All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Obama: Worst President Ever?
3/19/2014 5:28 PM
Posted by bronxcheer on 3/19/2014 5:24:00 PM (view original):

Would this fit the definition of a Retard-slap-fight in the making?

Normally, yes.  But it's been done.   So I won't be around long.  Once I start posting owls, it means I'm not that interested in re-hashing the same **** over and over again.

badluck just won't look at the big picture because it doesn't work for his argument of the ACA not costing Americans more and more over the years.  It's an unsustainable program as it stands. 
3/19/2014 5:35 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 4:55:00 PM (view original):
Depends on what you consider serious. 

I guess we'd agree cancer is serious(just starting at the top).  I'm diagnosed with nut cancer at 40.  Routine check-up I wouldn't have had if I had no insurance.  My nut is removed.   But the tricky thing with cancer is it could re-materialize somewhere else at a later date.   So, every 6 months or so, I'm off the cancer treatment center to be examined.   Maybe it never comes back but, nonetheless, I'm making two trips to the doc every year until I'm 90.   Without that check-up, I'm diagnosed with cancer all over my body at 46 because I had to go to the doc and I'm dead within a year.   What was more expensive?
Those two trips to the Dr. every year probably cost $75 each. Twice a year for 50 years, you're looking at $7500. Small potatoes. Round up to $100 each and you're still only at $10,000.

Cancer treatment, hospital stays, pain meds, and hospice care for a terminally ill patient will, just a guess, run more than $10,000.


Probably cost a little more.   Cancer and all.  You know, you don't get a big red C on your face when you have cancer.

Taking my dog to the vet costs more than $75.

Dying because they say "There's nothing we can do" is really inexpensive.
No, even terminally ill patients undergo a lot of care. They also get a lot of pain meds.

And anyway, that seems like a dumb argument against the ACA--people will get basic care and lead longer, healthier lives--considering the fact that that is a goal of the ACA.
3/19/2014 5:39 PM

Anyway, what I'm saying is that a guy who is being subsized $200 month on his $500 a month insurance payment isn't getting a raise because premiums go up.   And premiums will go up because insurance companies now have more sick people in their system.  They aren't going to cut profits.    Doctors aren't going to lower fees for services rendered because insurance companies will only pay x-amount of the fee.   So they'll reject that insurance company and refuse to see said patient. 

So, Joe Subsized will either get more subsidy money or fewer options for medical services.     Or maybe the government caps subsidy amounts.   But then it's not AFFORDABLE health care.    

The money to run this program has to come from somewhere.    The other option is to regulate profits for insurance/healthcare providers.  

3/19/2014 5:40 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 4:55:00 PM (view original):
Depends on what you consider serious. 

I guess we'd agree cancer is serious(just starting at the top).  I'm diagnosed with nut cancer at 40.  Routine check-up I wouldn't have had if I had no insurance.  My nut is removed.   But the tricky thing with cancer is it could re-materialize somewhere else at a later date.   So, every 6 months or so, I'm off the cancer treatment center to be examined.   Maybe it never comes back but, nonetheless, I'm making two trips to the doc every year until I'm 90.   Without that check-up, I'm diagnosed with cancer all over my body at 46 because I had to go to the doc and I'm dead within a year.   What was more expensive?
Those two trips to the Dr. every year probably cost $75 each. Twice a year for 50 years, you're looking at $7500. Small potatoes. Round up to $100 each and you're still only at $10,000.

Cancer treatment, hospital stays, pain meds, and hospice care for a terminally ill patient will, just a guess, run more than $10,000.


Probably cost a little more.   Cancer and all.  You know, you don't get a big red C on your face when you have cancer.

Taking my dog to the vet costs more than $75.

Dying because they say "There's nothing we can do" is really inexpensive.
No, even terminally ill patients undergo a lot of care. They also get a lot of pain meds.

And anyway, that seems like a dumb argument against the ACA--people will get basic care and lead longer, healthier lives--considering the fact that that is a goal of the ACA.
Not if they die quickly. 
3/19/2014 5:41 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 4:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 4:50:00 PM (view original):
Also, why do you think medical care provided to non-retirees is "funded by the government?"
For ****'s sake, you're like a child begging for someone to pay attention to them.    Will the ACA be subsidized by the government?
Health insurance premiums are subsidized for low income people by the government. The actual medical care is still paid for by private insurance companies.
And, when their costs go up because a lot more people are going to the doctor and discovering they have medical issues, what do you think insurance companies do?

