It's a good thing that Obamacare isn't government run healthcare.
Every part of the system is still privately owned. Hospitals, Doctors, Clinics,
Labs, Pharmacies and Pharmaceutical Companies, and Health Insurance Companies.
Every single one of them, still privately owned and operated.
The only thing that is clear is that electing people who want to shut down the
government is probably not the best idea. The tea party has been telegraphing
this since their inception and it should come as no surprise that they shut down
the government they so despise.
A worse idea would be to leave it to big business.
The conservative tea party and Senator Lee invoked the hostage of government
unsuccessfully defund or repeal a funded established law. No following law and
procedure is the real danger to our country.
"Do you really want a government that enjoys threatening the welfare of our
citizens in charge of our health care?"Of course not
Roseanne.Because the whole healthcare system was running just fine
before. NOT.With an aging population, the trajectory of healthcare
costs will bankrupt our country.We pay the highest in the world and get
far from the best outcome.We can either do nothing (GOP plan) or try
something (ACA).I'm a gambler. Because I know the GOP plan (do
nothing) is not sustainable.
Lots of people agree with the letter writer. For decades this was
"discussed" but no one ever made a move to try and do anything. Democrats didn't waste their chance when they had the house, senate, and
presidency. Our job now should be to amend the bill over time to get it
right.If you don't have a alternative solution, its going to be
hard to be heard.
I hope Roseanne never needs to use her "private" health care.
She's likely to find they won't cover what she's already paid
for. They'll find some "pre-existing condition" (i.e., she was
born) to deny her coverage.
Agreed that Gov't run health care is a bad idea... but doesn't it seem
that the gov't is getting the necessary things done? I don't see how
shutting down a few parks, while keeping all necessary gov't services
proves your point that well. What one could assume that in the
future the gov't would become so dysfunctional as to not maintain even
services that they deem as necessary. Course if we get to that point, then the
army would be offline and whether we can see a doctor might be one of the leasts
of our worries as a country.
Having an Obamacare waiver is a prized possession. The rest of us will suffer.
As always, Roland Kayser has corrected the mis-information portrayed in
Roseanne's letter. But let's also be clear, "government run"
healthcare programs around the world have proven t be more effective and more
cost efficient than the current (pre-ACA) system found in the United States.
Insurance companies exist for one reason - to make money for their shareholders.
With that as their first priority, is it any wonder than claims go unpaid,
often for bogus reasons, because the insurance companies know that the common
man doesn't have the time, energy or money to pursue the claims further and
will probably not fight their decision to not pay a claim. Despite the clever
advertising claiming otherwise, the private insurance company's task is to
keep as much of your premium as they can. That is priority number one for
them.It has been suggested by its opponents that the ACA is the
first step on the road to a single payer government run program. I can only
hope for that day to get here sooner than later.
I watch Fox news quite often.There is always a rant that Congress has
exempted themselves and their staffs from Obamacare.No explanation. Just
that they are exempt from it.That is misleading and disingenuous. I
hear it repeated frequently.Here are the facts. The ACA
was intended for people who were uninsured or did not get employer paid
insurance.It excludes employers from pushing their employees onto the ACA
and then subsidizing their coverage.R - Chuck Grassley introduced an
amendment that Required all of congress and their staffs to get their insurance
through the ACA. NO one else is required to get health insurance
through the ACA.So, the effect is that all of Congress and their
Staff (many who are paid very little) would lose the health care subsidy that
has been around for decades.An exemption was made to allow the
employer (ie government) to continue to pay part of the insurance premiums. Why
should they lose the health coverage subsidy that they always got? SO yes, congress and staff are given an exemption that others do not get, but
they are also required to participate when no one else is.At least
know the truth.
Single payer healthcare is a good idea. It need not be 'government
run', at least not at the federal level.
I forget, was it Ronald Reagan who said, "In my estimation the Republican
far-right is hopelessly witless"?
