Jump to content
personreal

"Obamacare ruled unconstitutional by Texas judge"

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

 

As I said, it seems to me to be a direct tax, in plain language.  But currently, it’s not unconstitutional because Roberts et al. said it’s not a direct tax.  We can disagree but they have the Supreme authority to interpret otherwise, which they did.

 

But that aside, no matter how constitutional or unconstitutional in whoever’s opinion, it doesn’t make the “tax” or the law itself “garbage.”

 

In other words, the constitutional analysis and the policy analysis are very different things.

I never said that it was garbage simply because it should have been ruled unconstitutional.  It is garbage all on its own.  It would still be garbage even if obama successfully got an amendment passed for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sane said:

It amazes me these people are mad that Obama wanted to make sure that Insurance companies have to cover you when you're sick.  Even if its not good for business.  

Why the hell should an insurance company have to cover someone that was already sick BEFORE buying their policy, moron?  Do you also think that car insurance companies should have to cover someone's losses for a preexisting car wreck before they bought their policy?

 

If a company has to cover something that has already happened, then this is no longer "insurance", dumbass.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Sane said:

When you're dieing its a f*cking crsis.  The problem is price gouging by the medical industry.  If you went into a grocery store and saw that bread was $100.  You wouldn't buy it.  If you had to, you could grow your own food to stay alive.  You can't grow your own health care.  That's it.  They price gouge.  I think you should get cancer and refuse health insurance cause you're a real american.  

So you think the only reason that grocery stores don't "price gouge" is because people can grow their own food?  Are you really that fucking retarded?  Lol...

 

It looks like you left an "in" off the front of your username...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, skews13 said:

 

Can't fu cking read? Pelosi will simply expand Medicare with DIRECT PAYMENTS TO MEDICARE.

 

Now it's no longer a tax paid to the IRS, and not subject to lawsuits by any Republicans, because they don't have standing to bring a case.

How are the poor people that you idiot libs want to get covered with this plan going to be able to afford to give a "DIRECT PAYMENT TO MEDICARE"?  And what will happen when the expenses & benefits paid out from the new program are greater than the "DIRECT PAYMENTS" coming into it, dimwit?  Are they going to take some of the money that was collected by the IRS to cover the gap?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Nighthawk said:

So you think the only reason that grocery stores don't "price gouge" is because people can grow their own food?  Are you really that fucking retarded?  Lol...

 

It looks like you left an "in" off the front of your username...

Ok, I know you love displaying your ignorant, but get your crayons out.  What determines price?  Supply and Demand.  If there is plenty of supply the cost goes down.  (go ahead write that down) In the grocery store metaphor the point was that access to food is abundant.  To the point you could grow your own if you needed to.  Hold on smart guy, I'll let you google metaphor.  What are your options for cancer treatment?  Could you grow your own?  How restricted is the supply?  How much does a month of cancer treatment cost?  50,000 - 60,000.  How much does that cost the physicians?  Oh yea, did I mention I was Senior Accountant for physician services at the Detroit Medical Center when Vanguard owned them?  I'm sorry retard you were going to tell me smart sh*t you heard on the radio.  Don't blame the insurance companies.  They have to make profit, and if we are going to tell them that they have to cover sick people when they get sick.  They have to cover their costs.  In other words you Fox Zombie, if you address the price gouging, you have addressed the cost driver.  uh Duh, but Rush said, Hannity said, put on your helmet and give it a think.  Insurance will ALWAYS be high if you are going to require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions with price gouging costs.  Now that you are armed with knowledge.  We'll see if you go from ignorant to idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sane said:

Ok, I know you love displaying your ignorant, but get your crayons out.  What determines price?  Supply and Demand.  If there is plenty of supply the cost goes down.  (go ahead write that down) In the grocery store metaphor the point was that access to food is abundant.  To the point you could grow your own if you needed to.  Hold on smart guy, I'll let you google metaphor.  What are your options for cancer treatment?  Could you grow your own?  How restricted is the supply?  How much does a month of cancer treatment cost?  50,000 - 60,000.  How much does that cost the physicians?  Oh yea, did I mention I was Senior Accountant for physician services at the Detroit Medical Center when Vanguard owned them?  I'm sorry retard you were going to tell me smart sh*t you heard on the radio.  Don't blame the insurance companies.  They have to make profit, and if we are going to tell them that they have to cover sick people when they get sick.  They have to cover their costs.  In other words you Fox Zombie, if you address the price gouging, you have addressed the cost driver.  uh Duh, but Rush said, Hannity said, put on your helmet and give it a think.  Insurance will ALWAYS be high if you are going to require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions with price gouging costs.  Now that you are armed with knowledge.  We'll see if you go from ignorant to idiot.

 

 

So in your world there is now a cure for cancer?

 

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No dumbass?  Can you read?  Let me use simple small words for you.  You as a cancer patient, desperate to live, will pay 50,000 - 60,000 for a months worth of treatment to try to keep you alive as long as possible.  You know what it costs the clinic?  If you have an average of 100 patients a month you will need 3 physicians (they general work 24 - 30 a week).  Administrative staff, Malpractice insurance (Big expense), and general overhead.  For on Month - Revenue 100 patients at 50,000 = $5,000,000 with costs of approximately $750,000.  It get's more complicated than that, but that is a good simpliciation for you.  Gee you should probably be pissed at obama.  I realize you don't know what you don't know.  Not a single policitican address the real issue.  They all scapegoat the insurance companies.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sane said:

No dumbass?  Can you read?  Let me use simple small words for you.  You as a cancer patient, desperate to live, will pay 50,000 - 60,000 for a months worth of treatment to try to keep you alive as long as possible.  You know what it costs the clinic?  If you have an average of 100 patients a month you will need 3 physicians (they general work 24 - 30 a week).  Administrative staff, Malpractice insurance (Big expense), and general overhead.  For on Month - Revenue 100 patients at 50,000 = $5,000,000 with costs of approximately $750,000.  It get's more complicated than that, but that is a good simpliciation for you.  Gee you should probably be pissed at obama.  I realize you don't know what you don't know.  Not a single policitican address the real issue.  They all scapegoat the insurance companies.  

 

 

Why do people waste that money, they are going to die anyways..

 

 

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Bear513 said:

 

 

Why do people waste that money, they are going to die anyways..

 

 

.

 Because the government traps us in to ripping us off and Trump is a master at it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bear513 said:

 

 

Why do people waste that money, they are going to die anyways..

 

 

.

Everyone's different.  Some people are desperate to live and they can prolong your life.  My father has been in remission for 10 years.  A friend of mine, her husband killed himself in the hospital when he found out he had prostate cancer.  I've know a few people who have died.  This year alone my girlfriend lost her aunt, who choose to just die, and the Tuesday before Thanksgiving her Grandmother was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.  She said the same thing.  I'm ready to go.  I don't know if you've had anyone close to you develop it.  It's ugly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Sane said:

Everyone's different.  Some people are desperate to live and they can prolong your life.  My father has been in remission for 10 years.  A friend of mine, her husband killed himself in the hospital when he found out he had prostate cancer.  I've know a few people who have died.  This year alone my girlfriend lost her aunt, who choose to just die, and the Tuesday before Thanksgiving her Grandmother was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer.  She said the same thing.  I'm ready to go.  I don't know if you've had anyone close to you develop it.  It's ugly.

 

 

That's the problem, you freak out, spend alot of health insurance money and f*cking die anyways.

 

 

..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nighthawk said:

How are the poor people that you idiot libs want to get covered with this plan going to be able to afford to give a "DIRECT PAYMENT TO MEDICARE"?  And what will happen when the expenses & benefits paid out from the new program are greater than the "DIRECT PAYMENTS" coming into it, dimwit?  Are they going to take some of the money that was collected by the IRS to cover the gap?

It's called subsidies. You pay on your ability to pay. And as is now is the case with Medicare, private plans can still be purchased by those who need, or can afford the extra coverage. 

 

What is also missing in a medicare for all plan, is now large companies that no longer have to provide sponsored plans, this saves companies how many hundreds of billions?

 

How much more money do employees have in their paychecks now that premiums are no longer being deducted?

 

This allows everyone to pay into the plan, which now shores it up by hundreds of billions it needs to provide the coverage. Nobody is forced into the plan. There are no tax penalties.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, skews13 said:

It's called subsidies. You pay on your ability to pay. And as is now is the case with Medicare, private plans can still be purchased by those who need, or can afford the extra coverage. 

 

What is also missing in a medicare for all plan, is now large companies that no longer have to provide sponsored plans, this saves companies how many hundreds of billions?

 

How much more money do employees have in their paychecks now that premiums are no longer being deducted?

 

This allows everyone to pay into the plan, which now shores it up by hundreds of billions it needs to provide the coverage. Nobody is forced into the plan. There are no tax penalties.  

America dont like being told to purchase health care insurance dork

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sane said:

Ok, I know you love displaying your ignorant, but get your crayons out. 

If I am really so "ignorant", then it should be extremely easy for one of you idiot libs to finally prove me wrong for a change instead of always cowardly running away while I endlessly bump the threads in which I participate to deafening silence (go ahead, see for yourself- Link).  So what the fuck are you waiting for shithead?

 

Good luck, you are going to need it.

 

Quote

What determines price?  Supply and Demand.  If there is plenty of supply the cost goes down.  (go ahead write that down)

No fucking duh, dumbass.

 

Quote

In the grocery store metaphor the point was that access to food is abundant.  To the point you could grow your own if you needed to.  Hold on smart guy, I'll let you google metaphor.  What are your options for cancer treatment?  Could you grow your own?

Whether someone can "grow their own" is completely and totally irrelevant, retard.  I can't "grow my own" TV or computer, but that doesn't mean that companies have some magical power to be able to "price gouge" on these items, shit-for-brains.

 

Quote

How restricted is the supply?

And what, exactly, is restricting the supply of various forms of medical care, you damn moron?

 

I will give you a hint- it starts with the letter "G" and it is not "God", even though you idiot libs love to worship it as if it was a God.
 

Quote

How much does a month of cancer treatment cost?  50,000 - 60,000.  How much does that cost the physicians?  Oh yea, did I mention I was Senior Accountant for physician services at the Detroit Medical Center when Vanguard owned them?

 

Where did I ever state that the prices for most types of medical care in this country were not sky high, dimwit?  Of course they are.  Again- no fucking duh.  The point you are not getting is- ***WHY*** this is the case?  The reason you are not getting it is probably because you only know what your liberal masters have told you when they have been brainwashing the ever-living fuck out of you, and you dutifully swallowed it like a good little sheep.
 

Quote

I'm sorry retard you were going to tell me smart sh*t you heard on the radio.  Don't blame the insurance companies.  They have to make profit, and if we are going to tell them that they have to cover sick people when they get sick.  They have to cover their costs.  In other words you Fox Zombie, if you address the price gouging, you have addressed the cost driver. 

 

Where did I ever say we should not address the high prices, numbskull?  Your problem is that you still don't know the "root cause" of the high prices.  And you can't even begin to solve a problem until you know the root cause, idiot.

 

Quote

 

uh Duh, but Rush said, Hannity said, put on your helmet and give it a think.  Insurance will ALWAYS be high if you are going to require insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions with price gouging costs. 

 

I don't give 2 shits about Rush or Hannity. 

 

Quote

Now that you are armed with knowledge.  We'll see if you go from ignorant to idiot.

You know, you really shouldn't talk down to someone that is easily your intellectual superior, little boy.  It is only going to make it hurt that much more when I easily humiliate you for your gross ignorance and abject stupidity, just like I have done to countless other idiot libs on these forums.  I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that you are eventually going to cowardly run away like a sniveling little pussy while I continually bump the thread to crickets chirping, just like all the other idiot libs I have destroyed.  Let's see if my prediction comes true...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, skews13 said:

It's called subsidies. You pay on your ability to pay.

So where do these subsidies come from, dunce?  From some magical fairy from the gumdrop forest?  Or from money taken by the IRS in the form of taxes, which you just claimed would not be the case for this program?

 

 

Quote

 

What is also missing in a medicare for all plan, is now large companies that no longer have to provide sponsored plans, this saves companies how many hundreds of billions?

 

How much more money do employees have in their paychecks now that premiums are no longer being deducted?

 

How the hell can it simultaneously save companies billions and this same money be in the employee's paychecks, retard?  In the long run, it won't save companies anything, as they will have to give the value of the insurance to their employees in the form of higher wages, assuming that they were not being overpaid to begin with.

 

 

Quote

This allows everyone to pay into the plan, which now shores it up by hundreds of billions it needs to provide the coverage. Nobody is forced into the plan. There are no tax penalties.  

And you still haven't answered my simple question from above.  Here it is again for you-

 

And what will happen when the expenses & benefits paid out from the new program are greater than the "DIRECT PAYMENTS" coming into it, dimwit?  Are they going to take some of the money that was collected by the IRS to cover the gap?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Nighthawk said:

If I am really so "ignorant", then it should be extremely easy for one of you idiot libs to finally prove me wrong for a change instead of always cowardly running away while I endlessly bump the threads in which I participate to deafening silence (go ahead, see for yourself- Link).  So what the fuck are you waiting for shithead?

 

Good luck, you are going to need it.

 

No fucking duh, dumbass.

 

Whether someone can "grow their own" is completely and totally irrelevant, retard.  I can't "grow my own" TV or computer, but that doesn't mean that companies have some magical power to be able to "price gouge" on these items, shit-for-brains.

 

And what, exactly, is restricting the supply of various forms of medical care, you damn moron?

 

I will give you a hint- it starts with the letter "G" and it is not "God", even though you idiot libs love to worship it as if it was a God.
 

Where did I ever state that the prices for most types of medical care in this country were not sky high, dimwit?  Of course they are.  Again- no fucking duh.  The point you are not getting is- ***WHY*** this is the case?  The reason you are not getting it is probably because you only know what your liberal masters have told you when they have been brainwashing the ever-living fuck out of you, and you dutifully swallowed it like a good little sheep.
 

Where did I ever say we should not address the high prices, numbskull?  Your problem is that you still don't know the "root cause" of the high prices.  And you can't even begin to solve a problem until you know the root cause, idiot.

 

I don't give 2 shits about Rush or Hannity. 

 

You know, you really shouldn't talk down to someone that is easily your intellectual superior, little boy.  It is only going to make it hurt that much more when I easily humiliate you for your gross ignorance and abject stupidity, just like I have done to countless other idiot libs on these forums.  I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that you are eventually going to cowardly run away like a sniveling little pussy while I continually bump the thread to crickets chirping, just like all the other idiot libs I have destroyed.  Let's see if my prediction comes true...

 

Hahahaha wow.  Tell you what there sporto.  You my intellectual superior?  Hahahaha if you only had brain you would see you demonstrated your inferiority.  Ok, maybe I came down on you a little hard.  Fair enough.  I don't know if I mentioned I spent years as a senior account for physician services at the Detroit Medical Center when it was owned by Vanguard.  So just take a guess, how in depth of my financial knowledge in this area might be just a little beyond yours?  Self the lib BS.  Get off your "Its the government" BS.  I know the numbers and the drivers.  I've put together the budgets, have been the point person for the audits, preformed all the SEC reporting, provided all the variance analysis, and been part of the team that determines which insurances we will accept, not accept, in which mixes, at 7 hospitals and 57 satellite clinics.  Oh yea, you're my intelectual superior with vast knowledge in this arena.  The metaphor that clearly went over your head breaks down to this.  Physicians Groups, Hospital, and Pharmaceutical companies can and DO price gouge.  Period.  Guess how the f*ck I know genius?  Politicians scapegoat insurance companies, right wing media makes sh*t up about death panels.  FYI socialized health insurance is not socialized health care.  The hospitals are still for profit entities that are independent.  Don't go stupid on me with your programing.  Libs, Libs, hate Obama, blah blah, blah.  I try to share my insight knowing I'm going to get the toddler tantrum from those who are emotionally involved in their propaganda.  The Government doesn't set prices.  I could explain to you how it works, you would be surprised, but I know you won't listen.  This will really piss you off.  The most cost effect for the payer is Medicare.  Not because I'm a liberal (repeat brainwashed mindless BS here) because I've worked in the industry.  They pay the least and they catch more fraud.  Period,  You don't know, hush.  I have no doubt like all government agencies the overhead is ridiculous, but net net, they are still the most cost efficient.  Tell you what, I know I was harsh on you.  I apologize for that.  I'm trying to share information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nighthawk said:

Interstate competition may not "solve" the problems with cost, but they would most certainly help "reduce" these costs, drastically in some cases.  The point you are missing is this policy would enable the very badly needed competition among the ***regulators*** of insurance in each state.  For example, if some state decided to burden the insurance companies, and thus their customers, in their state with tons of useless mandates for fertility drugs, hair pieces, acupuncture, and a bunch of other unneeded crap & quackery, then their citizens would be able to tell their state government regulators to go fuck themselves and simply buy insurance from another state that isn't doing these things, thus saving money.  This would eventually cause the regulators of each state to compete against each other by only enacting regulations that consumers truly want and need, as opposed to the ones their special interests groups have bribed them to impose, and no more.

 

I have yet to hear anyone give anything even slightly resembling a rational reason as to why people should not have the freedom to buy their insurance from another state.

 

A lion's share of the insured out there are insured through employment, and a great deal of those plans are "self-insured" which exempts them from state regulations (ERISA).  

 

There have also been states that have explicitly allowed out-of-state insurers to sell insurance there, but does that mean insurers actually decide to?  Nope.  https://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2012/rwjf401409

 

Medicare Advantage plans have pretty much the same regulatory requirements everywhere, and so shouldn't we see robust competition among insurers in offering Medicare Advantage plans?  You'd think, but no.

 

There are also networking difficulties and complexities for insurance companies to be able to offer decent coverage in some other state.  Providers have to be willing to network with them.  And if they want their insurance to be cheaper than the other guys, then what are they going to have to do?  Try to negotiate provider rates that are lower than the providers get from the other guys.  If they don't offer similar reimbursement rates to providers as the other guys, fewer providers are going to network with them, and then the insurer gets a reputation for having crappy, skinny networks.  "Yeah the premiums look great, but don't be fooled, you won't find an in-network doctor anywhere!"  

 

Simple and sensible in theory, highly complicated in reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Sane said:

The most cost effect for the payer is Medicare.  Not because I'm a liberal (repeat brainwashed mindless BS here) because I've worked in the industry.  They pay the least and they catch more fraud.  Period,  You don't know, hush.  I have no doubt like all government agencies the overhead is ridiculous, but net net, they are still the most cost efficient.  Tell you what, I know I was harsh on you.  I apologize for that.  I'm trying to share information.

So, you claim to have been a "senior account"... I assume you mean accountant. 

As an accountant, you would have ZERO knowledge about how medicare and private industry battle fraud.  

Hint: Government doesn't give a crap about fraud.

 

And you can't show me a SINGLE THING that government does more efficiently or at a lower cost than private industry.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Nighthawk said:

I never said that it was garbage simply because it should have been ruled unconstitutional.  It is garbage all on its own.  It would still be garbage even if obama successfully got an amendment passed for it.

 

Garbage compared to what?  There's really nothing to compare it to that makes it look like garbage by comparison.  Health care costs between 1995 and 2010 went completely crazy, so we can't hail the success of what preceded Obamacare, because that was the opposite of successful. 

 

There's no other example of a well-functioning health system in any developed comparable nation in the world that isn't either a single-payer universal health care system, or a multi-payer universal health care system.  So Obamacare took a major step toward multi-payer UHC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sane said:

Hahahaha wow.  Tell you what there sporto.  You my intellectual superior?  Hahahaha if you only had brain you would see you demonstrated your inferiority.  Ok, maybe I came down on you a little hard.  Fair enough.  I don't know if I mentioned I spent years as a senior account for physician services at the Detroit Medical Center when it was owned by Vanguard.  So just take a guess, how in depth of my financial knowledge in this area might be just a little beyond yours?  Self the lib BS.  Get off your "Its the government" BS.  I know the numbers and the drivers.  I've put together the budgets, have been the point person for the audits, preformed all the SEC reporting, provided all the variance analysis, and been part of the team that determines which insurances we will accept, not accept, in which mixes, at 7 hospitals and 57 satellite clinics.  Oh yea, you're my intelectual superior with vast knowledge in this arena. 

I don't give a damn about any of that crap you supposedly did in your job.  You clearly don't understand basic economic theory as to why we see such high prices for healthcare.  You still have not identified the "root cause" of the problem, despite all your supposed "financial knowledge", dunce.
 

Quote


The metaphor that clearly went over your head breaks down to this.  Physicians Groups, Hospital, and Pharmaceutical companies can and DO price gouge.  Period.  Guess how the f*ck I know genius?  Politicians scapegoat insurance companies, right wing media makes sh*t up about death panels.  FYI socialized health insurance is not socialized health care.  The hospitals are still for profit entities that are independent.  Don't go stupid on me with your programing.  Libs, Libs, hate Obama, blah blah, blah.  I try to share my insight knowing I'm going to get the toddler tantrum from those who are emotionally involved in their propaganda. 

 

For the umpteenth time, I am NOT denying that the prices are high, fool.  The question is - WHY???  And no, it is not because people can't "grow their own healthcare", moron.

 

Quote

The Government doesn't set prices. 

I never said they did.

 

Quote

I could explain to you how it works, you would be surprised, but I know you won't listen.  This will really piss you off. 

Try me.  Good luck.

 

Quote

The most cost effect for the payer is Medicare.  Not because I'm a liberal (repeat brainwashed mindless BS here) because I've worked in the industry.  They pay the least and they catch more fraud.  Period,  You don't know, hush.  I have no doubt like all government agencies the overhead is ridiculous, but net net, they are still the most cost efficient.  Tell you what, I know I was harsh on you.  I apologize for that.  I'm trying to share information.

No, they do not catch more fraud, twit.  The numbers are not even close.  Is that what your liberal masters told you?  Link.

 

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.

 

 

Oops, there goes your dumb little ignorant theory.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

 

A lion's share of the insured out there are insured through employment, and a great deal of those plans are "self-insured" which exempts them from state regulations (ERISA).  

 

There have also been states that have explicitly allowed out-of-state insurers to sell insurance there, but does that mean insurers actually want to?  No.  Evidence?  Here:  https://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2012/rwjf401409

 

Medicare Advantage plans have pretty much the same regulatory requirements everywhere, and so do we see robust competition among insurers in Medicare Advantage plans?  No.

 

There are networking difficulties and complexities for insurance companies to be able to offer decent coverage in some other state.  Providers have to be willing to network with them.  And if they want their insurance to be cheaper than the other guys, then what are they going to have to do?  Try to negotiate provider rates that are lower than the providers get from the other guys.  If they don't offer similar reimbursement rates to providers as the other guys, fewer providers are going to network with them, and then the insurer gets a reputation for having crappy, skinny networks.  "Yeah the premiums look great, but don't be fooled, you won't find an in-network doctor anywhere!"  

Thanks for the link.  Give me some time to read over it and I will comment further on it later.  My initial response is that even if no insurer supposedly wants to do it, why not make it legal anyway?  What is the harm?  Secondly, what is to stop an existing insurer in some state from simply re-licensing in another state that has better regulations while keeping all their existing networks in the first state that they already have?  Then there would be no "networking difficulties and complexities" and consumers would be able to bypass the useless & costly mandates.  Win-win all around, except for the special interest groups that would lose their gravy trains and the politicians that would lose the campaign contributions (a.k.a. bribes) from these groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Neomalthusian said:

 

Garbage compared to what?  There's really nothing to compare it to that makes it look like garbage by comparison.  Health care costs between 1995 and 2010 went completely crazy, so we can't hail the success of what preceded Obamacare, because that was the opposite of successful. 

 

There's no other example of a well-functioning health system in any developed comparable nation in the world that isn't either a single-payer universal health care system, or a multi-payer universal health care system.  So Obamacare took a major step toward multi-payer UHC.

Garbage compared to the ideal, correct solution for starters- a FREE MARKET with minimal government involvement outside of preventing/prosecuting fraud, providing a court system for settling disputes, and enforcing contracts.  Garbage compared to the health care system in this very country earlier in the last century (read here for evidence of this- Link).  And yes, garbage compared to even the horrendous system we had just before obamacare.  At least before, most healthy people could not simply wait until they got sick to go buy health insurance at the same price as people that were still healthy, which is complete and utter insanity.  And this is just one of many, many reasons things are now much worse.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Golfboy said:

So, you claim to have been a "senior account"... I assume you mean accountant. 

As an accountant, you would have ZERO knowledge about how medicare and private industry battle fraud.  

Hint: Government doesn't give a crap about fraud.

 

And you can't show me a SINGLE THING that government does more efficiently or at a lower cost than private industry.

 

Yes Senior Accountant.  You know what about accounting and finance?  Oh diddly squat.  

Medicare crawls up your ass.  Medicare audits are intense and they will shut you down.  Like now.  The penalties for violations are in the millions.  You just know all this from the sh*t that came out of your mouth.  Oh that's right, you don't. 

Fraud, Waste, and Abuse couple with low efficiency is the hallmark of government.  That said, here's how the real medical business works.  Get your crayons out assh*le.  You see the fee structure (that's what physician charge for their services) is fixed; however, no insurance which includes Medicare / Medicaid pays the full amount for the services.  Example, as 2,000 services is provided to 3 people.  2 have Blue Cross Blue Shield and 1 has Medicare.  BCBS1 will pay 1,350, BCBS2 will pay 1,500, and Medicare will pay 1,100.  These are call contractual adjustments.  Medicare ALWAYS pays out the least.  Which means the cost to payer is the LOWEST,  just a fact assh*le, don't hurt you TrumpTard brain trying to deny it.  Now as far as an organization goes, the overhead for Medicare is going to be more costly because of inefficiency.  That's an issue with all government agencies; however, insurance companies now have to make a profit.  In the final analysis, private health insurance on a per patient basis is more expensive.  There real cost driver is the price gouging, and yes assh*le in my role not only do I see the numbers I help with the fee schedules.  Determine break even points, tax strategy, I'm the f*cking point person for the audits.  Did you learn something?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sane said:

 That's an issue with all government agencies; however, insurance companies now have to make a profit. 

The profits they make are absolutely minuscule compared to the losses to fraud inherit in Medicare, twit- Link.

 

Medicare fraud amounts to $60 billion dollars a year. That is one heck of a lot of money. In fact, Medicare loses seven times as much money in fraud every year than the combined profits of the 14 health insurance companies on the Fortune 500.

 

 

Oops, there goes your dumb little ignorant theory, yet again.  You want to go for the trifecta?

 

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×