mar350 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Where is the name calling or racism here? > > > > mar350 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > marcus phoenix Wrote: > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > ----- > > > > equity_analyst Wrote: > > > > Did Rand Paul tell you that? > > > don’t infer that anyone tells me anything or > attempt to label me through association. > > > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Where is the name calling or racism here? > > > marcus phoenix Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > higgmond Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > >> > > USA for the most part is hardly “post racial” > enough > > yet to accept a (half) black man in charge. > > does calling the US racist count as racism? > > > > you’re a child. i’m done here. Now who is the one doing name calling? And who is calling the country racist? I was just stating that from an acceptance stand point Hillary would have been a more palatable candidate. There is a difference between being racist and tolerating someone. Did you see the campaign against Obama being a Kenyan, Muslim, Marxist etc? How low is that?
“The American people have spoken loud and clear! They have forcefully rejected [policy you don’t like here] and have given us an overwhelming mandate for [policy you like here].” And now, excuse me while I have some tea.
Speaking of the healthcare bill, three of the four leading insurers reported substantial profit gains for the third quarter of 2010, contradicting earlier health plan statements that health reform was causing them ro raise premiums. Their gains also raise questions about their claims that recent premium hikes simply reflect higher underlying health costs. Next year, the medical benefit ratio for large company plans must be at leas t 85 percent according to healthcare reform law. So insurance companies willl have to do some fancy tap dancing to keep up their profits, But for now, they’re sitting pretty. Also, when people are polled about healthcare a funny thing happens. When asked about line item aspects of the bill, people like what they hear. When they are asked about the bill in a general partyline way, they don’t.
^ I know for a FACT premiums went up. my friend went through it and a firm I worked for went through it. The 2 separate firms, both raised their premiums 40%, and both for no other reason except the healthcare bill. besides, you won’t see the effect of the extra payouts insurance firms have to pay shell out for a while anyway. You can raise premiums in a heartbeat, but people get sick and get insurance to pay for it over time.
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ I know for a FACT premiums went up. my friend > went through it and a firm I worked for went > through it. The 2 separate firms, both raised > their premiums 40%, and both for no other reason > except the healthcare bill. > > besides, you won’t see the effect of the extra > payouts insurance firms have to pay shell out for > a while anyway. You can raise premiums in a > heartbeat, but people get sick and get insurance > to pay for it over time. Yes, premiums did indeed go up as they have for the last ten years. But to attribute the rise in premiums to healthcare reform is a fallacy. Most of the proposed reforms haven’t even kicked in, yet the passage of the law has somehow increased healthcare costs?
Yes it has. call any healthcare insurer. my friend was given a hard deadline. anyone who bought insurance after Oct 22 (with Anthem) immediately saw a 40% increase. and how is it a fallacy if the insurer says “we are raising it 40% SOLELY because of the health care bill, and no other reason.” This is exactly what they told him. dead honest. And last I checked they weren’t going up 40% yearly for 10 years.
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes it has. call any healthcare insurer. my friend > was given a hard deadline. anyone who bought > insurance after Oct 22 (with Anthem) immediately > saw a 40% increase. > > and how is it a fallacy if the insurer says “we > are raising it 40% SOLELY because of the health > care bill, and no other reason.” > > This is exactly what they told him. dead honest. > > And last I checked they weren’t going up 40% > yearly for 10 years. My BCBS premiums went up as well, though by a much smaller margin. So they are hiking premiums exorbitantly and blaming the healthcare reform bill, though neither have most of the reforms gone into effect nor have the underlying healthcare costs gone up 40%. Dosen’t that strike you as an extremely disingenuous statement and merely racketeering on part of Anthem?
It’s totally unfair and it sucks. But all the insurance carriers are doing it, and if you want healthcare, you have to take it. What else can you do?
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It’s totally unfair and it sucks. But all the > insurance carriers are doing it, and if you want > healthcare, you have to take it. What else can you > do? A public option (the insurance lobby will be dead against this)? Allowing more doctors to be imported to America to reduce their exorbitant salaries especially in speciality areas (the AMA lobby will be against this)? Reducing the number of frivolous lawsuits against doctors (the lawyers will be up in arms against this)? Allowing the freer flow of generic drugs from other countries (the US Pharmaceutical companies will be up in arms against this)? Making the hospitals more transparent in what they charge for their services so we can “shop” for the cheapest prices (The hospitals will be against this)? Increased medical tourism? The list is endless. Healthcare is racket in this country and there are too many vested interests to keep the status quo.
^ sounds good to me. But the option was killed. so we still have no choice right?
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ sounds good to me. But the option was killed. so > we still have no choice right? Yup. The watered down version was passed because there is no way the blue dog dems would have voted for a public option and risk losing (they lost anyways). It is extremely difficult to pass anything which would be considered “too liberal” in a democratic controlled congress since the party has such a large tent. The only way to offset the lost revenue of insurance companies from removing the preexisting clause and not dumping sick patients was to make insurance mandatory for all. So liberals are unhappy cause it did not go far enough and conservatives are unhappy because the bill is “socialist”.
^ yup. terrific government we have isn’t it? dems couldn’t even push it through whole as it should be. and now they’ve been neutered. so who gets screwed? my unemployed friend who can’t risk a medical disaster that will destroy his life.
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^ yup. terrific government we have isn’t it? dems > couldn’t even push it through whole as it should > be. and now they’ve been neutered. > > so who gets screwed? my unemployed friend who > can’t risk a medical disaster that will destroy > his life. I would strongly suggest looking into options like medical tourism where you can get great bargains on expensive medical procedures. I am really hoping they start offshoring dermpath, radiology etc. and bring down the salaries of these docs - and if we could get the medical malpractice lawyers off our backs. Of course if you need urgent emergency medical care then its a whole different ballgame.
Actually radiology has been outsourced. just in the past few years, teleradiology labs have been doing final and primary reads, which really reduced costs.
iteracom Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Actually radiology has been outsourced. just in > the past few years, teleradiology labs have been > doing final and primary reads, which really > reduced costs. I hope that trend continues and spreads to other specialities. Dermpaths on an average make $700K an year and work 40 hrs a week, basically looking over as many samples as they can in an hour. I know they have a ton of student debt but this is ridiculous. Whatever happened to becoming a doctor for the love of medicine and helping others?
This is getting too civil…you’re both retards.
yea… bring on the hate! that’s what makes AF fun to read yes?
Our company health insurance premiums went up 20%…which is more than in the previous years I have been here. I wont attribute it to anything.
Obama - B.O.
Just back from the beach, why is everyone talking about Obama.