S
SuperLuigi
Guest
Sorry to hear that.
- Status
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Well, it is true that we have no idea whether the OP’s level of care is higher or lower because of the changes in the federal health care laws.
Yeah, sure.
It’s because of ObamaCare that people are losing their health coverage.
It is what the OP can get, and it is not theft or deceit to take it. There is no reason to be ashamed. The consternation is understandable, but the OP shouldn’t feel culpable or “complicit” in what he/she believes is an example of wrong-headed public policy.
B
Burt_Macklin
Guest
I do favor a single-payer system, but Obamacare is what everybody has to work with now. You shouldn’t feel guilty for using it.
And as a tax payer in a developed nation I would expect my tax dollars to be spent providing a certain level of medical care to those who can’t afford it. It is the same as I expect fire and police protection regardless of anyone’s ability to pay their fair share. I view it as money well spent if I get to benefit from a country without a sick and diseased population.
And as a tax payer in a developed nation I would expect my tax dollars to be spent providing a certain level of medical care to those who can’t afford it. It is the same as I expect fire and police protection regardless of anyone’s ability to pay their fair share. I view it as money well spent if I get to benefit from a country without a sick and diseased population.
P
pensmama87
Guest
I get what you are saying and I mostly agree…but (of course
) fire and police protection is provided on a much more local level than single payer health care is in most countries, and is tailored to the needs of the community and their ability to pay. Good municipal managers can do this, if they have the support from elected officials and (by extension) the taxpayers - but managing health care would be far outside their scope. But health care being handled by the federal government is a logistical and bureaucratic nightmare (I’ve also heard that it’s questionable whether or not it would be constitutional.) If we were to do it, I think at the state level makes the most sense. Not that state politicians are any less corrupt than federal ones, but at least it’s a more manageable population.Health care in general just seems to be a big mess. I’m sorry that the OP feels like she’s going back on what she wanted to do, but sometimes that’s the way it is. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t stink, though. :console:
P
phillylawyer
Guest
No problem. I did sort of hijack the conversation into a random direction.I’m sorry too. I misunderstood and sprouted off.
We are on the same page. I’m just taking shortcuts because I’m typing on my phone.
I wasn’t at all saying that the ObamaCare bill didn’t benefit your family. ObamaCare, like most bills, has some winners and some losers.
As you said, we are on the same page.
Sorry for the confusion.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
Maybe, maybe not. I don’t know the statistics.
Yeah, sure.
It’s because of ObamaCare that people are losing their health coverage.
But I will say this: My socially conservative mother-in-law, who despises Obama as much as she despised Clinton, asked me about her prescription medication copay, which dropped from whatever it was (reasonably low via Medicare) to less than $3. She asked, “Do you think it’s Obamacare?” I said, “I don’t know. Could be.”
There was a hint of, “huh, maybe this isn’t so bad after all…” in her voice.
P
phillylawyer
Guest
The ACA, like most bills, has winners and losers. Some people with pre-existing conditions who couldn’t get health insurance before, now can because of the ACA. Others, particularly those who are older, less healthy, and have lower income, will be paying a lot less for health insurance and medical care than they were before.
In order to pay for this, some people (generally, younger, healthier, more well-off individuals) will be paying more for health insurance. In addition, taxes will go up - somewhere north of $1 trillion over 10 years (mostly on those making more than $250k per year via the 3.8% medicare surtax and the .9% medicare wage tax) to help pay for a lot of these subsidies and other ACA costs. In addition, there will be some substantial savings (benefit reductions depending on your point of view) in Medicare. Some people will benefit financially from the ACA, others will pay more.
My wife, for example, had private health insurance through the market the year before the ACA rules came into effect. The year after they came into effect, the policy was cancelled (because it didn’t cover mental health coverage, which is a required minimum under the ACA rules) and her insurance premiums for the same policy (plus mental health coverage, which we decided we didn’t need) went up 66.9%.
If my wife paying 2/3 more for her health insurance (which we can afford) enabled others who couldn’t afford health insurance to now afford it, then perhaps the cost to us is worth it.
It drives me nuts when Republicans say “ObamaCare is evil and is all bad.” It equally drove me nuts when Obama promised that by passing the ACA “health insurance premiums would go down for families by $2,500, health care costs would be lowered” and implied everyone would be winners. Both statements are a bunch of bologna.
I wish both Democrats and Republicans would treat us like adults and have a grown-up conversation and say, “Listen, under the ACA, some people will benefit in the form of lower premiums and access to health insurance, and some others will have to pay via higher premiums and/or higher taxes to help provide these benefits. Let’s discuss whether the costs are worth the benefits.” Instead, we have this stupid childish name-calling “ObamaCare is better for everyone, you idiot, hateful Republicans.” “Nuh uh, ObamaCare is worse for everyone, you idiot, socialist democrats.” I guess that is just politics, but it’s so obnoxious.
End of Rant
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
The central issue with the AFA is that it’s government picking winners and losers.
Those who get a better deal with the AFA like it, those who do not dislike it.
That’s what happens in every single government program that interferes in the free market.
Regarding the morality of taking AFA benefits:
- It is there, more of less with the consent of the governed. People re-elected the President and various Democrats (it had zero GOP support) who passed the law. It was also upheld (although erroneously) by the Supreme Court.
- A priest once told me he doesn’t like doing his grocery shopping at the local store because they sell condoms. Then again, where is he supposed to go? To another store miles away that probably does the same thing?
A lot of these kinds of discussions on here boil down to that.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
It’s the government picking winners and losers. The fact that a few (and I do mean a few by scale of 330 million) get benefits is overshadowed by the next part of the comment:
That’s what happens when people depend on government They almost always make promises they cannot keep or have no incentive to keep.
But they’ll still make them because if nothing else, people will believe.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Exactly. The OP is not being complicit with an immoral, wasteful or wrong-headed governmental policy by using the program in its current form. There are politicians who will imply that anyone who uses the program must agree with it–“some people have fought our program, but X million Americans use it that were not covered before”–but that is preaching to their own choir. No one who is assessing heir claims objectively is going to buy that sort of self-serving rhetorical reasoning.
B
Burt_Macklin
Guest
The problem is that nobody has the courage to let the losers wither and die. If the winners will be responsible for the losers healthcare eventually it will be cheaper to pay preventative care rather than let things escalate to an emergency. There is such a thing as being penny wise and pound foolish as Easterjoy was pointing out.
S
SuperLuigi
Guest
:yup:
The government shouldn’t be propping up those who do not succeed in the free market. Private charity and private institutions such as religion should take the torch in helping out those in need.
That would happen more if the government would just get OUT of it and be a regulator.
C
Cat
Guest
And then there’s the issue of how ACA affects healthcare itself.
At the very least, it adds yet another “department” to every hospital, clinic, and health care system in the U.S. That “department” would be the “ACA Compliance Department.”
This is what happened after HIPAA–all hospitals have a “HIPAA Compliance Department” (it may not have that name).
And this adds the costs of hiring the people to work in that department, a manager(s) to run that department, the office space or even a building to house that department, and all the support departments (IT, janitorial, etc.) to keep that department going.
And guess who pays for that all cost? Hint–it’s not Mrs. Obama’s money tree in the White House garden.
In other words, the cost of your yearly physical just went up. And you don’t want to know how much your knee replacement surgery cost just went up.
I often get the impression that there are a lot of Americans who believe that health care should be “free.” Ain’t no such thing. I didn’t go to school for umpteen years to work in the lab with blood and other body fluids/parts for free. For that matter, all the housekeeping staff who didn’t go to school after high school but who work in the hospital cleaning up in my lab and hauling away those blood samples and body fluids/parts don’t want to work for free either. I don’t blame them. If that sounds selfish, well, guilty as charged and not ashamed.
At the very least, it adds yet another “department” to every hospital, clinic, and health care system in the U.S. That “department” would be the “ACA Compliance Department.”
This is what happened after HIPAA–all hospitals have a “HIPAA Compliance Department” (it may not have that name).
And this adds the costs of hiring the people to work in that department, a manager(s) to run that department, the office space or even a building to house that department, and all the support departments (IT, janitorial, etc.) to keep that department going.
And guess who pays for that all cost? Hint–it’s not Mrs. Obama’s money tree in the White House garden.
In other words, the cost of your yearly physical just went up. And you don’t want to know how much your knee replacement surgery cost just went up.
I often get the impression that there are a lot of Americans who believe that health care should be “free.” Ain’t no such thing. I didn’t go to school for umpteen years to work in the lab with blood and other body fluids/parts for free. For that matter, all the housekeeping staff who didn’t go to school after high school but who work in the hospital cleaning up in my lab and hauling away those blood samples and body fluids/parts don’t want to work for free either. I don’t blame them. If that sounds selfish, well, guilty as charged and not ashamed.
P
phillylawyer
Guest
The response from many democrats to this would be, “Yes, if private charity and private institutions, such as religion, were fully taking care of those in need, we wouldn’t need to have the government do it. But, the point is these private institutions aren’t able to fully provide for these needs via voluntary donations, which is why we need the government to step in. For a lot of these needs, the choice is not between government and private institutions filling the needs, the choice is between government and nobody doing so.”
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Just to clarify: It goes beyond Catholic teaching, however, to say that civil government should have no hand in using tax dollars to provide for indigent care, nor that civil society might not decide that providing universal health care has economic advantages that make it preferable to other means the citizenry might have for accomplishing that. There are political questions that do not have a definitive answers in the Catechism, in spite of what some on either side of this particular question sometimes imply. Catholics can differ on this one without parting ways in the faith.
O
Ophelia23
Guest
When I posted this morning, I think I was feeling a bit melancholy in general. Having read so many of the responses, I wanted to jump back in with a few thoughts. First, to everyone who has offered consolation and the friendly reminders to not despair, I genuinely appreciate it! I understand that there is no “obamacare” insurance plan. Had the bill never been passed, we still would be under whatever coverage was provided by the State. I also understand that I am not morally at fault for any of the plan’s objectionable services as we will not partake in them and continue to fight the fight against them. I didn’t mean to bring up a political discussion, although I can see how it happened. I’m sorry for that.
I think the next time I’m feeling super down in the dumps, I might just keep it to my self. I’m WAY better at being cheerful and perky.
I’ll stick to what my talents are! 
I think the next time I’m feeling super down in the dumps, I might just keep it to my self. I’m WAY better at being cheerful and perky.
I’ll stick to what my talents are!
P
phillylawyer
Guest
I can understand feeling down in the dumps. It can definitely be frustrating being in that situation.When I posted this morning, I think I was feeling a bit melancholy in general. Having read so many of the responses, I wanted to jump back in with a few thoughts. First, to everyone who has offered consolation and the friendly reminders to not despair, I genuinely appreciate it! I understand that there is no “obamacare” insurance plan. Had the bill never been passed, we still would be under whatever coverage was provided by the State. I also understand that I am not morally at fault for any of the plan’s objectionable services as we will not partake in them and continue to fight the fight against them. I didn’t mean to bring up a political discussion, although I can see how it happened. I’m sorry for that.
I think the next time I’m feeling super down in the dumps, I might just keep it to my self. I’m WAY better at being cheerful and perky.
As everyone else said, you really shouldn’t feel bad about getting a private health insurance policy that has been impacted by ObamaCare, even if there are some objectionable parts of the law.
Sorry for sidetracking the conversation into the political realm. It’s not your fault for doing so, it’s those (like me) that can’t resist the urge to jump on these things.
Something to cheer you up. The pope is probably coming to the U.S. (philly to be exact) in 2015 for the World Congress of Families. Well, maybe that’s to cheer me up since I’m in Philly and all!
O
Ophelia23
Guest
I can understand feeling down in the dumps. It can definitely be frustrating being in that situation.
As everyone else said, you really shouldn’t feel bad about getting a private health insurance policy that has been impacted by ObamaCare, even if there are some objectionable parts of the law.
Sorry for sidetracking the conversation into the political realm. It’s not your fault for doing so, it’s those (like me) that can’t resist the urge to jump on these things.
Something to cheer you up. The pope is probably coming to the U.S. (philly to be exact) in 2015 for the World Congress of Families. Well, maybe that’s to cheer me up since I’m in Philly and all!
You are sweet. And yes, that does bring cheer to my heart! Go Pope Francis!!- Status