HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Non-Sports > Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated" Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal

ACA/Health thread part IV

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-05-2014, 11:31 PM
  #51
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 33,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
Are there any numbers on how many ststes allowed the insurers to reissue the old plans, how many insurers actually did so, and how many people actually went back and re-enrolled?

I suspect, as you say, that its a very small number… and the real purpose of this is political damage control
I haven't seen anything. If I do I'll post it. I'm sure Fox will stay on top of it

__________________

Youth Movement! Tally Ho...
Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2014, 01:58 PM
  #52
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,988
vCash: 500
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101469265

Quote:
Senior administration officials said there are up to 1.5 million people who now have health insurance through individual or small-group plans that aren't compliant with Obamacare minimum standards, and who are now potentially eligible for the extension announced Wednesday.
I'm not sure if that estimate includes people whose states allow the extension. But either way, Led's right, that's pretty small. Especially over the course of two years.

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2014, 04:58 PM
  #53
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,988
vCash: 500
http://www.wmur.com/political-scoop/...#ixzz2vCsJKZWz

Quote:
GOP split, NH Senate passes low-income health insurance bill

CONCORD, N.H. —With Republicans split over the matter, the GOP-led New Hampshire Senate passed a measure Wednesday that would effectively expand Medicaid by providing health insurance to an additional 58,000 of some of the state's poorest residents.

After a year of posturing and proposing leaders in both political parties, a compromise was announced last month. Under this compromise, Republican leaders agreed to accept federal money to expand health insurance for the poor, but Democrats agreed to have these residents use private insurance plans instead of simply expanding the state's Medicaid program.
Sounds like they're taking the Arkansas route to Medicaid expansion. Hopefully it works out better there than it did in Arkansas.

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2014, 05:19 PM
  #54
Doppler Drift
Registered User
 
Doppler Drift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
http://www.wmur.com/political-scoop/...#ixzz2vCsJKZWz



Sounds like they're taking the Arkansas route to Medicaid expansion. Hopefully it works out better there than it did in Arkansas.
Nice.

"Under this compromise, Republican leaders agreed to accept federal money to expand health insurance for the poor, but Democrats agreed to have these residents use private insurance plans instead of simply expanding the state's Medicaid program."

There is no better welfare than corporate welfare.

Doppler Drift is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2014, 05:38 PM
  #55
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppler Drift View Post
Nice.

"Under this compromise, Republican leaders agreed to accept federal money to expand health insurance for the poor, but Democrats agreed to have these residents use private insurance plans instead of simply expanding the state's Medicaid program."

There is no better welfare than corporate welfare.
That's really the entire ACA.

I like it on the whole, but let's be honest here. It's already given private insurers over 4M new clients, and will only give them more over the next few years as the individual mandate expands.

But it's everything that could possibly pass through Congress, so here we are. And here is where we're likely to stay for who knows who long.

Anyone want to take bets? Over/under?

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 06:22 AM
  #56
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
That's really the entire ACA.

I like it on the whole, but let's be honest here. It's already given private insurers over 4M new clients, and will only give them more over the next few years as the individual mandate expands.

But it's everything that could possibly pass through Congress, so here we are. And here is where we're likely to stay for who knows who long.

Anyone want to take bets? Over/under?
Its a lot worse than you know. In kentucky, medicaid has been farmed out to private companies to manage. I just don't see how you can take a program that is already poorly funded, and then add a middle man who will take some of that money as profit, and think that the recipients will get better benefits. But I expect that model will be nationwide eventually.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 08:47 AM
  #57
Doppler Drift
Registered User
 
Doppler Drift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 10,048
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
Its a lot worse than you know. In kentucky, medicaid has been farmed out to private companies to manage. I just don't see how you can take a program that is already poorly funded, and then add a middle man who will take some of that money as profit, and think that the recipients will get better benefits. But I expect that model will be nationwide eventually.
You are arguing for universal, single payer again.

Doppler Drift is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 12:24 PM
  #58
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 33,431
vCash: 500
Awesome Daily Show interview last night by Aasif Mandvi - http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/th...nessee-edition

"If the poor want healthcare they should stop being poor."


Last edited by Led Zappa: 03-07-2014 at 01:09 PM.
Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 02:54 PM
  #59
Vyacheslav
That one guy
 
Vyacheslav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Jackson, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 14,741
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vyacheslav
I was going to skip watching it, but realized you put that in quotes for a reason and yeah he actually said that. That guy was like a deer in the headlights after Aasif said it was Knoxville.

Vyacheslav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 03:43 PM
  #60
Led Zappa
Tomorrow Today!
 
Led Zappa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Country: Scotland
Posts: 33,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vyacheslav View Post
I was going to skip watching it, but realized you put that in quotes for a reason and yeah he actually said that. That guy was like a deer in the headlights after Aasif said it was Knoxville.
I'm really hoping Pred's will watch it and tell me why all those people that can supposedly get healthcare for free are there and why that organization has to exist in America to begin with.

