Presented with no comment...
(h/t Jim Quinn's Burning Platform blog)
- advertisements -
JUST SAY NO TO OBAMACARE
it's a little late for that
p.s. you already pay for apps you can't get rid of...
Obamacare......funding to date.......zero.
Or $500 million for a web site. The answers change depending on who you talk to.
the only people signing up are the freeloaders ...
those who they are expecting to foot the bill (the young and healthy) need only not sign up to collapse the whole thing under its own weight.
So encouraging those who work for a living to stay away from the exchanges should be preached from every corner and soapbox.
Think about how the Fed convinces reasonable minds to believe that inflation remains at 2.00%. Yet, in the same breathe we hear the dollar has lost 40% of its buying power in last 10 years. You know what that's called? ...We are all too stupid to connect the dots!! The Fed and Washington understand this. Not one person can sign up for Obamacare, and by month's end - The President and his mainstream media will have obamacare as the most successful program ever devised by mankind. Facts be damned!
Good idea, don't sign up, in fact, just refuse medical care when needed, that will show that Obama whos right. Besides, Obamacare is just shitting public policy designed by the Heritage Foundation and all they ever do is design shitty policy.
there are plenty of studies out there that support the practice for young people. Most acute injuries are covered by other types of insurance, home owners, automotive, workers comp etc.
if you twist your ankle go to urgent care and pay cash.
A friend who has a small lawn care company went to sign up decided that his $900 a month was better spent elsewhere. I don't blame him.
i was unaware that the heritage foundation had anything to do with obamacare ... or are you simply spouting liberal gibberish?
Are you sure about that?
If you manage to break your neck at the house of a rich person, the rich person might have liability insurance that would cover your costs (six years later when the lawsuit is settled), but I never heard of a home owners policy that covered healthcare.
In case of auto insurance, the company will delay and deny for months, forcing you to hire a lawyer and fight for every penny (not easy when you are badly injured). The hospital will soon start demanding all your cash, or they will deny services. You will be drained by inflated charges, and then need to fight the insurance company for months or years and only recover a fraction of what you paid (because the hospital overcharged you, and they don't pay that much for that service, sorry.)
And yes, the individual mandate was originally (circa 1990) a Heritage Foundation staple. That's how it ended up in Romneycare. It makes right-wing sense, because it's a no-escape tax on the 47% you hate so much who don't pay taxes, and it goes to cover the care of the 47% who don't pay taxes. OK, Obamacare is softer and refunds the individual mandate cost to the 47%, but you can see how it made sense to the mandarins at Heritage.
Sounds like most of your issues are with insurance. Most of ours have to do with freedom. You have to go pretty far back to realize the core of the problem occured when insurance and their lawyers injected themselves into healthcare. But that's too hard of a problem to solve so we'll just pile on bad legislation on top of bad legislation thinking we can make things better.
You're also making a wild assumption that someone like myself thinks that Romneycare and the rhino who came up with it is a great thing.
Blanket statements such as "the 47% you hate so much" do nothing to inspire confidence in an actual constructive debate. Do i believe that the "47%" exist? ... that their votes are already wrapped up because their one and only criteria deciding their vote is who will give them the bigger paycheck? I do. Was it a politically stupid thing to say? absolutely .. that doesn't make it untrue.
that being said, i haven't voted for a republican since Reagan. Until people such as yourself are able to see that there are no measurable differences (as you so succinctly pointed out in your post) between republicans and democrats, nothing will change. You will be happy to argue to the death that the blue pill doesn't make you quite as ill as the red pill.
nope just use that religion loop hole they made for it and claim your religion prevents you from getting it.
I WILL NOT COMPLY!
You will be assimilated!
If you think you're hoss enough......come get some!
RETURN TO SENDER.
I DO NOT RECOGNISE YOU.
I DO NOT UNDERSTAND YOUR INTENT.
I DO NOT HAVE AN INTERNATIONAL TREATY WITH YOU.
NO ASSURED VALUE.
Prepare to be droned!
At the risk of jumping into the lion's den, I say hooray for Obamacare. Yes, it's a ridiculous law, not destined to survive in its current form because of all the built-in problems. But here at ZH it's common wisdom that the system must be broken to be fixed. Usually people say that about society as a whole, but it's equally true of sub-systems.
Here is an example of the current system:
It's the usual thing you probably saw before -- Americans pay from 7 to 25x more for prescription drugs than other countries. That is why our health costs are so crazy and our country is going bankrupt while many people don't even get medical care that is considered trivial elsewhere. Is that OK? If not, how are you going to change it? Our bought-and-paid-for congresstools will never change it, unless maybe the whole system explodes first. Hooray for Obamacare.
OK, maybe you have gold-plated health insurance and you don't give a rat's behind what happens to other people or how much it costs, as long as you get yours. But that is short-term thinking. The whole society will be bankrupted and unravel if the greed and profiteering in healthcare is allowed to continue, and you won't skate away untouched.
What you say is true - to a large extent. But what you don´t understand is that under the new system you will pay not only for your own drugs but also for countless other peoples meds. After a couple of years - if you have a job and are not wholly destitute you will begin to feel like you are being asked to fund the whole ACA by yourself.
I think it's you who doesn't understand.
In America today, very few Rx drugs are paid for out of pocket by individuals. They are mostly covered by insurance or the patient goes without.
You are already paying for other people's drugs, nearly all of them. Obamacare tinkers with the cross-subsidy of some people by others, but most certainly does not invent this phenomenon.
Government employees get free drugs. You pay.
Medicaid people get whatever drugs they get free. You pay.
Free-riders who suffer catastrophic illness or accident -- you pay their bills too.
People with employer-sponsored insurance -- you pay (in product prices).
If you went to college, part of your absurdly inflated cost was the gold-plated health coverage of everyone connected to a university.
Your own co-workers, if you have insurance -- the ones who use a lot compared to you are effectively getting higher comp than you for the same work. You pay for them too.
The only way to not pay for drugs for all those other people would be to outlaw insurance in principle. Probably not going to happen.
I say hooray for Obamacare.
On the surface, which is about all you have scratched, your thoughts might be germain. However, Obamacare is not about medical care. It's about government control in ways you have not even dreamed of. If all of us are here in another year, do me the favor of getting back to me on this. Let me know, honestly, if you have changed your mind.
Actually, Obamacare is insurance regulation. Not only has insurance regulation been dreamed of, it is commonplace.
Wrong. Other than effectively outlawing actual insurance, you know spreading risk, Obamacare has nothing to do with insurance. It is the unlawful regulation of health care which is a completely different animal than heal insurance. It is unlawful because both health insurance and health care are not commerce. Commerce is the large scale echange of goods. It is distinguished from retail. Commerce does not include service which is all that health care is. The delivery of health care does utilize some goods, the interstate exchange of which is the only thing the federal government can lawfully regulate. DIsabuse yourself of your false conceptions.
I have no illusion that Obamacare is a terrible law, the bastard child of Democrats and K Street. I am with Bruce Krasting that prices quoted this fall are teasers, and premiums will jump 20% per year thereafter, and the whole thing will blow up. I would be amazed and disappointed if the ACA is still around and lumbering along in threeyears. But somthing ...
On healthcare, people naturally talk their book. Those with gold-plated insurance already say I got mine bleep the rest of you. The young with negative net worth and no health problems correctly perceive that they are financially better off free-riding. I understand their point of view.
I belong to another segment -- self-employed, with enough savings to care if a greedy hospital steals it all. Living in the USA feels a lot like living among Somali pirates. One accident and they take everything with inflated charges of whatever they please, and there is nothing I can do about it. Now I am safely offshore, but I must return to the US for three years, and without ACA, it's a roll of the dice whether I can get out again with a dime in my pocket (or individual insurance would cost double the ACA teaser rate).
