Switch Theme:

The Political Junkie™ Thread - USA Edition  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 whembly wrote:
Indeed man. We're definitely debating this from different angles.... nothing wrong with that, because maybe we can educate each other on these issues (or at least spawn of avenues of research on our own time).


I’ve learned a bit from you, I like to think you’ve maybe learned a bit from me on this issue as well.

Just as an aside, I read a great piece on NPR a while ago, which might interest you as I know you’ve mentioned the crazy pricing arrangements for hospital care a few times before. The article was about agencies who fight excessive billing for patients. Faced with bills in the tens or hundreds of thousands, people can employ this agency, who have done the research to know how much the hospital would charge an insurer for the procedure, and they will then tell the hospital that’s how much the patient will pay. Apparently the hospitals will accept that amount pretty much every time.

If you’re interested I’ll find the article.

From my perspective, we can do much, MUCH better with our system... which doesn't necessarily means throwing more money at the current model.


From my perspective, the reforms in ACA are an improvement. They’re a million miles from perfect, and left many bad parts of the old system, but they have resulted in much reduced denial of coverage, and far fewer uninsured people.

This industry is so heavily regulated... we might as well as go to a single payer system, ala NHS/Canada. Can't cost that much more than it does now.


Single payer actually costs less than private systems. There’s a bunch of reasons, and not all of them are good, but the overall effect is a cheaper system. But I agree with your point - right now you’ve got all the waste and nonsense of for-profit health, combined with all the waste and nonsense of government control, so as you say might as well go to total government control and get rid of some of that waste.

But there’s a lot of political headwind that makes that basically impossible. I mean, look at the campaign waged by the private insurers against ACA, and all this did was cap their profit margins and remove denial of coverage. Imagine what they’d do if they were faced with a single payer system that would make them no longer exist.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 sebster wrote:
 whembly wrote:
Indeed man. We're definitely debating this from different angles.... nothing wrong with that, because maybe we can educate each other on these issues (or at least spawn of avenues of research on our own time).


I’ve learned a bit from you, I like to think you’ve maybe learned a bit from me on this issue as well.

Indeed... you (and others here) do challenge me to refine my positions, and at times I've changed my mind.

Just as an aside, I read a great piece on NPR a while ago, which might interest you as I know you’ve mentioned the crazy pricing arrangements for hospital care a few times before. The article was about agencies who fight excessive billing for patients. Faced with bills in the tens or hundreds of thousands, people can employ this agency, who have done the research to know how much the hospital would charge an insurer for the procedure, and they will then tell the hospital that’s how much the patient will pay. Apparently the hospitals will accept that amount pretty much every time.

If you’re interested I’ll find the article.

I remember reading about that too...

It's really just as simple as calling the Patient Accounting dept and tell them that you can't pay this bill. It's to their interest to work with you in any way they can... rather than sending the bill to collection agency where they can scant returns.

It's how I paid for my 1st born's hospital stay... I ended up negotiating a $25/month plan for 2 yrs, which was about 1/5th of the original bill.

I always tell everyone I know that if they've incurred a large out-of-pocket expense at the hospital... just call the patient account depart and demand why "x service" or "x treatment" cost so much. They'll work with ya rather than trying to explain an itemized bill.

From my perspective, we can do much, MUCH better with our system... which doesn't necessarily means throwing more money at the current model.


From my perspective, the reforms in ACA are an improvement. They’re a million miles from perfect, and left many bad parts of the old system, but they have resulted in much reduced denial of coverage, and far fewer uninsured people.

This industry is so heavily regulated... we might as well as go to a single payer system, ala NHS/Canada. Can't cost that much more than it does now.


Single payer actually costs less than private systems. There’s a bunch of reasons, and not all of them are good, but the overall effect is a cheaper system. But I agree with your point - right now you’ve got all the waste and nonsense of for-profit health, combined with all the waste and nonsense of government control, so as you say might as well go to total government control and get rid of some of that waste.

But there’s a lot of political headwind that makes that basically impossible. I mean, look at the campaign waged by the private insurers against ACA, and all this did was cap their profit margins and remove denial of coverage. Imagine what they’d do if they were faced with a single payer system that would make them no longer exist.