A)  Say "Damn.  Our days of making money are over!!"
B)  Increase premiums
C)  Restrict payment amounts for services rendered
D)  B and C

Now assuming they do B, where does that money for the higher premiums come from?  
Now assuming they do C, what do health care facilities do?  
A) Say "Damn.  Our days of making money are over!!!"
B) Refuse that form of insurance.

IMO, it's silly to believe insurance companies and medical facilities are going to take a huge cut from their bottom line for the "well-being of the people".    Do you disagree?
Care to comment?
3/19/2014 5:43 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:35:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:20:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:00:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 4:55:00 PM (view original):
Depends on what you consider serious. 

I guess we'd agree cancer is serious(just starting at the top).  I'm diagnosed with nut cancer at 40.  Routine check-up I wouldn't have had if I had no insurance.  My nut is removed.   But the tricky thing with cancer is it could re-materialize somewhere else at a later date.   So, every 6 months or so, I'm off the cancer treatment center to be examined.   Maybe it never comes back but, nonetheless, I'm making two trips to the doc every year until I'm 90.   Without that check-up, I'm diagnosed with cancer all over my body at 46 because I had to go to the doc and I'm dead within a year.   What was more expensive?
Those two trips to the Dr. every year probably cost $75 each. Twice a year for 50 years, you're looking at $7500. Small potatoes. Round up to $100 each and you're still only at $10,000.

Cancer treatment, hospital stays, pain meds, and hospice care for a terminally ill patient will, just a guess, run more than $10,000.


Probably cost a little more.   Cancer and all.  You know, you don't get a big red C on your face when you have cancer.

Taking my dog to the vet costs more than $75.

Dying because they say "There's nothing we can do" is really inexpensive.
No, even terminally ill patients undergo a lot of care. They also get a lot of pain meds.

And anyway, that seems like a dumb argument against the ACA--people will get basic care and lead longer, healthier lives--considering the fact that that is a goal of the ACA.
Not if they die quickly. 
And, FWIW, I'm not sure longer lives is such a great thing.

As I said, it sounds harsh. 
3/19/2014 5:52 PM
Posted by examinerebb on 3/19/2014 2:35:00 PM (view original):
Not the worst ever, but it's disheartening that we've had 14 straight years of garbage in the west wing.  It's bad enough that they were elected (and I voted for GWB the first time), but to have them both re-elected leaves me little hope for the quality of the people in government.  As well as for the intelligence of the people who elect them.
+1
3/19/2014 5:53 PM
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 4:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 4:50:00 PM (view original):
Also, why do you think medical care provided to non-retirees is "funded by the government?"
For ****'s sake, you're like a child begging for someone to pay attention to them.    Will the ACA be subsidized by the government?
Health insurance premiums are subsidized for low income people by the government. The actual medical care is still paid for by private insurance companies.
And, when their costs go up because a lot more people are going to the doctor and discovering they have medical issues, what do you think insurance companies do?

A)  Say "Damn.  Our days of making money are over!!"
B)  Increase premiums
C)  Restrict payment amounts for services rendered
D)  B and C

Now assuming they do B, where does that money for the higher premiums come from?  
Now assuming they do C, what do health care facilities do?  
A) Say "Damn.  Our days of making money are over!!!"
B) Refuse that form of insurance.

IMO, it's silly to believe insurance companies and medical facilities are going to take a huge cut from their bottom line for the "well-being of the people".    Do you disagree?
I think everyone has agreed previously that the biggest problem with health care in America is the out of control costs. Hospitals charging $16 for ibuprofen , for example.

Hospitals aren't going to voluntarily destroy their inflated profit margins. And individual consumers certainly don't have the leverage to push prices down. That leaves two options: the government or health insurance companies.

I don't think anyone wants the government jumping in and setting prices. Unless you do?

So that leaves health insurance companies. The ACA bands them together. They are limited in how much they can increase premiums. The only option they have is to apply pressure to providers to lower costs.

Sure, some specialists may stop taking all health insurance, but that isn't an option for the vast majority of hospitals and doctors. So they will have to control their costs.
3/19/2014 6:04 PM
$16 for Advil (I'm lazy) means 75 cents for your Advil and $15.25 for all the other Advil they have to give out for free.

Health Insurance companies are not limited to how much they can increase premiums, unless 40% is what they are limited to.

Now the rest of the country can enjoy what us Mass residents have endured since Romneycare. We have the highest premiums in the country.  Now everyone else can join us.

...and with Medicare being eviscerated for Medicaid, the payments to hospitals shrink even further.  Which causes hospitals to lay off or go out of business (see Georgia)...not to mention that young doctors won't be able to afford to accept Medicare patients.

The good news is that with all of our grannies dying prematurely, there may still be a couple of bucks left in Social Security for me when I get there.

3/19/2014 6:09 PM
Posted by raucous on 3/19/2014 6:04:00 PM (view original):
$16 for Advil (I'm lazy) means 75 cents for your Advil and $15.25 for all the other Advil they have to give out for free.

Health Insurance companies are not limited to how much they can increase premiums, unless 40% is what they are limited to.

Now the rest of the country can enjoy what us Mass residents have endured since Romneycare. We have the highest premiums in the country.  Now everyone else can join us.

...and with Medicare being eviscerated for Medicaid, the payments to hospitals shrink even further.  Which causes hospitals to lay off or go out of business (see Georgia)...not to mention that young doctors won't be able to afford to accept Medicare patients.

The good news is that with all of our grannies dying prematurely, there may still be a couple of bucks left in Social Security for me when I get there.

What Advil are they giving out for free?
3/19/2014 6:25 PM
The Advil they give to the broke uninsured people they have to provide ER care for?  The Advil that both Federal and private insurance reimburse at 50%?
3/19/2014 6:29 PM
Posted by dahsdebater on 3/19/2014 6:25:00 PM (view original):
The Advil they give to the broke uninsured people they have to provide ER care for?  The Advil that both Federal and private insurance reimburse at 50%?
So then the hospitals"only" get $8 a pill. Wow, that sucks.
3/19/2014 7:34 PM
Well in the case of drugs like this they're reimbursed at 0%, but I was generally referring to the abstract sense of all medical care provided and reimbursed at ~50%.  Thought you could be thinking of Advil in this case as a metaphor for all the overpriced care.  Apparently that's far too abstract and deep for you.
3/19/2014 7:44 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:53:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 5:25:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 5:01:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 3/19/2014 4:56:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 3/19/2014 4:50:00 PM (view original):
Also, why do you think medical care provided to non-retirees is "funded by the government?"
For ****'s sake, you're like a child begging for someone to pay attention to them.    Will the ACA be subsidized by the government?
Health insurance premiums are subsidized for low income people by the government. The actual medical care is still paid for by private insurance companies.
And, when their costs go up because a lot more people are going to the doctor and discovering they have medical issues, what do you think insurance companies do?

A)  Say "Damn.  Our days of making money are over!!"
B)  Increase premiums
C)  Restrict payment amounts for services rendered
D)  B and C

Now assuming they do B, where does that money for the higher premiums come from?  
Now assuming they do C, what do health care facilities do?  
A) Say "Damn.  Our days of making money are over!!!"
B) Refuse that form of insurance.

IMO, it's silly to believe insurance companies and medical facilities are going to take a huge cut from their bottom line for the "well-being of the people".    Do you disagree?
I think everyone has agreed previously that the biggest problem with health care in America is the out of control costs. Hospitals charging $16 for ibuprofen , for example.

Hospitals aren't going to voluntarily destroy their inflated profit margins. And individual consumers certainly don't have the leverage to push prices down. That leaves two options: the government or health insurance companies.

I don't think anyone wants the government jumping in and setting prices. Unless you do?

So that leaves health insurance companies. The ACA bands them together. They are limited in how much they can increase premiums. The only option they have is to apply pressure to providers to lower costs.

Sure, some specialists may stop taking all health insurance, but that isn't an option for the vast majority of hospitals and doctors. So they will have to control their costs.
ACA does nothing to control costs.   It simply subsidizes insurance for those who can't afford it.
 
Heath insurance companies will not be able to force doctors/hospitals to lower costs.    They can, however, say "We're only paying this much for an Advil.  If you insist on charging that much, collect it from the patient."   Now said patient is being subsidized for their health insurance.   So are they going to be capable of paying the additional amount?    If they're not, what is the option for the HC provider?  Refuse that insurance.

There will be HC/insurance providers that aren't under the ACA or, if nothing else, part of the ACA as the super duper double platinum plan that only a select few can afford.    So where does that leave healthcare?    Pricey, as it is, and less than stellar for those who can't afford it.    Kinda like it was before the ACA.

I think you'd be surprised at how many doctors will be able to turn away the cheapest of the health insurance coverages.
3/20/2014 9:02 AM
of 245
All Forums > General Discussion > Non-Sports > Obama: Worst President Ever?

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.