Jump to content

SiCKO


Recommended Posts

The situation in the state of Ohio is unique because we have the highest unemployment rate in the country. The official national average is 9.8%, in Ohio, the official rate is 14%. Yes they are laying off medical staff here. You obviously don't understand the emergency room argument. The hospital is not laying off because there is a lack of people needing care, it is because of the lack of people that can pay. They will expect less staff to handle more patients, which means the quality of care will continue to deteriorate. You will pay higher premiums because the hospital will bill your insurance company enough to cover their expenses. If everyone contributed you and everyone else that buys insurance would have less to pay, because the burden would be shared by all.

 

Nap I think your problem is that you like to argue for the sake of arguing, and most of the time you just don't understand what other people are saying. Don't you understand the principle. If you have 20M people and 10M pay for coverage. For everyone of the 10M that don't pay in and receive care. (and at some point it there life they will) The hospitals, and physicians will have to charge the money to cover there expenses to someone, so they charge it to the insurance companies that are obligated to pay. This means the insurance companies have to charge you higher premiums to cover the high prices they are required to pay. Now if all of the 20M contributed voluntary, or involuntary there would be less liability to the individual that pays. This means there would be no need for your employer to shift the premiums onto the employee because it wouldn't be nearly as expensive per capita for those who contribute.

 

 

Well said Furious!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The situation in the state of Ohio is unique because we have the highest unemployment rate in the country. The official national average is 9.8%, in Ohio, the official rate is 14%. Yes they are laying off medical staff here. You obviously don't understand the emergency room argument. The hospital is not laying off because there is a lack of people needing care, it is because of the lack of people that can pay. They will expect less staff to handle more patients, which means the quality of care will continue to deteriorate. You will pay higher premiums because the hospital will bill your insurance company enough to cover their expenses.

Nap I think your problem is that you like to argue for the sake of arguing, and most of the time you just don't understand what other people are saying. Don't you understand the principle. If you have 20M people and 10M pay for coverage. For everyone of the 10M that don't pay in and receive care. (and at some point it there life they will) The hospitals, and physicians will have to charge the money to cover there expenses to someone, so they charge it to the insurance companies that are obligated to pay. This means the insurance companies have to charge you higher premiums to cover the high prices they are required to pay. Now if all of the 20M contributed voluntary, or involuntary there would be less liability to the individual that pays. This means there would be no need for your employer to shift the premiums onto the employee because it wouldn't be nearly as expensive per capita for those who contribute.

I have a far greater understanding of healthcare insurance than you....you have proven that to me in your last 2 post.....

 

 

Explain this:

If everyone contributed you and everyone else that buys insurance would have less to pay, because the burden would be shared by all.

 

and your use of the term "argue" is also very telling......I'm discussing...you look at it as arguing because you are having trouble defending your point....and your pals Pastisparts and aces are worse than you...you guys just keep spouting the same one liners...that make no sense......

Edited by napfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a far greater understanding of healthcare insurance than you....you have proven that to me in your last 2 post.....

 

 

Explain this:

 

 

and your use of the term "argue" is also very telling......I'm discussing...you look at it as arguing because you are having trouble defending your point....and your pals Pastisparts and aces are worse than you...you guys just keep spouting the same one liners...that make no sense......

 

 

You are a misinformed narcissist, and you couldn't find your d-ck if I drew you a map to it's location! However if you have a small sheet of paper I will try once more!

Edited by Furious1Auto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The situation in the state of Ohio is unique because we have the highest unemployment rate in the country. The official national average is 9.8%, in Ohio, the official rate is 14%. Yes they are laying off medical staff here. You obviously don't understand the emergency room argument. The hospital is not laying off because there is a lack of people needing care, it is because of the lack of people that can pay. They will expect less staff to handle more patients, which means the quality of care will continue to deteriorate. You will pay higher premiums because the hospital will bill your insurance company enough to cover their expenses. If everyone contributed you and everyone else that buys insurance would have less to pay, because the burden would be shared by all.

 

Nap I think your problem is that you like to argue for the sake of arguing, and most of the time you just don't understand what other people are saying. Don't you understand the principle. If you have 20M people and 10M pay for coverage. For everyone of the 10M that don't pay in and receive care. (and at some point it there life they will) The hospitals, and physicians will have to charge the money to cover there expenses to someone, so they charge it to the insurance companies that are obligated to pay. This means the insurance companies have to charge you higher premiums to cover the high prices they are required to pay. Now if all of the 20M contributed voluntary, or involuntary there would be less liability to the individual that pays. This means there would be no need for your employer to shift the premiums onto the employee because it wouldn't be nearly as expensive per capita for those who contribute.

