Page 1 of 71 1234561151 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 1405
  1.    #1  
    I've gone to both my Senators Townhall Meetings, (D) and (R) and my Congressman's townhall. I've listened to people from both sides express their opinions.

    I feel the following is a good solution. Although long, it's a lot shorter than the House Bill (which I have also read most of)

    Here goes...let me know your opinions...if you like it forward it to your Representatives!
    ...........................................

    PROBLEM: Right now when someone shows up at an emergency room, we have to treat them. Emergency room treatment is very expensive.
    SOLUTION: Have health clinics associated with the hospital. When someone shows up in the emergency room, triage them according to emergency needs. This would lower the cost of treating non-emergency conditions. It would lower cost to insurance companies for people with insurance and the government for people without insurance. This could help lower health insurance premiums.


    PROBLEM: Portability of Policies

    SOLUTION: No Group Health Insurance. Rates should be the same for individuals regardless of who they work for. Allow insurance to be shopped nationwide and on the internet. Policies should be guaranteed renewable, so you don’t lose your coverage if you change jobs or become ill. Insurance Companies could offer a variety of benefits, so you only pay for what you choose. There should be a standard for comparing policies to make them easy to understand. Employers who want to offer health insurance could put premiums in a tax-deductible flexible spending account.


    PROBLEM: PRE-EXISTING CONDITIONS – If pre-existing conditions are covered unconditionally, no one would buy insurance until something happens to them. If you think mandatory insurance works, check out how many people don't have auto insurance where it is mandatory.

    SOLUTION: Insurance companies would cover pre-existing conditions after a two year waiting period. There could be a High Risk Pool to help people that insurance companies won’t accept. This would work the same as States High Risk Pools for auto insurance or homeowners insurance. High Risk premiums would be higher, so people would have incentive to buy regular polices before they need it.


    PROBLEM: UNAFFORDABLE PREMIUMS

    SOLUTION: Premiums could be tax-deductible. The loss of tax revenue would be offset by the cost of paying for uninsured. For low income individuals the credit would work the same as the current unearned income credit.


    OTHER PROBLEMS NEEDING ATTENTION
    Tort reform – Doctors and Hospitals perform many unneeded test out of extreme caution to avoid lawsuits

    Supply and Demand – Universities limit the number of students admitted to medical school to keep the number of doctors down. Fewer doctors  Higher Prices

    Cost shifting – Doctors should not be able to charge you more if you have health insurance then if you are on Medicare or paying cash. This is raising the cost of health insurance premiums.
    Last edited by Technologic 2; 09/12/2009 at 10:55 PM. Reason: Make it clearer
  2. #2  
    Wow a lot of very specific ideas. Yes seems as the other thread we have mainly is an argument to avoid doing much of anything, this thread is a welcome change. I would hope we could address all the topics you brought up here. First off, if we increase the number of doctors trained in med schools, wwouldnt that lead to a lot of out of work doctors? And who would pay? Would we subsidize med schools to do this or would it just be a matter of loosening the requirements to families who could afford it? I see problems with this idea, but I agree it's something to consider.
  3. #3  
    I had a friend from Germany whose wife was a psychiatrist. She said that here was such an oversupply of doctors there hat she was unemployed for a couple years at one point. I thnk to invest all that time and effort to train someon for that many years and have that go unused like thats eems real inefficient way to go delveries healy care. So I would still be in favor of some way to keep the supply of doctors within some guidelines. I would be curious what other folks thought.
  4. jewel's Avatar
    Posts
    638 Posts
    Global Posts
    666 Global Posts
    #4  
    These are all good but the problem is this president and this Democrat run congress don't want to listen.
  5. 1thing2add's Avatar
    Posts
    6 Posts
    Global Posts
    8 Global Posts
    #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by jewel View Post
    These are all good but the problem is this president and this Democrat run congress don't want to listen.
    The inclusion of 160 Republican-sponsored amendments (more than half of all amendments) is not listening?
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    The inclusion of 160 Republican-sponsored amendments (more than half of all amendments) is not listening?
    I did not realize there is already so much input from the republicans. When change comes to health care in the US, and I am pretty sure it will, the republicans can feel good that they helped with it.
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by E.LesterBrown View Post
    I did not realize there is already so much input from the republicans. When change comes to health care in the US, and I am pretty sure it will, the republicans can feel good that they helped with it.
    Let's wait and see what the final, final, final bill is and how many Republican points actually make it through. Oh sure, the democrats will likely let a few minor amendments pass through, but on the major issues, I'm sure there will be a public plan option (Republicans against), there will probably not be any tort reform (Republicans want), abortion will likely be covered (Republicans against), and illegals will still be able to get on the plan (Republicans against, although, illegals won't be able to get tax credits....a little bone thrown to the Republicans).

