By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 23 March 2010
Edit Thread
CommonMan said:
Kasz216 said:
CommonMan said:
Kasz216 said:
The_vagabond7 said:
So....big business has stolen our freedoms by using their obscene wealth to buy our government, and make it law to buy their products. Like I've said a hundred times before, in our modern age Capitalism+democracy=government by the corporation for the corporation. You can rally against big government in favor of big business, but there isn't a difference any more. Government is just business's mouthpiece and hammer.

Actually I think it's the opposite.

The thing about health insurance companies is... they don't actually make a lot of money.  My guess is, the plan is to enact all of these changes that raise insurance companies costs... the refuse them the ability to raise rates too high.

Which will result in a great number of insurance companies going out of buisness leading to just a few, so it's easier to switch to a single payer plan.


Of course, in the interm tons of people will lose jobs, healthcare will be a bit chaotic unless the exchanges are rolled out first, and even then it'd be worrisome and probably permanently effect some peoples health.


I'm pretty satisfied with this bill, but I will admit this is a possibility. I'm keeping the old fingers crossed that we're smart enough as a country to not have this happen.

Which part?  Me i'd rather have single payer then this bill.  To me this bill feels like a "worst of both worlds" scenario.  All of the ways it's supposed to reduce costs seem dubious at best since it seems to rely mostly on competition... which i'm not sure there is much room for these companys to cut it because of that.

I like that the preexisting condition loopholes will be closed, this is a big personal factor for me. But I agree, this got beat to death by the stupid bi-partisan bullcrap out there until it doesn't even resemble what we really need. I just like the idea of more people that deserve it having helthcare, I just hope it doesn't blow up in our faces.

It wasn't even bi-partisian... it was interpartisan more then anything.  Democrats vs Democrats.

That's the thing about Democrats, the party make up is very split up... I mean get a Union Democrat and a Liberal Democrat argueing and you'd be surprised they're even in the same party.


Honestly, I think it would of been better to help people with prexisting conditions either through a seperate government plan by themselves, so as to not raise everyone elses rates.  (The downside of course being, this would cost a LOT.)

Or the development of county level healthcare trusts... that basically aren't insurance bu negotiate insurance level prices.  The only downside is you'd need to pay upfront.  If the hospital knows your going to pay them the 75 dollars an insurance comapny is going to pay them anyway, it shouldn't be a problem. Perhaps either have a health savings fund, or some kind of government loans etc.

The reason why things cost so much more then they do when insurance pays for them is pretty much because they expect to have to use collection agencies to get the money out of you.

I still don't understand the point of making it so only the government can give out student loans.  I don't understand how this helps healthcare in anyway, or even students in anyway.  Doesn't it just make it so less people can get loans to go to school?