3
0

Obamacare, the greatest theft of all time?


 invite response                
2017 Nov 12, 7:36pm   12,091 views  55 comments

by CBOEtrader   ➕follow (4)   💰tip   ignore  

#politics Our healthcare has degraded into the worst of all possible situations. A family of 4 will be stuck with paying $1500/month easy. If the family is close to the federal poverty level, heavy subsidies from taxpayers are applied so we can cover essential health benefits such as transvestite gender reassignment surgery and hormone replacement medications.

If the family of 4 is poor, there is a high likelihood that the subsidized health insurance is the single largest consumption of resources made by that family, most likely eclipsing housing and dwarfing car payments.

The system is broken, and we have government intervention to blame. There is close to nothing in our healthcare system that resembles a free market. This system appears designed to fail, as the critics of Obamacare have said for a while.

The question: is there a solution?

« First        Comments 52 - 55 of 55        Search these comments

52   anonymous   2017 Nov 13, 7:22pm  

Single payer is the answer. Those who fear it don't comprehend the proportion of our total health care that's already covered by single payer. Get the remaining third or whatever it is on Medicare, and it lowers off per capita cost substantially. This should be obvious, and the government will set prices. The problem is it's paid by taxes, and god forbid someone pays in more than what goes toward their own health care (even though that's basically the definition of insurance - some take out way more than they put in).

The mantra that the government fucks everything up is just based on paranoia about communism and propaganda from 50 years ago. We won, so we don't have to be opposed to the any efficiencies that the government can bring into services such as health care.

I believe the numbers, that is the amount spent by Medicare - and the health services paid for by that, versus the amount spent by insurance of people under 65 (which includes Medicaid) relative to the services acquired for those expenditures could be put together and presented to the public in a way that would make the correct decision extremely obvious.
53   anonymous   2017 Nov 13, 7:40pm  

Goran_K says
What you're asking me to do is subsidize the health care of some non-contributor in addition to what I pay for myself already. How is that fair?


Yes! That non-contributor should die of a easily treatable ailment. It isn't fair that Goran should have to subsidize someone else's survival.
54   RWSGFY   2017 Nov 13, 8:23pm  

anon_62240 says
Goran_K says
What you're asking me to do is subsidize the health care of some non-contributor in addition to what I pay for myself already. How is that fair?


Yes! That non-contributor should die of a easily treatable ailment. It isn't fair that Goran should have to subsidize someone else's survival.


"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need"
55   MrMagic   2017 Nov 13, 8:39pm  

anon_08dee says
Get the remaining third or whatever it is on Medicare, and it lowers off per capita cost substantially.


How will it do that, the medical treatment will still need to be done, there's no volume discount on treating bodies?

anon_08dee says
This should be obvious, and the government will set prices.


The government already sets the prices with Medicaid and Medicare. That's a big part of the problem, no cost controls. Then add in, doctors can do whatever procedures or treatment they want, and Medicaid and Medicare just pays the bill, no oversight. In fact, Medicare uses a "Pay and Chase" business model and won't investigate fraud unless there is a huge outcry.

« First        Comments 52 - 55 of 55        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions   gaiste