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

[Vox]

Why aren't they going to 'accept the plans' exactly? And how is this any different than before?

because they have much lower reimbursement rate

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

LOL

the subsidies are for the INSURED, not for the doctors and providers .

Jake. sorry, but you are sterile on the issue. Don't make fun of yourself.

 

[Sarah G]

BTW, the paperwork is as much, or sometimes, even MORE important in the physicians refusal to accept obamacare.

Why would the paperwork be more than it was with any other insurance company? You're just creating problems here.

no, my ignorant, living in a box Sarah.

anything connected to the government - IS much more paperwork.anything. obamacare is a great disaster for ANY physician and to expect that anybody would want to tie himself/herself up to it is ridiculous.

Many established ones don't even want to take Medicare, although that at least reimburses decently.
But the bureaucratic nightmare... now it is the demand for EMR - which has increased serious mistakes already.

Sorry but you are wrong again. Here, just jump into the same box as the other numb nuts in this thread. Comon, jump!

 

[Amelia]

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.

.

Why aren't they going to 'accept the plans' exactly? And how is this any different than before?

People who had accepted plans have been forced off their accepted plans and into plans with with unsatisfactory levels of reimbursements. That's how it's different from before.

 

[Kosh]

They haven't taken over insurance companies.

I guess you believe that government does not any part of GM either.

Oops, you seem to be going down a different path because you doesn't understand the ACA...

Actually I do, it is the far left loyalists that do not. They only see what they are programmed to see.

Like I pointed out and proven you believe that the government does not own any part of GM.

Just like the government who sold off the Chrysler shares at $2.8 Billion dollar loss to Fiat in effect sending all the corporate taxes for that company to Italy.

It is built into Obamacare to bailout/buyout insurance companies as they fail. It is known that these companies are going to fail under this new law. And thus put them under government control.

And yes the government dictates and controls said insurance companies.

 

[Vox]

Since most of the plans on the exchange are sold by the companies and their brokers, how is a doctor going to know if the plan was purchased directly from the company or off the exchange?

This article sounds like utter nonsense.

The doctor will know as soon as he or she looks at the reimbursement rates.

Yes, but the plans I've seen are the same whether bought directly from the company or the exchange. They even have the same name. This does not make sense. I think there's a lot to more to story.

But you have not seen the reimbursement rates.read here:
ACA Countdown: Expect Low Pay for Docs in Exchange Plans
Doctor Reimbursements For Patients Covered By ?State Exchange Policies? Dropping Even More Doctors Below What Medicare Pays And In Some Areas Less Than Medicaid - Medical Quack

 

[Kosh]

Why aren't they going to 'accept the plans' exactly? And how is this any different than before?

because they have much lower reimbursement rate

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

This from a far left Obama drone that never thinks period.

Shows you don't understand Obamacare.

 

[Mac1958]

Why aren't they going to 'accept the plans' exactly? And how is this any different than before?

because they have much lower reimbursement rate

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

Okay, someone needs to explain this one to me.

.

 

[Mac1958]

But you have not seen the reimbursement rates.read here:
ACA Countdown: Expect Low Pay for Docs in Exchange Plans
Doctor Reimbursements For Patients Covered By ?State Exchange Policies? Dropping Even More Doctors Below What Medicare Pays And In Some Areas Less Than Medicaid - Medical Quack

I would love to have some Obamacare apologists read those two articles and comment.

It's precisely what we have been saying, and they've been mocking it.

This denial should be fascinating.

.

 

[Vox]

because they have much lower reimbursement rate

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

Okay, someone needs to explain this one to me.

.

he sincerely thinks that the subsidy which is helping the ones who qualify to pay for the insurance premiums is somehow connected to the reimbursement rates.
But it is not.
It does not matter who is behind the actual insurance plan - somebody who pays for it by himself, or somebody who receives a subsidy.

 

[Antares]

Why aren't they going to 'accept the plans' exactly? And how is this any different than before?

because they have much lower reimbursement rate

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

Moron alert.

The subsidies are to help the insureds to pay their Premiums BECAUSE the costs went up so much...you are quite stupid Jake.

 

[MACAULAY]

Why would the paperwork be more than it was with any other insurance company? You're just creating problems here.

no, my ignorant, living in a box Sarah.

anything connected to the government - IS much more paperwork.anything. obamacare is a great disaster for ANY physician and to expect that anybody would want to tie himself/herself up to it is ridiculous.

Many established ones don't even want to take Medicare, although that at least reimburses decently.
But the bureaucratic nightmare... now it is the demand for EMR - which has increased serious mistakes already.

Sorry but you are wrong again. Here, just jump into the same box as the other numb nuts in this thread. Comon, jump!

..................................................

A sure sign a poster is whipped in a debate (and you clearly are)--just call someone a name---numb nuts.

Numb Nuts has been just whipping you ass---as far as who knows what they are talking about.

Just my opinion. You lose.

 

[LoneLaugher]

That is bullshit, you know.

Nutters say that shit every day. "Der......you called me a name.....der....I win! Der....."

I will call an idiot a name as I am explaining the meaning of life to him. The idea that doing so signifies defeat is bogus. Try harder.

 

[TheSeventhTiger]

someone should ask jay corny a question regarding this mess, something like,,,Jay, how will Obama-Care work in California if 70% of all doctors are planning to relocate to other states?

 

[JakeStarkey]

because they have much lower reimbursement rate

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

Moron alert.

The subsidies are to help the insureds to pay their Premiums BECAUSE the costs went up so much...you are quite stupid Jake.

You, my friend, as normally, can't think clearly.

The costs if up, and the subsidies make up for that difference, will put $$$ in the doctors' pockets.

 

[Mac1958]

Vox, that is why the subsidies are involved. No one on the far right here is thinking clearly.

Moron alert.

The subsidies are to help the insureds to pay their Premiums BECAUSE the costs went up so much...you are quite stupid Jake.

You, my friend, as normally, can't think clearly.

The costs if up, and the subsidies make up for that difference, will put $$$ in the doctors' pockets.

Jake, that just isn't how it works.

Providers are paid via the terms of their contracts with insurance companies. It's not as if extra magic dollar bills come down from subsidies and go straight into a doctor's pockets above and beyond that.

Insurance company reimbursements to providers and ACA subsidies TO insurance companies for patients are two entirely different things. Not even close. Not in the same zip code.

And most importantly, the insurance companies have long since calculated anticipated subsidies when creating, negotiating and completing their contracts with the providers, so the payments to the providers are set in stone. There are going to be PLENTY of times in which the docs are going to be seeing patients at a loss, especially with the fucking FLOOD of Medicaid patients headed their way. You MUST know that. And worse, their calculations are based on information provided by HHS, which bases its calculations on the ACA, which apparently based its calculations on a tequila party and a Quija™ board.

You're not even close here.

.

 

[Darkwind]

When the paperwork triples and the payment schemes are 40 cents on the dollar, it is poor business practice to accept them.

BTW, the paperwork is as much, or sometimes, even MORE important in the physicians refusal to accept obamacare.

Why would the paperwork be more than it was with any other insurance company? You're just creating problems here.

No, I am stating what every doctor says when they have had dealings with medicare/medicaid.

In fact, there is a local doctor who was sued for discrimination for accepting cash only because he was once a medicaid provider who wanted to cut his patients some slack.

It is just simply one of those facts that often gets ignored in favor of protecting a cherished institution.

The paperwork is at least three times the normal paperwork, with less than half the return.

No doctor would be able to remain in business for long at that level of robbery.


ALSO.....on top of the paperwork nightmare, if so much as a single medical code is off, the entire thing must be redone. Guess what? At the Doctors expense.

 

[TooTall]

I guess you believe that government does not any part of GM either.

Oops, you seem to be going down a different path because you doesn't understand the ACA...

Actually I do, it is the far left loyalists that do not. They only see what they are programmed to see.

Like I pointed out and proven you believe that the government does not own any part of GM.

Just like the government who sold off the Chrysler shares at $2.8 Billion dollar loss to Fiat in effect sending all the corporate taxes for that company to Italy.

