O. Hatch kept saying 7 out of 10 Americans are happy with their health

insurance on Stephanopolus' show this AM.

Where does he get this figure?

Does anyone know?


thanks
:hi:

7 out of 10 Americans have employer paid health insurance benefits which are not taxed. Everyone else either has no insurance or buys it with dollars that are at least partially taxed if not fully taxed. Lots of reasons to be happy with that - especially if you are one of the 3 out of 10 Americans that is getting fucked.

Being facetious of course.....

Those employed by a large company are rewarded, everyone else is thrown to the dogs.

Why does antitrust keep creeping into this dialog?

this figure.

I have no insurance, and most of the friends that I know who do have insurance are less than "happy" with the plan they have, for many reasons.

Their co-pays, things that are NOT covered, having to get permission for care before procedures, their contributions, the fear that their employer will cut insurance as a 'benefit' not to mention the fear that if they lose their job, the couldn't pay the COBRA costs, if they were even eligible.

How can he spout this talking point, without any back-up or any challenge to produce evidence?

Betcha a lot of them would change their tune real quick if they got cancer, or were diagnosed with schizophrenia, or if their kids had complications due to their birth.

They've used up the death panel meme. This week it'll be something else.

I could believe that.

insurance are any indicator, that figure is still bogus.

He must have said this at least 4-5 times, on the show, and with no explanation, or challenge....??

I'm happy with my insurance, too, but I can still see the problems with the overall system and understand the need for vast changes. Being happy with your own current insurance does not equal being against reform and he's a lying prick to imply that.

"everyone" is pretty much content, and don't want (or shouldn't want) to change anything.

:hi:

without insurance reform. I also have friends and family with health conditions that can't get coverage or pay an arm and a leg for it and the proposed insurance reform would take care of that as well. Of course, I know some people don't have insurance because they choose not to have it and they will need to get covered - why shouldn't they?

That's usually when people become very dissatisfied with their insurance, when they have to use it.

He's sooo reliable and concerned about our health and well being.

and give the other 30 percent an option. What's wrong with that?

and empowers people?

:shrug:

The other 3 of that 10 went bankrupt when they had a medical emergency or were dropped from those plans when they got ill.

:shrug:


that's my guess too.

What a jerk- but people will hear him, and want to be among those "happy Americans" who he proudly represents.

:nuke:

that the study Hatch referenced at one point, was done by a biased health-care connected source.

If corporate interests told him that the sky was brown, he'd probably believe it.

Fuckin' A.

when compared to countless others I've heard or read about. I wonder if that logic figured into the 7 out of 10 figure. Doesn't mean it couldn't be improved upon, or that I couldn't be made even more happy.

I think the better adjective to use in a poll question would be "satisfied".

couldn't find anything at all.

The site also said that because of an overload of mail, he only was answering his Utah constituents.

I think that one of the most deceptive and manipulative tools used in politics over the last 10 or so years is "polls".

Wording and the 'sampling' population are critical to results that are anywhere near 'truthful'.

:hi:

I've said it all along..

Until employer-supported medical insurance is gone, we're not going to get universal care.

Congress will not let this happen because they know it really cannot happen.

why?

If we were truly faced with NO ONE having "subsidized" medical plans (employer subsidized), we would have to face some ugly truths.

Medical care costs a LOT.

A universal/national/single-payer plan would HAVE to come along with a national health care I.D. card.
It would have to be limited to citizens only. BOTH parties would vehemently oppose this:
...republicans..because they "don't want no gubbmint knowing their personal biddness & meddlin' in their lives"
...democrats:.. because they know that some in the party are related to people who are NOT legally here, or who at one time, may not have been legally here themselves... they would look at it as another chapter of "Us v Them", and would oppose it. Affordability of the "card" would also be an issue (even though Costco manages to issue photo IDs on the spot..for free)

Once employer-based care disappeared, there would be REAL tumult in the streets, and no one wants to deal with that. The briefcase-toters do not take to the pavement to fight for someone else to get what THEY have, but they WOULD speak up loudly, if THEY lost what they have.

True health care for all citizens means less money for fatcat industrialists, private armies, wars, military toys, corporate subsidies..

We are not a "nice" nation. Some of us care, but enough do not, so it probably will never happen. We have known that we "should" do it...for DECADES, and yet we have not..

and mr. o just read it wrong.

insured in this country is 180 million, roughly half the population. The others would be either uninsured or on government-sponsored programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, VA, etc. So . . . if 70% of the insured Americans are happy, doesn't that shake out to 35% overall? It doesn't look quite so rosy in that light.

believe-

And, while I was on MedicAID years ago, I got pretty good care, as opposed to the nothing I have now, and because of pre-existing conditions and lack of wealth cannot afford.

Thanks for helping make some sense of this strange statement by Hatch.

:hi:

My son and I have to pay out of pocket we have no insurance and he is diabetic.

would have some relief. Wouldn't that make your wife ..."happier" with her insurance?

I wish I knew the questions asked to determine Hatch's claim.

:hi:

who have employer sponsored and subsidized medical insurance. he has rounded up to get the 70%.
i am among the lucky 66% and have no real complaints to lodge yet against the structure that governs my insurance coverage but it would be a lie to suggest that i am getting the same coverage today as i was several years ago even though the cost has increased dramatically. any raise i might have gotten over the years has been swallowed by the increased cost of insurance.
i suspect that this is true for many others.
half of personal bankruptcies in america are the result of medical costs and 40 some % of those bankruptcies happened to people with medical insurance. its hard to imagine that they are happy with the coverage they have.
i think hatch took the 66% and rounded to 70 and assumed all were happy. i guess they are compared to the 34% who have no coverage.