I live in Texas where 25% of the population is uninsured and know for fact that those 25% go to the state subsidized COUNTY ER's that gets its reimbursements from the federal government already.
Texas hospitals are scrambling as we speak to expand the Medicaid roles while the state is opting out of the federal matching dollars outlined in Obama Care. This has led to hospitals trying to make up for lost revenue.
Steve Love, president and CEO of the Dallas-Fort Worth Hospital Council, a group that works with 80 hospitals in North Texas, said the waiver is creating two funding pools: an uncompensated care pool — costs of care provided to individuals who don't have Medicaid funds; and delivery system reform incentive payments.
Texas has the potential to receive up to $29 billion over the five years of the waiver, which is more than the $14 billion in funds that are available under the upper payment limits program, according to the Texas Hospital Association's website.
Translation- If the state won't do it hospitals will. Why won't the state do it?
I totally beg to differ. People with "government insurance" use the ER as a clinic. I can even pinpoint what days and times they use it. I would also like to point out that they have learned how to work the system so that they don't have to wait hours. They come in with complaints of chest pain, they come in with complaints of shortness of breath. They know that these complaints will get them seen within 10 minutes of arrival.
You don't experience the system, but I do.
Ask the expert on the frontlines
Are you saying they don't have medical issues and are just goofing off? Why do you think they come to the ER and not see a doctor?
Hello again, Steve:
Buck up Righty.. You're SCREWING people as bad as you think we're screwing you..
Sniveling doesn't help.
excon
Really? Hear is a news flash for you. Obamacare is going to ruin things as we know it. Many are barely making it and living paycheck to paycheck and are now mandated to pay yet another bill. The extra costs of Obamacare is about shifting responsibility from government hands since they want to spend it in other ways and shoving up the publics butt. Talk about a big time screwing. Anyone responsible for child support may not be able to live after this fully rolls in.
That's not true since 85% of us already pay that other bill, AND for the 15% that don't/or won't. But you hit on the root cause of most peoples woes, that paycheck hasn't grown in a long time, but the bills sure have.
That's great logic, our paychecks haven't grown so let's stick people for another few hundred bucks a month. Do you really not think about what you're saying?
If you cannot grasp the concept of what I write that's too bad. In simple terms, you have already been a victim of gouging as have we all, yet you cannot see it, but blame the easy target, and not the true target, and that's the broken business model that has failed us in the time of need.
Tal, stop pretending we're stupid and you know what's best for us. Your logic is illogical and we know when we're getting hosed in spite of your bullsh*t.
You were getting hosed long before this administration came along. Or the last. Crap is hitting the fan and a logical plan is needed aimed at the root cause of the problem. You ain't got enough money to meet the rising cost of every damn thing.
The point of young people getting health insurance is that those insured young people will then get those periodic exams they don't want to pay out of pocket for now as uninsureds. They will do the preventive dance (or at least have the coverage to do it) to guard their health and not end up with prostate cancer or breast cancer or some catastrophic illness that they have ignored symptoms of and that will cost us (i.e., Medicaid) tons of money when they show up uninsured at the ER.
The point of young people getting health insurance is to dilute the universe of the insured so that premiums are reduced.
The young, insured or not insured, don't get preventive exams.
The point of young people getting health insurance is to dilute the universe of the insured so that premiums are reduced.
The young, insured or not insured, don't get preventive exams.
They will when they are no longer young and dumb and priorities change. I didn't get many check ups in my younger years either, and had insurance. Time changed that.
They will when they are no longer young and dumb and priorities change. I didn't get many check ups in my younger years either, and had insurance. Time changed that.
Preventative medicine is something pushed by the profession, and whilst it may show up a problem, the general population doesn't need to spend unnecessary time in a doctor's office. Pathology (tests) has been one of the greatest ripoffs perpetrated on a gulliable public and has escalated medical costs for no other reason than covering the doctor's backside in a litageous society
They will when they are no longer young and dumb and priorities change. I didn't get many check ups in my younger years either, and had insurance. Time changed that.
I guess that's why they have to sell it as "hosurance."
They will when they are no longer young and dumb and priorities change. I didn't get many check ups in my younger years either, and had insurance. Time changed that.
That will be too late to affect premiums. I think you may have missed my point.
That will be too late to affect premiums. I think you may have missed my point.
I didn't miss your point. Why would a young person that's pre prime, even be interested in health insurance? Or twice a year check ups? Add to that all the hollering and screaming, gloom and doom?
Why would anyone WANT to increase their premiums, deductibles, copays, out of pockets and decrease their choice of physicians?
Now that is the essential question, isn't it? Could this be an unintended consequence of listening to the insurance companies and lobbyists, could this be the consequence of a market that is being regulated in the wrong way? or could it be the consequence of restructuring the market to open it to a larger number of participants who present a broader risk profile?
Could this be the unintended consequence of a lie? Could this be the unintended consequence of ramming sh*t through without knowing what was in it? Could this be the result of incompetence? You tell me what it is.
Now that is the essential question, isn't it? Could this be an unintended consequence of listening to the insurance companies and lobbyists, could this be the consequence of a market that is being regulated in the wrong way? or could it be the consequence of restructuring the market to open it to a larger number of participants who present a broader risk profile?
Here is what it is. The true fact that no one was ever denied healthcare is true. And for those seeking insurance with pre existing they did have a place to go to through the states they lived in that offered expanded form of medicaid. Now with Obamacare they are taking those that have been on medicaid rolls and push them into private insurance. The money that they were spending on medicaid will go to suppliment premiums because they are going through the roof. But there is a cut off to getting a supplement. So while the new law purports to make things cheaper they really arent when you add the supplement. Also with Obamacare they are creating a brand new dependent class of people to scare when it comes election time. Its all down to simple politics and money. And the poorest of the poor are going to be hit the hardest.
So, perhaps I should start with a story. A group of friends and a few acquaintances were having a politic discussion. Well, a friend of mine mentioned she was on state medical (she is paralyzed), and a person said something to the effect of, "you must be an Obama lover, most people on Welfare are...
I'm voting Democrat because English has no place being the official language in America.
I'm voting Democrat because it's better to turn corn into fuel than it is to eat.
I'm voting Democrat because I'd rather pay $4 for a gallon of gas than allow drilling for oil off the coasts of America.
...
Many of you guys can add it up in one minute, so please tell me:
How many wars were initiated by democrats since the beginning of the USA?
How many were started by republicans?
How many wars were ended by republicans versus democrats?
Originally Posted by excon
