Obamacare

[Wneglia]

70% California Docs Say No

Well Doc, I think it's outrageous that Medicaid payments aren't competitive. On the other hand, listening to one from your article... “We need some recognition that we’re doing a service to the community. But we can’t do it for free. And we can’t do it at a loss. No other business would do that,” he said? But how many other businesses would like to operate under the terms a medical practice does? Captive market, no actual competition, charge whatever you like, get paid most of it by a third party.

Charge whatever you want and get paid most of it by a third party? What are you smokin'? Insurance companies pay doctors a negotiated percentage above Medicare. When Medicare rates drop, so do insurance companies.

No competition? What about Chiropracters, homeopaths, alternative medicine types, nurse practitioners, nurses at "minute clinics" at your local pharmacies, etc.

[Wneglia]

Vrede:

Doctors are only now finding out if they are in exchanges and how much (or how little) they will be paid. When all the facts are known, if reimbursement is like California, you will see little participation.
There is already talk of linking state medical licensure to participation in ACA. If that happens there will be a mass exodus of physicians.

[O Really]

Apparently some find a more complex pricing method...http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/0 ... rice-tags/

Chiropracters, homeopaths, yada....seriously? An oncology specialist is going to call those "competition"??

[Another]

Well, I can see some of you lefties don't care for satire, and one of you can't distinguish satire from analogy. Did you guys finish high school?

Lemme see now: with a website that barely works, what the high-IQ tech boys are describing as the worst launch in the history of the internet; millions of people being thrown off existing health insurance plans and being offered new plans that are three times more expensive; employers dropping coverage and telling their employees to go to the exchanges; or reducing full-time labor to part-time or hiring only part-time workers to get under the Obamacare limit or not hiring at all; all this in an economy still struggling everywhere except Wall Street - whatever the lies about an unemployment rate of 7%; doctors either taking early retirement (like my family's personal physician back home) or threatening to quit the profession. A president who says "he's sorry" and says people can keep their existing plans even though the plans have been canceled and there's no procedure for reinstating them: Obama shows his cluelessness about how the insurance industry works, probably about how any business works since like most politicians he's never spent a day in his life at a real job.

Does that just about cover it?

Six months ago if you supported Obamacare, I'd've said you might be well intentioned but naive, because the system does need to be fixed and nobody says otherwise. Just not by the federal government which can only do two things efficiently: spend money and start wars.

Today in light of all these facts, if you still support Obamacare you just sound silly. I'm posting from outside the U.S. Out here, for those who know about it, Obama and his centralized health plan are jokes.

<sarcasm>Yeah, yeah, I got it from a "rightwingnut" website.</sarcasm>

[Wneglia]

Apparently some find a more complex pricing method...http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2013/05/0 ... rice-tags/

Chiropracters, homeopaths, yada....seriously? An oncology specialist is going to call those "competition"??

From your article:
"Another example in the local data is heart failure treatment costs. At Methodist, the charge is $13,205. North Memorial charges $35,557, and the University of Minnesota Fairview Hospital charges $60,611.
The government sees through this. They pay more or less the same for the same procedure. Private patients are likely to be charged the higher number,” Feldman said.
Private insurers also negotiate discounted rates from the sticker price."

The point is that sticker prices don't mean squat. Reimbursement is fixed by the government and insurers.

You are right that oncologists don't have competition from the yahoos I mentioned, but primary care physicians (who are becoming a dying breed) are. There are some physicians that make little more than a schoolteacher on an hourly basis when years of training, loans, hours worked, retirement benefits, etc. are factored in. LINK

[Ombudsman]

Well, I can see some of you lefties don't care for satire, and one of you can't distinguish satire from analogy. Did you guys finish high school?

I love satire but it's only effective when the analogy is accurate. Doesn't sound like you actually understand what satire is. The ACA hasn't thrown anyone off of their insurance plans. Insurers have dropped them. Thats gone on for years. It's nothing new. The economy is not still struggling everywhere but Wallstreet. We've had 44 straight months of private sector job growth. The housing market has rebounded and yes the Dow has doubled since Bush's departure. You gotta get your head out Limbaugh's ass if you really want to understand what's going on in the nation.

