Oppose the president?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cancel4
  • Start date Start date
C

Cancel4

Guest
Here's what you are supporting:


'Profits over people' is the mantra of the obstructionists.
 
DNC said:
You don't care who has to die, as long as the bloated profits of the insurance companies are protected, right?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R36Y...&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv&feature=player_embedded
Click to expand...

you know, it's sort of funny....most people aren't aware of this, but my insurer, BlueCross/BlueShield of Michigan, like the majority of BC/BS companies, is a non-profit corporation......I realize that sort of fucks up your argument, but I figure you'll find a way to cope with the disappointment.....

http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/52627047.html
 
Inefficient and inconsistent claims process adds as much as $200 billion annually to the healthcare system, the AMA contends.

One recent study estimated that physicians spend the equivalent of three weeks annually on health insurance red tape.

To keep up with the administrative tasks required by health plans, physicians divert as much as 14 percent of their revenue to ensure accurate payments from insurers.

The wide variation in how often health insurers deny claims, and the reasons used to explain the denials, indicates a serious lack of standardization in the health insurance industry.

Another issue caused by insurers is timeliness of payment for a claim. Each and every state has legislative mandates regarding this issue, and not surprisingly, all are different.

Appeals and grievance policies are different in all states, as are prompt payment laws. With national guidelines and electronic medical records, utilizing global experts for difficult cases, health care would improve and costs would be lower.

Patients should be able to choose the best providers for their needs, and in order to do this, outcomes data and provider performance data (including cost) needs to be available in a standardized format. Only then can patients and employers have the tools to choose the best doctor for their needs, and doctors who provide quality, cost effective medicine will be rewarded for their dedication to their practice of quality care.

Health care reform is a powerful step in the right direction.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
you know, it's sort of funny....most people aren't aware of this, but my insurer, BlueCross/BlueShield of Michigan, like the majority of BC/BS companies, is a non-profit corporation......I realize that sort of fucks up your argument, but I figure you'll find a way to cope with the disappointment.....

http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/52627047.html
Click to expand...

WOW! One in thousands and it fucks up the argument, no your plan is one that can be looked at as an example of what works when you remove profit from medicine and the fields connected to it! Isn't BCBS publicly traded?

People, such as teachers, believe they will be on a private health care system when they retire, when in fact, it will be Medicare!!!! It makes me smile, Americans really do vote against their own best interests!
 
froggie said:
WOW! One in thousands and it fucks up the argument, no your plan is one that can be looked at as an example of what works when you remove profit from medicine and the fields connected to it! Isn't BCBS publicly traded?

People, such as teachers, believe they will be on a private health care system when they retire, when in fact, it will be Medicare!!!! It makes me smile, Americans really do vote against their own best interests!
Click to expand...

one in thousands?....BC/BS is the largest insurer in the state, as it is in most other states where it operates....
 
PP has health care, so screw the 47 million who don't.

Wait 'til BCBS denies a claim or drops PP. Then we'll have another voice for change!
 
PostmodernProphet said:
one in thousands?....BC/BS is the largest insurer in the state, as it is in most other states where it operates....
Click to expand...

Yes, and they have many other companies, for profit!

Maybe, I exaggerated a wee bit.

Don't they run Medicare for the Feds via the states, too?
 
"Health insurance premiums for nearly 200,000 people covered by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan policies would increase an average of 22 percent -- far less than the company originally sought -- under a tentative agreement reached Thursday"

http://www.wilx.com/news/headlines/52627047.html

"President Barack Obama has issued the call for the medical insurance industry to produce significant reform so millions of Americans still uncovered or underinsured by the healthcare insurance industry can obtain affordable medical care and to rein in the skyrocketing cost of premiums for the individuals who do have access to it. In response, Blue Cross Blue Shield has notified the Washington Post that it has an ad campaign in the development stage that will lambaste many of the reforms advocated by the president."

http://medheadlines.com/2009/05/25/...launch-ad-campaign-against-obama-health-plan/
 
froggie said:
Yes, and they have many other companies, for profit!

Maybe, I exaggerated a wee bit.

Don't they run Medicare for the Feds via the states, too?
Click to expand...

every BC/BS in each state is a separate company...I know BC/BS of Michigan handles Medicare here, as well as the benefits programs for both state and federal employees in the state....around here the two largest insurers are BC/BS and Priority Health, both are non-profits.....and any profit based insurance company still has to stay competitive with both of them....in any event, insurance company profits are regulated by law at a maximum of 7% of benefits paid, so this "profit gorged" rhetoric is ridiculous propaganda.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
the 47 million is a lie that's been debunked a dozen times on this site....
Click to expand...

It was taken from the 2007 census, how have you debunked it, it could be lower or higher depending on the numbers coming out in the new census.

Okay, so it is 35 million or 55 million, what difference does it make, it is too many, in my opinion!
 
Please, tell us: what number of uninsured children do you find acceptable?
 
If 47 million uninsured is too high, what number is acceptable to the obstructionists?
 
froggie said:
It was taken from the 2007 census, how have you debunked it, it could be lower or higher depending on the numbers coming out in the new census.
Click to expand...
take the 2003 census data for example....they concluded that there were 43.5 million people in America who were uninsured....

this included 9.5 million people who weren't US citizens
it included 7.5 million people with incomes over $75k a year and another 7.2 million who earned between $50k and $75k a year.....
it included 15 million people who were uninsured for a portion of the year, perhaps as short as four weeks due to transition between jobs or insurance programs
it included 8.4 million people between the ages of 18 and 24, the age category of those who 1) have the least medical bills and 2) frequently choose to do without health care

so you tell me....are there 47 million Americans suffering because they don't have health care?.....or is that number a lie...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top