Free healthcare for all...

[Doc]

oh boy, indeed. your argument and calculus rests on the assumption that the us is soon going to a single payor system. even the most ardent supporter of a canadian styled system doesn't believe this. it will be a long time coming if it ever comes. and yes, then, malpractice reform will be an absolute economic necessity.....and would be very desirable, right now, as it is.

What do you consider a "long time?" I see it coming within the next decade, as Obamacare destroys the health insurance industry, along with the country. As you admitted, tort reform is needed now, but wasn't included (hmmmm, I wonder why?). Neither was any other real way of reducing costs, other than squeezing providers, which as I said won't save much and will have unintended consequences of further reducing the supply of/qualified providers.

[birdog1960]

What do you consider a "long time?" I see it coming within the next decade, as Obamacare destroys the health insurance industry, along with the country. As you admitted, tort reform is needed now, but wasn't included (hmmmm, I wonder why?). Neither was any other real way of reducing costs, other than squeezing providers, which as I said won't save much and will have unintended consequences of further reducing the supply of/qualified providers.

i think a decade is the earliest that will happen and i think that's a long time since it's about 15% of the avg lifespan and 25% of the avg career. it's still another couple years til the ACA is fully rolled out. then there's another prez election in 4 years...

[Doc]

i think a decade is the earliest that will happen and i think that's a long time since it's about 15% of the avg lifespan and 25% of the avg career. it's still another couple years til the ACA is fully rolled out. then there's another prez election in 4 years...

I think it will happen before 2020. And at this point, repealing Obamacare isn't going to happen and it will be a matter of sticking with it and watching its detrimental effects take down the country. It's another entitlement that won't be touched, like SS and Medicare.

[B-Man]

WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING?

 

Employers Using Loopholes In Affordable Care Act. “Because more people will be forced into part-time positions and into working multiple jobs, then less people will have the time to go to college, have benefits like vacation and sick days, and will have little time for rest, relaxation and spending time with family. The Affordable Care Act was designed to benefit, not burden, millions of Americans without health care.”

 

Well, see, there’s your mistake.

 

 

 

Also: Sow crap policy, reap crap policy.

 

 

.

[Doc]

This could be worse than I imagined. But as the saying goes, "be careful what you wish for; you just might get it."

[birdog1960]

WHO COULD HAVE SEEN THIS COMING?

 

Employers Using Loopholes In Affordable Care Act. “Because more people will be forced into part-time positions and into working multiple jobs, then less people will have the time to go to college, have benefits like vacation and sick days, and will have little time for rest, relaxation and spending time with family. The Affordable Care Act was designed to benefit, not burden, millions of Americans without health care.”

 

Well, see, there’s your mistake.

 

 

 

Also: Sow crap policy, reap crap policy.

 

 

.

sure, like big employers needed an excuse to make people part time. just a growing, sleazy trend. how many of these jobs had good benefits and good insurance before the aca?

[Doc]

sure, like big employers needed an excuse to make people part time. just a growing, sleazy trend. how many of these jobs had good benefits and good insurance before the aca?

Whatever it was, there are gonna be even fewer now. Nice going Barry.

[B-Man]

sure, like big employers needed an excuse to make people part time. just a growing, sleazy trend. how many of these jobs had good benefits and good insurance before the aca?

 

I guess I'll quote myself from the "union" thread

 

Businesses are not inherently evil, those who regurgitate that nonsense when trying to "defend" unions are simply wrong.

 

 

Apparently businesses are only operating to screw over everyone

 

a sad way to think sir.

 

 

 

 

.

[B-Man]

A Physician’s New Reality: Patients Ask Me to Break the Law :Ironically, but expectedly, the ones who do this now are likely to have supported Obamacare.

 

 

FTA:

I have now posted a notice in my office and each exam room stating exactly what Obamacare will cover for those yearly visits. Remember Obama promised this as a free exam — no co-pay, no deductible, no charge. That’s fine and dandy if you are healthy and have no complaints. However, we are obligated by law to code specifically for the reason of the visit. An annual exam is one specific code; you can not mix this with another code, say, for rectal bleeding.

This annual visit covers the exam and “discussion about the status of previously diagnosed stable conditions.” That’s the exact wording under that code — insurance will not cover any new ailment under that code.

 

If you are here for that annual exam, you will not be covered if you want to discuss any new ailment or unstable condition. I cannot bait and switch to another code — that’s illegal.

We, the physicians, are audited all the time and can lose our license for insurance fraud.

 

You, the patient, will then have to make a decision.

 

Do you want your “free” yearly exam, or do you want to pay for a visit which is coded for a particular, new problem? You can have my “free” exam if you only discuss what Obamacare wants me to discuss.

 

... It is the law.

If you are complaining of a new problem, then you have to reschedule, since Obamacare is very clear as to what is covered and what is not. Obamacare — intentionally — makes it as difficult to be seen and taken care of as possible.

 

... I have had patients make an “annual” exam, only to want to discuss and be treated for another ailment. I can’t do it.

 

... On top of all of that, doctors will be obligated — that’s right, obligated —

to talk to you about things you may have no interest or need to talk about.

You may just want to have a pap smear or check your cholesterol.

However, I am now mandated by the government to talk to you about your weight, exercise, family life, smoking, sexual abuse(!), and even to

ask if you wear seat belts

. And I am mandated to record your answers.

It takes a while, but the good doctor gets to the reason for his column's title in a later paragraph, wherein we learn, not surprisingly, that people who are expecting "free stuff" and always seem to be gaming the system to try to get it aren't pleased:

I have received interesting responses from my patients since I put up the notice. Almost all are supportive and totally understand. The very few who complain? The same patients who always ask for free samples, who always complain that we do not validate parking. These are also the same patients who call my office and ask for free samples even when they are not even being seen.

In sum, the overhyped "free annual physical" (or "free annual wellness visit") is yet another example of "You get what you pay for" -- in this case accompanied by a healthy dose of Big Brother as an intrusive, nagging nanny.

 

Normally, misleading labeling and government-mandated privacy intrusions would be fodder for press exposes. But not for ObamaCare, which is apparently seen as beyond any need for investigation or criticism.

 

 

.

[/dev/null]

Apparently businesses are only operating to screw over everyone

 

That and to not hire people and make the economy look bad while the black guy is President. Because the only reason the economy sucks right now is the greedy corporations that donated millions of dollars to Obama's Re-Election campaign just want to make Obama look bad

[B-Man]

How ObamaCare will keep unemployment high — by forcing small companies to cut their workforce to fewer than 50 people.

 

 

GETTING IT FAST AND HARD:

“The United States will now undergo a four-year stress test of American liberalism, as Obama will get his tax hike and ObamaCare will be implemented. Those who think Obama cared about people like them will now experience the full extent of his caring.”

[Nanker]

No need for an office visit, SKYPE! with your MD.

"A new system of “virtual clinics” is being planned in which GPs connect with patients via iPads and Skype, an idea that NHS bosses are importing from India.

The reforms would save £2.9billion “almost immediately” and improve the lives of most patients, for example by avoiding the need to find child care during appointments, Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said last week.

However, critics are concerned the initiative would create a two-tier NHS in which the less technologically able, particularly the elderly, would be left behind." Ted Jeory Daily and Sunday Express

[Doc]

No need for an office visit, SKYPE! with your MD.

 

"A new system of “virtual clinics” is being planned in which GPs connect with patients via iPads and Skype, an idea that NHS bosses are importing from India.

The reforms would save £2.9billion “almost immediately” and improve the lives of most patients, for example by avoiding the need to find child care during appointments, Health Minister Dr Dan Poulter said last week.

However, critics are concerned the initiative would create a two-tier NHS in which the less technologically able, particularly the elderly, would be left behind." Ted Jeory Daily and Sunday Express

LOL! More outsourcing.

[B-Man]

On Not Cooperating With Obamacare

by Wesley Smith

 

The Hill has an interesting story reporting on Republican governors refusing to set up state exchanges under Obamacare — which could save the states money since they are on the hook for costs in excess of federal grants. That means the feds will have to do it on a state-by-state basis, a daunting task even for this highly bureaucratic administration. Plus, it is perfectly legal under the law to engage in such passive resistance.

 

Some liberals say that approach isn’t conservative because, in effect, it allows the feds to run state health care. (As if they care!) I’m not buying. In case anyone hasn’t noticed, HHS already does run health care nationally about issues important to the Obama political coalition — as in free-birth-control rule, with more of the same no doubt coming soon. Indeed, Obamacare was designed to allow the technocracy to create entitlements nationally on the dimes of the private sector, while guaranteeing the employment of ever more technocrats.

 

{snip}

 

So, stalwart Obamacare opponents, time for some good old fashioned passive resistance. Go limp. For those on the political left who object to such blatant obstructionism, I have two words for you: sanctuary cities.

[birdog1960]

A Physician’s New Reality: Patients Ask Me to Break the Law :Ironically, but expectedly, the ones who do this now are likely to have supported Obamacare.

 

 

FTA:

 

It takes a while, but the good doctor gets to the reason for his column's title in a later paragraph, wherein we learn, not surprisingly, that people who are expecting "free stuff" and always seem to be gaming the system to try to get it aren't pleased:

In sum, the overhyped "free annual physical" (or "free annual wellness visit") is yet another example of "You get what you pay for" -- in this case accompanied by a healthy dose of Big Brother as an intrusive, nagging nanny.

 

Normally, misleading labeling and government-mandated privacy intrusions would be fodder for press exposes. But not for ObamaCare, which is apparently seen as beyond any need for investigation or criticism.

 

 

.

the problem with this argument is that it's not true. the american college of physicians questioned the ability to code for a sick visit coincidentally with a wellness exam from the outset. and medicare agreed that it is allowable. so you can be seen for a wellness exam and a new or old problem/s at the same visit. the sick visit is not 100% covered as the wellness exam is. it's covered like any other medicare sick visit. if docs don't know this then they aren't doing their homework. it's on the medicare website.

[birdog1960]

just had a chance to read the entire piece and some of the comments. just amazing that no one thought to check the truth of dr weiss statement. sorta like faux news and skewed polls and the elections...people convinced of a certain position reinforcing others that believe it even if it's patently false.

 

 

see paragraph 5 in this document for the truth.http://www.acponline.org/running_practice/payment_coding/wellness.htm

[CosmicBills]

No, you're espousing the victim mentality.

 

If life is so difficult they should empower themselves to leave and seek out a better life

This is the fundamental disconnect between progressives and conservatives. Conservatives refuse to acknowledge that "empowering" oneself is not always possible -- which of course is an absurd view. Progressives believe that leveling the playing field is possible if we just gave it a real chance -- which is also an absurd view.

 

One is idealistic the other pragmatic and both are utterly convinced of the nobility and righteousness of their outlook.

[3rdnlng]

This is the fundamental disconnect between progressives and conservatives. Conservatives refuse to acknowledge that "empowering" oneself is not always possible -- which of course is an absurd view. Progressives believe that leveling the playing field is possible if we just gave it a real chance -- which is also an absurd view.

 

One is idealistic the other pragmatic and both are utterly convinced of the nobility and righteousness of their outlook.

 

OK Adam, I'll bite. Which one of these diametrically opposed views is pragmatic but still absurd?

[keepthefaith]

This is the fundamental disconnect between progressives and conservatives. Conservatives refuse to acknowledge that "empowering" oneself is not always possible -- which of course is an absurd view. Progressives believe that leveling the playing field is possible if we just gave it a real chance -- which is also an absurd view.

 

One is idealistic the other pragmatic and both are utterly convinced of the nobility and righteousness of their outlook.

 

Don't agree that Conservatives feel that everyone must be "empowered". The question to me is where do you draw the line? I think most Conservatives understand the difference between those that really can't do for themselves and those that should be able to do for themselves and also the difference between a temporary helping hand and long-term government dependency. We've drifted so far as a nation away from common sense government assistance that a move toward common sense is seen by many as a radical idea.

[Adam]

 

 

OK Adam, I'll bite. Which one of these diametrically opposed views is pragmatic but still absurd?

I think you meant to respond to tgreg99