SomaliNet Forums

Repealing the health care bill is like repealing Social Security

NHG the supreme court has ruled, such a massice piece of legislation is not going to be repealed. Just think of it for a moment: hospitals, insurance companies, clinics, state governments, and the federal gov going to be so far into it and so much money put into this, it will be like trying to stop a locomotive by standing infront of it.

Obama will have sooo much fun tearing Mitt Romney appart in debates. Too bad Romney a wise choice as Gov in Mass. With universal healthcare, whic really gave the basis for the wholecountry. But politics is getting the best of him.

NHG are you also against income taxs, roads taxs, social security? I mean you don't get social security till your almost 70 or you get disabled, but what if you die before then, why you should I have to pay a tax though I don't see the benefit of it till I'm a senior? And this for everyone who works.

lmao, NHG, Romney has no chance of becoming President. 4 more years for Obama

americans

Can anyone explain what the difference between Obama and Romney is?
Some posters in this thread even said Obama healtcare was Romney idea?

Substance wrote:Can anyone explain what the difference between Obama and Romney is?
Some posters in this thread even said Obama healtcare was Romney idea?

The United States has a one party system, and that's the Business Party, with two fronts the Republicans and Democrats.

Thanks shirib, that made more sense to me.

The indivdual manadate is neccessary to correct the problem of adverse selection. The cost of healthcare in the US is sky-rocketing and the quality of it is substandard compared to Western European countries (America excels in research but that is not the issue here). Couple of years ago the Institute of Medicine published 2 reports: Too Err is Human..... and the second report: The Quality Chasm. The 2 reports discuss the quality of care in the US and the high number of people who die due to avoidable errors. Emtala , the statute enacted by government that no hospital can turn away a person from the emergency room had the unintended consequence of increasing cost of uncompensated care due to the free loaders that forego buying health insurance and just going to the hospital emergency. With free loaders out of the equation, the insurance companies has a pool of people to cover but it is faced with the problem of information asymetry. Insurance companies do not know the history of the people who are buying the coverage (yeah, people lie on applications). Full coverage are usually bought by people who are sick and need the coverage, healthy younger people may buy less coverage or opt out because they are healthy. Insurance companies react to covering only sick people by doing its version of damage control ( otherwise know as premuim death spiral) so, the insurance company comes up with putting limits on what one can spend on disease X per year, and denies coverage to those it finds having a pre-existing condition or a family history of that disease. There is also the issue of moral hazard (google that).
The government through incentive is doing several things, one of which is the establishment of Health Information Exchanges (HIE), HIE will be a marketplace where insurance companies can compete and offer different insurance options. The States are objecting to the Federal government's involvement and invoke compact clause and blue sky laws as giving them the rights to manage inter-state commerce. Thank God, the supreme court thinks different.
What is interesting about the 26 States that sued the Federal government is that they are requesting the incentives and other money from the Obamacare funds. Yes, the cost of health insurance for small business owners and small Dr. practices will go up, but in the long run cost of healthcare will go down and quality will improve.
Bill Cliton failed in this endevour because he approached the issue from a moral point of view. On the other hand, Obama approached it from the cost side of things. Overall a win win situation in my opinion. That is not to say, come 2014 people will not be suing the governor on up for infringement on personal freedom. Those who want "personal freedom, not to buy coverage want also to freeload on visits to hospital emergency room and let the tax payer foot the bill!

So if the insurance companies have sway of how much they want to charge on people who suddenly have to enroll in mandatory health care,then doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of cutting health care costs by giving health insurance companies even more leverage?

I think the best part of this health care bill would have been the so call public option which was taken out. That would have kept the health insurances from charging more to accommodate the millions more people of health care recipients.

one positive note; if you're student and are all your Parent's policy, then this is great news for you. for the rest of us tax payers, this doesn't do anything for us.

Somalistan, with the individual mandate, just like car insurance,(not counting New Hampshire) everybody will be required to have health insurance, the pool of potential customers will increase. The insurance companies claim that their market share of customers and profit is limited and hence the reason for jacking up prices to make a profit. But, if the pool of consumers is expanded their will be competition and pooling o resources. there are differnent proposals on how this will take shape. The main ponts are: 1. Everyone must buy health insurance, and 2) No one can be denied coverage for pre-existing condition. States or individuals that refuse to buy insurance should be made to pay a higher tax once a year. I beleive that is how they do it in New Hampshire.

Newhargeisagirl wrote:^ you are celebrating too early my friend dont you think? Mitt Romney made it clear yet again today that he is going to be replead and replace the bill in his first day in office this is exactly the same issue why the Dems lost the election in 2010 and it's certainly going to happen again in November. Abdiwahab have you even read the bill or watched the news lately because all this law does is impose extra taxes on anyone who can't already afford health insurance, and if one can't afford health insurance, one won't be able to afford the extra tax, and when that happens people will go to prison for tax evasion Anwyayz I don't understand what the buzz is since the bill wont even take effect until 2014

The price hike is short term. It is a little stunt to make people like Shirib vote for Mitt Romney and have a Republican administration repeal the bill through legislation before it really kicks off.

The health care bill is being implemented step by step. Full inception will be in 2014 when the marketplace competition starts and when people will have the option to pool into state made pools that are designed like the type of health care the government gives its workers. Then private mega companies will be forced to compete (bring premiums down) or lose customers. At that stage health care will be extremely cheap and accessible (either through the expansion of medicaid for super poor, the really cheap opt in to state pools, or what would become really cheap private insurance that are competing against public pools).

Forcing the "individual mandate" is really the most important part because it solidifies the effectiveness of the pools (basically it is ayuuto/hagbad...everyone chips in and supports everyone) which in turn basically swallows up private insurance or forces them to completely overhaul to compete against the public. In the end this is the next best thing and the closest the US could have gotten to nationalized health care at the moment.

Supreme Court decision

this would've been humiliating for Obama had it not passed.

Substance wrote:Can anyone explain what the difference between Obama and Romney is?
Some posters in this thread even said Obama healtcare was Romney idea?

Politics .
Romney passed a somewhow similar bill when he was Gov of Massachussets but now that he is running against Obama , the plan that he passed is not good anymore .... because his political opponent { Obama} had tha audacity to "copy" him .

Americans are f-king dumb I swear. Health Insurance lobbyist and interest groups pay their Congressmen to convinced them
.That a Universal Healthcare run by their government is a bad thing.And they believe them.US Is One Of Only Three Developed Nations Without Universal Healthcare For All,

Thuganomics wrote:Americans are f-king dumb I swear. Health Insurance lobbyist and interest groups pay their Congressmen to convinced them
.That a Universal Healthcare run by their government is a bad thing.And they believe them.US Is One Of Only Three Developed Nations Without Universal Healthcare For All,

who are the other 2?