he needs to kick the maggot right to the curb and move on with universal healthcare. Enough of reaching out to these illiterate tea bagging imbeciles. There are many reasons why these maggots are dead last in every metrics of human progress.
Yes, this is scary. I live in NY, and it costs me $ 1,200 per month for family coverage, and that is with my deductibles pushed to the maximum. It is completely and utterly out of control. The main increase in costs have come during the Bush years, where Insurance companies where in his back pocket. The Bush-administration-promoted "managed care" middle-tier health systems, have been the main culprit of this cost increase. Not only do we have Insurance companies which have been given a free rein on premium increases, but we also have this additional administration middle-tier, which tells us what and what we cannot get covered for, and these guys are pure-profit administrators and not doctors. I cringe when certain members of Congress say that they don't want to disturb the status quo, and eliminate people's choice for the healthcare they want. What planet are these guys living on ???? I know lots of people that I used to work with in the U.K., who are extremely satisfied with their public healthcare option. It's hard to quantify what it actually costs them, since VAT covers a bunch of things, but it has to be less than what we pay. Healthcare is now 17 % of my family budget per year. We drastically need health care reform, and although I'm still unsure of the President's details on reform, we ABSOLUTELY need a Public healthcare option. Not because government knows how to manage healthcare, but because we need a cost-effective alternative that can compete against ruthless insurance companies, to help curb cost. Competition is a great thing, and adding a public offering, will provide competition, which will easily help reduce costs all-around. We cannot continue to let these private insurance companies get away with highway robbery !
One of you wrote "It's comical how Obama and the douche bag Democrats love to inflate the numbers. lol They make sound like 46 million people are so desperate for insurance that they will all die tomorrow if we don't do something. Again, the "true" number of people that are in dire need of coverage is 14-15 million. The other 30 million simply choose not to buy it, or are illegals. So, does the entire system need to be overhauled for 14-15 million people? That's what the dictator-in-chief thinks." When Hillary Clinton tried to reform the health care system, I had the best insurance available for a family of three at around 550 a month. I am a trader, so I pay it myself. Now it is around 1300 bucks a month after scaling down the plan a couple of notches - and guess what, it is almost on par with my housing costs (which I have had the good fortune of buying prior to the housing bubble). So, health maintenance costs have climbed dramatically with almost no change to the average family income. I have no doubt the current health initiative will be defeated, just as Hillary was beaten senseless more than a decade ago. I also have no doubt that within a decade I will be paying aprox. 2500 a month for health insurance. The reason for overhaul is not whether there are 40 million or 14 million uninsured. The reason is that the average citizen is now at his wits end paying for the ability to be assured of healthcare. "Douche bag" democrats will fail because of "douche bag" health lobby and "douche bag" republican opposition. There will be a long lull after that with everybody licking their wounds while I continue to pay my 5 to 20% increases in health insurance rates every year.
Unfortunately, I agree with all you say. This Congress will again fail to come up with a plan, due to partisan politics dictating the mode of operation. If Congress were responsible for actually paying for their own healthcare, they might share our view of things. The next bubbles to burst: healthcare, credit card debt, and college tuition.
Let me be Devil's advocate. 1. Why don't you self insure? I presume because you don't want the risk, eh? Well what makes you think someone else wants the risk of you getting cancer and costing them a million dollars? 2. It's funny but few Leftist's squak about the spiraling cost of public education. I pesume your $1200 a month insurance premium includes a couple or more children. Most public school systems spend a thousand a month educating your kids. What SHOULD cost more? I'd rather produce education-little variance-for a grand a month than assume open ended liability for for that same thou. 3. As a society have we ever pondered that compared to the cost of housing, perhaps insurance is too cheap? Few us question a dank, city apartment costing $1000 or more a month yet we belch at our health premium costing half that. Many of us in Big Cities spend more on parking than health insurance! I say let the feee market derived value of insurance premiums CROWD OUT other expenditures. Hell, we're talking about LIFE. Should that not be our biggest expense?
