...makes good sense, his interview with Chuck Todd this morning did a good job of showing how both of the republican supported healthcare bills would hurt so many Americans & that an expanded Medicare system would be better for the health of our nation. Of course the health of our nation seems to mean far less than giving tax brakes to the upper income earners & more funding to the pentagon mega-dollar wasters, but for me the true mystery is how the people of this great country could be hoodwinked into voting them in last November.
There you can learn how elections work.
More people were actually hood winked into voting for Hillary.
Perhaps more young people vote repub, because they don't care about boomer issues, nor care about public assistance programs for people their own age.
Sanders never wanted to leave the Senate.
...missed the point, the health care proposals that the republican controlled Senate & house have advanced will harm the health of our nation, then we will have to pay to take care of even more sick & infirmary bound patients & the high earners still won't want to give up any of their tax breaks to help & the pentagon will have already have spent (wasted) all the money that could have alleviated the situation before it rose to that size of a problem.
If it gets to that point, I say Boycott the industry. They are the wealthy, spend all the money it's backed by oil.
No oil, no money, no HC, It's just a delusional argument, ask a a lamp post.
...I think we just heard from a lamp post.
And he's not smart enough to talk to one.
tune in to this fool
or you can watch CNN
It's just about all he's got
from the "upper income earners", how about reducing some of the fraud, abuse and waste. Even Eric Holder, you remember him, suggests that there is an estimated $60 to $90 billion in Medicare fraud, and a similar amount in Medicaid each year. That's a lot frigging money. Here's an idea, how about fixing Medicare and Medicaid first before asking for more money from the so-called upper income earners. It might even help the liberal argument a bit in selling "Medicare for all", "Single Payer System", Universal Healthcare", or whatever term du jour the Left is using these days.
With respect to "The Bern", I'm surprised he went on TV this morning and talked about healthcare. I mean his lovely wife Jane is accused of bank fraud. The investigation centers around whether Jane Sanders fraudulently obtained a bank loan and whether the senator's office pressured the bank to approve the application.
With the first part of your post we must reduce the fraud, abuse, & waste in our healthcare system, but Mr. holder only addressed Medicare & Medicaid, the fraud, abuse & waste perpetrated by the insurance industry & the private healthcare corporations is incalculable because there is no accountability, at least we can control these government programs there is nothing we can do with private industry. Your typical righty attempt to change the subject of the thread by injecting the problems of Bernie's wife should be food for a different thread & have nothing to do with healthcare.
especially on this topic. He is the spokesperson for the Left on moving to a Medicare for All, or whatever you want to call it. He wants to raise MY taxes to subsidize and support his grand egalitarian vision. Now he and his wife are suspected of bank fraud. It appears Bernie may have attempted to use the influence of his office to urge the banks to approve the loans. And now you want to follow Bernie into a grand health care vision with MY money. I don't think so. Fix the damn government system first. At least with the private sector I have a choice if and where I spend my money.
I'm a registered Independent. I despise both sides equally. But today, you reminded me again why I always have to watch my wallet with the Left.
...Yes he is but the person speaking for the administration has far less credibility, far less knowledge & he has never held a job ether.
opposing the repeal of the Affordable Care Act, which contains the most comprehensive legislation designed to combat Medicare and Medicaid fraud ever enacted. These provisions include more funding for fraud detection, new and comprehensive screening and compliance rules for health care providers, increased criminal and civil penalties for Medicare fraud, and data sharing across all the health care programs to enable increased detection of fraudsters.
While Medicare “fraud” is really not measurable in any meaningful sense– if the estimate is between 60 and 90 billion no one really has really any idea- the CMS claims these new tools have already saved billions of Medicare fraud even as the programs get started. I am suspicious of this claim but until all the programs get rolling it is premature to say.
But another word for all of these anti-fraud provisions is gasp – regulation – and, if the Repubs actually do repeal Obamacare to relieve the “suffering “ of the American people, these provisions will all be gone and replaced by a nice tax cut for the wealthy.
Just like that Seinfeld episode "We have to have Sex to save the Friendship"
So mari, what you are saying is, yes we believe Medicare/Medicaid is riddled with fraud, abuse and waste. We are not sure about the amount or the scope, but to help we need to keep this other healthcare system called Obamacare for fraud detection funding. So the last 50 years of Medicare/Medicaid, CMS has had their thumb up their ass doing nothing?
Who is the audience for Medicare/Medicaid? Think about it. They are old and feeble. Part B premiums come directly from their Social Security checks. Most select Plan F for their supplemental plan which not only covers the 20% from Part B, but also Part A and B deductibles. Same could be said for Part C Advantage plans. They don't have an incentive, (nothing comes out of their pocket), or even the mental capability (remember the customer base is old and feeble) to help government uncover fraud, abuse or waste. And then Medicare uses their SSN as their ID. And did I mention that Medicare is a "pay and chase" versus a "chase and pay" system.
And the Left wants to take this system and offer to all comers. Have you looked at the people who want to join? Most of their problems are self-inflicted, and you want ME to pay for it. Relieve the "SUFFERING" of the American People? If you are trying to tug at my heart, well it's not working.
In conclusion, your position is, we have to keep Obamacare, St. Croix has to pay for it, and somehow magically it will solve all of Medicare/Medicaid's problems.
And don't throw in that "nice tax cut for the wealthy crap". I didn't want the tax in the first place, and now you are attempting a little guilt trip.
-- Modified on 6/25/2017 4:44:33 PM
All these plans from the Democrats and the Republicans and all this talk is about reforming who pays for healthcare services and how those administrators get paid and how the healthcare providers get regulated more and more. What we need is a plan to reform the infrastructure that actually delivers the healthcare and how THEY get paid and operate. That’s where the inflation driver exists. That's where we need way more competition but no one is talking about that (especially not the lip service the ACA gives it).
The average American grocery shopper will drive an extra 5 miles to buy milk or hamburger on sale. Just imagine if we could turn that attitude of millions loose on doctors, clinics and hospitals, but government and insurance companies have used and abused over-regulation to make the system so opaque. It’s almost assuredly too late for competition reform. It was decades of government regulation dating back to pre-WWII that got us here so what are the chances of changing course now? Expanded Medicaid and ACA are failing due to price controls via reduced reimbursement rates but everyone simply focuses on the insurance companies drying up and withdrawing but not why. So let’s all get ready for single payer run by bureaucratic numbnuts whose only tool in their toolbag is spelled rationing.
What’s interesting is the disinformation/misconception in the U.S. where so many here think all of the rest of the developed world has totally government run and paid-for healthcare.
The problem with your “more competition among providers” theory is that the driver of health care cost inflation is not basic health care services but high end health care services, prescription drugs, and patents.
High end medical services – surgery, organ transplant, oncology – are too dependent on the overall condition of the patient to be priced competitively (“Need a heart transplant? Memorial Day sale!”)
New cancer drugs, for example, easily cost over $100,000 a year. No, competition is not going too lower those prices because those drugs are all on patent.
The ACA does in fact encourage competition for basic health care services by its price transparency provisions, as I pointed out to St Croix last year when he lamented the unknown cost of an MRI without knowing that the cost is in fact posted in many places thanks to the ACA. Once you get beyond these basic services, however, price transparency is simply not practical. Further, the fear of malpractice liability often cause doctors to do more than the standard of care requires, further muddying their ability to compete on price.
But I will give you credit for arguing for more competition between providers as opposed to more competition among health insurers, the clueless Republican talking point (“We’ve got to allow the sale of health insurance across state lines- that will drive down prices!”). If the insurers cannot make money in the individual market now where there are only a few providers in some states, how would adding more insurers help? Oh btw, the sale of insurance across state lines is already permitted by...drum roll…the Affordable Care Act, which contains reciprocity provisions for states that opt in. To my knowledge, no states have even attempted to take advantage of this provision.
So while "we need more competition" seems like a good idea on first glance, it does not withstand analysis.
...makes good sense, his interview with Chuck Todd this morning did a good job of showing how both of the republican supported healthcare bills would hurt so many Americans & that an expanded Medicare system would be better for the health of our nation.
Of course the health of our nation seems to mean far less than giving tax brakes to the upper income earners
& more funding to the pentagon mega-dollar wasters,
but for me the true mystery is how the people of this great country could be hoodwinked into voting them in last November.
I'm not the one that's confused here you MORON, who fucking cares if ole Bernie ever had a job or not, that has nothing to do with the healthcare question, and the tax brakes that are proposed certainly are for everyone but at your minimum wage job pay rate your break will be nothing compared to people making more than a million dollars a year. The pentagon (all branches of the military) have wasted Trillions that's right Trillions on nearly everything they have purchased over the last 20 years, not to mention all the foolish wars & conflicts that have spent so much of our tax money,if you have been asleep since Trump took over Obamacare is done & now it's congresses job to replace it. Oh & Last November means LAST November read what is put in front you!
you use "hoodwinked" too often in your post. Get some new material.
Bernie Sanders is a left wing loon that supports a socialist view towards health care. He does not understand the American people and electorate. Not to mention he's on his last leg. The feel the Bern ship has sailed........
...Sorry H.C that's just an old term that us hill people use when we see some one get fooled by someones lies & deceptions Ill try not to use it so much. Socialized medicine has already been here for many years,it's called Medicare it work's well & with just a few adjustments it could work for our entire country, Most of the rest of the advanced countries use similar systems why not America. We have a proven operational template that we know works well now we just need to adjust it to a system that our country can afford, the choice is do we pay for it with tax dollars or do we do we continue to pay insurance companies their jacked up profits.
We have a fundamentally different view on Medicaid and the health care system in general. Medicaid is an entitlement government program. It is essentially a free health care program offered by the government that was originally intended to help the poor and elderly. Throughout the years, the eligibility requirements decreased allowing more and more people to have free healthcare. Liberals, like yourself, want to expand ("just a few adjustments") to include Medicaid or free healthcare for everyone. It sounds like noble plan, but free healthcare empowers the government and not the people it intends to help.
One question that always enters the debate is, how do you pay for the expansion of medicaid for the entire country? There are over 320 million people in the united states. The federal debt is already out of control at 20 trillion. Would you allow the government to tax everybody to pay for healthcare like the other advanced countries and empower the government?
I would like to see the government reduce the medicaid program funding, reduce the national debt and increase the eligibility requirements of Medicaid to allow people to become more independent. People need to be responsible for there own healthcare coverage and in turn, empower themselves. Government funded Medicaid should only exist for small percentage of the population in dire needs.
For all entitlement programs, there needs to be a point where people make the jump from dependence to independence. Independence from government programs empowers the people. Dependence on government empowers the government. This is why socialism does not work and will never work here. Socialism empowers the government, not the people. It's against one of our founding principles, "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".
...On your first subject point H.C. you are correct, but the reason Medicaid doesn't work is it pays insurance companies direct, Medicare on the other hand pays providers directly holding them to Medicare rules & payment schedules, the supplemental insurance providers that pay the difference (up to 20%) have to only look at what Medicare paid to fulfill there contractual obligation. The rest of what you submitted becomes a series of moot points & poorly researched wishes that have little consideration for Americas future. It will be indeed difficult to enjoy Life Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness with a sick nation.
...you wouldn't have dodged my multiple questions about the obvious fact that expanding the MC program will only hasten its demise.
...Jack I can't find your posting in this thread.
i wonder if Bernie can still get it up?..
The bottom-line for healthcare insurance companies is to make money; particularly for shareholders, not to provide a means for to receive healthcare for sick people! Same with drug companies. Think in terms of those ferry boats, filled to way beyond capacity, capsizing, and their occupants drowning. Or, the airlines, who give you less and less legroom, and now give you a bag of peanuts rather than a meal. Each, offer less and less while demanding more and more, as long as demand goes up and up. Of course, not all the blame rests on them. Back in the days when the individual physician set the price, the health of his or her patient was front and center. But, much like what has happened to the family farm in the face of conglomerate agribusinesses, healthcare lost it's way when it became structured as a cash cow for investors. This created increasing price tags for healthcare, to the extent people where in fear of not having some assurances they could cover those costs. Enter the health insurance companies, which are designed, which is to be expected of a business, much like a Las Vegas casino, never lose. The expense, for many, was covered by group plans covered by employers, so the cost was not worrisome to the subscribers, until the companies dropped the plans, or began passing the costs onto the employees. Now, the fear of financial calamity, due to medical bills is once again predominate. So, fewer and fewer sick people in our country will be able to afford healthcare, unless everyone shoulders the burden of the cost, and yes, there is adequate regulation of costs, and enforcement of medical fraud.So, if they put their trust in Republicans, who are against regulations and for pure capitalism, throughout the healthcare industry, and the healthcare insurance companies, healthcare conglomerates and drug companies, to have their best interest in minds, they are in for a very rude awakening.
-- Modified on 6/26/2017 11:50:16 AM
Ocare ushered in new regs which kicked people OFF the coverage they had and liked and forced them ON to something they didn't want or need, which as we all know, was built on lies to the public to get it to pass.
Those regulations, based on those lies, are what have, at least in part, led to the incredible decline of the Dem party since Ocare's inception.
The "little guy" was watching and he didn't like what he saw and thus voted R, in massive numbers, the likes of which hasn't been seen in 90 years. Ouch.
...Well Jack what I started this thread for was to get people to talk about a Medicare system that would work for everyone, if you read all the posts you will many fear regulation, but with the current Medicare system most of those regulations are in place & working, why the fear?
A point you seem to keep missing.
for Medicare going bankrupt is most people on Medicare are over the age of 65 & of course they need to use medical services more often, but for each individual Dr. visit or medical procedure Medicare pays far less than private insurance. The private sector insurance companies must make a profit to stay in business & pay multi-million dollar salaries to CEO's & CFO's not to mention investors that demand their share of the profits. I know Bernie was perhaps not the best spokesperson for these ideas but with this group of commentators ANY public official that supports Medicare will be crucified as a pinko commie socialist crook. There did I leave any names out ?
Somehow the millions of people who benefitted from Obama Care (at a cost of TRILLIONS to the taxpayers) drowned out the cries of millions of other people who are worse off because of ObamaCare and I don't mean just the taxpayers footing the bulk of the bill.
I am one of those people. I was just fine with the old system, if I wanted "cheap insurance" I could buy "cheap insurance" and in order to sell ObamaCare to the masses Obama came out and told a bald faced lie that people like me who "liked our plan" could keep it. I never believed him for a moment and rightfully so, My plan is GONE, replaced with plans that "start" at over five times what my last plan cost me.
I believe in Capitalism, with Government oversight. What Bernie proposes is to hand over another 15%+ of the total economy to the Federal Government and you ask "why the fear?" I would think to anyone paying attention over the last several years the reason for my "fear" should be obvious.
My apologies if I allowed Bernie's leftist reputation to cloud the issue for you,but the truth is Medicare IS socialized medicine so please read the rest of the posts on this thread so I don't have to repeat myself, then make your comments.
and quite naturally Bernie (and you) want more of it while I want less of it. What's so complicated about that?
I don't really expect to change your mind about this, do you ever expect me to change my mind and embrace socialism as the way to solve the problems that face this country?
For the record, Bernie doesn't just have a "leftist reputation" he is an admitted Socialist.