AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 9:49:14 GMT -5
I think the person probably had a government program like SpecialCare in PA, which is ending now. Notice they never said WHAT they were paying... Just that it would cost 40-50% more. I know SpecialCare is like 160$ a person... If someone got kicked off that and had a 50% increase, well, so what? The whole thing could be based on fact, just fundamentally skeweed. I disbelieve the idea that he was in the individual market because I know how it works. No one who cost the company that much on an individual plan would still have an affordable rate. Right, so you will scrutinize what an individual has to say- and maybe with good reason. What I'm saying is that the whole country should have scrutinized the claims made concerning this zombie law. Because it's dead. It just hasn't died yet.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 21:14:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 9:51:54 GMT -5
I actually am. I am watching and listening. I'm just reserving judgement until, you know, it's actually up and running.... Until people are actually judging it based on the working facts, all of them, and not supposition....
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Nov 5, 2013 10:03:57 GMT -5
Yep, another casualty of change...and the blood of this individual is on the hands of the liberals who fought for this Obamacare monstorsity. But trying to get them to take any responsibility for this, or anyone else's problems with the ACA, is impossible. Mainly because they don't understand the meaning of responsibility... They will continue to defend this god-awful legislation while ignoring the bodies of the dead they're standing on...
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on Nov 5, 2013 10:06:20 GMT -5
No way that guy was on the individual market with an affordable plan after 1.2 million payout over 6 years.... More to the story. I'd like to know the actual numbers... Won't get it- WSJ opinion page. The real losers are those 6 feet under that couldn't get cancer treatments at all before this law- a little perspective is in order. This lady will still get coverage and treatment- worst case it may be a different facility or doctor. And if she ends up dead because of it...wtf do you care, right?
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Nov 5, 2013 10:45:00 GMT -5
If no one can get onto the website, how do all these people know what there costs will be ??
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Nov 5, 2013 11:00:22 GMT -5
online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304527504579171710423780446By Edie Littlefield Sundby Nov. 3, 2013 6:37 p.m. ET Everyone now is clamoring about Affordable Care Act winners and losers. I am one of the losers. My grievance is not political; all my energies are directed to enjoying life and staying alive, and I have no time for politics. For almost seven years I have fought and survived stage-4 gallbladder cancer, with a five-year survival rate of less than 2% after diagnosis. I am a determined fighter and extremely lucky. But this luck may have just run out: My affordable, lifesaving medical insurance policy has been canceled effective Dec. 31. My choice is to get coverage through the government health exchange and lose access to my cancer doctors, or pay much more for insurance outside the exchange (the quotes average 40% to 50% more) for the privilege of starting over with an unfamiliar insurance company and impaired benefits. Enlarge Image Bloomberg News Countless hours searching for non-exchange plans have uncovered nothing that compares well with my existing coverage. But the greatest source of frustration is Covered California, the state's Affordable Care Act health-insurance exchange and, by some reports, one of the best such exchanges in the country. After four weeks of researching plans on the website, talking directly to government exchange counselors, insurance companies and medical providers, my insurance broker and I are as confused as ever. Time is running out and we still don't have a clue how to best proceed. Dan Henninger is joined by Edie Sundby, a Stage-4 gallbladder cancer patient who is about to lose her 6-year-old medical insurance policy under the Affordable Care Act. Also, Paul Gigot on the Virginia gubernatorial race. Two things have been essential in my fight to survive stage-4 cancer. The first are doctors and health teams in California and Texas: at the medical center of the University of California, San Diego, and its Moores Cancer Center; Stanford University's Cancer Institute; and the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston. The second element essential to my fight is a United Healthcare PPO (preferred provider organization) health-insurance policy. Since March 2007 United Healthcare has paid $1.2 million to help keep me alive, and it has never once questioned any treatment or procedure recommended by my medical team. The company pays a fair price to the doctors and hospitals, on time, and is responsive to the emergency treatment requirements of late-stage cancer. Its caring people in the claims office have been readily available to talk to me and my providers. But in January, United Healthcare sent me a letter announcing that they were pulling out of the individual California market. The company suggested I look to Covered California starting in October. You would think it would be simple to find a health-exchange plan that allows me, living in San Diego, to continue to see my primary oncologist at Stanford University and my primary care doctors at the