The Truth About Obamacare

Shady · February 15, 2014

That's the beauty of universal health care. Everyone is covered for whatever ails them. No need to worry about what coverage you will need or when. Sooner or later, universal health care will take the place of obamacare.

Paying for insurance that doesn't apply to you isn't something I'd characterize as beautiful. But it's all about ones perspective and what they value most, ie more control over their own lives, freedom, liberty, etc.

Shady · February 15, 2014

We just have a little problem knowing if we'll get cancer or not.

That's not the issue. Perhaps this topic is a little over your head.

On Guard for Thee · February 16, 2014

That's not the issue. Perhaps this topic is a little over your head.

No, I think it's maybe a lot over yours. But fill your boots, go to the states take a gamble, I hope you don't get sick and lose everything you have worked for. I'll stay here thanks, and worry about other things.

bush_cheney2004 · February 16, 2014

No, I think it's maybe a lot over yours. But fill your boots, go to the states take a gamble, I hope you don't get sick and lose everything you have worked for. I'll stay here thanks, and worry about other things.

Do you really live each waking hour so worried about health care ?

On Guard for Thee · February 16, 2014

Do you really live each waking hour so worried about health care ?

I never worry about it, i only protect it.

bush_cheney2004 · February 16, 2014

I never worry about it, i only protect it.

No, it seems to be a very big concern of yours. Why ?

On Guard for Thee · February 16, 2014

I refer you back to "West Coast Runner" comment just above.I couldn't say it better.

On Guard for Thee · February 16, 2014

That's not the issue. Perhaps this topic is a little over your head.

Yep, that's the issue for most people. Not having to worry about whether you get sick or get hit by a car. You get the medical help you need. When you leave the house each day you don't know what might be just around the corner. Here we don't have to cherrypick that like the Americans have to do.

Shady · February 16, 2014

Yep, that's the issue for most people. Not having to worry about whether you get sick or get hit by a car. You get the medical help you need. When you leave the house each day you don't know what might be just around the corner. Here we don't have to cherrypick that like the Americans have to do.

Once again, that's not the issue. You're be obtuse, is it deliberate? It's not about cherry picking, it's about paying for things that only apply to you, and not having to pay for things that will never apply. Forcing a 75 year old woman to pay for insurance that includes maternity leave, or prostate examinations, etc, is retarded.

Argus · February 16, 2014

Nope.....some procedures are not covered by provincial health care...and this varies province to province. For instance, lap band surgery is not currently covered by OHIP. The U.S. will not implement Canada's version of universal health care, as far better public/private options are available.

Then why don't you impliment THEM?

TimG · February 16, 2014

Forcing a 75 year old woman to pay for insurance that includes maternity leave, or prostate examinations, etc, is retarded.

Insurance, by definition, works because it spreads costs among a large group of people. The larger the group the lower the average cost but to create a larger group one must include things that are not needed by the majority of the group.

If you believe that insurance is not necessary and people should simply pay the cost of their own medical care then say so. But don't waste time trying pretend that everyone should be able to buy an insurance product at a reasonable cost that does not pay for things that they will never need personally.

Edited February 16, 2014 by TimG

kimmy · February 16, 2014

The real problem with Obamacare is that it doesn't address overcharging.

Here's an example. A woman goes to a doctor for regular treatments that cost $500. Medicare pays $216 of it. Then her doctor sells his practice to a hospital. She goes back to get her treatment and now it costs $19,235 and Medicare pays $2623. The same treatment costs Medicare $2400 more because the ownership changed?

There are endless examples of this sort of thing. Patients find themselves flabbergasted by their bills and request an itemized breakdown, and find $24 Tylenol-3, $95 bags of saline solution, and $12 for a "mucous recovery system":

One of her favorites includes $12 for a "mucous-recovery system" — also known as a tissue.

Making sure everybody has access to health insurance might help people, but it doesn't address the underlying issue.

Consumers really do not have the power to reform the market, said Derek Fitteron, founder and chief executive officer of Medical Cost Advocate in Wyckoff, N.J.

"Health care is a very interesting market. It is very fragmented on one side — lots of consumers and hospitals and doctors," he said. "And very consolidated on the other side — several large insurers pay most of the bills."

That imbalance often leaves consumers at the mercy of hospitals and other medical providers, experts said.

"We have the best care in the world, but we pay a lot," Fitteron said. "We overpay for it. Our costs are not just higher than any other country; they are two times or three times higher than any other country."

When I was still a teenager, I looked into getting a replacement windshield for my first car (the mighty Reliant K-car I bought for $500 with my McDonalds money.) I went to a major autoglass company and got a quote from the guy at the counter. I believe it was somewhere in the range of $350. I balked at the idea of buying a $350 windshield for a $500 car, and he said "your insurance is paying for it, right?" I said that I was paying out of pocket, and he said "oh!" and came up with a new quote-- I think it was about $120, which I agreed to. I was surprised at the time to learn that the same windshield had different prices depending on who was paying for it.

I wonder if expanding health insurance coverage in America will just create more opportunities for hospitals to overcharge.

-k

Shady · February 16, 2014

Insurance, by definition, works because it spreads costs among a large group of people. The larger the group the lower the average cost but to create a larger group one must include things that are not needed by the majority of the group.

If you believe that insurance is not necessary and people should simply pay the cost of their own medical care then say so. But don't waste time trying pretend that everyone should be able to buy an insurance product at a reasonable cost that does not pay for things that they will never need personally.

