![]() |
PPACA aka Obamacare explained CNN and FOX got it wrong, initially, but the Affordable Care Act was upheld. I had a real general idea of what it's about, but a redditor posted a nice, easy-to-understand summary. It's a long read, but it's worth it, if you were wondering what this was all about: Quote:
|
It just blows my mind how people are so adamantly opposed to something that improves their overall quality of life. I am just glad PPACA passed/upheld so that American is one step closer to most developed countries and ultimately moves away from profit healthcare. |
Americans make fun of us Canadians cause of free health care, why would they want it? |
Quote:
(Hospital and surgery wait time is so much lower in the US vs Canada is because people who couldn't afford them in the US will just stay home and leave their disease untreated) The plan will improve the overall quality of life for the currently poor and uninsured, but it will most likely lower the overall healthcare quality for those who are already receiving good health care service |
The US is a strange little place. Here's my take on some of the objections. One: Bigger Gov't/Gov't stepping in on health care decisions This is a big one for Americans, given their history, and how their country was formed. They don't trust the gov't, and I kind of don't blame them. Their gov't has done some pretty fucked up things. Eight years later, you can be pretty sure that the people responsible are living off book deals and never have to answer for it. Myself, I'd much rather have health care be responsible to an elected official, that i can vote for, rather than a for-profit corporation. Ok, corporations are people? Well, most of them are assholes. Two: Cost This is a big one. I think the ultimate goal is to break the health care system, so that a universal, single pay system is viewed as a solution, not a problem. You really can't say that adding 30 million people to the rolls of the insured, at a subsidized price is going to be cheaper for all. You can't tell me that not a single tax is going to have to be raised to cover that cost. There is a percentage of those people that can afford insurance, but don't have. The rest are going to have to be subsidized. Three: Americans are very much "I pay my own way" until they need help. All of insurance is about mitigating risk. You pay some, in concert with others so that you don't need to pay all when you need it. The whole thing really makes you think that we have it lucky in Canada. We can leave employment when needed/desired without risk of health insurance and a lot in the states currently can't. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
bill maher show this week was discussing this and fareed zakaria was a guest and spoke of how when Taiwan decided to provide health care they had dozens of phds investigate other countries systems and they decided that the USA was an example of how Not to do health care and that Canada was the most efficient/cheapest way to implement health care compared to the rest of the world (this was like 15yrs-ish ago) Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Because everyone considers McDonalds health food right now |
americans do ;) |
No they don't. People know they are eating shitty food when they eat shitty food. They just don't care. Putting "calories" on the menu isn't going to change that. At least they aren't forcing restrictions though, I guess it could be worse. |
|
I'm giving this thread some life again. There wasn't a lot of discussion on this topic in the other thread nor this one. I'll look into it some more as I'm unsure what to think at the moment, but can America afford Obamacare? Is the government responsible for any of the costs or is it all going to be paid for in the solutions in the link I provided (didn't mention the government)? http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily...145413745.html |
Shouldn't to US gov be more worry about financial cliff/fiscal cliff first? |
Bing, government is responsible for all of the costs through the solutions that are listed on that page. Governments don't magically make money from air (well, some do, but that's a debate for another time), so they need some method to pay for it. And where do governments get money? Oh, right. Taxpayers. Some of the things that really shocked me in there though. They said that a "cheap" insurance plan is about $5,000 per year per person. That's more than $400 a month. That's fucking insane to me. America constantly resists "government interference", but Jesus motherfucking Christ, do they not see what kind of benefits they could get from a single payer system like we use here? Yeah, sure, there's waiting lists but Jesus...healthcare won't bankrupt you. Also, the fiscal cliff is an important problem right now for the Yanks, and it's something they seriously need to work on solving. That having been said, if they weren't bringing in Obamacare, health insurance costs in the really long run in the states would end up rising ridiculously. People who can't get into a hospital or a doctor when they have problems that are easily treatable will have to go to the hospital when it's an emergency. And even American hospitals have to give emergency medical procedures. As the American population ages, and as the number of people who cannot afford health care increases, it will place more pressure on the hospitals and the insurance companies that support them to charge more simply to deal with the costs of having so many emergency cases. Obamacare will, over time, reduce the costs of healthcare in the US by ensuring that people have sufficient coverage to go see a doctor and get stuff nipped in the bud. Fiscal cliff, looming. Medical coverage disaster...looming farther and bigger. |
Quote:
Yes, there is a taxpayer angle that people in the states are pissed about, ie. the subsidized plans for low income. Well shit you people, you are going to either subsidize them in some way through emergency care, or watch them die. Pick one. And if you pick the second one, fuck your country just a little more. The americans talk about not wanting government involved in their health decisions...so you are ok with a for profit company instead??? Totally reasonable. I could just sit here and spew on for days about how little I like the US. |
For those of you who are interested in reading up on why having an adequate social support system is necessary these days, I'd highly recommend you take a look at this page: The Million Dollar (Homeless) Patient | Reporting on Health It talks about the plight of the 'million dollar patients'; the homeless people whose treatment is so expensive at the emergency room, they are draining the resources of the American private medical care facilities and putting the government on a deeper hook. Even though I TL;DR spoiler'd a bunch of this article that isn't pertinent just to the dude, it's still kind of long. Sorry. Quote:
Now, if there were medical insurance that covered everyone in the states (kind of like there is here), these people wouldn't exist. This kind of problem exists up here too though--don't get me wrong. This is one of many reasons people need to get through their heads that having a drug addict in a home or getting them injecting safely means we are saving millions of dollars, countless hours that doctors and nurses could be using on genuinely ill people, and generally raising the quality of life for everybody. Not just "those damned lazy slobs who wanna take my money and don't put nothin' in the system." Sometimes it's not about what you put in. Sometimes it's about minimizing what others take out. |
^Is a good point. I work in the Medical Insurance industry, and a main issue we have here that no one is willing to talk about are healthcare costs in relation to medical technology. Having a Universal Health Care System doesn't fix this problem, eventually the idea of "death panels" (which is a loaded name for it) must exist in some way or another in the future. What do I mean? There are hospitals throughout Canada and the United States with patients who are taking up beds in ICU's, who really at that point should no longer be there. Intensive Care Units are by far the most expensive area within a hospital to keep a patient, with generally also the lowest amount of beds available. We now live in a time technology wise where we can keep people alive indefinitely, even if by logical terms, that person shouldn't be kept alive. Often times the decision to cut that person from care lies on the family, which in my opinion shouldn't be the case. The cost of keeping Grandma in the ICU to keep her hooked up for an additional 6 months of life in a coma, is utterly pointless, and EXTREMELY expensive. This is something that occurs in every hospital whether Canada or the US, and is easily one of the biggest pulls on the system in the US. Should someone suffering from serious Cancer who is being kept alive in the hospital by machine, really be kept on said machine only to continue the inevitable? Is this economically feasible? It's a tricky subject, and as we move forward this technology will only become better and more sophisticated, and at the same time we as a population need to figure out how to take the personal aspect out of deciding who should continue to receive care and those who should not. |
My mom had a great quote on that subject; it was in response to an article I'd read in the Georgia Straight. There was a guy who long ago had trained as a vet, but then decided to take the jump and become a doctor. He said that in his career as a doctor, he had seen extreme measure taken to save the lives of some people. Had those people been animals, and he a vet, he would have gone to jail for "allowing them undue harm and suffering". My mom's response: Quote:
|
To be honest in the least 7 years I visit the doctor less than 5 times, yet I am paying (well my compnay is) all this time for my health care......... Do I think is a waste of money.... Maybe health insurance should be bill differently say if you use the system less than you pay less upt o 40% off while you use health care more you pay regualr price. It will encourage people to stay more healthy, eat more healthy and reduce cost for the system. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:27 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net