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.

 

Virginia Democrat Calls For Forcing Doctors To Accept Medicare And Medicaid Patients

page: 6
23
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Here is the top20 for healthcare systems around the world:


1 France France 4
2 Italy Italy 11
3 San Marino San Marino 21
4 Andorra 23
5 Malta 37
6 Singapore Singapore 38
7 Spain Spain 24
8 Oman Oman 62
9 Austria 6
10 Japan Japan 13
11 Norway 16
12 Portugal Portugal 27
13 Monaco 12
14 Greece 30
15 Iceland Iceland 14
16 Luxembourg 5
17 Netherlands Netherlands 9
18 United Kingdom United Kingdom 26
19 Republic of Ireland Ireland 25
20 Switzerland Switzerland 2


Taking a look at Switzerland…

en.wikipedia.org...

After looking into it, whats even more interesting to note, is that Switzerland is like Obamacare on steroids, growth hormone and a cocktail of antibiotics:


Compulsory coverage and costs[edit]

Main article: Health insurance in Switzerland
Swiss are required to purchase basic health insurance, which covers a range of treatments detailed in the Swiss Federal Law on Health Insurance. It is therefore the same throughout the country and avoids double standards in healthcare. Insurers are required to offer this basic insurance to everyone, regardless of age or medical condition. They are not allowed to make a profit off this basic insurance, but can on supplemental plans.[1]
In 2014, the average monthly compulsory basic health insurance premiums (with accident insurance) in Switzerland are the following:[3]
CHF 396.12 for an adult (age 26+)
CHF 363.55 for a young adult (age 19–25)
CHF 91.52 for a child (age 0–18)


en.wikipedia.org...

So there you go America, here is the roadmap to successful Obamacare. You neuter the insurance companies:


They are not allowed to make a profit off this basic insurance, but can on supplemental plans.


Done and done.


edit on 4-11-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-11-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 01:05 PM
link   

boncho
Insurance companies should not have final say over someone's health. Denying claims, denying insurance, all that should be kept out of healthcare industry.


I certainly can't argue with this, but how does having single-payer ensure that rather than having an insurance company denying claims, the government doesn't deny claims? What is it about government that makes them altruistic?



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   

BobM88

boncho
Insurance companies should not have final say over someone's health. Denying claims, denying insurance, all that should be kept out of healthcare industry.


I certainly can't argue with this, but how does having single-payer ensure that rather than having an insurance company denying claims, the government doesn't deny claims? What is it about government that makes them altruistic?


The insurance company underwrites policies, they use the premiums to invest money. Every time they pay a claim they lose money from their investment pool. In the insurance industry in America, all underwriters have been posting losses since 1970, before then, it was always profits. I am not sure exactly how the system works, I do know the results though.

The bottom line is the profit driven initiative is not working. It doesn't necessarily have to be government based either, which is why I posted the example of Switzerland. They merely regulate the insurance industry with a heavy hand.

People in America have the highest spending per capita only next to Marshall Islands, yet, are beat out by Sierra Leone and a couple African nations by a small margin.

You can't argue facts and figures. There is something wrong with the system.

If the US is spending near 20% of GDP on healthcare, and the insurance companies are posting losses every year, where is the money going?

Do they invest in stocks of other companies they hold high shares in and purposely lose it all to avoid taxes? What's the angle, because there is one. Money is being siphoned out of the system…
edit on 4-11-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)


The US is listed at spending 17.6% of GDP on healthcare, and around 8000 per person. That is a huge amount. In comparison, most countries with really good systems pay 9-11% of GDP. Anywhere from 3-5000/Person.

If I live a hundred years in the US, I average the health cost of 8 million.

edit on 4-11-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 02:46 PM
link   
Drudge Report = Instant Disregard



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by TownCryer
 


Because Drudge Report is just a collection of links from other news/media sites.

What a profound, insightful, intelligent, and enlightening post. It's a wonder someone with that kind of IQ can utilize an electronic device and reply on ATS.

You Sir are an asset to this website and it was a pleasure to watch you work. Thank you.
edit on 4-11-2013 by Carreau because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


I, again, have no argument that there's a problem, but you didn't really answer the question. What is to prevent the government from doing the same thing that insurance companies do? The government may not be trying to make a profit, but they also have a fixed amount of money to work with. If it comes to a point that there's not enough money in the system to pay for everyone, like Social Security, what's to prevent the government from then denying some claims?

You raise a valid point about insurance companies, there's no argument from me on that. I just don't have the same faith that the government would do anything any different. I think it would simply be a "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 03:41 PM
link   

BobM88
reply to post by boncho
 


I, again, have no argument that there's a problem, but you didn't really answer the question. What is to prevent the government from doing the same thing that insurance companies do? The government may not be trying to make a profit, but they also have a fixed amount of money to work with. If it comes to a point that there's not enough money in the system to pay for everyone, like Social Security, what's to prevent the government from then denying some claims?