I agree. But telling a 75 year old woman that her previous health insurance plan is "junk" because it didn't include things like maternity leave, and prostate examination is absurd. And telling said woman if she like her plan, she could keep it, and than reneging on said deal is criminal. Anyways, it all comes down to philosphy. Does one prefer more freedom, liberty, and governance over their own life, with the choice to purchase insurance of their choosing, or does one want the opposite. To each their own.

Shady · February 16, 2014

The real problem with Obamacare is that it doesn't address overcharging.

Here's an example. A woman goes to a doctor for regular treatments that cost $500. Medicare pays $216 of it. Then her doctor sells his practice to a hospital. She goes back to get her treatment and now it costs $19,235 and Medicare pays $2623. The same treatment costs Medicare $2400 more because the ownership changed?

There are endless examples of this sort of thing. Patients find themselves flabbergasted by their bills and request an itemized breakdown, and find $24 Tylenol-3, $95 bags of saline solution, and $12 for a "mucous recovery system":

Making sure everybody has access to health insurance might help people, but it doesn't address the underlying issue.

When I was still a teenager, I looked into getting a replacement windshield for my first car (the mighty Reliant K-car I bought for $500 with my McDonalds money.) I went to a major autoglass company and got a quote from the guy at the counter. I believe it was somewhere in the range of $350. I balked at the idea of buying a $350 windshield for a $500 car, and he said "your insurance is paying for it, right?" I said that I was paying out of pocket, and he said "oh!" and came up with a new quote-- I think it was about $120, which I agreed to. I was surprised at the time to learn that the same windshield had different prices depending on who was paying for it.

I wonder if expanding health insurance coverage in America will just create more opportunities for hospitals to overcharge.

-k

We haven't done anything to fix our overcharging either.

kimmy · February 16, 2014

We haven't done anything to fix our overcharging either.

Que?

-k

Shady · February 16, 2014

Que?

-k

I'm fairly certain that the $1200 dollars the hospital listed as the charging prices of my crutches a couple of years ago was just a wee bit inflated. Unless you think a couple of pieces of wood with some foam is that expensive. But oh well, the province picked up the tabl Nobody knows, nobody seems to care.

TimG · February 16, 2014

But telling a 75 year old woman that her previous health insurance plan is "junk" because it didn't include things like maternity leave, and prostate examination is absurd.

I would just prefer if you correctly diagnosed the problem. The insurance companies in the US had found a way to provide different plans to target different markets. This also meant that some people found that they could not find an insurance product that suited their needs at a price they could pay and they complained. Obamacare comes in and tries to address these complaints by mandating a one-size-fits-all plan. This is no different than the government telling carmakers that they were only allowed to sell SUVs because some people were complaining that they could not afford SUVs.

i.e. the issue is Obamacare telling businesses what they are allowed to sell when there is no real justification. This issue is not about an insurance plan covering things that some people will never need.

Edited February 16, 2014 by TimG

cybercoma · February 16, 2014

Comparing health care to SUVs?

TimG · February 16, 2014

Comparing health care to SUVs?

No. I am comparing health insurance products to cars. There is no difference. Both are necessary expenses for the vast majority of people but different people have different needs so it is unreasonable to expect private companies to provide the same product to everyone.

kimmy · February 16, 2014

I'm fairly certain that the $1200 dollars the hospital listed as the charging prices of my crutches a couple of years ago was just a wee bit inflated. Unless you think a couple of pieces of wood with some foam is that expensive. But oh well, the province picked up the tabl Nobody knows, nobody seems to care.

ok, and that relates to Obamacare? If publicly-run health insurance in Canada can't keep a hospital from billing $1200 for crutches, what hope has a private citizen in the US got in fighting overbilling?

-k

bush_cheney2004 · February 16, 2014

....If you believe that insurance is not necessary and people should simply pay the cost of their own medical care then say so. But don't waste time trying pretend that everyone should be able to buy an insurance product at a reasonable cost that does not pay for things that they will never need personally.

Private health insurance is a product to be purchased by the consumer. There is no reason that a high deductible, catastrophic coverage policy cannot exclude specific procedures to reduce cost. Provincial health insurance does this very thing by excluding coverage for certain procedures.

On Guard for Thee · February 16, 2014

Once again, that's not the issue. You're be obtuse, is it deliberate? It's not about cherry picking, it's about paying for things that only apply to you, and not having to pay for things that will never apply. Forcing a 75 year old woman to pay for insurance that includes maternity leave, or prostate examinations, etc, is retarded.

Right then, so to follow your logic, we should make the retarded pay for being....retarded. Sounds a bit retarded.

Bonam · February 17, 2014

Insurance, by definition, works because it spreads costs among a large group of people. The larger the group the lower the average cost...

The larger the group the lower the average? No, that is not true at all (apart from potential second order effects like the ability of a large group to negotiate better deals for drugs/services, slightly reduced overhead per person, etc). But to first order, the average cost per person stays the same regardless of the group size, it is just the variability of cost over time that goes down.

bush_cheney2004 · March 14, 2014

Obamacare is dying.....

President Obama is dismantling it himself, lawlessly hacking off provisions as they become unpopular in order to minimize Democratic losses in the fall election.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2014/03/13/obamacare-is-dying/?intcmp=latestnews

MSNBC's Chris Matthews has already resigned himself to the loss of the Senate for Democrats.

Bitsy · March 14, 2014

Forcing a 75 year old woman to pay for insurance that includes maternity leave, or prostate examinations, etc, is retarded.

Do you have an example where this has occurred? I have never seen any Medicare supplemental plans or Medicare Advantage plans that included maternity leave.