So whatever happend to the national healthcare law they were trying to pass??

[Capvin]

My question is, will it be FREE like in some other countries..or what?
Right now its mandatory to have health ins. in my state. But the insurance rates in my state are crazy expensive..
So how will this law help me??

Redhen, you started this mess and now you have to up and ask a logical and sensible question that really does not currently have an answer. It is true that the insurance rates in MA are very high and that is because when the law was passed in MA in 2006 it had some very good ideas and intentions, including the individual mandate, but it failed miserably to have any cost controls built into it. The MA legislature is trying to solve that problem as we speak. Also the MA law has allowed a lot of people to scam the system by allowing them to get insurance right before they know they will need an expensive medical procedure. They pay about $1600 for a policy, get a $10,000 procedure and then immediately cancel the policy. They are trying to plug some of the loop holes. The short answer to your question is that while Obama Care has some good features that are not in the MA law, they are basically similar, but the Obama Care took a lesson from the MA law and does contain quite a bit of cost containment measures. Will it help you in the near future, NO, but I do believe that MA will get a handle on the costs and I think you will see a decrease in premiums soon. Reality is that both the MA law and Obama Care have some serious flaws but it is hard to argue that we do not need health reform and I think that MA has led the way.

 

[lucky123]

I had to cancel my health care four years ago when it went from 237.00 a month to 527.00 a month, even though I had never used it. I had knee surgery a few months later and had to pay cash to the doctor and the hospital before the surgery . I could have had the hospital charge it at high interest rates and declined. I would love to have health care, but can't afford it, and I don't want the government in my life anymore than possible. Here's an idea, how about the states and the people who live in them deciding for themselfs what laws they want? How about the goverment staying out of peoples lives? Its hard to believe there are people who think the government should dictate every part of ones lives.I can also tell you the people I know that don't have health care don't see doctors unless its completley unavoidable, so, to say people without health care use it the same way is not true. I can also tell you that people without heath care still have to pay hospital bills or loose everything they have, unlike illegals and others who have caused the issue. I don't think you will hear these same people claiming its a good thing talk about the price illegals cost everyone of us on health care alone.

 

[chickened]

Most people file an individual income tax to pay to the government so in reality it is about my tax dollars. Corporate tax is different.

What you are describing as a plan is subsidizing an industry by another name and see how popular those are nowadays.

Unfortunately, more people than I'd like are cool with refusing people, kids included, care. I mean...when it isn't them in that boat. That said, the way I understand it, people who opted out would still have the same private coverage, or they decided (at that point, it would be a decision) that they did not need health care, and the two groups would be treated the same as they are now.

I would let you pay my healthcare and it would be helping society one person at a time.

I know many like to make this topic about "me and my tax dollars"...buuut, I did not offer to pay money to any one individual. That would defeat the whole care of society aspect! And I'm not sure where you are getting the second portion. No where does the above compromise say everyone else should pay into a system of my choosing. In fact, it says those who wish to continue on using private health care providers can do so. It merely gives others the option to 'feel differently', and to have access to a fund they paid into. You wouldn't have to pay for anyone else if you didn't wish to...you just couldn't use the system you chose not to pay into. If you chose the public funded option, no private coverage, if you chose private, no public.
...Group plans are completely different, and rather easy to lose access to...

A very similar proposal to the above was shot down at the time. Reasons given included one from senate Republican leader, McConnell. In his words, "because the private insurance people will not be able to compete with a government option." *cough*

 

[chickened]

I do know that the people that voted on Obamacare were told to vote on it without reading it by Pelosi.

http://michellemalkin.com/2012/02/07/democrat-obamacare/

Believe me, there is no way to disagree with anyone in this country who possibly believes that the current Health Care law was passed by executive order. I would logically assume that everyone who truely believes that would also believe that Obama was born in Kenya and that Elvis lives. I think it is best to just quietly let your statement speak for itself because telling you that you are wrong about that or misinformed would not help.

 

[Bullitt]

Most of the time congressmen do not read a bill before they vote on it.

It makes you wonder.

 

[chickened]

Why would they read this one they are under a different plan.

Most of the time congressmen do not read a bill before they vote on it.

It makes you wonder.

 

[RHRanch]

Punkadoodle, nobody is preventing you from paying into someone elses healthcare I will let you pay into mine if you like. What you are really asking is that you and everyone else should pay into a system that allows healthcare to be dolled out to all and that you feel it is only "fair" that everyone else feel the same way about it as you do. The system you are describing already exists they are called group plans.

