My wife does HR and deals with the health care for the company she works for. She had to silently laugh when all of the twenty something year old employees who were big Obama supporters came to her office to complain about how their take home pay went so far down after the ACA plan went into effect. That's only one tiny example of how ignorant these younger people are who don't have real jobs yet and think they're entitled to cradle to grave services paid for by "someone else." It's all good until they find out THEY are the ones that have to pay for it once they start being a grown up.
I spread the love plenty. Most of is wasted on government over spending
I also create jobs. Plenty of them.
what do you do? punch a time clock?
I never said that the poor don't deserve healthcare. The solution isn't to keep taking from small business owners like me.
I also never said that I don't want to pay any taxes....I just don't want to pay your share too
and yes, if I choose to go to a different hospital than the county one.....I should be able to
stop your dribble
You'll never find out what "he does" because he's too afraid to list it in his profile. He'd rather just troll along like a keyboard cowboy and take pot shots, aiming for the low hanging fruit. Typical liberal.
I don't get why people have to take the extreme view to get there point across. The common ground is where the people should be shooting.
Try telling that to an American 18-25 year old who has been fully indoctrinated by our liberal public school systems. They're all shallow mindedly trained to think that all conservatives are evil, homophobic, racist, greedy etc... There is no tolerance taught for anything other than liberal viewpoints. Ever... No common ground there to be had. Especially in colleges.
I still love repeating that ole' saying that goes something like: "if you're 20 and aren't a liberal, you don't have a heart and if you're 30 and aren't a conservative, you don't have a brain."
Try telling that to an American 18-25 year old who has been fully indoctrinated by our liberal public school systems. They're all shallow mindedly trained to think that all conservatives are evil, homophobic, racist, greedy etc... There is no tolerance taught for anything other than liberal viewpoints. Ever... No common ground there to be had. Especially in colleges.
I still love repeating that ole' saying that goes something like: "if you're 20 and aren't a liberal, you don't have a heart and if you're 30 and aren't a conservative, you don't have a brain."
This is the most asinine statement I have ever read. I cannot think of one professor I ever had in college that taught "liberal viewpoints". As a matter of fact, one of the professors at my alma mater was/is the chairman of the county republican party.
Conservatives seem to believe that if people, such as myself, don't want their religious dogma shoved down my throat, or my children's throats, then we are intolerant. Also, their crusade to attack higher education seems that they want to keep people ignorant.
You won't agree, but it's so all of those previously uninsured can now be insured
no thanks
lower my premiums and let me keep my expensive doctor if I want to. I worked for the ability to choose who I want to see and what procedures I want.....without waiting in line, or listing how many guns I own
Obamacare and universal care is for the birds
Your premiums doubled because now if you get cancer, or another high cost illness, your insurance has to continue to cover you. They also can't deny coverage based on expensive pre-existing conditions. Which under insurers definition would mean every other person qualifies for a pre-existing condition.
Do you remember when you picked your plan pre-ObamaCare and there was that cheap plan and just below it the expensive plan that seemed the exact same? That cheap plan you choose would have left you high and dry should something expensive happen.
Tell your wife next time she laughs think about visiting pediatric cancer care facility and tell those kids they're too expensive to insure. Here in NY, under ObamaCare we have the option for catastrophic coverage only for those who do complain. It only covers broken bones, trips to emergency room etc. Reversing that argument, I openly laughed at the store owner in my building who complains about his $120K out of pocket pre-obama care heart-attack.
In short, premiums are high because HC is inherently expensive. ObamaCare forces insurance companies to cover cost of expensive procedures and long-term care.
my insurance coverage is and has always been, just catastrophic coverage. This is what insurance should be. It shouldn't cover every little thing.
The cost of healthcare should have been what was addressed years ago, not the ever expanding distribution of wealth
The local care clinic charges $400 for treatment of the flu. Hospitals charge upwards of $12 for an aspirin and you aren't allowed to bring in your own bottle from cvs.
When my daughter had acl surgery, I had to insist on an itemized invoice. They thought I was crazy. Several items on the invoice were greatly inflated. My insurance company listed the highest amount that they were willing to cover for each thing.....suddenly, the medical facility was okay with the new, reduced costs.
criminal
The examples are endless. Obama and the dems blew it. and don't give me that crap about....well, it's a start
BS
Your premiums doubled because now if you get cancer, or another high cost illness, your insurance has to continue to cover you. They also can't deny coverage based on expensive pre-existing conditions. Which under insurers definition would mean every other person qualifies for a pre-existing condition.
Do you remember when you picked your plan pre-ObamaCare and there was that cheap plan and just below it the expensive plan that seemed the exact same? That cheap plan you choose would have left you high and dry should something expensive happen.
Tell your wife next time she laughs think about visiting pediatric cancer care facility and tell those kids they're too expensive to insure. Here in NY, under ObamaCare we have the option for catastrophic coverage only for those who do complain. It only covers broken bones, trips to emergency room etc. Reversing that argument, I openly laughed at the store owner in my building who complains about his $120K out of pocket pre-obama care heart-attack.
In short, premiums are high because HC is inherently expensive. ObamaCare forces insurance companies to cover cost of expensive procedures and long-term care.
You totally missed the point. The point was that these idiots she manages thought they were voting to spend OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. Not their own. Classic liberal ignorance.
My oldest goes to the largest University in arguably one of the most conservative states in the union. She has encountered several very liberal professors.
She wanted some advice on how to interact. I told her that like one of her aunts and a grandmother, liberals are very passionate and not always rational. Play the game, voice your opinion but don't argue. Rally several students privately to help publicly share and support your position. Protect your grade from an angry professor
my insurance coverage is and has always been, just catastrophic coverage. This is what insurance should be. It shouldn't cover every little thing.
The cost of healthcare should have been what was addressed years ago, not the ever expanding distribution of wealth
The local care clinic charges $400 for treatment of the flu. Hospitals charge upwards of $12 for an aspirin and you aren't allowed to bring in your own bottle from cvs.
When my daughter had acl surgery, I had to insist on an itemized invoice. They thought I was crazy. Several items on the invoice were greatly inflated. My insurance company listed the highest amount that they were willing to cover for each thing.....suddenly, the medical facility was okay with the new, reduced costs.
criminal
The examples are endless. Obama and the dems blew it. and don't give me that crap about....well, it's a start
BS
Cliff, because you were covered, your insurer probably had a pre-existing contractual relationship (PPO or HMO) where the healthcare provider had already agreed to take the reduced payment.
You are right, it is criminal that HC providers can charge crazy rates and then give "deals" to the insured. That's part of the reason it makes sense to have everyone insured -- so the uninsured only get charged $80 for the flu treatment instead of $400, just like you.
Your story is an argument FOR universal coverage, not against.
The examples are endless. Obama and the dems blew it. and don't give me that crap about....well, it's a start
BS
Interesting how you think all the flaws with our HC system is caused by Democrats. It's as if Republicans are responsible for nothing. If Republicans aren't going to be responsible for anything, then why do people vote for them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ord27
The cost of healthcare should have been what was addressed years ago, not the ever expanding distribution of wealth
It was and republicans wanted no part of it.
Also the issue of HI and income inequity are related. When our govt decided that HI and employment should be integrally linked they set the stage for the problems we have now. When good jobs got sent overseas and the remaining jobs were too low end to support insuring the employee our HC system started it's downward spiral. Republicans have no answers and their constituents support that. Just like you indicated in your post.... it's not a republican problem.
My oldest goes to the largest University in arguably one of the most conservative states in the union. She has encountered several very liberal professors.
She wanted some advice on how to interact. I told her that like one of her aunts and a grandmother, liberals are very passionate and not always rational. Play the game, voice your opinion but don't argue. Rally several students privately to help publicly share and support your position. Protect your grade from an angry professor
she has listened well.....4.0 as a junior
Dad! My professor doesn't think like me! EHHHRMAGHERD!
Cliff -- like this thread, dontcha think it's good to be exposed to differing points of view? Even if you don't agree with them, it's good to understand them. And occaisionally we can all even learn something when we get out of our own echo chambers.
This is the most asinine statement I have ever read. I cannot think of one professor I ever had in college that taught "liberal viewpoints". As a matter of fact, one of the professors at my alma mater was/is the chairman of the county republican party.
Conservatives seem to believe that if people, such as myself, don't want their religious dogma shoved down my throat, or my children's throats, then we are intolerant. Also, their crusade to attack higher education seems that they want to keep people ignorant.
Anything other than towing the liberal party line is asinine to you. Crusade? That's laughable by itself. Exaggerate much? The truth is, liberals who claim to preach tolerance are anything but that themselves when it comes to opposing view points. They're tolerant of their own ideas alone.
Try telling that to an American 18-25 year old who has been fully indoctrinated by our liberal public school systems. They're all shallow mindedly trained to think that all conservatives are evil, homophobic, racist, greedy etc... There is no tolerance taught for anything other than liberal viewpoints. Ever... No common ground there to be had. Especially in colleges.
