U.S. health bill "thingie" passed -- What is it exactly?

[b0mbtrack]

Hey guys, I'm just wondering about something and maybe someone can help me.  I don't have time to go through all the posts (and would probably get annoyed if I did) but if it is there maybe someone can point it out.  I have my own health care and have been paying monthly for it for years without a problem.  Since they passed this bill is there any benefit for me having this healthcare or would I get the same kind of care as everyone else now?  Can someone tell me the benefits of paying for this healthcare now or is there none?

[gyzzzmo]

Hey guys, I'm just wondering about something and maybe someone can help me.  I don't have time to go through all the posts (and would probably get annoyed if I did) but if it is there maybe someone can point it out.  I have my own health care and have been paying monthly for it for years without a problem.  Since they passed this bill is there any benefit for me having this healthcare or would I get the same kind of care as everyone else now?  Can someone tell me the benefits of paying for this healthcare now or is there none?

That law mainly makes a difference for the lower-wealthy and a part of the mid-class since they can get a health-insurance now.
If things change for the people who are already paying, nobody can tell. Maybe waiting lists will get abit longer, maybe not, time will learn.

[sashaco]

How many progressive folks in 2003 were saying they'd leave the country if Bush were re-elected? 
I briefly worked among the grossly wealthy of Long Island (to my shame, but I needed to pay off college loans)  and constantly heard folks claiming they were leaving the state because of its socialist governor.  Physicians who claim they will leave the profession are spouting similar silliness.  Where would they go in this economy anyway?
Moving people into the health care system will very probably save the system money, as at the moment these people are treated, by law, when their conditions become life-threatening, by far the most costly time to provide care.   Thousands die every year anyway because of lack of coverage.
We also know that fee-for-service as it stands in the U.S. results in huge numbers of unneccessary procedures, many of them defensive, no doubt, but many of which could be eliminated by sensible National protocols.  There's plenty of slack in the system that needs to be filled before "death panel" rationing appears! This bill does nothing about these problems, but it's at least a step in that direction.
Rachfan, Place yourself for a moment behind a Rawlsian veil of ignorance, and ask yourself  whether you'ld rather be born into a country where a small percentage of your taxes would cover your health-care needs, like Canada, or into a country where, for a family of four at the MEDIAN income, 25% of your earnings after tax are neccessary to pay for decent private health insurance?  Remember, the company you're buying that insurance from may do its best to avoid paying for anything if you do get sick.
The claim that inheritance taxes were stealing family farms was never supported by one single example, but over 100,000 family homes are lost every year to bankruptcies brought on by inadequate health insurance.
I had good health insurance at a recent job, except that it, quite reasonably, refused to pay for care delivered in the U.S., where costs are ludicrously high.  We went to the States for a six week vacation, and, for $2200, (6% of my income) bought supplemental insurance.  My son got a minor case of pneumonia and spent a night in hospital.  Two years later, after endless battles with the insurance company, we have recouped 80% of the $3200, yes that's right, that one night cost.
The U.S. system is riddled with perverse incentives to which the private insurance system is a major contributor.  If this bill is only the first step in a new direction, bring on the next step say I.
Sasha Cooke