So Dig, we just spent 2 pages arguing when we agree with each other?!! :upsidedow

Ahh didn't read that sorry.

However he's simply trying to provoke *mad views*. If you think this is something that could or ever would happen then.....

The fact is, private healthcare would always be around for those with the means and desire to purchase it.

No. Just because *I* can afford something doesn't mean I'm going to forget about the millions who can't. This country needs universal health care in a bad way.

No he may actually be saying that you shouldn't be allowed to opt out of the system, and he has a point if he is. You're not allowed to opt out of many programs that are federally funded, because it would leave them underfunded.

Well, you can opt out of the program itself, but you can't opt out of paying your taxes for it.

You might be thinking of Blue Cross. It's private insurance, 'supplemental' to government provided health care, covering whats deemed the non-critical side of things; dental, vision, prescription drugs, homecare, shit like that.

Our system up here is not perfect, it needs a lot of fixing for sure, and I was hoping Moore would have pointed that out more in Sicko cuz it left him open for jabs later on, little jabs easily defended.

One reason wait times in Canada are longer for specialists and procedures is because of a shortage of doctors, to my understanding. In what we call the brain drain, we lose a lot of our university educated professionals to higher paying jobs south of the border and we especially feel it in health care. Especially in rural areas where few doctors with a taste of the city life want to end up.

You got me curious, whats them buying dog and cat food indicative of ?

He may be THINKING that, but he clearly said we should do away with private health insurance completely. If it's repeated - watch it ;)

While I would certainly love to opt out of paying into the program, I know that will never happen - just like you still pay taxes for the public school system even if you send your kids to private (something else I think the private sector does better than the government :winkwink: )

You can group me in with Holly any day. :thumbsup

I love how anyone who doesnt love all the spew Mikey froths from the gapping hole in his head must be brainwashed. :1orglaugh

I love lefties.

One side of their mouth.

Government is bad Fuck the government. Government has no idea what they are doing. Government needs to stay the fuck out of our lives!

Other side of their mouth.


The government should be running our health care system. Let them control it all... Silly Silly.

WHAT???

It's a business... for a small percentage of the people it pays out more, the rest of the people cover it. That's how all insurance companies work. They're not in business as a charity.

I love people who lack the intelligence & thinking process to see past the leftside / rightside mentality and can't focus on what's better for the people.

If they paid out more then they took in they wouldnt be in business and united health care couldnt have paid its chairman a 500 million dollar bonus.
Also Peaches if it all went gov wouldnt that kill medical coding which you have been studying?

Cant blame him he is home all day.

http://www.impawards.com/1990/poster...alone_ver1.jpg

but in 20 days, he is revolutionizing the model of the adult business ... :1orglaugh

Actually 80% of the medical coding is done for Medicare/caid - another reason my doctor doesn't accept Medicare/caid patients - he can put his procedures into about 500 different codes whereas Medicare/caid is VERY strict and to be honest, makes a lot of "busy work" and costs hospitals and other providers millions a year if it's not done the way Medicare/caid wants it. In order to get payment from the government, the providers spend millions in salaries so the claims aren't completely turned down. It's why it's such a fast growing field.

In actuality, the more government gets into healthcare, the better off I am at owning a coding company and the more money I'll make. :thumbsup

That doesn't mean I want the government to manage MY heathcare for me.

Well they are fearing seniors are going to spend there money of the much needed drugs to live then to buy food and return eat dog and cat food :(

So because we see it differently then we must be wrong... HYSTERICAL!! :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

First: I am glad you just admitted to be one of those people I described.

Second: wrong about what? Did you state a fact? I must have missed it, all I saw was an opinion.

opinion think about that....

no one said your opinion was wrong, think about that...

Poking Smot over there or what?

Well you are TELLING me what I think is not better for people. That would be a pretty clear case of you telling my opinion was wrong... lol anywho no time for squables tonight was just blowing some steam off for a bit.

Just so I got it straight, Lefties talking out both sides of their mouths has something to do with what's better for the people?

Well lets see since they all think our government is retarded, it would be a good thing to let a retarded person handle our health care needs.

You'll catch on.

Stereotyping, another sign of greater intelligence.

I don't think our gov't is retarded, I think that the people allowing our Gov't to operate the way they do are 100% responsible for the problems. Hopefully, that will change, but somehow I doubt it.

Don't you think this is ludicrous that a company would try to weasel its way out of paying a valid claim because it didnt get notified within two days? I would understand giving the party a month.