Steven Hansen at various sites has a wonderful article on how absurd it is that Government spends all this money on health care and it still pays for the American consumer to travel abroad in order to get actual healthcare. this is the type of insurance he personally owns...but it's not something you can just go out and buy either. Mr Hansen is no "right winger" either...just an honest man and excellent "academic" telling it like it is. Been reading his material for five years now and he's never let me down data wise. I think trying to explain the difference between the wheat and the chaff (Congress has exempted itself from this plan, so have certain businesses and certain unions) so that says to me somebody has done their homework, gone to the White House and gotten a waiver. that says to me there might be a problem with actual care here. how about a mandate that all employers with over 15 employees requiring an on site doctor? that's a program I could point to at least. (we used to have by the way. there was a time when Capitalsim was concerned about its own health care. if The ACA shows anything it shows there are businesses, politicians and industries that still are ironically enough.) bottom line? we're a mess. we're being fed scraps and asked to become the entertainment for people who only pretend to care. Port a Prince, Cairo, Detroit...it's all about the inflammation. go ahead...ask them if they're better off. I remember quite fondly actually Bill Clinton's rhetoric of rising above our baser nature...pushing Americans to reach for a higher state of togetherness. he was laughed at of course...but his poll numbers were quite high when he led office "in spite of being made fun of." sometimes I think he's forgotten that actually. in other words...do you have something GOOD to say? I mean it's not like this is a hard country to tear apart. is that the point? the "goal" as it were of a 9/11 world? I take one look at Wall Street and say "we have a winner." does the rest of America see that too? keep that television on USA...keep learning to hate "the other." it's all a contrivance...a mechanism...and to call it effective would be an understatement. "12 guys with box cutters" was all it took.
So what is the much vaunted advantage with ACA...then? Stated that it will provide universal coverage and include...maybe 40 - 50 million currently without coverage. You seem to think that they have been taken care of in the same way as under ACA. Well maybe in the most basic way. But now it will be same care for everyone,more or less. Otherwise what´s the idea with all this hype and bureaucracy..?
I can assure you that under a system with universal coverage the premiums for - middle class and others will continue to higher and higher levels. Since you will also be paying for others , on the margin.
Trust me - I have direct experience of paying for socialized health care.
scocialized health care is cheap compared to health care by lawyers (turned law makers) for lawyers. Just health care is the small part of the cost-- its the skim and the regulations and the tort that cost-so any talk about health care costing is BS.
and free market health care is even cheaper and better also I might add.
so the upshot is gov't (aka corruption) needs to go---gov't is obsolete.
No one has taken the lawyers out of the equation. The will find new work also with ACA.
Zooom- right over your head Thom--- the point was (and is) get the lawyers and the criminals and the skimers (aka gov't) out of it ---duh-- can't you live (think) with out the eubiquitous gov't in your every reason and idea----get off the drug--
OK, so the current system is 'broken' (I'd say more like it's just unliked by some who haven't taken the time to make it work better). There are some things that need to be fixed, for sure, but that doesn't mean it's 'broken', it just needs to have the portions the government screwed up to be either eliminated or fine-tuned.
Obamacare doesn't need fine-tuning. It needs an overhaul.
Yes, under the current system we pay for those who cannot through higher prices. But that doesn't mean I approve of this free-loading behavior. It's part of the cost of doing business, like a retail firm that raises prices to cover loss to theft or breakage. This is efficient.
Obamacare, instead, implies "well, since you already pay for this, you should feel compelled to pay MORE so that we can build a bureaucracy to make sure everyone has the exact same services available to them. You're paying for them already, so you shouldn't care, right? Besides, it's morally just for you to help others."
My reply is "No. I am not OK with this. If people realize their coverage is more or less 'free', they abuse it. Even under the current system, we see this. Institutionalize it, and it will get worse and then the bureaucracy, which we'll be paying more for, will eventually cut back services to make it more 'affordable'. Then we will all overpay for poor services, like they do in most other nationalized health nations."
Yes, I know the Canadians and British 'love' their services. Not really. They just don't know better. You can talk all you want about what they 'have', until you review their wait times, their losses, and the cases they ship out. It's a massive trade off, with a net loss. As Bastiat said, sometimes it's the unseen parts which are more important.
Fix our current system? Indeed. I'm all for the no-preexisting conditions part of Obamacare. Fine. Make that a law. But make healthcare portable across state lines. Standardize paperwork. Reform Tort laws. Introduce more widespread use of Health Savings Accounts so people can self-insure.
Instead, the government has screwed the pooch. Health care will drop at first, then taxes and fees will rise dramatically to cover substantially higher costs, most of which will be bureaucracy driven.
Single payer? The only single payer thing I support is access to annual physicals and certain basic prescriptions, and even those should be severely limited. Obamacare paying for birth control? I don't think that's something I'm OK with. Your irresponsible behaviors are not my problem. Forcing this on religious institutions? That's a Constitutional violation. Forcing it on states? Another Constitutional violation. Forcing it on individuals? A violation of the Commerce Clause (unless you're calling the fee a tax, as Roberts noted).
Thanks, I'll pass. Defund and start over.
You won't start over. You will defund and do nothing.
Sure it's easy to reform the US system:
1) Ban price discrimination in healthcare. Cash pay patients get the same deal as insurance companies.
2) Force doctors and hospitals to raise their ethical standards to the same lofty level as auto mechanics.
3) Regulate drug prices.
4) Make medical information (test results, xrays, etc.) legally the property of the patient, not the provider
That will all happen right after hell gets air conditioning.
I think the hidden goal of ACA is to get a critical mass of non-medicare care paid for by a single system, and it will be wildly too expensive, but no one will want to go back. (Employers won't want it back on their tab; the formerly uninsured won't want to be uninsured again). Then there will be political will to fix the system for real.
@Lost My Shorts
"You are already paying for other people's drugs"
I do not carry insurance other than catastrophic because I am responsible with my health and the only thing I have to fear is a freak accident. If the Free Shit Army wants to poison themselves with my foodstamps, then the only leeches I currently pay healthcare for (at gunpoint) are the ones on medicare.
Obamacare on the other hand, will force me at gunpoint to fund ALL of them.
You pay in other ways, too. Not just through insurance premiums.
yes agree lets try something if it doesnt work then adjust but something needs to be done.
what is wrong with this statement:
"Americans pay from 7 to 25x more for prescription drugs than other countries"..
well kiddies, first american drug regs cause costs of production here to be the highest in the world..second we produce more new drugs than most of the world combind, but my real point is:
this industry has given higher living standards to millions of americans ...but is now rapidly being dismantled and off shored, so when we in America are paying those low drug prices, most of those jobs will be gone and you might not have the cost of those "low cost drugs"..tariffs baby tariffs keep a nations work force employed and with a higher standard of life, alas free traders rule the day.
For accuracy, the iPhone should be a cardboard cut-out of an iPhone.
"JUST SAY NO TO OBAMACARE"
But it's your patriotic duty so Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid can be saved!
Save the system, kill the old people!
P.S. I am an "old people", this is personal for me.
The cartoon is accurate, but the fine one pays for not buying iCrap is levied against one's fragile self esteem.
excellent insight, SR.
i do have an "alternate" Q: Apple was down but came back big and likely will (but minus Jobs !) ?
does that mean obamacare will also? Hummmmmm.
It's still more than $200 off its highs, not sure that qualifies as coming back big, and looking at the chart it looks like it's about to tank again.
Tks for sharing...
it hit below $90 before Jobs' return in 2009;
and it kept rising after his return...And that's what I meant.
I pride myself for not having an iPhone. Apple's crap will never enter my house.
So you go for hikes, mountain biking or 10 mile runs with a Sony Discman? You don't have to buy their phones but saying no to an ipod, which puts thousands of songs at your disposal in a tiny device is retarded.
"saying no to an ipod...is retarded."
Fuck your pretentiousness and your iPod. There are numerous other mp3/multimedia players available.
not to mention, his belief that you can't be active without listening to music.
Infants are known for their need for constant sensory stimulation (lacking any internal mental stimulation to take its place).
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
How to report offensive comments
Notice on Racial Discrimination.