Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:39 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,758,281 times
Reputation: 20674

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Obamacare guarantees that the poor and the afflicted will be the people most willing to sign on. Look for them to be the most ardent supporters of the ACA as well. After all, who wouldn't want everyone else to pay for his health care?
We all pay for people who do not insure their healthcare risks and stiff providers, no different than how we all pay for shop lifting.

It's a tad curious that the latter is considered a crime and the former is somehow acceptable to a portion of society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:42 AM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,740,361 times
Reputation: 13868
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
We all pay for people who do not insure their healthcare risks and stiff providers, no different than how we all pay for shop lifting.

It's a tad curious that the latter is considered a crime and the former is somehow acceptable to a portion of society.
Of course we pay for uninsured but I was able to CHOOSE my healthcare and CHOOSE a plan that fit MY needs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:44 AM
 
41,110 posts, read 25,740,361 times
Reputation: 13868
On and on The One and the media continue with a pathetic snake-oil pitch consisting of misleading and blatantly false promises destined to fool only low-information voters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:47 AM
 
Location: it depends
6,369 posts, read 6,411,323 times
Reputation: 6388
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Well this is a new one. I am not aware of anyone who had richer benefits pre ACA than post ACA. Please explain.

I have no issue with those who chose not to adequately insure their risks not receiving medical attention, including in the ER, unless they can pay for it out of pocket. That's me. Right now, your government feels you have a right to the ER, regardless of your insurance status or ability to pay for it.
Get your head out of the sand and read the thread in which you are so enthusiastically participating. I had richer benefits pre-ACA: lower out of pocket maximum exposures, complete coverage for everything that could happen to me and mine. Stubbornly clinging to falsehoods is not helping us get to a better place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:47 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,128,317 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
We all pay for people who do not insure their healthcare risks and stiff providers, no different than how we all pay for shop lifting.

It's a tad curious that the latter is considered a crime and the former is somehow acceptable to a portion of society.
Would you approve of a law which says that you must pay a $5 tax in order to walk into a store, in order to help subsidize shoplifters? Somehow I doubt you would..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:48 AM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,957,870 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
We all pay for people who do not insure their healthcare risks and stiff providers, no different than how we all pay for shop lifting.

It's a tad curious that the latter is considered a crime and the former is somehow acceptable to a portion of society.
If we were already "pay[ing] for people who do not insure their healthcare risks" before the ACA was passed, tell me again why we had to get the federal government involved in ruining everyone's health insurance coverage?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:49 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,853,831 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossfire600 View Post
From the article:

"Alfred Gargiulio, who has cerebral palsy with a seizure disorder, has been seeing Leibowitz since 1993. “Obama had said I could keep my doctor. Now they’re doing away with my doctor. They kicked him out! After 20 years, that’s not right. We love Dr. Leibowitz,” said Gargiulio.

Another patient, Wilma Streicher, 76, was equally baffled. “Of course I want to keep Dr. Leibowitz. I don’t see why they want to push him out,” she said.

Patients of other doctors faced the same dire situation. Lung-cancer patient Jeannette Campregon, 79, received a letter from EmblemHealth saying that her internist, George Ruggiero, was terminated from her VIP High Option Medicare Advantage network.

Emblem notified her she could stay in her current plan and choose another doctor, pick a different plan to keep her doctor or call a customer-service rep for help.

“I’m going absolutely nuts,” said Campregon, who got conflicting information from three different service reps. “I don’t want to change my doctor!”

Dr. Ruggiero said, “The people who lose out are the patients.”

Did they vote for Obama? If so, they're getting what they deserve. They chose this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Barrington
63,919 posts, read 46,758,281 times
Reputation: 20674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossfire600 View Post
Medicare has been and continues to be free to terminate eligibility of a healthcare provider.

MDs opt in and out of Medicare all the time. Most limit the number of Medicare patients.

Since 2000 +/-, MDs have been selling their medical practices to hospitals like hot cakes and this had nothing to do with ACA. When they do, many will find themselves in a different PPO.

MDs/medical practices opt in and out of PPO networks all the time. Some limit the number of new PPO patients.

Hospitals are free to opt in and out of PPO networks with every contract.

Employers have been and continue to be free to change group health insurers and when they do, the PPO changes.

Some MDs and dentists too, do not affiliate with any PPO and do not accept any insurance. Their client base is wealthy enough to pay for service out of pocket.

The only thing here that was and remains constant is that people have the ability to use the same MD when they are willing to pay an out of network rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Area 51.5
13,887 posts, read 13,676,249 times
Reputation: 9174
Quote:
Originally Posted by middle-aged mom View Post
Your insurer has never been a part of determining what's best for you. Your insurer is in the business of making money. Those insurers who sold sub prime plans with high deductibles, low lifetime caps and exclusions were on the gravy train.

Being underinsured implies an intent to stiff the healthcare system, should your medical situation cost you substantially more than your own determination.
Bullhockey! Insurance companies dictate to doctors what to do, when to do it, and why. They even tell a doctor how many patients must be treated which leads to shorter consultation times.

Insurance companies rule the health industry. Long gone are the days when doctor knew best.

A good 30 years ago I knew a woman who had a double mastectomy. The hospital sent her home on the second day because that's all the insurance company wanted to pay for.

Absolutely disgraceful!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-25-2013, 10:52 AM
 
59,088 posts, read 27,330,758 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chimuelojones View Post
What exatly is good coverage? if having a low deductable and co-pay yet the policy doesnt meet the minumun of coverage, how good is it.

You gave one expample of higher deductable and copays...did you get only one quote? How many quotes did you consider...? Was the $6,000 higher option the lowest one available to you?
One of the problems is the "minimum" is a LOT more then many people need or want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:55 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top