University of California, San Diego. Not so. UCSD has agreed to accept only one Covered California plan—a very restrictive Anthem EPO Plan. EPO stands for exclusive provider organization, which means the plan has a small network of doctors and facilities and no out-of-network coverage (as in a preferred-provider organization plan) except for emergencies. Stanford accepts an Anthem PPO plan but it is not available for purchase in San Diego (only Anthem HMO and EPO plans are available in San Diego). So if I go with a health-exchange plan, I must choose between Stanford and UCSD. Stanford has kept me alive—but UCSD has provided emergency and local treatment support during wretched periods of this disease, and it is where my primary-care doctors are. Before the Affordable Care Act, health-insurance policies could not be sold across state lines; now policies sold on the Affordable Care Act exchanges may not be offered across county lines. What happened to the president's promise, "You can keep your health plan"? Or to the promise that "You can keep your doctor"? Thanks to the law, I have been forced to give up a world-class health plan. The exchange would force me to give up a world-class physician. For a cancer patient, medical coverage is a matter of life and death. Take away people's ability to control their medical-coverage choices and they may die. I guess that's a highly effective way to control medical costs. Perhaps that's the point.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 11:57:28 GMT -5
Won't get it- WSJ opinion page. The real losers are those 6 feet under that couldn't get cancer treatments at all before this law- a little perspective is in order. This lady will still get coverage and treatment- worst case it may be a different facility or doctor. And if she ends up dead because of it...wtf do you care, right? I think the phrase you're looking for is, "What difference, at this point, does it make?"
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 12:00:23 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 21:14:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 12:51:00 GMT -5
hmmmm.. Sad to see Mojo dropped off the boards. Although I did not agree with him I did very much enjoy reading his articulate and well thought out contributions to the many threads he visited.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 21:14:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 12:52:30 GMT -5
hmmmm.. Sad to see Mojo dropped off the boards. Although I did not agree with him I did very much enjoy reading his articulate and well thought out contributions to the many threads he visited. That is too bad. He was one of the top posters, IMHO.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 6, 2024 21:14:02 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2013 12:57:02 GMT -5
hmmmm.. Sad to see Mojo dropped off the boards. Although I did not agree with him I did very much enjoy reading his articulate and well thought out contributions to the many threads he visited. That is too bad. He was one of the top posters, IMHO. Yes, I agree. ( I meant to say I didn't ALWAYS agree with him ) sometimes he was spot on.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 15:19:49 GMT -5
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 15:23:04 GMT -5
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 16:11:09 GMT -5
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 5, 2013 17:02:51 GMT -5
Won't get it- WSJ opinion page. The real losers are those 6 feet under that couldn't get cancer treatments at all before this law- a little perspective is in order. This lady will still get coverage and treatment- worst case it may be a different facility or doctor. And if she ends up dead because of it...wtf do you care, right? Riiight. Of course I care- if it was the system I want she could go to whatever doctor she wanted- so could any citizen. So I guess to put it to you WTF do you care if thousands of people with treatable cancer die because they do not have coverage as long as those that can afford and qualify for it do, right?
|
|
bimetalaupt
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 9, 2011 20:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 2,325
|
Post by bimetalaupt on Nov 5, 2013 18:12:56 GMT -5
The problem has been under funded R& D due to low dollar value of needed anti-fungal or Chemotherapeutic drugs. What will Obamacare do to the amount of money spent. Will OBAMACARE demanding too large a discount from MRK or BMY!!!!! I care about best of care and improvements with better care. Esp with better total care with combination of several drugs. Yes, for the few that need them they are just $$$$$ for the patient. It hurts not to be able to provide care due to limits on insurance. We will have a larger pool of patient due to care cost being shared with a pool of the total USA Population. Just a thought, BiMetalAuPt
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Nov 5, 2013 18:40:02 GMT -5
