Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by gatordowneast, Jul 18, 2013.
Your perception of the situation isn't the truth.
Gawd you are ignorant.
It is a lot easier to have a skill and cut and sew, than to take care of illness. No offense to any surgeons, who are great at what they do, and require a lot of skill. The best ones have skill and knowledge, but surgeons always have the anesthesiologist, nurse, PA, or hospitalist to take care of their sick patients.
Hate to tell you I was being sarcastic.:grin:
actually i don't...the total number is in the billions, and if they didn't have such a high overhead that doesn't go to actual care, that number would be much better
i sure don't feel sorry for them
I'm sorry, have you been a patient lately? I have! I'm led to wait in the little rooms after of course waiting interminably in the waiting room. There 4-5 per doctor. I see my doc for 3-5 minutes. Most of the time I see his PA or nurse practitioner. They immediately go to the next and the next and the next patient.
Had me fooled...
That's because you don't understand economics or, perhaps better stated, you don't understand the real world.
if 4.37% is all they are getting, and healthcare provided to policy holders is as screwed up as it is----isn't it time to drop the notion that corporate healthcare is the way to go?
1. They aren't making but 4.37%--hardly enough to satisfy their shareholders
2. dissatisfaction of policy holders regarding healthcare provided via insurance
and what is the overhead?
well, costs of operating an insurance company
---owning/renting office buildings
---money to lobbyists representing the healthcare insurance lobby
---money to politicians(of all parties, to buy votes)
---desks, paper, pens, pencils, coffee machines, and everything else for a typical business office
---business lunches for execs
what goes to direct patient care is far less money that comes from all the policy holders combined.
Your government check is too much overhead.
Let's reduce it and give it to people who could use the money.
You are really, really naïve. Do you really think a government run anything is superior to an enterprise run by the private sector with a profit motive? Reason it is impossible for government to compete is due to the workers they attract and keep. Do you know any long time government workers? They may be excellent when hired but become very beaten down, unambitious and eager to collect their generous pensions. Why? Because in private enterprise, "the rate of the pack is determined by the speed of the leader." In unions or government, "the rate of the pack is determined by the pack."
Want to turn an ambitious, hard charging, motivated worker into an average worker? Easy...put them around union workers or government workers for a couple of years and wallah...you've got an average worker bee.
I remember years ago when I asked the liberal gatordon if he would agree to begin his million dollar government retirement at age 62 (he was taking it at age 60) so that others less fortunate could receive the difference, he balked.
That is the definition of a liberal's compassion. Demand your privately employed neighbors pay for the needs of others while demanding your benefits be increased.
Who does this remind you of?
insurance companies are middle men---they do NOT provide the direct medical care.
insurance companies, per the OP, are suffering at 4.37% profit---so is it feasible for the insurance company portion of the healthcare system to continue
people have been so dissatisfied with the corporate healthcare lack of performance in delivering healthcare that they were willing to elect a POTUS who had a plan for govt to have more prominent role in delivering healthcare.
If you want to blame someone for ACA coming to be you might want to blame the corporate healthcare system that was so lousy that people decided to consider a healthcare system with fed govt playing a more active role.
BTW---NCBullgator---do you work for a health insurance company? From a number of your posts in the past you mentioned that you are employed in business portion of healthcare system. and the stats, pov, etc you have posted seems to indicate that you are in the insurance field.
what say you to the following
healthcare industry is literally a conflict of interest
---industry---the bottom line is $$$$ profit
---healthcare--the bottom line is care delivered to the patient.
When decisions are made in the corporate healthcare system---which takes precedence---patient health or short term corporate profit
how do health insurance companies make the 4.37% profit?
---money from sales of insurance policies(people paying for a service)
---money retained by the company by denying service(people paying for service don't get the service) based on protocols, tables, etc that often override the medical judgment of the primary physician who actually sees the patient. Wonder how many of the people at insurance companies who tell someone the insurance company isn't going to cover a medical order,, actually get to see the consequences(in human suffering) inflicted on policy holders who get denied?
---money gained thru investments made by the company
If corporate world provided adequate product to people the people would not be turning to the govt. Bear in mind the tipping point in this issue aren't 'freeloaders' as GOP/Cons like to claim. The rising number of complaints against the corporate model have come from policy holders(you know---people who aren't freeloaders) becoming dissatisfied as a result of being ripped off by insurance companies. In other words good , hard working people, who aren't freeloaders have been getting ripped off by insurance companies.
oldgator, no, don't work for an insurance company and not in the health field.
Society is getting ripped off......by liberals who demand bigger government checks from their hard working privately employed neighbors.
Who could that be?
The mindset of dependence our government has created it disastrous.
If only LBJ did not redistribute future generations wealth to others creating this idea health care is to be paid for by a copay or some small amount rather than allowing insurance to cover large losses...
if corporate healthcare is sooooooo good----why has there been increasing number of people who own policies becoming more and more dissatisfied with insurance companies and corporate healthcare. To the point they are willing to consider govt intervening.
it isn't freeloaders who are screaming for ACA since they are already covered by the govt.
the ones wanting ACA have been people who got ripped off by corporate healthcare. People who are hard working and either pay for insurance themself or their employer has paid for it(and the employee being denied service at some point by the insurance company)
The problem on this issue isn't freeloaders
The problem has been hard working people paying for insurance(or getting it thru employer) and the medical care provided via insurance was unsatisfactory or simply denied by the insurance company.
The problem has also been hard working people willing to pay for insurance but being denied by insurance companies due to pre-existing conditions, etc
simply put---if insurance companies were providing good product(policies), services(paying for what policy is supposed to cover) and hospital corporations providing reasonably priced healthcare.....there would be little or no call from public for increased govt involvement in providing healthcare.
evidently healthcare insurance policy of denial of service over the years resulting in fewer and fewer people buying policies-----they may not have seen their profits drop to 4.37%. But over the years insurance(and other companies) in quest for short term profit have cost themselves customers. And now its biting them (insurance companies) on the ass.
Everyone that is so down on their health insurance , drop it and self insure yourself.You can do that you know.
Unless you are wealthy, one major illness could wipe you out.
I find it rather amazing to see someone spend 100 dollars on a meal and bitch about a 50 dollar copay to see a doctor s or pay a 10 dollar prescription charge. I guess some value a good meal over their health.
I say if private health insurance wants to remain in the picture then make them take on everybody, including those over 65, right now the government is forced to cover all of those the insurance industry doesn't want, the oldest and the sickest, because the private industry wouldn't insure them, the ACA is all about spreading and sharing the risk, the insurance industry doesn't want the competition, which is understandable because they will start off 4.7% behind as the government doesn't have to build in a profit for shareholders
Stated like a pure Komrade.
Always good to force companies in a country founded on the principles of liberty.
the insurances industry wants their cake and wants to eat it too. They don't have to accept the idea of insuring everybody but if they don't then they can't complain when the government does.