"soul crushing rejections"..Obamacare recipient unable to find doc who will take her. (dollars, high school)

[mohawkx]

Originally Posted by aneftp

Private physicians can take whoever they want. If they don't want to take any more medicaid patients, they don't have to.

I would normally suggest if someone can't find a doctor, they should just find someone in their local county health office or hospital

Oops.

That may be a problem as well since many "safety net" clinics are losing valuable funding because of the ACA.

The ACA assumes more people will get insured so they are decreasing funding from such safety net clinics.

Federally funded health centers brace for financial loss

From your own link.

•Medicaid has not been expanded in about half of the states. The ACA assumed people under 138% of the federal poverty limit would be on Medicaid, but a Supreme Court decision last year let states decide whether to expand Medicaid to cover the poorest of the poor. So, in many states, the sickest patients with the least ability to pay are still using their local clinics for health care.

Turns out most every problem the ACA is having is being caused by republican obstructionism.

[Sensei Han]

Originally Posted by Katiana

You do? No one has shown that this is happening!

Just the fact that they are doing it is proof.

[aneftp]

Originally Posted by mohawkx

From your own link.

•Medicaid has not been expanded in about half of the states. The ACA assumed people under 138% of the federal poverty limit would be on Medicaid, but a Supreme Court decision last year let states decide whether to expand Medicaid to cover the poorest of the poor. So, in many states, the sickest patients with the least ability to pay are still using their local clinics for health care.

Turns out most every problem the ACA is having is being caused by republican obstructionism.

What obstruction? Do you not follow the Supreme Court decisions? All the ACA supporters were high fiving each other when the Supreme Court made their decisions.

Nothing the republicans have done with Medicaid expansion is illegal or obstructing. Just because someone doesn't go with you doesn't mean they are obstructing.

So if the Repubs control the house and senate. If they pass laws obama doesn't like. Will you say Obama is the one obstructing? It works both ways.

[LexusNexus]

How about "soul crushing" lunacy of the Conservative narrative on this successful health plan? Or the "soul-crushing" lunacy of Republicans and Bush ignoring millions who couldn't find a doc in the health care crisis over 8 horrific years?

You are losing Pubs. This health plan is considered a resounding success. It would be more so if you would just get the hell out of the way.

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by bUU

There is no question that elevating one's own personal comfort and luxury over the basic needs of others is a perspective held by more than a few of your colleagues.

The perspective that a society is judged by how it treats its most vulnerable members is not a false morality - it is the prevailing professed morality of civilization. The ethic of reciprocity is the most universally held ethic among all belief systems, both religious and not.

Those who support what you support live in a world of rationalized self-centeredness and avarice. How folks deign to consider that as morality is mystifying to me but it surely is one's prerogative to call up "down" and call right "left".

I am beginning to think that perhaps you are devoid of rational thought.


1. If there were unlimited resources , then "equal" distribution of resources would be practical.

2. In a world of limited resources , those resources must be differentially allocated by the means by which society has established relative value.

i. e. Not everything can be free or equal in a world of
Limited resources . This is a simple fact which you cannot seem to comprehend.

3. Medicine is expensive, both for services and actual products.

4. It costs a lot of money, time, and effort to train physicians.

5. Drugs and medical devices are expensive.

6. Given items #1-5, one cannot equally distribute medical care, nor demand that the suppliers or service providers deliver medicine for free.

7. A two year old can understand the costs of a medical practice and the need to pay expenses, but this seems alien to you.


Do you work for free?

Is it "immoral" for you not to work for free?

Should i, rather than society, be able to determine the value of your labor and assign a salary?

Should there be any correlation between the years of training , intelligence required, hours worked , and difficulty of a job relative to salary?

Should a fast food worker make as much as a physician?

[Katarina Witt]

Originally Posted by aneftp

These are your exact words. Putting the basic needs of the most vulnerable in society.

1. The USA already provides essentially free basic health care for pregnant women (very vulnerable). All pregnant women? Document, please.
2. The USA already provides free basic health for all poor children (CHIP) To certain income levels, yes.
3. The USA already provides free basic health care for all poor families with children under 18 (vulnerable) You have to be pretty low income to get it for the non-pregnant adults.
4. The USA already provides free basic health care for those with disabled (either through straight medicaid or medicare combo)
5. The USA already provides free basic health care to ALL kidney dialysis patient (most vulnerable because without dialysis patients can die from fluid over load /congestive hear failure very quickly0

All these were in place BEFORE the ACA.

Tell me again how the USA was didn't have its moral priorities correctly.

I guess you believe we should subsidize those families of 4 making 94K a year who own "luxuries like iphones" as well. Shouldn't they give up their comfort and luxury (in addition to iphones, cable TV/eating out) if they accept help?

***

[aneftp]

Originally Posted by Katiana

***

Pregnant women who meet eligibility.

Medicaid | Florida Department of Children and Families

Each state runs it's own program.

So even in opt out states and pre ACA. There are programs for pregnant women for Medicaid.

As for your comment about "having to have pretty low income for families to qualify".

