Trump II

[Alan Klein]

Regarding the London bombing in their subways recently, "Iraqi asylum seeker Ahmed Hassan, 18, was motivated to unleash murder on the Tube because of his 'warped political views', it is alleged.

He entered the country illegally in 2015 and was put in foster care but before the terror attack he had 'expressed hatred for the UK government and society', the prosecution said."

Others involved are also Muslim refugees from the middle east.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4909992/Suspect-18-charged-Parsons-Green-bombing.html

Trump is trying to avoid this problem with his travel ban and other changes to our immigration procedures.

[Alan Goldhammer]

You say that as if ObamaCare matters to all citizens. It doesn't to a vast majority.

Using this logic, we should all be happy and support the Republican proposal.  For two years, both of my daughters were independent contractors.  They had good incomes but were reliant on Obamacare for their health insurance.  A number of their friends are/were free-lance workers and also dependent on this type of healthcare access.  Again, think twice before you post throw away lines.  It may be a small group of individuals but these folks are important and in many cases are good earners and taxpayers.

[Alan Goldhammer]

Trump is trying to avoid this problem with his travel ban and other changes to our immigration procedures.

A great many of the domestic terrorists over the past quarter century were not Muslim and did cause a significant loss of life in the US.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

You say that as if ObamaCare matters to all citizens. It doesn't to a vast majority.

Probably correct. It only affects, say 22 million people?

Cheers,
Bart

[scyth]

They had good incomes but were reliant on Obamacare for their health insurance. 

something does not add here... why 'd somebody with good income be elibigble for Obamacare ?

[scyth]

You say that as if ObamaCare matters to all citizens. It doesn't to a vast majority.

actually it does - because vast majority is not insured against something bad that might happen with each one of them (even not with all of them at once)... от тюрьмы и сумы (c) folklore

PS: copyright protection of photographs so important for some people here does not matter to a way vaster majority of US population either and so on

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Probably correct. It only affects, say 22 million people?

At start, it was 11 million ... how did it double in the meantime?

[DeanChriss]

+1. 

85% of Americans were perfectly happy with their health plans before Obamacare.  Most got theirs  through their employer and paid a reasonable amount.  Because of Obamacare, the whole system has been turned topsy turvy.  Regular people who had insurance can't afford it any longer or their deductibles are so high, they can't really use the insurance except if they have major health issues.

If we wanted to help people in the 15%, we should address only those people.  Keeping a competitive system otherwise would continue to provide the best research and doctors generally for everyone.  Going to a government system is just going to result in lousy health care. 

I'm on Medicare for over age 65.  All the better doctors in NYC are opting out of Medicare because they refuse to accept the low payments Medicare requires them to accept.  If you want their services, you have to pay out-of-pocket, the full amount they charge.  Secondary insurance policies won't pick up any of the charges either because primary, Medicare, refuses. So you would have to pay for full services. 

My wife when she was 63 had bone surgery to repair a break by one of the best orthopedic surgeons in the country.  It cost her nothing for his operation.  It was all picked up by her private health insurance paid for by her and her employer.  Two weeks ago, she needed additional surgery by this same surgeon to remove the plate he had put in  during the first operation.  Because she is now on Medicare and this same surgeon had opted out of Medicare, it cost us $5300 in direct payments to him.   We will get no reimbursements from Medicare or our secondary private insurance.  Fortunately for us, the anesthesiologist, who had not opted out of Medicare, charged us $2800.  However, Medicare is paying him only $250 which he'll have to accept.  How long will he continue to accept Medicare's low payments? 

So unless you're rich, your stuck with crappy surgeons and other specialists.  If Medicare or government single payer goes national, the same thing will happen for younger people.  If the government forces better doctors to accept low Medicare or government mandated fees, then smart students will switch to law and other professions and we'll no longer have the best doctors available to care for us even if we're willing to pay out of pocket.

My wife and I are both healthy with no serious or chronic problems. I've been self-employed for most of my adult life so I am the employer who provides health insurance for my wife and I. Before Obamacare our insurance premiums were around $2000 per month, and it was only that low because we have group insurance through a regional council of smaller enterprises. Is $2000/month a "reasonable amount"? In the 5 or so years before Obamacare we were seeing annual increases on the order of 30%, so we increased the deductible to higher levels several times just to keep premiums in check. A year before Obamacare happened our deductible was already at very high catastrophic insurance levels. Since Obamacare happened our premiums have not decreased but we get all of the preventative care and tests at no charge only because of Obamacare. Without that we'd be paying 100% of all of that, plus a couple thousand dollars per month.

My wife recently had 5 one hour physical therapy appointments. On two (first and last) occasions an actual physical therapist saw her, and on the others she was seen by an "assistant". All of the sessions consisted of the person telling her what exercises to do and her doing them. No active treatment, like traction, etc., was ever performed and no special equipment except a big rubber band that you can buy for a couple dollars) was used. The bill to our insurance for this was $500 per session. Is that reasonable? Her appointment with the orthopedic surgeon, which included several x-rays was cheaper.

The health care system in America was broken long before Obamacare happened. Before Obamacare around 60% of all personal bankruptcies had a medical cause and now that's down to around 25%, so there has been a positive impact. Here's some "fake news" for you to digest:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-obamacare-bankruptcy-20170509-story.html

Our kids in Australia don't sweat healthcare or insurance costs. Both have gone through having their own kids, and caring for one of those with special medical needs, all without a financial worry. Whenever I think about that I wonder why America can't do half as well for its citizens. My guess is because many fear any sort of change, bury their heads in the sand, and convince themselves that what we have is fine even though it's near the bottom of the heap for any developed nation.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...Again, think twice before you post throw away lines..

Alan, I gather that you don't like facing reality? Which is that the majority of Americans don't care about ObamaCare, for better or worse. I am just the messenger.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

At start, it was 11 million ... how did it double in the meantime?

Was it?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-obamacare-stocks/hospital-stocks-fall-after-republican-health-bill-seen-leaving-24-million-uninsured-idUSKBN16L1W1

So you are saying that it's okay if 11 million people are negatively impacted, very nice ...

Cheers,
Bart

[Alan Goldhammer]

something does not add here... why 'd somebody with good income be elibigble for Obamacare ?

Simple, they buy Obamacare policies but do not get any subsidy because their incomes do not qualify them for one.  A lot of consultants fall under 'Obamacare' but without the financial aid.

[Alan Goldhammer]

Alan, every time you say this, you say it as if freelancers had difficulty finding/getting coverage and could not get it for a reasonable price. 

This is simply not true; I, for years, prior to the ACA was able to get reasonable health insurance.  Since the ACA, by the way, my premiums have almost doubled by now. 

If your daughters, or their friends, could not find health insurance prior to the ACA being passed, then they certainly were not looking hard enough.  I got my coverage in about a week after I started looking for it.

Both girls were free lancers after the implementation of Obamacare and had no prior experience with purchasing individual policies.

[Alan Goldhammer]

At start, it was 11 million ... how did it double in the meantime?

The Affordable Care Act applies to anyone not receiving employer insurance.  It also specifies what has to be covered and sets forth various categories of coverage (bronze, silver, gold, platinum).  Medicaid expansion is part of the ACA as are the subsidies.  the actual number of people the ACA 'potentially' covers is quite large.  Not everyone will be eligible for subsidies or the Medicaid expansion.  I know a number of ex-pharmaceutical people who are active consultants and not old enough for Medicare.  The all have ACA policies (no subsidies)>

[Alan Klein]

Was it?

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-obamacare-stocks/hospital-stocks-fall-after-republican-health-bill-seen-leaving-24-million-uninsured-idUSKBN16L1W1

So you are saying that it's okay if 11 million people are negatively impacted, very nice ...

Cheers,
Bart

11 million people represent about 3%.  Even 22 million represent 6%.  Of course we don't want people not to be provided with health care.  However, rather than changing the entire health care system which was working for 85% of the people before Obamacare, address people who don't have insurance or have problems with insurance due to pre-existing conditions.  By keeping medical care competitive like other products, you'll have the best health care.  Making it single payer or government provided like the VA, will provide terrible health care for all the people.  We don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water. 

[Alan Klein]

Using this logic, we should all be happy and support the Republican proposal.  For two years, both of my daughters were independent contractors.  They had good incomes but were reliant on Obamacare for their health insurance.  A number of their friends are/were free-lance workers and also dependent on this type of healthcare access.  Again, think twice before you post throw away lines.  It may be a small group of individuals but these folks are important and in many cases are good earners and taxpayers.

Your subsequent posts indicated that your daughters never worked before Obamacare.  So your argument that they couldn't get health insurance without Obamacare is meaningless and frankly deceptive.  You tried to make it seem like Obamacare helped your daughters when it is now obvious they would have had no problem getting insurance if Obamacare never happened.  You never told the "whole" truth.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

America and Americans existed before Obama and Obamacare. Both will continue to exist after just as well.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

11 million people represent about 3%.  Even 22 million represent 6%.  Of course we don't want people not to be provided with health care.  However, rather than changing the entire health care system which was working for 85% of the people before Obamacare, address people who don't have insurance or have problems with insurance due to pre-existing conditions.  By keeping medical care competitive like other products, you'll have the best health care.  Making it single payer or government provided like the VA, will provide terrible health care for all the people.  We don't want to throw out the baby with the bath water.

It was changed because it was not working well. Things seem to have improved for millions, but more can be done. Going back to the prior situation is ass-backward. American Healthcare in general is performing pretty mediocre, compared to the rest of the civilized world, so improvements are more needed than further deterioration.

Cheers,
Bart

[Alan Goldhammer]

Your subsequent posts indicated that your daughters never worked before Obamacare.  So your argument that they couldn't get health insurance without Obamacare is meaningless and frankly deceptive.  You tried to make it seem like Obamacare helped your daughters when it is now obvious they would have had no problem getting insurance if Obamacare never happened.  You never told the "whole" truth.

I guess I'm out of here now, having had my veracity questioned.  I don't think the private lives of my daughters is any business of yours or anyone else on LuLa.  My comments were only about a certain time period of their lives when they were independent contractors and not receiving employer sponsored health insurance.  their employment history either before or after that time period is irrelevant to the discussion.  If you or Slobodan cannot understand why the ACA is needed of independent contractors you really should get out of the house more and look around and see how the current economy has changed.  there are a lot of contract workers who rely on the ACA for fairly priced independently provided insurance policies that make sense for them.

[Alan Klein]

I guess I'm out of here now, having had my veracity questioned.  I don't think the private lives of my daughters is any business of yours or anyone else on LuLa.  My comments were only about a certain time period of their lives when they were independent contractors and not receiving employer sponsored health insurance.  their employment history either before or after that time period is irrelevant to the discussion.  If you or Slobodan cannot understand why the ACA is needed of independent contractors you really should get out of the house more and look around and see how the current economy has changed.  there are a lot of contract workers who rely on the ACA for fairly priced independently provided insurance policies that make sense for them.

I shouldn't have questioned your veracity.  That was uncalled for.  I apologize. Also, I didn't intend to get into your daughter's lives.  You mentioned them first as to how Obamacare was helping them.  The only point I was trying to make and should have made, is that before Obamacare, independent contractors were able to secure medical insurance.

As an aside, my cousins husband, an accountant and independent contractor, complained to me how their insurance under Obamacare went up and up to $18,000 a year for him and his wife (they're in their young 60's at the time).  So while Obamacare provided insurance for your daughter and her friends, it seems that she could have got insurance before if she had be working then, and probably for less money.

One of the big problems with Obamacare is that while it provided health insurance for many who didn't have it or forced insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions, the premiums and deductibles have escalated a lot for many who had coverage before at lower costs.  Obamacare has helped some but hurt a lot of others.  That's part of the discussion going on in Congress.  How to resolve both issues without the government and the taxpayers busting the bank.

[Alan Klein]

It was changed because it was not working well. Things seem to have improved for millions, but more can be done. Going back to the prior situation is ass-backward. American Healthcare in general is performing pretty mediocre, compared to the rest of the civilized world, so improvements are more needed than further deterioration.

Cheers,
Bart

That's not true.  Healthcare in the US is fine.  It's that we have more problems with drugs and other issues especially with a large black and poor white category in the younger years.  So there's  a lot more abuse that even great health care can't help.

I looked up life expectancies to compare US with UK.

Here are the results.

US for 2014
From birth Men 76.33   Women 81.11
UK for 2013-2015
From birth Men 79.4 Women 83.1
That's about a 3 year difference for men and 2 year for women favoring the Brits.  These are the statistics you usually read about.

Now let's look at expectancies from age 65.
US
Men 82.84  Women 85.44
UK
Men 83.5 Women 85.9

That's about 7 months for men and 5 months for women, favoring the Brits.  Basically the same between the two countries.

So it seems that once past the younger ages, adults in the US and UK seem to live about the same years.  Whether this has to do with health care, DNA or both, I don't know. 

Another factor is where you live in the US.  We're a big country spread out all over the place.    My friend who developed cancer was not being treated very well in the rural area he lived.  Good specialists are not available in rural areas. They tend to congregate in larger cities where there are more potential patients.   He now has been transferred to NYC and is at one of the top cancer hospitals in the country.    So care varies.  What's concerning about national health care, as I mentioned in an earlier post, is that the best doctors in NYC are opting out of government insurance programs.  So only the very wealthy would be able to afford the best doctors in the future.  Look at the floundering Veteran's Administration if you want to see how national health care might work.