    All this will likely pass since the Republicans can not stop it....this is the democrats show and the Republican's main ideas won't be listened to. By the way, I don't blame democrats for that, it's the way politics work. In DC, bi-partisan support means getting the minority party to agree with the majority party. Whether Republican control, or democrat control, bi-partisan support does not mean real "coming together of ideas". The reason is because there is such a divide between the 2 parties that there is little to agree on. My hope is the "brave" democrats who go along will get promptly thrown out in 2010 and 2012 (the key one in 2012, Obama and his socialistic ideas and Czars). Of course, we will be stuck with many parts of the plan that is passed, but, maybe some aspects of it will be able to be trimmed back once Republicans get back in control.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  8. jewel's Avatar
    Posts
    638 Posts
    Global Posts
    666 Global Posts
    #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    The inclusion of 160 Republican-sponsored amendments (more than half of all amendments) is not listening?
    Okay I will put it bluntly. Obama and the Democrats do not want to listen. They want a socialized bill to pass disregarding the voice of many Americans. The Republicans are bringing out very reasonable proposals but they are being turned down.
  9. 1thing2add's Avatar
    Posts
    6 Posts
    Global Posts
    8 Global Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by jewel View Post
    Okay I will put it bluntly. Obama and the Democrats do not want to listen. They want a socialized bill to pass disregarding the voice of many Americans. The Republicans are bringing out very reasonable proposals but they are being turned down.
    Would you like the excel file of those Republican-sponsored amendments accepted or would you prefer a different format? I'm sorry that you feel Orin Hatch's and other Republican-sponsored amendments don't warrant consideration, but they were approved anyway.

    img.slate.com/media/1/123125/2220911/2221030/2222297/GOPHELPAmendments.xls
  10.    #10  
    This problem has been coming for a long time, so Republicans AND Democrats both share the blame.

    It is time to stop partisan bickering, it is destroying this country. The people have to get involved, let your representatives know what you want, and if they don't listen...Get rid of them! Regardless of Party!

    As far as a glut of doctors if we open up Med Schools to get more doctors...Right now, by time a doctor pays for his liability insurance the amount of income a doctor can make is not worth the time and work they go through to become a doctor. Limiting doctors lets them charge higher fees.

    I pay cash when I go to a doctor, last week I tore a tendon in my shoulder. I went to a Bone and Joint doctor and the soonest appointment I could get was in a week. So I had to go to a more expensive Emergency Clinic (although I did avoid the even more expensive ER Room at the hospital)

    Lets have more doctors, tort reform lowers their expenses, they make more money with fewer patients, we have more doctors offering us lower prices and shorter wait times.
  11.    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Would you like the excel file of those Republican-sponsored amendments accepted
    I would like to see a link of where they have been accepted.

    As far as illegal aliens (undocumented visitors) are concerned. Being here and what can we do about that is another question.

    But, as far as health care is concerned... If someone is in this country...Legal or Not...and they have a contagious disease..ex N1H1..do you want them walking the streets, untreated? Spreading the disease; or should they get emergency treatment to confine the disease.

    Someone can start a different thread as to what to do about them being here in the first place.
  12. #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Would you like the excel file of those Republican-sponsored amendments accepted or would you prefer a different format? I'm sorry that you feel Orin Hatch's and other Republican-sponsored amendments don't warrant consideration, but they were approved anyway.

    img.slate.com/media/1/123125/2220911/2221030/2222297/GOPHELPAmendments.xls
    And that is part of the problem... I don't think many know the number of Republicans who are joining in to make progress. On the other hand, you could make the argument that those admendments were accepted simply to appese the few and guarantee some republican votes.... so the dems could go it alone. lol

    I think the Republican party is at an impasse... they know reform is needed... but they also know if obama is able to pass this, it will almost guarantee him another four... and help the dems gain.

    Their are many differences, but I think they are being hashed out and eventually everyone will start to work together as they realize this is going to happen...

