-
aggie2012thman said...
I would ask you to provide any real world evidence of this, but I'm assuming this is an opinion, rather than a fact.
Regardless, here's the real world and the free market:
The free market once governed the workplace and the hiring if quality employees. Companies were encouraged to produce benefits in order to attract employees to their force. This spawned the benefit of health insurance for employees paid for by their employer.
But, the employer was smart. He knew that he had thousands of employees and the insurance company would love to have them all as costumers. The employer therefore struck a deal: Give him a discount and he'll buy all of his employees insurance with that company. Free market, fair deal.
This was a great idea and became wide spread. It was almost expected to have health insurance if you were going to attract employees. Insurance companies caught on to this and began raising their premiums. They made it more expensive to own individual insurance rather than get it through employment. This meant that insurance companies no longer had to worry about individual purchases as they could operate with employers.
Then there was the hospitals/clinics. They needed to get the most money they could out of insurance companies, but if they charged too much then the insurance company wouldn't allow their costumers to use that clinic (at least, they wouldn't pay for it). Less insurances meant less companies, but clinics would lose money if they went too low. This started the practice of artificially inflating prices in clinics. This way, you walk into the doctor's office and he tells you to put ice on your sprain, you would walk away with a $120 bill. The insurance company then comes into the clinic and says "No, you're going to give US a deal that says we only have to pay $60." The clinic agrees. The insurance company cut the price in half, and you pay a $30 copay for an artificially inflated $120 product.
This is all swell unless you DON'T have insurance. Since everyone has insurance due to employment, there's no market for the uninsured. So, when you walk in uninsured, you don't get that nifty $60 charge, you get the full $120, which the doctor is FORCED to charge so that he can negotiate the insurance companies down and still actually make a profit.
This continues until unemployment skyrockets. Now, employers don't NEED nice insurance to pull people in, but they need to keep it on in order to keep who they have. As a result, they cut a new deal with the insurance company that allows them to pay less, but also cut coverage. The insurance company thinks this is a splendid idea, and agrees. Yay free market.
Since you need a job, you'll take whatever coverage they can give you and pray there's not accident in your family. You can't afford the inflated medical prices and you can't afford the inflated individual insurance plans, you're stuck.
That's your free market.
-
buttonhere said...
Enough with the "cite this." You have cited nothing. When you ask someone to do something that you are not doing yourself, it gets old. I think there are good points to the bill, and I have no doubt that it will change several times over the next decade. You are clearly not alarmed when the feds poke their noses into peoples' affairs, and that is fine. You must realize that other people have legitimate concerns. You are casually dismissing the concerns of those that do not agree with you, and you are being a bit arrogant about it (IMO). I also highly doubt that you have read the bill, it is 1200 pages, right? I will be honest with you, since my diagnosis 14 months ago, I have checked out of the news and current events world. Not worth the time. I do however understand simple economis, and I also remember a few of the arguments against it. This is a sports board, so I do not really feel the need to cite anything.
AUBREY BLOOM CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COMMENT
aggie2012thman
- 5 stars Rating: 92
1024 votes total - (1860)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
aggie2012thman said...
"Health insurance isn't a guaranteed right. People die."
Fire protection isn't a guaranteed right. Properties burn. It sucks, but that's the way it is. The more money you have, the longer you can protect your property from fire typically.
Unfortunately, that's what I see.
Also, I'm not concerned with Health Insurance, but health CARE. As a future medical professional, the care is the reason I'm in the business. For example, if there was someone bleeding out in the street, and you were passing buy, would you look to them and say "I would help you, but caring for your health is a privilege, and you haven't done enough for me." Or, would you help them because it's not only the right thing to do, but it's as much their right to receive help as it is to be treated fairly?
"Health insurance is not a fundamental thing that makes this country function. It is something you can buy." Again, privatize any one of the many many things you already pay for with taxes, and you could say the same thing.
"You're gambling that you'll spend less on health insurance than you'll need for medical expenses. The insurance company is betting that you'll give them more than they'll have to pay." This literally promotes a system that profits on you: 1. Getting sick. 2. Dying. It's profitable to charge you more for illness. It's profitable for you to die before you use all of your insurance claim. It's profitable to *let you die* rather than help you.
