birdog1960 Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 You know that they do this so the kids can stay in college and continue the indoctrination right? you're serious arent you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/matt-vespa/shutdown-bushs-fault Damn that George W Bush! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 http://cnsnews.com/m...own-bushs-fault Damn that George W Bush! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 and none of what you outlined significantly lowers the 50 million uninsured number. THAT is the sticking point. the two sides fundamentally differ on their definition of the problem. i'm neither ashamed nor embarrassed. there are plenty of people that i respect greatly that are of the same mind and they're not ashamed either. and much like the environmental issues i referenced, the right sometimes (rarely) talks a good game but rarely acts on such matters. where were these ideas when clinton tried to pass his heathcare reform? where have they been for the past 50 years? who has championed healthcare reform for the right over that time? nobody. Is the issue a) insuring people, b) making it more affordable, c) reducing health care costs, or d) improving quality? If it's any but a), they failed. And even a) will only at-best insure 40% of those they purported were uninsured. And again, having coverage doesn't mean you'll be getting health care. Docs are now starting to limit or refuse new Medicare, Medicaid, and these "Medicaid Plus" exchange plans. It wasn't the Right's small steps plan that worried me, if the results are achieved incrementally I coudn't care less how they did it... my biggest concern was inaction... to me, that is far worse than any reforms that were put in place. I have no idea why doing something that will only lead to a worsening of the problem is better than doing nothing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 I have no idea why doing something that will only lead to a worsening of the problem is better than doing nothing? “Any fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius-and a lot of courage-to move in the opposite direction.” Albert Einstein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Is the issue a) insuring people, b) making it more affordable, c) reducing health care costs, or d) improving quality? If it's any but a), they failed. And even a) will only at-best insure 40% of those they purported were uninsured. And again, having coverage doesn't mean you'll be getting health care. Docs are now starting to limit or refuse new Medicare, Medicaid, and these "Medicaid Plus" exchange plans. I have no idea why doing something that will only lead to a worsening of the problem is better than doing nothing? you already decided in 2010 is wasn't goign to work, the rest of will wait and see what they actuall results are. Being uninsurable to stuck to a job for insurance is why I personally think it was better than doing nothing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 (edited) Is the issue a) insuring people, b) making it more affordable, c) reducing health care costs, or d) improving quality? If it's any but a), they failed. And even a) will only at-best insure 40% of those they purported were uninsured. And again, having coverage doesn't mean you'll be getting health care. Docs are now starting to limit or refuse new Medicare, Medicaid, and these "Medicaid Plus" exchange plans. I have no idea why doing something that will only lead to a worsening of the problem is better than doing nothing? a) will clearly be accomplished. many that will remain uninsured can blame obstruction to medicaid enrollment increases in red states. can't cause the problem and argue against it at the same time (well, you can but that would be disingenuous). b) for many, especially those now insured that weren't before it will definitely be more affordable. over time, with changes to compensation models that are surely coming, it will more affordable to nearly everyone. c) adding 30 million to the insurance rolls costs more but on a per insured basis, costs are likely to decrease, especially in high deductible plans (utilization is already decreasing due to more of these plans). in mass., about 50% of primary care docs are still accepting new medicaid and medicare and they are in the high 90's for percentag eof population insured.. the vast majority of patients looking for docs there can find them. as compensation models start to reward primary care and medical homes selectively there will be more providers. additionally, more team based care will increase the number of patients able to be cared for in each medical home. see, i can be just as optimistic as you are pessimistic. the truth is we haven't had a chance to begin to see outcomes for the aca. neither of us knows. yet, you act like it's a foregone conclusion. Edited October 16, 2013 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Tenative deal in Senate reached Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Tenative deal in Senate reached Wait! You mean a deal will be struck and we won't default and the world will keep on spinning? Never saw that coming. Let me guess...they came up with another can-kicker to benefit all parties up to the the midterms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Tenative deal in Senate reached Shows how long I've been visiting TSW. I first read that as Trentative Let me guess...they came up with another can-kicker to benefit all parties up to the the midterms. Speaking of Trentative, how much you want to bet whatever deal is struck is going to be like watcing Captain Checkdown at his finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Koko78 Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Looks like they're going to toughen ID requirements for signing up for Obamacare and authorizing enough money to allow for a blue ribbon bi-partisan supercommittee to convene and hammer out the budget divide. Blue Ribbon Supercommittee. They ain't f'ing around. http://news.yahoo.com/compromise-or-collapse--lawmakers-eye-breakthrough-on-debt--spending-150123572.