President Obama's Health Care Plan.

Chat about stuff other than Transformers.
User avatar
Mr_Hi_n_Mitey
Posts: 213
Joined: Sat May 08, 2004 8:07 pm
Custom Title: Overlord Of OlSkool Weirdness
Location: Richmond, Virginia USA.
Contact:

President Obama's Health Care Plan.

Post by Mr_Hi_n_Mitey »

Hello Folks:

So, what do you guys think about President Obama's Health Care Plan? Yea or nay? Man, those town hall meetings across America are really something! I have never seen so many people so riled up at any rallies like this before. There is throat-grabbing, name-calling, fascist-flag waving, etc. and the list goes on. One lady even compared Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler (?) and even showed a picture of President Obama with a Hitler moustache. Have any of you ever been to any of these health care rallies? Also, there are rumors that people who oppose the plans have been threatened by the government. I don't know how true this is, though. Some people have been caught bringing loaded weapons to rallies and to wherever President Obama speaks. The situation has gotten very intense. I would like to hear some of your input on this whole health care issue.

Machine Hunter :lies:
:devil: Image :angel:
User avatar
Denyer
Posts: 33033
Joined: Sun Sep 17, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Perfidious Albion
Contact:

Post by Denyer »

User avatar
Rurudyne
Protoform
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 8:56 pm
Location: North Texas
Contact:

Post by Rurudyne »

Aside from the legal issues arising from the Constitution where this proposal is concerned, I have a number of criticisms of the American health care system that touch on the debate in Washington. This pertains to the President Health Insurance plan because it is about heath insurance and not expressly about "heath care".

Possibly chief of these, an issue that strikes at the reason why health insurance is so expensive as a part of the equation, is the way that my fellow Americans seem to view the proper use of insurance.

Without apology, most Americans seek to eliminate risk from their lives and they view insurance in that light.

But insurance is only a fit mechanism to manage risk and not eliminate it.

It is actually a form of gambling. The bookie is the insurer who will buy people's actuarial risk — or risk that can be analyzed on a cost-benefit basis — provided they give him more money than he expects to pay out (plus his own operating cost). Just like a bookie an insurer protects himself from the likelyhood of people 'winning' the bets they place by taking lots of bets (i.e the insurance "pool").

For the person placing the bet, who really doesn't want to ever win it considering the nature of the bet, they are reducing their exposure to unwanted risk that could ruin them.

When a person only buys insurance that targets risk they may reasonably face or which provides what is called "catastrophic insurance" they are actually using insurance properly.

However, many people view insurance as a benefit and as a component of their heath care rather than of their finances. This, I'm convinced, is where and why they start looking to eliminate risk rather than manage it. There's an old saying: "Worry is prayer to the wrong god." Taking that as a truism then using insurance in this way is 'tithing' to that god.

Every condition, or possibility of a condition, that an insurance contract includes is another bit of actuarial cost added on the pile along with language, often written in excruciating legalese, and that drives up cost of premiums. Often these conditions are ones required by some regulating agency to be covered (and the way that insurance pools work actually means that such oddities covered are actually government arranged gifts as one person's premiums are made to subsidy those, sometimes few, people who may actually need coverage for unusual conditions).

In short: it is the nature of "insurance" to be much more expensive when it covers enough conditions that payout of benefits becomes a certainty.

Remember, ideally insurance is a weasel hole you throw money into just in case ... and the size of the weasel hole is a completely independent consideration of the fact that it must be, by definition, one of Dilbert's proverbial weasel holes.

Americans have BIG weasels living in their midst.

In the extreme there is so-called "insurance" like dental insurance which will often gladly charge you what you may expect to spend on dental work every year and in return pay for half of that back to you.

Compared to the slots, insurance tends to be a deplorable 'investment'.

And so-called "life insurance" is even worse than dental insurance is.
Standup Philosopher

"Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball"
User avatar
Selkadoom
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 1:53 am
Location: California and indifferent about it

Post by Selkadoom »

Well it appears the healthcare opposers are gaining steam
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

PSN ID: Selkadoom13
Steam: Scruffy.j2
User avatar
Rurudyne
Protoform
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 8:56 pm
Location: North Texas
Contact:

Post by Rurudyne »

Selkadoom ... this bill is about health insurance though.

If it were about health care they could do, for example, what I've often suggested: open National Hospitals akin to the County Hospitals that still dot the landscape.

In the Constitution the federal government is actually allowed general legislative power over places not under the jurisdiction of any State, such as DC or a Territory or land ceded by a State as with military bases. Thus the construction and operation of a few large hospitals in those places providing subsidized or means test health care would be legal even to an originalist such as myself. The only trick is that people would have to go to them ... but they could certainly do so to seek medical care for known conditions.

Such a system would also be dirt cheap to implement compared to trillions for an insurance overhaul. In 2007 the United States spent only about $30 billion for non-federal hospital construction ... so a physical plant costing even $3 or 5 billion (which would be a huge hospital) would be a drop in the bucket compared to this reform even including a few billion for operating cost ... frankly Congress can spend that much in its sleep.
Standup Philosopher

"Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball"
User avatar
inflatable dalek
Posts: 24000
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Kidderminster UK

Post by inflatable dalek »

I do hope it's true that one of the nay sayers seriously suggested Stephen Hawkins would have been dead by now if he'd ever been on the NHS...
User avatar
The Doctor
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Jun 27, 2009 6:33 am

Post by The Doctor »

inflatable dalek wrote:I do hope it's true that one of the nay sayers seriously suggested Stephen Hawkins would have been dead by now if he'd ever been on the NHS...
It is true sadly. The level of sheer dumbness that I have seen concerning this debate is disconcerting. Others have roared that the government had better stay away from their medicare.. Medicare of course is a goverment run single payer healthcare option for seniors....
User avatar
Springer007
Posts: 1162
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:28 pm
Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
Contact:

Post by Springer007 »

I am all for options, as everyone knows, but I would prefer to not have a government run health care since my experiences have taught me for a minor problem being in effect that I had to wait my turn for eight hours in a government/military run hospital. Civilians and elderly first, then recruits later, but of course when a hospital is amazingly not busy in an ER and Triage center, then one gets suspicious. Now if it is true that I have to pay even more taxes out of my paycheck for not signing up, or my family who are senior citizens for not signing up for the program, I draw the line. We're already taxed enough, and I understand that everyone should chip in, but food prices go up, fuel costs go up, but the taxes never fluctuate with the status of pay a person acquires accordingly.
If a person wants the government sponsored health care, go for it and that is that person's right to have it, but I am quite content on keeping myself happy and healthy on my own. I've truthfully had enough of doctors and hoodoos that don't know a lick about anything that I have had to go to for physical therapy in the past.
Now if the government would provide doctors who are extremely well educated and are tested vigorously in the field of medicine and anatomy and physiology, etc. Then I say go for it, but please, no 1000 page bills or whatnot that include pork barrel spending, or such high technical jargon that even a congressman can't break down for us (they're simple folk too who just get paid to look pretty in my view).
"Fear denies faith. And for the Immortal Emperor!"

-Space Marines
User avatar
Vin Ghostal
Posts: 5972
Joined: Sun Dec 17, 2000 12:20 am
Location: Making his summer residence in Alexandria, VA
Contact:

Post by Vin Ghostal »

The plan is far from perfect; millions will remain uninsured, but it will move us closer to what SHOULD be our goal: universal coverage. The people screaming about the plan being un-American are the sort of people who don't think universal coverage should be a priority; never mind the fact that our system sucks and that every other Western country knows that every citizen deserves health care.
Image
User avatar
Notabot
Posts: 2142
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 4:15 am
Location: Lowden, IA

Post by Notabot »

I like how many people supporting the Obama plan uses the notion that "everyone deserves health care" as if under the current system there are people denied it. "Health insurance" does not equal "health care". In fact, I don't think anyone is even denied health insurance. Yes, it's expensive, but that's life. If you shop around, you will find a policy that fits your needs. It's going to be far more expensive for some people who have made poor choices in their lives, and it's going to be far more expensive for some people who have had things beyond their control happen in their lives. Bottom line, though, is that it's available.
It's not perfect, but I certainly don't think putting the government in charge is a better alternative. No, you're not about to find a policy that gives you free everything like some people think they're entitled to, but you won't find that under the Obama plan either.
User avatar
Springer007
Posts: 1162
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:28 pm
Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
Contact:

Post by Springer007 »

under some employers and coverages, one might find that smoking, alcohol use, etc. is not a good thing to do while under those plans. no one wants to cover someone who makes poor health choices throughout their lives because that costs money and resources. nothing is perfect. not even the private insurers, but allowing a government of any sort any sort of leeway into any organization when itself has proved incompetent in the past decades when it comes to energy, health care, etc. then i don't want those nincompoops regulating anything with their agendas. leave it to the private citizens who have the degrees in operating said programs and government officials should just stay just as they are, government officials.
"Fear denies faith. And for the Immortal Emperor!"

-Space Marines
User avatar
Selkadoom
Posts: 617
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 1:53 am
Location: California and indifferent about it

Post by Selkadoom »

While I admit that NHS sounds good it will take thousands of jobs from employes who work for private insurance companies. Like Springer007 said, letting those incompetant fools with thier stupid agendas will ruin us, and in my opinon, take us a step closer to socialism
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

PSN ID: Selkadoom13
Steam: Scruffy.j2
User avatar
Sir Auros
Posts: 12980
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA
Contact:

Post by Sir Auros »

I think that "socialism" is the new "Nazi" as far as internet discussions go. I thought that bogeyman was played out already. Seriously, the detractors at most of these things sound like raving lunatics. No, we're not going to start pushing old people off cliffs, and you sound like an idiot when you say shit like that, Sarah Palin. Also, how do you Brits feel about the right-wingers in our country slagging your health care system? Were you aware that you're all red bastards who hate freedom?

I think the healthcare system in this country is bullshit, and I'm not saying that the current plan is the best. I personally think it's ridiculous how much money is made off of caring for people while the biggest cause of bankruptcy (last time I checked) is medical bills. I think it's insane that a doctor can charge you for being late or missing an appointment while his ass can cancel yours at any time or just not show up for three or four hours while you wait in one of his rooms. It's not right that somebody (like my father-in-law) won't be able to get health insurance when his policy runs out this month because he had a heart attack earlier this year, or that health insurance can be prohibitively expensive for families with blue collar jobs. There is a lot of bullshit surrounding the healthcare industry in this country, and regardless of how you feel about the public option, there is stuff that needs reform.

As far as what has been said specifically in this thread, I don't want to see government run hospitals, like Springer007, but I don't understand that to be a major part of the plan. Also, on a personal, irrational level, I say "**** 'em," when it comes to people in the insurance industry. It's you vs. them when you file a claim, and they will always have the upper hand.
Cliffjumper
Posts: 32206
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2001 5:00 am

Post by Cliffjumper »

Sir Auros wrote:Were you aware that you're all red bastards who hate freedom?
But we gone done what you told us to :(

But yeh, the proposal doesn't seem to be anything like the NHS (which, incidentally, employs loads of people... if one was to pop up in America the staff to man it wouldn't presumably be vat-grown or something, so it wouldn't create a lot of unemployment).

Sarah Palin... why does that name ring a bell?
User avatar
Halfshell
Posts: 19167
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Don't complain to me. I don't care.
Contact:

Post by Halfshell »

Sir Auros wrote:Were you aware that you're all red bastards who hate freedom?
This means I should get my "Communism FTW" tattoo removed before I enter the US, right?
User avatar
Sir Auros
Posts: 12980
Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2000 4:00 am
Location: Virginia, USA
Contact:

Post by Sir Auros »

I don't even know why we'd bother arguing this here, though. I mean, anyone could have guess what Notabot or my response was going to be, and is there any chance that our minds would be changed?
User avatar
Clay
Posts: 7209
Joined: Mon May 24, 2004 2:19 am
Location: Murray, KY

Post by Clay »

Notabot wrote: In fact, I don't think anyone is even denied health insurance. Yes, it's expensive, but that's life.
<raises hand>

I applied for health insurance with Blue Cross/Blue Shield and was denied because I had thrown out my back a few years before. Not "this is a pre-existing condition and we don't want to pay for anything related to it," but rather "go away, full stop."
User avatar
Springer007
Posts: 1162
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:28 pm
Location: Fort Smith, Arkansas
Contact:

Post by Springer007 »

It shouldn't just be the medical insurance, it should be automotive as well then. I think if one doesn't use their insurance because of good health, no car accidents, etc. then the "money" saved should compound so that way if in the event something major does happen to the person who is healthy, safe, etc. then they can afford it. I hate how it is like a credit that only works for the one month and then it goes away. On the same note, it should be like a roll over plan like the cell phone companies have for minutes and the like. But insurance is a rip off anyway and it needs to be reformed, just in a different, non 1000 page way? Maybe then people would want to be safer and healthier because they would feel that the money will be there when it is desperately needed.
"Fear denies faith. And for the Immortal Emperor!"

-Space Marines
User avatar
Rurudyne
Protoform
Posts: 1517
Joined: Sun May 28, 2006 8:56 pm
Location: North Texas
Contact:

Post by Rurudyne »

Sir Auros, I comprehend your frustration on account of you father-in-law and I hope it turns out well for him.

Can I ask your thoughts on if he cannot get insurance period (no one will offer him a plan at all) or if he cannot get insurance that he can afford?

I know it's not much of a practical difference on any case-by-case basis, but it's still an important one. It relates back to what insurance is and how it functions.

As for our current system, which does suck, the problem is that it is already a form of 'socialism' called syndicalism which has distorted both the market and perceptions of what insurance is and what it is for. This goes back to the genesis of industry using insurance as a benefit in WW2 when the Court stated that "benefits" were not subject to wage and price controls instituted by FDR (there was no delegated power for wage and price controls, but that never stopped FDR ... or Nixon who did the same). Syndicalism came in because insurance was included as a group benefit for employment from that point on. Governments rewarded the arrangement too (for example: employer provided insurance is pre-tax dollars while that which you buy for yourself is after-tax dollars). As they say: hard cases make for bad law.

Essentially, the insurance industry has been regulated haphazardly into a form that is untenable, 'accidental socialism' if you will with all of the side effects but none of the planning. HR3200 won't solve any problems because it is the government doing more of the same.
Standup Philosopher

"Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball"
User avatar
inflatable dalek
Posts: 24000
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2004 3:15 pm
Location: Kidderminster UK

Post by inflatable dalek »

Sir Auros wrote:Also, how do you Brits feel about the right-wingers in our country slagging your health care system? Were you aware that you're all red bastards who hate freedom?
It has actually done us one service, that Tory going on American TV to back up the claims was a good reminder that despite Cameron's best efforts to pretend otherwise they're still a bunch of complete twats.

Administrative and payment factors aside I think British and American hospitals aren't hugely different, everyone's overworked, underpaid and on the verge of a breakdown.
Post Reply