"It is a service you can purchase, not something you are entitled to" So, you're saying that we're entitled to everything else we pay for in taxes? Protection? Yup. Law? Yup. Upholding the law? Yup. Health? Nope.
This post was edited by TexBrenham on 6/29/2012 at 11:53 AM
Hookem for Life!
-
TexBrenham said...
We will differ so i try and state objectively what my I interpret:
To start, In my opinion, health insurance is not a right, but rather a privilege that you earn by some form of job/income for skills.
"Fire protection isn't a guaranteed right. Properties burn. It sucks, but that's the way it is. The more money you have, the longer you can protect your property from fire typically. "
At this time, Fire Protection is a guaranteed right within any municipality what is not a right or privilege is the outcome: property burned vs. property saved - regardless of how much money you pay in local taxes annually. To my knowledge, there is no option for private fire stations.
"Also, I'm not concerned with Health Insurance, but health CARE. As a future medical professional, the care is the reason I'm in the business."
The health insurance is what is at debate here. Health "Care" will always be there as medical professionals will always attempt to do what is in the best interests of the patient, however, what I feel this law does is give more power to the "Insurance" companies and government to regulate care and type of care based solely on cost and not how you will help care/cure each illness regardless of cost. You may not be concerned with insurance, but you need to understand that the insurance could disrupt the care you want to provide. Insurance and Government is how you will be paid so you better start concerning yourself with insurance given I will provide you with an income as a tax-payer/producer. Control is what they were after not quality care.
We are entitled to everything else we pay for because we chose to pay for it if we bought a home - property taxes or a stick of gum - sales tax. Or used our private income to buy private insurance to cover our families because I feel that is something that I want to do for my family in case we get sick.
AUBREY BLOOM CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COMMENT
aggie2012thman
- 5 stars Rating: 92
1024 votes total - (1860)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
aggie2012thman said...
"This is a sports board, so I do not really feel the need to cite anything"
This is my problem. You want citations for anything I've said, I'll give them to you. Just ask. If you are skeptical or you think I'm talking out of my ace, then let me know and I'll bring the data. Unfortunately, I don't have a compendium of pre-made citations/essays, or I would do it while I respond.
I don't expect you to cite everything off the top of your head, but if I ask for proof and you're only response is "You're a dick for asking for someone to back up what they say" I'm going to assume that you haven't actually done the research and you're speaking out of ignorance.
-
buttonhere said...
Wow. I never said "You're a dick for asking for someone to back up what they say."
I used to be you. The arrogant arguer, the know it all. Using words such as compendium. So, just by looking at your user name, am I correct to assume that you are in your early to mid 20's?
The assumptions I made about you sound silly, right? Don't assume anything about me. "I'm going to assume that you haven't actually done the research and you're speaking out of ignorance." Your words exactly.
I also used to see one side and one side only. The whole point is the slippery slope. The slope is not new of course, it just got a lot steeper. For you to trust the govt so intensely is not wise, in my opinion. These people want nothing more than to be re-elected, and I honestly believe that. They have done little to make me a believer.
AUBREY BLOOM CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COMMENT
aggie2012thman
- 5 stars Rating: 92
1024 votes total - (1860)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
aggie2012thman said...
"The health insurance is what is at debate here."
That's not entirely correct. If we went to a single-payer system (Many will call "Universal Health Care") we wouldn't have public health insurance, we would have public health care. The availability of health care is the problem here, not health insurance. Health insurance is the current medium in which many of us access health care, but that's not the problem.
Hookem for Life!
-
TexBrenham said...
The availability of health care is not the problem here. In my eyes, availability = access. Anybody can go into an ER for anything and they will not be refused care regardless if they can't pay for it. Health Insurance is the medium in which many of us help pay for health care not access to it. For example, if I did not have health insurance, I could and would still have access/availability to health care if I was sick regardless of ability to pay.
AUBREY BLOOM CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COMMENT
aggie2012thman
- 5 stars Rating: 92
1024 votes total - (1860)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
CoachCharlie ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
529 votes total - (1565)
- 18 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
aggie2012thman said...
'"I'm going to assume that you haven't actually done the research and you're speaking out of ignorance.' Your words exactly."
