Health care proposal mandates coverage, drops public option

[Jiro]

I did answered your questions... I don´t know why you overlook my answers to your questions...

where? I don't see any. I checked 3x and you have never answered my question as listed in my previous post. Please do not lie.

I entitle to my POV as different as you over healthcare issue. I am sorry if you don´t like my POV. Please accept that I have different knowledge as you that what I know. I would not post if I don´t know or I have no reason to make up anything.

I don't understand your last 2 sentences. You keep saying that I am misinformed and that I should educate myself on it. That means you're saying you know more it than me. and now you're telling me to "agree to disagree" ????????

:scratch:

Yes, you insult American over lazy at other thread a few months ago... I have no reason to make up... I did not forget what I saw and told you off for your disrespectful behavior and insult for label Americans as lazy etc. in other thread.

link please???????????????? You are notorious for misunderstanding one's post so you most likely misunderstood it. either way - LINK PLEASE? Please either prove it or stop accusing me.

 

[Jiro]

I just don't understand why Liebling chose to use medical tourism in the debate without knowing why people travel. The health reform is just to address the domestic affairs of Americans.

Someone who is travelling to another country to take advantage of a country's healthcare system is not a sign that something is wrong. It just... easier to bypass your own country's regulations by going to another country.

The medical tourism debate still doesn't address the uninsured or the rocketing premiums.

medical tourism DOES bring out pros and cons of one's own healthcare system..... and we try our best to fix it.

1. Americans get their prescriptions from Canada - clearly something wrong with our healthcare system.... and we both know that the drugs in America are very COSTLY
2. Canadians come to America for privatized, individualistic medical attention - clearly something wrong with Canadian's universal health care... and we all have heard of horror in Canadian system - the waiting list and mediocre quality.

you get my point. It would be great to see that our prescription drugs are affordable in here. It would also be great to NOT need health insurance to pay for pricey basic medical check-ups because not everybody needs or wants health insurance for time being because they are young and healthy.

 

[jillio]

medical tourism DOES bring out pros and cons of one's own healthcare system..... and we try our best to fix it.

1. Americans get their prescriptions from Canada - clearly something wrong with our healthcare system.... and we both know that the drugs in America are very COSTLY
2. Canadians come to America for privatized, individualistic medical attention - clearly something wrong with Canadian's universal health care... and we all have heard of horror in Canadian system - the waiting list and mediocre quality.

you get my point. It would be great to see that our prescription drugs are affordable in here. It would also be great to NOT need health insurance to pay for pricey basic medical check-ups because not everybody needs or wants health insurance for time being because they are young and healthy.

Even the young and healthy can acquire the need for catastrophic care at any moment in time. Healthy today, catastrophically ill tomorrow.

 

[Jiro]

Even the young and healthy can acquire the need for catastrophic care at any moment in time. Healthy today, catastrophically ill tomorrow.

and that's their choice. just as much as it's their choice to pick either comprehensive or limited auto insurance.

but most importantly - to make healthcare affordable!

 

[sallylou]

I think that up until 25 people believe that they are invincible. It's a natural developmental stage in everyone's life. Most of the time, it's true but young people need to be insured IN CASE they are one of the unlucky few who are in an accident or become seriously ill.

 

[Jiro]

I think that up until 25 people believe that they are invincible. It's a natural developmental stage in everyone's life. Most of the time, it's true but young people need to be insured IN CASE they are one of the unlucky few who are in an accident or become seriously ill.

that's their choice, isn't it? what's next? forcing us to get 401k just so we don't go broke when we're old in case social security payment isn't enough?

 

[sallylou]

No, Jiro, I don't want you to have a 401k. I want you to have health care in case you're hit by a bus. BTW, that happened to a young woman I knew and she died. Very tragic. Watch those buses, please. My mom advice for the day.

 

[Jiro]

No, Jiro, I don't want you to have a 401k. I want you to have health care in case you're hit by a bus. BTW, that happened to a young woman I knew and she died. Very tragic. Watch those buses, please. My mom advice for the day.

yes I will watch out for buses!!! and those nasty taxi drivers too!

 

[jillio]

and that's their choice. just as much as it's their choice to pick either comprehensive or limited auto insurance.

but most importantly - to make healthcare affordable!

Here's the rub. I don't know any 25 year olds with $100,000 socked away in case of catastophic illness. Unless they have the cash to pay for the treatment for say, a TBI, then we have the same situation we have now. The rest of us absorbing the costs of the uninsured. Result: medical costs continue to escalate.

 

[sallylou]

I hate the people who drive motorcycles and won't wear helmets. Same deal. A person gets TBI and racks up huge bills in the trauma center. Even if that person is insured, we absorb the portion of the bill that the insurer won't pay (they cover whatever they deem as "reasonable and necessary" expenses). I've got a name for those people--organ donors. Wear helmets people! Mom hint of the day #2.

 

[jillio]

Love the mom tips!:P

JMO, but someone who chooses to go without insurance that is easily affordable and available simply because they believe themselves to be young and invincible probably isn't behaving in responsible ways in other areas: such as riding without a helmet. Many of these TBI victims end up in skilled nursing facilities for the rest of their lives. If the injury occurred at age 25, and with a life expectancy of 75, that is 50 years of skilled nursing care and medical services. It runs in the billions.

 

[deafskeptic]

I hate the people who drive motorcycles and won't wear helmets. Same deal. A person gets TBI and racks up huge bills in the trauma center. Even if that person is insured, we absorb the portion of the bill that the insurer won't pay (they cover whatever they deem as "reasonable and necessary" expenses). I've got a name for those people--organ donors. Wear helmets people! Mom hint of the day #2.

I've seen some rather brutal photos of motorcycles accidents. I can well believe that you'd rack up very high medical bills if you were to survive a motorcycle accident. I try not to think about this stuff regarding my little sister and her husband. Both of them ride motorcycles.

 

[Reba]

that's their choice, isn't it? what's next? forcing us to get 401k just so we don't go broke when we're old in case social security payment isn't enough?

That's how Social Security started in the first place. The government decided that people had to be forced to participate in retirement plans, so that started the Social Security "contribution" scheme.

Funding for that scheme worked out fine, right?

Ha!

 

[darkdog]

That's how Social Security started in the first place. The government decided that people had to be forced to participate in retirement plans, so that started the Social Security "contribution" scheme.

Funding for that scheme worked out fine, right?

Ha!

Yup. The problem is that it's a Ponzi scheme- the beneficiaries get their money from those currently paying into the system. It only works as long as there are more paying into it than taking out of it. It's no surprise that programs like Social Security and Medicare are running out of money and threaten to incur much fiscal pain on us in the future.

I'm still pretty young so I have decades until I'm eligible to be a beneficiary. I don't know what kind of crappy return on investment I'm going to get, but I have a feeling I'll get less out of it than I've been forced to pay into it. I'd prefer to invest that money in my own portfolio and actually watch my money grow. I do plan to take out my benefits because I will have been forced to pay for them for decades. If anyone then accuses me of being a hypocrite for taking out from entitlement programs while opposing socialism or ridicules me by attributing phrases like "keep your government hands off my Medicare" to me, they will get an earful.

 

[Cowpuppy]

You and Jiro both mentioned the American Way. As though it is not changeable. Where are you getting this from?
The whole point of the legislative debates is to make change.....on the one hand you agree need of changes....but when you come to your issues you throw up the 'American way not changeable'. says who?
This is not a defense.
Tradition? bunk. oh we are so grand that we can not change anything? bunk.
We are at this juncture because it needs change.
You are trying to ram this 'american way' down our throats as though it is some high almighty religion.
We are in this position to make changes. Drastic changes.....not just some little pissant changes that suit your egoistic needs to glorify yourselves as big shot americans.
Maybe that's why we are in this position...because we think american way can't be changed.
Get over yourselves.....you are only showing everyone why the world despises us....cuz we think the american way is so grand it can't ever be changed...bunk.
Everything is changeable.

Don't put me in the same category as the Obama dissent crowd.



You ever noticed that every single country that have universal health-care in place say that their model is not for the Americans since theirs doesn't reflect the American values? They all say that universal health-care is needed in America, but they all also say that their model won't work in the States either. Mandatory insurance is not the American way.

If they want universal health-care, they need to figure out how to Americanize the thing rather than forcing it down the throats from the federal level and downward. I do believe universal health-care is possible in the United States-- however the current reform doesn't reflect what the Americans stand for.

