I Agree With The Founders About Healthcare

[Flash]

I have relatives who are Canadians. I joke about them wanting our healthcare system and they laugh at the absurdity. Tommy Douglas, who created it in Saskatchewan and it was seen as a great idea, is always voted the most popular politician of all time. Canadians laugh at our shitty system.

Not all Canadians:

"Why Canadian premier seeks health care in U.S."

https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/open...-premier-seeks-health-care-in-U-S-3198150.php

"Crossing the Border for Care: Frustrated by long waits, some Canadians are heading to the U.S. for medical treatment."

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-co...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

"Why Canadians Are Increasingly Seeking Medical Treatment Abroad"

"In 2014, more than 50,000 Canadians left the country for medical treatment, a 25 percent increase from the previous year. A similar number left the country for treatment in 2015."

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/canadian-medical-tourism_us_5949b405e4b0db570d3778ff

 

[CFM]

Lies, of course.

No, your jealousy is getting the best of you because you can't stand someone else had what you only wish you could have.

 

[CFM]

This should be interesting...can't wait to see how you tie the administration of reimbursement to care that's already happened.




So...let me get this straight...you want people who have genetic conditions they had no part in getting, to pay more for health care than someone who hasn't yet had a pre-existing condition? Why?




See, the thing is that this is within the context of profits for insurance companies. Because the amount the insurance company pays for your care is directly related to how much profit they make. So it's in their interests to deny you care so they can make more of a profit.

How does an insurance company profiting more materially affect your health care, other than what I stated above? You seem to think that a doctor treats you with lower quality depending on who reimburses them afterward, and that is a crock of shit. The quality of health care your doctor gives you is the same quality regardless of your insurance. Anything less is malpractice.

You don't seem to have any understanding of this subject at all.

The determination of costs has already been determined prior to the care being provided.

Life's not fair, son. Trying to make it that way will only make you a bigger loser than you were born. What you seem to be saying is that the person without the pre-existing condition should pay more in order that the person with one doesn't have to pay an amount equivalent to the amount of care they get.

It's not malpractice if you meet the minimum standard. Malpractice, by definition, involves a doctor not treating someone up to that minimum level.

I bet you're the type that thinks the burger flipper should get paid the same amount as the CEO.

 

[CFM]

[/B]
So rather than a patient determining this, you think an insurance company should and that leads to better care for you, how?

Don't you want the ability to negotiate for cheaper fees?

You're a terrible negotiator.

What you propose doesn't involve negotiation. It involves the government dictating what healthcare providers will get paid. The patient isn't involved at all.

 

[Old Trapper]

You will understand after you die. For now you will live the rest of your earthly existence as a socialist/ Luciferian damned fool. You have plenty of company.

Would that not depend on how you define "socialist"? The Repugnant way, or the Christian way? Remember, you are the one that voted for a lying, adulterous, cowardly, thief. I voted for an honest Christian named Darrell Castle. God said to select righteous leaders (Exodus 18: 21 "Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them as leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens.") You chose a piece of trash. God said Christians should believe in income equality (as well as the Founders), yet you chose the greed of the wealthy over God (2Corinthians 8: 13-15 “For I mean not that other men be eased, and ye burdened: But by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality: As it is written, He that had gathered much had nothing over; and he that had gathered little had no lack.”)

And yet I am the "Luciferian fool"?

I would suggest you get off your knees before your false god, and seek the one true God.

 

[LV426]

Doesn't change you're jealous of what other people have that you don't and you can't stop whining about it.

It's telling how you keep going back to this weakness as if it somehow lends your argument strength. Sounds to me like you're the jealous one here.

Why are so many doctors opting out of Medicare if it's as good of a system as you claim

Because they're not.

From KFF:

The vast majority of non-pediatric primary care physicians (93 percent) say they accept Medicare—comparable to the share accepting private insurance (94 percent)

So what happened is that you were sold a lie (doctors ditching Medicare), and you bought that lie because it confirmed your bias. But even a cursory Google search reveals virtually the same % of primary care doctors accept Medicare vs. private insurance YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE.

 

[LV426]

A commodity.

A commodity that does what? Cares for your health.

our argument has centered around it being a national issue solely related to HEALTH reasons.

Silly me for thinking health care has anything to do with health.

::

When you start arguing taxes, you invalidate your justification about being health related.

The taxes pay for it, dingleberry.

 

[LV426]

I'll take good before popular any day

You think it's good that the Russia Tax Cut exploded the deficit to $1T? Weren't you one of those who bought into the fad of stapling a teabag to your face and whining about deficits and debt?

