Obamacare implosion

I thought that I would post this just to illustrate what healthcare in many of the "civilized nations" is like.

http://conservatives4palin.com/2014/01/ ... aming.html

This issue resonates with me because I have had to contend with insurance companies questioning the efficacy of replacing my first pacemaker when the battery was drained because my displaced pacemaker lead that had perforated my cardiac septum to wind it's way through three out of four chambers of my heart makes my prognosis very questionable. (BTW, I am in a one out of one hundred thousand group who have this condition which has earned me the dubious priveledge of being the subject of a medical journal article for the second time in my life. Because the healthcare system in the US was still private, I could dicker with my doctor and the hospital to get a new pacemaker installed mostly at my own expense. My wife used to care for enough refugees from Canada's healthcare system that I have no doubt that paying out of pocket to get treatment outside of nationalized healthcare system is extremely difficult. The
infrastructure to efficiently perform advanced procedures on many patients simply does not exist in Canada. The cardiac surgery lab at St Vincents hospital with its huge inventory of cardiac implements is one of hundreds in the US but has no counterpart in Canada. The Obamacare tax on medical devices will cause the hospital to reduce inventory. People such as myself will DIE because the devices that are needed are not immediately available!

Oh FFS... Quit it with the ridiculous "Obama is a socialist" drivel.

Finally, a word to all of you citizens of foreign countries who have presumed to demonize the more conservative Republicans who attempted to prevent this train wreck during the recent debt limit debate.

If they behave like idiots, i reserve the right to call them idiots.
And trying to hold a big chunk of the nation hostage just to whine about something, no that´s nothing but idiotic.

You projected your own experiences with nationalized healthcare in your own countries onto the United States to justify criticism of conservatives.

Not really no. The US republicans provide an endless stream of craptacular stuff that justifies critique already, no need to make anything up.
The same goes for the democrats, they´re just slightly less inane and/or insane.

If you had bothered to do any research on the issue, you would have understood that the Obamacare abomination bears little resemblance to the nationalized healthcare systems in other countries that have evolved over most of a century.

I think you will find that at least I have repeatedly said that i do NOT think it´s a good idea, but that unfortunately, you don´t really have a choice, either you start reforming your healthcare business or in a few decades, it´s going to be "end of the line".

So the thing is crappy and messed up? Well FIX IT THEN! That´s the problem with your so called "conservatives" (real conservatives don´t run the national budget into the shitters BTW), they´re not coming up with something better, being too busy pampering the commercial interests of your absurdly bloated healthcare industry.

I´m really NOT happy about how healthcare works here, but i am oooh so happy that i don´t have to deal with the US version, because it´s only better if i pay through the nose, while the total costs of GDP are almost double than here.

In the future, when the US is involved in a political debates over internal issues that really are non of your business, please STFU!!!!!!!

So NOW you don´t like freedom of expression?
Ooh, so not impressed.

namelessfly wrote:....
The
infrastructure to efficiently perform advanced procedures on many patients simply does not exist in Canada.
...

You want to know from where the world at large learned to "perform advanced procedures on many patients" came from?

Cuba... From their way of developing procedures for rapid surgery of certain eye problems.

Spread around the world in the 70s and 80s.

I do not think that there is any tonal ambiguity. I am ANGRY. I am angry because there are too many American voters who allow the opinions of foreigners to influence how the cast their ballots.

Think of the analogy of someone who is having their house remodeled only to have the neighbors' insist on imposing their opinions on how the work should be done and even who the contractor should be. The homeowner goes bankrupt because of the resulting prolificacy without accountability results in skyrocketing costs. To add insult to injury, the house collapses and burns because the incompetent contractor that the neighbors insisted on selecting was dumber than a bag of hammers.

President Obama would never have been elected if he had not had people such as yourself encouraging the more weak minded fools in America that we had to elect this poverty pimp from Chicago because as he put it in his amazingly candid and frightening "crazy uncle in the attic" speech, "is the redeemer for the original sin of slavery.". Now that Obamacare has been revealed to be a steaming pile of feces, you try to shift the blame to Republicans by claiming that the compromises that they demanded created the problems. May be if you actually were a US citizen you would have noticed that ZERO Republicans were involvedin writing the Obamacare legislation and ZERO House Republicans voted for it. Even the RINOs voted against it.

I will climb down off my soap box now. It is time to go to the hospital to check my INR level to see if my dailydose of Waferin (aka "Rat Poison") is correct so hopefully my displaced pacemaker lead will not throw a blood clot to my brain that will kill me or turn me into vegetable. After that, it is back to the woods to harvest more old growth Douglas Fir trees with my Stihl MS-880. Thanks to my daily dose of rat poison, even a relatively minor injury that would require a few stitches will kill me.

BTW, my cardiologist informs me that it is theoretically possible to remove my displaced pacemaker lead but he would want an open heart surgery team standing by in case things went wrong. Now that Obamacare is in effect which is imposing restrictions on Doctor compensation while offerringno tort reform that might protect them from liability, thecardiacsuregeons who might have been willing to perform the operation are retiring young.

Thank You for foisting this life threatening disaster on me.

Donnachaidh wrote:Most of the comments I remember reading seemed to be more mystified about why conservatives in the US were against nationalized healthcare. I don't remember many that were demonizing conservatives.

You come across as a very angry person. I don't know if that's just because of the tonal ambiguity of text or what, but it'd be nice if you could try to come across in a more civil manner.

namelessfly wrote:Finally, a word to all of you citizens of foreign countries who have presumed to demonize the more conservative Republicans who attempted to prevent this train wreck during the recent debt limit debate. You projected your own experiences with nationalized healthcare in your own countries onto the United States to justify criticism of conservatives. If you had bothered to do any research on the issue, you would have understood that the Obamacare abomination bears little resemblance to the nationalized healthcare systems in other countries that have evolved over most of a century. In the future, when the US is involved in a political debates over internal issues that really are non of your business, please STFU!!!!!!!

Thing is the system you advocate would work somewhat for a state. Not well in the US but somewhat. For this country not a chance. I would refer you to the Solarian League and ask you to tell me how that is different.

I never can understand the "its all the fault of the huge, evil corporations". Then turn around and say that a huge government, or anything else, is not evil. "We get to vote on it, they can't be evil." Sounds good fails miserably in practice. Too many low information voters. Like my example before about what the current president says and what he achieves. We have supposedly learned, informed reporters like Mark Shields saying President Obama can't be a socialist because of those results. Who can't make the next step to those results are not they want. Maybe they need to do it differently.

Yes I understand that you are conservative for varying degrees of conservative. I really wish I could introduce folk here to some of my relatives for examples not-conservative. Really I do.

But the biggest problem is that you are severely hamstrung by having to go by what the media reports. Function of being half a world away or for that matter never getting out of a urban/suburban area IN the United States. Rural folk for the most part have to go to urban areas function of what is locally available.

No your characterization of what a US conservative is not even close to correct. Are there a bunch of people who believe the way you think, sure enough. Hell may even be in the millions, a million in the US is .3% of the pop.

I don't like large anything, to be honest. Unfortunately, somethings require large organizations. IMO, Health care is not one of them. Simple solutions normally fail miserably as the stimulus bill, TARP and ACA prove in spades.

"Better is the enemy of good enough."

For that matter take a look at what President Carter did to our mental health system. Simple solution system has abusive people in it, bump that close the system.

Like you I am hamstrung trying to understand the system in use half a world away. So I can't see what actually works or doesn't. What you do that would work here or not. Near as can generally tell you guys are too busy arguing things about a few hundred dollars of political travel funds. But that is what I see in the news. Generally followed by me giggling, because I know there are things I just can't know from here. I just don't know. Yep, people are people(sort of), culture is not culture.

A vary rambling post that is way out of context that I am just not smart enough to figure out how to fix.

Enjoy,
T2M

Daryl wrote:I'm not real good at 'Stay The F** U?'. I do admit that I was wrong initially in that I naturally assumed the new health system was a similar system to those in most developed countries. From what I have since read plus the generous information sharing here it appears to be a half hearted botch up that is very inefficient. With so many middle men and unnecessary steps it appears destined to do more to enrich those already in the insurance industry than to help the needy. I know my opinion won't be welcomed by some but what was needed was a president with balls and control of both houses to say, "Here is a government oversighted QUANGO (quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation) that will handle all aspects of health care. The existing medical insurance organisations can bid for service over and above the basic service, and excess employees will be provided with assistance to apply for jobs with the Quango."
It reminds me of the Eurozone's problems when they had many countries sharing the one currency, but not the same finance rules. Beggars belief that people earning big money would expect either debacle to work efficiently.
Regarding "demonize the more conservative Republicans" I don't have to work hard to do that. Interesting statistics recently about the percentage of them who believe in creationism and that humans were contiguous with dinosaurs about 4000 years ago. It might not be believed by some here but I do actually share some conservative views on topics like freedom of expression, personal security, law and order, those who can work should, and self sufficiency. Humans are too complex to pigeon hole in neat boxes.
It does appear that your politicians are even worse than our inept bunch, or at least have had more time to get hamstrung by tradition and partisanship.

