cable company, etc. The few hours of inconvenience a year are well worth it. 

[southsider2k5]

50 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

And there we have it - the Republican Definition of Freedom is the hours spent on the phone fighting to get your insurance company to cover something.

Sounds remarkably like the VA and Medicare. 

[southsider2k5]

12 minutes ago, Jenksismyhero said:

It's not perfect, changes can and should be made, but a single payer system run by the government would be a gigantic diasaster. Literally look at the VA and Medicare. The VA is so fucked up the private system is the preferred alternative.

I've never had to fight an insurance company anymore than I've had to "fight" my cell phone company, my cable company, etc. The few hours of inconvenience a year are well worth it. 

The VA literally pretends that entire diagnoses don't exist to make sure that most vets die from it by the time legal action can be taken to force them to admit that it was a real thing.

[ptatc]

18 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

The VA literally pretends that entire diagnoses don't exist to make sure that most vets die from it by the time legal action can be taken to force them to admit that it was a real thing.

Yes. Anytime any organization has complete power, it will not go well. There has to be other options especially in the practice of medicine. Insurance companies like to make grand assumptions about any diagnosis ie. number of visits, type of treatment covered. Imagine if there was only one rule for all of this.

[caulfield12]

Yet every industrialized country in the world can figure it out despite the US spending far and away the most per capita on health care well before the age of ObamaCare, with abysmal mortality rates and preventive care being two lowlights?

At any rate, fixing the donut hole within ACA is STILL much better than destroying the ACA, completely starting from scratch OR Medicare for All.

Let’s not forget the dangers of complete profit-oriented online schools, prisons/military contractors, bridge and tollways that charge a ton but are always under repair...where is the so-called market efficiency there?   

[ptatc]

33 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

Yet every industrialized country in the world can figure it out despite the US spending far and away the most per capita on health care well before the age of ObamaCare, with abysmal mortality rates and preventive care being two lowlights?

At any rate, fixing the donut hole within ACA is STILL much better than destroying the ACA, completely starting from scratch OR Medicare for All.

Let’s not forget the dangers of complete profit-oriented online schools, prisons/military contractors, bridge and tollways that charge a ton but are always under repair...where is the so-called market efficiency there?   

Because every industrialized country does not have the population that the US does. There are just too many people for a nationalized health care system to make economic sense.

[caulfield12]

1 hour ago, ptatc said:

Because every industrialized country does not have the population that the US does. There are just too many people for a nationalized health care system to make economic sense.

Fine, then why does it work so well in China?

They have more capital reserves than any country in the world, and everyone can cheaply see a doctor in 30-45 minutes...the same day they have a problem.

The only problem is that it’s so affordable, people take their young kids there for trivial issues...whereas we wait until near death to dare going to a hospital in the US.  This, invariably, makes the long term costs of avoiding treatment even more onerous.   Or you just end up with more medical bankruptcies or costs getting written off, with premiums consistently rising on the most high risk insurance pools.

[StrangeSox]

8 hours ago, ptatc said:

Because every industrialized country does not have the population that the US does. There are just too many people for a nationalized health care system to make economic sense.

The US has more money per person than those other countries, though. We could afford it if we wanted to. We already spent much more per person annually than those countries, and our outcomes are worse.