CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Healthcare/ACA 2017
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Healthcare/ACA 2017 - Page 4

post #151 of 181

Let us dispel the myth that the Medicaid expansion only insures able-bodied people who don't want to work:

 

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/2017/03/06/myths-about-the-medicaid-expansion-and-the-able-bodied/

 

Quote:

A conservative critique of the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA’s) expansion of Medicaid eligibility is that it helps adults who are “able-bodied” and may discourage them from working. For example, a policy summary released by House Republicans proposes that “Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion for able-bodied adults [should] be repealed in its current form” (emphasis added). Arkansas Governor Asa Hutchinson has declared that if people are not willing to work and are “able-bodied, they ought to be kicked off the system.” In fact, the great majority of adults covered by the Medicaid expansion are in ill health or are already working, in school, or looking for work.

 

This false understanding of Medicaid recipients and their health insurance options has already influenced policymaking at the state level. For example, Arizona plans to seek a Medicaid waiver to limit able-bodied adults to a maximum of five years lifetime coverage and impose work requirements during that period. Similar waiver proposals have been consistently rejected in the past because they are contrary to the statutory objectives of Medicaid, which has never imposed lifetime limits or work requirements. But there is a risk that such a waiver might be approved in today’s policy environment.

 

These policy ideas stem from a serious misunderstanding about Medicaid recipients and a flawed belief that employment effectively assures health insurance coverage. In reality, only a small share of the adults covered by Medicaid expansions are in good health but not working, in school, or looking for work. Moreover, the types of low-wage jobs available to Medicaid enrollees are unlikely to offer meaningful health insurance coverage.

 

Data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey illustrate that most healthy Medicaid expansion beneficiaries are working or pursuing economic opportunities. Half (48 percent) of adults covered by the Medicaid expansion are permanently disabled, have serious physical or mental limitations—-caused by conditions like cancer, stroke, heart disease, cognitive or mental health disorders, arthritis, pregnancy, or diabetes—-or are in fair or poor health. Low-wage jobs are often physically demanding, precluding those with limitations from employment. Of the other half, who might be viewed as “able-bodied,” 62 percent are already working or in school and 12 percent are looking for work; only 25 percent are not currently working or in school. (More information about the analyses is at the end of this brief.)

 

Only 13 percent of adults covered by Medicaid’s expansion are able-bodied and not working, in school, or seeking work. Of that small group, three-quarters report they are not working in order to care for family members and the rest report other reasons, like being laid off. A much higher share of overall American adults are unemployed or not in the labor force (28 percent), according to 2015 Census data. Medicaid expansion enrollees are more likely to be working or looking for work than the general public, unless they are burdened by ill health or the needs of their families. Moreover, Medicaid expansions could make it easier for beneficiaries to find work, as reported in Ohio.

post #152 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Farsight View Post
 

Heh, yeah, because if you offer people free access to MedicAid, they're going to refuse it. You'd have throw them in jail! Or just execute them! We can't execute everyone! So universal health care is unpossible!

 

Of course, he's not even considering the possibility of health care without insurance companies lining his pockets.

 

These guys' inability to form a single logical argument is baffling.

 

You scoff, but literally every country that has universal health care does it by filling their jails with freedom fighters who won't take free health insurance.

 

 

 

...right?

post #153 of 181
Thread Starter 

Such

monumental

ASSHOLES

 

 

House Republicans May Have Saved Trumpcare by Making It Even Crueler
Quote:

The proposal is to eliminate ten essential benefits that, according to the Affordable Care Act, must be offered as part of any insurance plan. Those benefits are:

 

• Outpatient care without a hospital admission, known as ambulatory patient services

• Emergency services

• Hospitalization

• Pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care

• Mental health and substance use disorder services, including counseling and psychotherapy

• Prescription drugs

• Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, which help people with injuries and disabilities to recover

• Laboratory services

• Preventive care, wellness services, and chronic disease management

• Pediatric services, including oral and vision care for children

 

I'm gobsmacked that these mf-ers can look at themselves in the mirror in the morning.

post #154 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTRan View Post
 

Such

monumental

ASSHOLES

 

 

House Republicans May Have Saved Trumpcare by Making It Even Crueler
Quote:

 

I'm gobsmacked that these mf-ers can look at themselves in the mirror in the morning.

