American health care bill

[aliss]

It did stand out. For those who are from the UK or US, just be advised, Canadians find the hat comment either annoying, or just plain offensive. Just FYI for the future.

 

[Sovereign]

My OH met someone through work with 4 fingers, he had previously lived in the States and had cut 2 off during an accident-- the doctor gave him a quote to reattach each finger and he had to choose ring finger or middle finger because he couldn't afford both.

Wow, seriously?! x

 

[JASMAK]

It did stand out. For those who are from the UK or US, just be advised, Canadians find the hat comment either annoying, or just plain offensive. Just FYI for the future.

Yes, that is a VERY OFFENSIVE comment to Canadians....who want no part of the USA nor do we like to be compared, nor are we really that similar.

 

[Chaos]

I don't really think you can compare them to be honest to how one has sorted it out and one aint, totally different countries with different laws and governments.

It's like saying Scotland is basically England. Offends both sets of people 99% of the time. You should go read up on the actual health care bill and educate your self seeing as it's the country you live in now!

 

[Shri]

As a UK citizen living in USA, I find the health care situation one MAJOR reason getting in the way of me actually liking this country. Could it be that when our friend was dying of cancer, everyone had to FIGHT with her insurance companies to get coverage for her treatments...goodness knows how people get well with that kind of pressure, I know from my own experience that it's very very stressful...

as for being penalized if you don't have health insurance under the new legislation...I will look into this more and get the facts but I somehow doubt very much that Mr Sensible would have come up with a plan that would get everyone so scared and angry about the potential of being FORCED to have health insurance... It's just not his style.

 

[Shri]

This should clarify things
https://www.whitehouse.gov/health-care-meeting/questions/no-insurance

 

[eightambliss]

I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, just adding my two cents: what some of us Americans want is a public option so we may go to the doctor (and dare I suggest, even dentist) whenever we need to. As it stands right now, you must either be very low income (I'm talking no job, no unemployment etc) or have a job with good healthcare benefits to go to a doctor. It should never come down to that. Examples: My husband is looking for work and I have a job, but my boss wants to save money and buy the cheapest (for him) plan that makes it expensive (for me) to go to the doc. My friend has a cushy new job, but the healthcare is outrageous-it is too expensive for her to go. Plus, she has some health issues since childhood that are labeled as pre-existing conditions, so they are not covered. I know a lot of people that self-medicate or look to natural options (like homeopathy) to keep them healthy/safe. I love my country, but the healthcare needs serious reform in one way or another. This is only a start.

 

[aob1013]

If giving birth costs over 7 grand a time I can't understand why people would be against it?!?! I'm glad to be British and I'm glad we have the NHS, one of the best things this country has.

 

[Minstermind]

I think the main thing for those who oppose it is that there's a lot more that goes with the package besides universal health care. They're not convinced it's going to lower their premiums and feel the focus should be on lowering the cost of health care altogether and getting a handle on the greedy insurance companies, and I think the biggest thing stickler for people is the idea that they will be forced to buy health insurance or be penalized, which is unconstitutional.

So, overall, I gather there's a lot more to the opposition than just the basic principle of universal health care. There's other facets to this reform which are pissing people off.

 

[JASMAK]

the more I hear about the US health care reform, the less it sounds like Canada's. But, I do hope that something happens...some kind of change...for the ones who can't afford. I heard that a US poll showed that most Americans are for it though??? Is that true. It will be interesting to see how it all unfolds.

 

[Minstermind]

Well, the ones who oppose it say that half or more of polled Americans are against it, and the ones that are for it say half or more of polled Americans are against it, LOL...I think it really is VERY close, nearly split down the middle.

 

[Shri]

they will not be forced to buy healthcare, nor be penalized. That is part of the negative propaganda. It's hard to find the hard facts but if you can find the actual bill (good luck) and read it, there is no where that states any kind of penalty for not having health insurance. It's complicated, but in order to make sure that healthcare is universal - that no one is left out, the reform is about making sure everyone has health insurance, in one way or another. It's all worked out on a sliding scale so that no on is worse off, in fact, most people will most likely be paying less. The only people who may feel negatively effected are the very wealthy who will be taxed a little more - and from what I can gather, the ones that protest to this are of the mindset that poor people are underachievers and why should they pay for the healthcare of others. But in fact there is not a direct line from their pockets to those with less income. The only complaints against this reform that I have ever heard or read come from completely illogical and selfish standpoints. I have not yet heard a good, solid, factual reason why this reform plan is a bad thing. The people I've heard or read about complaining about it are either very rich, or malinformed and basing their fears and worries on negative propaganda.

I cannot think of a single reason that it would be a bad idea for a society to all put money into a pot in order that everyone in that society could have equal access to healthcare and wellness. We work damn hard all our lives and are happy to pay taxes that make for a happier and more peaceful, well society because that makes OUR lives better too...some taxes are being spent on things that we don't like, but healthcare for all is not one of them.

 

[Minstermind]

That's very interesting, Shri...this is the first I've heard of the idea that people won't be penalized if they don't get health insurance. That's pretty much the crux of the opposition to the health reform and several governors have filed lawsuits against the government as a result because they say it's unconstitutional. I've even read in some briefs on the reform bill that it says people will be fined if they don't get it. So I'd be truly interested to hear more about what you just said because I'd love to let everyone know about it! I'm really surprised as I thought, if that were the case, the Democrats would have cleared that up, seeing as it's one of the biggest obstacles?

 

[Shri]

That's very interesting, Shri...this is the first I've heard of the idea that people won't be penalized if they don't get health insurance. That's pretty much the crux of the opposition to the health reform and several governors have filed lawsuits against the government as a result because they say it's unconstitutional. I've even read in some briefs on the reform bill that it says people will be fined if they don't get it. So I'd be truly interested to hear more about what you just said because I'd love to let everyone know about it! I'm really surprised as I thought, if that were the case, the Democrats would have cleared that up, seeing as it's one of the biggest obstacles?

I'm trying to find the hard facts on this. Not easy - I would have thought that it should all be laid out in plain english by the government, but OH says, it's still not clear and they keep making amendments so if you go and try to find THE actual bill from a couple of weeks ago, it's no longer there - which all seems a bit strange and fishy to me....

I saw something in the NY times about if you dont' get health insurance in 2014 you will be charged a 1% of your income penalty - but I cant find the actual part of the bill that states that. Employers will be fined for failing to cover full time workers if they have over 30 workers which probably gets a lot of people cross.

Seriously I don't know why it has to be complicated, why can't people just pay income based contributions towards it like they do in UK?

 

[Nic1107]

"MANDATED COVERAGE
If the Senate approves the House's changes to the bill, individuals would be required to buy coverage in 2014 or face a fine of $95 or 1 percent of income, whichever is greater. This fine would increase in 2015 to $325 or 2 percent of income, and in 2016 it would rise to $695 or 2.5 percent of income.

The plan, however, includes a hardship exemption for poorer Americans, and subsidies will be provided to families of four making up to $88,000 annually."


It's not propoganda, it's in the bill. Not saying how I feel about the bill, but the part about the fine is true.

Edit: I did find a link to the actual bill, but the entire thing seems to be made of amendments. It's all crazy, I figure whatever happens I'll roll with it. What else can you do, you know?

 

[Shri]

"MANDATED COVERAGE
If the Senate approves the House's changes to the bill, individuals would be required to buy coverage in 2014 or face a fine of $95 or 1 percent of income, whichever is greater. This fine would increase in 2015 to $325 or 2 percent of income, and in 2016 it would rise to $695 or 2.5 percent of income.

The plan, however, includes a hardship exemption for poorer Americans, and subsidies will be provided to families of four making up to $88,000 annually."


It's not propoganda, it's in the bill. Not saying how I feel about the bill, but the part about the fine is true.

Edit: I did find a link to the actual bill, but the entire thing seems to be made of amendments. It's all crazy, I figure whatever happens I'll roll with it. What else can you do, you know?

It doesn't seem that bad to me. Not that different to car insurance.

 

[Nic1107]

"MANDATED COVERAGE
If the Senate approves the House's changes to the bill, individuals would be required to buy coverage in 2014 or face a fine of $95 or 1 percent of income, whichever is greater. This fine would increase in 2015 to $325 or 2 percent of income, and in 2016 it would rise to $695 or 2.5 percent of income.

The plan, however, includes a hardship exemption for poorer Americans, and subsidies will be provided to families of four making up to $88,000 annually."


It's not propoganda, it's in the bill. Not saying how I feel about the bill, but the part about the fine is true.

Edit: I did find a link to the actual bill, but the entire thing seems to be made of amendments. It's all crazy, I figure whatever happens I'll roll with it. What else can you do, you know?

It doesn't seem that bad to me. Not that different to car insurance.

That's a great comparison, actually. Car insurance is mandated in most states and I don't think anyone complains! (That I've heard anyway). I admit I'm nervous about the bill, only because a change of this magnitude is, well, a big change! I am extremely lucky to have health insurance that doesn't have a monthly premium and carries a $3000 catastrophic cap, because of my DH's military/veteran status. I wonder what this health bill will or won't do for people who are already up to their eyeballs in debt from medical bills from before?

 

[Minstermind]

You're right, it's no different to car insurance. The ones who oppose it, though, say the difference for them is they at least have the choice to even own a car and thus have car insurance, whereas this bill requires everyone to purchase it (which they say is unconstitutional, and you know how people get about things violating the constitution...)

I'm ok with buying it. I'd like to have the option to do so as right now it would cost an absolute fortune for me to purchase health insurance, and I probably have even less options living overseas.

 

[Nic1107]

I really do understand the constitutionalists' point of view in that they don't want to be "taxed just for breathing"... but we're taxed just for breathing anyway! We're required to pay for public schools whether we have kids or not, fixing roads whether we drive or not, it's all part of living in society. I understand both points of view though, but I'm optimistic that America might get this one right.

 

[JASMAK]

I think big changes like this will always have kinks to iron out too...but, I truly hope in the end that most are happy with it.