Moved thread. "Ten things americans have gained from the health bill.

This is an old post which Fredt bumped up. TBH, I am not going to debate this further but for those that want to continue the discussion, have at it!!

Now be nice!!!! :&gt


gapsych
3/25/10 4:13 PM Ten things americans have gained from the new health bill.



I was not going to post any more about this issue, however people are posting a lot of misinformation. Many of the arguments used against the health care bill are shown in this article to be false. People are assuming things instead of finding out just what this bill entails!!

Stop listening to FOX, Limbaugh and anyone else spreading these false rumors and using scare tactics.

You can't please all of the people, all of the time.

Mother Jones Online / By Nick Baumann

http://www.alternet.org/health/146134


Here Are 10 Things You've Just Won With Health Care Reform

You already know about the health care reform vote, but you might not know what's in it for you. Here's 10 things that will kick in THIS YEAR.


You already know about the Democrats' big health care reform victory Sunday night, the deal it took to get there, and the debate that will come next. But if you haven't been paying close attention, you might not know what's in it for you. America, here's what you've won (and all of this stuff kicks in this year):

1.Insurance companies can no longer impose lifetime coverage limits on your insurance. Never again will you face the risk of getting really sick and then, a few months in, having your insurer tell you "sorry, you've 'run out' of coverage." Almost everyone I've met knows someone who had insurance but got really, really sick (or had a kid get really sick) and ran into a lifetime cap.

2.If you don't know someone who has run into a lifetime cap, you probably know someone who has run into an annual cap. The use of these will be sharply limited. (They'll be eliminated entirely in 2014.)

3.Insurers can no longer tell kids with pre-existing conditions that they'll insure them "except for" the pre-existing condition. That's called pre-existing condition exclusion, and it's out the window.

4.A special, temporary program will help adults with pre-existing conditions get coverage. It expires in 2014, when the health insurance exchanges—basically big "pools" of businesses and individuals—come on-line. That's when all insurers will have to cover everyone, pre-existing condition or not.

5.Insurance companies can't drop you when you get sick, either—this plan means the end of "rescissions."

6.You can stay on your parents' insurance until you're 26.

7.Seniors get $250 towards closing the "donut hole" in their prescription drug coverage. Currently, prescription drug coverage ends once you've spent $2,700 on drugs and it doesn't kick in again until you've spent nearly $6,200. James Ridgeway wrote about the problems with the donut hole for Mother Jones in the September/October 2008 issue. Eventually, the health care reform bill will close the donut hole entirely. The AARP has more on immediate health care benefits for seniors. Next year (i.e. in nine months), 50 percent of the donut hole will be covered.

8.Medicare's preventive benefits now come with a free visit with your primary care doctor every year to plan out your prevention services. And there are no more co-pays for preventative services in Medicare.

9.This is a big one: small businesses get big tax credits—up to 50 percent of premium costs—for offering health insurance to their workers.

10.Insurers with unusually high administrative costs have to offer rebates to their customers, and every insurance company has to reveal how much it spends on overhead.
There's a lot more that happens down the road. But this is most of what you get now. No death panels included.





Edit My Post | Delete My Post


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate








Gingareeree
3/25/10 4:17 PM That's who you cite as ....


credible source? I'll stop watchingFox/listening to Rush,Dennis Prager,Hugh Heuitt,etc. if you will stop listening /watching the sources you claim to be truthful!~~Jeanne







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




gapsych
3/25/10 4:52 PM Gingeree



I found several sites where the same information was given but I liked the concise way this article was written, especially on a forum like PH, where you don't want to post too long of an article.

Fox, Rush, Dennis Prager, Hugh Heuitt, etc., are credible sources? I think not.

However, if you feel so adamant about your stance, then debate the points the article makes and not arguments that simply sidetrack people from the real topic.

It doesn't make a difference which side you are on but we all need to do our homework and get the facts.






[This Message was Edited on 03/25/2010]




Edit My Post | Delete My Post


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




Gingareeree
3/25/10 5:01 PM I'll bet....


you've never listened to some of the names mentioned. Dennis Prager for one is a very level headed,intelligent, insightful person. His motto is "clarity over agreement". As for Rush,most that dislike him are basing that opinion on some precieved notion ,built up of course by the left ,.that see him as bombastic,arrogant,etc. He is so on the mark about everything,he's the original and still the best.Most libs take themselves too seriously,and he simply plays off of that. I've yet,in all the years I've listened to him ,heard him interrupt,be direspectful or rude to any caller regardless of their political leanings. Compared to the little bit I've heard of most left leaning talk show hosts,these guys are real gentelmen,no ranting,etc. Again to each his own.~~~Jeanne







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




spacee
3/25/10 7:50 PM I have a question just curious How much does your ins. cost a month?