Of course they can! A mirror only shows them the people they really care about.*

 

*It vexes me that most republicans are descendents of inmigrants that were the mexicans, muslims and the like of their day in the opinion of the "real americans" of the time.

post #155 of 181

God, so much chaos in the House just because Paul Ryan got his first boner while reading Atlas Shrugged.

post #156 of 181

Maybe with enough of this people will educate themselves on the state of the world and single payer will start mustering real support.  

post #157 of 181

The vote's reportedly been delayed, possibly to tomorrow.


EDIT: Yup, delayed. This is gloriously pathetic. They can't muster the votes. Everyone needs to find Ryan and laugh derisively at him, right at his stupid smug Rand-loving face.


Edited by Dent6084 - 3/23/17 at 12:48pm
post #158 of 181
Are they going to pull another all-nighter and fuck with it even more?

"What if we just deported people with preexisting conditions? Yeah!"
post #159 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Are they going to pull another all-nighter and fuck with it even more?

"What if we just deported people with preexisting conditions? Yeah!"

 

Bradito, you have to realize that the 1-10% of the population with pre-existing conditions or who are ill consume something like 99% of all healthcare costs.  If we want to give health insurance at a reasonable cost to the middle class we have to find a way to ensure that people who are sick aren't able to obtain coverage, cause including them does nothing but drive up the cost for everyone.  Those "people" aren't much fun to be around anyway, so society doesn't even benefit from them being alive.  

post #160 of 181
Yeah, fuck 'em!

Am I doing this right?
post #161 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

Yeah, fuck 'em!

Am I doing this right?

 

You need to be more word-smith-y and circumspect in your language choices in order to conceal your true meaning.  

post #162 of 181
You're the lawyer.
post #163 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

You're the lawyer.

Part time.  

post #164 of 181
Quote:

The proposal is to eliminate ten essential benefits that, according to the Affordable Care Act, must be offered as part of any insurance plan. Those benefits are:

 

• Outpatient care without a hospital admission, known as ambulatory patient services

• Emergency services

• Hospitalization

• Pregnancy, maternity, and newborn care

• Mental health and substance use disorder services, including counseling and psychotherapy

• Prescription drugs

• Rehabilitative and habilitative services and devices, which help people with injuries and disabilities to recover

• Laboratory services

• Preventive care, wellness services, and chronic disease management

• Pediatric services, including oral and vision care for children

 

Seriously, at that point, isn't all what's left a "Give us your money and get ​nothing​ in return" plan? You'd get better value setting your money on fire for warmth by the looks of that.

post #165 of 181

No, it provides a piece of string and a lump of burning coal as dental coverage.

 

I cannot fathom people who would write that into legislation and claim with a straight face that they represent your best interest, and that this constitutes effective health insurance.  If something like that is ever passed, invest in manufacturers of pitchforks.  I swear, Republicans are another race.

post #166 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
 

No, it provides a piece of string and a lump of burning coal as dental coverage.

 

I cannot fathom people who would write that into legislation and claim with a straight face that they represent your best interest, and that this constitutes effective health insurance.  If something like that is ever passed, invest in manufacturers of pitchforks.  I swear, Republicans are another race.

 

What's the deductible on that?

 

I've only recently learnt approximately what that means in the context on healthcare in the US and I'm not sure there's many if any worlds I hate more.

 

Oh, wait. Thought of one.

 

"Pre-existing condition."

post #167 of 181

Especially when they count having acne as a teenager or having tubes in the ears as a kid as 'pre-existing conditions'.

