Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The people cant afford it.......................So we as a collective must steal from others to pay for it.
Well isnt that damn impressive. We need an affordable care act.............
Oh wait!!!! One that actually makes it affordable............
yeah, fuck it....let 'em die...guess Grayson was right(this goes out to Mr."take a fuckin' pill" too).
go fuck yourselves you selfish dickheads.
There is a thing called liberty...........
I have or used to I should say the option of choosing what type of health insurance I would want to carry if any. I opted in. Have paid heavy premiums........ So now the liberals come along and say this other stuff should be free.
For who?????? Again with picking winners and losers. You idiots are spending us into very ugly times.
I dont take issue with helping the less fortunate, I do take issue with the piss poor management democrats insist on.
Will you ever get a damn clue?
5/10/12Geez! Don't nobody know nothing?
The 500 billion was not taken from medicare. It was taken from the medical advantage PRIVATE INSURANCE PLANS.
FYI (and you need it)
Medicare stays exactly the same. Nothing happens to it or its budget.
When I enroll in a medicare advantage plan (private insurance) medicare gives that private insurer "X" number of dollars per month for me. The private insurer then agrees to be totally responsible for my health care under the terms of medicare and the advantage plan.
The 500 billion came from that "X" number of dollars. I have a medicare advantage plan. In the wake of the bill my premium increased by 20 bucks a month. So you see I and others who have private insurance are paying this bill. I have no objection. The medicare advantage companies, at least in my state, are rolling in cash.
But that's another story.
Funny how facts are avoided by the dittoheads.
By the way, Humana and United are the two biggest players in the Medicare Advantage space. In the two years since Obamacare passed, HUM is up 25%, UNH is up 54%. They're doing fine with significantly lower Medicare reimbursement, the MA plans are still very robust, it's working out quite well. They've both moved away from PFFS plans, which were much more costly, and toward PPO and HMO plans.
I have to train on this crap as part of my profession. I don't get my information from partisan radio blabbers.
This is going to take a public/private partnership such as the one I've described, despite what Rush says, despite what the dittoheads repeat, despite how much they mock people who are suffering.
.
Today, about 25 percent of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.
In a report I prepared with Robert Book for the Heritage Foundation, we found that Obamacare will cut Medicare Advantage payment rates by an average of $3,700 per beneficiary in 2017, or 27 percent below the payment rates that would have been made without Obamacare. These cuts will translate directly into higher health-care costs for seniors. Seniors who remain in Medicare Advantage will face higher costs, because the cuts will force the plans to cut back on the benefits they offer and to charge higher cost-sharing for the services they do cover. Further, seniors who will be pushed out of Medicare Advantage and back into the traditional program will lose entirely the added benefits provided by most Medicare Advantage plans. None of this is captured in Fidelitys analysis.
This is no small matter. Seniors losing $3,700 per year from enrollment in Medicare at 65 until their deaths at age 77 or 78 would lose about $44,000 in benefits over their lifetimes, all because of Obamacares cuts.
Obamacare Hurts Seniors - James C. Capretta - National Review Online
.
National Review and the Heritage Foundation. Ho boy.
Even with the cuts, there are many Medicare Advantage plans that still have a $0 premium with robust benefits, and these are plans that do not allow for any health underwriting.
Imagine if Medicare Advantage Plans and Medicare Supplements were available to everyone at all ages, with the same waived underwriting, spreading the risk among healthier people. That would significantly lower net costs to insurers.
Imagine if these plans were all individual and portable, taking the entire health insurance burden off of our country's employers, freeing them to utilize those funds elsewhere.
Imagine if everyone could choose among a menu of Medicare Advantage plans that function like a PPO or HMO, or Medicare Supplements that essentially close all gaps in Medicare coverage.
Imagine unleashing the insurance industry to concentrate on just Medicare Advantage plans and Medicare Supplements, and all the cool extra benefits they could come up with.
