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.
this is so obviously bs. right now, there is limited stuff discrediting that story but it will grow. the intercept is leftist, so i will post their article on how the accusation is bs.
there are no such thing as friends when it comes to government. everyone is obligated to act in their own countries best interests. but russia hasnt done anything to us and has no reason to. it feels weird to have this debate while we live in america who has done way more to russia and spies on every nation on earth (even its own citizens). America has wrongly put sanctions on russians. openly. the US government has earned retribution from russia. but russia has been much better to america than america has been to it.
I would say the Intercept is more rightest than leftist.
I guess it the growing bromance between Trump and Putin.
I did not say the US hasn't done anything to Russia as far as who's done more????
The US has been indoctrinated since the 50's of the evils of Russia, and the evils of communism go back to the 20's. The Russians got the secrets of the bomb from the US. We had the space race. Don't worry, Russian children were indoctrinated about the US also.
An interesting story about the Russians, at one time some Russian diplomats were given a tour of a plant in the US that machined propellers for submarines. The diplomats wore shoes with gummy type soles to collect material from the plant floor, this material was later analyzed to determine the alloy the propellers were made of.
Unfortunately with our present system of health care/health insurance the ONLY thing driving it is profits, health care providers are for the most part only interested in profits, and insurance companies ARE only interested in profits. This it why single payer would work so much better, because then the emphasis WOULD be on care.
My goodness. Reminds me of the famous line in The Godfather, "who's being naive now Kay?"
The fallacy of liberals. That political self interest is somehow more noble than individual self interest.
Tell us wise sage how it is humanly possible to take the profit motive away from doctors, nurses, PAs, hospitals, administrators, techs. Are all these stakeholders going to provide these services out of the goodness of their hearts? Tell me how layering in the gargantuan bureaucracy needed is going to drive costs down. Are the bureaucrats going to volunteer their time?
I dream of flying pink unicorns to but then it's time to wake up and face reality.
Tell us wise sage how it is humanly possible to take the profit motive away from doctors, nurses, PAs, hospitals, administrators, techs. Are all these stakeholders going to provide these services out of the goodness of their hearts? Tell me how layering in the gargantuan bureaucracy needed is going to drive costs down. Are the bureaucrats going to volunteer their time?
Workers would still be paid, obviously. Staff salaries have little to do with profit. The serious money is going to insurance company executives (see below). In contrast, Sylvia Mathews Burwell, current head of HHS (which manages Medicare), earns $205,700 per year.
Quote:
HARTFORD — Aetna Chairman and CEO Mark Bertolini received $27.9 million in compensation last year, according to a filing Friday with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
About $24.8 million of the package was due to gains in value on restricted stock that vested in 2015 and on stock options he was awarded 10 years ago and exercised in 2015.
The total was up from $15 million in 2014.
His compensation also included $1,034,483 in salary, $1.84 million in cash bonus, and $271,908 in perks, mostly from the cost of his using the corporate aircraft for personal use.
The Courant calculates compensation as the sum of salary, bonuses, value gained on the exercise of stock options and the vesting of stock awards, and the value of perquisites, such as the 401(k) match and personal use of corporate aircraft.
Separately, he received $5.97 million in restricted stock and $8.14 million in stock options whose ultimate value will be determined in future years.
The company had about 50,100 employees at the end of 2015, about 6,000 of those in Connecticut.
Other executives received the following compensation:
Chief Financial Officer/Chief Enterprise Risk Officer Shawn Guertin: $5.59 million, not including $4.2 million in restricted stock and stock options;
Consumer Health and Services Executive Vice President Gary Loveman: $480,782, not including $7.5 million in restricted stock and stock options;
President Karen Lynch: $8.7 million, not including $2.7 million in restricted stock and stock options;
Government Services Executive Vice President Francis Soistman Jr.: $3.3 million, not including $3 million in restricted stock and stock options.
As mentioned in the preceding article, Aetna has 50,100 employees. Do you think the federal government would need that many employees to administer health benefits for an equivalent number of policy-holders?
I would say the Intercept is more rightest than leftist.
there is absolutely no question that there is nothing rightist about the intercept. the issue the intercept had with this election is that they supported bernie sanders. they are more idealistic so they were happy to take shots at hillary but it was because they supported bernie, not anything nearly right wing. i like them on facebook so i see what they post all the time.
trump probably doesnt see any need to treat putin as anything but an ally. russia hasnt done anything wrong to America. its a good thing that he wants to make nice with putin. im not sure why america and russia getting along is a bad thing. suddenly putin is running our country? please, nobody really believes that. its just insane fear mongering that makes no sense.
The fallacy of liberals. That political self interest is somehow more noble than individual self interest.
Tell us wise sage how it is humanly possible to take the profit motive away from doctors, nurses, PAs, hospitals, administrators, techs. Are all these stakeholders going to provide these services out of the goodness of their hearts? Tell me how layering in the gargantuan bureaucracy needed is going to drive costs down. Are the bureaucrats going to volunteer their time?
Great Britain seem to make it work. Doctors get bonuses based on the number of patients they keep healthy through preventative care. Many people in the US don't go to the doctor for preventative care, they go when the are sick, sometimes seriously, because they can't afford deductibles. In the US we have an obesity problem.
Do you know any nurses? Where do they have a profit motive? I never heard of a nurse having one. or x-ray technicians. Unless these people get paid extra for the number of tests administered (whether needed or not). Like the Doctor I used to go to that was in cahoots with a Lab and got kickbacks for bloodtests????? That seems to be the profit motive I hear about, FRAUD. At least once a month I read about some doctor being accused of Medicare fraud.
There is already a giant bureaucracy administering the insurance companies. There's a whole industry called "medical billing" and all sorts of "codes". I went to a surgeon who DOESN'T participate with ANY insurance plan. He got tired of having to employ 1 or 2 people to submit claims that were rejected for not having a T crossed or an I dotted. He just accepted what the insurance company sent as "reasonable and customary" minus the 20% since he wasn't participating. It worked out simpler for him.
I posted something a while back where I'd gone in for same day surgery. If I didn't have insurance and didn't qualify for "charity care", I would have been on the hook for 2x as much as the Hospital took from Blue Cross. This was before Obamacare. I think there is something wrong there, don't you?
Workers would still be paid, obviously. Staff salaries have little to do with profit. The serious money is going to insurance company executives (see below). In contrast, Sylvia Mathews Burwell, current head of HHS (which manages Medicare), earns $205,700 per year.
As mentioned in the preceding article, Aetna has 50,100 employees. Do you think the federal government would need that many employees to administer health benefits for an equivalent number of policy-holders?
Where do I begin? LOL
Umm, if Aetna's CEO made ZERO it would not make a difference. I am going to assume from your post you arent very good at math.
Aetna is a full service insurance company covering MUCH more than healthcare. By posting the number of their employees tells me NOTHING. Further, the belief that the federal government will be more EFFICIENT at administering health plans than a company that has been doing it for many years is blissfully ignorant.
Great Britain seem to make it work. Doctors get bonuses based on the number of patients they keep healthy through preventative care. Many people in the US don't go to the doctor for preventative care, they go when the are sick, sometimes seriously, because they can't afford deductibles. In the US we have an obesity problem.
Do you know any nurses? Where do they have a profit motive? I never heard of a nurse having one. or x-ray technicians. Unless these people get paid extra for the number of tests administered (whether needed or not). Like the Doctor I used to go to that was in cahoots with a Lab and got kickbacks for bloodtests????? That seems to be the profit motive I hear about, FRAUD. At least once a month I read about some doctor being accused of Medicare fraud.
There is already a giant bureaucracy administering the insurance companies. There's a whole industry called "medical billing" and all sorts of "codes". I went to a surgeon who DOESN'T participate with ANY insurance plan. He got tired of having to employ 1 or 2 people to submit claims that were rejected for not having a T crossed or an I dotted. He just accepted what the insurance company sent as "reasonable and customary" minus the 20% since he wasn't participating. It worked out simpler for him.
I posted something a while back where I'd gone in for same day surgery. If I didn't have insurance and didn't qualify for "charity care", I would have been on the hook for 2x as much as the Hospital took from Blue Cross. This was before Obamacare. I think there is something wrong there, don't you?
Britain does NOT seem to work. My goodness the bad information out there is truly scary.
The profit motive of nurses is SALARY. Hello McFly! Wake Up!!!!
Do you realize the government has NO ONE qualified to administer? Do you realize the bureaucrats to administers are plucked from the same source as the private sector? Or do you believe the fairy godmother waves her magic wand and qualified administers appear?
I find it fascinating how people truly believe the federal government....comprised of ZERO knowledge and knowhow in any field will suddenly become more efficient and better at ANYTHING. By definition, they cannot, they MUST partner with the private sector and when that happens it is known as CRONYISM. Reality is a mofo.
Do you realize the government has NO ONE qualified to administer? Do you realize the bureaucrats to administers are plucked from the same source as the private sector? Or do you believe the fairy godmother waves her magic wand and qualified administers appear?
I find it fascinating how people truly believe the federal government....comprised of ZERO knowledge and knowhow in any field will suddenly become more efficient and better at ANYTHING. By definition, they cannot, they MUST partner with the private sector and when that happens it is known as CRONYISM. Reality is a mofo.
The federal government does a pretty good job of managing Medicare. How different would it be for the government to run a single-payer plan, since that's what Medicare is? Why not just expand Medicare to everyone?
What's your plan for delivering health care once Obamacare has been repealed? Besides selling policies across state lines, which we have established won't work.
The profit motive of nurses is SALARY. Hello McFly! Wake Up!!!!
Hip-replacement patients have to wait as it's not considered life threatening. How many people have to wait in the US for someone WITHOUT any medical knowledge to approve treatment? Great Britain started their NHS in 1948?? I guess it's worked pretty good for OVER 60yrs. What about people in the US who don't buy medications because they CAN'T afford them. Or don't get hip replacement surgery because they can't afford deductibles, etc.
I don't know of any nurses that get MORE money if there are MORE patients in a hospital, do you??? Any nurses I know get paid hourly and with OT make more money. Hello McMagnusFly you WAKE UP!!!
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.
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.
