drnykterstein Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 OK. Tell that to the next surgeon you meet who's coming off a 80 hour a workweek. Oops. Let me fix that. Tell that to the next surgeon you meet since they almost all work 80 hour workweeks. Or even the family doctor who's working on Saturday. Or the resident coming off her 36th straight hour. Clearly, they have nothing but more time to give. Doctors are such a lazy bunch. Either way... what does this have to do with the issue at hand: figuring out how to get money so people can pay these doctors? No one can freeking afford a doctor anymore anyways. Not their fault, its the insurance companies fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Either way... what does this have to do with the issue at hand: figuring out how to get money so people can pay these doctors? No one can freeking afford a doctor anymore anyways. Not their fault, its the insurance companies fault. Just go to the doctor and don't pay... Do what the iunsurance companies train their people to do: "Delay, delay, delay... DO NOT PAY!" Oh, wait... That is what people are starting to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Either way... what does this have to do with the issue at hand: figuring out how to get money so people can pay these doctors? No one can freeking afford a doctor anymore anyways. Not their fault, its the insurance companies fault. Insurance companies fault? If it weren't for insurance companies I'd not be able to afford the doctors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 OK. Tell that to the next surgeon you meet who's coming off a 80 hour a workweek. Oops. Let me fix that. Tell that to the next surgeon you meet since they almost all work 80 hour workweeks. Or even the family doctor who's working on Saturday. Or the resident coming off her 36th straight hour. Clearly, they have nothing but more time to give. Doctors are such a lazy bunch. OR surgeons notoriously have the BEST lifestyle of all surgeons so of course you bring them up. Again showing off your limited knowledge of the subject at hand. And by the way--some defense...in it you admit that many doctors are worked to the bone as it is? That works for...umm...well it works against your entire premise. Can you rectify those two statements for me, please? I don't care that scientists say that the world is round, I've walked the earth on 4 different continents, and I can tell you that it is flat. Take it from somebody that did it. What the hell. Explain that please. Federal law entitles you to 18 months on COBRA. Effective with the ARRA, it's up to 36. Then my company screwed me. So actually Matthew, James, Luke, and Timothy said it all. No, they just reported it. Like quotes in an article. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124451570546396929.html Just a snippet from the article. I can't even quote the last rambling bits of your post because they don't resemble anything sensible. It seems like you're indicting a strawman: Some selfish business that doesn't care about its employees. As usual, you're only dead wrong. I know almost no business owner or business that isn't cutting tons off the bottom line these days to protect its employees jobs and health benefits through this recession. You're naive to think otherwise. In my own business, the only layoffs we made as our business bucked in the last year were those we would have otherwise made because we didn't want to send unemployed people out into this marketplace. Profit is way down. I went without pay for several months. And whatever. It's what more than less businesses have tried to do over the last year. Do you resort to quoting the magic man when reason fails you? Try Google sometime. Here's the first one I found that was from a Canadian doctor. Sorry I could only find you a first hand account from someone within the system you desire. #1 You are responsible for providing proof when saying something "factual." Here's a snippet from that article; Indeed, Canada's provincial governments themselves rely on American medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery -- described by the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and other types of bleeding in or around the brain." Here's an article I found; link Claims denial rates by leading California insurers, first six months of 2009: * PacifiCare -- 39.6 percent * Cigna -- 32.7 percent * HealthNet -- 30 percent * Kaiser Permanente -- 28.3 percent * Blue Cross -- 27.9 percent * Aetna -- 6.4 percent "Every claim that is denied represents a real patient enduring pain and suffering. Every denial has real, sometimes fatal consequences," said Burger. Which system is worse? Do the math. Your article says more than 160 patients. Look at the percentages above. Try and tell me 160 patients is more than those. Seriously try. Here's another story; Link This story is not unlike millions that play out in a similar fashion all over this nation. For-profit, private insurance companies practice medicine without apology – and without license to do so. Patients seek care; doctors assess medical needs; private insurance companies make the final choice. My insurance company – Blue Cross -- decided just yesterday that doctors at one of the finest medical facilities in this nation were wrong in what they prescribed for me. Linik Insurance Won't Pay NorCal Mom's Cancer Treatment Reporting Anna Werner SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) ― Will your insurance company pay for the treatment your doctors recommend? They may not. That's what a single mother from Chico said she found out. In late April, Shelly Andrews-Buta was scheduled to undergo treatment for breast cancer that had spread to her brain, threatening her life. ________________________________________ But instead of having doctors working to remove her brain tumors on the day the surgery was scheduled, she sat in a San Francisco hotel room. Why? Because at the last minute, her insurance company, Blue Shield, decided it wasn't going to pay for the treatment her doctors at UCSF Medical Center had recommended. Linky Injured war zone contractors fight to get care They're crucial to U.S. military efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but civilian workers wounded on the job must battle an insurance system marked by long delays and high costs, an investigation finds. _______________________________________________________ "It's almost like we're this invisible, discardable military. Once we've done our jobs, they can actually sidetrack us and not worry about us anymore," said Tim Newman, a sheriff's deputy from South Carolina who lost his leg to a roadside bomb in Baghdad. Once back home, he fought an insurance company for a year to get a prosthetic leg that his doctors recommended. ______________________________________ The insurance system for civilian contractors has generated profits for the providers, primarily AIG, the war zone's dominant player. Insurers collected more than $1.5 billion in premiums paid by U.S. taxpayers and have earned nearly $600 million in profit, according to congressional investigators. A military audit deemed AIG's premiums "unreasonably high." Insurance companies initially rejected 44% of claims from contractors involving serious injuries and more than half of all claims related to psychological stress, records show. As a result, civilians maimed or traumatized in the war zone often must wage lengthy court battles for medical care and benefits. ___________________________________________ In December 2008 -- 4 1/2 years after he was injured in Iraq -- an administrative law judge for the U.S. Department of Labor ordered AIG to pay all Smith's medical bills and disability payments. Judge C. Richard Avery ruled that the insurer had failed "to offer any medical evidence" supporting its position that Smith's PTSD was not caused by the convoy attack. Smith, the judge said, "has shown extraordinary effort in returning to work against the recommendations of his treating physicians and in spite of considerable physical pain." AIG has appealed. It has yet to pay Smith's outstanding medical bills. 160. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Insurance companies fault? If it weren't for insurance companies I'd not be able to afford the doctors. Americans protesting against health-care reform is like starving people protesting against food Insurance companies pay their CEO's $10-20 million per year. Insurance companies pay for six lobbyists in Washington per Congressman. Insurance companies spend over $1.4 Million per day fighting against reform. That is overhead that comes out of your pocket. Insurance companies deny people care, even if they are covered. Insurance companies will pull every string and do everything to avoid having to pay money. They will delay payments in hopes of not paying at all. Domestic violence has been claimed as a pre-existing condition and ground for denial. As soon as you get sick they can decide that is enough to deny you coverage. Sometimes they won't even try to beat around the bush, they just outright deny you coverage. 62% of all 1.5 million bankruptcies in 2009 will be medical bankruptcies, and 75% of those will occur despite having medical insurance. 45,000 people die per year because of problems in our health-care payment system. That is, 45,000 people that would be alive to fight for reform, but instead are dead. Universal health-care is the fiscal conservatives choice. The overhead is much-much lower, and that saves us all money, a lot of it. You may be covered. But that does not save you, when you need it most the insurance companies will fight you tooth and nail for their right to legally not pay for your coverage. You may at that point be too sick to fight back. Edit: And dangit read Steely Dan's posts again. Verify his claims on your own, or disprove them. Emotional or not, he's not lying. These are true stories that happen all of the time. With a bit of bad luck you too could easily be one of those stories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acantha Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 No, they just reported it. Like quotes in an article. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Not their fault, its the insurance companies fault. yes, it's all the evil insurance companies fault. first it was the oil companies, then the banks, then the credit card industry, then the hedgefunds and now it's the insurance companies. But yet, profit margins for the health insurance industry is at 3.3% nation wide. Which means that less than 3.5 cents out of every dollar is for profit, but yet, it's all the insurance companies fault . Insurance companies pay their CEO's $10-20 million per year. Insurance companies pay for six lobbyists in Washington per Congressman. Insurance companies spend over $1.4 Million per day fighting against reform This administration has done a wonderful job in demonizing so many industries this year, and of course people like you, fall for it, hook line and sinker . I would say that is about standard for CEO pay of a major corporation in any other industry. If you add up CEO pay and Lobbying fee's, and then eliminated every dollar of it, it still wouldn't make a lick of difference. It is a straw man populist argument, and it has very little real, tangible weight to it. All it does is play in to the emotions of the typical, emotional minded person. Of course they are going to Lobby this reform you retard, if the "public option" ever went through, this would mark the beginning of the end for the health insurers. But I guess they should just bend over to the government and not fight back, and say "yes masser, this time deeper and harder". I can gaurantee you right now, that whatever Health Reform Bill comes through out of Washington this year, will NOT BRING DOWN COSTS! Why? Because there is nothing in the Bill that will fundamentally bring down rates. But hey, there's always "HOPE" right? Conner, you truly are "the suxiest man alive". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Oh please, tell me how great the other "40 + countries" are. well France health system has a LOT of problems and is losing billions but anyway i'll take that system over the american anyday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 in Canada and other socialized systems: the government decides who doesn't merit help and thus decides who dies (or people get put in the back of the line for treatment and die in the queue). In the socialized systems i know the government decides EVERYBODY merit help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Either way... what does this have to do with the issue at hand: figuring out how to get money so people can pay these doctors? No one can freeking afford a doctor anymore anyways. Not their fault, its the insurance companies fault. Somewhere a group of politicians are laughing and fist bumping each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 well France health system has a LOT of problems and is losing billions but anyway i'll take that system over the american anyday... I'll pass on France thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Can you rectify those two statements for me, please? I said that most surgeons work 80 hour workweeks. You said ER surgeons do not. I countered by noting that of course you'd raise ER surgeons because ER surgeons have the best lifestyles of all surgeons. They are the notorious exception. Get it now? 160. The Canadian system in Ontario sent 160 patients to America because their system approved them for transfer. Are you not aware that many thousands of other patients just got sent to the back of the line (some to die) like the article says? By the way, where do you think America would send patients when the lines get too long? (Cricket, cricket.) That's right. Nowhere, because the USA still has the best healthcare system in the world despite its flaws. Is it possible you don't understand unless someone bolds and raises font sizing? 160! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 And dangit read Steely Dan's posts again. Verify his claims on your own, or disprove them. Emotional or not, he's not lying. These are true stories that happen all of the time. With a bit of bad luck you too could easily be one of those stories. Maybe so. That's why I have a good life insurance policy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 In the socialized systems i know the government decides EVERYBODY merit help. Then why all the stories of treatment denial in government-run systems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 yes, it's all the evil insurance companies fault. first it was the oil companies, then the banks, then the credit card industry, then the hedgefunds and now it's the insurance companies. But yet, profit margins for the health insurance industry is at 3.3% nation wide. Which means that less than 3.5 cents out of every dollar is for profit, but yet, it's all the insurance companies fault . Insurance companies pay their CEO's $10-20 million per year. Insurance companies pay for six lobbyists in Washington per Congressman. Insurance companies spend over $1.4 Million per day fighting against reform This administration has done a wonderful job in demonizing so many industries this year, and of course people like you, fall for it, hook line and sinker . I would say that is about standard for CEO pay of a major corporation in any other industry. If you add up CEO pay and Lobbying fee's, and then eliminated every dollar of it, it still wouldn't make a lick of difference. It is a straw man populist argument, and it has no weight to it what so ever. All it does is play in to the emotions of the typical minded person. Of course they are going to Lobby this reform you retard, if the "public option" ever went through, this would mark the beginning of the end for the health insurers. But I guess they should just bend over to the government and not fight back, and say "yes masser, this time deeper and harder". I can gaurantee you right now, that whatever Health Reform Bill comes through out of Washington this year, will NOT BRING DOWN COSTS! Why? Because there is nothing in the Bill that will fundamentally bring down rates. But hey, there's always "HOPE" right? Conner, you truly are "the suxiest man alive". Please explain how removing CEO salaries and lobbying cost "don't make a lick of difference" Here's an article supporting the insurance companies but is actually one of the best things I've read to support a government system. Litow finds that taking into account extra legal costs from Medicare adjudication and CMS salaries, the administrative cost ratio increases to 5.2%. Private Insurance on average has administrative costs of 16.7% (varying between 30% for individual policies to 12.5% for large group policies). Yet these figures are inflated. If we exclude taxes and profits, as well as sales commissions, then the total administrative costs decrease to 8.9% overall and 8.0% for large group policies. Litow finds that taking into account extra legal costs from Medicare adjudication and CMS salaries, the administrative cost ratio increases to 5.2%. If we exclude taxes and profits we still have a system that operates 3.7% cheaper, and that's if you accept his reasoning. Excluding taxes and profits is a silly thing to say. Taxes are made up by lowering the overall costs. He includes Medicare adjudication and yet ignores that private insurance companies pay a lot of money in adjudicating claims. The true cost would take into account the direct cost of hiring IRS workers to collect the taxes Would the government have to hire more IRS agents, yes, but how many more is a big question. This assertion makes it sound like the IRS has no agents working for it currently. What if a private insurance company raised its administrative costs by 1% , but was able to reduce fraudulent claims by 10% and reduce the premium charged to customers by 8%. This is an example of how an increase in the administrative cost ratio can add value. I have yet to hear of any private healthcare provider reducing premiums. Here's a FAQ about It's very long so I'll give out one snippet. You can read the rest. Is national health insurance ‘socialized medicine’? No. Socialized medicine is a system in which doctors and hospitals work for and draw salaries from the government. Doctors in the Veterans Administration and the Armed Services are paid this way. The health systems in Great Britain and Spain are other examples. But in most European countries, Canada, Australia and Japan they have socialized health insurance, not socialized medicine. The government pays for care that is delivered in the private (mostly not-for-profit) sector. This is similar to how Medicare works in this country. Doctors are in private practice and are paid on a fee-for-service basis from government funds. The government does not own or manage medical practices or hospitals. The term socialized medicine is often used to conjure up images of government bureaucratic interference in medical care. That does not describe what happens in countries with national health insurance where doctors and patients often have more clinical freedom than in the U.S., where bureaucrats attempt to direct care. In the socialized systems i know the government decides EVERYBODY merit help. Shhhh! They don't listen to reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Then my company screwed me. Gee, how could that have happened? I thought you were the COBRA expert. But of course, it's always somebody 'screwing you'. It couldn't be that you are too stupid to know your rights or manage your own benfeits properly. What is most likely is you were more than 30 days late on your premium payment and they canceled you as they are legally able to do. [insert ignorant whine here about how the company/government/anymore making more than $66,000 a year should have to subsidize you] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 I said that most surgeons work 80 hour workweeks. You said ER surgeons do not. I countered by noting that of course you'd raise ER surgeons because ER surgeons have the best lifestyles of all surgeons. They are the notorious exception. Get it now? The Canadian system in Ontario sent 160 patients to America because their system approved them for transfer. Are you not aware that many thousands of other patients just got sent to the back of the line (some to die) like the article says? By the way, where do you think America would send patients when the lines get too long? (Cricket, cricket.) That's right. Nowhere, because the USA still has the best healthcare system in the world despite its flaws. Is it possible you don't understand unless someone bolds and raises font sizing? 160! you meet since they almost all work 80 hour workweeks You did not say most. Read above you said "almost all". What are the categories and relative percentages of all surgeons? Tell me what other surgeons work in a different environment than an OR and what number their %ages stack up against OR surgeons. Then why all the stories of treatment denial in government-run systems? Because the insurance companies want you to believe that crap. They point out the small percentage of those cases there and deny the large percentage here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 ER=Emergency room. They have the best lifestyles in terms of hours worked. I know several surgeons and they all ackowledge it. Some are ER surgeons. Some are other types. Almost all surgeons and most surgeons work tons of hours. ER surgoens--because of the instantaneous stress of their jobs--work less. Comprende? This is like talking to a child. Tell me the truth. Are you older or younger than 22? BTW, love the great insurance company scandal stuff. What makes you think the government that runs the VA and medicare/aid will do a great job reforming the healthcare industry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
olivier in france Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Then why all the stories of treatment denial in government-run systems? i don't know but i've never heard about treatment denials in France... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted October 8, 2009 Author Share Posted October 8, 2009 Gee, how could that have happened? I thought you were the COBRA expert. But of course, it's always somebody 'screwing you'. It couldn't be that you are too stupid to know your rights or manage your own benfeits properly. What is most likely is you were more than 30 days late on your premium payment and they canceled you as they are legally able to do. [insert ignorant whine here about how the company/government/anymore making more than $66,000 a year should have to subsidize you] Ummmmm, no, all of my payments were made 30 days BEFORE they were supposed to be paid. So I "know" how it worked for me. Do you "know" how it worked for me? No, then STFU. We're both right. Link Qualifying Events The following events are "qualifying events" that make one eligible to receive COBRA benefits: * Death of a covered employee * Voluntary or involuntary termination of employment, except gross misconduct * Reduction of hours, making the employee ineligible for benefits * Divorce or legal separation (Separation does not apply in Pennsylvania) * Covered employee becomes entitled to Medicare * Dependent child ceases to meet the definition of a "dependent child" Since the woman accused me of "choking" her that probably fell under the term "gross misconduct" at least I'm guessing that's what it was considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts