The (un)Affordable Health Care Act & Debt Ceiling Controversies

[saevel25]

Not really. When they first showed up, they did have a great message. Its just they did a good job tempering their extremist views till they got in office, then they unleashed hell.  Though I say this, I don't think this would have been that bad if the tea party didn't find such a charismatic leader in Cruz. He really did a great job in rallying the whole tea party and focusing their influence.

[Mr. Desmond]

Yes, really. In July 2011, our debt was downgraded because of the tea party and the inability to come to an agreement when the Country was about to pass some decent legislation to reform entitlements And they do it again a week ago - the rest of the world now has lost confidence in our ability to work together And the tea party's disapproval rating went skyrocketing. The idiot Cruise only has influence over the tea party, and no one else.

[newtogolf]

You guys seem to be forgetting something. Bill Maher is a professional comedian. Whether or not he's a left wing nut job is largely irrelevant ... He can be really funny.

He was a professional comedian, now he's just a hand puppet for the liberal agenda.  Professional comedians leverage humor from both sides, like Leno.  Maher's material is 100% at the expense of the GOP.

[newtogolf]

Please do not bring your own prejudices into a man's intellectual ability to watch television shows and the ability to separate the wheat from the chaff.

Your comments and source of references indicates how you separate the wheat from the chaff.  Now I see why you like Brandel,  you claim to be unbiased but continue to slam the GOP and make Obama look like the victim.

[Golfingdad]

He was a professional comedian, now he's just a hand puppet for the liberal agenda.  Professional comedians leverage humor from both sides, like Leno.  Maher's material is 100% at the expense of the GOP.

Well I haven't had hbo for awhile now, and thus have not seen him, so if he's stopped being funny, then, well ... I was unaware. ;)

[sacm3bill]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

You guys seem to be forgetting something. Bill Maher is a professional comedian. Whether or not he's a left wing nut job is largely irrelevant ... He can be really funny.

He was a professional comedian, now he's just a hand puppet for the liberal agenda.  Professional comedians leverage humor from both sides, like Leno.  Maher's material is 100% at the expense of the GOP.

Getting 100% of his material at the expense of the GOP has nothing to do with the fact that he's simply not funny, IMO.

[newtogolf]

Well I haven't had hbo for awhile now, and thus have not seen him, so if he's stopped being funny, then, well ... I was unaware. ;)

I didn't say he stopped being funny, I just don't find him funny because his liberal bias is very evident.  if you get a good laugh from attacks on republicans and those that question Obama's ability to run the country you'd probably think he's funny.  His audience and Desmond seem to like him.

George Carlin was pretty liberal but he was intelligently funny.  He made you think about things and called things into question in a way that wasn't offensive if you didn't agree, Maher has none of those skills.  His humor I guess centers around calling people teabaggers.

[Ernest Jones]

FWIW, calling someone a teabagger is always funny and it was funny LONG before the advent of the Tea Party.

[Mr. Desmond]

I know you fellows don't watch Bill Maher but his guests typically include at least two conservatives on his panel. He does allow them to talk. And there is serious conversation on both sides. And he thinks Obama is too conservative. And the Conservatives do laugh at his jokes. If you've ever seen the new rules, you might laugh too.

[dsc123]

This seems like a silly side show, don't you think?

[mmoan2]

Remember, this is a GOP Plan based on Private Insurance - it was a GOP response to the one-payer Clinton plan of 1993.

The State GOP version of the ACA is operating in Massachusetts. Costs have increased under the plan but they are working to changing parts of the plan for cost savings. Rare is the plan - a plan so BIG - that it works well right out of the gates. This one has flaws that need fixing. There are lots of smart people in the HealthCare industry who have suggestions to fix it. I suggest both parties listen and fix.

I think history will find that the ACA is unworkable. When comprehensive health care reform finally achieves what it needs to do - universal health care with far cheaper costs - it will be vastly different than the ACA. A state version is far different than a national version, also. As for the fact that it is a GOP concept, that is true, but frankly irrelevant.

[newtogolf]

I know you fellows don't watch Bill Maher but his guests typically include at least two conservatives on his panel.

He does allow them to talk. And there is serious conversation on both sides. And he thinks Obama is too conservative.

And the Conservatives do laugh at his jokes. If you've ever seen the new rules, you might laugh too.

