And So It Begins...

vantexan

Well-Known Member
It exploded when hospitals were getting stiffed with unpaid bills saw their charity reserves exhausted and had to raise rates to compensate and pass it it off to health insurers and their subscribers. Then again, non profit public hospitals cannot by means of their license and charter refuse treatment on the basis of a patients inability to pay. Obamacare had many objectives. Among them was preventative care and the elimination of low premium near zero coverage policies and returning ER's to just that ER's Not the trauma centers they were becoming due to very sick people coming in with a host of conditions that could have been easily and cheaply treated through preventative care.
Not to mention all the ER's in the Southwest that were shut down due to illegal immigrants using them for all of their medical care, as advised by activists, and letting the government pick up the tab. And P.S., everyone's premiums and deductibles went up under Obamacare to subsidize the poor and to cover preexisting conditions.
 
Last edited:

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Cotton gin was patented in 1794.

“With the gin (short for engine), raw cotton could be quickly cleaned; Suddenly cotton became a profitable crop, transforming the southern economy and changing the dynamics of slavery. The first federal census of 1790 counted 697,897 slaves; by 1810, there were 1.2 million slaves, a 70 percent increase.”

Blows up your theory, Van.
It sure does. But I do know that abolitionists argued before the Civil War that slavery could no longer be justified with the advent of machines that could do the work. Somehow got it in my mind they were talking about the cotton gin. And for the peanut gallery I'm not saying slavery was justifiable, only that's what they argued to try to end it.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Not to mention all the ER's in the Southwest that were shut down due to illegal immigrants using them for all of their medical care, as advised by activists, and letting the government pick up the tab. And P.S., everyone's premiums and deductibles went up under Obamacare to subsidize the poor and to cover preexisting conditions.
Who are you to talk? The last time you went to the hospital you had no insurance but bragged about how you got the same billed rate as those who did whatever was necessary and sacrificed in order to keep their premiums paid. So quit shaming illegals when you have done nothing better yourself.
 

dmac1

Well-Known Member
Maybe you missed it. There was a LAW that was passed, and that law contained a MANDATE, and that LAW punished you with a FINE for not obeying the MANDATE.
You were given a choice- buy insurance and pay lower taxes, or don't pay insurance and face a higher tax bill. And few people even faced that choice. The well off were smart, and knew they needed insurance to protect their financial health. The poor up to $22k income for a single person got full coverage with no costs. Those not eligible for subsidies had enough income to afford insurance and if smart, had it. If you premium is more than 10% of your income, you were exempt from the penalty.

If you were one of those who paid the penalty, I think it meant that you were too stupid to know whats good for you, and that you are irresponsible.
And because 80% of the population gets coverage through work, social security, medicare, medicaid, or the VA, only a tiny percentage of even the stupid and irresponsible were subject.

You apparently want to pay for those too stupid or irresponsible to provide them care if needed, but absolutely hate those who can't provide themselves with enough food. Those without insurance make those with insurance pay more. Doctors and hospitals raise your costs to cover losses from the uninsured. That is a form of tax. Too bad you can't see the forest for the trees because FOX convinced you that having a healthier population that will cost less in the future when chronic issues are treated early is a bad thing.

Crybabies like Trump followers just whine that a few irresponsible people will need to pay their share and think it is a loss of freedom. Making others pay for their needs is taking 'freedom' away from the rest, since you equate 'freedom' with a requirement that you pay your own way if possible.
 

Fred's Myth

Nonhyphenated American
Who are you to talk? The last time you went to the hospital you had no insurance but bragged about how you got the same billed rate as those who did whatever was necessary and sacrificed in order to keep their premiums paid. So quit shaming illegals when you have done nothing better yourself.
Actually, hospitals here will provide your uninsured care at a 70% discount off their normal rates if you settle your bill within 10 days. Seems all the record keeping and red tape expenses come at a significant cost to the hospital.

Maybe if everybody would settle their debt this way, carrying only catastrophic insurance coverage, medical costs wouldn't appear to be so exorbitant.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Actually, hospitals here will provide your uninsured care at a 70% discount off their normal rates if you settle your bill within 10 days. Seems all the record keeping and red tape expenses come at a significant cost to the hospital.

Maybe if everybody would settle their debt this way, carrying only catastrophic insurance coverage, medical costs wouldn't appear to be so exorbitant.
And chances are that 70% off is about the same rate as that which insurers were able to negotiate with the provider. Do you really think that discounted rate would exist at all if it were not for the purchasing power of group insurance subscribers?
 

Fred's Myth

Nonhyphenated American
And chances are that 70% off is about the same rate as that which insurers were able to negotiate with the provider. Do you really think that discounted rate would exist at all if it were not for the purchasing power of group insurance subscribers?
If you would re-read my post #121 in this thread, you would also learn that those negotiated rates are purchased via retainer, meaning the net result is more expensive than cash.

Personal fiscal responsibility sometimes reaps a reward.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Not to mention all the ER's in the Southwest that were shut down due to illegal immigrants using them for all of their medical care, as advised by activists, and letting the government pick up the tab. And P.S., everyone's premiums and deductibles went up under Obamacare to subsidize the poor and to cover preexisting conditions.
And by the way. Most of not all of the 13 states that opted out of the expanded Medicaid program are in the Mid and Southwest including your state of Kansas. And rest assured if it had joined and you qualified you would have been right in there to fully capitalize on it to the fullest extent and at that very moment a program which is in your mind's eye a wasteful public spending program would immediately become the best public social program since Medicare. Pseudo conservatism at it's finest where it's easy to talk the conservative talk but the everyday application of it's core principles is a rocky road to walk indeed.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
If you would re-read my post #121 in this thread, you would also learn that those negotiated rates are purchased via retainer, meaning the net result is more expensive than cash.

Personal fiscal responsibility sometimes reaps a reward.
I did and it still comes down to the power of a large pool of insured subscribers ability to negotiate bulk rates. Then again even at the discounted rate how many people have enough money in their bank accounts to pay for a heart or kidney transplant or weeks in a coma ?
 

Fred's Myth

Nonhyphenated American
I did and it still comes down to the power of a large pool of insured subscribers ability to negotiate bulk rates. Then again even at the discounted rate how many people have enough money in their bank accounts to pay for a heart or kidney transplant or weeks in a coma ?
Ergo the catastrophic coverage mentioned in my previous response.
 

dmac1

Well-Known Member
Actually, hospitals here will provide your uninsured care at a 70% discount off their normal rates if you settle your bill within 10 days. Seems all the record keeping and red tape expenses come at a significant cost to the hospital.

Maybe if everybody would settle their debt this way, carrying only catastrophic insurance coverage, medical costs wouldn't appear to be so exorbitant.

Except many poor people can't afford even the basic office visit and basic lab tests that easily run over $400 combined. The ACA included those at no charge out of pocket once annually to catch the chronic issues that are cheap to fix when caught early. Those 'fat' people that some despise will cost a lot less to care for if given a $2 a month prescription for metformin instead of waiting until they end up in the ER with full blown diabetes. Paying now saves money later.

If that same person ends up on disability at age 45, and needs insulin, and faces other issues because you don't like giving people 'free care' then you are penny wise and pound foolish. The ACA was set up with future savings in mind. Same with expansion of medicaid. Keeping people healthy is much cheaper than treating them AFTER they develop chronic issues. Chronic issues are the leading costs in medicare. Caught younger, expenses for medicare in the future would be lower.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Ergo the catastrophic coverage mentioned in my previous response.
Then again all policies have coverage limits . All policies have premiums. And given that states regulate insurance markets some insurance products do not pass the muster of all 50 states insurance commissions.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
The only time in our history that automation released millions from their jobs was when the invention of the cotton gin made it no longer economically viable to keep millions of blacks as slaves. And they've been struggling ever since. Seriously, when have we ever seen the extinction of tens of millions of jobs at any time in our history? I don't think the research labs and universities developing all this stuff are just doing it for the fun of it. A lot of people are going to be on the outside looking in but you don't care as long as you've got yours.

OK. You can believe it's imminent because a rich guy says so with nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, to back it up.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Cotton gin was patented in 1794.

“With the gin (short for engine), raw cotton could be quickly cleaned; Suddenly cotton became a profitable crop, transforming the southern economy and changing the dynamics of slavery. The first federal census of 1790 counted 697,897 slaves; by 1810, there were 1.2 million slaves, a 70 percent increase.”

And by 1865, there were over 2 million slaves.

Blows up your theory, Van

Just goes to show that a horribly bad premise will be supported with horribly bad arguments.
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
You were given a choice- buy insurance and pay lower taxes, or don't pay insurance and face a higher tax bill.

Ah, the magic of semantics. It was no secret that the purpose of the "tax" was to punish those who didn't go out and obtain what the government demanded that they have on the grounds of "because we said so."

You apparently want to pay for those too stupid or irresponsible to provide them care if needed, but absolutely hate those who can't provide themselves with enough food. Those without insurance make those with insurance pay more. Doctors and hospitals raise your costs to cover losses from the uninsured. That is a form of tax. Too bad you can't see the forest for the trees because FOX convinced you that having a healthier population that will cost less in the future when chronic issues are treated early is a bad thing.