You raise a valid point about insurance companies, there's no argument from me on that. I just don't have the same faith that the government would do anything any different. I think it would simply be a "meet the new boss, same as the old boss".


God knows why you would have any faith in your government…
I'm not saying what your government is capable of (in its current state), I'm saying what you should be demanding from your gov.

The position some of you have is like saying, "well, Danny is stealing from me, but I think Carl would steal from me more, so I'm gonna let Carl keep stealing, since he just pays Danny a smaller amount on the side."

And if anyone gets just a little too close to hitting the nail on the head? OMG Democrats! OMG Republicans! Issue resolved, let the infighting begin.

USA for the win.
edit on 4-11-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 04:50 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


There's a thought that I have long harbored as part my various notions for health care reform. Now, this idea is usually part of trying to imagine the implementation of universal healthcare. What if you made doctors who accept universal healthcare patients (or in this case, Medicare/Medicaid patients) tax exempt as an added incentive, cap their capital gains tax at only 5%?

Medical professionals are significantly more important to the functioning of our society than churches, so why not give them some of the same benefit?

It's not perfect, but I think it's the kind of crucial building block that could make the system more viable.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   
And so it begins? Really? That line is so corny. First I would like to say that part of this is absolutely horrible news. Part of it is wonderful news. Forcing doctors to accept Medicare would be a great thing. Forcing doctors to take Medicaid would destroy the medical industry. Medicaid might pay a doctor 30 to 40 dollars when Medicare would pay them 120 to 145. No doctor should be forced to accept 30 to 40 dollars for their services.

Either Medicaid needs to get on board and pay as much as Medicare or they need to drop this entire shenanigans. If this passed you would see a mass exodus of doctors from that state. If you don't want any doctors in your state this is a fabulous idea! I will leave you all with that.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 08:36 PM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Funny you would post this. I just told my coworkers last week that we are truly brainwashed. Mothers used to ask their children, "Would you jump off a building if your buddy told you to do it"?

The 1st word spoken by most children, after Momma, is NO! I know you know it so start saying it.

Why does everyone think that you "have" to go along with all of these crazy rules and regs that are being pulled out the air and going against the very foundation and spirit that built our country and made it great?

We just need to stand up for what we believe, what we know to be right and what is our responsibility to protect. Our ancestors had so little but they still fought with every ounce of FUA! they had in their bodies, to protect and uphold the laws of our land. (Forgive me, I know I am stealing from another ATSer with the use of this word, but it is the word most fitting at this time.

Come on folks. You know that they are holding open the door and we are walking willing into the cage of our enslavement. It has gone way beyond the ridiculous and it will never stop until we just dig our feet in and say a loud, resounding "NO"!

If you go willing on this train you will ride it straight to the gulag and the gas chambers. It will never happen, you say. The may not put a tattoo on your arm but you better believe they are going to but a chip in your butt.

Too bad their won't be anyone left to tell your story.



posted on Nov, 4 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
Would you want a doctor treating you that is being forced to provide your care?

If they force doctors to follow rules and guidelines for treatment, that are dictated by computer modules and force them to provide treatments on those patients they have decided will receive treatment, then the doctor is not practicing medicine. He may as well play video games, at least the people will only die on the video screen and he can go back to his last save and start again.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Pimpintology
 


Considering how long the average appointment lasts, I think 30 is not that bad. Works out to at least 60 an hour.....



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by NightSkyeB4Dawn
 


In my experience, when someone is forced to do something, they do a halfhearted halfassed job. My old doctor was like a friend, I miss that guy. Only doctor I know that would start off the appointment with a firm handshake for me, and other men, and a hug for the ladies. The wife hugged everyone.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by BobM88
 


I don´t know other nations that well, but in the nations using single-payer system, which I know better, government can not deny any health care.

You can take it like an insurance, but without any claims. Everybody puts something in from paid taxes, if anyone needs health care, it is fully covered without questions (not dependent on how much you put in- everybody gets treated if they need it, whether cleaning lady, unemployed person or CEO) - there are no deductibles, nobody deciding whether something is covered or not, except medicines one needs to buy later (not when inside hospital) for cure. Government covers certain % of the cost, so that is the only out-of-pocket expense person has to take. If the pot is too small in long-term (not one year because of some disease outbreak for example ), taxes are raised. Every working person is paying the same % of their salary, here for example it is 10%, there are no different premiums. For everybody is the same amount.

The amount of bureocracy is significantly lower at the end which drives the cost significantly down. Also there are no middlemen in between, who are not directly involved in the system, for example insurance companies. In America for example, when you are paying for health care, it also covers the salaries of all the insurance company employees a´la salesmen despite them having nothing to do with you recieving healthcare directly. Everything paid in single-payer system only pays the salaries of doctors, the equipment bought + essential services needed in hospitals (a´la cleaning service, registration, running the online registration system etc) + a relatively small number of people working in the government running the system.
edit on 5-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 07:37 AM
link   

Destinyone
reply to post by boncho
 


Boncho, let me put it to you this way. Perhaps you'll see beyond the rainbows and unicorns mindset you seem to have on this particular issue.

