Choking on Obamacare

[Hayabusa Rider]

Ok, but was there any savings at all for Medicare or Medicaid BEFORE this bill was inacted? I think you would be hard pressed to find any instance of savings period.

At least 3/4 of the Affordable Care Act hasn't yet to be implemented so I am looking forward to more savings in the future...If there isn't savings for Americans then the GOP will be partially correct but in this instance I do believe the Affordable Care Act HAS saved money for American Seniors and the GOP is going to have fun clawing that money back from their constituents hands.

Was there savings? Yes because the various states have a kickback scheme (although it's not called that of course, it's a "rebate") for medications. When billed for certain products they refuse to pay because those manufacturers didn't agree to terms dictated by the state. BTW, private insurances also engage in all sorts of arrangements as well.

Obamacare has points which in themselves useful and others which are downright stupid.

Remember me talking about how physicians can their reimbursements cut because of health regulation?

http://physiciansmoneydigest.com/your-practice/Turning-a-Blind-Eye-to-the-Obese

A couple things. Note that this isn't a site dedicated to convincing the public or anyone else of the facts. The target audience already knows this. Secondly the cry of "they only think about money" isn't the point here. I guarantee that if you were to take on a tough cast at work you'd be rather unhappy if you were punished for doing the best possible job. The point is that simplistic regulatory action punishes providers for taking on those who have a less than average chance for a positive outcome. That's not the fault of the system, that's the nature of the person before them. Why not instead give rewards for those who discover better ways of treating such people? The only reason is that the bureaucracy doesn't care. It does what it's told and if it's ultimately harmful it's nevertheless utterly unaccountable for it's actions. That's why legislation and regulation should be vetted by those who have a clue as to what constitutes health care to begin with but that was never wanted. Control was and the outcome be damned.

 

[werepossum]

LMAO You have an AMAZING amount of self confidence....

If you think my self confidence is amazing you should see my modesty . . .

 

[Ausm]

Was there savings? Yes because the various states have a kickback scheme (although it's not called that of course, it's a "rebate") for medications. When billed for certain products they refuse to pay because those manufacturers didn't agree to terms dictated by the state. BTW, private insurances also engage in all sorts of arrangements as well.

Obamacare has points which in themselves useful and others which are downright stupid.

Remember me talking about how physicians can their reimbursements cut because of health regulation?

http://physiciansmoneydigest.com/your-practice/Turning-a-Blind-Eye-to-the-Obese

A couple things. Note that this isn't a site dedicated to convincing the public or anyone else of the facts. The target audience already knows this. Secondly the cry of "they only think about money" isn't the point here. I guarantee that if you were to take on a tough cast at work you'd be rather unhappy if you were punished for doing the best possible job. The point is that simplistic regulatory action punishes providers for taking on those who have a less than average chance for a positive outcome. That's not the fault of the system, that's the nature of the person before them. Why not instead give rewards for those who discover better ways of treating such people? The only reason is that the bureaucracy doesn't care. It does what it's told and if it's ultimately harmful it's nevertheless utterly unaccountable for it's actions. That's why legislation and regulation should be vetted by those who have a clue as to what constitutes health care to begin with but that was never wanted. Control was and the outcome be damned.

I agree whole heartedly on this point which is actually applicable on just about every piece of Legislation that goes through Congress.

But in the defense of the Affordable Healthcare Act they did bring a couple Insurance whistle blowers to the Hill so they could lay out how Insurance scams work in the Healthcare industry.

All those most important parts of the Legislation that would had actual teeth to control costs in the Healthcare industry were watered down and/or eventually stripped out to get Blue Dog Democrats and a couple of Republicans on board to overcome the Republican Filibuster to push the Bill through the Senate.

 

[Ausm]

If you think my self confidence is amazing you should see my modesty . . .

You sound a lot like my Oldman but you wouldn't want to know the nickname that I use for him.

 

[mattpegher]

"According to the most recent estimate from The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), overall U.S. healthcare spending in 2009 was $2.5 trillion. CMS reports that $505 billion accounts for physician clinical services. According to data from Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), physician compensation accounts for 37 percent of total collections, or $186 billion (7.5 percent of total U.S. healthcare spending)"

Meanwhile malpractice premiums have risen.

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=4968&type=0

So where are we supposed to save the money. Every physician in the US could give his services away for free and it wouldnt save enough to offset the costs.

Technology is the biggest cost of medical care

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8947/MainText.3.1.shtml

And the there are only two ways to curb the technological costs.
1. tort reform will decrease defensive medicine.
2. change the american demand for unnecessary tests. - not an easy task, because americans have become accustom to getting what they want and not listening or respecting the advice of their physician.

The next biggest cost is Financing.
You wouldnt use your credit card if everytime you did you got charged an extra 30%. We need to force some efficency into the financing system. One by minimizing its use through HSA's and second by reistablishing competition among carriers.

 

[Paul98]

Businesses are not the government that can just print money at will. Businesses operate under budgets. If the financial planning for the following year budget called for $100 million cash investment to open 10 stores, and the government passed a law causing your expenses to rise by $20 million, then you now have $80 million to invest in 8 new stores. This is a very simple illustration.

Ok lets assume that they cant' get an extra 20mil from somewhere to invest in 2 more stores. This will not take away the demand in the area that the two stores would have opened. Thus them not being able to open those stores just creates opportunity for another to open a store in that place. If the demand is there someone will take advantage of it.

 

[werepossum]

I agree whole heartedly on this point which is actually applicable on just about every piece of Legislation that goes through Congress.

But in the defense of the Affordable Healthcare Act they did bring a couple Insurance whistle blowers to the Hill so they could lay out how Insurance scams work in the Healthcare industry.

All those most important parts of the Legislation that would had actual teeth to control costs in the Healthcare industry were watered down and/or eventually stripped out to get Blue Dog Democrats and a couple of Republicans on board to overcome the Republican Filibuster to push the Bill through the Senate.

Go back and look at the history of Obamacare. It came fully formed from behind closed doors and, except for Vitter's healthy hooters amendment, passed unchanged. Every other Republican and Democrat amendment was defeated. There was no watering down for anyone beyond the very lowest common Democrat Party denominator; the bill passed amazingly unaltered and Reid relied on bribes and arm-twisting rather than sweeteners to get the Democrat votes. This was government by special interests for special interests at its finest.

 

[werepossum]

"According to the most recent estimate from The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), overall U.S. healthcare spending in 2009 was $2.5 trillion. CMS reports that $505 billion accounts for physician clinical services. According to data from Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), physician compensation accounts for 37 percent of total collections, or $186 billion (7.5 percent of total U.S. healthcare spending)"

Meanwhile malpractice premiums have risen.

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=4968&type=0

So where are we supposed to save the money. Every physician in the US could give his services away for free and it wouldnt save enough to offset the costs.

Technology is the biggest cost of medical care

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8947/MainText.3.1.shtml

And the there are only two ways to curb the technological costs.
1. tort reform will decrease defensive medicine.
2. change the american demand for unnecessary tests. - not an easy task, because americans have become accustom to getting what they want and not listening or respecting the advice of their physician.

The next biggest cost is Financing.
You wouldnt use your credit card if everytime you did you got charged an extra 30%. We need to force some efficency into the financing system. One by minimizing its use through HSA's and second by reistablishing competition among carriers.

Once again I'm in total agreement. I love HSAs (including my own) as well as competition. I think probably the biggest thing (perhaps excepting technology) driving up health care costs has been paying for it with other people's money. Whether government tax dollars or our employers, if someone else is paying for it we want the very best care possible at any cost.

Ok lets assume that they cant' get an extra 20mil from somewhere to invest in 2 more stores. This will not take away the demand in the area that the two stores would have opened. Thus them not being able to open those stores just creates opportunity for another to open a store in that place. If the demand is there someone will take advantage of it.

Not necessarily. Many areas are under served; one of the Democrats' priorities is to bring competition and choice in poor inner city neighborhoods. And at least in Tennessee, new Hardy's are usually built in very small towns where there is little or no competition.

Beyond that question, more money spent on insurance necessarily means less money spent on other things. Insurance of any type is a necessary evil; in and of itself it creates no additional wealth for the additional expenditure.

 

[bfdd]

The idea that regulations take money away from "job creation" is asinine.

The government mandates that your car have a catalytic convertor. How does that take away a job? Would the car manufacturer hire an extra worker if a car was cheaper to make? Why? Doesn't the job of the guy building catalytic converters count?

not all do, I would say more than half though do hinder small/medium business

 

[mattpegher]

I do think that just like any other commodity that is financed, homes, cars,etc, there is definitely a tendency for people to overspend. Your right about the employer component as well, with this we add another layer of expansion into the system. You just cant be a smart consummer if you dont know what your paying.

As I think I stated before, my employer gives a stipend for being a full time employee. With this money I can chose from 8 options for health coverage, I can also use some of it to put into other FSA's, insurance, disability or retirement accounts. If I dont spend it all I get it in taxed pay. If I spend more it comes from my wages. This makes me an informed consumer. I chose to minimize the amount that I give to the insurance company so that I am paying only for big ticket items, like labs and radiology studies (free standing participating facilities) or hospitalization. The plan pays for routine health maintainance exams and ER visits as well. It saves me $7000/year and only requires a $5000 deductable that can be put into an HSA. The only complaint that I have is that I cannot shop arround for more plans and have the insurance companies compete for my business which would likely get me better rates. This whole group rate crap is killing the system.

 

[werepossum]

I do think that just like any other commodity that is financed, homes, cars,etc, there is definitely a tendency for people to overspend. Your right about the employer component as well, with this we add another layer of expansion into the system. You just cant be a smart consummer if you dont know what your paying.

As I think I stated before, my employer gives a stipend for being a full time employee. With this money I can chose from 8 options for health coverage, I can also use some of it to put into other FSA's, insurance, disability or retirement accounts. If I dont spend it all I get it in taxed pay. If I spend more it comes from my wages. This makes me an informed consumer. I chose to minimize the amount that I give to the insurance company so that I am paying only for big ticket items, like labs and radiology studies (free standing participating facilities) or hospitalization. The plan pays for routine health maintainance exams and ER visits as well. It saves me $7000/year and only requires a $5000 deductable that can be put into an HSA. The only complaint that I have is that I cannot shop arround for more plans and have the insurance companies compete for my business which would likely get me better rates. This whole group rate crap is killing the system.

Agreed, I'd love to see everyone on an individual HSA with a catastrophic plan. Paying for routine office visits and such without going through mountains of paperwork and multiple firms would help immensely, but too many people want every single bit of healthcare "free".

Also, too many people don't want to be smart consumers. How many young people when interviewed say they don't believe Social Security will be there for them, but they don't want the "responsibility" of handling their retirement money themselves.

 

[Zorkorist]

Health Care should not be expensive, is the bottom line.

What about Health Care is expensive?

It is Government and Insurance Companies and Lawyers (the tri-fecta) doing what they do... raise and hyper inflate costs, so they can make a profit.

Basic Health Care is a function of Society, not Government, Lawyers, or Insurance Companies.

-John

 

[hal2kilo]

Health Care should not be expensive, is the bottom line.

What about Health Care is expensive?

It is Government and Insurance Companies doing what they do... raise and hyper inflate costs, so they can make a profit.

Basic Health Care is a function of Society, not Government or Insurance Companies.

-John

Just have both of your parents in a nursing home that last ten years of their lives, exhaust all of ther assets then become wards of the state, and you will realize where the bulk of medical costs are being spent.

 

[Zorkorist]

I have a parent in a nursing home now, and am spending $10,000/month on her care.

$10,000/month... take a second a think about that.

Now, tell me again, how when she runs out of money, it is the State's problem!?

-John

 

[hal2kilo]

I have a parent in a nursing home now, and am spending $10,000/month on her care.

$10,000/month... take a second a think about that.

Now, tell me again, how when she runs out of money, it is the State's problem!?

-John

How long can you pay $10000 a month? Not arguing with you about how it's the State's problem.

 

[Zorkorist]

It's ridiculous that her care costs $10,000 per month.

But it's accurate.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

How long can you pay $10000 a month? Not arguing with you about how it's the State's problem.

I can't pay $10,000 in one month, ever.

Mom Has some money, but at $10,000 per month she will be destitute, asap.

$10,000/month... $333/day... this is what a normal nursing home charges.

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Of course we, you and I are never supposed to see these bills.

This is what Obama Care is going to cover up...

The OUTRAGEOUS expenditures for health-care today.

-John

 

[hal2kilo]

Of course we, you and I are never supposed to see these bills.

This is what Obama Care is going to cover up...

The OUTRAGEOUS expenditures for health-care today.

-John

Not sure what ACA has to do with CEO's of nursing home chains making more money in a month than you or I will make in our lives.

 

[Zorkorist]

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) has everything to do with institutionalising these high costs of Health Care.

Instead of stories like mine ($10,000/month) in a Nursing Home, being spoken, it will become hidden, in this huge Government/Insurance/Lawyer program.

Healthcare, indeed.

-John

 

[nanette1985]

I hope she's getting good care for that $10,000/month. I've been through several elderly relatives that were treated really badly, at several different price levels.

Sorry for the detour.

 

[Zorkorist]

I hope to never go through this again, Nanette, and yes her care is as good as $10,000/month can buy.

I hope to have her back home soon, which is of course, priceless.

-John

 

[Ausm]

Go back and look at the history of Obamacare. It came fully formed from behind closed doors and, except for Vitter's healthy hooters amendment, passed unchanged. Every other Republican and Democrat amendment was defeated. There was no watering down for anyone beyond the very lowest common Democrat Party denominator; the bill passed amazingly unaltered and Reid relied on bribes and arm-twisting rather than sweeteners to get the Democrat votes. This was government by special interests for special interests at its finest.

LMAO you sound like you wrote that Right Wing commercial demonizing the Affordable Care Act that Republican Super PACS are plastering on TV.

With the 1.5 Billion dollars this Bill has saved Seniors on their Meds and the 2.5 million children who now can get healthcare insurance good luck getting this Bill repealed.

Here is a caveat that is bound to make you go fetal, I would say 3/4 of the changes implemented by the Affordable Care Act have yet to be instituted.

 

[Ausm]

It's ridiculous that her care costs $10,000 per month.

But it's accurate.

-John

My Stepmother has MS is in a nursing home that costs 12,500/month you know why?

They charge 7,000/month for the room because they are privately owned and can do this.

The double charge for all her drugs...because they are privately owned and can do this.

They charge 250/hr for RN care because they are a private institution and can.

They charge charge 1500/hour for her neurologist because they can.

Do you think Republicans would be in favor of the Gubermint telling private businesses what and how to charge for their services?

Anything in the Healthcare Bill that would have keep these institutions "honest" was stripped out to get Blue Dog Democrats and a couple of Moderate Republicans (I use that term loosely) to overcome the inevitable Republican Filibuster.

Healthcare for profit what's fucked up about this model?

 

[charrison]

My Stepmother has MS is in a nursing home that costs 12,500/month you know why?

They charge 7,000/month for the room because they are privately owned and can do this.

The double charge for all her drugs...because they are privately owned and can do this.

They charge 250/hr for RN care because they are a private institution and can.

They charge charge 1500/hour for her neurologist because they can.

Do you think Republicans would be in favor of the Gubermint telling private businesses what and how to charge for their services?

Anything in the Healthcare Bill that would have keep these institutions "honest" was stripped out to get Blue Dog Democrats and a couple of Moderate Republicans (I use that term loosely) to overcome the inevitable Republican Filibuster.

Healthcare for profit what's fucked up about this model?

They charge that much because a 3rd party is footing the bill most of the time. The is a problem that exists all over the medical industry.