Founding fathers liked taxed government health care

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

are you f-ing kidding me????

there is nothing that doctors hate more than having to accept medicare.

Medicare = government insurance

Doctors hate it because reimbursement rates are too low and paperwork is too much of a hassle.

I asked my friend and dentist awhile back if he takes medicare/medicade.

He said no and explained: Compare my service to buying a burger. It costs $1 for the materials to make it. it costs another $1 to pay the employees to make it. It costs $2 to maintain the resteraunt and by insurance for the resteraunt. The final $1 is for profit.

So I need to sell the burger for $5 to have a business that can make it. Now the government comes in and says I can only be reimbursed $1 for that burger... so I'm out $4.

If you think this bill will encourage young bring minds to become doctors, you are more clueless than ever thought before.

But then again you think its "easy to make" doctors.

Antitrust, there are some inaccuracies in the above post-

First of all, Medicare and Medicaid are not the same program and should not be lumped together, in the same way that Social Security is not funded the same way Medicare is, and should not be lumped in when discussing gov't debt (are you hearing me, mainstream media?). Medicare is a federal funded program for the elderly and certain long-term disabled people and Medicaid is shared between the federal and state gov'ts to provide care for the poor.

Reimbursement for doctors is generally not great with Medicare, however, reimbursement rates for hospitals are generally pretty good. Most hospitals would have to close without Medicare patients. The breakdown of where Medicare money goes is:

Acute care hospitals: 48%
Physicians: 20%
Home health: 9%
Outpatient services: 8%
Skilled nursing home care: 6%
Hospice care: 1%
Admin overhead: 0.7%
Profit: 0%

So, taking a dentist's opinion on Medicare as the complete truth is a rather limited sample size and I suspect would not get you a passing grade in a statistics class. And again, it's not the same thing as Medicaid and many doctors take Medicare and won't take Medicaid, of which only 6% of the money goes to doctors (25% goes to nursing homes and 19% to inpatient hospitals, 10% to home health care, to give you some frame of reference). Medicare also reimburses teaching hospitals at a higher rate, so in fact, many doctors have their education partly subsidized by Medicare.

The big issue with Medicare reimbursement rates, if we're talking long-term reduction of costs, is that more specialized procedures get reimbursed at a better rate than basic services. So, if it's harder to find a GP who accepts Medicare, you're more likely to put off getting care until something that might have been minor, becomes major.

And this is a very, very important point. Our current system essentially penalizes people for tending to water dripping through the ceiling, but pays up when the roof finally collapses from years of accumulated water damage. Requiring insurance companies to cover wellness visits will save them and us money in the long run.

The shortage issue is not doctors entirely, it's GPs specifically. Lord knows it's not dentists. GPs are the ones who need to be recruited. In my perfect world, the gov't would subsidize tuition, in return for a certain number of years of work in underserved areas. I have a relative who got her midwife certification under a program like that- tuition paid for; in return she works in inner city facilities for 5 years. Make tuition affordable and you'll see people eager to become doctors.

[joeydb]

The recent Florida decision pointing out the unconstitutionality of ObamaCare, along with the 78 pages detailing it, provide ample evidence of the exact opposite of the premise of this thread:

The Founding Fathers would have despised this socialist ilk.

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM153_vin.html

[dellinger63]

I think we can learn a lot from why physicians are refusing Medicare in fact it gives us a look at what a catastrophe Government involvement in the private sector would be. For starters:

Medicare regularly cuts the rates of reimbursement, which means doctors earn less for office visits and various procedures

There is a longer delay than ever before for doctors to get reimbursements from Medicare

Medicare has a very convoluted, bureacratic process that allows some tests and treatments, refuses to pay for others, and limits how a doctor can practice medicine

Doctors may need additional staff to handle the extra paperwork, phone calls, resubmissions, and negotiation with insurance companies.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I think we can learn a lot from why physicians are refusing Medicare in fact it gives us a look at what a catastrophe Government involvement in the private sector would be. For starters:

Perhaps you could review the PPACA ("Obamacare") and see how it addresses problems with Medicare reimbursements, and the stability of the Medicare program, as it does make some changes:

Here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient...dable_Care_Act

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

The recent Florida decision pointing out the unconstitutionality of ObamaCare, along with the 78 pages detailing it, provide ample evidence of the exact opposite of the premise of this thread:

The Founding Fathers would have despised this socialist ilk.

What about the two judges that upheld it and say it is constitutional? Do we just ignore them? And the 14 that said there is no case to hear?

The Supremes will probably get it April, and life will go on. With healthcare for many.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

The Supremes will probably get it April, and life will go on. With large fines for many.

FTFY

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

FTFY

$95 for an individual that you don't have to ever pay is a really big fine.

What about the small businesses that already are getting tax credits this year, and buying insurance for their employees for the first time ?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

$95 for an individual that you don't have to ever pay is a really big fine.

What about the small businesses that already are getting tax credits this year, and buying insurance for their employees for the first time ?

in 2016 - a short 5 years away.

The fine is $695 per person.

A family of 3 has to pay $2,085!!!

you must make a lot of money giving dogs rabies shots to think that 695 or 2085 is an easily payable fine


Your $95 thing is extremely misleading as that only counts for 2014 & 2015. But I dont expect anything less from you. I mean, you think Social Security is just fine because we dont run out of money until 2037 and you'll be long gone by then!

[Antitrust32]

actually, just saying $95 is even more misleading than I originally thought!!

in 2014 & 2015, an adult who does not have health insurance will be fined $95 or 1% of their income, whichever is GREATER.

aka

only if you make $9,500 per year will you only have to pay a $95 fine.



Say you make 25k per year... thats a $250 fine for 2014 and 2015

than after 2016 and beyond (which will encompass a lot more than the two years you decided to make an uneducated comment on)

it is $695 per adult... or 2.5% of their income... whichever is GREATER

or $2085 for a family, or 2.5% of their income... whichever is GREATER


So if a family makes 50k per year combined... you will be shelling out 4% of your income to the government. that is so easy to do!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

in 2016 - a short 5 years away.

The fine is $695 per person.

A family of 3 has to pay $2,085!!!

you must make a lot of money giving dogs rabies shots to think that 695 or 2085 is an easily payable fine


Your $95 thing is extremely misleading as that only counts for 2014 & 2015. But I dont expect anything less from you. I mean, you think Social Security is just fine because we dont run out of money until 2037 and you'll be long gone by then!

First, yes, I started with the beginning of the program - 2014 and 2015 - because that will be the fines people first will be assessed. Hopefully, during those two years, they will be able to purchase health insurance. That is the whole point - to make health insurance affordable so they will have healthcare.

Secondly, there is no penalty, no collection of unpaid fines.

So let's not be both misleading and rude and insulting to other posters. Right? Let's keep the personal insults out of it, because you're classy, right? I've highlighted all the non-insult stuff in your post, just so we can keep focused. Your insults are just extraneous personal bullshit from you.

And it is a false statement that we "run out of money" in 2037 regarding Social Security. We do not. At that point, if nothing at all is done, Social Security will still pay out, but at only 78% of what it should. That will be easily fixed, as it has in the past. There is no fear of Social Security "going broke"

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

The shortage issue is not doctors entirely, it's GPs specifically. Lord knows it's not dentists. GPs are the ones who need to be recruited. In my perfect world, the gov't would subsidize tuition, in return for a certain number of years of work in underserved areas. I have a relative who got her midwife certification under a program like that- tuition paid for; in return she works in inner city facilities for 5 years. Make tuition affordable and you'll see people eager to become doctors.

thank you for your respectful & informative reply.

I can agree with something along the lines of what you posted above. Though I'd much rather it be subsidized by charity or something other than government. Are taxes are too high as it is!!

[Riot]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Medicare is a federal funded program for the elderly and certain long-term disabled people and Medicaid is shared between the federal and state gov'ts to provide care for the poor.

And if one wants to see a real "government death panel", as a result of cutting state medicad-type funds, that has already resulted in the deaths of two people this year: look at Gov. Jan Brewer's cutting of state funds to patients on the transplant waiting list in her state.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_1...-10391704.html

http://blogs.forbes.com/rickungar/20...nother-victim/