The biggest issue I have with Obamacare is forced participation. Why not give
people a choice? If you love Obamacare, knock yourself out, sign up. But forcing
Americans to participate is just wrong. Being forced to do something is an evil
principle and is doomed to fail.
Re:MountanmanQ: Has the Obama administration allowed corporations to
"opt out" of the new health care law?A: No. The government has
granted more than 200 waivers, but these merely give companies a temporary delay
before being required to improve the coverage of cheap, bare-bones plans they
currently offer.(Factcheck 2010)"looking at the numbers of
waivers that have been given to both union and non-union groups, we don't
see any pattern that would support a case for special treatment. The number of
waivers are a small sample of all health plans, and many more waivers were given
to big companies and corporations. We looked for additional information or
evidence on this point and didn'tt find it."(Politifact 2012)Q: Is it true that there are bills in Congress that would exempt members
and their staffs and families from buying into Obamacare?A: No. Congress
members and staffers will be required to buy insurance through the exchanges on
Jan. 1.(Factcheck 2013)
@ MountainmanWhat about the military draft?
First, let's throw out the notion that ObamaCare has anything to do with
healthcare. It does not. It is no more about healthcare than Social Security
is about security. Both programs are simply TAXES that take a huge amount of
money out of the private sector and then transfer that money to the federal
government so that politicians can spend it on their pork projects with a
"promise to repay" in the form of an I.O.U. We know what
happened to the Social Security funds. They are gone. Politicians have
plundered the treasury for their own benefit without any concern for the
citizens.Now, we also know that politicians will throw all of us
under the bus if they don't get their way. Obama was given a chance to
help America and this is the way that he repays America for trusting him. He
refuses to negotiate until ObamaCare if fully funded. What more do we need to
know about ObamaCare? It was passed because of crooked backroom deals. Now
America is being held hostage if ObamaCare is not funded.Only
foolish or corrupt politicians would allow ObamaCare to continue.
Mtnman,"But forcing Americans to participate is just
wrong."On the surface, your statement sounds reasonable.
(although that was the premise of the Heritage foundation and Romneycare)What happens when someone in a young middle class family, who could
afford insurance, but decides not to, gets sick (cancer perhaps) or has an
accident.They gambled and lost. So, what happens?Do
they not seek treatment? Of course not. They head to the hospital and rack up
potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs. When they cannot pay,
the costs get spread out among everyone else.So, my medical costs go
up because this family decided to forgo insurance.Is that fair?
Ajax. Last time I check there is no military draft. We have an all volunteer
Re:MountanmanHayden, ID"The biggest issue I have with Obamacare
is forced participation. Why not give people a choice? If you love Obamacare,
knock yourself out, sign up. But forcing Americans to participate is just wrong.
Being forced to do something is an evil principle and is doomed to fail."Right I hate being "forced" to go a certain speed on
highways, wearing a seatbelt, adhering to zoning laws, buying car insurance etc
etc etc.And my kids have it right. Forcing them to go to school and
church is just wrong.
Truthseeker. Your comparisons of obeying speed laws and attending school and
forced compliance to Obamacare are irrational. Why not just force everyone to
obey a dictator? That's exactly where your "logic" takes us.
Freedom is a wonderful thing for most of us at least.
@Mountanman"The biggest issue I have with Obamacare is forced
participation. Why not give people a choice? If you love Obamacare, knock
yourself out, sign up. But forcing Americans to participate is just wrong. Being
forced to do something is an evil principle and is doomed to fail."I love how people who voted for Governor Romney have such strong opposition to
Romney's own concept."Last time I check there is no
military draft."Not currently, but those selective service cards
have a purpose you know...
Greed based healthcare is an even worse idea.
