Lol, I love her. Just curious if she is actively trying to keep Amazon out of New York, which I dont think she is, or just voicing concerns of her constituents? Did she say she didnt want them in NY? Nothing ive seen says she has.
Do you know that the OMB is? And I find what you think hilarious. I would assume she wants Amazon out but has no idea why.
Why do you assume she has no idea why? Why would you assume that other people don’t understand their own motivations?
Because of the number of naive things she’s already said in her short time in the public eye. It’s a fair assumption of her based on that.
Care to quote any of those naive things in full context? Or link to public statements in their entirety?
Lol, I love her. Just curious if she is actively trying to keep Amazon out of New York, which I dont think she is, or just voicing concerns of her constituents? Did she say she didnt want them in NY? Nothing ive seen says she has.
Do you know that the OMB is? And I find what you think hilarious. I would assume she wants Amazon out but has no idea why.
Why do you assume she has no idea why? Why would you assume that other people don’t understand their own motivations?
Because of the number of naive things she’s already said in her short time in the public eye. It’s a fair assumption of her based on that.
Care to quote any of those naive things in full context? Or link to public statements in their entirety?
Just pay for it. (When talking a bout the magic dollars that will appear to pay for healthcare).
I can’t afford first and last months rent (moving to a new place and taking a rather high paying job). - it’s her revelation that this seems to be unique to people trying to run for Congress. The only thing unique about it is the $174,000 annual salary that most people don’t get in one of their first jobs.
those are fairly well known, so I’m not bothering linking to anything.
I ask again - do you think she knows what the OMB is and how it factors into any spending bills?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Lol, I love her. Just curious if she is actively trying to keep Amazon out of New York, which I dont think she is, or just voicing concerns of her constituents? Did she say she didnt want them in NY? Nothing ive seen says she has.
Do you know that the OMB is? And I find what you think hilarious. I would assume she wants Amazon out but has no idea why.
Why do you assume she has no idea why? Why would you assume that other people don’t understand their own motivations?
Because of the number of naive things she’s already said in her short time in the public eye. It’s a fair assumption of her based on that.
Care to quote any of those naive things in full context? Or link to public statements in their entirety?
Just pay for it. (When talking a bout the magic dollars that will appear to pay for healthcare).
I can’t afford first and last months rent (moving to a new place and taking a rather high paying job). - it’s her revelation that this seems to be unique to people trying to run for Congress. The only thing unique about it is the $174,000 annual salary that most people don’t get in one of their first jobs.
those are fairly well known, so I’m not bothering linking to anything.
I ask again - do you think she knows what the OMB is and how it factors into any spending bills?
Neither of those examples are accurate to their context or what she actually said.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
No, Canadians do not go to the US for quality - that is not what's happening. You obviously don't believe me, but that's just you being willfully ignorant and admittedly making up your own facts out of uninformed assumptions.
Again, you clearly couldn't care less about the people in your own country, unless they impact you directly... I have to assume you haven't yet had a loved go bankrupt because they got cancer, or lose their rental because their rent had to go to an unexpected medical expense, or die because they couldn't afford treatment for something their insurer refused to cover.
Or had to drink water in Flint. Or live next to a superfund site. And to not consider “social” policies as a means of placing less burden on an overburdened health care system is ignorant. And wouldn’t Sweden then have a prevalence of cystic fibrosis burdening their health care system, being as homogeneous as you claim @e@EdsonNascimento?
According to the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry, in the United States:
More than 30,000 people are living with cystic fibrosis (more than 70,000 worldwide).
Approximately 1,000 new cases of CF are diagnosed each year.
More than 75 percent of people with CF are diagnosed by age 2.
More than half of the CF population is age 18 or older.
Are the other 40,000 all in Sweden?
And, yes - Flint and the like need to be fixed. Of course, social policy needs to be addressed. That was my earlier point about education, etc. We need to stop looking at solving the healthcare system by throwing money DIRECTLY at it. We need to fix the underlying causes. Some, like you mention can and should be addressed.
Are you aware that the life expectancy of those with CF is ten years longer in Canada compared to the US?
Ten years.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
So we are in agreement than that the US has the best doctors!
Nice chart. Free is better then best for candians. Can’t say I’d blame them.
Nope, that isn't what I said. Is that really how you interpreted it, or are you just being bratty? I said that certain rare specialists are poached so very specialized treatments or surgeries, and doctors doing them, are often there instead of elsewhere. I did NOT say that the US has better doctors in general, and that is not true at all. Canadians actually get BETTER outcomes in their own healthcare system than Americans do. The US actually has the highest rate of deaths amenable to healthcare in the entire G7, and it spend more per capita for that as well. When you look at actual facts and statistics, you discover that the US has an inferior healthcare system compared to not only Canada, but also compared to the UK, Japan, Germany, Sweden, the Netherlands, Australia, France... PLUS Americans are getting financially raped in the process. And no, I'm not trying to have a pissing contest with you. I'm saying all this because I'm simply horrified by the system that Americans are subjected to because they deserve so much better. So I HATE that these complete lies about the superiority of this disgusting for profit system are being drilled into the minds of Americans. It really is brainwashing, and people are literally dying for it. And losing their homes and going bankrupt. Just because they get sick. And they spending SO much hard earned money to pay for shitty insurance plans made by companies who profit from withholding care as much as possible. Not to mention their lobbyists. It's just fucking sick, and everyone responsible for propagating such a system should be thrown in jail IMO. I hope someday Americans riot in the streets until their human rights are respected via their healthcare system.
Piss away.
Its pretty obviously that if Us pays more they will attract the best doctors. That’s just simple economics/math.
i never said the system was better.
You're assuming that the greediest doctors are all the best doctors. That isn't the case, lol.
I’m assuming that the best doctors are human beings.
Tell me - do you like to make a good salary?
Many great doctors are completely repulsed by the American system and
wouldn't work there for any amount of money. I think you forgot for a
second that money isn't everything for all people.
I personally make a much lower salary than I could because I've chosen the public sector. I left the corporate sector and better pay because I felt rather disgusted by how everyone was motivated by the bottom line alone, and by the greed and competitiveness. Sorry, but your belief that everyone thinks money is the most important thing is completely false. That's sad you think that.
It’s a motivating factor for sure, not the only one. It’s sad what a condescending person you have become.
Lol, oh please.
Obviously everyone on the face of the planet knows that money is a motivating factor. You drew a conclusion beyond that IMO. You assumed all the best doctors will be where they get paid the most. That is not true.
You literally have no sense of humor unless it’s spelled out for you.
Well everyone who knows me knows that's not true, so maybe it's your sense of humour that's the problem? Or at least how you type it out? Because if you think there was supposed to be a joke in there somewhere, then you're doing something wrong, lol.
My joke was the origjnal comment about you agreeing US has the best doctors.
of of course I know you don’t agree with that
Joke? I took that as sarcasm, not a joke, and your second comment really wiped out any levity one might have read into the first (that obviously I saw, which is why I asked you if you were just being bratty). Hey dude, don't blame me when your crappy joke went over like a lead brick.
And if you haven't gathered, I'm pretty damned serious on this topic. I'm horrified by the American healthcare system (again, still acknowledging there are good doctors and other workers trying their best). With the gap between rich and poor getting bigger and bigger, and the growing employed poor, I sincerely worry for a lot of Americans if this system doesn't change. That is why I have such a negative reaction to people who pump up that system by passing around lies and misinformation about universal systems. It's definitely not a joking matter IMO. Especially not since even some Canadians who are more willing to believe whatever they hear or read get sucked in by it, get into the 'the grass is always greener' mindset, and that leads to obvious issues in my own country, and I am, of course, fiercely protective of our own healthcare system, as are many Canadians. That is yet another symptom of living right next door to the USA. And another example of why we are so concerned about what goes on down there.Some of our worst politicians look at the US as a kind of demonstration of what they might be able to pull of here. This issue comes into that as well for them. It's not a laughing matter.
BTW, my rich sister goes to the US for healthcare sometimes. Know why? Because she a complete hypochondriac. She goes there when the doctors at the exclusive private clinics here (where they are closely regulated) won't humour her disorder anymore. She never has trouble finding some quack in the USA who charges thousands and thousands of dollars to perform quack procedures that make no fucking sense - she'd get as much benefit out of going to one of those people obsessed with the power of crystals. But because of the strength of lack of regulation in the for-profit healthcare industry in the US, people like my hypochondriac sister go down, have a spa day, and let some asshole doctor who puts money before morals tell them what they want to hear. That is the kind of crap that a for-profit healthcare industry creates (not that I don't know that there are many amazing, caring doctors down there too btw. Of course there are. Again, I say this with a desire for the American healthcare system to be great, not to just hate on it. But with fools pretending a broken system is a great system, that will never happen).
Fair enough. But, if she's paying out of pocket, how is that the insurance industry's fault?
And there's a lack of regulation on the healthcare industry? Lol. Wow. We have whole departments in the Government that all they do is regulate and dictate (which adds cost to the system). Too funny. The Managed Care companies are the ones monitoring quality of doctors because that's how they make money. They get rid of doctors that have poor outcomes because you know what? An improperly treated diabetic costs a hell of a lot more than a properly treated one. Profit is a good motivation. Your understanding of US healthcare companies is so whacked that it's funny.
