I'm Rory. Been a libertarian since the mid 80's when my college economics teacher turned me on to it. I've spent most of my life trying to ignore politics, but Obamas antics got me fired up. I signed the FSP moving list about a year ago (found out about from Stossel - Stossel for president!!) but thought I would not be able to move for years. I am an optometrist and Obamacare has me fuming and ready to quit the medical field - I will not participate in a government takeover of healthcare. I am more serious about moving know - within a year to a year and half I hope. I am actively looking for a new career as well.
I am here to connect with people who think along the same lines as myself, and maybe make some connections. I want to know what areas of NH have larger porcupine populations. I am buddhist and would like to live in an area where I can easily connect with both free-staters and a sangha members.
I found the shire from FTL radio.
I may be interested in living in commune type of enviroment if the people are right - anyone know of such things in the area?
Welcome. Manchester, Nashua, Seacoast, Keene, Grafton have good amounts of free staters.
There are Buddhists in Keene: http://www.mindfulness.us/
Welcome!
[quote author=roryn3kids link=topic=6578.msg61000#msg61000 date=1342741770]
I am an optometrist and Obamacare has me fuming and ready to quit the medical field - I will not participate in a government takeover of healthcare.
[/quote]
As I understand the terms, optometry isn't technically "medical", but suffers under the same licensing and rent-seeking exclusion of competition.
150 years ago, itinerant peddlers wandered the plains with "eyeglass kits", where did almost exactly what modern optometrists do: "Can you see it better with…this? Or…this?"
There's absolutely nothing wrong with that; it's a valuable service. At almost any major big box store in American, there are reading glass displays where you can try, compare, pick, and buy the reading prescription that fits you best, all without any help from even a minimum wage store clerk, much less a licensed professional.
If a person helped you through that process, they'd be charged and fined.
Actually the last 20 or 30 years has seen major expansions in our scope of practice. In many states they are termed Optometric Physicians and we are held to the same standards as physicians. We did evolve out of jewelry shops and the old "refracting optician" still hangs over our heads. And our services will be hijacked by the government as much as any other healthcare provider will via obamacare. And yes licensure requirements are designed to protect the practitioner, not the public, our system is pretty sad.
I'm sure I'll catch flack for this…but how are healthcare providers hijacked by "ObamaCare"?
I mean I understand the objections to the individual mandate and that people shouldn't be forced to purchase a product under penalty of taxation/law.
I have a chronic, disabling medical condition and in the countless appointments I have had since the ACA was signed into law all my physicians comments about the law are about how now their patients will be able to have procedures (colonoscopies, EGDs) at a much lower cost and how that will increase compliance and disease surveillance. One doctor even told me how he is getting grants to pay off his student loan debt because of it.
Doesn't the law really only focus on "medical care" and not optometry? I could see how it would affect an Ophthalmologist, who is Medical Doctor and therefore engaged in the practice of medicine, but how does it affect an optometrist?
I realize that there is A LOT of right-wing propaganda against the law (and like I said I agree with the fact that people should not be forced to purchase a product under penalty of tax/law) but how exactly does it "hijack" healthcare providers?
Does making it illegal for an insurance company to kick a kid with cancer off his parent's insurance hijack healthcare providers?
Does making it illegal for an insurance company to charge women more simply for being born with a vagina hijack healthcare providers?
Does making it illegal for a monopolistic health insurance company to continuously raise rates, lower benefits and "earn" record profits at the expense of people's lives hijack healthcare providers?
and I, myself work in the healthcare field. I have worked in pharmacy, pharmacy management for an insurance company and as a practice manager in a physicians office. We were never hijacked…
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
how that will increase compliance[/quote]
And that phrase doesn't scare you?
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]One doctor even told me how he is getting grants to pay off his student loan debt because of it.[/quote]
And why should I be paying your doctor's students loans off? I'm still trying to pay MINE off!
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
Does making it illegal for an insurance company to kick a kid with cancer off his parent's insurance hijack healthcare providers?[/quote]
Yes
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
Does making it illegal for an insurance company to charge women more simply for being born with a vagina hijack healthcare providers?[/quote]
Yes
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
Does making it illegal for a monopolistic health insurance company to continuously raise rates, lower benefits and "earn" record profits at the expense of people's lives hijack healthcare providers?[/quote]
Yes. It also has had the exact OPPOSITE effect - all of these things are more common now than 5 years ago.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
and I, myself work in the healthcare field. I have worked in pharmacy, pharmacy management for an insurance company and as a practice manager in a physicians office. We were never hijacked…
[/quote]
Really? There were ZERO government regulations requiring you to do some things and not do others?
Doubtful.
-Aahz
[quote author=Aahz link=topic=6578.msg61225#msg61225 date=1344451749]
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
how that will increase compliance[/quote]
And that phrase doesn't scare you?
[/quote]
I was using "compliance" in the medical sense, not saying compliance with the law but compliance with medications and tests that the physician orders. (the degree or extent to which a patient follows or completes a prescribed diagnostic, treatment, or preventive procedure.)
Patient non-compliance is one of the major factors in the worsening of a disease state. (such as failure to take blood pressure medicines leads to long term high blood pressure which leads to strokes)
[quote author=Aahz link=topic=6578.msg61225#msg61225 date=1344451749]
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61224#msg61224 date=1344451318]
Does making it illegal for a monopolistic health insurance company to continuously raise rates, lower benefits and "earn" record profits at the expense of people's lives hijack healthcare providers?[/quote]
Yes. It also has had the exact OPPOSITE effect - all of these things are more common now than 5 years ago.
[/quote]
You really just made my point for me there. The law is only 2.5 years old and is not fully implemented so the fact that these problems have risen in the last 5 years (2.5 before the law was even signed) coupled with the fact that all provisions have not been implemented just shows how needed it was/is.
As far as regulations affecting physicians offices, yes there were government regulation, but they were all in place before the ACA was signed into law. It took me about 15-20 minutes to renew the physician's DEA Controlled Substances License, about 4 pages. It took well over an hour and 40+ pages to renew credentialing with a private insurance company.
Trust me, I know there are faults in the law. Faults that need to be fixed, but the entire law is not bad. The over-whelming majority of American's support each individual component of the law (except the mandate of course) but despise the law as a whole; mainly because of the extensive right-wing propaganda against it, most of which is completely false.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61229#msg61229 date=1344481396]
Patient non-compliance is one of the major factors in the worsening of a disease state. (such as failure to take blood pressure medicines leads to long term high blood pressure which leads to strokes) [/quote]
And how, exactly is any law going to help with this compliance? Jail if you don't take your blood pressure meds?
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61229#msg61229 date=1344481396]The law is only 2.5 years old and is not fully implemented so the fact that these problems have risen in the last 5 years (2.5 before the law was even signed) coupled with the fact that all provisions have not been implemented just shows how needed it was/is.[/quote]
First off, I just picked a number at random. I have no idea how long this law has been around as I ignore most such things.
Second, if you're saying the law's been in effect for 2.5 years, and I KNOW these problems have gotten worse in that time, then what exactly is your argument here? The law has still had the opposite effect. Prices keep going up, options keep going down. Doesn't this law effectively outlaw the cash doctor? Can you point to ANY reduced medical costs since this law went into effect? Because as I've aged and needed the services of a doctor more I've been able to afford them less. Directly as a result of government intervention in the medical field.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61229#msg61229 date=1344481396]As far as regulations affecting physicians offices, yes there were government regulation, but they were all in place before the ACA was signed into law.[/quote]
So, your argument is that this law doesn't hijack medical professionals because they were already hijacked?
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61229#msg61229 date=1344481396]Trust me, I know there are faults in the law. Faults that need to be fixed, but the entire law is not bad.[/quote]
Yes, it is. They all are. Person A forcing Person B to do something against their will is bad. Period.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61229#msg61229 date=1344481396]The over-whelming majority of American's support each individual component of the law
[/quote]
a) Not the ones I know, and
B) the same could have been (and was) said of slavery, not allowing women to vote, Japanese internment, sodomy laws, slaughtering the indians, pretty much every war the US has ever fought… Need I go on?
Popularity doesn't make using force against others "right" it just makes it popular. Simple question: how many people's support do I need to come to your home, throw you into the street and take everything you own including the house itself?
-Aahz
Sorry, please bear with me. I'm not too good at using the quotes.
The law helps with compliance by reducing costs of certain procedures. The example I had originally used was that of a Colonoscopy. Routine colonoscopies are now considered "preventative care" and are covered at 100% under insurance and medicare. There is no copay, deductible or coinsurance. For example in January of this year I had a colonoscopy and an EGD (scope through the mouth and stomach). I did not have a 20% coinsurance on the Colonoscopy nor did my deductible factor in. Many people in the past skipped colonoscopies because of the out-of-pocket cost associated with them (and the nasty ass stuff you have to drink lol). Now that there is a lower out-of-pocket cost, more people will be "compliant" (with the doctor's recommendations) and have the procedure done at the appropriate intervals.
I was not saying the law has been in effect for 2.5 years. It was signed 2.5 years ago but it goes into effect incrementally until January 1, 2014. A lot of the provisions all take effect January 1, 2014.
What I was saying about the majority of American's supporting individual components they were questions like:
1) "Should insurance companies be forbidden from cancelling coverage of children with pre-existing conditions." the majority of people said yes
2) "Should children be able to stay on their parents insurance (while a premium is still collected) while in college (until age 26)."
3) "Should an insurance company be able to charge women a higher premium than men" majority of the people said no
those are the types of examples I was referring to.
I do understand what you mean about popularity not making a law right. A good example is the Texas constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. It was passed with a huge majority, but is not right. My partner and I can not marry because of it.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61238#msg61238 date=1344484535]
The law helps with compliance by reducing costs of certain procedures. [/quote]
Even if everything you said about people's motivations was accurate (which I doubt), the law does not, in any way, reduce the cost of any procedure. Removing a copay doesn't mean that cost simply goes away. It just means that now everyone is being forced to pay for YOUR colonoscopy.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61238#msg61238 date=1344484535]I was not saying the law has been in effect for 2.5 years. It was signed 2.5 years ago but it goes into effect incrementally until January 1, 2014. A lot of the provisions all take effect January 1, 2014. [/quote]
Okay, but it still has been a direct cause of a DRAMATIC increase in the cost of health insurance. Even if insurance costs do drop after January 14th, they're unlikely to drop anywhere near as much as they've increased. Not to mention, why is it okay for everyone who gets sick or injured between now and then to suffer?
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61238#msg61238 date=1344484535]those are the types of examples I was referring to.[/quote]
The specifics don't matter. As soon as you get to the word "forced" it's wrong. Forcing anyone to do anything is wrong. Period. Forcing anyone to not do anything is wrong. Period. The specifics you list may be good things, but forcing them on people is wrong, period. If they are good things someone will do them and attract business away from those who won't.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61238#msg61238 date=1344484535]I do understand what you mean about popularity not making a law right. A good example is the Texas constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage. It was passed with a huge majority, but is not right. My partner and I can not marry because of it.
[/quote]
So the majority opinion only matters when it agrees with yours? You can't have it both ways. If popularity is what matters then you and your partner should likely not only be unmarried but jailed. Actually my guess would be killed in the majority of the world.
The only just or fair law is one that everyone affected agrees upon. And if everyone agrees, there is no need for a law.
-Aahz
I was not saying those motivations encompassed everyone, but those are quite common. I, personally, pay whatever the price (out of pocket) is every year for my colonoscopy because they are vital for management of my disease.
Just within the last week or two the insurance companies issued about $1.1billion in refunds for premiums they had over charged.
And no, I do not believe in a double standard with popularity. The point I was trying to make was that a lot of people that disliked the ACA when it was identified as the ACA or ObamaCare in polls liked individual portions of the ACA in the same polls when they did not know they were part of the ACA.
The rights and privileges of any group, no matter how big or small should be voted on by anyone.
The laws I believe in are ones like don't kill people, don't steal from people, etc… but I also believe that everyone should have access to purchase health insurance.
Oh and I would like to apologize to roryn3kids for taking over his post 
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61246#msg61246 date=1344489591]
Oh and I would like to apologize to roryn3kids for taking over his post
[/quote]
Whoops! Add my apology there as well. I kinda assumed this was your intro thread :-[
-Aahz
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61245#msg61245 date=1344488857]The laws I believe in are ones like don't kill people, don't steal from people, etc…[/quote]
But that's exactly what the ACA does, on both counts - it steals from me if I comply with it, and murders me if I do not. There is no law, anywhere which is not enforced by the threat of death. Every single one of them boils down to, "do this, or you'll be killed." The penalty is always death.
[quote author=CaptainIkarus link=topic=6578.msg61245#msg61245 date=1344488857]but I also believe that everyone should have access to purchase health insurance.[/quote]
The only thing preventing that is the government. If not, then anyone who wanted health insurance would just have to find someone who wants to sell it to him, and he'd be set. But, thanks to the government, only certain privileged companies are permitted to sell health insurance, so we're stuck with whatever they offer.