The irony in this is that I don't think conservatives are all that. They are mostly just shallow minded.
universal coverage scares me. The government isn't very good at running anything......anything
I disagree with your statement John. A good friend and I watched most of the healthcare procedure, and read just about everything back then. The dems didn't want repub intervention. They didn't want anything to get in the way of their dream. The republicans had no chance against the secretive agenda and political strong arming....especially when the repubs had a weak "leader"
we probably will never agree on that
yes, opposing views are good. They are only effective when there is an open discussion and everyone's points are heard. In the real world, this just doesn't happen much. Most liberals in this part of the country, that we encounter, don't want a discussion. When a point is won, there is no acknowledgement, just subject change, name calling, and anger
sad, but that's been our experience
I see no, or not much difference between a ****ty plan, and no plan. I don't agree that ,"at least it's a start", is a good plan
You totally missed the point. The point was that these idiots she manages thought they were voting to spend OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY. Not their own. Classic liberal ignorance.
What? Explain how anyone thought the ACA was to spend other people's money?
You'll never find out what "he does" because he's too afraid to list it in his profile. He'd rather just troll along like a keyboard cowboy and take pot shots, aiming for the low hanging fruit. Typical liberal.
You ever gonna explain that quote? Or just sit there and complain? And by saying I'm going for the low hanging fruit, are you saying that going after Cliff is the easy route out or something? Insulting his intelligence? Man you are a certain kind of something bud!
I spread the love plenty. Most of is wasted on government over spending
I also create jobs. Plenty of them.
what do you do? punch a time clock?
I never said that the poor don't deserve healthcare. The solution isn't to keep taking from small business owners like me.
I also never said that I don't want to pay any taxes....I just don't want to pay your share too
and yes, if I choose to go to a different hospital than the county one.....I should be able to
stop your dribble
Easy there. Never wanna throw comments about people's work around on an online forum board. Never know who you might be talking to.
And that is where the right and left disagrees. How are the poor going to get healthcare with how terribly setup it is? You brought it up yourself with the inflated costs. People simply can't afford it.
universal coverage scares me. The government isn't very good at running anything......anything
I disagree with your statement John. A good friend and I watched most of the healthcare procedure, and read just about everything back then. The dems didn't want repub intervention. They didn't want anything to get in the way of their dream. The republicans had no chance against the secretive agenda and political strong arming....especially when the repubs had a weak "leader"
we probably will never agree on that
yes, opposing views are good. They are only effective when there is an open discussion and everyone's points are heard. In the real world, this just doesn't happen much. Most liberals in this part of the country, that we encounter, don't want a discussion. When a point is won, there is no acknowledgement, just subject change, name calling, and anger
sad, but that's been our experience
I see no, or not much difference between a ****ty plan, and no plan. I don't agree that ,"at least it's a start", is a good plan
Actually, I think all of the name calling on this board has come from conservatives, and when a fact is brought up you guys dismiss it as impossible.
What? Explain how anyone thought the ACA was to spend other people's money?
They had no idea that voting for obama (and his plan) was gonna take any money out of their own pockets. They all assumed "the rich" would be the ones paying for it. Also, none of them realized that they as twenty somethings would be subsidizing older people's health care who use it more.
You ever gonna explain that quote? Or just sit there and complain? And by saying I'm going for the low hanging fruit, are you saying that going after Cliff is the easy route out or something? Insulting his intelligence? Man you are a certain kind of something bud!
I decided not to do your homework for you. Look it up yourself. There are TONS of sermons on that parable. Look for one by John MacArthur. If not, let it remain as something that's way over your head. And no. I never insulted Cliff. Nice try at sarcasm. Now go bang your head some more...
universal coverage scares me. The government isn't very good at running anything......anything
Guess we need a private military because our govt run one isn't very good, right?
When it comes to HC it seems that private industry isn't very good either. You were just telling us about how they would have liked to stick it to you with fraudulent charges. Trust me I know what you are saying about hospitals. I'm in dispute with them right now over an ER visit I had. They billed $20K (doesn't include doctors) before HI discount for less than 24 hours in the hospital. Turned out nothing was wrong with me and they didn't even address the issue I came in for. Talk about crazy sh*t. Every time they call me for payment I tell them the bill is in dispute, I'm willing to settle if someone will negotiate it with me, and if they don't like it then they can sell the debt for pennies on the dollar. They keep saying someone will call but they never do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ord27
I disagree with your statement John. A good friend and I watched most of the healthcare procedure, and read just about everything back then. The dems didn't want repub intervention. They didn't want anything to get in the way of their dream. The republicans had no chance against the secretive agenda and political strong arming....especially when the repubs had a weak "leader"
You say that, but after all these years the republicans have yet to craft anything that remotely looks like a replacement for the ACA. The fact that they repeatedly vote for repealing the ACA, yet have not created an alternative pretty much makes your claims moot.
