Hundreds face off at health care rally « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Politics

Hundreds face off at health care rally

[64 posts] [24 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 2 years ago by pecuniadea
Latest reply from gramarye

Tags:

« Previous 123 4 Next »

Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM

Andrew Hall wrote >>

Brant Jones wrote >>

rus wrote >>

Tenzo wrote >>
1) It does nothing to increase availability. You can't have more of something by just giving it to more people.

Indeed.

You're applying normal supply/demand logic to an exceptional case; the health insurance industry has an unlimited supply of product and universal demand for it. Selling health insurance isn't like selling apples at the fruit stand.

So sorry to inform, but product = dollars and the lack of unlimited supply (EMI!) is the core of the problem.
A.

I could do without the condescending dependent clauses when you're trying to teach me a lesson.

Posted 2 years ago #
spookygoddess78
Northland-ish
Login to Send PM

I agree with you - I didn't realize you were making your commentary from a provider perspective. I thought you were speaking from a consumer perspective, in which case, I believe that the majority of consumers get really good care (aside from dental). If you are a provider and not getting payment within a reasonable time frame, I would recommend filing a complaint with ODJFS. Believe it or not, greivances are taken seriously by ODJFS and improvement plans and fines can be levied against the plans for the things you speak of. And, the payment issue is definitely an ongoing problem.

Posted 2 years ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

Brant Jones wrote >>

Andrew Hall wrote >>

Brant Jones wrote >>

rus wrote >>

Tenzo wrote >>
1) It does nothing to increase availability. You can't have more of something by just giving it to more people.

Indeed.

You're applying normal supply/demand logic to an exceptional case; the health insurance industry has an unlimited supply of product and universal demand for it. Selling health insurance isn't like selling apples at the fruit stand.

So sorry to inform, but product = dollars and the lack of unlimited supply (EMI!) is the core of the problem.
A.

I could do without the condescending dependent clauses when you're trying to teach me a lesson.

Like "Selling health insurance isn't like selling apples at the fruit stand.
" ?

Posted 2 years ago #
Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM

Touche, Tenzo.

I should think twice before speaking like an economics expert when I am clearly not one.

And now that I think about it, that was probably an independent clause up there, wasn't it? This is not my day.

So help me understand where I'm wrong. Health care (doctors, hospitals, medicine) might be limited in supply, but the pool of money that makes up health insurance can grow without limit. Right? What is the flaw in my thinking here?

Posted 2 years ago #
gramarye
In Exile
Login to Send PM

Brant Jones wrote >>
So help me understand where I'm wrong. Health care (doctors, hospitals, medicine) might be limited in supply, but the pool of money that makes up health insurance can grow without limit. Right? What is the flaw in my thinking here?

First, the supply of money is limited, too. It can grow in the sense that the government can print more of it, but that dilutes the value of all dollars in circulation. Even with respect to existing money, any of that money that gets diverted to insurance has to come from somewhere, whether it's through taxes or directly from insured persons.

Second, to the extent there are flaws in America's health care system, it is not for a lack of money. I'm quite comfortable with the fact that we spend more on health care than other countries because I do think we get our money's worth for it; I've had miserable experiences in foreign countries' health care systems, and it's no secret that many patients with the means to do so come from those countries to America when they need care that can only be provided here. Cost control, however, rather than the need to throw more money into the system, has been a primary focus of the public debate here.

Third, your comparison between money and doctors was flawed not because money and doctors are different things, but because you compared money in the long term vs. doctors and hospitals in the here-and-now. You said the supply of money "can grow without limit." Even were that true, it is not true that the supply is currently unlimited. By contrast, the supply of doctors and hospitals can likewise grow over time, too, and, indeed, increasing that supply might be one of the few ways to actually control health care costs.

Posted 2 years ago #
byJody
Rural NW Columbus
Login to Send PM

It's interesting to me that folks say expanding government run healthcare is a bad thing, but we've had medicare, medicaid and VA benefits for years. If the private health industry and market forces are the best way to go, then why weren't these gaps addressed before we got to this crisis stage? Even if nothing passes, government run health care is going to expand dramatically because of the sheer number of aging baby boomers entering the Medicare pool.

This issue has not been tackled since the Clinton's failed so miserably 15 years ago. If it gets tabled, it is not going to get readdressed during this administration IMO.

I do not feel that this bill is going to solve everything, but it does have some good things.

Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ No Discrimination for Pre-Existing Conditions (kids this year; adults 2014)
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ No Exorbitant Out-of-Pocket Expenses, Deductibles or Co-Pays
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ No Cost-Sharing for Preventive Care
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ No Dropping of Coverage for Seriously Ill
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ No Gender Discrimination
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ No Annual or Lifetime Caps on Coverage
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ Extended Coverage for Young Adults (up to 26 years old)
Ã¢â‚¬Â¢ Guaranteed Insurance Renewal

Posted 2 years ago #
berdawn
near that stretch of N. High Street in the Short North
Login to Send PM

pecuniadea wrote >>
I don't know if anyone read this in the Columbus Dispatch this evening, saw Twitter updates, or watched on the news, but this afternoon, outside of Congresswoman Mary Jo Kilroy's District Office (next to the Cap City Diner), there were hundreds of people protesting for and against health care reform:
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/03/16/health-care-rally.html
I think it's great that people are expressing their constitutional right of freedom of speech, but I guess a gathering of people this angry kind of scares me.
Thoughts?

Protesting outside someone's office when she isn't there doesn't seem very effective unless one's actions have more to do with influencing the press and not the policy-maker.

Posted 2 years ago #
Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM

@gram Thanks.

Posted 2 years ago #
KSquared
Literally Hell
Login to Send PM

Well, Columbus made the front page of reddit. The video was shot by the Dispatch. Link here: http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/multimedia/video/video.html?video=949486

http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/beld8/is_this_the_lowest_tea_party_moment_ever_video/

These people are an embarrassment.

Posted 2 years ago #
Brant
Gahanna
Login to Send PM

Get the Video Player

Get the Video Player

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

It's always good to see adults come and peacefully, calmly and rationally discuss an issue...

Posted 2 years ago #
Charlie
Victorian Village
Login to Send PM

I found these articles interesting on health care systems in Japan and France.

Japan
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/06/AR2009090601630.html

France
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/22/AR2009092204289.html?sid=ST2009102805439

Posted 2 years ago #
mfreeman

Login to Send PM

Doctors choose whether or not to accept patients based on what health insurance plan they have. Many choose not to accept Medicare patients. Would this bill force providers to accept patients on the "public option"? If not, people may be disappointed to find that the coverage is not worth very much.

As an example, as of about two years ago when I last checked (not for myself), there were exactly zero psychiatrists that were accepting new Medicare patients in Franklin County.

Having insurance is meaningless if the providers won't treat the patients who have that insurance. I support the bill as a good first step. I am just pointing out that even if it passes, there will still be many more subtle issues like this that need to be addressed.

Posted 2 years ago #
kcrissinger
Brookshire
Login to Send PM

KSquared wrote >>

LBOWACC wrote >>
I am taking soeone on medicaid to the doctor right now, if you have ever been on medicaid, you know the government should run nothing. I like how all the middle class liberals praise government run shit, but they dont know shit about being on a government program, and how horrible it is. Middle class liberals=talk bout shit all day, but have no experience with shit. Middle class liberals crack me the fuck up, dumbest type of liberal. Poor liberals make sense, and millionaire liberals make sense, 50k a year liberal makes no sense.

Why don't you just tell them to get a decent job, since "all decent jobs come with health care"? Could it be that it's more complicated than that?

LOL. It is much more complicated than that. Even if you get a "decent job", there is always that pre-existing condition that will screw you. The new bill would eliminate this issue, which is what is hurting many people with "decent jobs."

Posted 2 years ago #
10sun
Columbus, OH
Login to Send PM

kcrissinger wrote >>

KSquared wrote >>

LBOWACC wrote >>
I am taking soeone on medicaid to the doctor right now, if you have ever been on medicaid, you know the government should run nothing. I like how all the middle class liberals praise government run shit, but they dont know shit about being on a government program, and how horrible it is. Middle class liberals=talk bout shit all day, but have no experience with shit. Middle class liberals crack me the fuck up, dumbest type of liberal. Poor liberals make sense, and millionaire liberals make sense, 50k a year liberal makes no sense.

Why don't you just tell them to get a decent job, since "all decent jobs come with health care"? Could it be that it's more complicated than that?

LOL. It is much more complicated than that. Even if you get a "decent job", there is always that pre-existing condition that will screw you. The new bill would eliminate this issue, which is what is hurting many people with "decent jobs."

Those middle class liberals pay taxes which in turn fund the government programs that they don't use. Care to point out a specific problem you have with their praise of the medicaid system?

Posted 2 years ago #
rus

Login to Send PM

mfreeman wrote >>
Doctors choose whether or not to accept patients based on what health insurance plan they have. Many choose not to accept Medicare patients. Would this bill force providers to accept patients on the "public option"? If not, people may be disappointed to find that the coverage is not worth very much.
As an example, as of about two years ago when I last checked (not for myself), there were exactly zero psychiatrists that were accepting new Medicare patients in Franklin County.
Having insurance is meaningless if the providers won't treat the patients who have that insurance. I support the bill as a good first step. I am just pointing out that even if it passes, there will still be many more subtle issues like this that need to be addressed.

On that note:

http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stories/2010/03/15/daily10.html

Walgreens said it wonÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t fill any new Medicaid prescriptions for new patients after April 16 at any of its 121 pharmacies in Washington state.

The Deerfield, Ill. pharmacy company (NYSE: WAG) is blaming Ã¢â‚¬Å“continued reduction in reimbursement under the stateÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s (Medicaid) program.Ã¢â‚¬Â

Pharmacists and drug companies across the state are reacting to cuts in reimbursements provided by the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) for Medicaid brand-name prescriptions. Walgreens said under the current payment structure, the state reimburses the company Ã¢â‚¬Å“below its cost to break even on nearly 95 percent of brand-name medications dispensed to Medicaid patients.Ã¢â‚¬Â Walgreens said it tried to hammer out a deal with the state over the past month, but negotiations failed, although talks continue.

Ã¢â‚¬Å“Obviously, weÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re disappointed that the alternatives weÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ve suggested have failed to achieve a compromise. We intend to continue our commitment to serving our existing patients, but we simply can not take on additional losses,Ã¢â‚¬Â said Kermit Crawford, Walgreens executive vice president of pharmacy, in a statement.

I wonder how likely that is here in Ohio. I also wonder if, should the government attempt to force a provider to accept a payment below their break-even cost, that provider will just shut down.

Posted 2 years ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

Brant Jones wrote >>
Touche, Tenzo.
I should think twice before speaking like an economics expert when I am clearly not one.
And now that I think about it, that was probably an independent clause up there, wasn't it? This is not my day.
So help me understand where I'm wrong. Health care (doctors, hospitals, medicine) might be limited in supply, but the pool of money that makes up health insurance can grow without limit. Right? What is the flaw in my thinking here?

Sorry my first degree was in Econ (from a school north of here).

Doctor's are a limited supply. There are only so many.
Current conditions are being set to make becoming a doctor more difficult. Hence the supply is not likely to increase and may shrink.

So no matter what you do, how you slice it, you can not give the same level of health care and give away more of it.

Also, everyone agrees that the cost of health care is high. That seems to be a lot of the argument for the bill. Yet the bill does not address any of the causes for high costs.

If you want affordable health care and costs are to high, doesn't it stand to reason that you should do something to lower the cost? Adding an additional layer of bureaucracy is unlikely to lower the cost.

Posted 2 years ago #
Tenzo
Chicago Lakeshore
Login to Send PM

LOL. It is much more complicated than that. Even if you get a "decent job", there is always that pre-existing condition that will screw you. The new bill would eliminate this issue, which is what is hurting many people with "decent jobs."

Then why would I buy insurance?
I'll just go along and IF I have something happen, THEN I will buy insurance.

Posted 2 years ago #
misskitty
Columbus
Login to Send PM

Since I have got lost in all of this now what is the idea? What is the Government trying to accomplish ? So they want free healthcare for all or do they want new rules to the health care we already have? I am asking a serious question the reason is because when this initially started it seemed like health care for all. Now it seems to be more rules within the health industry. So are we still trying to make sure everyone is covered still?

Posted 2 years ago #
Solidarity413

Login to Send PM

Hey Guys, I never post on here but I troll a lot. I figure I'd just get into silly political arguments that will get us no where.

However the video above that Brant posted made me jump in. I cannot watch that video and feel good about our city and the sentiment in our country. This is getting out of control. I don't know if it will stop, but I hope it does. I don't see how we are having a rational discussion about healthcare when people believe things like this...

Just my .02
I'll go back to not posting now :)

Posted 2 years ago #