Imagine if a foundational Medicare chassis were available for everyone, allowing people to get regular preventive treatment and easy access to diagnostic treatment, and how much money that would save the health care system in the long run.
Imagine if all plans adopted Value Based Insurance Design (VBID), which eliminates co-pays for specific medications and provides education on those conditions, a strategy that a recent study showed decreased emergency room visits by 70% and hospital visits by 80% of those patients.
Lower costs, full access, improved outcomes. Wow, imagine that.
Oops, Rush says no, so I know the answers I'll get here.
.
...are you imagining you're a medical visionary form of John Lennon........?
I keep offering ideas and specifics, tactics taken from both sides of the political spectrum, based on industry knowledge I utilize every day. You keep offering insults and standard rhetoric.
Perfect, thanks.
.
5/10/12Funny how facts are avoided by the dittoheads.
By the way, Humana and United are the two biggest players in the Medicare Advantage space. In the two years since Obamacare passed, HUM is up 25%, UNH is up 54%. They're doing fine with significantly lower Medicare reimbursement, the MA plans are still very robust, it's working out quite well. They've both moved away from PFFS plans, which were much more costly, and toward PPO and HMO plans.
I have to train on this crap as part of my profession. I don't get my information from partisan radio blabbers.
This is going to take a public/private partnership such as the one I've described, despite what Rush says, despite what the dittoheads repeat, despite how much they mock people who are suffering.
.
Today, about 25 percent of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans.
In a report I prepared with Robert Book for the Heritage Foundation, we found that Obamacare will cut Medicare Advantage payment rates by an average of $3,700 per beneficiary in 2017, or 27 percent below the payment rates that would have been made without Obamacare. These cuts will translate directly into higher health-care costs for seniors. Seniors who remain in Medicare Advantage will face higher costs, because the cuts will force the plans to cut back on the benefits they offer and to charge higher cost-sharing for the services they do cover. Further, seniors who will be pushed out of Medicare Advantage and back into the traditional program will lose entirely the added benefits provided by most Medicare Advantage plans. None of this is captured in Fidelitys analysis.
This is no small matter. Seniors losing $3,700 per year from enrollment in Medicare at 65 until their deaths at age 77 or 78 would lose about $44,000 in benefits over their lifetimes, all because of Obamacares cuts.
Obamacare Hurts Seniors - James C. Capretta - National Review Online
ROFLMAO!!!!!
This cut to medicare advantage plan was made because these companies (mine for sure) are rolling in cash. In short they are getting paid way too much.
But I only know what happens to me. I am in a medical advantage plan.
I have lost nothing in benefits. They remain the best I have ever had. There is no way I can pay more that a couple of hundred bucks no matter what catastrophe occurs.
No deductible, no limit. Physician co pay, none. specialist copay $15. Hospital copay $100 Emergency room copay, $150, waived if I am admitted. Drug copay $10. I have yet to have a test, procedure or treatment that was not fully covered. I have an eyeglass benefit of $75 per year and I can get a hearing test every couple of years. There is some kind of allowance for a hearing but I don't want one yet.
Not bad huh? Continuing.
My premium was raised $20 per month, $240 per year. This was about a 13% increase.
If one is "forced off" of a plan that means they must no longer pay a premium. (I have no idea how that would happen) I did not see that in your calculations. Push comes to shove I could drop down a couple of notches in coverage, pay half the premium and still have insurance you probably just dream of.
As I said my company is rolling in cash. So much so that they voluntarily returned several million bucks to the state. (they are contracted for medical payment management for various state plans) They even sent me a $35 gift card.
If the twenty buck a month extra charge to me allows someone else, via Obamacare, to get some insurance they might not otherwise have had then I am glad to pay it.
Why are you so cheap? Go scare someone else.
What constitutes a "loss" is also not defined. Was it a real dollar loss or was it an opportunity cost.
Mayo is doing an experiment with its Arizona facility. As of January of this year there are still no results to speak of from that experiment:
The Mayo Clinic stopped accepting Medicare at its five-physician practice in Glendale, Ariz., two years ago. Officials said at the time they would analyze financial results of the move early this year.
No results yet. Mayo spokesman James McVeigh said in an e-mail: “Our plan is to continue to study the program, collect data and review the impact on our patients.”
Mayo officials, who were unavailable at deadline, need more time to analyze how the Arizona clinic's decision to drop Medicare affected its finances, patient satisfaction and the overall number of patients, he said.
That said, it's a rather limited experiment:
So the broader point you continually try to make from this simply isn't supported by this pilot. Certainly not at this stage.
The point isn't to send everyone to the Mayo, it's to make more Mayos. Which is what the new payment incentives in Medicare to enable and encourage the sort of delivery system innovations that make places like Mayo so good are doing:
“Better coordinated care is good for patients and it saves money,” said Sebelius. “We applaud every one of these doctors, hospitals, health centers and others for working together to ensure millions of people with Medicare get better, more patient-centered, coordinated care.”
And, as I've already pointed out, these kinds of models are already showing they can save money while improving care where they've been implemented.
Listening said:"Decades of underfunding and paying for volume rather than value in Medicare have led us to this decision."
Exactly the philosophy of the ACA. Value, not volume, is the future of payment policy in this country. That's why it's landmark legislation.
in other words seniors are getting less and already PAYING MORE under Obummercare....
(and dims complain about the Ryan plan....)
also......what about the upcoming boomer seniors......didn't they pay for that half trillion to fund their medicare programs....whether earmarked for the Advantage program or not?
what gives Obama the right to take it from them and spend medicare money on his new program....?
....besides BO is robbing more than just the Advantage plan.....he's also taking $ from medicare hospital and nursing services, etc. This means facilities will operate more and more in the red and they will limit access to seniors or just close their doors.
I am not getting less. My medicare advantage program gives me the best healthcare of my life.
Do you have any idea what at private insurance contracts with hospitals look like?
In my case, during my hospitalizations, Blue Cross paid about 40% of the bill that was sent to me by the hospital. PAID IN FULL!! That is what the contract calls for.
Do you think the hospital was losing money on their blue cross contract?
You poor innocent!
have you considered that the cuts have not kicked in yet........? they begin October 15 (right before the election so very few voters will know anything about it)
who's really the "poor innocent" here.....?
Obamacare Hurts Seniors | TheLedger.com
I am not getting less. My medicare advantage program gives me the best healthcare of my life.
Do you have any idea what at private insurance contracts with hospitals look like?
In my case, during my hospitalizations, Blue Cross paid about 40% of the bill that was sent to me by the hospital. PAID IN FULL!! That is what the contract calls for.
Do you think the hospital was losing money on their blue cross contract?
You poor innocent!
have you considered that the cuts have not kicked in yet........? they begin October 15 (right before the election so very few voters will know anything about it)
who's really the "poor innocent" here.....?
Obamacare Hurts Seniors | TheLedger.com
how come if they know so much, they can't describe the effects of those cuts? They allude that seniors will have to pay more out of pocket, but they don't show proof.
.
National Review and the Heritage Foundation. Ho boy.
Even with the cuts, there are many Medicare Advantage plans that still have a $0 premium with robust benefits, and these are plans that do not allow for any health underwriting.
Imagine if Medicare Advantage Plans and Medicare Supplements were available to everyone at all ages, with the same waived underwriting, spreading the risk among healthier people. That would significantly lower net costs to insurers.
Imagine if these plans were all individual and portable, taking the entire health insurance burden off of our country's employers, freeing them to utilize those funds elsewhere.
Imagine if everyone could choose among a menu of Medicare Advantage plans that function like a PPO or HMO, or Medicare Supplements that essentially close all gaps in Medicare coverage.
Imagine unleashing the insurance industry to concentrate on just Medicare Advantage plans and Medicare Supplements, and all the cool extra benefits they could come up with.
Imagine if a foundational Medicare chassis were available for everyone, allowing people to get regular preventive treatment and easy access to diagnostic treatment, and how much money that would save the health care system in the long run.
Imagine if all plans adopted Value Based Insurance Design (VBID), which eliminates co-pays for specific medications and provides education on those conditions, a strategy that a recent study showed decreased emergency room visits by 70% and hospital visits by 80% of those patients.
Lower costs, full access, improved outcomes. Wow, imagine that.
Oops, Rush says no, so I know the answers I'll get here.
.
...are you imagining you're a medical visionary form of John Lennon........?
I keep offering ideas and specifics, tactics taken from both sides of the political spectrum, based on industry knowledge I utilize every day. You keep offering insults and standard rhetoric.
Perfect, thanks.
.
.
Yes, we should end Medicare and Medicaid. They should be replaced with (1) a Medicare-For-All health care delivery chassis that provides low-cost or no-cost preventive and diagnostic services to keep the populace healthier and therefore dramatically reduce the overall cost of health care delivery in America, (2) a robust and competitive free market-based insurance supplement menu based roughly on the current Medicare Supplement and Medicare Advantage systems, opening up a massive 300 million-plus market to the insurance companies at lower operating costs due to (1), (3) the creation and utilization of other obvious cost-cutting measures such as tort reform, national supplemental plans, Value-Based Insurance Design and global, coast to coast electronic records, and (4) low income subsidies for (2) above which will keep costs down in the long run due to decreased utilization by the demographic that historically is significantly less healthy.
Yeah, so get rid of Medicare and Medicaid and replace them.
No, we should not end Social Security. And anyone who thinks we should is so completely blinded by simplistic partisan ideology that they simply cannot see the damage it would do, top to bottom, across the country. Eliminating or significantly increasing the current Social Security income cap for payroll deductions (currently around $110,000) would create a de facto means testing apparatus and make Social Security solvent for a very long time.
Easiest freakin' question I'll answer all day.
.
.
Yes, we should end Medicare and Medicaid. They should be replaced with (1) a Medicare-For-All health care delivery chassis that provides low-cost or no-cost preventive and diagnostic services to keep the populace healthier and therefore dramatically reduce the overall cost of health care delivery in America, (2) a robust and competitive free market-based insurance supplement menu based roughly on the current Medicare Supplement and Medicare Advantage systems, opening up a massive 300 million-plus market to the insurance companies at lower operating costs due to (1), (3) the creation and utilization of other obvious cost-cutting measures such as tort reform, national supplemental plans, Value-Based Insurance Design and global, coast to coast electronic records, and (4) low income subsidies for (2) above which will keep costs down in the long run due to decreased utilization by the demographic that historically is significantly less healthy.
Yeah, so get rid of Medicare and Medicaid and replace them.
No, we should not end Social Security. And anyone who thinks we should is so completely blinded by simplistic partisan ideology that they simply cannot see the damage it would do, top to bottom, across the country. Eliminating or significantly increasing the current Social Security income cap for payroll deductions (currently around $110,000) would create a de facto means testing apparatus and make Social Security solvent for a very long time.
Easiest freakin' question I'll answer all day.
.
Since Soc Sec benefits payouts are calculated on the amount paid in, how will the benefits paid out be affected?
For example, for a worker retiring at age 66 in 2012, the amount is $2,513. This figure is based on earnings at the maximum taxable amount for every year after age 21.
A worker that had average earnings of $15,000 year would get $673 a month.
The I in FICA stands for Insurance. Normally, the premium of a life insurance policy is determined by the face amount of the policy. What you are you suggesting is that the premium, determined by the amount someone earns is unlimited, but the payout remains the same. A million dollar policy costs a helluva lot more than a thousand dollar policy, but it pays out a million dollars.
Just give everyone a one time choice to opt in or out of these programs.
Ok, but again, how do you address a generation of retirees who have their retirement accounts wiped out in a stock market crash?
DBS,,
another problem is that if some people are given the choice to opt out, they will spend all their windfall on booze and cigarettes and having nothing in their old age. We will wind up paying for them in the end anyway
So now we have entire nation of retirees who can only receive their check if the government can borrow because they have no assets to sell anyone in the "Trust Fund"
That's better?
No, you're not curious...You're just a fucking hack.how do you address a generation of retirees who have their retirement accounts wiped out in a stock market crash?
How do you address a generation of retirees who have had their cynically dubbed "trust fund" bled dry to buy votes and fund the socialistic welfare state?
No answers. No ideas.
Does that mean you guys don't know? Or don't care?
Again, honestly, I'm curious.
You only care when the free market fails and don't give a flying fuck when gubmint fails.
You favor dependence on failed programs to allegedly "help" people, then cynically hide behind them when your do-goodery falls flat on its face.
Just more evidence that the emotions of shame and embarrassment are nowhere to be found in the makeup modern American progressive/socialist.
Boo-fucking-hoo.Total lie.
They have all the access they want...Nobody is physically preventing anyone from getting anything....They merely have to pay for services rendered.
A lot of this would go away if the pimps for socialized medical services would just admit that they're total cheapskates.
"They just have to pay for services rendered." Oh, that's all.
Okay, so we're going to pretend that millions of Americans don't avoid getting preventive and diagnostic services done because they can't afford it. We're going to ignorethat many people can't get health insurance because they can't afford it, can't pass underwriting or both. We're going to pretend that these people can just write a check for services rendered.
We're also going to ignore the fact that the diseases and conditions that many people have could have been treated much more cost-effectively if they had been caught earlier if those people could have had access to preventive and diagnostic services.
You're goddamn right I'm a cheapskate. I'm sick and tired of paying vastly inflated health care premiums and costs, inflated due to the fact that I'm paying for other people's treatment. Inflated due to the fact that so many people can't afford preventive and diagnostic services and end up costing system and me far more than they should.
If you want to keep chanting "socialism", quoting Rush and paying a shitload more than you should be for health care, that's your call. I'm a cheapskate, and I think this simple-minded lunacy.
.
Get up off your wallet and quit expecting third parties to pay your way for everything.
Quoted because it is one of the best, most well thought out answers I've seen in a long time on this board. I wish I could give rep more than once.
Well, I just couldn't agree more!
.
"medicare for all"......? ....just another name for socialized medicine....
You can't polish a turd, dude.Yeah...A mature, rational, clear-thinking adult moocher, who wants everyone else to pay for serviced rendered to him.
You ain't nothing new.
As expected. Perhaps the paragraph to which I refer was a bit complicated. I understand.
.
The problem is that we haven't had anything resembling a free market in medical services in more than 50 years....The entire sector has been overrun by moochers who expect that their insurance is a defacto pre-paid medical plan, that covers any and every contact with anyone who wears a lab coat.
Your contributions to this thread have revealed you to be one of those people...What reaction do you expect to get?
From what I remember of the Ryan plan when he was on the Morning Joe show a few times.
Seniors now would not see ANY changes whatsoever.Future Seniors those needing the plan years from
now will have the changes apply to them thus giving everyone time to adjust.
The left knowing full well what his proposal was just started screaming that Ryan was gonna kill the programs.They even had a commercial with an actor that looked like Ryan pushing Granny in a wheelchair off the cliff.
So now we have entire nation of retirees who can only receive their check if the government can borrow because they have no assets to sell anyone in the "Trust Fund"
That's better?
Why do conservatives find it so comfortable to lie? Why do you? If you are as knowledgeable as you say you know that the SS contributions are adequate, even if nothing is done, to pay 75% of benefits as far into the future as we care to look.
If you don't know that you are ignorant.
If you do know it you are a liar.
The zero number of responses you got is telling.
These programs are socialism. Conservatives like to spout off about how socialism is the devil himself,
but they also know that to oppose these socialist programs outright puts them in a looney extremist minority.
Such a dilemma...
