Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
My grandparents didn't have healthcare and they prospered through the depression and fought WWII. The world doesn't owe you anything and the tyrannical government owes you even less. People need to become more self sufficient and most importantly get off their fat asses and do the things that will allow them to be healthier in later life instead of becoming a financial drain like the entitlement crazed boomer generation.
My grandparents died in their 60s........government didnt owe them anything
Let them die.......that's the GOP mantra
I said government adds to the cost but it's not the primary cause. When government pays for more healthcare for those who can not afford it, cost rises because more services are being delivered. One of the biggest causes of high medical cost is the fee for service system. It is wasteful, inefficient, and does not lead to the best outcomes. Lastly, patients are demanding better healthcare, earlier diagnosis, and more treatments for non-life threatening conditions.There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.
Yes and no.
Mandates have increased costs, no may about it.
Whats that term..........
Oh yeah ........Preexisting conditions? But it didnt start there. Technological I would agree is one of the bigger drivers.
Or we could do what conservatives advocate......tell everyone to go fuck themselves. "Let them die"
Are you saying you are not capable of buyiing your own health insurance ?
Many Americans have to choose between paying the rent, electric, car expenses, food.....and oh yea....that $500 a month self insurance rate
Choose wrong and republicans tell you....let him die
Nonprofit Healthcare Cooperatives such as Group Health in the Northwest or bundled health care such as in the Netherlands are far cheaper alternatives and seem to produce better outcomes than fee for service.I said government adds to the cost but it's not the primary cause. When government pays for more healthcare for those who can not afford it, cost rises because more services are being delivered. One of the biggest causes of high medical cost is the fee for service system. It is wasteful, inefficient, and does not lead to the best outcomes. Lastly, patients are demanding better healthcare, earlier diagnosis, and more treatments for non-life threatening conditions.
The fee for service system? As opposed to what?
In a co-op system, the healthcare provider is paid a fixed fee by either the member, government, or an employer to provide all the healthcare services for a member. Services are always coordinated through a primary care doctor who is employed by the coop. All the patient's medical information such as doctors notes, tests, prescriptions, and treatments by all providers are kept online and made available to all healthcare providers working with the patient. So there is no duplication of test or treatments. Patient loads are managed so as to fully utilize all healthcare providers. Since all healthcare providers are employees of the co-op, there is no incentive to sell nonessential services. Instead of employees receiving bonuses based on profits or services sold, employee performance and patient outcomes are used to determine any bonuses.
In bundled healthcare systems, government or other organization contracts with a healthcare provider to provide all services in a particular bundle for a fixed fee.
There are other alternatives to fee for service but all of them focus on removing any incentive to sell unneeded services, better utilize personnel, and provide a better healthcare outcome by utilizing a team approach in which a doctor manages the care as oppose to a patient.
Wrong again socialist. Government run health care is nothing but a socialist dream come true. The lie about republicans wanting everyone to roll over and die is getting old, it just makes idiots saying it look like, well, idiots.
So....let's recap the Republican position
1. Govt run healthcare is socialism
2. A Govt option is unfair competition
3 requiring employers to cover people is an unfair burden
Seems whatever option is proposed, republicans will find a reason to oppose it
Let them die.......Republican healthcare
More hyperbole...
Do you have anything new?
Try to keep up
The only thing being challenged is the individual mandate. We don't know if it is constitutional or not
There is nothing unconstitutional about either universal healthcare or a government option
So....let's recap the Republican position
1. Govt run healthcare is socialism
2. A Govt option is unfair competition
3 requiring employers to cover people is an unfair burden
Seems whatever option is proposed, republicans will find a reason to oppose it
Let them die.......Republican healthcare
More hyperbole...
Do you have anything new?
Nice post....thanks for your thoughtful insight on this topic
More hyperbole...
Do you have anything new?
Nice post....thanks for your thoughtful insight on this topic
So that's a "No", huh?
I figured that...
I'm gonna go push an old wheelchair-bound 0bama voter down the stairs...
later, man...
Payment by private insurance companies provide no more incentive to reduce cost than government. As long as claims are coded correctly and meet the requirements of the claim hand book, which is often based on the Medicare claims handbook, the claim will be paid. In the current system, the more services sold by the provider the more money they make and higher the cost of healthcare.There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.
No incentive to reduce costs through efficiency is the primary factor. In fact, there is a huge disincentive to increase administrative overhead.
Are you saying you are not capable of buyiing your own health insurance ?
Many Americans have to choose between paying the rent, electric, car expenses, food.....and oh yea....that $500 a month self insurance rate
Choose wrong and republicans tell you....let him die
$500 per month? That's someone with some significant issues. It's not too high though. It's less than most middle class people spend on their car. So are you saying that new Ford Fusion is more important than healthcare? I've always prioritized my consumption differently. Anything above basic transportation (a $5000 car) was purchased *after* I had the health insurance paid.
Maybe you think that's wrong.
Payment by private insurance companies provide no more incentive to reduce cost than government. As long as claims are coded correctly and meet the requirements of the claim hand book, which is often based on the Medicare claims handbook, the claim will be paid. In the current system, the more services sold by the provider the more money they make and higher the cost of healthcare.There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.
No incentive to reduce costs through efficiency is the primary factor. In fact, there is a huge disincentive to increase administrative overhead.
Here is a real world example. I had a problem with my elbow a few months ago. I saw my doctor and he ordered an X-ray at the clinic, told me to take Aspirin 4 times a day for week and to pick up and elbow band at the drug store and wear it two weeks. If it didn't improve in two weeks make another appointment. It didn't get better so I did. My doctor decided that I should see a specialist at the clinic which I did. The specialist ordered an MRI which showed nothing so he gave me a cortisone shot and sent me to me to a physical therapist who also worked in the clinic. 6 weeks with the physical therapist and I was back to normal. The total amount they billed my insurance company was almost $3,000. My neighbor had the same problem but she was in a healthcare co-op. She made an appoint with her doctor but saw a physicians assistant who's paid about half what a doctor is paid. She had a cortisone shot, and an x-ray, saw physical therapist, did the same exercise I did and was back to normal in about 6 weeks. I would estimate the cost of handling her problem was about one tenth my cost.
Nice post....thanks for your thoughtful insight on this topic
So that's a "No", huh?
I figured that...
I'm gonna go push an old wheelchair-bound 0bama voter down the stairs...
later, man...
I pushed two of them off a cliff yesterday.
Merry Christmas !!!
The problem with you paying a higher fee for expedited services is that the delivery of service would not be based on medical necessity but rather who pays most. If your doctor feels a service is needed immediately then he will ordered it.I said government adds to the cost but it's not the primary cause. When government pays for more healthcare for those who can not afford it, cost rises because more services are being delivered. One of the biggest causes of high medical cost is the fee for service system. It is wasteful, inefficient, and does not lead to the best outcomes. Lastly, patients are demanding better healthcare, earlier diagnosis, and more treatments for non-life threatening conditions.Yes and no.
Mandates have increased costs, no may about it.
Whats that term..........
Oh yeah ........Preexisting conditions? But it didnt start there. Technological I would agree is one of the bigger drivers.
True that the patients are demanding more. The problem is that they are unable or unwilling to pay more for it. I don't think the solution is to make healthcare like the DMV where there is no option to pay a premium for expedited service. Everyone pays the same fee and everyone endures the same wait. Of course there is a "fee for service" there too. It's right there on my receipt, a "service fee."
So how is government healthcare going to be any better again?
When CKE’s health-care advisers, citing Obamacare’s complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the company’s $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with.
Annual health care costs of $12 million for 70,000 people?
Thet're saying HC costs would go up about $171.43 per person, do you find that to be an unreasonable assessment? Actually, since much of ObamaCare's rules and policies are yet to be determined, it's just a guess. Pretty hard to tell IMO, so laong with the other unknows like taxes and energy costs, how can most businesses determine whether or not to invest more money and hire more people?
Which leads me back to Obama, chances are that however it shakes out will not be to the advantage of businesses large and small. Probably more to the large than small, which is odd cuz it's the small businesses that create the most new jobs. It's like he's doing the opposite of what he says he wants.
You want a few reasons why the US economy is sluggish? By this time, most economies have recovered and have experienced significant growth and more jobs after a recession is over. But not this time, and Mr Will talks about why.
Choking on Obamacare
By George F. Will, Published: December 2
In 1941, Carl Karcher was a 24-year-old truck driver for a bakery. Impressed by the large numbers of buns he was delivering, he scrounged up $326 to buy a hot dog cart across from a Goodyear plant. And the war came.
So did millions of defense industry workers and their cars. And, soon, Southern Californias contribution to American cuisine fast food. Including, eventually, hundreds of Carls Jr. restaurants. Karcher died in 2008, but his legacy, CKE Restaurants, survives. It would thrive, says CEO Andy Puzder, but for governments comprehensive campaign against job creation.
