- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 23, 2013 at 12:09 am #800092
dobroParticipant“…the more time you spend trying to identify fraudulent claims…”
Do you have any stats on fraudulent claims identified by ins. companies? I have a feeling its akin to those “voter fraud” claims thrown out by people that have an interest in the existence of fraud, but very little in the way of measurable info verifying such. I think if you compared the figures on fraud to the differential in overhead of gov’t healthcare vs private ins the math would come out in the gov’ts favor.
November 23, 2013 at 12:30 am #800093
skeeterParticipantdobro I don’t have good numbers. sorry. this article addresses the issue but you could probably shoot a thousand holes in it.
There are no good numbers on how much money private sector health insurers lose in fraud, but working with a well-known health care actuary a few years ago, we estimated that private insurers lose perhaps 1 to 1.5 percent in fraud. Medicare and Medicaid may be closer to 10 to 15 percent. And one of the primary differences is that the private sector insurers embrace software and other new technologies that help them find discrepancies and fraud in health care claims.
November 23, 2013 at 2:35 am #800094
JanSParticipantHey, did y’all hear that John Boehner signed up for the ACA? He had a slight problem with the website, but called the helpline, and was covered within a matter of a couple of hours. No info on what he’ll pay…
November 23, 2013 at 5:57 am #800095
KevinParticipant@Skeeter, would love to chat about healthcare over a beer / coffee sometime. C & P Coffee has both – name a time or other location and I’ll be happy to sit down with you and / or other folks.
.
Probably an interesting round table discussion. My personal contact info can be found in my WSB profile info.
November 23, 2013 at 6:59 am #800096
JanSParticipantit’s been a long time since we’ve had a “forum member get together” of any kind. Something to think about. We all have more in common than not, I do believe :)
November 23, 2013 at 2:17 pm #800097
kayoParticipanthttp://www.texasobserver.org/a-galveston-med-student-describes-life-and-death-in-the-safety-net/
Just read this today. Illustrates the poor who slip through the cracks and are refused service even in emergency rooms and often for treatable conditions. That this happens in a country of such abundance is shameful. I don’t know the answer to healthcare (we were fortunate enough to have a Cadillac plan until last year and now have a high deductible HSA which has its pros and cons). I do know that the fact that what this article describes is going on in Texas is morally wrong. There has to be a better way than telling people too bad you are poor and uninsured. Now go home and die.
November 23, 2013 at 3:46 pm #800098
miwsParticipantNovember 23, 2013 at 4:24 pm #800099
kayoParticipantPardon the lack of grammar and run on sentence. Up at 3 and 5 with small child. I read this article with much sadness. These are not people asking for unnecessary tests and treatments. These are people who desperately need them to survive treatable ailments. Are we really so morally bankrupt that we believe the poor deserve to die from their ailments because they should’ve been born into better circumstances or made different life choices (and how dare they get sick in the first place!)? Really? We are so fortunate here and the greed shown by insurance executives, lobbyists, politicians, etc., is shameful. I don’t have the answers, but I do know what is right and wrong and what is going on in Texas is wrong.
November 23, 2013 at 6:00 pm #800100
miwsParticipantkayo, your arguments are basically the same ones that I’ve brought up here in the Forums, and in comments on the Main Page, regarding Homelessness, and these Healthcare issues go hand in hand with that.
If Harborview had just fixed me up “well enough” for them to send me right back out the door two years ago, when I got my lights & siren ride to the ER, with pneumonia, I’d likely be dead by now, especially since even with the great and thorough immediate care and aftercare I received, as well has help from friends, I ended back up at the ER with a relapse of pneumonia a month later.
I know of at least one other person here that would likely not be here today if we were just given a bare minimum of Urgent Care to get us back out the door.
We have both been fortunate enough to be receiving decent ongoing care from our respective Providers, as well as the benefit of great friends, and a wonderful generous community. Even so, we’ve each had our own rough ride.
Not everyone is so fortunate as to have any support systems, let alone ongoing ones.
Your last sentence, in Post 81, is one I’ve used in discussions on Homelessness/Healthcare. I have wanted to use it so many more times than I actually have, but know that if I did, it would likely result in those that I was in the particular debate against would cry that I was claiming they actually wished death upon the less fortunate.
So I’ve tried to use it prudently, and often only after becoming frustrated by reading and debating same, the much-repeated, tired old anti-less fortunate comments by certain people.
Mike
November 23, 2013 at 8:07 pm #800101
miwsParticipantNovember 23, 2013 at 9:15 pm #800102
dobroParticipantSince yesterday was an all-JFK day I ran across this quote from a speech of his in 1962…
“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie—deliberate, contrived, and dishonest—but the myth—persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
Smart guy, that JFK. I think this pertains to the myth that there’s nothing that gov’t does that private industry can’t do better. It’s false, but is one of those “conventional wisdom” things that people spout as if its an unchallengeable truth. There are things in our communal life as a people and as a nation that are not compatible with the profit motive and, make no mistake, private industry is ONLY about the profit motive. If there’s no money in it for them, private industry doesn’t want to hear about it. Health care is one of those things that should be administered with no profit involved and available for all, regardless of social or economic station. As you stated, it is immoral to let people be sick and die in the street with no access to care unless they have money.
November 24, 2013 at 12:26 am #800103
dobroParticipantTo follow up on that myth, this is from POGO.org…
“Federal government employees were less expensive than contractors in 33 of the 35 occupational classifications POGO reviewed.
In one instance, contractor billing rates were nearly 5 times more than the full compensation paid to federal employees performing comparable services.
Private sector compensation was lower than contractor billing rates in all 35 occupational classifications we reviewed.”
There’s much more here…
http://www.pogo.org/our-work/reports/2011/co-gp-20110913.html#sthash.Egne0Bvp.dpuf
Project On Government Oversight is what POGO stands for and there’s a lot of info there refuting the idea that private contractors are cheaper or provide more quality than gov’t workers.
November 24, 2013 at 12:30 am #800104
dobroParticipant“Why does the U.S. spend so much more money that other countries and get no better overall medical care?”
Because all other Western nations use some variation of single-payer programs that concentrate on care and positive outcomes rather than profit for medical companies and insurers. The evidence is crystal clear unless you choose not to see it.
November 24, 2013 at 6:19 pm #800105
dobroParticipantSlightly off-topic, but while I was perusing JFK quotations I ran across another I particularly like…
“What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label “Liberal?” If by “Liberal” they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer’s dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of “Liberal.” But if by a “Liberal” they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people — their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties — someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a “Liberal,” then I’m proud to say I’m a “Liberal.” — John F. Kennedy
November 25, 2013 at 8:03 am #800106
HMC RichParticipantJoB, for not wanting to say something you certainly brought up so many fallacies that are stock answers for the doorway to tyranny that progressives love to spout off about. But you care more while forcing your views on everyone else. Got it. Pink Elephants dancing around….
Dobro. The states are given the right by the constitution to pass laws and tax to benefit the citizens. The “general welfare” was not specific in the preamble other than states being given the opportunity to address what those states felt was needed. The Bill of Rights laid out specifics of what people could and could not do. The Constitution says exactly what the branches Federal Government should do and should not in many areas. The rest was to be left to the states. Nowhere does it say Americans deserve healthcare. Nowhere does it say they do not. But what the constitution does not allow usually without some massive political maneuvering are the implementation of national programs that force Americans to be taxed. Income Tax, the (Un)Affordable Health Care Act, Medicare, and Social Security fall under that umbrella.
The logic used by the Administration because they were so afraid to call the ACA a tax was that it was NOT a tax. The President told George Stephanopoulous that face to face in an interview. (Kind of like telling people if they like their policy or doctor they can keep it…) The Supreme Court decision called it a tax and so due to precedent in five judges minds, it could be considered legal.
The prevailing 5-4 decision was legislating from the bench. They said it was a tax which was contrary to what the promoters of the bill said it was.
Quite strange, but it happened.
I didn’t write this but I found this in an article regarding healthcare. I think the founders other great thinkers from that time were quite astute… “Such unrestrained powers have consequences. As Adam Smith wrote in The Wealth of Nations, “All the members of human society stand in need of each other’s assistance, and are likewise exposed to mutual injuries. Where the necessary assistance is reciprocally afforded from love, from gratitude, from friendship, and esteem, the society flourishes and is happy.” By comparison, Smith notes, when such assistance is compelled by force, it can have significant and negative effects, even to the point of a societal collapse.”
The way the ACA is set up, it requires all to contribute and will fine all of those who do not or have been given a waiver (unions and businesses). The middle class again will bear the burden of this. The employer mandate has not even started yet. the 5 Million policies dropped by the Insurance companies is just a drop in the bucket to what is coming next year when companies decide to let their employees get healthcare through the exchanges.
Now JoB, Complain all you want about the 1% but the elitist politicians in both parties have not changed the fact that wealth creation and growth by the 1% is still happening to use your line of thought. Obama is just as guilty as Bush, as is Schumer as is O’Connell. They are in bed with them, the lobbyists, etc. So please stop all of this one sided blame game. The politicians bring home the bacon and work with the 1%. Do you see the insurance companies lowering premiums right now? The ACA gave them even more guidelines to charge what they felt was needed to make a profit. Sure, certain plans were now inadequate because 60 year olds need to fund birth control, drug rehabilitation etc. And when only two out of six exchange entities allow Children’s Hospital to be part of the plan, you see the injustice of the meddling by the government isn’t helping the situation now, is it?
The article I read says this and I agree with it… The general welfare phrase does not change the fact that our nation’s government is based on delegated powers, and the Constitution specifically spells out which powers are delegated. The Constitution is clear about the matter: the people of the United States have the right to set their own health care priorities, to pay for what they choose to pay for, to direct the paths of their own lives, and to live with the consequences of the path they take—without interference from the nation’s central government.
Dobro, are you saying the ACA is a Republican idea because of Romneycare? Maybe so but the Constitutionalist part of the Republican Party definitely does not agree with that arm of the Republican party.
November 25, 2013 at 8:24 am #800107
HMC RichParticipantDobro, math is interesting but even politics twist it. As you know Al Gore received a higher voter tally but lost due to the Electoral College and a Court decision. I love how you attempt to persuade the reader that I and others who disagree with your political views are stupid. We are not. And even if you think we are it is not your place to sit in judgement because when it comes to voting, all who vote are equal.
The contrast between left and right is interesting. Right side promotes the individual quite often, Left side promotes the group. Not that this plays out every time but it must be stated that the two can compromise at times to work out decent solutions.
I would rather not argue with you guys but I have much more respect for Kshama Sawant than I do for most of the Seattle Progressives.
The Socialist candidate said specifically what she wanted. The closet socialists won’t say it but will promote that line of thought.
Seeing the elected representatives recently trying to cover their butts about bus routes getting chopped makes the point. Putting a “positive” spin on an uncomfortable decision while trying to make the people who elected them happy.
And no Republicans in site. You voted these people in. You can’t complain about it if you voted for them. But I can, because I sure as hell didn’t vote for them.
November 25, 2013 at 8:36 am #800108
HMC RichParticipantSkeeter. I too would like to meet some of the fellow posters. The problem is time. I am working when many others are free or childcare/family duties don’t allow time for me to get out. I post late at night because it truly is the only time in the day where I have a few minutes to myself.
I have said it before and I will say it again. When meeting in person I will refuse to go in depth about politics in conversations, because in person, (and some of you will say on the forum) my debating skills are not great. In fact if they were I would run for office. But thankfully for all of us they are not. Aren’t you guys lucky!!!
I just don’t feel right trying to force my opinion on others when I really just want to get to know more about them. I like finding out who has cats, dogs, kids, hobbies, etc.
I don’t get the chance to see them hardly at all but I LOVE seeing Jo, Jan, Mike and the others. They are real people who care and have such interesting backgrounds.
And, I hope to see many of you soon.
November 25, 2013 at 8:52 am #800109
JanSParticipantNovember 25, 2013 at 4:59 pm #800110
skeeterParticipantOh yeah Rich, if we have a forum meet up I think it should just be a “meet and greet” type event. A political debate might be asking for trouble. I would like to meet some of the folks who post on the forums! I’ll try to post a new thread in the next couple of days to get a conversation about when/where we could meet.
November 26, 2013 at 12:01 am #800111
dobroParticipantThere’s a lot of malarkey in Rich’s post, too much to go over it all, but here’s a little bit…
“But what the constitution does not allow usually without some massive political maneuvering are the implementation of national programs that force Americans to be taxed. Income Tax, the (Un)Affordable Health Care Act, Medicare, and Social Security fall under that umbrella.”