So, if a company denies an A1C blood test for a diabetic patient (or a visit where one would be done) the cost to the healthcare system is potentially crazy (and obviously the cost to the patient is their health) with very little cost advantage by avoiding the visit or the test (relatively speaking). Do you know who does a better job of ensuring that diabetic patients get these tests timely? Managed care companies!!! Why? Because losses (to put it in those terms since those are the ones you understand) are exorbitant for an amputation. What does the Canadian gov't do to ensure they get there? do they proactively provide transportation to the Endocrinologist? The US and State Governments don't where they are the direct payers. Managed Care companies do. So, even if you think these companies are evil profit takers - they are providing the better care - why does it matter for what reason? Why is reaping the reward (while lowering overall cost to the system) a bad thing?
Nobody said the US system is perfect. Not sure where you got that from. All I'm saying is government run is not the solution.
The US has worse outcomes in diabetes care than Canada as well, including a higher rate of amputations due to diabetic complications.
Your posts have a lot of bafflegab but few facts.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
What's the rate of Sickle Cell Anemia in Canada vs. the US? What is the cause of this? The poor healthcare system or the demographics? If you had this disease and it's treated does it cost more or less money than not having the disease as prevalent in your overall population? You see? The Humans Rights Violation is much more inclusive than our snow white sisters to the North.
I am not picking on one disease or race. This is just one example of MANY. What makes the US great is it's inclusiveness. That does have a downstream effect on the healthcare system (And other things) that does not reflect negatively on the system at all (and quite the contrary) It's fairly easy to treat a mostly homogeneous population (Canada is 86% European/White). I am just pointing out that you must go deeper than spending per person, death rates and such to properly analyze the difference in health care systems and their relative burdens.
I wonder if you're aware that a Canadian doctor has pioneered a procedure to cure sickle cell anemia by stem cell transplants. Yup, it's a curative procedure.
Aside from your question about the rate of sickle cell disease, I can't make heads nor tails of your argument here. It seems to keep coming back to the "but the USA is so much more diverse" argument, which is simply a distraction.
Edit - forgot initially to also say that your figure of 86% white is incorrect - 2016 census shows 72.9% white. The percentage in the US varies depending on whether Hispanic people are counted or not; if so, 77% white, if not, 62% white.
Post edited by oftenreading on
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
How do you pay for a life saving medical procedure without health insurance? I don’t know, you just pay for it.
Two comments that the only back up I could find were faux news reports, gateway pundit or some other right wing outlet going on and on about. Be afraid, be very afraid of the Latina woman in Congress. BOO! And, oh my god, you don’t have to know what the OMB is or does to get elected to Congress, that’s why you get to hire staff. Great country, that America.
It’s fucking ridiculous the woman hasn’t even been sworn in yet and already people have forged an opinion as if they had her whole body of work before them ...
It’s fucking ridiculous the woman hasn’t even been sworn in yet and already people have forged an opinion as if they had her whole body of work before them ...
Repubs are very afraid of capable women. And invasions of unarmed women and children. Very afraid.
It’s fucking ridiculous the woman hasn’t even been sworn in yet and already people have forged an opinion as if they had her whole body of work before them ...
Repubs are very afraid of capable women. And invasions of unarmed women and children. Very afraid.
It’s unreal how the conservative men in this country are really afraid of wo
I remember Sarah Palin being attacked for new wardrobe too.
I never understood attacking someone for wanting to dress to impress?
It wasn't about the wardrobe besides the cost of it being spent. She was initially not on board with it, but became accustomed to it and then lied about things associated with it. I don't think this is anything like the Palin situation unless Alexandra took money from her constituents and spent over $100,000 on clothes recently.
I remember Sarah Palin being attacked for new wardrobe too.
I never understood attacking someone for wanting to dress to impress?
It wasn't about the wardrobe besides the cost of it being spent. She was initially not on board with it, but became accustomed to it and then lied about things associated with it. I don't think this is anything like the Palin situation unless Alexandra took money from her constituents and spent over $100,000 on clothes recently.
Same thing. Both took money to upgrade their wardrobe. Who cares.
Same thing with Michele Obama.
Who gives a shit...
I do like that she is out there right now doing things. Let's hope the system doesn't break her.
Why is healthcare attached to jobs? Why does their plan and their physical and mental health revolve around the particular terms of their employment?
It doesn't have to be and that's a fair (but wrong headed) debate. Why would you want to give up BILLIONS of healthcare subsidies from corporations that are based on competition for employees? I'm sure you don't understand all that means, but taxation replacing competitive healthcare subsidy would be the absolutely dumbest thing we could do as a country (and thus why Obama went down that road - he's not too bright when it comes to healthcare and bending the cost curve). There are many more people who successfully navigate employment to maintain their health coverage that is better than anything the government could ever reasonably provide (including ensuring proper, comprehensive access that countries with national care do not).