 

Not to split hairs here or anything but....there are 7 states listed on the bureau of labor statistics site that have higher unemployment rates then Ohio...The state rates are in the column on the right of the page...These stats are from August and they claim they are the latest...This is not one of your better posts...http://www.bls.gov/lau/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to split hairs here or anything but....there are 7 states listed on the bureau of labor statistics site that have higher unemployment rates then Ohio...The state rates are in the column on the right of the page...These stats are from August and they claim they are the latest...This is not one of your better posts...http://www.bls.gov/lau/

 

 

The rates change, and it has been a little since I looked. The latest national average I quoted was from our local paper. However it does not change the the fact that they are laying off medical staff at community hospital. Once again this does not have anything to do with the emergency room argument.

 

Nap it is funny you referred to the "discussion' as an argument, then chastised me for quoting you. You can't habe it both ways LOL!

 

so now you are saying that there are less people insured so they are laying off staff?...what happened to the argument that uninsured people were getting healthcare now....in the ER's.......so why would they lay-off staff........you can't habe it both ways
Edited by Furious1Auto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are a misinformed narcissist, and you couldn't find your d-ck if I drew you a map to it's location! However if you have a small sheet of paper I will try once more!

I'll refer to my previous post.....you can't support your point so you revert to childish and imature retorts... you remind me of children arguing.....

and I worried about your preoocupation with my genitalia....is their something you would like to tell us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll refer to my previous post.....you can't support your point so you revert to childish and imature retorts... you remind me of children arguing.....

and I worried about your preoocupation with my genitalia....is their something you would like to tell us?

 

If you click on the arrow in the quote of yours I captured calling it an "argument" it is linked directly to your post so there is no need to search for it, or even try to edit it.

 

Also, all I have done is back up my statements, while you can't even remember what you have posted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll refer to my previous post.....you can't support your point so you revert to childish and imature retorts... you remind me of children arguing.....

and I worried about your preoocupation with my genitalia....is their something you would like to tell us?

 

 

Speaking of your genitalia NAP, if you were say , 67 years old and your genitalia had a problem, would you resort to using govt health care like Medicare to fix the problem?

Edited by partsisparts
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something is Wrong in America

 

 

 

 

No details, just generalized rhetoric with visual stimuli. It reminds me of how Hitler vilified the Jews. The ones protesting Obama are just regular people. We used to be called the "silent majority". We stopped being silent. It is the protesters on the left who go around burning, looting, and killing. They can't get their message out using logic because it is a lie, so they use violence and intimidation. They are incapable of self-support, so they want the government to steal from the self-sufficient and give to them. They are like a bunch of children. We are giving them what their parents neglected to give them when they were kids. The government is using these mis-fits to try and build an Authoritarian system. All we want is for the government to back off so we, the people can re-build what the government has destroyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No details, just generalized rhetoric with visual stimuli. It reminds me of how Hitler vilified the Jews. The ones protesting Obama are just regular people. We used to be called the "silent majority". We stopped being silent. It is the protesters on the left who go around burning, looting, and killing. They can't get their message out using logic because it is a lie, so they use violence and intimidation. They are incapable of self-support, so they want the government to steal from the self-sufficient and give to them. They are like a bunch of children. We are giving them what their parents neglected to give them when they were kids. The government is using these mis-fits to try and build an Authoritarian system. All we want is for the government to back off so we, the people can re-build what the government has destroyed.

 

Tell it to the queen OH CANADA

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tell it to the queen OH CANADA

 

 

Damn bro you beat me to it, I was just going to say something similar but you beat me to the punch.

 

 

OUCH...at least they rated insults LOL

 

 

One liners HUH, I write fricken novels that are very descriptive in most posts. However dish-t is illiterate and doesn't read most before he replies. It wouldn't matter if he did anyway because he cannot reply to one liners either.

 

Hey Nap if you were injured would you utilize medicare if you had no other means of paying you doctor bills?

 

Watch he won't answer this post, and if he does he will quote a different part of my post never answering the question he has been asked several times in several threads.

Edited by Furious1Auto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of your genitalia NAP, if you were say , 67 years old and your genitalia had a problem, would you resort to using govt health care like Medicare to fix the problem?

I would use my BCBS......if I wanted to use medicare that would me my perogative, since I've paid into it for many years,,,,and I know what you're trying to do......you're going to say "see, you're ussing national healthare"...and you'd be wrong......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would use my BCBS......if I wanted to use medicare that would me my perogative, since I've paid into it for many years,,,,and I know what you're trying to do......you're going to say "see, you're ussing national healthare"...and you'd be wrong......

 

 

How would I be wrong??? Medicare is a govt run health care program with a 82% approval rating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How would I be wrong??? Medicare is a govt run health care program with a 82% approval rating.

 

 

Watch it, Soon the insurance lobby will be generating false statistics that debunk peoples approval of medicare, and they will start reporting that there is a growing number of medicare recipients that are becoming dissatisfied with their coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watch it, Soon the insurance lobby will be generating false statistics that debunk peoples approval of medicare, and they will start reporting that there is a growing number of medicare recipients that are becoming dissatisfied with their coverage.

 

 

You're right! They have already spent 375 million dollars (this year alone) to get people to think like NAP. So I guess what is a few more dollars in lobbying money to bury Medicare.

 

BTW the insurance industry has 6 lobbyists per senator working against reform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right! They have already spent 375 million dollars (this year alone) to get people to think like NAP. So I guess what is a few more dollars in lobbying money to bury Medicare.

 

BTW the insurance industry has 6 lobbyists per senator working against reform.

 

How can that be, agencies like BCBS are non profit :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right! They have already spent 375 million dollars (this year alone) to get people to think like NAP. So I guess what is a few more dollars in lobbying money to bury Medicare.

 

BTW the insurance industry has 6 lobbyists per senator working against reform.

 

How can that be, agencies like BCBS are non profit :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you are mistaken about BCBS as far as non-profit...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Cross_and_Blue_Shield_Association#Publicly_traded_companies

 

http://www.princeton.edu/prior/events/roun...summit-bell.pdf

 

 

Blue Cross Blue Shield Plans

 

Fundamental difference in purpose and philosophy from commercial insurers,“We remain special, and thus essentially different from our competitors…

“The characteristics that distinguish Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans from all others –community origins, community ties, small group recognition, unique hospital and physician relationships –along with strong name recognition.” Nonprofit, charitable corporations incorporated in the 1930s and 1940s.

 

June 1994: The national Blue Cross Blue Shield Association changed its policies to enable licensees to convert to for-profit status

 

sorry my bad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthem_(insurance)

 

Anthem (insurance)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

 

Anthem was an insurance company which began in the 1980s as a spin-off of the group insurance operations of American General Insurance. From its move to a publicly-traded company in 2001 until its final merger in 2004, it merged the Blue Cross Blue Shield organizations of several states to achieve economy of scale, converting them in the process from non-profit to for-profit status. In late 2004, Anthem and WellPoint merged, with the combined company taking the WellPoint name.

 

While Anthem no longer exists as a company, the Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield brand name is used by WellPoint in 11 states.

 

Anthem, Inc. grew out of two Indianapolis-based corporations formed in 1944 and 1946 as mutual insurance companies. Those two companies were created to provide health insurance to residents of Indiana as Blue Cross of Indiana and Blue Shield of Indiana. They eventually merged to form Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Indiana. In October 2001, Anthem demutualized and conducted an initial public offering of common stock. WellPoint, Inc. (formerly Anthem, Inc.) was formed when WellPoint Health Networks Inc. and Anthem, Inc. merged in 2004 to become the nation's leading health benefits company.

 

WellPoint Health Network Inc.'s predecessor was Blue Cross of California, which was founded in 1982 with the consolidation of Blue Cross of Northern California (established in 1936) and Blue Cross of Southern California (established in 1937). WellPoint was formed in 1992 to operate Blue Cross of California's managed care business. In 1993, Blue Cross of California spun off its managed care business into a separate publicly traded entity, WellPoint Health Networks Inc. In 1996, Blue Cross of California completed the conversion of all its business to for-profit status, resulting in a restructuring that designated WellPoint Health Networks Inc. as the parent organization.

 

Anthem and WellPoint have achieved a portion of this growth through mergers and acquisitions as follows:

Edited by nvsked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...