You are seemingly trying to say the Constitution does not allow Social Security, Medicare, and the IRS to exist. Reality and the Constitution beg to disagree. We have a little thing called “represenative government”, the structure laid out by the Constitution, that empowers the Federal Legislature to enact laws and programs that affect all 50 states. Obviously, the programs you mentioned have passed Constitutional muster and are recognized as settled law except by the same kind of cranks that want to return to the gold standard and call themselves “soverign citizens” who don’t have to pay taxes because freedom.
“Dobro, are you saying the ACA is a Republican idea because of Romneycare? Maybe so but the Constitutionalist part of the Republican Party definitely does not agree with that arm of the Republican party.”
Yes, I am saying the ACA is a Republican idea because it was created by a Republican thinktank, the Heritage Foundation, instituted in MA by a Republican governor, Romney. The fact that a faction of the Republican party doesn’t like it doesn’t make it less Republican.
“I love how you attempt to persuade the reader that I and others who disagree with your political views are stupid. We are not.”
I don’t believe I’ve ever called you, or anyone who disagreed with me, stupid. If you have examples, please point them out. What I do is quote your own words, show inconsistency and incorrectness in them, and usually never hear a response to refute what points I make. Other people can judge who’s “stupid” or not.
“And no Republicans in site. You voted these people in. You can’t complain about it if you voted for them.”
I can complain about anyone I want, even if I voted for them. I, like all of us, vote based on the choices we’re given and though I may agree with a candidate on some issues, even to the point of voting for him/her, that doesn’t mean I don’t reserve the right to evaluate their work as they go along. I know Republicans generally vote in lockstep and believe as they’re instructed by their talking point purveyors (Rush, Glenn, Sean, etc) but that’s not how I roll.
Whew. All for now.
November 26, 2013 at 12:11 am #800112
JanSParticipantthe people who can’t complain are the ones who don’t vote !
November 26, 2013 at 1:55 am #800113
dhgParticipant…which serves to answer that old “Obama is the Messiah” thing. Liberals DO NOT take him as the second coming and most certainly do not approve of everything he is doing. He’s done a lot of good things but I’d feel much better if he’d put a few BOA people in jail.
November 26, 2013 at 4:27 pm #800114
kayoParticipantNo One Is Talking About These Obamacare Stories
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-obamacare-success-20131125,0,1801769.story
Another interesting article amidst all the freaking out by Obamacare haters. Many people are being helped. Nice to hear some positive stories coming out.
November 26, 2013 at 5:50 pm #800115
wakefloodParticipantHey kayo, stop messing up a perfectly good rant with facts.
December 17, 2013 at 8:21 am #800116
HMC RichParticipantHello Dobro. You have not said it but there are some interesting implications. You and I differ on what each us calls evidence or proof. So be it.
Yes, Heritage did come up with a plan that looks familiar with Romneycare and Obamacare. But some of us see government as the wrong vehicle for providing certain services. Only time will tell how bad or how good this law will be. My main problem is that this was a one party bill. Americans were sold a lie. Even Politifact said Mr. Obama told the biggest lie of the year over and over. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/
They knew but still lied about it. Kind of like Susan Rice about a video … That was for you Jan.
The problem is that more people will most likely be uninsured than expected as the plan is implemented. The rollout has been quite disasterous. The safety issues with the site are horrendous.
Our youth are saying Whoa Dude, I don’t need to subsidize a bunch of old people. I’ll pay the fine instead.
The fact that Sebillius and Mr. Obama really didn’t communicate enough is very troubling. It really has been a failure in many ways. Oh there are a few areas where it will or has been positive but overall it is viewed now as a huge debacle.
As with all things, over time they will fix many parts of it.
Plus that 40 million uninsured figure is hogwash. Here is a link that helps explain how 40 million has become truth but is essentially untrue. http://www.enttoday.org/details/article/531807/A_Myth_of_Modern_Medicine_There_are_40_million_Americans_with_No_Access_to_Healt.html
Sorry, but I will be simplistic here. One size does not fit all. Americans are seeing their insurance payments balloon to unsustainable amounts. It is bad enough people couldn’t afford health care, but now people who formerly could are finding they can’t.
Is there a better way? Probably, but we are stuck with a bad law that will hurt many at the start but may help in the future. I don’t know and neither do you.
I have plenty of other reasons to pan this law but for now I will leave it alone and see what happens.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.