I pay through the nose for healthcare which by virtue eliminates fraudulent abuse of the system. When a hispanic has 10 kids because they do not believe in birth control makes minimum wage and expects me who was responsible in child bearing and lived within my means to pay for every office visit as if it were free to them and lives in a state with free healthcare you can see why people here are bitter.

It would be nice and I would support a system that sets a reasonable cost per person for basic care but it must be better than what the veterans get and better service than what the UK has.

Why single out "hispanics"? Why not just write "when a lot of people"? Why make this about a certain group of people?

 

[chickened]

I singled out hispanics because in my area they are the ones that I have first hand knowledge of that fit the bill. Most other races that are at minimum wage jobs are young people without kids and older people with grown kids at least in my area, yours may be different I really do not know as I have heard that San Diego is too expensive for minimum wage earners.

Why single out "hispanics"? Why not just write "when a lot of people"? Why make this about a certain group of people?

 

[redhen]

Redhen, you started this mess and now you have to up and ask a logical and sensible question that really does not currently have an answer.  It is true that the insurance rates in MA are very high and that is because when the law was passed in MA in 2006 it had some very good ideas and intentions, including the individual mandate, but it failed miserably to have any cost controls built into it.  The MA legislature is trying to solve that problem as we speak.  Also the MA law has allowed a lot of people to scam the system by allowing them to get insurance right before they know they will need an expensive medical procedure.  They pay about $1600 for a policy, get a $10,000 procedure and then immediately cancel the policy.  They are trying to plug some of the loop holes.  The short answer to your question is that while Obama Care has some good features that are not in the MA law, they are basically similar, but the Obama Care took a lesson from the MA law and does contain quite a bit of cost containment measures.  Will it help you in the near future, NO, but I do believe that MA will get a handle on the costs and I think you will see a decrease in premiums soon.  Reality is that both the MA law and Obama Care have some serious flaws but it is hard to argue that we do not need health reform and I think that MA has led the way.

 

Oh boy,.. if MA has lead the way, i think we are all in big trouble. Health care here is not really affordable to the average working person. But you have no choice,.. you have to pay it or risk a HUGE medical bill in some emergency situation, AND also the state wont give you back your state taxes that you PAID into all year long...
HOW can they TAKE my taxes every week and then refuse to refund them at years end when they are entitled to be paid back to me..? Something is VERY wrong here... very wrong.. (even if i didnt go to the ER with no insurance during the year **because NO primary care doctor here will even look at you with no insurance, you have to have cash or credit card or you're out of luck.... you have to go to the ER**, ,..they still will take MY taxes?? WHAT EXACTLY are they charging me for then?? Breathing air?..),...
$80 a week out of your check hurts MANY people financially...PLUS the high co-pays when you DO finally break down and go to the doctor.. AND THEN , a few weeks later you STILL get a bill for an insurance deductable that you have to meet for that year...(and thats not cheap either!)
Its just nuts..
I'm not happy.. :/
This year we are okay,.. we were able to show coverage for the year...
But next year?? Who knows if i can still afford $80 a week out of our paycheck...
Its getting scary...
I REALLY hope that this reform wont be like this?? Whats the point of it then?? Its HURTING people... NOT helping them.
Someone tell me theres a light at the end of the tunnel here??...

 

[newfoundland]

I have a suggestion. Pay taxes on a sliding scale with the first $7000 untaxed, then the next $2000 taxed at the rate of 20%. After this amount all money taxed at the rate of between 30 and 40%. No refunds unless you have overpaid. Use the money for among other things to run a national health service. As you can see this will be contributed to by all tax payers according to their means. Free healthcare at the point of service, so whatever the medical prognosis, the patient receives the necessary healthcare. I know some people think this is a radical idea, they did here 60 years ago, but it is the only way to go if you hope for a healthy and productive population. Health and Safety is just a red herring. people take part in extreme sports here, hang gliding, bungy jumping etc, and they are not required to pay a higher rate of national insurance. There are many forms of national health services around the world, and they all have a lot to offer. Some might say that the US is seriously behind the times in not having adopted this long before now. I should also add that our health service operates to the highest standards and the care is second to none. Doctors come from all over the world to train in the teaching hospitals, as they are such centres of exellence. A national healthcare service does not mean a second rate service.