 

I've only had a run-in with American insurance woes once.  My job offered a pretty weak SunLife plan as benefits, and I was trying to file a claim for a $90 massage.  They would only pay $85.  I was sure to phone them to ask why they were stiffing me five dollars, and I was not shy about telling the nice lady that my plan was to keep her on the phone long enough such that paying her to talk to me cost them more than that.  She was entirely cool with the idea and we had a lovely chat, both agreeing that it was really in SunLife's best interest to just pay me and move on.

post #168 of 181
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
 

Especially when they count having acne as a teenager or having tubes in the ears as a kid as 'pre-existing conditions'.

 

I've only had a run-in with American insurance woes once.  My job offered a pretty weak SunLife plan as benefits, and I was trying to file a claim for a $90 massage.  They would only pay $85.  I was sure to phone them to ask why they were stiffing me five dollars, and I was not shy about telling the nice lady that my plan was to keep her on the phone long enough such that paying her to talk to me cost them more than that.  She was entirely cool with the idea and we had a lovely chat, both agreeing that it was really in SunLife's best interest to just pay me and move on.

 

brilliant <applause>

post #169 of 181

Kevin Drum takes down a common conservative argument: healthcare doesn't actually save that many lives. Limiting positive health outcomes to lifespan glosses over the multiple ways in which access to healthcare makes life easier, from hip replacements to inserting IUDs. Quality of life is as important as the number of years one lives. 

 

More from Drum: http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/03/obamacare-doesnt-save-many-lives-why-do-we-focus-so-much

 

Quote:

People in the US don't die much before age 65, so health insurance for working-age folks has never been likely to have much effect on death rates.1 Below age 55, it's even less likely: the death rate is so minuscule that it would take a miracle to invent any kind of health-related practice that had a measurable effect on life expectancy. If the crude death rate is already below 0.5 percent, there's just no way to reduce it much more.

 

And yet, people like health care anyway. They like it so much that we're collectively willing to spend vast amounts of money on it. As you've probably heard many dozens of times, health care is one-sixth of the economy. On average, that means we all pay about one-sixth of our income to provide health care for ourselves.

 

Why? At the risk of repeating the obvious, most medical care isn't about lifespan. Before age 65, almost none of it is about lifespan. It's about feeling better. I'm taking a very expensive chemotherapy drug that probably won't delay my eventual death by much, but it will improve my life considerably in the meantime. Ditto for the antidepressant I take. And for the arthroscopic knee surgery I had a couple of decades ago.

 

The same is true for putting a leg in a cast; prescribing an asthma inhaler; replacing a hip; treating an infection; inserting an IUD; treating a hernia; removing a cataract; prescribing a statin; or a hundred other medical procedures. Only a small percentage of what doctors do is lifesaving.

 

It's a measure of our impoverished sense of empathy that we spend so much time focused on whether health care saves lives.

post #170 of 181
Thread Starter 

from NPR/Fresh Air piece....

Quote:
How U.S. Health Care Became Big Business

Health care is a trillion-dollar industry in America, but are we getting what we pay for? Dr. Elisabeth Rosenthal, a medical journalist who formerly worked as a medical doctor, warns that the existing system too often focuses on financial incentives over health or science.

"We've trusted a lot of our health care to for-profit businesses and it's their job, frankly, to make profit," Rosenthal says. "You can't expect them to act like Mother Teresas."

Rosenthal's new book, An American Sickness, examines the deeply rooted problems of the existing health-care system and also offers suggestions for a way forward. She notes that under the current system, it's far more lucrative to provide a lifetime of treatments than a cure.

"One expert in the book joked to me ... that if we relied on the current medical market to deal with polio, we would never have a polio vaccine," Rosenthal says. "Instead we would have iron lungs in seven colors with iPhone apps."
post #171 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTRan View Post
 

from NPR/Fresh Air piece....

Quote:
How U.S. Health Care Became Big Business

Health care is a trillion-dollar industry in America, but are we getting what we pay for? Dr. Elisabeth Rosenthal, a medical journalist who formerly worked as a medical doctor, warns that the existing system too often focuses on financial incentives over health or science.

"We've trusted a lot of our health care to for-profit businesses and it's their job, frankly, to make profit," Rosenthal says. "You can't expect them to act like Mother Teresas."

Rosenthal's new book, An American Sickness, examines the deeply rooted problems of the existing health-care system and also offers suggestions for a way forward. She notes that under the current system, it's far more lucrative to provide a lifetime of treatments than a cure.

"One expert in the book joked to me ... that if we relied on the current medical market to deal with polio, we would never have a polio vaccine," Rosenthal says. "Instead we would have iron lungs in seven colors with iPhone apps."

 

 

Funny: just 14 years ago, the very left-leaning show The West Wing was making the opposite argument:

 

Quote:
"If you had demanded that the N.I.H. solve the problem of polio not through independent, investigator-driven discovery research but by means of a centrally directed program, the odds are very strong that you would get the very best iron lungs in the world - portable iron lungs, transistorized iron lungs - but you wouldn't get the vaccine that eradicated polio." - Samuel Broder, former director of the National Cancer Institute

 

(The West Wing, "100,000 Airplanes," Season 3, Episode 11)

post #172 of 181
Thread Starter 

If  we have to choose between a non-profit governmental agency(ies) working to cure a disease and the profit-driven 'free market' (see: Shkreli), I'm going to go with the non-profit every time seeing as profit almost always seems to take precedent over the good of society.

 

...a quick google turned up another comment from Broder

Quote:

As a National Cancer Institute scientist and later as the Institute director, Dr. Broder believes the NIH was uniquely positioned to address the early questions of AIDS, since the disease appeared in the hospital several years before the virus was discovered and studied.

 

He also recalls the critical role NCI played in addressing an infectious disease emergency. At the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, NCI dedicated resources to identifying the cause and quickly developing drugs to treat the disease. At the time, NCI was “the only group at the NIH that actually had become a ‘pharmaceutical company’ working for the public in difficult areas where the private sector either could not or would not make a commitment,” Dr. Broder explains. The Institute had already developed AZT as a possible cancer drug, and Dr. Broder’s group moved quickly to investigate AZT and other agents for treating AIDS. “AZT laid the foundation for almost every other product because … the failure of AZT would have had very dramatic effects” on future drug research.

 

https://history.nih.gov/nihinownwords/docs/page_09.html

post #173 of 181

Oh, I agree with you WRT to going the non-profit route. I was just commenting that not so long ago, people on the left were making arguments in favor of free market participation or leadership in health care.

post #174 of 181

Sen. Dean Heller didn't have a fun townhall:

 

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/854112857725825024

post #175 of 181
post #176 of 181

White House trying to rush through an Obamacare repeal primarily because Trump wants to be able to say he did something during his first 100 days in office - http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/20/obamacare-repeal-republicans-new-deal-237397 

post #177 of 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangy View Post
 

White House trying to rush through an Obamacare repeal primarily because Trump wants to be able to say he did something during his first 100 days in office - http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/20/obamacare-repeal-republicans-new-deal-237397 

 

I detest the fact that the plan now is to do the following:

1. Repeal, creating chaos and uncertainty

2. Force through a shitty deal because we need to have SOMETHING in place, even if it's worse than the ACA or complete anarchy.

 

Fuckers

post #178 of 181
"Remember the thing I said I'd do on Day One? Well, I'm trying to get it done by Day 100. Probably won't happen but what can you do?"
post #179 of 181

Gov. Matt Bevin of Kentucky is proposing a program where people would have to earn points to receive Medicaid dental coverage:

 

http://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/politics/2017/04/21/gov-matt-bevins-likely-medicaid-shake-up-scares-kentucky-patients/100113996/

 

Quote:

Before he got dental coverage, David Thompson, who works at various construction jobs, said he suffered for years with untreated dental pain and decay.

 

"I'd go to work and the pain would be so excruciating that I would literally at lunch go in the parking lot and pull my own teeth," said Thompson, 49, who lives in South Louisville.

 

Now, having just gained health coverage through Kentucky's expansion of Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act, Thompson is hurrying to schedule dental and eye exams — care he said he urgently needs but realizes could be eliminated under major changes to Kentucky's Medicaid program proposed by Gov. Matt Bevin.

 

"I'm trying to do everything I possibly can before these rules change," said Thompson, a patient at Family Health Centers of Louisville. "Had I had insurance before this, I would have more teeth."

 

Kentucky is moving closer to an overhaul of the state's Medicaid program Bevin has said is aimed at controlling costs and encouraging more personal responsibility in consumers, changes that include elimination of basic dental and vision benefits for most "able-bodied" adults who instead would have to earn them through a "rewards" program.

 

The proposed changes:

 

Quote:

Proposed changes include monthly premiums, co-payments for services, mandatory work or volunteer activity to maintain Medicaid coverage and "lock-outs" of coverage for up to six months for some who fail to pay premiums. The state proposal also includes a "My Rewards" account where people can accumulate points for activities such as passing a GED exam, completing job training or completing wellness activities such as stop-smoking classes, points that go toward the purchase of services such as dental or vision care.

 

But Medicaid members also would have points deducted from their rewards account for infractions such as failing to pay premiums or "inappropriate" use of emergency rooms up to a negative balance of $150.

 

Critics of the requirement to work or volunteer up to 20 hours a week argue that a majority of adults affected by the changes already work, many in jobs such as food service, construction or housekeeping that don't come with health insurance.

 

"To use this as a stick just doesn't make any sense to me," said Emily Beauregard, executive director of Kentucky Voices for Health.

 

People are worried:

 

Quote:

 But advocates and public health officials are increasingly concerned about what they believe will be an adverse effect on Kentuckians they say have benefited enormously under the Medicaid expansion launched in 2014 by Bevin's predecessor, former Gov. Steve Beshear.

 

"We're all very, very concerned," said Muriel Harris, an associate professor of public health at the University of Louisville and chair of the Family Health Centers board in Louisville. "Those who have made the decisions are not considering the population we serve. It's just undermining any gains we have made in the past."

 

The proposed loss of dental benefits in a state with poor overall dental health is especially alarming to Bill Wagner, CEO of Family Health Centers. The community health agency just opened a new, full-service dental clinic at its East Broadway site with funds available through the federal health law also known as Obamacare.

 

"We see a lot of patients with severe dental problems," Wagner said. "This is really not the time to be cutting back on dental benefits for adults."

 

Thompson, who said he is a Democrat and did not vote for Bevin, a Republican, agrees.

 

"It is expensive to go to a dentist," he said. "These changes are just ludicrous."

 

But state officials, anticipating approval of Bevin's proposal from the Trump administration, expect to launch the new plan on Jan. 1, 2018, with changes that will affect many of the 440,000 Kentuckians added through the expansion of Medicaid to anyone at or below 138 percent of the federal poverty level. That's an annual income of up to $16,400 for an individual.

 

Advocates worry consumers won't understand the complex changes to the program and, as a result, will lose coverage.

 

"I think people are going to fall away as the system gets more complicated," said Richard Seckel, director of the Kentucky Equal Justice Center in Lexington. "It's an experiment and there's some peril in it. Ideally, we'd be trying things that help people get coverage and keep coverage."

post #180 of 181
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Maiden View Post
 

Gov. Matt Bevin of Kentucky is proposing a program where people would have to earn points to receive Medicaid dental coverage:

 

I'm thinking that it can be proven scientifically... Republicans = asshole

post #181 of 181
Thread Starter 

sociopaths....fucking ignorant sociopaths.

 

House Freedom Caucus leaders back new health-care plan

 

The White House just ratcheted up its threat to destroy Obamacare, a Democratic aide says

 

 

As noted, Congress is exempting themselves from the detrimental aspects of this new iteration of their "fuck you America" legislation.

 

 

Someone could point out that if the GOP were to save and expand the ACA, they would endear themselves to the American populace for at least a generation....but no, they are more concerned with spite and revenge against everything related to Pres. Obama's accomplishments.   

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Healthcare/ACA 2017