Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
Author Message
Owl 69/70/75 Offline
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,655
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #61
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 01:53 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Well I guess the question would be what are the mechanisms that allow the countries that have forms of government run health care to keep costs down that don't exist in the ACA? Yes we can obviously point to differences in size and demographics and everything else between the US and every other industrialized country but what is every other country able to do that the ACA isn't?
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2019/07/how-do...-countries

Four things:
1) They pay providers less for providing the same service. Over time, people figure out that medicine is not quite the financially attractive career path that it once was, and after a couple of generations, your brightest and best no longer go into medicine. You make up for it by importing docs from third world countries, who may or may not have the level of training and expertise that you would like.
2) They force drug companies to sell pills for the marginal price to manufacture, with no absorption of R&D costs. Those costs fall almost exclusively on US consumers. The way to lower US drug costs is to force foreign countries to pay their fair share.
3) Once you turn 65 or so, they pretty much cut off health care, particularly anything that might be expensive. The difference between US health care costs and other countries is almost entirely attributable to costs incurred in the last 3 years of life. There's a reason.
4) Their legal systems are different, and one consequence is that they don't get the same jackpot malpractice judgements that we do here. Sweden has no-fault malpractice that basically works the way workers' comp does here. That cuts the cost of malpractice insurance dramatically.

If you want to cut the price of medical services, you have to cut the cost to provide. Otherwise you just eliminate profit, and nobody wants to do it any more. Cutting malpractice insurance helps. Making foreign countries pay their fair share for drugs reduces the cost to US consumers. Another thing that we could do if we did Bismarck is something like what the military does, have a "free" side and a "pay" side, and if you agree to work for a salary on the "free" side for 10 years, we pay your way trough med school. So you get your M.D. basically free, you work for a fixed salary on the "free" side for 10 years, you develop your specialty and your expertise, and then you move to the pay side and make money.
03-06-2020 03:13 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
b0ndsj0ns Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 27,059
Joined: Oct 2009
Reputation: 1018
I Root For: ECU
Location:
Post: #62
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 03:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 01:53 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Well I guess the question would be what are the mechanisms that allow the countries that have forms of government run health care to keep costs down that don't exist in the ACA? Yes we can obviously point to differences in size and demographics and everything else between the US and every other industrialized country but what is every other country able to do that the ACA isn't?
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2019/07/how-do...-countries

Four things:
1) They pay providers less for providing the same service. Over time, people figure out that medicine is not quite the financially attractive career path that it once was, and after a couple of generations, your brightest and best no longer go into medicine. You make up for it by importing docs from third world countries, who may or may not have the level of training and expertise that you would like.
2) They force drug companies to sell pills for the marginal price to manufacture, with no absorption of R&D costs. Those costs fall almost exclusively on US consumers. The way to lower US drug costs is to force foreign countries to pay their fair share.
3) Once you turn 65 or so, they pretty much cut off health care, particularly anything that might be expensive. The difference between US health care costs and other countries is almost entirely attributable to costs incurred in the last 3 years of life. There's a reason.
4) Their legal systems are different, and one consequence is that they don't get the same jackpot malpractice judgements that we do here. Sweden has no-fault malpractice that basically works the way workers' comp does here. That cuts the cost of malpractice insurance dramatically.

If you want to cut the price of medical services, you have to cut the cost to provide. Otherwise you just eliminate profit, and nobody wants to do it any more. Cutting malpractice insurance helps. Making foreign countries pay their fair share for drugs reduces the cost to US consumers. Another thing that we could do if we did Bismarck is something like what the military does, have a "free" side and a "pay" side, and if you agree to work for a salary on the "free" side for 10 years, we pay your way trough med school. So you get your M.D. basically free, you work for a fixed salary on the "free" side for 10 years, you develop your specialty and your expertise, and then you move to the pay side and make money.

04-cheers

Thanks was actually hoping you'd give an answer on this.

What's your opinion on what you think will happen if the Supreme Court makes some peoples wet dreams come true and they strike down Obamacare completely?
03-06-2020 03:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
georgia_tech_swagger Offline
Res publica non dominetur
*

Posts: 51,393
Joined: Feb 2002
Reputation: 2017
I Root For: GT, USCU, FU, WYO
Location: Upstate, SC

SkunkworksFolding@NCAAbbsNCAAbbs LUGCrappies
Post: #63
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 02:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The simple resolution to this is to force everyone onto Obamacare. No grandfathered or exempted plans. No union plans. Only Obamacare.

We'd have a new bipartisan bill on Trumps desk in days.


Trey Gowdy and Tim Scott refuse to let their Congressional staffers use the Congressional health insurance plans. They're in ObamaCare like the rest of us. Now as for some of the big Democrat staffers .... well .... do as I say and purchase the health insurance I say .... not as I do.
03-06-2020 05:16 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #64
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 01:58 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 01:36 PM)solohawks Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 10:45 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 10:39 AM)hburg Wrote:  Obamacare needs to be struck down and the health insurance market needs to be overhauled. Ever since Obamacare, the cost of health insurance has become unaffordable for most families, including those who are not able to afford, but are above the threshold.

Everyone who is honest will agree Obamacare is terrible. Striking it down though with no replacement even proposed much less passable in the near term would be a big problem.

How did anyone actually believe that the ACA would control costs?

ANYTIME the Federal money spicket gets turned on, cost SKYROCKET.

