♥♥ If it's on your mind and you want somewhere to discuss it, this could be the place. My viewpoints often don't fit the right or the left. If yours don't fit mine, feel free to disagree-- politely, of course. ♥♥ I'm Rain Trueax and I approve this message ;)
Saturday, November 09, 2013
ACA and its goofs
been reading the complaints, a lot of places, on ACA and have some of my
own thoughts. Before an attempt was made to fix our health situation in
this country, anybody with a really serious illness could quickly find
themselves told they used up their lifetime allotment of coverage. It
wasn't that their payment would go up but that also they couldn't buy
it. Yes, this was happening-- talk about death panels.
So putting all
these people with a lifetime issue onto insurance plans was bound to up
somebody's cost and Obama never should have said everybody who likes
their insurance can keep it. He should have said-- anybody with good
coverage and even then it was a risky promise given insurance
corporations and their desire to make big profit.
glitches in what's out there and it's not just in the website. I read
that people in some resort areas have ended up with higher rates than is
fair since the rates are computed on the tourists as well
as themselves and a lot of these regions (the article was on one in
Colorado) have people living in them without anywhere near the income
the tourists have who visit. This should be fixed and I'm sure it's not just happened in Colorado.
One complaint that I think is ridiculous is -- I'm a 50 year old man and why should I be forced to carry maternity coverage. Well why should a 70 year old woman have to pay for coverage for Viagra, prostate exams, or vasectomies? Basically this kind of thinking leads to focused coverage on whatever we most think we might get and that's not how insurance companies have ever worked. Having lived most of my life with corporate insurance systems, those programs covered pregnancy and vasectomies as part of a total package rather than well I'll buy cancer coverage but don't need heart attack prevention.
Is the existing system right for how it's computing rates? Sounds to me like not. Was Obama too busy fighting off those who wanted to shut down the whole government to put a lot of time into ACA? Definitely and that reminds me of when Republicans impeached Clinton over a blow-job taking attention off the rise of al Qaeda. Republicans are proud of making him incapable of acting as one of their goals; so should they be surprised when he isn't able to put enough time into something important? Our whole system is geared to Dems making Republicans fail and Repubs making Dems fail. This seems like a business where both partners want the other to not succeed at anything. Seem smart? Not to me.
Obama can't and never should have been expected to micromanage everything. He trusted others and some of the problem is a desire to keep insurance profits high for the economy. They are the true middlemen in this.
My husband and I are on
Medicare given our age and not only did our Medicare not go up, neither
did the supplement we buy through United. For that, we get more coverage
than we had. I have never though worried as much about elders like
myself. I am an oldie. I worry for the younger generations and want to
figure out how you insure those with serious health issues and make sure
everybody gets basic preventative help like for high bp, cholesterol,
etc. I want to see children, like my friend's granddaughter with epilepsy, able to get health care all of her life instead of seeing it used up before she reaches 18. I want to see people go to a regular doctor (means training more of them) for preventative care rather than showing up in an ER.
What I think and have for some time is we'd be better off
with Medicare for all. For those who think Obama's program is socialism,
it's not. It's corporatism. It keeps the insurance companies making big
bucks off those policies. Obama didn't want to ding the economy by taking them and their jobs out of the system. He also never had the votes with all those blue dog democrats. So we got what we have-- half-assed (pardon my french).
Medicare enables people to buy extra
coverage, like we do, doesn't force it though, and gives basic coverage
to all in the program. I'd push us all onto that (except veterans who
should be given the choice to stay with the VA or switch) and that
includes Congress but it won't happen with so many people not
understanding what socialism actually is (when government owns the means
And accusing this of being fascism ignores that there were two elections. When Obama ran in '08, he ran on doing this and got elected. When he ran in '12, same thing. The fact that people don't like the election results doesn't mean he dictated it. Unlike bush who didn't run on going to war with Iraq, Obama ran on this one. I know the Repubs are busy trying to block a lot of voters based on that very fact but they are the ones who don't believe in democracy-- not those who ran on what they would do and their ideas won!