It is built into Obamacare to bailout/buyout insurance companies as they fail. It is known that these companies are going to fail under this new law. And thus put them under government control.

And yes the government dictates and controls said insurance companies.

I will help you prove that the govenment does still own part of GM. The ACA already dictates what the insurance companies have to insure, and Obama intends to put them ALL out of business so that the government can become the health insurer for all.

The U.S. Treasury Department reaped about $570 million from the sale of General Motors stock in September, as the government is closer to unloading its remaining shares in the automaker.

The Treasury Department said in a monthly report to Congress that it has recovered about $36 billion of the $51 billion invested to bail out GM in 2008 and 2009.

The report did not detail how many shares the government sold in September. But on Sept. 17, the government said it owned a 7.3% stake in GM, down from 13.8% as of June 12. The Treasury Department has said it plans to sell its last GM shares by April 2014.
By the time it sells the last GM shares, the government is expected to have lost about $10 billion on the GM bailout. The final figure will depend on the fluctuation in GM’s stock price over the next few months.

U.S. government sells $570 million more of GM stock | Detroit Free Press | freep.com

 

[Theowl32]

I am presuming this board has went over the notion that this ACA is a single payer trojan horse, right?

That is certainly what it appears to be more and more.

It is either that, or this is the most incompetent group of morons that has ever taken office in this country. I am tempted to think that they are that incompetent. However, assuming these ivy league egg heads have an actual education, then it is more likely that this is deliberate. Meaning, they are looking to back door the single payer that they all truly want (like the commies they are under the Saul Alinsky plan). They knew they could not get it past congress the other way, so they passed this sham called Obamacare. Knowing it would such an unmitigated disaster, they implement the single payer cause there will be little choice. The country will take anything rather than this ACA thing.

Has this board discusses this possibility?

 

[billyerock1991]

California's state-run Obamacare health insurance exchange, Covered California, is touted by the Obama administration as a model of the policy's success. That was, in fact, the political strategy all along, as Obama's non-profit organization, Organizing for Action, focused on helping California's rollout effort. But in addition to inflated web traffic numbers and privacy concerns, Covered California now faces an acute doctor shortage.

An estimated 70% of California doctors will not participate in the Obamacare-compliant health insurance policies offered by Covered California, according to the California Medical Association, as reported by the Washington Examiner. Though Covered California claims that 85% of doctors will participate, many doctors listed as participating are expected to decline payment, having learned that reimbursements will be very low.

Doctors Boycotting Obamacare in California
this could be a disaster given Ca. demography

so what they are saying the won't take for example etna ??? Anthem??? Blue cross blue shield, any of the privet sector health care insures that Covered California has offered in their PDF file ??? because there aren't any government health care companies ... they won't use those private sector health care plans ... the problem you have here is breitbart. who wrote the article, is just plain stupid ... we with a ounce of intellect knows this, you, not so much!!!!

 

[Redfish]

California's state-run Obamacare health insurance exchange, Covered California, is touted by the Obama administration as a model of the policy's success. That was, in fact, the political strategy all along, as Obama's non-profit organization, Organizing for Action, focused on helping California's rollout effort. But in addition to inflated web traffic numbers and privacy concerns, Covered California now faces an acute doctor shortage.

An estimated 70% of California doctors will not participate in the Obamacare-compliant health insurance policies offered by Covered California, according to the California Medical Association, as reported by the Washington Examiner. Though Covered California claims that 85% of doctors will participate, many doctors listed as participating are expected to decline payment, having learned that reimbursements will be very low.

Doctors Boycotting Obamacare in California
this could be a disaster given Ca. demography

so what they are saying the won't take for example etna ??? Anthem??? Blue cross blue shield, any of the privet sector health care insures that Covered California has offered in their PDF file ??? because there aren't any government health care companies ... they won't use those private sector health care plans ... the problem you have here is breitbart. who wrote the article, is just plain stupid ... we with a ounce of intellect knows this, you, not so much!!!!

please engage spellcheck or stop posting.