|
hobbesmaster posted:So you add $4020 to those values to get the total cost per year? Hopefully not "per month." So... anyone who has ever had a baby must pay $20,000 a year for health insurance for the rest of their life? I think that could make an Earth Mother join the "Childfree" crowd.
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
Typo posted:if it passes the senate yeah ppl will care cuz there will be trump voters dying on tv to curable diseases and poo poo and that makes republicans look bad Good luck finding one of those Trump voters dying of curable diseases to go on TV and admit they were wrong. They are pigheaded as gently caress. Their dying words will be "Clinton would have been worse."
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 19:54
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:Literally nobody will care about this by the next election, if anyone even cares now. They will certainly have forgotten, as their Lords and Masters will have distracted them with a new ethnicity to hate.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 19:58
|
|
|
Bueno Papi posted:By about the time when the 2018 election cycle starts you'll start to see the individual market implode and all the red states that elect to abandon defined health benefits go into effect. That means millions of additional uninsured and under-insured people. Healthcare will be front and center in that election. It would be one thing if the consequences fell onto the democrats base but AHCA is aimed directly at the republican base. They will blame Obamacare and ask for more time to sort out the mess.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:00
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:I'm talking about the singing by dems "looking bad," as the post I quoted was suggesting. People will care about healthcare, they won't care about some lawmakers singing Sha Na Na. This was probably not the time for Democrats to perform some dumb office in-joke that no-one outside their bubble "gets."
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Typo posted:Hillary would have won the election if it were not for Obama->Trump vote flippers Those are the people that will really suffer. And probably never vote again. They voted Democrat and were screwed. Voted Republican and were screwed. "Screw the lot of them" they will say.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:18
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:No one outside the tiny minority that follows the minutia of politics like it's a soap opera (AKA us) will even be aware of this happening. And literally nobody will care in a year and a half. I suspect your racist grandma will make sure that this spreads on Facebook.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:I'm pretty sure those people won't blame the GOP for anything going wrong as long as there are dark-skinned and/or gay and/or Jewish people in this world. Don't forget abortions. If 10,000 born babies die or are orphaned but 1 baby is saved from being aborted, it will all have been worth it!
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Alligator Horse posted:The real danger I see deriving from the House victory is that both chambers know the base was promised repeal/replace. What specific form that takes isn't as important as dealing a devastating blow to Obama's legacy. The Senate knows this. The HFC are saber rattling trying to dissuade the Senate from making sweeping changes to the bill, but at the end of the day Trump and Ryan are going to whip hard as can be once the Senate's version—should it pass—makes it back down to the House. You are not wrong. Start freaking out.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 14:16
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Don't lose your insurance for more than 6 months, don't live in a red state, make more money, and don't have any major medical issues until you are 65 and you'll be fine (and probably come out ahead financially) under the AHCA. If you have no major medical issues before 65 then you would do even better under the "don't have insurance at all" scenario.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 15:13
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Politics That pays zip at lower levels, as many interns have found out.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 15:40
|
|
|
Monkey Fracas posted:Yeah Nursing is a stressful job but on the other hand it's relatively accessible and pays relatively well. You are certainly stretching the definition of "easy" there. I'd rather code Java 8 hours a day in a comfy chair next to a coffee maker, than be on my feet all day being screamed at by people who are scared and in pain, and having to touch icky things all the time.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2017 16:22
|
|
|
Peachfart posted:Removing for profit insurance is only part of decreasing costs. You will have to lower doctor and healthcare salaries for universal health insurance to ultimately work. To do that, you'd need to lower tuition fees at universities. No-ones gonna go $400k in debt for a $75k salary. Specifically not clever doctor folks. There's other stuff they could do.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 01:25
|
|
|
Caros posted:It bugs me the most because it is so easily disproven and I'm getting annoyed at the news for not pointing that out. All the morning shows just went with 'isn't this a dumb thing to say' instead of pulling up the 2009 statistic showing that 45,000 people die annually from lack of ability to pay for medical care (insurance). This is the problem with intelligent people having problems communicating with dumb people. They assume that everyone knows it's not true and that it would be patronizing to say so. Clinton did this a lot. Trump patronizes the gently caress out of his supporters, but paradoxically they feel *respected* because they understood what he said, instead of feeling that the whole thing is a private joke that they aren't quite in on.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 16:09
|
|
|
LeeMajors posted:Yep. My wife's totally uncomplicated vaginal delivery with 3 nights at hospital ran us like $6500 out of pocket with good insurance, and they charged something like 30k to insurance. Cost to UK NHS for a woman to have a baby (uncomplicated birth) $3500. That's the complete cost that the NHS pays. It costs nothing for the patient.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
Twerk from Home posted:The problem is that we've got huge cracks that millions of people fall through and get nothing. Usually that people are poor, but not destitute. So they work, but it's 2 part-time jobs making up the hours of one full-time job. Part-time jobs aren't expected to provide health insurance. And companies are very much aware that it's cheaper to hire two part-timers than one full-timer and have to provide insurance. This is why the eternal cry of the poor in the USA is not "Why can't I get a job?" like in other countries, but "How come I have three jobs and still can't get by?"
