Merrill's attempt to hijack a thread from the Political forum

34,000 people can be insured at the cost of the United Health Group CEO who makes $122.7 million a year.

$350 - $400 billion could be saved in the first year of Single Payer implementation by way of

* reducing admin waste
* global budgeting with hospitals and other providers
* bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals and medical supplies

Choice:
* Patients have their choice of doctors,providers,hospitals,clinics,and other practices
* All medical decisions made only by the patient and his/her chosen professional = no more booklets of suggested providers that will accept your insurance provider.

It is simple economical and humane



Boohoo though luck for the 34,000 people. Its not their money to lay grubby hands on, nor is it up to someone else to give up a cent to make the world a better place.



I have to laugh at humane.... i consider putting animals down when it is no longer cost effective....or when they are to sick, very old and in pain....humane.
 
Last edited:
I am for IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Insurance for ALL absolutely!!!

Make IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Insurance for ALL available to all taxpayers as one of our choices.

Leave existing insurance on the table for those who enjoy spending large sums of money
for medical insurance. What could possibly be more American?

I want my tax dollars spent on a useful endeavor not on insurance over charges or obscene CEO salaries or golden parachutes or shareholders or special interest campaign funding!!!

It is time for my tax dollars to support this fiscally prudent insurance program. Allow me to sign up!

The single payer should be the one receiving the service. Your health care is not my responsibility.
I too want my tax dollars spent on useful endeavors, like what is enumerated in the Constitution.

Is fraud written into the constitution?

Why continue supporting this crap?

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

At a committee hearing yesterday, three health-care specialists testified that insurers go to great lengths to avoid responsibility for sick people, use deliberately incomprehensible documents to mislead consumers about their benefits, and sell "junk" policies that do not cover needed care. Rockefeller said he was exploring "why consumers get such a raw deal from their insurance companies."

The star witness at the hearing was a former public relations executive for major health insurers whose testimony boiled down to this: Don't trust the insurers.

"The industry and its backers are using fear tactics, as they did in 1994, to tar a transparent and accountable -- publicly accountable -- health-care option," said Wendell Potter, who until early last year was vice president for corporate communications at the big insurer Cigna.

Insurers make paperwork confusing because "they realize that people will just simply give up and not pursue it" if they think they have been shortchanged, Potter said.

More on this story:
Senate Panel Hears of ‘Raw Deal' Consumers Get From Health Insurers
Washington Post

Fraud is against the law. Any person or corporation that commits fraud Should be prosecuted and the free market should respond by seeking their goods and services elsewhere. I would much rather deal with a corporation that has an interest in running an efficient and profitable corporation than a bureaucracy that has a very real interest in running just as inefficiently as they figure they can get away with. When have you ever seen a government agency go to Congress and say that due to measures they've taken to reduce costs, they will need less money for the coming year?
Your claim that single payer health care will cost $2800/year is pretty damned disingenuous, at best.
The guy making 30 grand with a wife and six kids will not be paying $22,400/ year for his family's care. He will be paying what he does now, which is less than zero.
The guy with a wife and 2 kids making $300,000 won't be paying $11,200 either. He'll be paying much higher taxes to support someone else's family.
Go ahead! Continue to punish responsible achievers and reward the lazy and pretty soon you will have no one with a desire to excel at anything but breeding.

I am not responsible for your health care. YOU are. Get it?
 
Says logic.

You clearly have not given this much rational thought.

There will not be enough money for the list of services that you claim will be provided. Who will pay the shortfall? What about those who cannot afford to pay even the $2,700?

Who will pay for these 2.4million jobs?

Consider that IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Inusrance does not come loaded with:

1. 30% admin costs associated with the medical insurance industry

2. Obscene CEO pay packages (there are more than 2000 insurance providers = more than 2000 CEO's)

3. shareholders

4. golden parachutes (CIGNA CEO recently walked away with a $73 million retirement bonus = medical insurance coverage for 4,867 families for one year at $15,000 )

5. Special interest political campaign contributions

6. expensive campaigns to keep single payer insurance off the table at a cost of $1.4 million a day by way of the US Chamber of Commerce

Just to mention a few ways to save billions of dollars...

Dude, our government can't get it right as it is, they have never shown to be frugal, just wasteful. Your "improved" bs is pie in the sky.
If you think they are going to change, then you are naive.

This same old line that all government is bad simply does not fly. It's been going around for about 32 years. The medical insurance industry blew $1.4 million health care dollars a day to keep single payer off the table. That is a perfect example of extreme wasteful spending and those dollars could have been applied to health care. Stock options,shareholders and golden parachutes are more perfect examples of gross misconduct and mismanagement of health care dollars.

And:

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

More on this story:
Senate Panel Hears of ‘Raw Deal' Consumers Get From Health Insurers

Does that suck big time or what....

Profiteers are the loudest voices against the fiscal responsible approach to medical insurance. I say keep your insurance and I will go with my choice. Why do some love to spend big bucks for medical insurance = nothing fiscally conservative about that.
 
Medical insurance cannot get any better than this:

IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Insurance for ALL would cover every person for all necessary medical care 24/7 to include:

* Wellness
* prescription drugs
* hospital
* surgical
* outpatient services
* primary and preventive care
* emergency services
* dental
* mental health
* home health
* physical therapy
* rehabilitation (including for substance abuse)
* vision care
* hearing services including hearing aids
* chiropractic
* durable
* medical equipment
* palliative care
* long term care

No deductibles No Co-pays

True, it might cover all this.

You'll just have to wait months and months to get it though.
 
The figures do not add up.

Who will pay the shortfall?

Which figures do not add up?

What shortfall?

Where are you getting this information?

Why would there be a shortfall?

Do the damned math. Research the damned topic - which clearly you have not, otherwise you would know the answers to your questions. Why have you not investigated the concept thoroughly before supporting it?

That 70 million will be those who cost the most. Do the damned math.

Liberals can't do the math.
 
Which figures do not add up?

What shortfall?

Where are you getting this information?

Why would there be a shortfall?

Do the damned math. Research the damned topic - which clearly you have not, otherwise you would know the answers to your questions. Why have you not investigated the concept thoroughly before supporting it?

That 70 million will be those who cost the most. Do the damned math.

Liberals can't do the math.

They don't believe in math. They're A3ists.
 
Consider that IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Inusrance does not come loaded with:

1. 30% admin costs associated with the medical insurance industry

2. Obscene CEO pay packages (there are more than 2000 insurance providers = more than 2000 CEO's)

3. shareholders

4. golden parachutes (CIGNA CEO recently walked away with a $73 million retirement bonus = medical insurance coverage for 4,867 families for one year at $15,000 )

5. Special interest political campaign contributions

6. expensive campaigns to keep single payer insurance off the table at a cost of $1.4 million a day by way of the US Chamber of Commerce

Just to mention a few ways to save billions of dollars...

Dude, our government can't get it right as it is, they have never shown to be frugal, just wasteful. Your "improved" bs is pie in the sky.
If you think they are going to change, then you are naive.

This same old line that all government is bad simply does not fly. It's been going around for about 32 years. The medical insurance industry blew $1.4 million health care dollars a day to keep single payer off the table. That is a perfect example of extreme wasteful spending and those dollars could have been applied to health care. Stock options,shareholders and golden parachutes are more perfect examples of gross misconduct and mismanagement of health care dollars.

And:

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

More on this story:
Senate Panel Hears of ‘Raw Deal' Consumers Get From Health Insurers

Does that suck big time or what....

Profiteers are the loudest voices against the fiscal responsible approach to medical insurance. I say keep your insurance and I will go with my choice. Why do some love to spend big bucks for medical insurance = nothing fiscally conservative about that.

Merrill....what part of the government turns a profit or doesn't lose money? I'll be waiting for your answer.
 
Dude, our government can't get it right as it is, they have never shown to be frugal, just wasteful. Your "improved" bs is pie in the sky.
If you think they are going to change, then you are naive.

This same old line that all government is bad simply does not fly. It's been going around for about 32 years. The medical insurance industry blew $1.4 million health care dollars a day to keep single payer off the table. That is a perfect example of extreme wasteful spending and those dollars could have been applied to health care. Stock options,shareholders and golden parachutes are more perfect examples of gross misconduct and mismanagement of health care dollars.

And:

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

More on this story:
Senate Panel Hears of ‘Raw Deal' Consumers Get From Health Insurers

Does that suck big time or what....

Profiteers are the loudest voices against the fiscal responsible approach to medical insurance. I say keep your insurance and I will go with my choice. Why do some love to spend big bucks for medical insurance = nothing fiscally conservative about that.

Merrill....what part of the government turns a profit or doesn't lose money? I'll be waiting for your answer.

The Fed.
 
This same old line that all government is bad simply does not fly. It's been going around for about 32 years. The medical insurance industry blew $1.4 million health care dollars a day to keep single payer off the table. That is a perfect example of extreme wasteful spending and those dollars could have been applied to health care. Stock options,shareholders and golden parachutes are more perfect examples of gross misconduct and mismanagement of health care dollars.

And:

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

More on this story:
Senate Panel Hears of ‘Raw Deal' Consumers Get From Health Insurers

Does that suck big time or what....

