/dev/null Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I find this discussion most remarkable by its absence. Here we are, supposedly so desperate to keep people working that we'll flush away a trillion dollars in future revenue on stimulus spending to artificially create jobs. At the same time, we undertake a trillion dollar health reform. But we are assured that it will pay for itself, we can just wring the money out of waste, paper-pushers, and middlemen. Well guess what? All of these paper-pushers have jobs and earn money. If we can somehow get rid of them - and arrive at some magical lean mean health-providing machine - then we have a bunch of unemployed people on our hands. How much will we require to 'stimulate' them with employment? I dunno - maybe roughly the amount we saved getting rid of them? Getting something for nothing is proving to be harder than Obama let on. You're not looking at the big picture Sure those paper pushers will lose their private sector jobs. But as Obamacare® expands it will open up opportunities for government sector paper pushers. More government sector paper pushers = more federal workers More federal workers = bigger federal employee union Bigger federal employee union = bigger Democratic voting bloc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 You're not looking at the big picture Sure those paper pushers will lose their private sector jobs. But as Obamacare® expands it will open up opportunities for government sector paper pushers. More government sector paper pushers = more federal workers More federal workers = bigger federal employee union Bigger federal employee union = bigger Democratic voting bloc While that may be true up to a point- the healthcare system is broken- and "both sides" want it fixed....I put both sides in quotes, since we really have one party that divides its lemming followers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I can agree with you on that point, but one way or another it has to get started and the transition won't be easy No doubt but with the giant leap there is no turning back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fezmid Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Because they have no choice. The gubmint forces people to have car insurance. You can bet your arse that if it didn't, 40 million plus people wouldn't. It's not required in Wisconsin or New Hampshire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 It's not required in Wisconsin or New Hampshire. Well, bully for them. If I was the recalcitrant sort (like those who can afford health insurance and don't carry it) and the opportunity was present to NOT carry car insurance, I would NOT carry it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 The complaints are a joke. Ask yourself this: what is the actual cost of the medical care you consume in a year? Maybe it's a good year. You have two doctors visits and some lab work. An hour of a doctors time is minimally $200. Throw in a receptionist and paying for the facility and his overhead, and it's $400 a visit. And the labwork? Probably another $600. So $1,400 - not bad. But maybe it's a bad year - 4 visits, 10 tests of various sorts, and a proceedure. That's about $12,000. Or maybe it's a *really* bad year, the year you burn through $40,000 of hospital care before kicking the bucket. Most years are good, a few are bad. So what to you would be a fair amount of money to spend per year on medical treatment, on average, to cover your lifetime use? Maybe you feel that that cost is simply too high for someone to afford. It is about choosing what we spend our money on, after all, and the average cost of an individual plan is $4,700. But just out of curiosity, what does your car insurance cost? The average nationwide is $1,837, and we don't hear too many people complaining or going without. A good year between me and my wife is about $15,000 in health care costs. No major medical problems, just routine care and prescriptions. What we pay, however, is roughly $4500 (insurance and co-pays). A bad year...well, this month, my wife's been injured in a car accident and had carpal tunnel surgery. That's an easy additional $15k, just between the surgery and the imaging (MRIs and X-rays). A REALLY bad year...wife's coworker is dying of pancreatic caner. Diagnosed six weeks ago, should be dead by Friday. Five rounds of useless chemo, four weeks' hospitalization, six days in ICU, currently in hospice. Conservatively, that's a eighty thousand (probably north of a hundred). Your "actual cost" numbers are pretty off...particularly end-of-life care. I've read somewhere that 80% of a person's lifetime health care costs come in the last two weeks of life...so if we could only not pay for the last two weeks (since they're going to kick in two weeks anyway), health care would be fixed. Great idea...if you could identify those two weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 A good year between me and my wife is about $15,000 in health care costs. No major medical problems, just routine care and prescriptions. What we pay, however, is roughly $4500 (insurance and co-pays). A bad year...well, this month, my wife's been injured in a car accident and had carpal tunnel surgery. That's an easy additional $15k, just between the surgery and the imaging (MRIs and X-rays). A REALLY bad year...wife's coworker is dying of pancreatic caner. Diagnosed six weeks ago, should be dead by Friday. Five rounds of useless chemo, four weeks' hospitalization, six days in ICU, currently in hospice. Conservatively, that's a eighty thousand (probably north of a hundred). Your "actual cost" numbers are pretty off...particularly end-of-life care. I've read somewhere that 80% of a person's lifetime health care costs come in the last two weeks of life...so if we could only not pay for the last two weeks (since they're going to kick in two weeks anyway), health care would be fixed. Great idea...if you could identify those two weeks. It's called life insurance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted July 28, 2009 Author Share Posted July 28, 2009 Sorry, but the status quo sucks worse. Really? How so. I honestly don't understand the reasoning behind that statement. There are 40 million plus uninsured. Is the the big reason? The oft quoted '40 million' number. Does that figure include non-citizens? I think it does. And how many people simply choose not to spend their money on health insurance? Census reports indicate that 17 million of that group make > $50,000. Link to source...I didn't verify it So are we really considering this momumental shift because of the remaining 5%-7% of the population? Would it be that hard to simply build/fund more free clinics in the inner cities and rural areas where the poverty is centered? Why are we throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 A good year between me and my wife is about $15,000 in health care costs. No major medical problems, just routine care and prescriptions. What we pay, however, is roughly $4500 (insurance and co-pays). A bad year...well, this month, my wife's been injured in a car accident and had carpal tunnel surgery. That's an easy additional $15k, just between the surgery and the imaging (MRIs and X-rays). What are you? Hypochondriacs? How many frigging visits do you make to the doctor, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Really? How so. I honestly don't understand the reasoning behind that statement. Is the the big reason? The oft quoted '40 million' number. Does that figure include non-citizens? I think it does. And how many people simply choose not to spend their money on health insurance? Census reports indicate that 17 million of that group make > $50,000. Link to source...I didn't verify it So are we really considering this momumental shift because of the remaining 5%-7% of the population? Would it be that hard to simply build/fund more free clinics in the inner cities and rural areas where the poverty is centered? Why are we throwing the baby out with the bathwater? If Republicans supported spending more money on funding clinics like you suggest, that would have been done years and would have alleviated part of the problem. Why have they never supported that alternative? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 What are you? Hypochondriacs? How many frigging visits do you make to the doctor, anyway? I'm bipolar, and my wife's got a long history of cancer in her family (and a history herself), so she keeps on top of things. And that includes dentists' visits - that's going to be covered under ObamaCare, right? Most of that cost, though, is prescription meds. And frankly, I don't go to the doctor nearly as often as I should. And her coworker definitely was not a hypochondriac...if she were, she might not be dying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I'm bipolar, and my wife's got a long history of cancer in her family (and a history herself), so she keeps on top of things. And that includes dentists' visits - that's going to be covered under ObamaCare, right? Most of that cost, though, is prescription meds. And frankly, I don't go to the doctor nearly as often as I should. And her coworker definitely was not a hypochondriac...if she were, she might not be dying. I'm just trying to get a grip on how much *I* visit the doctor. I visit my PCP maybe 3 times a year. Dentist twice, and I don't see the headshrinker anymore. But, given the list that you just put forth, it makes sense. Although, I must say, you're probably not representative of the population in your age group. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 If Republicans supported spending more money on funding clinics like you suggest, that would have been done years and would have alleviated part of the problem. Why have they never supported that alternative? Because they're !@#$iing idiots too?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I'm just trying to get a grip on how much *I* visit the doctor. I visit my PCP maybe 3 times a year. Dentist twice, and I don't see the headshrinker anymore. But, given the list that you just put forth, it makes sense. Although, I must say, you're probably not representative of the population in your age group. I visit the Dr. pretty much 3 times a year. I have a minor heart condition which I'm on meds for and cholesterol meds so I need the blood work. I spend $20 a month on prescriptions and $20 a visit to the doctor. I see my dentist three times a year and I don't have dental insurance. My dentist says you typically pay more a year on insurance than on preventive care so I use my FSA which I put $150 per month in and that covers my dental visits as well as my wife's. My health insurance is $108 per month for a PPO through my work and my wife's is free. How will this new "plan" !@#$ up the sweet deal I've got? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 www.anncoulter.com That ain't gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I visit the Dr. pretty much 3 times a year. I have a minor heart condition which I'm on meds for and cholesterol meds so I need the blood work. I spend $20 a month on prescriptions and $20 a visit to the doctor. I see my dentist three times a year and I don't have dental insurance. My dentist says you typically pay more a year on insurance than on preventive care so I use my FSA which I put $150 per month in and that covers my dental visits as well as my wife's. My health insurance is $108 per month for a PPO through my work and my wife's is free. How will this new "plan" !@#$ up the sweet deal I've got? Immensely. It won't ruin *my* plan (as I'm under my wife's health insurance) but I'm thinking of ditching hers and going hi-ded with an HSA. Cheaper over the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 True enough. But I can tell you, most of my colleagues didn't vote for that bastard. Everybody gets nervous about change especially in their field/industry that their career and livelyhood centers around. I would be the first one to say that about myself as I work for the federal government... But, my god with what I see go around me daily... I would be the first one to admit that mass reorganization in my line of work needs to happen even if that means myself having to move onto a different line of work. To me the insurance industry represents the same exact thing I see in the top-heavy governement and all the self-personal interest of those greedy slugs refusing constructive and productive change in the system. I say bring it. You need to break some eggs to make an omelette. The tree needs to be shaken EVERYWHERE from the roots, not just the low hanging fruit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I'm bipolar Oh the directions I could manipulate that line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Live&DieBillsFootball Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 I'm bipolar, and my wife's got a long history of cancer in her family (and a history herself), so she keeps on top of things. And that includes dentists' visits - that's going to be covered under ObamaCare, right? Most of that cost, though, is prescription meds. And frankly, I don't go to the doctor nearly as often as I should. And her coworker definitely was not a hypochondriac...if she were, she might not be dying. Not to pick on you, but if you lost your coverage and had to buy in the market based on your health history you would be phucked. Most likely you would be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions. Also, any coverage that you find would probably not include mental health or prescription coverage. Like the Chef and most of us who have employer coverage, there is a worry that our sweet deal may get affected by health reform. However, the bigger worry that we should have is losing our coverage due to job loss or a major health issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 What are you? Hypochondriacs? How many frigging visits do you make to the doctor, anyway? I normally visit the doctor twice a year at most- this past year, while dealing with higher than usual stress levels on the job as well as my father going through the final stages of cancer, I got sick more often, dealt with a messed up sciatic nerve nerve and it eventually caused insomnia- a really bad case of it. Sometimes you have to go more than you normally do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts