Articles
   
       
       
Pics/Video
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WAKE WORLD HOME
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old    WakePowell Chris (epic1)      Join Date: Oct 2006       03-27-2010, 9:15 PM Reply   
thats how much my mom pays for her ins premiums for her and my dad. Whats the fine for not having ins? Like 3 grand? So 16800 minus three grand= 13800 a year?
That does not include co-pays, deducts., and the like.
So for YOU to NOT have ins is about $3000?
but for my mom to HAVE ins it's closer to $20000 a year?



I know I am basicly re posting what I have allready said, but do a search on non wake and see what topics about PRESIDENT OBAMA and they re 90% re posts.

man up take the fine. And be glad you never broke your hip. Got layed off, and could not get ins because you have a pre existing condition.
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-28-2010, 7:17 AM Reply   
So I should have to pay for her medical. Why don't you help your own Mom pay her medical bills.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-28-2010, 7:56 AM Reply   
How much does your parents use a year? Care to give me that number? Or does the amount paid out by the insurance not matter? How long were the in the plan?

Does your parents own their own business and getting rich off other peoples labor? At the end of the day, it sounds like your parents have a cadillac insurance plan to me. So, they are going to have to pay another $8,000 in taxes on that plan right?
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-28-2010, 8:11 AM Reply   
Btw, your parents premiums are getting ready to up. You see, You are required to buy insurance. That does not mean your insurance goes down. They are not required to keep kids on longer longer. Insure people who are already sick and put them on policies. There has been nothing done to change the cost of care. Matter of fact you just got people at these bigger companies laid off because almost everyone who gets medical from a company (especially in the more expensive states) have what is considered cadillac plans. I'll tell you right now, people at my work get laid off or my insurance goes in the crapper because of democrats, it is going to be bad for any democrat that I know.
Old    PAUL (pnichols)      Join Date: Jan 2007       03-28-2010, 8:42 AM Reply   
^^^^^are you drunk?
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-28-2010, 9:19 AM Reply   
oops. above I meant to type that they are required to keep children on.

You talking to me, Paul?

Explain fairy tale of how insurance costs are going to go down?
Old    Nick Tomsyck (sidekicknicholas)      Join Date: Mar 2007       03-28-2010, 9:55 AM Reply   
Your typo would be cause for asking if you were drunk.... maybe thats what he ist talking about.

And your right, if people now with good insurance get F*ed the dems have it real bad.... BUT if people's prices go down, and others get to actually go to the hospital who never could, it wouldn't be all that bad now would it?.... which I believe is the plan.... I don't really think they passed this bill to screw over as many people as they could.
Old    Dennis (dennish)      Join Date: May 2005       03-28-2010, 10:21 AM Reply   
[And your right, if people now with good insurance get F*ed the dems have it real bad.... BUT if people's prices go down, and others get to actually go to the hospital who never could, it wouldn't be all that bad now would it?.... which I believe is the plan.... I don't really think they passed this bill to screw over as many people as they could.[/QUOTE]

Explain how it is possible to give everyone full coverage including those with pre existing conditions, without any cost savings except denial of care, and prices not go up.
Old    Nick Tomsyck (sidekicknicholas)      Join Date: Mar 2007       03-28-2010, 10:46 AM Reply   
It isn't possible, but what is likely is that if people can get help if they need the country will be a better place...

I understand that some people (mostly the right side) sees it as another form a welfare, and i agree there are always going to be lazy people that abuse the system, but there are those that need help, bad.

The point of the gov't providing a care option means the that even though their coverage isn't top notch, if it is considerably more econimical I feel a lot of people will go fo it.... thus leaving their provider, and making them lower prices/not be complete *******s. I heard on the news (fox news) a lady say, "We cannot have gov't run healthcare, they are far too corrupt..." but having a business do it is better?!