And if she ends up dead because of it...wtf do you care, right? Riiight. Of course I care- if it was the system I want she could go to whatever doctor she wanted- so could any citizen. So I guess to put it to you WTF do you care if thousands of people with treatable cancer die because they do not have coverage as long as those that can afford and qualify for it do, right? I've asked this question before but no one ever has an answer for me. If some medical miracle was developed that would prolong life by 20 years would everyone be entitled to it? Let's say that miracle cost 1M, does your answer change? How do we pay for it? Now to leverage off your statement about "thousands" of people with treatable cancer, let's make that multiple millions, does your answer change? What if you knew the odds of developing cancer in the US was about 50% during a lifetime, is everyone entitled to full treatment at a cost of tens, hundreds, or even 1.5M per person? We all die sometime, to think everyone is entitled to have their life prolonged to the maximum of scientific ability, regardless of the cost to society, is in IMHO a huge injustice to future generations who at some point will have to pay the piper. You love to demonize the insurance industry, but they performed a function that at some point will be relegated to the government - the rationing of health care. It's inevitable that someone or something will have to perform this function. Lately I've seen very little from our government that makes me comfortable giving them this power. ACA does zero to control costs, and every resource has limits and has to be rationed somehow. What are your proposals or solutions? I have none, but to promise unlimited access to costly resources never worked, anywhere.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,493
|
Post by Tennesseer on Nov 5, 2013 18:45:30 GMT -5
Yup AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP-your continued articles are surely going to get Congress to overturn PPACA. I would imagine very few are reading your links as we get it-you and others don't like ìt. And Happy Anniversary pbp! It's the anniversary of your biggest wishful thinking and analysis.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,486
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 5, 2013 19:24:57 GMT -5
So he's a liar? So is every politician and most people. Huge surprise there. bingo. only children believe that adults don't lie. time to grown up, everyone.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,486
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 5, 2013 19:26:33 GMT -5
So he's a liar? So is every politician and most people. Huge surprise there. This is an unprecedented lie. bull-f-ing-s*&t. Bush's $1T WMD lie was a lie that would have made Goebbles blush.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,486
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Nov 5, 2013 19:29:14 GMT -5
Won't get it- WSJ opinion page. The real losers are those 6 feet under that couldn't get cancer treatments at all before this law- a little perspective is in order. This lady will still get coverage and treatment- worst case it may be a different facility or doctor. And if she ends up dead because of it...wtf do you care, right? just like you don't care about the people who will die because they can't get insurance? see how fun it is playing the holier than thou game?
|
|
bimetalaupt
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 9, 2011 20:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 2,325
|
Post by bimetalaupt on Nov 5, 2013 19:55:22 GMT -5
Riiight. Of course I care- if it was the system I want she could go to whatever doctor she wanted- so could any citizen. So I guess to put it to you WTF do you care if thousands of people with treatable cancer die because they do not have coverage as long as those that can afford and qualify for it do, right? I've asked this question before but no one ever has an answer for me. If some medical miracle was developed that would prolong life by 20 years would everyone be entitled to it? Let's say that miracle cost 1M, does your answer change? How do we pay for it? Now to leverage off your statement about "thousands" of people with treatable cancer, let's make that multiple millions, does your answer change? What if you knew the odds of developing cancer in the US was about 50% during a lifetime, is everyone entitled to full treatment at a cost of tens, hundreds, or even 1.5M per person? We all die sometime, to think everyone is entitled to have their life prolonged to the maximum of scientific ability, regardless of the cost to society, is in IMHO a huge injustice to future generations who at some point will have to pay the piper. You love to demonize the insurance industry, but they performed a function that at some point will be relegated to the government - the rationing of health care. It's inevitable that someone or something will have to perform this function. Lately I've seen very little from our government that makes me comfortable giving them this power. ACA does zero to control costs, and every resource has limits and has to be rationed somehow. What are your proposals or solutions? I have none, but to promise unlimited access to costly resources never worked, anywhere. The Captain, Well...The population study has always been part of Drug dollar distribution for R & D spending. Now if you have a 50% chance bet the population study will support huge increasing in Drug development. The CFO of MRK,BMY and Lilly will be in the Presidents office reallocation cash.. Bet they will cut the dividends and increase lab space. Remember most of the life expectancy increases over the the last 100 year were product of drug developments.. My thought is we will have more vaccines for certain cancers or co-infection. Prevention is cheaper then cure!!! The future population will befit from current spending on Vaccines etc. Please note most HMO'S LOVE VACCINE TO REDUCE COST OF CARE... As far as Obamacare..They say there will be no limit to care..this should be great for the huge $$$$$$$$ of any major care needs...AIDS...Cancer.....MS OR OLD AGE.... Cure for the side effect of ObamaCare....Watch the major Left in Denmark...Cost J ust a thought.
