70% Ca. doctors will not participate in obama's unaffordable care act

[JakeStarkey]

I see Yurt is reading me.

He is such a lying hypocrite.

 

[Mac1958]

.

This isn't a matter of providers "accepting Obamacare". This isn't about providers ultimately taking patients because they get paid for it.

Providers are already choosing not to accept particular insurers within those plans because those insurers had to drastically cut reimbursement rates and other variables in their doc contracts to make it under the regulatory wire. The providers are not signing the deals because there is no or negative profit in it for them each time they see one of these people.

It is going to continue to happen and it's going to get worse. It will also include not just individual doctors, but entire doctor groups.

Goddamn, trying to discuss anything within ten fucking miles of economics with lefties just gives me a fucking headache.

.

 

[Yurt]

Today, 01:46 PM
Remove user from ignore listJakeStarkey
This message is hidden because JakeStarkey is on your ignore list.

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

OMG!! what will all of those illegal aliens do? they thought everything was free in California.

 

[Katzndogz]

As there is not a left wing loon (working without talking points) with the capacity to refute the article...I will do it for him. for the sake of fair discussion.

The quote is from Insurance Bokers who foresee that the government will soon take their jobs.

Doesn't mean they are Liars (like our president)...just means they are prejudice...like every body in Obama's huge propaganda machine. The Citizens (and the Congress) have just about given up trying to get the Truth out of this White House.

Things are so partisan that an American despairs of getting the Truth about anything.

It's not partisan in this case, it's business and the doctors will not refuse patients. They're paying customers.

If the reimbursement rates are too low the doctors will just take paying customers instead of obama customers.

 

[MACAULAY]

.

This isn't a matter of providers "accepting Obamacare".

Providers are already choosing not to accept particular insurers within those plans because those insurers had to drastically cut reimbursement rates and other variables in their doc contracts to make it under the regulatory wire. The providers are not signing the deals because there is no or negative profit in it for them each time they see one of these people.

It is going to continue to happen and it's going to get worse. It will also include not just individual doctors, but entire doctor groups.

Goddamn, trying to discuss anything within ten fucking miles of economics with lefties just gives me a headache.
........................................................

I agree with your last statement.

I'm a bit conservative, I admit it; and I hated being lied to by our President and will never forgive him; but I'm mainly just an American looking to his pursuit of happiness. And health care is a very serious issue.

The O.P. contained an article in which the enforcers of this healthcare law say that 85% of the doctors in California will participate in serving the ObamaCare Patients and an estimate an Insurance Brokers Spokesman that says 70% will NOT participate.

The incredible disparity cannot be explained except by the fact that one is lying....and Obama and his sycophants have already lied to me repeatedly while the Insurance Brokers are not Proven Liars, insofar as I know.

The punishment suffered by Known Liars is that you are not believed even when you are telling the Truth.

If I was in California--I'd be worried.

 

[Katzndogz]

Lefties are moved by feeling alone. That they even make up as they go along. To the left, doctors will take a $12.00 reimbursement rate because they are getting $12.00 from a paying customer. In reality, a doctor will not take that patient. The doctor might take $50.00 from a cash customer instead.

 

[Katzndogz]

Doctors who take medicare patients today limit the medicare patient load to no more than 10% of their total practice. Even if a doctor takes obamacare that doctor could so severely limit that patient care to the point of actual worthlessness.

 

[JakeStarkey]

As there is not a left wing loon (working without talking points) with the capacity to refute the article...I will do it for him. for the sake of fair discussion.

The quote is from Insurance Bokers who foresee that the government will soon take their jobs.

Doesn't mean they are Liars (like our president)...just means they are prejudice...like every body in Obama's huge propaganda machine. The Citizens (and the Congress) have just about given up trying to get the Truth out of this White House.

Things are so partisan that an American despairs of getting the Truth about anything.

It's not partisan in this case, it's business and the doctors will not refuse patients. They're paying customers.

If the reimbursement rates are too low the doctors will just take paying customers instead of obama customers.

They are paying customers.

 

[Mac1958]

It's not partisan in this case, it's business and the doctors will not refuse patients. They're paying customers.

If the reimbursement rates are too low the doctors will just take paying customers instead of obama customers.

They are paying customers.

If the payment is below net cost, the provider is losing money on each visit and/or service.

You don't make that up with volume.

AAAAUUUUGGGGGHHHHH

.

 

[Kosh]

If Obama told these programmed drones that the sky was purple they would argue with anyone claiming it was blue.

 

[John W Slacker]

If true, it appears The Gollum's great Socailist Experiment is done for...in California, anyway.

And it appears to be true. It quotes the President of the California Medical Association. Also, this was posted yesterday, and only one Loon "demanded proof" and none refuted it.

Oh my god CALIFORNICATEYA IS NOT KISSIN HIS BUTT???

 

[JakeStarkey]

If the reimbursement rates are too low the doctors will just take paying customers instead of obama customers.

They are paying customers.

If the payment is below net cost, the provider is losing money on each visit and/or service.
You don't make that up with volume. AAAAUUUUGGGGGHHHHH .

They will certainly not be below net cost: you can't even make an argument for that.

But it will be a great brake for cost containment.

That is what you are crying about.

 

[Katzndogz]

Go to a five star restaurant and tell them you will pay six bucks for a lobster dinner and they have to give it to you for that price because you are a paying customer.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Go to a five star restaurant and tell them you will pay six bucks for a lobster dinner and they have to give it to you for that price because you are a paying customer.

False equivalency: not worth more comment than that.

 

[Pop23]

Go to a five star restaurant and tell them you will pay six bucks for a lobster dinner and they have to give it to you for that price because you are a paying customer.

False equivalency: not worth more comment than that.

Translation = of course you're right. I got nothin

 

[Mac1958]

They are paying customers.

If the payment is below net cost, the provider is losing money on each visit and/or service.
You don't make that up with volume. AAAAUUUUGGGGGHHHHH .

They will certainly not be below net cost: you can't even make an argument for that.

But it will be a great brake for cost containment.

That is what you are crying about.

As I made as simple as I could in post #22, providers and provider groups work off of negotiated contracts. Often they will drop insurers when the net benefits of the plan (and there's a ton of variables in any given provider contract) drop below the standards and thresholds of the provider or group. This is just the way it works, every single day.

I realize you have some obligation to defend this horrific law, Jake, but you're making points based on pure thin air. There are going to be providers who are not going to accept plans in the ACA because they make no economic sense for them to do so. Plus, now, the providers know damn well they're going to be flooded with low-LOW-reimbursement Medicaid cases. This is going to get worse, regardless of your denials.

I don't know how much more plain I can make it, but I strongly suggest you'll deny it based on, well, whatever it is you're basing this stuff.

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So a doctor in California is not going to take a patient who bought a policy from, say, Kaiser in CA, on the exchange?

And why not, exactly?

 

[Mac1958]

So a doctor in California is not going to take a patient who bought a policy from, say, Kaiser in CA, on the exchange?

And why not, exactly?

Please see posts 22 and 37. It's as simple as I can make it.

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If the payment is below net cost, the provider is losing money on each visit and/or service.
You don't make that up with volume. AAAAUUUUGGGGGHHHHH .

They will certainly not be below net cost: you can't even make an argument for that.

But it will be a great brake for cost containment.

That is what you are crying about.

As I made as simple as I could in post #22, providers and provider groups work off of negotiated contracts. Often they will drop insurers when the net benefits of the plan (and there's a ton of variables in any given provider contract) drop below the standards and thresholds of the provider or group. This is just the way it works, every single day.

I realize you have some obligation to defend this horrific law, Jake, but you're making points based on pure thin air. There are going to be providers who are not going to accept plans in the ACA because they make no economic sense for them to do so. Plus, now, the providers know damn well they're going to be flooded with low-LOW-reimbursement Medicaid cases. This is going to get worse, regardless of your denials.

I don't know how much more plain I can make it, but I strongly suggest you'll deny it based on, well, whatever it is you're basing this stuff.

.

Tell us your better plan for getting Medicaid eligible patients healthcare.