[Another]

I don't listen to Limbaugh. I do pay attention to alternative media.

Insurers dropped plans like flies because they don't comply with Obamacare, dummy. Yes, folks have been dropped before, but not at the present rate which is unprecedented. A bit reality-challenged, aren't you?

I suppose the pathetic growth you've seen counts in the stats, however. Good for quick-and-dirty replies that don't really say anything. Wall Street is clearly in a bubble caused by QE, the biggest in history. (You do know what 'QE' stands for, right?)

Get your head out of the asses of corporate media empires (like CNN).

I did forget to ask something earlier: when the founding fathers put that "promote the general welfare" clause in the preamble, do you lefties really think they were justifying the 20th c. welfare state?

[Ombudsman]

QE huh? Isn't that what you wing nuts like to refer to as printing money, even though it has nothing to do with that? So you're not a Limbaugh fan but you like to use one of his most oft quoted bulls shit arguments. You "another" of Solar's boys or can you think for yourself?

[Another]

QE = Quantitative Easing, and yes it does.

I have no idea what arguments Limbaugh uses.

Who is Solar? Or maybe the right question is, What the hell are you smoking?

[Ombudsman]

QE = Quantitative Easing, and yes it does.

Yes I know what it means and I know that wing nuts think it has to do with printing more money, because Rush popularized that argument. You're spouting Limbaughisms without even realizing it.

[bannination]

Solar is the nursemaid censor/owner of the Conservative Political Forum that some of our cons ran away to when they couldn't handle accuracy and accountability.

Or free speech.... apparently they felt it was ok to call people names.... but no... don't you dare say anything about them.

[Crock Hunter]

Solar is the nursemaid censor/owner of the Conservative Political Forum that some of our cons ran away to when they couldn't handle accuracy and accountability.

Or free speech.... apparently they felt it was ok to call people names.... but no... don't you dare say anything about them.

How true.. .I spent quite a few weeks on Solar's WingNut Preserve (still post there) and on LibertyNewsForum.. (the forum that booted Solar for being too idiotic/radical/conspiratorial/nuts.. .) .. and you are quite correct.. The far-righties are protected by despotic moderators from anything that remotely resembles reality.. .. I saw liberal posters banned because they were posting too many links to articles or research that backed up their arguments..

WingNuts see virtue in being willfully ignorant and are deliriously happy to be so..

[Wneglia]

...No competition? What about...nurse practitioners, nurses...

...You are right that oncologists don't have competition from the yahoos I mentioned...

Have you told the nurse practitioners (if you have any) and nurses at your practice that they are "yahoos"? What was the response?

Poor choice of words on my part. We have 11 nurse practitoners, and most if not all are excellent and a great asset to our practice.

[O Really]

You are right that oncologists don't have competition from the yahoos I mentioned, but primary care physicians (who are becoming a dying breed) are. There are some physicians that make little more than a schoolteacher on an hourly basis when years of training, loans, hours worked, retirement benefits, etc. are factored in. LINK

And yet, people keep on entering the field. Actually, if you exchange "residency" for "first year associate" you pretty much describe the path to law partnership, too. And there are a lot of people doing online what they used to have to pay general practice lawyers for. But the article comparing the bottom line financial condition of teachers and doctors was interesting. I would have liked for him to include, however, the percentage of teachers who belong to country clubs, have boats, vacation homes, and live in 3/4mil+ homes with the percentage of doctors who do.

