The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-20-2013, 12:25 PM   #51
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,949

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Excuse me...price increasing.

Call it what you want.

One side is in favor of legislation which effectively lowers prices, the other has already passed legislation that has long since raised prices.

Here's some light reading for you:

http://www.justice.gov/atr/public/eag/246374.htm

(WARNING: ARGUMENT BY HYPERLINK)
Ha. Anticompetitiveness.

Nothing's more anti-competitive than a government price list.

Anyway. Some people believe Legislation can fundamentally lower prices. In reality all it really accomplishes is restricting services. Except for those in the 1% who can laugh it all off.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 12:52 PM   #52
B-Large
Ring of Famer
 
Expunged... Accidently?

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,283

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor View Post
I work for a small privately owned company. I can't afford $800-$1000 a month for health insurance. Someone tell me how this healthcare plan is suppose to help the common person?

Oh that's right, that's not what it's intention is. It may have started that way, but when Obama made a closed door deal with the insurance lobbyists to get the legislation passed everything changed. No goverment healthcare offered, just buy insurance on "the free market" or else.....

Nice..
you wil have option like 150-300/month with deductible, and if you are economcially challnged as you claim, you will get tax credit to but that insurance, so perhaps that 200/month policy becomes $100/mo..

if you are serious: http://www.healthcare.com/insurance/...29+State+Terms

if you are just posting to be partisan and inflammatory, then by all means...
B-Large is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 12:54 PM   #53
B-Large
Ring of Famer
 
Expunged... Accidently?

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,283

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigs11 View Post
and those are the well read informed ones..... I kid, I kid...
B-Large is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 12:55 PM   #54
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Large View Post
you wil have option like 150-300/month with deductible, and if you are economcially challnged as you claim, you will get tax credit to but that insurance, so perhaps that 200/month policy becomes $100/mo..

if you are serious: http://www.healthcare.com/insurance/...29+State+Terms

if you are just posting to be partisan and inflammatory, then by all means...
And they're not great plans, by any means...but they are better than nothing, and definitely better than visiting the emergency room.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:13 PM   #55
B-Large
Ring of Famer
 
Expunged... Accidently?

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,283

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Anyway, the real problem with health care is it's neccessity, combined with how removed consumers are from cost. And I guess add in a sprinkle of how complex (difficult to comprehend for the consumer) the product offering is.

I'm kinda sorta paraphrasing something I read somewhere before, but imagine if you went car shopping knowing you were only going to pay for 10% (out of pocket) of whatever car it is you chose to buy.

Most of us would make some pretty extravagant decisions that would never occur to us if we were writing a check for the whole bill. Also imagine that the car salesman already knows you're only paying 10% of the cost. Do you think he's going to show us the $6,000 well-maintained 2004 Civic in the back that is maybe really all we need?

No, he's taking us to the factory-new car lot. And only selling top of the line. And we'll buy it.
If most people had a $2,500 deductible to pay before insurance kicked in, they woud ask WAY more questions about recommended services, treatment plans and alternatives.

My only issue with the car anology is that a person who can't afford/ doesn;t need a car can simple make arrangement to get rides, ride a bike, ride a bus... it works like a market should, you either find value in the product and buy or pursue other alternatives... inhealthcare, that market doesn't always exist and the consequense is not no car, but dead.

It is simlpe one of the hardest issues to solve, effectively and fairly
B-Large is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:15 PM   #56
B-Large
Ring of Famer
 
Expunged... Accidently?

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 2,283

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
And they're not great plans, by any means...but they are better than nothing, and definitely better than visiting the emergency room.
yes. but for most it doesn't have to be a great plan, just cover me in case of a 300K cancer treatment, or t-bone car accident... the whole idea is to not destroy me financially is I get sick...

I just don't get it, just about everybody epecially those with Children understand such a premise, why do so many people have a problem with buying basic insurance to hedge their risk...
B-Large is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:20 PM   #57
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,949

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Large View Post
you wil have option like 150-300/month with deductible, and if you are economcially challnged as you claim, you will get tax credit to but that insurance, so perhaps that 200/month policy becomes $100/mo...
I'm assuming you mean per person. Which would be right about where he says assuming an average size family.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:21 PM   #58
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Large View Post
inhealthcare, that market doesn't always exist and the consequense is not no car, but dead.
And not just the one hypothetical person, either. Whooping cough is going around...we're getting an influx of diseases that haven't been around in decades. It can't just be the cause of those idiots who don't get vaccines by choice. Then we're also talking about medical costs which can't be paid by the treated which end up getting passed on to the public.

But no, let's demonize a solution that at least attempts to help while not offering solutions of our own. Sounds like a plan.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:31 PM   #59
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,949

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Large View Post
If most people had a $2,500 deductible to pay before insurance kicked in, they woud ask WAY more questions about recommended services, treatment plans and alternatives.
I agree. Health Insurance should be catastrophic. Not for 'routine maintenance' so to speak.

Quote:
My only issue with the car anology is that a person who can't afford/ doesn;t need a car can simple make arrangement to get rides, ride a bike, ride a bus... it works like a market should, you either find value in the product and buy or pursue other alternatives... inhealthcare, that market doesn't always exist and the consequense is not no car, but dead.

It is simlpe one of the hardest issues to solve, effectively and fairly
No analogy is perfect. Transportation is pretty important though, especially depending on where you live. And when it comes to market forces, importance makes applying them more important... not less.

But you could use food. Or housing. All essential. But if you only paid 10% of your food bill, most people would eat much more expensive diets. Or if you only paid for 10% of your house, we'd all live in McMansions.

You get the point.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:48 PM   #60
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by B-Large View Post
If most people had a $2,500 deductible to pay before insurance kicked in, they woud ask WAY more questions about recommended services, treatment plans and alternatives.
And then a cheaply and successfully treatable condition becomes enormously expensive and much harder to treat.

An outpatient colonoscopy and polyp removal for a few thousand turns into emergency colon resection/colostomy surgery, 2 weeks hospital stay, 8 months of chemotherapy, rehabilitation, and of course reversing the colostomy.

It's why insurance companies often waive preventative care deductables, etc. It makes them more money in the long run.
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 01:57 PM   #61
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,949

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
And then a cheaply and successfully treatable condition becomes enormously expensive and much harder to treat.

An outpatient colonoscopy and polyp removal for a few thousand turns into emergency colon resection/colostomy surgery, 2 weeks hospital stay, 8 months of chemotherapy, rehabilitation, and of course reversing the colostomy.

It's why insurance companies often waive preventative care deductables, etc. It makes them more money in the long run.
Only when targeted. On the whole (Preparation H ) Preventative care is a money loser.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...not-cut-costs/

So says the CBO.

That's not to say it isn't worth it to the individual receiving it. But to a socialized system, it's a cost the system works to control, not encourage.
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 02:21 PM   #62
Fedaykin
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,704

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BBII View Post
Only when targeted. On the whole (Preparation H ) Preventative care is a money loser.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics...not-cut-costs/

So says the CBO.

That's not to say it isn't worth it to the individual receiving it. But to a socialized system, it's a cost the system works to control, not encourage.
I'm responding to the idea of creating a huge barrier to preventative care.

$2,500 deductibles for even preventable care is an insurmountable barrier for a lot (maybe even most) people.

Do you think insurance agencies don't know how to minimize their costs? Companies whose primary business function is cost and risk analysis of medical care are wrong?
Fedaykin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 02:27 PM   #63
Bronco Yoda
.
 
Bronco Yoda's Avatar
 

Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,480
Default

I think most of us know the answer to this one already.

The real question is "how much damage will/can they do to the economy over this pissing match this time around.
Bronco Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 02:33 PM   #64
BroncoBeavis
Ring of Famer
 
BroncoBeavis's Avatar
 
New to the Forum

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,949

Adopt-a-Bronco:
None
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fedaykin View Post
I'm responding to the idea of creating a huge barrier to preventative care.

$2,500 deductibles for even preventable care is an insurmountable barrier for a lot (maybe even most) people.

Do you think insurance agencies don't know how to minimize their costs? Companies whose primary business function is cost and risk analysis of medical care are wrong?
It is a barrier to preventative care. But one that an emotionally non-invested stakeholder cares nothing about.

Your personal life is of $0 value to that decision maker. In a socialized system, you are only a cost to be managed. And if you die at 50 because you didn't do any cancer screening, you'll probably still be less expensive to them than if you live to be 90 and die of something else.

If you have any doubt, I can pull out CMS' CT Colonography example again. Despite the fact that it works well. And many more people would be willing to get the screening (vs the probe-up-the-ass kind) meaning it would save many lives. And is cheaper per-procedure than the probe-up-the-ass.

