It Sure Looks Like This Obamacare Program Has Led to More People Dying

The Purge

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2018
Messages
16,560
Reaction score
4,801
Points
290
This is the great LIE of the left...

NO ONE can be DENIED care from a Hospital... They MUST at the very least treat you to a stable state before they can discharge you, regardless of your ability to pay or insurance.

Now if you have a chronic illness this doesn’t really help you as you will be stabilized, put back on the street only to get sick again because you won’t be able to afford your meds or follow up treatment... But the idea you can be denied care (at least at a Hospital) is nonsense.


To determine whether a government program is successful, it's often necessary to look not only at how well it does what it's supposed to do, but what it's doing that it isn't supposed to. For example, killing people.

Take the hospital readmissions program built into Obamacare. The program derived from a simple observation that hospitals were treating lots of people who would then return for more treatment within the month. Unnecessary readmissions cost Medicare an estimated $17.5 billion a year. If hospitals were treating people effectively, the thinking went, those people shouldn't need to return so soon.

So the health law instituted a Medicare payment penalty for hospitals with too many readmissions for pneumonia, heart failure, and heart attack. Since 2012, Medicare has assessed about $2 billion in penalties on hospitals with too-high readmissions rates.

Hospital groups have argued that these payments are punitive and unfair, particularly to so-called safety net hospitals that serve the poorest, sickest patients. These patients tend to have higher readmissions rates, and the hospitals that treat them were more likely to be hit with payment reductions. (Earlier this year, the Trump administration changed the penalty structure for safety net hospitals.)

But the program has often been labeled a success because it accomplished its primary goal. Readmissions dropped between 2.3 and 3.6 percentage points for the conditions targeted. Readmissions associated with other maladies dropped by 1.4 percent. The authors of one 2016 study suggested that the lower readmission rates "point to how Medicare can improve the care that patients receive through innovative payment models." It offered proof, and hope, that with the right incentives, Medicare could save money and provide better care.

A new study appears to dash that hope, at least as far as readmissions are concerned.

Read more at reason.com ...
 

Death Angel

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2016
Messages
30,065
Reaction score
11,200
Points
1,410
While I despise government/government CONTROLLED medical care, I lost a dear friend not too long ago due to the problem with the second part of your quote. There needs to be SOME way to help people with these serious conditions. There doesn't seem to be much real help fore these people. The ER just does a basic patch job and throws you out and tells you to see your doctor. This is the ONLY help some of these people can get, and it is what killed her.
NO ONE can be DENIED care from a Hospital... They MUST at the very least treat you to a stable state before they can discharge you, regardless of your ability to pay or insurance.

Now if you have a chronic illness this doesn’t really help you as you will be stabilized, put back on the street only to get sick again because you won’t be able to afford your meds or follow up treatment
 

Rambunctious

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
34,947
Reaction score
12,795
Points
1,550
People can't afford their meds...they wait too long to go to the doctor due to the expense...Obama never should have messed with what we had....he took our system...the peoples system for healthcare and made it a overly bloated government welfare program....with rules and regulation almost impossible to comply with....its a freaking mess....now Pelosi will block any fix to it because with her its about stopping Trump from succeeding not representing the people....the people do not have a congress right now...they have a get Trump out of office continuum.....
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
46,166
Reaction score
5,261
Points
1,860
This is the great LIE of the left...

NO ONE can be DENIED care from a Hospital... They MUST at the very least treat you to a stable state before they can discharge you, regardless of your ability to pay or insurance.

Now if you have a chronic illness this doesn’t really help you as you will be stabilized, put back on the street only to get sick again because you won’t be able to afford your meds or follow up treatment... But the idea you can be denied care (at least at a Hospital) is nonsense.


To determine whether a government program is successful, it's often necessary to look not only at how well it does what it's supposed to do, but what it's doing that it isn't supposed to. For example, killing people.

Take the hospital readmissions program built into Obamacare. The program derived from a simple observation that hospitals were treating lots of people who would then return for more treatment within the month. Unnecessary readmissions cost Medicare an estimated $17.5 billion a year. If hospitals were treating people effectively, the thinking went, those people shouldn't need to return so soon.

So the health law instituted a Medicare payment penalty for hospitals with too many readmissions for pneumonia, heart failure, and heart attack. Since 2012, Medicare has assessed about $2 billion in penalties on hospitals with too-high readmissions rates.

Hospital groups have argued that these payments are punitive and unfair, particularly to so-called safety net hospitals that serve the poorest, sickest patients. These patients tend to have higher readmissions rates, and the hospitals that treat them were more likely to be hit with payment reductions. (Earlier this year, the Trump administration changed the penalty structure for safety net hospitals.)

But the program has often been labeled a success because it accomplished its primary goal. Readmissions dropped between 2.3 and 3.6 percentage points for the conditions targeted. Readmissions associated with other maladies dropped by 1.4 percent. The authors of one 2016 study suggested that the lower readmission rates "point to how Medicare can improve the care that patients receive through innovative payment models." It offered proof, and hope, that with the right incentives, Medicare could save money and provide better care.

A new study appears to dash that hope, at least as far as readmissions are concerned.

Read more at reason.com ...
ER is not healthcare. They tell you to follow up with your family dr. Most people in the ER are not admitted to the hospital, that is why. Medicare patients should not stay under observation. Esp if you do not have part B and even if you have an advantage plan.

Most significantly, patients will not be able to obtain any Medicare coverage if they need nursing home care after their hospital stay. Medicare only covers nursing home care for patients who have a 3-day inpatient hospital stay – Observation Status doesn’t count towards the 3-day stay.

Outpatient Observation Status is paid by Medicare Part B, while inpatient hospital admissions are paid by Part A. Thus, Medicare beneficiaries who are enrolled in Part A, but not Part B, will be responsible for their entire hospital bill if they are classified as Observation Status.
Center for Medicare Advocacy ||  Outpatient Observation Status
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
46,166
Reaction score
5,261
Points
1,860
People can't afford their meds...they wait too long to go to the doctor due to the expense...Obama never should have messed with what we had....he took our system...the peoples system for healthcare and made it a overly bloated government welfare program....with rules and regulation almost impossible to comply with....its a freaking mess....now Pelosi will block any fix to it because with her its about stopping Trump from succeeding not representing the people....the people do not have a congress right now...they have a get Trump out of office continuum.....
No everyone should have a pre existing condition and not be able to afford health ins. No its not a bloated welfare plan. Pelosi had best save it. If only you knew what it was like before the ACA passed.
 

Ambivalent1

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
3,716
Reaction score
363
Points
150
Location
West
People can't afford their meds...they wait too long to go to the doctor due to the expense...Obama never should have messed with what we had....he took our system...the peoples system for healthcare and made it a overly bloated government welfare program....with rules and regulation almost impossible to comply with....its a freaking mess....now Pelosi will block any fix to it because with her its about stopping Trump from succeeding not representing the people....the people do not have a congress right now...they have a get Trump out of office continuum.....
No everyone should have a pre existing condition and not be able to afford health ins. No its not a bloated welfare plan. Pelosi had best save it. If only you knew what it was like before the ACA passed.
I do and this ISN'T better
 

Rambunctious

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
34,947
Reaction score
12,795
Points
1,550
People can't afford their meds...they wait too long to go to the doctor due to the expense...Obama never should have messed with what we had....he took our system...the peoples system for healthcare and made it a overly bloated government welfare program....with rules and regulation almost impossible to comply with....its a freaking mess....now Pelosi will block any fix to it because with her its about stopping Trump from succeeding not representing the people....the people do not have a congress right now...they have a get Trump out of office continuum.....
No everyone should have a pre existing condition and not be able to afford health ins. No its not a bloated welfare plan. Pelosi had best save it. If only you knew what it was like before the ACA passed.
I do and this ISN'T better
Its worse than before...its a nightmare....
 

Ambivalent1

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2018
Messages
3,716
Reaction score
363
Points
150
Location
West
People can't afford their meds...they wait too long to go to the doctor due to the expense...Obama never should have messed with what we had....he took our system...the peoples system for healthcare and made it a overly bloated government welfare program....with rules and regulation almost impossible to comply with....its a freaking mess....now Pelosi will block any fix to it because with her its about stopping Trump from succeeding not representing the people....the people do not have a congress right now...they have a get Trump out of office continuum.....
No everyone should have a pre existing condition and not be able to afford health ins. No its not a bloated welfare plan. Pelosi had best save it. If only you knew what it was like before the ACA passed.
I do and this ISN'T better
Its worse than before...its a nightmare....
Yes it is.
 

Dick Foster

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2018
Messages
6,867
Reaction score
3,178
Points
390
Location
The People's Republic of the Californicated
There is no doubt that our current healthcare system is a complete mess and is getting worse. Many if not most folks seem to be clueless as to what to do to fix it. As I'm old enough to remember how it was not so long ago when most folks paid for their own healthcare out of pocket I can assure most of you that you are wrong. Not only are you wrong you are clueless as to how to go about fixing it. The way to go about getting this train back on the rails is not more government involvement, it's less. Not only that but to also kill off all healthcare insurance programs ASAP by making it illegal to sell or even offer these scams. They are nothing more than con games dressed up to look like the crooked deals they are. If you take just one step back and look at the problem as a whole you can see that healthcare insurance can't possibly help the insured but only bring harm and hurt to the insured by adding more complexity to an overly complicated problem. Common sense dictates than unless you are a healthcare provider you simply have no business being involved must less being paid to be involved. In fact anyone not directly involved but the sick or the healthcare provider providing the care are a parasite unless they are working for free. Neither our government or any insurance company I'm aware of works for free. By eliminating the government and all third parties working for profit and allowing free market forces to dominate the cost of healthcare would soon come crashing down to earth making the cost of healthcare to come crashing down to earth where most folks could one again afford the cost of healthcare out of pocket. Charities could once again afford to take care of the less fortunate. This is the way it once was and it worked. I saw it work so I know it's true.
To those who persit in government involvement on any level, I can only ask, please name just one government agency or program that is sucessful and has not devolved into a totally disfuctional mess.
 

dblack

Platinum Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
33,962
Reaction score
3,272
Points
1,130
The death rate has been pretty consistent through all of history: 100%
 

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
141,315
Reaction score
13,594
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri

Mindful

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
37,548
Reaction score
9,629
Points
1,470
Location
Here, there, and everywhere.

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
141,315
Reaction score
13,594
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri

Mindful

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
37,548
Reaction score
9,629
Points
1,470
Location
Here, there, and everywhere.

Moonglow

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
141,315
Reaction score
13,594
Points
2,220
Location
sw mizzouri

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top