.

[MoonShadow]

Obamacare is good but single payer will be better.   I can't wait!   

Then move.  Canada would be glad to have you.

[MoonShadow]

I'm still waiting for the pro-Obamacare posters to tell me how well their experiences went.

[MoonShadow]

Again, still waiting for the great stories about wonderfully low priced health insurance.

Coinseeker?  RodeoX?  Anybody?

[Spendulus]

Again, still waiting for the great stories about wonderfully low priced health insurance.

Coinseeker?  RodeoX?  Anybody?

Here's my story.  The insurance bill, which we pay quarterly as self employed, came in today.  50% higher than the previous bill of 3 months ago and 2x what we were paying in 2009.

It's a movie script starring you and I.

Called "Government Gone Wild".

But let me state the obvious.  That's  an extra $1000 per month that my family will NOT BE SPENDING in the open market for goods and services.  So before you get too excited about OBubble-Care think about what if you were working in one of the businesses that just lost my, and many other peoples', $1000 per month.

You could be in any form of entertainment, restaurant, travel business, that is based on disposable income.  Let's see how that works out.

[RodeoX]

Again, still waiting for the great stories about wonderfully low priced health insurance.

Coinseeker?  RodeoX?  Anybody?

Here's my story.  The insurance bill, which we pay quarterly as self employed, came in today.  50% higher than the previous bill of 3 months ago and 2x what we were paying in 2009.

It's a movie script starring you and I.

Called "Government Gone Wild".

But let me state the obvious.  That's  an extra $1000 per month that my family will NOT BE SPENDING in the open market for goods and services.  So before you get too excited about OBubble-Care think about what if you were working in one of the businesses that just lost my, and many other peoples', $1000 per month.

You could be in any form of entertainment, restaurant, travel business, that is based on disposable income.  Let's see how that works out.

So you signed up for Obama-care and it was 50% higher? That is a bummer. I have not had a chance to sigh up yet myself, but I was hoping for a better price.

Wait, or are you saying that your insurance company raised the rate and you did not sign up for Obama-care. Because that is a different story.

[Barnacle_Ed]

As a Canadian expat who's lived in California for 15 years now, I still don't understand why Americans get into such religious wars over healthcare...



Nor why the root cause of over-charging patients still hasn't been addressed.

[MoonShadow]

As a Canadian expat who's lived in California for 15 years now, I still don't understand why Americans get into such religious wars over healthcare...

You're in the wrong state to learn how Americans think.  Cali is just South British Columbia, warmer but just as many liberals.  I hated it there.  Come to my state and spend some time, and you will come to know how different the culture really is.

Nor why the root cause of over-charging patients still hasn't been addressed.

Attempts have been made to do exactly that, but the liberals keep insisting that health care is a right and not a market.  The market says otherwise, and charges more to compensate for the overhead of government "regulations".  We haven't had a free market in healthcare, or anything else, since WWII, and probably earlier.

[Hawker]

...snip...
Attempts have been made to do exactly that, but the liberals keep insisting that health care is a right and not a market.  The market says otherwise, and charges more to compensate for the overhead of government "regulations".  We haven't had a free market in healthcare, or anything else, since WWII, and probably earlier.

You can't have a free market in healthcare if you have patent laws.  If one company has the patent on a drug that stops you dying and your insurance company drops you with a rescission, you are stuffed.  You can't negotiate as you will die.

That's why single payer systems work.  The unique advantage of the patent holder is balanced by the fact that there is only one person authorised to buy the product. 

If I am right about this, Obamacare is going to fail to control costs and its just a road block to the inevitable move to a single payer system.

[Rassah]

Does it really say that it will provide for free abortions? Cause that would be awesome!

[MoonShadow]

If I am right about this, Obamacare is going to fail to control costs and its just a road block to the inevitable move to a single payer system.

Dude, that's the whole point.  Obamacare was designed to fail, but softly and in a manner that the libs can cry, "see! markets don't work! we need a single payer system!"

But it's failing before it even gets that far.  And, at this point, I think that it's a fair point to note that patents are a government monopoly that shouldn't really exist.  Furthermore, a single payer system would just be one government enforced monopoly negotiating with another government managed monopoly regarding your health care options.  That's not going to end well even if you believe that at least one negotiating party has your best interests at heart.

[MoonShadow]

Does it really say that it will provide for free abortions? Cause that would be awesome!

Not really free.  We're all paying for them.  And I'm pretty sure that both you and the fetus must be registered Democrat before payment.

[MoonShadow]

That's why single payer systems work. 

How do you define "work" in this context?

[Kluge]

Could someone explain to me why, in all the advertisements for ACA insurance, they talk about a premium, and then a fixed out-of-pocket %? I never heard of that, before. The poor would probably take 60/40, right? So let's say you wind up with pancreatic cancer and total costs are $800K. The supposedly-insured person would be bankrupted, expected to cover $320K.

It'd be $xxx ($40 per visit) for me now, no matter what the cost of treatment came to, because I'm insured - so I'm assuming there's something wrong with my understanding of what seems to be some weird cost-sharing casino game with folks' lives.

ETA: Lol - alright - finally found the answer. Out-of-pocket cost sharing refers to copays and pre-deductible costs. You only pay 10-40% (or more if catastrophic) of costs before the insurance actually kicks in. You aren't paying 10-40% of total treatment cost + full deductible.

[MoonShadow]

Could someone explain to me why, in all the advertisements for ACA insurance, they talk about a premium, and then a fixed out-of-pocket %? I never heard of that, before. The poor would probably take 60/40, right? So let's say you wind up with pancreatic cancer and total costs are $800K. The supposedly-insured person would be bankrupted, expected to cover $320K.

It'd be $xxx ($40 per visit) for me now, no matter what the cost of treatment came to, because I'm insured - so I'm assuming there's something wrong with my understanding of what seems to be some weird cost-sharing casino game with folks' lives.

Any answer that anyone could provide would be speculation, and that is part of the problem.  Almost no one can get to the details of the plans supposedly being offered, so it's impossible to verify the claims being made by such ads.  If this were a radio car dealer's ad, I'd be smelling a bait & switch.

Do you smell bait?

[Hawker]

That's why single payer systems work. 

How do you define "work" in this context?

Good question. 

In the UK we have slightly better health outcomes than people who get US healthcare.  The NHS covers the entire population and health care is free at the point of delivery.  It costs about half what the US system does. 

I guess that is what I mean by a single payer system "works."

[Spendulus]

Could someone explain to me why, in all the advertisements for ACA insurance, they talk about a premium, and then a fixed out-of-pocket %? I never heard of that, before. The poor would probably take 60/40, right? So let's say you wind up with pancreatic cancer and total costs are $800K. The supposedly-insured person would be bankrupted, expected to cover $320K.

It'd be $xxx ($40 per visit) for me now, no matter what the cost of treatment came to, because I'm insured - so I'm assuming there's something wrong with my understanding of what seems to be some weird cost-sharing casino game with folks' lives.

Any answer that anyone could provide would be speculation, and that is part of the problem.  Almost no one can get to the details of the plans supposedly being offered, so it's impossible to verify the claims being made by such ads.  If this were a radio car dealer's ad, I'd be smelling a bait & switch.

Do you smell bait?

IF THE GOAL WAS TO LOWER MEDICAL COSTS...

• The first priorities would be to mandate competition for prescription drugs, with equal rights to off shore generic supplies.
• Second to mandate that doctors post their prices in the front of their offices.
• Third to mandate that the same price be charged by hospitals, doctors, equipment supplies and pharmacies whether the customer pays with insurance, medicare/medicaid, or cash.

None of the current Obamacare things has anything to do with lowering medical costs.

[Spendulus]

That's why single payer systems work. 

How do you define "work" in this context?

Good question. 

In the UK we have slightly better health outcomes than people who get US healthcare.  The NHS covers the entire population and health care is free at the point of delivery.  It costs about half what the US system does. 

I guess that is what I mean by a single payer system "works."

The necessary question at this point is whether you get your information on the outcomes of the UK government system from the UK government and feel compelled to actually believe what they say.  And if so, why would you think that you were saying things that were even remotely true.

[Bitobsessed]

Just dial 1-800-318-2596, or 1-800-F1U-CKYO if you have any questions...

[Hawker]

That's why single payer systems work.  

How do you define "work" in this context?

Good question.  

In the UK we have slightly better health outcomes than people who get US healthcare.  The NHS covers the entire population and health care is free at the point of delivery.  It costs about half what the US system does.  

I guess that is what I mean by a single payer system "works."

The necessary question at this point is whether you get your information on the outcomes of the UK government system from the UK government and feel compelled to actually believe what they say.  And if so, why would you think that you were saying things that were even remotely true.

Of course not.  Google it - the health care industry are very well researched.  And the US one is unique in that it gives huge IP protection and tariff walls to vendors and then calls itself a "market." 

[MoonShadow]

That's why single payer systems work. 

How do you define "work" in this context?

Good question. 

In the UK we have slightly better health outcomes than people who get US healthcare.  The NHS covers the entire population and health care is free at the point of delivery.  It costs about half what the US system does. 

I guess that is what I mean by a single payer system "works."

UK residents don't have better health outcomes than those in the US.  That's a myth.