Beware: ObamaCare’s now reality

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by WillowTree, Nov 15, 2012.

  1. WillowTree
    Offline

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,156
    Thanks Received:
    10,167
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,729
    President Obama’s re-election and Democratic gains in the US Senate end any possibility of repealing the Obama health law. It will roll out as written, imposing major changes soon on you and your family. If you are uninsured because you can’t afford it, help may be on the way. But if you are one of the 250 million Americans with coverage, there are big problems ahead.

    If you’re a senior or a baby boomer, expect less care than in the past. Cuts to future Medicare funding pay for more than half the Obama health law. Hospitals, for example, will have $247 billion less to care for same number of seniors than if the law had not passed. Hospitals will spread nurses thinner. California nurses already are striking over the increased workloads





    Beware: ObamaCare’s now reality - NYPOST.com






    America gets screwed and pays the whore more.
     
  2. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    15,635
    Thanks Received:
    1,877
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +4,298
    Dear WT: What I am going to recommend to the Governors of Texas, Florida and Red Border States is to push for an opt-in plan that allows taxpayers a choice, whether to be under the ACA, or invest the same amount of money funding alternatives, such as financing the restoration of historic sites to create a housing/home health exchange for veterans or other people NOT covered by ACA. Also converting prison/mental health houses into safer programs that work with counseling and services provided by educational internships, so this cuts the costs of both prisons, health care, education and housing at the same time.

    Give people a free choice of what model to experiment with since teh ACA is not proven yet. If these local models can be shown to be more cost-effective, and people invest voluntarily, then either give them a deduction, where half the fine from ACA goes to the federal ACA program and half goes to the local alternatives; or the State pays any contested difference and rewards citizens for funding their own local programs instead of ACA. In that case, I would suggest the Border States also assess the costs to citizens of federal govt failures to enforce immigration laws, and then balance the costs owed through ACA against that.

    Logistically we would need to solve the crisis with immigration, prisons, housing and mental health backlog if we are going to address the costs of health care that could be covered if these other issues weren't skyrocketing in costs and bankrupting the states paying for crime.
     

Share This Page