It is odd that you do not mention the details that The Secretary of the HHS is going to add. This is stated in 200 provisions of the law that are not yet defined. The Secretary can add detailed provisions without the oversight of Congress. AND, oh yeah, you did not mention the Reconciliation Bill passed the next day that included several of the costly provisions of Obamacare that would have made it cost-negative. Get honest with your reporting!!
i hope i live long enough to see all the posts 3-4 years from now when we're in a terrible mess saying its obama's fault. because he's going to leave us a dandy!
wow cbs you're really on the ball. three years later and you're just now writing articles about whats in the bill. you guys are a joke. i lnow whats in it and it will bankrupt the country. a good example of what this kind of policy creates is GREECE.
Actually, a good example is GERMANY, **the economic powerhouse of the EU**. Germans have apparently been confused as to why the USA put off the bill as long as it has, since it works great for them. Greece's ACTUAL issue, as opposed to the one you disingenuously suggested, was rampant borrowing from the same banks (cough G&S cough) that helped the US ontomits present path. That and possibly a more laid-back, "Mediterranean" work ethic; you should hear my old boss go off on the Greek work ethic, and he's Greek. . .
I have listened to both sides of this issue and I really don't understand why people believe this healthcare act is really good or bad. As soon as the bill passed the insurance companies raised their rates across the board by 35%. The argument was that they had to cover the costs of the 13 to 30 million people who would now be insured and the people that had to be carried until they were 27 on their parents insurance. Funny though most of this hasn't taken effect yet so I guess the insurance companies are getting a head start. Also we were going to pay for this by getting rid of the waste in Medicare. If we knew there was that much waste in Medicare why didn't we just stop the waste and save all that money? All these savings we are going to achieve sounds like my wife's explanation for how much money she saves at the local department store when they have a big "sale". SO far the only ones that I can see that are making out are the insurance companies who are gaining 30 million new customers that someone has to pay for.
Healthcare for all will benefit all. Whether I will personally benefit from a provision is not the issue. Those without healthcare need care. Hopefully preventative care. With care for all, our future will hopefully be allowing for reductions in emergency visits to hospitals, fewer major health issues for large populations of people. I benefit from this by having lowered the unhealthy Americans.
No, this plan provides Health INSURANCE for everyone, not Health Care. There is nothing in this plan that is going to do anything to improve the level of care I receive from any doctor or hospital.
This response is in to chip-and-andy's comment to your post. I think you can boil it down to this. a Pap test is a pant-load cheaper than cervical cancer, or in the words of the old adage, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of tax-payer's money.
No? For those of you who voted No, do you have a good reason for that answer? Have you not read what the Healthcare law does or will do for all of us, all U.S. Citizens? No, really? Have you not read the law? Do you not think, truly, it can help people? As for the cost, really, what is the cost to you? What is the cost of insurance to you now? Think about it. Do you think, the insurance business is looking out for you?
Walkinsun, when someone accuses you of being a socialist, do you deny it? If so, would seem weird to me since you advocate a wholesale take over by the government in healthcare all because they give you goodies.
On a second note, do you honestly believe we can spend 2.5 trillion dollars over 10 years and this plan saves money???? Wow, doesn't take much to convert you. Government math- 2+2= 3.
This plan is Health Insurance, not Health Care. There is nothing in this program that is going to improve the quality or quantity of care provided by any doctor or hospital. Just because I have insurance and can see a doctor doesn't mean the doctor is available and can see me when I need them.
The right wingnuts are way off on this one! Medicare was, is, and will continue to be the right thing to do for our seniors. We need to extend that same thinking to the rest of us. Why should anyone have to loose everything when they get sick? We all get sick by the way. Unlike how some of the wingnuts are talking out there, that there are 'many babies who are born and live to an old age without using heathcare'. What planet do these idiots live on?
The right does not want to reduce or otherwise damage Medicare. It is the left that wants to ration medical care to the elderly.
The nonsense about reducing government cost while adding about 30,000,000 "poor" people to the rolls of the national the-tax-payers-will-pay-your-medical-premium bunch is a cruel hoax on the American people.
what planet do you live on? obama robbed medicare of $500 bil to provide the susidies this thing provides for. hello!!!!!!! democrats cut medicare, not republicans!
As a top student I've never failed a test. When I fill out applications for employment, I almost always get hired. I am now living the dream of being self-employed as a software engineering contractor working from home, making a very good living.
However, I failed one application - applying for health care to BCBS. I tried another company, denied. I take medication high cholesterol. My wife was denied as well - she gets migrane. My son was denied - he had Astma as a child (he's 21 now). My daughter was denied because she was treated for depression when she was 16.
We went almost a year without any insurance because of pre-existing conditions. My life, my house, my bank account were all at risk - one heart beat away from losing everything.
Ah, the American dream to go bankrupt while health insurance companies get richer and richer every day.
And nothing in this program changes anything. Sure you can't be denied coverage for pre-existing, but that doesn't mean the coverage is going to be price controlled. This new plan is Health Insurance for everyone, not cheap insurance, not good insurance, just insurance.
The new plan is price controlled. Insurance companies in the exchanges have to offer health care at reasonable cost (which inevitably will change with inflation) and it must meet minimum standards. That is all part of the insurance reform in the bill. "Cadillac" plans that charge over a certain amount will be penalized for doing so.
I have been reading a lot about the health care issue in the US for about the past 20 years and the one thing I have been able to conclude is: no one really seems to know what would work the best regarding the provision of health care. As a nation, we can't even seem to decide whether health care is something that everyone should have access to or not. I come from the traditional liberal view that healthcare is something that every one should have access to and that the provision of such is easily within the reach of the country if we can decide on the best and cheapest method to provide it, but I have to admit that I'm at a loss as to how best to achieve that goal. I think what we should do is set up 6 to 8 different regions in the country balanced for demographic comparison and then establish a different system in each, at the end of 10 year, pick the one that has given the best service for the least expense and then implement it across the comparison zones but with different tweaks to the system, at the end of another 5 years, implement the tweaks that worked the best. If both parties committed to such an evolutionary long term experiment, I believe we could have the best health care system in the world that provided coverage to all citizens.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Greece's ACTUAL issue, as opposed to the one you disingenuously suggested, was rampant borrowing from the same banks (cough G&S cough) that helped the US ontomits present path. That and possibly a more laid-back, "Mediterranean" work ethic; you should hear my old boss go off on the Greek work ethic, and he's Greek. . .
On a second note, do you honestly believe we can spend 2.5 trillion dollars over 10 years and this plan saves money???? Wow, doesn't take much to convert you. Government math- 2+2= 3.
I do.
This plan is Health Insurance, not Health Care. There is nothing in this program that is going to improve the quality or quantity of care provided by any doctor or hospital. Just because I have insurance and can see a doctor doesn't mean the doctor is available and can see me when I need them.
The nonsense about reducing government cost while adding about 30,000,000 "poor" people to the rolls of the national the-tax-payers-will-pay-your-medical-premium bunch is a cruel hoax on the American people.
However, I failed one application - applying for health care to BCBS. I tried another company, denied. I take medication high cholesterol. My wife was denied as well - she gets migrane. My son was denied - he had Astma as a child (he's 21 now). My daughter was denied because she was treated for depression when she was 16.
We went almost a year without any insurance because of pre-existing conditions. My life, my house, my bank account were all at risk - one heart beat away from losing everything.
Ah, the American dream to go bankrupt while health insurance companies get richer and richer every day.