04-23-2010, 09:41 AM
Associated Press Writer Ricardo Alonso-zaldivar,
Associated Press Writer – Fri Apr 23, 5:58 am ET
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama's health care overhaul law is getting a mixed verdict in the first comprehensive look by neutral experts: More Americans will be covered, but costs are also going up.
Economic experts at the Health and Human Services Department concluded in a report issued Thursday that the health care remake will achieve Obama's aim of expanding health insurance — adding 34 million to the coverage rolls.
But the analysis also found that the law falls short of the president's twin goal of controlling runaway costs, raising projected spending by about 1 percent over 10 years. That increase could get bigger, since Medicare cuts in the law may be unrealistic and unsustainable, the report warned.
04-23-2010, 03:57 PM
Can there be any 'sane', thinking individuals that have even a modicum of intelligence, believe this program can do anything but cost multiples of whatever the proponents are preaching.
Show me ANY government bureaucracy that has come remotely close to holding the spending within the original intent. Is the expansion of this "nanny state" control so obscure that all the liberals on this BB are completely blinded by what's happening, and beyond that are embracing and promoting this taking of our freedoms?
Womb to the tomb control is what the liberals are championing, and they wonder why conservatives call them socialistic. DUH! Better yet, they think it's JUST the Obama administration that is causing the formation of the TEA party involvement. What fools. Look in the mirror...we are coming for thee. This has nothing to do with racism...it's about liberty and ignorance.
04-24-2010, 09:28 PM
I liked this quote
In a statement, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sought to highlight some positive findings for seniors. For example, the report concluded that Medicare monthly premiums would be lower than otherwise expected, due to the spending reductions.
Well, I should hope so ... if you're not going to be able to get the care, you shouldn't have to pay for it?
Tax credits would help many middle-class households pay their premiums, while Medicaid would pick up more low-income people.
It occurs to me that with the tax credits & the additional Medicaid expense, this is going to get ever more expensive as time goes on; and no real cost controls being part of the plan. Most Medicare recipients carry "Medigap" insurance to cover what Medicare does not. What will happen to the rates on those plans?
The Medicare premiums "will be lower than otherwise expected" (a nice way of saying the increase in those premiums won't be quite as bad) ... but if the Medigap coverages are in a different category than other health insurance plans for younger people, what happens to those premiums. It may be a moot point. If the cut in Medicare compensation is not over-ridden, and if providers will not accept Medicare patients, then that Medigap insurance will be useless. Will those seniors then end up in the emergency rooms, filling the spaces vacated by those who are currently uninsured? The emergency rooms may still be taking in as many people, the demographic will simply change.
04-25-2010, 12:34 PM
Of course it will cost more because we just added a lot of "free riders" to the system. Some of those "free riders" were already there being billed through non payment of emergency room services.
But now those "free riders" will be getting even more probably un-needed medical services which will increase the cost. Without tort reform and additional trips to the doctors office by "free riders", the doctors will be giving out many more just because I might be sued tests and medical procedures even though they feel those procudures aren't necessary.
I wonder if there will be an increase in frivelous law suits by "free riders" looking for a lottery ticket against doctors and hospitals under the new system since there will be more face time between doctors and "free riders"?
Under the previous system, many "free riders" had to rely on charity such as through St. Jude's Children's hospital, and appreciated the help they got. Moving the effeciency of charity away from non-profits into wealth re-distribution by the government will increase the number of "free riders" and therefore the costs of healthcare. As we all know, there are many professional "free riders" here in the USA, and giving them another place to "free ride" is just that much more of an incentive to remain a "free rider".
04-25-2010, 06:22 PM
If 11 or 12 million of the 34 million are illegals, the illegals will still be using the emergency rooms, right?
It would appear that sending the illegals home would be a great help to the cost situation.
And everyone should have to pay something for a doctor visit. What parent wouldn't spend $5 to take a child for free vaccinations, for example?
And I would agree with Terry that without cost controls and tort reform, there is no way out of the box.