Americans now favor Obamacare 50-35% !!!!

cruztbone

Experimental Member
Joined
May 22, 2004
Posts
1,283
Media
0
Likes
11
Points
258
Age
71
Location
Capitola CA USA
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
No, it IS money for healthcare that was unavailable BEFORE health care reform. It is more proof that Fox and friends cant lie their way past the American people all the time. Mandatory health insurance is the ONLY way everyone can be covered if they dont have a job, have a preexisting condition or have no other health care resource. Finally, the message is getting through to Americans. As to the health care industry, they fought this, and continue to fight it. They still dont support it. In California, our attorney general, Jerry Brown , continues the battle against the insurance companies who want to raise rates. And he is winning!
We may very well have a public option in the next 4 years. But it will depend on election results and how well the insurance companies comply with the new rules.
It remains further proof, however, that Obama IS keeping his promises and is changing America for the better, whether the GOP likes it or not.
 

MercyfulFate

Experimental Member
Joined
May 13, 2009
Posts
1,177
Media
23
Likes
21
Points
123
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
No, it IS money for healthcare that was unavailable BEFORE health care reform. It is more proof that Fox and friends cant lie their way past the American people all the time. Mandatory health insurance is the ONLY way everyone can be covered if they dont have a job, have a preexisting condition or have no other health care resource. Finally, the message is getting through to Americans. As to the health care industry, they fought this, and continue to fight it. They still dont support it. In California, our attorney general, Jerry Brown , continues the battle against the insurance companies who want to raise rates. And he is winning!
We may very well have a public option in the next 4 years. But it will depend on election results and how well the insurance companies comply with the new rules.
It remains further proof, however, that Obama IS keeping his promises and is changing America for the better, whether the GOP likes it or not.

The thing people don't get about mandatory insurance is that it was the HMO's that forced it in. It wasn't for the benefit of the people, it was for them. Obama and others didn't want it but they had no choice.
 

justasimpleguy

Legendary Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2009
Posts
444
Media
37
Likes
1,218
Points
348
Location
Alabama (United States)
Sexuality
99% Straight, 1% Gay
Gender
Male
That there is even a "health insurance industry" in this country means we are some fucking barbarians. Who would want to make money by charging people shitloads of money for crappy coverage and then dropping them when they get sick? I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.
 

B_Anchor_Baby

Just Browsing
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Posts
55
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
41
That there is even a "health insurance industry" in this country means we are some fucking barbarians. Who would want to make money by charging people shitloads of money for crappy coverage and then dropping them when they get sick? I wouldn't be able to sleep at night.

My health insurance isn't like that. I'm very satisfied with my insurance. They cover more than what I believe is their share.
 

Bbucko

Cherished Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Posts
7,232
Media
8
Likes
326
Points
208
Location
Sunny SoFla
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male

I'm guessing that you are being sarcastic: Pew Research Center

I read your link to the Missouri story; relevant to your assertion that...

The Pew Research Institute found the exact opposite results. 50% disapproval, 35% approval.

...the article you posted actually reads:

A Kaiser Family Foundation poll found approval grew to 50 percent while disapproval shrunk to 35 percent in July. A Pew Research Center poll showed the opposite, with approval falling to 35 percent and disapproval rising to 47 percent.
There was no link either to the assertions made about the KFF poll nor the Pew poll in the MO Dispatch article, so I clicked the link to the Pew Research Center. There was nothing about health care reform on its front page, so I did a site search. I found this story on the second page (HCR is half-way down the linked article):

Almost four months after the passage of major health care legislation, the law remains unpopular with the public. Nearly half of Americans (47%) disapprove of the health care law while just 35% approve of the measure. An overwhelming proportion of opponents of health care legislation – 37% of the public overall – favor repealing the legislation as soon as possible. Just 7% say they want to let the law stand and see how it works.
It goes on to say:

While whites disapprove of the law by nearly two-to-one (55% to 29%), non-whites approve of the measure by roughly the same margin (52% to 28%). There also continues to be a wide partisan divide in opinions about health care legislation: Republicans disapprove of the law by about eight-to-one (82% to 10%) and fully 69% favor its repeal. Democrats approve of the legislation, but by a less lopsided margin (65% to 17%), and 12% say it should be repealed. Just 30% of independents approve of the law, while 52% disapprove; 37% of independents say the law should be repealed as soon as possible.
There's a chart next to the paragraph quoted above headlined "Republicans Overwhelmingly Favor Repeal of Health Care Legislation". The only mention of democrats and Independents occurs at the bottom, which shows tha democrats approve the bill by 65%, disapprove by 17" and don't know by 18% (with 12% favoring repeal). Other political affiliations show, not surprisingly, that both Republicans and Independents disapprove, with 69% of Republicans and 37% of Independents favoring repeal.

Under Pew's "about the center" page, it states...