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted October 16, 2013 Author Share Posted October 16, 2013 Per Washington Post: It avoids any major changes to Obama’s signature Affordable Care Act, a major victory for Democrats and a repudiation to House and Senate Republicans who for weeks tried to use the threat of a shutdown and potential default to force changes in the health-care law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Wait! You mean a deal will be struck and we won't default and the world will keep on spinning? Never saw that coming. Let me guess...they came up with another can-kicker to benefit all parties up to the the midterms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 you already decided in 2010 is wasn't goign to work, the rest of will wait and see what they actuall results are. Being uninsurable to stuck to a job for insurance is why I personally think it was better than doing nothing.... a) will clearly be accomplished. many that will remain uninsured can blame obstruction to medicaid enrollment increases in red states. can't cause the problem and argue against it at the same time (well, you can but that would be disingenuous). b) for many, especially those now insured that weren't before it will definitely be more affordable. over time, with changes to compensation models that are surely coming, it will more affordable to nearly everyone. c) adding 30 million to the insurance rolls costs more but on a per insured basis, costs are likely to decrease, especially in high deductible plans (utilization is already decreasing due to more of these plans). in mass., about 50% of primary care docs are still accepting new medicaid and medicare and they are in the high 90's for percentag eof population insured.. the vast majority of patients looking for docs there can find them. as compensation models start to reward primary care and medical homes selectively there will be more providers. additionally, more team based care will increase the number of patients able to be cared for in each medical home. see, i can be just as optimistic as you are pessimistic. the truth is we haven't had a chance to begin to see outcomes for the aca. neither of us knows. yet, you act like it's a foregone conclusion. There will be tens of millions uninsured through no fault of the red states. And without millions of young and healthy people subsidizing care for the sicker people, this whole thing goes breasts up. They didn't buy it before when it was cheaper and when they could be denied insurance. Now that it's more expensive and they can't be denied...what's the incentive? And fewer doctors staying/entering the field meaning quality plummets. But I can see costs decreasing, as more people don't want to spend money on health care. Which leads to worse outcomes. Per Washington Post: Just going to let it implode on its own. Smart. And now that the shutdown is over, we can all start talking about what a disaster the rollout is and the dismal number of enrollees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Looks like they're going to toughen ID requirements for signing up for Obamacare and authorizing enough money to allow for a blue ribbon bi-partisan supercommittee to convene and hammer out the budget divide. Blue Ribbon Supercommittee. They ain't f'ing around. http://news.yahoo.co...-150123572.html The lack of income verification was idiotic and it's good that it's being fixed. Now if we could just fix the 99 other problems with Obamacare... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Just going to let it implode on its own. Smart. And now that the shutdown is over, we can all start talking about what a disaster the rollout is and the dismal number of enrollees. Any chance that is what they wanted in the first place, hold to see how the roll out went, then back off an let it fail all on it's own. Next year they can say "hey, Jack, we tried to stop it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 Is the issue a) insuring people, b) making it more affordable, c) reducing health care costs, or d) improving quality? If it's any but a), they failed. And even a) will only at-best insure 40% of those they purported were uninsured. And again, having coverage doesn't mean you'll be getting health care. Docs are now starting to limit or refuse new Medicare, Medicaid, and these "Medicaid Plus" exchange plans. I have no idea why doing something that will only lead to a worsening of the problem is better than doing nothing? They'll have health insurance but they won't have jobs. That's the ultimate in Liberal compromise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 They'll have health insurance but they won't have jobs. That's the ultimate in Liberal compromise. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 They'll have health insurance but they won't have jobs. That's the ultimate in Liberal compromise. but who needs jobs when we have unemployment compensation, welfare, food stamps, social security, disability, and section 8 housing? don't you people know utopia when you see it? and if for some strange reason anyone actually ever does need a job, the ever-expanding public sector ought to soon be literally bursting with employment opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanM.D. Posted October 16, 2013 Share Posted October 16, 2013 I have no idea why doing something that will only lead to a worsening of the problem is better than doing nothing? It's the Doc in you. First...Do no harm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts