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.
I'd like to see Medicare, Medicaid, Veterans Administration and Public Health Service become a single entity, under one Cabinet Officer (Surgeon General) and get on with it. We can do this in eight years time.
I agree with you. Having ONE program, as opposed to separate bureaucracies for Medicare, Medicaid, VA, SCHIP, etc. would save a bundle of money, simplify the system and improve efficiency.
But I don't agree we can do this under the current administration. Haven't you noticed that his "stimulus" focuses heavily on jobs through the government? If he put all of those bureaucrats out of work by streamlining the government healthcare programs, it would be counter-intuitive since GROWING government is what he believes is going to help the economy.
Most doctors who abuse the system get audited, get sued, get left by the insurers. Do you think your insurance would cover a head to toe MRI because your doctor wants to make money? Do you think the HMOs let the doctor order what ever they want?
Most doctors don't take Medicare patients b/c it costs more to see those patients than it does to simply turn the lights out. The current system have a short fall of Medicare funding. If Pres. Obama doesn't do anything about it, Medicare reimbursement will be reduced by some 40% in 5 years. Then who will see these patients? If it cost you money to go to work, why go to work?
Last edited by Reads2MUCH; 03-06-2009 at 06:00 PM..
Reason: edited for deleted content
Screw that. I'll take my QUALITY health care any day, even if it costs more. Universal health care should be renamed Universal Sh!%%y Health Care. It'd be more accurate.
Countries with UHC tend to have much better health statisitcs in general, e.g. infant mortality, life expectancy, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HereinDenver
No. Most doctors who abuse the system get audited, get sued, get left by the insurers. Do you think your insurance would cover a head to toe MRI because your doctor wants to make money? Do you think the HMOs let the doctor order what ever they want?
Most doctors don't take Medicare patients b/c it costs more to see those patients than it does to simply turn the lights out. The current system have a short fall of Medicare funding. If Pres. Obama doesn't do anything about it, Medicare reimbursement will be reduced by some 40% in 5 years. Then who will see these patients? If it cost you money to go to work, why go to work?
I don't think you understood what I was saying, probably b/c you have such a negative opinion of me. That post was not meant to be "anti-doctor". As teatime has pointed out, she has had no problem getting in with a specialist, just her old GP who doesn't take medicare. You can't expect the patient to have insurance, and then pay full fee to the dr. that doesn't take the insurance.
Last edited by Katarina Witt; 03-06-2009 at 01:31 PM..
Actually, Medicaid covers the disabled, too, if they are receiving SSI benefits. I was once married to such a person. For people who are too poor to afford Medicare premiums and copays, Medicaid would be a good alternative; for the rest of the population (who are already paying for insurance, or can afford to but cannot get coverage), Medicare seems fair.
This is misinformation. You can't be "too poor to afford Medicare" so they give you Medicaid. You're comparing apples and oranges here.
SSI is for people who have various issues and are EXTREMELY poor. Technically, you CAN receive both SSI and SSD but it's not typical. The reason you get Medicaid automatically with SSI is because of the extreme poverty factor. Medicaid is administered by the states and the states decide the eligibility requirements but it is ONLY for the poor.
Medicare is not needs based and it is tied to Social Security BUT, if you are poor, your state will pay your Medicare premiums for you. My state pays for mine and I'm very grateful. If you're really, really poor, the state will pay the Medicare premiums AND copays for you.
Again, Medicare is for the elderly and disabled ONLY. We all pay a payroll tax toward Medicare. Some elderly and disabled people may qualify for Medicaid, too, but many like myself don't. You have to be VERY poor to receive Medicaid or you have to have young children.
Sounds really great. Now do you think that we need to charge the same rate to those who are on your program the same as those of us on Medicare pay? I think that I have about $115 withheld from my SS check each month. That would mean a family of 4 could get the service for $460. Now that would be a great deal but how many of them won't pay for that? How many who refuse to have health insurance so they can have a better lifestyle would want to pay even that paltry $115 per month.
I think your California nurses are members of some kind of union, at least it sounds like it.
No, the typical American family would DEMAND that all of the single ppl without kids subsidize their brats so that they don't have to pay anything.
As Congress and the White House labor to finalize an $800 billion economic stimulus package that includes stopgap measures to plug the holes in our collapsing health care system and our fraying public safety net, there’s at least one other approach they should consider.
With one bold move, we could repair our broken health care system and take a major step on the road to economic recovery by expanding and upgrading Medicare to cover all Americans. And it would not even cost much more than we are spending on health care today.
For just $63 billion beyond current health care spending – the cost of extending Medicare to all, according to a new California Nurses Association study – we would create 2.6 million new jobs, effectively replacing every job lost in America in 2008, and make a major dent in the sobering layoff reports we see on our front pages every day.
No thanks. It's bad enough that I have to pay for medicare NOW, even though I will never use it. I would really be ticked off if I had to pay for MORE MEDICAL INSURANCE that I will never use.
No, you can't do that. If you pay the physician yourself, you have to sign a waiver saying you will NOT seek reimbursement from Medicare. If you don't sign it, the doc won't see you.
I know because I've had to do this. I had a wonderful GP but when I qualified for Medicare, I found out that he doesn't accept it. I've had a devil of a time finding another GP to accept Medicare (oddly enough, I haven't had a problem with specialists or any other services taking it -- just the GPs are refusing).
Then - you pay out of pocket. Two General Practice Physicans I know stopped taking Medicare - and their patient load has not gone down.
Who's going to pay for all those new Medicare medical care providers to get through nursing school and medical school to fill 2.6 million positions................
hmmm?
Snowball effect keeps on rolling.
No doctor's office I've been to in 10 years accepts Medicare.
Countries with UHC tend to have much better health statisitcs in general,
Longer wait times. No life saving care because you are too old
Great. Great "statistics"
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.