Go ahead - chase Amazon away. Kill Employer subsidized coverage. Do the math. It's not pretty. It's funny to me how people do these polls showing "uneducated" white man votes for Trump. Uneducated means a lot of things. There are a lot of people holding college degrees, even PhD's that are not very smart as it pertains to anything outside a book. Just as there are a lot of people who don't have college educations that are brilliant (hmmmmmmm... Can you think of someone you might think this of that is related to this very message board?).
That's cute. So you're saying the US scheme provides better, more efficient healthcare than other industrialized nations? Is that borne out in our mortality rates? How does our per capita healthcare spending vis-a-vis our mortality rate compare with other western democracies? (hint: we're way at the top by a large margin for the former, and we're nowhere near the top for the latter).
I can make statistics say things too. How heterogeneous are the populations of the other countries you speak of? What are the salaries of doctors in those other countries (or do you think we should cut their salaries?)? You can't simply take those snippets. you have to know how to put them in proper perspective. What's our teen pregnancy ratio vs. other countries? Should we abandon them or take care of them and the higher incident of both cost and poor outcomes? These are just examples. Think a bit deeper than what the media feeds you. Where Trump is wrong is it's not FAKE news. But, it is misrepresented news. What they are saying most of the time is true. It's just not well thought out or objectively presented.
We have many more deep seeded problems that we've accepted and feel right to address than other countries simply don't address. And that comes at a cost both financially and morbidity-wise. So, yes our healthcare system is better than Canada (for example). People might go to Canada to get their meds b/c of that pricing anomaly. But, they aren't going there to get surgeries.
Here's why I believe Jeff is right. Employers and cooperations don't pay the doctors and medical bills. They pay a third party who makes more money the less they pay for treatments. These third party insurance companies are a billion dollar industry. When insurance was first created it wasn't a necessity like it is now. People could still afford a doctor visit. But insurance has made that impossible. With what we pay in premiums alone our healthcare should be free. But we have to pay insurance premiums and a lot of money out of pocket on top of thay for any services we actually get. Two groups make money on health services. The health providers and the insurance companies. One of those provides virtually no health services directly to us, but takes nearly an equal share in the profit. I don't like the idea of socialized or government run care, but I think it would be better than what we have. I think the best option is keep it privatized, but get rid of the middle man (insurance). Either pay for everything out of pocket, which would be a fraction of what it costs now, or have the health providers be their own insurance, like an HMO. If the goal was to make money only on services rendered and not on the policy itself, healthcare costs would be cut in half and much more affordable. Most doctor offices have at least 1 full time employee to just deal with the mess that is insurance. That is why so many offer a cash discount if you claim to not have insurance. Why do we pay a third party so much money for our health care, it has gotten out of control.
Here's why he and you are wrong - Medicare Advantage provides greater benefits to Seniors and Disableds than Medicare Fee For Service (government direct pay) does for less cost. MA bench marking (rate) formulas are based on a percentage of Medicare FFS. In addition, they provide better quality as measured by CMS' quality scoring than Medicare FFS does.
In terms of commercial coverage- who here wants to give their current Employer sponsored coverage and contribution schedule up for complete out of pocket medical cost?
Anyone who thinks Government can run anything better than a competitive free market is not being honest about the government around them.
And if you think people could afford payments out of pocket - lol. You are living in dream land. I want to join you and Alexandra there.
I would not look forward to government run healthcare. I wouldn't want health services to be run like the DMV, education, VA, or many other government run programs. But I do think it would be better than what we currently have. I also do not look forward to paying for everything out of pocket, but then again, it would be better than what we have. I, and most others, are already paying thousands out of pocket. I am the average family, paying just over 20k a year (combined with my contribution + employer contribution, which is almost 50/50). On top of that we spend thousands for actual services. Even in our most expensive years with having kids we would not have even come close to what we spend. Even after all that ridiculous insurance premiums, having a baby will still cost about $3000 in hospital charges. We probably spend a total of about 30k a year average on health when you factor in already out of pocket costs + premiums. Out of that 30k my employer contributes about 12k in premiums, I pay about 10k in premiums and 100% of everything else out of pocket. My out of pocket expenses are already easily 15-20k a year, plus whatever my employer pays. Doctor visits are still $50, a specialty dr is $100, and ER is $200 + whatever else they want to charge. Prescriptions are through the roof. Much of the time the over-the-counter price on prescriptions was even cheaper than our co-pay price. But there are laws that prevent us from paying the cheaper out of pocket price if we have insurance. Why would I pay a $60 to insurance for meds if the actually price is only $35? But I'm forced to. Isn't the point of insurance to make services more affordable? You can find countless articles, and I've posted some on the healthcare thread, of examples where the copay for expensive treatments like an MRI are more expensive than the MRI. Someone might have a $2500 copay for an MRI, but the cash price at the hospital is $1500. Makes no sense. So yes, if I got that $30k a year that is paid currently and paid for everything out of pocket, I would still keep most of that 30k by the end of the year. I just don't see how anyone can say our current system is working to benefit the majority. We are a healthy family, I go to the doctor maybe twice a year, same as my 2 kids. There's no way we should be paying $30k for health services every year. I would so much rather see that 30k in my pocket, and just pay $200 for a doctor visit, or $5,000 for a trip to the hospital myself.
Why is healthcare attached to jobs? Why does their plan and their physical and
Here's why I believe Jeff is right. Employers and cooperations don't pay the doctors and medical bills. They pay a third party who makes more money the less they pay for treatments. These third party insurance companies are a billion dollar industry. When insurance was first created it wasn't a necessity like it is now. People could still afford a doctor visit. But insurance has made that impossible. With what we pay in premiums alone our healthcare should be free. But we have to pay insurance premiums and a lot of money out of pocket on top of thay for any services we actually get. Two groups make money on health services. The health providers and the insurance companies. One of those provides virtually no health services directly to us, but takes nearly an equal share in the profit. I don't like the idea of socialized or government run care, but I think it would be better than what we have. I think the best option is keep it privatized, but get rid of the middle man (insurance). Either pay for everything out of pocket, which would be a fraction of what it costs now, or have the health providers be their own insurance, like an HMO. If the goal was to make money only on services rendered and not on the policy itself, healthcare costs would be cut in half and much more affordable. Most doctor offices have at least 1 full time employee to just deal with the mess that is insurance. That is why so many offer a cash discount if you claim to not have insurance. Why do we pay a third party so much money for our health care, it has gotten out of control.
Here's why he and you are wrong - Medicare Advantage provides greater benefits to Seniors and Disableds than Medicare Fee For Service (government direct pay) does for less cost. MA bench marking (rate) formulas are based on a percentage of Medicare FFS. In addition, they provide better quality as measured by CMS' quality scoring than Medicare FFS does.
In terms of commercial coverage- who here wants to give their current Employer sponsored coverage and contribution schedule up for complete out of pocket medical cost?
Anyone who thinks Government can run anything better than a competitive free market is not being honest about the government around them.
And if you think people could afford payments out of pocket - lol. You are living in dream land. I want to join you and Alexandra there.
I would not look forward to government run healthcare. I wouldn't want health services to be run like the DMV, education, VA, or many other government run programs. But I do think it would be better than what we currently have. I also do not look forward to paying for everything out of pocket, but then again, it would be better than what we have. I, and most others, are already paying thousands out of pocket. I am the average family, paying just over 20k a year (combined with my contribution + employer contribution, which is almost 50/50). On top of that we spend thousands for actual services. Even in our most expensive years with having kids we would not have even come close to what we spend. Even after all that ridiculous insurance premiums, having a baby will still cost about $3000 in hospital charges. We probably spend a total of about 30k a year average on health when you factor in already out of pocket costs + premiums. Out of that 30k my employer contributes about 12k in premiums, I pay about 10k in premiums and 100% of everything else out of pocket. My out of pocket expenses are already easily 15-20k a year, plus whatever my employer pays. Doctor visits are still $50, a specialty dr is $100, and ER is $200 + whatever else they want to charge. Prescriptions are through the roof. Much of the time the over-the-counter price on prescriptions was even cheaper than our co-pay price. But there are laws that prevent us from paying the cheaper out of pocket price if we have insurance. Why would I pay a $60 to insurance for meds if the actually price is only $35? But I'm forced to. Isn't the point of insurance to make services more affordable? You can find countless articles, and I've posted some on the healthcare thread, of examples where the copay for expensive treatments like an MRI are more expensive than the MRI. Someone might have a $2500 copay for an MRI, but the cash price at the hospital is $1500. Makes no sense. So yes, if I got that $30k a year that is paid currently and paid for everything out of pocket, I would still keep most of that 30k by the end of the year. I just don't see how anyone can say our current system is working to benefit the majority. We are a healthy family, I go to the doctor maybe twice a year, same as my 2 kids. There's no way we should be paying $30k for health services every year. I would so much rather see that 30k in my pocket, and just pay $200 for a doctor visit, or $5,000 for a trip to the hospital myself.
You're right that none of that makes sense. It's an excellent example of what happens when health care is run by companies for profit.
If you didn't have to pay the $30K per year for insurance and instead had the option of having no insurance, you'd probably be fine.... until something major happened to one of you, which statistically is likely, and then you risk being one of those bankrupted by medical costs. It's a travesty.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
I also recall EdsonNascimento commenting something to the effect that "no one goes to Canada for surgery" (I'm not going to wade through all these posts trying to find that). That also isn't true. We certainly have fewer foreign nationals coming to Canada for medical care than some other countries, because in general our system discourages it and we do not market to that audience, but some hospitals choose to, and they bring in many millions. There are few stats released but the Toronto hospital network reportedly took in $30 million 2011-2015, primarily for cardiac and cancer surgeries.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Why is healthcare attached to jobs? Why does their plan and their physical and
Here's why I believe Jeff is right. Employers and cooperations don't pay the doctors and medical bills. They pay a third party who makes more money the less they pay for treatments. These third party insurance companies are a billion dollar industry. When insurance was first created it wasn't a necessity like it is now. People could still afford a doctor visit. But insurance has made that impossible. With what we pay in premiums alone our healthcare should be free. But we have to pay insurance premiums and a lot of money out of pocket on top of thay for any services we actually get. Two groups make money on health services. The health providers and the insurance companies. One of those provides virtually no health services directly to us, but takes nearly an equal share in the profit. I don't like the idea of socialized or government run care, but I think it would be better than what we have. I think the best option is keep it privatized, but get rid of the middle man (insurance). Either pay for everything out of pocket, which would be a fraction of what it costs now, or have the health providers be their own insurance, like an HMO. If the goal was to make money only on services rendered and not on the policy itself, healthcare costs would be cut in half and much more affordable. Most doctor offices have at least 1 full time employee to just deal with the mess that is insurance. That is why so many offer a cash discount if you claim to not have insurance. Why do we pay a third party so much money for our health care, it has gotten out of control.
Here's why he and you are wrong - Medicare Advantage provides greater benefits to Seniors and Disableds than Medicare Fee For Service (government direct pay) does for less cost. MA bench marking (rate) formulas are based on a percentage of Medicare FFS. In addition, they provide better quality as measured by CMS' quality scoring than Medicare FFS does.
In terms of commercial coverage- who here wants to give their current Employer sponsored coverage and contribution schedule up for complete out of pocket medical cost?
Anyone who thinks Government can run anything better than a competitive free market is not being honest about the government around them.
And if you think people could afford payments out of pocket - lol. You are living in dream land. I want to join you and Alexandra there.
I would not look forward to government run healthcare. I wouldn't want health services to be run like the DMV, education, VA, or many other government run programs. But I do think it would be better than what we currently have. I also do not look forward to paying for everything out of pocket, but then again, it would be better than what we have. I, and most others, are already paying thousands out of pocket. I am the average family, paying just over 20k a year (combined with my contribution + employer contribution, which is almost 50/50). On top of that we spend thousands for actual services. Even in our most expensive years with having kids we would not have even come close to what we spend. Even after all that ridiculous insurance premiums, having a baby will still cost about $3000 in hospital charges. We probably spend a total of about 30k a year average on health when you factor in already out of pocket costs + premiums. Out of that 30k my employer contributes about 12k in premiums, I pay about 10k in premiums and 100% of everything else out of pocket. My out of pocket expenses are already easily 15-20k a year, plus whatever my employer pays. Doctor visits are still $50, a specialty dr is $100, and ER is $200 + whatever else they want to charge. Prescriptions are through the roof. Much of the time the over-the-counter price on prescriptions was even cheaper than our co-pay price. But there are laws that prevent us from paying the cheaper out of pocket price if we have insurance. Why would I pay a $60 to insurance for meds if the actually price is only $35? But I'm forced to. Isn't the point of insurance to make services more affordable? You can find countless articles, and I've posted some on the healthcare thread, of examples where the copay for expensive treatments like an MRI are more expensive than the MRI. Someone might have a $2500 copay for an MRI, but the cash price at the hospital is $1500. Makes no sense. So yes, if I got that $30k a year that is paid currently and paid for everything out of pocket, I would still keep most of that 30k by the end of the year. I just don't see how anyone can say our current system is working to benefit the majority. We are a healthy family, I go to the doctor maybe twice a year, same as my 2 kids. There's no way we should be paying $30k for health services every year. I would so much rather see that 30k in my pocket, and just pay $200 for a doctor visit, or $5,000 for a trip to the hospital myself.
You're right that none of that makes sense. It's an excellent example of what happens when health care is run by companies for profit.
If you didn't have to pay the $30K per year for insurance and instead had the option of having no insurance, you'd probably be fine.... until something major happened to one of you, which statistically is likely, and then you risk being one of those bankrupted by medical costs. It's a travesty.
Okay, we can have catastrophic coverage for cases like that. But in all reality, what would that be and how much would that cost? There isn't a lot that I think should cost more than 30k . Car accidents are covered through car insurance, so I don;t have to worry about that. And if there is, if something happens and I'm stuck with a 100k bill, well, just a few years of not paying those 30k premiums will make up for that anyway. I wouldn't hesitate at all to get all my money paid to me and go cash for health services. The problem is if I opt out of insurance, my employer doesn't give me what they would be paying in premiums.
