HealingWell
Search Close Search
☰

Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us

Support Forums
>
Ulcerative Colitis
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
1 2 3 45
❬ ❬ Previous Thread |Next Thread ❭ ❭
Posted 3/4/2013 9:33 PM (GMT 0)
Old Hat,

Bravo - again!

I couldn't agree with you more!

Thank you for saying what has to be said.

:-)  

Posted 3/4/2013 9:53 PM (GMT 0)

UCThereIsCure said...
To get a j-pouch surgery even if you are sick I know there is 2 -3 year wait list. You have to be almost dying (just before), getting toxic mega colon or perforate colon to get a surgery

Wait, what?
Posted 3/4/2013 10:23 PM (GMT 0)
Obama and the like-minded people running this country have made a bad situation infinitely worse. The rich ARE getting richer in case you hadn't noticed while the middle class shrinks and a record number of people collect food stamps. His approach is a fail. The world is changing yet he clings to social democratic ideals of the 1970's and 80's which have never worked in the long run and will fail even faster now that Asia has become a black hole for American jobs.

If Obama has ideas to fix the debt problem, he should actually put forth a budget as he is required to do by law (and has never done). Then we can see if his ideas hold water.

It was just reported the the federal government will take in record revenue this year, yet we will still rack up another trillion in debt. I don't know which alternate reality some of you live in, but that's an utter fail by any standard tongue . We need to hold our elected officials to a higher standard.
Posted 3/4/2013 11:06 PM (GMT 0)
C_G_K, you have a short memory, do you remember where all the debt came from?
It started with Regan's "trickle down" ( more like the rich pissing on the poor) then the Bush years. I'll take a prez getting BJs in the white house with a surplus over what we have now any day.
Think about it -not what Rush is telling you -think for yourself. it will all become clear....
I am non-partisan, but my brain tells me we could do better.
Posted 3/4/2013 11:08 PM (GMT 0)

garylouisville said...

aguywithuc: you are giving credit to Obamacare before we actually see the results. So far all we have seen is a lot of rhetoric and generalities. The truth may wind up being far different that the hype. Nobody really knows yet which way it is going to go, one way or the other.

Mmm thats not correct Gary. The difference is subtle though.

Estimates never = Actuals be it financial predictions or our imaginations versus what happens in life.

I am saying doing nothing is projected to continue the spiraling cost and doing something (Ocare for example is more than nothing, might be two steps backwards, if it is then fix it ).

I was also relaying what the guy who dreamed it up 'hoped' it would accomplish but the reality will be anything but that. No credit given here for accomplishing anything yet it will take constant course correction just to keep it moving in a positive direction or need to be wholly replaced but then at least it served as a catalyst to get us off our arses and fix the health care mess.
Posted 3/4/2013 11:14 PM (GMT 0)
Beatuc-you are right. Bush spent like a drunken sailor. But Obama has racked up about the same amount or more (about five trillion dollars each.) bush was in office 8 years and obamas only had 4.

Before dems took congress in 2006 the deficit was 171 billion and just over 400 billion in bushes last year. Every year of Obama has been 1,000-1,500 billion

Not defending bush, both records are horrific, but to just say bush is disingenuous. How abt saying they both suck and don't have your or my best interests at heart?
Posted 3/4/2013 11:25 PM (GMT 0)
levi -agreed good points. Both parties suck -we are doomed!
OR will citizens of the USA wake up and kick them all out, it seems to me the 60's are a good model for where we stand now and where we go next.
Posted 3/5/2013 12:15 AM (GMT 0)
Bill Clinton was the best president we have had in the white house for quite a long time and one reason for this was because back then both the Democrats and Republicans were not only forced to work together to find bipartisan solutions but they actually did it instead of standing in their own corners like a bunch of spoiled rotten kids pointing their fingers at the other side saying it is all their fault.
Posted 3/5/2013 3:30 AM (GMT 0)

garylouisville said...
Bill Clinton was the best president we have had in the white house for quite a long time and one reason for this was because back then both the Democrats and Republicans were not only forced to work together to find bipartisan solutions but they actually did it instead of standing in their own corners like a bunch of spoiled rotten kids pointing their fingers at the other side saying it is all their fault.

