America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 2 months ago by frankj1. 331 replies replies.
7 Pages«<234567>
Help me understand.
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
leftyposthole Offline
#251 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:14 PM EST
Joined: 05-09-2011
Posts: 3,376
I can't say whether it will be good for us or not, since I have not read it. Let just say I am alittle more than sceptical that anything good can come out of Washington. The track record speaks for itself. I sure don't expect this to be any better.
victor809 Offline
#252 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:17 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Dude, I don't know who you've been talking to but everyone who works in healthcare is not in it to take care of people...they are in it for the money. That is why healthcare costs are going up on an average of 8-17% per year for the last several years (yes, even before Clinton, Bush, AND Obama). Tort reform would help, but only a little. Drug pricing would definitely help, but again only a little. Price fixing or competition of specialists would help...you get the trend here? The idea is that the whole system is broken. The system was bleeding money out of every pore and it needed a tourniquet solution...Other countries have this problem figured out...why not learn from them??? Is it soo bad to just admit that someone might have a better idea than we do? It worked in Massachusetts, Germany, France, Japan and just about every other industrialized nation...why can't it work here?




Other countries don't have it figured out. They just chose a "low cost" option. There are trade offs, and I'm actually most afraid of what the trade-off will be when the US decides to force costs of healthcare down. I think we have been supporting a lot of the indirect costs from government controlled healthcare in the rest of the 1st world countries. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.
victor809 Offline
#253 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:25 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
leftyposthole wrote:
You guys type way faster than me, I am trying to keep up. Victor, gay marriage is someones choice. I do not agree with it, but again I will not judge. Putting it on a ballot then forces me to make a choice, unless I do not vote, then I would have to vote against it. As for drunks as you call them dying in the streets, you can't force people to accept help, all we can do is make it available, its there choice if they choose to accept it. Brew its not abouit good or bad. I can't myself build a road, I can however give someone a coat or something to eat



Come on... you knew exactly what I was angling at, and you still managed to be contradictory.

Quote:

But they cannot and should not be in the buisiness of dictating moral and social actions, other than to keep us safe. Laws and such.

If that's the way you honestly believed, then your only concern with any marriage would be whether you're involved or not.

I suppose you actually meant to say "They cannot and should not be in the business of dictating moral and social actions that I don't believe in"...

Anyway, this isn't a gay marriage thread, my point is that you're a little bit hypocritical in your stance.

As for helping people, feel free, but there's a cost. Just as with social welfare programs, if you give a drunk a coat, you'll probably have to feed the **** in the morning.
victor809 Offline
#254 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:27 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Brewha wrote:

I guess when we tax people to pay for things we don’t use it would be socialism. If we buy roads with tax dollars it called . . . . something else. Because there is no way that anything socialistic could be good . . . .


I'm being honest, I don't know if it's considered a socialist program to improve infrastructure. I'm not trying to make some sort of right wing hue and cry. If infrastructure and school programs are socialist, then fine, they're socialist. A label is absolutely meaningless to me. I just want us to be accurate in our discussions.
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#255 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:34 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
leftyposthole wrote:
I can't say whether it will be good for us or not, since I have not read it. Let just say I am alittle more than sceptical that anything good can come out of Washington. The track record speaks for itself. I sure don't expect this to be any better.


Hmmm...let's see...

The world's best military...check

The world's greatest economy...check (US Dollar the "currency of the world")

One of the world's most expansive and strongest infrastructures (roads, utilities, etc.)...check

The greatest university system the world has ever known....check

The internet...check (not Al Gore BTW)

Shall I go on???

You guys are not half empty cups...you are empty cups...you don't know how good you have it OR how good things could be. Kwit yer bellyaching!!!
tailgater Offline
#256 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:35 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Dude, I don't know who you've been talking to but everyone who works in healthcare is not in it to take care of people...they are in it for the money. That is why healthcare costs are going up on an average of 8-17% per year for the last several years (yes, even before Clinton, Bush, AND Obama). Tort reform would help, but only a little. Drug pricing would definitely help, but again only a little. Price fixing or competition of specialists would help...you get the trend here? The idea is that the whole system is broken. The system was bleeding money out of every pore and it needed a tourniquet solution...Other countries have this problem figured out...why not learn from them??? Is it soo bad to just admit that someone might have a better idea than we do? It worked in Massachusetts, Germany, France, Japan and just about every other industrialized nation...why can't it work here?




Man, I started laughing so hard that I was going to thank you, but then I realized you were serious.

Obamacare isn't going to fix drug pricing. How could it? The same corporations will make the pills and sell them in the same quantities.
The price of specialists won't matter, because a single-payer system will not cover these expenses in full. Maybe Obamacare is trying to achieve this, but go to Canada or anywhere in Europe. Their socialized insurance programs do not cover specialists. Unless you consider being "covered" as meaning having to wait over a year for hip replacement. Or 9 months for a good Heart guy.

And then you finish with the laugh of the day, when you imply that the best way to SAVE money and improve efficiency is to hire the US Federal governement to do the job!!! Holy crap that's even funnier when I read it again!!!

And by the way, as a resident of Massachusetts and a partner in a manufacturing business, let me tell you: It isn't really "working" here. The costs are higher than any other state, and most people still want private plans and HMO's because they are vastly superior.
It isn't woking in Canada, where the residents drive down to Boston or some other US hospital to have surgury performed.
It doesn't work in England, where my neighbor just lost her father because their system was so slow and cumbersome that by the time they found the cancer it was too late. This was a guy who was very diligent about doctors visits and his health. Over the course of 9 months he was repeatedly told that his inability to breathe was simply residual fluids from a bout with pneumonia. And no he can't have those other tests performed because they're not covered.

My neighbors laugh out loud when they hear the system used in England floated out there as an example. They are MUCH happier with our "broken" system than what they left behind.

Bottom line: If you want something done better and more effecient, then the US federal Governement is the LAST place you should consider. They know only two things: More expensive and Slower. Sometimes they combine the two. Which feature are you shooting for with our health insurance?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#257 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:44 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Hmmm...let's see...

The world's best military...check


How's that? Maybe around WWII (which we're STILL deployed!) but you'd have to forget about Korea (Which we're ATILL deployed), Vietnam which we ran out of...Desert Storm where we stopped instead of finishing the job only to go back into that hellhole (which we're STILL deployed) and the quagmire called Afghanistan where were' in the midst of cutting and running!


SMGBobbyScott wrote:
The world's greatest economy...check (US Dollar the "currency of the world")


Nations right now are ready to rip the "currency of the world" title away.


SMGBobbyScott wrote:
One of the world's most expansive and strongest infrastructures (roads, utilities, etc.)...check


Jesus, to hear some in here on this board we're all gonna die because of the roads, bridges and infrastructures! Take a look at Holland and the dam system they built...hows that compare with the levy system in Louisiana?


SMGBobbyScott wrote:
The greatest university system the world has ever known....check


and still people rave about being a Rhodes Scholar...last time I checked Oxford was in England Think


SMGBobbyScott wrote:
The internet...check (not Al Gore BTW)


There are parts of this nation that don't even have the internet! There are even larger parts that don't have highspeed internet like most Asian nations.

SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Shall I go on???



Meh...why? After every statement you said "check"...we wrote a BIG check for stuff we can't afford. We're in debt. I know, I know...you've still got checks? Yeah...in our world it doesn't work like it does in DC!
teedubbya Offline
#258 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 5:49 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
I wonder how the admin cost of Medicare compares to that of the private insurance industry? IE how many cents of each health care dollar goes towards direct care vs something else? Anyone know where we can find this information?
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#259 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:02 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
victor809 wrote:
Other countries don't have it figured out. They just chose a "low cost" option. There are trade offs, and I'm actually most afraid of what the trade-off will be when the US decides to force costs of healthcare down. I think we have been supporting a lot of the indirect costs from government controlled healthcare in the rest of the 1st world countries. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.


That isn't true...some do make some choices based upon cost that cause longer waits for some services (i.e.England, Canada, etc.) but these are by and large specialist and high end services. In the US many of these services we have similar problems, they are just called "problems getting an appointment". That isn't due to government regulation, it is due to inefficient and poorly planned systems and providers that make seven figures seeing 10 patients a day (a little overstatement there, but not much).

I personally choose longer life for our citizens and access to primary and preventative services...the kind that really have an effect on length and quality of life.

We do agree on one thing...It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
ZRX1200 Offline
#260 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:12 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,626
7 patients a day for 7 figures?

I usually just ignore you but this is asinine.

No doctors in my area make 7 figures from salary alone and 7 patients a day? Maybe a plastic surgeon or orthopedic specialist.......and BTW we have an award winning hospital here.

I have discussed at length with local doctors here and thanks to insurance they spend as much time filling out paperwork as they do seeing patients. That's why many forgo private practice unless its a group and most just look for good hospital jobs.

A major issue besides what Bloody stated about insurance management is also patients behavior. Going to the doctor every time you have the sniffles or using the ER as a physicians office has financial consequences. Also THE INCREASE OF STATE AND FEDERAL INSURANCE (MEDICARE/MEDICAID) raises private insurance costs because everone takes it in the azz on their pricing.
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#261 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:13 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
At Dr. Mad:

Oh how do I get started...shesh...I won't bother...you are truly hopeless. Okay, I will say this though. If you want Holland's roads, you have to pay Holland's taxes (and maybe smoke a little weed too). Oxford, while cool, is only one university and I'd stack our Ivy League up against it any day. I think we have eight and at least one of them has a pretty good football team (BEAT THE DUCKS!). Other countries can try to challenge our currency's status, but during every economic downturn...everybody BUYS AMERICAN BABY!!!

Cheer up dude, or buy a bomb shelter...either way, I'm done arguing with you!

Shame on you
HockeyDad Offline
#262 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:22 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
Come on people...it works in France!
HockeyDad Offline
#263 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:26 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
You all need to break off a piece of that "hope" tha bobby's holding!
ZRX1200 Offline
#264 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:27 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,626
Teedubbya the Medicare admin cost as a percentage is a red herring. Most people on Medicare are old and are having expensive procedures done routinely. But you probably knew that and couldn't pass up a chance to be a contrarian.
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#265 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:28 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
ZRX1200 wrote:
7 patients a day for 7 figures?

I usually just ignore you but this is asinine.

No doctors in my area make 7 figures from salary alone and 7 patients a day? Maybe a plastic surgeon or orthopedic specialist.......and BTW we have an award winning hospital here.

I have discussed at length with local doctors here and thanks to insurance they spend as much time filling out paperwork as they do seeing patients. That's why many forgo private practice unless its a group and most just look for good hospital jobs.

A major issue besides what Bloody stated about insurance management is also patients behavior. Going to the doctor every time you have the sniffles or using the ER as a physicians office has financial consequences. Also THE INCREASE OF STATE AND FEDERAL INSURANCE (MEDICARE/MEDICAID) raises private insurance costs because everone takes it in the azz on their pricing.


I SAID I was overstating...but I was referring to specialist and sub-specialists. BTW, I work in healthcare and have for over 24 years so this isn't word of mouth...I've lived it. Here's the deal...Doctor's offices since the 1950's or so have been basically run like mom and pop shops. In the late 1980's insurance companies started driving them to computerized billing and that pinched them a little but most did okay with it. They hired "office managers" to handle the office side of things.

Over the years though, the insurance companies, NOT THE GOVERNMENT, have played games with them and made the billing side more and more difficult...driving the cost of operations up. Many have chosen to stop taking certain types of insurance because of either reimbursement or hassle and that has made business even more difficult. Now we have the Obamacare, some insurance requirements, and a number of other federal regulations taking effect and these "small businesses" either can't or don't want to cope. What is interesting is that the Obamacare provisions come with significant financial incentives to comply, the insurance ones are unclear...maybe they will, maybe they won't.

BTW...patients wouldn't go to the ER when they had the sniffles if they thought they had a legitimate alternative.