Guilty as charged, I haven't seen his show in quite some time.  I do get to see his YouTube highlights which usually focus on ripping the GOP, continuing to blame GW for Obama's inability to run this country, his position that all guns should be banned, etc.  Basically every clip I've seen he's spreading his propaganda not trying to be funny.  Basically he's a full-time entertainer for the Democrats

In the spirit of having an open mind I'll give him a chance and see if the entire show is any different than the clips I've seen or what I remember.

[saevel25]

I know you fellows don't watch Bill Maher but his guests typically include at least two conservatives on his panel.

He does allow them to talk. And there is serious conversation on both sides. And he thinks Obama is too conservative.

And the Conservatives do laugh at his jokes. If you've ever seen the new rules, you might laugh too.

Pretty much, and its really really sad that he thinks Obama is too conservative. He must have shit a brick when Clinton was in office.

[newtogolf]

I didn't want to get into this discussion but I'll make these points and leave it at that.  The ACA is not feasible as it's written today.

Financially it's flawed, the penalty is far below the cost of the health care plans.  Those who don't wish to spend money on health care will opt for the penalty as it costs them less.  So the biggest problem (uninsured people) isn't being addressed as after ACA we will still have uninsured.

Execution wise Obama has done nothing to ramp up the health care system to handle up to twice as many patients.  Money should have been dedicated to the building of hospitals, incentives for college students to become doctors, grants for hospitals to increase the number of MRI, X-Ray and other key equipment.  Adding new participants should have been ramped up so that the system isn't overwhelmed.

I already wait an hour to see my doctor, I can only imagine what it will be like when he doubles his patients or even worse what happens when all these doctors decided they aren't accepting new patients?

I like that President Obama forced insurance companies to take on people with pre-existing conditions - that is awesome.  I also like that he increased the age dependents could be covered by their parents (26) - also awesome.

He should have stopped there, considered the needs of everyone and built a plan that phased in and addressed everything.  Instead he rammed a plan down everyone's throat that people are all now opting out of (like congress, big unions, etc) because it's not the solution we need.

[mdl]

Shopping around for health care wont lower costs to much, because of how insurance companies work. What lowers costs is if you get rid of health care. Look at cosmetic surgery. Compared to other surgeries, these procedures are one of the least expensive out there (just talking about those who go under the knife). Why, because it isn't covered by health insurance plans, which means people have to go around and shop for doctors. This pits doctors versus doctor for the right to perform the procedure. That lowers the costs.

This is a common canard trumpeted in conservative circles.  It's intuitively appealing, but in fact makes no sense.  Very few medical services are like cosmetic surgery.  If I want a boob job, I can ask around my other trophy wife friends whether they like their surgeons, I can go on Yelp or whatever to see reviews, I can see before and after pics, and I can compare prices.  I can take the time to do all those things because it doesn't matter AT ALL when I get my boob job and I know everything I need to know to decide whether to get a boob job or not.

Real health care is almost never like that.  Emergency medicine is obvious.  You cant' comparison shop while bleeding out.

But even non-ER medicine isn't anything like that.  You have some issue, you go to the doctor he or she tells you what is wrong with you and and what needs to be done about it.  You have no way of assessing whether the doctor's right, you don't have an MD.  If the remedy is some drug, then there's a single price for that drug, unless it's generic in which case it's cheap regardless.  If the remedy is more extensive care, that probably means you have a pretty serious problem.  You don't have the luxury of taking 2 weeks to comparison shop like you're buying a car or a boob job.

Free market magic only works in markets where everyone has complete information and equal power.  A doctor-patient relationship isn't like that, and never could be.  This is where free market preferences turn from reasonable views into fantasy/ideology.

That's not to say that radically increased transparency in the medical industry isn't something I'd enthusiastically support.  I agree there are some areas where it could make a big difference, and it could improve things at the margin across the board.  But thinking that HSAs and transparent pricing would solve our problem is conservative fantastical thinking.  That just means rationing care by letting an ever higher percentage of people not be able to afford to ever have a serious medical expense once in their lives, rather than through very imperfect and improvable regulation like the status quo plus Obamacare.

[saevel25]

This is a common canard trumpeted in conservative circles.  It's intuitively appealing, but in fact makes no sense.  Very few medical services are like cosmetic surgery.  If I want a boob job, I can ask around my other trophy wife friends whether they like their surgeons, I can go on Yelp or whatever to see reviews, I can see before and after pics, and I can compare prices.  I can take the time to do all those things because it doesn't matter AT ALL when I get my boob job and I know everything I need to know to decide whether to get a boob job or not.

Real health care is almost never like that.  Emergency medicine is obvious.  You cant' comparison shop while bleeding out.

