Right to free speech? Sure as long as you don't dis obamacare

[GuitarDaddy]

Well under Bush Care my premiums had gone up on average 20% per year for the last several years while coverages got contiually worse, and so far since Obama Care passed my premiums are going up 17% but now with better coverage and no lifetime limits, sounds like a win to me.

And by the way anyone who uses the term Obama Care immediately gives away any credibility that they may have had and exposes themselves as a partisan douche.

 

[woolfe9999]

rudder

Claiming that the government saying that no BS and false statements are acceptable = denying freedom of speech is retarded. Do you have mental health coverage in your plan? Use it.

You beat me to it. This is yet another thread where criticism of speech is willfully misinterpreted as suppression of speech. Sebellius is disagreeing with the insurers, not gagging them. Apparently Rudder thinks that when a private industry who doesn't like being regulated is spewing propaganda in hopes of getting the regulation removed, this administration should just sit back and take it without responding.

Incidentally, the things the insurers are complaining about, that they claim are raising the cost of premiums, are the "non-controversial" parts of the bill, the parts that the republicans agreed with. The controversial aspect, that of mandating that people buy private health insurance, that's the part the republicans disagreed with but the insurance industry likes, and of course, they aren't complaining about THAT part of the bill. What they want is a mandate to buy their insurance, but no regulation. They want to have their cake and eat it too. And now people on the right want to vest their self-serving statements with credibility? Give me a break.

- wolf

 

[EagleKeeper]

Well under Bush Care my premiums had gone up on average 20% per year for the last several years while coverages got contiually worse, and so far since Obama Care passed my premiums are going up 17% but now with better coverage and no lifetime limits, sounds like a win to me.

And by the way anyone who uses the term Obama Care immediately gives away any credibility that they may have had and exposes themselves as a partisan douche.

Do you have a Cadillac plan?
How much of the increases are your employer covering?

 

[rudder]

You beat me to it. This is yet another thread where criticism of speech is willfully misinterpreted as suppression of speech. Sebellius is disagreeing with the insurers, not gagging them. Apparently Rudder thinks that when a private industry who doesn't like being regulated is spewing propaganda in hopes of getting the regulation removed, this administration should just sit back and take it without responding.

- wolf

How is it propaganda when her department came to the same conclusion? The insurance companies are simply justifying the increases to their customers and to state regulators which approve these increases.

Really you don't see her overstepping her bounds one bit by threatening to not allow some companies to sell on the exchange in 2014? I will say it one last time.. the insurance companies are justifying their rate increases at a rate that is very close to what the DHHS has stated these mandates would cost. Now they are being threatened because they are saying some of these increases are caused by obamacare.

read it yourself:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/09/20100909a.html

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

Well under Bush Care my premiums had gone up on average 20% per year for the last several years while coverages got contiually worse, and so far since Obama Care passed my premiums are going up 17% but now with better coverage and no lifetime limits, sounds like a win to me.

And by the way anyone who uses the term Obama Care immediately gives away any credibility that they may have had and exposes themselves as a partisan douche.

but your cable company analogy was pure win!

 

[woolfe9999]

How is it propaganda when her department came to the same conclusion? The insurance companies are simply justifying the increases to their customers and to state regulators which approve these increases.

Really you don't see her overstepping her bounds one bit by threatening to not allow some companies to sell on the exchange in 2014? I will say it one last time.. the insurance companies are justifying their rate increases at a rate that is very close to what the DHHS has stated these mandates would cost. Now they are being threatened because they are saying some of these increases are caused by obamacare.

read it yourself:

http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2010pres/09/20100909a.html

Actually the "threat" of not allowing participation on the exchange is pegged to unjustified rate increases, not the criticism of the health law. It says so right there in your link. She is accusing them of unjustifiably raising their rates, and using the new law as a false excuse. The law actually empowers the HHS to deny participation in the exchange to companies which unjustifiably raise their rates. It's part of how the law is supposed to keep rates down. Criticizing the health law isn't the issue. Raising your rates based on false justifications is, because according to the law, you can only raise your rates when you have justification, i.e. cost increases. This is just how the health law works. It's also how insurance companies have been regulated on the state level for decades. It's also how utilities companies like PG&E are regulated. This isn't a speech issue. She isn't trying to prevent speech. She is trying to keep our rates down by use of regulatory power. If you want to be critical of that, go ahead, but don't mislabel this as a speech issue.

