It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dr. Offers Flat Rate Care, N.Y. Says "No!"

page: 2
22
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 8 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
My wife (many years ago) had her gall bladder taken out in the hospital. We had full insurance. However, when the detailed bills came in, I would actually read them out of curiosity. One item stood out. It was a charge for about $250 for some service with a weird title...so I called the hospital to ask what it was. They told me that the charge was the difference between what the hospital charges...(get ready for this)...and the HIGHER amount they are dictated to charge. This system is obviously broken...or is it?

I don't think it is so much broken as screwed by the state and federal government who so obviously want to dictate the cost of everything. They want to control YOU by deciding what to tax products and services. That way, they can decide what you are allowed to buy (or can afford) by overtaxing what they don't like. Tobacco was one recent example...firearms ammo will likely be next. Like it or not, believe it or not, the government is only interested in controlling you...what you can and can't do...and they want YOUR money as theirs.

Given time, you won't earn money at all. And that would be exactly what they want. You will work, and they will collect your money and decide how to distribute it for what you get in return. They will decide what those products and services are...they will keep their "management" fee...and they will expect you to be grateful. Of course they will maintain their "pet projects" and "choose" them as the best provider of product/service you are permitted to receive...just as they do with our money now. They will likely put a "debit card" (or RFID) system in place so you can pretend that you are actually making a decision...or have a choice...of what you buy. But the choices will be so limited, and your decisions so predictable, that they might as well send you a box every month with your supplies for the next 30 days. Finally (fast forward a few decades)...you better watch your step...better be a "good boy"...cause if you cause problems (eg. have opinions, speak freely, etc.)...don't be surprised when your "debit card" stops working. Or when "mysterious" fees just get deducted because of the "expense" you cost the "system" by causing "problems".

And...just in case you haven't noticed...THEY ARE THE WORST MONEY MANAGERS THERE ARE. Especially under a liberal government...this will ultimately mean that everyone (with their "friends" as exceptions) will get the same thing. The extra money you earn will be distributed to all those who don't work as hard, didn't obtain a good enough educations, and...of course...all those poor folks that "can't work" because it depresses them.

Welcome to tomorrow! (or is that today?)

There are, however, many currently legal (for now) ways to fix this. Start a vegetable garden. Communities can start paying a portion of wages with local "coupons", good for community services. Anything to keep your money local to your own "people".

And one more comment on the vegetable garden. I recently discovered that if you choose to grow your own tobacco, for personal use only...and they find out...you owe (at least in PA) a tax of $13.50 per carton of cigarettes your produce for yourself. If you research it...you will also find out that the recent tax increase isn't even for a related cost...it is mostly for covering uninsured children. How far is that from them deciding that you growing your own vegetable garden "costs them money" and they put the same law into effect?

[edit on 5/8/2009 by WeAreAWAKE]




posted on May, 8 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by WeAreAWAKE
 


Basically you are on the right track with your thinking; except the part where you suggest that liberals are worse money managers as conservatives.
It doesn't matter what government you have. The results will be the same



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
reply to post by WeAreAWAKE
 

Health care insurance is one of the worst components of our system

That said, having the Feds in charge of a single-payor system would be worse by many degrees.

As for your garden, check out Representative LaRosa's "Food Safety Act" and related legislation from California.

Dow, Monsanto and Kellogg are supporting these bills. That should give you an idea of what thesy mean for small farms, home gardens, and farmers' markets.

Obama and his cabal are moving rapidly to "Change" our lives for the worse (worst?). "Hope" you can hang in there long enough to see the rebound.

It will come.

jw



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:24 PM
link   
This is a pretty blatant example of the insurance companies' stranglehold over our government. What we need is for more doctors to start offering affordable care and cutting out the health insurers.