This is an example of using your head to read between the lines instead of just following the party line of eating their BS. If republicans had a plan for HC then they would do what the democrats did... sell it to the people and try to get it enacted into law. Doing nothing and then whining that the other party is too strong is infantile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ord27
we probably will never agree on that
And you know my reasons why. I don't pay taxes for my representatives to sit on their thumbs and not solve the important issues of the day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ord27
Most liberals in this part of the country, that we encounter, don't want a discussion. When a point is won, there is no acknowledgement, just subject change, name calling, and anger
What's the point of a discussion? If I what to know what a conservative thinks, I can just turn on Fox News. When Fox says... "get on your toes", most of you guys start dancing. Want some ransom for your hostages now?
My oldest goes to the largest University in arguably one of the most conservative states in the union. She has encountered several very liberal professors.
She wanted some advice on how to interact. I told her that like one of her aunts and a grandmother, liberals are very passionate and not always rational. Play the game, voice your opinion but don't argue. Rally several students privately to help publicly share and support your position. Protect your grade from an angry professor
she has listened well.....4.0 as a junior
Good on your daughter. I've had three out of four in college and they all have had issues with liberal teachers/professors throughout their education. It's to the point of if they disagree politically in college, their grade is going down for sure. This has even happened in one of my oldest's classes at a so called "Christian college." "Play the game" is a great way to put it.
[QUOTE=shawndoggy;1941952]Dad! My professor doesn't think like me! EHHHRMAGHERD!
Cliff -- like this thread, dontcha think it's good to be exposed to differing points of view?
Not when your grade depends on you agreeing with them..... This thread on the other hand, is great because I get to laugh so hard at some of the posts from the other side.
I decided not to do your homework for you. Look it up yourself. There are TONS of sermons on that parable. Look for one by John MacArthur. If not, let it remain as something that's way over your head. And no. I never insulted Cliff. Nice try at sarcasm. Now go bang your head some more...
Again, all of the stuff on that quote I read was actually responded to negatively by Christians. So excuse me for the curiosity and the fact that you don't seem to be able to explain your own quote.
TheWakeIsReal
(doublemwa)Join Date: May 2016
08-09-2016, 9:54 AM
They had no idea that voting for obama (and his plan) was gonna take any money out of their own pockets. They all assumed "the rich" would be the ones paying for it. Also, none of them realized that they as twenty somethings would be subsidizing older people's health care who use it more.
That makes no sense. I think i'm going to have to go with: you're making that up. Or as Trump puts it: "A lot of people saying."
Go back and quote me on some name calling. I have not been apart of that in this entire thread. Interesting that you on the other hand are the first to start it.
They had no idea that voting for obama (and his plan) was gonna take any money out of their own pockets. They all assumed "the rich" would be the ones paying for it. Also, none of them realized that they as twenty somethings would be subsidizing older people's health care who use it more.
? You seem quite lost and just running around in circles at this point throwing statements out there with no factual backing.
to be clear, I am not touting the party line. I keep waiting for a true conservative to come along. He/She never does, or if they do, they get squashed in the social climate of today.
So, the reality seems to be to combat the liberal agenda, because the conservative messiah just isn't coming....
They had no idea that voting for obama (and his plan) was gonna take any money out of their own pockets. They all assumed "the rich" would be the ones paying for it. Also, none of them realized that they as twenty somethings would be subsidizing older people's health care who use it more.
So it was all fine and dandy with the govt subsidizing your HI. But then someone else needs a subsidy, it's "oh s*t I'll have none of that". Maybe if you were just paying for your HI all along this would have never happened. And when I say "you", I mean the public in general. I obviously have no idea under what conditions you bought HI. But the majority with HI were getting it socialized and subsidized by the govt before the ACA ever came along.
I throw you guys red meat and you continue to argue over a turd?
C'mon!
Not looking for meat. Looking for the truth. I know the truth as it relates to her, so...... To borrow from the Chapell Show playa haters in regards to Hillary, "What can I say about that suit that hasn't been said about Afgahnistan. Bombed out and depleted."
Not looking for meat. Looking for the truth. I know the truth as it relates to her, so...... To borrow from the Chapell Show playa haters in regards to Hillary, "What can I say about that suit that hasn't been said about Afgahnistan. Bombed out and depleted."
The Player Haters Ball was actually a pretty portrayal of the GOP convention
The opposing arguments for ObamaCare could be some of the most baseless in politics. Most right wingers don't even realize Massachusetts' state healthcare, AKA: RomneyCare, pre-dates and is is strikingly similar to ObamaCare
Hailed under a republican, rejected under a democrat.
I think most "right wingers" know this. This is an argument for states rights. If it works for the state then go for it. Not all states for the influx of cash to pay for this type of cost. BTW the Massachusett's house is solidly democrat. Romney just worked with them to get a deal done besides ACA is a wonderful corporate give away. Start moving the money from businesses having to pay for healthcare and move it to the individual. Perfect. Healthcare and retirement is pretty much an individual thing now. This won't bit us in the a$$ within a generation.
No doubt, it isn't perfect. But certainly a step in the right direction. My favorite was when Bernie was in the race promising free HC but starting at the lowest tax bracket would see an tax increase of 7%. All the conservatives lost their minds. Backing into some math, if you earn $20K a year and your taxes go up $45 a month, but your health insurance goes from $300 (single & no dependents) to $0.00! That is +$355 a month to your bottom line! How is that more expensive?
Unless you have HC through your work in which case a vast majority of middle class workers will see a massive tax increase.
Delta, regarding healthcare, what do you actually *want*?
I did not think it was a horrible issue until everyone made it a horrible issue. If I had to look at it from a selfish way, I want everyone to pay in. It will remove money from the economy at large. Then housing, cars and so on may be cheaper. It will make my dollar go further.
Take selfish out of it, there is no such thing as a free lunch. we know a few things:
1) Money into a system causes inflation.
2) It is not insurance, people want a service plan.
3) Those who are not insured are paying for those who are not because it is mandated that all people will be seen.
4) The government is not efficient
5) The so called European models also pay for the education of the doctors and nurses so that is a huge cost and allows them to price cap care
6) There has to be a consistent pool of money to pay for trained professionals regardless of work load. They have to be on staff.
It is not an easy answer.
To cheapen it the public has to accept changes. Youth sports needs to go bye, bye. Billions a year go into emergency care for youth sports. You get a life ending ailment after a certain age, it is too bad. There is no way to recoup a million dollars of funds from a 70 year old. Basic care is quick but elective or major surgeries would have to be slower depends on staffing levels. Emergency doctors need to be able to tell illegals and others that they can not see them from a tooth ache at the emergency room.
Not saying my initial thoughts are absolute, but it has to make people think of what we ask out of a system then don't want to pay for it. Right now we consider HC a right. It is not. It does not have a infinite budget so they can not have absolute coverage of doctors and facilities.
I did not think it was a horrible issue until everyone made it a horrible issue. If I had to look at it from a selfish way, I want everyone to pay in. It will remove money from the economy at large. Then housing, cars and so on may be cheaper. It will make my dollar go further.
Take selfish out of it, there is no such thing as a free lunch. we know a few things:
1) Money into a system causes inflation.
2) It is not insurance, people want a service plan.
3) Those who are not insured are paying for those who are not because it is mandated that all people will be seen.
4) The government is not efficient
5) The so called European models also pay for the education of the doctors and nurses so that is a huge cost and allows them to price cap care
6) There has to be a consistent pool of money to pay for trained professionals regardless of work load. They have to be on staff.
It is not an easy answer.
To cheapen it the public has to accept changes. Youth sports needs to go bye, bye. Billions a year go into emergency care for youth sports. You get a life ending ailment after a certain age, it is too bad. There is no way to recoup a million dollars of funds from a 70 year old. Basic care is quick but elective or major surgeries would have to be slower depends on staffing levels. Emergency doctors need to be able to tell illegals and others that they can not see them from a tooth ache at the emergency room.
Not saying my initial thoughts are absolute, but it has to make people think of what we ask out of a system then don't want to pay for it. Right now we consider HC a right. It is not. It does not have a infinite budget so they can not have absolute coverage of doctors and facilities.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying youth sports is driving up the cost of healthcare for all of us? I'm pretty sure the majority of anyone playing youth sports will fall under their parents HC plan. What does drive up the cost of an ER visit was the # of uninsured who used the ER as primary care.
"There is no way to recoup a million dollars of funds..." An inherent function of insurance is that no one policy is assumed to stand alone as profitable. IE some policies are going to be more expensive than others. Insurers were using pre-existing conditions and hidden language to cancel coverage to mitigate risk. Therefore, ACA and your increased premiums.
I don't think many people considers HC a right or expects it to be "free". I for one don't mind paying more in either taxes or premiums so that the elderly, terminally ill or less fortunate are covered.
Again, all of the stuff on that quote I read was actually responded to negatively by Christians.
How do you know they were Christians responding? Not every Christian understands every single context and meaning behind each verse.
So excuse me for the curiosity and the fact that you don't seem to be able to explain your own quote.
If I thought you were genuinely curious, I'd go out of my way to help you understand as best as I could.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying youth sports is driving up the cost of healthcare for all of us? I'm pretty sure the majority of anyone playing youth sports will fall under their parents HC plan. What does drive up the cost of an ER visit was the # of uninsured who used the ER as primary care.