Profiteers are the loudest voices against the fiscal responsible approach to medical insurance. I say keep your insurance and I will go with my choice. Why do some love to spend big bucks for medical insurance = nothing fiscally conservative about that.

Merrill....what part of the government turns a profit or doesn't lose money? I'll be waiting for your answer.

The Fed.

The Fed is part of the Government?
 
Consider that IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Inusrance does not come loaded with:

1. 30% admin costs associated with the medical insurance industry

2. Obscene CEO pay packages (there are more than 2000 insurance providers = more than 2000 CEO's)

3. shareholders

4. golden parachutes (CIGNA CEO recently walked away with a $73 million retirement bonus = medical insurance coverage for 4,867 families for one year at $15,000 )

5. Special interest political campaign contributions

6. expensive campaigns to keep single payer insurance off the table at a cost of $1.4 million a day by way of the US Chamber of Commerce

Just to mention a few ways to save billions of dollars...

Dude, our government can't get it right as it is, they have never shown to be frugal, just wasteful. Your "improved" bs is pie in the sky.
If you think they are going to change, then you are naive.

This same old line that all government is bad simply does not fly. It's been going around for about 32 years. The medical insurance industry blew $1.4 million health care dollars a day to keep single payer off the table. That is a perfect example of extreme wasteful spending and those dollars could have been applied to health care. Stock options,shareholders and golden parachutes are more perfect examples of gross misconduct and mismanagement of health care dollars.

And:

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Health insurers have forced consumers to pay billions of dollars in medical bills that the insurers themselves should have paid, according to a report released yesterday by the staff of the Senate Commerce Committee.

More on this story:
Senate Panel Hears of ‘Raw Deal' Consumers Get From Health Insurers

Does that suck big time or what....

Profiteers are the loudest voices against the fiscal responsible approach to medical insurance. I say keep your insurance and I will go with my choice. Why do some love to spend big bucks for medical insurance = nothing fiscally conservative about that.

Stop deflecting and answer my questions.

Who will make up the shortfall... because there absolutely will be one.

What about those that cannot afford your 'option'? (and don't tell me we're already paying for them. That is not a solution. I want your solution).

What about the R&D that has provided every single medical advance and life saving treatment that the whole world needs?

Who is going to pay for these 2.4 million new jobs?

Answer the questions.
 
Improved Medicare Single Payer Insurance for All is one substantial part of the solution.

- Easy to Implement: Medicare has been in existence since 1966, it provides
healthcare to those 65 and older, and satisfaction levels are high. The
structure is already in place and can be easily expanded to cover everyone.

- Simple: One entity – established by the government – would handle billing
and payment at a cost significantly lower than private insurance companies.
Private insurance companies spend about 31% of every healthcare dollar on
administration. Medicare now spends about 3%.

- Real Choice: An expanded and improved Medicare for All would provide
personal choice of doctors and other healthcare providers. While financing
would be public, providers would remain private. As with Medicare, you choose
your doctor, your hospital, and other healthcare providers.

- State and Local Tax Relief: Medicare for All would assume the costs of
healthcare delivery, thus relieving the states and local governments of the
cost of healthcare, including Medicaid, and as a result reduce State and
local tax burdens.

- Expanded coverage: Would cover all medically necessary healthcare
services – no more rationing by private insurance companies. There would be
no limits on coverage, no co-pays or deductibles, and services would include
not only primary and specialized care but also prescription drugs, dental,
vision, mental health services, and long-term care.

- Everyone In, Nobody Out: Everyone would be eligible and covered. No
longer would doctors ask what insurance you have before they treat you.

- No More Overpriced Private Health Insurance: Medicare for All would
eliminate the need for private health insurance companies who put profit
before healthcare, unfairly limit choice, restrict who gets coverage, and
force people into bankruptcy.

- Lower Costs: Most people will pay significantly less for healthcare.
Savings will be achieved in reduced administrative costs and in negotiated
prices for prescription drugs.
Healthcare-NOW! - Register for the Healthcare-NOW! Annual Strategy Conference

3955664.png
 
Which figures do not add up?

What shortfall?

Where are you getting this information?

Why would there be a shortfall?

"That 70 million will be those who cost the most. Do the damned math."


__________________
Do the damned math. Research the damned topic - which clearly you have not, otherwise you would know the answers to your questions. Why have you not investigated the concept thoroughly before supporting it?

That 70 million will be those who cost the most. Do the damned math.

Says who? You don't know this.

IMPROVED Medicare Single Payer Insurance will create an estimated 2.4 million jobs in the health care industry. Health Care may well be the fastest growing industry on the planet.
Since it's single payer, income for health care providers will be capped.

Where's the incentive to go into the health care profession? Why would anyone spend 10+ years in school and training only to have their salary dictated by the government?
 
34,000 people can be insured at the cost of the United Health Group CEO who makes $122.7 million a year.

$350 - $400 billion could be saved in the first year of Single Payer implementation by way of

* reducing admin waste
* global budgeting with hospitals and other providers
* bulk purchasing of pharmaceuticals and medical supplies

Choice:
* Patients have their choice of doctors,providers,hospitals,clinics,and other practices
* All medical decisions made only by the patient and his/her chosen professional = no more booklets of suggested providers that will accept your insurance provider.

It is simple economical and humane



Boohoo though luck for the 34,000 people. Its not their money to lay grubby hands on, nor is it up to someone else to give up a cent to make the world a better place.



I have to laugh at humane.... i consider putting animals down when it is no longer cost effective....or when they are to sick, very old and in pain....humane.
supermanobamacaren.jpg
 
East Otis, Mass. - The less some Americans know, the more strident and voluble they become. Take socialism. The wailing about it over healthcare reform proves my proposition.

Shrill critics menacingly brandish "socialism" to terrify the unthinking, forgetting – or willfully ignoring – that while the United States is capitalist, it's also hip deep in various modes of socialism.

Republicans apparently don't know that it was their beloved President Theodore Roosevelt who in 1912 proposed national health insurance for all.

Some American critics of socialized medicine cite nightmarish accounts of bungled medical treatment abroad, boasting that America has the best medical system in the world.

As a foreign correspondent, I lived in Britain, Germany, Israel, and the Soviet Union and did not discover any sapping of a nation's vital essences because the public enjoyed publicly funded national health insurance.

As a US citizen who lived more than two decades abroad, I found socialized national health insurance programs are often more compassionate and charitable than what I have seen with profit-driven, private insurance companies in the United States.

Some years ago my former wife took my sons on a driving tour of Britain and became involved in an accident. My elder son had a badly broken leg and was taken to a hospital for six weeks until his leg healed.

Although I didn't live in Britain at the time, the British National Insurance system paid all his hospital and doctor bills. When I offered to reimburse the hospital, the British charitably declined and only charged me $35 for a crutch my son used to hobble aboard a plane home to America.

A decade ago, a federal report shocked the nation by suggesting that our modern medical system was one of the leading causes of death in America. It called for cutting the rates of medical mistakes in half within five years. But it's only gotten worse. Today, preventable medical injuries kill some 200,000 Americans each year.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0916/p09s02-coop.html
 
East Otis, Mass. - The less some Americans know, the more strident and voluble they become. Take socialism. The wailing about it over healthcare reform proves my proposition.

Shrill critics menacingly brandish "socialism" to terrify the unthinking, forgetting – or willfully ignoring – that while the United States is capitalist, it's also hip deep in various modes of socialism.

Republicans apparently don't know that it was their beloved President Theodore Roosevelt who in 1912 proposed national health insurance for all.

Some American critics of socialized medicine cite nightmarish accounts of bungled medical treatment abroad, boasting that America has the best medical system in the world.

As a foreign correspondent, I lived in Britain, Germany, Israel, and the Soviet Union and did not discover any sapping of a nation's vital essences because the public enjoyed publicly funded national health insurance.

As a US citizen who lived more than two decades abroad, I found socialized national health insurance programs are often more compassionate and charitable than what I have seen with profit-driven, private insurance companies in the United States.

Some years ago my former wife took my sons on a driving tour of Britain and became involved in an accident. My elder son had a badly broken leg and was taken to a hospital for six weeks until his leg healed.

Although I didn't live in Britain at the time, the British National Insurance system paid all his hospital and doctor bills. When I offered to reimburse the hospital, the British charitably declined and only charged me $35 for a crutch my son used to hobble aboard a plane home to America.

A decade ago, a federal report shocked the nation by suggesting that our modern medical system was one of the leading causes of death in America. It called for cutting the rates of medical mistakes in half within five years. But it's only gotten worse. Today, preventable medical injuries kill some 200,000 Americans each year.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0916/p09s02-coop.html

OMG! Teddy Roosevelt had a bad idea. :lol:
 
Affordable health care is a bad idea?


Affordable health care is a good idea. Free health care to more 50% another 25% of the population at very low cost, is a bad business idea as it is unsustainable. Relying on only a few people to contribute and pay for the hoards will never work.


Affordable health care were everyone pays into it...no matter how much or how little you have is a good idea. Parents paying into a system for each of their children is a good idea.
 

Forum List

Back
Top