ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 9, 2011 7:41:55 GMT -5
if McCain/Palin had been elected? Their plan to repeal tax incentives for employers to offer benefits,tax benefits as income,and give a small tax credit to go towards purchasing your own would be easy to implement and be pretty compelling for employers.
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 9, 2011 8:01:45 GMT -5
Me neither... I still have the same insurance I had 15 years ago. As a side note, my neighbor,who is not exactly a political wonk, asked me seriously the other day when Obamacare was kicking in because he didn't want to pay for insurance anymore....The propaganda machine spouting socialism and socialist healthcare government takeover of healthcare sure worked on him.......He really thought he was going to get free healthcare from it. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:44:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2011 9:13:58 GMT -5
if McCain/Palin had been elected? Their plan to repeal tax incentives for employers to offer benefits,tax benefits as income,and give a small tax credit to go towards purchasing your own would be easy to implement and be pretty compelling for employers. I'm not sure what you mean by pretty compelling for employers? Thanks in advance for clarification.
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 9, 2011 9:19:39 GMT -5
Well,stopping tax incentives to provide healthcare benefits would be a compeling argument to stop providing them,imo..Just the thought of transfering the burden over to employees and the government would be compelling to them,I'd imagine.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:44:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2011 9:23:41 GMT -5
Ok. so if employers stopped offering benefits, then we'd have healthcare reform by now?
I didn't sleep much last night, so i may just be having a hard time processing today... but how would employers not providing benefits anymore result in health care reform? Do you mean that with more people without insurance, they would have insisted on reform?
Sorry to be so dense...
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 9, 2011 9:26:44 GMT -5
Well, the point of the McCain Palin plan was to shift the system from an employer based system,to an individual based system where the people would be on their own, subsidzed with a small tax credit. I think employers would have jumped at the chance and pushed for it..... My personal opinion is healthcare would have ended upthe worst for it, but I think it might have stood a good chance of being put into effect.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:44:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2011 9:32:42 GMT -5
I guess its my participation in the 'indivdiual based system' which makes it difficult for me to see that as a 'solution'.... in my head, from my experience, the obliteration of the employer based system, without a viable optional system of public option or group based exchange, will only result in more people without access to insurance/care...
To be sure, i think we SHOULD obliterae the employer based system... just not without a viable alternative....
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 9, 2011 14:29:47 GMT -5
I could go along with this ,I just don't know what a good alternative would be. I doubt a small tax credit would help me much in the way of a decent policy considering my age and my wife's health. I do appreciate my company sponsered insurance very much,despite a quarrel with them every now and then.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 10, 2011 12:54:43 GMT -5
I could go along with this ,I just don't know what a good alternative would be. I doubt a small tax credit would help me much in the way of a decent policy considering my age and my wife's health. I do appreciate my company sponsered insurance very much,despite a quarrel with them every now and then. Employer group plans are the cash-cow of the industry...if that were taken away the insurance companies would need to become MUCH more competitive to draw in individuals: that would be good for individuals... Except if you throw in a public option that undercuts pmts for services to keep premiums manipulatively low while at the same time robbing other tax funds to make up any budget shortfalls in the system. That would make an entirely unfair competitive edge to a public system over private - if the public option was run EXACTLY as a private option, then and only then would it be a fair market. However, since every private program/business the government has taken over has failed, we can't exactly expect them to play by the same rules, can we?
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 11, 2011 7:55:57 GMT -5
As long as you assume they cut their prices and profits instead of benefits. From what I hear from the right,insurance companies are already just barely making a go of it on a 3 percent margin.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 11, 2011 8:02:43 GMT -5
It would be great for insurance companies too- they could all of the high risk patients onto the government and get them out of the group pools. Even better- when it does come to claims time, it would be one person vs. the company-on their turf- they won't even have to pay out on the large claims anymore. What's not to love?
|
|
|
Post by magichat on May 11, 2011 8:09:13 GMT -5
While it still needs some modifications as Oped pointed out I would be more than happy to stop the employee health insurnace tax benefit. Right now i get screwed on taxes because I choose to purchase a private insurance plan over taking my employer's option. I can buy insurance much cheaper on the open private market on my own plan than I can from my employer. Unfortunately my premiums aren't paid with pre-tax dollars so I lose out on the tax benefit on the first 7.5% of my healthcare dollars.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:44:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2011 8:19:29 GMT -5
The propaganda machine spouting socialism and socialist healthcare government takeover of healthcare sure worked on him
ugonow, just thought that I would warn you that some people posting here don't understand that President Obama is pushing socialism. I had that discussion the other day. Deep down I think they know but just don't want to admit it even to themselves.
PS: If you want a real eye opener go to U-tube & search Reagan & health care. He predicted that's how they would try to get socialism introduced into the U.S. & they have & did.
|
|
ugonow
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:15:55 GMT -5
Posts: 3,397
|
Post by ugonow on May 11, 2011 8:25:04 GMT -5
Mandating people buy insurance is socialism and record profits and a bull market is communism...I know,I have heard it before. But the everyone in the US has healthcare,just go to the emergency room plan is not.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 11, 2011 9:42:33 GMT -5
It would be great for insurance companies too- they could all of the high risk patients onto the government and get them out of the group pools. Even better- when it does come to claims time, it would be one person vs. the company-on their turf- they won't even have to pay out on the large claims anymore. What's not to love? That's still an easier fight than one person vs government and its red-taped bureaucracy...
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 11, 2011 9:45:13 GMT -5
Of course there wouldn't- they just had to campaign on something to counter someone had actually intended to initiate a reform effort- and did even if it fell short.
I agree the employer based system needs to go- but until there is an alternative certain people are going to be trapped.
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 11, 2011 9:46:42 GMT -5
That's still an easier fight than one person vs government and its red-taped bureaucracy... Fought an insurance company lately? Just what a cancer patient needs- a legal battle to stay alive.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 11, 2011 13:41:42 GMT -5
That's still an easier fight than one person vs government and its red-taped bureaucracy... Fought an insurance company lately? Just what a cancer patient needs- a legal battle to stay alive. See many people winning lawsuits again government programs or agencies lately? Or ever, really...
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 11, 2011 17:41:56 GMT -5
Yep- there is a whole subsection of lawyers that sue for benefits- like SS disability. The point I guess is- having worked for one department- the government employees have no incentive to deny legitimate claims like a private insurer does- they might decide it is worth it to deny a claim and fight it out-in fact they do all the time. They even had recission bonus pools set up for expensive claims. I know who I'd rather deal with.
|
|
jkapp
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 12:05:08 GMT -5
Posts: 5,416
|
Post by jkapp on May 11, 2011 18:50:30 GMT -5
Yep- there is a whole subsection of lawyers that sue for benefits- like SS disability. The point I guess is- having worked for one department- the government employees have no incentive to deny legitimate claims like a private insurer does- they might decide it is worth it to deny a claim and fight it out-in fact they do all the time. They even had recission bonus pools set up for expensive claims. I know who I'd rather deal with. Right which is also one of the main problems...those government employees also have no incentive to stop waste, abuse, and fraud from occurring which is why Medicare pisses away $60B a year on such things. And if the government denies your claim...your options??? Hey, I'd like to skip out on the whole SS scam as I feel the government has screwed the pooch on that program - so how do I go about stopping the theft from my paycheck every other week? Yeah, there sure are SOOOO many options with government, aren't there?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:44:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2011 20:06:16 GMT -5
The point I guess is- having worked for one department- the government employees have no incentive to deny legitimate claims like a private insurer does-
The added benefit would be the huge number of increase government workers. That would result in a way for the government to get rid of that huge surplus of money they have sitting around in the way. Oh wait a minute......
