• Announcements

    • LatoyaADMIN

      What to do if you get a "Wrong Password" message   01/21/16

      You must reset your password (even if you know it's the right one) before you can sign into the community. Thanks to the upgrade, there's an issue with passwords and signing in. The good news is that you can click here: http://community.grandparents.com/index.php?/lostpassword/ to change your password (it'll let you reuse your old one). If you can't reach the email address connected to your account then please contact the admin at latoya@grandparents.com and I'll help you sort it out. 
    • LatoyaADMIN

      Anonymous posting is back   01/21/16

      We've removed the extra step that required you to go to the full-page editor to access the anonymous post option. Now, you can reply to a post and toggle the button to post anonymous (see photo below).    Read more on anonymous posting here:    In short, the mods can see who posts as anonymous, we moderate anonymous posts the same as revealed posts, you can reply anonymously to your own topic, you may report anonymous posts.
RoseRed135

"Obamacare" - should it stay or should it go?

117 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, Nana-mom said:

 

Insurance started this mess.  Years ago, well-baby was NOT covered - but office visits were usually reasonable and many were one doctor offices w/one or two nurses.

Are you suggesting that costs for medical care rose as insurance became available/more widespread? Or ??

Also, I'm not clear on whether or not you're saying that health insurance led to the rise of medical partnerships or if those partnerships prompted a raise in prices...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Nana-mom said:

Does anyone realize the taxes that ACA put on the very wealthy?  These same people say all the "rich" should be taxed more?  Yet if you are taxing earned income, much of the wealth is investment income, not earned, so would not be taxed that way.

Since other countries come into play as for comparisons - there was a blog about an American in Switzerland where he states they pay 22% in taxes - there are no loopholes for deductions like here.  But EVERYBODY pays that % -- to all those clamoring for single payer, would that be fair?

Insurance started this mess.  Years ago, well-baby was NOT covered - but office visits were usually reasonable and many were one doctor offices w/one or two nurses.

Why in Hades should we be so effing sympathetic to rich people who live in a higher tax bracket, when they're gutting the middle class and poor, sick and old people?

Do you know WHY the American rich pay higher taxes? Because in the U.S., CEO pay eclipses median salary 400 to 500 times over. In Europe? U.K. CEO pay is highest, and it only eclipses median salary 22 times.

By the way, @ImpishMom, we ultimately agree on the travesty of the vote, and I agree Trump believes in eugenics, but it would be a mistake to assume corporations and people are two different things in America. In fact, courts ruled in recently years (concerning campaign financing) that corporations/businesses ARE people. They made legal what has been the culture for some years now-- corporations before the general populace, every time.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, oscarsmaman said:

 

By the way, @ImpishMom, we ultimately agree on the travesty of the vote, and I agree Trump believes in eugenics, but it would be a mistake to assume corporations and people are two different things in America. In fact, courts ruled in recently years (concerning campaign financing) that corporations/businesses ARE people. They made legal what has been the culture for some years now-- corporations before the general populace, every time.

I get what you're saying. I was just trying to explain that I was looking at the impact on the individuals, not looking at the coroporate aspect.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your level to be considered wealthy?   And before the CEO salary spikes(CEO pay has gone off the charts - but it is not the current administration that did it.), was it not a wealthy (to most) person that took the chance to make something thus creating jobs?   Don't small businesses employ a whole lot of people?  You'd probably consider the owners of said businesses wealthy - correct? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And I am certainly saying costs for medical care rose as insurance became more widespread.  Due to the increasing insurance rules, the medical offices had to hire persons just to do insurance billing - instead of the pay-as-you-go or set up payment plan in the office (obviously this was some years ago - few do it today).  Folks tend to think little of running to the ER or other medical facilities when they don't have to pay much to use it (or those that won't pay at all). 

In an effort to control costs, many doctors started grouping together - then tried to see more and more patients.  Have you ever had a doc prescribe something for you that you are allergic to - yet he has your chart in his hands (and this was before the electronic stuff).  The doctors don't get to know a patient any more - and that could have bad results.  (I think some "bad beside manner" was posted earlier in this thread)

My kid's pedi retired earlier than was his original plan - and it was largely due to insurance dictating what he had to do, could do, etc.  Case in point - I took one of mine in as child had strep (you learn the signs).  Yep, after checking child over, doc said child had strep - but before he could give the shot of antibiotic, he HAD to do a strep test (which cost MORE than the shot) or the insurance would not pay any of it.  That just drove up the cost of that particular visit.

(This doc had much lower office visit costs than many - as much as 1/3 less; those visits cost me what a co-pay costs now - and it covered the entire visit unless something like a shot was needed.  Found out by fluke that this doc was a nationally known children's allergist -- he wanted to be able to help kids.  Figured out he has an outstanding reputation among docs here during the questioning by the neuro when they were working on diagnosing dau seizures.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Nana-mom said:

And I am certainly saying costs for medical care rose as insurance became more widespread.  Due to the increasing insurance rules, the medical offices had to hire persons just to do insurance billing - instead of the pay-as-you-go or set up payment plan in the office (obviously this was some years ago - few do it today).  Folks tend to think little of running to the ER or other medical facilities when they don't have to pay much to use it (or those that won't pay at all). 

In an effort to control costs, many doctors started grouping together - then tried to see more and more patients.  Have you ever had a doc prescribe something for you that you are allergic to - yet he has your chart in his hands (and this was before the electronic stuff).  The doctors don't get to know a patient any more - and that could have bad results.  (I think some "bad beside manner" was posted earlier in this thread)

My kid's pedi retired earlier than was his original plan - and it was largely due to insurance dictating what he had to do, could do, etc.  Case in point - I took one of mine in as child had strep (you learn the signs).  Yep, after checking child over, doc said child had strep - but before he could give the shot of antibiotic, he HAD to do a strep test (which cost MORE than the shot) or the insurance would not pay any of it.  That just drove up the cost of that particular visit.

(This doc had much lower office visit costs than many - as much as 1/3 less; those visits cost me what a co-pay costs now - and it covered the entire visit unless something like a shot was needed.  Found out by fluke that this doc was a nationally known children's allergist -- he wanted to be able to help kids.  Figured out he has an outstanding reputation among docs here during the questioning by the neuro when they were working on diagnosing dau seizures.)

To the bolded: I'm Canadian, it's UHC here.

Reality is, you're ALWAYS going to find some folks that'll run to an ER or what-have-you for the sniffles, or other ridiculous malady. For some, it's about the attention, for others, they're convinced they're dying every time the seasons change. Doesn't matter who's paying. Same as you're going to have folks who will deny having a health issue and refuse to be seen until they collapse in a corner somewhere, even if the Dr is free.

BUT.

I've had US friends who KNEW they were ill, needed to be seen, but they didn't get paid for another week and couldn't afford the co-pay.

Nobody in a First World Country should have to choose btwn their health, and eating. Or their kids having winter coats. Or paying rent/mortgage.

It's just wrong, imo.

In a First World Country, health care ought to be considered a right, vs a priviledge.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nana-mom said:

What is your level to be considered wealthy?   And before the CEO salary spikes(CEO pay has gone off the charts - but it is not the current administration that did it.), was it not a wealthy (to most) person that took the chance to make something thus creating jobs?   Don't small businesses employ a whole lot of people?  You'd probably consider the owners of said businesses wealthy - correct? 

 

I'm not talking about "wealth." I'm talking about "obscene wealth," the kind that amasses more wealth than a person could possibly spend in 10 lifetimes living a comparatively wealthy lifestyle, on the backs of laborers who are paid barely enough to keep body and soul together. I'm talking about the greed that seeks to bleed the country dry, keep salaries painfully low and who create suffering and hardship among the middle and lower classes, all for the benefit and delight of the top 20% in our country.

I'm talking about wealth that exploits.

And while the current administration didn't create the CEO-pay spike (Reagan really started that kick), Trump is exacerbating that problem in no small way, living the Gordon Gecko mantra "greed is good" and making it the policy of his administration. And that's undeniable.

As for "but these are the job creators!".... Nope, many of are worker-exploiters. Break the unions. Fight against corporate taxes and income taxes. Fight against consumer protections. Fight against environmental regulation. Fight against universal healthcare. Fight against price controls.

And we give in, because "oh, you lovely Job Creators!" Then they pay their workers crap.

Trump told a massive lie to the middle class, and they bought into it, desperate for any promise that their lives, their work, would improve.

I know people working two and three jobs to feed their families and attempt to provide the basics. It's not working anymore. CEO pay is 400 times more than in other countries. Something's gotta give.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ImpishMom said:

To the bolded: I'm Canadian, it's UHC here.

Reality is, you're ALWAYS going to find some folks that'll run to an ER or what-have-you for the sniffles, or other ridiculous malady. For some, it's about the attention, for others, they're convinced they're dying every time the seasons change. Doesn't matter who's paying. Same as you're going to have folks who will deny having a health issue and refuse to be seen until they collapse in a corner somewhere, even if the Dr is free.

BUT.

I've had US friends who KNEW they were ill, needed to be seen, but they didn't get paid for another week and couldn't afford the co-pay.

Nobody in a First World Country should have to choose btwn their health, and eating. Or their kids having winter coats. Or paying rent/mortgage.

It's just wrong, imo.

In a First World Country, health care ought to be considered a right, vs a priviledge.

That sentence, in bold, reflects more than the state of healthcare in the US- I can't claim to know what everyone's co-pays are but the ones I'm familiar with didn't exceed $300.00 which is what the co-pay was for the ER- However, at the ER the co-pay doesn't need to be paid to receive services/treatments- But at most doctors offices the signs on the walls at reception indicate that co-pays must be paid prior to receiving treatment- My point is .. that people don't make a living wage- They pay for insurance that they are unable to use until they can afford to use it- That sounds like a crime to me right out of the gate- And they are getting away with it-

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 5/6/2017 at 7:24 PM, ImpishMom said:

I don't think it's socialism for the rich, it's survival of the fittest. That's his plan for MAGA.

Once the ill, elderly, disabled and poor are gone, well, that's going to be a better America, right?

Remember, he believes that the rich are genetically *superior* to others. They don't need the supports that the poor, ill, disabled and elderly do. They're just drains on the economy.

As for PP, it pleased a chunk of his core.

Abortions are bad. Women having bodily autonomy, bad. Women having access to healthcare, bad. Women reporting sexual assault and domestic violence, bad.

And this health care bill addresses all of that, doesn't it?

Trump is for Trump and his Rich Friends plain and simple.  And I hope The  ***** --- grabbig Trump voters are happy and proud when they get screwed just like the rest of us who were smart enough not to vote for him.   It's just a matter of time.  Plus his tax cut is for the Rich,  Him, His Family and Friends. Honestly, he scares me. And no I didn't really want Clinton. either.

Edited by RoseRed135
guideline

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does that mean you are upset w/folks like the Walton family? 

Is is the same upset for the obscene salaries of sports figures?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, godsgifts said:

Abortions are bad. Women having bodily autonomy, bad. Women having access to healthcare, bad. Women reporting sexual assault and domestic violence, bad.

And erectile dysfunction is not listed as a pre-existing condition....y'all can see where the real truth lies

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nana-mom said:

Does that mean you are upset w/folks like the Walton family? 

Is is the same upset for the obscene salaries of sports figures?

Walmart and the Walton Family are horrible.  Walmart is terrible to it's employees.  They have a nasty tendency to hire employees with just enough hours so they don't have to pay them benefits.  They've been sued multiple times for wage violations and either settled out or lost.  They also not only discourage unions but there are reports that they punish people trying to form unions.  I remember a few years ago that people were mocking Walmart for putting out boxes to collect food for the needy because a large percentage of their workers at the time had to file for assistance because they were paid so little by the company and that collected food would probably be going to them.  

Personally, I think it's crazy that sports figures make so much money but our society, sadly, values sports and sports figures more than teachers.  However, they aren't making their money off the backs of thousands of employees and violating labor laws to do so.  They make their money throwing a ball or hitting a ball or kicking a ball, not by violating labor laws and paying their employees so little that the have to file for assistance.  There are certainly sports figures I dislike but it's usually because of their stupid behavior.  

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, britomart said:

Walmart and the Walton Family are horrible.  Walmart is terrible to it's employees.  They have a nasty tendency to hire employees with just enough hours so they don't have to pay them benefits.  They've been sued multiple times for wage violations and either settled out or lost.  They also not only discourage unions but there are reports that they punish people trying to form unions.  I remember a few years ago that people were mocking Walmart for putting out boxes to collect food for the needy because a large percentage of their workers at the time had to file for assistance because they were paid so little by the company and that collected food would probably be going to them.  

Personally, I think it's crazy that sports figures make so much money but our society, sadly, values sports and sports figures more than teachers.  However, they aren't making their money off the backs of thousands of employees and violating labor laws to do so.  They make their money throwing a ball or hitting a ball or kicking a ball, not by violating labor laws and paying their employees so little that the have to file for assistance.  There are certainly sports figures I dislike but it's usually because of their stupid behavior.  

So, you hate how those who have money and power use it to take advantage of others who depend on them for their livelihoods, to put more $ into their already bulging pockets, rather than treat their employees reasonably.

Makes sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/9/2017 at 9:30 PM, Nana-mom said:

And I am certainly saying costs for medical care rose as insurance became more widespread.  Due to the increasing insurance rules, the medical offices had to hire persons just to do insurance billing - instead of the pay-as-you-go or set up payment plan in the office (obviously this was some years ago - few do it today).  Folks tend to think little of running to the ER or other medical facilities when they don't have to pay much to use it (or those that won't pay at all). 