"There is no way to recoup a million dollars of funds..." An inherent function of insurance is that no one policy is assumed to stand alone as profitable. IE some policies are going to be more expensive than others. Insurers were using pre-existing conditions and hidden language to cancel coverage to mitigate risk. Therefore, ACA and your increased premiums.
I don't think many people considers HC a right or expects it to be "free". I for one don't mind paying more in either taxes or premiums so that the elderly, terminally ill or less fortunate are covered.
Yes. Youth sports is driving up costs. I think this is the point everyone is missing. Using healthcare insurance drives up the cost for everyone period. If you are using it, everyone pays. It does not matter that their parents have coverage. The parents are not paying for the full cost of little Billy's ACL repair. It is the businesses that pay the big premiums for their employees that is paying for Billy's ACL repair (or ER visit). When you read the term "the cost is in the billions" that cost goes to all.
It is like saying we all get a car and we are all paying for it. If everyone wants a Yugo, the cost is cheaper to everyone. If everyone wants a Rolls then the cost is going to be more expensive. Pay to play.
ER visits are a scam cost anyway. That needs to be rolled back. My guess they are segregating costs to show loses.
delta I think you just advocated for death panels.
No, I advocated what people are asking for but are afraid to say it out loud. If you are saying you want to control costs, you can not have unlimited budget. One way you can do it is to have a very narrow scoped program with a limited number of people employed that handles this type of work load. The more people in the program, the worse the service because of demand. Either that or you socialize unlimited number of people for an unlimited costs.
Point is, people need to understand what they are asking for. If you say my grandma needs a million dollars worth of care then others will argue that Billy should not be playing football.
delta do you have any evidence for this youth sports hypothesis?
Personally I believe that the costs of treating long time bad health decisions like obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, etc. are far exceeding the cost of on occasional blown knee on the youth soccer field. But maybe you can bury me with evidence about that.
No, I advocated what people are asking for but are afraid to say it out loud. If you are saying you want to control costs, you can not have unlimited budget. One way you can do it is to have a very narrow scoped program with a limited number of people employed that handles this type of work load. The more people in the program, the worse the service because of demand. Either that or you socialize unlimited number of people for an unlimited costs.
Point is, people need to understand what they are asking for. If you say my grandma needs a million dollars worth of care then others will argue that Billy should not be playing football.
Dude I totally agree with you. If we are going to control costs we have to ration care, period.
delta do you have any evidence for this youth sports hypothesis?
Personally I believe that the costs of treating long time bad health decisions like obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, etc. are far exceeding the cost of on occasional blown knee on the youth soccer field. But maybe you can bury me with evidence about that.
There are all sorts of numbers. The numbers talk about the acute injuries. Never mind how many follow up knee replacements and so on later in life due to the initial injury. Again, just because you have insurance does not mean it is covered. It just means it was a socialized cost. Someone without insurance is still a socialized cost, it is the hospitals are allowed to rob you with a made up cost schedule.
More than 3.5 million children ages 14 and younger get hurt annually playing sports or participating in recreational activities.
Although death from a sports injury is rare, the leading cause of death from a sports-related injury is a brain injury.
Sports and recreational activities contribute to approximately 21 percent of all traumatic brain injuries among American children.
Almost 50 percent of head injuries sustained in sports or recreational activities occur during bicycling, skateboarding, or skating incidents.
More than 775,000 children, ages 14 and younger, are treated in hospital emergency rooms for sports-related injuries each year. Most of the injuries occurred as a result of falls, being struck by an object, collisions, and overexertion during unorganized or informal sports activities.
Sprains and strains, fractures, contusions, abrasions and concussions top the list of sports-related ER diagnoses for kids ages 6 to 19 — at a cost of more than $935 million each year, according to a report out Tuesday from the non-profit advocacy group Safe Kids Worldwide.
High school athletes account for an estimated 2 million injuries and 500,000 doctor visits and 30,000 hospitalizations each year.1
More than 3.5 million kids under age 14 receive medical treatment for sports injuries each year.1
Children ages 5 to 14 account for nearly 40 percent of all sports-related injuries treated in hospitals. On average the rate and severity of injury increases with a child's age.4
Yes. Youth sports is driving up costs. I think this is the point everyone is missing. Using healthcare insurance drives up the cost for everyone period. If you are using it, everyone pays. It does not matter that their parents have coverage. The parents are not paying for the full cost of little Billy's ACL repair. It is the businesses that pay the big premiums for their employees that is paying for Billy's ACL repair (or ER visit). When you read the term "the cost is in the billions" that cost goes to all.