Led Zappa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 03:56 PM
  #61
Vyacheslav
That one guy
 
Vyacheslav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Jackson, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 14,741
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vyacheslav
Seems like a compelling question.

Vyacheslav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 07:05 PM
  #62
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
I'm really hoping Pred's will watch it and tell me why all those people that can supposedly get healthcare for free are there and why that organization has to exist in America to begin with.
Tell you what, ill watch it when I get home after providing health care all day including a couple of people who for whatever reason haven't enrolled and so still have no coverage.

But let's clear one thing up... I never said that "all these people" can get health care "for free"... I have stated that people with cancer won't be told they can't have treatment just because they have no insurance. If you can't see the difference between those two statements, there is really no point in trying to talk to you guys.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 08:49 PM
  #63
MurrayBannerman
Fishbulb
 
MurrayBannerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: 219
Country: United States
Posts: 22,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
Awesome Daily Show interview last night by Aasif Mandvi - http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/th...nessee-edition

"If the poor want healthcare they should stop being poor."
Since when is this about the poor getting healthcare?

MurrayBannerman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 08:53 PM
  #64
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
I'm really hoping Pred's will watch it and tell me why all those people that can supposedly get healthcare for free are there and why that organization has to exist in America to begin with.
OK, watched it, and while you guys think that its some kind of "gotcha" its actually an example of how the actual people in the health care system(i.e. doctors, nurses, etc) will actually go to great lengths to make sure that people without coverage get care. We have the same kinds of things in almost every community of any size, in the for of free clinics and health departments. And I find it hard to believe that this group had to airlift care to Knoxville.

Now, before you go twisting what I am trying to say, by no means is that kind of care delivery optimal. It would be far better if everyone had full, unfettered access to all of the great things the US health care system has available, and at no personal cost.

I just don't think any of you have any idea of how much more money and how many more physicians, hospitals, clinics, etc we would have to have to make it happen.

The alternative is give everyone coverage but have significantly limited access to anything other than emergency care or treatment of life threatening conditions.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 08:58 PM
  #65
Yoshimitsu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 5,030
vCash: 500
What do you mean by "significantly limited access"? I don't think Canadians, as an example, would describe their healthcare as the "significantly limited" disaster than Republicans like to make it out to be.

Yoshimitsu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 09:34 PM
  #66
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshimitsu View Post
What do you mean by "significantly limited access"? I don't think Canadians, as an example, would describe their healthcare as the "significantly limited" disaster than Republicans like to make it out to be.
Its a matter of expectations. In canada, a six to twelve month wait for an elective surgery is accepted. In the US it would be considered a significant limitation.

And the bottom line is, coverage is only one aspect of health care reform. Cost control is just as important. And in a single payor system, cost control is accomplished by limiting the amount of elective services delivered.

What is not often said is that a large number of people in the US before the ACA had plans that they considered "good" and were able to get elective care with relative ease compared to places like Canada. That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to fix the system, but it does mean a new system where that access is limited may be significantly less popular

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2014, 10:06 PM
  #67
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Led Zappa View Post
Awesome Daily Show interview last night by Aasif Mandvi - http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/th...nessee-edition

"If the poor want healthcare they should stop being poor."
and by the way turds like this trying to argue against the ACA are as frustrating to me as the crazy non-scientific alarmists of global warming are to guys like Leafsdude and Ilkka

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2014, 06:06 AM
  #68
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
uninsured still not signing up for care

Quote:
Only one in 10 uninsured people who qualify for private plans through the new marketplaces enrolled as of last month, one of the surveys shows. The other found that about half of uninsured adults have looked for information on the online exchanges or planned to look.
so basically, of the people who have even looked into enrolling, if they can get it free(Medicaid in most cases) they go ahead, but if its going to cost them money, even a reasonable sum, they pass.

and the ones who have signed up, only about half are actually paying their premiums, and thus actually getting coverage

Quote:
The survey also attempted to measure what has been another fuzzy matter: how many actually have the insurance for which they signed up. Under federal rules, coverage begins only if someone has started to pay their monthly insurance premiums. Just over half of uninsured people said they had started to pay, compared with nearly nine in 10 of those signing up on the exchanges who said they were simply switching from one health plan to another.
the bottom line is, there is a subset of people who either can't or won't pay for something even if its a really good deal. These people might sign up once the penalties kick in, but that will have to be seen in a year or two. Otherwise, about all the ACA has done for the uninsured is a significant expansion of medicaid, which is certainly good for the recipients, but not necessarily good for the whole system

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2014, 04:51 PM
  #69
Leafsdude7
Stand-Up Philosopher
 
Leafsdude7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,909
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Leafsdude7 Send a message via MSN to Leafsdude7 Send a message via Yahoo to Leafsdude7
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
Its a matter of expectations. In canada, a six to twelve month wait for an elective surgery is accepted. In the US it would be considered a significant limitation.
I believe I've corrected you specifically about this before, though I could be wrong about that. In Canada, there's no study that suggests elective surgeries take 6-12 months. The estimate is probably closer to 4-8 months, and that's for the fringe percentage. At least 75% of elective surgeries in Canada occur within the international 4-month benchmark. Still low compared to other countries (the US, for example, is over 90%), but I feel it's a misrepresentation of the system.

Leafsdude7 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2014, 05:04 PM
  #70
Vyacheslav
That one guy
 
Vyacheslav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Jackson, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 14,741
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Vyacheslav
It also ignores the wait of the uninsured who can't get those procedures. I am not referring to the cancer patients however, as it's been demonstrated that that will be treated regardless of money or insurance. I just want to make sure Preds knows that I understand he was only talking about the cancer patients getting free care, not the other sick people.

Vyacheslav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2014, 05:44 PM
  #71
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
uninsured still not signing up for care



so basically, of the people who have even looked into enrolling, if they can get it free(Medicaid in most cases) they go ahead, but if its going to cost them money, even a reasonable sum, they pass.

and the ones who have signed up, only about half are actually paying their premiums, and thus actually getting coverage



the bottom line is, there is a subset of people who either can't or won't pay for something even if its a really good deal. These people might sign up once the penalties kick in, but that will have to be seen in a year or two. Otherwise, about all the ACA has done for the uninsured is a significant expansion of medicaid, which is certainly good for the recipients, but not necessarily good for the whole system
First off, I'd like to say how stupid it is that the healthcare website doesn't ask a basic survey question like "how long have you been uninsured and why" when answering those questions is one of its main stated goals.

But further in the article, they say that most of the uninsured still don't believe they can afford insurance, which suggests that the ACA still hasn't gone far enough in controlling costs.

Here's a question though, Preds. Let's say that the only new people being added to the healthcare system are through Medicaid. That's about 5 million people (including people that were eligible before but weren't enrolled). That's 1.5% of the US population, and most of them won't even have great access to care because Medicaid is ridiculously underfunded and pays doctors like they're farm hands.

So this small additional percentage of the population, that won't even have access to that many doctors, is going to be bad for the system? In your opinion, are we talking bad like a heart attack or bad like Bud Light?

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-08-2014, 06:28 PM
  #72
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sevanston View Post
First off, I'd like to say how stupid it is that the healthcare website doesn't ask a basic survey question like "how long have you been uninsured and why" when answering those questions is one of its main stated goals.

But further in the article, they say that most of the uninsured still don't believe they can afford insurance, which suggests that the ACA still hasn't gone far enough in controlling costs.

Here's a question though, Preds. Let's say that the only new people being added to the healthcare system are through Medicaid. That's about 5 million people (including people that were eligible before but weren't enrolled). That's 1.5% of the US population, and most of them won't even have great access to care because Medicaid is ridiculously underfunded and pays doctors like they're farm hands.

So this small additional percentage of the population, that won't even have access to that many doctors, is going to be bad for the system? In your opinion, are we talking bad like a heart attack or bad like Bud Light?
the former CEO of the health system that I worked for used to have a saying… "if you are selling dollar watermelons for fifty cents, the answer is not to sell more watermelons"

so, its just Bud Light bad, but the truth is you lose money on every medicaid patient you treat. And if you say its still more than you'd get for uninsured, you're only partly correct, because I believe the ACA cuts out money that hospitals who saw large numbers of uninsured patients were paid.

Its also worse for the system by putting more demand on the system that may not be able to be met due to lack of physicians/providers. Increased medicaid is only a positive in places with excess capacity

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2014, 10:57 AM
  #73
Sevanston
Moderator
 
Sevanston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 10,988
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
the former CEO of the health system that I worked for used to have a saying… "if you are selling dollar watermelons for fifty cents, the answer is not to sell more watermelons"

so, its just Bud Light bad, but the truth is you lose money on every medicaid patient you treat. And if you say its still more than you'd get for uninsured, you're only partly correct, because I believe the ACA cuts out money that hospitals who saw large numbers of uninsured patients were paid.

Its also worse for the system by putting more demand on the system that may not be able to be met due to lack of physicians/providers. Increased medicaid is only a positive in places with excess capacity
Okay, this is all pretty fair.

I'm not going to sit here and pretend that Medicaid is really going to improve our ridiculous kludge of healthcare system. Healthcare coverage is only the first step, and Medicaid tends to get mixed results at best.

But I was curious to hear what you thought.

Sevanston is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2014, 04:20 PM
  #74
Troy McClure
Registered User
 
Troy McClure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Win it for Robidas!
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 25,444
vCash: 500
Now the GOP is proposing to cut the "doc fix" if Obamacare isn't repealed.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-...-mandate-delay

Troy McClure is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-10-2014, 08:40 PM
  #75
PredsV82
Puckaroni and cheese
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Outside
Country: Scotland
Posts: 13,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy McClure View Post
Now the GOP is proposing to cut the "doc fix" if Obamacare isn't repealed.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/gop-...-mandate-delay
Idiotic ploy. Wont work since they only have control of one house. And will be campaign fodder for democrats.

Boehner = teh stupid

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:39 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.