doing his part to push healthcare reform - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

DieselAddict · #16 10-02-2009, 06:27 PM

Despite what you may think I actually don't believe the individuals who administer Medicare are necessarily more efficient than those working for a private insurance company. I wouldn't even be surprised if they were slower, lazier, etc. That actually doesn't matter to me as much as what happens overall to MY health dollars. In Medicare more of my health dollars would go toward actual health care than with private insurance. That's a fact and to me that's what really matters.

I have no problem with doctors rejecting govt insurance. Let them. There are probably still more doctors accepting Medicare than any other specific insurance. All I want is more choice. If I want to buy my insurance from the govt, who are you to oppose me? Ditto if I want to see a doctor who accepts the govt insurance. All I want is more choice because currently there is very little.

daveuz · #17 10-02-2009, 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmac2012

Oops, flagged for removal.

As fast as they are removed new ones come on. I haven't checked any other cities but if you go to the Indianapolis Craigslist and type "Wellpoint" or just browse the housing wanted. Such as http://indianapolis.craigslist.org/sha/1402993765.html

aklim · #18 10-02-2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

In Medicare more of my health dollars would go toward actual health care than with private insurance. That's a fact and to me that's what really matters.

I have no problem with doctors rejecting govt insurance. Let them. There are probably still more doctors accepting Medicare than any other specific insurance. All I want is more choice. If I want to buy my insurance from the govt, who are you to oppose me? Ditto if I want to see a doctor who accepts the govt insurance. All I want is more choice because currently there is very little.

How did you ascertain that? You do realize that at 3% overhead, there isn't much left for fraud and abuse, right?

Well, toss the US flag around it and tie a bow. You make it sound so American. More choice. Who could object to that? In fantasy world, it will be just another option. My money says that given time, it will become another SS where it needs a bailout. Not the choice I want. Is that the choice you want? In the meantime, it will become a cash pool. Wanna take bets on that? The only way I can see it becoming a real choice is if it spins off and has no govt backing or influence. Otherwise, it will just become another entity that cannot be allowed to fail. IOW, it has an unfair edge because the backer (taxpayer) has deep pockets. Is that fair competition to you? As I have pointed out, even in Medicare, they have used govt power to skew the private companies. Is that what you mean by having more choices? Another moneypit with govt backing that can affect the private industry?

DieselAddict · #19 10-02-2009, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

How did you ascertain that? You do realize that at 3% overhead, there isn't much left for fraud and abuse, right?

Well, toss the US flag around it and tie a bow. You make it sound so American. More choice. Who could object to that? In fantasy world, it will be just another option. My money says that given time, it will become another SS where it needs a bailout. Not the choice I want. Is that the choice you want? In the meantime, it will become a cash pool. Wanna take bets on that? The only way I can see it becoming a real choice is if it spins off and has no govt backing or influence. Otherwise, it will just become another entity that cannot be allowed to fail. IOW, it has an unfair edge because the backer (taxpayer) has deep pockets. Is that fair competition to you? As I have pointed out, even in Medicare, they have used govt power to skew the private companies. Is that what you mean by having more choices? Another moneypit with govt backing that can affect the private industry?

Would you rather waste more taxpayer money on subsidies for the poor so they can buy private coverage when the govt could give them the same coverage for less? Because that's what's gonna happen without the public option.

aklim · #20 10-03-2009, 12:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

Would you rather waste more taxpayer money on subsidies for the poor so they can buy private coverage when the govt could give them the same coverage for less? Because that's what's gonna happen without the public option.

If those are the only choices, I prefer to pay less. However, how can we be sure that we are paying less for govt coverage? With private insurance, it is real easy to tell what we are paying. Therefore, that is one end of the thing for consideration.

How can we be sure what we are paying for with the govt? If they steal from Peter to pay Paul like they do with SS, is that not counted? Can we believe that they will not pad the books like they have been doing everyday? If they are simply writing checks without really doing proper fraud prevention, are we really paying less? Yes, I know they busted someone for a 10 million dollar theft. Peanuts compared to projections of 100 Billion dollars of fraud. Why use cash accounting when businesses use accrual accounting if not to make things look rosy? I think the most important question is: Given the govt's history, how can we be certain it will cost less like they say?

I think that it might be better if we paid more with the private option. Why? Because the govt will be in the wings waiting to pounce on fraud. IOW, there is a watcher on the insurance should they step out of line. Each fine adds to their coffers and makes them look better. OTOH, if the govt takes part in this endeavor, who watches the watchers?

DieselAddict · #21 10-03-2009, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

If those are the only choices, I prefer to pay less. However, how can we be sure that we are paying less for govt coverage? With private insurance, it is real easy to tell what we are paying. Therefore, that is one end of the thing for consideration.

How can we be sure what we are paying for with the govt? If they steal from Peter to pay Paul like they do with SS, is that not counted? Can we believe that they will not pad the books like they have been doing everyday? If they are simply writing checks without really doing proper fraud prevention, are we really paying less? Yes, I know they busted someone for a 10 million dollar theft. Peanuts compared to projections of 100 Billion dollars of fraud. Why use cash accounting when businesses use accrual accounting if not to make things look rosy? I think the most important question is: Given the govt's history, how can we be certain it will cost less like they say?

I think that it might be better if we paid more with the private option. Why? Because the govt will be in the wings waiting to pounce on fraud. IOW, there is a watcher on the insurance should they step out of line. Each fine adds to their coffers and makes them look better. OTOH, if the govt takes part in this endeavor, who watches the watchers?

It's highly unlikely that hiring a contractor would be cheaper than doing the job yourself. And the govt has shown itself highly capable of doing the job themselves. Medicare, Medicaid and the VA are great examples. If only the a-hole senators accepting bribes from the private insurance industry would make themselves more useful by getting out of the way.

aklim · #22 10-03-2009, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

It's highly unlikely that hiring a contractor would be cheaper than doing the job yourself.

And the govt has shown itself highly capable of doing the job themselves. Medicare, Medicaid and the VA are great examples.

If only the a-hole senators accepting bribes from the private insurance industry would make themselves more useful by getting out of the way.

Assuming you are equally competent, yes.

If doing the job is simply writing checks, they have indeed proven themselves and then some. Look at the way the have "cost overruns" in the military. Good thing my contractor doesn't bid low only to present me with a final bill that is more than expected.

Do you deny they have lied, are lying and will lie again in the future? IF not, sure. IF so, how do you know it won't turn into another SS where they "borrow" money from it? How do you know it won't turn into another cash pot? When it happens, you do realize that the cost you had in mind goes up, right? Seeing as how they have lied to us, why should we trust them again, this time with a 3 trillion dollar account? If your whole thesis is that you'd rather the money not go to insurance companies, irrespective of whether it gets spent wisely or whether it gets spent and you assume it is spent wisely, sure. At this time, lets not talk about incompetence. Lets look at their lying and thieving history only. So once again, what do you base your predictions on? The word of an honest man or the word of a thief and liar? If your wife cheated on you and continues to cheat on you, what do you do? Divorce her when it is possible financially or just "take the good with the bad" and carry on with her, investing more in her in future? I know what I would do.

Problem is they are not certain that they can use it as a pot of money to play with in the future or they would be 100% behind it. That and that they might not be around then so get what you can from the lobbyist today.

732002 · #23 10-04-2009, 02:07 AM

I am all for improving efficiency and reducing waste. Just
because the Gov/military has made mistakes is not a good
reason for eliminating the military.

Even under the current health care system there are parts
of the country that are more and less efficient, measure by
cost vs patient outcome.

Doctor groups buy medical equipment and then order tests on their
patients that will use the medical equipment they own, at best this
is a conflict of interest.

aklim · #24 10-04-2009, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 732002

I am all for improving efficiency and reducing waste. Just because the Gov/military has made mistakes is not a good
reason for eliminating the military.

The military we already have and probably have little choice but to stick with it. HOWEVER, the govt isn't just making mistakes. They have used every pot of cash to screw around with things and buy votes. This goes beyond "oops". Like I said, if my teller gave you 2 $50 bills instead of 2 $5, that is a mistake. HOWEVER, if my teller put a $5 in his/her pocket, that is deceit. If we have to put up with it for now, fine. Why should we increase their responsibilities and increase the chance for fraud and theft?

Think about it this way. If I cannot fire you at work and you have been stealing from and lying to me, what should I do? Limit your work as best as I can or give you more responsibilities?

732002 · #25 10-04-2009, 04:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

The military we already have and probably have little choice but to stick with it. HOWEVER, the govt isn't just making mistakes. They have used every pot of cash to screw around with things and buy votes. This goes beyond "oops". Like I said, if my teller gave you 2 $50 bills instead of 2 $5, that is a mistake. HOWEVER, if my teller put a $5 in his/her pocket, that is deceit. If we have to put up with it for now, fine. Why should we increase their responsibilities and increase the chance for fraud and theft?

Think about it this way. If I cannot fire you at work and you have been stealing from and lying to me, what should I do? Limit your work as best as I can or give you more responsibilities?

Sure the system has faults, usually it is those in positions of power
that benefit by changing gov policy in their favor. Alcohol in our
gas (welfare farming), changes in taxes, (Top marginal rates, Cap gains, inheritance)

Either the gov helps provide health care or we let 15% go without.
I don't see a third option.

aklim · #26 10-04-2009, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 732002

Sure the system has faults, usually it is those in positions of power
that benefit by changing gov policy in their favor. Alcohol in our
gas (welfare farming), changes in taxes, (Top marginal rates, Cap gains, inheritance)

Either the gov helps provide health care or we let 15% go without.
I don't see a third option.

