So, this is what passes for leadership, now?

[The Derp]

Another stupid claim that you can't substantiate. It seems all you do is make up shit for the sake of making up shit.

Not at all and here's how we get there:

You think that people should negotiate with doctors to pay cash for their health care. OK, so what happens when they don't have enough cash to pay for it? What then? What are they supposed to do? Offer chickens? Offer to paint their house? Offer to blow them in the office? What?

 

[Papageorgio]

So you didn't say "I'm glad it don't live there"?

How was anyone to know the context you dishonest nutjob? And when I asked for clarification, you didn't clarify yourself again! You are a dumb dishonest person. Now, do you have anything new to really add?

By employing reading comprehension, which you apparently are incapable of. My comment was made after pointing out that you live in a delusional world, based on your claim that a period of time when 48 million Americans were uninsured was getting by just fine.

It's not my fault that you are incapable of understanding the words that you read.

Not my fault you are a dumb fuck.

Well if that is all you got, then that is all you got. Lol!

Okay, then. Since that's all you got, I guess we're done here. Thank you for playing. Do feel free to pick up your parting gifts on the way out.

Thank you and here is your cookie.

 

[Papageorgio]

You said doctors didn't take cash or give a break for not going through your insurance. You are dead wrong.

Fine. I was wrong about that. But that doesn't change that your stupid idea doesn't satisfy the questions of pre-existing conditions.

If you have cash a doctor will treat a pre-existing condition. I have had kidney stones for 30 years and I paid the doctor cash.

I am all about solving my problems on my own, I don't want or need the government to interfere. I also hate the cookie cutter approach, if you need the government to cover your ailments, I'm fine with that. Let them take care of you. I research and look for better ways. Why can't we allow people that have things figured to opt out? Why do we need to force everyone into the same system?

 

[Papageorgio]

Another stupid claim that you can't substantiate. It seems all you do is make up shit for the sake of making up shit.

Not at all and here's how we get there:

You think that people should negotiate with doctors to pay cash for their health care. OK, so what happens when they don't have enough cash to pay for it? What then? What are they supposed to do? Offer chickens? Offer to paint their house? Offer to blow them in the office? What?

If you don't have cash to see a doctor, do you have money to cover the deductible, which is a lot higher than a cash pay to the doctor?

 

[The Derp]

If you have cash a doctor will treat a pre-existing condition. I have had kidney stones for 30 years and I paid the doctor cash.

Right, but kidney stones aren't a chronic condition. Bipolar disorder is. Diabetes is. Heart disease is. These require constant care, not ad hoc care like kidney stones do. You get that, right? You don't need chronic treatment for kidney stones, but you do need chronic treatment for bipolar disorder. I have had kidney stones too. Sometimes you go years without getting one. That doesn't happen with diabetes or bipolar disorder. Those are chronic conditions.

I am all about solving my problems on my own, I don't want or need the government to interfere. I also hate the cookie cutter approach, if you need the government to cover your ailments, I'm fine with that. Let them take care of you. I research and look for better ways. Why can't we allow people that have things figured to opt out? Why do we need to force everyone into the same system?

First of all, the government isn't "covering your ailments". All the government is doing in a single payer system is administering reimbursement to your doctor. That's it. That is all we are talking about here. Who pays your doctor for your treatment has no bearing on the delivery of health care to you because the reimbursement payment comes after the treatment, not before. In fact, the reimbursement is a transaction that you aren't even a part of. Furthermore, if there is no insurance, what happens when you get cancer and require surgeries, chemo, etc.? And you also realize catastrophic plans universally have lifetime caps. So even in catastrophic plans, you're still going bankrupt from medical costs. This was why the ACA was passed 7 years ago. It's stupid that we have to have these dumb debates all over again. Have you learned nothing?

So what happens if you don't have the cash to treat chronic conditions? You haven't answered that question because you haven't thought about it. You mistakenly believe that kidney stones are chronic conditions (they aren't), and compare to actual, real chronic conditions like diabetes or bipolar, two things that don't pop up every now and then, but rather conditions people live with all the time and have to manage. You don't require regular appointments for kidney stones, but you do require regular health care for diabetes or schizophrenia. You get that, right?

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

There! I fixed your error. Insurance is not defense.

So health insurance isn't a defense against illnesses, diseases, and accidents? What about "general welfare", wouldn't it fall into that.

BTW - you fucking assholes took Medicare to court in the 1960's, claiming it was unconstitutional. SCOTUS smacked that down. Hence, why we have Medicare today. Never mind the fact that all the Conservative predictions made of Medicare in the 60's all turned out to be wrong. So if you were wrong then, why would you be right today?

The SCOTUS also upheld Dred Scott.

 

[The Derp]

The SCOTUS also upheld Dred Scott.

So you think Medicare and Dred Scott are analogous?

 

[The Derp]

The SCOTUS also upheld Dred Scott.

So your position is that Medicare is unconstitutional? What makes you say that?

 

[The Derp]

If you don't have cash to see a doctor, do you have money to cover the deductible, which is a lot higher than a cash pay to the doctor?

If you don't have cash to pay the doctor, then you probably don't have cash to pay the deductible either.

So in your mind, what are people who don't have sufficient cash supposed to do if they require health care? Prostitute themselves to the physician? I've seen plenty of pornos to know how that ends up...

 

[jillian]

Point one:
With only a very small majority, the Republicans in the House & Senate need more victories next year since Dems totally obstruct, no votes!

We were let down by all of the Democrats and a few Republicans. Most Republicans were loyal, terrific & worked really hard. We will return!


Source: Trump's own Twitter account
DEMOCRATS?!?!?! Really??? So, the party that was not invited to the table, not included in the crafting process, were not allowed even the privilege of discussing the bill is the group of people who are responsible for the failure of this Republican boondoggle?!?! This is an example of Trump "Leadership"?!?! "Pass the Buck"? Where was the White House? Where was the leadership? Where was the President telling Congress what he wanted, and making sure it happened? Why is it that for the last eight years, whenever the Congress failed to accomplish something, everyone on the right was all over the place screaming about "lack of leadership from the White House", but now that your guy is in the office, the buck stops at Congress?

Point 2:
"I think we're probably in that position where we'll just let Obamacare fail. We're not gonna own it. I'm not gonna own it," Trump told reporters. "We'll let Obamacare fail and then Democrats are going to come to us."
Source: Trump says he plans to 'let Obamacare fail'
A couple of problems with that attitude. First, that's easy to say for the guy who has three more fucking years to let American forget about this massive clusterfuck. In the meanwhile, Senators, and Representatives have to go back home, and try to get re-elected behind this shit, in a year-and-a-half. And if Trump thinks those congresspersons won't be held accountable - with a Republican Led House, a Republican led Senate, and a Republican in the White House overseeing it all - for their failure to fix the problems of Obamacare, then Trump is delusional.

Second, Democrats have been coming to Republicans calling for Obamacare to be fixed!
“Rather than repeating the same failed, partisan process yet again, Republicans should work with Democrats on a bill that lowers premiums, provides long term stability to the markets and improves our healthcare system.”

The Problem is that there has been no political incentive - either for Trump, or Congressional Republicans - to do this. They have ran for the last 6 years on repealing Obamacare. So, what possible incentive could they have to work with Democrats? I find it ironic that, after everyone kept complaining about the "lack leadership" of Obama, when he had a hostile Republican Congress only interested in obstruction, yet, no one is questioning the leadership skills of Trump, when he can't get dick done with a friendly Republican Congress!!!

after the obstructionist rightwingnut loons' behavior over the past 8 years when the president actually won a majority of American votes, your calling Dems obstructionist for not supporting divesting 22 million people of health care is a joke.

great Nic.... your hammer is garbage

 

[jillian]

I'm still trying to get my head around having a sitting President of the United States matter-of-factly say that he's going to let our health care system collapse.

Out of adjectives.
.

because you're not a trump loon... trump loons are nasty ugly ignorant people

 

[Czernobog]

Point one:
With only a very small majority, the Republicans in the House & Senate need more victories next year since Dems totally obstruct, no votes!

