Aetna Ditching 70% Obamacare Business
Comments
-
Hondo.
-
You suck at teh InternetzSledog said:Hondo.
-
Again more lies. Here's an education.Sledog said:
The plan was written and passed without change. Rimmed through without even reading it, remember? Alzhiemers?2001400ex said:
Are you really that stupid? Or do you just like repeating talking points that have no bearing on reality? Because the $2,500 comment was on the plan Obama campaigned on. Which was vastly different than the plan that was passed.Sledog said:
Yeah where's my 2500.00 a year savings your guy promised because adding 30 million people would make it cheaper?2001400ex said:
What world do you live in? You pay for lazy ass people's health care every time you or your employer pay medical insurance or any time you pay a medical bill.Sledog said:
What part of the point did I miss besides you wanting us to pay for lazy ass peoples health care?2001400ex said:
You clearly missed the point.Sledog said:
The ones needing to leave are those wishing to live off the sweat of the producnot wish to be Cuba. America or GTFO!2001400ex said:
Then you should LEAVE. Now. If you pay for medical insurance right now, you are paying for other people's sickness. If you don't pay insurance and are paying cash, you are still paying for other people's sickness through inflated costs.PurpleJ said:
So your solution would be a government monopoly on health care? If socialized medicine was so great you would see people lining up to move to Canada. In reality, Canadians wait in line for operations and get shitty service by comparison.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.PurpleJ said:
Then go live there and fuck off.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicinegreenblood said:This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Sorry, I don't want to live in a country where I'm forced to pay for other people's misdeeds and misfortunes. It's stealing to take someone's money and give it to someone else.
By all means, argue based on statistics that you have no clue how to interpret. We spent billions on government-subsidized programs and costs went up. My grandma thanks you for her $400K surgery that didn't work out as planned.
It's almost like you don't understand basic concepts of insurance and health care costs.
I'm not talking about those that can't work I'm talking about those who won't work.
Holy fuck.
Are you really this daft?
Barack Obama
Would create a national health insurance program for individuals who do not have employer-provided health care and who do not qualify for other existing federal programs. Does not mandate individual coverage for all Americans, but requires coverage for all children. Allows individuals below age 25 to be covered through their parents' plans.
Allows individuals to choose between the new public insurance program and private insurance plans that meet certain coverage standards. The Obama campaign Web site says the coverage would have benefits similar to those offered to Congress through the Federal Employees Benefits Program. Plan would expand eligibility for Medicaid and State's Children's Health Insurance Program.
Offer an income-based federal subsidy for people who don't get insurance from an employer or qualify for government plans like Medicaid.
Obama estimates the cost at between $50 billion and $65 billion, to be paid for by eliminating Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000.
Regarding employer contributions toward healthcare costs, the Obama Web site states: "Employers that do not offer or make a meaningful contribution to the cost of quality health coverage for their employees will be required to contribute a percentage of payroll toward the costs of the national plan." The plan calls for small businesses to be exempt from the requirement and some could receive a tax credit that helps reduce healthcare costs, according to the Web site.
Says states can continue to experiment with health care plans as long as they meet the minimum standards of the national plan.
Proposes investing $10 billion a year during the next five years to implement standards-based electronic health information systems, which would include electronic health records.
Would allow Americans to purchase medicines from other developed countries if the drugs are safe and prices are lower than outside the United States. Says he would repeal the ban that prevents the U.S. from negotiating with drug companies.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/issues/issues.healthcare.html
If you don't like the source. Google it dumbfuck. -
If I like my health plan can I keep it and save $2500? ANSWER THE QUESTION!!
-
And to add, It was all locked down by Obama with the D's in Congress before He even took orifice due to his perceived "mandate" at the time.RaceBannon said:
No R votes were required for anything to do with this abortion of a bill. It is fully owned by Obama and the democrats.OZONE said:
In other words, they tried for single payer, but the (R)s forced this compromise for reform, because the insurance company lobbyists bought off the (R)s.greenblood said:The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option.
Every R voted against Obamacare You lie about as effectively as Hillary
Such lemmings J -
Flagged for mentioning bankruptcy. #TrumpTrollBaitingUWhuskytskeet said:
You'd have a point if the US didn't pay more per capita in health care than every country in the world, including those with universal.Fenderbender123 said:
Imagine actually believing that the government can provide services more efficiently than the free market, because "pr0fit!!!111!!"...lol profit is the reason WHY it's more efficient.OZONE said:It is sad that you think money paid for health services is evil if it is paid via taxes instead of through insurance premiums, even if the total amount spent is lower by removing the insurance company profit.
