Health Care Thread

Rescorla_sl said:

If you can provide any factual evidence based on statistics, studies etc that concierge doctors are more technically competent than doctors with traditional practices I would be more than willing to change my opinion. Until then you are just making an assumption and using your own stepdad as evidence to back up your point. I can counter your one example with one example of my own. Dr James Andrews is one of, if not the #1, most famous orthopedic surgeon in the world. He built his reputation performing surgeries on superstar professional athletes. His sports medicine practice is in Birmingham, Alabama and his primary clientele are high school athletes from all walks of life with basic insurance.

Lastly, I don't doubt you when you say the Canadian system works. If you are happy with it then more power to you. The US system works too. Back to the original topic of this thread, the issue is does the US system work better now than it did before Obamacare. The evidence so far clearly indicates it does not work better and appears to be getting even worse.

Click to expand...

Dude it's common sense that applies to every industry.. People pay more for a higher skillset if they can afford it. Would you pay 3K a year to an internist fresh out of med school when you can pay that amount to a doctor with 20+ years experience and wins top 10 doc in your city year after year? It's the same with the "out of network docs". Do you think a doctor fresh out of med school, or a doctor with an average reputation, can afford to "fire" all insurance companies and go out of network for all treatment? What about a plastic surgeon that has a thriving "travel" practice where people fly into LA for surgery with a famous PS, and he has a dedicated "travel nurse" and a deal with a nearby hotel for his patients to stay at? Does your average PS just out of med school have this type of practice, or is it primarily famous plastic surgeons?

Since the American health care system is capitalistic and profit driven in nature, obviously the same rules of demand/supply apply. Great doctors that are in high demand charge more, and can afford to do away with insurance dependency. The result is that the best quality medicine is reserved for those that can afford it. Your example (unless you can cite stats) is the philanthropic exception to the rule. My stepdad does do a few medicare and charity cases per month as well, but they are the exception not the rule..

As for whether Obamacare is good or not, I honestly don't know for sure. It hasn't effected me all that much, but it did cause my internist to enact his concierge service because he couldn't make as much as he used to, so imho that's a negative. On the whole, my opinion is that you can't marry socialist principles bolted onto a capitalist system. There are some fantastic rules like the elimination of pre-existing conditions as a barrier to getting insurance, but my opinion of Obamacare as a sum of its policies is so far negative. I can tell you my stepdad despises it, but that's because it generates less money for doctors, so his opinion is biased based on his pocketbook.

"Shut up imbecile. Your brazen stupidity hurting the country. You and all the idiots I'm sure you associate with to adopt such a pathetically stupid world view need to entrust your voting decisions to better men."

I would like to offer my heartfelt thanks to whoever said that. It caused me to chuckle and was the perfect way to end the work week. Anyone want to bet a six-pack of beer whoever the dumbfuck was who sent it to me voted for Obama? Let me brighten the day of that person.

How Marco Rubio is killing Obamacare

Since Rubio's provision was included in the omnibus spending bill, the Democrats who supported the legislation helped ensure Obamacare is dying a death from a 1000 cuts.

Well, I'm sure if it does get killed (note: many don't think this wound would be mortal) - you think people are going to be happy when they see people refused insurance and prices jump faster again when the price controls are off?

More people are getting fucked and my insurance rates are still going up! Weee, Rubio owns!?

Vaclav_sl said:

Well, I'm sure if it does get killed (note: many don't think this wound would be mortal) - you think people are going to be happy when they see people refused insurance and prices jump faster again when the price controls are off?

More people are getting fucked and my insurance rates are still going up! Weee, Rubio owns!?

Click to expand...

The Democrats will forever own Obamacare and everything bad that happens because of it. Opposing the use of taxpayer money for bailouts of Big Insurance corporations who are losing money because of Obamacare should prove to be extremely popular with voters.

Rescorla_sl said:

The Democrats will forever own Obamacare and everything bad that happens because of it. Opposing the use of taxpayer money for bailouts of Big Insurance corporations who are losing money because of Obamacare should prove to be extremely popular with voters.

Click to expand...

I'm sure they will rally behind it, briefly, if it fails. And then when they see the tide that it was holding back they'll be livid.

Seriously, you can quote me on this - if Obamacare ends up going away, without something EFFECTIVE being put in its place rapidly - you will see the end of the Republican party officially. And I'm not one for doomcrying them normally.

Fairly sure half the people supporting Obamacare in the poll above are non Americans.

Siddar_sl said:

Fairly sure half the people supporting Obamacare in the poll above are non Americans.

Click to expand...

Pssst. Every 'non-American' from a western nation with socialized health care thinks 'Obamacare' (lol) is a retarded half measure doomed to failure.

But okay.

Quaid_sl said:

Pssst. Every 'non-American' from a western nation with socialized health care thinks 'Obamacare' (lol) is a retarded half measure doomed to failure.

But okay.

Click to expand...

We would have been MUCH better off with single payer and controlling the pharmaceutical industry from gouging us.

TJT_sl said:

Demands empirical evidence.

Provides anecdote.

Click to expand...

I see the point went over your head. Wombat made an assertion based on anecdotal evidence so I countered it with better anecdotal evidence. Thanks for trying though.

Rescorla_sl said:

I see the point went over your head. Wombat made an assertion based on anecdotal evidence so I countered it with better anecdotal evidence. Thanks for trying though.

Click to expand...

All anecdotal evidence is crap however - so you countered nothing with nothing.

Flipmode_sl said:

We would have been MUCH better off with single payer and controlling the pharmaceutical industry from gouging us.

Click to expand...

I think most people see Obama care as simply a stepping stone towards that. I'd also think that most people that supported Obama care would have preferred if we went to single payer right off the bat. However there is a group that would of screamed "socialism" the second that got brought up. Now that their leading candidate is in favor of single payer maybe they'll continue the trend of being hypocrites and suddenly support it.

Cad_sl said:

United States National Health Care Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is what Obamacare should have been.

I would blame it on republicans but Dems had a 60 person supermajority in the senate in 2010 right? Why didn't they just pass this instead?

Click to expand...

The house of representatives had 242 Republicans to 193 Democrats.

The US needs more Francis Underwood.

Cad_sl said:

Jeez, this whole time I thought Obamacare was what they wanted. If the republicans were the roadblock to single payer, and now they complain about Obamacare not actually lowering costs when they wouldn't agree to the thing that would lower costs...

My head just exploded

Is there anyone that isn't a fox news talking head that thought the insurance industry was better before Obamacare?

Click to expand...

Gee I wonder why ... oh wait, no I don't.

Cad_sl said:

United States National Health Care Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is what Obamacare should have been.

I would blame it on republicans but Dems had a 60 person supermajority in the senate in 2010 right? Why didn't they just pass this instead?

Click to expand...

According to that Wiki article, that bill has been proposed in every Congress since 2003. The Democrats could have passed it anytime between Obama's election in 2008 and Scott Brown's election after Kennedy's death but they chose not to. There was no mention of any GAO scoring in that wiki. My guess is the reason it was never seriously considered is because the Democrats likely knew it would have been ridiculously expensive and unpopular.