|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:One of the more esoteric parts of the AHCA is that it bans you from Medicaid if you win the lottery. This is 10% of the bill, by the way. 6 out of it's 60 pages are devoted to making sure the 5 people that this could possibly apply to will never get Medicaid.
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 15:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 22:01 |
|
|
Family Values posted:Just a PSA (for you or anyone else reading), but don't ever put yourself in this position. Just because you're out of work doesn't mean you're invulnerable to traffic accidents or any other random disaster. Pay for COBRA to stay on your old plan (up to 18 months, although some states like CA double that) until you find a new job. Always have continuous coverage. loving LOL if you think I can avoid COBRA. I can barely afford rent.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2017 01:40
|
|
|
gandlethorpe posted:On one hand, the last few months were a complete and utter waste of time for Congress. On the other hand, the repubs made asses of themselves the entire time. I don't know how to feel. We want them wasting time, if they're not, they'd be passing terrible poo poo. This is a loving win-win here, this was their last and best shot, good luck trying to repeal healthcare in a midterm year.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 28, 2017 07:17
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:I still think the Republicans eventually pass some sort of awful replacement when the public is distracted, they still have 3.5 years. If they hold the Senate in 2018 (they probably will) then I don't see how they don't try again. If Dems take the House (highly likely), then it's loving dead no matter what happens with the Senate.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2017 06:08
|
|
|
Paracaidas posted:Many of the usual suspects have jumped on it, with the typical outofcontext and nuance-challenged twitter dunkings, so I'm assuming this will be a trashfire. I'd still recommend reading the actual piece though: quote:The tax issue, for example, is a critical substantive lacuna in the major health care bills. There’s no serious doubt that America could afford a heavier tax burden to finance a publicly provided health care system. But the design of that tax burden still makes a big difference. If you finance the system mostly with a value-added tax like many European countries do, for example, then senior citizens who already get Medicare will end up paying higher taxes in exchange for a program that doesn’t help them. But if you finance the system mostly with higher payroll taxes (how Social Security and Medicare work), you are creating a pretty strong new disincentive to work, since everyone would get the benefit whether or not they pay for it. Yes, people would just not work, because you can afford shelter and food by using free healthcare instead! 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
Ze Pollack posted:ill people... might not drag themselves into work? No, even better, the author is implying that people would choose to not work because they'd have healthcare either way. It has nothing to do with sick days.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 29, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Xae posted:Part of me wonders if one big problem with "The Media" is also that half of the talking heads just aren't smart enough to realize they're being constantly lied to. The problem is that they make too much money and are no longer in touch with the common person.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 15:42
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:no, journalists are not generally making too much money are you loving insane By "The Media" I figured he was talking about mainly talking heads on cable, not investigative journalists doing real work.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2017 16:11
|
|
|
Reik posted:I'm not going to tell you this isn't a lovely situation, I'm just saying maybe you should re-direct your anger from BCBS to the pharmaceutical company charging $1,000 a month for Latuda? Jesus loving Christ, Reik, have you no shame? Is someone paying you money to defend the loving insurance companies online?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
CheeseSpawn posted:I get some expensive eczema drugs per month so I was curious to see on what the process could be. quote:The physicians agreed. "Yes, you were very convincing. But the drugs are too expensive. So we typically reject requests, at least the first time. We figure that, if doctors are really serious, then they should be willing to make the request again and again."I was astonished. "If the drugs will help people, how can you say no?" Then I got the answer I did not expect. "You see, if it weren't for us, the system would go broke. Every time we say yes, healthcare becomes more expensive, and that isn't a good thing. So when we say no, we are keeping the system in balance. Our job is to save our system of healthcare." I responded quickly. "But you are not saving our healthcare system. You are simply making money for the company that you work for. And patients aren't getting the drugs that they need." Reik, this is literally the argument you keep trying to make, do you see why it comes across as sociopathic? "But without insurance existing, how would people have healthcare?" wonders man who works for insurance company, unable to cut the Gordian Knot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2017 16:14
|
|
|
Reik posted:What do you think is a bigger problem, pre-authorization and step therapy in formularies or pharmaceutical reps courting physicians to affect their prescribing patterns? All of it, it's all a big problem. And that's not going to happen while people like you sit there and claim that everything's peachy keen and insurance companies are just doing their best.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Reik posted:I've talked to some other actuaries about this and the best thing we could come up with is loving lmao "I talked with other people who are highly invested in our for-profit healthcare system continuing to exist and shockingly, none of us could figure out anything positive to do!"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2018 21:51
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:ACA's success in improving healthcare was not incidental. The motivated reasoning on display here is...impressive. Yea, look where we are now, we're in a paradise of healthcare, things are looking better and better since ACA passed!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2018 19:02
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Nobody on the payer side fought medicare because nobody's in a rush to insure the statistically least healthy age demographic. Meanwhile the AMA hated it and called it socialized medicine. Ironically, medicare was the first time for many on the provider side where they had a guarantee that their bills would be paid and it made doctors fabulously wealthy. Doctors today might complain about medicare but if you ask them if they want it abolished they'll backpedal furiously, they just want to be paid more. If I can think of one group of people who aren't making enough money, it's definitely doctors.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2018 20:03
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The other side of this is that a 100% public pharmaceutical industry would just not ever pursue the development of that medicine. quote:The FY 2017 Budget includes $33.1 billion, an increase of $825 million over FY 2016, for NIH to accelerate groundbreaking research on cancer, precision medicine, and the human brain, and to maintain the significant investments enacted in FY 2016. Why do we let this liar continue to post here?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2018 00:35
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Can you name 5 prescriptions released in 2018 that were developed and released by the NHS? Look at those goalposts move from "no country would spend hundreds of millions on medical research"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2018 01:03
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:I don't understand why Trotsky got probated for a month for this, what he said is essentially true He is a loving awful lying troll who loving poisons these forums, just because he occasionally says things that are technically accurate is no excuse to defend him, dude is a loving Holocaust denying piece of poo poo. I'd much rather the forums not have to refute false information that he spreads every time he posts, it makes for a better D&D experience if people aren't running around lying/trolling constantly to disrupt the discourse because they think it's fun. Like, loving click the rap sheet, am I the only poster here who remembers who the loving lovely liars are? Why do you expect them to suddenly become good posters the half the time when they're not lying?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:That's fine I guess You have missed my point entirely, congratulations. Seriously do other people just not have pattern recognition or something? Am I the only one who can see a pattern of lying/trolling/shitposting and then mentally file the poster into a garbage bin, never to trust them again? "But he was technically correct" is missing the forest for the trees here. Yeowch!!! My Balls!!! posted:aside from the part where he claims it's entirely normal and good, yes Also this, he's not even correct because he's implicitly making a value judgement that this situation is normal and fine. E: VVV Oh, now I get why you defended him. A fellow bootlicker! WampaLord fucked around with this message at 19:47 on Nov 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2018 19:42
|
|
but he's not wrong in that particular post.
|
Flesh Forge posted:e:If you guys are saying "this is morally wrong and I don't like it" that's great, say that, but it is literally the norm. That is actually what the person who posted the article said, and then LT2012 shat out a bunch of "technically correct" bullshit to imply that this is the norm and should continue, other people think this is an outrageous situation and yet another symptom of the profit motive in healthcare being loving terrible. Like, do you not understand when you say "But this is normal" you're defending the lovely status quo? And that's not a great look, to defend insurance companies in 2018? Do you get that? I feel like a lot of people on this forum go "I'm just describing what the situation is" not understanding they are implicitly defending the status quo every time they do it. CPAP machines reporting on your sleep schedule to your insurance company so they deny you benefits IS NOT NORMAL OR GOOD
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2018 19:50
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:Speaking of not having full understanding, it is uh, improbable that any insurance provider will extend you the coverage of some expensive rear end home treatment like a CPAP machine and then withdraw it based on one day's worth of monitoring and lack of compliance, and the twitter anecdote that you dudes are flipping out about is pretty disingenuous So now you're calling that dude a liar? https://twitter.com/ericuman/status/1065258162675228674 Jesus gently caress, just stop! Stop defending insurance companies! No one is forcing you to continue to double down over this, just take the L and go "wow, profit motive in healthcare is hosed up!" E: VVV Hahaha a tone argument, loving  of course
WampaLord fucked around with this message at 21:05 on Nov 21, 2018 |
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2018 21:02
|
|
|
Flesh Forge posted:You're goddamn right a tone argument, yes. Would you rather I posted screenfulls of gently caress YOU gently caress YOU gently caress YOU Ugh, these people are being so RUDE about having their insurance denied, well I never! Can't they just die quietly so I can have a nice polite discussion about my favorite insurance companies and how awesome they are?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2018 21:12
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 2, 2024 22:01 |
|
|
KingNastidon posted:Thanks for reading the first two sentences in the article, Yeowch. Always great to see your thoughtful contributions. Ah, a lesson in reading comprehension from the poster who can't read his own rap sheet and stop committing the behavior that has gotten him repeatedly banned. You are the embodiment of "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" and your perspective has no purpose in a debate about how to fix healthcare, because keeping healthcare broken is making you lots of money. e: vvv lol at going full calm hitler "hey everyone i'm just trying to keep my sweet pharma gig going, can we be less rude about desiring Medicare For All?" WampaLord fucked around with this message at 18:46 on Dec 26, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2019 18:06
|
|