My thoughts exactly.

:shrugs:

That's why I've advocated incremental reforms.

We'll see what the Supreme Court does next monday regarding the ACA subsides. If they rule against the government... ho-lee-gak... this industry is going to take a beating.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 03:21:23


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 sebster wrote:

That’s probably part of it. I think another part is the expectations people have when it comes to healthcare – people feel uncomfortable about seeing a less skilled person, just in case it might be something more than a regulation cold. This is compounded by healthcare systems in which the person receiving the treatment pays little of the cost of the visit – if they were paying $100 out of their own pocket for the doctor, or $50 for the nurse you might see a lot more people accept the nurse.


But that all feeds into a lack of respect for the position and education. In the US RNs, at a minimum, have 2 years of education and must pass a certification exam. NPs have at least 6 years of education (often 8) and a significant amount of experience as RNs. These are skilled, knowledgeable people.

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 dogma wrote:

But that all feeds into a lack of respect for the position and education. In the US RNs, at a minimum, have 2 years of education and must pass a certification exam. NPs have at least 6 years of education (often 8) and a significant amount of experience as RNs. These are skilled, knowledgeable people.



Personally, I think it stems from a lack of knowledge of the various nursing levels. For instance, my sister-in-law became an LPN fairly quickly, and used that LPN as a paid internship at the hospital where she worked (it was actually part of her training/schooling program). She became an RN after around 4-6 years, and has now gone back to school for another 2-3 to become an NP.

Aside from people who are related to nurses, are nurses, or work in the medical field to where they'd have some "professional knowledge"... how many people really know the difference between an LPN or an NP?
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 whembly wrote:

A start would be to somehow enforce pricing/cost visibility on every facet of healthcare.


Why can't people subject to the US system figure that out on their own? It isn't like it is overly complicated.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
...how many people really know the difference between an LPN or an NP?


Tragically few, but I think that ignorance is sexist. Half the jokes in Meet the Parents only "work" because Ben Stiller's character is a nurse.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/18 06:02:25


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in au
Longtime Dakkanaut




Squatting with the squigs

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
 dogma wrote:

But that all feeds into a lack of respect for the position and education. In the US RNs, at a minimum, have 2 years of education and must pass a certification exam. NPs have at least 6 years of education (often 8) and a significant amount of experience as RNs. These are skilled, knowledgeable people.



Personally, I think it stems from a lack of knowledge of the various nursing levels. For instance, my sister-in-law became an LPN fairly quickly, and used that LPN as a paid internship at the hospital where she worked (it was actually part of her training/schooling program). She became an RN after around 4-6 years, and has now gone back to school for another 2-3 to become an NP.

Aside from people who are related to nurses, are nurses, or work in the medical field to where they'd have some "professional knowledge"... how many people really know the difference between an LPN or an NP?


I don't. Here is Aus it is (atm)

AIN: assistant in nursing - showering ect
Enrolled Nurse - a step above AIN
Registered Nurse - general care obs and medication.
Nurse Specialist* - specialised nurse in each ward on that wards classification
Nursing Educator* - trains nurses , resolves issues in training and practice in conjunction with the NUM
Nursing Unit Manager - runs the ward
*not official title.
what's an NP? I gather LPN is our equivalent of an AIN/EN.

My new blog: http://kardoorkapers.blogspot.com.au/

Manchu - "But so what? The Bible also says the flood destroyed the world. You only need an allegorical boat to tackle an allegorical flood."

Shespits "Anything i see with YOLO has half naked eleventeen year olds Girls. And of course booze and drugs and more half naked elventeen yearolds Girls. O how i wish to YOLO again!"

Rubiksnoob "Next you'll say driving a stick with a Scandinavian supermodel on your lap while ripping a bong impairs your driving. And you know what, I'M NOT GOING TO STOP, YOU FILTHY COMMUNIST" 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

And the Pope's encyclical is out. It will be very interesting to see how the politicians express their opinions on climate change without appearing to disrespect someone who is probably the most loved and respected religious leader in years. I'm not Catholic, but I think the world would be a much better place if we could clone this guy a few times, creating one for each major religion.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Bullockist wrote:
 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
 dogma wrote:

But that all feeds into a lack of respect for the position and education. In the US RNs, at a minimum, have 2 years of education and must pass a certification exam. NPs have at least 6 years of education (often 8) and a significant amount of experience as RNs. These are skilled, knowledgeable people.



Personally, I think it stems from a lack of knowledge of the various nursing levels. For instance, my sister-in-law became an LPN fairly quickly, and used that LPN as a paid internship at the hospital where she worked (it was actually part of her training/schooling program). She became an RN after around 4-6 years, and has now gone back to school for another 2-3 to become an NP.

Aside from people who are related to nurses, are nurses, or work in the medical field to where they'd have some "professional knowledge"... how many people really know the difference between an LPN or an NP?


I don't. Here is Aus it is (atm)

AIN: assistant in nursing - showering ect
Enrolled Nurse - a step above AIN
Registered Nurse - general care obs and medication.
Nurse Specialist* - specialised nurse in each ward on that wards classification
Nursing Educator* - trains nurses , resolves issues in training and practice in conjunction with the NUM
Nursing Unit Manager - runs the ward
*not official title.
what's an NP? I gather LPN is our equivalent of an AIN/EN.

NP = nurse practitioner.

I'm over-simplifiying this as it can be different state-by-state, but think of them as Practicing MD's that can do just about anything except for order Narcotics. (even then, that's changing).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Tannhauser42 wrote:
And the Pope's encyclical is out. It will be very interesting to see how the politicians express their opinions on climate change without appearing to disrespect someone who is probably the most loved and respected religious leader in years. I'm not Catholic, but I think the world would be a much better place if we could clone this guy a few times, creating one for each major religion.

Meh.

He's a latino socialist. He'll use any means to distribution wealth.

For those who's praising the Pope on this... what about his stance against abortion?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 14:47:29


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in gb
Assassin with Black Lotus Poison





Bristol

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
And the Pope's encyclical is out. It will be very interesting to see how the politicians express their opinions on climate change without appearing to disrespect someone who is probably the most loved and respected religious leader in years. I'm not Catholic, but I think the world would be a much better place if we could clone this guy a few times, creating one for each major religion.


Think the first step should be to clone him in order to replace many of the hardline Bishops in the catholic church. Without them in the way I think reforms would come a lot faster.

The Laws of Thermodynamics:
1) You cannot win. 2) You cannot break even. 3) You cannot stop playing the game.

Colonel Flagg wrote:You think you're real smart. But you're not smart; you're dumb. Very dumb. But you've met your match in me.
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 dogma wrote:
 whembly wrote:

A start would be to somehow enforce pricing/cost visibility on every facet of healthcare.


Why can't people subject to the US system figure that out on their own? It isn't like it is overly complicated.

Because, for most people, it *is* complicated.

We have a system that's trying to play both sides of the "Capitalistic Model" and "Socialistic Model" within the same industry. Basically, this is textbook on how the government encourages the most inefficient environment to deliver healthcare.

If we truly want to lower costs of insurance and medical services... the only way to do it is make sure there are no artificial government barriers to provisioning these services AND to make sure that the people using them pay the ACTUAL cost.

Cost and Pricing visibility.

This is exactly how it works in the elective surgery industry, like Plastic Surgery.

That is the only way to ensure that people CAN make INFORMED decisions about what they are willing to pay for...

Anything else is really a political scheme that will end of with the Government offering "MOAR and for FREE!"

Otherwise, we might as well just cut to the inevitable endgame... ala, single payer, and save everyone from further bickering.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

I'm ok with single payer.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Frazzled wrote:
I'm ok with single payer.

What's interesting is that in the last few years, I'm seeing/reading/hearing a shift from conservative folks that they may be open to that.

However, I think dogma is right, they only way this get legs is if a Republican Congress pushes this. I ain't holding my breath for that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 15:34:44


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Extreme capitalism for healthcare is extremely wrong on a moral level. You shouldn't be sentenced to suffer and die for being poor.j
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Yea'rly!)




The Great State of Texas

 skyth wrote:
Extreme capitalism for healthcare is extremely wrong on a moral level. You shouldn't be sentenced to suffer and die for being poor.j

Agreed.

-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

Democrats in the U.S. Shift to the Left


So... I don't think HRC is going to do what Bill did during his tenure... Bill moderated his stance quite a bit.

With Sanders within 12 pts of HRC in NH in two polls... she's going have to move to the left a bit... no?

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

Eh, she still needs to appeal to the middle, though. The Rs still need to find someone they can all rally behind (or at least tolerate). Whoever can reach out to the middle while still keeping their own party's support should be the one to win.

"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Tannhauser42 wrote:
Eh, she still needs to appeal to the middle, though. The Rs still need to find someone they can all rally behind (or at least tolerate). Whoever can reach out to the middle while still keeping their own party's support should be the one to win.

Generally speaking... yeah.

But, I think this is one of those weird election season where there's going to be surprises.

I also wanted to point out that Poll Chart, showing that the Democrats are indeed being "more" lefty. Some in this thread challenged me on that saying it's only the Republicans are going more to the right.

It's both, being repelled from each other. And that, the moderates is getting smaller, and smaller.


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

There does come a point where fundamental differences in principles/thoughts of governance are not going to have workable compromises. When you attempt to force change in core beliefs, you will find resistance. I don't know we are at that point yet, but I can see a future where we reach it. The political class on both sides seem to only present the divides which helps to further the gap.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 20:24:52


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 CptJake wrote:
There does come a point where fundamental differences in principles/thoughts of governance are not going to have workable compromises. When you attempt to force change in core beliefs, you will find resistance. I don't know we are at that point yet, but I can see a future where we reach it. The political class on both sides seem to only present the divides which helps to further the gap.



That reads like something out of the 1850s

I wonder if our National Health Service style system would work in the USA? Money comes out of your wages (people would complain, but you're paying for it in the USA anyway, why not cut out the paperwork) and you still have the private option, so competition is there.

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
 CptJake wrote:
There does come a point where fundamental differences in principles/thoughts of governance are not going to have workable compromises. When you attempt to force change in core beliefs, you will find resistance. I don't know we are at that point yet, but I can see a future where we reach it. The political class on both sides seem to only present the divides which helps to further the gap.



That reads like something out of the 1850s

I wonder if our National Health Service style system would work in the USA? Money comes out of your wages (people would complain, but you're paying for it in the USA anyway, why not cut out the paperwork) and you still have the private option, so competition is there.

We have the framework for that already.

Medicare and Medicaid.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?





Fort Worth, TX

 whembly wrote:


I also wanted to point out that Poll Chart, showing that the Democrats are indeed being "more" lefty. Some in this thread challenged me on that saying it's only the Republicans are going more to the right.

It's both, being repelled from each other. And that, the moderates is getting smaller, and smaller.



Here's a thought, what if it's because the political middle is growing bigger? Maybe enough people are bailing on both parties that it only looks like the extremes are getting bigger as a percentage of who is still left in the party?


"Through the darkness of future past, the magician longs to see.
One chants out between two worlds: Fire, walk with me."
- Twin Peaks
"You listen to me. While I will admit to a certain cynicism, the fact is that I am a naysayer and hatchetman in the fight against violence. I pride myself in taking a punch and I'll gladly take another because I choose to live my life in the company of Gandhi and King. My concerns are global. I reject absolutely revenge, aggression, and retaliation. The foundation of such a method... is love. I love you Sheriff Truman." - Twin Peaks 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I wonder if our National Health Service style system would work in the USA? Money comes out of your wages (people would complain, but you're paying for it in the USA anyway, why not cut out the paperwork) and you still have the private option, so competition is there.


