PDA

View Full Version : The Speech



TXduckdog
09-09-2009, 09:13 PM
I'm going to noodle on this overnight, before rendering any kind of analysis. I don't want to be reactionary...but break it down piece by piece.

I'd like to find the text of the speech...anybody got a source?

There was a lot of well meaning, well intentioned ideas. Getting any of them into legislation is a whole nuther matter. I just wish Obama and his party in the congress could get anywhere near the same page. I thought there were some very ominous remarks that almost precluded this won't be a bipartisan effort. I was really dismayed with the insignificant bone thrown on tort reform.

My overall impression is where the heck is the money coming from to pay for the 30-40 million new insured? Not "one dime" of new spending? We'll get it from doing away with fraud and abuse in the current system?

I'm afraid the president is whistling past the graveyard on the funding.


I thought Axelrod was a total dick. Instead of looking forward to what his boss says can be done....he spews the same old rancid puke about Bush and Rove.

YardleyLabs
09-09-2009, 09:49 PM
The text of the speech is at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/us/politics/10obama.text.html. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/10/us/politics/10obama.text.html)

Boustany's response is at http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/09/transcript-gop-response-obamas-health-care-address/

Goose
09-09-2009, 09:56 PM
I love Joe Wilson. Give that man a ceegar!

We live in Cuba now.

Eric Johnson
09-09-2009, 10:12 PM
Didn't the speech state there were 30 million uninsured, a drop from 47 million?

Eric

M&K's Retrievers
09-09-2009, 11:23 PM
Sorry, couldn't watch this crap. Busy scouting.... while we can

Bruce MacPherson
09-09-2009, 11:36 PM
Didn't the speech state there were 30 million uninsured, a drop from 47 million?

Eric

Apparently this does not include the 17 million illegals he says he's not going to insure.
The problem is the numbers, they just don't pencil and everyone, including him, knows it.

YardleyLabs
09-10-2009, 05:51 AM
Didn't the speech state there were 30 million uninsured, a drop from 47 million?

Eric
No, he didn't. He only referred to "tens of millions" of uninsured.


Apparently this does not include the 17 million illegals he says he's not going to insure.
The problem is the numbers, they just don't pencil and everyone, including him, knows it.
I think the numbers of been very clear. For the number of uninsured, the source is part of an annual census survey. The 47 million represents a reduction from the prior year. We should be receiving updated numbers in the next week or so when the 2009 current population survey is released.

Raymond Little
09-10-2009, 06:55 AM
I'm going to noodle on this overnight, before rendering any kind of analysis. I don't want to be reactionary...but break it down piece by piece.

I'd like to find the text of the speech...anybody got a source?

There was a lot of well meaning, well intentioned ideas. Getting any of them into legislation is a whole nuther matter. I just wish Obama and his party in the congress could get anywhere near the same page. I thought there were some very ominous remarks that almost precluded this won't be a bipartisan effort. I was really dismayed with the insignificant bone thrown on tort reform.

My overall impression is where the heck is the money coming from to pay for the 30-40 million new insured? Not "one dime" of new spending? We'll get it from doing away with fraud and abuse in the current system?

I'm afraid the president is whistling past the graveyard on the funding.


I thought Axelrod was a total dick. Instead of looking forward to what his boss says can be done....he spews the same old rancid puke about Bush and Rove.

Why not start there and then come to the American Public with his plan for Nirvana?

tpaschal30
09-10-2009, 07:30 AM
No, he didn't. He only referred to "tens of millions" of uninsured.


I think the numbers of been very clear. For the number of uninsured, the source is part of an annual census survey. The 47 million represents a reduction from the prior year. We should be receiving updated numbers in the next week or so when the 2009 current population survey is released.

Yes he did. "There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/09/full-remarks-speech-business-washington-obama.html?partner=contextstory

txbadger
09-10-2009, 07:49 AM
"We are the only advanced democracy on Earth---"

Dang, I thought We were a Republic guess I was wrong & we do have 57 States too.

Steve Amrein
09-10-2009, 07:56 AM
Yes he did. "There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/09/full-remarks-speech-business-washington-obama.html?partner=contextstory


I find it a bit disingenuous to say that 30 or 47 (whichever) million CAN NOT get health care. Can not means they are denied ANY possibility of Buying some sort of coverage. It should be worded that they don't have coverage. I do agree that many choose not to which those that do pay for care end up paying for them anyway. I am not sure that mandating folks have coverage will pass constitutional muster. I want to know what steps will be put in place to keep illeagles from getting coverage. I am sure congress will never go along with any sort of federal ID program.

txbadger
09-10-2009, 07:57 AM
"We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange--a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It's how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it's time to give every American the same opportunity that we've given ourselves."

Actually, Mr Prez g'ment employees hae choices from private insurance companies not some new health exchange.

Seems like the Constitution gave the right of intrastate regulations to the State.

Once again the guy who's never run a thing shows why.

Buzz
09-10-2009, 07:59 AM
Yes he did. "There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/09/full-remarks-speech-business-washington-obama.html?partner=contextstory

Is the number who "cannot get coverage" the same as the number of uninsured? I don't know...

Steve Amrein
09-10-2009, 08:09 AM
If we can wave a magic wand and cut back on waste, fraud and mismanagement and improve medicare/medicade tell me again why we are not doing that now.

The move towards tort reform is a insult. Kinda like saying here little Billy I will buy you a red ballon if you sit in the car nice and quiet while I go in and rob your parents of all their money.

tpaschal30
09-10-2009, 08:11 AM
Is the number who "cannot get coverage" the same as the number of uninsured? I don't know...

Or does this include those who choose not to be covered but can afford it?

Buzz
09-10-2009, 08:18 AM
Actually, Mr Prez g'ment employees hae choices from private insurance companies not some new health exchange.

Seems like the Constitution gave the right of intrastate regulations to the State.

Once again the guy who's never run a thing shows why.

They choose their insurance from a menu, sort of like an exchange. :rolleyes:

Roger Perry
09-10-2009, 08:19 AM
I love Joe Wilson. Give that man a ceegar!

We live in Cuba now.

Why would you "love" a guy who jumps up and makes an ass out of himself?

Joe Wilson said it was a lie when Obama said the health care plan did not include illegal immigrants. John McCain said on one of the morning shows that no where in his health plan did it provide for illegal immigrants.

Pete
09-10-2009, 08:21 AM
[QUOTE][Apparently this does not include the 17 million illegals he says he's not going to insure.
The problem is the numbers, they just don't pencil and everyone, including him, knows it./QUOTE]

This is just a play on words. He is right illegals wil not becovered under insurance just like they arent now,,,but still recieve free medical.

But now I will be forced to pay for an insurance policy. Over my life time I have always whipped out the check book in time of need. Now I will be forced to whip it out every month weather I need it or not. Some choice that is.

Pete

tpaschal30
09-10-2009, 08:22 AM
Why would you "love" a guy who jumps up and makes an ass out of himself?

Joe Wilson said it was a lie when Obama said the health care plan did not include illegal immigrants. John McCain said on one of the morning shows that no where in his health plan did it provide for illegal immigrants.

Not now no. He will "bring them in from the shadows" later and make them legal, then they will be covered. Technically he is not lying. Lawyer speak!!!

YardleyLabs
09-10-2009, 08:43 AM
Yes he did. "There are now more than thirty million American citizens who cannot get coverage."

http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/09/full-remarks-speech-business-washington-obama.html?partner=contextstory
I stand corrected. I had been looking for the number 30 rather than the word. Of the 47 million uninsured, 30-35 million are native born and the balance includes both citizens and non-citizens. I suspect that is the source of his number plus a desie not to overstate.


"We are the only advanced democracy on Earth---"

Dang, I thought We were a Republic guess I was wrong & we do have 57 States too.
We actually call ourselves both: a democratic republic where the selection of representatives is by vote of the people and the number of representatives in congress is decided by population. The party of Jefferson was actually called the Democratic Republicans.


I find it a bit disingenuous to say that 30 or 47 (whichever) million CAN NOT get health care. Can not means they are denied ANY possibility of Buying some sort of coverage. It should be worded that they don't have coverage. I do agree that many choose not to which those that do pay for care end up paying for them anyway. I am not sure that mandating folks have coverage will pass constitutional muster. I want to know what steps will be put in place to keep illeagles from getting coverage. I am sure congress will never go along with any sort of federal ID program.Try to buy health insurance as an individual unaffiliated with a company or group. You will find that your premiums are at least twice those charged to a large group and that your ability to obtain coverage is likely to depend on a clean medical exam and will still exclude not only all pre-existing conditions but that your coverage may be terminated at any time if it turns out you had an undisclosed prior condition whether or not that condition had been treated and whether or not that condition was related to any subsequent claims for service. I went to purchase a disability plan once for myself. I discovered that it was cheaper for me to purchase coverage for all of my employees (30 people at the time) and pay the premium myself than it was to buy individual coverage. If you have a serious pre-existing condition, you may not be able to purchase coverage at any price. I went four months without insurance for that reason and only obtained coverage because of a state mandated open enrollment period.


"We will do this by creating a new insurance exchange--a marketplace where individuals and small businesses will be able to shop for health insurance at competitive prices. Insurance companies will have an incentive to participate in this exchange because it lets them compete for millions of new customers. As one big group, these customers will have greater leverage to bargain with the insurance companies for better prices and quality coverage. This is how large companies and government employees get affordable insurance. It's how everyone in this Congress gets affordable insurance. And it's time to give every American the same opportunity that we've given ourselves."

Actually, Mr Prez g'ment employees hae choices from private insurance companies not some new health exchange.

Seems like the Constitution gave the right of intrastate regulations to the State.

Once again the guy who's never run a thing shows why.
As noted above, individual coverage prices are extreme. The same is true for small companies. Coverage for an individual through my company plan was $760/month and coverage for a family was $2100. The same plan through a larger company group was $420 for an individual and $800 for a family. A health exchange as proposed would allow smaller companies and individuals to purchase at prices similar to large companies. However, this savings only happens when accompanied by a requirement ensuring virtually universal coverage. Currently, insurance companies assume that individual who are paying for their own insurance only purchase it if they anticipate becoming ill. The people who anticipate being healthy choose to forgo insurance rather than pay the full cost. If everyone buys insurance, the price to everyone with coverage will go down and insurance companies will better be able to predict cost. As a result, they will not need to charge as must of a risk premium.

txbadger
09-10-2009, 08:58 AM
"As noted above, individual coverage prices are extreme. The same is true for small companies. Coverage for an individual through my company plan was $760/month and coverage for a family was $2100. The same plan through a larger company group was $420 for an individual and $800 for a family. A health exchange as proposed would allow smaller companies and individuals to purchase at prices similar to large companies. However, this savings only happens when accompanied by a requirement ensuring virtually universal coverage. Currently, insurance companies assume that individual who are paying for their own insurance only purchase it if they anticipate becoming ill. The people who anticipate being healthy choose to forgo insurance rather than pay the full cost. If everyone buys insurance, the price to everyone with coverage will go down and insurance companies will better be able to predict cost. As a result, they will not need to charge as must of a risk premium."

Actually small group coverage contains state mandates & with 30 employees would provide guaranteed issue and coverage of pre-x, for most states. That would equate to around a 30% surcharge. A qucik online search for a quote for an individual/family plan vs you state risk pool should provide an accurate comparison. In TX for my age group this difference between the state risk pool, run by BSBS like medicare here, is 33% higher than a similar policy through bcbs. From an insurance companies viewpoint a known risk is the underwritten, full disclosed applicant and not in a group of 30 "strangers".

Steve Amrein
09-10-2009, 09:14 AM
I stand corrected. I had been looking for the number 30 rather than the word. Of the 47 million uninsured, 30-35 million are native born and the balance includes both citizens and non-citizens. I suspect that is the source of his number plus a desie not to overstate.


We actually call ourselves both: a democratic republic where the selection of representatives is by vote of the people and the number of representatives in congress is decided by population. The party of Jefferson was actually called the Democratic Republicans.

Try to buy health insurance as an individual unaffiliated with a company or group. You will find that your premiums are at least twice those charged to a large group and that your ability to obtain coverage is likely to depend on a clean medical exam and will still exclude not only all pre-existing conditions but that your coverage may be terminated at any time if it turns out you had an undisclosed prior condition whether or not that condition had been treated and whether or not that condition was related to any subsequent claims for service. I went to purchase a disability plan once for myself. I discovered that it was cheaper for me to purchase coverage for all of my employees (30 people at the time) and pay the premium myself than it was to buy individual coverage. If you have a serious pre-existing condition, you may not be able to purchase coverage at any price. I went four months without insurance for that reason and only obtained coverage because of a state mandated open enrollment period.


As noted above, individual coverage prices are extreme. The same is true for small companies. Coverage for an individual through my company plan was $760/month and coverage for a family was $2100. The same plan through a larger company group was $420 for an individual and $800 for a family. A health exchange as proposed would allow smaller companies and individuals to purchase at prices similar to large companies. However, this savings only happens when accompanied by a requirement ensuring virtually universal coverage. Currently, insurance companies assume that individual who are paying for their own insurance only purchase it if they anticipate becoming ill. The people who anticipate being healthy choose to forgo insurance rather than pay the full cost. If everyone buys insurance, the price to everyone with coverage will go down and insurance companies will better be able to predict cost. As a result, they will not need to charge as must of a risk premium.


The issue for me is that if I felt strongly enough I would buy insurance at any cost. Just as I do now being a small business owner. We choose what we want to cover how much the deductibles are and with what carrier. I have younger guys at the shop who would rather piss the money away on fun stuff than pay for insurance. Its up to them but I agree that if they have a ER visit or some other high dollar issue they will just declare bankruptcy and leave everyone else on the hook. Pretty much like the folks that are in the ER everytime I have to take one of the shop guys or myself. I would guess that more than 1/2 dont have insurance and wont pay.

So arent we really providing catastrophic care now?

I want the list or point me to some evidence that people have died from being denied health care. If that was the case BHO would have had the names printed on a backdrop or had the bodies piled up in front of him during his many speeches.

YardleyLabs
09-10-2009, 09:57 AM
The issue for me is that if I felt strongly enough I would buy insurance at any cost. Just as I do now being a small business owner. We choose what we want to cover how much the deductibles are and with what carrier. I have younger guys at the shop who would rather piss the money away on fun stuff than pay for insurance. Its up to them but I agree that if they have a ER visit or some other high dollar issue they will just declare bankruptcy and leave everyone else on the hook. Pretty much like the folks that are in the ER everytime I have to take one of the shop guys or myself. I would guess that more than 1/2 dont have insurance and wont pay.

So arent we really providing catastrophic care now?

I want the list or point me to some evidence that people have died from being denied health care. If that was the case BHO would have had the names printed on a backdrop or had the bodies piled up in front of him during his many speeches.
People die all the time for lack of health care. Under Federal law, hospitals and comparable providers must provide emergency life-sustaining care. However, they are not required to provide treatment beyond that. Thus, if you have cancer, but no insurance, no one is under any obligation to provide you with chemo or radiation treatment. If you die as a consequence, no laws have been broken. That happens all the time, and has happened to at least one person I know. In that case, he lost his job because of his cancer, COBRA ran out, and he could not pay for continuing care.

Buzz
09-10-2009, 10:09 AM
That happens all the time, and has happened to at least one person I know. In that case, he lost his job because of his cancer, COBRA ran out, and he could not pay for continuing care.


THAT is what is so screwed up about employer based health insurance. You get really sick, can't work, so sorry...

ducknwork
09-10-2009, 10:56 AM
In situations of TRUE need (yardley's example), we should help people out.
________
Teen Mexican (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/1043/mexican/videos/1)

ducknwork
09-10-2009, 11:09 AM
Republicans ? some of whom expressed open contempt for Obama by scanning their BlackBerrys or holding up copies of GOP bills during the speech ? saw the president?s remarks as a Democratic call to arms that belied the president?s oft-repeated calls for bipartisanship.

"I was incredibly disappointed in the tone of his speech,? said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).?At times, I found his tone to be overly combative and believe he behaved in a manner beneath the dignity of the office. I fear his speech tonight has made it more difficult ? not less ? to find common ground.

"He appeared to be angry at his critics and disappointed the American people were not buying the proposals he has been selling. ... If the Obama administration and congressional Democrats go down this path and push a bill on the American people they do not want, it could be the beginning of the end of the Obama presidency."

Rep. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), who is running for Obama's old Senate seat, said, "He talked at us. He didn't listen to us ... It was a missed opportunity."

Added Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.): "I sat there tonight wondering what the purpose of this evening was. I was hoping to hear the president flesh out a middle ground, but instead we heard platitudes and campaign rhetoric."

But Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), one of Obama's most consistent critics, saw some room for compromise. "It was a good speech, the problem is that what he wants and what they've written are two totally different things," said Coburn, an OB-GYN. ?I'm willing to compromise to get things fixed. But I'm not willing to put the government in charge because we don't have a good track record."
________
GM L66 ENGINE SPECIFICATIONS (http://www.chevy-wiki.com/wiki/GM_L66_engine)

tpaschal30
09-10-2009, 03:45 PM
In situations of TRUE need (yardley's example), we should help people out.

That is always the case, and was taken care of prior to any social programs. Sometimes people may have to ask, and look for help. You can lead a horse to water......

As far as not being part of a group plan, there are many associations you can join to get in on better premiums. Of course that would require initiative.

YardleyLabs
09-10-2009, 04:40 PM
That is always the case, and was taken care of prior to any social programs. Sometimes people may have to ask, and look for help. You can lead a horse to water......

As far as not being part of a group plan, there are many associations you can join to get in on better premiums. Of course that would require initiative.
Actually, in his case he would have had to spend himself into total poverty, losing his apartment and piano and moving along the way, and then apply to qualify for welfare and Medicaid. He thought that dying had a little more dignity. He used to come to my house and hold puppies against his liver (where his cancer had come to rest) looking for that puppy breath magic to save what cancer had destroyed. He had no family. My church helped with some money and meals and for the last few months with people to stay with him until the end (He was not a member, but joined toward the end and played the piano at many of our services.).

Steve Amrein
09-10-2009, 04:48 PM
In my simple way of thinking BHO says he know more about running things like GM, Chrysler, Wall Street and so on. Now he want to bother with my piss ant little company. I dont see him giving me anything but the chance to take money away from me and my employees. As best as I can tell he has never even held a job or owned a company. If I have money left I am usually quite generous to charitable organizations and volunteer my time. Folks have come to the RTF with need and folks have stepped up and more than likely in a far superior way of any nanny state well meaning elected official. The more government injects themselves into peoples personal life the worse things get. I keep hearing this nightmare in my head and some guy shows up and says We are from the government and we are here to help.

Put a plan that pays for those (who truley) cant afford insurance and tell me where to send the check after that go the F*@# away.

Terri
09-10-2009, 06:16 PM
I just have some questions. How are we going to tell who is legal and who is illegal? If the president doesn't have to show his birth certificate how are we going to require it from the man on the street? Are the legal groups going to fight the government to accept a person as a citizen based solely on his word?
Why isn't the government involved in car insurance (this might be next- not trying to give them any ideas)? The law in my state says you must have car insurance. So everyone buys some type of insurance. Some people have better insurance than others, but it is a choice based on how much you want to buy. Why doesn't the law just say you must have health insurance and let the free market compete for business? Everyone I know seems to come up with the money for car insurance- even the people I know who don't have health insurance. All my daughters friends who are in their 20's have some type of auto insurance, but most chose not to pay for health insurance. I believe young adults (20- 30) are the group with the highest levels for being uninsured. Our insurance dropped our daughter on her 23 birthday, we couldn't believe she would have coverage that long since she graduated college 2 years earlier and is an adult. She is still in graduate school so she looked around at the prices and decided to buy school based insurance. Not the best, but she is a poor student who wanted to have some insurance. Most of her friends have full time jobs and if the employer doesn't provided insurance they chose not to have insurance. They would rather spend their money at the bars instead of getting some type of coverage. Everyone makes choices some better than others.

My husbands favorite quote to our kids--"people do not plan to fail, they fail to plan." Maybe if more parents expected more of their kids we would not be a nation of free loaders. Just my 2 cents.

Terri

tpaschal30
09-10-2009, 08:26 PM
Actually, in his case he would have had to spend himself into total poverty, losing his apartment and piano and moving along the way, and then apply to qualify for welfare and Medicaid. He thought that dying had a little more dignity. He used to come to my house and hold puppies against his liver (where his cancer had come to rest) looking for that puppy breath magic to save what cancer had destroyed. He had no family. My church helped with some money and meals and for the last few months with people to stay with him until the end (He was not a member, but joined toward the end and played the piano at many of our services.).

After a 3 minute search I found this. I'm sure much more is out there.

"Financial Aid for Cancer Patients
Managing Debt Crisis, Health Insurance, and Financial Assistance

Jamie McIntosh
Nov 11, 2007
Financial Aid for Cancer Treatment, Morguefile.com
Cancer places a tremendous financial burden on patients, even when health insurance is in place. Many organizations can help.

Cancer is an expensive disease to treat. Doctors, laboratories, pathologists, oncologists, and other specialists may send out separate bills for their services. Even if you have health insurance, your deductibles can cause out-of-pocket expenses to strain your budget. After you’ve received a diagnosis of cancer, you may want to meet with a social worker to help you understand the hospital’s billing process. Some hospitals assign a patient advocate to help patients navigate their health care system.

If you are underinsured or uninsured, you may feel tempted to let the bills pile up without addressing their mounting reality. Although denial is a powerful coping mechanism, you must not allow payment deadlines to pass without addressing a payment plan. Many government agencies and non-profit organizations exist that provide financial assistance for cancer care. You may qualify for free or reduced cost cancer treatment if you meet certain qualifications. Explore each resource in this article, and take steps to ease your financial concerns today.
American Cancer Society

The American Cancer Society has several programs to help cancer patients with financial assistance. The Hope Lodge program provides free temporary housing for cancer patients in treatment. The Road to Recovery provides free transportation for cancer patients within their community. Call 1-800-ACS-2345 for more information and referrals.

Hill-Burton Hospital Program

Hospitals that receive construction funds from the federal government must provide some services to cancer patients who can’t afford to pay for their care. Approximately 300 hospitals take part in this program. Call 1-800-638-0742 to find a participating hospital in your area.

Read more: http://cancer.suite101.com/article.cfm/financial_aid_for_cancer_patients#ixzz0QkzVXLMy"

source
http://cancer.suite101.com/article.cfm/financial_aid_for_cancer_patients



Sorry about your friend. He chose worldly possessions over treatment. You should be all for that. Freedom of choice.

TXduckdog
09-10-2009, 08:37 PM
Why would you "love" a guy who jumps up and makes an ass out of himself?

Joe Wilson said it was a lie when Obama said the health care plan did not include illegal immigrants. John McCain said on one of the morning shows that no where in his health plan did it provide for illegal immigrants.


Roger...maybe not in McCain's health care plan...but in the other plans there sure are....Joe Wilson serves on several committees that provided amendments to the plan "un-insuring" illegal immigrants....and has followed amendments from other committees that have neutered the enforcement side of not including illegals in the coverage....thats why he was so upset.

Perhaps the Prez was not aware of this. I bet he doesn't know, and doesn't want to know the malfeasance taking place in Congress on this crap.

TXduckdog
09-10-2009, 08:41 PM
Guys...the more I watch this whole soap opera....I am almost convinced that Obama is being screwed over by his own party.

The Dems in congress are running amok and all the Prez can do is put the best face on it he can....sort of like the "lipstick on a pig....it's still a pig."

YardleyLabs
09-10-2009, 08:50 PM
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The man in question is dead. He stopped treatment when he was no longer able to pay. His insurance was canceled after COBRA ran out and he was uninsurable at any price given his condition.

He was unwilling to apply for Medicaid which would, with some delay, presumably have permitted treatment to continue. His situation is not uniqe. Estimates that I have seen are that 10-20,000 people die each year in the US because of their inability to pay for health care. Almost all would ultimately have qualified for Medicaid. However, by that time they are no longer treatable in many cases.

In this case, the man had options but not ones that he was willing to use. For him, rightly or wrongly, death was preferable to welfare. Had he been able to continue his health insurance -- and he was current in all premium payments -- he would have continued his insurance and continued treatment. He probably would have lived another year. In his mind he had paid his way at every step of his life and he was not willing to switch gears. I understand his reaction and might well do the same if faced with the same circumstances. Had he been a little older, he would have qualified for medicare and the issue would have been moot. That is why Medicare was created. We decided as a society that we were not prepared to force our older citizens, who had supported themselves responsibly for their entire lives, to ask for charity to receive the medical care they need.

tpaschal30
09-10-2009, 09:07 PM
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The man in question is dead. He stopped treatment when he was no longer able to pay. His insurance was canceled after COBRA ran out and he was uninsurable at any price given his condition.

He was unwilling to apply for Medicaid which would, with some delay, presumably have permitted treatment to continue. His situation is not uniqe. Estimates that I have seen are that 10-20,000 people die each year in the US because of their inability to pay for health care. Almost all would ultimately have qualified for Medicaid. However, by that time they are no longer treatable in many cases.

In this case, the man had options but not ones that he was willing to use. For him, rightly or wrongly, death was preferable to welfare. Had he been able to continue his health insurance -- and he was current in all premium payments -- he would have continued his insurance and continued treatment. He probably would have lived another year. In his mind he had paid his way at every step of his life and he was not willing to switch gears. I understand his reaction and might well do the same if faced with the same circumstances. Had he been a little older, he would have qualified for medicare and the issue would have been moot. That is why Medicare was created. We decided as a society that we were not prepared to force our older citizens, who had supported themselves responsibly for their entire lives, to ask for charity to receive the medical care they need.

The point is there were alternatives and choices. There are charities, federal, and state programs already in place. Nursing home care can do the same thing financially. The man was not forced into anything, other than dieing, and none of us are getting out of here alive.
Medicare and Medicaid also take of those who have not been responsible all their lives. As does welfare.

Martin
09-10-2009, 09:15 PM
Actually, in his case he would have had to spend himself into total poverty, losing his apartment and piano and moving along the way, and then apply to qualify for welfare and Medicaid. He thought that dying had a little more dignity. He used to come to my house and hold puppies against his liver (where his cancer had come to rest) looking for that puppy breath magic to save what cancer had destroyed. He had no family. My church helped with some money and meals and for the last few months with people to stay with him until the end (He was not a member, but joined toward the end and played the piano at many of our services.).

Yardley,

this is where tthe system could be fixed and not cost the taxpayers a dime. Your friend had to "lose" everything to qualify for medicade. that is backwards.

Take medicare and first fix it. Make it run like a business. Right now it is funded by taxpayer dollars and no one who uses the system pays into it. Economy 101 says this will not fly.'

Remove all the income restrictions on medicade. Offer it to everyone regardless of income. Here is the part where it can be run like a profitable business. Put a pay scale on it. ex...if you make less than 10,000 a year you pay nothing, trully welfare. If you make 10,001 to 25,000 you pay say 20 per family member. 25,001 to 35,000 you pay 40 per family member and so on. If there are 47 mil uninsured, which I doubt, paying an average of 20 dollars, you get 940,000,000 mil per month. Divide that by 50 states and you get 18.5 mil per state per month. Now, this might not be enough but it is a start. Everyone pays. Money going in abd services paid out. Just apply economy 101, which our polititions seem to know nothing about, and the health care reform might just make it!

As far as the Rep. who called out Obama was in sort speaking the truth. He, Obama, is misleading us. One...This will not cost the tax payers a dime and two he says he wont raise taxes to pay for it. As far as one goes, Who in the heck is going to pay for it? Number two. if you do not get coverage, private or public, you get a penalty form the IRS, ie. tax!

I don't agree that the Rep should have jumped up and shouted but just maybe that is the sort of passion that it will take to straighten this mess out!

Regards,
Martin

Gerry Clinchy
09-10-2009, 10:42 PM
I don't agree that the Rep should have jumped up and shouted

In case anyone cares, Wilson did issue a prompt apology; and also personally to the Pres.

Cody Covey
09-11-2009, 12:47 AM
Jeff this is directed at you since i see you say it a lot. explain to me how INSURANCE can/will provide care for prior conditions without charging more. Can you get car insurance AFTER a wreck or home insurance AFTER a flood?

ducknwork
09-11-2009, 06:38 AM
Martin for prez 2012!

or maybe just medicare czar...
________
PAXIL SIDE EFFECT (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/paxil/)

YardleyLabs
09-11-2009, 07:31 AM
Jeff this is directed at you since i see you say it a lot. explain to me how INSURANCE can/will provide care for prior conditions without charging more. Can you get car insurance AFTER a wreck or home insurance AFTER a flood?
Providing medical treatment is always more expensive than doing nothing. The cheapest option would obviously be to let the sick and infirm die quietly at home. As a society, we choose not to do that. For most people, restrictions on coverage for pre-existing conditions is almost never an issue. We receive coverage through our employers. If our employers change insurance plans, the insurance companies waive restrictions on prior conditions as part of the transition. If a new employee is hired, or an employee marries and enrolls a spouse, coverage is not restricted based on pre-existing conditions, although there may be a 30 day delay before coverage begins. The delay weeds out those who are actively ill and the fact that a specific life event (employment, marriage) had to happen to qualify eliminates the problem of "moral hazard".

"Moral hazard" is at the heart of insurance company restrictions in pre-existing condition restrictions in legitimate health plans. Moral hazard is insurance jargon describing the behavior of a person that doesn't purchase insurance until they expect to have a claim. For example, you don't have insurance and become pregnant. To obtain maternity coverage you enroll in an insurance plan pay a relatively small premium, and receive thousands in benefits. When the baby is born and you are sure he is healthy, you terminate coverage have profited greatly from your brief enrollment. That represents an uninsurable risk. To prevent this, insurance plans normally invoke a pre-existing condition exclusion when you seek coverage not linked to a "life event". For example, you take a new job but decline health coverage even though you do not have coverage under another plan. Six months later you change your mind and request coverage. You discover that you are able to get coverage but that pre-existing conditions are excluded altogether or at least for an extended period of time (e.g. 12 months following enrollment). Plans may also have open enrollment periods when anyone can enroll. The belief is that this reduces the chances that someone is "gaming" the system.

Illegitimate plans operated by predatory insurance companies -- that is, plans written in borderline fraudulent language and designed to minimize benefits paid in return for premiums -- tend to use pre-existing condition exclusions and punitive language concerning undisclosed conditions to plant the seeds for denying benefits when a claim is filed. Under such plans, there might be a simple statement that excludes coverage for pre-existing conditions. In the application, you are asked to list all previous care received and all medical conditions that you have whether or not they have been treated at any time in your life. Subsequent to enrollemnt, you are diagnosed with cancer. The insurance company denies your claims and cancels your policy noting that you had gallstones removed five years earlier and failed to disclose that fact on your application. Predatory companies also tend to offer easy accdss to cheap services but to restrct coverage for types of treatment only needed by patients with more expensive problems.

For individual coverage, as distinct from group coverage, pre-existing condition exclusions tend to be much more draconian, especially if you have not had any coverage at all for more than 30 days prior to enrollment. You may not be able to obtain coverage at all in this circumstance. If you do, you will pay a significantly higher premium because of the concern that you are only enrolling because you know there is a problem.

Legitimate insurance companies are not trying to avoid claims for treatment that is consistent with the needs of the population of covered lives. That risk is pretty easy to estimate. Like casinos, they are concerned about those gaming the system to change the odds because, in that situation, the guy with the weakest defense ends up with all the garbage. No one can estimate that risk. Mandatory universal coverage makes it impossible to game the system and reduces risk for all insurers. Mandatory minimum coverage levels make it harder for predatory insurance companies to game the system by offering services that are generally only relevant for high cost patients (e.g. restricted coverage for radiation therapy to keep cancer patients from enrolling).

Buzz
09-11-2009, 08:01 AM
The point is there were alternatives and choices. There are charities, federal, and state programs already in place. Nursing home care can do the same thing financially. The man was not forced into anything, other than dieing, and none of us are getting out of here alive.
Medicare and Medicaid also take of those who have not been responsible all their lives. As does welfare.

Any options available are there despite the Republicans. After all, why should they pay for the care of someone who in their mind has not earned it. I'm getting a chuckle out of Republican politicians casting themselves as defenders of Medicaid and Medicare.

Gerry Clinchy
09-11-2009, 11:18 AM
The same is true for small companies. Coverage for an individual through my company plan was $760/month and coverage for a family was $2100. The same plan through a larger company group was $420 for an individual and $800 for a family.

When I worked for a small company, one of my responsibilities was selecting health insurance. Having had some experience in a life/health insurance office, I chose BS/BS ... a primary reason for that selection was that it allowed the employee, if terminated, guaranteed conversion to individual coverage with no loss of benefits.

I had to use that option myself a couple of years later! I currently pay $380/mo for individual coverage (just myself). I will admit that over time my coverage has changed. I have a $1500/year deductible now; much higher than it was just about 5 years ago. I do not belong to a "group" of any kind.

tpaschal30
09-11-2009, 11:21 AM
Any options available are there despite the Republicans. After all, why should they pay for the care of someone who in their mind has not earned it. I'm getting a chuckle out of Republican politicians casting themselves as defenders of Medicaid and Medicare.