I don't see how part of it being in the hands of what should be by the people and for the people (clearly it isn't like it use to be) could be worse than a business running it.... a business has one purpose MAKE MONEY, F*** everything that else besides money.... thats half the reason the economy is in such shambles, business (owners) decided they deserve everything, the ones below them are going to get **** on. Having healthcare run by those people, I don't think so.

I'll take corrupt gov't over corrupt business anyday... because lets face it, whether we like it or not, the gov't has given us a lot.... protection, roads, schools, fire dept., comedy, debt..... and what does the average business do, find a way to nickle and dime and get paid.

* I know there are some great business owners, I know that some people have morals and run things how they should be, but lets face it, most of the big ones grow and grow until their own greed somehow kills them
Old    Matt Laird (Matt)      Join Date: Mar 2010       03-28-2010, 12:41 PM Reply   
Nick I dont think they are intending on screwing everyone...

I have great insurance for my family and myself... I pay close to 10k a year for Dental, Vision, Health, and Life insurance, That is alot already.. Now we are going to be forced to have medical or pay a government penelty... All the market resarch I can find the private insurance comanies will be forced to raise premiums up to 15% to cover the preexisting conditions and not to mention the amount of people who will misuse the insurance.. Then we will start talking about The federal to increase to cover this (Big government insurance).. Now I'm already in the 38% tax bracket and they are taking about 4-7% increase to cover this plan.. So just me one person who Works over 300 24hr days a year to support my family I now get an additional $20,000 a year to pay in...


How can you say that this is an improvement... I stand behind my belief that any goverment plan should be
#1 required to take monthly drug tests
#2 on a temperary plan only, (so it will get people off there a**)
#3 required to be paid back by the recipient and not only the people who are out working to support there familys...
Old    Chad (dcwillette)      Join Date: Sep 2005       03-28-2010, 12:43 PM Reply   
Nick, you just hit on something that us free market capitalist never want to admit to ourselves... that while we idolize the business world for being responsible for the prosperity that we enjoy today (and we are still enjoying prosperity) their motivation is not the welfare of their customers, it’s taking as much wealth as possible away from the consumer and transferring it their shareholders and employees, namely senior executives.

It's my opinion that essential services and things like healthcare need to be tightly regulated if the government is going to allow the private sector to provide them. Regulation does not mean lack of competition. Regulation drives costs up but it also provides safe guards in the interests of the consumer. When markets are deregulated and private companies are left to police themselves or control the supply of services as in a monopoly or oligopoly, they often become efficient but there is a great potential for corruption, price fixing.

As an example, most people think Enron was just an accounting scandal but it was much deeper than that. The blackouts in CA not that long ago caused a huge public problem for the State, not to mention $30Billion! Traders and executives at Enron were responsible for that. They manipulated the supply of power to drive the prices up in order to meet demand and then turned the power back on and reaped the profits from the inflated prices. I use this example to demonstrate how powerful private sector companies driven by greed may not always be in our best interests when providing things that are considered essential in our society.

Insurance companies make profits by collecting more revenue than paying out in costs (claims). This isn't news to anyone, but sometimes it's good to re-examine the status quo. There is an inherent conflict of interests there. As long as we're happy with the service and can stomach the costs, then we resist change. The cost is hidden from most of us because we don't see the money our employers are paying out for our healthcare in our paychecks and then pay it out ourselves.

I heard an argument the other day that caused me to stop and think. We all like to point out that the majority feels this way or that way when trying to justify why politicians should in our favor or to sway someone to our political viewpoints. However, what the majority wants or what benefits the majority is not always the right thing to do. If it was, then things like the Civil Rights Movement and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 would never have happened. It did not benefit the majority of Americans, it benefited the minority and it was the right thing to do. It took power from the “haves” and gave some of it to the “have not’s”. Sometimes, the right thing to do is not the efficient or the cost-effective thing to do. So, this healthcare reform is going to drive cost up. So what? Does that mean that as a society we don’t do it?
Old    Nick Tomsyck (sidekicknicholas)      Join Date: Mar 2007       03-28-2010, 1:32 PM Reply   
Quote:
Nick I dont think they are intending on screwing everyone...
Thats what I'm saying, as far as the gov't plan... I also feel that most of the current providers aren't to specifically screw anyone, they are health care providers- not screwers... but if a big wig is faced with the choice: an extra 10k this year or dropping some random person from their plan.... i bet i know what their choice would be.


