Senate health bill targets ‘Cadillac’ plans but can end up hitting middle class hard.

[Patranus]

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2024576&page=2

Well, the discussion that I "ran away from" was over pre-existing conditions. There was an argument based on numbers and an argument based on *feelings*. There is no debating someone who makes arguments based on *feelings* as no matter what numbers you throw at them they will still have the *feelings*.

My point remains. Those with pre-existing conditions should be charged more as they place a higher burden on the system and the risk/reward for the INSURANCE provider is much lower.

I will agree with the argument that a company should not be able to deny insurance but I see nothing wrong with a company charging more for it.

Now, please answer my question. If the government pays for 70% of something where does the remaining 30% come from?

 

[Darwin333]

Now, please answer my question. If the government pays for 70% of something where does the remaining 30% come from?

I think we have pretty much burned through anything we could borrow from SSI, so.... China? You honestly don't think they are going to raise taxes THAT much do you?

Hell, I am almost to the point that I say fuck it lets get everything we can before the wheels come off. We basically have an interest only adjustable rate loans on the majority of the money we owe others and we are still borrowing as fast as we can. We aren't gonna pay it back as it is so why not really go for broke?

 

[Patranus]

I think we have pretty much burned through anything we could borrow from SSI, so.... China? You honestly don't think they are going to raise taxes THAT much do you?

Hell, I am almost to the point that I say fuck it lets get everything we can before the wheels come off. We basically have an interest only adjustable rate loans on the majority of the money we owe others and we are still borrowing as fast as we can. We aren't gonna pay it back as it is so why not really go for broke?

This has nothing to do with borrowing. They borrow to cover the 70%.

Medicare pays out 70 cents on the dollar for the cost of services. The costs to doctors/hospitals/insurance companies make up for the cost by....increasing rates....government is a large factor in the high cost of private medical care.

Try going to a doctor that doesn't take medicare and pay in cash. You will see how much less it actually costs for services.

 

[Zorkorist]

I've said this before, but I have settled large Hospital Bills for 50%, because I am uninsured.

I now wish I had proposed 25%.

 

[brblx]

You do know that in 2007(ish) there was a heat wave in France and thousands of the elderly died due to the overwhelming of the health system. Emergency operators stopped answering phones. Where was President Chirac? On vacation. Go France!

how can you complete and utter tits not even understand the different aspects of healthcare, and what is not healthcare related at all?

since when the fuck is a 911 operator related to the healthcare system? under a universal healthcare system with all the same hospitals and doctors we have now, why would we be any less equipped to deal with an influx of patients?

if you can't be bothered to even examine the argument at hand and understand what it encompasses, keep your dumbass mouth shut.

 

[Zorkorist]

Now,if that woman did not have to pay the state, she might have had a gardner. Her gardner may have seen she was not right, and walked over to his friend the doctor.

His friend the doctor, because there was no such thing as medical mal-praxtice, because he didn't answer to the state, because he wasn't being sue'd left and right, because the government wasn't dictating his pay, his patients; etc.

He walked over and treated her,

 

[BoberFett]

Reality disagrees. Non profit based UHC in the other 1st world countries are half the price. Next?

Ad hominems don't add to your arguments.. they make you, and therefore, them, less credible.

When you have nothing, you attack the person.

Correlation failure! Eject! Eject!

 

[nobodyknows]

So what you are saying is that I am supposed to pay for your problems? That is what it boils down to. If I don't want to pay for other peoples' choices/problems I am now the bad guy?

I guess you would be "healthier" if more money was thrown at your medical problem but the insurance simply would not pay, is that it? If that is the crux of YOUR problem then why didn't you mortgage everything you own to pay? Wasn't worth it to you?? But it is fine and dandy if you can get your government to legislate that I now have to pay, right?

The bottom line is medical care these days is way too expensive and one of the biggest reasons for that is government interference. They are not the solution. Just look at this complete shit bill.....just pushes the cost onto someone else without addressing any of the REAL problems.

You are a typical misguided emotionally thinking liberal. I feel sorry for your situation, I trully do, I just don't feel RESPONSIBLE to pay for it.

Well, you're partially right. What you don't give a crap about is that people end up outside the system through no fault of their own. That is why I think people like your are nothing but low lifes.

Thw whole cocept of insurance is to divide the risk equally among everybody but the cost of health care is so damned expensive these days that everyone is looking for a way kick people out of their program to increase their bottom line. If it's not available to everyone at the same price then it's not insurance. Your ignorant assertion that iyt's all the govement's fault just shows how crude you righties really are. Take your so called sympathy and stuff it.

 

[piasabird]

When was the last time the government managed something and it went down in price? The only way the federal government can save money is to cut other programs. The government is the problem, not the solution.

 

[nobodyknows]

When was the last time the government managed something and it went down in price? The only way the federal government can save money is to cut other programs. The government is the problem, not the solution.

When was the last time big buisness gave the little guy a fair break?

 

[stateofbeasley]

The government is the problem, not the solution.

With this kind of attitude, it's a miracle half the country hasn't fallen into anarchist/communist style chaos.

 

[Darwin333]

When was the last time big buisness gave the little guy a fair break?

I can tell you the last time big government gave big business a real big break...

 

[Zorkorist]

Can we talk about lawyers, and the legal system?

When you wonder about why health care is so expensive, then this is one thing someone can squarely put on lawyers.

 

[Zorkorist]

What you don't hear is how Government wants ro regulate Hospitals... they just wan't to stop the loss, ie. Lawyers.

 

[Zorkorist]

When you factor in Insurance companies, and lawyers, you know you are screwed.

 

[Zorkorist]

The main thing that needs to stop is Government enabling Lawyers, and Insurance Companies.

But, they don't get that.

So, the triumverate of Government, Insurance Companies, and Lawyers, are together.

 

[cubeless]

When was the last time big buisness gave the little guy a fair break?

u r such an idiot... "big business" has given "the little guy" a lifestyle that equals what only royalty had not too many years ago...

sorry that you are so envious, greedy and pampered that you cannot see that it wasn't you who created all this, it was "them"...

 

[Zorkorist]

And believe me, they are devestating.

 

[nobodyknows]

u r such an idiot... "big business" has given "the little guy" a lifestyle that equals what only royalty had not too many years ago...

sorry that you are so envious, greedy and pampered that you cannot see that it wasn't you who created all this, it was "them"...

Then again maybe your just screwed in the head. How dare I get my subserveant ass in an uproar, don't I know my place!!

Fuck you clueless.

 

[shadow9d9]

Well, the discussion that I "ran away from" was over pre-existing conditions. There was an argument based on numbers and an argument based on *feelings*. There is no debating someone who makes arguments based on *feelings* as no matter what numbers you throw at them they will still have the *feelings*.

My point remains. Those with pre-existing conditions should be charged more as they place a higher burden on the system and the risk/reward for the INSURANCE provider is much lower.

I will agree with the argument that a company should not be able to deny insurance but I see nothing wrong with a company charging more for it.

Now, please answer my question. If the government pays for 70% of something where does the remaining 30% come from?

The argument is over evidence. Evidence that they made 1000% profit yet covered less people. Feelings don't enter the equation. Just logic.

You run away whenever someone posts evidence.