Coming to a hospital near you, sign up now.

[schuylaar]

You are not listening...

You would still have catastrophic insurance like you do when you get in a car accident.

The problem is if our healthcare insurance was similar to car insurance it would pay for the gas, the tire rotations, the brake jobs, the tuneups, etc. If car insurance had all those addons it would be really fucking expensive as well.

You go to the doctor for routine care. If you need a procedure above 50K or so your insurance kicks in. That would cause medical insurance to be really cheap. The rest you pay for out of pocket. I am sure they would come up with financing programs like for cars for people who can afford it.

For people stupid enough or poor enough to not buy insurance we should have some sort of loan program similar to a student loan. You go to the emergency room, they fix you up but you are still going to have to pay for the care. In this scenario if you dont pay then the government comes in and garnishes 5% or so of your wages until it is paid off or until you die.

Doctors offices would have to compete for care. A heart bypass would drop from hundreds of thousands of dollars to thousands of dollars because all of the hidden charges would be removed. There would be innovation created by the need for less expensive procedures where there simply is no demand for it now.

The insurance game makes things crazy expensive. If the government only pays 33% for a medical device the company simply triples the cost of the medical device and still gets what they want right now. In direct pay where the customer is concerned with cost these kinds of things would not happen.

i know what you're saying..i can read..but you didn't answer the question..

what would you do? patients have to make this decision all the time..when it's up to them to pay out of pocket..you are going to get patients that won't go to the doctor..one key component of ACA is prevention..i've run out of gas..had no oil in my car because of cash flow..and others will do the same.. patients will then "let go" of their health and rely on catastrosphic to pick up the pieces.

 

[joe macclennan]

agreed something had to be done, for some doing the wrong thing is better than nothing. I will never in my life understand that position.

to me the wrong thing is doing nothing. At least something is being done. It may not be perfect and will need some modification.

rarely do politicians get it right the first time. Even the constitution wasn't perfect. It's why they added amendments.

Lets think about your statement there in terms of the MJ laws in america. The right thing would be to just make it legal,taxed and regulated. No different than alcohol. Since this has not been done in all but a few states. All mj progress should be repealed because it is wrong. We should go back to the dark old days of MJ being a crime since it isn't fully legal everywhere.

Of course this isn't the case. It is a step in the right direction. So we should keep these laws. Much the same as obamacare. imo

 

[Rob Roy]

well, let me put it to you this way..WTF you talkin' 'bout Willis?

What will "government" do to peaceful people if they say, NO, I won't participate? Ultimately they will initiate violence against these people. Are you okay with that? Why?

 

[schuylaar]

I understand what you are saying I have been that guy, and there was allready something in place for people that get turned down....I got turned down by three POS insurance companies then I qualified for the oregon health plan, which was for people that get turned down like me....I didn't need Obama care to get Ins, and it has been that way for a very long time...It cost money but if you didn't have money you can get on medicade....So I don't get why we needed Obama care, because in a way we all ready had it available it was called oregon health plan....

I've had health insurance all my life..ditched a job..ended up with COBRA and because I didn't have SEAMLESS coverage.. a 30 day gap, mind you..they wanted to carve out EVERYTHING that has happened to me since day 1 of my life.. medical records are made available to insurance companies..to qualify for medicaid in my state, you must have a minor child living with you..to receive cash assistance, you must have a minor child living with you..obamacare is NOT insuring you..an insurance company that YOU choose will be insuring you..if you live in a state that refuses to set up the insurance exchange AKA website..then feds will do it for the state..if your state does not want to expand medicaid, all they are doing is throwing away millions upon millions of $$$ from the fed..

 

[schuylaar]

to me the wrong thing is doing nothing. At least something is being done. It may not be perfect and will need some modification.

rarely do politicians get it right the first time. Even the constitution wasn't perfect. It's why they added amendments.

Lets think about your statement there in terms of the MJ laws in america. The right thing would be to just make it legal,taxed and regulated. No different than alcohol. Since this has not been done in all but a few states. All mj progress should be repealed because it is wrong. We should go back to the dark old days of MJ being a crime since it isn't fully legal everywhere.

Of course this isn't the case. It is a step in the right direction. So we should keep these laws. Much the same as obamacare. imo

right..and not every state adopted social security in the beginning either..now you couldn't pry the Baby Boomers' arthritic claw off their check on the 1st of every month..

 

[Rob Roy]

I think you hide the problem behind this absolute Wrong stuff. You say it is wrong. WE say it is not about right and wrong. That is just something we train kids with.

WE say you will comply will Federal Taxes and the Draft or whatever. WE say you will. It doesn't make it right. And because something is not right to you does not mean that it is wrong to US.

Cut the shit out about the "we" crap too. That's a fallacy, often in the actual voting there isn't a "majority will" expressed. Even if there were it means little, when it is simply a codification of making one group of people subservient to another.

In any given election a significant portion of people don't vote. Let's say out of 100, that 40 actually vote. In that vote, to "win" a person need only get 21 people to believe his horseshit. Once elected the elected assholes rarely do anything they promised. Even when they do, the only way they can "give" anything is to redistribute other people's resources....theft.

Also even if there were an actual majority it cannot create the "consent" of the minority. Statutory laws routinely shift back and forth which indicates that absurdity of it.

 

[schuylaar]

What will "government" do to peaceful people if they say, NO, I won't participate? Ultimately they will initiate violence against these people. Are you okay with that? Why?

what will happen? you will be billed a non-participation fee..so in essence it just makes sense to find a plan that you will like with a high deductible..better to get something for your money than to pay a fee with nothing to show for it..

 

[Rob Roy]

to me the wrong thing is doing nothing. At least something is being done. It may not be perfect and will need some modification.

rarely do politicians get it right the first time. Even the constitution wasn't perfect. It's why they added amendments.

Lets think about your statement there in terms of the MJ laws in america. The right thing would be to just make it legal,taxed and regulated. No different than alcohol. Since this has not been done in all but a few states. All mj progress should be repealed because it is wrong. We should go back to the dark old days of MJ being a crime since it isn't fully legal everywhere.

Of course this isn't the case. It is a step in the right direction. So we should keep these laws. Much the same as obamacare. imo

Expanding government control over people's lives is a bad idea. You should be able to do what you want as long as you allow others the same. Why do you think going against that policy is "good" ?

 

[Rob Roy]

what will happen? you will be billed a non-participation fee..so in essence it just makes sense to find a plan that you will like with a high deductible..better to get something for your money than to pay a fee with nothing to show for it..

Okay. When a person sends you a bill for a "service" you did not contract for and then after you refuse to pay it, they threaten you with more harm (ultimately they'll kill you), you think that is acceptable?

 

[schuylaar]

Cut the shit out about the "we" crap too. That's a fallacy, often in the actual voting there isn't a "majority will" expressed. Even if there were it means little, when it is simply a codification of making one group of people subservient to another.

In any given election a significant portion of people don't vote. Let's say out of 100, that 40 actually vote. In that vote, to "win" a person need only get 21 people to believe his horseshit. Once elected the elected assholes rarely do anything they promised. Even when they do, the only way they can "give" anything is to redistribute other people's resources....theft.

Also even if there were an actual majority it cannot create the "consent" of the minority. Statutory laws routinely shift back and forth which indicates that absurdity of it.

but didn't our president win the popular vote as well?..the majority did speak..baby boomers are on their way out..they are the old guard..what has happened in our country was predicted long ago..time magazine maybe 20-25 years ago did a story on it as well as just recently..the voting majority of this country has color and it's never going back..

 

[schuylaar]

Okay. When a person sends you a bill for a "service" you did not contract for and then after you refuse to pay it, they threaten you with more harm (ultimately they'll kill you), you think that is acceptable?

ummmmm, it's gonna be from the government similar to IRS..if not the IRS..i believe you will be billed through your taxes..but if you want i can google it..

