America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 years ago by tailgater. 28 replies replies.
C.B.O. predicts 22 million more would be uninsured under senate healthcare bill.
Speyside Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I do not want this. What say you?
DrafterX Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
over 10 years because they would opt out for a better policy.... Mellow
teedubbya Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Not so much
DrafterX Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
and according to the Dems half of them will prolly die anyways... Mellow
ZRX1200 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,589
We have to pass it to see what's in it.

DrafterX Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
So we don't know exactly how many people Trump is gonna kill yet..?? Huh
ZRX1200 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,589
Since he's not a Democrat, it's gotta be alot.

dstieger Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
I'm continually confounded by the health care 'debate'....just what is the objective? It seems like there's a few very basic questions that need to be answered before any talk about insurance....but I don't hear anybody discussing them.

What is the problem that Congress is trying to solve? Seems to me that it is only about politics....that's all I hear, anyway...and maybe that's largely because they don't believe the population can handle a reasoned discussion....I don't know

In my mind the questions should be about cost and availability of 'quality care'...however you end up defining

Is EQUALLY high quality health care a right for all American citizens? Is it ok for a rich guy to pay for his own 'elective' medical services that might prolong his life or improve his health....if poorer people can't access the same?

What is the point of health insurance, anyway? In my mind, it should be a lot like any other insurance. You pay out of pocket for regular stuff, but rely on insurance for irregularities, or emergencies. I don't see how it can continue to be called insurance, if we simply pay up front and 'everything' is always covered. It will never be controlled....a person always has to have some skin in the game....some personal responsibility, even if 'coerced'

What does a lifetime of 'average' preventative and emergent care cost in the US...on average? Does the average person contribute that average amount over the course of his productive, working life?

What's a reasonable profit margin for insurance companies? I don't want the government to stipulate that, but the market should? Can 'private' or semi-private insurance be run by non-profits?

I don't have any numbers or access to any real facts....because the health/industrial/insurance complex benefits from the obfuscation...but, I believe that we would be best served, not by assorted government health acts, but by transparency in costs and benefits of the industries..health providers and insurance. In that fog, there's, no doubt a LOT of profit-taking that most of us, even conservatives, would find grotesque and underhanded, vice 'earned'

only peripherally related, but did anyone see Megyn Kelly's show Sunday....the story on rehab communities in FLA? Unfnbelieveable....the level of corruption was astounding....but, even the sensational story didn't begin to get at what I thought was a huge cause...the insurance companies, themselves. While not violating laws, like many on the take...they completely facilitate the problem by being the money launderers, without ever questioning the 'system'

This whole political sideshow about 'health care' is shouting over anyone trying to have an intelligent question about what it is that really needs to be changed, what would be appropriate future state and what is preventing us from getting there....I'm increasingly pessimistic that any long-term good will come of any of the current 'debate' and legislative actions around health care
DrafterX Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
basically Obama gave free insurance to a bunch of people and expected everyone else to pay for it... now Trump is trying to fix it without actually taking back the free stuff Obama gave out... I say just Repeal and forget... If a family needs insurance they can go to work like everybody else... Mellow
dstieger Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
What planet are you from? I have NEVER heard of a government giving away free stuff....and then politicians successfully taking it back...aint gonna happen as long as anyone involved actually wants to be reelected....
tailgater Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
dstieger wrote:
What planet are you from? I have NEVER heard of a government giving away free stuff....and then politicians successfully taking it back...aint gonna happen as long as anyone involved actually wants to be reelected....

sorry.... :)


Which is why Bernie Sanders was such a dangerous candidate.
tailgater Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
What is the healthcare debate?
It's partisan jockeying to design a government means to cover obscene costs. Which will do nothing more than allow those costs to escalate even further.
We all agree that healthcare is too expensive in the USA.

Here's a great article.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/26/opinions/us-health-care-prices-rosenthal-opinion/index.html

tailgater Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
I do not want this. What say you?


Why 22 million uninsured?

Did those 22 million have healthcare insurance 10 years ago when Bush was President?

Just curious.

bs_kwaj Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-13-2006
Posts: 5,214

Let them get jobs....

...oh, and eat cake!

Beer
dstieger Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
tailgater wrote:

Here's a great article.
http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/26/opinions/us-health-care-prices-rosenthal-opinion/index.html




Good read. Thanks.

Unfortunately, it essentially my rant....but doesn't help me understand how we get to a better place....maybe it should be mandatory reading for every person in the US before they make their next insurance payment...or receive any treatment...If their level of outrage pegs at 6, or above, they are given the mailing and email address of their Congresspersons and made to write to them.
dstieger Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
bs_kwaj wrote:
Let them get jobs....

...oh, and eat cake!

Beer



That points to another corner of the undiscussed stuff. When many of us were 'younger', a good portion of the population worked for firms for a LONG time and received health insurance through their employer. For some reason, that sorta worked. IDK if companies put pressure on insurance companies to keep things reasonable? But, in current day, that's something that individuals and government can not do?

Did employers stop providing health insurance because it stopped making for better workers...who just leave every few years anyway? Did worker loyalty to employers fall off because employers stopped taking long-term care of their workers?

At any rate, the health insurance model shifted pretty dramatically away from employers...I don't know if that's a net good thing or bad thing, but it probably is worth examining. I'd just like to find one insurance company that actually has the best interest of their insured as fundamental part of their culture or business plan...I doubt there is one anymore.
delta1 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,782
American businesses realized there is no money/little profit in taking care of its employees when they can shift their operations overseas and tap into cheap labor...


Anybody notice that the GOP plan will keep most of the Obamacare coverage in place until after the 2018 elections, and phase in the tax breaks for the wealthy over a few years, to try to avoid the appearance that they are cutting medical insurance for average Americans while giving more money to the rich...the hammer will drop when they have safely kept control of Congress...

it's an interesting dance to watch, as the Trump administration does all it can to undermine Obamacare to cause it to fail quicker, while Congress is hoping it'll survive long enough to allow them to repeal it...
DrafterX Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
that's one way to look at it I guess.... Asking people to provide for themselves in just another... Mellow





Obama's plan mighta worked if they were able to force the minimum wage increase on us... but then he woulda had to force them to buy his insurance with the extra money... but the extra money they woulda paid in income tax woulda helped also I guess... Mellow
gummy jones Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
#17
A less slanted, less biased version is that as regulatory burden, government involvement and crony capitalism continue to increase the cost of doing business in the USA companies, despite the desire to remain domestic, face increasing pressure to find more favorable business environments.
tailgater Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
delta1 wrote:
American businesses realized there is no money/little profit in taking care of its employees when they can shift their operations overseas and tap into cheap labor...


Anybody notice that the GOP plan will keep most of the Obamacare coverage in place until after the 2018 elections, and phase in the tax breaks for the wealthy over a few years, to try to avoid the appearance that they are cutting medical insurance for average Americans while giving more money to the rich...the hammer will drop when they have safely kept control of Congress...

it's an interesting dance to watch, as the Trump administration does all it can to undermine Obamacare to cause it to fail quicker, while Congress is hoping it'll survive long enough to allow them to repeal it...


The plan sucks.
Just like the original ACA sucked.

Built in failure "at a date to be determined later" is par for the course.

MACS Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,770
When you ROB from Peter to pay Paul... you'll always have Paul's vote.

What happens when people get tired of being taxed to death and stop working and get on the gravy train? When you have more folks taking from the system than you have contributing to it... you get Greece, Venezuela... etc. About 60% of our budget goes to social programs, but everyone screams about the 16% spent on defense (which certainly could be done better).

http://www.cbpp.org/research/federal-budget/policy-basics-where-do-our-federal-tax-dollars-go
victor809 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
You know that's an inaccurate interpretation of the numbers MACS.

A large part of what you identified as social programs is social security... it is paid from a different tax than all the others.
delta1 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,782
Any bets on whether Mitch can get 50 votes for his healthcare bill after the recess?
DrafterX Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
no.... I wonder if a new boat will show up at Cruz's door over the weekend... Think



What was that deal the dude from Nebraska made to vote for Obamacare at the last minute..?? Think Think
teedubbya Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
#20 yup. Spot on.

But for some it's about their team winning the game rather than good of country.
gummy jones Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
Quote:
The number of Americans enrolled in Medicaid has increased from 29 million in 1990 to 73 million today -- an increase of 252 percent over a period when the nation's population increased 30 percent.

Total spending on Medicaid today is $574 billion, 275 percent above the $209 billion of 2000.

Medicaid amounts to about 40 percent of the total spending on the 10 largest means-tested federal government programs targeted at low-income Americans. According to the Congressional Budget Office, spending on these programs has tripled as a percentage of our GDP over the last 40 years.

Does all this mean we are becoming a more fair and compassionate nation?

That might have been the intention. But if we honestly look at what is happening, we will see things have gone badly astray.

Some perspective on this is available in a new article by Harvard University economist Edward Glaeser in the City Journal magazine of the Manhattan Institute.

The article, "The War on Work -- and How to End It," paints a dismal picture of the direction in which our national culture is trending. Specifically, the deterioration of our culture of work, particularly among "prime-age" men, those between 25 and 54.

According to Glaeser, 95 percent of "prime-age" men were working in 1967. However, during the last recession, over 20 percent of this group was not working. Today, it remains at 15 percent.

"Thirty percent of prime-age jobless men currently live with their parents," Glaeser reports.

One reason why we're not seeing robust growth in our economy despite today's low unemployment rate is that the low rate reflects large numbers of workers who have dropped out of the work force. The unemployment rate just considers those actively looking for work -- not those who have stopped looking.

Most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics show that 62.7 percent of the workforce is working, compared to 66 percent in 2000. According to Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute, if work rates today were what they were in 2000, there would be 10 million more Americans earning salaries.

What is happening? Why are droves of Americans, particularly "prime-age" men, dropping out of the work force?

Glaeser offers a number of hypotheses. But major in this equation is the dramatic growth of the American welfare state. The welfare state might have been driven by good and compassionate intentions. But to a large and destructive extent, it has subsidized and encouraged not working.

Which brings us back to Medicaid.

Eberstadt writes, "According to the Census Bureau's SIPP survey (Survey of Income and Program Participation), as of 2013, one fifth (21 percent) of all civilian men between 25 and 55 years of age were Medicaid beneficiaries. For prime-age people not in the work force, the share was over half (53 percent)."

Eberstadt notes a 2016 study by Princeton economist Alan Krueger, former chairman of the council of economic advisors under President Obama, that "nearly half of all prime working-age labor force dropouts -- an army now totaling roughly 7 million men -- currently take pain-medication on a daily basis."

Medicaid is footing the bill for a good chunk of the opioid epidemic.

And Eberstadt adds: "Of the entire un-working prime-age male Anglo population in 2013, nearly three fifths (57 percent) were reportedly collecting disability benefits from one or more government disability programs."

We must be a compassionate nation as well as a productive nation.

But compassion cannot be confused with subsidization of poor values and waste. Blindly dropping taxpayer funds from helicopters is not compassion.

As we have the very important discussion now taking place about health care, about Medicaid, and about other well-intentioned but ill-conceived government programs, let's keep this in mind.
tailgater Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
You know that's an inaccurate interpretation of the numbers MACS.

A large part of what you identified as social programs is social security... it is paid from a different tax than all the others.


Yeah.
Algore put it in a lock box.

tailgater Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
#20 yup. Spot on.

But for some it's about their team winning the game rather than good of country.


Make no mistake about it: I do like winning.

Users browsing this topic
Guest