It is like saying we all get a car and we are all paying for it. If everyone wants a Yugo, the cost is cheaper to everyone. If everyone wants a Rolls then the cost is going to be more expensive. Pay to play.
ER visits are a scam cost anyway. That needs to be rolled back. My guess they are segregating costs to show loses.
Typically, the more something is bought, the cheaper it gets. IE: the term Volume Discounts. But you're half right in that ER's are expensive to operate and due to the EMTALA act of 1986 in some cases ER's loose money. Like when someone comes in without any insurance to pay for emergency services. Therefore, given more people are now insured ER's are more profitable under ACA.
One reason that HC is expensive is that it is a capitalist market. Case in point is this *******:
and the costs of those injuries is what % of the cost of treating smoking-related illnesses?
Don't know and don't care. that is a whole other pot of cash. I detest smoking. It killed both my parents. One directly and the other indirectly.
All I am saying is people need to be careful what they ask for. Youth sports is a voluntary billion dollar expense. Smoking is a voluntary expense. Being skinny does not mean you are healthy so it is hard to pin fat vs skinny as an automatic or even voluntary.
At a certain point if it gets too much cost, people are going to start calling enough is enough on voluntary activities that cost.
and the costs of those injuries is what % of the cost of treating smoking-related illnesses?
It's minuscule. Delta has had some ridiculous arguments in the past, but this one takes the cake. As if the costs of Little Johnny's broken ankle on the Pee-wee football field compares to Sally who has to have a quadruple bypass because she loves all-you-can-eat buffets and likes to wash down her large pizza with a two liter of Mountain Dew. Mind-boggling.
Typically, the more something is bought, the cheaper it gets. IE: the term Volume Discounts. But you're half right in that ER's are expensive to operate and due to the EMTALA act of 1986 in some cases ER's loose money. Like when someone comes in without any insurance to pay for emergency services. Therefore, given more people are now insured ER's are more profitable under ACA.
One reason that HC is expensive is that it is a capitalist market. Case in point is this *******:
Not sure how a Trump article about the second amendment ties in........
That drug company guy is a POS.
healthcare is going to be a capitalistic market. That is why I tried to tell this group from the beginning that the ACA would not make it cheaper. I have yet to see money thrown into any market make a product cheaper. More money to capture, they more prices are raised to capture said money.
Products only get cheaper when there is a glut of suppliers/ supply. Not by a glut of money. Doctors and nurses have expenses, liability insurance and education to pay off. Doctors are going to maximize to get out of debt faster. They are paid in part due to rarity. Raise the price until a very few people can afford their service while maximizing throughput. Right now most insurance is paid for by businesses who then socialize cost of doing business in product prices.
It's minuscule. Delta has had some ridiculous arguments in the past, but this one takes the cake. As if the costs of Little Johnny's broken ankle on the Pee-wee football field compares to Sally who has to have a quadruple bypass because she loves all-you-can-eat buffets and likes to wash down her large pizza with a two liter of Mountain Dew. Mind-boggling.
Problem is Jeremy. It is still over a billion dollars a year for Johnny. It is a provable voluntary event. It also puts demand on taxes for all the fields, equipment and so on. Being fat is not automatically make someone unhealthy and it is not always diet that causes heart bypasses and so on. I know plenty of skinny people who are ill with heart issues. I know a guy who died at 50 of a heart attack while mountain biking and he was a stud. You can not legislate everything but if you are going to start swinging cost cutting axes, voluntary items would be the first to go.
Me, I love youth sports. I played everything. My daughters played a little. I only wanted them to play a little bit to see if they liked it and to learn a skill to be in tune with their body but I did not want them to have a weather telling shoulder either from over use.
Like I said, when push comes to shove, everything will be on the table. If you want to socialize costs, people are going to go after all low hanging fruit.
It's minuscule. Delta has had some ridiculous arguments in the past, but this one takes the cake. As if the costs of Little Johnny's broken ankle on the Pee-wee football field compares to Sally who has to have a quadruple bypass because she loves all-you-can-eat buffets and likes to wash down her large pizza with a two liter of Mountain Dew. Mind-boggling.
Alcohol, Obesity and Smoking Do Not Cost Health Care Systems Money
I think the conclusion that it does not cost to treat bad habits. Almost all people are treated for end of life issues. Alcohol, smoking and obesity tend to happen at a younger age but you still have the costs at some point. Interesting take on it.
This is the kind of thing that really gets my goat
I can't wait for the day that a legal resident sues and wins.....unless of course Obama and Clinton stack the supreme court in order for this kind of nonsense to flourish
things like this are why I say that the dems need fought every inch of the way....even to the point that nothing gets done
Alcohol, Obesity and Smoking Do Not Cost Health Care Systems Money
I think the conclusion that it does not cost to treat bad habits. Almost all people are treated for end of life issues. Alcohol, smoking and obesity tend to happen at a younger age but you still have the costs at some point. Interesting take on it.
