The Health Care Bill Passes!

[DallasApple]

Better yet why did it cost $15,000 for my son to have a DAY surgery with a scope on his knee? For a tiny piece of torn carteledge?

Love

Dallas

 

[Mr Cheese]

But I dont understand why it should ever reach a point of "struggling" in the first place.

Why did it cost $2,500 for my husband to spend 5 or 6 hours in the emergency room recieving morphine and having a few test run over a kidney stone?

Love

Dallas

simple answer....

health insurance is a racket dear dallas...

they are a law unto themselves....

My girl friend works in the field....part of her job is to scare the bejeebus out of health care insurance companies.... believe me..she does a good job...

yes I'm dating an amazonian warrior...so to speak

 

[Mr Cheese]

Better yet why did it cost $15,000 for my son to have a DAY surgery with a scope on his knee? For a tiny piece of torn carteledge?

Love

Dallas

american healthcare is about the most expensive in thew world...
but the actual health care is mediocre at best (overall) according to long term studies...

obviously some aspects of health care in this country are probably no1 (before someone starts screaming "unamerican" or similar)

We can also see this graphically in the fact that USA is ranked 36th in the world for life expectancy.....36th.......

This is one of the main reasons why healthcare reform is essential

....

Its normal for americans... but outside of America, doctors do not advertise in the same way that perfume sellers, car manufacuturers etc do ..on billboards etc

unless thigns have changed since I left europe

 

[DallasApple]

simple answer....

health insurance is a racket dear dallas...

they are a law unto themselves....

My girl friend works in the field....part of her job is to scare the bejeebus out of health care insurance companies.... believe me..she does a good job...

yes I'm dating an amazonian warrior...so to speak

Yes ..I've always had a hatred towards insurance companies myself.One time my son got an ear infections or strep throat or something like that.When I went to pick up his prescription they were like "that will be $180 please..Well back then all we had was a $10 copay ..period..They said that there was no such person on our insurance.

My son's (is a boy by the way) name is Tristan.

Well not only did they have him as "Christian" they had him as a female.

I had to purchase the antibiotics (we were fortunate we had the money..if we hadnt I have no idea what I would have done)...

And then go back and hassle with those people for a month.Thank God I had kept my original application for the inusurance where it was in clear PRINT TRISTAN..and a clear X through the choice for male.

I finally dropped trying to kept my $180 back and just settled for the fact they finally "admitted' I had a son named Tristan.After spending many hours talking to many different people it was worth $180 not to have to talk to them anymore.

I think they did it on purpose.

Having said that..Now I would love to have insurance that we could afford that had a flat $10 copay with no deductable for all prescriptions.

Love

Dallas

 

[MysticSang'ha]

as far as I know...

thats the whole point isn't it...

obviously initially, there are going to be numerous moronic loop holes

but only this morning the news qwas saying congress has voted on more amendments yesterday than it did in the whole of december last year....

so all this scaremongering is just that

the whole reform laws are not set in stone yet, in any form

I distance myself completely from the scaremongering. It's a waste of time and energy.

I'm also always willing to learn something new. I have a certain philosophy about how government and tax dollars should be utilized, but I know I'm human and I can be wrong.

What I have seen over the last thirty years is a deficit being run up faster and faster. I have also seen our country using so-called "socialist" methods, but only for the benefit of Big Business (hence our government not really being socialist, but more of a corporatacy). When I want to find answers, I follow the money. And Sunstone is right from what he said in another thread......money is always being re-distributed in society whether we like it or not. It's the nature of the beast.

As of now, I see the money continually being funnelled into the insurance companies when it's all said and done. And at this moment, I'm not seeing the connection to how this is saving taxpayers money yet.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Yes ..I've always had a hatred towards insurance companies myself.One time my son got an ear infections or strep throat or something like that.When I went to pick up his prescription they were like "that will be $180 please..Well back then all we had was a $10 copay ..period..They said that there was no such person on our insurance.

My son's (is a boy by the way) name is Tristan.

Well not only did they have him as "Christian" they had him as a female.

I had to purchase the antibiotics (we were fortunate we had the money..if we hadnt I have no idea what I would have done)...

And then go back and hassle with those people for a month.Thank God I had kept my original application for the inusurance where it was in clear PRINT TRISTAN..and a clear X through the choice for male.

I finally dropped trying to kept my $180 back and just settled for the fact they finally "admitted' I had a son named Tristan.After spending many hours talking to many different people it was worth $180 not to have to talk to them anymore.

I think they did it on purpose.

Having said that..Now I would love to have insurance that we could afford that had a flat $10 copay with no deductable for all prescriptions.