But even non-ER medicine isn't anything like that.  You have some issue, you go to the doctor he or she tells you what is wrong with you and and what needs to be done about it.  You have no way of assessing whether the doctor's right, you don't have an MD.  If the remedy is some drug, then there's a single price for that drug, unless it's generic in which case it's cheap regardless.  If the remedy is more extensive care, that probably means you have a pretty serious problem.  You don't have the luxury of taking 2 weeks to comparison shop like you're buying a car or a boob job.

Free market magic only works in markets where everyone has complete information and equal power.  A doctor-patient relationship isn't like that, and never could be.  This is where free market preferences turn from reasonable views into fantasy/ideology.

That's not to say that radically increased transparency in the medical industry isn't something I'd enthusiastically support.  I agree there are some areas where it could make a big difference, and it could improve things at the margin across the board.  But thinking that HSAs and transparent pricing would solve our problem is conservative fantastical thinking.  That just means rationing care by letting an ever higher percentage of people not be able to afford to ever have a serious medical expense once in their lives, rather than through very imperfect and improvable regulation like the status quo plus Obamacare.

Well you can always get a 2nd opinion can't you? That has been done for years by many people.

Well HSA's are usually high deductible health plans. Were you pay your deductible from a savings account. I like HSA's because it forces you to SAVE money for times when you NEED it. I think that is important for Americans who tend to like to SPEND SPEND SPEND, and grow their own debt. If your 20 years old, and don't get sick for 10 years, lets say you make 50,000 a year, you can easily save 10% of your income a year. Believe me, I am in that range, and I live an easy life style and I save nearly 15-20% of my own money for retirement. But that would be 50,000 dollars by the time your 30 years old, not including interest. I think many people would take that. For HSA's, that means usually $2,000 per year in deductibles, that would last them 6.25 years if they don't continue to save.

The problem is the American mentality. They are use to, GIVE ME GIVE ME GIVE ME, instead of actually doing the logical thing and saving more than they spend. The fact that all these businesses and governments have said, "Oh, you'll be able to retire, don't worry about, we got you". It has made Americans complacent. To truly save the health care system, you need to attack it from both sides. I can agree to some sort of government involvement in extreme cases, but American's need to learn to save for their own health. I mean come on, its your own body. I understand you just can't change it now, you need a buffer for it. You really need a generation of people, my generation. Those who are healthy, get them to start saving. Then every future generation needs to start saving. This will bring in one of the most powerful forces in economics, Compound Interest. In doing so, we can seriously attack this health care issue. That an I hope future generations actually care about their health, get the Obesity under wraps.

[Golfingdad]

This is a common canard trumpeted in conservative circles.  It's intuitively appealing, but in fact makes no sense.  Very few medical services are like cosmetic surgery.  If I want a boob job, I can ask around my other trophy wife friends whether they like their surgeons, I can go on Yelp or whatever to see reviews, I can see before and after pics, and I can compare prices.  I can take the time to do all those things because it doesn't matter AT ALL when I get my boob job and I know everything I need to know to decide whether to get a boob job or not. Real health care is almost never like that.  Emergency medicine is obvious.  You cant' comparison shop while bleeding out. But even non-ER medicine isn't anything like that.  You have some issue, you go to the doctor he or she tells you what is wrong with you and and what needs to be done about it.  You have no way of assessing whether the doctor's right, you don't have an MD.  If the remedy is some drug, then there's a single price for that drug, unless it's generic in which case it's cheap regardless.  If the remedy is more extensive care, that probably means you have a pretty serious problem.  You don't have the luxury of taking 2 weeks to comparison shop like you're buying a car or a boob job. Free market magic only works in markets where everyone has complete information and equal power.  A doctor-patient relationship isn't like that, and never could be.  This is where free market preferences turn from reasonable views into fantasy/ideology. That's not to say that radically increased transparency in the medical industry isn't something I'd enthusiastically support.  I agree there are some areas where it could make a big difference, and it could improve things at the margin across the board.  But thinking that HSAs and transparent pricing would solve our problem is conservative fantastical thinking.  That just means rationing care by letting an ever higher percentage of people not be able to afford to ever have a serious medical expense once in their lives, rather than through very imperfect and improvable regulation like the status quo plus Obamacare.

Matt, can I make a suggestion? Don't get a boob job! You are fine just with what god gave you ... Be proud! ;)

[k-troop]

Matt, can I make a suggestion? Don't get a boob job! You are fine just with what god gave you ... Be proud! ;)

I thought boob job was a euphemism for Bill Maher's show. :-)