reinbeau
Moderator Extraordinaire
My solution is to insure them. Only them. It would be far cheaper to take care of the uninsured than to change the whole system. But that won't help them gain even more control over us, so that's out.
Obama finally called them out
- Thread starter Big Daddy
- Start date
enjoy the ride
Sufficient Life
What has happened with Medicare and HMO plans (of which I am a member) is that doctors have stopped taking new patients under these plans because their reimbursement is much less due to Congresses and the Executive branch's trying to keep the cost under control. Canada gets around this by mandating that all doctors can not charge more than the plans allow and must be part of the plan. Doctors have no choice in Canada.
That is so unlikely to happen here in the US. So doctors will maximize their income by seeking the patients with the most lucrative reimbursements. As the woman at my insurance provider said- we can't make doctors take a patient. So there I am - no primary care physician and no ability to see any other doctor because HMO requires a primary care physician. Because the plan tried to control costs by limiting reimbursements- like Medicare.
Doctors demand a certain level of income in the US- Can you see Congress standing up to a doctor's strike, if it even gets that far? Or giving up to the pharmaceutical lobby? Even if they agree to hold back costs in one area, they will make up for it in another.
Hospitals in heavy Mdeicare communities are going broke because Congress decided to limit Medicare reimbursement as THE GOVENMENT COULDN"T AFFORD THE PROGRAM.
This is not just a matter of Congress waving its legislative magic wand. It has to be done well. THAT is what I have yet to see Congress do. They have never reformed anything in my lifetime so why should I think they will do so now. There is enough wiggle room in all the plans that Congress has made public to allow lots of bad things to happen.
It is not a matter of making everyone part of plan if that plan does not work. It will just drag all down into a pit of ineffective, extremely wasteful and expensive mediocrity. I can see the news now about health care fiascos.
People here keep arguing for universal coverage as if that will fix everything with really looking at what they will get for this coverage and what it will cost. And that is before the lawyers make a living out of litigation for the next twenty years.
No- something is not better than nothing- paying taxes on a million cars that don't work is not worth anything.
You may be able to keep your "plan" but your plan will change under any legislation I have seen.
From listening to my Representatives town hall- this is a train barrelling down the track to a bad end- not one question for specifics from the public was answered with anything but a terse "we know better than you."
That is so unlikely to happen here in the US. So doctors will maximize their income by seeking the patients with the most lucrative reimbursements. As the woman at my insurance provider said- we can't make doctors take a patient. So there I am - no primary care physician and no ability to see any other doctor because HMO requires a primary care physician. Because the plan tried to control costs by limiting reimbursements- like Medicare.
Doctors demand a certain level of income in the US- Can you see Congress standing up to a doctor's strike, if it even gets that far? Or giving up to the pharmaceutical lobby? Even if they agree to hold back costs in one area, they will make up for it in another.
Hospitals in heavy Mdeicare communities are going broke because Congress decided to limit Medicare reimbursement as THE GOVENMENT COULDN"T AFFORD THE PROGRAM.
This is not just a matter of Congress waving its legislative magic wand. It has to be done well. THAT is what I have yet to see Congress do. They have never reformed anything in my lifetime so why should I think they will do so now. There is enough wiggle room in all the plans that Congress has made public to allow lots of bad things to happen.
It is not a matter of making everyone part of plan if that plan does not work. It will just drag all down into a pit of ineffective, extremely wasteful and expensive mediocrity. I can see the news now about health care fiascos.
People here keep arguing for universal coverage as if that will fix everything with really looking at what they will get for this coverage and what it will cost. And that is before the lawyers make a living out of litigation for the next twenty years.
No- something is not better than nothing- paying taxes on a million cars that don't work is not worth anything.
You may be able to keep your "plan" but your plan will change under any legislation I have seen.
From listening to my Representatives town hall- this is a train barrelling down the track to a bad end- not one question for specifics from the public was answered with anything but a terse "we know better than you."
VT-Chicklit
Lovin' The Homestead
enjoy the ride, you get it. As different people weigh in on this topic I see that there are more people who get it than I thought.
me&thegals
A Major Squash & Pumpkin Lover
While I respect your feelings on this issue, one person certainly cannot speak for all the rest.Wifezilla said:
me&thegals
A Major Squash & Pumpkin Lover
Let's get serious. If your proposal worked, we wouldn't be dealing with so many uninsured.Wifezilla said:
Blueskys--That's great that you have health without insurance. I work at a medical clinic, and I could tell you many stories about people delaying important treatments (think heart disease and diabetes) and hoping for free samples until they hopefully are insured again.
We could bicker over how many *exactly* uninsured people there are. We could also propose all sorts of haphazard plans for insuring these people voluntarily. I suppose we could even argue over whether people *should* get insurance if they have not yet exhausted ALL their resources first. I guess I just don't see the point of these rather apparently pointless arguments.
I see my parents struggling to keep their business afloat due to the economy and health insurance costs. I need my job solely for healthcare, and each year more of my salary goes to the premiums, now about 1/5. In my work, I transcribe patient visits for people who make impossible medical decisions based on their ability to pay.
We live in the wealthiest nation on earth. It seems ludicrous to me that some would believe we cannot work out a system that allows all people healthcare without bankrupting businesses or discouraging entrepreneurs, skyrocketing costs of our goods and services or in some other way cause more harm than good.
me&thegals
A Major Squash & Pumpkin Lover
Who is proposing this? Last I heard the plan was to supplement what is already out there in order to cover the uninsured and NOT to reinvent the whole wheel.reinbeau said:
me&thegals
A Major Squash & Pumpkin Lover
Isn't that a bit condescending? I suppose some people simply don't agree and perhaps it isn't that they don't "get it."VT-Chicklit said:
ETR: I can see your point about reimbursement for doctors and their unwillingness to take patients who don't bring full reimbursement. We see this quite a bit here with dentists, who simply will not take patients with Medicare/Aid.
VT-Chicklit
Lovin' The Homestead
me&thegals, It has nothing to do with being condecending, it has to do with human nature. When something is "FREE" more use it. When you cut the reimbursment to doctors, they will get the money from those who have better insurance than the government plan or some will take extra from their patients because they will not take assignment or if they cant do either of these things they will close their practice. A Rasmussen Poll was taken reciently that showed that 40% of the doctors would close their practices if one of the plans under discussion were to be passed into law. It would mean more work for them and less pay into their practices. Even if only 20% actually did this, this would radically reduce the numbers of doctors available, in a system that currently has too few doctors, already! No matter what plan you have, if you cant get an apointment in a timely manner, or you cant find a doctor who is willing to take you on as a patient, what good is health insurance . . . Government or Private! It seemed to me that enjoy the ride got the point. We all will be paying top dollar for something that will be, in the end, worth less than the current situation as it stands currently.
There are things that need to be done but the current administration ignores those who suggest, tort reform, the ability to buy insurance across state lines, portability, and allowing unrelated groups of individuals getting together inorder to bargain for health insurance. These would pick up most of those who are currently not insured. The remainder could be placed on an existing program. Unfortunatly, these suggestions are not as flashy as redoing the whole healthcare system, therefore they ignore them. They are attempting to redo alot of things that are not broken. They will make a mess of these things, like they already have by making it inpossible to purchase insurance across state lines and by aiding their lawyer buddies who get rich off of Tort! The Government is not a benevolant Uncle Sam or a Nanny State, they Do Not have our best interest at heart. If we get any help when they do something, it is purely accidental. Most are only thinking of their next election and how to line their pockets.
There are things that need to be done but the current administration ignores those who suggest, tort reform, the ability to buy insurance across state lines, portability, and allowing unrelated groups of individuals getting together inorder to bargain for health insurance. These would pick up most of those who are currently not insured. The remainder could be placed on an existing program. Unfortunatly, these suggestions are not as flashy as redoing the whole healthcare system, therefore they ignore them. They are attempting to redo alot of things that are not broken. They will make a mess of these things, like they already have by making it inpossible to purchase insurance across state lines and by aiding their lawyer buddies who get rich off of Tort! The Government is not a benevolant Uncle Sam or a Nanny State, they Do Not have our best interest at heart. If we get any help when they do something, it is purely accidental. Most are only thinking of their next election and how to line their pockets.
FarmerChick
Super Self-Sufficient
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2008
- Messages
- 11,417
- Reaction score
- 14
- Points
- 248
When something is "FREE" more use it.
****it wouldn't be free. medicaid/medicare is already in action. I guess that would be a free program in a way. Expand medicaid a bit to allow for a higher poverty level and it includes some more people. The others would not just "be free"
So now you are saying we are being held hostage by doctors.
Let 40% close their doors! I refuse to not move forward on healthcare in this nation because some doctors don't want their income lowered. Too darn bad I say. Maybe it is time to shake up the doctors! Nothing wrong with that. Maybe it would then let the govt. take action and offer incentives for doctors to be produced. Give them some scholarships to help pay those education costs etc. We need to produce good doctors in this nation. Also with the majority of the population hitting old age at one time, we need more doctors in the country...and the population is only growing.
Malpractice will be dealt with. It has too to help control costs.
Across state line purchases is not as simple and effective as a control as one might think. I mentioned before that risk management effects ins. cost by location etc. You won't just get any lower cost plan from another state if you live in a high state risk area situation.
And there is not alot of reasonable priced premium plans out there anyway....regardless of where you live.
The govt. helping is not wrong. It needs to insure everyone. Everyone in ths nation to control costs the best way it can. And everyone deserves reasonable insurance prems to be covered.
A person will not care if everyone has coverage. An individual person usually is out for themsselves. At least with govt. help involved, everyone gets treated as a whole. The good of the whole outweighs the good of the few. It has to be that way or the nation dies.
We are climbing on uninsured. Within 7-8 years they are looking at 68 million uninsured. That is close. You add 20 mil more in that time and you watch your ins. prems. skyrocket.
We need control now.
I still say the govt is the help that is needed for a nation to survive.
Individuals are concerned with themselves, not the overall nation. Therefore I want the govt help to try to get everyone insured vs. an individual's ideas.
I know we all agree something needs to happen, just the route to take and if the govt should be helping.
One thing I know....the govt is stepping in and for me, I sure hope they don't pansy out. I hope they hit this situation head on and hard!
****it wouldn't be free. medicaid/medicare is already in action. I guess that would be a free program in a way. Expand medicaid a bit to allow for a higher poverty level and it includes some more people. The others would not just "be free"
So now you are saying we are being held hostage by doctors.
Let 40% close their doors! I refuse to not move forward on healthcare in this nation because some doctors don't want their income lowered. Too darn bad I say. Maybe it is time to shake up the doctors! Nothing wrong with that. Maybe it would then let the govt. take action and offer incentives for doctors to be produced. Give them some scholarships to help pay those education costs etc. We need to produce good doctors in this nation. Also with the majority of the population hitting old age at one time, we need more doctors in the country...and the population is only growing.
Malpractice will be dealt with. It has too to help control costs.
Across state line purchases is not as simple and effective as a control as one might think. I mentioned before that risk management effects ins. cost by location etc. You won't just get any lower cost plan from another state if you live in a high state risk area situation.
And there is not alot of reasonable priced premium plans out there anyway....regardless of where you live.
The govt. helping is not wrong. It needs to insure everyone. Everyone in ths nation to control costs the best way it can. And everyone deserves reasonable insurance prems to be covered.
A person will not care if everyone has coverage. An individual person usually is out for themsselves. At least with govt. help involved, everyone gets treated as a whole. The good of the whole outweighs the good of the few. It has to be that way or the nation dies.
We are climbing on uninsured. Within 7-8 years they are looking at 68 million uninsured. That is close. You add 20 mil more in that time and you watch your ins. prems. skyrocket.
We need control now.
I still say the govt is the help that is needed for a nation to survive.
Individuals are concerned with themselves, not the overall nation. Therefore I want the govt help to try to get everyone insured vs. an individual's ideas.
I know we all agree something needs to happen, just the route to take and if the govt should be helping.
One thing I know....the govt is stepping in and for me, I sure hope they don't pansy out. I hope they hit this situation head on and hard!
Wifezilla
Low-Carb Queen - RIP: 1963-2021
Yet one person (or a few) claims to speak for 47 million. Yet, being a part of the alleged 47 million, my voice doesn't count.
Exactly. You can come up with all kinds of plans and schemes, but you have to pass laws forcing doctors to sell dimes for 5 to get the whole thing to work.
