How messed up are you? by Iremisst

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by xraftermanx:
Kwicko-

You must be very young or maybe just naive. Perhaps you would like to go work for the BlueSun.

Nope. Not young, not naive. And aren't YOU the one looking to go to work for "The Man", as a teacher? I'm sure they'll be glad to have another preprogrammed drone at their behest.

Quote:

Simplest terms. A Free Market with multiple companies and competition brings down prices and gives incentives for innovation and efficiency. The lack of consumer knowledge makes it easy for companies to take advantage. HSA's are wonderful because that give some control back to the consumer. The HSA consumer must find the best price for visits and treatment. This leads to an educated consumer.

What if a consumer doesn't WANT to get educated in this area, they just want to be able to see a doctor when they're sick, without having to go to medical school and become a CPA beforehand? Do you know how to rebuild your car's engine? Can you do so at 6am, so you can get to work in the morning? Or do you just want the damn thing to WORK when you turn the key?

As to your "simplest terms", I'd say the "free market" led us where we are now, and if you're so into competition, why are you so against letting a not-for-profit option into the marketplace to compete? Are you afraid they'd kick the living shit out of your beloved insurance companies? You say it couldn't possibly be done effectively or efficiently, yet you quake in mortal fear at the mere mention of the possibility. Sounds rather young and naive to me...

Quote:

A public option is not an option. No one can compete with public dollars ever. There is no incentive to be efficient. An appointee will not have the option of failure. They will beat the competition at any cost for the sake of politics. The FED will make the rules that will benefit the public option. The most notable one is that the public option will be available to every state but private insurance companies will not be able sell across state lines.

Case in point. The United States Postal Service is the only company legally allowed to place mail into your mail box. Get rid of that rule and you will have UPS, DHL, and FEDEX all jumping in but because we have subsidized the USPS all these years, and still do, the other companies would be hard pressed to compete.

You missed the point entirely. I deal with shipping and receiving on a daily basis. On some stuff, the US Post Office is THE best option, bar none. On other stuff, not so much. If you want to get a letter across town, you can pay the Post Office forty-four cents, or you can pay FedEx or UPS around $7.50. One of those companies is a government-run not-for-profit enterprise. Oddly, the other two still seem to be able to eke out a living... Do you think the almost twenty-fold difference in price is all down to the fact that UPS isn't allowed to put a letter in your MAILBOX? Really?

Quote:

By the way, do you think that all the Insurance companies get together and hold secret meetings and say we will all charge this... NO. They are competing for our business. The FED doesn't compete...they Dictate... because that's what governments are for, to get in a Man's way.

Do you think private companies DO NOT ever collude to set prices? Man, and you call ME naive...

By the way, you'll note that insurance profits are up over 428% over the last decade. Sounds like they're really slashing prices to keep the competition stiff, eh?

Quote:

You should really watch FF/S again.

Why? So I can see how the Alliance cruiser takes in even "outlaws" and gives them free healthcare?

Quote:

p.s. there are a few corporations and a number of unions that are endorsing the public option. Why? isn't this just supposed to make it more competitive? Or will the few make out big?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, December 8, 2009 7:40 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Cops and firefighters are local issue, the military is a national issue.

Proper functions of Gov't. That's why. Thus endeth the civics lesson.

"Proper functions of government." That's it? That's all you've got? You don't have an actual answer or reason, do you? WHY should I be obligated to pay for the healthcare of people who were too stupid to stay out of the way of incoming fire? Why them and nobody else?

Quote:

( And the 40,000+ folks dying because they lack health insurance is a totally fabricated #, as is the 40 MILLION number unable to get insurance, so there's no point in debating that point. )

Because RAPPY says so, eh? You can't argue the point, so "there's no point in debating" it.

By the way, your claim that "there is no crisis"? It's bullshit. You made it up, pulled it out of your ass, so there's no point in debating it, because you're clearly wrong, as usual. Debate over. You lose.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 12:25 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
By the way, your claim that "there is no crisis"? It's bullshit. You made it up, pulled it out of your ass, so there's no point in debating it, because you're clearly wrong, as usual. Debate over. You lose.

Awww....did I say something that's different and scary for you to hear? Good. Because I'll say it again. Despite what you're seeing in the news, despite what Congress is going through, this 'crisis' is purely manufactured for political reasons.

This isn't RWED. I'm not debating here, just offering my 2 cents.

Deal w/ it.

( and just to clarify.. we pay soldier's salaries, college education, and retirement, so it logically follows we'd pay for their medical as well. They defend THE NATION, so it's only proper the nation pays them for their service. City & local communities foot the bill for their LOCAL services. Due function of Govt )

The T.Rex they call JANE!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 5:17 AM

Quote:

Nope. Not young, not naive. And aren't YOU the one looking to go to work for "The Man", as a teacher? I'm sure they'll be glad to have another preprogrammed drone at their behest.

Can't beat, join em' for now. 30% unemployment in Detroit and even Teachers are being laid off. In all likelihood I will be at a private college which is my goal anyway.

Quote:

What if a consumer doesn't WANT to get educated in this area, they just want to be able to see a doctor when they're sick, without having to go to medical school and become a CPA beforehand? Do you know how to rebuild your car's engine? Can you do so at 6am, so you can get to work in the morning? Or do you just want the damn thing to WORK when you turn the key?

Mechanics love to work over Dupes. Salesmen love to sell you stuff you don't need. Extended warranties, Rust proofing, etc... Why would an insurance salesman be any different. Now, when it comes to consuming healthcare an insurance company can pay what it wants to if it is large enough and can stiff-arm the doctor and the Dupe just hands over the card says Okay. HSA'a make the consumer responsible. If you like being a dupe that's cool but don't complain about profits.

Quote:

As to your "simplest terms", I'd say the "free market" led us where we are now, and if you're so into competition, why are you so against letting a not-for-profit option into the marketplace to compete? Are you afraid they'd kick the living shit out of your beloved insurance companies? You say it couldn't possibly be done effectively or efficiently, yet you quake in mortal fear at the mere mention of the possibility. Sounds rather young and naive to me...

The public government option is NOT a non-profit. Their profit is a political "I told you so". If it is allowed they will win. It's a foregone conclusion. They have no choice but to win or admit they were wrong. Politicians love admitting when their wrong:) I have seen what other countries provide and yes it is scary. Everything the government does is inefficient. Bureaucracy is what you will get. Wait and wait and wait and die.

Quote:

You missed the point entirely. I deal with shipping and receiving on a daily basis. On some stuff, the US Post Office is THE best option, bar none. On other stuff, not so much. If you want to get a letter across town, you can pay the Post Office forty-four cents, or you can pay FedEx or UPS around $7.50. One of those companies is a government-run not-for-profit enterprise. Oddly, the other two still seem to be able to eke out a living... Do you think the almost twenty-fold difference in price is all down to the fact that UPS isn't allowed to put a letter in your MAILBOX? Really?

I deal in shipping? Whoopty Doo. Did you miss the word subsidized in my original. I ran a Bulk Mail Business for three years. A non-profit can send a newsletter every month for as little as 6 cents/piece. Magazines are sent for as little as 14 cents/piece. If you want pricing go to a large PO and go to the back to the Bulk Mail Entry and pick up a free copy of the Quick Service Guide. The taxpayers pay the difference. We always have and the government sets it up so private companies can not compete at all.

Quote:

Do you think private companies DO NOT ever collude to set prices? Man, and you call ME naive...

It is illegal to price fix and if they did the company is lost. They do not need to price fix with the system they have. Lots of dupes in this country. Its like two gas stations across from each other at an intersection. Both watch each other intently and the price flutters. The system sucks the way it is. If we had food insurance we would all be eating steak everyday. Car insurance covers the catastrophic but we pay for the day to day maintenance like brakes, tires, oil changes, etc... The doctors and the patients need the control. Most doctors will order up extra tests so that they are covered against a lawsuit. We need Tort reform.

Quote:

Why? So I can see how the Alliance cruiser takes in even "outlaws" and gives them free healthcare?

Yes, watch FF/S again. Note that the alliance was NOT going to take them in until Book gave his ident-card that changed their minds. Book must have been an operative or something.(speculation) And at the end of the BDM the Captain said that the Operative would be in a mess of trouble for patching up their hurt. The Operative said, they can do nothing to me now. So did the alliance provide FREE healthcare?

We are the only free Democratic Republic in the history of the World. We can choose to be great or we can choose to do nothing. The current administration is fundamentally changing the United States as we know it. If all of the ideas from the progressives are realized we will cease to be a Democratic Republic. We will become a more socialistic democracy akin to a Parliamentary system. We will have a centralized government that only the few elite will have control over.

Take a little time and read the Constitution. Its only 17 pages long. The progressives believe that it is a living document subject to interpretation and change. Sure you can change it with an amendment but not by just passing laws and adding power to the Federal Government whenever you want.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 6:12 AM

CORNCOBB

Posted by xraftermanx: "You get what you pay for. Instead of a new car at $500/mo + gas + insurance + tax + tags, buy a used vehicle and get yourself covered. I guess you have to have priorities or big brother can pay for everything and you have to wait your turn and ask permission. Your choice."

My prioroties are just fine thank you very much. I do not have a new car + gas + insurance + bells + whistles etc etc etc. I can't afford such luxuries any more than I could afford health insurance, and if I had to choose, health coverage would of course come first. Don't try to paint me as some selfish layabout who expects to have everything handed to him so he can live in luxury.
Private health care in Britain may be expensive, but that doesn't matter because in the vast majority of cases it IS NOT NEEDED. Sometimes people have to wait for procedures, but treatments are prioritised so that people with urgent problems get treated promptly. Are you really so impatient that you would prefer to have your every petty ailment seen to immediately, even if that means the very poor are left to suffer and maybe die? Not everyone has an excess of money, to spend on cars and whatever else you listed. Many people can't even afford to make ends meet. If you can't understand or sympathise with such situations, well I quite frankly don't wish to hear your opinion.

"Gorramit Mal... I've forgotten my line."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 7:04 AM

Quote:

Sometimes people have to wait for procedures, but treatments are prioritised so that people with urgent problems get treated promptly. Are you really so impatient that you would prefer to have your every petty ailment seen to immediately, even if that means the very poor are left to suffer and maybe die?

I guess you don't quite know how it works in the USA. Emergency Rooms have a triage nurse that sorts though the patients and prioritizes (notice the z in prioritize) by severity regardless of the patients status to pay. Operations that are not emergent are bumped for those that are. We DO NOT leave the poor to die EVER. We do have some problems with "layabouts" crowding our ER's and treating them like free clinics because they get faster service there. Hospitals pass on the cost of "free" treatment to the other consumers. It's not perfect but the quality of care is not diminished. Quality of care does include timeliness of care.

My aunt should never have been made to wait 10 months in excruciating back pain for a surgery because Canada prioritizes and allocates its resources based upon the money it mismanages. Talk about having your priorities out of wack.

Speaking about cars in the UK. Petrol is 1.10/liter today. That is 1.78 US dollars. That is $6.78/gallon in US dollars. Why so much? A barrel of crude is the same price the world over. Oh yeah, gotta pay for that wonderful healthcare. And how about those luxury taxes on engines over 2.0liters and automatic transmissions. No wonder you can't afford a car. We pay $2.50/gallon right now and hate it. I drive a 4.0Liter and love it. There's no replacement for displacement.

In one way the US stands alone. We do not regulate the work week and time off like so many of our Allies. The UK got busted for opting out of the EU regulations and now all EU member states are complying. 48hr max work week including overtime. Hard to make a living if you have low pay and can not legally take a second job. Doctors in the EU used to average a 58hr work week and now it is 48. Limited resources will drive up the costs or you just prioritize and make people wait. Then you can add a mandated 4week paid vacation for everyone and 1.6 weeks worth of government holidays. Most Americans would love 5.6 weeks off per year. Yet we also like to work hard and get overtime.

We are born free with an aversion to authority telling us what to do. Ask a two-year old to do something and they say NO. We are conditioned to queue up and wait and nobody queue's like a Brit.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 8:22 AM

CORNCOBB

To answer your main points in roughly the order in which they occured:

Prioritise is an acceptable variation. Continental differences and all that. Look it up.

I admit that our system isn't perfect. It is overly beaurocratic, as is everythign in Britain currently.

If nobody in the US is allowed to die EVER, then how do you explained the statistics that show many thousands die from lack of health care?

Prices here ARE unbelievable, you win that one. But that's not what stops me from owning a car. Some people are just a victim of circumstances, full stop. I have no disposable income at all. Cars would have to be free for me have one.

I really don't care about US policies for regulating the working week. It's rather beside the point, surely. Why did you even bring that up?

Finally, I shall refrain from making comments about you comparing yourself to a two year old.

"Gorramit Mal... I've forgotten my line."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 8:43 AM

Quote:
(notice the z in prioritize)

Rafterman, do you REALLY want to go down that road? He's British, so "prioritise" IS correct spelling. We Yanks are the ones who misspell it.

And do you want me to go through all YOUR posts and point out the spelling and grammatical errors "their"? Really? You'd end up quite embarrassed about your teaching ambitions, I'm afraid. ;)

More later; back to work for now. See, some of us DO have full-time jobs, and I've never been without one in the last 30 years, except for the six-month sabbatical I took in 1998, when I did some much needed travelling.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 8:51 AM

Oh, hell, I just can't resist just a couple more quick zingers...

Quote:

Take a little time and read the Constitution. Its only 17 pages long.

You mean the one that starts, and I quote:

Quote:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Now really, what could more promote the general welfare than good health? And without your health, what good are any of the other provisions of the document?

Quote:

The progressives believe that it is a living document subject to interpretation and change. Sure you can change it with an amendment but not by just passing laws and adding power to the Federal Government whenever you want.

Yeah, the conservatives (like you, I take it) seem to think you can change it by simply ignoring the parts you don't agree with or like.

Can you show me in the Constitution where the USA Patriot Act fits in? Warrantless wiretaps? Torture? Illegal wars with no declaration of war from Congress? I'll defer to your expertise, since you're clearly so well-versed in the Constitution.

Oh, I notice also that you're in favor of tort reform and allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines. Is that based on passing federal laws to allow such, and taking away the states' rights to set such regulations? If so, why are you so gung-ho to take away states' rights and hand them to the federal government?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 9:07 AM

Quote:

If nobody in the US is allowed to die EVER, then how do you explained the statistics that show many thousands die from lack of health care?

When a person seeks medical care at a Hospital in the United States they are not denied for a lack of insurance. There are many things to die from, but a lack of medical insurance not one. Some may not seek medical care if they do not have insurance and some with insurance do not seek care because of an irrational fear of hospitals. Send a link with a peer-reviewed study and verifiable statistics instead of just saying statistics that show.

Quote:

I really don't care about US policies for regulating the working week. It's rather beside the point, surely. Why did you even bring that up?

Why? Because it has everything to do with the economics of Health Care. The EU regulates the work week and as such their is no incentive to working hard. A doctor will put in his/her 48 hours and go home because he/she will not get paid and it is illegal. So doctors become scarce. They get paid less because they see less patients. Those who would enter the profession do not choose to because they can not make enough money to even pay back their student loans. So what is left is the rationing of Health Care. And you get to stand in line. You pay more in you taxes for less services than you would in a private system. This is rudimentary economics. 99% of economist's in the free world agree that the 20th-century British economist John Maynard Keynes was wrong.

Quote:

Finally, I shall refrain from making comments about you comparing yourself to a two year old.

I like this and will gladly say NO to authority figures who tell me to do something that I do not want to do and know is wrong. We said NO to crazy King George and look how that turned out.

What would the Captain think? Live free or die comes to mind.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 9:47 AM

Quote:

You mean the one that starts, and I quote:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Quote:

Now really, what could more promote the general welfare than good health? And without your health, what good are any of the other provisions of the document?

This being the liberal interpretation of welfare. The provisions of the Constitution are pretty specific.

Quote:

Yeah, the conservatives (like you, I take it) seem to think you can change it by simply ignoring the parts you don't agree with or like.

Can you show me in the Constitution where the USA Patriot Act fits in? Warrantless wiretaps? Torture? Illegal wars with no declaration of war from Congress? I'll defer to your expertise, since you're clearly so well-versed in the Constitution.

I am a Libertarian. I don't agree with the Patriot Act, Warrantless Wiretaps, Torture, or a declaration of war without the approval of Congress.

Quote:

Oh, I notice also that you're in favor of tort reform and allowing insurance companies to compete across state lines. Is that based on passing federal laws to allow such, and taking away the states' rights to set such regulations? If so, why are you so gung-ho to take away states' rights and hand them to the federal government?

I wouldn't say gung-ho but yeah Tort reform is a good thing. Texas has done it and it is working very well for their economy. Non-economic damages are limited to $750,000. States are doing it on their own but the system as a whole is off. One of the few powers granted to Congress is the regulation of interstate commerce. There is an allowance of auto insurance but not health, so what gives. Those blocking these two things are getting rich and it is just hurting the everyday man. Opening up interstate commerce is not taking away states rights.

What is taking away states rights is mandating that all citizens must purchase health insurance. In the house bill, if you do not purchase health insurance you will be fined. If you do not pay the fine you will be imprisoned.

So forget the Republicans who spend like crazy and forget the Democrats who spend like crazy cause we can not afford our liabilities now. We are toast. The dollar is weakening and inflation is here. Wait til crude gets traded in everything but US dollars. Inflation will go through the roof.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 1:40 PM

Quote:
Why? Because it has everything to do with the economics of Health Care. The EU regulates the work week and as such their is no incentive to working hard. A doctor will put in his/her 48 hours and go home because he/she will not get paid and it is illegal. So doctors become scarce. They get paid less because they see less patients. Those who would enter the profession do not choose to because they can not make enough money to even pay back their student loans. So what is left is the rationing of Health Care. And you get to stand in line. You pay more in you taxes for less services than you would in a private system. This is rudimentary economics. 99% of economist's in the free world agree that the 20th-century British economist John Maynard Keynes was wrong.

Since you were asking the OP for links to peer-reviewed studies and cites for some of his claims, might I ask you for the same?

By the way, the "socialized" French healthcare system is ranked Number One in the world. Sorry if that doesn't jibe with your preconceived notions.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 1:44 PM

Quote:
So forget the Republicans who spend like crazy and forget the Democrats who spend like crazy cause we can not afford our liabilities now. We are toast. The dollar is weakening and inflation is here. Wait til crude gets traded in everything but US dollars. Inflation will go through the roof.

Sounds like we should do away with ALL subsidies. That would include subsidies to private corporations in any form (tax abatements, sales tax rebates, etc.), subsidies to farms to not grown crops, subsidies to automakers, subsidies to parents for having children, etc.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 2:32 PM

Quote:

Since you were asking the OP for links to peer-reviewed studies and cites for some of his claims, might I ask you for the same?

Did I use or quote statistics in anything. If I did I will provide. I thought I was just writing in general terms that all could grasp. Yet, if you use the terms of they said, or statistics say just back them up.

Quote:

By the way, the "socialized" French healthcare system is ranked Number One in the world. Sorry if that doesn't jibe with your preconceived notions.

Number One according to? The World Health Organization? What are their stats? Well check out this link by the CATO institute. Yes they are conservative but their information is good.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/bp/bp101.pdf

My favorite stat from the W.H.O. is that if you have any increase in health services your score goes up. However it does not have to increase for everyone in your country. If the health services increase for the wealthy only and the poor stay the same your country's score goes up.

I would never go to France for a surgery. We have the best doctors and you get what you pay for.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 2:41 PM

Quote:

I wouldn't say gung-ho but yeah Tort reform is a good thing. Texas has done it and it is working very well for their economy. Non-economic damages are limited to $750,000. States are doing it on their own but the system as a whole is off. One of the few powers granted to Congress is the regulation of interstate commerce. There is an allowance of auto insurance but not health, so what gives. Those blocking these two things are getting rich and it is just hurting the everyday man. Opening up interstate commerce is not taking away states rights.

Actually, you're wrong - Texas HAS done it, and has had very mixed reviews. Non-economic damages are capped at $250,000, by the way, not $750,000. 34 states have enacted tort reform, but apparently neo-LIbertarians don't believe the states know what they're doing, because they - along with the Republicans who spawned them - seem to think that we need a massive new federal program aimed at tort reform at the federal level, and at putting all class-action lawsuits into the federal system.

Which is all a very nice subsidy for big business. We'll cap their payouts, but malpractice incidents won't become less common, and the malpractice insurance premiums won't come down anywhere near as much as the payouts are lessened for the carriers. It's a win-win for the insurance industry, which you seem to be very happy for. Your supposed "libertarian" leanings seem to me to be nothing more than neo-Bushisms under their latest name: tea-bagging. It's the same old corporatism, but today you call it "libertarianism" where yesterday you called it "neo-conservatism".

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 2:46 PM

Quote:

Sounds like we should do away with ALL subsidies. That would include subsidies to private corporations in any form (tax abatements, sales tax rebates, etc.), subsidies to farms to not grown crops, subsidies to automakers, subsidies to parents for having children, etc.

Are we actually in agreement or is this sarcasm.

The biggest sticking point with member nations of the World Trade Organization in the past 10 years or so has been food subsidies and sending Food to Africa as relief. The EU is the worst culprit followed closely by the United States. These governing bodies buy food at market prices and send it to drought stricken regions in Africa. This, in turn, bankrupts the struggling local farmers. They could possibly make it if they did not have to compete with the Free food provided by the USA and the EU.

The USA and the EU argue that we can not open up trade because we need to be self sufficient. It just may be a national security issue but the Food Aid should stop.

The worst food subsidy is the sugar subsidy put in place by Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It was supposed to be repealed 6 years ago, but it didn't happen. We turned to High Fructose Corn Syrup for a cheap sweetener in everything. If you have every tasted a coke made with real sugar then you know what you are missing. It is so, so much better.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 2:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by xraftermanx:
Quote:

Since you were asking the OP for links to peer-reviewed studies and cites for some of his claims, might I ask you for the same?

Did I use or quote statistics in anything. If I did I will provide. I thought I was just writing in general terms that all could grasp. Yet, if you use the terms of they said, or statistics say just back them up.

So you feel comfortable making blanket claims like this without any sourcing or backup?

Quote:
Why? Because it has everything to do with the economics of Health Care. The EU regulates the work week and as such their is no incentive to working hard. A doctor will put in his/her 48 hours and go home because he/she will not get paid and it is illegal. So doctors become scarce. They get paid less because they see less patients. Those who would enter the profession do not choose to because they can not make enough money to even pay back their student loans. So what is left is the rationing of Health Care. And you get to stand in line. You pay more in you taxes for less services than you would in a private system. This is rudimentary economics. 99% of economist's in the free world agree that the 20th-century British economist John Maynard Keynes was wrong.

You've not shown any evidence to back up your claims that the EU regulates work weeks (the US Department of Labor does the same thing here, by the way), to show a "scarcity" of doctors, to show that "99% of economist's [sic] in the world agree" on ANYTHING, or any of your other ludicrous claims. Now you try to lay it all off as "you're just saying", like you didn't really mean any of it. So you admit you were making all this up?

Quote:

Quote:

By the way, the "socialized" French healthcare system is ranked Number One in the world. Sorry if that doesn't jibe with your preconceived notions.

Number One according to? The World Health Organization? What are their stats? Well check out this link by the CATO institute. Yes they are conservative but their information is good.

"Good" according to? According to them, because they made it up? According to you, because it agrees with your preconceived notions? Sorry, but if you get to dismiss my sources, don't expect me to blindly trust yours just because YOU say they're good. ;)

Quote:

My favorite stat from the W.H.O. is that if you have any increase in health services your score goes up. However it does not have to increase for everyone in your country. If the health services increase for the wealthy only and the poor stay the same your country's score goes up.

I would never go to France for a surgery. We have the best doctors and you get what you pay for.

"Best" according to? And if you get what you pay for, why aren't we the healthiest nation on Earth? After all, we pay FAR more for healthcare than any other nation on the planet (and if we're not using sources or cites, I can comfortably say that we pay twelve thousand times more than the rest of the world combined! ;0 ), and we don't get better outcomes than they do.

I know you really believe all this "We're number one!" bullshit, but you seriously need to turn off the GlenBeck and the RushBaugh and open your eyes and ears a bit.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:05 PM

Quote:

Actually, you're wrong - Texas HAS done it, and has had very mixed reviews. Non-economic damages are capped at $250,000, by the way, not $750,000. 34 states have enacted tort reform, but apparently neo-LIbertarians don't believe the states know what they're doing, because they - along with the Republicans who spawned them - seem to think that we need a massive new federal program aimed at tort reform at the federal level, and at putting all class-action lawsuits into the federal system.

Yeah it is 250, my bad, I had read it a while ago. 34 is not quite 50 now is it. Would it take a huge program or to just institute a law capping it at 250 and insuring Judges follow the law.

Quote:

Which is all a very nice subsidy for big business. We'll cap their payouts, but malpractice incidents won't become less common, and the malpractice insurance premiums won't come down anywhere near as much as the payouts are lessened for the carriers. It's a win-win for the insurance industry, which you seem to be very happy for. Your supposed "libertarian" leanings seem to me to be nothing more than neo-Bushisms under their latest name: tea-bagging. It's the same old corporatism, but today you call it "libertarianism" where yesterday you called it "neo-conservatism".

Can you call this a subsidy? These aren't taxes they are damage awards. Malpractice suits are less common in Texas. Dallas county went from 1,108 in 2003 to 142 in 2004 after it was instituted. 184 last year and thousands of doctors are headed for Texas to practice medicine.

http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/05/19/doctors-flock-to-texas-after-to
rt-reform/?mod=WSJBlog

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:15 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

What's this, have we abandoned the RWED to PirateNews and moved all rational discourse here? It's a good idea.

Quote:
The EU regulates the work week and as such their is no incentive to working hard. A doctor will put in his/her 48 hours and go home because he/she will not get paid and it is illegal. So doctors become scarce. They get paid less because they see less patients. Those who would enter the profession do not choose to because they can not make enough money to even pay back their student loans. So what is left is the rationing of Health Care. And you get to stand in line. You pay more in you taxes for less services than you would in a private system. This is rudimentary economics.

From Wikipedia:

"More money per person is spent on health care in the United States than in any other nation in the world"

"Currently the U.S. has a higher infant mortality rate than most of the world's industrialized nations.[nb 1][12] The USA's life expectancy lags 42nd in the world, after most rich nations, lagging last of the G5 (Japan, France, Germany, UK, USA) and just after Chile (35th) and Cuba (37th)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States

Hmm, the facts are at odds with your neat economic theory.

Quote:
Despite what you're seeing in the news, despite what Congress is going through, this 'crisis' is purely manufactured for political reasons.

You don't see a need for reform? Not scared at all by these graphs?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Health_care_cost_rise.PNG

Heads should roll

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:25 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally posted by Iremisst:

My mother has a job with a flexible schedule that allows her to volunteer with the fuzzy-wuzzies but has no insurance... anyway three days ago she fell on her truck and completely dislocated her shoulder...She still in massive pain and also can't afford therapy, or the hospital visit... My Grandmother wanted to take her to a CHIROPRACTER because she thought it'd be CHEAPER!!

Chiro is very cheap ($30 a visit), but don't volunteer for the "physical therapy". That's where they make 80% of their profit. Chiro is also better than any MD for joint problems, unless the tendons and ligaments have completely torn from the bone. Osteopath is best of both worlds, but more expensive than chiro.

Chiros won't tell you to drink vinegar/honey, which tightens the ligaments, eliminates muscle pain and makes arthritis go away. That would eliminate their repeat business.

Not having insurance is a good thing, since MDs murder 2-million US citizens every year.
http://www.lef.org/magazine/mag2004/mar2004_awsi_death_01.htm

None of the "reform" will attempt to reduce death by medmal, and Obama will ban all vitamins, since the goal of "reform" is to massively raise the death rate, and massively raise taxes to bail out the insurance companies who wrote the legislation.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:28 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

A good idea while it lasted.

Heads should roll

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:38 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:

"More money per person is spent on health care in the United States than in any other nation in the world"

"Currently the U.S. has a higher infant mortality rate than most of the world's industrialized nations.[nb 1][12] The USA's life expectancy lags 42nd in the world, after most rich nations, lagging last of the G5 (Japan, France, Germany, UK, USA) and just after Chile (35th) and Cuba (37th)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States

Abortion = infant mortality, but is NOT included in "statistics".

As a former US soldier, I've been waiting 12 years for a medical appointment with the Veterans Administration clinic. The only VA doctor in Tennessee who tests for radiation poisoning works 8 hours away, part-time, and he's from Pakistan, a nation USA is currently at war with. My wife got paid $80/month VA disability pension for medical malpractice, but after 6 months VA stole it all back, saying only 5% of disabled soldiers get paid both retirement and disability pensions (the only job in USA that does that).

The average disabled US soldier is forced to live on $80/month. VA has 4,000 lawyers whose job is to deny claims, while vets are not allowed to hire lawyers. VA hospitals have maggots eating the brains of patients.

US war vets must repay their enlistment bonus when their legs get blown off, and are billed for damaged "bullet-proof" vests with bullet holes.Soldiers who complain about bad healthcare are either murdered in hospital, or their careers are destroyed, according to family members who complained to commanding officers.

THAT'S what you get when Uncle Scam gives you "free" healthcare (paid for by borrowed money from Commie China, that genocided 60-million of its citizens and has a 1-child-or-we-kill-your-baby-after-its-born law).

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:44 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally posted by xraftermanx:

What is taking away states rights is mandating that all citizens must purchase health insurance. In the house bill, if you do not purchase health insurance you will be fined. If you do not pay the fine you will be imprisoned.

5 years in prison and $250,000 fine if you refuse to buy a $15,000 insurance policy to bail out a private insurance corporation, that pays its executives $100,000 PER WEEK personal salary PER PERSON, up to a personal salary of $35-BILLION PER YEAR PER PERSON TAX-FREE, as Warren Buffet paid himself as head of GEICO Govt Employees Insurance Corp.

The kosher banksters got their $25-Trillion Bailout. Now its the insurance robber barons turn at the trough.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:46 PM

Quote:
Yeah it is 250, my bad, I had read it a while ago. 34 is not quite 50 now is it. Would it take a huge program or to just institute a law capping it at 250 and insuring Judges follow the law.

Just so we get this all straight - you're a "libertarian", calling for MORE federal laws, right?

And "insuring judges follow the law" is the answer, in your book? You have a funny, funny idea of what "libertarian" means, guy. You seem to be saying that mandatory minimums are A-OK in your book; after all, why should judges have any semblance of personal responsibility in how they mete out justice or sentencing, eh? Just write it all into a federally-mandated sentencing handbook, and then you don't even NEED the judges in the first place!

And how about "insuring doctors follow their charts" in the first place? Seems if they weren't fucking up so often, there wouldn't be so many lawsuits.

And yes, it IS a subsidy - it's money that your beloved little tort reform GIVES the insurance industry, in the form of money for mistakes that they NEVER pay out. They still take the premiums, of course - so this is just extra profit for them. It's a subsidy, bought and paid for by your government.

By the way, will your tort reform extend to everybody, in your ideal world? For instance, if I murder somebody and claim it was an "accident", can I just pay $250,000 and stay out of prison? :)

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 3:47 PM

Quote:
What's this, have we abandoned the RWED to PirateNews and moved all rational discourse here? It's a good idea.

Well, it wasn't supposed to be that way, but that's where this thread got started, so that's where it stayed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 4:24 PM

Quote:

"Best" according to? And if you get what you pay for, why aren't we the healthiest nation on Earth? After all, we pay FAR more for healthcare than any other nation on the planet (and if we're not using sources or cites, I can comfortably say that we pay twelve thousand times more than the rest of the world combined! ;0 ), and we don't get better outcomes than they do.

I know you really believe all this "We're number one!" bullshit, but you seriously need to turn off the GlenBeck and the RushBaugh and open your eyes and ears a bit.

You said France was number one and I asked according to? You never answered. I answered it for you. You probably heard it from Michael Moore and 12,000 times more. Since you didn't read the CATO article lets show you the best in 5 year cancer survival rates.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1560849/UK-cancer-survival-rate
-lowest-in-Europe.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1234276/Britain-sick-man-Europ
e-Heart-cancer-survival-rates-worst-developed-world.html?ITO=1490&referrer=yahoo

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/health/story.html?id=2f6e7d6b-5c7a
-46b5-ace6-3add4ec6efd5

No matter where you go the US has the highest 5 year cancer survival rate. If you go by WHO stats then Costa Rica ranks better than the USA. Still I will stay here were quality no matter the price is king. I would rather have the 91.9% chance of surviving 5 years than Europe's 57.7%.

I am done writing here... I would prefer to engage those interested in FF/S only topics. I came here and found those who dislike America. Its alright, you can, its a free country for now anyway.

You found your way to FFF because you thought you were a fan but think long and hard about what the crew of Serenity stand for and why they do what they do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 4:35 PM

Quote:
I am done writing here... I would prefer to engage those interested in FF/S only topics. I came here and found those who dislike America. Its alright, you can, its a free country for now anyway.

Yes, wanting to make America better for ALL Americans shows our true dislike of our nation.

You know that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel, right? After all of the idiocy you've posted, and been called on and proven wrong every single time, now you want to fall back on the old tried-and-true "you just hate America!" line. Pretty pathetic, but I couldn't call it unexpected.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 4:49 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by xraftermanx:

You said France was number one and I asked according to? You never answered. I answered it for you.

You answered for me in the same breath that you asked the freaking question! You had no interest in hearing my answer, or you'd have given me a chance to answer.

Also, I note for the record that all of your sources are conservative publications. It comes as no surprise they'd reflect your Republican values and skew their results to meet your expectations.

