OT: Health care struck down

Page 3 of 16  
wrote:

they already mandate we have kids.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jan 31, 7:42 pm, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

NO, it does much more than that and none of it will result in lowering the cost of healthcare for anyone including the Federal Government.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 20:42:55 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

yeah. imagine american citizens getting health care.
bastards

au contraire. it does require a market study of payments to medicare and other providers
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

At what cost?

Yeah they are limited to a 20% overhead, the current worst case guess is 15-17%. That is getting even with them.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

That 20% has to cover overhead, profits, etc.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Profit was included in "overhead" at the 15-17%. Insurance companies only get a 3-4% profit but don't cry for them, it is 4% of billions of dollars. With all of that they are still far more efficient than a purely government run system. Don't throw up that "5% overhead" Medicare number. That ignores the fact that the account receivables department is the IRS, not included in the 5% number and that most of the accounting is still done by the private insurers. Medicare just writes checks. They also have a fraud rate several times higher than private insurers because they write the check before the claim is verified. The FBI calls it "pay and chase".
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

Yep one of my all time favorite bits. I had a Dem Congresscritter address a meeting I was attending try this bit. I asked him if he was aware that the 5% was to run Center for Medicare Medicaid Services and that by the time you included money paid the Fiscal Intermediaries to do the actual heavy lifting most of that had gone away. He hemmed and hawed and did not answer my question. Big surprise there.
--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to
koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 03 Feb 2011 21:47:44 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

other countries do it cheaper than we do. so the cost should be negative
and why is it fair to balance tax cuts for the rich by healthcare cuts to the working poor?

which was law before the healthcare bill was passed
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Doctors make more, we actually use more services and the lawyers raise the cost of everything along the way.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 02:02:32 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

mapractice amounts to 1.5% of all medical costs in the country. it's a useful whipping boy for the right since trial lawyers are big contributors to the dems, but there's little factual basis in it.
and the high cost of doctors, along with the high cost of medicine in the US means the free market has failed, compared to socialized medicine...it's been unable to meet demand.
other socialized medicine countries have healthcare as good as ours, with 70% of the cost.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/5/2011 8:18 AM, bpuharic wrote:

I wish i could find an old country doc whose office is at the front of his home. I'll probably be called a socialist, but there was a day when docs and dentists probably did not aspire to be millionaires. Medicine is no longer a profession, it is simply a business. There is so s--- in the system that people should howl and scream about, but all they can think of is "Is that a Dem policy or a Rep policy". Ferinstance, medical specialists make calls on nursing home patients, largely Medicaid. Old folks need the care. Specialist needs an assistant (non-professional) and both are employed by the same sub-contractor. Both have company vehicles to drive. Both might drive to assignments in other cities, with employees in those cities driving to the places where the first pair reside.
I don't need marble hallways and decorator leather furniture to sit on when I go to the doc. Last couple of visits to docs were rather worthless, anyway...they got their office fee and not much else mattered.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Are you aware that the average salary or take home income for doctors is just over $100k per year and that is only after having gone to school for 20 years, several years as residents making almost nothing while trying to pay for student loans in the $100's of thousands. Yet you bitch about having to pay $75 for an office visit but don't utter a single word about paying $150 to the local dealership to change your battery in a car that costs more per year than you spend on healthcare. Most auto repair shops have standard rates per hour of $60 - $90 for work performed by a highschool dropout with minimums of 1 hour. If you don't pay, the dealer can put a mechanics lean on your car and you are out of luck. If you don't pay your doctor, you may get a collection notice but little else and you just go back again.

Do you have any idea of just how much Medicaid reimburses those medical specialists for those visits? How about what Medicare pays? Do you have a clue about how much time and paperwork is involved in filing claims on either one or what additional expenses for the various regulatory rules are involved for those who are willing to accept either one? I really can't see why any doctor would continue to accept Medicare and Medicaid except for the fact that they care about their long term patients.

Your point being?

You are right, they should be walking instead. Why don't you volunteer to drive them?

You don't seem to mind the shinny marble floors and expensive furniture at the local car dealer though, guess we know where your priorities are.

