I'd like to see the states take this as an opportunity to build their own health care systems.
The ACA both helped and hurt me. My health care costs more than doubled under the ACA, but the preexisting conditions rule probably kept me from not having coverage at all.
I'd like to see the states take this as an opportunity to build their own health care systems.
The ACA both helped and hurt me. My health care costs more than doubled under the ACA, but the preexisting conditions rule probably kept me from not having coverage at all.
But this argument is the height of stupidity, because it was congress who changed the mandatory enrollment while not changing any other part of the law, so it is in fact exactly now as congress intended,, an update of what it intended before.
It's likely too late for any substantial changes to happen in 2019. The ACA was something that never could be more than a stopgap insurance scheme which was my beef. "Medicare for all" is pretty much the same in the sense that the underlying infrastructure remains and it will be alway a politics over medicine with an onerous bureaucracy. There are several possible outcomes if something is undertaken. First is the "Medicare for all", something which will take more effort than people think because there are all sorth of legal challenges ahead that will make the ACA seem like a welcome home party for a family hero.
Assuming that comes through then it will be medicine by lawful regulation in an American bureaucracy, a Pentagon of healthcare. I've dealt with the mechanics of management for decades so this isn't an armchair practioner speaking.
But assuming that it eventually is passed, a government program will still increase in costs because that's the nature of progress. Technology costs if it means improvement. So we could decide that this is the perpetual state of care with very occasional changes and more gradual increased. The number of practitioners will decrease through attrition. The system will be less available while being more accessable.
Then there's the old way to what we had. Unacceptable at so many levels.
In fact I argue that there is no possible satisfactory approach at the moment, but there can be and maybe someone like AOC can understand if she has an opportunity to be educated.
There are answers but work needs to be done as a "system" assembled of broken parts our medical infrastructure is the last thing to happen.
I'll get into that later. We can have better, but it requires outside of the box, non-faith based solutions which means apolitical ones, but based on science and technical fixes by those who have expertise.
Oh we remember you hated it. Worried about your jerb in healthcare. Selfish bitch.
Ah, you were the idiot who got everything wrong. Tell us again what happens if you drive people out of care? You were very keen on doing that by your "approach"
What are you talking about? You were worried too many people would need care and you would have to work hard. What did I get wrong exactly?
Waaaaah. Too many people will need care if we let everyone have insurance. Lol. That was your position.You missed everything then. If you haven't sufficient support then the standard of care falls. "Working hard" is a given. That was about 5 percent of what was going on. Things are far more complex but there's not much sense discussing the matter if you know it all so adios.
it isn't 'hard work', it's the chronic under staffing that affects care for everyone. you can not provide good care if you don't have the people to properly take care the patients.You missed everything then. If you haven't sufficient support then the standard of care falls. "Working hard" is a given. That was about 5 percent of what was going on. Things are far more complex but there's not much sense discussing the matter if you know it all so adios.
it isn't 'hard work', it's the chronic under staffing that affects care for everyone. you can not provide good care if you don't have the people to properly take care the patients.
We will go to Medicare for all next. Those who work in the industry won’t like the limits on payments but fuck them. Healthcare is a right not a commodity to get rich with.
it isn't 'hard work', it's the chronic under staffing that affects care for everyone. you can not provide good care if you don't have the people to properly take care the patients.
Everyone should realize this is a district court opinion that is overwhelmingly likely to go nowhere. It’s barely worth discussing.
This is scary because a significant amount of people in the US already have preexisting conditions or will:
Hypertension - 33%
Cancer - 38% (life-time risk)
Diabetes - 9.5%
COPD/Emphysema - 5%
Obesity - 33%
Rheumatoid Arthritis - 3%
Hypothyroid/Hyperthyroid - 12%
Osteoarthritis - 12%
I'd like to see the states take this as an opportunity to build their own health care systems.
The ACA both helped and hurt me. My health care costs more than doubled under the ACA, but the preexisting conditions rule probably kept me from not having coverage at all.