So why should we trust that they won't shaft us once more? If your spouse has lied to and cheated on you many times in the past but you can't divorce her for whatever reason, I would not recommend you entangle yourself with he any more than you are already.

15% go without what they cannot afford is better than changing the system and getting the shaft once again. We have seen what they do with SS and other pools of money. How do you think this time will be different especially when they are doing it at this very moment? OTOH, if they have stopped their crap for a few years, MAYBE we might explore that trust thing.

732002 · #27 10-04-2009, 11:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

So why should we trust that they won't shaft us once more? If your spouse has lied to and cheated on you many times in the past but you can't divorce her for whatever reason, I would not recommend you entangle yourself with he any more than you are already.

15% go without what they cannot afford is better than changing the system and getting the shaft once again. We have seen what they do with SS and other pools of money. How do you think this time will be different especially when they are doing it at this very moment? OTOH, if they have stopped their crap for a few years, MAYBE we might explore that trust thing.

You are ignoring the fact that the current health care system is very flawed.
The uninsured still eventually end up in emergency rooms and hospitals provide care at their and our loss.

We spent too much for health care on the 85% that have it. If the cost continues to rise we could have health care at 33% of GDP.

No "trust" the voters can always wake up and vote for change again. Ultimately it is the votes fault for whatever happens, politicians only tell us what we want to hear.

aklim · #28 10-05-2009, 12:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 732002

You are ignoring the fact that the current health care system is very flawed.
The uninsured still eventually end up in emergency rooms and hospitals provide care at their and our loss.

We spent too much for health care on the 85% that have it. If the cost continues to rise we could have health care at 33% of GDP.

No "trust" the voters can always wake up and vote for change again. Ultimately it is the votes fault for whatever happens, politicians only tell us what we want to hear.

Well, no system will be perfect. Maybe we should make medicine a "fee for service" thing where you have to pay to get service. Yes I am aware that flaws exist. However, do we want to solve this problem just to add YET ANOTHER system for the politicians to abuse and have YET ANOTHER problem to solve later on? Like the spook movies, there is usually little problem summoning the devil to take care of your problem. HOWEVER, don't think he won't come for your soul later on.

That is a scary projection but that was like the housing boom. We all thought it would go on forever and houses that were worth 200K would be in the 500K level. I don't think it will get to that stage.

You mean just like the voters woke up to demand change for SS so they cannot steal money from there? Like where our Tobacco Windfall money went? Where other tax money went? Did you see the article in USA Today from somewhere else where the states were using the fact that interest rates were lower and that they are guaranteed by the Federal Govt to borrow even more money to make up for the lack in tax receipts? AFAIK it was so they would not have the task of telling the voters to choose what to cut. And Oh, we are kicking the can further down the road.

DieselAddict · #29 10-05-2009, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Assuming you are equally competent, yes.

If doing the job is simply writing checks, they have indeed proven themselves and then some.

Never mind the fact that the VA has outperformed private hospitals in just about every category and Medicare has left private insurance in the dust when it comes to overhead. Yes, the latter is not really an apple-to-apple comparison, but it's far from irrelevant. Certainly there's no evidence that I'm aware of that suggests that Medicare mishandles our health dollars more than private insurance. In fact if anything it's the complete opposite. But you're too anti-govt biased to see that. In your mind there's just no possible way govt could do anything better than the private sector. To hell with any numbers to the contrary. Must be lies or accounting tricks.

aklim · #30 10-05-2009, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

Never mind the fact that the VA has outperformed private hospitals in just about every category and Medicare has left private insurance in the dust when it comes to overhead. Yes, the latter is not really an apple-to-apple comparison, but it's far from irrelevant. Certainly there's no evidence that I'm aware of that suggests that Medicare mishandles our health dollars more than private insurance. In fact if anything it's the complete opposite.

But you're too anti-govt biased to see that.

In your mind there's just no possible way govt could do anything better than the private sector.

As I asked before. Where did these figures come from? Lets consider the source. Are we dealing with a group of honest people or people that have, are and probably will be lying to and stealing from us. How do we know if those figures are true or not?

And why do you think that is? Perhaps it is because I am tired of being lied to on a daily basis?

Even if they could, it would only be in the initial phases. Could they manage SS better? On paper, yes. What is the total tab from all their screwing around? We need to know that before we can decide if it is better or not.

Lets make this real simple. Look at all the deceit they have committed. Tell me why we should trust them again with any of their projections or future actions. Right now, the watchers monitor insurance companies. If the watchers become the administrators, who would watch the watchers? Should we trust them because this is a new item IN SPITE OF their past?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode