|
Post by AztecWilliam on Aug 7, 2009 10:40:53 GMT -8
Obama's statements about health care contain serious built-in contradictions that the public has trouble swallowing. Here's a look at that in the context of how the Democrats see the '94 debacle. www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1914973,00.html AzWm
|
|
|
Post by aztecwin on Aug 8, 2009 15:22:22 GMT -8
The obvious flaws in our present system can not be an excuse for making an even more bizarre system with even bigger faults and disastrous consequences. Lets fix what is wrong and not just make it worse!
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 9, 2009 13:03:20 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 9, 2009 17:00:34 GMT -8
Obama's statements about health care contain serious built-in contradictions that the public has trouble swallowing. Here's a look at that in the context of how the Democrats see the '94 debacle. AzWm While it may have internal contradictions (and let's keep in mind that there is no final bill in either House of Congress yet), most of the people protesting are not protesting the contradictions, they're protesting based upon the lies they are being told about "death panels" and other nonsense. =Bob
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Aug 10, 2009 8:24:42 GMT -8
The goal is single payer. This is a step. The American people are the frogs in a slowly warming kettle. Their ability to jump out of the kettle gets more difficult as the steps progress. Private insurance will not be directly eliminated by government. It will occur as a natural result of government actions. Removing any chance of a profit will kill private insurance and government will step in as the savior.
When they tell you "you can keep your current something" but take steps making it impossible for that "something" to continue, they are lying.
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 10, 2009 9:16:32 GMT -8
Nothing wrong with a single payer system. Medicare works just fine.
I understand that there are a number of posters on this board who are on Medicare. Please explain to me what isn't working for you.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 10, 2009 14:51:19 GMT -8
The goal is single payer. This is a step. The American people are the frogs in a slowly warming kettle. Their ability to jump out of the kettle gets more difficult as the steps progress. Private insurance will not be directly eliminated by government. It will occur as a natural result of government actions. Removing any chance of a profit will kill private insurance and government will step in as the savior. Whose goal is single-payer? There are 5 bills between the Senate and the House and none of them call for single-payer and it's unlikely the Blue Dogs will go for a plan that appears to bring about single-payer down the road. But tell ya what, Will. Go through all 5 of the bills and find where and how they conspire to eliminate insurance companies and then come back and talk to us. =Bob
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 10, 2009 15:01:03 GMT -8
Nothing wrong with a single payer system. Medicare works just fine. I understand that there are a number of posters on this board who are on Medicare. Please explain to me what isn't working for you. Works okay most of the time. The point is that after having paid into it for decades, people will use it to the extent they find it useful. It only pays 75%, though. And that is only 75% of the Medicare "allowed" amount, not what is billed. That's okay, as long as you can find a doctor who agrees to accept that. Please explain why someone who hasn't paid a dime into a program should be entitled to the same care? That is, after all, what the proposal means. In addition, single payer will deny everyone the ability to go outside the program if desired. It will become a crime to do that. It has to, because doctors would otherwise opt out of the system. At least any doctors worth a damn. Doctors who will accept arbitrary limits are getting harder to find. When it gets to be illegal for a doctor and a patient to independently negotiate a price, there are going to be a lot less doctors. People will figure out that they can make more money, with less time and money invested, by becoming something like, say, an auto mechanic.
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Aug 10, 2009 15:42:09 GMT -8
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qumccdsdYgE The Medicare/Medicaid programs are breaking the government and those programs are only supporting a portion of the US population and now we would want to extend that sort of support to a majority of the US population? The Gov bureaucracy involved will result in loss of control, blown budgets and more deficits regardless of the varied arrays of oversight planned. As it is now, Medicare and Medicaid pay the least, gets abused the most, and costs the most and you will just put that all on steroids with these bills. The most likely unintended consequence will be doctors opting out of the "pubic" insurance option because of reduced payments and they will go cash only or work with selected private insurance companies (like plastic surgeons do now). This will cause long waits and rationing for those medical services still available on the Pubic option. To remedy the shortages, the deficits, etc, the Gov will be forced to go "strong-arm" against the Docs, the Hospitals, the Patients and Tax Payers (ala Canada) and that will not sit well for the average American. This will all auger in if we jump off the way it is currently going.
|
|
|
Post by AlwaysAnAztec on Aug 11, 2009 7:46:06 GMT -8
Nothing wrong with a single payer system. Medicare works just fine. I understand that there are a number of posters on this board who are on Medicare. Please explain to me what isn't working for you. Works okay most of the time. The point is that after having paid into it for decades, people will use it to the extent they find it useful. It only pays 75%, though. And that is only 75% of the Medicare "allowed" amount, not what is billed. That's okay, as long as you can find a doctor who agrees to accept that. Please explain why someone who hasn't paid a dime into a program should be entitled to the same care? That is, after all, what the proposal means. In addition, single payer will deny everyone the ability to go outside the program if desired. It will become a crime to do that. It has to, because doctors would otherwise opt out of the system. At least any doctors worth a damn. Doctors who will accept arbitrary limits are getting harder to find. When it gets to be illegal for a doctor and a patient to independently negotiate a price, there are going to be a lot less doctors. People will figure out that they can make more money, with less time and money invested, by becoming something like, say, an auto mechanic. Medicare is structured like the 'traditional' 80/20 plans. If you don't want to cover the 20% yourself you can purchase supplemental insurance. That is what my parents did. You can 'go outside of the system' right now. My mother-in-law has Secure Horizons (Pacificare). She pays an additional premium and has the exact same HMO benefits that I do through my insurance at work. The only negotiation that goes on between doctor and patient is when the patient does not have health insurance and is charged full boat. Otherwise the reimbursement rate is set by the insurance companies often using the Medicare rate as a baseline. Yes some of the larger health care providers, such as Scripps Clinic, are able to negotiate higher rates but most providers accept what the insurance company pays or they don't have any patients.
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 11, 2009 13:35:49 GMT -8
Works okay most of the time. The point is that after having paid into it for decades, people will use it to the extent they find it useful. It only pays 75%, though. And that is only 75% of the Medicare "allowed" amount, not what is billed. That's okay, as long as you can find a doctor who agrees to accept that. Please explain why someone who hasn't paid a dime into a program should be entitled to the same care? That is, after all, what the proposal means. In addition, single payer will deny everyone the ability to go outside the program if desired. It will become a crime to do that. It has to, because doctors would otherwise opt out of the system. At least any doctors worth a damn. Doctors who will accept arbitrary limits are getting harder to find. When it gets to be illegal for a doctor and a patient to independently negotiate a price, there are going to be a lot less doctors. People will figure out that they can make more money, with less time and money invested, by becoming something like, say, an auto mechanic. Medicare is structured like the 'traditional' 80/20 plans. If you don't want to cover the 20% yourself you can purchase supplemental insurance. That is what my parents did. You can 'go outside of the system' right now. My mother-in-law has Secure Horizons (Pacificare). She pays an additional premium and has the exact same HMO benefits that I do through my insurance at work. The only negotiation that goes on between doctor and patient is when the patient does not have health insurance and is charged full boat. Otherwise the reimbursement rate is set by the insurance companies often using the Medicare rate as a baseline. Yes some of the larger health care providers, such as Scripps Clinic, are able to negotiate higher rates but most providers accept what the insurance company pays or they don't have any patients. Yes, Medicare is structured like traditional 80/20 plans, no duh. People who paid into it all their working lives are entitled to use it to the extent that they want to, to the extent it approves a service, and to the extent they can find providers who are willing to accept Medicare. But no one is required to use it. If a certain procedure is denied by Medicare, indeed, today you can go outside the system. The point was, under a single-payer government system, there can be no alternative for the patient. It is take it or leave it, and oh by the way, you will not be permitted to contract outside the system independently. I do not believe that a patient cannot negotiate for less than so-called "full boat". I've done it.
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 11, 2009 13:54:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 11, 2009 16:45:36 GMT -8
I've come to the conclusion that those on here who support the current system are nothing but p*****s. They've grown so old and set in their ways that any change of any sort is something they cannot live with because they hate change (quite typical of old farts).
And more to the point, some of those on here who oppose any change are retired military and have had the advantage of government controlled health care since they were somewhere between 17 and 50. They've spent their lives under "socialized medical care", but see no reason why others should have what they have enjoyed because they think it's okay for us to pay for their health benefits but don't think we should have the same advantage.
Dave, Pooh, and others; you make your choices in your careers and as far as I can tell, you enjoyed what you did. But please explain to me why serving in the military gives you some sort of high position that others who served for a few years or didn't serve do not have?
Let's hear it, guys. This is your chance to whine about how your family life was disrupted because you made the decision to re-up over and over. You never take it to a personal level and I'm pretty sure I know why you don't do that. But I'm giving you the chance to claim why you "deserve" something more than other citizens.
=Bob
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 11, 2009 16:55:56 GMT -8
I've come to the conclusion that those on here who support the current system are nothing but p*****s. They've grown so old and set in their ways that any change of any sort is something they cannot live with because they hate change (quite typical of old farts). And more to the point, some of those on here who oppose any change are retired military and have had the advantage of government controlled health care since they were somewhere between 17 and 50. They've spent their lives under "socialized medical care", but see no reason why others should have what they have enjoyed because they think it's okay for us to pay for their health benefits but don't think we should have the same advantage. Dave, Pooh, and others; you make your choices in your careers and as far as I can tell, you enjoyed what you did. But please explain to me why serving in the military gives you some sort of high position that others who served for a few years or didn't serve do not have? Let's hear it, guys. This is your chance to whine about how your family life was disrupted because you made the decision to re-up over and over. You never take it to a personal level and I'm pretty sure I know why you don't do that. But I'm giving you the chance to claim why you "deserve" something more than other citizens. =Bob bull$#!+. You got the same or similar programs by carrying the mail. You got the same or similar by working for the county. That was part of the employment package you signed up for. If you think hobos and illegals should get the same package you got from your employer, fine. You can pay for it. Not me.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 11, 2009 16:59:20 GMT -8
I've come to the conclusion that those on here who support the current system are nothing but p*****s. They've grown so old and set in their ways that any change of any sort is something they cannot live with because they hate change (quite typical of old farts). And more to the point, some of those on here who oppose any change are retired military and have had the advantage of government controlled health care since they were somewhere between 17 and 50. They've spent their lives under "socialized medical care", but see no reason why others should have what they have enjoyed because they think it's okay for us to pay for their health benefits but don't think we should have the same advantage. Dave, Pooh, and others; you make your choices in your careers and as far as I can tell, you enjoyed what you did. But please explain to me why serving in the military gives you some sort of high position that others who served for a few years or didn't serve do not have? Let's hear it, guys. This is your chance to whine about how your family life was disrupted because you made the decision to re-up over and over. You never take it to a personal level and I'm pretty sure I know why you don't do that. But I'm giving you the chance to claim why you "deserve" something more than other citizens. =Bob bull$#!+. You got the same or similar programs by carrying the mail. You got the same or similar by working for the county. That was part of the employment package you signed up for. If you think hobos and illegals should get the same package you got from your employer, fine. You can pay for it. Not me. "HOBOS" Jeez, how old are you? But just FYI, the USPS medical system sucked while I was there. I got Kaiser, for a price, but if I wanted dental, it had to be through the union and I didn't care to sign up for the union because I considered the union to be worthless. The County was definitely better, but it still cost me a ton of bucks to sign up for health, dental and vision - what the County was willing to pay didn't even cover Kaiser, let alone my dental and vision health plans - those I paid big time for. When I retired, I was paying close to 400 bucks a month for Kaiser, 37 bucks a month for vision and almost 100 bucks a month for dental. The county was paying about 168 bucks a month for my entire health care package. It's really very simple, Dave. You've always had government health care since the time you enlisted and you've still got it. You have no clue what it's like to be in the public sector or private sector when it comes to what health care coverage costs because, since the time you enlisted, you've had the benefits of "socialized" health care. It's really rather simple - like Pooh you assume that because you had a job in the military you assume that you sit in some privileged position that should give you something more than those who did not. It's fine with me that you made that choice, but it's not fine with me that you now demand that others who worked their asses off their entire lives and didn't get to retire at the young age I'm sure you retired at, should be told to stuff it. In short, all you offer is the typical Nav whine. You enlisted, you spent 6 months a year away from your family due to WestPac duty and you now claim that it was some sort of hardship. I'm sorry, but it was your decision and maybe it's time you stopped whining and take responsibility for your decisions instead of denying people, who were just as important in our economy, the benefits you get. I'm sorry, but there is nothing all that special about someone who takes a job in the military. The pay sucks, but you re-upped over and over and apparently now you want to whine about it. Ain't going to cut it. =Bob
|
|
|
Post by ptsdthor on Aug 11, 2009 19:13:34 GMT -8
I've come to the conclusion that those on here who support the current system are nothing but p*****s. They've grown so old and set in their ways that any change of any sort is something they cannot live with because they hate change (quite typical of old farts). And more to the point, some of those on here who oppose any change are retired military and have had the advantage of government controlled health care since they were somewhere between 17 and 50. They've spent their lives under "socialized medical care", but see no reason why others should have what they have enjoyed because they think it's okay for us to pay for their health benefits but don't think we should have the same advantage. Dave, Pooh, and others; you make your choices in your careers and as far as I can tell, you enjoyed what you did. But please explain to me why serving in the military gives you some sort of high position that others who served for a few years or didn't serve do not have? Let's hear it, guys. This is your chance to whine about how your family life was disrupted because you made the decision to re-up over and over. You never take it to a personal level and I'm pretty sure I know why you don't do that. But I'm giving you the chance to claim why you "deserve" something more than other citizens. =Bob I'm so impressed how "brave" some people are with other people's money. And as the thread says, its about the "plan", not the need to do heathcare reform. Obama's plan sucks for the many reasons cited in any number of threads in here and more. Just because there are 5 bad bills that are not yet the law, it is foolish to say, effectively, "how can you oppose it when it is not 100% resolved?" Every one of the various bills intertwines Government too deeply in the reform. All experience tells us that the resultant Government entitlement will be abused, underfunded and grow unreasonably. And this is no small thing. It will swallow the entire government and Obama knows it and wants it. It could easily bankrupt the Country if done wrong and all indications are going that way. The reform needs to stay predominately private which is an anathema to the garden variety Statist, let alone an avid neo-Marxist. But it can be done better however. Alas, everyone knows where Nancy, Harry and Obama are philosophically. So they have a fight on their hands. Boo Hoo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2009 12:44:28 GMT -8
Medicare is structured like the 'traditional' 80/20 plans. If you don't want to cover the 20% yourself you can purchase supplemental insurance. That is what my parents did. You can 'go outside of the system' right now. My mother-in-law has Secure Horizons (Pacificare). She pays an additional premium and has the exact same HMO benefits that I do through my insurance at work. The only negotiation that goes on between doctor and patient is when the patient does not have health insurance and is charged full boat. Otherwise the reimbursement rate is set by the insurance companies often using the Medicare rate as a baseline. Yes some of the larger health care providers, such as Scripps Clinic, are able to negotiate higher rates but most providers accept what the insurance company pays or they don't have any patients. I do not believe that a patient cannot negotiate for less than so-called "full boat". I've done it. As have I. The wife wanted to get some foot surgery done not covered by our plan at the time. I did an interesting thing, something almost unheard of when it comes to the medical industry; I shopped and I negotiated. What was initially a $12,000 procedure with a night in the hospital at Scripps Green went down to a $3500.00 outpatient procedure at Scripps Carmel Valley. Same Doctor and everything. Weird but true..
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 12, 2009 13:45:05 GMT -8
bull$#!+. You got the same or similar programs by carrying the mail. You got the same or similar by working for the county. That was part of the employment package you signed up for. If you think hobos and illegals should get the same package you got from your employer, fine. You can pay for it. Not me. "HOBOS" Jeez, how old are you? But just FYI, the USPS medical system sucked while I was there. I got Kaiser, for a price, but if I wanted dental, it had to be through the union and I didn't care to sign up for the union because I considered the union to be worthless. The County was definitely better, but it still cost me a ton of bucks to sign up for health, dental and vision - what the County was willing to pay didn't even cover Kaiser, let alone my dental and vision health plans - those I paid big time for. When I retired, I was paying close to 400 bucks a month for Kaiser, 37 bucks a month for vision and almost 100 bucks a month for dental. The county was paying about 168 bucks a month for my entire health care package. It's really very simple, Dave. You've always had government health care since the time you enlisted and you've still got it. You have no clue what it's like to be in the public sector or private sector when it comes to what health care coverage costs because, since the time you enlisted, you've had the benefits of "socialized" health care. It's really rather simple - like Pooh you assume that because you had a job in the military you assume that you sit in some privileged position that should give you something more than those who did not. It's fine with me that you made that choice, but it's not fine with me that you now demand that others who worked their asses off their entire lives and didn't get to retire at the young age I'm sure you retired at, should be told to stuff it. In short, all you offer is the typical Nav whine. You enlisted, you spent 6 months a year away from your family due to WestPac duty and you now claim that it was some sort of hardship. I'm sorry, but it was your decision and maybe it's time you stopped whining and take responsibility for your decisions instead of denying people, who were just as important in our economy, the benefits you get. I'm sorry, but there is nothing all that special about someone who takes a job in the military. The pay sucks, but you re-upped over and over and apparently now you want to whine about it. Ain't going to cut it. =Bob You don't know squat about military health care. No matter how many times you repeat the same bull$#!+, it simply isn't true. I haven't whined about anything, and I do not for a minute believe what you say above about county and USPS health care benefits. I showed you the links, but evidently you seem to think by ignoring them they will go away: Health Insurance The Postal Service participates in the Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program, which provides excellent coverage and flexibility with most of the cost paid by the Postal Service. There are many plans available, including both traditional insurance coverage and Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs). Employee premium contributions are not subject to most taxes, making health insurance even more affordable. www.usps.com/employment/compbenefits.htmCore Benefits Work Medical Insurance Dental Insurance Vision Insurance Life Insurance Accidental Death Dismemberment Insurance Organization Long Term Disability Insurance Short Term Disability Insurance www.sdcounty.ca.gov/hr/benefits.htmlActive duty military does not have "insurance". They are obligated to use military treatment facilities. If they go to a civilian facility, it is on their own hook. (In fact, if an active duty member goes to a civilian doctor without the military's approval, that member can be punished with an Article 15 or a Court-Martial). And oh by the way, the military doctors are immune from any malpractice law-suits. Retired military can use TRICARE but there are premiums. When the retiree reaches age 65, s/he goes on Medicare because military pay has been docked for that since the program was started. The retiree can retain TRICARE as a secondary payer for a premium. No dental for retirees, unless the retiree buys insurance. Right now it costs 40 bucks a month, and it is quite limited with up to 50% co-pay, and 1000 bucks a year cap. If you were paying 100 a month for dental, you either have serious dental problems or you're a fool. It's your uninformed trolls that "don't cut it".
|
|
|
Post by davdesid on Aug 12, 2009 16:25:17 GMT -8
Hey =Perfesser, how much does an entry level mail carrier get compared to an entry level military memeber? Well, looks like the mail carrier gets over three times as much: www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=U.S._Postal_Service_(USPS)/Hourly_RateCompare, and do the math: www.navycs.com/09militarypaychart.htmlEntry level mailman gets about 56K per year, entry level military about 16K. Now lets look at salaries for San Diego County employees. There are 46 pages in the below link, but I picked a few out like these: Planning Board Secretary starts at 41K. Max at 50K. Planner Estimator starts at 46K. Max at 57K. Deputy Director of Planning and Land Use starts at 73K. Max at 144K. Assistant Director of Planning and Land Use starts at 81K. Max 168K. Director of Planning and Land Use starts at 129K. Max 204K. Hell, even an entry level gardener makes twice as much as the military guy. 31K. agency.governmentjobs.com/sdcounty/default.cfm(click the link on the left menu, job descriptions and salaries) You are the one who is doing the whining. You stayed in San Diego walking around neighborhoods delivering mail, and then sitting on your fat ass in the County building on Harbor Drive raking in many times the salary of most military people, and you have the gall to bitch, whine and moan about having to pay a premium for health insurance. I'm sorry, but there sure as hell isn't anything all that special about someone who takes a slug bureaucrat job making as much as you did by sitting on your ass and going home every night to mommy's ***** and whining about health care premiums.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Forsythe on Aug 12, 2009 16:33:03 GMT -8
The reform needs to stay predominately private which is an anathema to the garden variety Statist, let alone an avid neo-Marxist. But it can be done better however. Really? Are you happy with the increases you've had to deal with in recent years? Are you stupid enough to assume that it's all because there is no tort reform and that insurance companies will charge you less if there is tort reform, given that there is already tort reform in this state? it can be done better however. What the F@$k does that mean other than you offering an opinion that our current health system sucks? =Bob
|
|