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press is an independent, non-partisan public opinion research organization that studies attitudes toward politics, the press and public policy issues. In this role it serves as a valuable information resource for political leaders, journalists, scholars and citizens.
...though in light of the lack of information regarding how Democrats view the plan, and especially why there is both support and opposition, it makes me wonder. Rasmussen, which is widely viewed as so skewed conservative/Republican as to be discounted as a legitimate source for information, describes themselves as:


“If it’s in the news, it’s in our polls” is more than our slogan. It’s how we do business. Our polling ideas are generated at a morning news meeting and pulled from the headlines of the day. Rasmussen Reports highly values its independence and credibility and cannot be hired to conduct a poll for anyone.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,784
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
People always tend to fear the unknown. The main thing with this plan is to look at who or whom will lose money if it is in fact implemented. One of the provisions is that there will be no more denial of benefits for pre-existing conditions. Obviously insurance is to insure against risk. They want to only insure healthy people and this is why in spite of all of their complaints that their profits have soared. Pharmaceutical giants fear it because it may bring about an examination of their policies and the out and out fraud that is rife within their industry. Always remember that if you are a pharmaceutical giant that there is no profit in a "cure" we want to have a "chronic but manageable" condition which will require a lifetime of expensive medications to extract the most profit. Again a carefully audited system will begin to uncover this behavior. If we are lucky it will be brought out into the open where everyone can see it for the parasite it is.

There are a number of things I want to see in this and I am hopeful that over time this will happen.

Pharmaceutical manufacturers in the United States manufacture drugs for a world wide market. Drugs manufactured in South Carolina or Georgia are sold in Mexico, Europe, Canada, South America, Africa and the Asia. The packaging and language of the packaging changes depending on the destination of the batch. However the price schedules under which these drugs are sold worldwide vary on both a wholesale and retail level. I have relatives who retired from this business and I know this to be the truth. Some American companies are now importing drugs from manufacturers in India and other third world Countries because it costs less to make them in these locations. They don't tell you because there is no law in place that says that they have to tell you where a drug was manufactured. Again, good or bad under audits in a good national health care system this will or would be uncovered and exposed.

The United States as of right now remains the only world wide health care system with few checks and balances in place.

Eventually and I would give an estimate of about 10 years we will probably springboard this into a single payer nationalized health care system. It will happen in stages and repeated audits of greedy and crooked private corporations placing outrageous profits to shareholders over patient care will over time expose this private system as a failure.

I am for private enterprise unless private enterprise proves that it is operating outside the "public interest", and this has been the case for decades.

Obama's health care plan is horrifically flawed. Democrats needed to get an alterable framework passed and conservatives wanted to deliberately sabotage this framework to turn people against universal health care it is that simple.

Right now we as a family are watching this "scamming" first hand. We are dealing with cancer of the tongue in our 23 year old. Cost of "cat scan" with a total time in the scanner of less than 20 minutes was $3,500.00. Pet scan with contrast total time in the scanner again less than 15 minutes $3,800.00. We have not even done anything about the cancer yet and we and the insurance company are already in this $7,300 and counting.

In 2001 I watched an HMO deny care entirely to my then 80 year old Mother and this resulted in her death. After a heart attack they refused to pay for CCU, they instead sent her to a convalescent home in horrific shape where she was not properly regulated on medication resulting in her death from that attack one week later. It was horrific abuse and was a direct cause of death.

Remember there are different sets of rules here. If your Mother has a heart attack and dies in your home the Coroners Office will investigate YOU for wrong doing in that death. If an Insurance or Health Care provider denies care nobody even takes a second look at it unless the denial of care is so blatant that it is offensive. Then they usually place a dollar value on the life that they knowingly and willingly took and have you as the "injured and bereaved" sign a non-disclosure statement absolving them of any wrong doing. After they pay off the people to shut them up with regards to the "truth" they simply consider these pay outs for negligent care a "cost of doing business" and pass them along to others paying insurance premiums.

If you really want to be insulted look at the salaries of the Board of Directors of these Insurance and Health Care Corporations.

Though it is unrelated to medicine, just watch what the "severance package" ends up looking like for the outgoing head of BP. I think it disgusting that Government should ever have to interfere in private industry. Yet, the whole mess has become so "one sided" that we have no choice. As disgusting as it is and I hate every moment of it, there is zero ways to reign this back in without Government participation and or regulation.

The "mandatory insurance" part is an absolute "joke". Those authoring the bill knew it would not fly from the beginning. The reason that this was included was to "quiet down" the insurance carriers who are all sitting like the greedy vulchers they are and making them think that they are going to get some kind of "gift" in that huge customer base.

This will be the turning point in and of itself as investigations for price gouging begin to take place that not only revives the public option but in fact may simply move the entire nation over to "medicare" which is already in place. We have the ability to do this right now and to make it work. Medicare is "broke" because of mismanagement of funds by Dems and Conservatives alike. If it is the singular national health care system and even the U.S. Military and all of your Senators and Congressmen are covered under it as well, you can then bet that then they will start caring.

I stand on one premise. If you want Universal Health Care to work you get rid of all of the "cushy" health care plans currently offered to ALL of your Politicians and place THEM and their families under the plan. I can guarantee you that it will then work just beautifully!

Both excellent observations.

Your personal experience with the HMO is something going on every day and it's happening to people without coverage and for those paying for coverage as well.

If you've ever gone to your doctor with health concerns and came away wondering why they didn't order this or that procedure or test, the answer is because what they do and don't do is almost always influenced by what your insurance will and won't cover. You can bet your life it (and in fact, you do).