Chad, I agree on everything.
Old    Akadirtbikingdad (wakeboardingdad)      Join Date: Aug 2008       03-28-2010, 3:13 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcwillette View Post
....So, this healthcare reform is going to drive cost up. So what?
It is not the right time to do it. Our country's economy is suffering enough without this. Have you heard what this is going to cost companies and that this will cause more layoffs? If you say that they are over-estimating, or blowing it out of proportion, I'll only say that the government estimates are conservative and optimistic. Besides, haven't you been listening? This CHANGE is going to SAVE money.
Old    wakeridinrob            03-28-2010, 4:07 PM Reply   
I am not going to pay for anyones medical bills. sorry this misfortune has happened to your family but it sure as hell isnt coming out of my paycheck. i already get + - 80%
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-28-2010, 7:36 PM Reply   
"I am not going to pay for anyones medical bills. sorry this misfortune has happened to your family but it sure as hell isnt coming out of my paycheck. i already get + - 80%"

Rob, if you have insurance, you are already paying for other peoples medical bills.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-28-2010, 7:38 PM Reply   
"Have you heard what this is going to cost companies and that this will cause more layoffs? If you say that they are over-estimating, or blowing it out of proportion, I'll only say that the government estimates are conservative and optimistic."

So how exactly does that make you right and Chad wrong?
Old    Manzo (zo1)      Join Date: Aug 2002       03-28-2010, 8:12 PM Reply   
Quote:
I am not going to pay for anyones medical bills. sorry this misfortune has happened to your family but it sure as hell isnt coming out of my paycheck
It already does... I don't like this bill but to argue that you don't want to pay for other people when you already are, and at a much higher rate than necessary doesn't really make sense.

Healthcare needs reform and regulation. It's that fine line again between what is best for society and business.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-28-2010, 8:26 PM Reply   
Interesting thing. This is not a government plan. This is ALL PRIVATE. You are required to buy private insurance and private insurance has to let you on regardless of risk. You can pretty much throw everything you said you were for out the window.

Of the people in California, a great many are illegals. They don't have to buy crap. There are an estimated 15 million in the country. Are they part of the reported 45 million without?

On the talk of private insurance being about profit. Of course they are. I think you miss the point each and every time. Read it carefully. The private insurance companies have to do what they do in order to make their modest 5%. That means they have had to cut people off, not take new high risk costumers and so on. Now I think that it sucks they have to do that, but, you guys continuously miss the financial point to this. They do all these thing and still only make 5%. The health care issue is not about 5%. The insurance companies are only paying out money that is required to be paid out on their customers behalf. If they can't make their 5% profit, they raise their rates. It is that simple. You think that insurance companies need to work for free? What do you think the government is going to do on your behalf? The government plans are the biggest denier of service of all insurance plans. It does not matter since the government is not offering the insurance anyway. They are taking your tax money and putting it into private insurance. Hate to tell you but the people over at the progressive websites are starting to understand this too and are getting mad about it.

Hard working middle class workers are going to get their insurance reduced or laid off because of the "cadillac" plans. Me and my wife's employers have already sent emails out saying they are monitoring and are formulating plans to deal with it. Many of the so called working poor in california actually do not qualify as poor under federal standards and are going to be required to buy insurance. Illegals who have shut down a few hospitals in So Cal do not have to buy it. There has been nothing done to actually curb costs which is actually on the provider end and not the insurance end.
Old    Akadirtbikingdad (wakeboardingdad)      Join Date: Aug 2008       03-28-2010, 8:33 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
"Have you heard what this is going to cost companies and that this will cause more layoffs? If you say that they are over-estimating, or blowing it out of proportion, I'll only say that the government estimates are conservative and optimistic."

So how exactly does that make you right and Chad wrong?
You really don't see the bigger picture here. If Caterpillar says this is going to cost them $110M, it will cost jobs. The problem is that this cannot be remedied by simply not paying the shareholders or the execs less. They will have to layoff employees. (More unemployment that this country cannot take. We are already at 10%!) This will be typical of all businesses, big and small. Publicly traded AND privately owned. The privately owned part means that there are not stock holders to absorb this extra cost or tax. Now, add this new cost to the increased minimum wage, that was just "eaten" by the businesses of America, and you have more closed down businesses and unemployed people. Heck, my son lost his job when the business closed he worked at, mainly due to the increase in labor costs.

Let me ask: What exactly would make the cost of healthcare less? Really? Should the drug manufacturers also be government run? What about the hospitals? They're "non-profit" already. What about the doctors? Should they make what I make (average) after going to school for 8 to 12 years, incurring $100K in debt for student loans and then having to insure themselves to the hilt, with malpractice insurance, due to blood thirsty patients who think the docs are miracle workers? I guess we could reduce the credentials a doctor has to have so they are willing to work for less, but then you have doctors who are less qualified; as compared to our current system. Let's look at Russia (a socialized nation) for a moment. A friend at work, who is retired now, immigrated here from Russia. She was an engineer there and ran a engineering department at a manufacturing plant. She had a sister-in-law who was a general practitioner who immigrated here too. The degreed engineer in Russia, was not so here. The doctor from Russia couldn't even qualify to be a nurse practitioner here. I wonder why that is? They did it cheaper, to save money, because it was government run. Personally, I do not want a sub-standard doctor working on any part of me. Jeremy, have you ever gone to have a second opinion? Have you ever talked to anyone and asked there opinion of a doctor? On a site like this, there are tons of threads and PM's sent about ACL injuries and who folks use (and travel to) for surgeries. If anyone has ever been "guilty" of wanting the best to perform their needed surgery, then you probably don't want a second rate, workin' for less doctor slicing you open. That will be just one of the results of this grand healthcare plan.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-28-2010, 8:35 PM Reply   
I just read Manzo's response. I don't think we pay for anyone's insurance. There are so many people waiting to get into doctors that they only give you less than 5 to 10 minutes. It is just like any other industry. You have people lined up, you raise the price until you don't. Why do the doctors have to work harder when they can make the same profit for less. We did not have this issue until everyone started to actually have insurance. Going to the doctor was pretty cheap when I was younger. What is going to happen, is all of us are going to be required to pay a crap load more of our insurance premiums and much higher deductibles. We wont go to the doctor as much. I predict this is what is going to happen.

There is a certain point that if you service an area where no one will pay a bill then you will have to shut down, but, I don't think that is the overall issue.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-28-2010, 8:39 PM Reply   
I am still interested in how much the insurance pays out for your parents expenses? I am not trying to be cold, but, we need to hear both sides of the equation to help make a rational argument.
Old    Chad (dcwillette)      Join Date: Sep 2005       03-28-2010, 9:13 PM Reply   
I don't have a lot of time right now but I wanted to touch a few points that have been raised:

Unemployment. You have to understand how unemployment is defined; what the labor market really consist of. 4% unemployment is considered by economist to be somewhat of a flat steady state, in other words...those that are available (not full-time students, retired, in prison, etc) and includes that choose not to work for whatever reason. In a sense, this 4% is near zero unemployment as most common people define it. If you don't care about people not having health insurance then why do you care if they have a job?

Paying for others healthcare. The non-profit hospitals and health clinics need to to turn a profit to cover overhead. Those that think non-profits don't need to earn a profit really don't understand what a non-profit really is. It's a tax coding from the IRS, it doesn't mean they can afford to waste resources or operate at a loss for extended periods of time without significant support from taxes, fund raising, or foundations. These hospitals must charge raise the price of their care for everyone to cover the non-payers. They write off the bill as a loss, raise the price for services to cover their aggregate costs and charge your insurance company for it. In other words, we are all paying for it either thru taxes or higher insurance. Since people without healthcare insurance cannot get things like pap smears, routine physicals and other preventive medicine without paying for it out of pocket, they come to the emergency room when it becomes a crises... which is the most expensive form of healthcare.

Corporations having to lay-off workers... that's a whole another thread in itself and each is a case by case basis. However, when CEO pay is now 344 times that of the average worker (only 11-17 times in Europe and Asia) and risen 10 fold since 1970 in America... I don't see how reforming executive pay could mitigate most layoffs. Also, remember that in addition, the CFO and COO's in America usually earn about 1/2 to 2/3 or more of the CEO in well managed companies.

I've owned a business before and I hate paying for the dumb and lazy too. However, this is not just an issue for the dumb and lazy. It may be a personal problem for any one person or 12 people, or group of thousand people.... but at some point social problems cease to be an individual's personal problem and become society's problem.

I can't argue that it doesn't have the effect of a redistribution of wealth and benefits... but that doesn't necessarily make it wrong. I don't have kids and personally don't use public education but I paid $5K last year in property taxes so your kids can go to school.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-29-2010, 6:49 AM Reply   
Wakeboardingdad, this is the umpteenth time I have heard Caterpillar mentioned with regards to healthcare. Have you stopped to think why this is the main name mentioned? Have you looked at the board at Cat and what other capacities those board members serve? A little info, they do not only serve Caterpillar. Also, you bring up "second tier doctors"? Why do you think you are going to be served by a substandard doctor because of the healthcare bill? I mean really, do you honestly believe that Medical Schools and licensing boards are going to lower the standards for future and current MD's? This is fear-mongering at its finest and you bit hook, line, and sinker. Our system is different than Russia's, but a Russian MD can serve in a MD capacity in the US provided:

1. The Russian Med School attended must have ECMFG status.
2. You have to pass the USMLE (step I and II).
3. You have to complete residency.
4. You then have to pass the USMLE (step III).

Is it a difficult process? Yes, but not impossible.

Chad hit the "nonprofit" issue.

People touching on the constitutionality of the bill. Where in the Constitution does it state you have to have a passport to leave the country?
Old    Akadirtbikingdad (wakeboardingdad)      Join Date: Aug 2008       03-29-2010, 7:22 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by wake77 View Post
Wakeboardingdad, this is the umpteenth time I have heard Caterpillar mentioned with regards to healthcare. Have you stopped to think why this is the main name mentioned? Have you looked at the board at Cat and what other capacities those board members serve? A little info, they do not only serve Caterpillar. Also, you bring up "second tier doctors"? Why do you think you are going to be served by a substandard doctor because of the healthcare bill? I mean really, do you honestly believe that Medical Schools and licensing boards are going to lower the standards for future and current MD's? This is fear-mongering at its finest and you bit hook, line, and sinker. Our system is different than Russia's, but a Russian MD can serve in a MD capacity in the US provided:

1. The Russian Med School attended must have ECMFG status.
2. You have to pass the USMLE (step I and II).
3. You have to complete residency.
4. You then have to pass the USMLE (step III).

Is it a difficult process? Yes, but not impossible.

Chad hit the "nonprofit" issue.

People touching on the constitutionality of the bill. Where in the Constitution does it state you have to have a passport to leave the country?
Those are all very good points and you've got me thinking. However, let me ask: Where are the cuts going to come from then? Are they coming from only the insurance companies? They are not the only ones who are to blame for high healthcare costs. It comes from drug companies, equipment manufacturers and technology, doctors, etc, etc. It comes from general labor costs as well. All across the board, hospitals and doctors are held at standards that cost money, which probably stemmed from some goverment standard. It happens all the time. Some governmental entity thinks something should be included in some product to save lives or improve safety, which not always a bad thing. It'll only cost a little more. We are little mored to death. I know I got off base here, but the government has never been able to do anything on time and on budget. What makes anyone think this'll be different? It's not going to. We're going to end up with everyone having insurance that is not worth the card they carry in their wallet.
Old    Someone Else (deltahoosier)      Join Date: Jun 2002       03-29-2010, 9:07 AM Reply   
25% of the people on government healthcare and 50% of all healthcare payouts (private and government combined). People also ignore that the US has nearly 20% better cancer survivor rates than our European counter parts.

The healthcare issue is mainly a healthcare issue because the democrats decided it was. Pure and simple. The people who are uninsured now are the ones who are uninsured then.

Hospitals will also push along costs of not seeing any people in the emergency room. They are required to staff the emergency rooms. If no one shows up, they are going to get their moneys worth as well. That is a little different than the private practices that pretty much are turning away people (they can't and don't but the demand is there that they could).

The progressives are getting more and more ticked off about this healthcare vote. They wanted single payer which is stupid because the issues of cost of service is still are not met. They realized they just had their people vote in a windfall for insurance companies.

I don't know what to really more to say about all this. At the end of the day, I think it is going to be laugh my A** funny when all these big city liberals in Cali realize they are considered rich in the rest of the country but poor in their overly inflated priced city, have to start paying the equivalent of a car payment for health insurance that has such a high yearly deductible they can not afford to use it anyway. They are going to buy into a bottom plan that ends up costing a few hundred a month and then carries a $5000 a year deductible. Good luck affording that when it is time to use it. I think then they will realize their mouth wrote a check that their wallet can't cash.

BTW, are the unions still excused from the cadillac plans tax?
Old    Akadirtbikingdad (wakeboardingdad)      Join Date: Aug 2008       03-29-2010, 10:48 AM Reply   
Perhaps I am over optimistic, but I'm going to go out on a limb here and say this: Now that the democratic senators have had a break, and been to their home state where the taxpaying populous ripped them a new one, the present bill will be repealed and a more palatable one voted in.

Meanwhile, I am on my way to see my internist, who I called and got an appointment with just this morning. Why do I go to an internist instead of a GP for my simple ailment today? Because I do not want to go wait for 2 hours and then have to see a nurse practitioner. Nothing against a nurse practitioner, but when I (my insurance) pays for a doctor, I want to see a doctor.
Old    Craig Cox (wakedoctor)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-29-2010, 1:01 PM Reply   
" Why do you think you are going to be served by a substandard doctor because of the healthcare bill? I mean really, do you honestly believe that Medical Schools and licensing boards are going to lower the standards for future and current MD's?"

Yes but not because they want to, because they are going to be forced to. Lets remember here that we are in a shortage of Healthcare providers nation wide. This is were all the rumors of longer waits turn into truths due to more people will have access to Healthcare unless something is done. There are many people out there with the mentality that "Well I have insurance I am going to use it. ". Even if it is for a hangover or the same bed sore they were seen about last week. The same type of people have been doing it with Medicare and Medicaid for years and I have seen several times having insurance or not is the determining factor for wether people go seek medical attention or not. To start with money has got to come from somewhere. I know they are talking about scraping a lot of the M.D. residency programs in Georgia hospitals which cost millions to keep afloat. I am sure the same procedure will be coming to a state near you, due to the budget cuts that have happened recently. The budget cuts that are going to help pay for our bailouts and healthcare. There is also talk about shortening medical schools to a three year program instead of four. Of course it is at the schools leisure wether they do this or not, but it is being experimented with at Texas Tech. I do see this trend growing although I hope it doesn't. You are putting out more M.D.s ready to start internships and residency to fill the shortage, but you are cramming what should be a third year's experience into two years. From what I hear the standard four year programs are enough stress, and the final two is really where the foundation is made for hands on procedures and exposure to actually working in a healthcare environment. Long story short yes I see having to lower our standards from what we expect from M.D.s and healthcare in general.
Old    Jeremy (wake77)      Join Date: Jan 2009       03-29-2010, 2:13 PM Reply   
Okay, Craig, if we are "in a shortage of Healthcare providers nationwide", why didn't they make changes prior to the Bill being passed? I mean the bill was just passed 1 week ago, so did the problem of shortages just start? I don't think this is what you were implying, so why no changes? Medical school is difficult to get in to and it costs a lot of money. So why didn't they address this earlier? If schools are scrapping residency programs, think about it, it is going to increase competition and it will be harder to get accepted and "substandard MDs" will be fewer and far between. I think your reasoning is not logical.
Old    Akadirtbikingdad (wakeboardingdad)      Join Date: Aug 2008       03-29-2010, 2:43 PM Reply   
Jeremy, this democratic congress, this president, doesn't care about the truthes or the short comings of it. When I would see Pelosi speak of getting it done and making history, that is all she cared about. She smiled knowing that the congress she was leading would go down in history for providing insurance to everyone. Yay! Look what we did. The president, who has no real experience at anything but smiling, also wanted to go down in history the same way, while also being the first black president. None of them simply care about the repercussions and didn't think as far along as Craig stated. I almost said earlier how in demand nurses are. They can go anywhere and find a job. Also, if they want to become a travelling nurse, like a friend of a friend is, they really rake in the cash. I'm sure docs are the same way.

Earlier, you said that I took the bait hook, line, and sinker. You're right, that name stuck in my head. However, that name is just the tip of the iceberg, not the base. The base of the iceberg contains all of the smaller, nameless, faceless companies who will be in the same boat as Cat is.

BTW, I went to the doc today after trying to get rid of a problem for over 3 months on my own and spending more than my co-pay I paid today. Craig is right about a large percentage who will use the insurance just to see a doctor again for something they failed to follow through on themselves. They will also continue to use the ER's for things as simple as a minor rash they have had for days or a cold. Why? Because that is the way they have always done it. It is too much trouble to call and make an appointment to see a doctor. Today, my appt was at 2:30. I got there at 2 and sat in the waiting room until 2:30 when I was called back. At 2:35, I was walking out the door with a script electronically on way to Walgreens. I love that my doctor "wasted" his money on a system that allows him to see all my charts, all my previous scripts and then send a new one out at his fingertips. I doubt anyone will get that kind of service if the healthcare bill rolls out as it is planned now.

I'll end saying that after reading some threads here, especially about pre-existing conditions, I have had to re-think my original stance and/or assumption. I am very blessed with a secure job with good insurance. I know everyone doesn't have it like I do. I also know that there are those who will do anything in their power to take advantage of any governmental program they can. They are the ones, who I blame for some of my discontent to support the necessary social programs, as a taxpayer, that are already in place today.
Old    Craig Cox (wakedoctor)      Join Date: Dec 2004       03-29-2010, 4:59 PM Reply   
Jeremy, as stated, this shortage have been going on for years now. Some hospitals were giving out big sign on bonuses to nurses trying to encourage more to go to LPN or RN schools and enter the medical field. I understand your reasoning on more competition, but keep in mind that us science and medical folks go with whatever has the highest statistics. Are you going to shoot for something that you have a 1 in 5 chance of getting in or 1 in 500? Once the residencies go the physicians will go. The bad thing about this is that usually wherever a physician completes his residency is most likely where he will stay to practice. The reason the government did not do anything to counter act this is because nobody writing this bill has any knowledge about medicine. They claim that they had spoken with this M.D. and that M.D. but the whole thing has been processed behind close doors. The simple facts that I have said should prove it. None of it adds up money wise or labor wise, but heck i'll agree, it would sound like a d@mn good idea to me if I had no idea about shortages and the poor job of managing the Medicare and Medicaid that exist. I have said from the get go, if they want to piss away our money waste it on government ran hospitals. It will be the best of both worlds. It will help with the shortages and they can watch the insurance fraud they allow (our tax money) in their own buildings.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 7:11 PM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2012 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us