White house to working class Americans pay astromical deductibles- or Else...

[hadit]

Asked and answered.

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

Lets see if you can find a doctor that accepts it this reminds how many doctors would accept single payer???


.

One of the central facets of Hillarycare (remember that one?) was a $10,000 fine and 5 years in jail for anyone making a private contract with a doctor. Single payer gets forced on the country by making other options illegal or prohibitive in some way. Even obamadon'tcare used the law to force people to buy into it. Without that, it would have sank into oblivion long ago.

A private contract with a Doctor for what?

For services. It costs a doctor a lot of money to interact with insurance companies, in fact he usually has to hire a person just to do that. A person can offer a doctor $1,000/year to do one physical exam and say three unscheduled appointments for antibiotics, flu treatments, etc. The doctor saves money because he doesn't have to wait for insurance companies to pay and doesn't have to wrangle with them when they won't cover his cost and he can pass the savings on to the patient. He can also prioritize the patient's care because he's already paid him in cash. In fact, if a doctor had enough of those private contracts, he could do away with insurance companies entirely and the whole "do you accept XYZ insurance?" question goes away.

 

[OnePercenter]

Medicare, Medicaid, and Medi-Cal don't work?

Don't work or don't work as well as private insurance? Clarify what you're really talking about.

Asked and answered.

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

That's not the operative question. The question is, could he receive better healthcare? You can say that seniors living in state run rest homes are receiving care, but are they receiving quality care?

State owned, or State run?

 

[hadit]

Don't work or don't work as well as private insurance? Clarify what you're really talking about.

Asked and answered.

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

That's not the operative question. The question is, could he receive better healthcare? You can say that seniors living in state run rest homes are receiving care, but are they receiving quality care?

State owned, or State run?

Why is that significant?

 

[g5000]

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

Lets see if you can find a doctor that accepts it this reminds how many doctors would accept single payer???


.

One of the central facets of Hillarycare (remember that one?) was a $10,000 fine and 5 years in jail for anyone making a private contract with a doctor. Single payer gets forced on the country by making other options illegal or prohibitive in some way. Even obamadon'tcare used the law to force people to buy into it. Without that, it would have sank into oblivion long ago.

A private contract with a Doctor for what?

For services. It costs a doctor a lot of money to interact with insurance companies, in fact he usually has to hire a person just to do that. A person can offer a doctor $1,000/year to do one physical exam and say three unscheduled appointments for antibiotics, flu treatments, etc. He saves money because he doesn't have to wait for insurance companies to pay and wrangle with them when they won't cover his cost and he can pass the savings on to you. He can also prioritize your care because you've already paid him in cash. In fact, if a doctor had enough of those private contracts, he could do away with insurance companies entirely and the whole "do you accept XYZ insurance?" question goes away.

That's a great plan, except for the inconvenient fact that people get cancer and broken bones and strokes and heart attacks and so forth and so on. And humans have this nasty habit of falling from heights, crashing their cars, slamming into trees on ski slopes, diving into empty swimming pools, sticking their fingers into electrical outlets, and so forth and so on.

We will always need insurance companies, and therefore doctors will always have to deal with them.

 

[OnePercenter]

Medicare, Medicaid, and Medi-Cal don't work?

I know nothing of Medi-Cal, but I can tell you this... the federal programs are marching towards total insolvency.

LESS government means more capitalist racketeering.

You should move to Venezuela, you'd love it there. Gubmint Utopia... food a plenty, free money for everyone...

The reason that 'government programs are marching toward insolvency' are the high costs that insurance companies that own the majority of hospitals and healthcare providers are charging. ie; Capitalist racketeering.

Total baloney. Private insurance companies pay high medical costs because the providers know they will have to provide a certain percentage of care for which they will never be compensated. If they accept Medicare, for example, they will only be paid what Medicare will pay, which often doesn't cover the true cost of care and a large reason why a lot of providers refuse Medicare covered patients. They will also have to provide care for anyone who comes into the ER, regardless of their ability or intention to pay. Thus, the only entities actually paying the bills have to cover the rest.

The majority of providers in the US ARE the insurance companies.

Incorrect. Insurance companies most emphatically do NOT provide health care. They are payers, not providers.

Then why does UHC own Southwest medical in Vegas? Take the top three healthcare insurers in the US and compare and contrast who owns what.

 

[hadit]

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

Lets see if you can find a doctor that accepts it this reminds how many doctors would accept single payer???


.

One of the central facets of Hillarycare (remember that one?) was a $10,000 fine and 5 years in jail for anyone making a private contract with a doctor. Single payer gets forced on the country by making other options illegal or prohibitive in some way. Even obamadon'tcare used the law to force people to buy into it. Without that, it would have sank into oblivion long ago.

A private contract with a Doctor for what?

For services. It costs a doctor a lot of money to interact with insurance companies, in fact he usually has to hire a person just to do that. A person can offer a doctor $1,000/year to do one physical exam and say three unscheduled appointments for antibiotics, flu treatments, etc. He saves money because he doesn't have to wait for insurance companies to pay and wrangle with them when they won't cover his cost and he can pass the savings on to you. He can also prioritize your care because you've already paid him in cash. In fact, if a doctor had enough of those private contracts, he could do away with insurance companies entirely and the whole "do you accept XYZ insurance?" question goes away.

That's a great plan, except for the inconvenient fact that people get cancer and broken bones and strokes and heart attacks and so forth and so on. And humans have this nasty habit of falling from heights, crashing their cars, slamming into trees on ski slopes, diving into empty swimming pools, sticking their fingers into electrical outlets, and so forth and so on.

We will always need insurance companies, and therefore doctors will always have to deal with them.

Being able to not deal with insurance companies would only happen in the case of a doctor having a significant number of people under contract with him, and would only be practical for GP's, not specialists.

 

[hadit]

I know nothing of Medi-Cal, but I can tell you this... the federal programs are marching towards total insolvency.
You should move to Venezuela, you'd love it there. Gubmint Utopia... food a plenty, free money for everyone...

The reason that 'government programs are marching toward insolvency' are the high costs that insurance companies that own the majority of hospitals and healthcare providers are charging. ie; Capitalist racketeering.

Total baloney. Private insurance companies pay high medical costs because the providers know they will have to provide a certain percentage of care for which they will never be compensated. If they accept Medicare, for example, they will only be paid what Medicare will pay, which often doesn't cover the true cost of care and a large reason why a lot of providers refuse Medicare covered patients. They will also have to provide care for anyone who comes into the ER, regardless of their ability or intention to pay. Thus, the only entities actually paying the bills have to cover the rest.

The majority of providers in the US ARE the insurance companies.

Incorrect. Insurance companies most emphatically do NOT provide health care. They are payers, not providers.

Then why does UHC own Southwest medical in Vegas? Take the top three healthcare insurers in the US and compare and contrast who owns what.

Link to that?

 

[OnePercenter]

If insurance was to blame, then we would have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance.

Since we don't have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance, then something else is causing skyrocketing HEALTH insurance.

The reason health insurance is skyrocketing is because we don't buy it the same way we buy auto, life, and home insurance. We should be, if we want to get it under control.


We need to eliminate employer-sponsored health insurance (ESHI). ESHI drives up the cost of healthcare, and EVERYONE knows it. So why does ObamaCare more deeply embed ESHI?

Things that make you go, "Hmmmm..."

The reason ESHI was more deeply embedded in Obamacare is because it is a labor union boondoggle.

We should be buying our health insurance the same way we buy our auto, life, and home insurance. This provides us MAXIMUM leverage.

Instead, you are a total hostage to your employer's insurance. It's a take-it-or-leave-it proposition where you have ZERO leverage.

In turn, your employer is hostage to the insurance company. Small employers have almost no bargaining leverage at all with insurance companies, especially since the government limits the number of insurance companies your employer can buy from.

If you work at a small company, you are in a tiny risk pool. If one employee in your company suffers a catastrophic illness, everyone in the company suffers massive increases in premiums. That's just plain insane and would not happen if you bought your health insurance the same way you buy your auto, life, and home insurance.

In turn, the insurance company is hostage to the medical care providers in your geographical area.


So how come you can buy your auto insurance from ANY auto insurance company in America, thereby providing you with maximum bargaining power, and yet you can't buy health insurance from any health insurance company in America?

Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."


Here's the difference: The US government is the biggest market player in the health insurance market. You don't see that in the auto, life, or home insurance markets, now do you?

Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."

But wait. It's even worse than that. Not only is the US government the biggest player in the health insurance market, IT GETS TO WRITE THE RULES FOR ALL ITS COMPETITION!

What...the...FUCK?!?!?

How's that working out for you?

Imagine if you were a car maker, and you got to write the rules for your competitors.

Yeah. What would happen to the price and quality of cars? After all, you could be as slapdash and sloppy as you like since you have your competitors hog-tied.


We need LESS government in the market, not more! Jesus, every time the government gets more involved, things get worse. But then the fucking retards think it is because we need MOAR government!

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result.

GREED!

Really? I just buried you, and that's all you got?

If insurance was to blame, then we would have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance.

Since we don't have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance, then something else is causing skyrocketing HEALTH insurance.

Greed.

I'll prove my point.

A friend of mine that owns a business in Vegas related an issue he was having.

He provides UHC HMO insurance for his employees. His employees are forced to obtain medical care from Southwest Medical which is owned by UHC. When the employee obtains healthcare he/she pays a co-pay, and is also charged a co-pay for each additional service such as x-ray which is also owned by UHC.

UHC charges for insurance to provide urgent care, and charges for operation costs for the urgent care.

Any wonder why UHC makes double-digit billions in profit?

GREED!

 

[g5000]

If insurance was to blame, then we would have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance.

Since we don't have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance, then something else is causing skyrocketing HEALTH insurance.

The reason health insurance is skyrocketing is because we don't buy it the same way we buy auto, life, and home insurance. We should be, if we want to get it under control.


We need to eliminate employer-sponsored health insurance (ESHI). ESHI drives up the cost of healthcare, and EVERYONE knows it. So why does ObamaCare more deeply embed ESHI?

Things that make you go, "Hmmmm..."

The reason ESHI was more deeply embedded in Obamacare is because it is a labor union boondoggle.

We should be buying our health insurance the same way we buy our auto, life, and home insurance. This provides us MAXIMUM leverage.

Instead, you are a total hostage to your employer's insurance. It's a take-it-or-leave-it proposition where you have ZERO leverage.

In turn, your employer is hostage to the insurance company. Small employers have almost no bargaining leverage at all with insurance companies, especially since the government limits the number of insurance companies your employer can buy from.

If you work at a small company, you are in a tiny risk pool. If one employee in your company suffers a catastrophic illness, everyone in the company suffers massive increases in premiums. That's just plain insane and would not happen if you bought your health insurance the same way you buy your auto, life, and home insurance.

In turn, the insurance company is hostage to the medical care providers in your geographical area.


So how come you can buy your auto insurance from ANY auto insurance company in America, thereby providing you with maximum bargaining power, and yet you can't buy health insurance from any health insurance company in America?

Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."


Here's the difference: The US government is the biggest market player in the health insurance market. You don't see that in the auto, life, or home insurance markets, now do you?

Things that make you go, "Hmmmmm..."

But wait. It's even worse than that. Not only is the US government the biggest player in the health insurance market, IT GETS TO WRITE THE RULES FOR ALL ITS COMPETITION!

What...the...FUCK?!?!?

How's that working out for you?

Imagine if you were a car maker, and you got to write the rules for your competitors.

Yeah. What would happen to the price and quality of cars? After all, you could be as slapdash and sloppy as you like since you have your competitors hog-tied.


We need LESS government in the market, not more! Jesus, every time the government gets more involved, things get worse. But then the fucking retards think it is because we need MOAR government!

Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over, expecting a different result.

GREED!

Really? I just buried you, and that's all you got?

If insurance was to blame, then we would have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance.

Since we don't have skyrocketing auto, life, and home insurance, then something else is causing skyrocketing HEALTH insurance.

Greed.

I'll prove my point.

A friend of mine that owns a business in Vegas related an issue he was having.

He provides UHC HMO insurance for his employees. His employees are forced to obtain medical care from Southwest Medical which is owned by UHC. When the employee obtains healthcare he/she pays a co-pay, and is also charged a co-pay for each additional service such as x-ray which is also owned by UHC.

UHC charges for insurance to provide urgent care, and charges for operation costs for the urgent care.

Any wonder why UHC makes double-digit billions in profit?

GREED!

I say again. Auto, fire, home, and life insurance are not skyrocketing. Only health insurance is.

Clearly, there is another cause behind the skyrocketing of HEALTH care costs than insurance, since we are not seeing a commensurate skyrocketing in any other form of insurance.

It clearly is not insurance causing it. Insurance is rising because the cost of health care is rising. If health care costs go up, then insurance HAS to charge you more to pay for it.


You have to be a really stupid person not to realize that.

You have the cart before the horse.

 

[OnePercenter]

This idiot now claims to be a business owner? The same idiot t hat claimed limiting premiums won't limit revenue?

Jesus....

You argument is insurance companies have to charge more to cover more, but if the insurance company owns all aspects of care, does it actually cost more?

 

[OnePercenter]

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

Lets see if you can find a doctor that accepts it this reminds how many doctors would accept single payer???


.

One of the central facets of Hillarycare (remember that one?) was a $10,000 fine and 5 years in jail for anyone making a private contract with a doctor. Single payer gets forced on the country by making other options illegal or prohibitive in some way. Even obamadon'tcare used the law to force people to buy into it. Without that, it would have sank into oblivion long ago.

A private contract with a Doctor for what?

For services. It costs a doctor a lot of money to interact with insurance companies, in fact he usually has to hire a person just to do that. A person can offer a doctor $1,000/year to do one physical exam and say three unscheduled appointments for antibiotics, flu treatments, etc. The doctor saves money because he doesn't have to wait for insurance companies to pay and doesn't have to wrangle with them when they won't cover his cost and he can pass the savings on to the patient. He can also prioritize the patient's care because he's already paid him in cash. In fact, if a doctor had enough of those private contracts, he could do away with insurance companies entirely and the whole "do you accept XYZ insurance?" question goes away.

The problem is finding enough people that can afford that.

What happens when the person has to be admitted in a hospital?

 

[OKTexas]

I saw a report that they want a big increase in the penalty because young adults still aren't buying it.

Pure extortion

Sorry there bubba, you got to get your terms straight. Penalties are unconstitutional, it's a tax, Roberts said so. Doesn't matter what the law says, it's a direct tax, which BTW is also unconstitutional but since when does that bother the court.

 

[OKTexas]

Blaming ACA because your insurance company is screwing you is stupid.

We used to have a choice remember?

The choice was to have medical insurance or live off taxpayers when you get sick.

No, that choice is still available, so you speaking of it in the past-tense is inaccurate.

 

[OKTexas]

Not to mention we're now going to be taxed on employer provided insurance. You people are fucking worthless scum.

If an employer pays the cost of an accident or health insurance plan for his/her employees, including an employee's spouse and dependents, the employer's payments are not wages and are not subject to Social Security, Medicare, and FUTA taxes, or federal income tax withholding.May 4, 2016
Employee Benefits - IRS.gov
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small...self.../employee-benefitsInternal Revenue Service

So what does it say about the cadilliac tax. Oh yeah, the employer gets ripped for providing good benefits.

 

[healthmyths]

Mine went from $2,500 to $12,000.

Nice work.

My girlfriend had to go to the ER, paid a co-pay and got a bill for the whole damn thing.

What a clusterfuck.

Leftists are complete imbeciles.

There are two areas of EXTREMELY GROSS ignorance by a lot of Americans and this translated into why the examples you show occur!

A) There NEVER were 46 million "uninsured" Americans..
1) 10 million were illegals and even the Census agreed!
2) 14 million BEFORE Obamacare were eligible for Medicaid but the gross incompetencies of Obama administration NEVER advised these 14 million!
3) 18 million under 34 making over $50,000 never wanted, or NEEDED health insurance!
That leaves 5 million that truly needed by NOT to the point of destroying the health care industry as Obamacare has done.
B) If there was a way to reduce nearly $500 billion a year that doctors all agree they WASTE why didn't we attack that first?
If instead of destroying healthcare as we know it, a simple plan called American Uninsured Health Ins. Co. (AUHIC) be formed.
Using a 10% tax (like Obamacare does tanning salons) lawyers' $270 billion that would be tied directly to this $500 billion a year that doctors order duplicate tests,etc.
all because they fear lawsuits which 94% are settled out of court because insurance companies don't want pay.
That $27 billion would pay the premiums for every one of the truly 5 million that are uninsured..AFTER the uninsured was means tested, i.e. do they qualify for Medicaid,
etc. In addition the hospitals that HAVE to per Medicare requirements must see uninsured patients would pay a premium and then ALL the uninsured claims
be paid by AUHIC. As a result then hospitals would NOT be able to jack up prices just as the CEO of a hospital said...when asked "How do hospitals deal with
the cost of the uninsured? His answer: " Like any business, we pass it on to the paying customers." Translate that into your girlfriend!
She may have paid paid for a $2,000 CAT scans that cost $100 to be done...again the hospitals get their money from paying hospitals to cover the uninsured!

 

[OnePercenter]

Asked and answered.

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

That's not the operative question. The question is, could he receive better healthcare? You can say that seniors living in state run rest homes are receiving care, but are they receiving quality care?

State owned, or State run?

Why is that significant?

Because State owned doesn't mean State run.

 

[OKTexas]

Not to mention we're now going to be taxed on employer provided insurance. You people are fucking worthless scum.

If an employer pays the cost of an accident or health insurance plan for his/her employees, including an employee's spouse and dependents, the employer's payments are not wages and are not subject to Social Security, Medicare, and FUTA taxes, or federal income tax withholding.May 4, 2016
Employee Benefits - IRS.gov
https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small...self.../employee-benefitsInternal Revenue Service

They will be... there is no other reason for having to report the $$ amount of employer paid premiums which is a new requirement under the ACA..

The sky is falling!!!!

No, premiums are going UP as much as 62%, your dear leader did a good job pushing off the worse effects till he was out the door. What do you think the people would have said if they told the truth about this crap? You can't keep your doctor, you can't keep your plan and your cost will increase $4,100.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

This idiot now claims to be a business owner? The same idiot t hat claimed limiting premiums won't limit revenue?

Jesus....

You argument is insurance companies have to charge more to cover more, but if the insurance company owns all aspects of care, does it actually cost more?

The insurance company doesn't own all aspects of healthcare. What on Earth are you talking about?

 

[OnePercenter]

The reason that 'government programs are marching toward insolvency' are the high costs that insurance companies that own the majority of hospitals and healthcare providers are charging. ie; Capitalist racketeering.

Total baloney. Private insurance companies pay high medical costs because the providers know they will have to provide a certain percentage of care for which they will never be compensated. If they accept Medicare, for example, they will only be paid what Medicare will pay, which often doesn't cover the true cost of care and a large reason why a lot of providers refuse Medicare covered patients. They will also have to provide care for anyone who comes into the ER, regardless of their ability or intention to pay. Thus, the only entities actually paying the bills have to cover the rest.

The majority of providers in the US ARE the insurance companies.

Incorrect. Insurance companies most emphatically do NOT provide health care. They are payers, not providers.

Then why does UHC own Southwest medical in Vegas? Take the top three healthcare insurers in the US and compare and contrast who owns what.

Link to that?

You can't figure out who the top three health insurance companies are? Sad.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Okay, so you're going with "do they work?". That's a false question, because they are government programs that work only to a certain extent. They are fraught with fraud, not accepted by many providers because they don't pay enough, and are facing financial shortfalls because they keep expanding with little or no new revenue. Thus, a false question.

So a person that has medicaid receives healthcare.

That's not the operative question. The question is, could he receive better healthcare? You can say that seniors living in state run rest homes are receiving care, but are they receiving quality care?

State owned, or State run?

Why is that significant?

Because State owned doesn't mean State run.

Wait, so I'm trying to understand this.... state takes over a previously privately run business and then farms out the operations to a private firm?

What the hell?