Yeah it is pathetic - infantile.

March them out back one slug each, maybe the next crop wont act like they think they are rock stars and instead behave like humble public servants.

Post Edited (aguywithuc) : 3/4/2013 9:30:20 PM (GMT-7)

Posted 3/5/2013 4:46 AM (GMT 0)
I never listen to Limbaugh.

Obama is no Clinton. I think Clinton and Reagan were the best presidents of my lifetime. What's going on now is a disaster.
Posted 3/5/2013 5:37 AM (GMT 0)
BeatUC-- the 1960s are a model for what excessive military spending leads to-- domestic shortfalls. (War in Vietnam then-- Iraq/Afghanistan now) Don't forget that Clinton took a lot of flak while in office (for policies in addition to BJs!), but he also had a populist side that won some opponents over when he needed votes in Congress. Reagan was one of the worst presidents ever except his acting skills convinced many Americans that he cared about their lot (BS instead of BJs). IMHO the strongest modern-era presidents supporting beneficial domestic policies were FDR & LBJ. Harry Truman was memorable for trying to "tell it like it is"-- no toadying to the media, and he stood up to General MacArthur, thereby preventing war with China in 1950. They all had their battles with Congress. I agree with AguywithUC that SOME movement in a progressive direction RE health care cost containment is better than nothing at all; parts of the ACA have yet to kick in so we hopefully will see more improvement in 2014 when pre-existing conditions for adults gets adjusted. / Old Hat (32 yrs with left-sided UC; presently in remission taking brandname Colazal)
Posted 3/5/2013 12:53 PM (GMT 0)
IAS,

Yes, Medicare should be extended to cover a wider base of people.

IMO, we should have Medicare for ALL.

:-)  

Posted 3/5/2013 12:53 PM (GMT 0)
BabeintheWoods-
I just listened to the link you provided in an earlier post.
thedianerehmshow.org/audio-player?nid=17377


The facts presented by the author of Bitter Pill are appalling.
It's unfortunate that previous posters failed to listen to this audio before making comments.

There is nothing absurd about extending Medicare to cover more people in order to get medical costs under control. Medicare is much like a Costco or other large provider of services because it has the ability to negotiate prices that individuals do not have.

Some of the examples provided in the audio clearly illustrate the gouging that goes on when hospitals deal with those who do not have such medical coverage.

Thank you so much for this post.
Posted 3/5/2013 2:04 PM (GMT 0)
To get back to the original gist of the thread the whole discussion here is pretty much moot. I don't even hear the Democrats talking about lowering the eligibility age of Medicare so, no matter what anyone says, it ain't gonna happen anyway. In fact, Obama is now starting to talk about cutting the growth in spending of the "social safety nets" in return for closing loopholes in the tax code. I have a feeling there is actually some backroom bargaining being done which could end up in the so called "grand bargain" by the new March 27th deadline. We shall see.
Posted 3/5/2013 11:24 PM (GMT 0)
RE Democrats not doing anything about cuts: see boldprogressives.org concerning Alan Grayson (D-FL) & Mark Takano (D-CA) statement rejecting harmful proposals to Social Security, Medicare, & Medicaid even if offered by Obama. Many Congresspeople, including mine, have joined their effort. Anyone interested can contact their Member of Congress to urge support if they are not already involved. / Old Hat (32 yrs with left-sided UC; presently in remission taking brandname Colazal)
Posted 3/6/2013 12:05 AM (GMT 0)
I have a problem with rejecting any and all proposals to reform Social Security.
Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems that several different types of payments are covered by the Social Security "umbrella".

As I understand it, there are (1) payments to retirees who have paid into the system during their working lives, (2) payments to those who have never contributed including legal immigrants and (3) disability payments to those who qualify.

I would be interested in dividing the Social Security "budget" into the various categories so we could see just how much is spent in each.
Maybe someone has already mentioned it in a previous post but I don't think the original idea behind Social Security included supporting unemployable immigrants and people with addictions.

I also think that "to the extent that they are able", those who are collecting disability benefits should be working in some way to earn their benefits.

(You should probably know I live in Massachusetts that has a reputation for providing handouts in the form of welfare. Very annoying to those of us who work to pay for the deadbeats.)

What do you think?

Maybe this should be a new thread.......:-)
Posted 3/6/2013 1:02 AM (GMT 0)
Those are actually great ideas. I really don't understand those completely and totally against reforming social security to make it solvent so that it will not go bankrupt. There are many ways to do that. Any idea about raising the retirement age has never been aimed at people who are there now or are approaching it. It has always been aimed at future generations who will be living longer anyway. On top of that there are many other things that we could do such as making the FICA tax applicable to all earned income, not stopping at a particular amount. I never understood that anyway. This would hit the richer people. Also, I have always been in favor of means testing for social security. Mitt Romney even suggested this. Why do Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Donald Trump, and others need a social security check? That's insane. Another fairly easy fix is tweeking the FICA taxes by a few tenths of a percent, which hits businesses and the richer people more than the middle income and poor. One thing I don't care for is changing the formula for yearly increases so that the increases are smaller. I think the other ideas are far more preferable than that. It really makes no sense to just flat out be opposed to retooling social security and other programs so that they won't go bankrupt. Some people just believe the demogogary that this is a pretext for eliminating the programs altogether or sticking it to the poor. Even the most diehard right wing Republicans don't want to do that. That has never been more than fear mongering by the progressive liberals.
Posted 3/6/2013 5:06 AM (GMT 0)
Interesting article about Obamacare insurance plans:

www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2013/03/05/obamacare_insurance_plans_will_be_bare_bones_--_and_expensive_100176.html
Posted 3/6/2013 6:18 AM (GMT 0)
It's Always Something-- who do you think is collecting Social Security without having paid into it? New immigrants? In my area the Social Security Offices do very careful checks on applicants so I don't think it's easy to pass off a fraudulent application. Garylouisville-- the Grayson-Takano statement certainly opposes cuts to current benefits-- but all you do here is slander progressives so I don't expect you to say anything positive about their efforts even though they're male. You seem to be a very hostile person, which is why you support Paul Ryan, who also disparages everybody outside the rightwing and wants to put them on a voucher system for health care, education, etc. (Voucher= code for 2nd class treatment or worse) This is what fascists and racists want-- if they can't outright annihilate the people whose presence in the USA disturbs them. I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHO YOU THINK IS CHEATING-- THAT LIBERALS ARE COVERING FOR-- SINCE YOU KEEP BLAMING EVERY NATIONAL SHORTFALL ON THEM. Do you believe in the Bogeyman? / Old Hat (32 yrs with left-sided UC; presently in remission taking brandname Colazal)
Posted 3/6/2013 2:38 PM (GMT 0)
KillColitis: I know a gal from Montreal, she had to be sick for 4 yrs and she did not have an option to go for the surgery due to the long wait list. She finally had a perforated colon and the doctor finally agreed to do the surgery because it was an emergency, and 3 steps instead of 2 steps...(she was so sick then...) New Zealands is the same situation 2 year wait list for the surgery unless you become emergency case.
Posted 3/6/2013 7:34 PM (GMT 0)
Old Hat: I'm a hostile person? Maybe you should reread your own posts, including the last one using capital letters. What difference does it make if Grayson and Takano are male?????? How can you possibly say that Paul Ryan "disparages everybody outside the rightwing"? He was voted into office in a Democratic state! I'm sorry but my dictionary doesn't define voucher as a "code for 2nd class treatment or worse". You made that up out of your own opinion. What's wrong with the idea of a voucher system for education? That means anyone, including the poor, can use the FREE voucher to send their kids to any school they choose - including private schools.

You also compare Ryan to "fascists and racists", saying that they want to "annihilate the people whose presence in the USA disturbs them". That's a very sick opinion. I have never once said that liberals are covering for people cheating and I have never blamed every national shortfall on them. I have repeatedly blamed and criticized both Democrats and Republicans for the gridlock we now face. Obama and the Democrats have not done well on jobs and the economy. That's just a fact. A new poll out today gives Obama only a 43% approval rating. Personally I think the Republicans are all wrong in criticizing Obama's foreign policy. He has actually done a good job in regards to national defense issues and I applaud him for that. Thank god he doesn't listen to the far left when it comes to this area.
Posted 3/6/2013 7:42 PM (GMT 0)
C_G_K

Regarding the source of the article you cite.......

From Right Wing Watch:
The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) is one of the oldest and most influential of the pro-business right-wing think tanks. It promotes the advancement of free enterprise capitalism, and has been extremely successful in placing its people in influential governmental positions, particularly in the Bush Administration. AEI has been described as one of the country's main bastions of neoconservatism.

Maybe a little biased???????
Posted 3/6/2013 8:08 PM (GMT 0)
Old Hat......you asked...
"It's Always Something-- who do you think is collecting Social Security without having paid into it? New immigrants? In my area the Social Security Offices do very careful checks on applicants so I don't think it's easy to pass off a fraudulent application."

There are a large number of immigrants from Russia, Vietnam and areas near Nepal in MA. Some are political refugees but they are all here legitimately. They receive help from both state and federal agencies in the form of rental subsidies, education subsidies, heath care subsidies and (for some of the older ones) Social Security payments.

My point was that Social Security was not originally created to provide all of the peripheral benefits that are currently given.
When do we decide that we cannot afford to be so generous?

My grandparents immigrated to the U.S. from Italy and Ireland. They worked their asses off to make a good life here and learned the language so they were employable.

As far as Disability Payments ......I know of people who are alcoholics or drug addicts who get benefits. Tell me that they had no choice in going down the road to addiction!
Treatment, yes. Free ride, no. Go to work!

Some who suffer from "anxiety" also get benefits.
That annoys the hell out of me! Who doesn't at some time in their life suffer from anxiety? Look at some of the people on this forum who go to work every day with UC. That defines anxiety!

Sorry about the soap box. I think we need to stop the insanity.
Posted 3/6/2013 8:24 PM (GMT 0)
A couple of thoughts I had on Obamacare which aren't discussed very much:

1. Apparently employers who are obligated to provide health insurance to their employees are only legally obligated to offer the insurance to the employee and the employee's dependants. The spouses of the employee aren't actually dependants and could possible be excluded from this coverage, forcing them to get an additional policy on their own, which of course would be subject to a different set of deductibles. I don't believe the companies have to pay a dime for coverage for anyone other than the actually employee, forcing the employee to pay 100% of the coverage for all dependents. I'm not sure how all this is actually going to play out.

2. Since insurer's are going to be forced to accept patients with pre-existing conditions, obviously some insurers are going to get the short end of the stick compared to other insurers. It would be to a health insurance company's benefit to have as few pre-existing conditions patients as possible. I could see the companies taking (I'm sure illegal) steps to minimize the number of of these pre-existing condition patients as possible, maybe by purposely providing extremely poor customer service. You deal with a totally inept company and, knowing that if you changed companies a new company would be forced to accept you by law, you get ticked off and fire your first company and go with another. The first company says, "Oh darn! I'm sorry you feel like leaving but we wish you the best with your new company!". Everyone could take turns purposely ticking you off and you go around the insurance merry-go-round forever and forever. Of course I'm sure this would be illegal but someone would actually have to prove you are getting poor customer service just because of your pre-existing condition.
Posted 3/6/2013 8:25 PM (GMT 0)
Maybe the use of "labels" is causing unnecessary hostility.

I consider myself independent and thoughtful, having liberal attitudes on some issues (like health care being available to everyone), but obviously conservative wrt others (no free rides unless really disabled).
I resent it when someone labels me.

People within my extended family have very different political leanings and I try to remember one thing when we have occasional discussions.
MOST (or all) POLITICIANS LIE.
I'm not going to risk a friendship or family relationship based on what I think are the facts. All of it could be BS.
✚ New Topic ✚ Reply
12345