I'm not one to say that doctors get paid too much for what they do. I'm sure if I or a family member were one of your patients we'd gladly find you are more than worth it. But how would we know, other than that we hopefully recovered? There isn't any easy access to how a doctor's fees are calculated, or on what they are based. There isn't any easy access to comparative figures, say comparing the fees you charge for a given procedure to others equally qualified. Right-wingers like to talk about people becoming "better healthcare consumers" and "taking charge of their (payments)" but for the more expensive stuff, the data simply isn't there in a usable form. Plus, even if the dollar data is there, consumers don't generally have enough knowledge of their own condition to make informed selections. (side story - back when HMO's were getting big, one complaint participants had was they didn't want to have to use a doctor on the list - they wanted to pick their own. Then one extensive survey was done on how participants select their doctors - 1. Friend or family member goes to him/her; 2. yellow pages; 3. distance from home; 4. referral from other physician... I don't remember all the others, but it was a long way down the list before you got to anything remotely resembling a researched and informed selection.)

[Wneglia]

More Unintended Consequences

[O Really]

More Unintended Consequences

Background of the story from a more reliable source... https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.NSF/lnx/0302101260

I seriously doubt there's going to be thousands of fire stations go out of business

[Another]

Yes I know what it means and I know that wing nuts think it has to do with printing more money, because Rush popularized that argument. You're spouting Limbaughisms without even realizing it.

Actually my source was Ben Bernanke -- the mostly unknown Ben Bernanke of maybe ten years ago who spoke openly of that "wonderful" process of printing money. That was before he got his hands on that power, and lied openly on a 60 Minutes interview early last year, denying that the Federal Reserve created money out of nothing. If that's what Rush Limbaugh says, then he's right. A statement doesn't become false because Rush Limbaugh says it. I'm sure he sometimes says this time of the year, "Damn it's cold!" Is he right or did the weather just get warm because Rush said it's cold?

[Another]

I don't support the ACA. I accept it as an inadequate compromise - thanks to Dem and GOP cons - that is marginally superior to the status quo. I hear your dogma about government but the fact is that every other developed democracy has chosen single payer - some socialized, most not - and gets comparable outcomes for 1/2 to 2/3 the per capita cost. Of course, unless your "outside the U.S." is not developed or not a democracy you already know this.

Yes, of course. Where I'm at is closer to a free market. It works brilliantly, a seamless system connecting health care with insurance at per capita cost at least as good if not better than those figures. But if single payer is what you want, then promote it. Educate people about what you think its strengths are, if you think it's better than Obamacare (that wouldn't be saying a whole lot, of course). Then put it on the next ballet and let the public vote. That's what democracy is about, right?

[Another]

Solar is the nursemaid censor/owner of the Conservative Political Forum that some of our cons ran away to when they couldn't handle accuracy and accountability.

If you say so.

...I did forget to ask something earlier: when the founding fathers put that "promote the general welfare" clause in the preamble, do you lefties really think they were justifying the 20th c. welfare state?

They were wisely leaving it to future governments to determine what promotes the general welfare and act accordingly.

They placed limits on what future governments could do. It's called the Bill of Rights, admittedly mostly gutted, but without it you might as well not have a Constitution. I really do sometimes think just scrapping that document would be the honest thing to do, although obviously I don't expect that.

Do you cons really think they were justifying 21st c. corporate welfare and the military-industrial complex that y'all love with other clauses?

Where did I say I supported corporate welfare or the military-industrial complex? I'm not sure I am a "con" but if anybody labels me it should be me.

[Ombudsman]

Yes I know what it means and I know that wing nuts think it has to do with printing more money, because Rush popularized that argument. You're spouting Limbaughisms without even realizing it.

Actually my source was Ben Bernanke -- the mostly unknown Ben Bernanke of maybe ten years ago who spoke openly of that "wonderful" process of printing money. That was before he got his hands on that power, and lied openly on a 60 Minutes interview early last year, denying that the Federal Reserve created money out of nothing. If that's what Rush Limbaugh says, then he's right. A statement doesn't become false because Rush Limbaugh says it. I'm sure he sometimes says this time of the year, "Damn it's cold!" Is he right or did the weather just get warm because Rush said it's cold?

Just because you claim he lied doesn't mean he lied. It's just further proof you don't understand what quantitative easing is. There is no "printing of money" involved. Just because some wing nut gives you a lame ass talking point, doesn't mean it's true. You can click your heels together three times and say "printing money" over and over and it still isn't what QE is.