Ok lets feel this out... You dont think our goverment will solve its current issues, and yet you want to add on a huge burdensome health care system onto it.... hmmm This sounds like a solid plan. Lets move forward with it IMMEDIATELY! :thumbsup

When did I say I wanted the Gov't to run the healthcare? But I also don't want Insurance & Pharmaceutical companies controlling our Gov't, like they do now.

Our office is pretty happy with Medicare payments. They are more reliable than most insurance company payments.

Sticky,

I personally don't want this current administration to run things any more - Im willing to give a new Executive branch the benefit of the doubt. Please ask your friends if they can resign now. The American public sure wants it that way.

I would say it depends on what the contract says. I doubt the providers don't KNOW what the contract says - you have lazy workers who don't get the claims processed on time. If you sign a contract that says 48 hours then don't expect them to take the claim after 30 days.

Hmm you must be confused one what Mikey wants then...

You're lucky - and must have good coders :thumbsup

I was just reading where there was over $28bil (yes, that's with "b") in Medicare fraud in 2005. With Medicaid, state funded medical plans and private insurance added in it totaled $77bil. Seems we should be looking towards some of that to get the ball rolling on getting medical costs down.

The executive branch has little to do with it. Its a demmy majority right now, what universal health care bills are currently trying to be passed?

Better healthcare for Americans? All Americans having healthcare?

God, he must be nuts.

Umm ok so how exactly do you propose that gets done?

The Department of Health and Human Services falls under the control of the Secretary of HHS, an Executive Branch appointee. They would probably oversee whatever expansion of Medicare or new health care system.

What do you fail to understand about my statement? And please don't answer with some non-sequitur about its Clinton's fault/Democrats can't manage anything.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...NGBSKR3RA1.DTL

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medi...p?newsid=73865

Ok you do realize that is a state bill right?

It would require a bill to be passed and made into a law. The only thing the executive branch would have to do with it would be if it was vetoed. Not sure what point you are trying to make.

Fuck if I know, but i know what is going on now is insane & wrong.

Yes, but, it's a start. If it works there, people may catch on, if it doesn't, then we can see why it didn't work. California is a pretty big fucking place, not sure what it's ranked today but it was the 5th largest economy in the world.

You can't just flip a switch and say "ok, healthcare is on".

Actually the more I think about it, the more I think that State managed healthcare would have a much higher chance of success than Federal.

Tennessee has had TennCare for years. Its a mismanaged mess that has nearly collapsed several times. Lots of states already have free health care of some sort.

Id be more inclined to endorse a state system over federal. Still has problems though. Does it cover you if you are in a different state and get hurt etc etc.

So why can most first world countries manage to implement universal healthcare and make it so popular even conservatives support it?

I think you're confusing government with the people who run it.

You know as well as I that if it were passed it would be vetoed and they don't have a 2/3 majority to override the veto.

You were saying how liberals want the government to provide health care and Im saying yes, but we dont want the current Executive branch running universal health care.

Please tell me you're not this stupid. You've said a lot of ignorant things in this thread but these two points are completely off track.

First off, there are not many doctors that will not take Medicare and if there are ones out there that won't it's not because of 'the strings attached' or that 'payments take months', there are much more strings attached with insurance companies and an insurance company will delay payments a hell of a lot more. The reason a doctor would not take Medicare is because the profits are a lot lower than with the privates. Medicare/Medicaid has a pre-determined amount it will pay out on medical procedures, the privates do not.

A very good friend of mine is a Urologist and he explained how this works. Say someone needs an operation. If they have private insurance they would charge an insurance company $50,000 (obviously an example), for the same operation Medicare will only pay out $30,000. The doctors, surgeons, hospital, etc still make a profit JUST NOT AS MUCH. Now here's the kicker, if that same person needs an operation and DOES NOT HAVE ANY COVERAGE they will get charged $70,000...why? Because they can. The health care industry and the pharmacutical companies have created this problem, not the insurance companies. These industries are all about how much profit they can make, not helping people.

And as far as your other ignorant statement about landlords and section 8, I have owned many rental properties throughout the years and I have rented to section 8. With section 8 I ALWAYS knew I would get the rent, THAT was the good thing. The bad thing, and the reason why many landlords won't do it is because section 8's damage the property more often and there is an overall less concern about keeping up the condition of the property, it certainly isnt due to waiting months for the rent.

Its gotta be painful to watch tv in states if you have IQ over Bush...