Obamacare/Trumpcare Horror Stories

[fan_since79]

3 hours ago, red321 said:

I watched a bit of Ryan's presentation. I'll admit...was pretty snazzy...powerpoint charts and rolled up sleeves.

But damn...that dude has no clue how insurance works.

That's because these plans are not really insurance. They're government subsidized health care plans.

We don't have a choice. We want everyone to be covered but are not willing to let the free market decide, because we know that a lot of people won't be insured (for whatever reasons).

Real insurance would not cover preexisting, expensive conditions such as cancer. Companies would issue a waiver for an affected person applying for a policy. It's a business. If you force them to cover everyone, they have to raise premiums in order to stay in business.

Single-payer Medicare for all, and call it a day. Everyone pays in through payroll taxes, or if you're unemployed/disabled, through a deduction from your benefit check. Any attempt to 'repair' Obamacare will just kick the can down the road, because such plans are doomed to implode at some point.

 

 

[fan_since79]

I see this thread has made it all the way to Washington, D.C.

Obamacare Victims Tell Their Horror Stories at The White House

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/03/13/trump-meets-with-obamacare-victims-n2298136

[gotbeer]

Person #1.  Say you own a car, and for 20 years you have no accidents.

Person #2.  And say another person buys a new top of the line Tesla every year, and totals it every year.

So does that make sense that person #1 and person #2 should pay the same amount of car insurance every year?

The fatal flaw of Obamacare, Republicare, Californiacare, and most of the other plans out there is the SJW whining woe is me.  I am sick, but no way should I pay more than anyone else.  And unless you can decrease health care costs, which wouldn't be that difficult (But you will have the same SJW's saying no you can't do that because it's unfair for companies to spend millions to develop drugs, and if they are wrong we need the rights to sue for billions.  And it's unfair if we can't sue doctors, so that they have to take out such large malpractice insurance that they are working 3+ months of the year just to pay it.), it's forever going to be a Kobayashi Maru.   

[red321]

14 hours ago, gotbeer said:

Person #1.  Say you own a car, and for 20 years you have no accidents.

Person #2.  And say another person buys a new top of the line Tesla every year, and totals it every year.

So does that make sense that person #1 and person #2 should pay the same amount of car insurance every year?

The fatal flaw of Obamacare, Republicare, Californiacare, and most of the other plans out there is the SJW whining woe is me.  I am sick, but no way should I pay more than anyone else.  And unless you can decrease health care costs, which wouldn't be that difficult (But you will have the same SJW's saying no you can't do that because it's unfair for companies to spend millions to develop drugs, and if they are wrong we need the rights to sue for billions.  And it's unfair if we can't sue doctors, so that they have to take out such large malpractice insurance that they are working 3+ months of the year just to pay it.), it's forever going to be a Kobayashi Maru.   

This could be the one of the dumbest healthcare posts I've ever read.

1) people aren't cars

2) access to healthcare is now SJW whining?

3) you have zero understanding of what drives healthcare costs...seriously...malpractice and I'm not even sure what the hell you are trying to say about drug development...though it's impressive you were able to drop in another shot at the SJW bogeyman. Is that the new LOL...you're just too lazy to type liberal? You want to know one of the best ways to help reign in health care costs? Preventative and coordinated care, early treatment, ensuring folks stay on maintenance procedures/drugs.This helps minimize patients falling into a more expensive level of care, keeps them out of the hospital/emergency rooms, etc. You know the best way to ensure people get preventative care? Access to health insurance with good preventative care measures.

 

Google is your friend. I would suggest you read up on some of the links below before...wow...seriously...SJWs and healthcare

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=healthcare+cost+drivers&*

 

 

 

[mtangelsfan]

3 hours ago, red321 said:

This could be the one of the dumbest healthcare posts I've ever read.

1) people aren't cars

2) access to healthcare is now SJW whining?

3) you have zero understanding of what drives healthcare costs...seriously...malpractice and I'm not even sure what the hell you are trying to say about drug development...though it's impressive you were able to drop in another shot at the SJW bogeyman. Is that the new LOL...you're just too lazy to type liberal? You want to know one of the best ways to help reign in health care costs? Preventative and coordinated care, early treatment, ensuring folks stay on maintenance procedures/drugs.This helps minimize patients falling into a more expensive level of care, keeps them out of the hospital/emergency rooms, etc. You know the best way to ensure people get preventative care? Access to health insurance with good preventative care measures.

 

Google is your friend. I would suggest you read up on some of the links below before...wow...seriously...SJWs and healthcare

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS517US517&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=healthcare+cost+drivers&*

 

 

 

I don't think anyone is arguing they shouldn't have access red.  That is a red-herring.

[red321]

your red herring alert has nothing to do with the original posters comments regarding reducing healthcare costs and my response to it

[mtangelsfan]

sheesh, tough crowd.  

[Make Angels Great Again]

23 hours ago, calscuf said:

Oddly, all those people are white.

 

I know this is a joke, but...

 

 

[red321]

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/remember-the-people-americas-healthcare-system-has-already-killed

It struck me as normal, somehow, to watch my girlfriend enter an online sweepstakes that would help decide whether or not she would be able to afford to buy medicine. Only now, watching the Republican establishment dismantle the Affordable Care Act, has this struck me as cruel.

I don't remember the specifics of the promotion, but I remember that it was a monthly trivia contest run by an online cystic fibrosis pharmacy. Answer the questions right, and your name was entered to receive $500 toward your meds. I'd ask Katelin about it now, but she is dead.

The Republican plan to repeal Obamacare and replace it with something that offers more "choice" has inspired thousands of people to confront lawmakers with their stories about how the law—and health insurance more generally—has saved their lives or prevented financial ruin. Their courage should be applauded, their voices amplified.

We should remember, though, that we are hearing from the fortunate ones. The ones who were repeatedly fucked by insurance companies before Obamacare? They are dead.

[mtangelsfan]

I guess those promotions that offer to pay your mortgage for a year are cruel as well.

I find it funny that all of these people couldn't muster enough votes to beat the guy who promised from day one he would abolish the ACA.

[red321]

If winning said promotion is your only chance you have to afford your medicine for the week/month/year because you can't get insurance...then yeah...it's friggen cruel

[mtangelsfan]

What if its the only way I can pay my mortgage?

[Stradling]

6 minutes ago, red321 said:

If winning said promotion is your only chance you have to afford your medicine for the week/month/year because you can't get insurance...then yeah...it's friggen cruel

So medicine was expensive before Trumpcare?  Who knew. 

[red321]

7 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

What if its the only way I can pay my mortgage?

your argument is losing your house = dying?

 

ok...thanks for playing

[red321]

8 minutes ago, Stradling said:

So medicine was expensive before Trumpcare?  Who knew. 

look up to your left...farther...farther...keep going...

[mtangelsfan]

14 minutes ago, red321 said:

your argument is losing your house = dying?

 

ok...thanks for playing

not having a place to live is better than having expensive meds?

its fun to play.

So which is it, do people have a "right" to healthcare?  Housing?  Food?  Clothing?

[red321]

boy...you slayed that strawman...

if having those expensive meds are what you need to live...I'm going to go ahead and say yes, it's more important than paying your mortgage. But then again, you are the one making that ridiculous assertion equating the two so you tell me.

 

[mtangelsfan]

No strawman.  Just curious as to what your feelings on overall welfare are and what people should be able to have.  I have already said that prescription drugs are too expensive and that Trump broke his promise about lowering them.  I have already said that healthcare should be affordable.  I do not believe it should be free.  

I feel the same way about housing.  I am fine with governmental affordable housing simply because I don't believe the market will ever really be free to do that on its own.

my point is I don't think a promotion for free prescription is any more cruel than any other kind of promotion.  I mean at least one person got their meds paid for instead of zero.

[nate]

So I have been away for a while but the Republican replacement for Obamacare may as well not exist, it is hardly anything of any significance, which I guess is what they were going for.

I do have a huge problem with them wanting to get rid of Planned Parenthood and free contraceptives for females.  The last thing we need is for more poverty babies, and in the long run that is a super small cost.  But that is just how Republicans roll.  If it is not white man related they don't give a shit.

The plan does fix the issue with Obamacare which is that it was too expensive of a program since only sick people were signing up.  It fixes it by simply not insuring those people anymore.  Basically reverting everything to pre-Obamacare with some incremental improvements.  I am not totally against that.  Ironically, it sounds like they are having trouble getting full Republican support for the bill because it will basically increase the uninsured by tens of millions, and they are afraid of running with that hanging over them during re-election.

Also, I am against government affordable housing.  I think it just encourages gang and unlawful activities by condensing low incomes into one small overpopulated area.

[mtangelsfan]

I mean more of a local government.  In So Cal many communities only allow new apartment communities if the developer designates so many of the new units as low-income.  That works fairly well I think.

[nate]

4 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

I mean more of a local government.  In So Cal many communities only allow new apartment communities if the developer designates so many of the new units as low-income.  That works fairly well I think.

Yeah, I completely disagree with that.  If it gets too expensive then the people that can't afford it should move.  Otherwise you devalue the product as soon as it is built.

[mtangelsfan]

Ok, I've seen it work though.

Regardless, how do you think drugs and healthcare costs can be lowered?  Or can they be?

[gotbeer]

7 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

I mean more of a local government.  In So Cal many communities only allow new apartment communities if the developer designates so many of the new units as low-income.  That works fairly well I think.

I am against that also.  When it costs millions, just for the land.  And a few million and up to build.  It's just impossible to build.  That's what's happening right now on two big plots near the Crenshaw Expostion line, and the La Brea/Wilshire line.  They have opened the bidding, but no one is bidding since they can't meet the poor folk standard and still make money. 

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

20 minutes ago, mtangelsfan said:

I mean more of a local government.  In So Cal many communities only allow new apartment communities if the developer designates so many of the new units as low-income.  That works fairly well I think.

Plenty of people in that situation are people not committing crimes but when they added more low income units in HB they've seen an uptick in crime in those areas.  I haven't followed it real close but I know this has led to people speaking out against the high density housing options whenever a developer pitches one at a community meeting.  Call me an ahole but if I pay more to live in a nice area where I feel that my family will be safe I don't want to see that change because of low income housing.  HB has changed for other reasons as well but this is why I've seen a lot of people who grew up around here moving or wanting to move to South OC or Irvine in particular.  It's kind of like people leaving CA for other states then years later those states have some of the same issues and I expect South OC to experience that more some day.

[Jay]

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-affordable-housing-20150615-story.html

Developers can be required to include affordable housing, California high court rules

The decision clears the way for Los Angeles and other cities to require developers to sell a percentage of the units they build at below-market rates as a condition of a building permit. Developers also could be given the option of paying into a fund for low-cost housing.

 

http://www.scpr.org/news/2016/03/09/58355/huntington-beach-scraps-latest-plan-for-low-income/

Huntington Beach scraps latest plan for low-income housing

In the case of Huntington Beach, the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) said it needs 410 more units of low-income housing to comply with state law. 

The city found that it was out of compliance with state mandates for low-income housing in June 2015. 

Melinda Coy, a housing specialist from HCD, said at Monday's city council meeting that the number of low-income units needed is due to increased household growth over a certain period of time. The data is gathered in partnership with the Southern California Association of Governments. 

Coy said funding sources from the state could be withheld if the city doesn't comply.

She said for example, if the city wanted to make improvements for parks and applied for funding, it would lessen its competitiveness for certain programs.