 

[LV426]

As far as what's more popular, depends on who you ask.

Thousands of people polled say they like Obamacare more than your shitty Russian Tax Cut.

 

[CFM]

It's telling how you keep going back to this weakness as if it somehow lends your argument strength. Sounds to me like you're the jealous one here.




Because they're not.

From KFF:

The vast majority of non-pediatric primary care physicians (93 percent) say they accept Medicare—comparable to the share accepting private insurance (94 percent)

So what happened is that you were sold a lie (doctors ditching Medicare), and you bought that lie because it confirmed your bias. But even a cursory Google search reveals virtually the same % of primary care doctors accept Medicare vs. private insurance YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE.

I have what you said others should have. Can't be jealous of someone with less, boy.

This is a source: https://healthcare.dmagazine.com/2016/02/05/why-more-doctors-are-walking-away-from-medicare/

You can call me what you want, boy. I have what you said you wished you had. Jealous little bastard.


If Medicare was as good as you claim, why aren't 100% of doctors accepting it.

 

[LV426]

It's just an educated guess but I'd say those benefiting from the tax cut would find it more popular and those benefiting from the Obamacare subsidies would find it more popular

Trouble is that only 1% benefits from the Russia Tax Cut.

Most everyone else has seen their real wages decline since the Russia Tax Cut.

So yeah, I bet the Russia Tax Cut is really popular among the top 1%. Unfortunately, there's the other 99% for whom the Russia Tax Cut doesn't benefit.

 

[CFM]

Thousands of people polled say they like Obamacare more than your shitty Russian Tax Cut.

It's not hard to understand why those not paying the taxes that were cut wouldn't like something. They don't benefit from a handout.

 

[LV426]

those benefiting from the Obamacare subsidies would find it more popular

More people are benefiting from Obamacare than from your shitty Russia Tax Cut, is all you're saying here.

If the latter number is higher, all that says is those getting the subsidy don't pay the taxes that fund it.

Or that more people benefit from Obamacare than benefit from the Russia Tax Cut.

 

[CFM]

Trouble is that only 1% benefits from the Russia Tax Cut.

Most everyone else has seen their real wages decline since the Russia Tax Cut.

So yeah, I bet the Russia Tax Cut is really popular among the top 1%. Unfortunately, there's the other 99% for whom the Russia Tax Cut doesn't benefit.

I benefited. That you didn't means you should remove your sig line because it sounds as if you're jealous of someone doing better than you.

 

[CFM]

More people are benefiting from Obamacare than from your shitty Russia Tax Cut, is all you're saying here.




Or that more people benefit from Obamacare than benefit from the Russia Tax Cut.

The only thing that shows is there are more freeloaders than those of us that keep the country running.

 

[LV426]

I said the justification used claimed it was. Nowhere did I say that it was a correct interpretation.

Forgive me if I don't accept the interpretation of a racist Conservative liar on a message board.

 

[LV426]

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruled separate but equal was OK. If that was Constitutional, why did people argue against it and push to change it?

You're comparing Medicare to segregation.

That's pretty weak sauce, man.

 

[CFM]

Forgive me if I don't accept the interpretation of a racist Conservative liar on a message board.

I don't really care about the opinion of someone whose opinion doesn't come up to the level of shit in a nigger's back yard.

 

[CFM]

You're comparing Medicare to segregation.

That's pretty weak sauce, man.

Not at all. It's a simple mind that would think so and we both know that the 85 average IQ of your kind doesn't let you get above below average.

 

[LV426]

The end user doesn't get to tell the provider how much the provider can charge.

In a single payer system they do because the entity representing the patients is the one that does the negotiating. So in a system where the profit motive for administrating reimbursements is removed, the bargaining power shifts to the side that has the leverage. And a single payer, by definition, has all the leverage. So a single payer can tell a provider they're only going to reimburse up to a certain amount for a particular procedure. If the doctor wants to make more money, the doctor is free to upcharge his/her patients. But that's not really going to translate to more profits for the doctor since health care is all about volume. That's how you lower costs, idiot. By using the bargaining power to negotiate for lower costs.

Have you ever negotiated for anything in your life?!?!?!?

You don't go into a grocery store and if something costs $.69 tell the manager he/she can only charge you $.49.

Like I've said...the fundamentals of this subject you simply don't understand, and you're resistant to understanding them. You just want to make yourself feel better on a message board because your life is total shit.