The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

[unofan]

Too late for that already. They've been trumpeting the exchanges which won't be ready on time. the ones that are ready offer such limited access, what good is a policy if you can't find a physician who will accept you as a patient? we're seeing it already and the exchanges aren't even started yet.

Public service announcement, in all seriousness: find yourself a physician NOW. if you are under 25, ask your parents to ask their doctor to accept you as a patient as an exception since it is family.

Ok Mitt. And what is your solution for the millions of Americans who can't mooch off their parents? You know, the reason we need health care reform in the first place because they don't have any health care coverage to begin with due to things like corrupt insurance companies, tightwad employers and pre-existing conditions?

So far, the only thing I'm taking from your whining is that single payer continues to sound like a remarkably sane idea.

[joecct]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

As others in other media have pointed out, the individual mandate is still in place. As I understand it, I am required to get health insurance my employer is not required* to provide.

* Well, technically, the employer HAS to provide health insurance (by law), but the executive branch will not enforce the law for the first year.^

^ Is the administration setting a record for not enforcing laws on the books?

[Priceless]

Ok Mitt. And what is your solution for the millions of Americans who can't mooch off their parents? You know, the reason we need health care reform in the first place because they don't have any health care coverage to begin with due to things like corrupt insurance companies, tightwad employers and pre-existing conditions?

Don't get sick.

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Ok Mitt. And what is your solution for the millions of Americans who can't mooch off their parents? You know, the reason we need health care reform in the first place because they don't have any health care coverage to begin with due to things like corrupt insurance companies, tightwad employers and pre-existing conditions?

So far, the only thing I'm taking from your whining is that single payer continues to sound like a remarkably sane idea.

When these newly insured people do get sick, yet can't find a PCP to care for them because the PCPs already sit at full capacity for patients, what good towards keeping healthcare costs down does having these patients insured? They're now paying for services they can't receive. Sure, they'll lower your overall costs, but that won't benefit them.

[unofan]

When these newly insured people do get sick, yet can't find a PCP to care for them because the PCPs already sit at full capacity for patients, what good towards keeping healthcare costs down does having these patients insured? They're now paying for services they can't receive. Sure, they'll lower your overall costs, but that won't benefit them.

Except now when they end up in urgent care or the e.r., their bills are covered.

Otherwise, your argument still seems to compel me to believe single payer is the way to go.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Except now when they end up in urgent care or the e.r., their bills are covered.

Otherwise, your argument still seems to compel me to believe single payer is the way to go.

It's nice that the ER can take care of them. That's even better than Mitt Romney's "Don't Get Sick" program.

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Except now when they end up in urgent care or the e.r., their bills are covered.

Otherwise, your argument still seems to compel me to believe single payer is the way to go.

Even without insurance, their bills were still paid. It's merely the mode of payment that's now changed. There's still no net social benefit from the PPACA. Instead of either paying the bills themselves, for those who can, or the government for those who can't, these people who can pay are submitting monthly checks to an insurance company and those who can't still have the government paying their ER visits, only the name of the check has changed.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Even without insurance, their bills were still paid. It's merely the mode of payment that's now changed. There's still no net social benefit from the PPACA. Instead of either paying the bills themselves, for those who can, or the government for those who can't, these people who can pay are submitting monthly checks to an insurance company and those who can't still have the government paying their ER visits, only the name of the check has changed.

Last time I checked the ER was more expensive than the standard doctor visit. Where was it that you go to the ER where it isn't?

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

As others in other media have pointed out, the individual mandate is still in place. As I understand it, I am required to get health insurance my employer is not required* to provide.

* Well, technically, the employer HAS to provide health insurance (by law), but the executive branch will not enforce the law for the first year.^

^ Is the administration setting a record for not enforcing laws on the books?

According to Justice Roberts, the mandate is unconstitutional; he rewrote the law so that what was once the "mandate" is now a "choice" and what was once the "penalty" is now a "tax":

you can choose either to pay for insurance or pay the tax. He noted that the IRS does not have the authority to penalize people if they don't pay the tax, they merely collect the tax and if the tax becomes past due, the tax plus interest. Unlike income tax, which does have penalties if you don't pay it on time.

It is not at all clear that the administration even pays attention to the laws as they are written!



Lost in the hullabaloo over last week's SCOTUS ruling was a little-noticed ruling that might eventually lead to the invalidation of the requirement that all employers must pay for contraceptive services if the employer objects to providing abortifacients under religious grounds.

Hey, women may be dying at a record rate because of prescription painkiller abuse, but that doesn't really matter as a women's health issue as long as they can eject fertilized eggs from their womb, right? uh, right?

[unofan]

Even without insurance, their bills were still paid. It's merely the mode of payment that's now changed. There's still no net social benefit from the PPACA. Instead of either paying the bills themselves, for those who can, or the government for those who can't, these people who can pay are submitting monthly checks to an insurance company and those who can't still have the government paying their ER visits, only the name of the check has changed.

There's no net social benefit in preventing people from going bankrupt due to medical bills?

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Last time I checked the ER was more expensive than the standard doctor visit. Where was it that you go to the ER where it isn't?

My point is that these people won't be able to get into a standard doctor (the Primary Care Physicians - PCPs). The crux behind Obamacare is that those not currently receiving preventative care end up in the ER where costs are most definitely higher. Well, looking at the figures, we're not gaining enough PCPs to hand the huge influx of new patients wanting services. When these PCP doctors do not exist, people will still end up in the ER. So you have families paying some $X per month for insurance they wouldn't have purchased otherwise now unable to make an appointment because doctors, PAs and LNPs will not or cannot accept new patients. So these people will still end up in the ER. Who benefits.

[unofan]

According to Justice Roberts, the mandate is unconstitutional...

*****http://hotnerdgirl.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/picard-facepalm.jpg******

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

There's no net social benefit in preventing people from going bankrupt due to medical bills?

This is why there's this little thing called an emergency fund.

[Patman]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

Except now when they end up in urgent care or the e.r., their bills are covered.

Otherwise, your argument still seems to compel me to believe single payer is the way to go.

So basically everybody ends up in a queue for doctors that clearly don't exist? I don't see how single payer makes it better... the only thing you've done is negated a penalty (cash) and changed it with a penalty (health, ironically) applied to ALL others. So we're gone from "these people can't" to "everybody can't".

Funny how we're arguing for the moralistic "we need to provide care to everybody" which usually means "equal care to everybody"... which is naturally anti-economic and inefficient.

Ahh.... the trainwreck we call morally mandated solutions. BUT ITS MORAL!!!! Efficient, well, no... but the heart of the matter is our hearts are in the right place.

Worse, is we're seeing it fall apart in motion and people are STILL saying they can build it better.

Ladies and gentlemen when you try to take the insanely complicated and try to make it universally harmonizable... It just can't happen. It lacks adaptability. The invisible hand is still more responsive than a single data machine. Remember, I AM the one you're looking to build the machine.

edit: I KNOW my doctor hates this stuff and I KNOW she works with spanish speaking people. Fact is the burden wouldn't be better for them under single payer.

In all this is the presumption that we have the tools and knowledge to do better if given the chance. What I don't understand is why the "intelligent" never learned the term "hubris". What's really going to happen is we're going to paper over the problems so the intelligent don't end up looking stupid.

If anything, the only thing "intelligent" people know how to do is to paper their tracks and obfuscate when caught out.

[FreshFish]

Re: The PPACA - Implementation Phase I

your argument still seems to compel me to believe single payer is the way to go.

Actually, that might not be such a bad idea: let's arrange it so that the patient is the payer, and then have reimbursements flow through him/her. This third-party payment from one entity to a provider without the patient even seeing how much it costs has universally been acknowledged as one of three driving factors behind the growth of healthcare costs. Give the patient a bit more financial incentive to be a better shopper, now that is indeed something upon which you and I can both agree.

Then each patient can figure out the best way to get covered among the myriad intersection of possibilities. In fact, we can make a whole growth industry out of people who become specialized in navigating the ins and outs of the healthcare maze, and will track down all the paperwork for you, in exchange for a relatively modest fee compared to how much value they provide.*

I never would have expected such imagination and vision from you! Very impressive. Thanks.




* This is already going on, in the way plans in California are setting out to help people enroll. There are organizations receiving government grants to help people enroll in insurance exchanges. Another form of corporate welfare, one of the most enduring bipartisan forms of corporate welfare.