In an effort to control costs, many doctors started grouping together - then tried to see more and more patients.  Have you ever had a doc prescribe something for you that you are allergic to - yet he has your chart in his hands (and this was before the electronic stuff).  The doctors don't get to know a patient any more - and that could have bad results.  (I think some "bad beside manner" was posted earlier in this thread)

My kid's pedi retired earlier than was his original plan - and it was largely due to insurance dictating what he had to do, could do, etc.  Case in point - I took one of mine in as child had strep (you learn the signs).  Yep, after checking child over, doc said child had strep - but before he could give the shot of antibiotic, he HAD to do a strep test (which cost MORE than the shot) or the insurance would not pay any of it.  That just drove up the cost of that particular visit.

(This doc had much lower office visit costs than many - as much as 1/3 less; those visits cost me what a co-pay costs now - and it covered the entire visit unless something like a shot was needed.  Found out by fluke that this doc was a nationally known children's allergist -- he wanted to be able to help kids.  Figured out he has an outstanding reputation among docs here during the questioning by the neuro when they were working on diagnosing dau seizures.)

Thanks for answering my questions!

No doubt, the medical profession has changed, and some of that is due to health insurance though, to my understanding, some of it is due to the need for malpractice insurance, also. As often is the case, one change leads to another.

But don't those changes and their effects mean that health insurance coverage,  etc., has to change now, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On May 9, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Nana-mom said:

Does that mean you are upset w/folks like the Walton family? 

Is is the same upset for the obscene salaries of sports figures?

You're making this personal. You're making it about me. But yes, I am upset, and you should be upset, too, because the Walton family makes billions of dollars while many of their employees depend on governmental food stamps to supplement the CRAP wages the Walton family pays them, so that the Walton family can make billions. It's another, albeit indirect form of corporate welfare when working American citizens rely on governmental welfare programs to feed their families.

The obscene salaries of sports figures is also another indirect form of corporate welfare, as team owners extort billions of money from cities on pain of taking their teams elsewhere if the cities don't cough up tax money or credits to build stadiums that they can well afford to build themselves.

The question is, why AREN'T you upset by these things? Why would anyone treat the obscenely wealthy as though they were a class of citizenry who should be extensively sheltered and coddled from paying their effing fair share?

Nobless oblige used to be a thing. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not personal at all - another poster responded to that - the "you" is being used in general terms.

You can't be sure if I'm upset or not - and about which parts.  There are several things that irk me, but I try to keep a calm approach on this board since it is public.

WalMart always seems to be a 'bone of contention' - yet many that gripe about them still shop there.  Doesn't make sense.  And how many use the self-checkout at any of the stores?  I refuse to use those things - that IMO is taking a job from someone (and makes me wonder how much will they push the self-check).  McDonald's is sometimes another one in a similar spot - and I can tell you that those touch screens are coming as we saw them on the trip to Rome!  Walked into one in search of a restroom - first thing in the door was 6 big touch screens (so wished somebody would have been there putting an order in so we could watch - not sure if it was dual language). 

I don't personally know any of the obscenely wealthy - and I would not treat them any different, tho I am sure many of them would treat me w/much disdain.  I was blessed w/a boss from a prior job that "made good."  He actually raised his family in the projects, took a chance on building a company (with 3 others at the time I came on board).  When I came on board, they were just barely hanging on - but got a job to do that required more administrative personnel than they had.  When other jobs in this area were paying the minimum of $3.35/hr, this job offered $5/hr - was not expecting to get the call at all.  To keep the company where he wanted it during the busy season, he would come and tell me to not cut him and the other co-owner a paycheck until he came to change it back - this was over the summer for about 5 years.  Then as the company prospered, he started a profit-sharing fund - and actually did "share the wealth" - even down to the people like me (I know, I did the payroll).

(and don't forget to mention the lovely Christmas parties done for the employees)

I worked w/a lady that was a CPA - wish we had worked together longer - she was so willing to teach!  Anyway, she has done taxes (locally - not NYC, etc) for those that might be considered obscenely wealthy - and she told me no one really knows just how much they do pay as it is way more than most ever think.  So much so that she said she could no longer make comments about them paying their share.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

24 minutes ago, Nana-mom said:

Not personal at all - another poster responded to that - the "you" is being used in general terms.

Thanks for letting us know, @Nana-mom! It's not always easy to tell the difference on the Internet though. In the future, please indicate that by, say, writing "general" or "you-general" in parentheses.

 ....There are several things that irk me, but I try to keep a calm approach on this board since it is public. Appreciated!

..... And how many use the self-checkout at any of the stores?  I refuse to use those things - that IMO is taking a job from someone (and makes me wonder how much will they push the self-check).  I tend to avoid them, also, for the same reason..

 

 

Edited by RoseRed135

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now