Look at the university system. Federal student loans were created so modest amounts could be taken amount to meet the expensive, but manageable, university costs. Once that federal spicket was turned on, PRICES SKYROCKETED because there was no incentive to keep costs down. Everyone and their brother could get loan to pay for the outrageous costs.

How were higher premiums not the logical outcome of the ACA??? They mirror our healthcare costs with the rise of insurance. Many are shielded from the full costs due to subsidies, just like health insurance shields patients from the full cost of healthcare, but the root problem not only continued, but grew.

People who did not have subsidies for health insurance are now like people who do not have health insurance trying to get healthcare.

You get screwed because the system is not set up to have the average Joe pay the full cost.

My premiums have quadrupled. The number of buyers I could choose from has dwindled from a half dozen to just one. The sole remaining insurer has a well earned reputation for denying claims after the fact and fighting to nickel and dime the customer and the health service industry whenever possible: BCBS.

But on the plus side I now pay for maternity coverage. So that's great if I ever decide to transition to a woman in a sci-fi future where I could get an ovarian transplant and then give birth. And then set a weightlifting world record for women. Wow, I'm so brave.

Well instead of BCBS, you could have United Healthcare, who has lost multiple lawsuits for, to put it bluntly, fraud.
03-06-2020 06:42 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #65
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 03:38 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 03:13 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 01:53 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  Well I guess the question would be what are the mechanisms that allow the countries that have forms of government run health care to keep costs down that don't exist in the ACA? Yes we can obviously point to differences in size and demographics and everything else between the US and every other industrialized country but what is every other country able to do that the ACA isn't?
https://www.pgpf.org/blog/2019/07/how-do...-countries

Four things:
1) They pay providers less for providing the same service. Over time, people figure out that medicine is not quite the financially attractive career path that it once was, and after a couple of generations, your brightest and best no longer go into medicine. You make up for it by importing docs from third world countries, who may or may not have the level of training and expertise that you would like.
2) They force drug companies to sell pills for the marginal price to manufacture, with no absorption of R&D costs. Those costs fall almost exclusively on US consumers. The way to lower US drug costs is to force foreign countries to pay their fair share.
3) Once you turn 65 or so, they pretty much cut off health care, particularly anything that might be expensive. The difference between US health care costs and other countries is almost entirely attributable to costs incurred in the last 3 years of life. There's a reason.
4) Their legal systems are different, and one consequence is that they don't get the same jackpot malpractice judgements that we do here. Sweden has no-fault malpractice that basically works the way workers' comp does here. That cuts the cost of malpractice insurance dramatically.

If you want to cut the price of medical services, you have to cut the cost to provide. Otherwise you just eliminate profit, and nobody wants to do it any more. Cutting malpractice insurance helps. Making foreign countries pay their fair share for drugs reduces the cost to US consumers. Another thing that we could do if we did Bismarck is something like what the military does, have a "free" side and a "pay" side, and if you agree to work for a salary on the "free" side for 10 years, we pay your way trough med school. So you get your M.D. basically free, you work for a fixed salary on the "free" side for 10 years, you develop your specialty and your expertise, and then you move to the pay side and make money.

04-cheers

Thanks was actually hoping you'd give an answer on this.

What's your opinion on what you think will happen if the Supreme Court makes some peoples wet dreams come true and they strike down Obamacare completely?

My opinion is that the Democrats will obstruct, Republicans will dither and not know what they want to do. MSM will blame it on Republicans with at least a little more justification than their current attacks on President Trump and Democrats will win the House and Senate and pass awful legislation that Trump will have to veto and we go all over this again in 2024. Republicans will be forced to propose something other than the 2008 status quo.
03-06-2020 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
bullet Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 66,301
Joined: Apr 2012
Reputation: 3285
I Root For: Texas, UK, UGA
Location:
Post: #66
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 05:16 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 02:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The simple resolution to this is to force everyone onto Obamacare. No grandfathered or exempted plans. No union plans. Only Obamacare.

We'd have a new bipartisan bill on Trumps desk in days.


Trey Gowdy and Tim Scott refuse to let their Congressional staffers use the Congressional health insurance plans. They're in ObamaCare like the rest of us. Now as for some of the big Democrat staffers .... well .... do as I say and purchase the health insurance I say .... not as I do.

Term limits and make all laws that apply to the people also apply to Congress.
03-06-2020 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
JRsec Offline
Super Moderator
*

Posts: 37,901
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation: 7737
I Root For: SEC
Location:
Post: #67
RE: Obamacare headed back to the Supreme Court
(03-06-2020 06:48 PM)bullet Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 05:16 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  
(03-06-2020 02:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  The simple resolution to this is to force everyone onto Obamacare. No grandfathered or exempted plans. No union plans. Only Obamacare.

We'd have a new bipartisan bill on Trumps desk in days.


Trey Gowdy and Tim Scott refuse to let their Congressional staffers use the Congressional health insurance plans. They're in ObamaCare like the rest of us. Now as for some of the big Democrat staffers .... well .... do as I say and purchase the health insurance I say .... not as I do.

Term limits and make all laws that apply to the people also apply to Congress.
This is the whole point! The are citizens the same as the rest of us and should abide by the same laws, use the same retirement systems of the states they serve, use the same SSI as the citizens, and be required to spend a set amount of time actually in the states the serve during any calendar year. What's more they should never be able to vote themselves a pay raise. Raises for Congress should be voted on in a national referendum. By God, that would make them answerable to the people again!

And the next time they vote themselves privileges that we don't have or worse rights legal or otherwise that we don't have they should be impeached and imprisoned.
03-06-2020 06:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.