" Of the $98 billion in federal government waste this year, more than half of it was due to Medicare and Medicaid "improper payments." But they'll get it right with health care reform. Trust them "


Yes submitter, please ignore that these improper payments are almost never made unless a "FOR PROFIT" health care company double bills the government.

So much for the honesty, integrity and record keeping of our FOR PROFIT health care system. They can't even bill properly, give a rat's ass about their customers well being.

See? Its just like the GOP says, no reform needed!

I find it difficult to believe that the government only wasted $98B this year. I would find it far easier to believe $980B.

So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

So vote Republican.

Racht: So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

So vote Republican.

Well, let's say that hypothetically, you had a teenage child. That child asks for a credit card, so they can handle things like school clothes and whatnot. You give them a $500 credit limit, and tell them to be responsible, and go ahead.

A couple weeks later, they've charged up $20,000, and acquired a wicked cocaine habit and a big gambling problem, and are "experimenting" with prostitution.

Would you say that the solution to that problem is that they simply don't have a high enough credit limit, and believe their promises to do better this time, or say hell no, and take their credit card?

Racht: So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

true, the government isn't perfect. which means (1) It should do just as little as is necessary, so as to cut down on the potential for waste and (2) We shouldn't believe politicians when they promise when they offer a massive program and say that this time it will be different.

medicare is basically the government cutting checks. it's an open target for fraud so obvious that every state is required to have a medicare fraud control unit. even then, they can't catch even a small percentage of the fraud.

abolish the IRS and turn it into the agency that runs universal health care.

Con_Authority: " Of the $98 billion in federal government waste this year, more than half of it was due to Medicare and Medicaid "improper payments." But they'll get it right with health care reform. Trust them "


Yes submitter, please ignore that these improper payments are almost never made unless a "FOR PROFIT" health care company double bills the government.

So much for the honesty, integrity and record keeping of our FOR PROFIT health care system. They can't even bill properly, give a rat's ass about their customers well being.

So all healthcare providers should be non-profit? We've moved from hating insurers to service providers now?

Racht: So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

No, we are being told that government run health care will be more efficient, fair and equitable than our current system. I, for one, do not believe that our government will be able to operate the health care system in any sort of efficient manner whatsoever. And there is evidence enough to suggest that the Fed will not live up to the claims made by Congressional members who say that things will work as advertised.

So before we turn over health care reform to the federal government, I think we're right to ask a couple of questions about the whole thing.

doublesecretprobation: abolish the IRS and turn it into the agency that runs universal health care.

F*ck that. want cheaper drug prices, hire some of those drug pushers we've got in federal lock up.

Weaver95: So before we turn over health care reform to the federal government, I think we're right to ask a couple of questions about the whole thing.

no. dissent is the highest form of racism.

EatHam: hypothetically

That's a really bad example, and you did your best to completely blow things out of proportion. But sure, let's build some straw men to knock down.

Also, could you all get your talking points in a line? It's confusing to not know one week from the next whether government health care will destroy itself from being completely wasteful and whether it will be so efficient it will annihilate all private health care.

albo: racism

Ooh, look, another strawman to derail the argument!

Weaver95: doublesecretprobation: abolish the IRS and turn it into the agency that runs universal health care.

F*ck that. want cheaper drug prices, hire some of those drug pushers we've got in federal lock up.shiat, this viagra is mostly baking soda.

I hate the filter.

A better quandry, for me anyway, is why some think we should put people - who don't believe a government can ever be competent - in charge of said government. Recognizing government as a necessary institution, I'm much more inclined to place my trust in people who at least have ideas.

albo: Racht: So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

true, the government isn't perfect. which means (1) It should do just as little as is necessary, so as to cut down on the potential for waste and (2) We shouldn't believe politicians when they promise when they offer a massive program and say that this time it will be different.

medicare is basically the government cutting checks. it's an open target for fraud so obvious that every state is required to have a medicare fraud control unit. even then, they can't catch even a small percentage of the fraud.

Right, so we should vote Republican. That was already covered.

Weaver95: Racht: So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

No, we are being told that government run health care will be more efficient, fair and equitable than our current system. I, for one, do not believe that our government will be able to operate the health care system in any sort of efficient manner whatsoever. And there is evidence enough to suggest that the Fed will not live up to the claims made by Congressional members who say that things will work as advertised.

So before we turn over health care reform to the federal government, I think we're right to ask a couple of questions about the whole thing.

Actually, Medicare has been erroneously paying primary on claims that it should've rightly been paying as secondary on for a long time, and insurance carriers have been on a gravy train with it.

