My wife works for a insurance company and just talked to a good friend of mines wife she is a nurse . They both say you havent seen nothing yet . and i believe them
The republican that conceded is for the federal house of representatives. It just means that our representation in the house in DC only flips from 7dems 6 republicans to 9 republicans 4 democrats.
I've never had trouble getting in to see the cardiologist, sometimes the day after I call for an appointment. Haven't had unacceptable waits to get my mom in to see the neurologist either, even my wife's rheumatologist is, pretty accessible.
I have been in hospitals and at appts constantly in the last year--in multiple states. My family has had two kidney transplant surgeries, five cases of cancer between siblings and parents, two hip replacements in parents (had to get them done before the 2014 deadline because according to Obabmacare he would have been too old ) and an emergency bowel obstruction surgery, plus a few other odds and ends. We have amazing health care in America. After a year of this I am exhausted but we have always been able to get into doctors and specialists--sooner if it is an emergency situation--and everyone has always been able to get the health care they need. Yea, sometimes we jump through a few hoops etc. but our health care does an amazing job. So maybe we go to the real problem: the costs. Should people be able to afford health insurance even if it is not a benefit of their employment? Of course. So how do we lower the actual cost of our health care? just putting everyone on insurance does not do that--it loads the health care system without dealing with the true issue. Plus it adds burdens to small businesses that will now be required to provide that. I am not sure how it ever became an assumption that it is an employers responsibility to provide insurance. Why is it not the health care and insurance companies responsibility to make if feasible for everyone to purchase it?
Just some ramblings and food for thought from someone who lives in both worlds--I work under a union but also own a small business with employees.
Jeff, sorry for the slow reply. Yes I did watch the Judge Judy video. I can assure you that it ticked me off at least as much is it probably did everyone else. No, I do not condone that misuse of the system. And it really bugged me that they guy was getting so much cash to pay for a degree in music, although I don't know what to do about that. Countries like China dictate who goes to college and what they are suited to do for a living. I don't want to see us go that route.
But I fail to see the connection to folks like those getting social security and medicare. That's what these guys are talking about when they mention entitlements. See the quote below:
I know that I'm going to get hit with higher taxes. I know I'm probably going to pay more in SS if the ceiling gets raised. I imagine I'll pay higher Medicare premiums. But what I really disagree with is raising the eligibility age for Medicare. I have had more than one of my cousins end up out of work in this economy and end up taking early retirement. But they were not eligible for Medicare, so they went without coverage and took a chance because they could not afford a personal policy at what they want for a 64 year old. If they follow through with that approach, we're going to see sixty somethings getting sick with no coverage and losing their homes and their retirement savings to medical expensed, mark my word.Quote:
WASHINGTON—Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said he wanted changes to safety-net programs that focus on altering eligibility requirements, and suggested that if Democrats agreed both sides could move closer to a budget deal to avert the fiscal cliff.
In an interview in his Capitol Hill office, Mr. McConnell (R., Ky.) said if the White House agrees to changes such as higher Medicare premiums for the wealthy, an increase in the Medicare eligibility age and a slowing of cost-of-living increases for programs like Social Security, Republicans would agree to include more tax revenue in the deal, though not from higher tax rates.
And I can see raising the SS eligibility age, but I already will have to work until 67. Working later is fine for guys who sit at a desk and punch keys on a computer and talk on the phone. But what about the guy who does hard labor for a living? By 65, those guy's bodies are wearing out. There has to be a better way...