 

[ChesusRice]

i know what you're saying..i can read..but you didn't answer the question..

what would you do? patients have to make this decision all the time..when it's up to them to pay out of pocket..you are going to get patients that won't go to the doctor..one key component of ACA is prevention..i've run out of gas..had no oil in my car because of cash flow..and others will do the same.. patients will then "let go" of their health and rely on catastrosphic to pick up the pieces.

Go a step further.
People dont have the money to fix that squeek in the front left wheel. Bearing goes out at 65 mph and they veer head on into another car killing all aboard both vehicles.

I would rather they take care of the "little squeek" than to walk around with an infectious disease

 

[nitro harley]

but didn't our president win the popular vote as well?..the majority did speak..baby boomers are on their way out..they are the old guard..what has happened in our country was predicted long ago..time magazine maybe 20-25 years ago did a story on it as well as just recently..the voting majority of this country has color and it's never going back..

Never going back?...That could be,...I guess we will find out if the color can take us forward....and not backwards....

 

[ChesusRice]

Okay. When a person sends you a bill for a "service" you did not contract for and then after you refuse to pay it, they threaten you with more harm (ultimately they'll kill you), you think that is acceptable?

Hey whiner

DO YOU even have a job?

I wouldnt hire your whiny ass.

 

[schuylaar]

Cut the shit out about the "we" crap too. That's a fallacy, often in the actual voting there isn't a "majority will" expressed. Even if there were it means little, when it is simply a codification of making one group of people subservient to another.

In any given election a significant portion of people don't vote. Let's say out of 100, that 40 actually vote. In that vote, to "win" a person need only get 21 people to believe his horseshit. Once elected the elected assholes rarely do anything they promised. Even when they do, the only way they can "give" anything is to redistribute other people's resources....theft.

Also even if there were an actual majority it cannot create the "consent" of the minority. Statutory laws routinely shift back and forth which indicates that absurdity of it.

hmmmmmmmm, last time i looked obama is still living at 1600 pennsylvania ave..

 

[Rob Roy]

but didn't our president win the popular vote as well?..the majority did speak..baby boomers are on their way out..they are the old guard..what has happened in our country was predicted long ago..time magazine maybe 20-25 years ago did a story on it as well as just recently..the voting majority of this country has color and it's never going back..

You have a cognitive dissonance problem, and I mean that clinically, not to be insulting. I know how the dysfunctional system supposedly "works". I'm saying that a majority wanting something or believing something doesn't make it correct.

I think it's best to let others make their own decisions, as long as they don't aggress against others. Obamacare is blatantly an act of aggression against those who don't want it. Why do you support that kind of aggression? Isn't gang rape simply a case of the majority exerting their will against an unwilling person?

 

[schuylaar]

Never going back?...That could be,...I guess we will find out if the color can take us forward....and not backwards....

wow..i can't believe you said that..

 

[schuylaar]

You have a cognitive dissonance problem, and I mean that clinically, not to be insulting. I know how the dysfunctional system supposedly "works". I'm saying that a majority wanting something or believing something doesn't make it correct.

I think it's best to let others make their own decisions, as long as they don't aggress against others. Obamacare is blatantly an act of aggression against those who don't want it. Why do you support that kind of aggression? Isn't gang rape simply a case of the majority exerting their will against an unwilling person?

i answer your questions intelligently and you keep coming back with temper tantrum technique..and it's me who has the problem?

 

[Rob Roy]

Hey whiner

DO YOU even have a job?

I wouldnt hire your whiny ass.

It's not real likely I'd seek employment with a thief or a moron, but thanks for the update.

 

[Rob Roy]

i answer your questions intelligently and you keep coming back with temper tantrum technique..and it's me who has the problem?

You never answered if you approve of one person or group of people threatening force against other peaceful people. I'm not angry, slightly amused though.