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
Average salary for doctors and nurses is high in the USA. Average salary for the USA is high in general. Don't jump on me and tell me that there are poor folks in the USA; I know - but jobs that require a degree tend to pay more than the equivalent in Europe. Coders get about double in the USA vs UK. I think it's probably related to the high cost of university level education. Coming from the U.K. I'm always startled by the hordes of support staff a doctor needs to handle insurance. There must be at least as many on the insurer side. Perhaps start there. Bureaucracy adds nothing to anyone's life.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:Obama said this when passing ACA. he promised that even if their catastrophic health plan that they loved so much for whatever reason was illegal under the new law, their doctor who they like and trust would still take the new insurance they got on the marketplace. Insurance companies promptly set up second-class plans for their ACA customers which not all doctors took who took the primary plan. This was so predictable I don't know why Obama assumed they wouldn't. It confuses patients and it confuses doctor's staff, too - often they will say "We take all BCBS plans." But if you ask them too look it up they are like "Sorry. All BCBS plans EXCEPT ACA."
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 08:06
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Who gives a poo poo about what republicans believe right now? Implement UHC and they'll defend it to the hilt once they see that they'll benefit from it personally. For an example, see the furor over repealing the ACA once the GOP base realized that it was going to take away their healthcare. But they are still doing it, aren't they? And the base will find some way to rationalize it.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:Why are people surprised by this? The GOP was always going to repeal the ACA. Did anyone seriously believe that anyone standing by Donald Goddamn Trump was going to be swayed by a bunch of phone calls to the effect "Oh sir my daughter (who'd probably vote against you) can't possibly survive without her healthcare?" They don't give a poo poo about their constiuency, their plan is to simply redefine their constiuency into only those people who will vote for them. I talked to a dummy on this very forum pre-election who was planning to vote Trump despite being on Obamacare. Apparently I was really naive for thinking that Trump would follow through on his election promise to repeal Obamacare because "it would be unpopular." Best of health to that guy, I'm going back to my home country if decent health insurance is no longer available on the open market.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 18:26
|
|
|
Rhesus Pieces posted:They all know how bad this is and they don't care. Tax cuts Tax Cuts TAX CUTS!!! I think they feel invincible right now because their voters have shown that they have utter loyalty to party, no matter what the party does. It must be a rush.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Queering Wheel posted:Is there anyone I can follow on Twitter or whatever that is keeping a close eye on what's going on? I know that these evil fucks are keeping their AHCA version private, but is anyone trying to figure out how GOP senators are likely to vote? If Collins and Murkowski vote no due to the heavy Medicaid cuts and then Rand Paul votes no because it's not a full repeal, that's three right there. Or have they changed their minds in recent days? I'm really scared about this bill and it's hard to find this information on it. The whole point is we plebs are meant to be kept in the dark until it is passed. Then it will be too late to protest, and the rather passive Republican voters will think "It's a done deal, gotta live with it. It might look like it fucks us over but we have to trust our representatives to have made a good deal for us in the long run."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
Spiritus Nox posted:I'm really tired of people declaring that the problem is dems abiding by the rules and not that a huge portion of the electorate is actively evil. Isn't the problem that they are playing by the rules when the evil guys are not? This is like the sheep and the wolves trying to co-operate.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 17:48
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:no that is not the problem Ok wise guy how are you going to make evil people nice?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:It isn't rolling over. There's nothing they can do about it. Make a stink so that Republican voters who depend on it notice it is happening?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Gumbel2Gumbel posted:They're hiding their constituent reactions from senators who are too dumb to realize the severity of the beating they're going to take at the polls. Oh boy, they might lose the next election. But not any subsequent elections because of goldfish voter memories. Hope the Democrats enjoy holding the House for 2 short years (but not the Senate or the Presidency.)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
succ posted:Washington Post's Editorial Board: NHS doctors get paid a lot less than US doctors. But on the other hand, their student loans aren't as hellish. And they still get paid great wages in very secure jobs. My mum vaguely knows a two-doctor family and they send their large brood of kids to private school, live in an amazing house, and have all the horses. These guys aren't hurting for money. The patient experience is much the same. Longer waiting for surgery for things that won't kill you in the UK, but on the other hand, you don't have to turn into an instant expert in an arcane insurance system and spend your time on hold in call centers when you really should be resting and getting well.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:rich/middle class people would have to accept lower standards of care in an affordable single-payer system. Not really, if run like most first world countries. You think Canadians would put up with that? There are edge cases where it is lower, such as if you want a transplant ASAP and have infinite cash. But for the experience of most people, single payer is the same experience or better. "Lower standards of care" obviously scares the poo poo out of Americans, but it doesn't work that way. In fact, in UHC countries, the rich can usually skip the line by ponying up stacks of cash. Of course, the Republicans would continually sabotage a US UHC system like the Tories do to the NHS... and since they are much better at it, they might manage to make it a more miserable experience than it has to be.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Rich people can currently pay piles of cash for premium healthcare without paying an additional 6% of their income in taxes. The truly rich don't tend to have health insurance, because they would never need to use it. They just pay cash. The wealthy middle classes (below the 1%) *would* benefit from UHC though.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 16:33
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Upon becoming employable, you will then spend normal business hours and on-call stints servicing a wide spectrum of anxious sick people who may or may not be able and willing to pay you once you actually provide your services. If your field is one where you have to join insurer provider networks to be solvent, your income will be getting continually squeezed by private insurers (who may audit you at any point if your billing patterns are "suspicious" and require you to hire outside counsel) and your diagnoses will often be second-guessed in an effort to control costs and justify claim rehections. You may need to pay for staff (or outsourcing) just to deal with all the billing paperwork. So sell it on that! "Doctors, would you like to fire most of your office staff? Think of the money you could save! Tired of deadbeat patients? We pay, guaranteed by the US government! Simplify your life so you can get down to what you do best - doctoring."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Chimp_On_Stilts posted:Has anyone noted that John McCain's vote on AHCA is going to kill more Americans than the VietCong ever did?* Voters don't really care that someone poor from somewhere else might die. The Democrats need to work on the "Your healthcare will suck because of this bill, even if you are covered by work" angle.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 15:03
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Republicans from the Deep South love condescending speeches from a liberal with a foreign accent. Yeah. A smarmy limey with a smug comedy style. That'll convert them to reason. I do enjoy watching John Oliver, but he's preaching to the converted, definitely.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
Apt phrasing...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
ThisIsWhyTrumpWon posted:Ok lets invite some of the people from UKMT in here and ask them about how good of an idea it is to hand the government control of health care when the country just elected a literal fascist dictator and one of the parties like punishing poor people for fun. If you think Theresa May is a fascist dictator, you should try reading US news sometime, or even worse, Russian. She's a typical Tory. And that sucks, but she's no dictator (wouldn't give her as much as even odds of being in power next year.) Sir Kodiak posted:I've heard the NHS has some problems, but is it really worse than the AHCA/BCRA for the poor? That would be pretty interesting. Bollocks is it worse than the BCRA. That is a healthcare system of "no healthcare for the poor" so how could it be better? British people constantly complain about the NHS, but that's because it needs constant voter interest not to be gradually whittled away by Tory cuts. Don't confuse "complaining about something" with "not liking something" especially where the British are involved. I think a lot of Americans are imagining something grim with seven year waiting lists for breast cancer, and dour, crowded wards. In fact, UK hospitals and doctors' offices look and function pretty similar to US ones. Including waiting times. It's not as if you just swan into a private US doctor's at the very minute of your appointment, is it? You get to wait.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 16:57