Why is healthcare attached to jobs? Why does their plan and their physical and
Here's why I believe Jeff is right. Employers and cooperations don't pay the doctors and medical bills. They pay a third party who makes more money the less they pay for treatments. These third party insurance companies are a billion dollar industry. When insurance was first created it wasn't a necessity like it is now. People could still afford a doctor visit. But insurance has made that impossible. With what we pay in premiums alone our healthcare should be free. But we have to pay insurance premiums and a lot of money out of pocket on top of thay for any services we actually get. Two groups make money on health services. The health providers and the insurance companies. One of those provides virtually no health services directly to us, but takes nearly an equal share in the profit. I don't like the idea of socialized or government run care, but I think it would be better than what we have. I think the best option is keep it privatized, but get rid of the middle man (insurance). Either pay for everything out of pocket, which would be a fraction of what it costs now, or have the health providers be their own insurance, like an HMO. If the goal was to make money only on services rendered and not on the policy itself, healthcare costs would be cut in half and much more affordable. Most doctor offices have at least 1 full time employee to just deal with the mess that is insurance. That is why so many offer a cash discount if you claim to not have insurance. Why do we pay a third party so much money for our health care, it has gotten out of control.
Here's why he and you are wrong - Medicare Advantage provides greater benefits to Seniors and Disableds than Medicare Fee For Service (government direct pay) does for less cost. MA bench marking (rate) formulas are based on a percentage of Medicare FFS. In addition, they provide better quality as measured by CMS' quality scoring than Medicare FFS does.
In terms of commercial coverage- who here wants to give their current Employer sponsored coverage and contribution schedule up for complete out of pocket medical cost?
Anyone who thinks Government can run anything better than a competitive free market is not being honest about the government around them.
And if you think people could afford payments out of pocket - lol. You are living in dream land. I want to join you and Alexandra there.
I would not look forward to government run healthcare. I wouldn't want health services to be run like the DMV, education, VA, or many other government run programs. But I do think it would be better than what we currently have. I also do not look forward to paying for everything out of pocket, but then again, it would be better than what we have. I, and most others, are already paying thousands out of pocket. I am the average family, paying just over 20k a year (combined with my contribution + employer contribution, which is almost 50/50). On top of that we spend thousands for actual services. Even in our most expensive years with having kids we would not have even come close to what we spend. Even after all that ridiculous insurance premiums, having a baby will still cost about $3000 in hospital charges. We probably spend a total of about 30k a year average on health when you factor in already out of pocket costs + premiums. Out of that 30k my employer contributes about 12k in premiums, I pay about 10k in premiums and 100% of everything else out of pocket. My out of pocket expenses are already easily 15-20k a year, plus whatever my employer pays. Doctor visits are still $50, a specialty dr is $100, and ER is $200 + whatever else they want to charge. Prescriptions are through the roof. Much of the time the over-the-counter price on prescriptions was even cheaper than our co-pay price. But there are laws that prevent us from paying the cheaper out of pocket price if we have insurance. Why would I pay a $60 to insurance for meds if the actually price is only $35? But I'm forced to. Isn't the point of insurance to make services more affordable? You can find countless articles, and I've posted some on the healthcare thread, of examples where the copay for expensive treatments like an MRI are more expensive than the MRI. Someone might have a $2500 copay for an MRI, but the cash price at the hospital is $1500. Makes no sense. So yes, if I got that $30k a year that is paid currently and paid for everything out of pocket, I would still keep most of that 30k by the end of the year. I just don't see how anyone can say our current system is working to benefit the majority. We are a healthy family, I go to the doctor maybe twice a year, same as my 2 kids. There's no way we should be paying $30k for health services every year. I would so much rather see that 30k in my pocket, and just pay $200 for a doctor visit, or $5,000 for a trip to the hospital myself.
You're right that none of that makes sense. It's an excellent example of what happens when health care is run by companies for profit.
If you didn't have to pay the $30K per year for insurance and instead had the option of having no insurance, you'd probably be fine.... until something major happened to one of you, which statistically is likely, and then you risk being one of those bankrupted by medical costs. It's a travesty.
Okay, we can have catastrophic coverage for cases like that. But in all reality, what would that be and how much would that cost? There isn't a lot that I think should cost more than 30k . Car accidents are covered through car insurance, so I don;t have to worry about that. And if there is, if something happens and I'm stuck with a 100k bill, well, just a few years of not paying those 30k premiums will make up for that anyway. I wouldn't hesitate at all to get all my money paid to me and go cash for health services. The problem is if I opt out of insurance, my employer doesn't give me what they would be paying in premiums.
I think a lot of medical issues could easily cost over $30k. A surgery, with a few days in hospital, some imaging, medication and follow up easily could.