Hence why Medicare has started requiring just this year a "data match" datafile sent each month from payors that indicates eligibility and coverages, etc., so that Medicare doesn't pay when it isn't supposed to any further.

Link (new window)

So in essence, the system has been broken for a long time and they're fixing things little by little now. Or so it would seem.

Observation of comments, not the link -

In June the libs would be posting a lot in the defense of health care reform. Now? Not so much.

Have they seen the light? Or do they realize that Pelosi/Obama's plan is very hard to defend?

bradkanus: Observation of comments, not the link -

In June the libs would be posting a lot in the defense of health care reform. Now? Not so much.

Have they seen the light? Or do they realize that Pelosi/Obama's plan is very hard to defend?

The "libs" still want single-payor and we're not getting it, obviously. This homunculous they have drawn up now isn't going to amount to much.

bradkanus: Observation of comments, not the link -

In June the libs would be posting a lot in the defense of health care reform. Now? Not so much.

Have they seen the light? Or do they realize that Pelosi/Obama's plan is very hard to defend?

So we have to keep making the same defense to the same disproved points continuously? Why?

make me some tea: The "libs" still want single-payer

THIS

Maybe if we didn't keep cutting Medicare oversight we'd have enough overseers to properly police the program.

/yes i know thats crazy talk

GAT_00: That's a really bad example, and you did your best to completely blow things out of proportion. But sure, let's build some straw men to knock down.

Also, could you all get your talking points in a line? It's confusing to not know one week from the next whether government health care will destroy itself from being completely wasteful and whether it will be so efficient it will annihilate all private health care.

It is pretty much exactly what happens in the government every day. And I think government health care is a foregone conclusion - it's going to happen. I think that it will not annihilate all private health care, but it will kill off quite a few health insurers. The remaining ones would provide the private health care similar to other countries.

And I don't think that government health care will destroy itself either. I just think that it, like almost every government problem will be a clusterfark, wasteful, and almost certainly worse than the alternative. That said, there are a shiat load of people rushing headlong for it, and begging for it, so it'll probably happen.

EatHam: And I don't think that government health care will destroy itself either. I just think that it, like almost every government problem will be a clusterfark, wasteful, and almost certainly worse than the alternative. That said, there are a shiat load of people rushing headlong for it, and begging for it, so it'll probably happen.

So, to review, it will be wasteful, a clusterfark, and almost certainly worse than the alternative...but it will kill off quite a few health insurers.

Tell me, how will it kill off quite a few health insurers...by out-stupiding them?

bulldg4life: Tell me, how will it kill off quite a few health insurers...by out-stupiding them?

Because with a public option, there simply would not be as many people demanding insurance.

make me some tea: So in essence, the system has been broken for a long time and they're fixing things little by little now. Or so it would seem.

Too little too late IMHO. if medicare is to be the example to follow, it's not exactly inspiring confidence.

That's what "reform" is, subby, you god damned simple minded fool. You want them to leave it alone and keep wasting all that money, or try to waste less?

EatHam: Because with a public option, there simply would not be as many people demanding insurance.

So, they would be choosing the public option over a private insurer causing that insurer to go out of business?

Would that not mean that the public option provides a better service than the private insurer or is the consumer choosing the public option because the government does things worse than the private insurer?

Let me sum up this thread so far from the liberal perspective.

"If only the mean old Republicans would get out of the way we would get the rainbows and unicorns that The Messiah promised us."

Anyone who thinks that giving more power and money to the federal government is going to result in less waste is delusional.

To review, it can't be "almost certainly worse than the alternative" while also being able to "kill off quite a few health insurers" because "there simply would not be as many people demanding insurance".

If people are choosing the public option over the private insurer, than it is most definitely NOT worse than the alternative.

/So vote Democrat.

BillCo: The Messiah

Do you even notice that the only people who say stuff like that are Republicans?

WaltzingMathilda: You want them to leave it alone and keep wasting all that money, or try to waste less?

if there is massive fraud and waste now, and they know it, and have medicare employees and 50 state MFCUs on the case trying to stop it every single day, then why haven't they, and why should we think they will be able to do it under an expanded government health care plan?

Yea.... and a couple days ago Republicans were complaining that medicare and medicaid were getting too many cuts just in time for The Atlantic to shift the rehtoric.

/spinning towards freedom

BillCo: Anyone who thinks that giving more power and money to the federal government is going to result in less waste is delusional.

That is actually the Democratic Party platform. Never wise to insult an entire group of people in such a sweeping manner.

3_Butt_Cheeks: /So vote Democrat.

From The Atlantic!? God damn it man.

bulldg4life: So, they would be choosing the public option over a private insurer causing that insurer to go out of business?

if dumping private insurance and letting employees go on the public option saves money for employers, they'll do it. that's what's going to put more people on teh public option.

bulldg4life: So, they would be choosing the public option over a private insurer causing that insurer to go out of business?

Would that not mean that the public option provides a better service than the private insurer or is the consumer choosing the public option because the government does things worse than the private insurer?

1. Yes.
2. No, it would be because they perceive the public option as "free". It is very difficult to compete with free.

bulldg4life: If people are choosing the public option over the private insurer, than it is most definitely NOT worse than the alternative.

Certainly it can, if they perceive it as being cheaper. How do you think Wal-Mart sells so much cheap shiat? It's cheaper. Not better.

albo: if dumping private insurance and letting employees go on the public option saves money for employers, they'll do it.

And it will save money for them. And it will cut their pension liabilities, among other benefits. A public option isn't all bad, there are certainly good points about it. And I hope that it works out really well, and that I eat a steaming plate of shiat for being wrong.

EatHam: 2. No, it would be because they perceive the public option as "free". It is very difficult to compete with free.

Yes, I can totally see how a health insurance plan that forces you to pay premiums could be considered free.

?

EatHam: Certainly it can, if they perceive it as being cheaper. How do you think Wal-Mart sells so much cheap shiat? It's cheaper. Not better.

Wouldn't that be the free market at work? Someone provides a service I am comfortable with at a cheaper price than a competitor?

EatHam: 2. No, it would be because they perceive the public option as "free". It is very difficult to compete with free.

How the hell could they perceive it as free, when they're cutting checks to cover the premiums every month?

The public option is not funded by taxes. It's funded by premiums, the same as private options.

The argument is that our government is too incompetent to run a national healthcare insurance plan, yet every other first world country does it...and their systems are more successful and efficient (and humane) than ours.


soooo.... is the argument just that the American government is much more stupid than the rest of the first world?

Everybody else can do it but we suck too much to pull if off?

GAT_00: BillCo: The Messiah

Do you even notice that the only people who say stuff like that are Republicans pseudo-conservatives?

Slight correction.

reform
/rɪˈfɔrm/ [ri-fawrm]
-verb (used with object)
4. to change to a better state, form, etc.; improve by alteration, substitution, abolition, etc.
5. to cause (a person) to abandon wrong or evil ways of life or conduct.
6. to put an end to (abuses, disorders, etc.).


just throwing that out there.

So the GOP wants to end Medicare and Medicaid, right?

...

Private companies rip off the government = it's the governments fault.

Solution? Give more control over to the private companies.

Libertarians are the poker players who always bluff, not just little bluffs, they'll look you in the eye and tell you the most outrageous pile of shiat you've ever heard and expect you to buy it.

bulldg4life: Yes, I can totally see how a health insurance plan that forces you to pay premiums could be considered free.

My perception is that employers will offer a federal health plan for free, or make you pay for a private one. I could easily be wrong, but that's what I think.

bulldg4life: Wouldn't that be the free market at work? Someone provides a service I am comfortable with at a cheaper price than a competitor?

Sure, I'm not saying it isn't a free market. Of course, to be free, the government would have to not give itself unfair advantages, but it could certainly happen that way.

EatHam: Racht: So, in conclusion, it would be proper for the government never to do anything whatsoever, because the government isn't perfect.

So vote Republican.

Well, let's say that hypothetically, you had a teenage child. That child asks for a credit card, so they can handle things like school clothes and whatnot. You give them a $500 credit limit, and tell them to be responsible, and go ahead.

A couple weeks later, they've charged up $20,000, and acquired a wicked cocaine habit and a big gambling problem, and are "experimenting" with prostitution.

Would you say that the solution to that problem is that they simply don't have a high enough credit limit, and believe their promises to do better this time, or say hell no, and take their credit card?

So eliminate Medicare it is!!!

Solved that problem.

I don't understand, why can't we have universal healthcare like those in Europe do? Why must the little guy (or in my case, girl) always, always get the shaft? Why can't we have nice things too!?

albo: if there is massive fraud and waste now, and they know it, and have medicare employees and 50 state MFCUs on the case trying to stop it every single day, then why haven't they, and why should we think they will be able to do it under an expanded government health care plan?

You'll never get rid of fraud entirely. I'd wager that this amount (which is roughly 6% of their outlays, and I don't think qualifies as 'massive') is comparable to the waste/fraud in private insurance.