|
|
|
The best system for the US would be a "public option" rather than doing an NHS and the government saying to all doctors "You work for us now." That ain't gonna happen. But if all US citizens can rely on the government for a reasonably priced plan which can use its power to negotiate prices, then the whole cost spiral can be arrested without scared citizens having to immediately leave their trusted workplace plans.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
Hulk Krogan posted:This is, in fact, exactly what many Americans imagine socialized medicine is like. It's honestly gotten into urban legend territory where everyone "knows" someone with a family member who died of cancer they could have caught had they not been on the waiting list for a checkup for years. The NHS are ridiculously good at caring for my father's diabetes. He goes to regular checkups and his health has been fantastic since he was diagnosed - he has got a new lease of life. My mum had a worrying symptom a while back that might have been cancer, and the NHS was testing her so fast she couldn't blink (turned out to be nothing) - no waiting lists. My elderly uncle suffered a rare form of cancer and the NHS not only sent him to the top expert in the country, but paid to put him up in a hotel, too, because it is a long journey for him (recovery so far has been perfect.) Remember that all this was completely free (apart from a token fee for prescriptions which none of them paid as they are all over 60.) For most people, the NHS is fantastic. Not everyone though. No big organization is amazing all the way through. You can find horror stories if you are looking, some hospitals are bad - but for the average person, it is top notch.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:It honestly depends on the type of procedure, there are admittedly significant wait-times for certain kinds of specialists. If the procedure is cheap enough Canadians close to the boarder might just decide to pay to get it done. A year is not plausible for a relatively simple procedure though. When people worry about healthcare, they are more worried about things like "Can I get chemo if I get cancer?" than "Can my kid get their ear tubes in 3 days rather than 3 months?" Non-painful, non-urgent procedures are always going to be way down the priority list in a fair healthcare system. It's not fair that a poor deaf kid can't get life-changing cochlear implants because the rich kids' parents can't stand to wait a couple of months for ear tubes to correct minor hearing issues.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 18:10
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:This is a bad way to think about it because how do I judge what my care is likely to be like if it's serious? I judge it by how it is every day. That's my only experience with it. If I, or my kid, faces much longer waiting periods for non-emergency care in a new health care system I'm going to assume I will face a worse situation if I need more serious care in this new health care system and I'm not likely to be all that mollified by statistics. And that's not an unreasonable assumption: that's how we function all the time. If the system is bad at the little stuff, I'm not going to trust it when it comes to the big stuff because if it fucks up the big stuff I'm hosed. In practice, it's fine. British people do not think "Well, I had to wait 3 weeks for my travel vaccinations, so imagine how long I'd have to wait for cancer surgery!" because they all have experience of knowing older folk who actually got cancer and were treated promptly and excellently. This is the kind of fear Americans have, because they have been trained to hate and fear government. And they may not be all that irrational, as Republicans have no scruples about hurting people to "prove" government doesn't work.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 18:40
|
|
|
Invalid Validation posted:And you would think a healthy and smart population would be a good financial investment for corporations. But what the gently caress would I know? They like people being afraid to quit jobs and have their health insurance lapse/change.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 08:32 |
|
|
evilweasel posted:No. This is neither an irrational fear nor an "american fear because they have been trained to hate and fear government" and if you think something so stupid you're going to be in for a very rude awakening. This is that if you create a new health care system people will judge it by their interactions with that program. If those interactions are negative, that will influence their opinion of what future interactions will be like. This can be briefly summarized as "first impressions matter." It is why, for example, Obama fired a cabinet secretary over the botched Obamacare website rollout. It mattered. I think you are yelling at me for agreeing with you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2017 19:29
|
|