"I'd be dead without Obamacare."

[Openmind]

To All, if you have time please read and give an opinion.. Thanks
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=3419012

Again, a lot of crap!

So. . . . you don't want to pay for pregnancy care because you are a man and you won't get pregnant? Well. . . why should young people pay for prostate cancer or stroke?

The fact is that EVERYONE needs to be cover for ALL the basics so that the insurance become less expensive for ALL!

I will agree about paying the REAL cost of medication and procedure. . .but the thing is that, IF YOU DON"T HAVE INSURANCE, you will pay even more for those than the person who does have insurance, because the insurance provider has a bargaining position to force the price of those procedures and medication down. . .but if you are not part of the insurance, you will pay MORE (sometimes as high as twice) the price the insurance will pay for it!

Don't believe me? I hadn't realise that until I was faced with the situation myself. My husband and I have always had excellent (cadillac) plans, most of the time, two plans since we both worked. Thank God, because a little over 20 years ago I was diagnosed with breast cancer. About 10 years after I underwent treatment for breast cancer, we moved from CA to SC, and we couldn't take our insurance with us, obviously (see. . .it isn't just ACA that doesn't allow insurance across state lines!), but we selected to register with the same insurer in SC (Blue Cross/Blue Shield/Anthem). I obviously continued to get my mammogram every year, and one year, it was also necessary for me to get X-rays and MRI because my mammogram was suspicious.
A few weeks later, I received a bill from my insurance, telling me that these procedures/tests were NOT NECESSARY, so they would not cover it. I fought them (the bill was about $1,500.00) and told them I had cancer, that my records with the same insurance, but in CA should show that I had cancer in 1996. So they told me that they would check, but that I had to pay the full bill NOW and. . .they would pay me back if it was true that I had cancer and the procedures/tests were necessary. It lasted about 7 months, and I received threatening letters from the hospital and doctors, and they threatened to report to my credit score. I decided to pay the full bill with the condition that, once I OBTAINED THE REPORT FROM CA MYSELF, I would be paid back. I called my oncologist and the hospital where my surgeries were done, and I got the records which I forwarded to my insurance.

I was lucky. . .the oncologist explained that they must keep records for 10 years, but then they can dispose of them. It had been 11 years by then, and my records were in a back trailer, and were found ONLY when they were getting ready to burn them with the other records for that year!

A week later, I got a check back from my insurance, with the explanation of benefits. This is when I realise that, although the hospital had charged ME $1,500.00 they had charged my insurance ONLY $600.00, so my insurance had to cover only that amount (minus my deductible, of course!)

The fact is that, with healthcare as with MANY things (i.e., the environment), we are ALL IN A BOAT TOGETHER. . .and it may be the Titanic! It is not because some are in luxury suits and others in the engine room that we can escape health crisis! Sure, some might die sooner or later. . .but ALL of us will face health issues. By the way. . .Men may not want to pay for maternity care. . .menopausal women may not want to pay for maternity care. . .but all in all, we are in this together. Would you agree that women should not pay for Viagra coverage. . .or should access to birth control be covered by EVERYONE? Would you agree that women shouldn't pay for testicular cancer? Or should EVERYONE be covered against cancer. . .be it testicular, breast, prostate, or uterine?

It is all that "splitting hair" and all the unnecessary administration costs that are also part of increasing the price tag!

Another thing: Medicaid is NOT ONLY for poor people. . .Most of the Medicaid recipients are DISABLED (sometimes very young, as were many of my clients!) and ELDERLY in nursing homes!

Health care cannot be totally explained in terms of algebra or mathematical formula. It can't be totally explained or made better by economic principles. It is a human right, and it is a NECESSITY FOR ALL! Too many on the Right forget about the HUMAN FACTOR.

 

[Openmind]

You would prefer to deny reality ?
You deny that greed works in both directions ?
Company X wants my money but so do I so if Company Y sells for less because they too want my money, I can consume what I choose.

Yes. . .except that in many big business cases. . .Company X and Company Y are under the same umbrella of Company ALPHA. . .and they use collusion to keep prices HIGH!

 

[grumpy]

This is what's going to happen folks..The Democrats are not waiting for any recovery efforts by Republicans.. Senator Bernie Sanders is putting their single provider alternative together.
The strategy is, unfortunately, brilliant. When Obamacare further collapses, and all Americans are being further crushed by the skyrocketing costs, at exactly the moment when the American electorate are at their most frustrated and everyone is in crisis mode – whammo, here’s the solution.
All of the previous opposition to single-provider has been kicked out of the Democrat party. The DNC will unify, as one single voting bloc without a single representative in disagreement, behind the Sanders proposal.
As ObamaCare explodes, the factional infighting between the purists in Hillary’s Favorite Republican Caucus and various GOPe proposals will continue. Directly into this void of leadership will flow the single provider plan, just as the Democrats and the coordinated media messaging tell the American electorate the solution is right there:

“Medicare for all”.

 

[Openmind]

This is what's going to happen folks..The Democrats are not waiting for any recovery efforts by Republicans.. Senator Bernie Sanders is putting their single provider alternative together.
The strategy is, unfortunately, brilliant. When Obamacare further collapses, and all Americans are being further crushed by the skyrocketing costs, at exactly the moment when the American electorate are at their most frustrated and everyone is in crisis mode – whammo, here’s the solution.
All of the previous opposition to single-provider has been kicked out of the Democrat party. The DNC will unify, as one single voting bloc without a single representative in disagreement, behind the Sanders proposal.
As ObamaCare explodes, the factional infighting between the purists in Hillary’s Favorite Republican Caucus and various GOPe proposals will continue. Directly into this void of leadership will flow the single provider plan, just as the Democrats and the coordinated media messaging tell the American electorate the solution is right there:

“Medicare for all”.

Don't be so sarcastic! The "medicare for all" plan has been presented by Sanders before. . .and it is NOT a dream! Especially the way he wants to implement it, which is: reducing the age of access to medicare GRADUALLY (i.e., from the current 65, to 55, then to 45, then . . .anyone who chooses!). By the way, this could be done as PART Of the private option offered to everyone. . .those who qualify for "early" medicare, could still choose to buy their own private healthcare or, which is already true for medicare at this time, to SUPPLEMENT the basic medicare by private (supplemental) insurance.

THEN we would have a REAL competition. . .REAL free market, because instead of price fixing at the highest level by ONLY private insurance, we would have a REAL competition between private insurance AND MEDICARE. . .which we KNOW is more efficient that private insurance! Obviously, you may not want to believe this because of the "myths" that surround medicare and are carefully cultivated by private industry and the opponents of medicare!

Top six myths about Medicare | Reuters
www.reuters.com/article/us-column-miller-medicare-idUSBRE87E15N20120815
Aug 15, 2012 - ... plans to slash the cost of Medicare, the U.S. health insurance program for ... the program is dramatically more efficient than private insurance.

And, at least, EVERYONE would be covered, even if they choose not to purchase a supplemental insurance!

 

[dogtowner]

Yes. . .except that in many big business cases. . .Company X and Company Y are under the same umbrella of Company ALPHA. . .and they use collusion to keep prices HIGH!

And company beta wants alphas market share. Competition always exists.

 

[dogtowner]

Again, a lot of crap!

So. . . . you don't want to pay for pregnancy care because you are a man and you won't get pregnant? Well. . . why should young people pay for prostate cancer or stroke?

The fact is that EVERYONE needs to be cover for ALL the basics so that the insurance become less expensive for ALL!

I will agree about paying the REAL cost of medication and procedure. . .but the thing is that, IF YOU DON"T HAVE INSURANCE, you will pay even more for those than the person who does have insurance, because the insurance provider has a bargaining position to force the price of those procedures and medication down. . .but if you are not part of the insurance, you will pay MORE (sometimes as high as twice) the price the insurance will pay for it!

Don't believe me? I hadn't realise that until I was faced with the situation myself. My husband and I have always had excellent (cadillac) plans, most of the time, two plans since we both worked. Thank God, because a little over 20 years ago I was diagnosed with breast cancer. About 10 years after I underwent treatment for breast cancer, we moved from CA to SC, and we couldn't take our insurance with us, obviously (see. . .it isn't just ACA that doesn't allow insurance across state lines!), but we selected to register with the same insurer in SC (Blue Cross/Blue Shield/Anthem). I obviously continued to get my mammogram every year, and one year, it was also necessary for me to get X-rays and MRI because my mammogram was suspicious.
A few weeks later, I received a bill from my insurance, telling me that these procedures/tests were NOT NECESSARY, so they would not cover it. I fought them (the bill was about $1,500.00) and told them I had cancer, that my records with the same insurance, but in CA should show that I had cancer in 1996. So they told me that they would check, but that I had to pay the full bill NOW and. . .they would pay me back if it was true that I had cancer and the procedures/tests were necessary. It lasted about 7 months, and I received threatening letters from the hospital and doctors, and they threatened to report to my credit score. I decided to pay the full bill with the condition that, once I OBTAINED THE REPORT FROM CA MYSELF, I would be paid back. I called my oncologist and the hospital where my surgeries were done, and I got the records which I forwarded to my insurance.

I was lucky. . .the oncologist explained that they must keep records for 10 years, but then they can dispose of them. It had been 11 years by then, and my records were in a back trailer, and were found ONLY when they were getting ready to burn them with the other records for that year!

A week later, I got a check back from my insurance, with the explanation of benefits. This is when I realise that, although the hospital had charged ME $1,500.00 they had charged my insurance ONLY $600.00, so my insurance had to cover only that amount (minus my deductible, of course!)

The fact is that, with healthcare as with MANY things (i.e., the environment), we are ALL IN A BOAT TOGETHER. . .and it may be the Titanic! It is not because some are in luxury suits and others in the engine room that we can escape health crisis! Sure, some might die sooner or later. . .but ALL of us will face health issues. By the way. . .Men may not want to pay for maternity care. . .menopausal women may not want to pay for maternity care. . .but all in all, we are in this together. Would you agree that women should not pay for Viagra coverage. . .or should access to birth control be covered by EVERYONE? Would you agree that women shouldn't pay for testicular cancer? Or should EVERYONE be covered against cancer. . .be it testicular, breast, prostate, or uterine?

It is all that "splitting hair" and all the unnecessary administration costs that are also part of increasing the price tag!

Another thing: Medicaid is NOT ONLY for poor people. . .Most of the Medicaid recipients are DISABLED (sometimes very young, as were many of my clients!) and ELDERLY in nursing homes!

Health care cannot be totally explained in terms of algebra or mathematical formula. It can't be totally explained or made better by economic principles. It is a human right, and it is a NECESSITY FOR ALL! Too many on the Right forget about the HUMAN FACTOR.

Pregnacy is not the basics for single males. Single males did not buy a product they did not need which partly doomed ocare which declared up front that it required a level of their participation that they never came close to. Just one of many fatal flaws.

 

[Openmind]

Pregnacy is not the basics for single males. Single males did not buy a product they did not need which partly doomed ocare which declared up front that it required a level of their participation that they never came close to. Just one of many fatal flaws.

Single males also make women pregnant! And the point is that if everyone is covered for ALL the basics (and, I'm sorry, but having a baby IS basic, a basic HUMAN RIGHT even. . .ask your so called "pro-life" friends) the whole population will pay less!

Do you want an "exception" for EVERY possible ailment and situation? Do you want every woman to have an "exception" in their policy because they will never get prostate cancer, or testicular cancer? You do know that males can also get breast cancer, right?

Do you realise what such overload of exceptions would do to the administration of any healthcare plan? Universal healthcare plans all over the civilised world cover ALL the basics at ½ or ⅓ of the cost of the US healthcare. . .it really doesn't matter if a man can't have a baby. . .his wife (or girl friend) may have a baby. . .and if ONLY women are paying for prenatal or birth care, the cost will go much higher. Same thing goes for prostate cancer and/or testicular cancer. . .if only men pay for that, the cost will also double! DUH!

 

[Openmind]

And company beta wants alphas market share. Competition always exists.

But if they fix prices at a higher level than warranted. . .the competition doesn't matter, since it is not providing the FAIR, FREE level of market competition.

Why do you think that price fixing is illegal?

 

[grumpy]

Don't be so sarcastic! The "medicare for all" plan has been presented by Sanders before. . .and it is NOT a dream! Especially the way he wants to implement it, which is: reducing the age of access to medicare GRADUALLY (i.e., from the current 65, to 55, then to 45, then . . .anyone who chooses!). By the way, this could be done as PART Of the private option offered to everyone. . .those who qualify for "early" medicare, could still choose to buy their own private healthcare or, which is already true for medicare at this time, to SUPPLEMENT the basic medicare by private (supplemental) insurance.

THEN we would have a REAL competition. . .REAL free market, because instead of price fixing at the highest level by ONLY private insurance, we would have a REAL competition between private insurance AND MEDICARE. . .which we KNOW is more efficient that private insurance! Obviously, you may not want to believe this because of the "myths" that surround medicare and are carefully cultivated by private industry and the opponents of medicare!

Top six myths about Medicare | Reuters
www.reuters.com/article/us-column-miller-medicare-idUSBRE87E15N20120815
Aug 15, 2012 - ... plans to slash the cost of Medicare, the U.S. health insurance program for ... the program is dramatically more efficient than private insurance.

And, at least, EVERYONE would be covered, even if they choose not to purchase a supplemental insurance!

Not being sarcastic, it 's what they had planned all along.. This was just my opinion on what I think might happen..trust me that's not real competition..

 

[Openmind]

Not being sarcastic, it 's what they had planned all along.. This was just my opinion on what I think might happen..trust me that's not real competition..

Because you think that we had REAL COMPETITION prior to ACA? Or that we have it now? Once again. . .the whole healthcare for profit industry is engaged in price fixing. . .it is not a competition to the lowest price. . .it is a competition to the top price!

It would have been a lot simpler to have expanded medicare, over let's say a 10 year progression, directly when the ACA was voted in. But it is people like you who are born nay sayers for all that they don't understand or what their propaganda machine negates who kept this from happening!

 

[dogtowner]

Single males also make women pregnant! And the point is that if everyone is covered for ALL the basics (and, I'm sorry, but having a baby IS basic, a basic HUMAN RIGHT even. . .ask your so called "pro-life" friends) the whole population will pay less!

Do you want an "exception" for EVERY possible ailment and situation? Do you want every woman to have an "exception" in their policy because they will never get prostate cancer, or testicular cancer? You do know that males can also get breast cancer, right?

Do you realise what such overload of exceptions would do to the administration of any healthcare plan? Universal healthcare plans all over the civilised world cover ALL the basics at ½ or ⅓ of the cost of the US healthcare. . .it really doesn't matter if a man can't have a baby. . .his wife (or girl friend) may have a baby. . .and if ONLY women are paying for prenatal or birth care, the cost will go much higher. Same thing goes for prostate cancer and/or testicular cancer. . .if only men pay for that, the cost will also double! DUH!

It's not difficult to maintain, they did it for years. If you want to sell a service you need to make it mutually beneficial. If you want to tax people then you do whatever you can get away with. That means taxing disproportionately and just denying services when you guess wrong on your taxes.
All well and good unless you're the one getting denied.

 

[Openmind]

It's not difficult to maintain, they did it for years. If you want to sell a service you need to make it mutually beneficial. If you want to tax people then you do whatever you can get away with. That means taxing disproportionately and just denying services when you guess wrong on your taxes.
All well and good unless you're the one getting denied.

Wrong. When my husband carried insurance for both of us, he wasn't asked whether or not I was planning on having children, or whether or not he took viagra or I took birth control pills. People working for him, if they were single and not covering another family member all paid the SAME rate for single people, all those who covered a family, whether that family had 1 or 4 children, all paid the same rate for "family coverage!"

You really know nothing about healthcare, do you? Why should my husband pay for road taxes. . .or for the stupid wall. . .since he no longer drives and we live thousands of miles away from that wall!

Why should I pay for an increase in defence spending. . .I am not a veteran, my husband is a veteran who is not getting ANY benefits because he didn't "retire" from the military, and we do not agree with the false wars started by the US in the last 50 years!

Why should I pay for corporate welfare subsidies. . .when I prefer to pay for food stamps or meals on wheels?

How far do you want to take that? Why do I have to pay for so much police force because YOU want to have a "guns in every hand" policy?

 

[grumpy]

It would have been a lot simpler to have expanded medicare, over let's say a 10 year progression, directly when the ACA was voted in. But it is people like you who are born nay sayers for all that they don't understand or what their propaganda machine negates who kept this from happening!

I'm not looking for simple, are you sure you want to bring propaganda into this..

 

[Openmind]

I'm not looking for simple, are you sure you want to bring propaganda into this..

If you bring in the old erroneous beliefs spread by propaganda against "socialised medicine," I certainly will call it for what it is!

 

[dogtowner]

Wrong. When my husband carried insurance for both of us, he wasn't asked whether or not I was planning on having children, or whether or not he took viagra or I took birth control pills. People working for him, if they were single and not covering another family member all paid the SAME rate for single people, all those who covered a family, whether that family had 1 or 4 children, all paid the same rate for "family coverage!"

You really know nothing about healthcare, do you? Why should my husband pay for road taxes. . .or for the stupid wall. . .since he no longer drives and we live thousands of miles away from that wall!

Why should I pay for an increase in defence spending. . .I am not a veteran, my husband is a veteran who is not getting ANY benefits because he didn't "retire" from the military, and we do not agree with the false wars started by the US in the last 50 years!

Why should I pay for corporate welfare subsidies. . .when I prefer to pay for food stamps or meals on wheels?

How far do you want to take that? Why do I have to pay for so much police force because YOU want to have a "guns in every hand" policy?

Wasn't asked. But he was married and seeking coverage for you both.
Try to stay on topic.