It seem like one of Ron Paul's staffers wished Obama-care would have kicked in. He didn't have insurance because no Insurance company would cover him because of a preexisting condition, something that will be prohibited in 2014.
Also the gloom and doom the Obstructionists predicted to the reduction of payments under Medicare Advantage are failing to materialize as well. Contrary to a lot of naysayers, there are a lot of good elements of the ACA that WILL BENEFIT AMERICANS
Europe is so good. Googel "cancer survivor rates international" and read the first 5 hits.
Canada, which used to be pretty much only government, now has private insurance.
In England their is a phrase, "going private," for people who what medical care that they can't get for the government.
England and Canada have two classes of medical care: 1) people who can afford private for stuff not covered by national health and; 2) People who rely on the government, take what they are offered and eat shit.
If you doubt that, how come they have this phrase in England "Go private" in reference to medical care. Languages reflect culture. They don't need 20 words for snow, but the needed a phrase for "going private."
Also the gloom and doom the Obstructionists predicted to the reduction of payments under Medicare Advantage are failing to materialize as well. Contrary to a lot of naysayers, there are a lot of good elements of the ACA that WILL BENEFIT AMERICANS
You are comparing apples to oranges. Obamacare, whatever its plusses and minuses, is not the same as European or English health care. Not even close. Pretending it is just isn't a credible argument.
It is true that the English and the Obama model are not identical, but for decades all I have heard is "Europe has......" Why can't we be more like ......
In fact, the big complaint on the left is that they could not get single payer, Obama care being a comprimise.
It is intellectually dishonest to try to divorce once self from the model that motivates the entire left side of the debate.
The English system (and others) don't work, but when ever I mention them to lib friends, I always get, "No one ever suggested we do anything like......"
DNCPhil,
You are simply incorrect when you state the European Models don't work. I've attached a report that displays an overwhelming patient satisfaction rate with their health care systems. In particular, Denmark has a 91% patient satisfaction rate.
You make the argument as to why there are private insurance options in countries like England, Canada, Australia, its because their citizens have choice and since no system is perfect, private companies will work to fill a need. There is nothing wrong with that. By your argument, Fedex or UPS would not ever be necessary because the USPS is in existence. It's always difficult to build any system that can address every shortcoming in every instance.
You also have argued that only a few have problems with our healthcare system and that overwhelming change wasn't necessary. Again you are incorrect. Nixon tried to establish some type on universal/single payer system and was rebuffed. As a result, and employer based system was created resulting in a system that has obvious holes where large swaths of people are uninsured. Yes, individuals can buy insurance, but cannot take advantage of group pricing that some companies can take advantage of. We have an entire H/C system where the individual has no control over the type of care that they can receive or will be covered because that decision is largely left to employers and those interested in only the bottom line.
You also argue that if Obamacare is fully enacted that we will have 2 types of H/C classes. Those that can afford private care, which you assume will be superior, and everyone else. I argue that we have that very same system today. If you are in a good paying job with benefits, you can get care. If you work at McDonalds or Walmart, you wont have H/C resulting in increased usage of emergency room services for routine care. Increased cost because manageable illnesses become chronic and then the cost is passed on to everyone in higher costs.
Not to mention the inefficiencies in the H/C system where H/C records are not easily shared and the same tests are repeated over and over again. Where Insurance companies hire doctors on staff so they can find pre-existing conditions so that coverage can be denied or payment delayed.
What we currently have is broke and the ACA was the first step trying to fix our system
In fact, the big complaint on the left is that they could not get single payer, Obama care being a comprimise.
It is intellectually dishonest to try to divorce once self from the model that motivates the entire left side of the debate.
The English system (and others) don't work, but when ever I mention them to lib friends, I always get, "No one ever suggested we do anything like......"
Here, people with a job who can afford to have insurance have it even though they have to pay escalating prices and those who don't have insurance cannot even eat shit, they just curl up and die.
FYI, UK and Europe always had private insurance. Sure, given choice, you would have us convinced that only US has doctors and medicine in the whole world.
Keep drinking the Kool-Aid, the more you drink, the better it tastes.
I know Europe always had private insurance, but it has become a necessity now. In Canada they had it, but its use has increased greatly. If the system is so good, why do they need it.
MORE IMPORTANTLY, what happens to someone in Canada or England who doesn't have insurance and needs treatment not covered?
If an Englishman doesn't have private insurance, they get to die.
Also you say, "Sure, given choice, you would have us convinced that only US has doctors and medicine in the whole world. Keep drinking the Kool-Aid"
I never said only the US has doctors. I said that cancer patients live longer, much longer. Look up macular degerenartion treatment or arthritis in G.B. I never said only we have doctors and medicine. But we do get better treatment for those and other.
But if you make up what I say, it is so easy to prove it wrong.
Gosh, you want to take my house to pay for a common cold. (How is that for making up what you didnt say?)
...his former campaign manager; only 49 years old. He could have gotten insurance, but the cost would have been prohibitive, due to his pre-existing condition. Indeed, he would have been able to obtain affordable insurance under Obama's plan.
He left his family holding the bag for a $400,000. medical bill. Now they are trying to pay it off via a website. How would unknown Joe Sixpack's family pay off such a debt?
I don't see Ron Paul and the Seven Dwarves rushing to help Snyder's family.
-- Modified on 9/15/2011 7:55:05 PM
"Obama-Care....Call us when you're shovel ready".
Anyone that believes they can get 'low cost, affordable health insurance' with ObamaCare is living in a fantasy world. No way can someone purchase a health plan with a pre-existing condition, cheaper than a plan for someone in good health. Also, no way can ObamaCare cut $500 million from Medicare, and give Medicare recipients the same care as previous, without raising Medicare premiums. My Medicare monthly premiums sure as fuck went up.
My doctor said if ObamaCare reduces his reimbursements for Medicare patients, I should start looking for a new doctor. So much for, "If you want, you can keep your current doctor". How many times did BHO say that in a speech?
that there needs to be further reform. No surprise, the problem is acute and complex. So when we find out what's wrong with the current plan, Congress can go back and fix it. That's what was done with Social Security and Medicare. But it's a lot easier to go back and fix something when a start has been made, so I'm glad Obama at least tried.
Before the election in '08, by every poll, the substantial majority of people were happy with their care, even though the realized that a small number had problems.
THe proof that most people liked it is that every Dem who tried to sell Obama care said 1,000 time, "If you like your care....., if you like your care....., if you like your care......"
They knew that if they told every it would affect them they would go down in more flames than Dresden.
This means that most people liked it, and it was only a problem for some. At the time Obama estimated that 30 million did not have insurance. Using that number, which included many who were covered by other means, that means 10% did not have insurance.
That is not an acute problem that requires "fundamentally changing" the system. It is a minor problem that requires focuse adjustment.
If 90% ACCORDING TO OBAMA were covered, why do something that massive?
Easy answer.
President Obama wanted his place in history. The bill kept getting watered down throughout the process yet he didn't care. He just wanted something passed so he could point to it and say, "Look at what I did . . . . "
Here is the link I forgot to include
In the US all we hear is how bad it is. Thus, in surveys people say the system is bad, even though the vast majority like their health care.
I have never seen exposes about the French systen when I've been in France, or other Eupropean countries when I was there.
perception is a big thing.
BOTTOM LINE. The vast majority were happy. That is why he said 1,000 times, like a mantra, "If you like our doctor.....
Now for the story. 15 years ago, before heath care was the big issue it is now, I was in a samll town in Italy. I was having dinner and started talking to the 2 couple next to me. They were American architects living in France for 2 years, while they renovated hospitals. I asked why the French hired a NY firm.
They explained that France had not updated hospitals for decades and were so far behind, they didn't have the know-how, so they hired US firms.
Now a person going to a hospital in Lyon or Dijon would not know his hospital is 20 years out of date, because he has never seen a new one. He just hears stories about how bad health care is in the US, and he is happy with what he gets.
He has had to grant over 1,000 exemptions. It is very unpopular as is, and if he hadn't granted exemptions, it would be the most unpopular bill ever passed.
And the FINAL STRAW is the vast majority of groups that asked for exemptions from his greatest achievement to date are his allies, Service Union Employees, etc, who want no part of the damn thing, but are happy to dump it on you.
Even Reid wanted an exemption for his entire state after he helped write the bill.
If it is so good, don't let your friends out.
Also the gloom and doom the Obstructionists predicted to the reduction of payments under Medicare Advantage are failing to materialize as well. Contrary to a lot of naysayers, there are a lot of good elements of the ACA that WILL BENEFIT AMERICANS