What will low income people do for healthcare if they lose their Obamacare?

Here is a suggestion to answer the question.

"The 14194 clinics in this database offer medical services (some may also offer dental services) and are free, low-cost, low-cost with a sliding scale based on income, or offer some type of financial assistance. If you're under or uninsured, and looking for a nearby free clinic, sliding scale clinic, or low-cost clinic, where you and/or your family can go for lost cost medical care, NeedyMeds can help. Please note that the clinics listed are not necessarily free.

For additional information and appointments contact the clinic directly.

For a description of which clinics we include on our website and what type of information we provide on each clinic, visit our Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics page."

Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics | NeedyMeds

/---- libs say viable healthcare options are not an option unless it involves an abortion.

one, there is no medical care probided by the Affordable Care Act. the ACA gives ACCESS to health insurance.

so what do you think happens to the 25 million people who would be knocked off of insurance rolls by the rightwingnut brigade?

and of course all women's healthcare should be covered. insurance companies are paying for it, not the federal government.

abortion is legal, but I do love the gubmint hating "small gubmint" hypocrites who only like gubmint when it imposes rightwingnut Christian ideology on the rest of us.
 
Private health care has never worked anywhere in the world.

It has worked quite well for me all of my life.
As long as you're content to pay double what it would be in a country with single payer.


Cato Institute? Really



1. Universal Healthcare Around the World:

Italy: average wait for a mammogram is 70 days

“When you compare the outcomes for specific

diseases, the United States clearly outperforms

the rest of the world. Whether the disease

is cancer, pneumonia, heart disease, or

AIDS, the chances of a patient surviving are far

higher in the United States than in other countries.


The same is true for prescription drugs.

For example, 44 percent of Americans who

could benefit from statins, lipid-lowering

medication that reduces cholesterol and protects

against heart disease, take the drug.

That number seems low until compared with

the 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of

Britons, and 17 percent of Italians who could

both benefit from the drug and receive it.”

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-613.pdf

In Great Britain, about 20% of patients with treatable colon cancer at the time of discovery are considered incurable by the time treatment is finally available.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-613.pdf

Countries in which complementary or supplementary private health insurance policies are common include

Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United States (in

the case of Medicare programme beneficiaries).

In countries where private health insurance is available, governments often impose rules on what sort of

coverage is permissible. For example, Australia prohibits private insurance policies from covering the

ambulatory care co-payments required in the public programme. Canada prohibits private health insurers

from covering benefits included in the national plan.

The public-integrated model combines on-budget financing of health-care provision with hospital

providers that are part of the government sector.6 These systems, which merge the insurance and provision

functions, are organised and operated like any government department. Staff is generally paid on salary

(although, in some cases, doctors can have private patients as well) and they are most often public-sector

employees. Ambulatory doctors and other health-care professionals can be either public employees or

private contractors to the health-care authority, with a range of remuneration packages. Ensuring complete

population coverage is particularly easy under such systems, and as they are under the control of the

budget, the growth of overall costs has been contained more easily. However, they have weak incentives to

increase output, improve efficiency, or maintain quality and responsiveness to patient needs.



2. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): tells Brits if their life is worth living- in actual dollars and cents. As the NYTimes states, its job is to develop “a standard method of rationing. NICE has decided that Britain, except in rare cases, can afford only £15,000, or about $22,750, to save six months of a citizen’s life.”
(British Balance Benefit vs. Cost of Latest Drugs)

So, the average one-bedroom apartment in Manhattan is worth way more than a Brits’ life!(www.tregny.com

So, it has concluded that if you have breast cancer, the drug Tykerb, shown to delay the progression of the disease, is worth more than you are “despite Glaxo’s offer to pay for the first 12 weeks of treatment.”

U.K. Says Tykerb Isn’t Worth Cost, Even With 12 Free Weeks


3. Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle praised NICE-type policies in his book about healthcare and advocated a ‘super board’ that would tell doctors how to treat you. This board would choose “what it will cover and how much it will pay.” Can you spell “NICE”? (Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis by Tom Daschle, Jeanne M. Lambrew, and Scott S. Greenberger (Hardcover - Feb 19, 2008) p. 158 BTW, Daschle was Barack Obama’s first choice as Sec’y of HHS.



4. The Bush Administration sent chief medical officer of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Sean Tunis to learn about NICE and try to adopt the processes and mechanisms they used, “and we just couldn’t…[use]price to determine which drugs or devices Medicare or Medicaid provides has provoked fierce protests.”
British Balance Benefit vs. Cost of Latest Drugs
I quit reading at Cato Institute.


But you're an imbecile.....so why does it matter what you don't read?????
 
Unless I've missed something, we do not live in a socialist country. Nor have we amended our Constitution to permit Government (the taxpayers) to pay for healthcare for all.

Hence, we have the observable phenomena that :

People with money tend to eat better than people without money;

They tend to have nicer clothes;

They tend to live in safer, more posh places;

They tend to send their kids to better schools (all the way through college), whether public or private;

They get better healthcare.

To the extent that healthcare is a high priority, people who are "poor" have to seek out whatever resources are available and exploit them to the extent necessary.

But on the whole, people with resources will always get better healthcare than people without resources. AND THAT EVEN HAPPENS IN COUNTRIES WHERE THEY HAVE SOCIALIZED MEDICINE.

So if you don't mind, stop telling me that I am financially responsible to see to it that every poor bastard in this country has "adequate" health care. If you think the Constitution needs changing, and if enough people agree with you to get it done, then I will happily pay my share. But until that happens STFU. Ain't my problem.
Which is why I have no problem fucking over the government and every rich piece of shit I can. :)
 
The Republi-can't Ryan-TrumpCare is DEAD ON ARRIVAL!!!!!
dead-on-arrival-trumpcare-feature-933x445.jpg







T
 
Not to worry. If the GOP passes the ACHA, by 2025 we will have full universal single payer health care. Going back to what we had prior to the ACA will create the impetus for a Dem sweep in the House, Senate, and Executive. And dingbats like PC can move to Somalia where I am sure she will appreciate the smallness of the government. Maybe she can hook up with one of the warlords there, and assure her existences. LOL



"....by 2025 we will have full universal single payer health care."



And now for one more episode of "Facts Hidden From Liberal Dolts"


Let's see how the US stacked up against the socialist nations BEFORE OBAMACARE:

The following ‘Universal Healthcare’ countries have higher out-of-pocket costs than the United States:

Out-of-pocket spending as a share of total expenditure on health, 1980-2000 http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/5/53/22364122.pdf (table 4)

http://www.oecd.org/els/healthpoliciesanddata/22364122.pdf

These countries had higher out-of-pocket costs:
Canada, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Spain, Switzerland.



And so, this episode ends with yet another verbal custard pie in the kisser to the OldDunce.


But.....an improvement in his physiognomy.
645339300-demonstrator-holds-a-sign-reading-trumpcare-fake.jpg.CROP.cq5dam_web_1280_1280_jpeg.jpg
 
Graham and Manchin and Cruz said today that Trumpcare will not pass in the Senate.
 
Yup and no other country has the amount of people the US has.
^^
ignorance

Nope. Fact.
What difference does population make?

The more people, the more cost. No other country approached the 300 million in America.
The more people using it & more people paying into it.

Single Payer. The best option. Medicare for all.

A person turning 65 this year will have paid a Medicare tax since they were 16 years old as long as they were employed. It started in 1965, so a 16 year old today should have to pay the Medicare tax for 49 years to catch up and start even. A lump sum would be fine.
 
Here is a suggestion to answer the question.

"The 14194 clinics in this database offer medical services (some may also offer dental services) and are free, low-cost, low-cost with a sliding scale based on income, or offer some type of financial assistance. If you're under or uninsured, and looking for a nearby free clinic, sliding scale clinic, or low-cost clinic, where you and/or your family can go for lost cost medical care, NeedyMeds can help. Please note that the clinics listed are not necessarily free.

For additional information and appointments contact the clinic directly.

For a description of which clinics we include on our website and what type of information we provide on each clinic, visit our Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics page."

Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics | NeedyMeds

/---- libs say viable healthcare options are not an option unless it involves an abortion.

one, there is no medical care probided by the Affordable Care Act. the ACA gives ACCESS to health insurance.

so what do you think happens to the 25 million people who would be knocked off of insurance rolls by the rightwingnut brigade?

and of course all women's healthcare should be covered. insurance companies are paying for it, not the federal government.

abortion is legal, but I do love the gubmint hating "small gubmint" hypocrites who only like gubmint when it imposes rightwingnut Christian ideology on the rest of us.

It is against the law for the government to pay for an abortion. It is not a Christian law.
 
Listen up, Scubs. Here's the bottom line.

You know what the scuzzy, parasitic underclass rabble can do to pay for their medical needs? The loathsome prole vermin can get their nasty bloodsucker hands out of our pockets and pull their own weight.

The party's over for the freeloading shitbags. They can man up and take care of themselves for a change -- or they can fucking ROT! And we don't care which.

God, how we hate the odious maggots of the filthy Marxist welfare state! :flameth:

Are we clear on this? You better be.

America for REAL Americans!

Know what we mean?
 
Last edited:
Yup and no other country has the amount of people the US has.
^^
ignorance

Nope. Fact.
What difference does population make?

The more people, the more cost. No other country approached the 300 million in America.
Bullshit

The more people you have, the more demand for medial services. The more demand the price goes up.

You are a dolt.
 
What difference does population make?

The more people, the more cost. No other country approached the 300 million in America.
Bullshit

The more people you have, the more demand for medial services. The more demand the price goes up.

You are a dolt.
I repeat .. bullshit.
 
Nope. Fact.
What difference does population make?

The more people, the more cost. No other country approached the 300 million in America.
Bullshit

The more people you have, the more demand for medial services. The more demand the price goes up.

You are a dolt.
I repeat .. bullshit.

I repeat. Dolt.
 
Here is a suggestion to answer the question.

"The 14194 clinics in this database offer medical services (some may also offer dental services) and are free, low-cost, low-cost with a sliding scale based on income, or offer some type of financial assistance. If you're under or uninsured, and looking for a nearby free clinic, sliding scale clinic, or low-cost clinic, where you and/or your family can go for lost cost medical care, NeedyMeds can help. Please note that the clinics listed are not necessarily free.

For additional information and appointments contact the clinic directly.

For a description of which clinics we include on our website and what type of information we provide on each clinic, visit our Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics page."

Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics | NeedyMeds

/---- libs say viable healthcare options are not an option unless it involves an abortion.

one, there is no medical care probided by the Affordable Care Act. the ACA gives ACCESS to health insurance.

so what do you think happens to the 25 million people who would be knocked off of insurance rolls by the rightwingnut brigade?

and of course all women's healthcare should be covered. insurance companies are paying for it, not the federal government.

abortion is legal, but I do love the gubmint hating "small gubmint" hypocrites who only like gubmint when it imposes rightwingnut Christian ideology on the rest of us.

It is against the law for the government to pay for an abortion. It is not a Christian law.
Here is a suggestion to answer the question.

"The 14194 clinics in this database offer medical services (some may also offer dental services) and are free, low-cost, low-cost with a sliding scale based on income, or offer some type of financial assistance. If you're under or uninsured, and looking for a nearby free clinic, sliding scale clinic, or low-cost clinic, where you and/or your family can go for lost cost medical care, NeedyMeds can help. Please note that the clinics listed are not necessarily free.

For additional information and appointments contact the clinic directly.

For a description of which clinics we include on our website and what type of information we provide on each clinic, visit our Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics page."

Free/Low-Cost/Sliding Scale Clinics | NeedyMeds

/---- libs say viable healthcare options are not an option unless it involves an abortion.

one, there is no medical care probided by the Affordable Care Act. the ACA gives ACCESS to health insurance.

so what do you think happens to the 25 million people who would be knocked off of insurance rolls by the rightwingnut brigade?

and of course all women's healthcare should be covered. insurance companies are paying for it, not the federal government.

abortion is legal, but I do love the gubmint hating "small gubmint" hypocrites who only like gubmint when it imposes rightwingnut Christian ideology on the rest of us.

It is against the law for the government to pay for an abortion. It is not a Christian law.
/---- And yet PP gets 1/2 a billion dollars a year and you say not one dime goes to abortions?? Yeah sure Spanky, we believe you.
 
The 24 million uninsured are mostly poor democrat immigrant families who should of never been let into the country.
24 million will affect a lot of red state voters.....make no mistake!!!! Get ready for the GOP over reach and lost of GOP house seats in 2018.

Is that the same CBO that predicted 24 million would be signed up on the exchanges and there were less than 12 million that did? I think they should take another year, since the Democrats in the Senate will block it any way and let Obamacare stay in force.
there was a solid calculable reason for the CBO estimate being that far off... in their calculation....

The medicaid expansion for low income earners that was mandatory at the time of their calculation was reversed by the Supreme Court which made the expansion OPTIONAL, and only about half the States went with it the first year, plus penalties were pushed out a couple of years, and the grand opening of the exchange was a cyber disaster....

The CBO is pretty darn good at giving estimates, but they can only do so at any given time with the rules of the game given to them at the time.

It's REWRITING HISTORY now to claim the CBO was inaccurate with their projected estimate without giving the reasons why....like the medicaid expansion thing being made optional.



"The CBO is pretty darn good at giving estimates,...."

"In 2013 it projected that 26 million people would be enrolled in ObamaCare’s exchanges by now. The actual number is 10 million. Before the passage of the 2003 Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, the CBO said it would cost $394 billion over a decade. Actual expenditures were roughly 40% less. The CBO has a tendency to underestimate the benefits of market forces."
Articles | Karl Rove
 
The truth of the matter is the GOP-Ryan-TrumpCare will be a rip off if you earn between minimum wage to 60K per year. That's right! Red State voting conservatives who enjoy the current ACA/Obama care will be screwed in the end. Here is the Truth:
 
Private health care has never worked anywhere in the world.

It has worked quite well for me all of my life.
As long as you're content to pay double what it would be in a country with single payer.


OMG!

Where do they get this endless supply of morons???????


1. Universal Healthcare Around the World:

Italy: average wait for a mammogram is 70 days

“When you compare the outcomes for specific

diseases, the United States clearly outperforms

the rest of the world. Whether the disease

is cancer, pneumonia, heart disease, or

AIDS, the chances of a patient surviving are far

higher in the United States than in other countries.


The same is true for prescription drugs.

For example, 44 percent of Americans who

could benefit from statins, lipid-lowering

medication that reduces cholesterol and protects

against heart disease, take the drug.

That number seems low until compared with

the 26 percent of Germans, 23 percent of

Britons, and 17 percent of Italians who could

both benefit from the drug and receive it.”

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-613.pdf

In Great Britain, about 20% of patients with treatable colon cancer at the time of discovery are considered incurable by the time treatment is finally available.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-613.pdf

Countries in which complementary or supplementary private health insurance policies are common include

Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United States (in

the case of Medicare programme beneficiaries).

In countries where private health insurance is available, governments often impose rules on what sort of

coverage is permissible. For example, Australia prohibits private insurance policies from covering the

ambulatory care co-payments required in the public programme. Canada prohibits private health insurers

from covering benefits included in the national plan.

The public-integrated model combines on-budget financing of health-care provision with hospital

providers that are part of the government sector.6 These systems, which merge the insurance and provision

functions, are organised and operated like any government department. Staff is generally paid on salary

(although, in some cases, doctors can have private patients as well) and they are most often public-sector

employees. Ambulatory doctors and other health-care professionals can be either public employees or

private contractors to the health-care authority, with a range of remuneration packages. Ensuring complete

population coverage is particularly easy under such systems, and as they are under the control of the

budget, the growth of overall costs has been contained more easily. However, they have weak incentives to

increase output, improve efficiency, or maintain quality and responsiveness to patient needs.



2. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): tells Brits if their life is worth living- in actual dollars and cents. As the NYTimes states, its job is to develop “a standard method of rationing. NICE has decided that Britain, except in rare cases, can afford only £15,000, or about $22,750, to save six months of a citizen’s life.”
(British Balance Benefit vs. Cost of Latest Drugs)

So, the average one-bedroom apartment in Manhattan is worth way more than a Brits’ life!(www.tregny.com

So, it has concluded that if you have breast cancer, the drug Tykerb, shown to delay the progression of the disease, is worth more than you are “despite Glaxo’s offer to pay for the first 12 weeks of treatment.”

U.K. Says Tykerb Isn’t Worth Cost, Even With 12 Free Weeks


3. Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle praised NICE-type policies in his book about healthcare and advocated a ‘super board’ that would tell doctors how to treat you. This board would choose “what it will cover and how much it will pay.” Can you spell “NICE”? (Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis by Tom Daschle, Jeanne M. Lambrew, and Scott S. Greenberger (Hardcover - Feb 19, 2008) p. 158 BTW, Daschle was Barack Obama’s first choice as Sec’y of HHS.



4. The Bush Administration sent chief medical officer of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Dr. Sean Tunis to learn about NICE and try to adopt the processes and mechanisms they used, “and we just couldn’t…[use]price to determine which drugs or devices Medicare or Medicaid provides has provoked fierce protests.”
British Balance Benefit vs. Cost of Latest Drugs
 

Forum List

Back
Top