As I've stated before Medicare and Medicaid should end or stop enrollment. It is a large part of the nonmarket based health care system that offers fewer choices than a market based system where the providers are employed by the patients. If only the people who were in true need and not laying on their AZZes were taking part in the system no one would have a problem, but the entitlement mentality along with pure fraud makes it a grand waste of money, and it destroys lives by disincentivizing self reliance.

YardleyLabs
09-11-2009, 11:51 AM
When I worked for a small company, one of my responsibilities was selecting health insurance. Having had some experience in a life/health insurance office, I chose BS/BS ... a primary reason for that selection was that it allowed the employee, if terminated, guaranteed conversion to individual coverage with no loss of benefits.

I had to use that option myself a couple of years later! I currently pay $380/mo for individual coverage (just myself). I will admit that over time my coverage has changed. I have a $1500/year deductible now; much higher than it was just about 5 years ago. I do not belong to a "group" of any kind.
I actually tried to buy BC/BS but they required 100% participation which we did not have.

Buzz
09-11-2009, 11:57 AM
As I've stated before Medicare and Medicaid should end or stop enrollment. It is a large part of the nonmarket based health care system that offers fewer choices than a market based system where the providers are employed by the patients. If only the people who were in true need and not laying on their AZZes were taking part in the system no one would have a problem, but the entitlement mentality along with pure fraud makes it a grand waste of money, and it destroys lives by disincentivizing self reliance.

I rest my case...

YardleyLabs
09-11-2009, 12:20 PM
As I've stated before Medicare and Medicaid should end or stop enrollment. It is a large part of the nonmarket based health care system that offers fewer choices than a market based system where the providers are employed by the patients. If only the people who were in true need and not laying on their AZZes were taking part in the system no one would have a problem, but the entitlement mentality along with pure fraud makes it a grand waste of money, and it destroys lives by disincentivizing self reliance.
Imagine how quickly health prices would drop if we increased the number of uninsured from 46 million to 131 million by getting everyone off Medicaid and Medicare. Personally, I think that would make great sense at the same time as we eliminate all employer paid health insurance.

Gerry Clinchy
09-11-2009, 12:38 PM
I actually tried to buy BC/BS but they required 100% participation which we did not have.

That was easy for our company: less than 10 employees, and the owners stood to benefit from the coverage as well since they were also employees. The company paid for the premium for everyone, so 100% participation was a piece of cake :-)

road kill
09-11-2009, 12:47 PM
Why would you "love" a guy who jumps up and makes an ass out of himself?

Joe Wilson said it was a lie when Obama said the health care plan did not include illegal immigrants. John McCain said on one of the morning shows that no where in his health plan did it provide for illegal immigrants.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_ union.html

Amazing.........:rolleyes:

Buzz
09-11-2009, 01:01 PM
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_ union.html

Amazing.........:rolleyes:

I have a real hard time understanding the difference between some boo's and calling the president a liar in front of the congress and the country.:confused:

TXduckdog
09-11-2009, 01:03 PM
Imagine how quickly health prices would drop if we increased the number of uninsured from 46 million to 131 million by getting everyone off Medicaid and Medicare. Personally, I think that would make great sense at the same time as we eliminate all employer paid health insurance.


Jeff...what the hell would be left?

TXduckdog
09-11-2009, 01:07 PM
I have a real hard time understanding the difference between some boo's and calling the president a liar in front of the congress and the country.:confused:


I'd kind of think they were the same.

Kind of hypocritical for the House to be demanding an apology from Joe on the house floor. I'd tell the bitch to stick it.

Steve Amrein
09-11-2009, 01:08 PM
I hope Joe Wilson is in the headlines every day for years. Each time he is interviewed he says he was wrong for blurting out during the speech. Then they quickly start asking about why he said it.

The Boos are no different except W is a big boy and had been disrespected for years. I liked watching when Hillery would roll her eyes and shake her head. The said thing is the guy that should be offended is presidential enough to accept it and try and move on.

road kill
09-11-2009, 01:09 PM
I have a real hard time understanding the difference between some boo's and calling the president a liar in front of the congress and the country.:confused:
That's because one is the truth, and the other is just hatred.

You be the judge.

"undocumented immigrants" regards!!:D

tpaschal30
09-11-2009, 04:22 PM
Imagine how quickly health prices would drop if we increased the number of uninsured from 46 million to 131 million by getting everyone off Medicaid and Medicare. Personally, I think that would make great sense at the same time as we eliminate all employer paid health insurance.

You would have to get folks everywhere paying for their own. When you have an artificially restrained supply with artificially restrained price or no real additional cost(to the patient) you get artificially boosted demand for limited supply. Guess what happens then?