BiMetalAuPt
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 21:03:39 GMT -5
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on Nov 5, 2013 21:05:27 GMT -5
Riiight. Of course I care- if it was the system I want she could go to whatever doctor she wanted- so could any citizen. So I guess to put it to you WTF do you care if thousands of people with treatable cancer die because they do not have coverage as long as those that can afford and qualify for it do, right? I've asked this question before but no one ever has an answer for me. If some medical miracle was developed that would prolong life by 20 years would everyone be entitled to it? Let's say that miracle cost 1M, does your answer change? How do we pay for it? Now to leverage off your statement about "thousands" of people with treatable cancer, let's make that multiple millions, does your answer change? What if you knew the odds of developing cancer in the US was about 50% during a lifetime, is everyone entitled to full treatment at a cost of tens, hundreds, or even 1.5M per person? We all die sometime, to think everyone is entitled to have their life prolonged to the maximum of scientific ability, regardless of the cost to society, is in IMHO a huge injustice to future generations who at some point will have to pay the piper. You love to demonize the insurance industry, but they performed a function that at some point will be relegated to the government - the rationing of health care. It's inevitable that someone or something will have to perform this function. Lately I've seen very little from our government that makes me comfortable giving them this power. ACA does zero to control costs, and every resource has limits and has to be rationed somehow. What are your proposals or solutions? I have none, but to promise unlimited access to costly resources never worked, anywhere. What kind of medical miracle? A drug? As far as cancer if 50% of the population ends up needing cancer treatment- then I would have to ask why in the hell it costs 1.5M per person. I am not saying everyone deserves to have the best team of doctors squeezing out the last few weeks cost be damned- I am talking about the average citizen with an average, treatable cancer (or other condition) that will kill them without it. Everyone in that situation should be treated- period. To let someone die because they are poor, do not have the proper policy, etc. is about the worst thing we could do and the symptom of a failed health care system. My solution is to figure out what is working in all of these other countries and try to come up with the best system in the world, whether it involves some role for private insurance or not. Universal coverage at a fair cost. I like single payer- put everyone on Medicare and tell the insurance companies to take a hike. I demonize insurance companies because they deserve it- especially health insurers. Look what they are doing right now- sending out letters cancelling the individual plans trying to convince people to sign up with more expensive options (and not really mentioning the exchanges)- it is what they always do- try to screw people when they are vulnerable or do not know any better.
|
|
bimetalaupt
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 9, 2011 20:29:23 GMT -5
Posts: 2,325
|
Post by bimetalaupt on Nov 5, 2013 21:26:07 GMT -5
NO..COST WOULD BE SHARED OVER A LARGER POPULATION!!! BET ON VACCINE!!
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 5, 2013 22:19:03 GMT -5
The market already has developed the best healthcare system in the world. The 45% of healthcare services delivered, though still highly regulated, outside the government system that controls the delivery of the other 55%, is the best in human history. Imagine we threw off the government constraints, and got government OUT of healthcare? The delivery of health services to every individual is like the delivery of websites, eyeglasses, groceries, televisions, smart phones (we'd all have rotary phones if it were up to government- DEREGULATION SAVED THE PHONE COMPANY- and all of us)- and anything else- it is too large, and to complex to be centrally planned. The argument against big government is big government.
|
|
usaone
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 9:10:23 GMT -5
Posts: 3,429
|
Post by usaone on Nov 6, 2013 9:03:29 GMT -5
It really doesn't matter at this point if Obama lied or not. hes not running in 2016 and the law is already enacted.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 6, 2013 9:16:00 GMT -5
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 6, 2013 9:16:44 GMT -5
It really doesn't matter at this point if Obama lied or not. hes not running in 2016 and the law is already enacted. Slavery was the law. Jim Crow was the law. We've beaten back bad Democrat laws in the past, we'll beat this one back.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Nov 6, 2013 9:23:01 GMT -5
It really doesn't matter at this point if Obama lied or not. hes not running in 2016 and the law is already enacted. One of the Articles of Impeachment against Richard Nixon was "Lying to the American People" (once considered a 'high crime and/or misdemeanor'). That was not a very consequential lie in the grand scheme of things- probably not even worthy of impeachment, and probably wouldn't have gotten very far in the Fox / New Media world we live in today. However, Obama's lie is the single most consequential lie ever told to the American people by a sitting President in the history of the country. Mark my words- I cannot predict how it will manifest, or what the consequences are going to be, but a price will be paid for this lie. This lie will not stand. This lie has completely destroyed the credibility of Obama, and the Democrats on healthcare.
|
|