    Part of the solution or part of the problem.
    01000010 01100001 01101110 00100000 01010100 01101000 01110010 01100101 01100001 01100100 00100000 01000011 01110010 01100001 01110000 01110000 01100101 01110010 01110011 00100001
  13. jewel's Avatar
    Posts
    638 Posts
    Global Posts
    666 Global Posts
    #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    Would you like the excel file of those Republican-sponsored amendments accepted or would you prefer a different format? I'm sorry that you feel Orin Hatch's and other Republican-sponsored amendments don't warrant consideration, but they were approved anyway.

    img.slate.com/media/1/123125/2220911/2221030/2222297/GOPHELPAmendments.xls
    You know what you are very much correct. And clearly you are smarter and more informed than I am with regards to those amendments. I hope they would listen though to some crucial points like eliminating the public option, encourage competition to lower cost by crossing state line, assure that abortion is not sponsored, assure that illegals will not be covered, etc.

    Thanks for sharing me the file.
  14.    #14  
    Thanks, I've read your spreadsheet.

    Things to be careful about.

    Picking a panel to determine basic benefits...We should let supply and demand do this. I would like to buy a plan that DOES NOT pay for regular doctor visits and preventative care. I can pay for that myself and save a lot of money.

    Watch...One amendment approves something while another amendment cancels what was just approved. They have to get this done in simple language.

    Life Insurance policies have to be written on a 3rd grade reading level, how about legislation doing the same. Let the general population be able to read and understand their legislation.

    Watch talk about Gateways. The thing most people hate about HMOs is having to go to their Gatekeeper Doctor with no choice of going somewhere else if not satisfied. You should have a choice of what doctor to see and you should have a choice of what insurance company and what level of benefits you choose.
  15. 1thing2add's Avatar
    Posts
    6 Posts
    Global Posts
    8 Global Posts
    #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by theog View Post
    And that is part of the problem... I don't think many know the number of Republicans who are joining in to make progress. On the other hand, you could make the argument that those admendments were accepted simply to appese the few and guarantee some republican votes.... so the dems could go it alone. lol

    I think the Republican party is at an impasse... they know reform is needed... but they also know if obama is able to pass this, it will almost guarantee him another four... and help the dems gain.
    And as some Republican politicians have stated, "If they can stop Obama here, they can stop him, period!". Playing Russian roulette politics with healthcare economics will have far more devastating effects than the Wall St crisis, with the exception that is will play out longer, deeper, and slower. JoeSixpack just won't realize it until it's far too late.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    My hope is the "brave" democrats who go along will get promptly thrown out in 2010 and 2012 (the key one in 2012, Obama and his socialistic ideas and Czars).
    The Whole 'Obama is a scary communist because he appoints people to government positions with russian titles is laughable. You do realize that Bush appointed quite a few more 'Czars' that Obama has right?

    List of U.S. executive branch czars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    And for the record, it was the Communists that overthrew the Czars.
  17. #17  
    No, because the administration has not taken the time to make itself familiar with the legislation. What is there does not mean it will stay there. Barry keeps saying one thing and the paper work says another thing.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1thing2add View Post
    The inclusion of 160 Republican-sponsored amendments (more than half of all amendments) is not listening?
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by Groovehog View Post
    The Whole 'Obama is a scary communist because he appoints people to government positions with russian titles is laughable.
    His statement did not in fact make that causal claim. Socialism and communism are two different economic philosophies anyway.
    You do realize that Bush appointed quite a few more 'Czars' that Obama has right?

    List of U.S. executive branch czars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    According to your link, 3 more positions. Don't know if that's fairly considered quite a few. There were more people who held those positions, but that's over 8 years compared to 8 months, so it's a tad premature to give that one to President Obama at this time.
    And for the record, it was the Communists that overthrew the Czars.
    Just because they called themselves Communists doesn't mean they were. They were more accurately Socialist (and Oligarchist eventually). The union/state controlled the economy. While Marx envisioned this as a transitional state to true Communism, the 'iron law of oligarchy' makes sure that Communism doesn't scale well. It works fine in a familial arrangement like the traditional family or in small communes, but even when it approaches any level beyond a small village, the bonds start to break apart.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  19.    #19  
    and does anyone think my original plan would or wouldn't work? That is, if we can get pass the politics.
  20. 1thing2add's Avatar
    Posts
    6 Posts
    Global Posts
    8 Global Posts
    #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    No, because the administration has not taken the time to make itself familiar with the legislation. What is there does not mean it will stay there. Barry keeps saying one thing and the paper work says another thing.
    The president does not legislate. Congress does. Obama has provided his outlines for what is acceptable and what is not acceptable for being signed into law. A number of ranking Republicans are engaging the issue of healthcare economics reform, which is something we should all support.
Page 1 of 71 1234561151 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions