Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Health Care Bill It's about Fire and Money
Old 07-21-2009, 02:34 PM   #1
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 256
Health Care Bill It's about Fire and Money

Hi Folks.

Even you retirees not on medicaid need to look into the new Healthcare bill. To his Credit Obama says he wouldn't sign a bill that makes "individual private medical insurance illegal" but the fact that he doesn't know what congress is doing is disturbing to me and hopefully you.. IBD article that first brought this up is first.

I contacted my Congressman....

Wally

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- It's Not An Option

Morning Bell: Obama Admits He’s “Not Familiar” With House Bill - The Foundry
__________________

__________________
wallygator69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-21-2009, 02:51 PM   #2
Recycles dryer sheets
beowulf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 466
As written, it's pure socialized medicine with eventually no options for anyone. You won't have any freedom other than to use government approved plans and a bureaucracy will determine your treatment. No different than Canada, Britain and countless other countries.

There are some (a few) good things in the bill, but its size alone and the fact that very, very few of our elected officials, apparently including the President, have read it should signal that something is seriously wrong. I'm all in favor of having some sort of umbrella health care for those who can't afford it or can't get it through their employer, even if it results in slightly higher taxes. But I don't understand why doing that has to result in everyone else being forced into a national healthcare program. I've seen what happens with Medicare when my parents had it and it wasn't pretty.

My opinion, FWIW, is that anyone who has adequate health care should be left alone, anyone who doesn't has the option of some sort of government program and those who want nothing be allowed to stay out (as long as they don't then decide to ask everyone else to pay for their care when they get sick). Not sure how all this would work, but the current proposals are unacceptable.
__________________

__________________
beowulf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 02:52 PM   #3
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Too many political slogans going around and not enough thought. "Making private insurance illegal" is a phrase that means nothing without context. Instead of talking in phrases that are meant to rile people up, we should talk about what is the best way to make things work better than they are. I have to say that after all the reading that I have done over the past 5 years I think that the private for profit health insurance system is a problem, not a solution. But our politicians won't even talk in any detail about whether that is the case. Nothing should be off the table when we talk about options.


Well, you vented Wally and now I vented. I also have contacted my representatives and senators. I do so frequently.
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 02:54 PM   #4
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Yeah, health care and health insurance reform is about FIRE and money, but seeing as the primary thrust of this thread is politics, that's where it is being moved.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 03:37 PM   #5
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martha View Post
Too many political slogans going around and not enough thought. "Making private insurance illegal" is a phrase that means nothing without context. Instead of talking in phrases that are meant to rile people up, we should talk about what is the best way to make things work better than they are. I have to say that after all the reading that I have done over the past 5 years I think that the private for profit health insurance system is a problem, not a solution. But our politicians won't even talk in any detail about whether that is the case. Nothing should be off the table when we talk about options.


Well, you vented Wally and now I vented. I also have contacted my representatives and senators. I do so frequently.
Martha, you will be disappointed, and those who like private insurance can sleep well, because Senator Baucus, D. Montana, is not going to let anything happen to his buddies and major contributors the health insurers.

"Elsewhere in health care news, The Washington Post’s Perry Bacon Jr. and Michael Fletcher report on the newest Republican strategy – linking the administration’s handling of health care to its economic policies, both of which may becoming less popular, according to recent polls. The Post also takes a look at where the health care industry’s political contributions are going, finding that the political committees of Senator Max Baucus, the chair of the Senate Finance Committee, received close to $1.5 million in 2007 and 2008."

The Early Word: Shifting Timetables on Health Care - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com

By the way Gator, what you mean is Medicare, not Medicaid.

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 03:45 PM   #6
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 309
Canada health care
Free Market Cure - A Short Course in Brain Surgery
__________________
homestead is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 05:44 PM   #7
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by homestead View Post
Now that we actually need Michael Moore to solve a problem, where the heck is he? Certainly he has the answer to all this..........
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 07:41 PM   #8
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Gone4Good's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 5,381
Quote:
Originally Posted by homestead View Post

So what happens in the US to someone without insurance who doesn't have a spare $28K lying around? (and $28K for brain cancer surgery and treatment seems suspiciously light considering the MRI probably cost a couple of grand all on its own).

Maybe something like this . . .

http://www.venturacountystar.com/new...for-treatment/

Or this study by the American Cancer Society that found cancer "patients who were uninsured were 1.6 times as likely to die in five years as those with private insurance."

