PDA

View Full Version : Fuck you United Healthcare - Fuck you in the ass



mike black
03-09-2010, 11:21 AM
Today I get a statement from my Doctor for the past five months stating that I haven't paid any of my bills. I call them and ask why - "United seems to state that you haven't reached your deductible."

I call United. "Your deductible has been raised due to increasing frequency of charges."

"You mean because I'm actually going to the doctor, and using my insurance, you're going to not cover these visits? And you're retroactively denying payment for the past five months?"

Just slapped with $300 in charges. Whooptie-doo.

And fuck you to anyone who thinks we shouldn't tear the entire system apart and rebuild from scratch.

Alexander Hamilton
03-09-2010, 11:23 AM
Today I get a statement from my Doctor for the past five months stating that I haven't paid any of my bills. I call them and ask why - "United seems to state that you haven't reached your deductible."

I call United. "Your deductible has been raised due to increasing frequency of charges."

"You mean because I'm actually going to the doctor, and using my insurance, you're going to not cover these visits? And you're retroactively denying payment for the past five months?"

Just slapped with $300 in charges. Whooptie-doo.

And fuck you to anyone who thinks we shouldn't tear the entire system apart and rebuild from scratch.

This I find a little confusing...

You hate the current status quo, but don't want to see it change?

Regardless, sorry about the troubles.

TheKraken
03-09-2010, 11:27 AM
This I find a little confusing...

You hate the current status quo, but don't want to see it change?

Regardless, sorry about the troubles.

He's saying it should change. "Fuck... anyone who thinks we shouldn't..." :)

Sorry to hear that, Mike.

mike black
03-09-2010, 11:29 AM
He's saying it should change. "Fuck... anyone who thinks we shouldn't..." :)

Sorry to hear that, Mike.

I'm familiar with Insurance company shenanigans, living in Florida. We go through it each hurricane season - companies refuse to pay out claiming it will bankrupt them. But Jesus, this is really fucking shady.

mike black
03-09-2010, 11:30 AM
This I find a little confusing...

You hate the current status quo, but don't want to see it change?

Regardless, sorry about the troubles.

Shouldn't, not should. ;)

Alexander Hamilton
03-09-2010, 11:30 AM
Shouldn't, not should. ;)

oops.. :Oops:

TheKraken
03-09-2010, 11:32 AM
I'm familiar with Insurance company shenanigans, living in Florida. We go through it each hurricane season - companies refuse to pay out claiming it will bankrupt them. But Jesus, this is really fucking shady.

Imagine my area post-Katrina. At least one company still flatly refuses to begin any new home insurance policies 5 years later...

Stark Raving
03-09-2010, 11:35 AM
Why do you hate America, Mike Black?

http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/7583/cryingbeck.jpg

mike black
03-09-2010, 11:36 AM
Imagine my area post-Katrina. At least one company still flatly refuses to begin any new home insurance policies 5 years later...

Yeah, man. It's horrendous. 2004 was really bad for us - four hurricanes destroyed central Florida, and every insurance company in the state threw their hands in the air and went "Fuck it. We don't care that you've been paying insurance for years." State Farm actually lost it's license to insure Florida homes because they wouldn't pay out.

mike black
03-09-2010, 11:38 AM
Why do you hate America, Mike Black?

http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/7583/cryingbeck.jpg

Mother fucker gives True Republicans and Libertarians a bad name. Apparently "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" only applies in theory.

R0cketFr0g
03-09-2010, 11:38 AM
Are you looking for Social Justice, commie? You got sick, you should fucking pay your doctor.

Marcdachamp
03-09-2010, 12:04 PM
Yeah, this is the bullshit that needs to get fixed.

maverick-99
03-09-2010, 12:09 PM
Three hundred dollars?

You can go ahead and quit your bitching, sir.

In this day and age, three hundred dollars for a handful of doctors visits is getting off easy.

When we had out baby last year, we ended up paying six-thousand dollars out of pocket for the whole fiasco. As a matter of fact, we just paid off the last of it with our federal tax return.

mike black
03-09-2010, 12:12 PM
Three hundred dollars?

You can go ahead and quit your bitching, sir.

In this day and age, three hundred dollars for a handful of doctors visits is getting off easy.

When we had out baby last year, we ended up paying six-thousand dollars out of pocket for the whole fiasco. As a matter of fact, we just paid off the last of it with our federal tax return.

This is three hundred dollars on top of the $600 I've already pair - for three doctor's visits and medication. It's a fucking fiasco - I essentially have no insurance. I'm paying for everything out of pocket.

maverick-99
03-09-2010, 12:16 PM
This is three hundred dollars on top of the $600 I've already pair - for three doctor's visits and medication. It's a fucking fiasco - I essentially have no insurance. I'm paying for everything out of pocket.

Do you have an HSA or anything set up? Depending on what your deductible is, you probably should.

I'm pretty sure my deductible is something like $3,000, and I have an HSA with about a grand in it, which means if I have any medically related expenses beyond $1k, I'm paying with my own coin. Pretty standard fare in today's healthcare situation.

RickLM
03-09-2010, 12:32 PM
I'm still mystified that every American doesn't support reform.

Brother Power the Gong
03-09-2010, 12:37 PM
I get these statements from my insurance company detailing my trips to the doctor.

Basically, I go to the doctor, and my doctor says the trip costs $500.

My insurance company says, "How about we pay you $300?"

Doctor says OK.

Insurance company tells me I owe $300.

I mean, I could do that. For free.

Sorry about your troubles, Mike.

Prime
03-09-2010, 12:47 PM
$900 bucks for some doctors visits?

damn

two of friends (around 30) have both just been in hospital from operations this week and it hasn't cost them anything, i know we pay for it in taxes but that's all forgotten about when you don't have to worry about the cost and hassle of going to the doctor.

I haven't been to the doctor in a while, but when I fell a few years ago and banged my knee up pretty bad, I could call in the morning and more times than not get an appointment with my doctor that day, and then I was eventually referred to the local hospital the same day.

no idea what that would have cost over there but I never saw any bill.

RickLM
03-09-2010, 12:59 PM
$900 bucks for some doctors visits?

damn

two of friends (around 30) have both just been in hospital from operations this week and it hasn't cost them anything, i know we pay for it in taxes but that's all forgotten about when you don't have to worry about the cost and hassle of going to the doctor.

I haven't been to the doctor in a while, but when I fell a few years ago and banged my knee up pretty bad, I could call in the morning and more times than not get an appointment with my doctor that day, and then I was eventually referred to the local hospital the same day.

no idea what that would have cost over there but I never saw any bill.


But socialized medicine doesn't work, so you must be lying!

maverick-99
03-09-2010, 01:04 PM
I'm still mystified that every American doesn't support reform.

The ones who don't either never go to the doctor, or have no family.... or both.

If you see a doctor more than a couple times a year and/or get prescriptions filled regularly, or if you have kids that go for regular checkups and whatnot, then you know the score.

If not, well then you are shocked to learn that a few doctors visits will cost you several hundred dollars.

RickLM
03-09-2010, 01:08 PM
The ones who don't either never go to the doctor, or have no family.... or both.

If you see a doctor more than a couple times a year and/or get prescriptions filled regularly, or if you have kids that go for regular checkups and whatnot, then you know the score.

If not, well then you are shocked to learn that a few doctors visits will cost you several hundred dollars.



In my experience, the anti-reformers are:

1. The free-market or religious zealots who will stick with one viewpoint on healthcare even if all evidence suggests it isn't working.

2. Folks who work for large organizations that have great health plans, and so they haven't experienced many of these insurance nightmares.

Brian Defferding
03-09-2010, 01:28 PM
I'm still mystified that every American doesn't support reform.

I think it's more a matter of what type of reform it is, is where the battle is at.

Brian Defferding
03-09-2010, 01:33 PM
In my experience, the anti-reformers are:

1. The free-market or religious zealots who will stick with one viewpoint on healthcare even if all evidence suggests it isn't working.

2. Folks who work for large organizations that have great health plans, and so they haven't experienced many of these insurance nightmares.

While on the other side you have:

1. The far-left/socialists/marxists that want single payer and want it now despite all evidence suggesting that isn't working either

2. Folks who don't have healthcare but could afford it and simply want lower bills, practical solutions be damned

(I don't necessarily believe this, but I'm just reflecting how narrowing down sides of the argument like this isn't accurate)

Free marketers want reform too - just the right kind of reform.

CougarTrace
03-09-2010, 01:37 PM
Today I get a statement from my Doctor for the past five months stating that I haven't paid any of my bills. I call them and ask why - "United seems to state that you haven't reached your deductible."

I call United. "Your deductible has been raised due to increasing frequency of charges."

"You mean because I'm actually going to the doctor, and using my insurance, you're going to not cover these visits? And you're retroactively denying payment for the past five months?"

Just slapped with $300 in charges. Whooptie-doo.

And fuck you to anyone who thinks we shouldn't tear the entire system apart and rebuild from scratch.

we should tear the system apart by making the insurance compaines, pharamaceuticals, etc not be able to do this type of thing. Its that easy to hold these firms accountable and stop the ungodly profits while treating people and business correctly but government won't do it with all those lobbyist in their pockets.

A.Huerta
03-09-2010, 01:37 PM
I think it's more a matter of what type of reform it is, is where the battle is at.


Something this big and important always takes baby steps. The average american is expecting the next perfect plan, but until that mentality changes, nothing new is going to develop.

Brian Defferding
03-09-2010, 01:42 PM
Something this big and important always takes baby steps. The average american is expecting the next perfect plan, but until that mentality changes, nothing new is going to develop.

I think that's one of the reasons why large omnibus bills like this are so hard to pass, it's understandably going to cause concern among everyone, especially if it passes more bucks onto our elected officials.

mike black
03-09-2010, 02:13 PM
we should tear the system apart by making the insurance compaines, pharamaceuticals, etc not be able to do this type of thing. Its that easy to hold these firms accountable and stop the ungodly profits while treating people and business correctly but government won't do it with all those lobbyist in their pockets.

The other night I was at the gas station picking up cigarettes. While I was there, the clerk and some customers were musing on how fucked up the US government is. One customer said "Easily, we could march to DC, guns in hand, and demand they all step down." Everyone else nodded in agreement, saying it really should happen.

At this point, I fear that government inaction is going to lead towards something explosive.

dasNdanger
03-09-2010, 02:16 PM
Today I get a statement from my Doctor for the past five months stating that I haven't paid any of my bills. I call them and ask why - "United seems to state that you haven't reached your deductible."

I call United. "Your deductible has been raised due to increasing frequency of charges."

"You mean because I'm actually going to the doctor, and using my insurance, you're going to not cover these visits? And you're retroactively denying payment for the past five months?"

Just slapped with $300 in charges. Whooptie-doo.

And fuck you to anyone who thinks we shouldn't tear the entire system apart and rebuild from scratch.


Something we can agree on. :)

Last year my endocrinologist 'fired' me because - according to him - I have OCD. :? I really wasn't aware that he was also my psychiatrist. :roll: (He fired me after I questioned his affiliation with all the pharmaceutical reps that were always in his office - basically, I took Dirty Harry's .44 Magnum and shot myself in the foot.) I told my ob-gyn about it, and he said that at this rate, in a few years health care will be nearly impossible to get, and that more and more doctors will be 'firing' patients.

Scary, really.


das

Ben
03-09-2010, 02:19 PM
The other night I was at the gas station picking up cigarettes. While I was there, the clerk and some customers were musing on how fucked up the US government is. One customer said "Easily, we could march to DC, guns in hand, and demand they all step down." Everyone else nodded in agreement, saying it really should happen.

At this point, I fear that government inaction is going to lead towards something explosive.Aren't most of the people living in Florida there because of some incident with a gun in another state?

mike black
03-09-2010, 02:27 PM
Aren't most of the people living in Florida there because of some incident with a gun in another state?

I'm not even sure what this snark is about.

greg donovan
03-09-2010, 02:37 PM
In my experience, the anti-reformers are:

1. The free-market or religious zealots who will stick with one viewpoint on healthcare even if all evidence suggests it isn't working.

2. Folks who work for large organizations that have great health plans, and so they haven't experienced many of these insurance nightmares.

unfortunately group #2 is impossible to motivate to support any sort of change because they are fine and dont give a flying fuck about anyone else because they are covered.

SgtPepper
03-09-2010, 02:39 PM
Yeah, man. It's horrendous. 2004 was really bad for us - four hurricanes destroyed central Florida, and every insurance company in the state threw their hands in the air and went "Fuck it. We don't care that you've been paying insurance for years." State Farm actually lost it's license to insure Florida homes because they wouldn't pay out.

State Farm fucking sucks. We had some issues with them in Indiana after this nasty hail storm 3 or 4 years ago and they refused to pay for roofs damaged by the storm.

Benel Germosen
03-09-2010, 02:40 PM
I'm not even sure what this snark is about.

He's saying all people who live in Florida are ex-cons.


As a New Yorker that is something I could easily believe.

information
03-09-2010, 02:42 PM
State Farm fucking sucks. We had some issues with them in Indiana after this nasty hail storm 3 or 4 years ago and they refused to pay for roofs damaged by the storm.

But it's my understanding that they are there, in the same sort of way a good neighbor, for instance, would be there.

mike black
03-09-2010, 02:50 PM
He's saying all people who live in Florida are ex-cons.


As a New Yorker that is something I could easily believe.

As an ex-New Yorker, it's mostly people giving the finger to Long Island.

Nick Hale
03-09-2010, 03:29 PM
I'm dealing with somethikng similar. I had to get a CT scan last june, everything was fine until last month. I got a bill for the scan with a note that said that cigna had declined. I've still not had a chance to contact cigna yet because I've had so much crap going on but I don't expect it to go well.

babydave
03-09-2010, 11:01 PM
Sorry for your troubles and that of others. What you've detailed is exactly why I don't have insurance. I choose not to pay for it because insurance companies use your money however they please and try every trick in the book to avoid giving it back to you. I've had many untreated injuries where I've relied on luck to avoid it being serious. In the current system, the winners are medical institutions and insurance companies. Medical care should be a "non-profit" service. Single-payer isn't perfect but it's better than anything else. When it comes to helping others, when did "first do no harm" become "can I see your insurance card?"

Insurance companies use your money to pay salaries and claims. If approving a claim will cut into someone's salary, then it's back on the "denied" pile for you. Government isn't perfect. Far from it, but one could assume government would do a better job of managing health care decisions than a bunch of capitalists in need of seventh car. If the health care bill goes through without the public option, we won't be able to say "fuck you (insurance company)" anymore because even though you can leave one company for another you're still forced to pay one of them so what's their motivation to be more helpful than the last company? It becomes dumping one diseased whore for another, and while it may look like you're the one saying "fuck you" to the dumped one you're still the one getting fucked. The only "fuck you" is the ability to remove support from the system, and most people can't do that because of all the medical bills or the knowledge of what it would cost if medical care was needed.

That's pretty fucked up for a once-noble profession.

Jacques Toochay
03-10-2010, 12:54 AM
The other night I was at the gas station picking up cigarettes. While I was there, the clerk and some customers were musing on how fucked up the US government is. One customer said "Easily, we could march to DC, guns in hand, and demand they all step down." Everyone else nodded in agreement, saying it really should happen.

At this point, I fear that government inaction is going to lead towards something explosive.

I wouldn't worry too much about that since I'm pretty sure they're the same idiots who think it's just a matter of time before the South rises again.
:wink:

Greygor
03-10-2010, 01:09 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about that since I'm pretty sure they're the same idiots who think it's just a matter of time before the South rises again.
:wink:

You've just made his list

http://www.bittenandbound.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/nathan-bedford-forrest-head-of-kkk.jpg

mike black
03-10-2010, 03:49 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about that since I'm pretty sure they're the same idiots who think it's just a matter of time before the South rises again.
:wink:

Florida isn't Alabama, aside from the occasional flag over a Confederate graveyard, you wouldn't know it's a southern state. Most people down here are Northern transplants.

badpoet
03-10-2010, 04:08 AM
The thing that I think is funny is that people think they're going to be paying out of the ass for health care reform, when, in reality, we're already paying way more than we need to for health care. Uncompensated care and defaults are picked up by employers paying their side of insurance, employees paying more for portion of insurance and higher deductibles, and state and property taxes. We're already paying for everyone to get health care, we just do it in the most expensive way possible, because the people in power are more concerned about HMO and drug company profits than they are taxpayers.

If we socialized (if you want to use that term that has become loaded these days), we'd be paying much less for equivalent or better services (and don't give me that shit about people waiting years for surgeries in Canada, because for the most part that is a bunch of bullshit - besides, people here just die because they can't afford the surgery).

We have the best health care system in the world, if you're a Sheik from Saudi Arabia going to the Mayo clinic. Otherwise, it's a terribly broken system that we need to overhaul completely, and, yes, socialize. Market economics would only make matters worse.

dmh3000
03-10-2010, 04:11 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about that since I'm pretty sure they're the same idiots who think it's just a matter of time before the South rises again.
:wink:

I have friends in Texas who would slap me if I made a comment like that.

And sorry to hear about the situation Mike. You should send word to the press so that they eventually cave in. Or, you know, sue you for slander.

CougarTrace
03-10-2010, 04:14 AM
I wouldn't worry too much about that since I'm pretty sure they're the same idiots who think it's just a matter of time before the South rises again.
:wink:

:no:

I'm afraid people all over the US are just tired of Washington politics that never change no matter the political affiliation or who has been elected. I heard this same anti-Washington sentiment in Philly a couple of weeks ago.

Greygor
03-10-2010, 04:40 AM
I wonder what percentage of the money you pay your Healthcare provider goes to pay the wages of adjusters/investigators looking at ways not to pay your claim?

mike black
03-10-2010, 05:00 AM
I wonder what percentage of the money you pay your Healthcare provider goes to pay the wages of adjusters/investigators looking at ways not to pay your claim?

I would guess 40%. The remaining 60% is split between rent, advertising telling my employer how awesome it would be to work together, bonuses, and lobbying.

Natty P
03-10-2010, 05:40 AM
System is way broken. I have some misgivings about socialized medicine, many actually, for one I think it's an aggressive move towards mediocrity (see Western Europe) but haven't seen many viable alternatives. And all I see out of the Right wing in our government is Schaudenfreude(whatever I'm not looking up how to spell that right) instead of a solution.

dasNdanger
03-10-2010, 05:49 AM
The thing that I think is funny is that people think they're going to be paying out of the ass for health care reform, when, in reality, we're already paying way more than we need to for health care. Uncompensated care and defaults are picked up by employers paying their side of insurance, employees paying more for portion of insurance and higher deductibles, and state and property taxes. We're already paying for everyone to get health care, we just do it in the most expensive way possible, because the people in power are more concerned about HMO and drug company profits than they are taxpayers.

