What do opponents of health care reform mean by choice?
blueevent47 asked:
This is not a facetious question. I would like to know specifically what opponents of health care reform mean by wishing to preserve choice. This is not an invitation to explain (or rant!) why they think nationalized health care will stop choice, but how private health care provides them choice. If they care to also to explain how the present system offers choice for the 50 million who have no health care at all and how for those of us who do belong to HMOs have extremely limited choice as well, I’d appreciate it.
This is not a facetious question. I would like to know specifically what opponents of health care reform mean by wishing to preserve choice. This is not an invitation to explain (or rant!) why they think nationalized health care will stop choice, but how private health care provides them choice. If they care to also to explain how the present system offers choice for the 50 million who have no health care at all and how for those of us who do belong to HMOs have extremely limited choice as well, I’d appreciate it.
Cheers.
Flu Advantage
Anything the government gets involvedin always costs the US taxpayer Trillions.
So lets leave this alone.
I see you are not getting answers. No surprise.
Most of those against health reform can’t really articulate what they mean. There is a lot made of their choice being taken away, but they can’t really give details on how that will happen, because they don’t have them.
They fear that they will be forced into a single system. That has never been proposed. They claim Obama wants a single payer system, but even though it is not in any bill and he has denied it, they do not believe it.
Countries with socialized medicine do not Force everyone to use the system. Those who can afford it can buy supplemental insurance or pay cash.
The definition of a talking point is that it is a single point. If you ask for details or explanations they are at a loss because there are none.
A perfect example of a “public option” is medicare. No one is forced to buy medicare. Most do, but they do not have to. The other talking point is about physicians not making decisions. Not true in Medicare, only true in private insurance. Doctors do not determine your health care choices in for profit medical insurance. The Insurance company does.
Most anti reform people have very little experience dealing with an insurance company or navigating the health care system.
private health care can give you options of what medical services they can offer and you choose the private health care you want to cover what you need cover. you’ll be able to get what you need but you have to be able to afford it. it is expensive but they will try to get the best medical drugs you may need if something bad may happen to you you’ll have a safety net to catch you. government run health care dose not provide those and you will have to wait in line for months or years, and if you are lucky enough, you’ll get crappy treatment by the government who will pay for the cheapest services and low quality health care. if the bill dose not pass, private health care will save more lives and expand life expectancy. it is very expensive to reform health care and why most Americans have a problem with that is that we know we are in massive debt and if this bill passes we will be deeper in the hole and taxes will increase while the government spends our money on their wants while the concentrate on just getting reelected and staying in power
I’m happy to answer your question.
The “choice” that opponents refer to is the ability to choose which insurance carrier (and therefore which HMO, if applicable) you select to provide your coverage.
HR 3200 is an enemy of this choice because:
1. As President Obama reiterates, you may keep your carrier or keep your doctor. However, he does not reiterate that if you become dissatisfied with your provider, if you lose your job, if you change jobs, or if you move and have to change jobs, you must either go right to the government plan or pay an additional 2.5% in income tax. Additionally, those eligible for Medicare go right on Medicare. They lose the choice to decline.
2. Private health care provides choice in that citizens don’t even have to have insurance if they don’t want to. If HR 3200 passes, that will only be an option if you are willing and financially able to pay the additional 2.5% in income tax.
3. Some of the 50 million uninsured are uninsured because they are exercising their right to choose not to have insurance. Some rely on their automobile collision insurance as coverage and go on a wing and a prayer for the rest (I’m not kidding). As for the rest of the 50 million, there is not enough choice. Choice is limited by things like the inability for carriers to sell across state lines, the ban on certain types of insurance like catastrophic insurance in certain states, and both federal and state mandates (which drive up costs across the board, therefore limiting choice). None of these choice-limiting (and therefore cost-increasing) factors are addressed in the bill.
4. HMOs have to go. They limit choice and drive up price. End of story.
JM is pretty much 100% correct. People barely have a say in their health care as of now. The insurance companies make the decisions. Why so many Americans go to countries like Canada and France, because they have some of the better rated health care systems in the world.
These waiting lines you keep hearing about are nothing, but gibberish from ignorant Bushies. We have waiting lines here as well that take years. Waiting for organs and transplants and such. These are the same waiting lines in other countries. The facts are just twisted by these crazy right wingers.
Basically no one is even forcing people to do this plan. It is basically saying hey you want it you can have it. That is another thing I see these small business owners freaking out about it. I’m like are you crazy you can save a bundle of money by doing this. The government is basically offering to pay you for providing health care to your employees. It boggles the mind how ignorant some people are.
As for spending, give me a break. I mean when has spending ever been a concern? Where were these people when the GOP was spending like crazy. Reagen and Bush certainly didn’t have a problem blowing billions and trillions on wars then taxing the poor and middle class to try and cover it.
Basically now we are just doing the smart thing and taxing the rich versus the middle class and poor. I’m talking the NFL star or corporations like Walmart. These guys make a lot, bout time they start coughing up their fair share.