The Biggest Threat to Obama's Health Care "Reform" - Reality

194959799100119

Comments

  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Here's another reality:



    Two-thirds Of Colorado Doctors Refuse Or Limit Basic Medicare Patients:



    Quote:

    A survey of Colorado primary care doctors found most are reluctant to take a new patient on basic Medicare, the government health insurance for people 65 and over.



    Colorado Public News called family, general practice and internal medicine physicians across the state, using the nation’s official website that lists thousands of doctors the site claims treats patients on Medicare. Of 100 contacted, only 34 said they would readily accept a new patient.



    Of the remainder, 40 said they would not add a new patient on traditional Medicare. Another 26 limit new clients, making decisions on a case-by-case basis, or placing patients on waiting lists of up to six months. That adds up to 66 – or two-thirds – refusing or limiting new patients.



    The questions focused on traditional Medicare, which is used by most recipients.



    Several doctors said they hesitate to take Medicare patients because Medicare doesn’t pay enough, pays late, and can require a nightmare of paperwork and repeated telephone calls.





    Quote:

    The findings contrast sharply with the government’s statement that 94 percent of Colorado physicians take Medicare. Colorado Public News found that while many doctors may be signed up for Medicare, or be paid by Medicare for a certain number of patients – that doesn’t mean those doctors will accept any new patients.





    Quote:

    Dr. Jonathan Zonca, of Ascent Family Medicine in Denver, is taking new Medicare patients. But he said he hesitated after figuring out that Medicare had paid half of what other insurance plans did, over three years.





    Quote:

    Medicare also pays more slowly than other insurance plans, doctors say. Ascent has been waiting more than six months for $55,000 due from Medicare, Zonca said. Medicare officials have provided no assurances that the payments will ever come, he added.





    I wonder what will happen if something similar to this happens under Obamacare. Or, what will happen in this case for that matter.
  • tontontonton Posts: 14,063member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


    Here's another reality:



    Two-thirds Of Colorado Doctors Refuse Or Limit Basic Medicare Patients:



    I wonder what will happen if something similar to this happens under Obamacare. Or, what will happen in this case for that matter.



    This is why we need universal, non means-tested healthcare. Cut the costly red tape and no one falls through the cracks. Want better care? Pay for it.
  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    This is why we need universal, non means-tested healthcare. Cut the costly red tape and no one falls through the cracks. Want better care? Pay for it.



    I'm not sure how your proposed solution actually addresses the problem here.



    Senior citizens are effectively under a program sorta like "universal, non means-tested healthcare" through medicare and doctors are dropping them because the payer's (the US governments) "costly red tape" is causing them nothing but grief. Did you read the article?



    That's not even mentioning the effect your proposed solution would have on healthcare costs (direct and indirect). Yikes!
  • frank777frank777 Posts: 5,693member
    What he means is to force all American doctors to accept only patients whose care is paid for through ObamaCare.



    Like here in Canada.
  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    What he means is to force all American doctors to accept only patients whose care is paid for through ObamaCare.



    Like here in Canada.



    I knew where he was going. I was just waiting to see if he was going to be as transparent about his authoritarian inclinations.
  • tontontonton Posts: 14,063member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    What he means is to force all American doctors to accept only patients whose care is paid for through ObamaCare.



    Like here in Canada.



    No, actually, that's not at all what I mean. Not even close. For you to say that shows that you've ignored practically every post I've made on the subject.
  • marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by john galt View Post


    Take that Queen Nancy.



    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/61218.html



    Would you buy insurance if you have no other coverage for your family?
  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    No, actually, that's not at all what I mean. Not even close. For you to say that shows that you've ignored practically every post I've made on the subject.



    Then, perhaps you can explain how your solution addresses the issue of doctors dropping government-insured patients (e.g., medicare patients)?
  • marvfoxmarvfox Posts: 2,275member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Punctuation. It's important.



    Genius it is the concept i am trying to get across not the grammar!
  • frank777frank777 Posts: 5,693member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    No, actually, that's not at all what I mean. Not even close. For you to say that shows that you've ignored practically every post I've made on the subject.



    I apologize if I misrepresented your position. However most on the left (and virtually everyone on the left in Canada) tend to argue that a parallel private system serves only the rich, duplicates resources and steals labour from the government-sponsored health care side.



    And thus, Canadians must go to the U.S. for treatment if the system fails them (I almost had to make the trip last month.) Our private system was outlawed years ago.



    With your Secular-Humanist-in-Chief already dictating what kind of health care religious people must buy, certainly the U.S. won't be far behind, if ObamaCare remains law.
  • brbr Posts: 8,252member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    With your Secular-Humanist-in-Chief



    Evidence?



    Quote:

    already dictating what kind of health care religious people must buy



    Wrong, the compromise eliminated the need for religious institutions to pay for contraceptives--the insurance company just provides it at no additional cost. Insurance companies like that because contraception is WAY cheaper than pregnancy or abortion.



    By the way, these rules have been around at both the federal and state level for over a decade now. Why suddenly the outrage? Oh wait, election year and conservatives knee-jerk to hate Obama.



    Quote:

    certainly the U.S. won't be far behind, if ObamaCare remains law.