Yet federal gatekeepers still won't pay for it. Why? Currently only about half of people keep up on the recommended frequency of preventative colonscopy. Because the probe-up-the-ass is unpleasant. The virtual CT procedure is much less unpleasant. And would be far more heavily utilized. Plainly put, it would cost Medicare more.

CMS is literally trading lives for dollars. And single payer will absolutely do the same thing.

I guess put another way, if you don't care enough to keep up on preventative care, nobody else is going to care for you. And nobody is going to take that on in the name of saving money. Because nobody, other than you and your loved ones, derives any real $$$ benefit from it.

Now there are targeted cases, where if a screening test is cheap and easy, and then it makes sense. But when looking at the entire 'preventative' market (again in pure dollars and cents), the old thinking about an ounce of prevention, etc, is mostly a myth.

Last edited by BroncoBeavis; 09-20-2013 at 02:41 PM..
BroncoBeavis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 02:40 PM   #65
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,272

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rigs11 View Post
Haha people are stupid!
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 02:42 PM   #66
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,272

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

"It's already impacting the economy, and will only get worse as the mandates and penalties start to be implemented."

That's the fourth panel that you could put me into on that comic. It's terrible legislation that isn't going to work like intended, and put a lot of people out of work.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:02 PM   #67
frerottenextelway
█████
 
frerottenextelway's Avatar
 
█████

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: █████
Posts: 8,427

Adopt-a-Bronco:
██
Default

It's a shame Calgary Cruz ruined his 2016 nomination chances over this, I was really looking forward to the comedic debate performances.
frerottenextelway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:04 PM   #68
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,272

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frerottenextelway View Post
It's a shame Calgary Cruz ruined his 2016 nomination chances over this, I was really looking forward to the comedic debate performances.
I think the guy is a shoe in for the next Senate Majority leader. I'm not too sure his ambitions are presidential at this point.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:08 PM   #69
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,272

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

besides that, the guy would be a very viable candidate in the Republican field. WHo would beat him? Rick Perry?
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:08 PM   #70
frerottenextelway
█████
 
frerottenextelway's Avatar
 
█████

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: █████
Posts: 8,427

Adopt-a-Bronco:
██
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I think the guy is a shoe in for the next Senate Majority leader. I'm not too sure his ambitions are presidential at this point.
I think it's almost a certainty him and Paul are going to run based on their actions. Cruz would've flamed out anyways, but it would've been a fun ride when he had his moment in the sun as a front runner. Of course, the nomination is all Christies at the end if he chooses.
frerottenextelway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:10 PM   #71
frerottenextelway
█████
 
frerottenextelway's Avatar
 
█████

Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: █████
Posts: 8,427

Adopt-a-Bronco:
██
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
besides that, the guy would be a very viable candidate in the Republican field. WHo would beat him? Rick Perry?
Paul will get that part of the wing. But the power players and money (and sanity) will align with Christie. Like it did with Romney.
frerottenextelway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:11 PM   #72
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,272

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frerottenextelway View Post
I think it's almost a certainty him and Paul are going to run based on their actions. Cruz would've flamed out anyways, but it would've been a fun ride when he had his moment in the sun as a front runner. Of course, the nomination is all Christies at the end if he chooses.
I don't think Christie has a prayer of winning it. He'll have establishment money backing him at a time when the base is trying to escape the establishment. I think what's going to happen is Christie will be perceived as too far left - Cruz will be perceived as too far right... and there in the center will be Rand Paul, who will walk away with the nomination after winning Iowa, New Hampshire, and Nevada. Cruz will win SC. Christie will win Florida. Eventually, Rand will be seen as the happy medium between the three.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:12 PM   #73
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
I think the guy is a shoe in for the next Senate Majority leader. I'm not too sure his ambitions are presidential at this point.


What, is he turning Democrat or something?
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:13 PM   #74
Taco John
24/7 Broncos
 
Taco John's Avatar
 
Peddling the Orange Addiction

Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 50,272

Adopt-a-Bronco:
Peyton Manning
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frerottenextelway View Post
Paul will get that part of the wing. But the power players and money (and sanity) will align with Christie. Like it did with Romney.
Romney is a big part of why Christie doesn't have a prayer.
Taco John is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-20-2013, 03:13 PM   #75
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,405
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taco John View Post
Romney is a big part of why Christie doesn't have a prayer.
Except Christie isn't a dolt and doesn't have the baggage Romney did.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:17 AM.


Denver Broncos