Ours is $1300 a month.

Son, wife and child is $425 a month...yes they did not include pre existing, yet have not denied
anything sent them.

Single son $400 a month.

We pay them all. The son's are private policies cause one can't find a job and the other is
in college. And ALL have deductibles on labs and xrays. And the family one has a deductible on RX's too.

I only see them going up. One of my DH's client's said is insurance is going up 35%.

I agree there are some good points to the reform. Shame on insurance companies for making
us have to have a law to get coverage while their profits have gone up.

Well...that is my 2 cents. We pay more for insurance premiums than we do for housing.
Scary.

But would like to say this. We have the best research in the world..(I think). Thank capitalism
for that. (my 2 cents again.

Spacee







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




aussiewoman
3/25/10 7:58 PM Nothing.


We pay no health care premiums and no copay.
Nothing. Everyone can afford it I thank capitalism for taxing the stinking rich oil and gas industry.

[This Message was Edited on 03/25/2010]







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




Juloo
3/25/10 8:06 PM Spacee -- insurance costs


We have insurance through our (small!!) business -- that we own -- and the rate for our family (man and woman in mid-40s, son in early teens) is $1377/mo. It's an Aetna PPO. This past year our rate went up 20%, but in the years before, 30%+. We used to offer health insurance for employees AND families, but our last one went off two years ago and switched to his wife's (she works for a 500+ employee business).

Can no longer afford counseling (psychologist) visits. Must ration chiropractor care ($50 co-pay per visit), and any physical therapy (similar to chiro). Have gone off as many meds as we can, and gone to generics where we can, but even so, meds add at least $200+ to our health care expenses each month.

No dental. No vision.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




quanked
3/26/10 12:15 PM GAPSYCH


i DO NOT see a problem discussing this issue further. I can ignore those who are just indulging their tendencies to use this issue to figuratively batter those who do not agree with their take and are just "squabbling". This is a huge and important issue.

I copied and pasted the item below from a union web site. My personal opinion is that while the the health care reform bill (and it is now changing daily) may somewhat fix current problems in health care insurance today it creates new ones. Therefore I do not see the bill as necessarily useful.

I appreciate your input.

WE NEED A MORE SENSIBLE SMALL EMPLOYER EXEMPTION FOR A KEY
INDUSTRY THAT IS MADE UP OF ALMOST ALL SMALL EMPLOYERS
The current Senate proposal exempts ALL companies that employ less than 50 employees. But in construction, 90% of firms employ fewer than 20 workers, 80% employ less than 10 and 50% employ less than 5.


This means the small employer exemption will give a free pass to almost the entire construction industry, one of the largest industries in our economy.


Such an impact undermines health care reform AND is highly unfair to the BuildingTrades and our employers who have been doing the right thing and providing healthcare for years.


THE PROBLEM

Construction is a low-bid business. Unless fixed, the current small business exemption will harm all the construction employers who do the right thing and provide health care, while giving a significant unfair advantage to thousands of unfair companies that don’t.


The union sector of the construction industry has been providing health care to working families for 60-plus years. To do this, union workers sacrifice wages; union contractors sacrifice profits. This is how we get it done and everyone benefits. However, health care can account for as much as 20% of payroll. So firms that deny their workers heath care can easily undercut those that provide it, which means contractors who take the low-road end up with an unfair advantage on every job they bid.


Do we really want health care “reform” that punishes companies and unions who do the right thing, but goes out of its way to reward contractors who don’t? This must be fixed.


WHY IS THE CONTRUCTION INDUSTRY UNIQUE?

Construction is unique and different from many other industries. For example, with some of the highest injury, illness and fatality rates, it’s one of the most dangerous of all industries. As a result, in health, safety and many other areas, federal and state laws and public policies treat construction differently to address the unique and special conditions of this industry.


Mandatory health care for most construction employers is critical for all these reasons. Over 25,000 companies currently provide health care in this industry, so can the rest.








--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




TigerLilea
3/26/10 1:05 PM Tar Sands


Being in AB, you don't pay PST either. You can thank the tar sands for that. We pay for our health insurance here in BC, however, we don't pay anywhere near what the American's are expected to pay in the US. I'm very fortunate that because of my CFS I don't have to pay anything; the gov't covers the cost of my insurance.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




TigerLilea
3/26/10 1:17 PM Gap


Hi Gap - I wonder how many people have actually taken the time to go to the White House web-site and look through the health bill. I know it is long (2074 pages), however, it would help if they at least skimmed through it. I think a lot of people are reacting out of fear and from believing gossip and/or opinions that aren't substantiated with fact.

I read a newspaper article last year that claimed that many Americans relyed on getting their information from sources such as FOX and CNN/HLN (even though most culprits have moved over to FOX now), and the Rush Limbaughs, Glenn Becks and Bill O'Reillys. These are not credible sources for non-biased information.

Someone mentioned previously that Medicare and Medicaid were going to be greatly affected and that covereage would become much less under this new health care bill. However, from the little I have read, I got the impression that the gov't planned on putting much more money into these two plans and providing more services.





[This Message was Edited on 03/26/2010]







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




spacee
3/26/10 2:21 PM Hey Friends


I can read about 10 pages a week of a really easy book...so I have to rely on the news for
info and I realize, you need to be picky with that.

DH is an accountant. And he gets regular news updates from the American Institute of CPAs.

We, in America, have just spent the last of our reserves for Medicare. We have had plenty of reserves all these years since it was established. There is a lot more to this but I think we have been borrowing from the reserves and now...something has got to be done about it.

I think it involves selling bonds and China has been buying bonds. Heaven help us, if they want
their money. I do remember it being on the news (ABC) that the Chinese kids go to schools
that are unheated and (darn if I can remember the other thing, forgive me) so that the gov't
can keep buying bonds.

The AICPA newsletter predicts another stock market down spiral. Not good news.

I guess some of this type stuff belongs on the Chit Chat Board.

To be honest...I haven't gotten angry over the different points of view. I have found it
a bit of a diversion to talk about this.

Thanks for posting what your family pays for insurance...and what it doesn't cover. We still have some vision. But we have never had dental....of course all three kids needed major
orthodontia and one even jaw surgery.

Spacee









--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




AuntTammie
3/26/10 2:24 PM bill....and sources of info


It tries to make it look like it is helping Medicare, bc it is giving $250 to those who fall into the donut hole this yr (in other words those who have reached the point where their meds are no longer covered until they spend around $4,000 in out of pocket costs.....not many people fall into this and for those who do, 250 is a drop in the bucket).

It also says that it is going to close the gap in the so called donut hole in twenty years, and even then there will still be a 25% charge for meds during the gap- that is still pretty high if you are on the expensive meds that cause you to reach that gap in the first place....and twenty yrs is a long time.

Further, they are planning to cut funding for Medicare Advantage programs, which are generally the programs people use to get meds covered in the first place. 25% of the people on Medicare get the Advantage programs, bc the coverage is A LOT better, depedning on what you need it for, and the copays are usually substantially less. If you need meds or mental health coverage, forget about regular Medicare. Same goes with any specialist appts or even things like PT, OT, or chiropractic. As an exp, counseling appts with regular Medciare cost a 45% copay. No one with a low income can afford that.

And, all that said, even the Advantage plans coverage is not great and they do not pay doctors well at all. The most recent E.O.B. I had from them showed that they paid less than EIGHT PERCENT of the bill!! It is very hard to find doctors who will take any Medicare plans, bc they do pay so low. That is not necessarily doctors being greedy as was said in one of these threads. That is just them trying to make enough to cover their overhead, their malpractice insurance, possibly still their student loans, etc.

I do NOT get my info from Fox news or any of the other sources that people seem to want to believe that anyone against these plans gets it, ether. I do not even have TV reception. I have actually read parts of the bill itself and have looked at a lot of other sources on both sides. I also know how to think for myself and to figure out if the person presenting the info has an agenda. I am sick of the implications that if we are against this plan, we must all be stupid people who just buy into what we are fed. It often seems like the opposite is true (though I am seriously not referring to anyone on this site); people are so eager for change that they overlook the facts about the proposed change or want to believe those who are promising them the world, without realizing that the promises are not going to be possible.

I am very much for change in this situation. Things have been bad and need to be worked on. Change that is going to make things worse is not the solution, though!







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




cfs since 1998
3/26/10 3:05 PM talking heads


I don't get my information from Fox news either or any of the other talking heads. In fact I HATE Fox news and every other major media outlet and never watch any of them. I form my opinions by applying critical thinking and information from nonpartisan organizations (as distinguished from bipartisan organizations).

"One of the great mistakes is to judge government policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results." -- Milton Friedman





[This Message was Edited on 03/26/2010]







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




gapsych
3/26/10 7:40 PM quanked



Thank you. That's interesting information. I did not realize construction businesses usually have less than 50 employers. You learn something new every day, eh?

gap

ETA

I almost forgot something that is in my introductory post.

"small businesses get big tax credits—up to 50 percent of premium costs—for offering health insurance to their workers."

Does the health bills definition of small businesses include less than 50 people?

I appreciate that you state the facts w/o scare tactics, overgeneralizations, as this is the way we can learn more about this topic and form our own conclusions.

I want to find out more how this affects the construction industry. I am very pro union.



[This Message was Edited on 03/26/2010]




Edit My Post | Delete My Post


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




quanked
3/26/10 8:00 PM AMEN TO FRIEDMAN


Yes, indeed. I am certain that SOME of those involved in putting together this so called "health reform" had some good intentions. However, given what did not make it into the bill makes me wonder about other intentions. But a less pithy quote or saying--"the proof is in the pudding" also sums it up.


It does not matter how noble any intentions may have been I do not think that the results are going to be all that pleasing. Have we forgotten NAFTA?


I would not watch Fox news if it were the only news program available. I do not watch any tv news as a rule. The last time I was involved in the news on tv was during last presidential election.

Then came all the bailouts and excuse making for the banks, the auto industry, blah, blah. It was just more crap after more crap. No change. No one is held accountable--business as usual.


I would like to see how well Obama's "let's look and move forward" rhetoric works in a criminal court of law when a defendant asks the court to look forward and not at the past--LOL!! Ya, sure that is going to happen! Yikes! Who does he think he is fooling?! And I voted for the guy. At least I can stand to look and listen to him unlike the yahoo that came before him.

To me one of the most obvious questions regarding the bill is who is going to benefit in the long run--monetarily speaking? There are more questions but this is a good start for me. If I sound jaded or suspicious or negative about this health care reform then guess what? I am!

I think health care and its reform is a topic that is appropriate for a group of individuals with great medical needs. I like seeing it on this site. I do not want to go elsewhere to see what my fellow sufferers are thinking on the subject.

I am interested in reading all serious responses to this issue.







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




gapsych
3/26/10 8:01 PM Aunt Tammy



Found this.

Seniors get $250 towards closing the "donut hole" in their prescription drug coverage. Currently, prescription drug coverage ends once you've spent $2,700 on drugs and it doesn't kick in again until you've spent nearly $6,200. James Ridgeway wrote about the problems with the donut hole for Mother Jones in the September/October 2008 issue. Eventually, the health care reform bill will close the donut hole entirely. The AARP has more on immediate health care benefits for seniors. Next year (i.e. in nine months), 50 percent of the donut hole will be covered.

Am I confusing medicare with medicaid? Which one are you on? I know my dad did not take the prescription option as he would not save any money being on it.

I also want to look at the AARP's stance on the new bill.

Time to go to bed as my mind is just too tired to sort this part out.

Boy, do I have a lot more research to do, LOL!!

gap




Edit My Post | Delete My Post


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




aussiewoman
3/26/10 9:05 PM TigerLilea/Alberta's Wealth


I really am proud that we, as Canadians, do tend to look out for one another.

I think its right that we all pay into the federal piggy-bank and the money gets doled back out according to NEED. This applies to healthcare, and other things too. Why should people in, say, New Brunswick go without when we have too much? Who else has a Heritage Fund worth billions?

I remember when we had the lowest minimum wage in the country. Then came the talk about raising the minimum wage - fat, stinking rich Calgary was awash with working poor who slept in tents in public parks and worked their butts off in crappy jobs during the day. Landlords gouged their tenants, it was unbelivable. At one point we had a 0.3 % vacancy rate - despite the gouging. There was much whining and whinging and threatening and hand-wringing by business when talk began about raising the minimum wage. We now have the highest minimum wage in the country - and our post-recession "bounce" is higher and faster than anywhere else in the country. Ditto for the oil and gas industry: the provincial government reduced their royalties. If you don't like it, take a hike. Guess what, they're still here...

We are creating affordable housing at a faster rate than any other province.

Our hospitals are well stocked, even small towns have hospitals. The government threatened cutbacks in this area and backed off due to the volume of public protest (reminding them of their foolishness during the 90's, the ramifications of which are still being felt). They backed right off and did not touch healthcare. It was not up for discussion, pure and simple.


Our provincial disability scheme - AISH - compensates the severely disabled at the highest rate in the country. Not so long ago, it provided the lowest rate of all.


What changed? Disadvantaged groups got organised and SHAMED the provincial government into behaving with a social conscience. We're still richer than anybody else so its right that we share our bounty with poorer parts of OUR nation. Take from the rich, and give to the poor. Its the morally right thing to do. I look around and I still see moneymoneymoney everywhere, almost as much as before this recession hit. We have more than enough, more than our fair share. We are very fortunate.


And then there's New Brunswick...

[This Message was Edited on 03/26/2010]







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




fredt
5/5/10 8:28 PM Major problems with new health bill


Those 10 so-called benefits sound nice but someone has to pay for them. Don't expect those "greedy" health insurance companies to pay for them because they only average a low 3% profit and the additional costs would bankrupt them.

The first 3 things the OP said we gained are actually things we LOST:

1. No lifetime coverage limits
2. No annual caps

No limits sounds good but in reality it means higher premiums and less freedom. The reason health insurance companies offer plans with coverage caps is to make their plans affordable for those of us who aren't rich. We already have the option to purchase health plans with no coverage limits. Under ObamaCare, those of us who can't afford this additional coverage will not be allowed to keep our limited coverage and will be forced to drop our health insurance due to the cost. How does taking away our freedom to purchase less coverage help anyone?

3. No pre-existing condition exclusion - Sounds good also but once every sick person joins, costs will skyrocket. The healthy will drop their insurance and only purchase it when they need it, driving up costs even more. It's already happening in Massachuttes which has had something almost identical to ObamaCare for a few years now. Costs have skyrocketed and their health insurance rates are now the highest in the US. More people are covered due to government subsidies, but many were forced to drop their health insurance due to skyrocketing costs.

Most states already have a subsidized high-risk pool that covers these conditions so this is no benefit for most of us and in fact hurts everyone else who is forced to pay much higher rates or drop their insurance due to the high cost.

4. High-risk pool - This Republican idea is about the only benefit I see listed.

5. End of recissions - It's already illegal. No one wants illegal recissions so don't credit Obama for that one.

The Republican Plan - Would allow everyone to purchase insurance at fair market rates and allow those with health problems who can't get coverage to purchase insurance in a subsidized high-risk pool. Everyone would get a subsidy to help pay for it. Everyone would have the choice to choose what coverage the want to purchase (can choose lifetime or annual caps or accept pre-existing condition exclusions to lower premiums so they are affordable, everyone has the option to purchase or decline prescription drug, mental health, substance abuse, drug rehab, chiropractic, etc.)

Obama Plan - Nearly a complete government takeover of the individual health care industry. New $1,000 health care tax for those who don't purchase the government mandated plan. Everyone will be forced to purchase the same coverage decided upon by the government. Everyone will be forced to purchase insurance coverage for mental health, substance abuse, drug rehab, prescription drugs, etc. Those who can't afford mandated coverages they don't need will be forced to drop their health insurance and go without any insurance. Costs will skyrocket for everyone. The only option you will have is insurance company and how you want to pay for it (low deductible, higher premiums or high deductible, low premiums). What's happening in MA is the sick people sign up for the low deductible plan and the healthy sign up for the low cost, high deductible plan. Because the low deductible plan is full of sick people, the costs are close to $3,000 a MONTH for a family plan.

Due to huge subsidies based on income (a very low income family can get a $25,000 subsidy), Obama's plan will result in massive tax increases for the middle class. A family earning $30,000 a year who gets a second job paying $15,000 a year will owe an additional $12,000 in taxes for an effective tax rate of 80% (that's no myth - they would pay about $3,000 directly in taxes and have the health insurance subsidy/tax credit reduced by $9,000 = $12,000 in taxes on $15,000 of income). Due to childcare costs, the family could actually LOSE money by getting a second job. Families will be forced to choose between health insurance or a job and may have to quit working in order to afford health insurance.

There IS a reason the citizens of the liberal state of MA decided to elect the first Republican in decades. It's because they already have ObamaCare and they HATE it.

Sources:

"Overall, the profit margin for health insurance companies was a modest 3.4 percent over the past year, according to data provided by Morningstar. That ranks 87th out of 215 industries" - http://www.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains

Short-term customers boosting health costs - http://www.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/04/04/short_term_customers_boosting_health_costs/

"Under the House bill, a family of four that struggles to climb from $30,000 to $45,000 would only get to keep $3,000 of that additional $15,000 — an implicit tax rate of more than 80 percent." - http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11126

[This Message was Edited on 05/05/2010]







--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate




gapsych
5/6/10 6:27 PM Nancy



Thanks!! Your post is almost identical to my first post but you have an even better source.

Take care.

gap

ETA, I am going to move this thread to the chit chat board.

[This Message was Edited on 05/06/2010]




Edit My Post | Delete My Post


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply Add to Favorites Add to Friends Ignore this Post Ignore this User Report as Inappropriate