CKE, with more than 3,200 restaurants (Carls Jr. and Hardees), has created 70,000 jobs, 21,000 directly and 49,000 with franchisees. The growth of those numbers will be inhibited by among many government measures Obama*care.
When CKEs health-care advisers, citing Obamacares complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the companys $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with. They guessed $18 million twice what CKE spent last year building new restaurants. Obamacare must mean fewer restaurants.
And therefore fewer jobs. Each restaurant creates, on average, 25 jobs and as much as 3.5 times that number of jobs in the community. (CKE spends about $1 billion a year on food and paper products, $175 million on advertising, $33 million on maintenance, etc.)
Puzder laughs about the liberal theory that businesses are not investing because they want to punish Obama. Rising health-care costs are, he says, just one uncertainty inhibiting expansion. Others are government policies raising fuel costs, which infect everything from air conditioning to the cost (including deliveries) of supplies, and the threat that the National Labor Relations Board will use regulations to impose something like card check in place of secret-ballot unionization elections.
CKE has about 720 California restaurants, in which 84 percent of the managers are minorities and 67 percent are women. CKE has, however, all but stopped building restaurants in this state because approvals and permits for establishing them can take up to two years, compared to as little as six weeks in Texas, and the cost to build one is $100,000 more than in Texas, where CKE is planning to open 300 new restaurants this decade.
CKE restaurants have 95 percent employee turnover in a year not bad in this industry and the health-care benefits under CKEs current mini-med plans are capped in a way that makes them illegal under Obamacare. So CKE will have to convert many full-time employees to part-timers to limit the growth of its burdens under Obamacare.
In an economic climate of increasing uncertainties, Puzder says, one certainty is that many businesses now marginally profitable will disappear when Obamacare causes that margin to disappear. A second certainty is that employers everywhere will be looking to reduce labor content in their business models as Obamacare makes employees unambiguously more expensive.
According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, by 2008 the cost of federal regulations had reached $1.75 trillion. That was 14 percent of national income unavailable for job-creating investments. And that was more than 11,000 regulations ago.
.
.
.
Barack Obama has written that during his very brief sojourn in the private sector he felt like a spy behind enemy lines. Puzder knows what it feels like when gargantuan government is composed of multitudes of regulators who regard business as the enemy. And 22.9 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed or too discouraged to look for employment know what it feels like to be collateral damage in the regulatory states war on business.
I happen to agree with George Will. I don't think employers should be the ones providing healthcare coverage. It is inefficient and not in their best interests
That's why we need government to step in and fill the role formerly conducted by employers.....provide an option for low cost healthcare
Or we could do what conservatives advocate......tell everyone to go fuck themselves. "Let them die"
Payment by private insurance companies provide no more incentive to reduce cost than government. As long as claims are coded correctly and meet the requirements of the claim hand book, which is often based on the Medicare claims handbook, the claim will be paid. In the current system, the more services sold by the provider the more money they make and higher the cost of healthcare.There are many reasons for rising healthcare cost. Government may add to cost but it is not the major reason for rising costs. Fee for service and technological advances are far more important factors.
No incentive to reduce costs through efficiency is the primary factor. In fact, there is a huge disincentive to increase administrative overhead.
Here is a real world example. I had a problem with my elbow a few months ago. I saw my doctor and he ordered an X-ray at the clinic, told me to take Aspirin 4 times a day for week and to pick up and elbow band at the drug store and wear it two weeks. If it didn't improve in two weeks make another appointment. It didn't get better so I did. My doctor decided that I should see a specialist at the clinic which I did. The specialist ordered an MRI which showed nothing so he gave me a cortisone shot and sent me to a physical therapist who also worked in the clinic. 6 weeks with the physical therapist and I was back to normal. The total amount they billed my insurance company was almost $3,000. My neighbor had the same problem but she was in a healthcare co-op. She made an appointment with her doctor but saw a physician's assistant who's paid about half what a doctor is paid. She had a cortisone shot, and an x-ray, saw physical therapist, did the same exercise I did and was back to normal in about 6 weeks. I would estimate the cost of handling her problem was about one tenth my cost. This is not usually and it cost us billions of dollars for necessary healthcare services.
The problem with you paying a higher fee for expedited services is that the delivery of service would not be based on medical necessity but rather who pays most. If your doctor feels a service is needed immediately then he will ordered it.I said government adds to the cost but it's not the primary cause. When government pays for more healthcare for those who can not afford it, cost rises because more services are being delivered. One of the biggest causes of high medical cost is the fee for service system. It is wasteful, inefficient, and does not lead to the best outcomes. Lastly, patients are demanding better healthcare, earlier diagnosis, and more treatments for non-life threatening conditions.
