<p>^ Possibly. The CBO says that the bill will actually end up saving the govenment money. But honestly, with things like that, we really have to see. They sometimes drastically underestimate or overestimate.</p>
<p>thx sg12 for the article. </p>
<p>I heard from President Obama on TV that the health care reform bill would decrease the deficit.</p>
<p>So covering 38 million people is going to save money? If the president told people that his “great” bill would also save money, then no wonder it passed. Too bad they are delusional.</p>
<p>I can’t wait for this bill to start working and go into effect. Then maybe people will shut the hell up and stop making up lies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok… let me run this down for you just using some common sense. </p>
<p>1- we cover everyone in health care = less people in the ER and doing unnecessary and costly tests (they’ll just go to a regular doctor). </p>
<p>2- We cover everyone with health care = people get diagnosed and treated EARLY rather than waiting until the cancer is stage 4 and no longer treatable except with costly medicine. </p>
<p>3- It was also designed to cut a LOT of the excess out of medicaid. Thus, saving bundles. </p>
<p>4- It raises taxes on those with over a 250k income (ie- the top 2% of earners in the country). </p>
<p>It is deficit neutral.</p>
<p>Disclaimer: I am far left of centre.</p>
<p>I think one of the problems with this bill is that there is not enough reform. If it doesn’t work. it will be because of that reason BUT the republicans will say “look it was too much change”. They will flip it 180! They are great at that. Anyways, America is nowhere near the point where they can accept single payer but its dissapointing that even a public option isn’t in it. The republicans are even calling this watered down version of the bill “government takeover” which I find apalling. O well, I guess this bill is better than nothing.</p>
<p>I do not want to pursue this argument any further, as it will accomplish nothing. I leave you three words: we will see.</p>
<p>How will this effect people in the insurance business?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m shocked that there is nothing that you actually have to argue about, but rather that you leave us with a subtle thread :rolleyes:</p>
<p>alam1, I’m with you 100% but I’ll definitely take this over nothing.</p>
<p>People’s voices are finally being heard. This shows that unity can overcome the power of the status quo.</p>
<ol>
<li>Adult children may remain as dependents on their parents policy until their 27th birthday</li>
<li>Children under age 19 may not be excluded for pre-existing conditions</li>
<li>No more lifetime or annual caps on coverage</li>
<li>Free preventative care for all</li>
<li>Adults with pre-existing conditions may buy into a national high-risk pool until the exchanges come online. While these will not be cheap, theyre still better than total exclusion and get some benefit from a wider pool of insureds.</li>
<li>Small businesses will be entitled to a tax credit for 2009 and 2010, which could be as much as 50% of what they pay for employees health insurance.</li>
<li>The donut hole closes for Medicare patients, making prescription medications more affordable for seniors.</li>
<li>Requirement that all insurers must post their balance sheets on the Internet and fully disclose administrative costs, executive compensation packages, and benefit payments.</li>
<li>Authorizes early funding of community health centers in all 50 states (Bernie Sanders amendment). Community health centers provide primary, dental and vision services to people in the community, based on a sliding scale for payment according to ability to pay.</li>
</ol>
<p>Thank you for that informative post, Pyroza. :]</p>
<p>pyrzora, I didn’t hear about that last one. It’s awesome. Can you send me a link to where you found that? :)</p>
<p>
Maybe. To my knowledge, this bill doesn’t really include any effective rationing.
Medicaid = for low income, managed by states
Medicare = old people, managed by the feds</p>
<p>The latter is going to get cut, but probably not enough. I LOL at Republicans who complain about “government takeovers of healthcare” and then fight Medicare cuts.
For now, they make an absolute fortune. The government is handing them a huge number of new customers and paying for it. There is still fear in the industry because this is a step towards single-payer, which would mean no more big bucks.</p>
<p>To be clear, I would have no problem with a single-payer system. But this isn’t a single-payer system. It’s a bastardization of our current system that doesn’t fix the overall symptomatic problems.</p>
<p>^ Whoops, sorry. Always mess up care and caid. :o</p>
<p>rom, [House</a> Passes Health Care Reform: The First Changes](<a href=“http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2010/03/21/house-passes-health-care-reform-the-first-changes.htm]House”>About the U.S. House of Representatives)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a nice summary of the last 80 years of American fiscal policy, not including a few years under Clinton. If the experts are wrong and this is very costly, Obama will join the previous socialist leaders we’ve had, like Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, in sinking this nation in debt. </p>
<p>To be fair though, even with $100B+ surpluses (which would be universally opposed politically) it would take decades upon decades to pay off the debt. Realistically speaking, it’s never going to disappear.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, that seemed to be a constant feature on the Daily Show (while it was still on Hulu) - Republicans scared of any possible infringement on Medicare.</p>
<p>“GOVERNMENT - HANDS OFF MY MEDICARE !!!” </p>
<p>haha</p>
<p>Educate yourselves, this was a good bill
[Proposed</a> Changes in the Final Health Care Bill - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com](<a href=“Proposed Changes in the Final Health Care Bill - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com”>Proposed Changes in the Final Health Care Bill - Interactive Graphic - NYTimes.com)</p>
<p>UHC 2024!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Whose voices? Not mine. Not the majority of Americans.</p>