If we can't have a decent national health plan like every other developed nation, we might as well have a true private plan. That way we can deal with Dr's directly, and not get raped by the insurance companies. Of course neither will ever happen, as there are too many people making far too much money in the health racket.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegreatobserver
reply to post by WeAreAWAKE
 


Basically you are on the right track with your thinking; except the part where you suggest that liberals are worse money managers as conservatives.
It doesn't matter what government you have. The results will be the same


Sorry for any confusion there...the "liberal" part was intended to relate to the "spreading YOUR wealth" portion only. While I think the government as a whole (both parties) are dirtballs, I especially take issue with spreading my, your or their wealth around.



posted on May, 8 2009 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by drwizardphd
 

We CAN have a better system, and this small example proves it will work.

As far as major medical needs are concerned, perhaps a government funded, or insurance, pool of funds would be less expensive and still provide choice and cost effectiveness.

jw



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 04:20 AM
link   
While Canada's system isn't perfect, the US media spreads so many lies about how it works. I don't have to go to a gov't appointed doctor. I can choose who I want for a GP and going to the hospital doesn't involve a credit check.

What will eventually happen with a gov't funded health care system(I hope) is that the costs will go down over time. There is no health insurance company that makes billions in profits. The government funds all needs. They need to keep the costs down(hot political debate during elections). Some provinces like BC, residents pay around $60/month MSP(Medical Services Premium). I get extended coverage through work.

Now yes we pay higher taxes to have this Socialist system. But it's reasurring to know that a serious illness/injury won't bankrupt me or my family. It could cost millions and I'd never see a bill or increase in my premiums.



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by DEEZNUTZ
 
Another Canadian posted about a shortage of doctors there.

Instead of paying higher taxes, wouldn't you rather be able to set aside your money tax free, have doctors/clinics compete for your service, and have access to a pool of funds or 'msp' type program for serious illness and injuries?

The "pool" could be set up at far less expense than the cost of a nation-wide system for all levels of care.

jw



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


You do not see my link at all.

Health insurers get big bucks from people/their employers for health insurance.

So, from an ECONOMIC stand point, this doctor will be charging at an extraordinary low rate compared to the average. Thus, getting rid of business from the "big guy".

An illegal alien works for cheap. So, whatever company using the cheap workers will be ahead financially compared to those following the rules or the tradition.

My point is that the one person is working for a lot less, and it is hurting the industry as a whole (not in a bad way for consumers, because this is what our country is based on).

That is just my opinion in why they went after him. Never did I say that I agreed with this. If we lived in a 100% capitalist state, sure this would be fine. But we do not.

If you insist though, I do disagree with it all. Whatever services he wants to hand out, he should be able to (if licensed accordingly). This is just an example of big business shutting the little man with a big idea down.



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
we live in such a sad country.

when will it end?



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ddacunha
we live in such a sad country.
when will it end?


Didn't you notice? It ended 1/20/2009.

You are witnessing the emergence of a new nation of Obama, by Obama and for Obama. The "United States of America" has perished from this Earth.

jw



posted on May, 9 2009 @ 11:59 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


"Didn't you notice? It ended 1/20/2009.

You are witnessing the emergence of a new nation of Obama, by Obama and for Obama. The "United States of America" has perished from this Earth."

LOL. I hope you're joking, because comments like that adds fuel to the fire.
What if the government is not what is at fault? I'm starting to think that the American people are what is wrong with this country, not the GOV.



posted on May, 10 2009 @ 01:03 AM
link   
Originally posted by ddacunha

I hope you're joking, because comments like that adds fuel to the fire. What if the government is not what is at fault? I'm starting to think that the American people are what is wrong with this country, not the GOV.


No joke.

Ever heard of Gerald Celente? He's supposed to be a trend-spotter and social visionary, featured on many ATS threads. In an ATS interview last week he said:

Obama is turning out to be "The worst of Clinton and the Best of Bush".

We are turning closer and closer into a fascist state. I don't say that as hyperbole, as a merger of corporate and state powers, by definition according to Mussolini - who knew a thing or two about fascism --- is called fascism. So when you put that with the dismantling and abrogation of our constitutional rights, martial law, could very easily be instituted in our system.


The interview is featured in a "Hot Topics" link in the right column at the top of this page.

jw



posted on May, 10 2009 @ 08:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


"Ever heard of Gerald Celente? He's supposed to be a trend-spotter and social visionary, featured on many ATS threads. In an ATS interview last week he said"

I know who the man is, but do you really think it started with Obama?

I'm just really tired of the right blaming the left and the left blaming the right.



posted on May, 10 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by jdub297
 


The insurance industry is a cancer our society. It is ridiculous to pay a third party middleman for anything especially health care. The insurance industry is the ONLY reason health care is unfordable and is also bankrupting companies.

They turn tail and ran from the Gulf Cost after making billions over the years. One bad Hurricane come through and many of the companies simply wont insure here now and the ones that do charge more than most can afford.

No. I am not all about big government but peoples health is something that needs to be controlled by people elected "by the people" and not the greedy unscrupulous corporate elites. When the Corporations run something it is worse than if the government does. We have less say in how things go. I prefer to run our Nation with elected officials rather than the filth that ran the car industry and banks into the dirt.



posted on May, 10 2009 @ 09:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Xeven
 
You had me with you until you stated that "corporations" are worse than government. The people elected by the people do not represent us anymore. They act only out of self-interest. Petitions are ignored. Calls, letters and emails dismissed.

Why do you think the Congress' approval rating fluctuates between 10% and 30%? They cannot be trusted with our health care dollars and our lives.

Most, if not all, doctors, hospitals, clinics, and diagnostic and rehab services ARE corporations.

Corporations, of themselves, are not the root of our health care problems.

The doctor-patient relationship is the absolute core of health care.
Anything that comes between them corrupts and bastardizes the relationship. When people use their own money to purchase reasonably priced basic health care, the system will work. Extraordinary risks and expenses are the only reason for collective coverage, whether through insurance or a public pool of funds.

Aside from the basic reasons for government: self-defense, defense of borders, international relations, and promotion of commerce internationally and among the states, there is nothing it can do better than the people, the states, and private enterprise.

Left and right have nothing to do with government usurpation of our freedom and rights.

jw

[edit on 10-5-2009 by jdub297]



posted on May, 11 2009 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by thegreatobserver

The doctor's business model is based on two things:

1: to help solve an existing problem (many people lose jobs and their health insurance)
2: to gain or maximize profit (he obviously did the math and knows how many clients and/or visits he needs to exceed overhead)

So, from an economic standpoint I would say it's a pretty good idea. Identify a demand/lack of service and then offer a solution to it.

I still don't know where the illegal guy fits in here...


There are other reasonable alternatives, too! A doctor in Dallas has been offering similar service to individuals and employers at $40/month.

Luckily, they are in Texas and don't face a "nanny state."

Others are doing it too and it scares insurers and governments, alike.

See: "10 Ways to Keep Health Coverage if You Lose Your Job"
www.ncpa.org...

jw



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
Devil's advocate;

It seems too cheap. 500 clients for a gross of 39,500 per month. I don't see how that could cover the overhead of office, staff, insurance and equipment. How many clients a day can his office handle? How long can his clients wait for care?

He has yet to turn a profit, which means he is probably losing money. How long can he lose money? More clients would help cover the overhead but he's sticking his neck pretty far out there.

The concern could be valid. Perhaps the problem is that sufficient care could not be provided for that cost and those who prepaid would be left without care when the operation folded.


no offense but shouldnt you mind your own business? why is everyone trying to tell this guy how to run his finances?

wow this world is turning highly nazi every day that passes on

what is next? telling me i cant sit on the toilet for more than 10minutes? its dangerous and will cut off the blood flow to my legs? Wha???



posted on May, 14 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Sorry there are two concepts here being mixed:

1 - Nanny State
2 - Fascist State

The nanny state does not stipulate prices that will damage the consumer. A nanny state can stipulate prices that damage enterprises. A nanny state wants to protect the consumer on an extreme way.

A fascist state benefits the enterprises, damaging the consumers. A fascist state protects the big entreprises on an extreme way.

Both are bad because they are extermists and cant concur to achieve an ideal point.

Therefore, NY is a fascist state.. not a nanny one.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1   >>

log in

join