Does anyone have any insight about how the Supreme Court
will decide the health care reform act?
While listening to NPR, I got the impression that the reporters think that it will be struck down.
But from what I read here, from so many of you wonderful people who share so much of your insights and knowledge with us, I just wonder if they may let it stand.
So, if anyone has anything they wish to share, I would love to read and reflect on it.
Thanks.
radhika
(1,008 posts)It's called Horary, meaning 'of the hour'. Essentially, a chart is cast for the moment a question is posed to the astrologer. With that in mind, I cast a chart for the moment I read your question, as I previously worked as an astrologer. My horary techniques are rusty, but I'm giving it a shot.
The opposing side (e.g, Republicans) are in a stronger position than the defenders (e.g., Obamacare). But there is not complete animosity to the entire bill; some parts will prevail. The part most likely to be rejected is the Mandate, which will weaken the cost basis very much (Moon opposes Pluto). It will be treated as a tax. It will be a close vote (5/4) but the defect will not result in completely throwing it out (Republican's 9th).
Both sides will be frustrated by the final ruling, as neither gets their heart's desire (5th house). Messaging will be vile for both, especially in areas that deal with children and students.
Drama ensues.
Tumbulu
(6,437 posts)if the mandate is dropped can the bill go forward do you think?
Kookaburra
(2,649 posts)what I'm picking up intuitively is this:
This health care bill was a bust from the moment it was signed. It wasn't what Obama wanted, nor was it anywhere near what the progressives wanted. By the time it was signed it had been watered down to the point of being very little help to those who need it the most. If parts of it are struck down, then it sets the stage for implementing Medicare for all (or some other type of single-payer coverage).
Republicans are to the point now that they no longer care to hide their nefarious intentions. It's all coming out into the open, so it wouldn't surprise me a bit if this were stuck down. But that's a good thing in the long run, and on some level I can't help believing that this is what Obama intended all along.
Tumbulu
(6,437 posts)I wish that I could believe that medicare for all was on the way. In the meantime, the unregulated health insurance industry getting it's way really saddens me.
radhika
(1,008 posts)It was conceived in toxicity and birthed with significant disabilities. I personally, think it needs to go off into the sunset.
kimmerspixelated
(8,423 posts)Hard to improve on your thoughts, there... Touche'!
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)in the short run it seems to matter. But I think the current health care system as a whole is too broken to be fixed within the system.
Forcing health care insurance to insure and forcing the uninsured to buy insurance will not fix what is fundamentally wrong with US health care. It shifts some burdens around, but the foundation is still crumbling.
It reminds me of the current, shod versus barefoot trim versus no treatment for founder in horses. A different set of horses dies or survives with chronic disease with one type of treatment versus the others. But statistically the number of horses that die or survive with chronic disease remains the same. The amount of suffering varies by individual circumstances. And prevention through knowledge and appropriate care remains the only real cure.
Tumbulu
(6,437 posts)required by private investors that make the health care costs so high?
I know doctors making less than minimum wage (when they add up all the time it actually takes to fill out all the paperwork when they get home after seeing patients all day) , nurses in a similar boats...it seems that the people who actually are the health care providers are exploited by the fact that they care and want to help.....
I have read your posts here and in some other groups and from them I have learned something about what the lab workers deal with being overworked and underpaid.
If hospitals and clinics were publicly owned would it be better? Or is this something more massive.....
My take is that the inferior food produced by profit driven corporations have provided a staple diet that is rich in cheap calories and poor in nutrient content and vitality. This diet produces people who are prone to all these ailments for which there really are no good fixes. That all the medicines in the world cannot cure.....and so it is a matter of time before their bodies succumb to one of the many chronic illnesses, not if, but when.....and then it becomes the responsibility of the health care system to fix the problem when the problem was created by the agricultural system......and has to be solved by the agricultural system...and these two worlds are not connected.
