Healthcare.gov Upgrades to Go Live Today

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here it is diagrammed out in flowchart mode:
Obamacare.jpg
 
Twisted Kidney said:
I agree, but with all the political stuff aside it's still monumentally idiotic to try to roll out any program nationally in a single day. The smart way to do it would be state by state or region by region. There's what 330 million Americans?
Click to expand...
I don't know about other states but California's version worked pretty well the first week, I tried it myself, got a quote of different plans, granted there was a lot of information to mull over, but it worked fine. Went to the federal site and when it found out I was from California it sent me to the state site. So maybe those other states who are too lame to have their own webpages setup just rely on the feds to get things done.
 
The good thing about computers and cars is that you can make porblems on purpose to make an extra buck.
 
sliverjazz said:
The good thing about computers and cars is that you can make porblems on purpose to make an extra buck.
Click to expand...

Wait...you can't POSSIBLY be suggesting that contractors abuse government contracts! I mean, that's taxpayer money! Everyone knows how strictly and carefully that is spent!
 
Raffin said:
Let's be clear about what exactly Single Payer Healthcare is: Socialized Medicine - no more, no less. In most countries that have socialized medicine it doesn't work very well, in many others it is an unmitigated disaster. Giving the bureaucratic fraud, waste and abuse that almost every government entitlement program currently has - how in the world is it a good idea to do this with our healthcare???
Click to expand...
No, single payer system is not "socialized medicine"

Medicare is a single payer system. Explain how it qualifies as "socialized medicine."

We do have a version of socialized medicine in the US -- the VA.
Explain how the VA qualifies as a "single payer system."

Lastly, in terms of government "waste," the data are clear that administrative costs are much lower for single payer systems despite this so-called boogyman.
 
Why do you guys all hate each other so much lol. There is no right or wrong side. Fact of the matter is whether Democrat or Republican your side or even the Gov as a whole doesn't give a damn about helping you or the country.

The only way to fix this mess is to drop the notion of a 2 party system and get big business out of gov IMHO.
 
mope54 said:
No, single payer system is not "socialized medicine"

Medicare is a single payer system. Explain how it qualifies as "socialized medicine."

We do have a version of socialized medicine in the US -- the VA.
Explain how the VA qualifies as a "single payer system."

Lastly, in terms of government "waste," the data are clear that administrative costs are much lower for single payer systems despite this so-called boogyman.
Click to expand...

It's socialism when the government is the single payer.
 
Stiletto said:
It's not mandatory? So in the UK, if you have a job, but don't use the health care system, you don't have to pay for it? Your check remains free of the NHS tax?
Click to expand...

Nah it gets taken out of your wages, but even if you are unemployed and claiming benefits you are still covered, and they don't come after you if you don't have a job and try and fine you. You can go for private health care if you want but that's up to you.
 
Terpfen said:
It's socialism when the government is the single payer.
Click to expand...
first of all, socialism is not "when the government is the single payer" and secondly, that's not even how single payer works!

socialism occurs when the government owns and operates the means of production and distribution/delivery of the goods and/or services.

In this country we have a single payer system in the form of medicare. It's not socialism. Medicare patients still go to private hospitals and they obtain private care. The government pays their bills to a single entity that then pays for their services.

how do you come to the conclusion that medicare is socialized medicine simply because the government pays the bills? or more accurately, how is it socialized medicine simply because there is one single entity collecting and paying the bills to private hospitals and health care practitioners?


contrast that example with the one I keep using to illustrate where we actually *do* have socialized health care--the VA. The government *owns* the hospitals, has its *own* doctors, and the veterans don't have to pay into the system at all. The only private industry involved in the VA health care delivery system is the education system the practitioners learn from...and those are often public institutions!

I know it's fun to get on a soap box but the concern is that every time I post these two examples so people can analyze them and actually learn what does and does not qualify for socialized medicine the post gets ignored.

Are you seriously arguing that the VA health benefits are *bad* and should be abolished? Because other than the argument that "socialized medicine" sounds bad in the US what argument do you even have against it?

these labels you guys are applying to these situations don't make any sense because you're misusing words and labels that have meaning--meaning that is already out there in the world and not open to interpretation.

it's like you are bending over and smelling roses and standing up declaring how much you hate the color red
 
Outamyhead said:
Nah it gets taken out of your wages, but even if you are unemployed and claiming benefits you are still covered, and they don't come after you if you don't have a job and try and fine you. You can go for private health care if you want but that's up to you.
Click to expand...

