The healthcare bill will utterly annihilate what is left of American healthcare

4runner,

First off, I apologize for the coffee comment...I'll replace that with "pop". Americans live off fast food and "pop". I was trying to make the point that the French live healthier than Americans...anyways...

Second, I am 100% opposed to farm subsidies...I am not a "Republican", I am a conservative. I don't tie myself to contradictory party platforms and the actions of corrupt politicians who call themselves Republicans. This is the major problem with the health care debate: not everyone is Republican or Democrat. Half of the rebuttals I hear in this debate are "well, Bush spent so much on this...why can't we spend on health care". Umm, we didn't support Bush spending either. I'm sick of the politics in this conversation. Convince me as an independent and fiscal conservative that the plan will work. I support health reform, and I'm confident that the majority of those opposing the current plan do as well. What they don't support is budget deficits, increased government influence, and a significant primary care physician shortage. The numbers simply don't add up.

B-I-N-G-O.

By the way, a good organic coffee that isn't over-roasted is actually quite healthy and has many bioflavanoids.

American Way wrote:

Second, I am 100% opposed to farm subsidies...I am not a "Republican", I am a conservative. I don't tie myself to contradictory party platforms and the actions of corrupt politicians who call themselves Republicans.

Wow. Thanks for not being a strident partisan.

Convince me as an independent and fiscal conservative that the plan will work. I support health reform, and I'm confident that the majority of those opposing the current plan do as well. What they don't support is budget deficits, increased government influence, and a significant primary care physician shortage. The numbers simply don't add up.

Budget deficits: we can sit here all day screaming about numbers. Fact of the matter is that we do-- as a nation-- spend too much money on healthcare. You pointed to many of the reasons-- I'd like to add one more-- the complete lack of any preventative/prophylactic healthcare in the U.S. Unless a doctor can get a major reimbursement, he/she won't do the work.

Which leads us to the second issue, namely:

Why the gov't does have to be involved in healthcare.

There are fundamental human decisions that must be made on a daily basis in health care:

-Who gets what treatment?

-How much of a profit can you make delivering that treatment?

-What do we do with uninsured freeloaders who don't pay premiums but yet access health care in the most inefficient way possible, i.e., at the emergency room?

-How much of an effort do we need to make in order to keep the dying alive? To save preemies? etc.

-How do we balance the public good of healthier people with the private good of maximizing incentives toward efficient health care delivery?

Right now, those decisions are being made by insurers. If you go to the doctor with a headache, it is the insurer who decides whether or not you get an MRI to check for brain cancer. It is the insurer who decides how much a primary care physician gets reimbursed for advising a mom how to care for a newborn, or advising an obese person on how to lose weight. It is the insurer who decides what coverage is available for preemies.

These are fundamental questions that should not be left in the hands of private, for-profit companies. The ONLY institution in our society with the legitimacy to spell these things out is a government constituted of our duly elected representatives. Don't get me wrong-- they are a bunch of jokers-- but they are the best hope we have of striking a balance that reflects the needs and the mores of society.

UsedToBeKnowItAll wrote:

Basically, I expect taxes and premiums to go up. I don't think your doomsday scenario plays out. I think things will be mildly worse for the majority of the currently insured and vastly, unbelievably better for people that are suffering with pre-existing conditions.

I have friends and family that are currently without insurance and have ALS and cancer, if you have to wait a month to get your MRI on your lame ass running injury so they can get the care they need, I don't really give a sh!t.

That sounds about right to me. I'm happy making things better for those with pre-existing conditions, because (a) I'm a nice person and (b) I might become one.

One other thing to note, which should please the Republicans here, this will be a boon to small businesses and entrepreneurs. There are plenty of people who would like to start their own businesses but can't do so because of an inability to purchase health care. Take away that worry and these people will get to work. Neat, ay?

4runner wrote:

The ONLY institution in our society with the legitimacy to spell these things out is a government constituted of our duly elected representatives. Don't get me wrong-- they are a bunch of jokers-- but they are the best hope we have of striking a balance that reflects the needs and the mores of society.

Wow, this is horrifying to read. It looks a lot like the mentality that sold Germany to the National Socialists (AKA Nazi Party). Scary stuff!

Oh, and a large part of why health insurance is so expensive is government regulation that heaps additional costs on the insurance companies. Such costs are always passed down to the consumer. So once again, government can be revealed to be a large part of the problem, and certainly not the solution.

AND did you know the France is the biggest market worldwide for McDonald's after the USA. Those French can't get enough of McDonald's quality fast-food.

4runner wrote:

American Way wrote:

People in France aren't living off of fast food and coffee.

You ever been to France? You might want to rethink your argument about "not living off of coffee."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_coffee_consumption_per_capita

Yes, unfortunately we are exporting our bad habits all over the world, which is why nations like France are actually moving more "rightward," because they see the ticking time bomb. France's finance minister (if she still exists in that role) is a US-educated conservative. But, the French drink more wine (bioflavanoids) eat more fruit and veggies, non-hormone infused cheese, and, here's the BIGGIE, do NOT consume PROCESSED, HIGH-FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP-LADEN food. They are also generally less stressed. Not a good comparison.

