U.S. House's Health Care Reform Bill

Automatic Washer - The world's coolest Washing Machines, Dryers and Dishwashers

Help Support :

and whats more

The American and Canadian systems seem to suffer with two extremes-the American with its lack of universality and the outrageous fact that those who most need health care cant get insurance to cover them and the Canadian with its lack of choice and rationing of services.

I am proud of how Australia has navigated a middle path through these two extremes in how it structures its health care. America needs to have a healthy public system in direct competitioon with a viable vital group of private insurers.

Other Australian members rightly point out the downward pressure that a good universal public health insurance scheme places on private insurers making them offer good, relevant and competitive products. But I need to add that there are some important forces that the privately insured allow others to bring to bear on the public sysytem. My being able to have my arthritic hip replaced a week after diagnosis as a private patient allows the uninsured to bring moral pressure to bear on the politicians in charge of our public system by asking why other people need to wait years to have a hip replacement with its associated pain suffering and disability.

The private sector is also more responsive and adaptable to technological innovation and improvement. In recent years many new techniques have been introduced first to private patients but the skills and knowledge quickly spreads to doctors in the public system as doctors can bring pressure to bear in the public system to introduce improvements that they have already seen benefit their patients.

Hence the privately insured patient has alot to thank Medicare for in Australia in offering a rational alternative to buying the private insurance products, but also the uninsured can thank those who do insure for creating higher expectations of and greater choice in the health system in general.

Trust me I'm a doctor...

Peter
 
Participation is moreless compulsory, but a range of "hardship waivers" will be given, for everything from affordability problems to religious objections.

In addition, "affordability credits" will be available for individuals with incomes up to 400% of poverty level ($43,000/year).

 
Sorry, in case it wasn't already clear, participation is moreless compulsory for Americans who choose the public option. Those who choose private insurance aren't affected.
 
Well, it's not a matter of choice for America's poorest. You can't get blood out of a stone, so it's very probable these "affordability credits" will be close to 100% of the premium amounts for people living under or just above the poverty line. The credits extend (regressively) for those making up to $43,000/year, or $88,000 for a family of four.
 
i really hope we do get it. The uninformed have never written checks i would think. The parents both had health insurance with "capped coverage" from Dad's retirement. His cancer and her heart disease, reached the cap quickly. Many people who have insurance do not realize there a limits to the "max" coverage. When the "Companies" will no longer insure, for less than a kings ransom. The naysayers may well embrace the public option. "I have health insurance and i am very happy with it", has probably been blessed with good health. Do not think for a minute if you have a catastrophic illness, that hospital adm. is uninterested in your personal assets.
 
Tax increases on the "mega-wealthy"

equals higher cost for the products and services they provide. We ALL will have to pay for this, not just the "mega-wealthy".
 
Why isnt this bigger news?

Where are all the bleeding heart liberals? Where are the right wingers who see this as a covert threat to the right to bear arms? I thought this would have stimulated alot more debate. I watch the New York Times site and very little on there either. I thought the private insurance companies would be telling horror stories about socialised medicine by now. I thought the left wingers would be parading uninsured families in front of the press. I thought members here would be excited and or horrified at the changes proposed.

Is Obama such a clever politician that he can get this through without all of the controversy?
 
Why isnt this bigger news?

Where are all the bleeding heart liberals? Where are the right wingers who see this as a covert threat to the right to bear arms? I thought this would have stimulated alot more debate. I watch the New York Times site and very little on there either. I thought the private insurance companies would be telling horror stories about socialised medicine by now. I thought the left wingers would be parading uninsured families in front of the press. I thought memebers here would be excited and or horrified at the changes proposed.

Is Obama such a clever politician that he can get this through without all of the controversy?
 
Is Obama such a clever politician that he can get this throu

Methinks things, times and the econmy here are so bad and the lack of hope abounds so much that tradtinal reisitance to change has faded.

I was shocked to here car manufacturers here commending the governmnt on its more stringet emissions and efficieny (mileage) standards. The things one will do to get millions!
 
Read the bill. It is a disaster, just like the cap and tax bill. The price of everything will go up to cover the cost, in addition to taxing the hell out of small business owners.

As for actual healthcare, see what you may be in for..

 
The din of impending doom is getting very tired.

Yes. There are problems with other healthcare systems in other countries. It's pretty short-sighted to automatically assume ours will have to be identical to theirs or that we're not smart enough to come up with a program that works for our needs.
 
> Methinks things, times and the econmy here are so bad and the lack of hope abounds so much that tradtinal reisitance to change has faded. <

It's more that we now recognize we can no longer afford the cost of doing nothing. The same thing is true for global warming and cap-and-trade.

We must have a public option for healthcare, if for no other reason than to exert downward pressure on costs and pricing of our private insurance system. Without this pressure, health care costs would eventually bankrupt us.

The other reason this is happening now is because most people realize it's never going to happen with Republican leadership in Congress. From 1994-2006 they had 12 years to address these problems, and they spent their time doing nothing except giving corporations everything they ever wanted, giving tax breaks to people who didn't need them, and trying to prove Bill Clinton had an extramarital affair. Just as our national debt quadrupled in just eight years under Ronald Reagan's "leadership", and in just eight years the U.S. went from being the world's largest creditor to the world's largest debtor -- a title we still hold today, 12 years of Republican control of Congress did more to damage our economic stability and gut our middle class than 40+ years of Democratic "tax and spend liberalism" did.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top