Final Fantasy Hacktics

Quote from: "Dominic NY18"Furthermore, the current efforts for reform are to get people covered under a plan the federal government pays for. They are not administering aspects of the industry itself, but simply paying for people's coverage. It's not like were suddenly going to emulate the health care system in Britain or anything along those lines.

So you are saying the plan is to have free healthcare for people who use the government option? That isn't being "competitive", it will simply run the other companies out of business making "free" government healthcare the only option. I'm not sure if this is what you meant to say... but either way where is the fed planning on getting money from to pay for people's healthcare? Borrowed money? Should we raise taxes? I am not attacking you here Dominic, but there is just so much that isn't clear in this bill it is hard to believe people aren't skeptical about it... not AGAINST it, but skeptical about it.

It's not that there is uncleared ends in the bill it's that no one wants to do any research about the bill. Dom has clearly researched it more than I have. I am off to do the same.

And No, Mental Gear, if you would have read the topic At All, you would have seen us making Points that it is Nothing like the UK's plan, if it were the media would cover it as such.

Quote from: "dwib"So you are saying the plan is to have free healthcare for people who use the government option? That isn't being "competitive", it will simply run the other companies out of business making "free" government healthcare the only option. I'm not sure if this is what you meant to say... but either way where is the fed planning on getting money from to pay for people's healthcare? Borrowed money? Should we raise taxes? I am not attacking you here Dominic, but there is just so much that isn't clear in this bill it is hard to believe people aren't skeptical about it... not AGAINST it, but skeptical about it.

Let's clear a few things up then.

Firstly, there really isn't one bill, but instead several bills floating around in the various committees in both houses of Congress.

Free was the wrong word to use. The fact that the word "affordable" is used in reference to the public option should let you know that people on it will have to pay a premium, however little the amount may be. Whatever tax dollars are used for it won't result in increased taxes (unless you're wealthy. But their taxes are going back up regardless).

Keep in mind that those who are uninsured fall into different categories, one of which is those who make enough that they cannot be covered by Medicare, but cannot afford the premiums for whatever private insurance is available where they live. And of course, there are those who insurance companies refuse to cover because of preexisting conditions. These people aren't even in the market for health insurance, either because they can't afford it or because insurance companies refuse to cover them. Why the worry about whether covering these people will lead to a government funded, single-payer system for all, which seems to be your fear?

Under the current system, there's no reason to keep costs for private insurance low, what with the lack of competition in most of the nation's markets. And so costs have continued to increase with no end in sight. A nationwide public option would have enough muscle to negotiate for lower rates with health care providers and drug companies. And unless they want to go under, private insurers will likely follow suit. Why not pressure insurance companies to lower their costs?

Another thing to note is that a public option would likely only cover some minimum level of health care. Premium level care would likely still be the domain of private insurers.

Like I've already stated, much of the funds to pay for it will come cutting the massive amount of waste and utilizing possible savings within the current system. So, for example, Obama wants the waste within Medicare to be cut. If taxes are used, it will

It's will be an option for those seeking coverage, not a mandate for those with coverage to get on the government plan.

Quote from: "Dominic NY18"Under the current system, there's no reason to keep costs for private insurance low, what with the lack of competition in most of the nation's markets. And so costs have continued to increase with no end in sight. A nationwide public option would have enough muscle to negotiate for lower rates with health care providers and drug companies. And unless they want to go under, private insurers will likely follow suit. Why not pressure insurance companies to lower their costs?

Another thing to note is that a public option would likely only cover some minimum level of health care. Premium level care would likely still be the domain of private insurers.

This section helped clear things up. And also if you are wondering where my fear of a complete government takeover of healthcare comes from it is from the extent to which the government will choose to take this. For example, if prices drop so low it becomes unprofitable for other companies or if they decide to pass more legislation later on. I understand it all fairly well, but I won't be completely convinced unless it goes through and it works well for a while. That's just how I am on this subject.

I don't understand the rationale behind this fear of Single-payer/Public Option thing. Most wealthy countries in Europe have single-payer or hybrid systems with a public option and most or all of them their health care systems are ranked higher than the US. The only alternative we have is to do nothing and continue an almost century long discussion. The right wing loonies like to talk a lot of shit, but they have no real alternative. Also I'd like to remind the pinheads that cry socialism to remember that the police and fire department are social (as in socialist) programs. Do they want us to privatize those, too? In the immortal words of Denise Hopper in "Blue Velvet", "Fuck that shit!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snhiofL2Rh4

Quote from: "Vanya"Also I'd like to remind the pinheads that cry socialism to remember that the police and fire department are social (as in socialist) programs. Do they want us to privatize those, too?

We read the same articles.

If there's anything to complain about concerning a socialist government controlling your life, then the police certainly would be the most obvious problem, no?