Published
[h=1]another poll question?[/h]
Absolutely not! It should not be repealed. That would be devastating to millions. The only acceptable substitute would be single payor. I've had so many patients getting quality healthcare for themselves and for their children for the first time in their lives. It's so sad to hear how fearful people are now that the security of insurance will likely be taken away. It's shameful that this country does not provide healthcare as a right.
I love the idea of giving hc to everyone but punishing people based on their income. It should be given to everyone regardless of their income. I'm fortunate that my deductible is $400. A friend of mine is about $7500. Mind you, her insurance was perfectly fine before Obama Care. I wonder how many people out there will discover that while others get it for almost next to nothing, they get discriminated for working their ass off to live. Not a big deal for people who don't pay into it or make too much money.
Mind you, her insurance was perfectly fine before Obama Care.
What I commonly find when people make this statement is that people didn't actually know what their insurance would cover. It may have covered basic things like preventative care for a healthy person, but what about if they found out they had a chronic condition like asthma or diabetes or had a kid, or injured badly. They would then find out it wasn't perfectly fine. That they could lose their insurance because they were too sick, or it didn't really cover anything else. I had a friend who broke her ankle in a mole burrow one night. She had insurance, but she still ended up with over 10k in bills because her insurance wouldn't cover the majority of the treatment she needed for it. Follow that up with the hospital that treated her was unable to provide her with charity care, even though she met their financial thresholds because she had insurance. She got screwed heavily by the "My insurance was just fine"
I definitely think the affordable care act has created some unnecessary expenses and bureaucracy. But the bigger problem to me is just how fragmented and confusing our medical systems are. All the billing and pricing issues. And how when need acute care, like hospitalizations, you still get thousands of dollars in bills for an overnight stay even when fully insured. I'm not sure what the solution is to these problems, but I'd really like the insurance industry to almost completely cover out of pocket expenses for acute care, even if that means higher cost of insurance. I had a one night hospital stay and ended up with a $3400 bill while insured. To me that's just ridiculous and not a cost an 'insured' person should have for such a short stay. Who wants to be sick, miss work, and then have a huge bill to work off?
What I commonly find when people make this statement is that people didn't actually know what their insurance would cover. It may have covered basic things like preventative care for a healthy person, but what about if they found out they had a chronic condition like asthma or diabetes or had a kid, or injured badly. They would then find out it wasn't perfectly fine. That they could lose their insurance because they were too sick, or it didn't really cover anything else. I had a friend who broke her ankle in a mole burrow one night. She had insurance, but she still ended up with over 10k in bills because her insurance wouldn't cover the majority of the treatment she needed for it. Follow that up with the hospital that treated her was unable to provide her with charity care, even though she met their financial thresholds because she had insurance. She got screwed heavily by the "My insurance was just fine"
Yeah, I used to marvel at this during the debate leading up to the passage of the ACA, when various anti-ACA groups would point to polling numbers showing that the majority of people polled were happy with their insurance. I used to scream back at my TV screen that those people were only happy with their insurance because a) they didn't know how much they were really paying for it (I've always been amazed at the number of people, even nurses, who thought that that $50 or $75 that showed up on their pay check stub was what their insurance actually cost), and b) they hadn't really needed to use it yet. People who understood what they were actually paying for their insurance, and/or had had some serious health problem and been screwed over by their insurance company, got it. All the other folks didn't, and thought the status quo was just fine.
EXACTLY! I could not have said it better! Also thank you for saying Affordable Care Act. I was correctly taught in nursing school that the term "Obamacare" is politically charged and unprofessional. Not a term for a professional registered nurse to ever use. So than you!!
"Could not have said it better" than who? If you use the "Quote" button (see? Like I did), others can tell with which post you're agreeing.
EXACTLY! I could not have said it better! Also thank you for saying Affordable Care Act. I was correctly taught in nursing school that the term "Obamacare" is politically charged and unprofessional. Not a term for a professional registered nurse to ever use. So than you!!
Why? Nurses cannot be political in the non-patient care setting?
When you engineer a strategy to intentionally force a bill through without allowing time for review or debate you get a greater than normal ownership for that bill. I think it is very appropriately nicknamed Obamacare.
Why? Nurses cannot be political in the non-patient care setting?When you engineer a strategy to intentionally force a bill through without allowing time for review or debate you get a greater than normal ownership for that bill. I think it is very appropriately nicknamed Obamacare.
You mean a year wasn't enough? I personally don't care whether you call it Obamacare or ACA. But this particular meme is bull-puckey.
Well, the ball is squarely in the GOP court now. Let's just see what they do. I'm betting.... not much.
They're already backing off majorly on the "repeal, repeal, repeal, it's a disaster" alternative fact ....because they're hearing from their constituencies that a huge number of people will be totally screwed if it goes back to the way it was before, and the people don't WANT it repealed.
Apple-Core, ASN, BSN, RN
1,016 Posts
Socialist healthcare does not mean the country has to become overall socialist. Personally, I support and believe in socialist education and socialist healthcare. But that's where my support of socialism ends and capitalism begins.
One major factor worth pointing out, however, is that with systems such as the British NHS comes brutally low wages for.... you've guessed it.... nurses. Starting salaries for a new grad barely touch $20K, and you'd be lucky to scrape $25K after quite a few years.
I imagine there'd be a mass exodus from the profession in the event salaries were reduced in the States to match those in England!
Ideally, everyone from rich to poor would have universal free healthcare and nurses would make the same or more than they currently do here in the states. However, to achieve that, the money would have to come from somewhere and the only viable source is taxes, which would cause an outcry too (although without health insurance costs, upping taxes wouldn't be quite so painful, she said hopefully).
One can dream, I guess!!