patrick.net

Tenouncetrout says

Only to impose hardship on every small business owner, middle class worker and rich person.

I think we all lose with this bill. Oh the insurance scumbags might make a little more money for a while and a few more people might get to live off someone else's dollar for a while, but in the end, the federal bureaucracy will have more control over medicine. We are on a march toward complete government control of the basic human needs. We might as well let the feds have control of food production, housing, employment etc.. and make our descent in to full Central planning and socialism complete.

AdHominem says

We might as well let the feds have control of food production, housing, employment etc.. and make our descent in to full Central planning and socialism complete.

So, in your mind it's impossible to have a single payer health care system without descending entirely into socialism? So, how does every other civilized country pull it off? Are they all socialists?

ZippyDDoodah says

So govt programs which have been notoriously inefficient and wasteful suddenly become the model of efficiency when it comes to healthcare?? Actually, administrative costs average 12% for private industry insurance providers, not 25% as claimed. And there are sleight-of-hand statistical reasons for the reported differences in adminstrative costs between medicare and private providers, none of which have anything to do with government “efficiency”. Since medicare focuses on the elderly and medical treatment costs for the elderly are on average far, far higher than the non-elderly, the higher spending artificially skews the Medicare administrative cost average downward. If you went by a more honest per-patient administrative cost, Medicare administrative costs jump to a massive 25%, not 3%. Oh, and did anyone mention the matter of Medicare keeping its future obligations off the books? No?

No, I agree government programs are far from a model of efficiency. Private health insurance isn't either. Future obligations have no bearing on administrative costs by the way, why bring it up? Yes the numbers can be read different ways. I've read the Heritage Foundation (far from an objective organization) article before and found it to be very light on supporting facts and methodology. There is a lot of juggling of definitions to come up the Books's numbers also. For example the 12% number only applies to large insurers covering large companies. Individual policy coverage is more like 30%. Yes medicare pays larger bills, but these kinds of treatments create a literal blizzard of claims from dozens of sources with hundreds of separate items to be paid, NOT a single big bill so this is a bogus argument. You screwed up on the 25% vs 3%, the article claims medicare is 25% higher not 25%.

Anyway my point was that if you wanted to pick an example of government inefficiency there are lots better choices than Medicare, which does a decent job. Adequately fund fraud prevention efforts and you could probably move that up to pretty good job.

tatupu70 says

So, how does every other civilized country pull it off? Are they all socialists?

LOL, AdHom doesn't want civilization, he wants the libertarian minarchy, ie how things were around 2000BC, but with guns.

Troy says

tatupu70 says

So, how does every other civilized country pull it off? Are they all socialists?

LOL, AdHom doesn’t want civilization, he wants the libertarian minarchy, ie how things were around 2000BC, but with guns.

actually not at all. And you are the first people who should be disarmed.

AdHominem says

actually not at all

So, you've realized that it is possible to have a single payer system in a capitalist system?

staynumz says

Only a step? Why didnt you guys get the whole thing done?

Because corporate interests have enough Republicans on the payroll to make sure they railroad any changes that might adversely affect them...

staynumz says

Why didnt you guys get the whole thing done?

The House version is pretty good, but the Senate, for numerous rather dubious Constitutional and historical reasons, gives dickholes like Lieberman disproportionate sway in the legislative process, and in our bicameral system both houses have to reach agreement before the bill proceeds to the executive for approval.

It doesn't help matters that 30% of this country are outright anti-gummint retards. And another 30% is de-facto helpless (ie with zero discretionary income) with little political power or organization. Plus one out of six who are elderly and basically have Got Theirs already and are resistant to change. Plus the 10-20% who are wealthy enough to not have to worry about access to the medical system.

That leaves ~10% of the population that have their heads on straight and are reform's primary beneficiaries. Not much of a popular constituency!

tatupu70 says

staynumz says

Only a step? Why didnt you guys get the whole thing done?

Because corporate interests have enough Republicans on the payroll to make sure they railroad any changes that might adversely affect them…

You can't possibly think that the Dem's are immune to this, do you?

The lobbyists pay the out-of-power party to subtract actual beneficiary regulations from a bill, while using the in-power party to get government mandated oligopoly powers and create extra barriers to entry for future competitors (i.e. small businesses).

The insurance companies' stocks all popped after this bill was passed. Seems to me that whatever the Dems are doing, it is great for big business at the direct cost of the taxpayer.

Tat and all dem supporters, I find your mindset to be DANGEROUS. This time, YOU ARE THE ENABLERS. The looting of the US taxpayer/economy has increased many fold over the last years, and will continue to get worse as long as dem supporters allow it. The Republitards definitely started this job, but the dems will be in power when the death knell sounds.

tatupu70 says

staynumz says

Only a step? Why didnt you guys get the whole thing done?

Because corporate interests have enough Republicans on the payroll to make sure they railroad any changes that might adversely affect them…

So you are freaking smart enough to realize the dilemma that presented.
Now pray tell, why did the Democrats fall into the Republicans clever little trap?

So you do admit that this batch of Democrats were ill equipped to toy with the forces they screwed up beyond FUBAR.

CBOEtrader says

tatupu70 says

staynumz says

Only a step? Why didnt you guys get the whole thing done?

Because corporate interests have enough Republicans on the payroll to make sure they railroad any changes that might adversely affect them…

You can’t possibly think that the Dem’s are immune to this, do you?
The lobbyists pay the out-of-power party to subtract actual beneficiary regulations from a bill, while using the in-power party to get government mandated oligopoly powers and create extra barriers to entry for future competitors (i.e. small businesses).
The insurance companies’ stocks all popped after this bill was passed. Seems to me that whatever the Dems are doing, it is great for big business at the direct cost of the taxpayer.
Tat and all dem supporters, I find your mindset to be DANGEROUS. This time, YOU ARE THE ENABLERS. The looting of the US taxpayer/economy has increased many fold over the last years, and will continue to get worse as long as dem supporters allow it. The Republitards definitely started this job, but the dems will be in power when the death knell sounds.

Yeah, unless I am mistaken it was 100% Democrats and 0% Republicans who voted to pass this bill (at least in the Senate).

Insurance companies know what Americans don't want to admit. You get what you pay for. Insurance lobby bought and paid for a bunch of congressmen and women in BOTH parties. And they got what they paid for, a bill that will help them and almost no one else.

Howard Dean summed it up very well: " This is going to benefit the insurance companies and not much more. We should kill this bill and start over." The government always does a great job running things. Obama admitted Medicare & Medicade have over $500 BILLIION per year in fraud .... uhhhh , and what exactly did the government ever do to stop that much fraud?

RayAmerica says

The government always does a great job running things. Obama admitted Medicare & Medicade have over $500 BILLIION per year in fraud …. uhhhh , and what exactly did the government ever do to stop that much fraud?

You need to check your figures there Ray. Your decimal point is off by one place.. And Obama just signed an executive order to fight Medicare fraud--that's what our Government is doing..

http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/content/FIN-242319/Obama-Plans-to-Sign-Executive-Order-to-Target-Medicare-Waste-Fraud.html

RayAmerica says

Obama admitted Medicare & Medicade have over $500 BILLIION per year in fraud

do you read what you type? $500B is just about their entire annual budget to the first approximation.

this batch of Democrats were ill equipped to toy with the forces they screwed up beyond FUBAR

The government always does a great job running things

we get the government we deserve. Maybe if the Republicans and teabaggers weren't so committed to obstructionism we'd have a better program.

and the Independents aye?

you know there's a word for the government you would like.

and if this Turd bill was so greatly crafted by the Republicans, then why didn't one single Republican vote for it, and why did so many Democrats vote for it?

Geesh you guys are denser than a mudderfugger.

If I have a medical emergency and have to go to the emergency room, will this bill benefit me?

Troy .... Medicare/Medicade annual budget is over $800 Billion. And yes, I do READ what I post.

As for you, do some research before flying off the handle ....

Why do Democrats support $500 billion in Medicare Waste/Fraud/Abuse?
MSNBC's First Read wonders why, if the President can so easily identify over $500 billion in Medicare waste, he hasn't done anything?:

Speaking of health care, how has Obama gone from touting $300 billion in Medicare waste/fraud/abuse savings in June as part of his plan to pay for health care to now claiming the White House has found $500-$600 billion in these savings. The fact is the president still hasn't release a detailed plan in general, let alone gotten into the "how to pay for" weeds when it comes to exactly how they found yet another $200 billion in cuts. This actually gets at the nut of the president's potential credibility problem: If there is so much money in waste/fraud/abuse in the Medicare system, then why do we continue to let it happen? Why are we waiting so long to deal with it? The average cynical voter is thinking, “Well, the president may be well meaning, but the bureaucracy that is the American government let this waste/fraud/abuse happen once, who is to say they won't let it happen again?”

RayAmerica says

Why do Democrats support $500 billion in Medicare Waste/Fraud/Abuse?
MSNBC’s First Read wonders why, if the President can so easily identify over $500 billion in Medicare waste, he hasn’t done anything?:

Ray-- could you link yto that article? Here's the only one I could find there

Law enforcement officials said it's just one of the many widespread, organized and lucrative schemes to bilk Medicare out of an estimated $60 billion dollars a year

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22184921/

You're off by an order of magnitude...

Tenouncetrout says

then why didn’t one single Republican vote for it, and why did so many Democrats vote for it?

The situation is a bit more complex than this. The Republicans are going to run against this in November. Democratic Senators at all vulnerable needed a watered-down bill that didn't completely alienate the two-thirds of this country who are total fuck-heads.

That and what many Dems are today would really be somewhat conservative, Eisenhower Republicans of 50 years ago.

None of you have even read the bills in congress or the house, more speculation on what it will and will not do.

RayAmerica says

If there is so much money in waste/fraud/abuse in the Medicare system, then why do we continue to let it happen? Why are we waiting so long to deal with it?

Common Scams:
Equipment companies: they get a list of Medicare recipients (or cold call people) and send them equipment they didn't order. It's sent in the mail, can't reasonably be returned, and the companies change their addresses frequently so they're hard to catch.

Diabetic supplies - commercials like Wilford Brimley's classic offer "free" supplies, mail them to the patient and charge Medicare the max amount. They are on an automatic system where the supplies are sent every month, whether the patient needs them or not. IMHO supplies should be obtained from the local pharmacy so that the patient's supplies & meds are monitored.

Skilled Nursing Facilities, Therapy providers, home health companies charging for patients who probably don't need the care. Notes are "fudged" and/or doctored to make patients look sicker than they are.

Medical care provided that the patient doesn't need - extra tests, labs, treatments, etc.

Hospices signing on anyone they can, rather than discharging the patient if he/she doesn't appear to get better they keep them on service for several months. One nationwide hospice paid millions in fines for this practice, as well as refusing to allow patients to transfer to other hospices and refusing to allow them to "fire" the hospice.

The problem is that there are millions of providers and audits are conducted on a percentage basis. As quickly as one company is caught, others spring up. With the recession, there are cutbacks in the state-run programs the provide oversight. These providers give others a bad reputation, and also take advantage of seniors who don't understand the system.

Nomograph says

The purpose of Medicare is to provide medical care to elderly recipients,

I thought the purpose was to buy votes with other peoples money.