Love

Dallas

Insurance companies do not want to lose money. It's their business.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here when I say that, though.

Hence why I'd like to see health insurance be a not-for-profit venture. They should not have the kind of overhead they do.

 

[DallasApple]

american healthcare is about the most expensive in thew world...
but the actual health care is mediocre at best (overall) according to long term studies...

obviously some aspects of health care in this country are probably no1 (before someone starts screaming "unamerican" or similar)

We can also see this graphically in the fact that USA is ranked 36th in the world for life expectancy.....36th.......

This is one of the main reasons why healthcare reform is essential

....

Its normal for americans... but outside of America, doctors do not advertise in the same way that perfume sellers, car manufacuturers etc do ..on billboards etc

unless things have changed since I left europe

yep...The hospitals advertise too like they are a vacation getaway/5 star hotel.And I can understand why at 2,500 a night just for a bed.(I think they charge extra for the bandaids)..

i'll never forget when I had my second son.My employer(another rotten story) had STOPPED paying my premiums for my insurance and didnt bother to tell me and I was PREGNANT...I found out IN the hospital while laying in the bed bleeding half to death in premature labor I had no insurance..

Any way long story short I had to get retroactive cobra(for the bargain price of $800 a month) ..and anyway I was reviewing the bills..and the itemized charges..One of the charges was for an "ice pack" ..$15..The "ice pack" was a glad sandwich bag with a wash cloth wrapped around it.

Love

Dallas

 

[DallasApple]

Insurance companies do not want to lose money. It's their business.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here when I say that, though.

Hence why I'd like to see health insurance be a not-for-profit venture. They should not have the kind of overhead they do.

Yep it seems to be the only answer.

Love

Dallas

 

[McBell]

They should not have the kind of overhead they do.

What over head do insurance companies have?

I mean other than paying $200,000 for a lawyer to get them out of paying 80% of a $10,000 operation?

 

[Mr Cheese]

What over head do insurance companies have?

I mean other than paying $200,000 for a lawyer to get them out of paying 80% of a $10,000 operation?

• You forgot company cars
• bonuses
• slime for their hair
• vacations
• hookers (not the rugby kind)
• and maybe a needle to extract the blood that they need to sign the pact with satan, every time their is a new employee

 

[DallasApple]

What over head do insurance companies have?

I mean other than paying $200,000 for a lawyer to get them out of paying 80% of a $10,000 operation?

They have to pay all the people to answer the phone and put you on hold for 14 hours while they run around looking for the the 4th copy of the same document you sent them repeatedly to try and prove you have a male child named Tristan.And because of that they also have to buy a lot of those plastic bins to stick the stacks of paper they shuffle around to each other in.

Love

Dallas

 

[MysticSang'ha]

What over head do insurance companies have?

I mean other than paying $200,000 for a lawyer to get them out of paying 80% of a $10,000 operation?

Their administrative costs are outrageous. But here is where I found a number of what is in the overhead in our country. Note: it's the PNHP and active in advocacy for a single-payer system in the country, so there is bias, but I have a difficult time challenging the numbers they came up with.

I understand where you're coming from, though. They're not concerned about offering coverage for their customers like they are about protecting their assets.

 

[DallasApple]

Also they need a lot of stamps to mail you the letter every year to inform you at the stroke of midnight on your upcoming birthday they are raising your premiums 30 more dollars and if you agree to this mail them back that form within the hour after you recieve the letter or else they are cancelling you.

Love

Dallas

 

[McBell]

Their administrative costs are outrageous.

They are inflated.

But here is where I found a number of what is in the overhead in our country. Note: it's the PNHP and active in advocacy for a single-payer system in the country, so there is bias, but I have a difficult time challenging the numbers they came up with.

I understand where you're coming from, though. They're not concerned about offering coverage for their customers like they are about protecting their assets.

Thanks for the link, but it does not help answer my question.
It is basically just an arbitrary ( because it is not broken down at all) number.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

They are inflated.


Thanks for the link, but it does not help answer my question.
It is basically just an arbitrary ( because it is not broken down at all) number.

I'm still looking. As it is, I want answers too. So far, the only ones I've seen are the ones from left-leaning sources.

 

[DallasApple]

Also it takes even more stamps for them to mail you the other letter all the time asking you to confirm you arent covered by any other insurers(or even elegible to be) that they can try and deny your claims while they fight with the other insurance company to make them pay your bills in case you ever file a claim.Again if you dont answer them immeditely they will cancel you.

When I got my new insurance not so long ago I sincerely enjoyed mailing them that letter back telling them to...well..its a bad word I cant say it.