We were let down by all of the Democrats and a few Republicans. Most Republicans were loyal, terrific & worked really hard. We will return!


Source: Trump's own Twitter account
DEMOCRATS?!?!?! Really??? So, the party that was not invited to the table, not included in the crafting process, were not allowed even the privilege of discussing the bill is the group of people who are responsible for the failure of this Republican boondoggle?!?! This is an example of Trump "Leadership"?!?! "Pass the Buck"? Where was the White House? Where was the leadership? Where was the President telling Congress what he wanted, and making sure it happened? Why is it that for the last eight years, whenever the Congress failed to accomplish something, everyone on the right was all over the place screaming about "lack of leadership from the White House", but now that your guy is in the office, the buck stops at Congress?

Point 2:
"I think we're probably in that position where we'll just let Obamacare fail. We're not gonna own it. I'm not gonna own it," Trump told reporters. "We'll let Obamacare fail and then Democrats are going to come to us."
Source: Trump says he plans to 'let Obamacare fail'
A couple of problems with that attitude. First, that's easy to say for the guy who has three more fucking years to let American forget about this massive clusterfuck. In the meanwhile, Senators, and Representatives have to go back home, and try to get re-elected behind this shit, in a year-and-a-half. And if Trump thinks those congresspersons won't be held accountable - with a Republican Led House, a Republican led Senate, and a Republican in the White House overseeing it all - for their failure to fix the problems of Obamacare, then Trump is delusional.

Second, Democrats have been coming to Republicans calling for Obamacare to be fixed!
“Rather than repeating the same failed, partisan process yet again, Republicans should work with Democrats on a bill that lowers premiums, provides long term stability to the markets and improves our healthcare system.”

The Problem is that there has been no political incentive - either for Trump, or Congressional Republicans - to do this. They have ran for the last 6 years on repealing Obamacare. So, what possible incentive could they have to work with Democrats? I find it ironic that, after everyone kept complaining about the "lack leadership" of Obama, when he had a hostile Republican Congress only interested in obstruction, yet, no one is questioning the leadership skills of Trump, when he can't get dick done with a friendly Republican Congress!!!

after the obstructionist rightwingnut loons' behavior over the past 8 years when the president actually won a majority of American votes, your calling Dems obstructionist for not supporting divesting 22 million people of health care is a joke.

great Nic.... your hammer is garbage

Uh...Jillian...you might wanna go back, and follow the "Donald Trump" link in my post. That wasn't me calling Dems obstructionist. That was a quote from Lord Dampnut's twitterfeed...

 

[jillian]

Point one:
With only a very small majority, the Republicans in the House & Senate need more victories next year since Dems totally obstruct, no votes!

We were let down by all of the Democrats and a few Republicans. Most Republicans were loyal, terrific & worked really hard. We will return!


Source: Trump's own Twitter account
DEMOCRATS?!?!?! Really??? So, the party that was not invited to the table, not included in the crafting process, were not allowed even the privilege of discussing the bill is the group of people who are responsible for the failure of this Republican boondoggle?!?! This is an example of Trump "Leadership"?!?! "Pass the Buck"? Where was the White House? Where was the leadership? Where was the President telling Congress what he wanted, and making sure it happened? Why is it that for the last eight years, whenever the Congress failed to accomplish something, everyone on the right was all over the place screaming about "lack of leadership from the White House", but now that your guy is in the office, the buck stops at Congress?

Point 2:
"I think we're probably in that position where we'll just let Obamacare fail. We're not gonna own it. I'm not gonna own it," Trump told reporters. "We'll let Obamacare fail and then Democrats are going to come to us."
Source: Trump says he plans to 'let Obamacare fail'
A couple of problems with that attitude. First, that's easy to say for the guy who has three more fucking years to let American forget about this massive clusterfuck. In the meanwhile, Senators, and Representatives have to go back home, and try to get re-elected behind this shit, in a year-and-a-half. And if Trump thinks those congresspersons won't be held accountable - with a Republican Led House, a Republican led Senate, and a Republican in the White House overseeing it all - for their failure to fix the problems of Obamacare, then Trump is delusional.

Second, Democrats have been coming to Republicans calling for Obamacare to be fixed!
“Rather than repeating the same failed, partisan process yet again, Republicans should work with Democrats on a bill that lowers premiums, provides long term stability to the markets and improves our healthcare system.”

The Problem is that there has been no political incentive - either for Trump, or Congressional Republicans - to do this. They have ran for the last 6 years on repealing Obamacare. So, what possible incentive could they have to work with Democrats? I find it ironic that, after everyone kept complaining about the "lack leadership" of Obama, when he had a hostile Republican Congress only interested in obstruction, yet, no one is questioning the leadership skills of Trump, when he can't get dick done with a friendly Republican Congress!!!

after the obstructionist rightwingnut loons' behavior over the past 8 years when the president actually won a majority of American votes, your calling Dems obstructionist for not supporting divesting 22 million people of health care is a joke.

great Nic.... your hammer is garbage

Uh...Jillian...you might wanna go back, and follow the "Donald Trump" link in my post. That wasn't me calling Dems obstructionist. That was a quote from Lord Dampnut's twitterfeed...

happens when you're looking at a computer screen.

did you watch American Gods, btw?

 

[Papageorgio]

If you have cash a doctor will treat a pre-existing condition. I have had kidney stones for 30 years and I paid the doctor cash.

Right, but kidney stones aren't a chronic condition. Bipolar disorder is. Diabetes is. Heart disease is. These require constant care, not ad hoc care like kidney stones do. You get that, right? You don't need chronic treatment for kidney stones, but you do need chronic treatment for bipolar disorder. I have had kidney stones too. Sometimes you go years without getting one. That doesn't happen with diabetes or bipolar disorder. Those are chronic conditions.

I am all about solving my problems on my own, I don't want or need the government to interfere. I also hate the cookie cutter approach, if you need the government to cover your ailments, I'm fine with that. Let them take care of you. I research and look for better ways. Why can't we allow people that have things figured to opt out? Why do we need to force everyone into the same system?

First of all, the government isn't "covering your ailments". All the government is doing in a single payer system is administering reimbursement to your doctor. That's it. That is all we are talking about here. Who pays your doctor for your treatment has no bearing on the delivery of health care to you because the reimbursement payment comes after the treatment, not before. In fact, the reimbursement is a transaction that you aren't even a part of. Furthermore, if there is no insurance, what happens when you get cancer and require surgeries, chemo, etc.? And you also realize catastrophic plans universally have lifetime caps. So even in catastrophic plans, you're still going bankrupt from medical costs. This was why the ACA was passed 7 years ago. It's stupid that we have to have these dumb debates all over again. Have you learned nothing?

So what happens if you don't have the cash to treat chronic conditions? You haven't answered that question because you haven't thought about it. You mistakenly believe that kidney stones are chronic conditions (they aren't), and compare to actual, real chronic conditions like diabetes or bipolar, two things that don't pop up every now and then, but rather conditions people live with all the time and have to manage. You don't require regular appointments for kidney stones, but you do require regular health care for diabetes or schizophrenia. You get that, right?

So now we call you Dr. Derp? You know nothing about my health nor are you very informed on kidney stones. So having kidney stones every month or two is not chronic? It is called cystinuria. There are people that get stones daily. They are given morphine vials to help them cope with pain. You might want to read and learn before you spout stupid nonsense.

Cystinuria

I also have diabetes, which I have controlled by diet, high protein, low carbs and virtually no sugar. My glucose levels have been great for quite awhile.

Again, I had catastrophic insurance, it worked well for me. It might not work well for others. I hate doctors and only go when I have to. I'd rather work on solutions on my own and not take medications that have long term side effects. That is just me.

If I thought single payer would drop the cost and save anyone money, I would be for it however with the government that won't happen, even if it was cheaper the government would never lower the tax, they would waste it somewhere else.

 

[Papageorgio]

If you don't have cash to see a doctor, do you have money to cover the deductible, which is a lot higher than a cash pay to the doctor?

If you don't have cash to pay the doctor, then you probably don't have cash to pay the deductible either.

So in your mind, what are people who don't have sufficient cash supposed to do if they require health care? Prostitute themselves to the physician? I've seen plenty of pornos to know how that ends up...

What do they do now?

 

[Czernobog]

Point one:
With only a very small majority, the Republicans in the House & Senate need more victories next year since Dems totally obstruct, no votes!

We were let down by all of the Democrats and a few Republicans. Most Republicans were loyal, terrific & worked really hard. We will return!


Source: Trump's own Twitter account
DEMOCRATS?!?!?! Really??? So, the party that was not invited to the table, not included in the crafting process, were not allowed even the privilege of discussing the bill is the group of people who are responsible for the failure of this Republican boondoggle?!?! This is an example of Trump "Leadership"?!?! "Pass the Buck"? Where was the White House? Where was the leadership? Where was the President telling Congress what he wanted, and making sure it happened? Why is it that for the last eight years, whenever the Congress failed to accomplish something, everyone on the right was all over the place screaming about "lack of leadership from the White House", but now that your guy is in the office, the buck stops at Congress?

Point 2:
"I think we're probably in that position where we'll just let Obamacare fail. We're not gonna own it. I'm not gonna own it," Trump told reporters. "We'll let Obamacare fail and then Democrats are going to come to us."
Source: Trump says he plans to 'let Obamacare fail'
A couple of problems with that attitude. First, that's easy to say for the guy who has three more fucking years to let American forget about this massive clusterfuck. In the meanwhile, Senators, and Representatives have to go back home, and try to get re-elected behind this shit, in a year-and-a-half. And if Trump thinks those congresspersons won't be held accountable - with a Republican Led House, a Republican led Senate, and a Republican in the White House overseeing it all - for their failure to fix the problems of Obamacare, then Trump is delusional.

Second, Democrats have been coming to Republicans calling for Obamacare to be fixed!
“Rather than repeating the same failed, partisan process yet again, Republicans should work with Democrats on a bill that lowers premiums, provides long term stability to the markets and improves our healthcare system.”

The Problem is that there has been no political incentive - either for Trump, or Congressional Republicans - to do this. They have ran for the last 6 years on repealing Obamacare. So, what possible incentive could they have to work with Democrats? I find it ironic that, after everyone kept complaining about the "lack leadership" of Obama, when he had a hostile Republican Congress only interested in obstruction, yet, no one is questioning the leadership skills of Trump, when he can't get dick done with a friendly Republican Congress!!!

after the obstructionist rightwingnut loons' behavior over the past 8 years when the president actually won a majority of American votes, your calling Dems obstructionist for not supporting divesting 22 million people of health care is a joke.

great Nic.... your hammer is garbage

Uh...Jillian...you might wanna go back, and follow the "Donald Trump" link in my post. That wasn't me calling Dems obstructionist. That was a quote from Lord Dampnut's twitterfeed...

happens when you're looking at a computer screen.

did you watch American Gods, btw?

Every episode. Fuckin rocked. I've used this user name for the last decade, and you're the first person to ever make the connection. I generally have to explain that he is the Slavic god of chaos; which, while making him a dark god, does not, necessarily make him evil.

 

[jillian]

Point one:
With only a very small majority, the Republicans in the House & Senate need more victories next year since Dems totally obstruct, no votes!

We were let down by all of the Democrats and a few Republicans. Most Republicans were loyal, terrific & worked really hard. We will return!


Source: Trump's own Twitter account
DEMOCRATS?!?!?! Really??? So, the party that was not invited to the table, not included in the crafting process, were not allowed even the privilege of discussing the bill is the group of people who are responsible for the failure of this Republican boondoggle?!?! This is an example of Trump "Leadership"?!?! "Pass the Buck"? Where was the White House? Where was the leadership? Where was the President telling Congress what he wanted, and making sure it happened? Why is it that for the last eight years, whenever the Congress failed to accomplish something, everyone on the right was all over the place screaming about "lack of leadership from the White House", but now that your guy is in the office, the buck stops at Congress?

Point 2:
"I think we're probably in that position where we'll just let Obamacare fail. We're not gonna own it. I'm not gonna own it," Trump told reporters. "We'll let Obamacare fail and then Democrats are going to come to us."
Source: Trump says he plans to 'let Obamacare fail'
A couple of problems with that attitude. First, that's easy to say for the guy who has three more fucking years to let American forget about this massive clusterfuck. In the meanwhile, Senators, and Representatives have to go back home, and try to get re-elected behind this shit, in a year-and-a-half. And if Trump thinks those congresspersons won't be held accountable - with a Republican Led House, a Republican led Senate, and a Republican in the White House overseeing it all - for their failure to fix the problems of Obamacare, then Trump is delusional.

Second, Democrats have been coming to Republicans calling for Obamacare to be fixed!
“Rather than repeating the same failed, partisan process yet again, Republicans should work with Democrats on a bill that lowers premiums, provides long term stability to the markets and improves our healthcare system.”

The Problem is that there has been no political incentive - either for Trump, or Congressional Republicans - to do this. They have ran for the last 6 years on repealing Obamacare. So, what possible incentive could they have to work with Democrats? I find it ironic that, after everyone kept complaining about the "lack leadership" of Obama, when he had a hostile Republican Congress only interested in obstruction, yet, no one is questioning the leadership skills of Trump, when he can't get dick done with a friendly Republican Congress!!!

after the obstructionist rightwingnut loons' behavior over the past 8 years when the president actually won a majority of American votes, your calling Dems obstructionist for not supporting divesting 22 million people of health care is a joke.

great Nic.... your hammer is garbage

Uh...Jillian...you might wanna go back, and follow the "Donald Trump" link in my post. That wasn't me calling Dems obstructionist. That was a quote from Lord Dampnut's twitterfeed...

happens when you're looking at a computer screen.

did you watch American Gods, btw?

Every episode. Fuckin rocked. I've used this user name for the last decade, and you're the first person to ever make the connection. I generally have to explain that he is the Slavic god of chaos; which, while making him a dark god, does not, necessarily make him evil.

I don't think he's an evil G-d... he's a trouble maker. FWIW, I recognized the name immediately. It was an amazing novel... and a phenomenal series. Even the areas where they changed the story made sense and I loved the casting...

when I read the novel, I looked up all of the G-ds to see a) were they made up; and b) was Gaiman accurate in representing them.

I love love love Neil Gaiman... went to Town Hall in NYC this year to hear him read from Norse Mythology.

 

[The Derp]

So now we call you Dr. Derp? You know nothing about my health nor are you very informed on kidney stones.

I am well acquainted with kidney stones, having passed two this past March. But that was the first time I ever had them in all my 38 years on this earth. Since passing them, I haven't had to go back to the doctor. Now, contrast that with someone diagnosed with schizophrenia who needs constant medication and psychiatric care to manage the condition.

That's why kidney stones are not a chronic condition. They are a pre-existing condition, but not a chronic one. There is a difference.

So having kidney stones every month or two is not chronic? It is called cystinuria. There are people that get stones daily. They are given morphine vials to help them cope with pain. You might want to read and learn before you spout stupid nonsense.

You gotta be fucking kidding me. You're saying you get kidney stones every month? How long has this been going on? Why not just get your gall bladder removed? And you didn't say you got kidney stones daily. You made it sound like you get them all the time, but again, your story starts wavering and changing as we get deeper into its validity. Now, Cystinuria is a chronic condition, but you don't have that condition, do you? You just get kidney stones every now and then, not daily. Unless you're going to pretend you never said that and that you suffer from Cystinuria which begs the question; if you do suffer from it, how come you've only gone to the doctor once to pay for surgery? You never said you are in constant care with your doctor. All you said was that you negotiated with him for the surgery that you claim cost $4,800 w/o insurance, and $20,000 w/ insurance.

This is what I'm talking about when I say I don't believe you. Nothing you are saying makes any sense. It all sounds made up, and off the top of your head, then you redefine the parameters as it suits you. You, personally, do not suffer from Cystinuria. You didn't make that claim before, so you can't make it now. You getting kidney stones every now and then is not the same thing as getting them daily, which you never said happened to you. You're full of shit, aren't you? My BS detector is going off the charts.

I also have diabetes, which I have controlled by diet, high protein, low carbs and virtually no sugar. My glucose levels have been great for quite awhile.

So, of course, that isn't what controls diabetes. You didn't say what kind of diabetes you have because there are different kinds and require different treatments. Do you require regular insulin shots? Do you not? You see how skeptical I am because everything you say about yourself is always vague and general, with no specifics. So why should I believe you???? According to the American Diabetes Association, the average diabetic costs about $8K a year to treat. That's independent of insurance. That's just the base cost. So what does that $8K a year entail? Do you even know? No. Because you just made this shit up to help bolster your discredited argument.

Again, I had catastrophic insurance, it worked well for me. It might not work well for others. I hate doctors and only go when I have to. I'd rather work on solutions on my own and not take medications that have long term side effects. That is just me.

So you say you only go to the doctor "when you have to", which would mean your kidney stones are not a chronic condition, but rather an ad-hoc one you are trying to misrepresent as Cystinuia. I've had kidney stones too. I don't have Cystinuia. Furthermore, someone with Cystinuria wouldn't get a catastrophic plan because of the lifetime caps all catastrophic plans have. Pre-ACA, that was universally the case. There was no such thing as a catastrophic plan that didn't have a lifetime cap. So something about your story doesn't add up. You have a chronic condition, yet you claim to only go to the doctor "when you have to"...as opposed to...going when you don't? Huh?

f I thought single payer would drop the cost and save anyone money, I would be for it however with the government that won't happen, even if it was cheaper the government would never lower the tax, they would waste it somewhere else.

Well, this isn't a question of belief, it's a matter of accepting facts. Single payer reduces health care costs because there no longer exists a profit motive for the insurance companies. You said yourself administrative costs are why your $4,800 surgery would have cost $20,000 with insurance (a dubious claim to be sure, but whatever, I'll let it slide). Do you think those costs are the same across every type of insurance plan? What if there was only one insurance plan everyone was on...wouldn't that cut down on all the administration necessary to process claims from dozens, hundreds of different insurers.

It's no coincidence that single payer nations spend half as much as we do per patient. In this country, we have entire floors of hospitals dedicated to administration of claims. The reason is because of the myriad different insurers that there are and the administrative support necessary to process their claims. Whereas in single payer nations, that job is done by one -maybe two people- in one room. Wouldn't cutting the number of payors down to one streamline the administration?

Again, here is the budget from HHS for Medicare, notice how administration makes up 1%?

And here is the budget from Aetna, notice how administration makes up 17%?

So which is less? 1% or 17%? What is more efficient, a single payor or multiple payors? Who has the bargaining power when there are more payors than providers? Who has the bargaining power then there are more providers than payors?

There is no other way to lower health care costs other than having a single entity do the administration of processing reimbursements.

 

[The Derp]

What do they do now?

Well, now they get Medicaid or subsidies for their insurance plans. That's something you want to take away. For those who still cannot afford insurance, the bulk of them fall into the Medicaid Coverage Gap that I talked about earlier; how the red state death panels refused to expand medicaid out of spite for Obama. Had they done that, most of those who couldn't afford insurance would have qualified for Medicaid, and the uninsured rate would be at least a full percentage point lower than it is now.

 

[Papageorgio]

So now we call you Dr. Derp? You know nothing about my health nor are you very informed on kidney stones.

I am well acquainted with kidney stones, having passed two this past March. But that was the first time I ever had them in all my 38 years on this earth. Since passing them, I haven't had to go back to the doctor. Now, contrast that with someone diagnosed with schizophrenia who needs constant medication and psychiatric care to manage the condition.

That's why kidney stones are not a chronic condition. They are a pre-existing condition, but not a chronic one. There is a difference.

So having kidney stones every month or two is not chronic? It is called cystinuria. There are people that get stones daily. They are given morphine vials to help them cope with pain. You might want to read and learn before you spout stupid nonsense.

You gotta be fucking kidding me. You're saying you get kidney stones every month? How long has this been going on? Why not just get your gall bladder removed? And you didn't say you got kidney stones daily. You made it sound like you get them all the time, but again, your story starts wavering and changing as we get deeper into its validity. Now, Cystinuria is a chronic condition, but you don't have that condition, do you? You just get kidney stones every now and then, not daily. Unless you're going to pretend you never said that and that you suffer from Cystinuria which begs the question; if you do suffer from it, how come you've only gone to the doctor once to pay for surgery? You never said you are in constant care with your doctor. All you said was that you negotiated with him for the surgery that you claim cost $4,800 w/o insurance, and $20,000 w/ insurance.

This is what I'm talking about when I say I don't believe you. Nothing you are saying makes any sense. It all sounds made up, and off the top of your head, then you redefine the parameters as it suits you. You, personally, do not suffer from Cystinuria. You didn't make that claim before, so you can't make it now. You getting kidney stones every now and then is not the same thing as getting them daily, which you never said happened to you. You're full of shit, aren't you? My BS detector is going off the charts.

I also have diabetes, which I have controlled by diet, high protein, low carbs and virtually no sugar. My glucose levels have been great for quite awhile.

So, of course, that isn't what controls diabetes. You didn't say what kind of diabetes you have because there are different kinds and require different treatments. Do you require regular insulin shots? Do you not? You see how skeptical I am because everything you say about yourself is always vague and general, with no specifics. So why should I believe you???? According to the American Diabetes Association, the average diabetic costs about $8K a year to treat. That's independent of insurance. That's just the base cost. So what does that $8K a year entail? Do you even know? No. Because you just made this shit up to help bolster your discredited argument.

Again, I had catastrophic insurance, it worked well for me. It might not work well for others. I hate doctors and only go when I have to. I'd rather work on solutions on my own and not take medications that have long term side effects. That is just me.

So you say you only go to the doctor "when you have to", which would mean your kidney stones are not a chronic condition, but rather an ad-hoc one you are trying to misrepresent as Cystinuia. I've had kidney stones too. I don't have Cystinuia. Furthermore, someone with Cystinuria wouldn't get a catastrophic plan because of the lifetime caps all catastrophic plans have. Pre-ACA, that was universally the case. There was no such thing as a catastrophic plan that didn't have a lifetime cap. So something about your story doesn't add up. You have a chronic condition, yet you claim to only go to the doctor "when you have to"...as opposed to...going when you don't? Huh?

f I thought single payer would drop the cost and save anyone money, I would be for it however with the government that won't happen, even if it was cheaper the government would never lower the tax, they would waste it somewhere else.

Well, this isn't a question of belief, it's a matter of accepting facts. Single payer reduces health care costs because there no longer exists a profit motive for the insurance companies. You said yourself administrative costs are why your $4,800 surgery would have cost $20,000 with insurance (a dubious claim to be sure, but whatever, I'll let it slide). Do you think those costs are the same across every type of insurance plan? What if there was only one insurance plan everyone was on...wouldn't that cut down on all the administration necessary to process claims from dozens, hundreds of different insurers.

It's no coincidence that single payer nations spend half as much as we do per patient. In this country, we have entire floors of hospitals dedicated to administration of claims. The reason is because of the myriad different insurers that there are and the administrative support necessary to process their claims. Whereas in single payer nations, that job is done by one -maybe two people- in one room. Wouldn't cutting the number of payors down to one streamline the administration?

Again, here is the budget from HHS for Medicare, notice how administration makes up 1%?

And here is the budget from Aetna, notice how administration makes up 17%?

So which is less? 1% or 17%? What is more efficient, a single payor or multiple payors? Who has the bargaining power when there are more payors than providers? Who has the bargaining power then there are more providers than payors?

There is no other way to lower health care costs other than having a single entity do the administration of processing reimbursements.

A gall bladder does not produce kidney stones. A kidney produces kidney stones. A gall bladder produces gall stones. Now I have a problem with you twisting what I post. I said "other people" get stones daily. I don't. Nowhere did I post otherwise, so either post that is said I get kidney stones daily or apologize. I am not going to continue speaking with you when you can't understand simple posts and sentences.