Which political party wants you dead?

[Travis]

I'll admit that in many ways choosing political party affiliation is not easy. There are such banal bloviating blunderous blowhards on both sides that it can be hard to slog through the political spin machine mud.

Then I realize only one party actually wants me dead. That makes things so much easier. Oh sure the other party isn't exactly bleeding from the knuckles trying to save my life but at least it isn't actually making a policy that will ensure my death part of its core position planks.

No, only the Republican Party wants to ensure I will never get health insurance. So it seems I'm stuck with a Democratic Party that is merely indifferent to my potential death rather than actively trying to make it happen. What a great time to be among millions of Americans that can't get health insurance.

YAY two party politics.

 

[bynmdsue]

Why can't you buy your own health insurance? And why aren't you dead yet without it?

 

[crimresearch]

In the USA there is only one party, playing two different roles to scare people into voting against 'them'... and for business as usual.

 

[Howie Felterbush]

I think the Democratic party is the one most closely associated with dead voters, so they're the ones that probably want you dead.

The Republicans just want you really sick.

 

[Shalamar]

I'll admit that in many ways choosing political party affiliation is not easy. There are such banal bloviating blunderous blowhards on both sides that it can be hard to slog through the political spin machine mud.

Then I realize only one party actually wants me dead. That makes things so much easier. Oh sure the other party isn't exactly bleeding from the knuckles trying to save my life but at least it isn't actually making a policy that will ensure my death part of its core position planks.

No, only the Republican Party wants to ensure I will never get health insurance. So it seems I'm stuck with a Democratic Party that is merely indifferent to my potential death rather than actively trying to make it happen. What a great time to be among millions of Americans that can't get health insurance.

YAY two party politics.

To be fair, the GoP doesn't really want you dead. They just don't care.

 

[Shalamar]

Why can't you buy your own health insurance? And why aren't you dead yet without it?

Pre-existing conditions, current poor health, or even a nasty family history can make it very expensive to purchase health insurance privately. Many companies may decide to not even cover you.

The only way for many of these people to get coverage is to have a job, that provides good insurance, which may not even then be a sure thing.

 

[bynmdsue]

y'know who else is going to die? EVERYBODY! People with health insurance, people without, folks who pay for their own treatment, people who've never seen a doctor, people with the best care in the world, they are all going to die!

 

[Tricky]

y'know who else is going to die? EVERYBODY! People with health insurance, people without, folks who pay for their own treatment, people who've never seen a doctor, people with the best care in the world, they are all going to die!

Based on your photograph, you're already half dead.

 

[AlBell]

In my families case it's becoming more and more difficult to find doctors who will accept medicare patients thanks in part to Obamacare. That should hasten our deaths; thanks, democrats.

 

[Shalamar]

y'know who else is going to die? EVERYBODY! People with health insurance, people without, folks who pay for their own treatment, people who've never seen a doctor, people with the best care in the world, they are all going to die!

And?

If deaths and illness can be prevented or repaired with medicine, should we not do so? We could, of course, just let the sick and injured attempt to recover without any intervention..

 

[theprestige]

Insurance is about pooling risk for affordable premiums and affordable payouts.

Travis's problem is that his risk is so high that no affordable premium exists, and no affordable payout is possible. He doesn't need health insurance, he needs health care. Which is, of course, expensive. Living in a depressed region and not having an Engineering degree probably don't help matters.

Any insurance company that accepted high-risk members without charging commensurately high (unaffordable) premiums would promptly go bankrupt. Obviously Travis is not entitled to compel the bankruptcy of any insurance company.

One possible way to mitigate this would be to compel a large number of extremely low-risk individuals to pool their risk with Travis, so as to keep the premiums affordable and guarantee the high-cost healthcare that Travis will almost certainly require.

Of course, this is not really "insurance" anymore: It's really just "health care for Travis, faked up to look like insurance, and relying for success on government compulsion and artificially-capped premiums".

I can't speak for the GOP: For all I know, they really do want Travis dead. That's probably the most rational explanation, right?

But all I want is to know if Travis is any more entitled to compel low-risk people to pool their risk with his and pay for his health care, than he is to bankrupt insurance companies?

 

[theprestige]

And?

If deaths and illness can be prevented or repaired with medicine, should we not do so? We could, of course, just let the sick and injured attempt to recover without any intervention..

And? Medicine isn't free. Is everyone entitled to the highest-possible quality of medical care?

If so, at what cost? Where does the funding come from?

If not, where do you draw the line? How do you know whether Travis is on the right side of it or not? How do you know if you are on the right side of it or not?

 

[Silly Green Monkey]

Our risks are pooled already.

 

[Shalamar]

And? Medicine isn't free. Is everyone entitled to the highest-possible quality of medical care?

If so, at what cost? Where does the funding come from?

If not, where do you draw the line? How do you know whether Travis is on the right side of it or not? How do you know if you are on the right side of it or not?

Why should there be a line? No, Health Care isn't free. But many other countries manage just fine without denying anyone health care, and without those same people going bankrupt.

Pool the risk. The pool? Everyone in the country. Paid through via taxes. Health insurance is no longer bound to employment, small businesses no longer have to worry about providing health insurance. The self employed no longer have to worry about their families. Heck, how much money would bigger businesses save by not having to worry about what plans to offer employees?

 

[TragicMonkey]

In my families case it's becoming more and more difficult to find doctors who will accept medicare patients thanks in part to Obamacare. That should hasten our deaths; thanks, democrats.

Are you certain doctors are refusing Medicare patients because of the few reforms that have actually been implemented? Or is it because of the constant cuts to Medicare funding that make it more difficult to get reimbursed for treating Medicare patients?

If the former, which particular changes in "Obamacare" are undesirable to physicians?

From what I've seen, it's the insurance companies that stand to lose money with healthcare reform, not physicians.

 

[Buckaroo]

y'know who else is going to die? EVERYBODY! People with health insurance, people without, folks who pay for their own treatment, people who've never seen a doctor, people with the best care in the world, they are all going to die!

Deleted for extreme rudeness.

 

[BStrong]

I'll admit that in many ways choosing political party affiliation is not easy. There are such banal bloviating blunderous blowhards on both sides that it can be hard to slog through the political spin machine mud.

Then I realize only one party actually wants me dead. That makes things so much easier. Oh sure the other party isn't exactly bleeding from the knuckles trying to save my life but at least it isn't actually making a policy that will ensure my death part of its core position planks.

No, only the Republican Party wants to ensure I will never get health insurance. So it seems I'm stuck with a Democratic Party that is merely indifferent to my potential death rather than actively trying to make it happen. What a great time to be among millions of Americans that can't get health insurance.

YAY two party politics.

Travis - I know I've said it before, but have you looked into the local county and state medical assistance programs available?

I know that locally (where I reside) they've covered up to and including a liver transplant, and I know a guy right now going through cancer treatment through the county and they seem to be doing a good job of it.

 

[AlBell]

Are you certain doctors are refusing Medicare patients because of the few reforms that have actually been implemented? Or is it because of the constant cuts to Medicare funding that make it more difficult to get reimbursed for treating Medicare patients?

If the former, which particular changes in "Obamacare" are undesirable to physicians?

From what I've seen, it's the insurance companies that stand to lose money with healthcare reform, not physicians.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...d-president-obama-steal-500-billion-medicare/

The bill doesn't take money out of the current Medicare budget but, rather, it attempts to slow the program's future growth, curtailing just over $500 billion in anticipated spending increases over the next 10 years. Medicare spending will still increase, however. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projects Medicare spending will reach $929 billion in 2020, up from $499 billion in actual spending in 2009.

So while the health care law reduces the amount of future spending growth in Medicare, the law doesn't cut current funding for Medicare.

Still, where does the $500 billion in future savings come from?

Nearly $220 billion comes from reducing annual increases in payments that health care providers would otherwise receive from Medicare. Other savings include $36 billion from increases in premiums for higher-income beneficiaries and $12 billion from administrative changes. A new national board -- the Independent Payment Advisory Board -- will be tasked to identify $15.5 billion in savings, but the board is prohibited from proposing anything that would ration care or reduce or modify benefits. Then there's another $136 billion in projected savings that would come from changes to the Medicare Advantage program, an alternative to traditional Medicare that has turned out to be much more costly than expected. About 25 percent of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan.

If you disregard the incendiary word "stole," it is true that savings from Medicare help pay for other parts of the health care law. That's because Democrats wanted to make sure they did not increase the federal deficit with the new health law. The savings from Medicare offset new spending resulting from the health care bill.

 

[Mike!]

Have you actually seen the "Kill Travis With Extreme Impunity" memo, or was this just a lucky guess?

 

[casebro]

Everythng I know I lernt off the interwebs, and the only reason that I know of for a doctor not to take medicare is that medicare won't pay him- because he got caught in fraud.