View Single Post
Old 04-26-2010, 11:17 PM   #75
key
Member

How Do You Identify?:
androgynous, gender-queer, butch
Preferred Pronoun?:
depends on person addressing me
Relationship Status:
merrily single hopefully married one day
 

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: san francisco, ca and chama, nm
Posts: 197
Thanks: 59
Thanked 430 Times in 136 Posts
Rep Power: 885764
key Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputationkey Has the BEST Reputation
Member Photo Albums
Default in response

Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
Key -


Yes, its grand that pre-exists will be no longer. What it doesn't do is cap the premium for those with pre-exists.
So, what this means it does not change what you have now - insurance co's being able to raise rates as much as they want. They were trying to raise rates 20-30-40% as this bill was being debated. But the change is that they can't drop you, like they had been doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
The tax on the "cadillac plans" - I see this as being handed down to employers in rate hikes - I currently offer three different coverages to our employees - all three would fall into this category. Do you think that BCBS is gonna just absorb the cost?? Hell no. We will see it in rate increases, but they will be much more than the 12-15% per year increases we have seen over the last 4 years and it will effectively force the small business who has employed folks for over 57 years to drop health coverage.
So, if the co does drop it's plans, they better give that benefit money directly to the employee so they can shop for their own coverage. This may be helpful to getting us on the path to single payer. HC should not (in my opinion) be employer based. Hopefully you work at a union shop so the union can fight to make sure this happens (benefit $ goes directly to employees).

Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post

That the federal government would oversee any new plans?? Oh hell no - if Medicare is a shining example of oversight, I'll pass, thanks.
You know what the second most satisfied group of healthcare recipients are in the US? Recipients of Medicare. Know what the first is? Recipients of the VA. (Our Socialist Medicine). Know what the least satisfied is? Private Insurance.

Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
Don't even get me started on the Part D debacle and how most of the legislators supporting it went on to be bankrolled by the pharmaceutical companies.
Part D is what you get when Republicans are in charge. They care nothing, not one iota about human people, only corporate "persons". Period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
I watched as the state of TN took Medicaid dollars and pooled them into several managed care programs. Anyone caring to take a look at that successful model, feel free to google "TennCare." It was a fiasco that left many covered individuals without medical care because the administration of the plans was so fucked up, providers stopped accepting patients if they were TNCare recipients.
More Republicans in charge I imagine. Just a guess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
Do I think we need a single payer system? Yes.
With all due respect, you just went off about how Government can't do it right? Who do want administering this single payer system? A private company? That answers to ....it's shareholders...not the people using it's service? Give me the Government (who I can fire at 2 year intervals if need be) running this system any day over a private company only out to make a profit, answerable only to the bottom line. That is how we got in this mess to begin with Healthcare (actually it's denial) for profit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
Do I think that people such as my beloved Jess need to battle chronic, debilitating illness without consistent, proper, adequate medical care? No. Do I think that ANYONE should have to choose between healthcare and food? No. Do I want my government, who has a glorious way of fucking up the simplest of things, involved in the insurance coverage that my son depends on? No. I want a solution - a workable solution. Not a Band-Aid on a gushing artery.
Again, you want a CEO making 7 million a year deciding your and your son's health care "coverage" People who rail against the government running things, I ask. So we should privatize everything? Is there nothing so precious to you that you want to have control (through the political process) over who gets to "control" it? You want everything to be about the bottom line and making sure someone makes a buck off it? Like corporations have not f-ed the country up (can we say a housing bubble that nearly destroyed this country? how about a military contractor that lost 9 billion dollars in cash and electrocuted our troops in the shower? how about giving away American's well paying jobs to communists so that their shareholders could make more money, geesh I could go on and on about predatory capitalism, talk about a gushing artery)

Whew! Enough.



Quote:
Originally Posted by christie0918 View Post
I think this was another "throwing a bone" so that it looked good for midterm elections. I think it was a piss poor effort and would have rather our elected officials really grown a set of balls and went for the tougher fight of Single Payer. It really would have been worth it and not felt like we were sold out or that they settled yet once again.
Again, the contradiction. You hate the Government running things, but you want single payer. I don't get it. Please explain.
key is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to key For This Useful Post: