If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   Pre-existing conditions are hard for the GOP. They're the center of the Venn Diagram of "People Ayn Rand Said To Ignore" and "People Jesus Said To Help"   (theatlantic.com) divider line 636
    More: Interesting, venn diagrams, GOP, pre-existing condition, Yuval Levin  
•       •       •

16325 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Sep 2012 at 12:17 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



636 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-10 02:35:12 PM  

Ctrl-Alt-Del: The only reason the goalposts move in actual policy discussions is because the opposition fights tooth and nail against every goddamned inch of progress, and if it looks like we might get more than a yard or two, they threaten to burn down the entire stadium


In other words, the ends justify the means.
 
2012-09-10 02:35:27 PM  

Kit Fister: I don't understand that way. I only understand being self-relient and self-sufficient. I work at a job I hate to provide for my family. I work hard to try and stay healthy so I don't end up back in the hospital with lots of bills. I refuse to take every new test and medication because frankly all that does is feed into the idea that you're sick with SOMETHING and end up leaving you paying a LOT of money to cover what amounts to being psycho-somatic.

I suppose it's really a cultural difference.


You sound smug.  Please go live on an island somewhere so us mere mortals don't infringe on your boot-strappitude.
 
2012-09-10 02:35:54 PM  

Parthenogenetic: BarkingUnicorn: The flaw in Romney's thinking is that no one is in a "unique circumstance" when it comes to health care. We're all going to get sick or injured, and die. There is absolutely no need for multiple health insurance "options." Providing them is like adding more slots and colors to a roulette wheel; it benefits only the house.

I wasn't directly quoting Romney. I was portraying how one would try to justify a for-profit voucherized system to feed gubmint money to private entities, while retaining a government-funded system to serve as a relief valve for the unprofitable cases.

But the empty-chair hypothetical retort to your point would be, "Why should a healthy young man be forced by government regulations to buy insurance that covers Pap smears, mammograms, birth control pills, and abortions? He should be free to choose a plan that covers his own, individual, freedom-loving circumstances, not what some Washington bureaucrat says he needs!"


Well, one could argue that most healthy young men need healthy, not-pregnant women; think of their contributions to "women-only" health care as insurance against sex scarcity or child support. One could also argue that experts on health care have a better idea of what a healthy young man is likely to need in the way of health care than he does; again, it's a question of taking the lifelong view vs. "I don't need it today... I hope."

As for government paying only for unprofitable health care, that's simply insurance for insurers and their shareholders.
 
2012-09-10 02:36:08 PM  

pedrop357: I'm criticizing the idea that catastrophic high deductible insurance is unacceptable because it doesn't cover/make affordable routine medical visits.


There is a direct connection between the affordability of routine medical visits and the incidence of catastrophic health problems.
 
2012-09-10 02:36:27 PM  

o5iiawah: FarkedOver: Exactly! Someone's health (and by extension their life) should have a price. If that price is too high then, obviously, that person must die. It's a beautiful world we live in.

Interesting world you've created where a stranger owes his life and labor to the needs of someone he doesn't even know.


I was agreeing with you. If you don't have money FARK YOU.
 
2012-09-10 02:36:40 PM  

o5iiawah: FarkedOver: Exactly! Someone's health (and by extension their life) should have a price. If that price is too high then, obviously, that person must die. It's a beautiful world we live in.

Interesting world you've created where a stranger owes his life and labor to the needs of someone he doesn't even know.


That's the world we live in now.
 
2012-09-10 02:37:41 PM  

Inchoate: Routine medical visits and preventive care can often fix an incipient medical "catastrophe" before it happens. It's a better deal for everyone.


Why does it need to be forced then? One recurring theme here is that insurance companies are profit obsessed, yet deliberately turn away the chance to cut costs and boost profits. I would think they would jump all over routing and preventative coverage.
 
2012-09-10 02:38:06 PM  
Here's what i REALLY want:

1:
I want family doctor's and practitioners to stop charging $150 for 15 minutes of their time.

That comes down to $600/hr.

I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a physical
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a prescription for $5 worth penicillin when i get a respiratory infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Flu shot
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for removing an ingrown toenail
I want them to stop charging $600/hr to treat a staph infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Vaccine

I would GLADLY pay the doctor between $25-$50 per visit for the above treatments (and $75-$100 for a specialist).
By doing that, an office is still making between 100 and 200 an hour. They won't have to accept insurance, so they can literally cut out their entire billing department. Go back to having a receptionist, a nurse, and a book keeper. Everyone gets paid a decent living wage including the doctor.

There's no need for a family MD to be a "prestigious" career that warrants 300K+ a year.

None.

2:
Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.


If they did this, this country would be healthier, happier, and wealthier. Insurance companies would be there to insure against accidents and unforeseen problems.
There wouldn't be the problem of "pre-existing condition" because all diagnosis would be affordable enough to get it when it happens. Employers wouldn't HAVE to pick up benefits, though they could if they wanted to.

But tell a doctor to lower his prices so he doesn't NEED the insurance companies, and he would probably throw up in his mouth at the idea.
 
2012-09-10 02:38:14 PM  

Noam Chimpsky: They should have bought insurance before their pre existing condition happened. Instead, they partied on crack.


Yeah, that lazy farker who was born with spina bifida is getting what he deserves!
 
2012-09-10 02:38:47 PM  

pedrop357: I would think they would jump all over routing and preventative coverage.


Many already do.
 
2012-09-10 02:38:50 PM  
This is so stupid.
Simply GIVE every American Citizen the SAME FARKING INSURNACE COVERAGE CONGRESS AND MITT FARKING ROMNEY GAVE TO THEMSELVES>

It must be good, they did it.

/html sucks
 
2012-09-10 02:39:36 PM  

CeroX: Here's what i REALLY want:

1:
I want family doctor's and practitioners to stop charging $150 for 15 minutes of their time.

That comes down to $600/hr.

I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a physical
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a prescription for $5 worth penicillin when i get a respiratory infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Flu shot
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for removing an ingrown toenail
I want them to stop charging $600/hr to treat a staph infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Vaccine

I would GLADLY pay the doctor between $25-$50 per visit for the above treatments (and $75-$100 for a specialist).
By doing that, an office is still making between 100 and 200 an hour. They won't have to accept insurance, so they can literally cut out their entire billing department. Go back to having a receptionist, a nurse, and a book keeper. Everyone gets paid a decent living wage including the doctor.

There's no need for a family MD to be a "prestigious" career that warrants 300K+ a year.

None.

2:
Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.


If they did this, this country would be healthier, happier, and wealthier. Insurance companies would be there to insure against accidents and unforeseen problems.
There wouldn't be the problem of "pre-existing condition" because all diagnosis would be affordable enough to get it when it happens. Employers wouldn't HAVE to pick up benefits, though they could if they wanted to.

But tell a doctor to lower his prices so he doesn't NEED the insurance companies, and he would probably throw up in his mouth at the idea.


You need to add a 1a.) we need to heavily subsidize people genuinely interested in the field of medicine. Loans for doctors are astronomical and one way to offset the cost is to make medical schools more accessible and more affordable.
 
2012-09-10 02:40:06 PM  

clevershark: Noam Chimpsky: They should have bought insurance before their pre existing condition happened. Instead, they partied on crack.

Yeah, that lazy farker who was born with spina bifida is getting what he deserves!


They are covered under their parents insurance until they are 26.
 
2012-09-10 02:40:27 PM  

CeroX: 2:
Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.


And if you handed out antibiotics like candy, we would almost certainly increase the number of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics because, news flash, bacteria can evolve! Thanks for killing millions of people with incurable strep throat, asshole.
 
2012-09-10 02:40:56 PM  

The Muthaship: clevershark: Noam Chimpsky: They should have bought insurance before their pre existing condition happened. Instead, they partied on crack.

Yeah, that lazy farker who was born with spina bifida is getting what he deserves!

They are covered under their parents insurance until they are 26.


Well hopefully they die on their 27 birthday so they are not a burden to society.
 
2012-09-10 02:41:06 PM  

pedrop357: Inchoate: Routine medical visits and preventive care can often fix an incipient medical "catastrophe" before it happens. It's a better deal for everyone.

Why does it need to be forced then? One recurring theme here is that insurance companies are profit obsessed, yet deliberately turn away the chance to cut costs and boost profits. I would think they would jump all over routing and preventative coverage.


So you believe the catastrophic coverage plans that you are strenuously arguing for are illogical?
 
2012-09-10 02:41:24 PM  

Thunderpipes: impaler: Thunderpipes: Rest of the developed world has a much broader tax base. Might want to think about that. In what developed country to half of all people pay no income taxes towards their benefits?

Don't let your campaign be dictated by fact checkers

[growlersoftware.com image 519x707]

And why don't you get local taxes out of there, which have nothing to do with income taxes, dumbass?



Cry me a river you lying sack of shat. Here was the exchange:
Egoy3k: I love how mysterious and scary universal healthcare is to Americans. It's as if the rest of the developed world hasn't already figured this shiat out. Basically it seems like every time you guys try something new you pretend to be brave pioneers into unknown territory.

Thunderpipes: Rest of the developed world has a much broader tax base. Might want to think about that. In what developed country to half of all people pay no income taxes towards their benefits?


You didn't say the rest of the world has a broader "income" tax base.

You then selected one specific tax in the US (on one specific year), to deliberately distort your red herring - tax base has nothing to do with healthcare costs. You have to lie to support your logical fallacy. Even your logical fallacies can't stand on their own merit.

In other words, the facts prove you wrong, so you just lie like a Republican. Scum.
 
2012-09-10 02:42:02 PM  

FarkedOver: Well hopefully they die on their 27 birthday so they are not a burden to society.


They probably do because we have no programs in place to see to their medical care.
 
2012-09-10 02:42:16 PM  

pedrop357: Ctrl-Alt-Del: The only reason the goalposts move in actual policy discussions is because the opposition fights tooth and nail against every goddamned inch of progress, and if it looks like we might get more than a yard or two, they threaten to burn down the entire stadium

In other words, the ends justify the means.


What is this I don't even

/now i remember why you're marked the way you are in my favorites. Because you don't think nearly as well as you like to think you think.
 
2012-09-10 02:42:39 PM  

Graffito: Kit Fister: I don't understand that way. I only understand being self-relient and self-sufficient. I work at a job I hate to provide for my family. I work hard to try and stay healthy so I don't end up back in the hospital with lots of bills. I refuse to take every new test and medication because frankly all that does is feed into the idea that you're sick with SOMETHING and end up leaving you paying a LOT of money to cover what amounts to being psycho-somatic.

I suppose it's really a cultural difference.

You sound smug.  Please go live on an island somewhere so us mere mortals don't infringe on your boot-strappitude.


Allow me translate: Personal Responsibility don't go 'round here
 
2012-09-10 02:42:49 PM  

The Muthaship: clevershark: Noam Chimpsky: They should have bought insurance before their pre existing condition happened. Instead, they partied on crack.

Yeah, that lazy farker who was born with spina bifida is getting what he deserves!

They are covered under their parents insurance until they are 26.


Lazy farker should've known better than to be born to parents without insurance and/or live past the age of 26.
 
2012-09-10 02:42:54 PM  

CeroX: Here's what i REALLY want:

1:
I want family doctor's and practitioners to stop charging $150 for 15 minutes of their time.

That comes down to $600/hr.

I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a physical
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a prescription for $5 worth penicillin when i get a respiratory infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Flu shot
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for removing an ingrown toenail
I want them to stop charging $600/hr to treat a staph infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Vaccine

I would GLADLY pay the doctor between $25-$50 per visit for the above treatments (and $75-$100 for a specialist).
By doing that, an office is still making between 100 and 200 an hour. They won't have to accept insurance, so they can literally cut out their entire billing department. Go back to having a receptionist, a nurse, and a book keeper. Everyone gets paid a decent living wage including the doctor.

There's no need for a family MD to be a "prestigious" career that warrants 300K+ a year.

None.

2:
Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.


If they did this, this country would be healthier, happier, and wealthier. Insurance companies would be there to insure against accidents and unforeseen problems.
There wouldn't be the problem of "pre-existing condition" because all diagnosis would be affordable enough to get it when it happens. Employers wouldn't HAVE to pick up benefits, though they could if they wanted to.

But tell a doctor to lower his prices so he doesn't NEED the insurance companies, and he would probably throw up in his mouth at the idea.


I bet you want your doctor to accept a jar of pickled eggs for payment too.
 
2012-09-10 02:43:08 PM  

The Muthaship: FarkedOver: Well hopefully they die on their 27 birthday so they are not a burden to society.

They probably do because we have no programs in place to see to their medical care.


I don't want a bunch of 27 year old hipsters clogging up the ER when mommy and daddy's insurance runs out. farking freeloading assholes.
 
2012-09-10 02:43:09 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Zeb Hesselgresser: Philip Francis Queeg: The Muthaship: If you require private insurance companies to accept everyone regardless of their health at the time of enrollment, you have by definition destroyed the industry. Just say you want the government (by which you mean tax payers) to pay the bill for your health care, and be done with it.

Just say that you want those who are sick and not wealthy to die painful deaths without treatment so that you can save a few bucks, and be done with it.

Because prior to the ACA that's exactly what happened.

Yes, as a matter of fact it did happen.

Advocacy group: 26,000 die prematurely without health insurance

A national health care consumer advocacy group estimates that three Americans die every hour as a result of not having health insurance.

According to "Dying for Coverage," the latest report by Families USA, 72 Americans die each day, 500 Americans die every week and approximately Americans 2,175 die each month, due to lack of health insurance.


Hmmm, interesting numbers. What about the number of people killed by overdoses, interactions, and complications from surgery that they probably didn't need?
 
2012-09-10 02:44:19 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: There is a direct connection between the affordability of routine medical visits and the incidence of catastrophic health problems.


Then they should simply argue that. Every argument and proposal always seems to focus intently on emergencies and catastrophes. When a proposal to mitigate that is laid out, it's attacked as not fulfilling a new goal.

A sample argument follows:
Universal health insurance is necessary not just to keep people from dying because they can't afford life and death treatment (dying in the streets), but also to help prevent illnesses from getting to the point of being life and death. Proposals for catastrophe only coverage miss the point in that it would be cheaper and more effective to cover more routine/preventative care in order to reduce the number of illnesses that become so severe as to be life or death.
----
Instead we get singularly focused arguments about dying in the streets and bankruptcy for accidents and serious non-illness related care. Healthy young people would probably benefit enormously from catastrophe only coverage , but that's criticized for not covering the routine visits that even insured young people are notorious for not getting.
 
2012-09-10 02:44:43 PM  

wildcardjack: Philip Francis Queeg: Zeb Hesselgresser: Philip Francis Queeg: The Muthaship: If you require private insurance companies to accept everyone regardless of their health at the time of enrollment, you have by definition destroyed the industry. Just say you want the government (by which you mean tax payers) to pay the bill for your health care, and be done with it.

Just say that you want those who are sick and not wealthy to die painful deaths without treatment so that you can save a few bucks, and be done with it.

Because prior to the ACA that's exactly what happened.

Yes, as a matter of fact it did happen.

Advocacy group: 26,000 die prematurely without health insurance

A national health care consumer advocacy group estimates that three Americans die every hour as a result of not having health insurance.

According to "Dying for Coverage," the latest report by Families USA, 72 Americans die each day, 500 Americans die every week and approximately Americans 2,175 die each month, due to lack of health insurance.

Hmmm, interesting numbers. What about the number of people killed by overdoses, interactions, and complications from surgery that they probably didn't need?


So denying people access to healthcare is actually a benefit to them in your sage opinion?
 
2012-09-10 02:45:01 PM  

FarkedOver: I don't want a bunch of 27 year old hipsters clogging up the ER when mommy and daddy's insurance runs out. farking freeloading assholes.


SSD has your back.
 
2012-09-10 02:45:21 PM  

BarkingUnicorn: Parthenogenetic: BarkingUnicorn: The flaw in Romney's thinking is that no one is in a "unique circumstance" when it comes to health care. We're all going to get sick or injured, and die. There is absolutely no need for multiple health insurance "options." Providing them is like adding more slots and colors to a roulette wheel; it benefits only the house.

I wasn't directly quoting Romney. I was portraying how one would try to justify a for-profit voucherized system to feed gubmint money to private entities, while retaining a government-funded system to serve as a relief valve for the unprofitable cases.

But the empty-chair hypothetical retort to your point would be, "Why should a healthy young man be forced by government regulations to buy insurance that covers Pap smears, mammograms, birth control pills, and abortions? He should be free to choose a plan that covers his own, individual, freedom-loving circumstances, not what some Washington bureaucrat says he needs!"

Well, one could argue that most healthy young men need healthy, not-pregnant women; think of their contributions to "women-only" health care as insurance against sex scarcity or child support. One could also argue that experts on health care have a better idea of what a healthy young man is likely to need in the way of health care than he does; again, it's a question of taking the lifelong view vs. "I don't need it today... I hope."

As for government paying only for unprofitable health care, that's simply insurance for insurers and their shareholders.


We the Public are the shareholders of Medicare/caid and Obamacare. We are seeing massive, massive losses. Time to fire the CEO and Chairman of the Board I would say?

Eventually, you run out of rich people to tax (and that won't contribute that much any way in the overall scheme of things) and you just get more and more people each year reliant on the government. Growth will never rebound, revenue will fall, costs increase, like is happening now. I am sorry, but simply throwing money at poor people by taking it from successful people, at best, can solve short term issues.

We need growth. Can't tax your way into growth, (no, Clinton tax increases had nothing to do with growth) we have no looming giant tech booms.
 
2012-09-10 02:45:56 PM  

CeroX: Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.


cdn.styleforum.net
You know how I know that you are not a doctor, pharmacist, or epidemiologist?!?

 
2012-09-10 02:46:05 PM  

pedrop357: Why does it need to be forced then? One recurring theme here is that insurance companies are profit obsessed, yet deliberately turn away the chance to cut costs and boost profits. I would think they would jump all over routing and preventative coverage.


Short-term vs. long-term, combined with insurance being largely tied to one's employment.

The conventional wisdom used to indeed be that insurers would love to cover preventive services to save money on someone in the long run.

However, since people change jobs every few years, and companies change insurers regularly, the insurer is betting you'll be Someone Else's Problem before the lack of preventive care kicks in. So then we're back to a classic coordination problem. If every insurer covered prevention they would all save money, but it's not in any individual insurer's best interest to do so.
 
2012-09-10 02:46:07 PM  
And, Rand was areligious, anti-religious, and most likely atheist.
 
2012-09-10 02:46:22 PM  

Zeb Hesselgresser: impaler: [growlersoftware.com image 850x562]

Now overlay that with Cancer Survival Rates please.

USA, USA, USA, We win.


I think you mean Cuba and France...

lh6.googleusercontent.com
 
2012-09-10 02:46:25 PM  

The Muthaship: FarkedOver: I don't want a bunch of 27 year old hipsters clogging up the ER when mommy and daddy's insurance runs out. farking freeloading assholes.

SSD has your back.


ohhh nice, the Boston Hardcore scene has my back!

www.xclaim.com
 
2012-09-10 02:48:23 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: So you believe the catastrophic coverage plans that you are strenuously arguing for are illogical?


For some, yes.

For others, it's a perfect fit. Young people, even those with insurance from their employer or their parent's employer, are well known for not seeking preventative care. You can cover their routine and preventative visits all you want, but if they don't seek them out, it's a waste. They can't be given a true discount for not seeking those coverages either (there are limits on age differentiated premiums).

Healthier young people would be better off seeking catastrophe coverage to cover accidents and several illness and non-illness care. The same way a good driver in an area with lower accident rate may choose a higher deductible auto insurance plan.
 
2012-09-10 02:48:28 PM  

FarkedOver: ohhh nice, the Boston Hardcore scene has my back!


Is the guy with the Cromwell haircut playing a keyboard?

If so, no hardcore card.
 
2012-09-10 02:48:31 PM  

Serious Black: CeroX: 2:
Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.

And if you handed out antibiotics like candy, we would almost certainly increase the number of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics because, news flash, bacteria can evolve! Thanks for killing millions of people with incurable strep throat, asshole.


That's exactly how MRSA came about, and drug-resistant TB.
 
2012-09-10 02:48:38 PM  
Why are you politics tab idiots so obsessed with Ayn Rand? I see more references to her here than any libertarian site I've ever been to.
 
2012-09-10 02:48:46 PM  

Thunderpipes: (no, Clinton tax increases had nothing to do with growth)


They didn't prevent growth either.
 
2012-09-10 02:49:09 PM  

pedrop357: Philip Francis Queeg: There is a direct connection between the affordability of routine medical visits and the incidence of catastrophic health problems.

Then they should simply argue that. Every argument and proposal always seems to focus intently on emergencies and catastrophes. When a proposal to mitigate that is laid out, it's attacked as not fulfilling a new goal.

A sample argument follows:
Universal health insurance is necessary not just to keep people from dying because they can't afford life and death treatment (dying in the streets), but also to help prevent illnesses from getting to the point of being life and death. Proposals for catastrophe only coverage miss the point in that it would be cheaper and more effective to cover more routine/preventative care in order to reduce the number of illnesses that become so severe as to be life or death.
----
Instead we get singularly focused arguments about dying in the streets and bankruptcy for accidents and serious non-illness related care. Healthy young people would probably benefit enormously from catastrophe only coverage , but that's criticized for not covering the routine visits that even insured young people are notorious for not getting.


It's not an either or argument, as much as you would like to make it one. Access to routine and catastrophic coverage are both vitally important.

Even more importantly, it's an artificial divide. People should have access to the entire spectrum of healthcare. The argument you are making is as fallacious as any in that it based on that false division.
 
2012-09-10 02:49:13 PM  

impaler: Zeb Hesselgresser: impaler: [growlersoftware.com image 850x562]

Now overlay that with Cancer Survival Rates please.

USA, USA, USA, We win.

I think you mean Cuba and France...

[lh6.googleusercontent.com image 296x512]


Cuba? I question the validity of your results.

Cuba. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
 
2012-09-10 02:49:26 PM  

The Muthaship: FarkedOver: ohhh nice, the Boston Hardcore scene has my back!

Is the guy with the Cromwell haircut playing a keyboard?

If so, no hardcore card.


SSD had no keyboards! He looks like a biatchy roadie.
 
2012-09-10 02:51:27 PM  

FarkedOver: SSD had no keyboards! He looks like a biatchy roadie.


Well then, carry on.
 
2012-09-10 02:51:30 PM  

Graffito: CeroX: Here's what i REALLY want:

1:
I want family doctor's and practitioners to stop charging $150 for 15 minutes of their time.

That comes down to $600/hr.

I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a physical
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a prescription for $5 worth penicillin when i get a respiratory infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Flu shot
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for removing an ingrown toenail
I want them to stop charging $600/hr to treat a staph infection
I want them to stop charging $600/hr for a Vaccine

I would GLADLY pay the doctor between $25-$50 per visit for the above treatments (and $75-$100 for a specialist).
By doing that, an office is still making between 100 and 200 an hour. They won't have to accept insurance, so they can literally cut out their entire billing department. Go back to having a receptionist, a nurse, and a book keeper. Everyone gets paid a decent living wage including the doctor.

There's no need for a family MD to be a "prestigious" career that warrants 300K+ a year.

None.

2:
Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.


If they did this, this country would be healthier, happier, and wealthier. Insurance companies would be there to insure against accidents and unforeseen problems.
There wouldn't be the problem of "pre-existing condition" because all diagnosis would be affordable enough to get it when it happens. Employers wouldn't HAVE to pick up benefits, though they could if they wanted to.

But tell a doctor to lower his prices so he doesn't NEED the insurance companies, and he would probably throw up in his mouth at the idea.

I bet you want your doctor to accept a jar of pickled eggs for payment too.


"or a chicken"

chattahbox.com
 
2012-09-10 02:51:55 PM  

FarkedOver: The Muthaship: FarkedOver: Well hopefully they die on their 27 birthday so they are not a burden to society.

They probably do because we have no programs in place to see to their medical care.

I don't want a bunch of 27 year old hipsters clogging up the ER when mommy and daddy's insurance runs out. farking freeloading assholes.


1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-10 02:52:02 PM  

SpectroBoy: CeroX: Antibiotics like penicillin and amoxicillin need to be Over-the-Counter. They are cheaper than most cold and flu OTC meds and may actually CURE YOU.

[cdn.styleforum.net image 477x316]
You know how I know that you are not a doctor, pharmacist, or epidemiologist?!?


It's like he's never encountered MRSA or another antibiotic-resistant bacterial infection in his life.
 
2012-09-10 02:52:03 PM  
The only actual pre-existing condition we need to deal with is GOP and DFL infection.
 
2012-09-10 02:52:37 PM  
I like to picture Jesus as a figure skater. He wears like a white outfit, and He does interpretive ice dances of my life's journey.

media.screened.com
 
2012-09-10 02:52:41 PM  

Gaseous Anomaly: However, since people change jobs every few years, and companies change insurers regularly, the insurer is betting you'll be Someone Else's Problem before the lack of preventive care kicks in. So then we're back to a classic coordination problem. If every insurer covered prevention they would all save money, but it's not in any individual insurer's best interest to do so.


Thank you for this response. I understand and agree with this problem of insurers basically kicking the can.

This is another problem I think can be mitigated or almost eliminated by decoupling insurance from employers.
 
2012-09-10 02:52:55 PM  

A Dark Evil Omen: I am eternally bewildered by this right-wing attitude that real solutions must always take a backseat to letting someone feel good about how rich they are.


What you are missing is that poor people are put on this earth by God so that middle class people can give a couple of old cans of fruit and baked beans every year and earn they way into heaven. If liberal economic policies could eradicate poor people, everyone would be doomed to go to hell.
 
2012-09-10 02:53:19 PM  
If one cares to set aside ideology and emotion in favour of rational analysis it becomes quite clear that some of the products, services and infrastructure we want is most efficiently run by private enterprise and some by collectives like the state.

Industries which benefit significatly from monopolies or universal service have been found to work well when run collectively (by the state for example, or by a private enterprise which is given a monopoly through legislation typically in exchange for providing a public benefit).

The clearest examples include:
- transport infrastructure (municipal roads, bridges and national highway systems)
- sewage and stormwater management systems
- levees and dykes
- national defense (and offense)
- electrical distribution grids
- healthcare
- education
- telecom rights of way
- policing and the judiciary

Deciding which industries we will run collectively and which we will leave to free enterprise is an important part of our civic life. If we want our country to prosper (in terms of $, quality of life and freedom) we need to be able to discuss these things rationally.

Ranting and raving about "right-wingers" and "left-wingers" and capitalism and socialism is beyond unhelpful, it is actively counter-productive. The next person to scream *socialism* or mockingly ask "what would republican Jesus do?" should punch themselves in the cock.
I'm serious. Punch yourself in the farking cock you idiot.

On the subject of healthcare; The USA has done fairly well with a mixed private/public system. You have a largely private system with public support for the poor and elderly.
It is a reasonable system which excels in some areas and leaves some gaps. Other rich western nations have opted for a larger public system, or even an entirely public system. Some of them, like Canada for instance have experienced extremely positive results.

Yet Canadians are no less Free than Americans, and Americans are not "heartless bastards leaving poor people to die outside hospitals". There are significant advantages to a universal, public system. There are significant advantages to a free-wheeling private system.
For the love of all that is holy, try a little calm, rational debate before you ruin your country by constantly obstructing and undermining each other. 


ohgod :words:
I'm sorry.
 
Displayed 50 of 636 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report