Your reading comprehension skills need improvement.

- wolf

 

[CPA]

fair enough, but then you should ALSO be complaining about Social Security and Medicare. The next generation of Americans WILL be paying for your medical needs as well as the needs of your immediate family.

Either your point of view should hold throughout, or its not a correct opinion.

Believe me, I have. I hate that I am forced into Social Security. It should be privatized or voluntary program, not some forced, low-interest, slush fund for Congress.

 

[BoberFett]

Maybe it was "Hope OR Change" and we were supposed to pick one?

 

[feralkid]

What about the taxes being imposed on the employer/employee of the Cadillac plans.

And the insurance companies are also being hit with fees.

Both are mandated by Obama Care and independant of normal rate increases

And both are supported by a majority of Americans.

 

[soulcougher73]

i still dont understand why people are against "obamacare"? Extending Medical Services to millions should be a positive thing? I dont mind paying a little bit extra if it helps the populace as a whole

This is my thinking. But im more for a true single payer UHC. Not this obamanation known as Obamacare.

 

[soulcougher73]

Yeh people like you who don't mind paying a bit extra have probably filed for earned income credit on their tax returns... and have no desire to go spend 10+ years to become a doctor only to earn a pittance because that is all the government can pay.

First off I don't want this thread to be about the merits of obamacare. Yes providing health care to millions should be a positive thing. Nothing good will come of a more bloated government program that will end up consuming a majority of the federal budget. The facts are out there as are the discussions in other threads about that.

This is about the federal government abusing is powers and about obama granting some of these secretaries of various departments more power than they need.

The insurance companies average increases are in line with what the DHHS initially said anyway.

I want doctors who want to treat and help people, not doctors who are in it for the money.

 

[soulcougher73]

Because it's not my role to take care of anyone but me and my immediate family. If more Americans believed and acted as if it were their responsibility to care for themselves, not just by having health insurance, but being active, eating better, taking maintenance precautions, you wouldn't have so many people needing extended medical services.

preemptive response to moonie: yes, I hate myself

That is because you are selfish and only think about yourself and your family. A good society should care about all the people in it. And yes life is not fair to all of us and some will struggle and some will prosper. A society with everyone out for themselves is no society i want to live in.

 

[soulcougher73]

You're an ignorant fool. Government imposes all sorts of standards on products offered to the public by private companies. Cars must have a third, central tail-light, seat belts, and driver-side airbags. Eggs must not be contaminated with Salmonella. Baby strollers must not be constructed of highly combustible materials. And on and on and on.

Complying with government-imposed standards can cause the price of products to increase. But - hopefully - the benefits accrued outweigh the extra costs. In the case of lifetime caps, there are numerous examples where families are financially ruined because the cost of treating a serious disease exceeds the lifetime cap imposed by the policy.

Think that means the insured have made a poor choice of insurance? Well, guess what? Most group policies impose such limits. And chances are that if you're covered by employer-provided insurance, you're subject to such caps, too. Who don't all you right-wing extremists on this forum who crow about "personal responsibility" and who are covered by capped group polices tell us how you've taken "personal responsibility" and obtained a supplemental policy that will cover any costs that exceeds the cap. Come us, flood us with all of your examples of personal responsibility.

You and you family are just a serious illness away from bankruptcy, even if you THINK you have good insurance. So, the change to the no-caps rule will prevent such tragedies. I think it will be a definite change for the better.

This. Well said.

 

[BoberFett]

I want doctors who want to treat and help people, not doctors who are in it for the money.

When corporations want employees to work for less money, people call them greedy. Why do you get a pass?

Why would anybody bust their ass to become a doctor when cheap assholes like you tell them they should do it for the same money they could make doing any number of other, easier jobs?

 

[BoberFett]

That is because you are selfish and only think about yourself and your family. A good society should care about all the people in it. And yes life is not fair to all of us and some will struggle and some will prosper. A society with everyone out for themselves is no society i want to live in.

If everyone thought more about themselves and their families and less about what other people are doing, everyone would be better off. Stop being such a jealous selfish ass. "Waaaaah, some people have more than I do, waaaaaah!"

 

[TheWiseOne]

...Secondly, I was accepted into Med School, but didnt follow through because I wanted to make money, lots of it. Going into the profession with the intent of making money is one of the things wrong with our medical system. I did not want to contribute to that. So now I make tons of money in another industry

Abuse of power is all relative. Let the government abuse some power to do good for the majoirty.

A lot of people enter the medical profession merely for the $ and social status which follows meanwhile they are able to provide proper patient care. Not every Doctor is a mother Teresa knock off.

If you had no intentions of entering the profession why did you apply to med school?

Also I think anyone entering any profession (of respect) just for the money with no regard for their enjoyment while performing the jobs everyday acts is one of the major things wrong with our work system.

 

[dainthomas]

Because it's not my role to take care of anyone but me and my immediate family. If more Americans believed and acted as if it were their responsibility to care for themselves, not just by having health insurance, but being active, eating better, taking maintenance precautions, you wouldn't have so many people needing extended medical services.

preemptive response to moonie: yes, I hate myself

I probably don't even need to ask, but I assume you will be denying all Medicare and SS benefits when you're eligible.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I want doctors who want to treat and help people, not doctors who are in it for the money.

You don't want the cow, but you want the milk for free. Just what do you think people coming out of medical school should make after many years of an expensive education coupled with the loss of income during those years?

Let's have a dollar figure.

 

[BoberFett]

I probably don't even need to ask, but I assume you will be denying all Medicare and SS benefits when you're eligible.

Why would he deny them? He pays for them, doesn't he? If people were allowed to stop paying into SS I'm sure they'd be more than happy to lose the "benefit."

 

[routan]

A lot of people enter the medical profession merely for the $ and social status which follows meanwhile they are able to provide proper patient care. Not every Doctor is a mother Teresa knock off.

If you had no intentions of entering the profession why did you apply to med school?

Also I think anyone entering any profession (of respect) just for the money with no regard for their enjoyment while performing the jobs everyday acts is one of the major things wrong with our work system.

I just believe it to be disingenuous when friends would take an oath, and then gloat about their brand new BMW. As to why I applied... I can change my mind about something, right? I mean I applied to different schools for undergrad. Just because I chose to go to one or the other doesnt really go towards my intent?

 

[routan]

Believe me, I have. I hate that I am forced into Social Security. It should be privatized or voluntary program, not some forced, low-interest, slush fund for Congress.

Fair enough. I hate that 40% of work year goes towards the government. But arguing about the basic system of American government will never have a conclusion

 

[woolfe9999]

You don't want the cow, but you want the milk for free. Just what do you think people coming out of medical school should make after many years of an expensive education coupled with the loss of income during those years?

Let's have a dollar figure.

Well, doctors are the highest paid profession in the country by a longshot. I dunno, it seems like they could make somewhat less and still be quite wealthy. But asking for a single figure is problematic because it varies too much by specialty. Lookee here:

http://www.allied-physicians.com/salary_surveys/physician-salaries.htm

- wolf

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

i still dont understand why people are against "obamacare"? Extending Medical Services to millions should be a positive thing? I dont mind paying a little bit extra if it helps the populace as a whole

The problem is this doesn't address the issue of health care. It's created as a top down solution by people who haven't a clue about what health care is.

Further, there are a number of people who use the 5K tax shelter for unreimbursed medical costs. No one socks away that kind of money unless they need to use it. Whatever is left over is seized entirely by the government.

That's being done away with. Working people who have the greatest medical need are being punished as a result. That sound good to you?

We hear about bankruptcies and how awful that is, while making it harder for those who have to use services and who work to do so not file.

It's as if every political consideration possible was jumbled into one package, with facilitating the patient/provider relationship as being inconsequential, although it is the key to any long term solution.

Do it right, or let someone who has an idea step in and formulate a program. Neither was done.

 

[hellotyler]

Should have been single payer, this is obviously just a payout to the insurance companies.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Well, doctors are the highest paid profession in the country by a longshot. I dunno, it seems like they could make somewhat less and still be quite wealthy. But asking for a single figure is problematic because it varies too much by specialty. Lookee here:

http://www.allied-physicians.com/salary_surveys/physician-salaries.htm

- wolf

Add up all the years needed to specialize then subtract income lost due to not earning pay while in school. Then there are educational loans etc. Then add in the intangibles such as if you screw up it's not like you can add cheese to the burger. It's a qualitatively different level of responsibility than someone who just works with mere money.

I'm still interested in how much he thinks people ought to be paid.

This reminds me of people discussing educator salaries. "They should be doing it for the love of teaching" which means "I don't think they should get paid what they do".