Obamacare continues to kill jobs across the country. Thanks, liberals.

[Oldguy]

I didn't say that. Of course we should talk about it, but clinging to hardened, black or white ideological or partisan positions is not "talking," is it?



Yes, we should have. But, one party was invited to participate and flat refused to do so. And, the President never offered up HIS plan as a starting point. Instead, we ended up with a bill crafted by committee, by one party. Who should be surprised at what we got, given that genesis?

However, that's in the past now and there's nothing we can do about how it came to pass. We still have the future, though, and COULD work together to either fix what's wrong with it or replace it with something else.

That will not happen unless WE demand it. And, THAT will require that we all look past our own prejudices and distrust of the other side.

Good luck with that.

One party was invited to "rubber stamp" what the other party "crafted" (can you REALLY even use that word for such a bad piece of legislation?) behind closed doors. Am I surprised that it's a bad bill? Of course not...it was primarily drafted by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid...two dyed in the wool progressives who are not very bright when it comes to economics or health care.

So we've got a law that is going to destroy jobs at a time when we desperately NEED them. Who's fault is that? Why do we need to completely overhaul something that was just passed?

Oh, please. The bipartisan panel to discuss healthcare reform was carried on live TV. I watched it. The President solicited ideas from the GOP representatives and only Dr. Tom Coburn (R-OK) was willing to engage in substantive discussion. He paid the price for that later.

 

[Freewill]

Maybe the discussion should start with why are health care cost climbing at a rate that seems much higher then the inflation rate?

Is it because there is more use?

Is it because of law suits?

Is it because of exorbitant raises given to medical staff?

Then we can discuss how Obamacare is to reduce the cost.

How can it reduce the cost, right or wrongly, there will obviously be more use by people not paying into the system? Will this reduce emergency room visits enough to break even.

Are they going to limit the amount medical facilities can charge as they have done with Medicare? Which of course means that those with private insurance will be charged more?

Will this reduce drug costs? If I remember correctly Obama made a deal with the drug companies so the price will not go down.

What I see, and this is my opinion, this is a boom for the insurance companies. Sure they will pick up people they don't want to pick up but the cost will be spread out over the rest no lost to them. It may be a boon to the medical facilities that treat those on medicare or will force those who are on medicare to pay even more for supplemental insurance.

I am not sure how a single payer system would fix any of this. What I do believe is that when things are free that is when they get abused. So those getting a free ride, rightly or wrongly, will end up using the bulk of the services. Those who pay their own way will end up paying even more. Unless the cost for services can be contained.

I was thinking of retiring next year and making room for a younger man but now I am not sure, really not sure.

 

[Oldguy]

And by the way...blaming ideology for the opposition to this "Frankenstein's monster" of a bill is insulting, Old. I oppose it NOW for the same reasons I opposed it four years ago. It doesn't do what it's supposed to do...lower health care costs.

But, what good does it do to continue to oppose it? It's not going anywhere, is it?

At this point, we should be talking about how to make it better, or even replace it, but political positions (is that better than ideology?) are so hardened that nobody is willing to sit down together and fix it.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Maybe if the right would stop running around in circles and screaming, "OMG! OBAMACARE!" and sit down to talk about it, we might be able to fix what's wrong with it.

The fact is that The People voted for Obama, knowing fully well that a vote for him was a vote for Obamacare, yet the GOP continues to act is if that didn't happen, preferring instead to keep on blathering the same "kill it" nonsense which cost them the election.

Obamacare is here to stay, folks. It's not going away. It has things in it which need to be fixed, so either get involved or shut the hell up about it.

The people who jammed this legislation did so behind locked doors with no input from the opposition. The American People were locked out as well and were told, " we have to pass it first so you can find out what is in the legislation.". Who is going to fix it?

 

[Freewill]

And by the way...blaming ideology for the opposition to this "Frankenstein's monster" of a bill is insulting, Old. I oppose it NOW for the same reasons I opposed it four years ago. It doesn't do what it's supposed to do...lower health care costs.

