Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court The Great ObamaCare Debate, Part 237: Back to Court

10-31-2017 , 01:54 PM
I meant Saudi Arabia in terms of no one wants to work for normal wags. I'm sure the Bangladeshis would do just fine. They all speak English from birth practically, and you could probably get a bunch of doctors and lawyers for what Nordstroms pays + an H1B.
10-31-2017 , 01:58 PM
One of our biggest issues here is housing is stupid expensive (and has been forever, and I don't know why) - not in comparison to SF/LA/NY, but way higher than Vegas, for example - so jobs that look like they pay pretty well don't look so good in comparison.

/end derail

MM MD
11-01-2017 , 11:12 AM


I've seen Tom Cotton and now Rand Paul push for this. Isn't this just a redux of what they tried earlier? The whole point of "healthcare reform" was to cut all that spending to open up tax cuts for billionaires, this doesn't seem any different. The lie is the same as well. The savings from the cutting the individual mandate is saved by not spending as much on healthcare for people. In other words Republicans want to chunk some people off of insurance, take that money that would have been spend on them, and supposedly give it to the middle class (but come on we know it's going to billionaires)
11-01-2017 , 07:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl


I've seen Tom Cotton and now Rand Paul push for this. Isn't this just a redux of what they tried earlier? The whole point of "healthcare reform" was to cut all that spending to open up tax cuts for billionaires, this doesn't seem any different. The lie is the same as well. The savings from the cutting the individual mandate is saved by not spending as much on healthcare for people. In other words Republicans want to chunk some people off of insurance, take that money that would have been spend on them, and supposedly give it to the middle class (but come on we know it's going to billionaires)
Repealing only the individual mandate actually increases government spending because healthy people aren't compelled to purchase while sick people will. Because of this, prices of plans will have to go up which means those on subsidies get a larger subsidy since their spending is capped.

The only way to save money with Obamacare is to repeal the Medicaid expansion or remove the subsidies.
11-02-2017 , 01:03 PM
Anyone know where I can find up to date stats on the rise of premiums after Trump cut the subsidies? Or is it still too early? Hearing lots of personal stories about peoples premiums skyrocketing but can't find any stats.
11-02-2017 , 01:05 PM
MM MD tilts me.
11-02-2017 , 01:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by OmgGlutten!
MM MD tilts me.
His refusal to change it is even worse.
11-02-2017 , 02:25 PM
He gave me advice on my cut hand one time. He gets a lifetime pass imo.
11-02-2017 , 05:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by StimAbuser
Anyone know where I can find up to date stats on the rise of premiums after Trump cut the subsidies? Or is it still too early? Hearing lots of personal stories about peoples premiums skyrocketing but can't find any stats.
maybe this can help

11-04-2017 , 08:14 PM
11-07-2017 , 11:28 AM
Quote:
Single payer, like a cup of coffee on your red-eye, is free at the point of consumption.

And though you may have already paid into the system, like property taxes pay into local elementary schools, the system is free when you actually use it. No one is checking your credit as you drop your kids off in the morning.

Psychologically, therefore, you experience it as free, like taking a book out of your local library. A service is provided to you and then you don’t use your own money to pay for it.

I actually learned this insight from my father, a life-long Republican, who recently turned 65 and switched to Medicare. Thinking I would catch him in a fit of cognitive dissonance, I asked him how he liked relying on a government program and he said, “It’s great,” before adding: “It’s free!”

That is when I, the educated adult, the man of letters with a master’s degree in public policy, the informed voter with political opinions about the moral uses of state resources, replied that, in fact, Medicare is not really free because he has spent a lifetime paying taxes and the funds for Medicare come out of the pool of revenue the government has collected from tax payers just like him, and he looked at me like I had three eyes and was visiting him from a planet that didn’t understand math, but somehow built spaceships.

“It’s free, now, Michael,” he reiterated. “For me.”

It’s free now. For me. Your Republican voting base in action.
http://peoplespolicyproject.org/2017...-single-payer/
11-07-2017 , 11:34 AM
Quote:
On Tuesday morning, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) unveiled new criteria for evaluating pitches from states to tweak their Medicaid programs, a significant departure from the Obama administration’s approach to such requests.

Whereas in the past states had to prove that proposed changes would “increase and strengthen” health coverage of their low-income population, that requirement is gone, replaced with language that welcomes proposals for work requirements, drug tests and other hurdles that experts predict would reduce the Medicaid rolls by hundreds of thousands of people.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/medi...-verma-cms-hhs

Ending Medicaid as we know it.
11-07-2017 , 08:24 PM
Got a sweet $485 bill from an UrgentCare trip 4 months ago for the minor cut/antibiotics prescription/band-aid they provided...and that was with a Silver Plan
11-07-2017 , 10:20 PM
I feel like this is important

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf


The future is single payer, my friends.
11-07-2017 , 11:01 PM
From what I could tell, Northam was in favor of increasing Medicaid/Obamacare - didn't see anything from him about single payer. The GOP guy, it goes without saying, sucked beyond belief on healthcare.

MM MD
11-08-2017 , 05:47 PM
I have an HSA question. If I sign up for an HSA right now and start putting money into it, can I use that money to pay for older medical bills? ie, bills that I am already on a payment plan for.
11-08-2017 , 07:26 PM
you may not (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i8889.pdf) unless you want to pay a penalty
11-08-2017 , 09:25 PM
ty carrot
11-09-2017 , 01:16 AM
Immigration is a dire concern for Virginian repubicans.
11-10-2017 , 05:51 PM
The problem with single payer is we'll have rationing
Quote:
In an effort to curb unnecessary and costly ER visits, the Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurer has told customers in a few U.S. states to go to the hospital only in a real emergency such as a heart attack, stroke and major bleeding — or they could wind up footing the bill.

Anthem, the nation’s second-largest insurer, wants patients to consider alternatives like drugstore clinics, nurse advice hotlines or telemedicine. Insurers for years have been raising ER co-payments to try to deter unnecessary — and expensive — visits, and Anthem’s policy marks another round in this long-standing fight.

Even doctors agree the ER — an important revenue source for hospitals — isn’t the best option for minor complaints like sinus infections, rashes or ankle sprains. They say it’s better in those cases to see a family doctor who knows a person’s medical history.

But some also worry that Anthem’s clampdown will scare patients away from the ER in an actual emergency, especially in cases where major problems may not seem serious at first.
https://apnews.com/57387afda51e40e5a...stion-ER-visit
11-10-2017 , 10:25 PM
I find it pretty hard to believe that there's lots of people with insurance who are going to the ER with what they believe to be minor ailments. I can't imagine many more miserable places. And if it is happening, I wonder how much of it is due to people not able to miss work so they did up going to the ER in the evening when doctors offices are typically closed.
11-11-2017 , 03:17 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vaya
I find it pretty hard to believe that there's lots of people with insurance who are going to the ER with what they believe to be minor ailments. I can't imagine many more miserable places. And if it is happening, I wonder how much of it is due to people not able to miss work so they did up going to the ER in the evening when doctors offices are typically closed.
More common than you would think. There was a good presentation at our national meeting last year by an economist from an Ivy league school who pointed out that most insured people are acting totally rationally by going to an ER for care. If you are lucky enough to have insurance and wake up with a sore throat and call your primary providers office you'll likely get an appointment in 5 days or so. If you have any "real" problem like chest or abdominal pain, your primary is going to tell you to go straight to the ER anyway.

Or let's say you wake up with a fever of 101 and are coughing up green crud, and feel short of breath. You call your doc, and there (by a miracle) is an appointment at 10am with a provider. You show up, get examined, and get sent across the street for a blood draw and then next door for a chest x-ray. (Of course, if you look REALLY sick you get sent to the ER immediately). Then you either wander back to the office and wait for the results to be sent to your doc, or go home and wait for a phone call. If it turns out you have pneumonia, you then either get sent to the ER, or go to a pharmacy to pick up your prescriptions. So you've shot the whole day.

Or you go to the ER in the first place - we average about 90 minute waits for walkins (but the trige nurse can draw blood and order a cxr by protocol, so they're done before you are bedded - if you look REALLY sick, you come right back), once you're back, it's about another 60- 90 minutes to be seen by a boarded MD, get your x-ray and lab results, and a decision. If you're OK for outpatient treatment, we send your prescription by computer to your pharmacy. Pick them up on the way home, or if you're really sick your IV antibiotics are on board within 30 minutes of arrival (hopefully, but it's a standard we're pretty good at meeting.)

The economist had numbers that suggested from purely a financial view, most people with insurance with an acute medical condition are WELL ahead of the game by just going to the ER in the first place. Note - this obviously doesn't apply to Cook County or LA county - for a whole bunch of reasons.

MM MD

Last edited by hobbes9324; 11-11-2017 at 03:41 AM.
11-11-2017 , 11:55 AM
Ive been to the er twice in the last 10 or so years. once I broke my finger. was mangled pretty bad and I went the next day. I guess I could have made an appointment and waited a few days or a week, but it hurt pretty bad and I wanted some pills and a splint. proly should have gone to the urgent care. ended up having surgery 2 weeks later after seeing a specialist. was only at the hospital for like 2.5 hrs.

other time was I got a nasty infection in my foot and didnt take good care of it and it lingered for like a month. started small and then got bigger. it seemed to be spreading and the bone or muscle bc it felt like a sprained ankle. they gave me an ultrasound to make sure it wasnt in the bone. proly should have gone to urgent care but I dunno, the ultrasound was likely necessary. was at the hospital for over 7 hrs when I demanded my antibiotic script and pulled the IV out of my arm getting blood everywhere lol.

so ya, at this point I will do anything to avoid the er. its utterly absurd how long everything takes.
11-12-2017 , 06:39 PM
You should prob go to the ER more, not less.
11-13-2017 , 01:26 AM
Strong work Victor-ripping the IV antibiotics out for the win!

      
m