American Health Care Act

05 May 2017 07:38 #1 by ramage
From blog.dilbert.com


The Healthcare Confusopoly
Posted May 4th, 2017 @ 12:39pm in #Trump #Obamacare #healthcare

Years ago I coined the term Confusopoly to describe any industry that benefits by keeping consumers confused. For example, mobile phone carriers know their offerings are too confusing for consumers to compare one company to another on cost. That is clearly intentional. If consumers could compare offerings it would drive profit margins to zero fairly quickly. By keeping their service and pricing confusing, they keep margins high.

Insurance companies are also confusopolies. So are law firms. And the entire financial services industry is little more than a confusopoly. All of those services can be simpler, but to simplify would invite real competition. No seller wants that.

Now look at the healthcare bill in the news today. Do citizens understand all the implications? No, clearly.

Do members of Congress understand all of the implications of the new bill? Not a chance in hell.

Who is behind this confusion?

Duh.

The insurance companies are keeping the healthcare topic confusing because that’s how you keep margins high. If Congress or the public ever started to understand healthcare, we would know which buttons to push to lower the profit margins in the industry. But by keeping things complicated, no one can explain to anyone else what needs to be done for the public good.

My recommendation to the public is to refuse to re-elect any politician who votes for a healthcare bill that YOU don’t understand. If you don’t understand a healthcare bill, that means it is designed to screw you.

To be fair, I doubt politicians see this situation as a confusopoly. They probably just think some things are complicated by their nature, and this is one of them. They might also think they understand the big points. But that seems unlikely to me. A few politicians, such as Rand Paul, might dig into the details and grasp most of it, but the majority will not.

I’m opposed to any healthcare bill that isn’t easy for the public to understand. If the President wants the public to back a particular plan, he needs to give us something simple. Otherwise, my preference is for no new healthcare bill.

Your thoughts?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

08 May 2017 19:13 #2 by ScienceChic
Oooh boy, hope you have lots of time for reading! :)- I am pissed at the representatives who voted for this POS bill. There was no discussion in committee on what was contained within it, it sounded like several of them admitted they hadn't even read it, there's no CBO report on the effects it will have on our costs, and it contains no protections for pre-existing conditions like Trump promised - it was a true ramming through of a bill, unlike the ACA which was debated for a year prior. It sounds like it's a massive tax break for the wealthy and will cost the poor and middle class more. The best part? Those who voted for it exempted themselves from its provisions. They know it will suck and they don't want to be covered under it, it's not good enough for them - they want what the ACA, aka Obamacare, provides for coverage.

To paraphrase Jim Wright: Think about that.

Congressman Joe Kennedy III speech about the AHCA

Way to go Massie.
How Cincinnati's delegation voted on the GOP health bill

"Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Garrison (Represents Northern Kentucky.)
Voted no: "As recently as a year ago, Republicans argued that mandates were unconstitutional, bailouts were immoral, and subsidies would bankrupt our country. Today, however, the House voted for a healthcare bill that makes these objectionable measures permanent. The former Democrat Speaker of the House was rightfully derided for imploring Members to vote for a healthcare bill to “find out what was in it.” Yet today, we voted on a healthcare bill for which the text was available only a few hours before the vote. In fact, the Congressional Budget Office had no time to even provide Congress with a preliminary estimate of the full cost of this bill."


Every Republican who voted for this abomination must be held accountable
By Paul Waldman May 4

I won’t mince words. The health-care bill that the House of Representatives passed this afternoon, in an incredibly narrow 217-to-213 vote, is not just wrong, or misguided, or problematic or foolish. It is an abomination. If there has been a piece of legislation in our lifetimes that boiled over with as much malice and indifference to human suffering, I can’t recall what it might have been. And every member of the House who voted for it must be held accountable.