If we socialized (if you want to use that term that has become loaded these days), we'd be paying much less for equivalent or better services (and don't give me that shit about people waiting years for surgeries in Canada, because for the most part that is a bunch of bullshit - besides, people here just die because they can't afford the surgery).

We have the best health care system in the world, if you're a Sheik from Saudi Arabia going to the Mayo clinic. Otherwise, it's a terribly broken system that we need to overhaul completely, and, yes, socialize. Market economics would only make matters worse.

Our health care system ranks pretty low compared to other countries, with mortality rates fairly high for things that shouldn't even be an issue in a first world country (such as infant mortality). Americans are more likely to put off treatment, or even going to a doctor, because of the expense, which means higher death rates overall due to delayed treatment or untreated illness. It's expensive in this country to take care of your health.

I was pretty sick last year - 6 months of bronchitis, sinus infections, pneumonia, strep, and nose bleeds (from all the infections) - 6 months of doctor and hospital visits. Hubby had a couple bouts of bronchitis, and at the end of the year, he cut his thumb. We also had dentist visits, and hubby got new glasses. We both have insurance (except for eye, and hubby has dental, but I don't, but my overall insurance is top of the line). Total out-of-pocket for two people with health insurance? $4500.00 :p I can't even imagine what it would have been like if we didn't have the insurance...I probably would have not gone to the doctor, and could have died from a very treatable illness.


das

Prime
03-10-2010, 05:54 AM
I was pretty sick last year - 6 months of bronchitis, sinus infections, pneumonia, strep, and nose bleeds (from all the infections) - 6 months of doctor and hospital visits. Hubby had a couple bouts of bronchitis, and at the end of the year, he cut his thumb. We also had dentist visits, and hubby got new glasses. We both have insurance (except for eye, and hubby has dental, but I don't, but my overall insurance is top of the line). Total out-of-pocket for two people with health insurance? $4500.00 :p


das

I'd have paid for the glasses, and dentist visits. everything else would have been covered fully. (prescriptions may have been needed but those are capped at £7.20 per refill)

CougarTrace
03-10-2010, 05:58 AM
Our health care system ranks pretty low compared to other countries, with mortality rates fairly high for things that shouldn't even be an issue in a first world country (such as infant mortality). Americans are more likely to put off treatment, or even going to a doctor, because of the expense, which means higher death rates overall due to delayed treatment or untreated illness. It's expensive in this country to take care of your health.

I was pretty sick last year - 6 months of bronchitis, sinus infections, pneumonia, strep, and nose bleeds (from all the infections) - 6 months of doctor and hospital visits. Hubby had a couple bouts of bronchitis, and at the end of the year, he cut his thumb. We also had dentist visits, and hubby got new glasses. We both have insurance (except for eye, and hubby has dental, but I don't, but my overall insurance is top of the line). Total out-of-pocket for two people with health insurance? $4500.00 :p I can't even imagine what it would have been like if we didn't have the insurance...I probably would have not gone to the doctor, and could have died from a very treatable illness.


das

Thats just horrible insurance unfortunately. I wouldn't have even paid $400 for all that out of pocket

but, I'll disagree as a whole that our health care system is that bad. My eye specialist sees patients from all over the world because they can't get the treatment in their country than he and his colleagues provide. So, while I pay more, I know I'm getting the care that some in the world have to travel for. That doesn't mean the system isn't broken though. We could do more to pharmaceuticals, insurance companies,etc to be fairly priced.

dasNdanger
03-10-2010, 06:04 AM
I'd have paid for the glasses, and dentist visits. everything else would have been covered fully. (prescriptions may have been needed but those are capped at £7.20 per refill)

Okay, then...the eyeglasses and dentist visits maybe came in at about $1100.00 (mainly because I had several fillings re-done). Usually the dentist only costs me about $200-$250 a year, and glasses aren't a regular purchase. I wear contacts, and have very poor vision, so my new glasses and contacts cost between $600-800 a pop - I should get them once a year, but try to stretch it out to two years because of the cost. I have a prescription plan, but still pay $30 for three months of blood pressure meds, and other prescriptions vary. In a 'healthy' year, our out-of-pocket expenses (optical, dental, medical, prescriptions) usually come in around $2500.

das

dasNdanger
03-10-2010, 06:11 AM
Thats just horrible insurance unfortunately. I wouldn't have even paid $400 for all that out of pocket

but, I'll disagree as a whole that our health care system is that bad. My eye specialist sees patients from all over the world because they can't get the treatment in their country than he and his colleagues provide. So, while I pay more, I know I'm getting the care that some in the world have to travel for. That doesn't mean the system isn't broken though. We could do more to pharmaceuticals, insurance companies,etc to be fairly priced.

Here's how it breaks down (for me): $20 co-pay to doctors, and urgent care; $50 to ER, $100-150 to ER doctors AFTER insurance reimbursement, and prescriptions vary from $10 - $30. I went to the hospital about 5 times, Urgent Care about 6 or 7...lost count...then to a few specialists. Hubby had a co-pay of $30, and $100 for ER visits (he only had one with his cut thumb). He also has a prescription plan, but not sure what his range is - I think some as low as $5. His company just switched insurance, so not sure what his figures are now.

But I still haven't recovered financially from last year, and my credit cards which did not carry balances before I got sick, all carry balances now. :(


das

Greygor
03-10-2010, 06:12 AM
We have the best health care system in the world, if you're a Sheik from Saudi Arabia going to the Mayo clinic. Otherwise, it's a terribly broken system that we need to overhaul completely, and, yes, socialize. Market economics would only make matters worse.

Perhaps WHO took cost into account when they last drew up the Healthcare Rankings table



1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
38 Slovenia
39 Cuba
40 Brunei


I suppose this table means nothing unless you know the ranking criteria

CougarTrace
03-10-2010, 06:14 AM
Here's how it breaks down (for me): $20 co-pay to doctors, and urgent care; $50 to ER, $100-150 to ER doctors AFTER insurance reimbursement, and prescriptions vary from $10 - $30. I went to the hospital about 5 times, Urgent Care about 6 or 7...lost count...then to a few specialists. Hubby had a co-pay of $30, and $100 for ER visits (he only had one with his cut thumb). He also has a prescription plan, but not sure what his range is - I think some as low as $5. His company just switched insurance, so not sure what his figures are now.

But I still haven't recovered financially from last year, and my credit cards which did not carry balances before I got sick, all carry balances now. :(


das

Ah, now I see. With all the hospital admissions and ER visits I can see. I would have paid more then. I think my max out of pocket is $1500 a year.

But, see to me thats where we can fix health care in this country. Stop letting the insurance companies, health care systems, and pharmaceuticals rob the American people. Its really the easiest thing to do but in no way will corrupt Washington put a stop to it.

dasNdanger
03-10-2010, 06:20 AM
Perhaps WHO took cost into account when they last drew up the Healthcare Rankings table



I suppose this table means nothing unless you know the ranking criteria

Michael Moorcock has said over and over again on his forum that the best health care system is in France. Though British, he now lives in Texas, with family (I believe) in France. He has suffered for a few years with a bad foot wound (complications of diabetes) and has spoken publically about it. He has received treatment from many countries, and has nothing but praise for the French system.

http://www.multiverse.org/fora/showpost.php?p=188477&postcount=59


das

badpoet
03-10-2010, 09:22 AM
Perhaps WHO took cost into account when they last drew up the Healthcare Rankings table



I suppose this table means nothing unless you know the ranking criteria

My point was that we have a few great facilities that most people either can't afford or don't have legitimate access to that are absolutely world class. I was also making attempting to lampoon the people who say "The U.S. has the best health care in the world" (generally Republicans who say there's no problem or we just need to tinker with our system to make it better), because it's obvious that by any statistical analysis of it that we aren't even close.

Right now we by 1.5 times more for health care that any country with socialized medicine. And, our system sucks. We're not even overpaying for good health care. We're overpaying for a truly shitty health care system. And, we're doing it because we're too stupid or too prideful to just admit that most of the industrialized world does it better than us.

I'm really tired of these Teabaggers, Republicans, and outright idiots that continue to want to give HMO's, other health insurance companies, and pharm companies money that we simply don't need to give them. Let's socialize health care now in the U.S. Employers will be freed from having to always have health care on the table during negotiations, employees won't have to worry about losing health care if they lose their job, become sick, or just because the insurance company feels like it, and all of us would save money both in the short and long term. Taxes might go up, but your out of pocket expenses both now and in the future will easily make up for that, in addition to U.S. companies actually being able to compete because they have the crushing overhead caused by our current health care system.

Taxman
03-10-2010, 09:24 AM
we should tear the system apart by making the insurance compaines, pharamaceuticals, etc not be able to do this type of thing. Its that easy to hold these firms accountable and stop the ungodly profits while treating people and business correctly but government won't do it with all those lobbyist in their pockets.I didn't know you had it in you, Trace.

Generic Poster
03-10-2010, 10:31 AM
I'm still mystified that every American doesn't support reform.

The main problem, I think, is that the cost of health insurance is hidden from most people because they get it through their employer. I have to get my own, and for a family of 4, it costs about $11,000 per year for an OK but not super great HMO.

Dreaded Anomaly
03-10-2010, 10:34 AM
People have been using phrases like "best health care system in the world" and "socialized medicine" pretty loosely. Let's clear up a few things.

There are two very distinct elements to health care. One of them is the actual medical professionals who provide health care. The US has a pretty good selection of these, and people who make the "best health care in the world" claim are generally referring to this element. The other element is insurance, i.e. how we pay for health care. This part is pretty shitty, and that has nothing to do with the first element, one way or another. So making the "best health care in the world" claim, whether or not it's true, is absolutely irrelevant to the argument.

"Socialized medicine" is when medical services are directly delivered by the government. Britain is the most notable country with this system, although there are others. The term has been expanded in US political use to include any involvement of the government in "health care," but that's bullshit meant to confuse the average voter. No one is proposing an actual system of "socialized medicine" for the United States. At most, people propose single-payer, which is when the government acts as the sole provider of health insurance (not medical services), in order to take the profit-seeking element out of it and expand availability. This would not, by default, affect the quality of medical professionals in the country, and so people who say "best health care in the world" as opposition to it simply aren't making any kind of argument.

Brian Defferding
03-10-2010, 11:13 AM
System is way broken. I have some misgivings about socialized medicine, many actually, for one I think it's an aggressive move towards mediocrity (see Western Europe) but haven't seen many viable alternatives. And all I see out of the Right wing in our government is Schaudenfreude(whatever I'm not looking up how to spell that right) instead of a solution.

There are solutions out there to fix health care issues that do not require more government control or another $1-3 trillion of our taxes to pay for it, it's just that due to the Democrats control in our legislative and executive branch, those other solutions are overshadowed, outshouted, or just ignored.

Here are some ideas, via Dr.Mary Ruwart:

http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/Dr-Mary-Ruwarts-Shocking-Plan-to-Reduce-Healthcare-Costs-by-80-Without-Spending-2-Trillion

Prime
03-10-2010, 11:21 AM
There are solutions out there to fix health care issues that do not require more government control or another $1-3 trillion of our taxes to pay for it, it's just that due to the Democrats control in our legislative and executive branch, those other solutions are overshadowed, outshouted, or just ignored.

Here are some ideas, via Dr.Mary Ruwart:

http://www.breakthematrix.com/content/Dr-Mary-Ruwarts-Shocking-Plan-to-Reduce-Healthcare-Costs-by-80-Without-Spending-2-Trillion

A person working for the pharmacutical industry arguing against drug regulations?

I'm shocked.

Brian Defferding
03-10-2010, 11:26 AM
A person working for the pharmacutical industry arguing against drug regulations?

I'm shocked.

Drug regulations have favored drug companies more than deregulation has - a look at the reimportation sale ban is a perfect example, it allows them to spike their prices here. The big pharma companies can eat the costs of introducing a new drug, but smaller companies go bankrupt. It's anti-competitive and the big pharma companies love it.

The FDA does have a track record for keeping good treatments away too long due to its overprotection. It's well-intentioned policy that backfires. Can you agree there?

mike black
03-10-2010, 04:23 PM
I'm really tired of these Teabaggers, Republicans, and outright idiots that continue to want to give HMO's, other health insurance companies, and pharm companies money that we simply don't need to give them.

No one's saying we shouldn't overhaul the system but the HMO's themselves. Even your average Republican will go "We need to fix this shit."

The argument comes when you start talking about government involvement in health care to the effect of the British or French systems.

Mylazycat
03-10-2010, 04:37 PM
As a lifelong Canadian all I can say is me and everyone I know are quite happy to have universal healthcare. Also, no, our hospitals are not the nightmare some have made them out to be who don't want American healthcare reform. Not getting into the whole debate, just a quick personal experience comment.

Chris McCarver
03-10-2010, 04:44 PM
I have to deal with this shit for a fucking living, and it still blows my mind what health insurance companies get away with.

Mattman
03-10-2010, 04:48 PM
I have to deal with this shit for a fucking living, and it still blows my mind what health insurance companies get away with.
Aren't they the second biggest lobby in Washington? That's how they get away with it. They're not even trying to hide it anymore.

Chris McCarver
03-10-2010, 04:56 PM
Aren't they the second biggest lobby in Washington? That's how they get away with it. They're not even trying to hide it anymore.

They fuck over the healthcare providers just as much they do patients. The sheer amount of crap I have to write off as "contractual discounts" would fund the construction of a fucking Helicarrier.

Khrutch
03-10-2010, 04:58 PM
Let's socialize health care now in the U.S. Employers will be freed from having to always have health care on the table during negotiations, employees won't have to worry about losing health care if they lose their job, become sick, or just because the insurance company feels like it, and all of us would save money both in the short and long term. Taxes might go up, but your out of pocket expenses both now and in the future will easily make up for that, in addition to U.S. companies actually being able to compete because they have the crushing overhead caused by our current health care system.

Can I come and live in your fantasy world?

dmh3000
03-10-2010, 05:00 PM
I remember one guy who used to work for an HMO told me he'd get wasted a lot just to numb the guilt of billing all these people who were suffering. When he finally quit his big 'fuck you' to his boss was to approve every claim.

Reminds me of The Incredibles where the boss was yelling at Bob just for telling people how to get their money.

mike black
03-10-2010, 07:44 PM
As a lifelong Canadian all I can say is me and everyone I know are quite happy to have universal healthcare. Also, no, our hospitals are not the nightmare some have made them out to be who don't want American healthcare reform. Not getting into the whole debate, just a quick personal experience comment.

Not to derail the thread with a conversation about Canadian health care, but as I understand it from Canadians connected to the board, it's (minus the money,) a nightmare for entirely different reasons.

Epic Conventions
03-10-2010, 08:23 PM
$900 for some Doctor visits does seem expensive...

Maybe stop asking for a reach-a-round when he's checking your prostate?

Jacques Toochay
03-10-2010, 08:53 PM
Can I come and live in your fantasy world?

What's the matter? Was it getting a little too sexy in your current fantasy world?

Jamie Coville
03-10-2010, 09:07 PM
The Canadian system isn't a nightmare. There are certain parts of the system where there were/are long waiting times for something (say a Kidney transplant or something) but I'd say for the vast majority of us, for the vast majority of the time the system works fine.

Really the biggest problem with our healthcare are the fucking conservatives who spent a better part of a decade trying to privatize it by stealth. They have unfortunately privatized some parts which have lead to us paying more to contract it out then when we did it in house, service getting worse and the people now doing the same job for less pay.

Hyperstorm
03-10-2010, 09:14 PM
Michael Moore was right ... you Americans have sucky medical.

RickLM
03-10-2010, 09:18 PM
The Canadian system ... a nightmare.... long waiting times...


I've shortened your comments to fit my preconceived beliefs.

A.Huerta
03-10-2010, 10:11 PM
I've shortened your comments to fit my preconceived beliefs.

:rofl:

dasNdanger
03-10-2010, 10:26 PM
Some of the doctors in our area are charging patients around $1600 a year (per patient) to treat them - unlimited - whether they have insurance or not (though I think they must have insurance or medicare as well, but not 100% sure). However, if you don't have the $1600 to give up front, they drop you as a patient, regardless of your medical coverage.

I don't get this thing that doctors are doing - they are picking the patients they want and if you don't (or can't) jump through their hoops, you're shit out of luck.

das

CougarTrace
03-11-2010, 04:56 AM
My friend in England has cancer. Young guy at that.

He had to wait 6 weeks to get tests done to confirm the diagnosis and then another 8 weeks to start his treatment.

I don't want that kind of socialized medicine.

The fix to our medical crisis in the US is to stop allowing the pharms to charge outrageous prices. They say other countries don't allow them the profits to develop the new medicines so the Americans have to pay more. I say put a stop to that. Don't allow them the 1000 percent profit per pill and and then other countries need to step up to help pay.

Second, stop the insane practices between the health care systems and insurance companies that allow the hospitals,etc to charge insane amounts based on what insurances will pay and not pay.

Third, hammer down on the insurance companies for their high profits and just plain immoral behaviors and acts in regards to how they want to pay for care.

All this can be done and it would greatly improve medical care and lower the costs, but Washington will never do anything more than say some angry words.

Ben
03-11-2010, 05:03 AM
My friend in England has cancer. Young guy at that.

He had to wait 6 weeks to get tests done to confirm the diagnosis and then another 8 weeks to start his treatment.

I don't want that kind of socialized medicine.I would love to hear the other side of the story.

Not all cancers are require IMMEDIATE treatment. For some, there's no change in prognosis if you wait a bit.

Greygor
03-11-2010, 05:07 AM
My friend in England has cancer. Young guy at that.

He had to wait 6 weeks to get tests done to confirm the diagnosis and then another 8 weeks to start his treatment.

I don't want that kind of socialized medicine.



There are always isolated incidents like this. In general it is much quicker, the aim is a maximum of 8 weeks between suspected cancer referral and the start of treatment.

The government tracks this and puts the stats on-line Here (http://www.performance.doh.gov.uk/cancerwaits/2008/q3/index.html)

A look at which you can see most hospital trusts are well within that target.

Also consider that this "socialised medicine" (extra points for use of the scary buzzword :) ) means that every single UK citizen is entitled to the treatment with no bills being sent through the post for it.

CougarTrace
03-11-2010, 05:07 AM
I would love to hear the other side of the story.

Not all cancers are require IMMEDIATE treatment. For some, there's no change in prognosis if you wait a bit.

this is true. While his is in the early stage, its an aggressive cancer.

I still can't fathom knowing I have cancer and not being able to have the initial surgery and the following treatments until 8 weeks later.

Here I could have the surgery the week (sometimes a day) after diagnosis and the treatment to follow immediately.

I'll admit we have things to fix in the USA and I want them fixed but we have to be careful to not endanger the great health care providers we have. I probably wouldn't have one of my eyes if I didn't live in this country.

OzMan
03-11-2010, 05:35 AM
Today I get a statement from my Doctor for the past five months stating that I haven't paid any of my bills. I call them and ask why - "United seems to state that you haven't reached your deductible."