But, what good does it do to continue to oppose it? It's not going anywhere, is it?

At this point, we should be talking about how to make it better, or even replace it, but political positions (is that better than ideology?) are so hardened that nobody is willing to sit down together and fix it.

None of that will happen if Obama doesn't want it to happen. He has shown no sign of changing anything, except exemptions for political support. He certainly isn't going to replace his legacy piece of legislation that would be a sign of defeat. So the only thing Obama may support would be his dream of a single payer system which I do not see as any better. I am guessing what that would do is eliminate health insurance companies? If so then the hit on the economy would really be great and it would seem like it would only shift that cost to the government.

Truth is no matter what we do health insurance is going to cost a whole lot more. There is no way around it. Cover more people who pay little into the system someone has to pay. Cut the amount that the health care providers can charge and they will either quit or treat patients like cattle. They will have no other choice. More expense, less service, I believe that is the future.

 

[Stephanie]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE]Obama on single payer health insurance - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Oldguy]

Maybe the discussion should start with why are health care cost climbing at a rate that seems much higher then the inflation rate?

Is it because there is more use?

Is it because of law suits?

Is it because of exorbitant raises given to medical staff?

Then we can discuss how Obamacare is to reduce the cost.

How can it reduce the cost, right or wrongly, there will obviously be more use by people not paying into the system? Will this reduce emergency room visits enough to break even.

Are they going to limit the amount medical facilities can charge as they have done with Medicare? Which of course means that those with private insurance will be charged more?

Will this reduce drug costs? If I remember correctly Obama made a deal with the drug companies so the price will not go down.

What I see, and this is my opinion, this is a boom for the insurance companies. Sure they will pick up people they don't want to pick up but the cost will be spread out over the rest no lost to them. It may be a boon to the medical facilities that treat those on medicare or will force those who are on medicare to pay even more for supplemental insurance.

I am not sure how a single payer system would fix any of this. What I do believe is that when things are free that is when they get abused. So those getting a free ride, rightly or wrongly, will end up using the bulk of the services. Those who pay their own way will end up paying even more. Unless the cost for services can be contained.

I was thinking of retiring next year and making room for a younger man but now I am not sure, really not sure.

So far as I know, a single payer system isn't being mentioned by anybody but the RWNJ conspiracy freaks. It's just not an issue at this time.

As I see it, the biggest factor driving the rise in healthcare costs is what Medicare will pay. It seems that the whole system is built around milking Medicare for all it's worth. Medicare payments appear to be the basis for every charge on a hospital or nursing home bill.

For instance: My Mom is in a nursing home. The charge is roughly $4000 per month (which she's currently paying) and that's what Medicare will reimburse. In other words, we have no way of knowing if that's a fair price or not, it's just that every resident is charged the Medicare maximum, regardless of anything else. When the time comes that Mom can no longer afford it and the tab is picked up by Medicaid, the charge will be the same.

Another example: She had an emergency and they sent her to the hospital in an ambulance (about 2 miles distant). Charge: About $1500. Why? Because that's what Medicare would pay. The return trip was $100. Medicare won't pay that, I don't think. While in the hospital, she had TWO MRI's of the same spot in her head in a single day and was scheduled for a third the next day. Why? Apparently because Medicare would pay for it. (We sons said "to hell with that" and checked her out.)

One more: When my Dad was dying in the same hospital 20 years ago, we elected to just let him go. As soon as we left and Mom was there alone, they moved him down to intensive care which, at the time, was billed at about $1500 per day, as opposed to the $120 a day for his private room. When I went back up there and confronted the doctor about WHY he was moved to IC, his response was "Why shouldn't the hospital make some money off this?" Literally...that was his response.

Until and unless somebody addresses the amount of legal, Medicare over billing and the resultant un-necessary costs associated with that, healthcare costs will continue to rise.

Obamacare attempts to address that through reducing Medicare payments to providers, which is a good start, but it doesn't go far enough to contain for-profit hospitals from milking the system and their patients.

ps: My figures may be a little off in this because I don't have the actual bills right in front of me, but you get my drift.