|
|
EVT1
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 16:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 8,596
|
Post by EVT1 on May 11, 2011 21:53:16 GMT -5
Yep- there is a whole subsection of lawyers that sue for benefits- like SS disability. The point I guess is- having worked for one department- the government employees have no incentive to deny legitimate claims like a private insurer does- they might decide it is worth it to deny a claim and fight it out-in fact they do all the time. They even had rescission bonus pools set up for expensive claims. I know who I'd rather deal with. Right which is also one of the main problems...those government employees also have no incentive to stop waste, abuse, and fraud from occurring which is why Medicare pisses away $60B a year on such things. And if the government denies your claim...your options??? Hey, I'd like to skip out on the whole SS scam as I feel the government has screwed the pooch on that program - so how do I go about stopping the theft from my paycheck every other week? Yeah, there sure are SOOOO many options with government, aren't there? I can tell you my experience determining SSA claims- the incentive was to do your job right- and believe it or not they have QA like any other claims process. I never denied a good claim, or allowed a bogus one- I had to rely solely on medical evidence and the guidelines of the program (not that some doctors weren't full of it or in on it). Claimants also have a line of appeals built into the system up to an ALJ and you can be represented by counsel- most of whom are gladly to work on commission if they feel you have a legitimate claim. The problem is a large percentage of claimants are full of crap and tie up resources- the #1 problem. They don't have to lie- just allege a disability that has to be dealt with by someone- and they can keep applying. Even so- I'd rather deal with SSA/Medicare/Medicaid over any private insurer. I at least know they are trying to do the right thing, not make a bonus finding a loophole to throw you in. BTW that wonderful government job paid shit compared to the private sector- the only thing it had going for it was good benefits and a pension + some job security- the reason a lot of people put up with the pay. Think of that the next time you want to take away benefits from government workers- they are already working for substandard wages.
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on May 12, 2011 7:27:10 GMT -5
Yep- there is a whole subsection of lawyers that sue for benefits- like SS disability. The point I guess is- having worked for one department- the government employees have no incentive to deny legitimate claims like a private insurer does-. So, just like an insurance company, the government gets sued for denying legitimate claims? Not seeing much of a difference here.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on May 12, 2011 9:24:16 GMT -5
To be socualist one normally has towant to socialize something...- As is, the health "system" is bankrupting the country and ruing our competitiveness... Here are ten benefits which come online within six months of the President's signature on the health care bill: 1. Adult children may remain as dependents on their parents’ policy until their 26th birthday 2. Children under age 19 may not be excluded for pre-existing conditions 3. No more lifetime or annual caps on coverage 4. Free preventative care for all 5. Adults with pre-existing conditions may buy into a national high-risk pool until the exchanges come online. While these will not be cheap, they’re still better than total exclusion and get some benefit from a wider pool of insureds. 6. Small businesses will be entitled to a tax credit for 2009 and 2010, which could be as much as 50% of what they pay for employees’ health insurance. 7. The “donut hole” closes for Medicare patients, making prescription medications more affordable for seniors. 8. Requirement that all insurers must post their balance sheets on the Internet and fully disclose administrative costs, executive compensation packages, and benefit payments. 9. Authorizes early funding of community health centers in all 50 states (Bernie Sanders’ amendment). Community health centers provide primary, dental and vision services to people in the community, based on a sliding scale for payment according to ability to pay. 10. AND no more rescissions. Effective immediately, you can't lose your insurance because you get sick. In our community - half-rural and half-suburb -- 50 community health centers will receive funding to provide health and preventive services to people with no access right now. And that's just one benefit. They're all valuable. The corporate media spemds so much time noting the effects
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on May 12, 2011 9:34:19 GMT -5
4. Free preventative care for all Wow...free? For all? Liberal utopia at last? For once, I agree with war. From each according to their ability is clearly marxist, not socialist.
|
|
Politically_Incorrect12
Senior Member
With a little faith, we can move a mountain; with a little help, we can change the world.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:42:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,763
|
Post by Politically_Incorrect12 on May 12, 2011 9:37:56 GMT -5
I doubt much would have been done if McCain/Palin won. Pelosi and company would have been too focused on the next election and found them every step of the way....all you need to do is revisit the last 2 years of Bush term.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 18, 2024 4:44:51 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2011 10:07:18 GMT -5
Problem with Obamacare-- MDs don't like it. hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_HEALTH_CARE_SETBACK?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-05-11-16-10-25Obama plan for health care quality dealt a setback By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama's main idea for getting quality health care at less cost was in jeopardy Wednesday after key medical providers called his administration's initial blueprint so complex it's unworkable. Just over a month ago, the administration released long-awaited draft regulations for "accountable care organizations," networks of doctors and hospitals that would collaborate to keep Medicare patients healthier and share in the savings with taxpayers. Obama's health care overhaul law envisioned quickly setting up hundreds of such networks around the county to lead a bottom-up reform of America's bloated health care system. But in an unusual rebuke, an umbrella group representing premier organizations such as the Mayo Clinic wrote the administration Wednesday saying that more than 90 percent of its members would not participate, because the rules as written are so onerous it would be nearly impossible for them to succeed. "It's not just a simple tweak, it's a significant change that needs to be made," said Donald Fisher, president of the American Medical Group Association, which represents nearly 400 large medical groups around the country providing care for roughly 1 in 3 Americans. Its members, including the Cleveland Clinic, Intermountain Healthcare in Utah, and Geisinger Health System in Pennsylvania, had been seen as the vanguard for accountable care. The medical groups say they are worried they will be left holding the bag for losses, that the government has designed things so there is no easy way to tell which patients are part of the program, and that there's no reliable way to adjust for patients who are sicker and require closer follow-up and more expensive treatments. The deadline for public comments on the proposed regulations is still weeks away, but Fisher said "we needed to get their attention early on, so (the administration) could be thinking about how major changes are needed to make these regulations viable." Medicare spokesman Brian Cook said the agency is doing extensive outreach to explain and take feedback on the regulations and hat "we will carefully consider this input." "We are confident that providers' decisions on whether to participate in the program will be made on the basis of the final rule, which will reflect the feedback we receive," added Cook. Many in the health care industry were silent partners backing Obama's overhaul law, but disappointment over the accountable care rules has put a chill into the relationship. During the congressional debate, Obama extolled Mayo and Geisinger, holding them up as a model of what he wanted to achieve for the nation. Industry criticism of his administration's proposal has been building up for weeks in online forums. "This has all the hallmarks of a party that nobody comes to, unless there is a serious rethinking," said former Medicare administrator Gail Wilensky, who ran the agency under President George H.W. Bush. Wilensky said the idea of coordinating care isn't the problem, but "it sounds like (the administration) really overshot the mark." The regulations are "overly prescriptive, operationally burdensome, and the incentives are too difficult to achieve to make this voluntary program attractive," the medical group association said in its letter. One of the major problems seems to be that medical groups have little experience in managing insurance risk, and the administration blueprint rapidly exposes them to potential financial losses. Without major changes, "we fear that very few providers will enroll ... and that (Medicare) and the provider community will miss the best opportunity to inject value and accountability into the delivery system." Private insurers are also experimenting with versions of the accountable care idea, but successful adoption by Medicare is seen as the key to spreading it across the country. The Obama administration had estimated as much as $960 million in savings from the first three years of the program, and bigger amounts thereafter. Fisher, the medical association head, said he does not think the administration will easily back off its approach, because on paper it saves the government money.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on May 12, 2011 10:08:33 GMT -5
So you prefer to get NOTHING from people, who get the most expensive care, ER care? I don't believe you understand preventive care or what Marxism is, or how you save MONEY and LIVES... You have plenty of company. "60% are against health reform AND admit they don't understand it", but believe bought off Pub fear mongering...idiocy.
|
|
hello fromWarsaw
Senior Member
Hiya! Wake UP!!
Joined: Feb 13, 2011 1:24:04 GMT -5
Posts: 2,044
|
Post by hello fromWarsaw on May 12, 2011 10:16:27 GMT -5
Most MDs are Pubs who are only frightened they might lose money...foolishly. My father was an MD who was for "socialized medine" (TOTAL BS) for 65 YEARS before he died. The hell with all of em!! We need more GPs and doctors in it for taking care of people. ;D
|
|
floridayankee
Junior Associate
If You Don't Stand Behind Our Troops, Feel Free to Stand in Front of Them.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:56:05 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by floridayankee on May 12, 2011 10:24:26 GMT -5
So you prefer to get NOTHING from people, who get the most expensive care, ER care? We need anything from anybody. It's FREE! Party on fat, unhealthy sheeple of America. Liberal utopia is finally here!
|
|