Typical.

Anyone who disagrees with you, offers another fact, or you run out of anything else to say, is an idiot. BTW, you go on that daily 100 calorie diet, lose weight, and see what damage that will do to your body; but yes, you will lose weight and most likely your life in the process or be severely damaged for what's left of it.

But, I am the one who is an idiot. :1rotfl:

Sorry dilly...not worth my trouble. You offered nothing. You agree and don't even realize it.

Healthcare expense is in no way as simple as your example
 

1. As far as your example. We do not deny healthcare to anyone. It is far too simplistic to think. Hey they don't pay for it so we should not provide it.
You go out to eat, hire a gardener etc-they have Tuberculosis-good chance you will catch it.
2. Healthcare is expensive. So YOUR KID-just to make it personal-he is healthy why pay for insurance. He is walking across the street and gets hit by a car. Would you want someone who thinks like you, and I sometimes do as well, to say, I see he does not have any insurance OR PROOF THAT HE CAN PAY. so take him to the garbage dump alive or dead.
3. RE: preexisting condition.
You as you live in the villages are over 55. You do not heal as well as you did at one time. PREEXISTING CONDITION YOU ARE OVER 55.
Back to reality-there are genetic tests that will predict what you will get in your life-IS THAT NOT A PREEXISTING CONDITION?
4. RE: OUR MEDICAL SYSTEM
It is a mess for many reasons but simply, it is tied to attorneys some deserve the title of ambulance chasers.
I've read that American Healthcare costs twice what other industrialized nations pay. I've read that lawsuits and fear of lawsuits adds 30-40% to our medical costs.
Cost of drugs. We all complain but we expect, we demand no consequences of drug use. The doctor that prevented the LEGAL use of thalidomide in the US, just recently passed away. Yes, ther were some severely deformed babies in the US due to the use of Thalidomide but in every case the mother got the drug illegally.

I've read that 80% of all medical care is paid for by either the government or by insurance. As it is there is no incentive for the patient to even think about the cost.

We demand equal care for all whether they pay for it or not.
We tell the doctor what he can charge so there is no financial motivation to be better-to take more time to do a better job.

On religious grounds we have outlawed euthanasia. Argue if you wish but it is based on religious grounds. We will euthanize an animal but not a human Step back and THINK. Today, a terminally ill person is taken off food and water and allowed to slowly pass to death. Or, often, the doctor orders enough,PAIN KILLERS, to kill the patient.

NO SHORTAGE OF TOUGH QUESTIONS-NO EASY ANSWERS ESPECIALLY IF YOU NEED OR WANT TO HAVE LAW APPLY TO ALL.

Your thought process is not consistant
 

First you are mixing up AVERAGES with specific people-Chinese person hit by a rescue vehicle.

RE: your health insurance cost.
If, you are paying private health isnsurance it is because you CHOSE to quit working before age 65 when you could, would, be covered by medicare. Medicare is, even for you,
subsidized by others.

RE: Your view about paying for others.
You list smoking, you list fat. I assume you do not smoke and are not fat. HUM you do not mention drinking-you must do that and think it is not evil. AND THEN THE OBVIOUS-YOUR HATE TOWARD OTHERS IS KILLING YOU.

I neither agreed with you nor did I not offer anything. I will try again.

IF someone goes on your 100 calorie a day diet, you are right they WILL lose weight. They also risk losing their LIFE (which in all probability would make you happy). IF they survive such a diet, they WILL have severe damage to their bodies. That, medically, is a FACT. This in turn, WILL require extensive care for what is left of their lives. This somewhat mimics the Texaco slogan, "Pay me now, or pay me later" in terms of YOU having to pick up the tab. You are either going to get stuck because people are fat or you are going to get stuck if they follow your advice and drop that weight by going to your extremes and doing far greater damage than just excess weight.

Spot on! And the poster did not take into account genetics, only lifestyle issues. You can change lifestyles; you cannot change genetics. You are born who you are and cannot change that. You can accomplish not passing along your genetics by not procreating, but you are still stuck with who you are.

Insurance companies should only insurance healthy people. As soon as you need their services. they don't want you. What about all the money that you or the company you worked for paid in premiums before you got sick? That doesn't account for anything. Insurance companies only want to collect premiums, and never want to pay out anything in services. What a surprise!

What were the poor doing before ACA? The emergency room was their primary care physician. Who do you think paid for that? Higher fees at the hospital equaled higher cost to insurance companies, which was past along to the healthy.

What the hell is the difference now? The poor do have healh insurance, and are paying for it less credits depending on their income.

As for your Publix example, the person on front of you handed the cashier $53. in food stamps. Who is paying for the food stamps?

When the minimum wage isn't a living wage, who is benefitting from that? The government has provided the means to keep these people alive. In essence, companies are receive a back door handout from the country by not paying their people a living wage.

That clown that he have for president stated, "Obamacare was a gift to the health insurance companies as pay back for the donations that the Democrats received from the health insurance companies." The man is operating without a clue. Obamacare was modeled after a plan put forward by the Heritage Foundation, a right wing organization. The Democrats want a single payer plan that would eliminate health insurance companies.

And in case you failed to watch the news earlier today, there was a segment on people using the ER for everything besides emergency care....ear cleanings and hangnails, for instance. Supposed to be more to come on the evening news. My point is: Since so many were supposedly afforded healthcare insurance that didn't have it before Obamacare, it seems nothing has really changed except for those who responsibly purchased health insurance in the past can no longer afford theirs.

Did the piece mention what states these people came from? Almost all of Republican controlled states didn't take the Medicaid expansion. So, the people that they are highlighting may not have insurance.

I am not sure what station you watch, but my guess is Fox News. It is typical. Show the few that are taking advantage of the system, and project that this behavior is common place. While it may not be fake news, it certainly is misleading news. That is as bad as fake news.

I was talking about fat people who SAY they can't lose weight...are lying and cheating...that IF they were really dieting, they WOULD lose weight and then I made an example of people in the German work camps on limited diets and NONE were obese.

YOU went off about how a 100 calorie diet is unsafe...it was just an EXTREME example to make a point. I wasn't telling fat people to go on a 100 calorie diet...I just said when they're "dieting" and still gaining weight...they're cheating.

Actually, I believe it was WESH, local NBC channel. I watch all three starting at 4:00 every day that I can and national on one of them starting at 6:30. Didn't mean to burst your bubble regarding Fox. I do watch it, as well, just not when the local news is on or NCIS, etc.

Ditto....:thumbup:

No doubt you are a women...it appears you allow your emotions to change the words you read...Please consider the woman's only forum!
Go back and read my post again, maybe several times for you. I did not mix averages with Chinese person being hit. I was responding with the story about the Chinese gal being hit to a comment about immortality. "when it's your day, its your day".

Are you suggesting that a person that CHOSES to retire earlier than 65 should pay extra for healthcare insurance?? Well, I am still working! I am 53, my healthcare insurance premiums went from $750 a month to $1300 a month in the last 3 years, and I am healthy. That still does not make it fair to me, does it?

I am struggling to understand your silly logic on this comment...No I do not smoke, no I am not fat. I did not mention suicide, do you think I am guilty of that?

Again your silly logic, no I don't hate people, I don't think it is fair that I have to pay more for my health insurance so some other lazy POS who eats too much or smokes cigarettes can get healthcare (heart disease is the number 1 killer in the country, and cancer is the number 2 killer). If I did hate people, which I don't, obviously me being healthy discounts your above statement.

The top 10 leading causes of death in the United States - Medical News Today

PS: Suicide is the number 10 killer in the country...

Well I hate to break up your high fiving session, but I just want to make sure I understand you correctly.

So...Your family has a history of heart disease and you eat yourself to 350 pounds, you have to ride in the electric cart at the grocery store...and you believe it is genetics to blame? You don't think you should have been watching what you ate, knowing that your family is prone to heart disease??

Or...Your family has a history of cancer and you decide to take up smoking, you have an oxygen bottle on your rascal...and you believe it is genetics to blame? You thought the warning on the side of cigarettes was just a scare tactic and people with a history of cancer are going to get it no matter what??

I believe genetics and the knowledge of your family health history; reduce the EXCUSE to be fat or to smoke. Do you agree?

NAILED IT!! :thumbup:


What you stated is, in a nutshell...how so many on the right justify their hate, racism & bigotry. :ohdear:

Like when you were being hateful, racist, and a bigot by inferring that people that do not speak good English were undocumented?

I do agree with your assessment of both lifestyle and genetics combined. I'm not stupid nor illiterate.

That being said, people who do all the right things (eating healthy, not smoking, not drinking, not doing drugs, etc.) still cannot escape their genetics and do have heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc., in spite of all their efforts to avoid them.

As to your "fat" argument, many drugs to treat cancer and rheumatoid arthritis just to name a couple, do lead to what appears to people like you as fat and worthy of judgment, but is actually fluid retention. There is a major difference. One can be helped, as you have repeatedly stated; the other cannot without stopping life-saving treatment. What would be your choice? Would you rather look good so others won't think you overeat, or live?

The "medical industry" is the #3 killer...

Bullsh!t...nobody "retains" 400lbs of water. It's FAT...nasty, wrinkly FAT. From eating too much! Too much sh!t.

Did I say ANYTHING about someone retaining 400#s of water? You have implied that ANYONE who is even so much as slightly overweight (by your standards) eats too much. I GET IT! YOU hate fat people. Because they are so abominable to you, you go on and on and on. You must be a totally miserable human being for it to be such a bother for you.

Just so you know, I am not fat....not even overweight, so don't even go there. I did gain weight when I got pregnant, but I don't think that counts, does it?

Why don't you quit being an emotional girl and stick to the facts?

So WHY are YOU arguing FOR fat people dilly? Can't fat people defend themselves?

Someone who weighs 400 lbs eats too much...period. They should be denied subsidized healthcare. When they lose weight and go below morbidly obese...they can be covered again. It's simple.

Smokers...quit smoking or no coverage.

Diabetics, control your sugar or no healthcare.

You can't IGNORE them and expect to keep getting care.

Same with old people...after certain age we MUST limit the subsidized care offered. Same with extreme preemies, we shouldn't be trying to save everyone. I know...they learn from them...but it's too costly.

The cold, hard, accountants, will have to prevail on this one.

Republicans have their OWN healthcare....its the original AHA
 

Those chefs who don't eat their own cooking.....don't eat there....

Winners And Losers Under The House GOP Health Bill
 

Winners And Losers Under The House GOP Health Bill : Shots - Health News : NPR

In Trump’s America, Rape Is a Preexisting Condition
Under New Health-Care Bill, Rape Is a Preexisting Condition

The 11 states most likely to be affected by pre-existing conditions all voted for Trump
11 Trump states to be affected by pre-existing conditions - CNNPolitics.com

Here Is What's In The House-Approved Health Care Bill
Here's What's In The House Republicans' Health Care Bill : Shots - Health News : NPR

American Medical Association Releases The Deadly Consequences Of Trumpcare
https://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceja.../#18e1bab07eff

Ohio senator, Sherrod Brown lists the pre-existing conditions that will be lost under Trumpcare (VIDEO)
http://www.salon.com/2017/05/04/sen-...aV61s.facebook

Analysis: 5 issues that could derail the GOP health care bill in the Senate
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...e-bill-senate/

‪Just so we're clear: People with pre existing mental health conditions have access to firearms and not healthcare. ‬

At least be honest with yourself
 

You will post and spin anything that you see as anti-republican.

RE: pre-existing conditions
A valid reply would take a book but very abridged. First of all I HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION and have had it since the age of 13. When, we were PAYING for private healthcare insurance, OBAMACARE HAD BEEN PASSED, we were not allowed to purchase the far less costly catastrophic insurance-THEY SIMPLY REFUSED TO SELL IT TO US.
We find it reasonable and acceptable that people who have had auto insurance claims or home insurance claims, or have a high risk profession etc PAY MORE FOR INSURANCE, why do YOU not see this as reasonable for healthcare insurance.
We refuse to see the FACT that people must be forced to be responsible. As to medical-care, we refuse to deny care to anyone. BEFORE YOU START SCREAMING- A young healthy person decides they would rather spend their money on a car, a vacation, a house or.......... so they DECIDE not to BUY insurance. They are crossing the street and are hit by a car. To make it simple assume the car driver is innocent. ARE WE PREPARED ONCE WE DISCOVER THEY DO NOT HAVE INSURANCE TO TAKE THEM TO THE DUMP DEAD OR ALIVE? They get care and others pay for that THEFT OF SERVICE.
RE: CONGRESS KEEPING THEIR MEDICAL COVERAGE
PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, LOGIC.
People have medial coverage due to military service (VA), people have medical coverage due to their job-teachers, government, union etc.

THERE IS NOTHING SIMPLE ABOUT MEDICAL CARE.
Typical of American thought we thing everyone should get equal care WHETHER THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT OR NOT.
Medical care is one of the few things that you cannot shop for. However crude it is, your doctor is SELLING YOU a service. Here in the Villages, the snow flakes are going home. It is not a coincidence that you are NOW getting e-mails etc from your doctor-HAVE NOT SEEN YOU IN A WHILE

Eighty percent of all medical care is paid for by either insurance or the government. WE thus have to allow the people who pay to tell you AND YOUR DOCTOR what care you can get. I spent 4 days in the villages hospital when I was covered by private health care insurance under AETNA. The bill was 50,000 AETNA paid the bill in full for 30,000. IF WE DID NOT HAVE INSURANCE FOR WHICH WE PAID 12,000 THEY WOULD HAVE DEMANDED AN ADDITIONAL 20,000 FOR EXACTLY THE SAME SERVICE.

Ask your doctor about COST. Ask your doctor about less expensive options. Your doctor's reaction will tell you a lot about your doctor that you had never thought to ask.
IS WHAT TYPE OF INSURANCE YOU HAVE A MAJOR PART OF YOUR MEDICAL CARE? OF COURSE IT IS. YOU NEVER THOUGHT TO ASK. IT IS AT THE TOP OF YOUR MEDICAL FILE-THEY HAVE ASKED.

[QUOTE=Guest]You will post and spin anything that you see as anti-republican.

RE: pre-existing conditions
A valid reply would take a book but very abridged. First of all I HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION and have had it since the age of 13. When, we were PAYING for private healthcare insurance, OBAMACARE HAD BEEN PASSED, we were not allowed to purchase the far less costly catastrophic insurance-THEY SIMPLY REFUSED TO SELL IT TO US. [QUOTE=Guest]

AHA did not have "catastrophic" insurance. AHA disallowed the health care companies to put a cap on coverage, so, there was no further need for catastrophic coverage.


[QUOTE=Guest]We find it reasonable and acceptable that people who have had auto insurance claims or home insurance claims, or have a high risk profession etc PAY MORE FOR INSURANCE, why do YOU not see this as reasonable for healthcare insurance.[QUOTE=Guest]

If you have not noticed, health insurance is SIGNIFICANTLY more complex and costly than either home or auto insurance. The "high risk" premiums are significantly lower than the possible "high risk" pool premiums, and the $8Billion over 10 years spread out to all 50 states, is a laughably low amount to help those in need.


[QUOTE=Guest]We refuse to see the FACT that people must be forced to be responsible.[QUOTE=Guest]

Tell that to the parents of a child born with defects, or cancer.

[QUOTE=Guest]As to medical-care, we refuse to deny care to anyone. BEFORE YOU START SCREAMING- A young healthy person decides they would rather spend their money on a car, a vacation, a house or.......... so they DECIDE not to BUY insurance. They are crossing the street and are hit by a car. To make it simple assume the car driver is innocent. ARE WE PREPARED ONCE WE DISCOVER THEY DO NOT HAVE INSURANCE TO TAKE THEM TO THE DUMP DEAD OR ALIVE? They get care and others pay for that THEFT OF SERVICE.[QUOTE=Guest]

A very simplistic example, and a microcosm of the need.


[QUOTE=Guest]RE: CONGRESS KEEPING THEIR MEDICAL COVERAGE
PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, LOGIC.
People have medial coverage due to military service (VA), people have medical coverage due to their job-teachers, government, union etc.[QUOTE=Guest]

The congress enacted the AHA with the stipulation that all members of congress and their staffs were REQUIRED to participate in AHA. The current bill that the House passed kept that same coverage only for the members of congress and their staffs. If the "new" healthcare law is good for the population of Americans in their congressional districts, it should be good enough for the members of congress and their staffs. The AHA did not effect the current group health programs for corporations with 50 or more employees, just revised the rules so that ALL recipients of health care could NOT be discriminated against because of pre-existing conditions, could not have a cap on their coverage, could not be cancelled after a claim, and could keep their children on their policy until that child was 26 years old and still living at home, or have become emancipated.

[QUOTE=Guest]THERE IS NOTHING SIMPLE ABOUT MEDICAL CARE.
Typical of American thought we thing everyone should get equal care WHETHER THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT OR NOT.
Medical care is one of the few things that you cannot shop for. However crude it is, your doctor is SELLING YOU a service. Here in the Villages, the snow flakes are going home. It is not a coincidence that you are NOW getting e-mails etc from your doctor-HAVE NOT SEEN YOU IN A WHILE [QUOTE=Guest]

A good reason for getting second opinions.....

[QUOTE=Guest]Eighty percent of all medical care is paid for by either insurance or the government. WE thus have to allow the people who pay to tell you AND YOUR DOCTOR what care you can get. I spent 4 days in the villages hospital when I was covered by private health care insurance under AETNA. The bill was 50,000 AETNA paid the bill in full for 30,000. IF WE DID NOT HAVE INSURANCE FOR WHICH WE PAID 12,000 THEY WOULD HAVE DEMANDED AN ADDITIONAL 20,000 FOR EXACTLY THE SAME SERVICE.[QUOTE=Guest]

You can anticipate your health care costs to increase dramatically if the House bill is enacted. Increased premiums then, if unaffordable to many, will DECREASE their availability of proper care.


Other than the doctor's fees for examination, and surgery, the multiple costs are not usually known by that particular doctor. Hospital costs, drug costs, equipment costs, and the many other fees and costs are known only by the accounting departments of those hospitals and the insurance companies who have negotiated those costs and fees with those providers. Since the average health costs per person in the USA are TWICE that in most other countries, (Per Capita Healthcare Costs — International Comparison) just where is the extra money going? The answer is to the insurance companies.

If you can imagine paying $6000 per year for a single-payor system (Medicare is a perfect example) rather than $12000 per year per person, for the SAME care, wouldn't you consider it? If you don't like that system, or there are deductibles and co-pays that you must pay out of pocket (much like Medicare, again) there would be "private" health insurance available for that as well as for those who would want their own "high-end" medical protection.

One should not "label" things with outmoded terms like "socialism" because that only stirs up emotions that we, as a free country have demonized. We should look at the practicality and economics of a health care system that allows ALL the American citizens health care, not just the people who can afford it.

[QUOTE=Guest][QUOTE=Guest]You will post and spin anything that you see as anti-republican.

RE: pre-existing conditions
A valid reply would take a book but very abridged. First of all I HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION and have had it since the age of 13. When, we were PAYING for private healthcare insurance, OBAMACARE HAD BEEN PASSED, we were not allowed to purchase the far less costly catastrophic insurance-THEY SIMPLY REFUSED TO SELL IT TO US. [QUOTE=Guest]

AHA did not have "catastrophic" insurance. AHA disallowed the health care companies to put a cap on coverage, so, there was no further need for catastrophic coverage.


[QUOTE=Guest]We find it reasonable and acceptable that people who have had auto insurance claims or home insurance claims, or have a high risk profession etc PAY MORE FOR INSURANCE, why do YOU not see this as reasonable for healthcare insurance.[QUOTE=Guest]

If you have not noticed, health insurance is SIGNIFICANTLY more complex and costly than either home or auto insurance. The "high risk" premiums are significantly lower than the possible "high risk" pool premiums, and the $8Billion over 10 years spread out to all 50 states, is a laughably low amount to help those in need.


[QUOTE=Guest]We refuse to see the FACT that people must be forced to be responsible.[QUOTE=Guest]

Tell that to the parents of a child born with defects, or cancer.

[QUOTE=Guest]As to medical-care, we refuse to deny care to anyone. BEFORE YOU START SCREAMING- A young healthy person decides they would rather spend their money on a car, a vacation, a house or.......... so they DECIDE not to BUY insurance. They are crossing the street and are hit by a car. To make it simple assume the car driver is innocent. ARE WE PREPARED ONCE WE DISCOVER THEY DO NOT HAVE INSURANCE TO TAKE THEM TO THE DUMP DEAD OR ALIVE? They get care and others pay for that THEFT OF SERVICE.[QUOTE=Guest]

A very simplistic example, and a microcosm of the need.


[QUOTE=Guest]RE: CONGRESS KEEPING THEIR MEDICAL COVERAGE
PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, LOGIC.
People have medial coverage due to military service (VA), people have medical coverage due to their job-teachers, government, union etc.[QUOTE=Guest]

The congress enacted the AHA with the stipulation that all members of congress and their staffs were REQUIRED to participate in AHA. The current bill that the House passed kept that same coverage only for the members of congress and their staffs. If the "new" healthcare law is good for the population of Americans in their congressional districts, it should be good enough for the members of congress and their staffs. The AHA did not effect the current group health programs for corporations with 50 or more employees, just revised the rules so that ALL recipients of health care could NOT be discriminated against because of pre-existing conditions, could not have a cap on their coverage, could not be cancelled after a claim, and could keep their children on their policy until that child was 26 years old and still living at home, or have become emancipated.

[QUOTE=Guest]THERE IS NOTHING SIMPLE ABOUT MEDICAL CARE.
Typical of American thought we thing everyone should get equal care WHETHER THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT OR NOT.
Medical care is one of the few things that you cannot shop for. However crude it is, your doctor is SELLING YOU a service. Here in the Villages, the snow flakes are going home. It is not a coincidence that you are NOW getting e-mails etc from your doctor-HAVE NOT SEEN YOU IN A WHILE [QUOTE=Guest]

A good reason for getting second opinions.....

[QUOTE=Guest]Eighty percent of all medical care is paid for by either insurance or the government. WE thus have to allow the people who pay to tell you AND YOUR DOCTOR what care you can get. I spent 4 days in the villages hospital when I was covered by private health care insurance under AETNA. The bill was 50,000 AETNA paid the bill in full for 30,000. IF WE DID NOT HAVE INSURANCE FOR WHICH WE PAID 12,000 THEY WOULD HAVE DEMANDED AN ADDITIONAL 20,000 FOR EXACTLY THE SAME SERVICE.
WHY???

If other countries that are smaller than ours can't sustain it, even by taxing everyone Aprox.55% of their salary, how would America, a much larger country afford it? Sorry, but why should we foot the bill for millions that either refuse to pay for it or can't pay for it?

[QUOTE=Guest][QUOTE=Guest][QUOTE=Guest]You will post and spin anything that you see as anti-republican.

RE: pre-existing conditions
A valid reply would take a book but very abridged. First of all I HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION and have had it since the age of 13. When, we were PAYING for private healthcare insurance, OBAMACARE HAD BEEN PASSED, we were not allowed to purchase the far less costly catastrophic insurance-THEY SIMPLY REFUSED TO SELL IT TO US. [QUOTE=Guest]

AHA did not have "catastrophic" insurance. AHA disallowed the health care companies to put a cap on coverage, so, there was no further need for catastrophic coverage.


[QUOTE=Guest]We find it reasonable and acceptable that people who have had auto insurance claims or home insurance claims, or have a high risk profession etc PAY MORE FOR INSURANCE, why do YOU not see this as reasonable for healthcare insurance.[QUOTE=Guest]

If you have not noticed, health insurance is SIGNIFICANTLY more complex and costly than either home or auto insurance. The "high risk" premiums are significantly lower than the possible "high risk" pool premiums, and the $8Billion over 10 years spread out to all 50 states, is a laughably low amount to help those in need.


[QUOTE=Guest]We refuse to see the FACT that people must be forced to be responsible.[QUOTE=Guest]

Tell that to the parents of a child born with defects, or cancer.

[QUOTE=Guest]As to medical-care, we refuse to deny care to anyone. BEFORE YOU START SCREAMING- A young healthy person decides they would rather spend their money on a car, a vacation, a house or.......... so they DECIDE not to BUY insurance. They are crossing the street and are hit by a car. To make it simple assume the car driver is innocent. ARE WE PREPARED ONCE WE DISCOVER THEY DO NOT HAVE INSURANCE TO TAKE THEM TO THE DUMP DEAD OR ALIVE? They get care and others pay for that THEFT OF SERVICE.[QUOTE=Guest]

A very simplistic example, and a microcosm of the need.


[QUOTE=Guest]RE: CONGRESS KEEPING THEIR MEDICAL COVERAGE
PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, LOGIC.
People have medial coverage due to military service (VA), people have medical coverage due to their job-teachers, government, union etc.[QUOTE=Guest]

The congress enacted the AHA with the stipulation that all members of congress and their staffs were REQUIRED to participate in AHA. The current bill that the House passed kept that same coverage only for the members of congress and their staffs. If the "new" healthcare law is good for the population of Americans in their congressional districts, it should be good enough for the members of congress and their staffs. The AHA did not effect the current group health programs for corporations with 50 or more employees, just revised the rules so that ALL recipients of health care could NOT be discriminated against because of pre-existing conditions, could not have a cap on their coverage, could not be cancelled after a claim, and could keep their children on their policy until that child was 26 years old and still living at home, or have become emancipated.

[QUOTE=Guest]THERE IS NOTHING SIMPLE ABOUT MEDICAL CARE.
Typical of American thought we thing everyone should get equal care WHETHER THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT OR NOT.
Medical care is one of the few things that you cannot shop for. However crude it is, your doctor is SELLING YOU a service. Here in the Villages, the snow flakes are going home. It is not a coincidence that you are NOW getting e-mails etc from your doctor-HAVE NOT SEEN YOU IN A WHILE [QUOTE=Guest]

A good reason for getting second opinions.....

Why Not? Many other countries have SUCCESSFUL medial coverage and have sustained their economies. Your rants are just that: empty rants of an uniformed, yet willfully ignorant stooge

There is lots of screaming and hair-pulling going on about how insurance costs are going to rise if a new plan is eventually enacted. Isn't that already happening? Aren't people already being denied AFFORDABLE insurance? In some instances, those on Obamacare are losing coverage period because the insurance companies are choosing to no longer participate.

Something has to change. Will it be overnight? No, so why expect it. Even the ones working on a new plan have said right up front that it is going to take time. At the very least, in the meantime, people are no longer going to incur a penalty for not being able to pay even their PRIVATE insurance premiums. Many on the Obamacare plans can't, either, because of the rise in premiums.

Healthcare is TOO expensive to GIVE to everyone.

Let that sink in...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/danmunro...-3-8-trillion/

Yes...we spend $3.8 trillion a year in healthcare costs.

That comes out to MORE than $10,000 PER man, woman, and child...each year.

Now...tell me...HOW are we supposed to pay for that?

I kept telling you, a $ million in total lifetime medical costs...NOT an unreasonable number...takes 960...over $1,000 a month...80 years of paying each month...payments to equal out to $1 million.

We CAN'T afford healthcare for everyone at these prices. There WILL be death panels for the very young and the very old. We can't afford to do whatever it takes to try to save everyone. The very young preemies cost over a $ million before they even leave the hospital. Many more millions their entire short and difficult lives. They SHOULD be allowed to die naturally...what the natural roll of the dice intended. The very old shouldn't "waste" $ millions just to get a few months of misery.

Almost 80 million people are on Medicaid! That's coming in on 1/3 the population...so poor they're on Medicaid. We have 50 million, around 1/6th the population on food stamps.

The poor are going to eat us alive...they'll destroy America...as their numbers rise...quality of life WILL go down. It's what ALWAYS happens...look it up. The French Revolution...too many poor people...starving.

Since at least 1/2 of the $3.8 trillion goes to insurance companies, and most other countries only spend $4-5,000 per person on health care, it is our bloated insurance and prescription companies that are to blame. Single payor has been shown to work. Digging your heals into "we can't afford" it is nonsense. We can afford $trillions on war, and military, but we cannot afford to keep our citizens healthy? educate our citizens? .....
Your heart is hardened, your mind is soft

[QUOTE=Guest][QUOTE=Guest][QUOTE=Guest][QUOTE=Guest]You will post and spin anything that you see as anti-republican.

RE: pre-existing conditions
A valid reply would take a book but very abridged. First of all I HAVE A PRE-EXISTING CONDITION and have had it since the age of 13. When, we were PAYING for private healthcare insurance, OBAMACARE HAD BEEN PASSED, we were not allowed to purchase the far less costly catastrophic insurance-THEY SIMPLY REFUSED TO SELL IT TO US. [QUOTE=Guest]

AHA did not have "catastrophic" insurance. AHA disallowed the health care companies to put a cap on coverage, so, there was no further need for catastrophic coverage.


[QUOTE=Guest]We find it reasonable and acceptable that people who have had auto insurance claims or home insurance claims, or have a high risk profession etc PAY MORE FOR INSURANCE, why do YOU not see this as reasonable for healthcare insurance.[QUOTE=Guest]

If you have not noticed, health insurance is SIGNIFICANTLY more complex and costly than either home or auto insurance. The "high risk" premiums are significantly lower than the possible "high risk" pool premiums, and the $8Billion over 10 years spread out to all 50 states, is a laughably low amount to help those in need.


[QUOTE=Guest]We refuse to see the FACT that people must be forced to be responsible.[QUOTE=Guest]

Tell that to the parents of a child born with defects, or cancer.

[QUOTE=Guest]As to medical-care, we refuse to deny care to anyone. BEFORE YOU START SCREAMING- A young healthy person decides they would rather spend their money on a car, a vacation, a house or.......... so they DECIDE not to BUY insurance. They are crossing the street and are hit by a car. To make it simple assume the car driver is innocent. ARE WE PREPARED ONCE WE DISCOVER THEY DO NOT HAVE INSURANCE TO TAKE THEM TO THE DUMP DEAD OR ALIVE? They get care and others pay for that THEFT OF SERVICE.[QUOTE=Guest]

A very simplistic example, and a microcosm of the need.


[QUOTE=Guest]RE: CONGRESS KEEPING THEIR MEDICAL COVERAGE
PROGRESSIVE, SOCIALIST, LOGIC.
People have medial coverage due to military service (VA), people have medical coverage due to their job-teachers, government, union etc.[QUOTE=Guest]

The congress enacted the AHA with the stipulation that all members of congress and their staffs were REQUIRED to participate in AHA. The current bill that the House passed kept that same coverage only for the members of congress and their staffs. If the "new" healthcare law is good for the population of Americans in their congressional districts, it should be good enough for the members of congress and their staffs. The AHA did not effect the current group health programs for corporations with 50 or more employees, just revised the rules so that ALL recipients of health care could NOT be discriminated against because of pre-existing conditions, could not have a cap on their coverage, could not be cancelled after a claim, and could keep their children on their policy until that child was 26 years old and still living at home, or have become emancipated.

[QUOTE=Guest]THERE IS NOTHING SIMPLE ABOUT MEDICAL CARE.
Typical of American thought we thing everyone should get equal care WHETHER THEY ARE PAYING FOR IT OR NOT.
Medical care is one of the few things that you cannot shop for. However crude it is, your doctor is SELLING YOU a service. Here in the Villages, the snow flakes are going home. It is not a coincidence that you are NOW getting e-mails etc from your doctor-HAVE NOT SEEN YOU IN A WHILE It's obvious that you are speaking from ignorance. Try living overseas in those countries and then talking about it. "Successful" my @ss. They are either going bankrupt or moving back to private insurance. Canada, Germany, etc. This is a large country and the lazy that are working low paying jobs, the lower middle class that are not paying taxes, the ones that fill in the half of our country that do not pay Federal Income taxes, will not like suddenly moving down in lifestyle so that they can suddenly have to pay for EVERYONE to have health care. Believe me when I say that if you are making $50K per year and have to pay half of it in taxes, you won't be happy with health care. On top of that, to get quality health care, you will have to pay more to supplement private insurance coverage.
The grass isn't always greener on the other side, and spoiled and pampered Americans will be crying the blues with they get what they are begging for.

The insurers pay the medical bills. They are also heavily regulated.

I've said that the for profit medical industry makes too much money...many times.

I don't support the wars either...I'm against empire.

We agree on these... What we disagree on is the 100 million poor people who are mostly minorities...what to do with/about them.

My heart IS hardened after 60 years of watching America sink lower and lower...but my mind is sharp.

House GOP health bill changes exempt members of Congress
 

House GOP health bill changes exempt members of Congress | TheHill

Fact Check: Is Congress Exempt From the G.O.P. Health Bill?https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/04/u...alth-bill.html

House GOP health bill changes exempt members of Congress House GOP health bill changes exempt members of Congress | TheHill

Is Congress Exempt from GOP Health Bill? Is Congress Exempt from GOP Health Bill? - FactCheck.org

CONGRESS AGAIN EXEMPT FROM SOME REPUBLICAN HEALTH PLAN CUTS Congress Again Exempt From Some Republican Health Plan Cuts

Typical left wing rhetoric. When Obama exempted the unions from Obamacare, the left was silent. When Obama/congress exempted congress from Obamacare, the left was silent.

Advice: Get over it. It's blown out of proportion. AGAIN.