 

[J.E.D]

Michigan medical technology giant Stryker Corporation announced last year that it was slicing its workforce by 5 percent and blamed ObamaCare’s medical device tax as the reason.

There are three heirs to the Stryker fortune that was started when Homer Stryker, a surgeon from Kalamazoo, Michigan, founded the company. They are his three billionaire grandchildren: Pat Stryker, Jon Stryker and Ronda Stryker.

Great. More greedy rich people who think they deserve special treatment. What a sad sad story

 

[Oldguy]

Maybe if the right would stop running around in circles and screaming, "OMG! OBAMACARE!" and sit down to talk about it, we might be able to fix what's wrong with it.

The fact is that The People voted for Obama, knowing fully well that a vote for him was a vote for Obamacare, yet the GOP continues to act is if that didn't happen, preferring instead to keep on blathering the same "kill it" nonsense which cost them the election.

Obamacare is here to stay, folks. It's not going away. It has things in it which need to be fixed, so either get involved or shut the hell up about it.

The people who jammed this legislation did so behind locked doors with no input from the opposition. The American People were locked out as well and were told, " we have to pass it first so you can find out what is in the legislation.". Who is going to fix it?

Bullshit. I read it, every word of it. It was on-line at the Congressional website from day one.

If somebody didn't read it, it was because they were just too lazy to do so.

 

[J.E.D]

If the people we elected don't come up with any better ideas we'll end up with single payer in the next 15 years.

Sounds good to me

 

[Oldguy]

And by the way...blaming ideology for the opposition to this "Frankenstein's monster" of a bill is insulting, Old. I oppose it NOW for the same reasons I opposed it four years ago. It doesn't do what it's supposed to do...lower health care costs.

But, what good does it do to continue to oppose it? It's not going anywhere, is it?

At this point, we should be talking about how to make it better, or even replace it, but political positions (is that better than ideology?) are so hardened that nobody is willing to sit down together and fix it.

None of that will happen if Obama doesn't want it to happen. He has shown no sign of changing anything, except exemptions for political support. He certainly isn't going to replace his legacy piece of legislation that would be a sign of defeat. So the only thing Obama may support would be his dream of a single payer system which I do not see as any better. I am guessing what that would do is eliminate health insurance companies? If so then the hit on the economy would really be great and it would seem like it would only shift that cost to the government.

Truth is no matter what we do health insurance is going to cost a whole lot more. There is no way around it. Cover more people who pay little into the system someone has to pay. Cut the amount that the health care providers can charge and they will either quit or treat patients like cattle. They will have no other choice. More expense, less service, I believe that is the future.

It may be chic to blame the President for everything which happens, but he's only the Chief Executive. He has a lot of power and authority, but he can't make laws on his own hook. Congress has the unfettered and unrestrained power to change, eliminate or replace Obamacare any time they like and, if support is enough to over-ride a veto, there's nothing Obama or any other President can do about it. Our system of government DOES still work...IF we're concerned enough to get involved.

But, too few of us know how much power we really have and too many prefer instead to just piss and moan about it.

 

[Stephanie]

Maybe the discussion should start with why are health care cost climbing at a rate that seems much higher then the inflation rate?

Is it because there is more use?

Is it because of law suits?

Is it because of exorbitant raises given to medical staff?

Then we can discuss how Obamacare is to reduce the cost.

How can it reduce the cost, right or wrongly, there will obviously be more use by people not paying into the system? Will this reduce emergency room visits enough to break even.

Are they going to limit the amount medical facilities can charge as they have done with Medicare? Which of course means that those with private insurance will be charged more?

Will this reduce drug costs? If I remember correctly Obama made a deal with the drug companies so the price will not go down.

What I see, and this is my opinion, this is a boom for the insurance companies. Sure they will pick up people they don't want to pick up but the cost will be spread out over the rest no lost to them. It may be a boon to the medical facilities that treat those on medicare or will force those who are on medicare to pay even more for supplemental insurance.