Congratulations, you are healthy and didn't have anything to complain about except for being healthy...this time.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Agreed. Why the high costs? Doctor education is more expensive here than elsewhere. Practicing being a Doctor is needlessly expensive with all the form filling, repeatedly submitting claims that get denied without valid reasons, etc. And last (in my litany), but ccertainly not least, the American consumer would like the newest, "best" yet unproven treatment possible. Compare blood pressure medications. Generally (that means in many but not all cases), reducing sodium intake and using a diuretic that may cost $9/month, plus weight loss would take care of 90% of blood presure problems. However, I am taking the cheap hydrochlorothiazide plus several much more expensive things, like cheese and crackers, and sit too much.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

yep, agreed. the free market at work. insurance companies pay more to DENY claims than they do in PAYING them. their job is to make money for their stockholders, NOT to provide medical care
. And last (in my litany), but ccertainly not

yep. we insist on test after test, with the latest gadgets...medical treatments at end of life that do no good (and conservatives want to continue, lest anyone be accused of 'death panels')
nuts. absolutely nuts
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

BULLSHIT! Even if you 1.5% were true it would represent a HUGE added cost that based on "all medical costs in the country" which go well beyond just doctors. I did work for a radiology group several years back that consisted of 7 doctors. Their total malpractice insurance bill came to over $2 million dollars per year and they had NEVER been sued and found at fault. That malpractice insurance for that one practice amounted to a 10% add on cost to every single procedure performed. Don't try and bullshit everyone about the true cost of malpractice insurance, every doctor and medical practice in this country knows better.

Another bullshit lie.

and another lie, probably the biggest one of all. Guess you aren't aware that almost every country with socialized medicine is in desperate need of more government money to continue providing services, even limited and rationed services or that most of those same countries are developing a private network to provide services that the socialized medicine is failing to provide.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 07:57:09 -0800 (PST), BobR

Bob and his friends also ignore the $100,000 - $250,000 a year a doctor pays for malpractice insurance. That ends up on our bill
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 05 Feb 2011 12:18:24 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@aol.com wrote:

gfretwell and his right wing friends ignore the fact insurance companies INVEST their money. they do NOT sit on it.
they lost their asses in the last few years. so they run to the right wing, complan that all those people who are injured every year are draining the system! it has nothing to do with THEIR investments, you see. they're INSURANCE COMPANIES and god knows, they'd NEVER hurt our health!!
so the right wing makes the healthcare CONSUMER pay for the losses of rich insurance companies
the right wing ALWAYS likes to bail out the rich. this is no exception
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 2/6/2011 8:33 AM, bpuharic wrote:

So tell me genius, what's the average profit margin for health insurance companies? I doubt you know or even understand what a profit margin is. No, I'm not a Republican, Republicans disgust me but Democrats are special, they horrify me. I would hope that you would research the subject for yourself and not fall for the emotional rhetoric from Liberal, Left Wing, Socialist sources. Take what is said by Right Wing extremists with the same skepticism as I do and look it up for yourself. It's really easy, every time I hear a Republican or Democrat open their mouth I know at least half of what they're saying is a lie or exaggeration in one way or another. Politicians lie, it doesn't matter which side they're on, they lie. I won't call you stupid because I would assume you're as young and as liberal as I once was before I grew up. I'm glad you're the way you are because I don't trust young Conservatives, they set off my weasel detector. Years from now you'll understand what I'm postulating. You have to read through a lot of male bovine droppings but you will eventually get at the truth. Take a look:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2fk3tpd
http://biz.yahoo.com/ic /
TDD
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 06 Feb 2011 20:02:17 -0600, The Daring Dufas

, irrelevant question, isn't it? the REAL question is, what does the AMERICAN CONSUMER pay for healthcare?
and the answer is 'more than anyone else'

so tell me, how does a profit margin benefit the US?
does it make us healthier?
nope
does it make our economy more efficent?
nope
OK i give up. give it your best shot.
what advantage is there in having a profit margin in healthcare?
I'm glad you're the way you are because I don't trust young

you havent offered ANY evidence....AT ALL...as to why the free market gives us better healthcare
because it doesnt
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bpuharic wrote:

By almost every objective standard, health care in America is superior to that anywhere else.
The only statistic touted by the socialized medicine crowd is "life expectancy." But that's a false metric. Many people die in the U.S. before the health care system can get involved (i.e., automobile wrecks or gang shootings). There are a huge number of people who either refuse treatment or fail to follow the prescribed regimin, such as the morbidly obese or diabetics.
A much better metric is, say, five year survival after a disease is diagnosed. Breast cancer in women: US-63%, Europe-56% Prostate cancer in men: US-66%, Europe-47% Women, all cancers: US-61%, Canada-58% Men, all cancers: US-57%, Canada-53% Bowel cancer: US-65%, UK-52% Heart failure: US-80.4%, Canada-78.6% and so on...
We do pay more for health care than many other places, but that's because we CAN.
We don't send patients with congestive heart failure home with a bottle of nitroglycerine pills, we undertake heroic measures for very premature babies rather than letting them die as in France so they can be tabulated as "still-born".
There are more MRI machines in my town than in all of Canada (there are ~220 in Canada). This means that if I blow out my knee today, I can get a scan no later than tomorrow. In Canada, there is a significant wait time.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.