Sounds like you know what you're talking about, but without facts it is just speculation or imagination. Why didn't you say 16 to 17 million or 13 to 14 million how did you come up with your numbers? How did you account for the number of under insured, those with huge deductibles and those insured but with restrictions due to preexisting conditions?
I am moving to Asia with a disabled parent. I may be uninsurable based on full history, but not interested in insurance after years of experience, necessity and ultimately, self reliance. I am digusted with what passes for US conventional medicine now, at least locally. Parent had decades of missed opportunities, docs often hooked on expensive dangerous drugs/procedures that one spends considerable effort overcoming the side effects; mostly by replacement with relatively cheap, more effective nutriceutical answers. (orthomed.org, lef.org, doctoryourself.com) Doctors under 55 to 70 often seem to know nothing about previously common technologies that are *not* inferior (IMHO some oldies greatly superior, kudos to pharmaceutical marketing and journals on marked up dreck and procedures totally obliterating prior knowledge). The local conventional medicine paid with Medicare failed repeatedly. Supervising nurse and MD geriatrician in denial despite pronounced, biochemically measured or reversible objective changes. Locals were obstructive even after getting two better qualified doctors' signatures on advanced nutritional progam and subsequent clear improvements. Even strangers comment about my parent's unusual progress with specific examples. New Care Plan 1. will avoid hospitalization, "ICU" at foreign home, outpatient basis for procedures and tests 2. will bring primary care physician to house monthly, ~$15, nurse will work on call or part time in good times, full time if necessary 3. total control of (super) nutrition at home with aides 4. off patent Asian medicine e.g. 10 cents each instead of $5-$9 pills (x4/day) or 1-2 cents (100+ yr old natural source drug, better IMO) instead of 30 -120 cents (50 yrs old synthetic drug) 5. full time cook, 2 full time or live-in aides 6. import *massive* supplements, mostly from US, under $200/month 7. arrange US nutritional and medical advice 8. read, read, read All under $2500 per month including food and electricity, 300 m2 house already paid off. Hospitals and medical co-op with limited insurance are cheap. Instituting part of this approach worked well for mother-in-law, surviving 7 years at home after several serious strokes that no doctor predicted over 6 months survival and always wanted hospitalization for no clear advantage. Obama's amorphous plan seems to lock-in a clear and present danger to our family's health and wealth rather than improving market evolution and consumerism. Cost wise, Obamacare sounds like national suicide, expect 3x quoted costs, at least. I *demand* (or will make) opt-out provisions.
Let me respond: 1) Risk and cost are all derived from statistics and the actuarial tables. Add the additional overhead of bloated and superfluous "managed-care" administration, and the price increases. Add the near monopolistic hold that the insurance companies have, and price increases further. We need to get rid of the middle-management waste, and provide more competition in the industry, to reduce cost, and stymie these annual double-digit increases. Obviously, self-insurance would cost significantly more, when I am evaluated purely against myself, and not the larger pool. 2) I'm glad that you brought up Public Education; that is out of control as well. My real estate taxes have tripled in the last 16 years (went up more than 2.5 times during Bush administration alone). The Teacher's Union has everyone by the balls these days; it's unbelievable the concessions they have received. The bulk of my R.E. bill is local taxes - and 2/3 of my local taxes is public education. Over 2/3 of our entire school budget is made up of teachers' retirement and health benefits (see, not totally off-topic !). I've examined our local school budget carefully, and the local taxpayers subsidize 85 % of teachers' health carel. Does subsidizing teachers' exhorbitant heatlh care costs make them teach better and make my children any smarter ? I seriously doubt it. So, I think we are on the same page here. And by the way, I'm not a leftist. I am a long-time Rebpulican, turn centrist. I'm all about the correct solution, not about sticking to a party doctrine. 3) Competition is a key ingredient to the free market place. We need to provide alternatives to the status quo. The health insurance sector, although not a pure monopoly, has the look and feel of a cartel, more and more, all the time. Sure, life is the most important thing of all - I totally agree - but isn't there something morally wrong with making huge globs of money off life, when in fact, insurance companies relish denying service, to increase profits, with absolutely no regard or concerns for life. I think INSURANCE COMPANIES & LIFE are a diametrically opposed oxymoron.