I call United. "Your deductible has been raised due to increasing frequency of charges."

"You mean because I'm actually going to the doctor, and using my insurance, you're going to not cover these visits? And you're retroactively denying payment for the past five months?"

Just slapped with $300 in charges. Whooptie-doo.

And fuck you to anyone who thinks we shouldn't tear the entire system apart and rebuild from scratch.

Sorry to hear about that...glad to know my district switched to CIGNA. United wasn't going to cover my son's life changing surgery, I had to fight with them to get it done.

Generic Poster
03-11-2010, 05:37 AM
My friend in England has cancer. Young guy at that.

He had to wait 6 weeks to get tests done to confirm the diagnosis and then another 8 weeks to start his treatment.

I don't want that kind of socialized medicine.

My friend in Texas had a serious issue with her esophagus that the doctor at the emergency room said needed surgery within the next three days. Her insurance wouldn't authorize the test needed before the surgery until she got a referral for the test from her primary care doctor. Her PC doctor referred her to someone who couldn't see her for two weeks. By the time the paperwork ground through the insurance company and the surgery was approved, two months had passed.

I don't want that kind of private system.

Mylazycat
03-11-2010, 05:41 AM
this is true. While his is in the early stage, its an aggressive cancer.

I still can't fathom knowing I have cancer and not being able to have the initial surgery and the following treatments until 8 weeks later.

Here I could have the surgery the week (sometimes a day) after diagnosis and the treatment to follow immediately.

Now imagine needing the treatment or surgery and not having one penny to pay for it or access to a loan or friends or family with the cash to cover it.

That would suck.

RebootedCorpse
03-11-2010, 05:43 AM
My friend in England has cancer. Young guy at that.

He had to wait 6 weeks to get tests done to confirm the diagnosis and then another 8 weeks to start his treatment.

Did your "friend in England" die? Or is he better now?

CougarTrace
03-11-2010, 05:48 AM
My friend in Texas had a serious issue with her esophagus that the doctor at the emergency room said needed surgery within the next three days. Her insurance wouldn't authorize the test needed before the surgery until she got a referral for the test from her primary care doctor. Her PC doctor referred her to someone who couldn't see her for two weeks. By the time the paperwork ground through the insurance company and the surgery was approved, two months had passed.

I don't want that kind of private system.

thats messed up. And thats the part of the system we need to fix. I don't need to be referred to a doctor to see one and that should be the same for everyone

CougarTrace
03-11-2010, 05:49 AM
Now imagine needing the treatment or surgery and not having one penny to pay for it or access to a loan or friends or family with the cash to cover it.

That would suck.

I completely agree.

CougarTrace
03-11-2010, 05:50 AM
Did your "friend in England" die? Or is he better now?

he is currently going through chemo. I think the doctors are trying to do aggressive treatments now to prevent it from jumping stages which is the danger.

Greygor
03-11-2010, 05:54 AM
he is currently going through chemo. I think the doctors are trying to do aggressive treatments now to prevent it from jumping stages which is the danger.


Hope everything ends well

Brian Defferding
03-11-2010, 05:59 AM
There are always isolated incidents like this. In general it is much quicker, the aim is a maximum of 8 weeks between suspected cancer referral and the start of treatment.

The government tracks this and puts the stats on-line Here (http://www.performance.doh.gov.uk/cancerwaits/2008/q3/index.html)

A look at which you can see most hospital trusts are well within that target.

Also consider that this "socialised medicine" (extra points for use of the scary buzzword :) ) means that every single UK citizen is entitled to the treatment with no bills being sent through the post for it.

Which can - and has - caused overcrowding and, yes, wait times, with the government responsible to fix it in an efficient manner and everyone pays for it through various taxes, trusting the government to spend it efficiently. Their inflexibility has lead to a setback in medical research and experimentation, the quality of care suffers.

RebootedCorpse
03-11-2010, 06:02 AM
The wait times baloney has been disproven again and again.

Brian Defferding
03-11-2010, 06:04 AM
The wait times baloney has been disproven again and again.

All that has been proven is that the wait times weren't as bad as some of the shock jock pundits and a few experts were claiming. But that doesn't prove much of anything. It's still an issue and will continue to be.

RebootedCorpse
03-11-2010, 06:06 AM
All that has been proven is that the wait times weren't as bad as some of the shock jock pundits were claiming. But that doesn't prove much of anything. It's still an issue and will continue to be.

What has been proven is that in the EU wait times do not have any adverse effect on cure and survival and when immediate attention is required, it is provided.

Greygor
03-11-2010, 06:08 AM
Which can - and has - caused overcrowding and, yes, wait times, with the government responsible to fix it in an efficient manner and everyone pays for it through various taxes, trusting the government to spend it efficiently. Their inflexibility has lead to a setback in medical research and experimentation, the quality of care suffers.

But the Government doesn't spend the money, IIRC it gathers the money in taxes and then distributes it to the local NHS trusts, they are responsible for budgeting within their own hospitals.

I'm not saying the hospitals always budget effectively and the Administration is somewhat top heavy on managers. But the spending of money on services is not directly done by government.

Greygor
03-11-2010, 06:12 AM
What has been proven is that in the EU wait times do not have any adverse effect on cure and survival and when immediate attention is required, it is provided.

This is in the main true I believe. The majority of problems have occurred through initial misdiagnosis, which can happen under any Healthcare model.

I certainly laughed my arse off (which was quickly replaced for free after a visit to my local A&E) during the Healthcare debate when listening to the outright lies and Distortions by the opponents of "Socialist Healthcare".

afroloq
03-11-2010, 06:13 AM
Not sure if it's the same(some of you guys are referring to home insurance) but from working with medical insurance companies, I would highly advise all of you to thoroughly check your coverage. In many cases you can't 'just go see a doctor' as many times as possible. In some cases, you may have a limit on how many times you can see a specialist or how much your insurance will cover that particular provider.

For instance, if you are seeing a chiropractor, you may only be allowed 8 visits per year ( yes I have seen this happen), some insurances may not even cover for certain specialties.

I would have to say (without knowing the specifics) contact your insurance company and find out about coverage for that particular specialty. How many allowed visits you may have and also make sure that your doctor is in or out of network.

Brian Defferding
03-11-2010, 06:13 AM
But the Government doesn't spend the money, IIRC it gathers the money in taxes and then distributes it to the local NHS trusts, they are responsible for budgeting within their own hospitals.