Mountanman:I can assure you from personal experience (via a summons
from Uncle Sam during the Vietnam War) that the United States has had a military
draft (perhaps you are too young to remember or otherwise were able to avoid the
draft). That it does not presently utilize that power does not diminish
Ajax's point, nor that of Truthseeker, that the government has the power to
force us to do many things not of our own free will. What you are arguing for
Re:Mountanman#1) Last time I checked, we live in a democracy. We
vote. "We" are the govt. But living in a democracy means that
sometimes one's favored "team" doesn't have the power
necessary to implement changes. So, we get to try again every election cycle to
change the balance in our favor. #2) If by "force" you mean
we don't have choices, you are wrong. We have choices. But we don't
have choices absent of consequences. And so it is with secular and religious
Roland KayserRe: "It's a good thing that Obamacare isn't
government run healthcare"...But as Obama and his supporters
have said, "this is the first step, it will take a decade to get to
government singlepayer system". And as many left-leaning posters have
posted here... they are disapointed that we don't have government run
healthcare, and WISH we had government run healthcare. For those people I say,
"Try Medicare or Medicaid and see if you like it".To those
who WISH we had government run healthcare...1. Name one thing the
Federal Government runs well (meaning efficiently, fairly, cost effectively, and
with a focus on the satisfaction of it's customers)... waiting...Even the main thing the Federal government is supposed to run (the
military) has more waist and cost than it should have.Post office?
(Keeps having problems and cost overruns and customer satisfaction problems,
while private deliverers are growing in popularity)Schools? (Most
people prefer private schools over government run schools).Legislating? (if you call a 4% approval rate a "Success"... then I
guess we like the way they are legislating).Transportation (full of
waiste, and mostly private contractors anyway)out of words...
@Roland Kayser:"It's a good thing that Obamacare isn't
government run healthcare. Every part of the system is still privately
owned."Obamacare is the first step in the process of a single
payer program. Of course, Obama doesn't want the government to own
everything... just control it all. He wants the government to tell you what
healthcare services you can and cannot get. He's already told the elderly
'if you need serious healthcare just go home and take a painkiller.'
Being loyal to a government involves some risk, but, for every government
shutdown, there are many thousands of private shut downs, failures,
discrimination's and misdeeds by private enterprise.
@ECR:"It has been suggested by its opponents that the ACA is the first
step on the road to a single payer government run program. I can only hope for
that day to get here sooner than later."It should be here in
time so that, when you get old and need a hip replacement you can hear the
government tell you to just go home and take a painkiller... and get a wheel
chair to move around in.@JoeBlow:"There is always a rant
that Congress has exempted themselves and their staffs from Obamacare."Congress is merely enjoying what Obama said: 'you can keep the
insurance you have.'
@ MountainmanHow disingenuous. Do you really think that the
military draft is no longer an accepted option in time of war?
@2 bits"Try Medicare or Medicaid and see if you like it".Alright, then let us try it. Democrats wanted a Medicare-buyin to be an
Obamacare exchange option but Republicans and a few insurance industry shills
like Lieberman eliminated that. The insurance industry hates it because Medicare
is the most efficient (due to a lack of profit motive they operate at something
like 5% overhead compared to the industry which is more like 15-20% to the point
that Obamacare bans insurance companies from spending less than 80% on care).
Ultra BobRe: "Being loyal to a government involves some risk"...
I think you can be loyal to a government and still not want them to run
everything. Just because you don't want them to run something
doesn't mean you are dis-loyal. The founding fathers wanted a very
limited Federal Government. Were THEY "dis-loyal"?atl134Re: "Medicare is the most efficient".If you really believe
that you need to open your eyes. Google "Medicaid fraud" and read some
of the articles if you don't believe me. 60 Minutes, ABC News, NBC News,
etc have reported on it for years. Stories like this one...Updated
April 2013. Overview. Fraud and abuse in Medicaid cost states billions of
dollars every year, diverting funds that could otherwise be used for legitimate
2 bits:You do realize, don't you, that Medicare and Medicaid
are not the same thing? So why do you attack the efficiency of Medicare by
citing instances of fraud or abuse in Medicaid?And do you really
think there is no fraud or abuse in the private health care system or in the
health insurance industry? If so, you are beyond naive. The only difference is
that the objects of fraud and abuse in the private health care/insurance system
are the patients and premium-paying insured persons.
"1. Name one thing the Federal Government runs well (meaning efficiently,
fairly, cost effectively, and with a focus on the satisfaction of it's
customers)... waiting..." VA Hospital right here in SLC! Ask
any vet about the service they receive there. Highest ranked patient
satisfaction in the Intermountain Area._______________"The founding fathers wanted a very limited Federal Government. Were THEY
"dis-loyal"?"If they just wanted a very limited Federal
Government, they would have stuck with the Articles of Confederation. Can you
tell me why they wrote the Constitution instead, making the Federal Government
the Supreme Power?
Cannot spin the tea party backdoor maneuver and failure to vote on clean bill.
Every act of legislation not passed unanimously has people against it. Do they
get to subvert the process?
Curmudgeon,I do know that Medicaid and Medicare are not the same thing.
My first job out of college was to write software to calculate the expected
reimbursement for hospitals, and I developed logic for both of them. So I know
they are different. But they are both "government ran" healthcare
examples, are they not? And they are both full of abuse, fraud, and graft.
That's not from me, that's been documented by every mainstream news
organization I know of.I also know that hospitals and doctors hate
to have to deal with Medicare and Medicaid... because they know they will get
the Government runaround and huge hassles to get reimbursed, and they won't
get paid what their work is worth (just what the government thinks they should
get). Private insurance also puts limits on what they will pay, but their
reimbursement rates are MUCH more in line with what the care actually costs than
Medicare and Medicaid.
to Roland Kayser: have you not seen all of the privatly owned areas around the
US that have been shut down because the Federal Government had some hold on
them?What part of "really bad idea" did I miss?
Lane Myer,Re: "VA has highest ranked patient satisfaction in the
Intermountain Area"Have you ever been in the VA Hospital? I
have. Not as a patient, but on a service mission. Back then conditions at
the VA Hospital were TERRIBLE. I'm serious. I would visit patients at
the UofU and the VA everyday... and I would NEVER want to be put in the VA
hospital. Conditions there were terrible and patient's seemed to be
treated very badly.VA does not get the highest customer satisfaction
ratings in the intermountain area. And that's not my opinion. They
actually do patient surveys. Google "Best Hospitals in Utah" to see the
results.According to US News and World Report...#1
Intermountain Medical Center#2 UofU Med Ctr#3 LDS Hospital#4
Utah Valley Regional Medical Ctr#5 Intermounatin McKay-Dee Hospital Ctr#6 St Marks#7 Timponogos Regional Hospital#8 Dixie Medical CtrHint... VA didn't make the top 8, let alone #1.Just
because you say something... doesn't make it so. Do some research. The
VA does not in FACT get very high rankings as a hospital.More
evidence Government Hospitals are not "best" or "most
To "Roland Kayser" you are wrong. The Federal Government does have its
hands in healthcare, and can use it against anybody who is either signed up for
insurance through the Federally operated exchanges or else depends on government
subsidies to be able to afford their insurance.To "JoeBlow"
and what has changed under Obamacare?Insurance is more expensive and
covers less.No new doctors were added to the system, so now getting
care will cost more, and bankrupt the nation as a whole instead of only a few
people who were not prepared for retirement.Doing nothing was a
better plan than the ACA because insurance rates would not have increased as
much and benefits would have remained the same.To
"Truthseeker" if I don't want to be forced to obey laws on the
roads, I have a choice to NOT buy a car and drive. I don't have the choice
to NOT buy insurance anymore.What good has ever come to the world
through the use of Force?FYI, we don't live in a democracy, we
live in a representative republic. Go and read the Constitution.
"All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public
order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have
the Romans ever done for us?"
We have to register for the draft mountman. To me that is one step toward the
draft and of course in any large global conflict would be invoked...
2 BIT: Have you ever been in the VA Hospital? I have. Not as a patient, but on
a service mission. Back then conditions at the VA Hospital were TERRIBLE.
I'm serious. I would visit patients at the UofU and the VA everyday... and
I would NEVER want to be put in the VA hospital. Conditions there were terrible
and patient's seemed to be treated very badly.----------You need to go back there. Pres. Bush had the VA Secretary upgrade
everything in the VA Hospitals. They are top notch right now. Go see what your
tax dollars can do in the way of cost effective, patient focused - MEDICINE. It
is amazing the change. Ask patients that go there if they are pleased with
their government controlled healthcare. Then go ask anyone on medicare if they
want that healthcare to go away. Again, they don't. They really like
Medicare. Surprise! Healthcare run by the government. It can work.
Re:RedshirtDemocracy--broadly speaking, not the specific type of
democratic govt which we have.Dictionary definition democracy:a :
government by the people; especially : rule of the majorityb : a
government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by
them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving
periodically held free elections2: a political unit that has a
democratic governmentYou can absolutely refuse to buy health
insurance. You may be assessed a fine, but you can also refuse to pay the fine.
You can choose to not purchase a car, or not to have kids, but are
you not "forced" to pay taxes for roads and education anyway?You
can also refuse to pay taxes. The individual mandate was a
Republican idea, based on the principle of "personal responsibility,"
requiring people to have "skin in the game."If you
don't like the individual mandate, then why don't Republicans devise a
system where proof of insurance or proof of ability to pay is required up front
before anybody gets medical treatment?
Medicare is government-run health care. It works great.
To "Truthseeker" but we don't have a rule by majority. We elect
representatives, there is no majority rules. In addition to that, we are a
repubic.Since the IRS is going to be running the ACA, if you refuse
the pay the fine, the IRS has the power to garnish your wages.If I
don't buy gas, I won't pay for roads. If I never buy a home, I
won't pay for local schools. Also if I don't ever earn enough to pay
state income taxes, I will never pay for education.
The government is too much involved in health care already; let's not make
it worse and more intrusive yet. The private sector charges too much and
doesn't do a great job either but at least I don't have to go to the
doctor's, at least I don't have to buy health insurance under
semi-private medicine and private insurance. Seeing doctors just encourages
Put that along with the other Tea-Party "We hate all things Government"
such as the military, Police force, Social Security, Fire Department, health,
sanitation, infrastructure, communications, etc.
For the 10,000 time...Healthcare is NOT government run, ACA is
NOT Government required.If you don't what it, don't get
it.There is NO Government doctors, hospitals, clinics, or services.Just like Car insurance, mortgage Insurance, or Home owners insurance --
Buy private insurance, orpay the fine.To the
Tea-party of "personal responsibility", ACA allows people the
chance to BE responsible.
"Letters: Government-run health care is a bad idea"And there
in lies the whole problem with the whole argument. We no more have government
run medical care then we have government run automobile insurance. You are
mandated to take care of your own health by buying your own insurance, rather
than rely on everyone one else to subsidize your care because you don't
have insurance.Every single person who uses the medical system
without insurance cost everyone with insurance more. Why is it unreasonable to
make people buy their own insurance... so we don't have to pay for their
care through higher bills and higher insurance rates ourselves. Reagan mandated hospitals must render care - regardless of a persons ability
to pay. I very noble cause, but it just forced their cost to everyone else. It
is time these people stop being subsidized by everyone else, and buy their own
@moiuntainman...... in principle, I agree with you. You should be able to opt
out.... but other things would need to go along with that. The Reagan rule that
hospitals must render care also has to be nullified as well. You can't
have people with a "right" to care... without the responsibility to pay
for that care.What happens is people opt out of paying for
insurance, then something happens, the get services, the hospital tries to bill,
and the person doesn't pay. Often the provider tries to recover the cost -
at a much higher cost - but in many cases, those funds are not recoverable.With rights, comes responsibilities. Putting the responsibility on
others because you choose not to do so yourself, often the conservatives mantra
about entitlements, applies here. You can't have the right - without the
responsibility. If you don't like the responsibility, you should also lose
the right as well.