Hell, the only reason why our own healthcare was finally adopted was because the provincial governments have more control over their own affairs, in almost everything, than the federal government themselves; the federal government conceded that control to the provincial governments. So while we are based on the British system, how it is being governed is completely different. So no two healthcare systems are the same.

 

[Cowpuppy]

Funding did work well for SS. the problem was that leaders milked it for other projects. Rather than investing the monies they blow it on other things. There was always plenty of money paid in which should have been invested.
But alas.....US society changing into having more older persons on SS and less young people paying into the system...so yes it will become a problem...and need change. I would say it was a pretty succesful program which actually even took care of some other needs, too.
Just cuz something needs change after 60 years doesn't mean it was a failure...same goes for the healthcare issues.
Just modernizing. Learning from experience.

That's how Social Security started in the first place. The government decided that people had to be forced to participate in retirement plans, so that started the Social Security "contribution" scheme.

Funding for that scheme worked out fine, right?

Ha!

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

You and Jiro both mentioned the American Way. As though it is not changeable. Where are you getting this from?
The whole point of the legislative debates is to make change.....on the one hand you agree need of changes....but when you come to your issues you throw up the 'American way not changeable'. says who?
This is not a defense.
Tradition? bunk. oh we are so grand that we can not change anything? bunk.
We are at this juncture because it needs change.
You are trying to ram this 'american way' down our throats as though it is some high almighty religion.
We are in this position to make changes. Drastic changes.....not just some little pissant changes that suit your egoistic needs to glorify yourselves as big shot americans.
Maybe that's why we are in this position...because we think american way can't be changed.
Get over yourselves.....you are only showing everyone why the world despises us....cuz we think the american way is so grand it can't ever be changed...bunk.
Everything is changeable.

I am not an American, but rather a Canadian, and I didn't claim they cannot be changed. Just people don't really change much.

Um... look at other countries' healthcare system. They are based on the cultural values of those countries, many of which are deeply rooted from four centuries ago. Europe haven't really changed much in its structure since the feudal era despite equalization of classes, industralization, introduction of capitalism and so on. Hell, Canada itself haven't really changed much since the pre-Confederation in term of their cultural values.

The Japanese healthcare system is based on their cultural values.
The Canadian healthcare system is based on their cultural values.
The German healthcare system is based on their cultural values.

And so on...

 

[Cowpuppy]

Social Security isn't only for retirement. It pays disability for for those injured for long periods or for life....and for those disabled by medical reason.
Imagine the person who pays minimal for 10 years and then collects for 70 years. Sounds like a pretty good investment return to me. It is a backup protection for this scenerio. If it happened to you you would be grateful....and so happy for it. Just consider your self lucky it wasn't you....but you were covered.
So.....the investment return is insurance against this........you don't neccesarily get a monetary return on it....it is also insurance protection against medical disability etc.
Just like car insurance.....maybe we never gt in an accident.....but if we had had an accident we were covered. You don't neccesarily always see abenifit from paying insurance.
You're trying to play it like it's wasted money....have to look at the whole picture.
and if you want to seperate retirement money from disability money and option to not pay disability...then you are asking everyone else to cover you if you get hurt or disabled.

Yup. The problem is that it's a Ponzi scheme- the beneficiaries get their money from those currently paying into the system. It only works as long as there are more paying into it than taking out of it. It's no surprise that programs like Social Security and Medicare are running out of money and threaten to incur much fiscal pain on us in the future.

I'm still pretty young so I have decades until I'm eligible to be a beneficiary. I don't know what kind of crappy return on investment I'm going to get, but I have a feeling I'll get less out of it than I've been forced to pay into it. I'd prefer to invest that money in my own portfolio and actually watch my money grow. I do plan to take out my benefits because I will have been forced to pay for them for decades. If anyone then accuses me of being a hypocrite for taking out from entitlement programs while opposing socialism or ridicules me by attributing phrases like "keep your government hands off my Medicare" to me, they will get an earful.

 

[shel90]

I think that up until 25 people believe that they are invincible. It's a natural developmental stage in everyone's life. Most of the time, it's true but young people need to be insured IN CASE they are one of the unlucky few who are in an accident or become seriously ill.

My coworkers were discussing that and someone said that now young people can stay on their parents' insurance until they are 26 years old.

 

[Foxrac]

My coworkers were discussing that and someone said that now young people can stay on their parents' insurance until they are 26 years old.

Only if they are full time student, if not so you cannot under parent's insurance.