I'm not saying the hospitals always budget effectively and the Administration is somewhat top heavy on managers. But the spending of money on services is not directly done by government.

Fair enough.

Brian Defferding
03-11-2010, 06:23 AM
What has been proven is that in the EU wait times do not have any adverse effect on cure and survival and when immediate attention is required, it is provided.

In some cases yes, in other cases no. The US still ranks as one of the best countries for quick response times for non-elective surgery and non-emergency surgery, and also one of the best countries in response times for specialty care treatment. While non-emergency surgery doens't fit with your reference to "immediate" attention, also keep in mind that sometimes new problems emerge when surgery is considered non-emergency and then is put on the queue, and new problems arise due to the surgery not occuring fast enough.

Not to say the US is some sort of shining beacon of quick health care - I'm with everybody else here saying our system is severely broken and needs fixing, the US ranks pretty poorly in other areas on care, and I feel it has a lot to do with how coerced we are into the mindset that health insurance=health care, which sets us all up for disaster.

Greygor
03-11-2010, 06:29 AM
In some cases yes, in other cases no. The US still ranks as one of the best countries for quick response times for non-elective surgery and non-emergency surgery, and also one of the best countries in response times for specialty care treatment.

Not to say the US is some sort of shining beacon of quick health care - I'm with everybody else here saying our system is broken and needs fixing, the US ranks pretty poorly in other areas on care, and I feel it has a lot to do with how coerced we are into the mindset that health insurance=health care, which sets us all up for disaster.

As you say I don't think anybody denies the quality of the actual Healthcare or it's speed in the states.

It's just the access to it (or indeed the costs afterwards).

RickLM
03-11-2010, 06:50 AM
My friend in England has cancer. Young guy at that.

He had to wait 6 weeks to get tests done to confirm the diagnosis and then another 8 weeks to start his treatment.

I don't want that kind of socialized medicine.

The fix to our medical crisis in the US is to stop allowing the pharms to charge outrageous prices. They say other countries don't allow them the profits to develop the new medicines so the Americans have to pay more. I say put a stop to that. Don't allow them the 1000 percent profit per pill and and then other countries need to step up to help pay.

Second, stop the insane practices between the health care systems and insurance companies that allow the hospitals,etc to charge insane amounts based on what insurances will pay and not pay.

Third, hammer down on the insurance companies for their high profits and just plain immoral behaviors and acts in regards to how they want to pay for care.

All this can be done and it would greatly improve medical care and lower the costs, but Washington will never do anything more than say some angry words.


But "putting the hammer down" on insurance companies, pharma, and hospitals can only be done by Washington. Which of course is the first step toward your socialist nightmare, right?

Brian Defferding
03-11-2010, 06:54 AM
But "putting the hammer down" on insurance companies, pharma, and hospitals can only be done by Washington.

Most legislation done in Washington are gifts to the insurance lobby. This includes all the regulation that appears to be "sticking it" to them.

RickLM
03-11-2010, 07:02 AM
Most legislation done in Washington are gifts to the insurance lobby. This includes all the regulation that appears to be "sticking it" to them.


Then I guess nothing can be done. Shame on Obama for wasting our time on this silly issue.

Brian Defferding
03-11-2010, 07:08 AM
Then I guess nothing can be done. Shame on Obama for wasting our time on this silly issue.

Never said that. It's just from what I've seen every law and program passed over the last fifty years seemed to have helped insurance companies one way or another, or have made the situation worse, so it's easy to see where my cynicism is coming from thinking that Washington will solve it for us this time.

CougarTrace
03-11-2010, 07:37 AM
Never said that. It's just from what I've seen every law and program passed over the last fifty years seemed to have helped insurance companies one way or another, or have made the situation worse, so it's easy to see where my cynicism is coming from thinking that Washington will solve it for us this time.

I think that is fair. Its hard to believe Washington wants or can fix it based on the past.

I read where the Senate finance committee said that the government healthcare option would be more expensive than private health care "for some time". I don't like the sound of that as I don't think it helps and might not help in the long run. And competition doesn't guarantee lower prices.

I just wish we would tackle the real problems head on by going straight to the problem makers: Insurance companies, pharms,etc.

Washington won't do that though

Jamie Coville
03-11-2010, 05:45 PM
That would be biting the hand that feeds them.

RickLM
03-11-2010, 06:33 PM
I just wish we would tackle the real problems head on by going straight to the problem makers: Insurance companies, pharms,etc.

Washington won't do that though


If you don't want Washington to tackle the corporations, who do you think can do it? Private citizens with torches and pitchforks? A band of renegades led by Snake Pliskin? A plucky band of teen superheroes?

You're not making a lot of sense. Obama has indeed proposed laws that would curb the worst insurance abuses. The entire GOP seems opposed to that. Do the math there.

mike black
03-11-2010, 06:45 PM
If you don't want Washington to tackle the corporations, who do you think can do it? Private citizens with torches and pitchforks? A band of renegades led by Snake Pliskin? A plucky band of teen superheroes?

You're not making a lot of sense. Obama has indeed proposed laws that would curb the worst insurance abuses. The entire GOP seems opposed to that. Do the math there.

He said "Washington won't do that though".

Kedd
03-11-2010, 06:48 PM
I used to work for United HealthCare. I say burn the place tot he ground.

RickLM
03-11-2010, 06:53 PM
He said "Washington won't do that though".

The Democrats have been talking about new regulation for the past year. So contrary to what Cougar and Deff believe, it seems like Washington is about to do something very substantial.

The off-hand comment that "Washington won't do anything" is knee-jerk cynicism, and also not accurate. Even if Obama's plan goes down, there is strong evidence that insurance practices like pre-existing conditions and recission will be reigned in with some more modest legislation.

CougarTrace
03-12-2010, 04:22 AM
The Democrats have been talking about new regulation for the past year. So contrary to what Cougar and Deff believe, it seems like Washington is about to do something very substantial.

The off-hand comment that "Washington won't do anything" is knee-jerk cynicism, and also not accurate. Even if Obama's plan goes down, there is strong evidence that insurance practices like pre-existing conditions and recission will be reigned in with some more modest legislation.

I never said Washington wasn't trying to do something

What I said was they won't tackle the real problem head on.

RebootedCorpse
03-12-2010, 06:02 AM
http://www.appletreeblog.com/wp-content/2008/12/kitty-suicide.jpg