Im one of the ones that was forced (if I wanted insurance and I was lucky they even let me buy it) that had to pay for a seperate plan from the rest of my family to carry "high risk insurance" and pay the same amount as it was for my husband and 2 children to be covered(just for me) because I had a "pre-existing"...

Love

Dallas

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Now, the war in Iraq was for oil, and to prevent china from dominating all the world's oil supply. The war would not even be as expensive if it weren't being fought by Haliburton and Blackwater. Afghanistan, has minor strategic importance itself, but keeps Pakistan stable. That money spent there is way more than it needs to be, but thats because the first Bush (and Bill Clinton continued it) cut our military in half after the cold war. Of course, reduction in force lead to the illusory "surplus" we had (which dems claim was because of clinton, but it was the reduction of the military, really)....this surplus would have been really handy, if it had actually materialized, but we used it to increase the size of government by a few trillion dollars. That part was W's fault.

But it took the Obama adminstration one year to spend as much as W in all 8 years he was in office. And to add to this, Obama is the commander in chief. HE could get us out of Iraq and Afghanistan.....the congress is democrat, they could have defunded the war for years now, had they wanted to. This is not a conservative's war, my friend. This is the dem's war now. The money spent there is as much on this prez as the past one. He could have said, send in more of our troops and get rid of the mercenaries....but, no. We have status quo. It really makes one think there is more going on behind the scenes. I think so anyway.:yes:

There is so much wrong in these two paragraphs that I really don't know where to start.

Let's just take a couple of statements.

"The war would not even be as expensive if it weren't being fought by Haliburton and Blackwater." Okay, I'll grant the point. Let me ask you though - who (which party/president) put Halliburton and Blackwater in there, and gave them no-bid contracts for their services? Hint: it wasn't the current administration.

"This is not a conservative's war, my friend." Yes, it is. You may want to simply hand the blame to whoever is holding the bag, but there is absolutely no question as to who started this war, on what grounds, and by what method. Do Obama and the Dems have some responsibility for it? Absolutely. But let's not make any mistake about who lied us into this war, who beat the drums and called anyone that questioned the reasoning a traitor.



"But it took the Obama adminstration one year to spend as much as W in all 8 years he was in office." A Republican talking point that is simply a lie. If you wish to simply parrot what you hear from Limbaugh, at least try to pick the BS that can't be refuted with facts. Take a look at the federal budgets over the last 9 years:

2011 United States federal budget - $3.83 trillion (submitted 2010 by President Obama)
2010 United States federal budget - $3.55 trillion (submitted 2009 by President Obama)
2009 United States federal budget - $3.10 trillion (submitted 2008 by President Bush)
2008 United States federal budget - $2.90 trillion (submitted 2007 by President Bush)
2007 United States federal budget - $2.77 trillion (submitted 2006 by President Bush)
2006 United States federal budget - $2.7 trillion (submitted 2005 by President Bush)
2005 United States federal budget - $2.4 trillion (submitted 2004 by President Bush)
2004 United States federal budget - $2.3 trillion (submitted 2003 by President Bush)
2003 United States federal budget - $2.2 trillion (submitted 2002 by President Bush)
2002 United States federal budget - $2.0 trillion (submitted 2001 by President Bush)

During his time in office, Lord Bush submitted 8 budgets that totaled $17.2 trillion (give or take a billion).

During his first year in office, Obama submitted his budget that totaled $3.6 trillion.

That isn't even close. Even the most devout rightwing zealot can see that the talking point you used ("But it took the Obama adminstration one year to spend as much as W in all 8 years he was in office.") is blatantly and patently false - by a wide margin.

Be a zealot if you wish. Ignore reality, if that makes you happy. But at least have the decency to do a basic fact check prior to spouting these mindless claims made by Glen Beck, Hannity, and Malkin. Hell, Bill Kristol is more correct than that.

 

[Sunstone]

But Barak Obama is a fascist communist progressive, guys. How can anything he's for be good for us? Sometimes I get so mad at Barak Obama and his evil fascist communist ways that I want to call Barney Frank a bad name.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

You make a good point, Sunstone.

Apparently, we are going to condemn Obama for what he's thinking, or what he might do.

Meanwhile, we'll act like all of the damage that Lord Bush and his merry band of neocon thugs did either (a) never happened, or (b) is the fault of Obama for not immediately fixing.

Damn that Obama!

 

[MysticSang'ha]

But Barak Obama is a fascist communist progressive, guys. How can anything he's for be good for us? Sometimes I get so mad at Barak Obama and his evil fascist communist ways that I want to call Barney Frank a bad name.

Why not just settle for a drink with me? :drunk:

It would be just as cathartic.