![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 26 to 50 of 107. Go back in thread:
Posted by poser938 on June 28, 2012, at 18:32:44
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed » europerep, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 17:31:28
if i understood correctly...
there is supposed to be a penalty you are to pay if you dont get an insurance plan, but there are zero consequences for not paying the penalty... so what does it matter if you just ignore this whole obamacare thing and dont get health insurance?
Posted by psychobot5000 on June 28, 2012, at 18:44:15
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed » europerep, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 17:31:28
> You don't know me one bit. And you know what? That's perfectly ok with me, particularly after your post about Phillipa.
>
> I happened to be alive during the ninety percent marginal tax rates and stagflation of the Carter presidency. 16-18% interest rates! I thought Reagan's decrease of the top marginal tax rate to 50% or so was fabulous. The later reductions to already low rates I saw more as pandering to the electorate. I seem to remember one under the Clinton administration that I particularly disapproved of.
>
> Keep thinking whatever you like.
>
> "I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent."
> Source: Letter of Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, March 13, 1789.
>There were never 90% tax rates under carter--though during the period of 1940-1970, i.e. the period in which the US experienced the most rapid economic growth in its history (c. 2.8% per year), top tax rates did indeed fluctuate between 70% and 94% for the upper income of those making millions. With the junk deductibles that accompanied these top rates, the wealthy payed an -actual- top rate of about 45-50% on the upper end of their income. During Carter rates never went above 70. ...And the 18% interest rates occurred in 1981-2, under Reagan, not Carter.
On to Healthcare!
The Affordable Care Act is not Socialism. Rather, it's distinctive in the extent to which it works through the private insurance market to achieve its objective of helping more people get insurance coverage and pay their way into the market.People on this board stand to benefit tremendously from the bill, as you will now be able to purchase insurance at a reasonable cost regardless of pre-existing conditions or who you work for. Those with lower income will be provided modest, incomplete subsidies to help them afford that care.
Unions have been given only a -temporary- reprieve from paying the 'cadillac' tax, in recognition of the years of preparation and work that went into those contracts. After a couple of more years, they'll be on the same field as everyone else. As for the new 'mandate,' it amounts merely to a modest tax incentive encouraging you to buy health care or else pay a modest fee to the government instead.
That's about the size of it all. It's remarkable how much will stay the same. The worst insurer abuses will now be illegal, and people will have more access to insurance with a little help in paying for it if they're poor or middle class (subsidies that are payed for by cuts elsewhere, reorganizations of present health programs for greater efficiency, and a few carefully placed taxes like that on 'cadillac' plans and the employer 'mandate,' (which means that if an employer doesn't provide health insurance to its workers, it has to pay the government a large fee in its place--a policy deemed necessary to keep nearly every business from dropping their coverage to let the gov't pick up the tab) but that's about it. No reason to hyperventilate, folks. There are a lot of people out there who gain from making us scared of this bill, but the truth is: it's here for us :)
Posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 18:49:31
In reply to you dont even have to pay the 'tax/penalty', posted by poser938 on June 28, 2012, at 18:32:44
"ObamaCare" amounts to nothing more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Unless the US adopts universal healthcare, like Canada, France, the UK, etc., the insurance companies and health care providers will continue to call the shots, and the non-rich will continue to suffer, medically and financially.
And in regard to the misuse of the term "socialism", somebody's been watching Fox News way too much.
Posted by psychobot5000 on June 28, 2012, at 18:53:11
In reply to you dont even have to pay the 'tax/penalty', posted by poser938 on June 28, 2012, at 18:32:44
> if i understood correctly...
> there is supposed to be a penalty you are to pay if you dont get an insurance plan, but there are zero consequences for not paying the penalty... so what does it matter if you just ignore this whole obamacare thing and dont get health insurance?They can withhold a tax refund from you if you don't pay. That's the only enforcement mechanism i'm aware of. It's unclear whether that'll be enough to hold the plan together. That, plus some people signing up just because you're 'supposed to,' might be enough to keep the present insurance system afloat and serving a broader slice of our society.
Posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 19:06:09
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed » novelagent, posted by europerep on June 28, 2012, at 15:58:06
> > I have difficulty with believing you don't know what socialism means.
>
> That's the only part of your post that I'd disagree with. Philippa has a history of posting unqualified nonsensical bullshit.
>
> What always amazes me is how a people that refers to its head of state as the "leader of the free world" actually wants to debate whether they want to assist their fellow man/woman/child/baby/whatever when their health is at risk. Had I been born in the US into an uninsured family that wouldn't qualify for Medicaid, I would be dead by now. And even if you want to get into details about the impacts of universal health care on the economy: Switzerland has an excellent public health care system, and is the most competitive country in the world, according to the World Economic Forum. Norway, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden and others have excellent public health care as well and still are in the top 10 of competitive countries.
>
> This whole debate is nothing but a joke, at the expense of poor and ill American citizens.
>A BIG +1 on this post!
Posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 19:06:14
In reply to Re: Healthcare Bill Deemed Constitutional, posted by psychobot5000 on June 28, 2012, at 18:44:15
Whoops, you're right about Carter's tax rates. It was 70% and he did reduce the capital gains tax. But I'm right about his interest rates.
Posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 19:13:13
In reply to Re: Healthcare Bill Deemed Constitutional » psychobot5000, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 19:06:14
I really appreciate your providing the lucid facts in regard to the silly assertions being made in this thread. The overall lack of critical thinking here is appalling.
Posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 19:14:13
In reply to Kudos To Europerep!!, posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 19:13:13
Critical thinking really is lacking.
*ssh*l*.
Posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 19:17:57
In reply to Agreed » ron1953, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 19:14:13
> *ssh*l*.
Name-calling - how adorable.
Posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 20:18:20
In reply to Re: Agreed, posted by ron1953 on June 28, 2012, at 19:17:57
Wow been gone all day and a lot has gone on. First I have Medicaire which all my taxes and contributions assured me would be there when I retire. Being age 66 I now draw the money I've contributed based on past salaries. I also pay for United Healthcare as a secondary policy to pick up where medicaire leaves off. Pay for med insurance. No one should be denied insurance due to preexisting conditions this I agee with but after many discussions with real people whom are currently working. So far their insurances have been cut and costs have risen for their care. And the trend is to cut full time jobs now to below the minimum needed to assure the employee access to company insurance. Lots of part time employees mean less cost to the employer. I talked to two owners of companies today as live in affluent area and they plan on hiring less full time and cutting hours of others as they can't afford to carry insurance for all. I always pay a co-pay for any services rendered. Always have. And I pay out of pocket for my meds as not in the formulary for medicaire. So if we adapt the European model. Will we have celexa only covered? Just an example. Pretty good discussion going on on facebook at moment. Lets take care of our own at home first before spending our money in other countries. Lets take care of our own. And Switzerland I've been there. True or not immigration to this beautiful country isn't possible unless wealthy or have a job in the country already. Can't comment on those born there. Personally since not the recommendations for for ob-gyn exams is not recommended for females over 65 recent development, colonoscopies are now being deemed not necessary that checking for occult blood is enough. And Mammograms make females nervous. Should they be abandoned as it might cause unnecessary cost if the test is negative. I'm grateful to have a great endocrinologist that will no longer accept new patients but provides excellent care to those he has. More to follow time to eat late dinner. Then do at home business to suplement my income. Phillipa
Posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 20:34:25
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed, posted by poser938 on June 28, 2012, at 15:13:16
As someone who lives in Massachusetts, which has had the equivalent of Obamacare for several years (and which Mitt Romney pushed through the legislature to avoid a single payer plan), I can tell you that it is a great improvement and absolutely nothing like socialism and has not led to employers cutting back on employment-based insurance (at least not more than in other states. Employment based insurance has been falling for years. Don't believe me? Check out census.gov or statehealthfacts.org). The state subsidizes premiums for those up to 300% of the poverty level ($17,000 for a family of three). My hairdresser, who had out of control diabetes for years and no treatment, now goes to the Joslin Clinic and pays $164 month for insurance. Only 2% of the population is uninsured, compared to 25% in Texas. This is not because of the stiffness of the penalty for being uninsured (it's only around $500/year) but because affordable subsidized insurance is available to everyone with no limits due to pre-existing conditions (like mental illness). Taxes are not particularly high in MA -- we fall about in the middle of the states for taxes. Employment is higher here than in the US as a whole. Housing prices fell by very little compared to other parts of the country. So I'd say Obamacare is working pretty well in MA. Or maybe we should call it Romneycare.
Posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 20:37:00
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed, posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 20:34:25
I get really, really angry about turning this forum into a political debate. Keep your politics to yourself. This is not what this forum is for.
Posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 21:00:05
In reply to Re: Healthcare Bill Deemed Constitutional » psychobot5000, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 19:06:14
> Whoops, you're right about Carter's tax rates. It was 70% and he did reduce the capital gains tax. But I'm right about his interest rates.
The top rate was raised under Nixon. Reagan reduced it to 28%, then raised it again after the deficit proved too huge. Carter had no control over interest rates. The Fed did that all on its own under Paul Volcker. The idea was to control inflation by driving interest rates up, putting the economy in a recession and driving wages down. This is why Carter didn't get reelected. But enough of this. I teach college level economics and health economics. I get angry at how little most people know, yet how much they think they know.
Posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 21:20:17
In reply to Re: Healthcare Bill Deemed Constitutional, posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 21:00:05
I thought the top marginal rate was still 28% when he left office? I thought the 28% was a bit low, but it was accompanied by a lot of tax reform and reduction in deductions. So the drop from 50% to 28% wasn't as dramatic as it sounds.
I never said Carter instituted the rates. I said they were too high in his administration, which was the first administration where I was of an age to care about such things. I thought then and think now that 70% is too high.
If you think I'm ignorant, so be it.
Posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 21:24:17
In reply to Re: Agreed, posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 20:18:20
5 Misused and Overused Practices
From: Medscape Family Medicine
Expert Interviews
5 Misused Practices: AAFP Guidance
An Interview With Glen Stream, MD, MBI
Questionable Practices From ACP
An Interview With Steven Weinberger, MD
Are You Choosing Tests Wisely? A Challenge From the ABIM Foundation
Expert Interview With Christine K. Cassel, MD
Slideshow
Breaking 10 Old Habits: From ACP and AAFP
The 5 AAFP Recommendations Plus Resources
1. Don't obtain screening exercise ECG testing in individuals who are asymptomatic and at low risk for coronary heart disease.
ACP Issues Guidelines for Diagnostic Imaging for Low Back Pain
No Benefit to Routine Imaging for Low Back Pain Without "Red Flags"
Early Imaging of Low Back Pain Unnecessary, Harmful
2. Don't routinely prescribe antibiotics for acute mild to moderate sinusitis unless symptoms last for 7 or more days, or if symptoms worsen after initial clinical improvement.
New Rhinosinusitis Guidelines Discourage Antibiotics
Diagnosing and Treating Rhinosinusitis: New Guidelines
Antibiotics Not Necessary or Helpful for Acute Sinusitis
3. Don't use dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) screening for osteoporosis in women younger than 65 or in men younger than 70 with no risk factors.
USPSTF Issues Osteoporosis Screening Update
Women May Get Unneeded Osteoporosis Screening
Dual-energy X-ray Absorptiometry in Clinical Practice
4. Don't order annual ECGs or any other cardiac screening for low-risk patients without symptoms.
2010 ACCF/AHA Guideline for Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk in Asymptomatic Adults: Executive Summary
Screening for Cardiovascular Risk in Asymptomatic Patients
ECG Screening Finds High Risk People, But Benefits Not Clear
No Benefit of CCTA Screening in Asymptomatics
5. Don't perform Pap smears on women younger than 21 or who have had a hysterectomy for non-cancer disease.
Cervical Cancer Screening: A Guideline Synthesis From AHRQ
Updated Guidelines Released for Cervical Cancer Screening
Updated Guidelines for Cervical Cancer Screening: Less Is More
Posted by sleepygirl2 on June 28, 2012, at 21:27:09
In reply to Re: Healthcare Bill Deemed Constitutional, posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 21:00:05
Wow, thanks for that emmanuel.
You answered a question of mine a long time ago...about why it is that heavily populated states, with large metropolitan areas tend to be democratic verses republican.
I was listening to the radio today, with people expressing their opinions, and I just don't know what to think. It's because I just don't understand the economics of it all, in combination with social interests.
Posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 21:27:36
In reply to P.S., posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 20:37:00
Boy, I agree with that. Until the post about Phillipa, I was content to gripe about the increased cost to myself. And my fear about what this would mean to therapy and to diabetic supplies that my insurance company does not pay for. I'm reasonably sure my medication deductibles eat up most of that $2500. And recent policy changes have left office copays so high.
I've always hated politics on Babble.
Posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 21:37:21
In reply to Today After See A Trend?, posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 21:24:17
I've been seeing this for a while now!
I have no idea what it means, but I've noticed the trend for.... Hmmm... I'm lousy with time.
Posted by iforgotmypassword on June 28, 2012, at 21:43:13
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed » novelagent, posted by europerep on June 28, 2012, at 15:58:06
> > I have difficulty with believing you don't know what socialism means.
>
> That's the only part of your post that I'd disagree with. Philippa has a history of posting unqualified nonsensical b*llsh*t.
>please. this is a mental health forum. you just can't attack people like that. please. i happen to disagree with her *adamantly*, as i do with enough people, it seems. let's show each other some respect, some of us are sick. in the end, it has to be safe to be wrong here, and to learn, or we are doing f all to help each other.
Posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 21:45:14
In reply to Today After See A Trend?, posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 21:24:17
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/what-kind-of-socialist-is-barack-obama/
Posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 21:58:43
In reply to Re: Today After See A Trend? » Phillipa, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 21:37:21
Dinah less testing means less dianosis and less money spent. Why (sarcastically said) would a female over 65 need an obgyn exam anymore. Goodness cancer could be found and if found means that treatment would be needed. It's to me like the ostrich with head in hole. What we don't know can't hurt us? My 50 year old male neighbor has a history of intestinal cancer in his family he did get a colonoscopy at 50 as was advised at time and polyps were found and removed and biopsied. Cost his insurance company money. Thankfully they were benign. But what if no colonoscopies were done as a test for occult blood is deemed good enough the polyps wouldn't have been found removed and biopsied. And if they had been allowed to stay would they have turned cancerous in a few years? Now they are saying colonoscopies can cause perforation of intestines so they are not necessary. Could go on and on. Mammograms in England even after Cancer every three years after first one done. It does get worse. Phillipa
Posted by johnLA on June 28, 2012, at 22:04:22
In reply to Re: Welcome USA To Socialism Healthcare Bill Passed » europerep, posted by Dinah on June 28, 2012, at 17:31:28
i, too, wanted to stay out of this...
i was a public school teacher for 27 years. i had continuos employer supplied health coverage from the time i was 22. i never thought anything about it until i got sick and could no longer work...
now, since i came down w/severe depression over 2 years ago i have had to pay for my own insurance. for now i am a bit lucky, in california we have extended cobra benefits; 36 months. still, this is taking-up about 20% of my current income. (i'm on early retirement at 50% of my planned pension.) i do not qualify for any social security (medicare/etc) benefits because in california teachers do not pay in to social security. i am legally disabled at this point. i am very very worried about what will happen when my cobra runs out. again, i do not qualify for any government funded healthcare at this point.
i looked for cheaper coverage. never got the chance; no way any insurance company was going to offer me coverage due to my health history. so, like i said, i am lucky that at least i have the cobra coverage for now.
i am luckier than many. 40 million americans are without health coverage. many of these are actually working middle class people. this is just not right. i am not saying president obama's plan is the best, but FINALLY a national discussion is happening on healthcare. this is good i believe and long overdue.
you can get caught-up in all the politics due to this being an election year. i could give rat's *ss about that. nobody knows what a potential national healthcare plan will look like in 2 years. much debate/discussion/compromise i believe will take place in the congress, senate and the white house over he next 2 years. i am hopeful that this will lead to getting more people insured in this country.
regardless, if some of that discussion/debate leads to reform that allows for greater access to insurance that is affordable and inclusive i can see this as only a positive.
some final thoughts; the number 1 reason people file for bankruptcy in this country is due to medical costs. not loss of job. 2. i find it ironic that it is the 'law' to have car insurance. why no complaints there? by far a greater expense to this country publicly is caused by those without health insurance, not uninsured motorists.
sorry, last one. the ceo of my health insurer earned 125 million dollars last year. i am all for a free market, but when is enough enough? part of that 125 million came from almost 20% of my limited income. this is the guy who also decides not to insure sick kids. doesn't seem right.
again, i would highly recommend that you do not get caught-up in the rhetoric that will be played-up by both campaigns on this issue leading-up to the presidential election. it's a very easy issue for both candidates to exploit.
in the end, i believe those with health insurance will see no real difference. both in cost, coverage, taxes, etc. i am hoping that those 40 million of us who do not have insurance will see a change; a chance to get insurance that does not break the bank, has no pre-existing restrictions, and offers the health care every american deserves.
john
Posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 22:06:28
In reply to Re: Today After See A Trend? » Dinah, posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 21:58:43
> Dinah less testing means less dianosis and less money spent. Why (sarcastically said) would a female over 65 need an obgyn exam anymore. Goodness cancer could be found and if found means that treatment would be needed. It's to me like the ostrich with head in hole. What we don't know can't hurt us? My 50 year old male neighbor has a history of intestinal cancer in his family he did get a colonoscopy at 50 as was advised at time and polyps were found and removed and biopsied. Cost his insurance company money. Thankfully they were benign. But what if no colonoscopies were done as a test for occult blood is deemed good enough the polyps wouldn't have been found removed and biopsied. And if they had been allowed to stay would they have turned cancerous in a few years? Now they are saying colonoscopies can cause perforation of intestines so they are not necessary. Could go on and on. Mammograms in England even after Cancer every three years after first one done. It does get worse. Phillipa
Why is all this worse? This has nothing at all to do with Obamacare and everything to do with recent studies in health care, from medical journals. Colonosopies are now recommended every ten years instead of every five. Mammograms every two or three years instead of every year. Pap smears not at all for women over 60 and PSA tests not at all at any age. This is all based on evidence that most cancers are not aggressive and that those that are aggressive will kill you whether found early or late. This may suck, but it's the truth. And again, Obamacare has nothing to do with any of this. The medical profession itself has been issuing these new guidelines based on extensive studies.
Posted by johnLA on June 28, 2012, at 22:24:41
In reply to Re: Today After See A Trend?, posted by emmanuel98 on June 28, 2012, at 22:06:28
as a former teacher, i respect another teacher that can explain complex information clearly, without drama and just the right amount of passion.
let me know if you ever need some info on film, art, or music history. ;)
john
Posted by Phillipa on June 28, 2012, at 22:33:23
In reply to what about the 40 million that are uninsured?, posted by johnLA on June 28, 2012, at 22:04:22
John extremly well written and correct. And true lots of debate changes will take place over next two years. So in essense agree with you. Oh and never knew that about California teachers. Now we need to stop this Ceo stuff. I applaud you post. Phillipa
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.