General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhat people REALLY mean when they say "wait times will increase" under Obamacare
Of all the arguments made against universal health care arguments, the one that bothers me the most is "wait times will increase."
What people are really saying there is this:
"My health insurance gives me easy access to a doctor that other people don't have. If those people get access to affordable care, they might try to make an appointment to see my doctor and I have a problem with that. Screw the health of other people, I want my appointments sooner, even if other people are more sick than I am."
It's a fundamentally selfish talking point.
TheMastersNemesis
(10,602 posts)nykym
(3,063 posts)and they said come right in!
sinkingfeeling
(51,438 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)gopiscrap
(23,726 posts)and never really had any significant wait times.
alc
(1,151 posts)The media will be finding all sorts of people who can't get a doctor's appointment and who have to wait weeks or months for surgery. I guarantee you the republicans will find someone who dies before they get surgery and puts their family on TV 24/7 for a few days.
The real problem is that the ACA does NOT give people equal access to doctors - only to ACA policies. Different policies have access to different hospitals/doctors. And some doctors have already said they will start operating on cash rather than insurance. If they have success, there's likely to be more of that happening and we'll be back to where "the masses don't have access to my doctor".
I know of one doctor where the "preferred-customer waiting list" (those who pay $3000/year upfront) is shorter than the wait list for anyone else. He hopes to not have to see anyone other than "preferred customers". For that $3000 you get a free checkup but insurance pays full price for everything else (or you pay cash. the $3000 isn't some type of pre-payment - he keeps it in addition to charging for services).
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)My primary doctor went that route, and I told him where he could stick his $1600 per year. $1600 for an annual physical, for which my insurance has a $0 copay. Otherwise, $1600 for the privelidge of remaining his patient. Yeah, right.
I am quite happy with my new primary doctor.
ck4829
(35,039 posts)Their argument in a nutshell.
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)I'm not saying Obamacare is a bad thing, but most of the support I read is along the lines of,
"Obamacare is good because I got health insurance for $135/month"
"Woman opposed Obamacare until she discovered exchange offered policy for less money."
"Obamacare is good because I can finally get insurance."
Opposition seems to be much the same,
"Obamacare is bad because the policy I liked was cancelled."
ret5hd
(20,483 posts)JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)Why do people keep putting the worst possible interpretation on things that are said?
Obama care is a good thing for dozens of reasons. There's nothing wrong with wanting insurance, but making Obamacare about one's self, making it about the personal benefit that accrues to "me, me, me," is selfish.
Saying "Obamacare is good because it provides insurance for millions of people, one of whom is me" would be laudable. Saying "Obamacare is good because it provides insurance for me" is selfush. Do you see the difference?
ret5hd
(20,483 posts)I want shelter: not selfish
I want security: not selfish
I want my fill of food and you can have the leftovers: selfish
I want warm dry and sanitary shelter and you can go to the homeless shelter dorm or cardboard box: selfish
I want security and you can fend for yourself: selfish
Do you see the difference? The mere fact that a person thinks of what they personally need does not indicate selfishness.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"The mere fact that a person thinks of what they personally need does not indicate selfishness..."
Unless of course, it denies that same need, whether directly or indirectly to someone else.
JayhawkSD
(3,163 posts)Let's see if one more try will do it.
"I want shelter: not selfish" Absolutely, but "this legislation is good because it provides me shelter" is selfish.
"I want security: not selfish" Absolutely, but "this legislation is good because it provides me security" is selfish.
"I want my fill of food and you can have the leftovers: selfish" Yes, but what has that got to do with the discussion? It might if anyone was claiming that "I have insurance so the ACA should not have been passed," but that has never been part of this discussion.
"I want warm dry and sanitary shelter and you can go to the homeless shelter dorm or cardboard box: selfish" Again, no one in this discussion is claiming the anyone should go without insurance.
"I want security and you can fend for yourself: selfish" And for the third time, no one is arguing against the ACA.
Zambero
(8,962 posts)As a fine upstanding X-tian, I'm entitled to immediate access to my physician. Why don't these wretched upstart patients wanting to schedule time to see my doctor just stay home and die!
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Response to LuckyTheDog (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
One_Life_To_Give
(6,036 posts)At the Student Clinic way back when. They didn't really take appt's and you could be waiting over an hour to be seen. We were students so we put up with it. These days I find that it depends alot on where you go. The wife's Dr is at what I call the Cattle medical center. Patients are treated like it's a stockyard with long wait times. Maybe you can book an appt. with your primary care 6-10 mo's in advance and hope it isn't cancelled. A PA might be seen within several days if it's more urgent. And Emergency might only be backed up for a few hours. Yet for my own Primary Care two days would be a long time for an urgent case. More importantly to me I can schedule appt's middle of day with minimal time away from the office to attend to whatever is needed. No unpredictable wait times etc.
The first couple months it might be hectic with an influx of patients who have been holding off tests and/or treatment. But in the end the system should adjust and bring times to normal. If people stopped patronizing places that treat them like livestock then we might get more patient oriented care everywhere.
OwnedByCats
(805 posts)Seeing my doctor was no problem, I never really had to wait more than a day, and that's if I missed the morning walk in hours, which wasn't very often. He always returned my phone calls within 2 hours and he did house calls! I cannot get that kind of service here, at least in my neck of the woods. I would be damn lucky if my doctor bothers to call me back at all! Then when she does it's rarely the same day. And house calls, NEVER in a million trillion years! I had to see a neurologist there and here .... guess where I had to wait the longest? You guessed it, here! Over there it was 2 months, here it was 4, and that was LONG before the ACA even got started. Wait times I'm sure will increase, but hopefully that's only temporary. The one thing everybody in England told me wait times were the longest was hip replacements. Yeah they might have to wait 6 months, but they will get it done and not owe anything outside their national insurance tax and small copays for scripts, and that's a bargain compared to what insurance companies charge here, even the cheaper rates on the exchange. Oh I did have to wait 2 months to have my very painful impacted tooth removed by an oral surgeon as my dentist would not touch it. However, they kept me pain free in the meantime by not depriving me of good pain killers. Over here it would be easier to buy the damn things on the street than get a script from your doctor - well, at least where I live.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)There is no reason they should not expand staff and facilities accordingly. More patients still means more fractions of cash to the profit side.