@#%@%%^ You guys are missing the point...the bottom line is we have a 30% obesity rate and France has a 9% obesity rate. Forget I said anything about fast food, coffee, etc. Obesity is primarily a life style issue. Some people have genetic predisposition, but the majority of the problems stem from diet and exercise (and according to Times, not exercise, but thats a different argument). You can nit-pick my statements all day, but you can't argue the facts.

I know you're replying to the board generally, but I sure as hell ain't missing your point.

Going back to the very first point of the very first post:

Forcing insurance companies to accept patients with pre-existing conditions.

I think that we all agree that they need healthcare.

How do they obtain this?

Then again, I'm 6'3", 155 pounds and eat a diet that is roughly 50% "raw." Lots of good stuff in raw food that works symbiotically to get your body to its proper "set-point." Amzaing that these weight watcher diets focus on counting calories, but not the composition of those calories. And so all of these "weight watchers" drink their diet sodas and eat their synthetically derived treats and snacks, replete with their sucralose and all kinds of other potent neuro-toxins, paving the way for "repercussions." It's really not hard to figure this stuff out. You don't need a bureacrat talking about preventative medicine or the FDA's "food" pyramid.

I used to work in a cardiology clinic focused on "preventative" medicine. These patients would even come to "workout" with an exercise physiologist, under the guidance of a forward-thinking endocrinologist who rejected the notion of a lifetime of insulin dependency. And just how many of these fat slobs do you think stuck with the program? I'm guessing maybe 1 in 20.

Obamam needs to do what he was elected for and ram this thing through. Screw all the opinions of the conservatives and Repubs... they lost and will never be happy with anything he does.

American Way wrote:

@#%@%%^ You guys are missing the point...the bottom line is we have a 30% obesity rate and France has a 9% obesity rate. Forget I said anything about fast food, coffee, etc. Obesity is primarily a life style issue. Some people have genetic predisposition, but the majority of the problems stem from diet and exercise (and according to Times, not exercise, but thats a different argument). You can nit-pick my statements all day, but you can't argue the facts.

Ever think of the diversity of our population compared to France?

Also obesity is not going to change health care. Even if we all magicly were within out BMI, there'd still be cancer, heart problems, etc...

Too be the biggest concern is that we are being told that we can implement this massive program w/o a tax increase or any changes to our current level of care. That just can not be true.

How can we take on millions of people that currently are uninsurable and have no consequences?

We need reform of some type, but it I don't want to see a socialist system.

Doctors in France make about $70,000 a year. What kind of people will you attract into the health care field if we end up any where NEAR that number? ( I have more concerns than that, but that's just one of them.)

I want the Pres to come out and say "Listen we are going to have reform, but there will be draw backs. It's going to be expensive you taxes will go up X%, and yes we will ration care, if you have a non-life threatening issue expect to wait for care or receive the least expensive cure."

At least then it'd be honest and people can decide if that's the trade off we want, but don't tell me we wont have any changes. That's a lie.

This is a very lucid and rational analysis. To anyone in favor of the new healthcare bill, please enlighten us if you have a rational and clear-headed retort.

There are no "scare tactics" involved in pointing out the obvious flaws in the plan. The math doesn't add up... it's as plain as day when you analyze what Obama has described in his utopian vision.

The hypocrisy of Obama is appalling when he sights "scare tactics" of his opponents. This whole health care "emergency" is one GIANT scare tactic!!

Nouli wrote:

The hypocrisy of Obama is appalling when he sights "scare tactics" of his opponents. This whole health care "emergency" is one GIANT scare tactic!!

True, this is a power grab similar to the Dems Great Society programs. they knew that if they implemented these things they'd secure the black vote for the forseable futre because they'd be totally dependant on the Dems. They can always threaten that "if you vote for a mean ol' Rep they'll take away your benefits!" This is the same thing. Another way to make a greater section of the USA dependent on the government. Once you are dependant then they have you as a voter forever.

All I know is that when you have over 50% no longer paying federal taxes when considering the refundable tax credit, your majority shareholder in government no longer has any incentive to rein in spending. This is what happened in Michigan and is happening to California. But Obama is shrewd. His economic projections have been off all along (not his fault that he's dealing with this fallout, but it's HIS economy now) and his team has NO WAY of knowing whether we stumble back into recession, multi-year stagnation, and permanently high unemployment once this artificial, inorganic stimulus wears off. So, better to cram this thing through now, because he risks losing the political capital if he waits. Ironically enough, his approval rating and Congressional support is lower than Bush had when he went into Iraq. Obama has an even smaller, myopic "coalition of the willing."

Personally, I think something needs to be done on healthcare, but I don't believe now is the time to implement MASSIVE, SYSTEMIC change. Not unless you find ways to increase accountability, transparency, and competition on the assets side of the balance sheet to balance the liabilities side. And I just don't see it happening.