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/MED/co...r_Outcomes.asp
__________________
Gone4Good is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 08:44 PM   #9
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,255
I'd agree that the articles in the OP may have a strong political bias, but this comment from the mayo clinic is hard for me to ignore(bold mine):

Mayo Clinic’s reaction to House Tri-Committee bill « Health Policy Blog

Mayo Clinic’s reaction to House Tri-Committee bill
Quote:
Although there are some positive provisions in the current House Tri-Committee bill – including insurance for all and payment reform demonstration projects – the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher-quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite.

In general, the proposals under discussion are not patient focused or results oriented. Lawmakers have failed to use a fundamental lever – a change in Medicare payment policy – to help drive necessary improvements in American health care. Unless legislators create payment systems that pay for good patient results at reasonable costs, the promise of transformation in American health care will wither. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States.
-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-21-2009, 11:58 PM   #10
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Gotadimple's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,758
Ummm . . . a key reason health care is expensive is the desire to assure positive patient outcomes. So, "patient-focused" does mean more studies of what works/does not work, more protocols, more paperwork, etc.

While I am appreciative of the intent of the Mayo Clinic, they don't offer an alternative, just a criticism. With a limited resource ($), which is more important: patient-focused protocols, or actually deploying resources to treat those who don't have access to health care?

-- Rita
__________________
Only got A dimple, would have preferred 2!
Gotadimple is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 01:19 AM   #11
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
haha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hooverville
Posts: 22,380
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotadimple View Post
Ummm . . . a key reason health care is expensive is the desire to assure positive patient outcomes. So, "patient-focused" does mean more studies of what works/does not work, more protocols, more paperwork, etc.

While I am appreciative of the intent of the Mayo Clinic, they don't offer an alternative, just a criticism. With a limited resource ($), which is more important: patient-focused protocols, or actually deploying resources to treat those who don't have access to health care?

-- Rita
I know you worked in the field, so you are an expert. However, in my opinion getting it right is much more important. If you broaden coverage w/o getting a handle on cost/benefits, costs spiral and we all lose.

Ha
__________________
"As a general rule, the more dangerous or inappropriate a conversation, the more interesting it is."-Scott Adams
haha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 08:03 AM   #12
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 18,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotadimple View Post
So, "patient-focused" does mean more studies of what works/does not work, more protocols, more paperwork, etc.

... With a limited resource ($), which is more important: patient-focused protocols, or actually deploying resources to treat those who don't have access to health care?

-- Rita
Why is it one or the other?

Finding out what works and what does not should help contain costs, and those cost savings can be applied to cover more people. Win-Win.

Yes, it might take some studies and paperwork to uncover best practices, but if reasonably designed, the payback should be huge. Should we not require degrees/certification for our Doctors and Nurses - too much paperwork?

I'm with haha - if it isn't sustainable it isn't a solution.


-ERD50
__________________
ERD50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 08:34 AM   #13
Moderator Emeritus
Martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: minnesota
Posts: 13,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotadimple View Post
Ummm . . . a key reason health care is expensive is the desire to assure positive patient outcomes. So, "patient-focused" does mean more studies of what works/does not work, more protocols, more paperwork, etc.

While I am appreciative of the intent of the Mayo Clinic, they don't offer an alternative, just a criticism. With a limited resource ($), which is more important: patient-focused protocols, or actually deploying resources to treat those who don't have access to health care?

-- Rita
Mayo proposed a different system of reimbursement, led by changes in the Medicare reimbursement system. Keep in mind too that Mayo in large part is considered to be a model of efficiency and cost containment.
__________________
.


No more lawyer stuff, no more political stuff, so no more CYA

Martha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 08:43 AM   #14
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by haha View Post
If you broaden coverage w/o getting a handle on cost/benefits, costs spiral and we all lose.
I would agree. In my opinion, any reforms which do not focus first and foremost on cost containment are non-starters. Once we can adequately figure out a way to control costs, then universal coverage is much more easily attainable and implemented. Until then it's another fiscal disaster waiting to happen like Medicare, Social Security and state/local pension plans.

I'm fairly non-ideological about this issue in terms of the "philosophy" of the implementation of reforms, with the notable exception of being vehemently opposed to changes which don't have realistic and substantial cost-containment measures.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 09:25 AM   #15
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
I'll judge the outcome of all this by whether the feds choose to include or not include themselves. If Congresscritters and all fed employees are full participants in the new system, at least I'll know they made a sincere try at creating something good for the country. If they are excluded and continue on their current plans, then I'll know their intention has been to screw Ms/Mr Average American all along.

The exception would be active military, of course.

Anyone seeing anything on whether fed employees will be full paricipants or whether they are holding themselves above the fray?
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:10 AM   #16
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,183
The Congresscritters (aka vermin) see no reason to include themselves. I have been reading bits and pieces of the proposed bill and it struck me as odd that there is absolutely NO LIFETIME CAP of any sort. Now you may have to jump thru some hoops but I am not sure that is a good thing. My current plan does have a 3M cap currently and I hope to never reach it. I do see this as a problem to continue to maintail life at all costs. Stop to think about the extreme preemies and the family who wants Grandpa around at all costs. I am not in support of unlimited healthcare for certain situations. Really think about this for a bit and share your thoughts please.
__________________
crazy connie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:14 AM   #17
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
HFWR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Lawn chair in Texas
Posts: 12,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy connie View Post
The Congresscritters (aka vermin) see no reason to include themselves. I have been reading bits and pieces of the proposed bill and it struck me as odd that there is absolutely NO LIFETIME CAP of any sort. Now you may have to jump thru some hoops but I am not sure that is a good thing. My current plan does have a 3M cap currently and I hope to never reach it. I do see this as a problem to continue to maintail life at all costs. Stop to think about the extreme preemies and the family who wants Grandpa around at all costs. I am not in support of unlimited healthcare for certain situations. Really think about this for a bit and share your thoughts please.
Qloud - Popular Songs By Austin Lounge Lizards - Grandpa's Hologram
__________________
Have Funds, Will Retire

...not doing anything of true substance...
HFWR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:14 AM   #18
Moderator
ziggy29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,612
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy connie View Post
I do see this as a problem to continue to maintail life at all costs. Stop to think about the extreme preemies and the family who wants Grandpa around at all costs. I am not in support of unlimited healthcare for certain situations. Really think about this for a bit and share your thoughts please.
I agree you in philosophy there, but the problem is: Inevitably, if we're talking about curtailing end-of-life care which has a very low chance of positive outcome, somewhere there has to be a line which determines what qualifies for ongoing treatment and which are, well, allowed to die (perhaps only given palliative treatments such as pain meds).

Where is the line and who draws it? And will mounting cost pressures continue to cause the line to be redrawn so more and more people are refused treatment?

I agree with the concept that heroic end-of-life measures to prolong a low-quality life for a little while is a bad "investment" to the extent cost has to be a factor in health care. But I worry that drawing a line is a slippery slope to having redrawn again and again as cost pressures continue to force more and more people to be considered "beyond hope" and effectively sentenced to certain death.
__________________
"Hey, for every ten dollars, that's another hour that I have to be in the work place. That's an hour of my life. And my life is a very finite thing. I have only 'x' number of hours left before I'm dead. So how do I want to use these hours of my life? Do I want to use them just spending it on more crap and more stuff, or do I want to start getting a handle on it and using my life more intelligently?" -- Joe Dominguez (1938 - 1997)

RIP to Reemy, my avatar dog (2003 - 9/16/2017)
ziggy29 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:27 AM   #19
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 1,183

Also got to listen to "The Drugs I Need" it is spot on! Thanks for the smiles and laughs HFWR I needed that!
__________________
crazy connie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-22-2009, 10:37 AM   #20
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy connie View Post
The Congresscritters (aka vermin) see no reason to include themselves. I have been reading bits and pieces of the proposed bill and it struck me as odd that there is absolutely NO LIFETIME CAP of any sort. Now you may have to jump thru some hoops but I am not sure that is a good thing. My current plan does have a 3M cap currently and I hope to never reach it. I do see this as a problem to continue to maintail life at all costs. Stop to think about the extreme preemies and the family who wants Grandpa around at all costs. I am not in support of unlimited healthcare for certain situations. Really think about this for a bit and share your thoughts please.
You can't control end of life care or efforts to save extreme preemies through lifetime caps. You would need to detail circumstances and allowed procedures. This would likely be a political shot in the head to whichever congresscritter sponsored it. It isn't going to happen...........
__________________

__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Long-Term Care - Part of Health Care Reform Bill chinaco Health and Early Retirement 3 07-19-2009 03:53 PM
New Health Care Proposal -- If it happens what does it mean? chinaco FIRE and Money 9 06-11-2007 04:04 PM
How to cut your food bill by 90% and FIRE even quicker chinaco FIRE and Money 5 04-29-2007 10:27 PM
health insurance and effect on increased health care costs Martha Other topics 9 08-08-2006 02:54 PM
Health Care Lovecraft Young Dreamers 3 02-20-2004 09:28 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:44 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.