To "Open Minded Mormon" if government doesn't run healthcare, then
tell us, who runs the ACA State Insurance exchanges? Who runs Medicare? Who
runs Medicaid? Who runs the VA? Last I checked, those were all government run
insurance programs, or healthcre.But if I don't want to buy car
insurance, mortgage insurance, or homeowner's insurance or any other
insurance policies, there are ways to avoid it. If I don't want car
insurance I won't buy a car. If I don't want mortgage insurance, I
will rent. If I don't want to buy homeowner's insurance I won't
buy a house. I still have a choice there, I don't have pay any
"tax" becaue I didn't buy those insurance policies. With health
insurance, if I don't buy it I will be taxed, and if I refuse to pay then
the IRS will garnish my wages or close my business.
Difference being Redshirt... is if your house burns down, and you don't
have insurance, we don't end up covering the bill for you. With medicine,
the equivalent would be that a builder would be required to provide you with
basic housing - and that cost would be passed on to the rest of us. Same with
your car... we are not required to pay for your car to get back into basic
running condition after an accident if you are uninsured.But with
medical treatment, you are guaranteed essential medical treatment -- regardless
of if you have insurance or not. YOu simply show up at the emergency room....
and the rest of us pay for it. I think it is also funny that today
Kobe Bryant - one of the most well paid athletes out there - just returned from
Germany getting medical treatment he could not get, at any price, here in the
states. It is a complex issue... with no simple solutions.
Anyone who has spent time on the telephone dealing with the IRS on a tax issue
is well aware of the maddening frustration of dealing with the federal
government. The incompetence, the bureaucracy, the inefficiency , and combine
all that with the threats against your livelihood are reasons to be desperately
afraid and angered that the IRS will be the Obamacare secret police so to speak.
The IRS was used to intimidate conservative groups prior to the 2012 elections
and there should be no doubt in anyone's mind - liberal or conservative -
that the same intimidation is going to be used by the IRS to enforce Obamacare.
Surgeries will be denied if you are found to not be in alignment with the
politically correct ideas of the day and a member of the "correct"
political party. This is NOT America but it IS Barack Obama's new socialist
state of affairs complete with many of the same intimidation, spying and other
tactics used by other socialist regimes of the 1930's and 1940's in
Germany not to mention the old cold war USSR. If you are not afraid - you ought
Dear 2-BIT -- Please do your research before making comments like this
that are BLATANTLY FALSE. The US NW&WR list here of hospitals does not
include ANY VA Hospitals in the ranking. This kind of FALSE information, trying
to prove your point, makes it clear that you are quick to make accusations, but
not to take some time to find the truth. I think everyone from now on may shrug
a bit, when they see your "Well, THIS says THIS!" And I would hope that
they check your facts themselves. "According to US News and
World Report...#1 Intermountain Medical Center#2 UofU Med Ctr#3 LDS Hospital#4 Utah Valley Regional Medical Ctr#5 Intermounatin
McKay-Dee Hospital Ctr#6 St Marks#7 Timponogos Regional Hospital#8 Dixie Medical CtrHint... VA didn't make the top 8, let alone
#1.Just because you say something... doesn't make it so. Do some
research. The VA does not in FACT get very high rankings as a
hospital.""" So, Mr Bits, Please DO SOME RESEARCH. VA
Hospitals were not allowed in the study, much to the chagrin of researchers.
PLEASE DO YOUR RESEARCH before telling others to do theirs.
The government is already all up in the healthcare. The consequences
of requiring medical school, licenses and drug regulation is that 40 million US
citizens can't afford to go to a DR. Fix it.Either deregulate
everything and make ALL drugs and remedies perfectly legal to acquire and use or
fix the unintended consequences of making it necessary to see a Dr for
prescriptions and remedies. Why should it cost $300 for 5 minutes of a Dr's
" You can't have the right - without the responsibility. If you
don't like the responsibility, you should also lose the right as
well." You shouldn't be receiving the right to have
subsidized or free insurance, if you can't be responsible enough to buy it
on your own, independently without the subsidy. Finally I agree with Blue.
Rights and responsibilities, that's where its at.