And I stand behind them. All I asked for was for you and others to back up what your saying. I ask because I'm skeptical about what is being said, and this is a topic that is not only incredibly important, but a topic I have researched thoroughly.
I'll admit, there are several points when I lose respect for arguments. For example, when someone grandstands and starts making quotes using plural pronouns such as "we" in order to make statements and assumptions that are their opinions that they spout as fact.
You act like I'm here to change everyone on the board, but what I want is to be proven wrong. I want to hear something that could cut the legs out from under me. If I hear it, I want it backed up with resources. I want either research or real world examples.
What I don't want is to be told that I'm wrong because of (Insert anecdote here). Or I'm wrong because (insert personal opinion here). Nor do I want to see people stand up and say "this is terrible and destroying the country because I say so." As soon as I came here asking for people to cite their sources, I got slammed with "It's just my opinion, bro, back off." But people don't come out and say "It's my opinion, but this is a bad move."
No, we got:
"This sucks. That man needs to GTFO of office."
"I'm sure there will be parties in the streets here in San Fran when all the granola people wake up.."
"Obama wants us to be like Europe.., that's working out just great over there isn't it?"
"We need a new freakin president. Bad." -This guy actually TOLD me to back off because it was just his opinion.
"And Congress. And House. And by the time this ass hat's tenure is over, we'll probably need a new government. Or country."
I could continue, but I digress.
I said none of the words you have in quotes. I see no sense in trying to prove you wrong, even if I bothered to provide links. At one time I could cite numbers to you like the back of my hand. But, as I got older, I realized I could find numbers and stats to prove or disprove anything. Again, it is about the slippery slope. Do you agree that is got steeper? I think it has. I used to be passionate about this like you, but once you stare your mortality in the face, things change. This is all theoretical, and more importantly, useless. It is here. It is done. The arguments are moot. All anyone can say now is opinion since the debate is over. Maybe we should just get a room, what do you say?
Anyway, tell me about it. Seriously. Whatever form it takes over the coming years, it is here to stay, time to embrace it. If it is comparable in coverage at a lesser price than the shitty plan I have at my mega-giant company, I will get it. Is it just an expansion of Medicaid, have the details been worked out of what it will look like?
-
aggie2012thman
- 5 stars Rating: 92
1024 votes total - (1860)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
buttonhere said...
I said none of the words you have in quotes. I see no sense in trying to prove you wrong, even if I bothered to provide links. At one time I could cite numbers to you like the back of my hand. But, as I got older, I realized I could find numbers and stats to prove or disprove anything. Again, it is about the slippery slope. Do you agree that is got steeper? I think it has. I used to be passionate about this like you, but once you stare your mortality in the face, things change. This is all theoretical, and more importantly, useless. It is here. It is done. The arguments are moot. All anyone can say now is opinion since the debate is over. Maybe we should just get a room, what do you say?
Anyway, tell me about it. Seriously. Whatever form it takes over the coming years, it is here to stay, time to embrace it. If it is comparable in coverage at a lesser price than the shitty plan I have at my mega-giant company, I will get it. Is it just an expansion of Medicaid, have the details been worked out of what it will look like?
AUBREY BLOOM CONTRIBUTED TO THIS COMMENT
aggie2012thman
- 5 stars Rating: 92
1024 votes total - (1860)
- 13 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
-
aggie2012thman said...
"For example, if I did not have health insurance, I could and would still have access/availability to health care if I was sick regardless of ability to pay."
I know I'm going to get a beating for this, but what's your source for this.
If it's the ER thing, they don't have to treat you, just stabilize you. If you had cancer, it's not their job to give you chemo. If you have psoriasis, they've no obligation to help you with that either. If you need a transplant, they don't even have to help with that.
Hookem for Life!
-
CoachCharlie ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
529 votes total - (1565)
- 18 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
CoachCharlie ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
529 votes total - (1565)
- 18 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
CoachCharlie ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
529 votes total - (1565)
- 18 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
-
CoachCharlie ●
- 5 stars Rating: 82
529 votes total - (1565)
- 18 months
- Send Message
- Follow User
- Ignore User
- 5 stars
- Post a New Topic
- Back to Topics
- « Previous Topic
- Next Topic »
- Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Refresh
Obamacare Passes