What, may I ask, do you, Boncho, do for a living? What is it that you do to make a living and provide for yourself and family? What if, your government passed a law tomorrow that the only way you could do that anymore, is if you only follow their *new* RULES....and guidelines. What if that cut your income drastically, and you and your family's standard of living fell below the standards you want. What if the ONLY tools they ALLOWED you to use to do your work, were sub-standard and innefficiant. You are already trained and educated in your field of work, but now, you can't do things the way you KNOW are right. You can only hold your job, you depend on, if you follow a new set of RULES, established by people who have zero training in your job.

This is what is being forced on skilled working Doctors now.....It's the HIVE mentality.

Des




edit on 3-11-2013 by Destinyone because: (no reason given)


Good point. Fascists love to dictate what someone else "deserves" but not themselves.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 07:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


That is currently only because the system changed. In countries with already existing single-payer system people who go to learn becoming a doctor, know such things beforehand, so most people with primary goal of making money do not even go to learn medicine. Field of medicine is still popular, as it provides fixed significantly over the average income, while one can help others (do something worthy, good). Every doctor who want to stay here knows from the beginning that when you chose doctor, you will not get rich with the job, but you will live well for the rest of your life, if you do that job.

I personally would never trust a doctor for whom money is the primary goal. The primary goal of every doctor should be helping/ curing the people in need, not exploiting the survival insticts of people as much as possible for personal financial gain.

A doctor is not like any other field. When a person becomes a doctor, it comes with a big responsibility in front of society. When people go to doctor, they give their trust to the person, because the doctor has learnt the field and knows better on how to cure the disease. These should be the primary goals of every doctor. Due to trust, making extra income off the poor person is quite easy by adding in prescriptions from sponsors to the clinic, adding extra more costly test, even if they are not actually needed.

Doctors should be well-paid, although the amount of prescription they give out or tests they make should have zero-influence on their salary.

If you go to learn being a doctor, you should not except making millions of the poor people who have gotten some disease, millions of the unlucky ones getting worse genetics.

Doctors are a job for society, not a job for self-needs. That is something every person who wants to become a doctor should learn. If somebody is learning to be a doctor for making millions, not helping others, they chose the wrong field.
edit on 5-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 


That is the way all jobs are, doctors are not special in that aspect. All jobs are doing a service someone else needs. Well no, I suppose not these days, but you know what I mean. Too many people these days are working strictly for a paycheck. They do the least amount of work they can etc. That is why service generally sucks everywhere.

When I build someone a house, I am fulfilling someone's need. My name is attached to my work, so I do the job right. If I don't, I won't get more work. I am also working to earn a profit. It's the same with any job or career really, especially if you own your own business. It's easy to work in a company with 239857309403892 employees and get away with crap work, especially when there is unions involved.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:35 AM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


Other fields are not about life or death. Health issues might lead to death in the long run or short-run depending on the issue.

Most jobs are about material needs/comfort/luxury, healthcare is about survival.

Because of that healthcare does not follow capitalistic rules of supply/demand. The cost of the service does not affect the need for it. It is called inelastic need, when price does not affect it.

Whether the cost of life-serving is 1$ or 10000$, the person will find a way to pay for it. This does not apply to construction or plumbing services. If it costs too much, person will not buy or will postpone. You can not postpone or not get a life-threatening treatment, as you would die afterward. When survival is at stake, most people would do anything/pay anything to survive and doctors are on job that can exploit the survival instict.

When somebody is holding a gun on your head, asking you to pay him whatever amount, if you have it, you would probably pay. Same is about health. Nobody is forcing you to pay, but most people would give everything they have in order to survive.

With healthcare there is too much room for exploitation of the most basic natural instinct - self-preservation - that is why it is nothing like other fields.
edit on 5-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:39 AM
link   

RobertAntonWeishaupt
reply to post by beezzer
 


There's a thought that I have long harbored as part my various notions for health care reform. Now, this idea is usually part of trying to imagine the implementation of universal healthcare. What if you made doctors who accept universal healthcare patients (or in this case, Medicare/Medicaid patients) tax exempt as an added incentive, cap their capital gains tax at only 5%?

Medical professionals are significantly more important to the functioning of our society than churches, so why not give them some of the same benefit?

It's not perfect, but I think it's the kind of crucial building block that could make the system more viable.


Back when physicians could write off charity and volunteer care on their income tax, there was a lot of free care being given. That "loophole" was closed because doctors are the "underserving wealthy" to the leftists.



posted on Nov, 5 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
reply to post by beezzer
 


Ever notice the more ya go to the doctor the sicker you get?


They start you real early out of the womb, then the pediatrics ages 2-14), then the dentists come in.
Fascinating stuff


No mystery the dollar $ign looks like a snake on a rod.



new topics




 
23
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join