I am not sure how a single payer system would fix any of this. What I do believe is that when things are free that is when they get abused. So those getting a free ride, rightly or wrongly, will end up using the bulk of the services. Those who pay their own way will end up paying even more. Unless the cost for services can be contained.

I was thinking of retiring next year and making room for a younger man but now I am not sure, really not sure.

So far as I know, a single payer system isn't being mentioned by anybody but the RWNJ conspiracy freaks. It's just not an issue at this time.

As I see it, the biggest factor driving the rise in healthcare costs is what Medicare will pay. It seems that the whole system is built around milking Medicare for all it's worth. Medicare payments appear to be the basis for every charge on a hospital or nursing home bill.

For instance: My Mom is in a nursing home. The charge is roughly $4000 per month (which she's currently paying) and that's what Medicare will reimburse. In other words, we have no way of knowing if that's a fair price or not, it's just that every resident is charged the Medicare maximum, regardless of anything else. When the time comes that Mom can no longer afford it and the tab is picked up by Medicaid, the charge will be the same.

Another example: She had an emergency and they sent her to the hospital in an ambulance (about 2 miles distant). Charge: About $1500. Why? Because that's what Medicare would pay. The return trip was $100. Medicare won't pay that, I don't think. While in the hospital, she had TWO MRI's of the same spot in her head in a single day and was scheduled for a third the next day. Why? Apparently because Medicare would pay for it. (We sons said "to hell with that" and checked her out.)

One more: When my Dad was dying in the same hospital 20 years ago, we elected to just let him go. As soon as we left and Mom was there alone, they moved him down to intensive care which, at the time, was billed at about $1500 per day, as opposed to the $120 a day for his private room. When I went back up there and confronted the doctor about WHY he was moved to IC, his response was "Why shouldn't the hospital make some money off this?" Literally...that was his response.

Until and unless somebody addresses the amount of legal, Medicare over billing and the resultant un-necessary costs associated with that, healthcare costs will continue to rise.

Obamacare attempts to address that through reducing Medicare payments to providers, which is a good start, but it doesn't go far enough to contain for-profit hospitals from milking the system and their patients.

ps: My figures may be a little off in this because I don't have the actual bills right in front of me, but you get my drift.

reducing medicare payments to providers should do WONDERS for the people
and you thought these people who came up with Obamatax cared about you..fools

 

[Oldguy]

reducing medicare payments to providers should do WONDERS for the people
and you thought these people who came up with Obamatax cared about you..fools

Would you care to expand upon that, or do you just want to discuss things in simplistic sound bites?

 

[Freewill]

But, what good does it do to continue to oppose it? It's not going anywhere, is it?

At this point, we should be talking about how to make it better, or even replace it, but political positions (is that better than ideology?) are so hardened that nobody is willing to sit down together and fix it.

None of that will happen if Obama doesn't want it to happen. He has shown no sign of changing anything, except exemptions for political support. He certainly isn't going to replace his legacy piece of legislation that would be a sign of defeat. So the only thing Obama may support would be his dream of a single payer system which I do not see as any better. I am guessing what that would do is eliminate health insurance companies? If so then the hit on the economy would really be great and it would seem like it would only shift that cost to the government.

Truth is no matter what we do health insurance is going to cost a whole lot more. There is no way around it. Cover more people who pay little into the system someone has to pay. Cut the amount that the health care providers can charge and they will either quit or treat patients like cattle. They will have no other choice. More expense, less service, I believe that is the future.

It may be chic to blame the President for everything which happens, but he's only the Chief Executive. He has a lot of power and authority, but he can't make laws on his own hook. Congress has the unfettered and unrestrained power to change, eliminate or replace Obamacare any time they like and, if support is enough to over-ride a veto, there's nothing Obama or any other President can do about it. Our system of government DOES still work...IF we're concerned enough to get involved.

But, too few of us know how much power we really have and too many prefer instead to just piss and moan about it.

The lesson should have been learned during the vote on NAFTA and GATT. Without Clinton pushing the democrats would have never supported the treaties and they never would have made it past filibuster. So yes, the party follows the president, Republican or Democrat. Certainly what you say could be true but except for the auto bailouts I have not seen where the party has opposed their president.

The Tea Parties were formed to oppose the large expansion of government. Maybe you agree maybe you don't but you see how they were vilified by the left. It takes a whole lot to oppose the powers to be.

We should have executed our power last election and voted those in out but we are too afraid of losing "our guy" or power to ever do such a thing.

 

[Freewill]

Would you care to expand upon that, or do you just want to discuss things in simplistic sound bites?

By what my medical provider has told me is that medicare payments now is a losing proposition. If it were not for private insurance picking up the slack they would not have any medicare patients. Matter of fact some today will not take on any more medicare patients. So what are those who are on medicare to do? Those who can afford it buy supplemental insurance, those who can't??????

 

[Oldguy]

None of that will happen if Obama doesn't want it to happen. He has shown no sign of changing anything, except exemptions for political support. He certainly isn't going to replace his legacy piece of legislation that would be a sign of defeat. So the only thing Obama may support would be his dream of a single payer system which I do not see as any better. I am guessing what that would do is eliminate health insurance companies? If so then the hit on the economy would really be great and it would seem like it would only shift that cost to the government.

Truth is no matter what we do health insurance is going to cost a whole lot more. There is no way around it. Cover more people who pay little into the system someone has to pay. Cut the amount that the health care providers can charge and they will either quit or treat patients like cattle. They will have no other choice. More expense, less service, I believe that is the future.

It may be chic to blame the President for everything which happens, but he's only the Chief Executive. He has a lot of power and authority, but he can't make laws on his own hook. Congress has the unfettered and unrestrained power to change, eliminate or replace Obamacare any time they like and, if support is enough to over-ride a veto, there's nothing Obama or any other President can do about it. Our system of government DOES still work...IF we're concerned enough to get involved.

But, too few of us know how much power we really have and too many prefer instead to just piss and moan about it.

The lesson should have been learned during the vote on NAFTA and GATT. Without Clinton pushing the democrats would have never supported the treaties and they never would have made it past filibuster. So yes, the party follows the president, Republican or Democrat. Certainly what you say could be true but except for the auto bailouts I have not seen where the party has opposed their president.

The Tea Parties were formed to oppose the large expansion of government. Maybe you agree maybe you don't but you see how they were vilified by the left. It takes a whole lot to oppose the powers to be.

We should have executed our power last election and voted those in out but we are too afraid of losing "our guy" or power to ever do such a thing.

I'm not talking about parties. I'm talking about The People.

Yes, political parties and their platforms are a creation of The People and generally represent our views, but the mass of uncommitted and unaffiliated People have power too, if we'd just exercise it.

As an example, consider George Bushs' immigration reform he crafted in partnership with Ted Kennedy. It looked like a lock because both parties were behind it, but The People rose up enmass, flooded Washington and the airwaves with their unhappiness and stopped it dead in its tracks.

Another example is when the Tennessee Legislature was meeting behind closed doors to consider a tax hike a few years ago and word got out about it. A mob of unhappy citizens gathered up outside the Capitol building and, after a few rocks were tossed through the window, the legislators beat a hasty retreat.

The point isn't that mob action is the preferred method of registering our discontent, but that The People can affect any change they want if they're exercised enough over it.

 

[Oldguy]

By what my medical provider has told me is that medicare payments now is a losing proposition. If it were not for private insurance picking up the slack they would not have any medicare patients. Matter of fact some today will not take on any more medicare patients. So what are those who are on medicare to do? Those who can afford it buy supplemental insurance, those who can't??????

Yes, that's becoming a problem here too, but with healthcare profits at an all-time high, and still rising, I can't help but wonder how much of that is driven by simple greed, an unwillingness to take a little less profit, or trying to exercise political influence?

Probably the worst thing we EVER let happen was the conversion of healthcare from a patient-centered system to a profit-making enterprise. It may be too late to close that barn door, but it's not too late to curtail it and force patient welfare in front of profit, is it?

That IS one thing Obamacare attempts.

 

[bripat9643]

These people are full of it, medical and insurance costs were on a ruinous rise before anyone did a thing and were a leading cause of layoffs and terminations,

Really? I suppose you have some actual evidence to back this claim up. For your information, insurance costs have been going up faster since obamacare was passed.

FAIL

if special interests had not insisted we stick to the employer provided group coverage scam we have always had then perhaps so many employers would not find themselves still in a position of being on the hook for insurance costs.

You can blame Obama and the Dims for that. No Republicans voted for this monstrosity.

 

[Greenbeard]

Maybe the discussion should start with why are health care cost climbing at a rate that seems much higher then the inflation rate?

Is it because there is more use?

Is it because of law suits?

Is it because of exorbitant raises given to medical staff?

Then we can discuss how Obamacare is to reduce the cost.

Obamacare doesn't take just one approach to cost containment. It accepts that incentives are broken at pretty much every level of the health care system and proceeds from there.

If your pet issue is overutilization/poor shopping for health services by consumers and patients, you'll be pleased to know the law is a boon for consumer directed high deductible plan-HSA pairs. It reduces the tax incentive for employees and employers to have overly generous benefit designs. It adds new transparency requirements for hospitals to make public a list of their charges for items and services they provide.

If you think costs increases can be traced to the insurance side, the ACA places limitations on the portion of premium revenue that can be spent on non-medical things (like the executive compensation liberals complain about). It brings new insurers into markets that have been devoid of competition, in part by seeding the creation of new homegrown (and consumer-operated) plans and in part by allowing existing insurers to sell across state lines in new markets.

It fixes deficiencies in existing insurance markets to ensure that consumers have the information and the structure needed to make meaningful choices and send clear price signals--shopping in the new marketplaces is going to make it very easy to see what you're getting with a new plan, what the prices are (and even your own likely expenses under a given plan), how the choices stack up in terms of quality, etc. The ACA also helps states to develop new insurance premium oversight mechanisms that, when used aggressively, have shown potential in being able to help hold down rising costs.

If you think costs are being driven on the provider side, the ACA is making a huge push to address the problems in organization and care coordination, etc that drive costs on the provider side. It would take way too long to go through all of what it's doing on that front but a major strategy in the ACA is to use Medicare reform to drive change by (1) shifting the way Medicare pays for services away from encouraging high-volume, low (or mediocre) value service provision, and (2) promoting and assisting health care providers in delivering better care more efficiently and less expensively, while holding them accountable for quality outcomes. You can see some of what's coming down the pike in results (i.e. slower cost growth, higher quality scores) from this private sector pilot in Massachusetts that incorporates some of these principles: http://www.usmessageboard.com/healt...-reform-model-lowers-costs-improves-care.html.

More importantly, there are some early indicators that providers have already begun to reorganize care delivery in response to the ongoing and coming reforms, accounting for some of Medicare's current record-low cost growth--and offering some promise that we might be entering a new era of cost containment.Obamacare tackles the biggest cost drivers, not just in Medicare but in the entire health system: the inflationary payment mechanisms and flawed delivery systems that have plagued the health system for decades.

If tort reform is your issue, the ACA offered federal money and assistance to help states find innovative ways to reform their own tort laws (the GOP Congress has refused to fund that provision of the law). Those who push for blunt force approaches to tort reform, like national caps on damages, miss the fact that many, many states have already tried caps on damages and the like. If there's money to be saved through tort reform, we're going to have to get smarter about how we do it by trying new approaches (e.g. health courts). That's why we need states to start experimenting with new strategies.

Those who say the law does nothing to rein in costs are just being silly: it goes after cost drivers at every level of the system. There's more to be done in the future but it's a hell of a start.

 

[Greenbeard]

For your information, insurance costs have been going up faster since obamacare was passed.

September 11, 2012

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- The cost of employer-sponsored family health insurance premiums jumped again this year, but the rate at which they rose slowed to historic lows, according to a new survey Tuesday.