General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLiving on the streets because of medical bankrupcy
Article about the after-affects of health issues - Bankrupcy and staggering life changes because of insurance problems
"Bankruptcy can also make it difficult to find employment given that many employers will disqualify a candidate with a bankruptcy filing found from a background check.
According to a study published in February 2019, about 530,000 bankruptcies filed annually are because of debt accrued due to a medical illness. The study found that even the Obama administrations landmark Affordable Care Act (known as Obamacare) has failed to change the proportion of bankruptcies caused by medical debts, with poor health insurance cited as one of the main culprits.
Republicans and Democrats are currently at loggerheads over Trump administration plans to further weaken Obamacare by" making it easier for states to opt out of certain requirements and offer cheaper plans that could further exacerbate the situation.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/14/health-insurance-medical-bankruptcy-debt?ref=hvper.com&utm_source=hvper.com&utm_medium=website
EmInColorado
(31 posts)brooklynite
(94,792 posts)EmInColorado
(31 posts)Anything less will allow the bleeding to continue.
We tried the other ways. It's time to do what's proven to work. No more reinventing the wheel.
Health insurance companies shouldn't exist. They serve no purpose other than to profit off the death and pain of others. They're absolutely needless.
brooklynite
(94,792 posts)Public option gets more people to vote Democratic. Voting for Sanders risks both the White House and the House of Representatives (which we won with moderate suburban candidates)
FWIW - Sanders can't seem to get Democrats to vote for him, much less Independents and moderate Republicans.
EmInColorado
(31 posts)Ya we're not going to agree here at all.
You seem to dislike Bernie. Unsure why. And I don't believe a second anything you've said here especially about Bernie. How do you oppose someone who's running & whose policies do the most to help people? I don't understand it.
brooklynite
(94,792 posts)"Get people to vote" is a generic answer. People tried to "get people to vote" in 1972, 1984, 1988.....
EmInColorado
(31 posts)Sorry but I don't any system which doesn't combat our healthcare crisis. There's only 1 and it's M4A.
It's a moral issue and that figure is disgusting.
Get out the vote is 100% the answer. You don't win elections otherwise. I think we can agree on that.
brooklynite
(94,792 posts)I'm not convinced (based on 40 years of political experience) that there are enough pro-Bernie votes to get out. Adding a Public Option improves the situation and moves us closer to universal coverage.
EmInColorado
(31 posts)And there are enough Bernie voters to win. In fact, Bernie just announced that he has 4 million individual donors. More than anybody else by miles and the fastest to reach that mark than any other candidate in history. All evidence points to you being wrong.
A public option allows for people to still pay a ton out of pocket and exploitation from insurance companies to happen. Insurance companies literally have no reason to exist. We need Medicare For All, not "Mediocre For All". It's time to stop people dying.
brooklynite
(94,792 posts)EmInColorado
(31 posts)brooklynite
(94,792 posts)I was at some of his early events; his crowds weren't that big in the months leading up to Iowa.
I was also at some of Bernie's events in in 2015. His crowds didn't represent a groundswell of voters.
MrsCoffee
(5,803 posts)And all the speculation over Trumps little medical stop this weekend surely proves it
Bernie is not the first person to support M4A, nor is he the only candidate who supports M4A.
By the way, he had that many donors in 2016 and was thoroughly defeated. All evidence points to you being wrong.
EmInColorado
(31 posts)And I stand by what I said.
Nobody else besides Warren supports M4A and she just waffled. Bernie wrote the damn bill.
And I won't get into 2016 because we'll have very different POV's on it.
area51
(11,929 posts)moondust
(20,017 posts)Seems to me another potential problem could be doctors refusing to accept public option patients. As it is now I think some practices refuse to accept Medicare patients. The continued profit motive could incentivize finding any number of ways to deny public option patients.
And of course if Americans were stupid enough to elect a lot of Republicans again they could keep trying to repeal an "add-on" like a public option just as they've done with the ACA. It would be much more difficult and probably unrealistic to "repeal" a system that had undergone a more significant makeover such as M4A.
Doremus
(7,261 posts)One of the problems with incrementalism is with each tiny step forward, the pukes take us back 10 more.
Settling for incrementalism AGAIN is idiocy.
jayfish
(10,039 posts)to prohibit credit checks for anything other than the extension of credit.
EmInColorado
(31 posts)from not having healthcare over the last 7 decades.
The figures are absolutely staggering 35,000+ still dying since the ACA was made law. In that 8 years alone. That's a total of 385,000 dead from not having healthcare just since 2008. Now when you do the figures pre-ACA from the last several decades, it becomes millions.
I don't understand how people oppose M4A. I simply don't. It's disgusting.
ismnotwasm
(42,020 posts)Im wary of how it will be implemented. I want the ACA expanded and a public option added
Are there enough providers? Are there enough nurses? Are there enough hospitals? Clinics? who will administer M4A, will it be all government or contracted out? How are the contracts awarded? Will we use the same quality assurance we are using now? The same reimbursement for hospitals and providers? What is the plan to rein in the pharmaceutical companies? Do we eliminate existing for profit hospitals?
Hospitals and providers are under reimbursed by Medicare.
Any M4A or universal healthcare plan that doesnt address the need for people to actually administer healthcare with proper infrastructure planning is disgusting.
Ive yet to see one single plan.
The bulk of medical costs go to the elderly, by the way. Nothing wrong with this, its worth noting however because Boomers are aging out.
EmInColorado
(31 posts)See above in the thread with the link as to why.
Insurance companies don't need to exist. They serve absolutely no purpose. They are a needless middle man.