|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 22, 2012 21:12:11 GMT -8
' ' ' if you are old and need specialist help, or simply need to see the right doctor in a reasonably short period of time, ObamaCare is very bad news. These very frightening flaws in ObamaCare have been pointed out again and again, yet the Left continues to be unwilling or unable to acknowledge the truth. (And, once again, I challenge fans of ObamaCare to refute, point by point, the charges contained in this article. Once again I very much doubt that anyone will do so.) www.forbes.com/sites/scottatlas/2012/08/20/how-to-save-americas-health-care-safey-net/AzWm
|
|
|
Post by burrito on Aug 22, 2012 21:34:02 GMT -8
Which is exactly why a single payer system is the most economical and fairest system available.
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 23, 2012 8:14:06 GMT -8
Which is exactly why a single payer system is the most economical and fairest system available. +1,000
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 23, 2012 8:27:22 GMT -8
He quoted the AMA Report Card for 2008. Wonder why when the AMA publishes one for every year. The summary results from 2012 are below. Based upon what the AMA publishes, Medicare does pretty damn well. Once again your blind hatred of Obama is overshadowed by the facts. www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/psa/2012-nhirc-results.pdf
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 23, 2012 9:37:33 GMT -8
He quoted the AMA Report Card for 2008. Wonder why when the AMA publishes one for every year. The summary results from 2012 are below. Based upon what the AMA publishes, Medicare does pretty damn well. Once again your blind hatred of Obama is overshadowed by the facts. www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/psa/2012-nhirc-results.pdfOh, please! I do not hate Obama. Don't much like him for a variety of solid reasons, to be sure, but hate? Nonsense. Actually, as somebody said a day or two ago, this should really be called PelosiCare. Obama was too busy playing golf to get involved in the actual creation of this monster. Oh, yes, one more thing. The AMA represents about 20% of U.S. doctors, so I am not too impressed with anything it publishes. I and others I know have talked to actual doctors who practice on a daily basis, and they are NOT optimistic about what ObamaCare will do to U.S. medicine. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 23, 2012 9:42:28 GMT -8
Which is exactly why a single payer system is the most economical and fairest system available. Single payer, arguably, is where we are headed. That means that the government will totally run health care in this country. The standard procedure of governments, once they realize that socialized medicine still costs too much (quality of care is virtually ignored), is simply to cut reimbursement to the bone, regardless of the consequences to patients. Perhaps you need to reread the article I have linked. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 23, 2012 10:17:50 GMT -8
Which is exactly why a single payer system is the most economical and fairest system available. Single payer, arguably, is where we are headed. That means that the government will totally run health care in this country. The standard procedure of governments, one they realize that socialized medicine still costs too much (quality of care is virtually ignored), is simply to cut reimbursement to the bone, regardless of the consequences to patients. Perhaps you need to reread the article I have linked. AzWm I would rather have an efficient (see my link above) government run single payer system (i.e. Medicare) than what is offered by the crooked insurance companies.
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 23, 2012 10:34:58 GMT -8
Single payer, arguably, is where we are headed. That means that the government will totally run health care in this country. The standard procedure of governments, one they realize that socialized medicine still costs too much (quality of care is virtually ignored), is simply to cut reimbursement to the bone, regardless of the consequences to patients. Perhaps you need to reread the article I have linked. AzWm I would rather have an efficient (see my link above) government run single payer system (i.e. Medicare) than what is offered by the crooked insurance companies. In order to be efficient, government run can not be part of the system. Medicare has tens of billions in waste and fraud now. Root that out first and then talk about Medicare as efficient.
|
|
|
Post by aztec70 on Aug 23, 2012 11:37:23 GMT -8
I would rather have an efficient (see my link above) government run single payer system (i.e. Medicare) than what is offered by the crooked insurance companies. In order to be efficient, government run can not be part of the system. Medicare has tens of billions in waste and fraud now. Root that out first and then talk about Medicare as efficient. Now that you are retired from federal government, they have become much more efficient.
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Aug 23, 2012 14:42:18 GMT -8
I would rather have an efficient (see my link above) government run single payer system (i.e. Medicare) than what is offered by the crooked insurance companies. In order to be efficient, government run can not be part of the system. Medicare has tens of billions in waste and fraud now. Root that out first and then talk about Medicare as efficient. And the post office. And social security. etc.,etc., etc. Anything government touches is a big overblown waste of time and money. What I really find troublesome under this program is that as you get old and need a specific medical procedure some beurocratic clowns are going to make the decisions about that care by a quality of life table. In other words, if you are 85 and neesd a knee replacement which costs say $100,000 and they determine by your records that you are estimated to have 24 months left to live, they will say $50,000 per year is not worth the cost so here are more painkillers Mr. Patient. I want to be around when someone who wants obamacare has this situation with,say, their mother.
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 23, 2012 15:02:21 GMT -8
In order to be efficient, government run can not be part of the system. Medicare has tens of billions in waste and fraud now. Root that out first and then talk about Medicare as efficient. And the post office. And social security. etc.,etc., etc. Anything government touches is a big overblown waste of time and money. What I really find troublesome under this program is that as you get old and need a specific medical procedure some beurocratic clowns are going to make the decisions about that care by a quality of life table. In other words, if you are 85 and neesd a knee replacement which costs say $100,000 and they determine by your records that you are estimated to have 24 months left to live, they will say $50,000 per year is not worth the cost so here are more painkillers Mr. Patient. I want to be around when someone who wants obamacare has this situation with,say, their mother. I guess you've never dealt with an insurance company who's only goal is to make money. I've dealt with Medicare as both of my parents reciently passed away. They authorized EVERYTHING the doctors ordered. I wish my current dealings with private insurance was as smooth. Too bad you don't have a clue on what you talk about. Just keep spouting the talking points Rush tells you too.
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 23, 2012 15:21:30 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by tuff on Aug 23, 2012 15:29:29 GMT -8
And the post office. And social security. etc.,etc., etc. Anything government touches is a big overblown waste of time and money. What I really find troublesome under this program is that as you get old and need a specific medical procedure some beurocratic clowns are going to make the decisions about that care by a quality of life table. In other words, if you are 85 and neesd a knee replacement which costs say $100,000 and they determine by your records that you are estimated to have 24 months left to live, they will say $50,000 per year is not worth the cost so here are more painkillers Mr. Patient. I want to be around when someone who wants obamacare has this situation with,say, their mother. I guess you've never dealt with an insurance company who's only goal is to make money. I've dealt with Medicare as both of my parents reciently passed away. They authorized EVERYTHING the doctors ordered. I wish my current dealings with private insurance was as smooth. Too bad you don't have a clue on what you talk about. Just keep spouting the talking points Rush tells you too. Sorry about your parents and I am glad you didn't have any problems with Medicare. I had a long afternoon with my orthopedic surgeon and his family yesterday and these were a few points discussed.. And we were talking about obamacare not medicare. I do have a question for you about your parents medicare coverage if you can remember, Did they have a supplemental policy and with whom?
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 23, 2012 15:33:33 GMT -8
In order to be efficient, government run can not be part of the system. Medicare has tens of billions in waste and fraud now. Root that out first and then talk about Medicare as efficient. Now that you are retired from federal government, they have become much more efficient. Speaking of efficiency, how are you doing on =short's tax problem. figured out the 1040 EZ yet?
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 23, 2012 15:45:33 GMT -8
And the post office. And social security. etc.,etc., etc. Anything government touches is a big overblown waste of time and money. What I really find troublesome under this program is that as you get old and need a specific medical procedure some beurocratic clowns are going to make the decisions about that care by a quality of life table. In other words, if you are 85 and neesd a knee replacement which costs say $100,000 and they determine by your records that you are estimated to have 24 months left to live, they will say $50,000 per year is not worth the cost so here are more painkillers Mr. Patient. I want to be around when someone who wants obamacare has this situation with,say, their mother. I guess you've never dealt with an insurance company who's only goal is to make money. I've dealt with Medicare as both of my parents reciently passed away. They authorized EVERYTHING the doctors ordered. I wish my current dealings with private insurance was as smooth. Too bad you don't have a clue on what you talk about. Just keep spouting the talking points Rush tells you too. One of the reasons that Medicare is so well liked is they will approve just about anything. This is why they are so susceptible to fraud and abuse. I am always glad to hear when folks who need legit care get high quality care with minimum hassle. I just have to wonder if putting up with closer scrutiny would not eliminate some of the down side in terms of cost to Medicare. Also, the question about how well you like the program might be dependent on your supplemental program. Now that we are both on Medicare, and our other payer is pretty reasonable as well we have no problems. I think I would be glad to put up with closer monitoring if it meant that less fraud was going on in general. I also wonder just how long my provider will give us this great care when the overall reimbursement rate for Medicare is going to go down by at least the 716 billion bucks that is trying to be siphoned off to pay for ObamaKare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 23, 2012 17:30:00 GMT -8
If you are young and healthy, you shouldn't listen to anything William or Win has to say.
|
|
|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 23, 2012 17:49:52 GMT -8
And the post office. And social security. etc.,etc., etc. Anything government touches is a big overblown waste of time and money. What I really find troublesome under this program is that as you get old and need a specific medical procedure some beurocratic clowns are going to make the decisions about that care by a quality of life table. In other words, if you are 85 and neesd a knee replacement which costs say $100,000 and they determine by your records that you are estimated to have 24 months left to live, they will say $50,000 per year is not worth the cost so here are more painkillers Mr. Patient. I want to be around when someone who wants obamacare has this situation with,say, their mother. I guess you've never dealt with an insurance company who's only goal is to make money. I've dealt with Medicare as both of my parents reciently passed away. They authorized EVERYTHING the doctors ordered. I wish my current dealings with private insurance was as smooth. Too bad you don't have a clue on what you talk about. Just keep spouting the talking points Rush tells you too. Did you not read where Medicare denies claims twice as often as private insurance companies? The idea that government run health care is going to be more efficient is a dangerous fallacy. No doubt government workers try their best, but there are inherent problems in how governments work that make it virtually impossible to match the efficiency that is generally (though, of course, not always) found in private industry. Ultimately, socialized medicine supporters come to the realization that there is no way in hell for a government run health system to be more efficient that one that relies on private organizations. Therefore, when the tapioca is about to hit the fan, governments do the only thing they know how to do - - - cut reimbursement without regard to how those cuts will impact the availability and the the quality of health care. And, guess what; if the government runs it, you are just out of luck if you want to do better. I have an example that may, if you are open-minded, offer some enlightenment. Let's take the auto industry. What do you think of German cars? A stupid question, really, with BMW, Mercedes, Audi, and VW known and respected all over the world. Let's go back to 1945. German lay in ruins. What came to be known as West Germany was very likely much worse off in terms of war damage than the eastern part of the country. It was several years before German recovery even began. Okay, jump ahead to about 1990. West Germany was building great cars as mentioned above. What did The Peoples Republic of Germany offer its citizens? Why, yes, that great icon of automotive excellence the Trabant! ! ! The Trabant was arguably the worst large scale production (over 3,000,000 units) automobile in history. The damned thing had a lawnmower style engine and emitted horrible pollution. Do you seriously think that it's a coincidence that excellent cars came from (reasonably) free market West Germany and the worse than awful Trabant came from Communist East Germany? I'm waiting for someone to tell me that the Trabby may have been awful but East Germany had great health care! ;D ObamaCare will be the Trabby of health care systems. And if it prevails, we will suffer from it for decades just as the East Germans had to put up with the Trabant. AzWm
|
|
|
Post by burrito on Aug 24, 2012 13:42:50 GMT -8
Please explain to me how this is wrong. The US spends more on total healthcare expenditure and total healthcare expenditure per capita than any other developed country. source: www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/oecd042111.cfmHowever, at the same time, the US does not have a substantial improvement in life expectancy and other key indicators. In fact, the US ranks 38th or 42nd (depending on modelling) behind other peasant socialist countries who spend a smaller amount of money on healthcare including; CUBA!, Israel and pretty much everyother OECD country. I pose to you then, what would be your steps in the current condition to make the US not the highest spending country per capita on healthcare, and at the same time, increase the overall standard of peoples health? Opponents of universal healthcare are just plain scare mongering. How is it that every other developed country's government can run healthcare but some reason, the US elected officials will be unable?? Are American citizens who become elected morally corrupt, unable to run a large scale program, uneducated or a combination of both?
|
|
|
Post by burrito on Aug 24, 2012 13:45:51 GMT -8
If you are so worried that the officials wont be able to run it, go borrow the French or German modelling and their department officials. They seem to be doing a pretty good job.
This idea of American elitism of not borrowing on ideas from other countries is holding it back.
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 24, 2012 14:36:29 GMT -8
Please explain to me how this is wrong. The US spends more on total healthcare expenditure and total healthcare expenditure per capita than any other developed country. source: www.kff.org/insurance/snapshot/oecd042111.cfmHowever, at the same time, the US does not have a substantial improvement in life expectancy and other key indicators. In fact, the US ranks 38th or 42nd (depending on modelling) behind other peasant socialist countries who spend a smaller amount of money on healthcare including; CUBA!, Israel and pretty much everyother OECD country. I pose to you then, what would be your steps in the current condition to make the US not the highest spending country per capita on healthcare, and at the same time, increase the overall standard of peoples health? Opponents of universal healthcare are just plain scare mongering. How is it that every other developed country's government can run healthcare but some reason, the US elected officials will be unable?? Are American citizens who become elected morally corrupt, unable to run a large scale program, uneducated or a combination of both? The usual "smoke and mirrors" argument. www.forbes.com/sites/aroy/2011/11/23/the-myth-of-americans-poor-life-expectancy/Even if your phony conflation of socialized health care and longevity were correct, I would prefer freedom to longevity. OBTW, I like your screen name. www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkfX77bDBxM
|
|