Smokers and the obese cheaper to care for, study shows
Delta, did you read your links? The only reason "smokers and the obese are cheaper to care for" is because they typically die at a younger age. If you compare a 55 year old smoker to a nonsmoker, then the medical costs aren't even close. Smokers also add costs to employee medical plans: "and excess health care expenses cost $2,056 annually for every employee that smokes" (webmd). You seem to be advocating bad habits to lower the lifetime medical costs, of course, you have to hope that they die younger than their health-conscience counterparts.
Delta, did you read your links? The only reason "smokers and the obese are cheaper to care for" is because they typically die at a younger age. If you compare a 55 year old smoker to a nonsmoker, then the medical costs aren't even close. Smokers also add costs to employee medical plans: "and excess health care expenses cost $2,056 annually for every employee that smokes" (webmd). You seem to be advocating bad habits to lower the lifetime medical costs, of course, you have to hope that they die younger than their health-conscience counterparts.
Yes, I read it. Your total life lived is of no concern of the money handlers. I think what I am reading is stating that bad habits may actually be better for societies pocketbook. The argument was made that Joe smoker or Hilda the pizza eater cost skinny non smokers money. I am suggesting that there may be evidence that may be false.
According to related articles if you account for total pension costs savings by smokers dying early, it is a no brainer from a pure money aspect.
This is not about cheap for employers. This is about lifetime payout of socialized medical costs. I am just making arguments because it is fun for the most part. I don't have an answer.
Historically if you stay relatively healthy you will still go through some sort of end of life experience. You will go through a similar end of life experience even if you are fat or a smoker. I call that a wash. If a "healthy" person lives 10 years longer, who is going to pull more from the HC money? What treatment do smokers really go through over the years that cost an employer more? My guess it is only end of life costs. What I bet it is, they will go through an end life event while still employed vs when they are in retirement years thus it costs employers more. If it is retirement years, it is a government expense. Regardless if you are talking total HC costs, it is a hit to the total money no matter when it happens thus a wash.
So if you are talking total outgoing money and end of life is end of life (where the Germans budget around 3 or 4% income paid over your life for this), what is the real discussion? You are talking all the events before end of life. That is wounds, defects, hurt playing sports, body parts seize up, car wrecks, fevers, general illness and so on. Matter of fact studies suggest that having a desk job is worse than smoking when considering health related topics.
So if you put on your executive hat and are cutting costs, what items can you point to directly and say that right there is what costs us X amount of dollars if we stop doing that? Would those items be on the chopping block first?
This is the kind of thing that really gets my goat
I can't wait for the day that a legal resident sues and wins.....unless of course Obama and Clinton stack the supreme court in order for this kind of nonsense to flourish
things like this are why I say that the dems need fought every inch of the way....even to the point that nothing gets done
Alcohol, Obesity and Smoking Do Not Cost Health Care Systems Money
I know here smokers actually subsidize other healthcare uses because the tax on cancer sticks are so high that they actually kick more into the slush fund than they take out with healthcare costs.
Ho ho, I am really starting to come around. Trump suggests Clinton should be shot, hard to disagree.
I am just shaking my head. The chit that comes out of this guys mouth....
Really, spin this GOP....it's just a joke.
Just in the past week/10 days, hack our classified files, commit murder. Maybe I'm reading too much into his jokes. Even if I am, I can't believe foreign leaders will take the jokes as well.
To cheapen it the public has to accept changes. Youth sports needs to go bye, bye. Billions a year go into emergency care for youth sports. You get a life ending ailment after a certain age, it is too bad. There is no way to recoup a million dollars of funds from a 70 year old. Basic care is quick but elective or major surgeries would have to be slower depends on staffing levels. Emergency doctors need to be able to tell illegals and others that they can not see them from a tooth ache at the emergency room.
It that what the European model does... let old people die?
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltahoosier
Not saying my initial thoughts are absolute, but it has to make people think of what we ask out of a system then don't want to pay for it. Right now we consider HC a right. It is not. It does not have a infinite budget so they can not have absolute coverage of doctors and facilities.
I'm happy with the Universal HC model. And I'm OK if Johnny has to wait 8 months for his ACL replacement.
It that what the European model does... let old people die?
I'm happy with the Universal HC model. And I'm OK if Johnny has to wait 8 months for his ACL replacement.
Well our VA allows people to die. It is a similar model right? A fixed number of resources managed by the government. How do people feel about that model?
Linear Mode