To put my comments in context. I was responding to BUU assertions that we must provide health care for the most vulnerable members of society.

We have services in place.

Do we keep redefining most vulnerable?

Most vulnerable means families with kids who are very poor. Children and disabled. Those are the most vulnerable. Yes or no?

[dreamofmonterey]

Originally Posted by Sensei Han

I see the problem with doctors refusing to care for Americans because they are getting less money now.

But let's not forget that the ACA was created by Bush. They waited to find a good little servant to put his face on it and push it on us.

Obama is a puppet.

Blame your own who are hiding behind the facade that is "obama".

agree, The fake paradigm of blaming Obama is getting so old. Healthcare was in shambles in early 90's.

1992 Pres. debates Bush Sr. wanted to talk about his grandkids, we should have elected Ross Perot.

[bUU]

Originally Posted by hawkeye2009

I am beginning to think that perhaps you are devoid of rational thought.

It's pitiful to watch how you go from vacuous exhortation to ad hominem attack to try to rationalize your corrupt perspective. Discuss the topic. Attack my perspectives if you must. But attacking me personally just demonstrates desperation and shows you have nothing legitimate to say.

[hawkeye2009]

Originally Posted by bUU

It's pitiful to watch how you go from vacuous exhortation to ad hominem attack to try to rationalize your corrupt perspective. Discuss the topic. Attack my perspectives if you must. But attacking me personally just demonstrates desperation and shows you have nothing legitimate to say.

Hmmmmmmm.............

It is interesting indeed that you claim you respond to any of the points I make about the costs of medical care and why "forcing" physicians to see certain patients is not practical.

You have not (in a single post) adressed ANY OF THESE POINTS, yet ramble on about being an "expert" in morality. Your "morals" constitute childish demands and sacrifices of OTHER PEOPLE in order to satisfy some sense of guilt or conscience that YOU HOLD that have no practicality in the real world. However, YOU DEMAND other people sacrifice time, money, and effort, to satisfy your wishes.

Want to put your money where your mouth is? Work hard in undergrad, get straight As, apply to med school, go through residency, accumulate debt, go several years without an income, then YOU WORK FOR NOTHING IN ORDER TO SATISFY YOUR GUILT AND MORALITY. I would bet that would last about two weeks!

Let us review (again)

1. One cannot force any physician to see any patient electively (13th amendment). On call (which is deemed "emergent") one must accept any patient.

2. An average of $300K in debt is accumulated by physicians in training. Why would anyone go into medicine when they could not pay off thier debt?
a. do you assume the feds would pick up that tab?
b. do you understand that Obamacare looted $750 billion from medicare?
c. do you understand that residency slots are funded to a great extent by medicare?

3. Medicaid pays less than one fifth what private insurance does. ANY PRACTICE that opened its doors (without rationing) to medicaid would be bankrupt in a few months.
a. do you understand that we pay 45% in overhead?
b. do you understand that nurses and staff have to be paid, regardless of revenues?
c. do you understand that rent and supplies have to be paid, regardless of revenues?
d. what happens to those practices that go bankrupt by your rules? Are those physicians allowed to retire, or are they forced to pay to practice until they are personally bankrupt?

4. If one is to "force" physicians to see certain patients and work at the will of the feds, then-
a. what other occupations will be forced to work for the pleasure of the feds?
b. are physicians allowed to retire?
c. do physicians get any vacation time?
d. what do the feds do if we choose to simply quit? Do they arrest us?

5. Our license is conferred by the state, therefore they have no power over us
a. do you think that states will concede that authority to the feds?
b. do you realize that state boards have different discipline rates and actions?
c. do you realize that state boards have different CME and education requirements?

6. If you cut reimbursement, such that making a living is difficult-
a. why would anyone go into medicine?
b. why would those over age 50 continue to practice?
c. do you realize that there is already a physician shortage?
d. do you realize that PAs, NPs, and CRNAs bill the same amount as physicians?

7. Do you realize that medicaid patients-
a. have a high incidence of drug abuse?
b. are abusive to staff?
c. "no show" quite frequently?
d. complain about $1 co-pays?
e. are poorly compliant?

8. Do you realize that the poor already have healthcare coverage- better than those with insurance?
a. emergent care cannot be denied
b. patients are not "balanced billed" for very expensive care
c. CHIP programs provide for children
d. county clinics and hospitals offer care free, which is not available to those with insurance

9. Society determines salaries and reimbursement based on what the market determines
a. how much do you think physicians should be paid?
b. given that many of us work 80+ hours, should we be paid by the hour?
c. should 13 years of post high school education be a consideration?
d. should the high GPAs and MCATs required to get into med school be considered?
e. should the relative stress of medicine, compared to flipping burgers, be considered?
f. should the debt and time without income be considered?



You live in a childish world in which YOU CLAIM the high ground of "morality", when in fact your wishes and "demands" are totalitarian in nature and disregard the effort and work of others for your personal emotional needs. Amazing

READ THIS LINK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning...3Kruger_effect