ER visits went UP under Romneycare

[Patrick2]

One by one, everything the obamanistas have said about obamacare is being proven false. Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can? Now 30% of employers have so far notified the government that they will opt out of providing healthcare - those people will be dumped into the obamacare system, like it or not. Also, eg, under the state "universal healthcare" in Massachusetts which is very similar to obamacare, the ER visits were supposed to go down, since everyone in the state was supposed to be covered. Instead, they've gone UP 4%.

Romney’s steadfast stand for a bad idea - The Boston Globe

 

[CitizenPained]

I think you're confusing Obama with Romney.

 

[Patrick2]

I think you're confusing Obama with Romney.

One by one, everything the obamanistas have said about obamacare is being proven false. Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can? Now 30% of employers have so far notified the government that they will opt out of providing healthcare - those people will be dumped into the obamacare system, like it or not. Also, eg, under the state "universal healthcare" in Massachusetts which is very similar to obamacare, the ER visits were supposed to go down, since everyone in the state was supposed to be covered. Instead, they've gone UP 4%.

.

 

[Mr_Rockhead]

...Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can?...

This was the biggest lie of all (like it was ever up to me to make that decision).

 

[editec]

The health care crises we are facing is HOPELESS until we rethink the social contract.

Seriously, there is NO solution (not socialist or capitalist) until we have a seachange in thinking about what obligations and rights citizens have in regard to society as a whole.

The longer we live on average, and the more effective (and expensive HC gets as a result of those advances) the higher a percentage of the GNP health care is going to cost us.

TRULY, this problem is not one that we ought to BLAME people for.

IN this case I don't blame EITHER PARTY because the problem is an organic and economic outcome of the fact that MEDICINE now actually works!

 

[auditor0007]

One by one, everything the obamanistas have said about obamacare is being proven false. Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can? Now 30% of employers have so far notified the government that they will opt out of providing healthcare - those people will be dumped into the obamacare system, like it or not. Also, eg, under the state "universal healthcare" in Massachusetts which is very similar to obamacare, the ER visits were supposed to go down, since everyone in the state was supposed to be covered. Instead, they've gone UP 4%.

Romney’s steadfast stand for a bad idea - The Boston Globe

This is indeed very interesting. Did you know that between 2004 and 2008 that emergency room visits increased by 9%? And since 2006 when Romneycare went into effect, they increased 4%. So that tells us that they actually were increasing at a higher rate prior to Romneycare going into effect.

Emergency Room Visits Increase in Massachusetts - By Avik Roy - Critical Condition - National Review Online

Another interesting fact; while emergency room visits increased by 4.1% between 2006 and 2008, low severity visits fell by 1.8%. In other words, the emergency room visits that increased the number of visits were due to high severity injuries or illnesses for which people tend to go to the ER regardless of whether they have insurance or not. The fact that ER visits for low severity problems fell by 1.8% tells us that since more people now have insurance, they are not going to the ER for a simple cold of flu. The ones that were going to the ER had major emergencies that actually needed immediate attention. The cause of the increase in these severe injuries or illnesses is not known.

http://articles.boston.com/2011-06-07/news/29630188_1_emergency-room-primary-care-health-care-law

 

[masquerade]

A woman from another country gets off the plane at the local airport and takes a taxi to the Emergency Room. Triaged and admitted, stays in the hospital for a few days. She can't go to rehab before travelling back to her country of origin because she doesn't have insurance. Her family who has lived in the area for several years, the same family who told her she could go to this hospital for free care, refuses to take care of her in their home for 2-3 days before she heading back home.

This is just one of many stories I know as truth.

 

[Patrick2]

The health care crises we are facing is HOPELESS until we rethink the social contract.

Seriously, there is NO solution (not socialist or capitalist) until we have a seachange in thinking about what obligations and rights citizens have in regard to society as a whole.

Rights have NOTHING to do with health care.

The longer we live on average, and the more effective (and expensive HC gets as a result of those advances) the higher a percentage of the GNP health care is going to cost us.

That's illogical - the more sophisticated medicine and health care gets, the more likely diseases are to be prevented and the attendant costs.

 

[Greenbeard]

Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can?

Sure, given that news sources existed two years ago and wrote down what he said, I remember:

“When I say if you have your plan and you like it,…or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans, what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform,” the President said.​

That wasn't a statement about your HR department's decision-making process.

Now 30% of employers have so far notified the government that they will opt out of providing healthcare - those people will be dumped into the obamacare system, like it or not.

I'm not sure what you're referring to about someone having "notified the government" of something. Presumably you're referring to the results of that McKinsey survey, which had nothing to do with the government and was not intended to actually predict anything:

The survey was not intended as a predictive economic analysis of the impact of the Affordable Care Act. Rather, it captured the attitudes of employers and provided an understanding of the factors that could influence decision making related to employee health benefits.

As such, our survey results are not comparable to the healthcare research and analysis conducted by others such as the Congressional Budget Office, RAND and the Urban Institute. Each of those studies employed economic modeling, not opinion surveys, and focused on the impact of healthcare reform on individuals, not employer attitudes.​

Impressive, particularly given this:

A particular criticism of McKinsey's study was that only 51% of respondents had a direct hand in choosing health benefits. Also, in questions about what they knew about the health reform bill, about 40% to 60% of the more than 1,300 respondents said they had heard but didn't know much, or were not familiar at all, with key parts of the legislation.

Some of McKinsey's questions laid out some details of the legislation, and asked respondents in the online survey to answer based on the assumptions and facts it presented.​

Very impressive.

I think you're confusing Obama with Romney.

One by one, everything the obamanistas have said about obamacare is being proven false. Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can? Now 30% of employers have so far notified the government that they will opt out of providing healthcare - those people will be dumped into the obamacare system, like it or not. Also, eg, under the state "universal healthcare" in Massachusetts which is very similar to obamacare, the ER visits were supposed to go down, since everyone in the state was supposed to be covered. Instead, they've gone UP 4%.

.

Did you really just quote your own language from the OP to support your point?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

A woman from another country gets off the plane at the local airport and takes a taxi to the Emergency Room. Triaged and admitted, stays in the hospital for a few days. She can't go to rehab before travelling back to her country of origin because she doesn't have insurance. Her family who has lived in the area for several years, the same family who told her she could go to this hospital for free care, refuses to take care of her in their home for 2-3 days before she heading back home.

This is just one of many stories I know as truth.

How's that my problem?

 

[CitizenPained]

The OP forgets that the Obama and Romney plans were quite different.

I'd rather live in a Romneycare world.

 

[CitizenPained]

Why does Romney hate unborn babies??

 

[Patrick2]

Sure, given that news sources existed two years ago and wrote down what he said, I remember:

“When I say if you have your plan and you like it,…or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans, what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform,” the President said.​

That wasn't a statement about your HR department's decision-making process.

What a load of hair-splitting crap. The HR department's decision-making process will be economically compelled by the new law which makes it disadvantageous for some companies to continue to offer their current plans. Clearly, obama left the impression to employees that they would be allowed to keep their plans if they wanted, which for many, will be simply false, BECAUSE OF THE NEW LAW.

One by one, everything the obamanistas have said about obamacare is being proven false. Remember when obama said, don't worry, if you want to keep your employer insurance you can? Now 30% of employers have so far notified the government that they will opt out of providing healthcare - those people will be dumped into the obamacare system, like it or not. Also, eg, under the state "universal healthcare" in Massachusetts which is very similar to obamacare, the ER visits were supposed to go down, since everyone in the state was supposed to be covered. Instead, they've gone UP 4%.

.

Did you really just quote your own language from the OP to support your point?

No einstein, I retype it for posters whose replies make it appear they have reading comprehension problems.

 

[Patrick2]

Why does Romney hate unborn babies??

Good question.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

The OP forgets that the Obama and Romney plans were quite different.

I'd rather live in a Romneycare world.

Have at it. I, like many people, left the People's Republic of Taxachusetts. I'm sure they have plenty of room for you there now.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This is indeed very interesting. Did you know that between 2004 and 2008 that emergency room visits increased by 9%? And since 2006 when Romneycare went into effect, they increased 4%. So that tells us that they actually were increasing at a higher rate prior to Romneycare going into effect.

Emergency Room Visits Increase in Massachusetts - By Avik Roy - Critical Condition - National Review Online

Another interesting fact; while emergency room visits increased by 4.1% between 2006 and 2008, low severity visits fell by 1.8%. In other words, the emergency room visits that increased the number of visits were due to high severity injuries or illnesses for which people tend to go to the ER regardless of whether they have insurance or not. The fact that ER visits for low severity problems fell by 1.8% tells us that since more people now have insurance, they are not going to the ER for a simple cold of flu. The ones that were going to the ER had major emergencies that actually needed immediate attention. The cause of the increase in these severe injuries or illnesses is not known.

Visits to ER rise despite health law - Boston.com

You raise interesting points, but neither of those articles conclusively prove that RomneyCare is the reason for the leveling off of emergency room increases. It's all speculation pretty much.

 

[Mr_Rockhead]

Sure, given that news sources existed two years ago and wrote down what he said, I remember:

“When I say if you have your plan and you like it,…or you have a doctor and you like your doctor, that you don't have to change plans, what I'm saying is the government is not going to make you change plans under health reform,” the President said.​

That wasn't a statement about your HR department's decision-making process.

What a load of hair-splitting crap. ...

Exactly.

And the quote that was posted is not the only time he ever spoke about that point.

And, when he does, he usually always uses words like - If you like your current plan, you don’t have to do anything – you can keep it.

Yeah, right.

 

[Anachronism]

I think you're confusing Obama with Romney.

On this particular topic there really is no difference between the two individual.

The health care crises we are facing is HOPELESS until we rethink the social contract.

Seriously, there is NO solution (not socialist or capitalist) until we have a seachange in thinking about what obligations and rights citizens have in regard to society as a whole.

The longer we live on average, and the more effective (and expensive HC gets as a result of those advances) the higher a percentage of the GNP health care is going to cost us.

You're exactly right. Until we get it through the thick skulls of Americans that healthcare is not, never has been, and never will be a RIGHT, but instead is a PRIVILEGE, these issues will persist.

As for changing the social contract.... I've already promised society that I will NEVER take a penny of Government healthcare, even if it means my death. Can anyone else say that?, becuase that's the sort of change necessary to fix this problem.

A woman from another country gets off the plane at the local airport and takes a taxi to the Emergency Room. Triaged and admitted, stays in the hospital for a few days. She can't go to rehab before travelling back to her country of origin because she doesn't have insurance. Her family who has lived in the area for several years, the same family who told her she could go to this hospital for free care, refuses to take care of her in their home for 2-3 days before she heading back home.

My question is.... Why was she allowed to come here in the first place if she didn't have the money to pay for the medical expenses?

I'd rather live in a Romneycare world.

Only if you believe that the Government knows what's in your best medical interest more than you do.

 

[editec]

The health care crises we are facing is HOPELESS until we rethink the social contract.

Seriously, there is NO solution (not socialist or capitalist) until we have a seachange in thinking about what obligations and rights citizens have in regard to society as a whole.

Rights have NOTHING to do with health care.

The longer we live on average, and the more effective (and expensive HC gets as a result of those advances) the higher a percentage of the GNP health care is going to cost us.

That's illogical - the more sophisticated medicine and health care gets, the more likely diseases are to be prevented and the attendant costs.

Ya think?

Well, there's no other way to say this other than:

You're completely wrong.​

The distribution of health care costs is strongly age dependent, a phenomenon that takes on increasing relevance as the baby boom generation ages. After the first year of life, health care costs are lowest for children, rise slowly throughout adult life, and increase exponentially after age 50 (Meerding et al. 1998). Bradford and Max (1996) determined that annual costs for the elderly are approximately four to five times those of people in their early teens. Personal health expenditure also rises sharply with age within the Medicare population. The oldest group (85+) consumes three times as much health care per person as those 65–74, and twice as much as those 75–84 (Fuchs 1998). Nursing home and short-stay hospital use also increases with age, especially for older adults (Liang et al. 1996).

source

 

[Greenbeard]

What a load of hair-splitting crap. The HR department's decision-making process will be economically compelled by the new law which makes it disadvantageous for some companies to continue to offer their current plans. Clearly, obama left the impression to employees that they would be allowed to keep their plans if they wanted, which for many, will be simply false, BECAUSE OF THE NEW LAW.

Were you under the impression that your doctor would be forbidden from retiring because, if he did, you wouldn't be able to keep him? Clearly you seem to think Obama was suggesting the law would forbid HR departments from changing health plans, which makes about as much sense.

The reality is that Obama was translating a specific policy in rhetoric: namely, he was referring to the fact that the law would (as every incarnation of it did) contain a grandfather clause to prevent regulatory changes from affecting existing plans as long as individuals or groups retained them. If you read more into it than was there (which you apparently did, thinking your company would never be allowed to change health plans) that's too bad, but it doesn't reflect on anyone but you. When pressed on what he meant, Obama elaborated in the quote I provided above, which really shouldn't be difficult to interpret.

No einstein, I retype it for posters whose replies make it appear they have reading comprehension problems.

Can you describe the workforce provisions of Chapter 58 of the Acts of 2006 in Massachusetts? What was the strategy there for addressing primary care shortages? Maybe you can do a little compare and contrast with the ACA for us.