    The Affordable Care Act does nothing but EXTEND PRIVATIZATION. There's NO PUBLIC OPTION. What world are you living in?
  • frank777frank777 Posts: 5,693member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BR View Post


    Wrong, the compromise eliminated the need for religious institutions to pay for contraceptives--the insurance company just provides it at no additional cost.



    So these are magic contraceptive pills that cost nothing to produce?



    The 'compromise' is a typical Obama lie. Those of us living in the real world understand that we would still be subsidizing the production and distribution of those pills.



    Forcing religious people to violate their consciences and work with companies that distribute products they abhor is still wrong any way to pretend to slice it.



    The only upside on this is that Obama is incompetent enough to do with the Liberals have done in Canada - push more of the Catholic vote to the conservative side. At least the Liberals didn't have the precedent staring them in the face.



    Evangelicals largely bailed on the Democrats a long time ago, while practicing Catholics still stayed despite the abortion industry's stranglehold on the Dems. Republicans see an opening that will open doors into the Catholic and Hispanic constituencies.



    Why do you think a Catholic is suddenly the favourite to win the GOP nomination?



    One side is playing chess, and the other checkers.
  • tontontonton Posts: 14,063member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


    Then, perhaps you can explain how your solution addresses the issue of doctors dropping government-insured patients (e.g., medicare patients)?



    Have a quota for civic duty. It's simple.
  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    Have a quota for civic duty. It's simple.



    So force doctors to take patients?
  • tontontonton Posts: 14,063member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by marvfox View Post


    Genius it is the concept i am trying to get across not the grammar!



    Respectfully, and with no offense meant -- grammar, spelling and punctuation all help to make the message more clear. They are important.
  • brbr Posts: 8,252member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    So these are magic contraceptive pills that cost nothing to produce?



    The 'compromise' is a typical Obama lie. Those of us living in the real world understand that we would still be subsidizing the production and distribution of those pills.



    Forcing religious people to violate their consciences and work with companies that distribute products they abhor is still wrong any way to pretend to slice it.



    The only upside on this is that Obama is incompetent enough to do with the Liberals have done in Canada - push more of the Catholic vote to the conservative side. At least the Liberals didn't have the precedent staring them in the face.



    Evangelicals largely bailed on the Democrats a long time ago, while practicing Catholics still stayed despite the abortion industry's stranglehold on the Dems. Republicans see an opening that will open doors into the Catholic and Hispanic constituencies.



    Why do you think a Catholic is suddenly the favourite to win the GOP nomination?



    One side is playing chess, and the other checkers.



    Let's try this again.





    By the way, these rules have been around at both the federal and state level for over a decade now. Why suddenly the outrage? Oh wait, election year and conservatives knee-jerk to hate Obama.
  • tontontonton Posts: 14,063member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


    So force doctors to take patients?



    We force doctors to do lots of things. We force them to maintain certification, we force them to get malpractice insurance, we force them to drive on the right side of the road.



    By requiring civic duty as a percentage of a doctor's patient quota we can eliminate health care bias against the poor.



    Doctors in the US are NOT underpaid. They can give a little back.



    It's the same thing we do in the legal profession, and we don't see lawyers bitching and moaning about it. They still make millions, and doctors will still make millions.



    Look at it like House MD. He doesn't want to do those clinic hours, but they do provide plenty of entertainment!
  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    We force doctors to do lots of things. We force them to maintain certification, we force them to get malpractice insurance, we force them to drive on the right side of the road.



    By requiring civic duty as a percentage of a doctor's patient quota we can eliminate health care bias against the poor.



    That's a long-winded way to say "yes."



    More signs of the left's creeping socialism and totalitarianism.



    BTW, I'm sure your long-winded answer was intended to distract from the fact that you said this:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton


    No, actually, that's not at all what I mean. Not even close. For you to say that shows that you've ignored practically every post I've made on the subject.



    In response to this:



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Frank777


    What he means is to force all American doctors to accept only patients whose care is paid for through ObamaCare.



    I think you owe Frank777 an apology.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    Doctors in the US are NOT underpaid. They can give a little back.



    I love it when liberals tell us how much someone else able to "give back."









    P.S. You reasoning for forcing someone to do X because "we" already force them to do Y is exactly the kind of slippery slope that people who advocate liberty are concerned with.
  • tontontonton Posts: 14,063member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post


    That's a long-winded way to say "yes."



    More signs of the left's creeping socialism and totalitarianism.



    BTW, I'm sure your long-winded answer was intended to distract from the fact that you said this:







    In response to this:







    I think you owe Frank777 an apology.









    I love it when liberals tell us how much someone else able to "give back."









    P.S. You reasoning for forcing someone to do X because "we" already force them to do Y is exactly the kind of slippery slope that people who advocate liberty are concerned with.



    Read Frank's statement again. Then give me an apology.



    In case you didn't get it yet... you see that little word "only" in there? It makes a hell of a lot of difference, don'tcha think?
  • mj1970mj1970 Posts: 9,002member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tonton View Post


    Read Frank's statement again. Then give me an apology.



    In case you didn't get it yet... you see that little word "only" in there? It makes a hell of a lot of difference, don'tcha think?



    Ahh...yes. You are correct. You wouldn't force them to only take Obamacare patients. I was wrong. I apologize.



    However...back to my original point...you would force them to take Obamacare patients. That you would force them to take any patients is my concern.



    What do you imagine some of the unintended consequences of your coercion might be?
Sign In or Register to comment.