Oh, and specialists make a TON of money REGARDLESS of what they may tell you...that's why they live in those big houses and have those big families.
ZRX1200 Offline
#266 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:30 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,626
Mark Twain has a great quote about arguing with someone like you. I'll take his advise.
HockeyDad Offline
#267 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:31 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
ZRX1200 wrote:
Teedubbya the Medicare admin cost as a percentage is a red herring. Most people on Medicare are old and are having expensive procedures done routinely. But you probably knew that and couldn't pass up a chance to be a contrarian.



Isn't TW medicare admin? We should fire him for wasting our time with that post.
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#268 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 6:31 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
Again, something we can agree!!!
victor809 Offline
#269 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 7:24 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
That isn't true...some do make some choices based upon cost that cause longer waits for some services (i.e.England, Canada, etc.) but these are by and large specialist and high end services. In the US many of these services we have similar problems, they are just called "problems getting an appointment". That isn't due to government regulation, it is due to inefficient and poorly planned systems and providers that make seven figures seeing 10 patients a day (a little overstatement there, but not much).

I personally choose longer life for our citizens and access to primary and preventative services...the kind that really have an effect on length and quality of life.

We do agree on one thing...It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

you're not thinking long term enough...

When I talk about indirect cost, I mean the cost of innovation, or the incentive to create new facilities or for the next generation's doctors to become educated.

As a small example, think of the multinational pharma companies. The companies manufacture and sell the same drug around the world, earning a different profit everywhere. A highest profit, and therefore a bulk of the future R&D spending, comes from US sales. What do you think will happen if policies restrict drug prices in the US? Do you think a publicly traded company will reduce its earnings? No, they'll cut costs.

Or think about the investment decision making process. A company/hospital/individual decides to invest based on the expected future income stream against sunk costs. All investments at the margin (where they just exceed break even, will probably not occur.

Anyway, that's what I expect to have a long term impact.
Brewha Offline
#270 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 9:08 PM EST
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,201
Regulation, of the people, by the people, for the people.
And unlike France, it will work.
teedubbya Offline
#271 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 9:59 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Z you know you can run various utilization models to account for that right? You can actually normalize things for an apples to apples comparison. Anyone know where I can find such data?
teedubbya Offline
#272 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:02 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
You can also isolate profit, marketing, economy of scale etc. really interesting analysis models are out there for anyone interested in the study of data rather than hyperbole or anecdotes.

Start with the kaiser foundation if you are bored.
DrafterX Offline
#273 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:03 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,559
The internets..??Huh
teedubbya Offline
#274 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:03 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Hint. It's not all flattering to government. It's also not all unflattering.
teedubbya Offline
#275 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:07 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
The sad part is all of the sources are biased therefore we can say whatever we want and were right
DrafterX Offline
#276 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:12 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,559
teedubbya wrote:
The sad part is all of the sources are biased therefore we can say whatever we want and were right


Ya, then all we have are our own opinions.... Sad
teedubbya Offline
#277 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:12 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Like bung holes
DrafterX Offline
#278 Posted: Wed, Nov 14 2012, 10:16 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,559
teedubbya wrote:
Like bung holes

True... true.... Mellow
victor809 Offline
#279 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 9:15 AM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
teedubbya wrote:
You can also isolate profit, marketing, economy of scale etc. really interesting analysis models are out there for anyone interested in the study of data rather than hyperbole or anecdotes.

Start with the kaiser foundation if you are bored.


I'm sure there are some very good models out there. I don't actually care enough about the outcome (voted for Obama, remember?) to go digging around in it. I'm not trying to stop Obamacare or any of the other permutations of it that may pop up, I just have some expectations of the impact they have on the future based on simple macroeconomics. I don't care enough whether I'm right or wrong on this one (other than getting to say "I told you so" 30 years down the line) to put much more effort into it.
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#280 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 11:38 AM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
Here is an example of how crazy our healthcare system is...I have GREAT Healthcare insurance, it is rated among the top 25 in the nation. This is a bill I paid today...

Total Charges - $628.00
Ins Payments - $17.60
Ins Adj. - $596.00
Amount Due - $14.40

Now if this was an uninsured person, they would have been expected to pay the ENTIRE $628.00 or if they didn't pay it would appear on their credit report and it would be written off to bad debt. The bad debt becomes a tax write-off OR the organization in some cases gets money from the federal and/or state government to cover the shortfall. This has been the case for YEARS...long before Obama became Senator, much less President. The entire system is set up to screw the government and the poor.

This SUCKS!!!
HockeyDad Offline
#281 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 11:49 AM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
How will that bill look and be paid under Obamacare?
DrafterX Offline
#282 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 11:53 AM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,559
we will still get billed under Obamacare..?? Huh
DrMaddVibe Offline
#283 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:03 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
At Dr. Mad:

Oh how do I get started...shesh...I won't bother...you are truly hopeless. Okay, I will say this though. If you want Holland's roads, you have to pay Holland's taxes (and maybe smoke a little weed too). Oxford, while cool, is only one university and I'd stack our Ivy League up against it any day. I think we have eight and at least one of them has a pretty good football team (BEAT THE DUCKS!). Other countries can try to challenge our currency's status, but during every economic downturn...everybody BUYS AMERICAN BABY!!!

Cheer up dude, or buy a bomb shelter...either way, I'm done arguing with you!

Shame on you



Arguing? That's what you call it? Whatever. Act like my ex wife and just scream about nothing then. Feel better?

I talked about Holland's dam system and you type up about roads...then you talked about smoking dope? Who's high on that stuff when you dare to compare the 2? Either way taxes will be spent. One nation OBVIOUSLY did it better than another! SHOCKER...America isn't #1!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_control_in_the_Netherlands vs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_levee_failures_in_Greater_New_Orleans


Then you went on about Ivy league vs Oxford...and brought in sports teams? Who gives a flying rat's ass about sports teams? Really? Cheer about your favorite all you want but last time I checked there was no prestigious higher learning grant like being a Rhodes Scholar...from OXFORD!

Then that leaves us with the currency status...http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_05/wibbelsman050206.html

The fix is in...what's going on with the dollar now? Hint...it's NOT stronger.


Like to think you can have an actual discussion, but that's a lost art with someone hellbent on arguing off the bat!
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#284 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:12 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
HockeyDad wrote:
How will that bill look and be paid under Obamacare?


Well, under ObamaCare (as I understand it at least...some of the regs still haven't been written)...the bill will look similar to mine...at least for 95% of Americans. That will save a ton of money for many and save the credit ratings of a ton of others. Needless to say the hospitals will lose a cash cow...I won't shed a tear.
HockeyDad Offline
#285 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:28 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Well, under ObamaCare (as I understand it at least...some of the regs still haven't been written)...the bill will look similar to mine...at least for 95% of Americans. That will save a ton of money for many and save the credit ratings of a ton of others. Needless to say the hospitals will lose a cash cow...I won't shed a tear.


95% the same, 5% win, and hospitals take a beating... Sounds like hospitaling is about to become a bad business. Weird thing is I thought hospitals and doctors were for Obamacare.

Maybe somebody got a double dose of "hope"!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#286 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:30 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
HockeyDad wrote:
95% the same, 5% win, and hospitals take a beating... Sounds like hospitaling is about to become a bad business. Weird thing is I thought hospitals and doctors were for Obamacare.

Maybe somebody got a double dose of "hope"!



An overdose on Hope?

Mon du!Gonz
teedubbya Offline
#287 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:51 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
HockeyDad wrote:
95% the same, 5% win, and hospitals take a beating... Sounds like hospitaling is about to become a bad business. Weird thing is I thought hospitals and doctors were for Obamacare.

Maybe somebody got a double dose of "hope"!


Hopspitals (or at lest their Associations) sure got a pot of gold (a few hunnert mil in one area alone (HEN))
SMGBobbyScott Offline
#288 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:52 PM EST
Joined: 07-24-2012
Posts: 3,328
HockeyDad wrote:
95% the same, 5% win, and hospitals take a beating... Sounds like hospitaling is about to become a bad business. Weird thing is I thought hospitals and doctors were for Obamacare.

Maybe somebody got a double dose of "hope"!


Well, when 45-50 million people suddenly become insured...hospitals have to win. They just win in different ways. Instead of over billing in the ER and urgent care they will actually get paid for surgery and hospital stays. It will take some time to see how the math will play out but it would be nice to see organization's being paid for what they actually do rather than padded billing (i.e. $500 hammers, toilet seats, etc.) and yes, I know that those were special cases but you get my point.

Also, the issue is that 95% win, 5% are out and the hospitals have to adjust their business model to be more customer focused rather than payor focused. Time will tell if it plays out that way...
tailgater Offline
#289 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 12:55 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Well, under ObamaCare (as I understand it at least...some of the regs still haven't been written)...the bill will look similar to mine...at least for 95% of Americans. That will save a ton of money for many and save the credit ratings of a ton of others. Needless to say the hospitals will lose a cash cow...I won't shed a tear.


Odd.
Because there is nary a category under the sun that qualifies as encompassing "95% of Americans".
Especially when discussing such a bill as healthcare, where many will strive to keep their existing providers while many others manipulate the system to get the "free" coverage provided by yours truly.
Yet you claim this will have no effect on the bill?
HockeyDad Offline
#290 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:12 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
teedubbya wrote:
Hopspitals (or at lest their Associations) sure got a pot of gold (a few hunnert mil in one area alone (HEN))



That is odd. I heard they lost a cash cow.
HockeyDad Offline
#291 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:15 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
SMGBobbyScott wrote:
Well, when 45-50 million people suddenly become insured...hospitals have to win. They just win in different ways. Instead of over billing in the ER and urgent care they will actually get paid for surgery and hospital stays. It will take some time to see how the math will play out but it would be nice to see organization's being paid for what they actually do rather than padded billing (i.e. $500 hammers, toilet seats, etc.) and yes, I know that those were special cases but you get my point.

Also, the issue is that 95% win, 5% are out and the hospitals have to adjust their business model to be more customer focused rather than payor focused. Time will tell if it plays out that way...



Sounds like we're betting on that "hope" thing again!
HockeyDad Offline
#292 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:17 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
DrMaddVibe wrote:
An overdose on Hope?




...And extra big-ass fries from Carls JR!
teedubbya Offline
#293 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:19 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
HockeyDad wrote:
That is odd. I heard they lost a cash cow.


it just moved to a different field... and there are many more

that's the problem with the bill is there are little nuggets everywhere.... I'm not sure anyone understands it completely despite all the expert analysis in here
HockeyDad Offline
#294 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:25 PM EST
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,156
I'm trying to figure out if I'm one of the 95% or the 5% when my company eliminates medical insurance
teedubbya Offline
#295 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:28 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
HockeyDad wrote:
I'm trying to figure out if I'm one of the 95% or the 5% when my company eliminates medical insurance


be both
DrMaddVibe Offline
#296 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:44 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
HockeyDad wrote:
...And extra big-ass fries from Carls JR!


You said that like the guy that does those Monster Truck show commercials didncha?
tailgater Offline
#297 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:45 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
be both


So in other words....All In?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#298 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:46 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,489
teedubbya wrote:
it just moved to a different field... and there are many more

that's the problem with the bill is there are little nuggets everywhere.... I'm not sure anyone understands it completely despite all the expert analysis in here



Yeah...stop listening and posting in here...go listen to more insHannity! He'll tell you all you need to know!
tailgater Offline
#299 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:46 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
it just moved


Was it the insurance talk, the fawing over Obama, or something more subtle?
leftyposthole Offline
#300 Posted: Thu, Nov 15 2012, 1:51 PM EST
Joined: 05-09-2011
Posts: 3,376
Our hospital has two diff. charges for the same procedure. One price for those with ins. and half as much for those without. Who is screwing who...................
Users browsing this topic
Guest
7 Pages«<234567>
Back to Top