12-01-2009, 03:26 PM
Quote:I doubt that the optimal solution for our healthcare reform could be a simple thing, but that's a hell of a lot of pages to wade through for anyone.
That right there is the problem.
Quote:Read the passage again, it states that no 'individual', company, business, etc... will have a penalty or fine imposed for not participating in the govt plan. Perhaps that was different in an earlier version of the bill, but if so, it appears to have changed now.
I think another problem (which you touch on in your reply) is that people are making wild declarations about the bill without ever having read it. It's a lot to read and very few people are going to take the time. I'm working my way through it. I've also done word searches on the entire document for relevant terms.
(Hopefully!) I said it may have changed in the Senate bill which I linked but I KNOW It was there in the House bill. I'm pretty sure it's still in the Senate bill somewhere but I'm not 100%.
Quote:That may or may not be true, but it doesn't seem to make sense. Why would the govt WANT to take more responsibility on itself for people's health care? The simple fact is, EVERYONE is going to need healthcare of some sort at some time. Many people will end up needing expensive care at some point. The private insurance companies are still ripping folks off big time, but I can see how a small insurance company would be wiped out pretty quickly if they had a few people with high claims. Why the govt would want to have to shell out for those care costs instead of having some private company do it, is beyond me.
Umm... they've been asked that a few times and have yet to give an honest answer. When have you heard of anything the gov't does making much sense lately?
Quote:Nice. I haven't seen any mention of that in the bill, but I did see a lot of proactive stuff in there about disease prevention. Weight loss, stop smoking programs, diabetes management and such. It didn't say whether those programs would be 'mandatory' or simply 'optional', but either way, I think it's a good direction to be going in. I also saw stuff about facilities being rewarded for higher ratios of healthy patients, which is also a good thing I think.
This kind of thing is a double edged knife. What if they do make things like that mandatory?
They've made mention that it could be. I don't think having good health and encouraged for it is a bad thing but having it forced upon you or having to pay higher rates if you're unhealthy is not very good either. It's a new way of 'stacking the odds' if you ask me.