True that the patients are demanding more. The problem is that they are unable or unwilling to pay more for it. I don't think the solution is to make healthcare like the DMV where there is no option to pay a premium for expedited service. Everyone pays the same fee and everyone endures the same wait. Of course there is a "fee for service" there too. It's right there on my receipt, a "service fee."
So how is government healthcare going to be any better again?
The healthcare law has little to do with the delivery of healthcare. It addresses how we pay for healthcare, who gets healthcare and regulates insurance companies which is why it will not have a major effect on healthcare cost of the nation.
Many employers do not offer health insurance. Some increase salaries so employees can pick their own insurer.You want a few reasons why the US economy is sluggish? By this time, most economies have recovered and have experienced significant growth and more jobs after a recession is over. But not this time, and Mr Will talks about why.
Choking on Obamacare
By George F. Will, Published: December 2
In 1941, Carl Karcher was a 24-year-old truck driver for a bakery. Impressed by the large numbers of buns he was delivering, he scrounged up $326 to buy a hot dog cart across from a Goodyear plant. And the war came.
So did millions of defense industry workers and their cars. And, soon, Southern Californias contribution to American cuisine fast food. Including, eventually, hundreds of Carls Jr. restaurants. Karcher died in 2008, but his legacy, CKE Restaurants, survives. It would thrive, says CEO Andy Puzder, but for governments comprehensive campaign against job creation.
CKE, with more than 3,200 restaurants (Carls Jr. and Hardees), has created 70,000 jobs, 21,000 directly and 49,000 with franchisees. The growth of those numbers will be inhibited by among many government measures Obama*care.
When CKEs health-care advisers, citing Obamacares complexities, opacities and uncertainties, said that it would add between $7.3 million and $35.1 million to the companys $12 million health-care costs in 2010, Puzder said: I need a number I can plan with. They guessed $18 million twice what CKE spent last year building new restaurants. Obamacare must mean fewer restaurants.
And therefore fewer jobs. Each restaurant creates, on average, 25 jobs and as much as 3.5 times that number of jobs in the community. (CKE spends about $1 billion a year on food and paper products, $175 million on advertising, $33 million on maintenance, etc.)
Puzder laughs about the liberal theory that businesses are not investing because they want to punish Obama. Rising health-care costs are, he says, just one uncertainty inhibiting expansion. Others are government policies raising fuel costs, which infect everything from air conditioning to the cost (including deliveries) of supplies, and the threat that the National Labor Relations Board will use regulations to impose something like card check in place of secret-ballot unionization elections.
CKE has about 720 California restaurants, in which 84 percent of the managers are minorities and 67 percent are women. CKE has, however, all but stopped building restaurants in this state because approvals and permits for establishing them can take up to two years, compared to as little as six weeks in Texas, and the cost to build one is $100,000 more than in Texas, where CKE is planning to open 300 new restaurants this decade.
CKE restaurants have 95 percent employee turnover in a year not bad in this industry and the health-care benefits under CKEs current mini-med plans are capped in a way that makes them illegal under Obamacare. So CKE will have to convert many full-time employees to part-timers to limit the growth of its burdens under Obamacare.
In an economic climate of increasing uncertainties, Puzder says, one certainty is that many businesses now marginally profitable will disappear when Obamacare causes that margin to disappear. A second certainty is that employers everywhere will be looking to reduce labor content in their business models as Obamacare makes employees unambiguously more expensive.
According to the U.S. Small Business Administration, by 2008 the cost of federal regulations had reached $1.75 trillion. That was 14 percent of national income unavailable for job-creating investments. And that was more than 11,000 regulations ago.
.
.
.
Barack Obama has written that during his very brief sojourn in the private sector he felt like a spy behind enemy lines. Puzder knows what it feels like when gargantuan government is composed of multitudes of regulators who regard business as the enemy. And 22.9 million Americans who are unemployed, underemployed or too discouraged to look for employment know what it feels like to be collateral damage in the regulatory states war on business.
I happen to agree with George Will. I don't think employers should be the ones providing healthcare coverage. It is inefficient and not in their best interests
That's why we need government to step in and fill the role formerly conducted by employers.....provide an option for low cost healthcare
Or we could do what conservatives advocate......tell everyone to go fuck themselves. "Let them die"
Employers offering health insurance caused this entire healthcare nightmare. Imagine what would happen if employers could no longer offer health insurance, and it was left up to each individual and family to purchase their own coverage. I bet the cost would come down and most people would only purchase major medical.