So private health insurance is optional...but public health insurance is mandatory. If you have public health insurance, then what is the point of buying private?
 
Stiletto said:
So private health insurance is optional...but public health insurance is mandatory. If you have public health insurance, then what is the point of buying private?
Click to expand...

I dunno how it works over there, but I believe in many countries if you want non-essential things or if you want to see certain specialists without referrals from a GP or similar sorts of things, that won't be covered by the public health insurance but might be covered by private depending on your plan.
 
Well, this all makes me feel better so I guess Obamacare works. :p

I feel better about telling friends and family that "any idiot" can assemble there own computer, set it up, etc. :D

I am now very comfortable in that statement. :eek::rolleyes:

For added hilarity, the California GOP just got caught running a fake healthcare website that they directed all the people on their mailing list to go to for healthcare advice. Disguised as a version of the actual California State Healthcare site. Telling people about Medicare people losing coverage, death panels, etc. Very funny.
 
mope54 said:
No, single payer system is not "socialized medicine"

Medicare is a single payer system. Explain how it qualifies as "socialized medicine."

We do have a version of socialized medicine in the US -- the VA.
Explain how the VA qualifies as a "single payer system."
Click to expand...

I'll explain how they are BOTH "socialized medicine". When either one runs out of money, do they go bankrupt like any true private entity? No? What happens then? Oh, the people are forced to pay for them and prop them up? I guess that makes them both "socialized" programs.

worm
 
bullet-worm said:
I'll explain how they are BOTH "socialized medicine". When either one runs out of money, do they go bankrupt like any true private entity? No? What happens then? Oh, the people are forced to pay for them and prop them up? I guess that makes them both "socialized" programs.

worm
Click to expand...
by your logic, does that make Wall Street a socialized program?
Are our car manufacturers "socialized"?
 
mope54 said:
by your logic, does that make Wall Street a socialized program?
Are our car manufacturers "socialized"?
Click to expand...

They were effectively nationalized after the TARP and auto bailouts, yes. You seem to think that those who decry Obama's policies as socialist don't apply the same label to some of Bush's policies.
 
Indeed, the Bush regime lost a lot of his own party for his propping up of the Banks and Insurance companies. Hell, those actions may have been the initial spark that ignited the fire that became the Tea Party.

And yes, if our Government refuses to let failed companies fail by propping them up with the public's money and influence, then I certainly would call that socialized because we citizens are ultimately the ones responsible for paying the bill. In fact, its WORSE than socialized because we people get NOTHING for it. The Banks and Insurance Cos got to reap the rewards for their irresponsible actions, all we got was the bill when their house of cards crumbled around them.

worm
 
I sure hope healthcare.gov starts working soon, I’ve been trying to login for 2 weeks and I keep getting booted out. I grew up in Canada and have lived in EU for 15+ years, healthcare in America is the biggest scam I’ve ever seen. You’re paying more than double per capita than any other western country for inferior service. The only reason this system survives is because US Congress are basically employees of multinationals and special interests.
 
reb00tin said:
I sure hope healthcare.gov starts working soon, I’ve been trying to login for 2 weeks and I keep getting booted out. I grew up in Canada and have lived in EU for 15+ years, healthcare in America is the biggest scam I’ve ever seen. You’re paying more than double per capita than any other western country for inferior service. The only reason this system survives is because US Congress are basically employees of multinationals and special interests.
Click to expand...

Well, prepare to watch an even bigger scam over the next year. A lot of people are going to suffer and lose their coverage.
 
Stiletto said:
Well, prepare to watch an even bigger scam over the next year. A lot of people are going to suffer and lose their coverage.
Click to expand...

Indeed I lost my coverage. The new plans must comply with the new law, so my premium jumped by more than 50%. It still doesn’t give me full coverage, and I’d be responsible for $1000s out-of-pocket. But they give you rebates. My plan would cost $600/month and the Fed will throw in about $300, effectively subsidizing insurance companies (with your tax money).
 
Stiletto said:
They were effectively nationalized after the TARP and auto bailouts, yes. You seem to think that those who decry Obama's policies as socialist don't apply the same label to some of Bush's policies.
Click to expand...
there isn't anything I "seem to think" other than what you assume about me based on reasons only you have conjured up

certainly I've never said anything in this thread, or elsewhere, that would lead anyone to think I'm of any particular political leaning or supporter of any particular policy

I've simply stated the factual definition of "socialized medicine," provided an example of it in this country, then provided a factual definition of "single payer system," provided an example of it in this country, then asked someone if he was willing to apply the same logic of how he comes to determine what is and what is not "socialized" in this country to established free market domains (Wall Street and auto manufacturing).


I can be an anarchist for all it matters and still understand that you and he arguing that US financial system and auto manufacturing are "socialism" is wackadoodle reasoning
 
if everything from Wall Street banking to Veterans' health benefits is "socialism" and therefore "bad" then what is "capitalism" and "good?"

that would pretty much leave only bitcoins. but then again bitcoins have to be mined so they have the socialism "taint" by proxy of publicly subsidized energy and internet infrastructure

that's just one of the many reasons it's poor logic and reasoning to misuse a label and apply it to everything you don't personally like. once you start testing what you state you believe it rapidly falls apart and doesn't allow any kind of rational discussion about the issue.
 
mope54 said:
there isn't anything I "seem to think" other than what you assume about me based on reasons only you have conjured up
Click to expand...

I judged you based on your own words. By asking if the same standard applied to the Wall Street and auto bailouts, you are implying hypocrisy. I have clarified that none exists. You're touchy.
 
mope54 said:
if everything from Wall Street banking to Veterans' health benefits is "socialism" and therefore "bad" then what is "capitalism" and "good?"
Click to expand...

We haven't even managed to have a discussion of whether socialism is good or bad because every time socialism is brought up, people like you scoff at the idea that the United States practices any level of socialism, or that any of its projected policies are socialist. Some are. The minute that you get over yourselves and admit that not every single idea proposed by American politicians is in the name of "freedom", the sooner we can have an honest discussion of the pros and cons of various ideologies.
 
nearly every post in this thread is about how bad socialized medicine is and in the other thread it was about how bad socialized medicine is along with the added nonsense that all single payer systems are necessarily socialized medicine.

You apparently have me confused with someone else, or perhaps simply trolling (probably the latter I should know better than to click "view post" when I see your name), I haven't scoffed at anything. I've simply clarified what is and what is not socialized medicine in this country.
 
mope54 said:
You apparently have me confused with someone else, or perhaps simply trolling (probably the latter I should know better than to click "view post" when I see your name)
Click to expand...

I always know I'm winning an argument when I start getting personal! ;)
 
Come on now, single payer is certainly socialized medicine. That doesn't make it bad, I am for it 100%; there's no reason not to call it what it is.
 
maverikv said:
Come on now, single payer is certainly socialized medicine. That doesn't make it bad, I am for it 100%; there's no reason not to call it what it is.
Click to expand...

Never mind the labels and the outdated politics. The US will eventually have universal healthcare, simply because it’s a lot cheaper and fairer. It will be something like the Canadian system, and in theory it should be even more affordable because with a larger population the US should have economies of scale. The next step after Obamacare will be getting rid of insurance companies because they’re nothing more than unnecessary middlemen.
 
bullet-worm said:
Indeed, the Bush regime lost a lot of his own party for his propping up of the Banks and Insurance companies. Hell, those actions may have been the initial spark that ignited the fire that became the Tea Party.

And yes, if our Government refuses to let failed companies fail by propping them up with the public's money and influence, then I certainly would call that socialized because we citizens are ultimately the ones responsible for paying the bill. In fact, its WORSE than socialized because we people get NOTHING for it. The Banks and Insurance Cos got to reap the rewards for their irresponsible actions, all we got was the bill when their house of cards crumbled around them.

worm
Click to expand...

This is why the Tea Party was founded, to highlight and try and reverse the Bush big government giveaways like his new medicare entitlement and to basically say that people have had enough of cronyism in government with waste, fraud, and abuse of the peoples money that only makes government larger, fatter, slower, and more intrusive into the lives of citizens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top