Quote:

No matter where you go the US has the highest 5 year cancer survival rate. If you go by WHO stats then Costa Rica ranks better than the USA. Still I will stay here were quality no matter the price is king. I would rather have the 91.9% chance of surviving 5 years than Europe's 57.7%.

According to factcheck.org, that's wrong info, but you should be used to that. You're so very, very good at giving out faulty information, and then claiming that you weren't "using quotes or statistics" so you shouldn't be held accountable for the figures you spew.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/a-false-appeal-to-womens-fears/

WebMD backs this up with some numbers of its own, which also refute your claims.

http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/20080716/cancer-survival-rates-vary-b
y-country

Quote:
Where you live plays a role in cancer survival, according to a new study that shows the U.S., Japan, and France recorded the highest survival rates among 31 nations for four types of cancer. Algeria had the lowest survival rates for all four cancers.

"This is the first direct comparison of so many countries as far as I am aware," says Michel Coleman, MD, a professor of epidemiology and vital statistics at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and the study's lead author.

While Coleman and other epidemiologists have long known that cancer survival rates vary country by country, and even within a country, the study lends hard numbers to the fact. Still, there were surprises. "I think the surprises were that the range in global survival is really quite wide," Coleman tells WebMD.

"Survival in the USA is high on a global scale but varies quite widely among individual states as well as between blacks and whites within the USA," he tells WebMD.

Cancer Survival by Country
Coleman and colleagues drew on data from nearly 2 million cancer patients, ages 15 to 99, whose medical information was entered into 101 population-based cancer registries in 31 countries. The patients had been diagnosed with one of four cancers: breast, colon, rectum, or prostate cancers during the years 1990-1994. They were followed up to 1999, with the researchers comparing five-year survival rates.

The highest survival rates were found in the U.S. for breast and prostate cancer, in Japan for colon and rectal cancers in men, and in France for colon and rectal cancers in women, Coleman's team reports.

In Canada and Australia, survival was also high for most cancers.

The lowest cancer survival rates for all four cancers were found in Algeria.

But YOU said, and I quote:

Quote:
No matter where you go the US has the highest 5 year cancer survival rate. If you go by WHO stats then Costa Rica ranks better than the USA. Still I will stay here were quality no matter the price is king. I would rather have the 91.9% chance of surviving 5 years than Europe's 57.7%.

"No matter where you go, the US has the highest 5-year cancer survival rate."

Well, as long as you're only talking about two certain types of cancer, that is.

Quote:

I am done writing here...

Yes, run away. It's what Republicans do best these days.

Quote:
You found your way to FFF because you thought you were a fan but think long and hard about what the crew of Serenity stand for and why they do what they do.

Do you often confuse a television show for reality? Did you think Star Wars was real, too?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 5:04 PM

BORIS

Hey unload away Iremisst...the system sucks worse in your country than it does in mine. It does always come down to the money though. If you are well off and can afford health insurance you get taken care of. the rest of us have to wait and wait until you just give up. My situation is not as bad as others, but it does get exhausting sometimes. So I myself to piss and moan about it. It's theraputic.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 6:47 PM

I Have a reaAALLLLY bad idea , Boris...

Next time you get a few days clear in your schedule maybe you should get jacked on pain pills and try to dislocate it so they have to fix it then...

Bad idea, and yes, after what happened to mom I completely know what I'm sayin' is a bitch, but sometimes playin' by other people's rules means ya hafta play hardball...

Either way, please let me know if it ever gets fixed, 'till then I'll be wishing better things for ya hon, & stay strong!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 9, 2009 7:15 PM

Does anybody here watch WNIN or PBS? They had a documentary on last month about our (and parts of others) healthcare systems. Don't remember much, 'cept Japan charges the equivilent of $10 for a night's stay in a hospital (which is great , but half of the hosp. are going broke!)
But the thing that seemed to be working better is the way a doctor's visit is handled... First the doctor stays in the same office and you come to him which is not really a problem because your whole visit is less than five minutes- you state your problem he writes a prescription for you to try and on your way you go. Also, simple problems are VERY cheap to fix. Five dollars for a laceration suture, wart removal ect. And pretty much every procedure has a Gov. regulated set price... No thousand dollar ice packs or anything... Only problem with that is fewer peeps want to BE docs, because they can't get rich at it... so ... I dunno. If we can be vampiristic and suck the good procedures out of other countries and modify them slightly so we leave off the negatives, we COULD get somewhere, maybe...

By the way, I was charged $38 for ONE DOSE of regular children's Motrin one time and I still find that shocking, I checked -I could buy 7 bottles of it for that!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 10, 2009 4:41 PM

BORIS

eek! Iremisst that is radical!!! just thinking about the pain of doing that to myself is making me wince so hard my jaw and temple hurt. Ironically it looks like I may have to have it professionally dislocated and then repositioned to fix it anyway...but it will happen under sedation...with the pain factor managed.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 10, 2009 5:32 PM

Oh, thank god...Am very happy to hear it. You probably wouldn't believe the things I've done to myself to not go to a doc, especially when we were out of jobs. Don't know if it's made me stronger or a little bit crazier

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, December 16, 2009 5:21 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

( and just to clarify.. we pay soldier's salaries, college education, and retirement, so it logically follows we'd pay for their medical as well. They defend THE NATION, so it's only proper the nation pays them for their service. City & local communities foot the bill for their LOCAL services. Due function of Govt )

Sorry, Rappy, but you got lost in the flood a bit, what with all the hullaballou Rafterman was making, before he decided to ponce off.

So where were we?

Oh yeah. WHY do you say this is all due function of government? WHY do we give these soldiers these benefits? HOW did they come to be?

Aren't they just more socialist programs enacted by that famous socialist, FDR? Are you defending socialism?

You DID know that prior to 1944, most of these things WEREN'T paid for, right?

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 17, 2009 3:23 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

You're changing the subject again.

First, it was to treat US military as being on par w/ local fire, police and educmicators, or what ever. NOW it's switched to how business was done pre/ post WW2.

The point being, those who defend the nation should be paid BY the nation, as those who work for state/ local bodies should be paid by them.

The T.Rex they call JANE!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, December 17, 2009 3:55 PM

Actually, the point is, we as a nation didn't use to do these things for our soldiers and veterans; we do now. Things change. They CAN change, and we can change them. We also used to not pay for police and fire protection; we had volunteers for that. Things change.

We pay soldiers for their "service" to the nation. We provide them with insurance for the same reason. Likewise, we can decide as a nation that we are going to provide insurance for all citizens, as part of the payment we make for their service to the nation.

The things you say are done as "functions of the government" weren't always functions of the government. We made them that way, and most of them quite recently, historically speaking.

Mike

Work is the curse of the Drinking Class.
- Oscar Wilde

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 20, 2009 8:46 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

This thread has gone on so long, and I"'m a latecomer to it, so I've probably missed a lot.

I'm covered thru my husband's insurance, and it's damned good. Only once been refused coverage; Jim went for a recheck of his various stuff (emphysema, arteriosclerosis, etc.) and they billed it as a "regular checkup)...we're still fighting it, but will probably have to pay the $400 in the end, dammit.

But I've been through a LOT of stuff, several surgeries, in the past few years, and everything's been covered. Even physical therapy, for more than the officially covered amount. Just finished another bout of PT for achilles tendonitis, and immediately started up again (like the same week) for degenerative disc disease.

Our dental coverage sucks, however. I've got several chipped teeth and am waiting for the new year to do them. When I finally went last time, I, too, had myriad problems which need fixing, but it's so expensive, I'm doing it a bit at a time.

Last time I saw a dentist, I had to have a bridge. Paid my estimated share, but it turned out to be much higher than estimated. Took years to pay off, and I never finished, so have two filed-down teeth in preparation of a bridge and a huge gap between them. Gotten used to it; dunno if I can ever afford to have it finished.

In my opinion we desperately need reform in America. I'm lucky because my husband is covered through the union (tho' he's not in the union, there are only a couple of admin people so they get the same coverage). I do believe it's Blue Cross, via an employee trust fund...but I agree, BLue Cross and Blue Shield are the devil incarnate and MUST be curtailed in their rampant pursuit of more and more profits.

Medicare picks up what insurance doesn't for me, so I rarely pay much for anything. Given I've got Medicare, and we'll get a supplement once Jim ceases working, I have no personal interest in the healthcare reform issue...but I still feel VERY strongly for all those without decent healthcare and those having to fight for ANY here in the US.

I just learned the proposed bill SOLIDIFIES the big ins. co.'s monopoly status--that and the individual mandate, with no public option, makes it an ins. co. gimee, nothing more. We need something that will actually CURTAIL their huge profits and unsavory actions. I'm allowed to wish...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, December 21, 2009 8:34 AM

Talk about unsuspecting billing practices... My daughter had to have her tonsils and adnoids removed over five months!! ago, they were so swollen she almost couln't breathe. At the time of the surgery I was told that our co-pay would be $325 (and for the first time in our marriage we finally have some really good insurance) and I thought Yay! we are going to survive this one, and today I get another bill for $250 and I called and asked and that said "Oh, you just paid the doctor's bill you didn't pay the facility bill." And she had this attitude that boy, was I stupid for not having a medical billing degree... "And I said oh, well when do I get the bill from the janitor and each CRAPPY nurse involved, oh and how about the contractor who built the place and the water company...."
And this is FIVE MONTHS LATER mind you...

Not to mention they did the surgery in 45 minutes and tried to kick us out of there a half an hour later, and she wasn't even stable. I sent my husband out on an errand so I COULDN'T leave, then we get her home and she's throwing up and I'm panicking because didn't she just have surgery on her throat? Is this gonna get infected? Is this normal? And for this I get the honor of paying $600 dollars- WITH insurance!!!?

Bastards and #ssh*oles, every one of them!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:47 PM

I get low-income health care through my state-it's a program unique to oregon alone. It covers most things for free, but here's the kicker: I was low-income because I was a student. I've just graduated and now-PRESUMABLY-I'll be getting a good job. (We'll see). Anyway, if I start making even a little bit more, I lose the insurance, but of course won't be making enough for conventional coverage. I'll be in health coverage limbo. How low can you go?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:48 PM

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:51 PM

Wow.I remember getting my tonsils out when I was four. I stayed there overnight and they gave me ice cream. Now they probably charge extra for the ice cream. Probably call it "temperature sensitive nutritional healing aid," or some such go-sa.

I get low-income health care through my state-it's a program unique to oregon alone. It covers most things for free, but here's the kicker: I was low-income because I was a student. I've just graduated and now-PRESUMABLY-I'll be getting a good job. (We'll see). Anyway, if I start making even a little bit more, I lose the insurance, but of course won't be making enough for conventional coverage. I'll be in health coverage limbo. How low can you go?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 21, 2010 12:52 PM

Wow.I remember getting my tonsils out when I was four. I stayed there overnight and they gave me ice cream. Now they probably charge extra for the ice cream. Probably call it "temperature sensitive nutritional healing aid," or some such go-sa.

I get low-income health care through my state-it's a program unique to oregon alone. It covers most things for free, but here's the kicker: I was low-income because I was a student. I've just graduated and now I'll be getting a good job. (We'll see). Anyway, if I start making even a little bit more, I lose the insurance, but of course won't be making enough for conventional coverage. I'll be in health coverage limbo. How low can you go?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, January 21, 2010 1:52 PM