On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 02:01:51 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 21:59:18 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 19:40:49 -0700, Jack wrote:


Sounds like you need to get a job with some benefits, and rescue your
wife from having to support you and from providing you with your own
health care.

Yeah, but ... tying health care to business is the wrong approach, IMO.
Besides the anti-competitive costs to business in the world market, if
you get sick with a long-term illness, you are SOL. A dirty little
secret, most employee health insurance policies end when you aren't
collecting a pay check. Try paying for CORBA with just a disability
check, if you even get a disability check.

I believe there is a need for a national system for situations like
this.

What I don't like about this Obamacare is that it's going to force
choices on people and that bothers me.

From what I've been reading, if your job status changes (like changing
jobs/companies, etc.) or there are benefit changes (like an increase
in co-pay), you and/or your employer are forced into the "qualified"
system rather than just pay the increased co-pay. The "qualified"
plans are run by Federal bureaucrats who are going to tell you what is
and what isn't acceptable.

Additionally, if would appear that treatments will be rationed by
"cost effectiveness". Meaning that, to use me for example, if the
Feds decide that the Retuxin treatment isn't effective because of cost
vs my age (I'll be 63 on Monday), that I'll be forced into a
different treatment that is cheaper and not as effective - but it will
cost less.

Personally, I don't want to be taking percocet for the rest of my life
because some douche bag bureaucrat decides that my treatment isn't
worth the money being spent on a costly, but very effective treatment
regime. If what I"m reading is correct, I can't even pay for the
treatment myself - that's not an option.

And you have to be suspicious of this Obamacare if Congress critters
aren't getting the same Obamacare as the average citizen.

"In the health debate, liberals sing Hari Krishnas to the "public
option" -- a new federal insurance program like Medicare -- but if
it's good enough for the middle class, then surely it's good enough
for the political class too? As it happens, more than a few Democrats
disagree.

On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a
two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would
require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new
government-run health plan. Yet all Democrats -- with the exceptions
of acting chairman Chris Dodd, Barbara Mikulski and Ted Kennedy via
proxy -- voted nay."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124786946165760369.html

That right there has got to tell you something and as I understand it,
Federal employees will get the keep their very generous plans - paid
for by the taxpayer.

It's got to say something when even Bernie Sanders wants to stay out
of the very system he is to hot to trot on. Personally, I agree with
the general consensus on this - if it's good enough for me and you,
it's good enough for them too.

Dollars to donuts, Obamacare wouldn't even make it out of comittee if
the Congress critters were forced to accept the same system as the
American citizen.

Do we need some kind of health care system for those who can't afford
it or protect them and their families? Yes - absolutely - I agree.

Do I need it or want it? Absolutely not.

Good points. One of my brothers was for changing the health care
system before he got some rare ailment. Now he's reaping many, many
of times more in benefits than he's paying for insurance, and wants to
keep his plan. Just the drug costs are a kazillion dollars.
Makes sense to me. Doesn't address the problem though.
And a sticky one it is.
I see the main issues as not everybody kicking in - for whatever
reason, defensive medicine, inefficient treatment by medical staff,
excessive insurance company vigorish, excessive drug company vigorish,
essentially dishonest medical practices (eg., the insurance company
will pay for those $10 12 ounce bottles of water when we bill them)
and the list goes on. I'll bet about 10-20% of medical costs are
outright fraud by medical providers. Then you got your "want to live
forever at whatever cost" syndrome.
Sticky indeed.

--Vic

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 05:38:33 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Jul 2009 02:01:51 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 21:59:18 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2009 19:40:49 -0700, Jack wrote:


Sounds like you need to get a job with some benefits, and rescue your
wife from having to support you and from providing you with your own
health care.

Yeah, but ... tying health care to business is the wrong approach, IMO.
Besides the anti-competitive costs to business in the world market, if
you get sick with a long-term illness, you are SOL. A dirty little
secret, most employee health insurance policies end when you aren't
collecting a pay check. Try paying for CORBA with just a disability
check, if you even get a disability check.

I believe there is a need for a national system for situations like
this.

What I don't like about this Obamacare is that it's going to force
choices on people and that bothers me.

From what I've been reading, if your job status changes (like changing
jobs/companies, etc.) or there are benefit changes (like an increase
in co-pay), you and/or your employer are forced into the "qualified"
system rather than just pay the increased co-pay. The "qualified"
plans are run by Federal bureaucrats who are going to tell you what is
and what isn't acceptable.

Additionally, if would appear that treatments will be rationed by
"cost effectiveness". Meaning that, to use me for example, if the
Feds decide that the Retuxin treatment isn't effective because of cost
vs my age (I'll be 63 on Monday), that I'll be forced into a
different treatment that is cheaper and not as effective - but it will
cost less.

Personally, I don't want to be taking percocet for the rest of my life
because some douche bag bureaucrat decides that my treatment isn't
worth the money being spent on a costly, but very effective treatment
regime. If what I"m reading is correct, I can't even pay for the
treatment myself - that's not an option.

And you have to be suspicious of this Obamacare if Congress critters
aren't getting the same Obamacare as the average citizen.

"In the health debate, liberals sing Hari Krishnas to the "public
option" -- a new federal insurance program like Medicare -- but if
it's good enough for the middle class, then surely it's good enough
for the political class too? As it happens, more than a few Democrats
disagree.

On Tuesday, the Senate health committee voted 12-11 in favor of a
two-page amendment courtesy of Republican Tom Coburn that would
require all Members and their staffs to enroll in any new
government-run health plan. Yet all Democrats -- with the exceptions
of acting chairman Chris Dodd, Barbara Mikulski and Ted Kennedy via
proxy -- voted nay."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124786946165760369.html

That right there has got to tell you something and as I understand it,
Federal employees will get the keep their very generous plans - paid
for by the taxpayer.

It's got to say something when even Bernie Sanders wants to stay out
of the very system he is to hot to trot on. Personally, I agree with
the general consensus on this - if it's good enough for me and you,
it's good enough for them too.

Dollars to donuts, Obamacare wouldn't even make it out of comittee if
the Congress critters were forced to accept the same system as the
American citizen.

Do we need some kind of health care system for those who can't afford
it or protect them and their families? Yes - absolutely - I agree.

Do I need it or want it? Absolutely not.

Good points. One of my brothers was for changing the health care
system before he got some rare ailment. Now he's reaping many, many
of times more in benefits than he's paying for insurance, and wants to
keep his plan. Just the drug costs are a kazillion dollars.
Makes sense to me. Doesn't address the problem though.
And a sticky one it is.
I see the main issues as not everybody kicking in - for whatever
reason, defensive medicine, inefficient treatment by medical staff,
excessive insurance company vigorish, excessive drug company vigorish,
essentially dishonest medical practices (eg., the insurance company
will pay for those $10 12 ounce bottles of water when we bill them)
and the list goes on. I'll bet about 10-20% of medical costs are
outright fraud by medical providers. Then you got your "want to live
forever at whatever cost" syndrome.
Sticky indeed.

I would agree with you on almost everything with one exception.

Not enough people take charge of their own health - Obama is right on
that score, but his solution isn't.

You have to be pro-active and not reactive meaning that if a Doctor
says - we have to run this test or that procedure, you need to ask
questions - of if you don't have the base knowledge of your own
physiology, anatomy and pharmacology, find a advocate who can explain
it to you.

In my case, I'm a licensed paramedic/trauma specialist and while I'm
not a Doctor or NP, I'm the next best thing and I can ask pointed and
detailed questions. My internist learned her lesson very early in our
relationship - don't ever try to bull**** me on a course of action.
Same with my RA doc and the osteopath I see regularly.

The funny part is if I have a funky blood test and they want to
"consult" a GI doc or another RA doc (specialist) they usually set
aside additional patient contact time because they know they are going
to get the third degree rubber hose treatment. And if they do answer
my questions properly and explain it so that I agree to see the
specialist, they call ahead and speak personally to the physician and
tell them to watch out because, while I'm never a wise guy or a
difficult patient, I tend to be fully prepared to ask questions and
get appropriate answers. :)

And believe it or not, my providers are very good about it - they
appreciate the dialoge and it even works out that by questioning them,
they get different ideas about what may or may not work - it helps
them think outside the box.

Granted that my condition is extremely rare (1 in 300 million men) and
it's interesting from that aspect, but still. :)