It comes back to really healthy food and healthy habits for everyone, not just the few in the know (ie those of us who have worked in ag and see what is behind the curtain).
radhika
(1,008 posts)The entire business model that applies to late-stage capitalist healthcare will never advance the needs of the people. The equity holders NEVER do profit (in their minds) by doing more for more people. All subsequent business decisions flow from that premise. The premiums, the marketing plans, the lobbying, the campaign donations, the strategies - down to the the types of CEOs. executives and medical directors they hire.
The idea that preventive care $$ save acute care $$ downstream is not compelling to corporatists. Why? Because Americans largely get their health plan thru an employer - and that employer decides which plans and services they will offer the employees. Every year or so, the employers re-price competing plans and often change for a cheaper/better deal. So the NEW health plan derives benefits from the PRIOR health plan's preventive care $$. Add also the fact that employees come and go, adding further to continuity problems.
I would love to see American healthcare removed from the backs of employers and returned to the individual human being. I would like to see it handled as a non-profit enterprise. Or at least under strict regulations and pricing constraints. But Reptiles Rule at this point in the USA. So don't hold you breath.
Your comments about the food supply are fine - but that industry has it's own Reptiles too.
(btw: I worked in healthcare IT for many years, and participated in several health plan merger consolidations. I also have a Masters in Public Health).
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)Our lifestyles are unhealthy
Our diets are unhealthy
We are immersed in toxins and pollution
Expectations are unrealistic. Most of the people in the ER are NOT emergencies. And it's not necessarily because they lack insurance. It's because they don't know the difference between a 24-hour stomach bug and serious illness, or because they don't understand the difference between an ER and a 24-hour walk-in clinic. It's so bad that some hospitals are starting to charge $100 up front for non-emergencies that show up in the ER, so people will make the choice to go to the walk-in clinic.
The profit model wastes resources
The fear wastes resources.
The nonprofit model is where I work. It still wastes resources.
Focus on acute care and management of chronic diseases instead of prevention wastes resources -- this is a big one when they look at US model versus other models.
Elder care wastes huge resources. Huge $$ spent to maintain very low quality of life. Dying 90 year olds being repeatedly transfused so they can hang on a few more days or weeks is insane.
This last is the most sensitive part. People need to grow up, enact living wills or something. We're born, we live and sooner or later we die. Deal with it.
And, if all that is not bad enough, sooner or later (and it's more likely to be sooner than not) the antibiotic magic bullet will be gone. That alone is going to change everything...and in a big way.
BlueIris
(29,135 posts)Don't want to "jinx" that result, if you will.
Let's just say...I think many people here and in MSM will be surprised.
AC_Mem
(1,979 posts)My gut says it will stand, but i'm going to do a card reading on it when I get home - as I really want it to survive. Baby steps forward are still steps forward. We must not let the GOP take us backward!
Taking away guarantees for pre-existing conditions, allowing those up to 26 who live at home or are in college to be covered on their parents policies, all this and more is GOOD stuff. I don't know why people are so freaked out about the mandate, it was debated, it was voted on and it passed as law.
The amount of money it will cost companies to UNDO new policies set in place over the past two years if the GOP gets its way and the law is stricken will be sickening.
Personally, I'm for healthcare as other countries have it such as Canada, France - it is built into their taxes and it is not something that the people have to worry about becoming bankrupt over. What is WRONG with the United States??? My God, it makes me want to weep.
Annette
noel711
(2,185 posts)My gut instinct...burbles back and forth:
either it will stand.. I know, Scalia and his brood of vipers
were obnoxiously questioning the most insane and insipid details...
But part of me says they know they are strolling the edge of judicial neutrality
based on the "Citizens United' blather...
and thus the nasty dialog was simply playing 'devil's advocate'
and the return decision will be to uphold,
if only for their own sake.
IF it gets struck down (my gut says)- this act will
disembowel the government, particularly the Obama administration,
and there will be rioting in the streets.
Just look at how the Trayvon Martin issue has
disrupted civil discourse.
And this will be the tipping point...
BTW, been wearing a lots of hoodies lately...
Cleita
(75,480 posts)the mandate in. By removing it, it will screw the health insurance companies, who will only get sick people on the exchange. The insurance companies will make sure it doesn't happen.