There are literally dozens of test cases available that prove universal is cheaper and actually leads to a healthier populace, but you retards are too fucking shortsided to change. I hope you all get aids and die just before your bankruptcy hearing. -
I actually think a single payer system competing against the private system would be a good thing. But when I read it's proponents comments on these boreds, I retreat and change my mind in hopes those posters will just die instead.UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
-
Don't worry, we will all be dead soon.TurdBuffer said:
I actually think a single payer system competing against the private system would be a good thing. But when I read it's proponents comments on these boreds, I retreat and change my mind in hopes those posters will just die instead.UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
-
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending? -
You are confusing people with facts again. Stop that shit.UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending? -
Medicare is working just fine
Doctors refuse to accept medicare patients
Medicare 2015: More doctors rejecting medicare patients
Curious how that works. Price controls reduce supply. Who woulda guessed? -
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?
-
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending? -
Hondo hates old people hthSoutherndawg said:
Medicare is working just fine
Doctors refuse to accept medicare patients
Medicare 2015: More doctors rejecting medicare patients
Curious how that works. Price controls reduce supply. Who woulda guessed?
Which watching how he and Race interact, it makes perfect sense. -
And yet every single country with universal health care spends less than the US per capita, most more than 50%.Southerndawg said:
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending? -
Medicare and Obningo care are both rife with billions in fraud every year. I guess it's efficient at false claims.UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending? -
You think this is because their system is more efficient, or because their culture isn't full of mountain dew drinking cheeto eaters playing Warcraft in theirUWhuskytskeet said:
And yet every single country with universal health care spends less than the US per capita, most more than 50%.Southerndawg said:
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?mom'sdads' basement? No offense to present company, of course. -
He's obviously young, not white and rich.pawz said:
Is cute how nearly every part of your life is traxed yet you think more needs to be paid.doogsinparadise said:Obamacare is a shitty product, but acting like the Republicans have taken the high road on healthcare is so fucking laughable that I'm not even going to go into it. Look back to the Bush-era prescription drug handout for a little taste.
Pass single payer and raise the tax ceiling for fucks sake and join the rest of the civilized world. -
The first part is right.Sledog said:Obama care was written and ready to go prior to Obingo being president. Written by the Apollo Alliance. You can look them up, quite interesting.
It has to fail. We can not afford it. We are not entitled to health care at others expense. Get over it.
I haven't heard of the Creed Alliance, so I'm guessing that 's some Birther BS. -
Bullshit2001400ex said:
Sounds like you prefer entities with a profit motive to make health care decisions for you. Have you ever known anyone who got sick and their insurance pulled? Or the insurance company denied a necessary surgery because it costs too much?Fenderbender123 said:
Which proves nothing for 2 reasons:OZONE said:
They all rank above us in efficiency and coverage.Fenderbender123 said:
Just because they've all done it doesn't mean it wouldn't be more efficient if they hadn't.OZONE said:
The 20 countries that have all done it, disagree with your blind faith in the invisible hand when it comes to health care services.Fenderbender123 said:
Imagine actually believing that the government can provide services more efficiently than the free market, because "pr0fit!!!111!!"...lol profit is the reason WHY it's more efficient.OZONE said:It is sad that you think money paid for health services is evil if it is paid via taxes instead of through insurance premiums, even if the total amount spent is lower by removing the insurance company profit.
1) The US has nothing close to a free market health care system. It's heavily influenced by government.
2) The overall efficiency of healthcare is determined by more factors than just government policy. If the efficiency and coverage really is better than the US in any of those countries, it would be even more efficient if their healthcare providers operated under the realm of a free market.
I'm not in favor of government overegulation. But there are some things the government need to step in. -
Cause private insurers are immune to fraud?Sledog said:
Medicare and Obningo care are both rife with billions in fraud every year. I guess it's efficient at false claims.UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?
http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21603078-why-thieves-love-americas-health-care-system-272-billion-swindle -
Mods?
-
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.PurpleJ said:
Then go live there and fuck off.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicinegreenblood said:This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so. -
I will say. There is truth to the fact that overall, Americans are less healthy due to our lifestyle and living habits.dnc said:
You think this is because their system is more efficient, or because their culture isn't full of mountain dew drinking cheeto eaters playing Warcraft in theirUWhuskytskeet said:
And yet every single country with universal health care spends less than the US per capita, most more than 50%.Southerndawg said:
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?mom'sdads' basement? No offense to present company, of course. -
UK, Australia, and many others are within a couple percentage points of our obesity rates. Fat fucks are definitely a drain on the system private or not, though. Then again, giving poor fat fucks the opportunity to visit a doctor once in a while might be enough for them to lose some weight. Same goes for all preventive care, it's much cheaper to fix things health issues early, but uninsured don't go in until they absolutely have to.dnc said:
You think this is because their system is more efficient, or because their culture isn't full of mountain dew drinking cheeto eaters playing Warcraft in theirUWhuskytskeet said:
And yet every single country with universal health care spends less than the US per capita, most more than 50%.Southerndawg said:
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?mom'sdads' basement? No offense to present company, of course. -
salemcoog said:
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.PurpleJ said:
Then go live there and fuck off.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicinegreenblood said:This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
Fucking this.
-
Heard all the supposed ways it will be cheaper. Why the hell didn't Happen? Oh yeah socialist shit NEVER HAS WORKED, never will.UWhuskytskeet said:
UK, Australia, and many others are within a couple percentage points of our obesity rates. Fat fucks are definitely a drain on the system private or not, though. Then again, giving poor fat fucks the opportunity to visit a doctor once in a while might be enough for them to lose some weight. Same goes for all preventive care, it's much cheaper to fix things health issues early, but uninsured don't go in until they absolutely have to.dnc said:
You think this is because their system is more efficient, or because their culture isn't full of mountain dew drinking cheeto eaters playing Warcraft in theirUWhuskytskeet said:
And yet every single country with universal health care spends less than the US per capita, most more than 50%.Southerndawg said:
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?mom'sdads' basement? No offense to present company, of course. -
It depends on who you are. If you are in the ruling class, socialism works very well for you.Sledog said:
Heard all the supposed ways it will be cheaper. Why the hell didn't Happen? Oh yeah socialist shit NEVER HAS WORKED, never will.UWhuskytskeet said:
UK, Australia, and many others are within a couple percentage points of our obesity rates. Fat fucks are definitely a drain on the system private or not, though. Then again, giving poor fat fucks the opportunity to visit a doctor once in a while might be enough for them to lose some weight. Same goes for all preventive care, it's much cheaper to fix things health issues early, but uninsured don't go in until they absolutely have to.dnc said:
You think this is because their system is more efficient, or because their culture isn't full of mountain dew drinking cheeto eaters playing Warcraft in theirUWhuskytskeet said:
And yet every single country with universal health care spends less than the US per capita, most more than 50%.Southerndawg said:
Private insurance more efficient than medicare by farHoustonHusky said:
17%? OZONEfs said it was 70%...UWhuskytskeet said:
It literally is, Medicare is way more efficient than private insurance.Sledog said:
Yeah the US government is far more efficient. Holy shit!UWhuskytskeet said:Why would we want to provide coverage for everyone and reduce our burden by 50%? Single payer is scary! Why add thousands of dollars per capita into other sectors of the economy when we can pay for 50 layers of bureaucratic inefficiencies at insurance companies?
Here are a couple highlights:
Medicaire's spending grows at a slower rate than private insurance premiums (4.3% per year vs 6.5%).
It's administrative costs are tiny compare to private insurance also (2% of expenditures vs 17% of revenue).
Are you under the impression that paying medical billing coders, insurance adjusters etc is a good use of health care spending?mom'sdads' basement? No offense to present company, of course. -
This is very truepawz said:salemcoog said:
Do you think it may be related to the diets and the failure of the FDA to allow giants such as Conagra to provide cheap, instant blood sugar spiking foods to the masses... Just maybe???Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
love it or leave it response from the pothead. No surprise.PurpleJ said:
Then go live there and fuck off.Fire_Marshall_Bill said:
Pretty much every other advanced country has single payer or some kind of similar "evil" socialized medicinegreenblood said:This was the plan from the get go. The administration knew they couldn't get a single payer system passed, so they came up with a system that would be sure to fail. Once it fails, single payer will be the only option. Pretty sick if you ask me.
You do know that healthcare is about 18% of GDP vs. about 8-12 in the other countries and people are charged 400 times as much for pills as in those countries.
Since the FDA has done such a bang up job with the regulation of our food. I'm sure the Federal Government would do even better at further control of health care.
Every Looberal says so.
Fucking this.
I wish they would pass legislation that prevents people using food stamps to buy fast food and other junk food. Food stamps should only be used for meat, cheese, milk, water, veggies, bread, etc. The fact that someone can use taxpayer dollars to buy bags of Doritios, 24 pack Mountain Dew, fast food combo meals, etc. is disgusting to me. This country gives these people money to make themselves even more sick, so we have to spend even more money paying for their more expensive medical bills later in life.
I understand that people should have freedom to spend their money. But they didn't earn that money, we gave them that money. And thus, we should be able to control how that money is spent. When they get a job and earn actual wages then they can buy all the crap they want.
Social security obviously doesn't count, because most of that money was earned from years of employment.
This obviously won't pass because every fast food and junk food lobbyist in the country would prevent this from happening.