We might focus on the fact that Republicans are rushing to pass it without having held a single hearing on it, without a score from the Congressional Budget Office that would tell us exactly what the effects would be, and before nearly anyone has had a chance to even look at the bill’s actual text — all this despite the fact that they are remaking one-sixth of the American economy and affecting all of our lives (and despite their long and ridiculous claims that the Affordable Care Act was “rammed through” Congress, when in fact it was debated for an entire year and was the subject of dozens of hearings and endless public discussion). We might talk about how every major stakeholder group — the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the AARP, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Heart Association, and on and on — all oppose the bill.


Jim Wright, Stonekettle Station - his Facebook post about this

Health Insurance for people with preexisting conditions is a "luxury" according to Donald Trump's favorite show, Fox and Friends.

Healthcare for people with preexisting conditions is a luxury.

Now you think about that.

You follow that though to the end and what you get is: People who are less than physically or mentally perfect are a luxury.

And in the context of the healthcare debate, we cannot afford luxuries.

That is some Nazi shit, right there.

That is the same rhetoric and the same thinking used by those who believed in the idea of a Master Race, who believed in EUGENICS.

And don't you dare think for one goddamned minute that's NOT what these people are saying, because it IS.

Mike Coffman is the only Colorado rep who voted no on this.
How Every Member Voted on the House Health Care Bill

Groups against this health care bill: the American Medical Association, the American Hospital Association, the AARP, the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the American Heart Association, the March of Dimes, the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation, American Diabetes Association, the National MS Society, National Organization for Rare Disorders

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

09 May 2017 16:21 #3 by ramage
Replied by ramage on topic American Health Care Act
"it contains no protections for pre-existing conditions like Trump promised -"
SC,
The actual bill voted on and passed in the House of Representatives has a $130 billion fund for pre-existing conditions.
This bill now goes to the Senate, where it will be debated and possibly revised, then voted on. After that a Senate-House conference committee will meet to decide on a bill that can be proffered to both branches for a vote. If successful it will the be sent on to the President for his signature or veto.
That is the process and has been since the acceptance of the Constitution.
Please do not stress yourself about hypotheticals.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

12 May 2017 07:38 #4 by ramage
Replied by ramage on topic American Health Care Act
Pre-existing conditions do not require insurance rather they require funding. By definition, insurance provides for the unexpected. The pre-existing condition is known, not unexpected. One might argue that pre existing conditions can lead to new complications and thus one would need insurance. For example, a diabetic patient developing non-healing ulcers. Medicine knows that such an issue is the result of the pre existing condition and thus reimbursement would come from the pre-existing condition fund. Pre-existing conditions do not result in all medical issues. To wit, the aforementioned patient is involved in an automobile accident resulting in a broken leg. Not related to the pre existing condition and thus covered by insurance, purchased at a lower rate.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

14 May 2017 15:31 #5 by ScienceChic
States are permitted to opt-out of mandating coverage for pre-existing conditions - it'll be a shocker if any states don't allow this. Not covering pre-existing conditions before was the norm and I'm sure companies are anxious to get back to reducing any known costs they'll have to pay out.

Every family at some point will have a new existing condition; some unfortunately get diagnosed at birth. Either healthcare needs to be made affordable (i.e. giving birth shouldn't cost $100,000 or worse if there are complications) or we need insurance so families don't go bankrupt at a diagnosis. The ACA wasn't perfect but absorbing the people with pre-existing conditions was evening the system - yes it was hard on the industry at first, but it was getting better. Scrapping the ACA and putting this abomination in its place will make things worse, IMO.

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jul 2017 09:38 #6 by ramage
Replied by ramage on topic American Health Care Act
Shades of P.J. O’Rourke’s famous line that “The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn’t work and then they get elected and prove it.”
From Roger Simon, PJ Media, 7/17/2017
The following user(s) said Thank You: ScienceChic

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

18 Jul 2017 10:21 #7 by ScienceChic
That's rather prophetic, thank you ramage.

I think our leaders have a unique opportunity facing them right this moment and I hope they realize it and take advantage: now that this 2nd version of repealing the ACA has failed, how cool would it be if Republicans and Democrats were to come together and craft a bill that everyone could be somewhat happy with? Fix what's wrong with the ACA and create a win-win for both parties where they could say they accomplished something for the good of the country and their constituents. Proving to their party members that they honored their campaign pledges to "get rid of the ACA" (as it exists) and "protect" the parts of the ACA that everyone wants?

