Health Care Reform

[DIYer]

Originally Posted by mzpro5

I'll admit I haven't read all 400+ posts in this thread but looking over the last few pages it comes across that you think that the answer is simple - if you don't have a high paying job just move where there are high paying jobs (where is that?) if you want health insurance get a job with someone offering health insurance ( becoming less and less) and if you don't just go to the ER if you need medical care.

MZ and GoldTeeth, there is a difference between "high paying job" and "higher paying job" and latter is what I mentioned.

I may be misinterpreting your stance

Well, sort of. My last post was more of a satire of what's being discussed by those in power as an attempt to remedy the problem.

As I said I am not for forcing anyone into a program and I am not in favor of the way Pelosi and the rest are trying to pass anything just to say they passed something but it is disgraceful that there are people in this country that cannot receive basic healthcare.

You seem to shoot down ideas but do you have any solutions?

Again, my last post was a satire.
The proposals that I would like to see? As mentioned on previous page, why not take care of the ones that are not covered instead of trying to change the entire system? What's less damaging to the national budget, using $## billions on fixing the area in need of help or using $## trillions on changing the entire system that most people are satisfied with?

[GoldTeethII]

Originally Posted by DIYer

MZ and GoldTeeth, there is a difference between "high paying job" and "higher paying job" and latter is what I mentioned.

My point still stands. Not everyone can have a higher paying job. To have a higher paying job requires that someone has a lower paying job.

I do not dispute that this or that individual can improve his or her situation. My point is that it is impossible for everyone to do this.

[mzpro5]

Originally Posted by DIYer

The proposals that I would like to see? As mentioned on previous page, why not take care of the ones that are not covered instead of trying to change the entire system? What's less damaging to the national budget, using $## billions on fixing the area in need of help or using $## trillions on changing the entire system that most people are satisfied with?

I don't believe most people are "satisfied". Just because people "accept" the situation does not mean they are satisfied.

I believe there are many people like myself. I get health insurance thru my employer and I pay 15% of the premium each month. My health insurance for a single person is close to $800/month and I pay about $120/month. That may not seem too bad but over the last 4-5 years the premium goes up at least 20-25% each year.

I work for a non-profit organization and it is getting to the point that health care is taking a fair chunk of the budget. Plus I haven't had a raise in 3 years so my real income keeps going down due to my share of the premium. You may say well get another job. At 58 yo that is not a good option and I will keep the one I have. I am able to pay my mortgage and expenses but my savings/retirement contributions are getting less and less every year.

I have accepted what is going on but I and my employer are far from satisfied. Something has to change or in a few years I and my employer will not be able to afford it.

That is why the whole system needs to be revised.

[Rope]

Originally Posted by mzpro5

I don't believe most people are "satisfied". Just because people "accept" the situation does not mean they are satisfied.

I believe there are many people like myself. I get health insurance thru my employer and I pay 15% of the premium each month. My health insurance for a single person is close to $800/month and I pay about $120/month. That may not seem too bad but over the last 4-5 years the premium goes up at least 20-25% each year.

I work for a non-profit organization and it is getting to the point that health care is taking a fair chunk of the budget. Plus I haven't had a raise in 3 years so my real income keeps going down due to my share of the premium. You may say well get another job. At 58 yo that is not a good option and I will keep the one I have. I am able to pay my mortgage and expenses but my savings/retirement contributions are getting less and less every year.

I have accepted what is going on but I and my employer are far from satisfied. Something has to change or in a few years I and my employer will not be able to afford it.

That is why the whole system needs to be revised.

Don't you worry about your retirement. After paying into the Social Security fund for the past 46-50 years, they'll be plenty of money for your retirement.

On second thought, perhaps you should worry about your retirement, you'll only be receiving 74 cents on every dollar you paid into the fund. Odd that you won't be receiving $1.20 for every dollar you contributed based on the interest that should have accrued on that principle for the last 46-50 years, Further more, the federal government will get what they want, and that's another cash-cow so they can continue to "lap" funds, so it appears everything is well in America.

Sooner than later there will be a reckoning with the spending government continues to proliferate. You cannot spend more money than tax dollars you are collecting, and thus far, everything you purchase has a federal and state tax. Hmmm, wonder where all that money goes?

Rope

[scubabob]

Originally Posted by mzpro5

This is a big part of the problem and a major overall cost contributor to healthcare - people using the ER as if it were a doctor's office. People question the government getting involved but have no problem with people that cannot afford healthcare going to the ER and shifting the cost to the rest of us. They cannot to pay for the care so the cost gets absorbed by those that have insurance or can pay.

...shifting the cost to the rest of us...

The government is already involved. How is going to the ER, getting treated, not paying (no insurance, no out of pocket), and having the costs shifted to the rest of us any different than going to the ER or someplace else, getting treated, not paying for it (no taxes, no out of pocket), having UHC pay for it, and shifting the cost to the rest of us? Right now I help keep the hospitals afloat in our county via county taxes. At least that is more local. Having the federal government do the same thing in a huge, new socialized program (IMO) does not stand a chance of being any better.

[mzpro5]

Originally Posted by scubabob

...shifting the cost to the rest of us...

The government is already involved. How is going to the ER, getting treated, not paying (no insurance, no out of pocket), and having the costs shifted to the rest of us any different than going to the ER or someplace else, getting treated, not paying for it (no taxes, no out of pocket), having UHC pay for it, and shifting the cost to the rest of us? Right now I help keep the hospitals afloat in our county via county taxes. At least that is more local. Having the federal government do the same thing in a huge, new socialized program (IMO) does not stand a chance of being any better.

The hospitals in my area are private not publicly funded via any type of tax so that does not apply in my situation. Half of the hospitals in our area are operated by the Cleveland Clinic and another big entity University Hospitals Health system both big private conglomerates.

And when you say the federal health plan will result in a huge new socialized program what plan are we discussing? The bill that Rush and Beck talk about? The plan that Oberman talks about? The plan that NPR talks about? Has anybody seen an actual plan that is going to be voted on? I haven't. Supposedly there is one bill/plan in the House and one bill/plan in the Senate - they are not the same. The House will vote on theirs and the Senate on theirs and then it goes to conference and who knows what will come of that. All I've heard is discussion, speculation and rumor about what "the government plan" is and there isn't even a solid bill yet. So all of this is just conjecture.

I can't say I am in favor or not in favor because there is no solid plan at this time. Just 2 different pieces of legislation that no one really knows what they are.

So until I see a detailed bill all I will say is there needs to be a change in the current situation in this country regarding health care.

[DIYer]

Originally Posted by GoldTeethII

My point still stands. Not everyone can have a higher paying job. To have a higher paying job requires that someone has a lower paying job.

I do not dispute that this or that individual can improve his or her situation. My point is that it is impossible for everyone to do this.

My reply would have been little different if it was for you or mzpro instead of Chizzap. In theory, yes, you are right in terms of the balance in this world but my reply containing "higher paying job" was specific to Chizzap based on what laid out as his problem of not being able to afford $100/month premium when he once had a coverage that requires $300/month.

[scubabob]

Originally Posted by mzpro5

And when you say the federal health plan will result in a huge new socialized program what plan are we discussing? The bill that Rush and Beck talk about? The plan that Oberman talks about? The plan that NPR talks about? Has anybody seen an actual plan that is going to be voted on? I haven't. Supposedly there is one bill/plan in the House and one bill/plan in the Senate - they are not the same. The House will vote on theirs and the Senate on theirs and then it goes to conference and who knows what will come of that. All I've heard is discussion, speculation and rumor about what "the government plan" is and there isn't even a solid bill yet. So all of this is just conjecture.

I don't know which one -- take your pick I don't care. Each and every one is an assault on my personal liberty, an overstep of federal authority, and unconstitutional. Those in power are way smarter than me, so they must already know this. Why are they proceeding anyways? DIYer wants to know too.

[Lulimet]

House passes the bill http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091108/..._care_overhaul

Now it's up to the senate.

[Towen7]

I've always believed that even though I disagreed with the politics of some in the House and Senate, that they genuinely wanted to do what was best for the country.

This debate has changed my mind.