I don't think so. Too many people don't earn or don't earn enough that it would still be a redistributive policy where middle class earners like my wife and I end up subsidizing the even more of health care of others (we already have medicaid/medicare as pointed out). Our smaller pay check would ensure that we could not then afford that private option. Enough already comes out of our paychecks that I do not feel like giving even more to the gov't. Call me selfish, but when I negotiated my salary, I negotiated it for an amount acceptable to me with the assumption I get to keep the lion's share of what I earn. I didn't negotiate it for an amount that lets me pay a crap ton of new taxes.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 20:43:05


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in gb
Courageous Grand Master




-

 CptJake wrote:
 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:


I wonder if our National Health Service style system would work in the USA? Money comes out of your wages (people would complain, but you're paying for it in the USA anyway, why not cut out the paperwork) and you still have the private option, so competition is there.


I don't think so. Too many people don't earn or don't earn enough that it would still be a redistributive policy where middle class earners like my wife and I end up subsidizing the even more of health care of others (we already have medicaid/medicare as pointed out). Our smaller pay check would ensure that we could not then afford that private option. Enough already comes out of our paychecks that I do not feel like giving even more to the gov't. Call me selfish, but when I negotiated my salary, I negotiated it for an amount acceptable to me with the assumption I get to keep the lion's share of what I earn. I didn't negotiate it for an amount that lets me pay a crap ton of new taxes.



We had that same argument in the UK. People were asking why poor people should get free medicine, but it turned out it was cheaper to give somebody heart pills for five years than pay a heart surgeon to do the work when they got ill. Multiply that cost over thousands of people.

"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

I think the real answer is both parties are bleeding moderates and independents... this is more than a year old, and I'm not convinced it's changed much:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx



Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Plus you likely are paying for insurance out of your paycheck (in addition to the amount your employer pays towards it that you don't see and theoretically should go to you if there is a nhs.)

Plus you are already subsidizing the people who don't have health insurance through your taxes plus higher insurance rates because of people who don't pay.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 whembly wrote:
I think the real answer is both parties are bleeding moderates and independents... this is more than a year old, and I'm not convinced it's changed much:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/166763/record-high-americans-identify-independents.aspx




I'm registered independant but I go out and vote against Republicans. *shrugs*

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 21:06:20


 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





CL VI Store in at the Cyber Center of Excellence

 skyth wrote:
Plus you likely are paying for insurance out of your paycheck (in addition to the amount your employer pays towards it that you don't see and theoretically should go to you if there is a nhs.)

Plus you are already subsidizing the people who don't have health insurance through your taxes plus higher insurance rates because of people who don't pay.



1st: I am very aware I already subsidize it, I am very much against coughing up MOAR. I already pay my 'fair share'. And screw anyone who thinks I ought to pay MOAR.

2nd: The insurance is the easiest part to fix. Allow the insurance companies to sell across state lines and set their risk pools correctly and charge according to the risk pool. You want to live on a diet of cigarettes, cheetos and mountain dew? Fine, don't expect to be in the same risk pool I'm in and see what your premiums look like. Decide not to have insurance? Fine, expect to be turned away for anything but life saving emergency procedures and then expect to have to file bankruptcy. Allow folks to buy only catastrophic coverage if that is what they want.

It is a hard world. Forcing me and my family to subsidize 'hoverounds' for fat folks to clog up the aisles of walmart and buy junk food is immoral. Stopping that type of abuse of the system goes a long way towards getting folks to be willing to subsidize those truly in need.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/06/18 23:05:08


Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings. 
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 whembly wrote:

Because, for most people, it *is* complicated.


So your argument is that most US citizens are so lazy, stupid, or disabled that they cannot do research on their healthcare plan?

Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 dogma wrote:

So your argument is that most US citizens are so lazy, stupid, or disabled that they cannot do research on their healthcare plan?


In essence, yes. You wouldn't believe the number of people I sat in front of who had no idea how copays worked, or the 50/50 or 80/20 breakdowns for standard plans.

Most people have it in their heads, mostly due to ridiculous obamacare commercials: "I want my doctor visits covered"


On top of that, I am convinced that hospital bills specifically, are designed in the most convoluted and difficult to use way possible, precisely so that people will get frustrated and just overpay to be done with it.
   
Made in us
Dwarf High King with New Book of Grudges




United States

 CptJake wrote:

Allow the insurance companies to sell across state lines and set their risk pools correctly and charge according to the risk pool.


Insurance companies already set premiums according to their risk. As to out of State sales: good luck convincing State governments to allow them. As Georgia figured out, you'll need more than one.

 CptJake wrote:

Decide not to have insurance? Fine, expect to be turned away for anything but life saving emergency procedures and then expect to have to file bankruptcy.


That isn't a solution. In that situation the individual is likely to go into Chapter 13 which will significantly delay the service provider's ability to collect, raising costs for everyone else. Like it or not you are going to pay for the healthcare of other citizens, getting upset because the state is making you do so is irrational.

 CptJake wrote:

It is a hard world. Forcing me and my family to subsidize 'hoverounds' for fat folks to clog up the aisles of walmart and buy junk food is immoral.


Perhaps if those people were provided with proper healthcare they wouldn't need mobility assistance.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

In essence, yes. You wouldn't believe the number of people I sat in front of who had no idea how copays worked, or the 50/50 or 80/20 breakdowns for standard plans.


I probably would. Average people are average, and average isn't very good. But I would think that in the aftermath of the healthcare debate people would think "Yeah, I should research my insurance plan.", the resources are easily available.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

On top of that, I am convinced that hospital bills specifically, are designed in the most convoluted and difficult to use way possible, precisely so that people will get frustrated and just overpay to be done with it.


They have to get their money somehow.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/06/19 04:29:05


Life does not cease to be funny when people die any more than it ceases to be serious when people laugh. 
   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





 dogma wrote:
But that all feeds into a lack of respect for the position and education. In the US RNs, at a minimum, have 2 years of education and must pass a certification exam. NPs have at least 6 years of education (often 8) and a significant amount of experience as RNs. These are skilled, knowledgeable people.


Sure, I didn’t ever say or imply they weren’t. But they aren’t the most qualified person in that clinic – you don’t need sexism to explain why a two year course is seen differently from a 6+ year course. And when it comes to healthcare people insist on the best, even when the actual benefit of being seen by the best is minimal, or non-existant. And the problem is made worse when the patient isn’t directly paying.



Remember I said this would happen. In response to the Republican shift to the right, Democrats would respond by moving further to the left.

So... I don't think HRC is going to do what Bill did during his tenure... Bill moderated his stance quite a bit.

With Sanders within 12 pts of HRC in NH in two polls... she's going have to move to the left a bit... no?


Hillary’s announcement speech was pretty left wing, but then Obama said plenty of left wing stuff through his primary run as well, only to backtrack in the general. Playing to the left in the primary and then swinging back to the centre for the general is a pretty central part of any presidential run these days.

That said, I think your chart shows an underlying trend that will come to play more and more – the disappearance of swing voters. There just isn’t that many people left who are engaged in politics but unsure whether they prefer elephants or donkeys. Both sides now rely mostly on getting out their core voters.

That doesn’t mean a hard left/hard right strategy is optimal though, because part of the art is to avoid pissing off the other side and seeing them vote against you. A lot of 2008 votes weren’t cast for Obama, but against Bush/Republicans in general. Similarly Romney probably got approximately 4 people excited about a Romney presidency, but millions showed up to vote against Obama. Getting your core voters excited while not giving the other side to get angry about is a real strategy – GW Bush’s 2000 election was probably the perfect example of how to achieve this.

 whembly wrote:
Indeed... you (and others here) do challenge me to refine my positions, and at times I've changed my mind.


Never admit that on the internet.

It's really just as simple as calling the Patient Accounting dept and tell them that you can't pay this bill. It's to their interest to work with you in any way they can... rather than sending the bill to collection agency where they can scant returns.

It's how I paid for my 1st born's hospital stay... I ended up negotiating a $25/month plan for 2 yrs, which was about 1/5th of the original bill.


It's actually pretty good advice whenever you owe money, be proactive and contact them to negotiate. It works pretty well whenever the bill has a lot subjectivity and some legal fuzziness in it, like the itemised bill you mention.

We'll see what the Supreme Court does next monday regarding the ACA subsides. If they rule against the government... ho-lee-gak... this industry is going to take a beating.


It’ll be a big test for both parties, for sure.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: