Obamacare: Should I get out while I still can? - page 3

by TexasAbby 51,277 Views | 55 Comments

Hello :) I didn't know exactly where to ask this, but I am very concerned and need some guidance...I am just about to take prerequisites to get into a BSN program. I would really love to be a nurse! And I have been looking... Read More


  1. 0
    No, not necessarily. I believe that all Americans should have access to affordble health insurance. In Mass, Romney (while governor of Mass) put together a brilliant plan that allowed for all people to have health insurance. After a year of research, he was able to gain an accurate view of his residents and their needs. By doing so, he was able to provide reform that suited the residents of his state. He developed a plan that would provide for individual residents of the state to purcahse insurance directly and based on their income. The state would provide subsidies according to financial need. The subsidy for the poor was on a sliding scale where the poorest would get a greater percentage of money, and people received less and less of a subsidy as their incomes went up and they were more able to afford it on their own.The monies that would go towards providing these subsidies would come from the funds that were previously designated to pay for people who were receiving a "free ride." What Mr. Romney found through his year long research was that only 20% of the uninsured were truly too poor to buy health insurance. This is a very important point because it had generally been assumed that all the uninsured fell into this category. 40% of the uninsured had the financial means to purchase health insurance but simply refused to do so. The last 40% of the uninsured were people who were able to partially pay for their insurance premiums, but could not afford all of it. As of today recent polls have shown that 84% of Mass residents are in favor of the reform that has gone into place. 99% of the residents of Mass have health insurance, and it has not exceeded it's budget in over 5 years. It still allows Mass residents to choose their plans and therefore retain their freedom and control. I do not endorse a "one size fits all" as Obamacare is and I also do not support a plan that gives the federal government control over such an important issue as my health. I also do not support a plan that will increase tax dollars that I or any other American will have to pay. There is a better way to fix problem and Mr. Romney prooved it. Each state should be responsible for their own. That is the beauty of our unique model as a united nation of states.
  2. 1
    Quote from jetro
    You are so correct with number 1. I know people in other states that are telling me that some people that they know personally who are BSNs and boards passers, even those with experience who were laid off are settling as CNAs because of the abundance of nurses. too many people are changing their careers into nursing. I used to believe nursing isnt for everyone, but apparently almost everyone has to be one cause of the recession. Darn economy! lol -sigh
    !
    *** The poor economy isn't responsible for the glut of nurses. The over supply of nurses was deliberatly brought about by those who stand to gain financialy from a glut of nurses. They used false and self serving (though very effective)propaganda, combined with money lobbied from the federal and state governenments used to expand current or creat new nursing programs. That is what created the ovser supply situation for nurses. The current economy only moved the day of over supply up a few years but it has been building for a long time now.
    It didn't happen, it was done to us and to maek matters worse WE as tax payers subisidzed it.
    Last edit by PMFB-RN on Nov 10, '12
    Fiona59 likes this.
  3. 1
    Didn't take long post election for the Speaker of the House, John Boehner to issue a statement saying "Obamacare is the law of the land". So like it the thing is done and we all must bear it as best we can.

    Not only did Obama win re-election but Democrats held and increased their seats in the Senate in many cases with far more liberal members than before. In short several themes seem to have emerged from the election results including a majority of hte population believes the federal government should be *more* involved affairs such as healthcare.

    Physicans as a group in whole according to polls did not support Obama, and now it remains to be seen how they respond to the changed landscape. However two trends that began before the election probably are going to continue; more doctors are going to give up private practice in favour of being "employed" by hospital systems, and physicans who can are going to decline all type and sort of insurance/entitlement programs in favour of cash payment up front. From there patients will have to submitt claims to get their money back.

    As it relates to hospitals/healthcare systems the push from the federal government to drive down costs is most certainly going to be felt in one way or another by the nursing service. Hospital/bedside nurses probably looking at yet more paperwork, doing more with less staffing, adjusting to creative and or innovative staffing methods as hospitals seek to fine tune census to nurse ratios.

    In many areas of the country there is probably going to be more mergers and or closings of hospitals as the weakest either shut down or absorbed by larger systems. That again continues another trend in healthcare; the larger the system the better able it will be to demand better reimbursement rates from insurance companies and so forth. One foresees hospitals/heathcare systems moving more towards a type of vertical integration system where they are not only providers of healthcare but insurance as well.

    Look also for more out sourcing such as what a hospital in Westchester recently pulled off; terminating all employed NAs then contracting out that service to an agency.

    Long story short it took generations to build up the private healthcare system in the United States, and many are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming into any sort of world that even smells of what they associate with "socialised" medicine.
    DroogieRN likes this.
  4. 0
    WF Fqlz
  5. 1
    Quote from Ineedhelp#
    WF Fqlz
    Did your cat run across your keyboard?
    VivaLasViejas likes this.
  6. 5
    AmandaVanGuilder- I am wondering if you are aware that the ACA and the Massachusetts plan of which you are so fond are fundamentally the same? Or is simply the federal implementation of the plan that you oppose? Taxes must go up for many people*, one way or another, mostly through elimination of deductions. That is the long and the short of it, lol.

    *above certain income levels, not going to take the time to elaborate on the specifics at this time.

    DoGoodThenGo- What you describe has been happening for 20 years and works beautifully, with outstanding results. The fee-for-service model is going to end, and insurance companies are going to have to adjust. They will not like this, as it has been a cash cow for them. But the system cannot sustain it, and the gravy train is over. The transition has already begun, and some of the most successful systems in the country (Mayo, Cleveland Clinic, Kaiser) have already proven the comprehensive care model works, with better outcomes and improved provider and patient satisfaction. They can be profitable as well, but not with the same margins the fee-for-service model used to provide. The only "losers" are the share holders, and what they are losing are a few percentage points. Risk is inherent in investment and they are less entitled (there's that word again ) to that net return than are individuals to basic health care. Therefore, the transition is, IMO, ethical and socially just, not to mention in the best interest of public health.
    mappers, Tflowers34907, elkpark, and 2 others like this.
  7. 0
    Quote from AmandaVanGuilder
    No, not necessarily. I believe that all Americans should have access to affordble health insurance. In Mass, Romney (while governor of Mass) put together a brilliant plan that allowed for all people to have health insurance. After a year of research, he was able to gain an accurate view of his residents and their needs. By doing so, he was able to provide reform that suited the residents of his state. He developed a plan that would provide for individual residents of the state to purcahse insurance directly and based on their income. The state would provide subsidies according to financial need. The subsidy for the poor was on a sliding scale where the poorest would get a greater percentage of money, and people received less and less of a subsidy as their incomes went up and they were more able to afford it on their own.The monies that would go towards providing these subsidies would come from the funds that were previously designated to pay for people who were receiving a "free ride." What Mr. Romney found through his year long research was that only 20% of the uninsured were truly too poor to buy health insurance. This is a very important point because it had generally been assumed that all the uninsured fell into this category. 40% of the uninsured had the financial means to purchase health insurance but simply refused to do so. The last 40% of the uninsured were people who were able to partially pay for their insurance premiums, but could not afford all of it. As of today recent polls have shown that 84% of Mass residents are in favor of the reform that has gone into place. 99% of the residents of Mass have health insurance, and it has not exceeded it's budget in over 5 years. It still allows Mass residents to choose their plans and therefore retain their freedom and control. I do not endorse a "one size fits all" as Obamacare is and I also do not support a plan that gives the federal government control over such an important issue as my health. I also do not support a plan that will increase tax dollars that I or any other American will have to pay. There is a better way to fix problem and Mr. Romney prooved it. Each state should be responsible for their own. That is the beauty of our unique model as a united nation of states.
    Actually, although a less complicated law and run at the state level and therefore much more efficient then Obamacare will be, Romneycare isn't working either. That's why you didn't here much about it from either side leading up to the election.

    Sorry, Liberals, RomneyCare Is Still Not Working - Reason.com
  8. 0
    Quote from mariebailey
    Regarding your first statement - NO, that is not what I stated. Nurses advocate for their patients, so I do have a hard time understanding why a nurse or aspiring nurse would be opposed to legislation that would allow more access to primary & preventive services and prevent denial of coverage d/t pre-existing conditions, among other perks. Regarding the quote at the end: nursing is hard work; many of us work long hours under stressful conditions. Burnout potential is high if you like the job/financial security but dislike the nursing aspect of nursing. That is worth considering.
    -You have further clarified that you do not think that someone who has a different point of view then yourself on the effectiveness of Obamacare can be a good patient advocate.

    -I agree. Someone should consider those aspects of a nursing career when considering going into it. I took you statement a different way (actually two) the first time. Thanks for elaborating.
  9. 2
    Quote from SC_RNDude
    Actually, although a less complicated law and run at the state level and therefore much more efficient then Obamacare will be, Romneycare isn't working either. That's why you didn't here much about it from either side leading up to the election.

    Sorry, Liberals, RomneyCare Is Still Not Working - Reason.com
    The problem with your position is that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is a concervative law. Nothing but a shill to big business. It's nothing liberals would want.
    Sisyphus and jojonavy like this.
  10. 0
    BlueDevil DNP: ACA and Romneycare are different in many ways. I am opposed to taxes going up because they don't have to at all. In fact Romney proved that with the implementation of Romneycare. Although it is nice to trust what the mass media tells us about Obamacare and how it is so similar to the very successful program that Mass has in place now, they are lying to you! It's high time we start doing our research instead of just accepting what information we are fed. We must be wise consumers. Here is an outline of the vast differences. RomneyCare VS ObamaCare
    1. RC – Applies to only 8% off MA workers that were not insured.
      OC – Applies to 100% of Americans
    2. RC – Bill is 70 pages long
      OC – Bill is 2000-3000 pages long (28X greater)
    3. RC – Romney VETOED 8 parts of the Bill before it was passed
      OC – Obama VETOED 0 parts of the Bill & has not read the entire bill
    4. RC – Written by Office of Govenor MITT ROMNNEY
      OC – Witten by . . . . ?
    5. RC – Funded by existing revenues
      OC – Paid for by borrowing money
    6. RC – Did not raise taxes
      OC – Raises taxes
    7. RC – Inforced by Massachutes Health (MassHealth)
      OC – Inforced by the IRS
    8. RC – Adopted by 67% majority vote in MA (2/3rd)
      OC – Forced thru Congress and has no Bi-partisan support (Obama Democrats only) Backroom deals
    9. RC – Leaves 0.02% of children un-insured
      OC – Leaves 11% of children un-insured
    10. RC – Doesn’t affect / cut Medicare
      OC – Reduces Medicare Benefits
    11. RC – Ruled as Constitutional
      OC – Ruled as Unconstitutional twice (so far)
    12. RC – Does not Regualte Health Care Industry – works with Healthcare Providers and Private insurance companies
      Oc – Regulates 100% of the Health Care Industry – Forces Healtcare Providers and Private insurance to comply.
    13. RC –
      OC – caused the loss of many democratic seats in Novemeber of 2011
    14. RC – Still in effect in MA
      OC – Budget concerns, Constitutionality of mandate in question.
    15. RC – Don’t like it – Try another approach
      OC – Don’t like it – Tough!
    16. RC – Stayed on Budget Projections
      OC – Went over budget by 100% (can Obama add?)

      It seems so very obvious to me that we have a real problem on our hands and although it is the law of the land, it is scary!




Top