Quit it with the ridiculous "Obama is a socialist" drivel.

It all depends on what it would take to be called a socialist. Obama is a leftist true believer and he has given every indication that if he had a magic wand, he would magically transform the country into a socialist one. That said, socialism is a non-starter in US politics and any politician that advocates socialist policies is dead in the water. So, many politicians who like socialist ideas (Obama among them) have adopted an incremental approach attempting to move the US closer towards socialism. The policies they advocate are not socialist ones but simply a step closer to socialism than the policies that they wish to replace.

So if to be a socialist you must openly advocate for socialist policies, then you are correct Obama is not one. But if to be a socialist is to believe in socialist ideals and advocate for policies that move the US step by step in that direction, than Obama is a socialist. It's all in the definition.

real conservatives don´t run the national budget into the shitters BTW

Agree with that one. I'm not very happy the the Republicans either. Both parties seem intent on wrecking the country for their own short term political gain.

I´m really NOT happy about how healthcare works here, but i am oooh so happy that i don´t have to deal with the US version, because it´s only better if i pay through the nose, while the total costs of GDP are almost double than here.

There are good things and bad things about how health care works here. On the bad side pre-Obamacare we had about 15% of the population uncovered by insurance. In an attempt to fix things for that 15%, Obama has managed to screw things up for the 85%. And at the end of this we may very well STILL have 15% uninsured!

I'm not entirely sure Obamacare IS fixable. It is such a massive boondoggle and so poorly written that if I had the magic wand I'd get rid of it entirely and start over from scratch!

Step 1 - Take the few item in Obamacare that have genuine widespread support (the ability of young adults to stay on their parents insurance until 26 is the only one I can think of but their could be others) and implement them into law immediately.

Step 2 - Sit down with the governors of all 50 states and work out some experimental solutions for the 15% uncovered. Set a timeframe, say 10 years. And at 10 years evaluate which plans are working well and which plans are not by the criteria of "Biggest Bang for the Buck". At that point withdraw Federal support for plans which are not working well, but offer those states the ability to continue to receive Federal support if they switch to a different experimental solution that has been proven to work in other states.

Don't just impose nationwide solutions! Test them first. And no Romneycare in Massachusetts and Obamacare in DC aren't the same. Obamacare was based in part on Romanycare, not in its entirety. Second, Romneycare isn't working that well. It is failing the bang for the buck test. It is costing a lot of bucks but producing relatively little bang for the money. Local bureaucrats and politicians have continued to tinker with it, producing some improvement in results but were still trying to get it fixed when it was superseded by Obamacare (Federal law supersedes state law).

Too many low information voters.

HUGE problem! And these people are scary, they are very easily led by what sounds good. It's one of the problems in a democracy, you can't force people to be informed. Although it's not a US specific problem. Other democracies have it as well. It's an inherent flaw in the system.

But the biggest problem is that you are severely hamstrung by having to go by what the media reports.

Very true. In the US 90%+ of the media votes for the DEMOCRATS, as a result the reports (which are then picked up by the media in other countries) are severely slanted toward the Democratic point of view. Some of the Democratic slant is deliberate, some of it is subconscious but it is very much there. So what most of you in other countries are seeing is not a balanced picture but the point of view of only 1 side.

The only major national media outlets that provide the right of center perspective are foxnews and the Wall Street Journal, the rest are on the left. If you truly wanted balanced news from the US, read www.foxnews.com (the Wall Street Journal has a nice website as well, but about 80% of it you have to pay to get access to) for the right of center perspective and www.cnn.com for the left of center perspective.

For that matter take a look at what President Carter did to our mental health system. Simple solution system has abusive people in it, bump that close the system.

For those of you not in the US, after Carter closed the mental hospitals, the mental patients moved to the streets of the major cities. At least half of the permanent homeless population in the US is mentally ill.

biochem wrote:
snip
I'm not entirely sure Obamacare IS fixable. It is such a massive boondoggle and so poorly written that if I had the magic wand I'd get rid of it entirely and start over from scratch!

Step 1 - Take the few item in Obamacare that have genuine widespread support (the ability of young adults to stay on their parents insurance until 26 is the only one I can think of but their could be others) and implement them into law immediately.

snip

I think the exchanges are a good thing. Just don't let the government run it. Have it run by a coop of health insurers. Have all health insurance offered on the exchange and the costs and benefits of that policy clearly represented.

I like that policies are individually owned. Owners take them as they move from job to job. Companies don't have to offer and keep track of benefits, they just have to pay a salary that the employee spends as he/she sees fit. Wise employees would buy insurance.

One thing that these policies should have is that states must allow them to be sold between states so long as the policies meet the state requirements. As it stands, policies cannot be sold between states. This alone will increase competition.

For those that need assistance, subsidize those existing policies with a voucher. I would further suggest that any money not spent from that voucher should be rewarded to the individual. Better to give the individual needing assistance an incentive to save than an incentive to the insurance company to set prices to the level of the voucher and not a penny lower.

The more we get the government out of healthcare, the better and cheaper it will be in the US.

As the British say about the US "Two countries divided by a common language". In this particular topic it appears to be one country (USA) divided from the rest of the developed world by different cultures, different values and different language terminology, even though on the surface it appears to be similar.
A simple obvious example is the word SOCIALISM. Very different interpretation between cultures. Firstly if an American politician from a hundred years ago was to look at the current USA system they would be horrified as to how socialistic they would perceive it has become, yet a citizen of current Sweden regards it as anything but socialist. All democratic developed countries have some socialist aspects to varying degrees. The alternative would be to have the aristocracy living in utter splendour while the peasants die of starvation. Generally we outside the US are surprised to observe just how vehemently the US citizenry react to the term. The USSR, China, and Vietnam were not bad places to live because of socialism but because of totalitarian dictatorships. By all means have informed discussions about the degree and type of socialistic policies you support but don't say you reject the all. Too late, you already are partially socialistic.
Media bias to left or right is another issue that is relative to the viewer's stance. In Australia we have a government funded broadcaster (ABC) that is very popular due to high production values and professionalism. Regularly the conservatives declare it is biased to the left and call for independent inquiries. When these are held they get down in the weeds counting news articles that are pro progressive or pro conservative, among other exhaustive audits. These inquiries (even the conservative stacked ones) invariably state that the broadcaster is neutral. The reason this is so is that most of our other media is controlled (directly or indirectly) by Murdock and is so biased to the conservative side it make all else look leftish. All the free world now has access to most media and an amusing game is, in the event of an international significant happening check out Fox's report compared top the rest. Pure fantasy and most unprofessional, aimed at their client base of closed mind LCDs.
I'm sorry Fly to hear of your situation and wish you the best in getting it sorted. I do agree with Donnachaidh that you do come across as very angry and negative, neither of which is helpful for anyone with cardiac difficulties. I would suggest that you chill out, relax and calmly try to find a solution. A close friend of mine in the UK had an almost identical situation (displaced pacemaker and defibrillator leads) that was recently sorted for free by their universal health system, so it can be done.
Finally to come back to the different cultures, I see on this thread that the suggestions to fix things are to ensure that everyone has individual and easily transportable personal contracts. Elsewhere we would say, stuff the whole contract thing, everyone has an implicit contract with their government that they will be looked after, so just do it. If corporations won't provide affordable solutions tell them to get out of the way.

Daryl wrote:As the British say about the US "Two countries divided by a common language".-SNIP-

Very true, Daryl. From observing this and other forums that I frequent, I have come to the fundamental conclusion that US citizens do not understand how things work in other countries in the same way as NON-US citizens do not understand how things work in the US.

The basic life experiences and culture in which we respectively live are fundamentally different. Therefore we view each other with incomprehension.

A single forum like this is a poor barometer of what other countries are like. As it's an American based forum, I suspect that most members are American with a comparatively small number of non-US contributors. It doesn't give you enough of a population cross section to give a more accurate idea of what it's like to live in Australia, Sweden or the United Kingdom. If you, as I do, use a number of different forums on different subjects, you do get a very basic impression rather than just relying on one forum exclusively - I'm including Baen's Bar here as well. It's footprint very similar to this one.

The only way to understand is to actually live in the country your discussing. Nameless is therefore correct in saying that non-US people should stay out of a discussion involving internal American dynamics, but, as this is the internet, that is impossible as everyone likes to stick their oar in!

Mike.