But honestly, wouldn’t it just be better to not have to worry about that at all? To just know you don’t have to pay out of pocket?
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Comments
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I can’t afford first and last months rent (moving to a new place and taking a rather high paying job). - it’s her revelation that this seems to be unique to people trying to run for Congress. The only thing unique about it is the $174,000 annual salary that most people don’t get in one of their first jobs.
those are fairly well known, so I’m not bothering linking to anything.
I ask again - do you think she knows what the OMB is and how it factors into any spending bills?
Ten years.
The US has worse outcomes in diabetes care than Canada as well, including a higher rate of amputations due to diabetic complications.
Your posts have a lot of bafflegab but few facts.
I wonder if you're aware that a Canadian doctor has pioneered a procedure to cure sickle cell anemia by stem cell transplants. Yup, it's a curative procedure.
Aside from your question about the rate of sickle cell disease, I can't make heads nor tails of your argument here. It seems to keep coming back to the "but the USA is so much more diverse" argument, which is simply a distraction.
Edit - forgot initially to also say that your figure of 86% white is incorrect - 2016 census shows 72.9% white. The percentage in the US varies depending on whether Hispanic people are counted or not; if so, 77% white, if not, 62% white.
Two comments that the only back up I could find were faux news reports, gateway pundit or some other right wing outlet going on and on about. Be afraid, be very afraid of the Latina woman in Congress. BOO! And, oh my god, you don’t have to know what the OMB is or does to get elected to Congress, that’s why you get to hire staff. Great country, that America.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I never understood attacking someone for wanting to dress to impress?
Same thing with Michele Obama.
Who gives a shit...
I do like that she is out there right now doing things. Let's hope the system doesn't break her.
Is this what politics has become, fucking tweeter beefs and social media garbage?
I wish her luck and thick skin, pushing a Democratic Socialist agenda isn't gonna be easy
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
I also do not look forward to paying for everything out of pocket, but then again, it would be better than what we have. I, and most others, are already paying thousands out of pocket.
I am the average family, paying just over 20k a year (combined with my contribution + employer contribution, which is almost 50/50). On top of that we spend thousands for actual services. Even in our most expensive years with having kids we would not have even come close to what we spend. Even after all that ridiculous insurance premiums, having a baby will still cost about $3000 in hospital charges.
We probably spend a total of about 30k a year average on health when you factor in already out of pocket costs + premiums. Out of that 30k my employer contributes about 12k in premiums, I pay about 10k in premiums and 100% of everything else out of pocket. My out of pocket expenses are already easily 15-20k a year, plus whatever my employer pays.
Doctor visits are still $50, a specialty dr is $100, and ER is $200 + whatever else they want to charge. Prescriptions are through the roof. Much of the time the over-the-counter price on prescriptions was even cheaper than our co-pay price. But there are laws that prevent us from paying the cheaper out of pocket price if we have insurance. Why would I pay a $60 to insurance for meds if the actually price is only $35? But I'm forced to. Isn't the point of insurance to make services more affordable? You can find countless articles, and I've posted some on the healthcare thread, of examples where the copay for expensive treatments like an MRI are more expensive than the MRI. Someone might have a $2500 copay for an MRI, but the cash price at the hospital is $1500. Makes no sense.
So yes, if I got that $30k a year that is paid currently and paid for everything out of pocket, I would still keep most of that 30k by the end of the year.
I just don't see how anyone can say our current system is working to benefit the majority. We are a healthy family, I go to the doctor maybe twice a year, same as my 2 kids. There's no way we should be paying $30k for health services every year.
I would so much rather see that 30k in my pocket, and just pay $200 for a doctor visit, or $5,000 for a trip to the hospital myself.
You're right that none of that makes sense. It's an excellent example of what happens when health care is run by companies for profit.
If you didn't have to pay the $30K per year for insurance and instead had the option of having no insurance, you'd probably be fine.... until something major happened to one of you, which statistically is likely, and then you risk being one of those bankrupted by medical costs. It's a travesty.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/ocasio-cortez-gets-in-closed-door-fight-with-veteran-lawmaker-over-climate-change/ar-BBPKX46?ocid=spartanntp
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
But in all reality, what would that be and how much would that cost? There isn't a lot that I think should cost more than 30k . Car accidents are covered through car insurance, so I don;t have to worry about that.
And if there is, if something happens and I'm stuck with a 100k bill, well, just a few years of not paying those 30k premiums will make up for that anyway. I wouldn't hesitate at all to get all my money paid to me and go cash for health services.
The problem is if I opt out of insurance, my employer doesn't give me what they would be paying in premiums.
But honestly, wouldn’t it just be better to not have to worry about that at all? To just know you don’t have to pay out of pocket?
A guy in a suit is a guy in a suit unless he's Gotti. That guy had some suits.