Think our leaders can step up their game and do their jobs? Give them a call and suggest that. :)

"Now, more than ever, the illusions of division threaten our very existence. We all know the truth: more connects us than separates us. But in times of crisis the wise build bridges, while the foolish build barriers. We must find a way to look after one another as if we were one single tribe.” -King T'Challa, Black Panther

The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. ignorance may deride it, but in the end, there it is. ~Winston Churchill

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

19 Jul 2017 13:33 #8 by Rick
Replied by Rick on topic American Health Care Act
I like your optimism SC, but the fundamental differences are too great to ever find real compromise. First of all, they would have to tackle the reasons why health care, and therefore health insurance, is so damn expensive. The costs of care were never addressed by the Dems when they created the ACA, in fact they made sure costs would go up by taxing medical devices even more. Nothing in the 2500 + pages of that bill addresses the high cost of malpractice insurance which has skyrocketted due to a growing lawsuit frenzy that just keeps getting worse. They also did nothing to allow competition across state lines which is legal for every other kind of insurance which brings down rates.

We also know that the Dems really don't like health insurance and want a single payer system where the government has complete control. I wonder, if we ever do get a single payer system, will that be the day that tort reform is finally addressed? Will the same number of lawsuits be allowed with the same unlimited dollar amounts to patients and their lawyers? And will that also be the day that valid citizen IDs are required to get care? That's something that Dems don't believe in to vote, so....?

If I repaired someone's leaking engine the same way the Dems decided to "fix" health care, instead of actually fixing the leak, I'd install an extra oil reservoir so the customer could drive twice as far before having to add more oil... it's just that stupid.

Bottom line is the Dems want the control of our health care to be doled out and managed by the government while the Repubs (most anyway) want a system where patients decide how much coverage they need and where the free market decides the price of those plans. Neither will work though if the actual reason for high medical costs and drugs are not addressed and fixed.

It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy

George Orwell

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

23 Jul 2017 15:27 #9 by ramage
Replied by ramage on topic American Health Care Act
Medicaid use spikes in mountains
by Chad Abraham, Aspen Daily News Staff Writer
Saturday, July 22, 2017

I urge everyone to read this article. Then think about it. The transportation services are doing very well, the hospitals and clinics that the patients go to, are doing well. Both from Medicaid reimbursement. However Medicaid's physician payment schedule is too low for a MD in private practice to absorb. Ergo the patients are off on a 200 mile ride to a clinic where the MD's are employees of the clinic.
Another interesting point of the article is, "
“We kind of dismiss the resort areas as just wealthy people, and there is a lot of wealth, but there is also a lot of need,” he said. “This underscores that as well. Who would’ve thought there are so many people in Pitkin County on Medicaid?”
Evidently the just wealthy have not bothered to look at the service people that allow them their life style.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

24 Jul 2017 08:19 #10 by FredHayek
Replied by FredHayek on topic American Health Care Act
I think eliminating coverage for pre-existing conditions would be a career killer for many state politicians. It is one of the most popular parts of ACA. It will be interesting to see what they actually vote on this Tuesday, the House bill, a simple repeal, or a modified Senate bill.

ScienceChic wrote: States are permitted to opt-out of mandating coverage for pre-existing conditions - it'll be a shocker if any states don't allow this. Not covering pre-existing conditions before was the norm and I'm sure companies are anxious to get back to reducing any known costs they'll have to pay out.

Every family at some point will have a new existing condition; some unfortunately get diagnosed at birth. Either healthcare needs to be made affordable (i.e. giving birth shouldn't cost $100,000 or worse if there are complications) or we need insurance so families don't go bankrupt at a diagnosis. The ACA wasn't perfect but absorbing the people with pre-existing conditions was evening the system - yes it was hard on the industry at first, but it was getting better. Scrapping the ACA and putting this abomination in its place will make things worse, IMO.


Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.161 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum
sponsors
© My Mountain Town (new)
Google+