Ulcerative Colitis a pre existing condition according to Trump & the Repugs

We can not force anyone to participate in National Healthcare. We can campaign for reform and we may eventually get it.....but doctors and hospitals may decide not to participate in it. It is happening here where I live. There are doctors that are refusing to participate in Obama Care. They are refusing to accept patients. I know.....I live it. Then there are the doctors that do participate. ..some of them can't even spell Crohns let alone treat it. I don't know what the answer is but I do know that what we have now is not working. The ideology was optimistic but it is not working for me.

Yes, I too am concerned. Nobody wants to die because of lack of Healthcare. With Medicare Remicade is 1700. To 1800.00 per infusion. Remistart will not help anyone with Medicare. If you are younger than the age of normal Medicare supplements your supplement will be significantly higher...I was quoted 800.00. Then there is the drug plan.... But if you wait long enough and you liquidate everything so you don't have over 3000.00 you can get medicade. ....which is even worse.... Or if you are lucky enough to live to 65 the supplemental amount usually goes down....or there are some people lucky enough to have secondary insurance through their employer.....

My Dad was an immigrant. He raised us to stand on our own two feet and to help others if you have the means. I don't know what he would think now. Before company growth that wasn't in the double digits was acceptable....as long as you had continued growth...but now everyone wants to make more money..easier and faster....

Maybe if we limited terms, paid our elected officials an average wage, provided some type of housing and food for them, and they did not continue to collect wages for the rest of their lives....maybe we could use some of that money to pay towards other things? And maybe people would truly serve their country because they loved their country...not to get rich....

Last time I was in the hospital my nurse called ObamaCare, Medicare and Medicade population control.

Under a single payer system you would see an increase in concierge medicine, especially for top level specialists. That would be an unintended and unfortunate consequence.

NiceGuyEddie said...
Under a single payer system you would see an increase in concierge medicine, especially for top level specialists. That would be an unintended and unfortunate consequence.

As opposed to now, when millions of people can't even afford to go to an urgent care clinic...

It will stop being a moot point when one of two things happen:

a) millions lose their coverage, doctors lose business and people die
or
b) millions more are insured, there's a single payer market that doesn't seek profits off illnesses and more people are able to see a doctor when they need to

I'll go with the latter, more compassionate option

My opinion: insurance companies are waiting for the majority of Baby Boomers to vest into Medicare and their largest vocal opposition will go away. I am a middle Boomer and 2.5 years away from Medicare. I will continue to VOTE for fairness for all but most people will settle into their entitlements and go away.

Insurance companies have run the numbers and decided which powerful politicians get their money for exactly how long, and it won't be long at all until the majority against them ages out.

I do not know why this great country is so far behind all the major modern countries in this aspect and conclude it is big money being shoveled into many pockets. Not religious or cultural, it's money being paid to people in power to continue this travesty. We can vote them out but they will do anything to continue their gravy train by dividing us on other less important (than life and death) issues.

I have never read or heard anyone express this opinion (about waiting for Boomers to age out), it's the one I truly believe.

Post Edited (imagardener2) : 5/14/2017 5:42:02 PM (GMT-6)

sfc425 said...
The most vocal opposition is not going away with the boomer generation. You're underestimating the radicalization of people who are in their 30s and younger.

If anything, the voices will get louder and opposition stronger - especially given that this is the first generation to have grown up with the Internet.

I hope you are right but... insurance cost for the majority of people that age is much, much less expensive so they have less reason to make health insurance a voting issue and older people vote in higher percentage than younger people. That's why they call Social Security the "third rail", death to the politician who touches it.

Younger people are afraid more taxes will be heaped on them, paying for Social Security and many more people on Medicare than now. There is an age divide coming on many issues and healthcare is a big one.

Here's an excerpt from The Federalist (a libertarian website) from last February:

Millennials are simply not that alarmed by the idea of socialism. For instance, a national Reason-Rupe survey found that 53 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds view socialism favorably, compared to only a quarter of Americans over 55. A more recent January YouGov survey found that 43 percent of respondents younger than 30 viewed socialism favorably, compared to 32 percent thinking favorably of capitalism.

In fact, millennials are the only age cohort in which more are favorable toward socialism than unfavorable. Young people are also more comfortable with a political candidate who describes him- or herself as a socialist. A May 2015 YouGov national survey found that 37 percent of millennials reported being “comfortable” (29 percent) or “enthusiastic” (8 percent) with the prospects of a socialist candidate. Among those older than 45, only about half that agree. So why are millennials so much more favorable toward socialism compared to older Americans?

Here is an excerpt from The Washington Post a few weeks ago:

A new Harvard University survey found 51% of the participants between the ages 18 and 29 said they do not support capitalism. According to the Washington Post, 42% said they do support capitalism while 33% supported socialism as an alternative.

The university's results echo recent findings from Republican pollster Frank Luntz, who surveyed 1,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 26 and found that 58% of respondents believed socialism to be the "more compassionate" political system when compared to capitalism. And when participants were asked to sum up the root of America's problem in one word, 29% said "greed."

Socialism takes away incentives to succeed.....to work. I think there are many countries that are capatilistic fundamentally while working in some aspects of socialism.

Secondly.....humans are inherently selfish...it is built into our genetics to have our family live or succeed. I think because of this human nature complete Socialism does not last for long.

I just don't know if a truly socialist country with no capatilistic tendency could survive.......

Cause if everyone is equal.....why go to med school? Why work if someone is going to support me? Most of all....how would this be paid for and how would you keep the people at the top from taking more out of the pot????

I do agree there needs to be some regulations or over sight on medications and health insurance...... don't know how you would go about it.... Please.....I am still trying to figure out if my original health insurance is going to pick up the 1700.-1800. tab left over for my Remicade treatment....and if I don't get it I could die. I have severe fistulizing Crohns and keep ending up with sepsis or other complications... This is all so complicated....where is the easy button?

Post Edited (clo2014) : 5/14/2017 8:37:15 PM (GMT-6)

sfc425,

Thank you for trying to explain all this to me. I know that I am probably driving you up the wall. I am truly just trying to understand.

I went to college full time for 11 years.....and yet now I have issues understanding the simplist things.....but that is what all the medications and Crohns can steal from you. I feel like a deer caught in the headlights.....Lol...

You are very knowledgeable about this and I think that when you reach out....like you have with me....you can help people understand things. I hope you don't mind if I hope back in and ask you more questions....

Thanks again....

Clo

clo2014 said...
Socialism takes away incentives to succeed.....to work. I think there are many countries that are capatilistic fundamentally while working in some aspects of socialism.
Secondly.....humans are inherently selfish...it is built into our genetics to have our family live or succeed. I think because of this human nature complete Socialism does not last for long.
I just don't know if a truly socialist country with no capatilistic tendency could survive...

There is a difference between socialism and communism. Communism failed mostly for the reasons you mentioned above. Capitalism with a socialist face is thriving now in Europe. Their socialism is represented by a single-payer health system that provides for everyone at half the cost of our health care system, and with better results if you compare their longevity and health statistics.

sfc425 said...
Millennials are simply not that alarmed by the idea of socialism. For instance, a national Reason-Rupe survey found that 53 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds view socialism favorably...

That is why a total unknown like Bernie Sanders, who was advocating Medicare for everyone, can come out of nowhere with no establishment support at all and challenge St. Hillary is last year's primary elections. And he probably would have won if the Dem establishment didn't cheat and use every trick in the book the thwart him, including giving Hillary the questions before their presidential debates.

That tells me that the country is ready and willing to change from this system that promotes greed over the general welfare of the people.

Health insurance companies are predominately for-profit businesses, and completely act like it with their complex policies built on all of the copays, deductibles, life time caps, and desire to exclude pre-existing conditions. A minority of the insured are responsible for the majority of healthcare expenditures (it's those of us who are chronically ill and also end of life costs being the standouts). All the various policies are underwritten to discourage behavior, procedure, and medicine that's expensive. It's more a cost thing rather than a what's medically best.

A more effective system wouldn't be fee for service but would be more based on results. You'd catch things early through an empasis on preventative care. For example it's much more cost effective and preventative to get a monthly "how ya feeling, i can see you haven't been filling your meds" call from an IBD nurse than to wait until we're flaring badly and in the hospital. Monitor, listen, coach and help based on our concerns rather than wait until it's a full blown emergency. I'd make it mandatory for us to have routine crp or fcp tests at least quarterly. Anything that can say something is awry baded on your trend ...

Don't get me wrong, I feel screwed over by my insurance all the time like anyone else... but I will say the moment I was diagnosed my insurance company sent me a letter inviting me to set up Case Management. I don't know if this is something all insurance companies offer but basically (if you choose to use the service) you get assigned a nurse who works for the insurance company and sends you information about your disease and calls you about every 2 weeks to check on you, help you coordinate care and find providers, and generally provide basic nursing advice. The nursing line is also open 24/7 if you have questions. They also help you get the most out of your benefits and encourage you to seek preventative/early care. The service is free, and they provide paperwork that states nothing you say or do with the case management nurse will have any effect on your benefits. It's been a great help to me.

My biggest beef with my insurance company is that basically no routine healthcare counts toward my deductible anymore. In other words, if I get a blood test, I pay my share but it doesn't count towards anything. The only thing that counted toward my deductible this year was my colonoscopy. So now my deductible is met but unless I have another major imaging or procedure done, none of my other costs for the rest of the year will count toward my deductible anyway. I believe this became "a thing" when the ACA went through, as a way to help the insurance company recoup costs. While I hate that, I understand the cold, hard statistical evidence that shows the ACA is objectively better for everyone (in terms of both the economy and public health) than pre-ACA and the proposed AHCA. That doesn't mean I don't believe improvements could be made to the ACA, of course.

At the end of the day, I believe that sick/dead people don't make for productive, tax-paying members of society. Investments in public health are investments in the work force.

noodlesnoodles said...

At the end of the day, I believe that sick/dead people don't make for productive, tax-paying members of society. Investments in public health are investments in the work force.

Yeah because Stephen Hawkings is not one of the most productive members of society. FDR was one of our greatest presidents but couldn't walk because of a childhood disease.

That's why we need Healthcare to keep people healthy and preventive care. The sooner you treat someone who is sick the less it costs and the sooner they get well and back to work.