Oh, you poor leftist dingle dip. Insuring everyone doesn't reduce costs. It does more to increase demand, which in turn DRIVES UP THE AGGREGATE COSTS OF PROVIDING CARE because it results in more people attempting to consume services without a corresponding increase in the quantity of service providers. And over the long run, it drives up the prices that providers charge, which is reflected in the premiums that the insurance companies charge.

Not that we aren't already experiencing that to a certain degree, but there comes a point where the costs of further straining the system with higher demand are greater than the costs of those whose expenses are written off because they couldn't/wouldn't pay.

Crybabies like Trump followers just whine that a few irresponsible people will need to pay their share and think it is a loss of freedom. Making others pay for their needs is taking 'freedom' away from the rest, since you equate 'freedom' with a requirement that you pay your own way if possible.

What is the deal with you progressives, always wanting to use the force of the government to ram your will down the throat of people?
 

59 Dano

I just want to make friends!
Except many poor people can't afford even the basic office visit and basic lab tests that easily run over $400 combined. The ACA included those at no charge out of pocket once annually to catch the chronic issues that are cheap to fix when caught early. Those 'fat' people that some despise will cost a lot less to care for if given a $2 a month prescription for metformin instead of waiting until they end up in the ER with full blown diabetes. Paying now saves money later.

If that same person ends up on disability at age 45, and needs insulin, and faces otherissues because you don't like giving people 'free care' then you are penny wise and pound foolish. The ACA was set up with future savings in mind. Same with expansion of medicaid. Keeping people healthy is much cheaper than treating them AFTER they develop chronic issues. Chronic issues are the leading costs in medicare. Caught younger, expenses for medicare in the future would be lower.

Let me tell you a secret. People who didn't do :censored2: to properly manage their health before the ACA didn't so so afterwards, either. The flawed theory behind mandated coverage is that all these uncovered people are going to immediately take full and proper use of the benefits they got with their newfangled ACA coverage, thus becoming healthier and driving down health costs for the population. Guess what? They don't. There was no big turnaround in habits, and anyone with any sense of awareness predicted as much.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Let me tell you a secret. People who didn't do :censored2: to properly manage their health before the ACA didn't so so afterwards, either. The flawed theory behind mandated coverage is that all these uncovered people are going to immediately take full and proper use of the benefits they got with their newfangled ACA coverage, thus becoming healthier and driving down health costs for the population. Guess what? They don't. There was no big turnaround in habits, and anyone with any sense of awareness predicted as much.
What a person can do in behalf of their health is important and might serve to slow down but not stop the ageing process. Age and heredity are also key factors . I lost a good friend 3 months ago due to a hereditary form of heart disease that had already killed two of his siblings. So Dano if there are disease patterns that are common in your parents families chance are they'll be paying you a visit sometime in the not too distant future.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
And by the way. Most of not all of the 13 states that opted out of the expanded Medicaid program are in the Mid and Southwest including your state of Kansas. And rest assured if it had joined and you qualified you would have been right in there to fully capitalize on it to the fullest extent and at that very moment a program which is in your mind's eye a wasteful public spending program would immediately become the best public social program since Medicare. Pseudo conservatism at it's finest where it's easy to talk the conservative talk but the everyday application of it's core principles is a rocky road to walk indeed.
Except that I wouldn't. You think government is the answer to everything but as Obamacare illustrated it isn't.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
OK. You can believe it's imminent because a rich guy says so with nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing, to back it up.
Have you actually listened to the guy? A real policy wonk. And he does cite sources when he talks. He's not Al Gore. And yes they are developing robotics and AI with the intent of replacing human workers. A number of places, for example, are working on self driving semi trucks. And for good reason. There's a chronic shortage of drivers, there's constant turnover, and many drivers jump ship to other companies for more money. Fully implemented that would eliminate millions of jobs. About half of all jobs can possibly be replaced. He pointed out millions of jobs were lost due to automation in the auto industry. Not just factory jobs, but many jobs in the communities that depended on good paying auto jobs to support their economy. You say it leads to other opportunities. But those were the states who were hurting so bad they voted for Trump.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Except that I wouldn't. You think government is the answer to everything but as Obamacare illustrated it isn't.
Your other bill was lowered considerably thanks to government sponsored and passed healthcare laws that allowed for the creation of insurance subscriber groups and insurance pools and thanks to them you made out quite nicely even though you didn't contribute a cent to them. Oh yeah, if you were faced with a major health condition that ran up hundreds of thousands of dollars in bills and you're just getting by from week to week you'll accept financial assistance from any place you can get it and I mean any place. And that includes government sources and don't even try to tell me that you wouldn't accept it.
 
Top