GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently January 21 19, 2:07 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: January 17 17, 12:03 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: July 15 08, 8:24 pm
Posts: 18544
Location: Low A Minors
Arthur Dent wrote:
ghostrunner wrote:
Stuff like this makes me wonder if Americans like to be contrarian for it's own sake. Maybe all countries have it going on to some extent. And being truthful, I've been like that on some things.


The other way to look at it is the question is answered relative to alternatives. The shift here is an increase in people saying it's a good idea, which you may be more likely to say when it looks like repeal is the alternative rather than reform.


The other thing I see when I look at that is less undecided people. Just eyeballing but it looks like the # of undecideds varied from about 15% to 25% over time. Now it is at the low end of that range, around 14%.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 17 17, 12:43 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm
Posts: 23654
pioneer98 wrote:
Arthur Dent wrote:
ghostrunner wrote:
Stuff like this makes me wonder if Americans like to be contrarian for it's own sake. Maybe all countries have it going on to some extent. And being truthful, I've been like that on some things.


The other way to look at it is the question is answered relative to alternatives. The shift here is an increase in people saying it's a good idea, which you may be more likely to say when it looks like repeal is the alternative rather than reform.


The other thing I see when I look at that is less undecided people. Just eyeballing but it looks like the # of undecideds varied from about 15% to 25% over time. Now it is at the low end of that range, around 14%.


Probably true.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 17 17, 3:35 pm 
Offline
tl;dr

Joined: May 21 09, 12:41 pm
Posts: 4024
That's the part that I don't get. Sure, it isn't perfect and there are things that need to be fixed but it's a good start as far as I'm concerned. I don't get this desire to completely scrap and start over instead of just fixing what didn't work like it was thought it would. We now know what works and what doesn't, how parts had different effects than were hoped or believed they would have. Why not just tweak or overhaul the parts that need it?

Isn't that be like the Cardinals saying that they had some injury problems, made some bad decisions with the lineup and didn't win the WS... so gut the entire organization from top to bottom and start over from scratch instead of just trying to fix the mistakes and plug the holes on the team?

When their car won't start one morning, do they decide the internal combustion engine as we know it just doesn't work and decide to design an entirely new engine from scratch?

Sadly I know the reason they want to scrap it entirely is purely political and NOT out of what's best for the country.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 24 17, 10:32 am 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: July 15 08, 8:24 pm
Posts: 18544
Location: Low A Minors
Aetna withdrew from Obamacare as retribution for not letting them merge with Humana, and allowing them to become a monopoly over a larger region. There is no way to regulate these companies to make them behave nicer. Profit is the only thing that matters to them.

U.S. judge finds that Aetna deceived the public about its reasons for quitting Obamacare
Quote:
Aetna claimed this summer that it was pulling out of all but four of the 15 states where it was providing Obamacare individual insurance because of a business decision — it was simply losing too much money on the Obamacare exchanges.

Now a federal judge has ruled that that was a rank falsehood. In fact, says Judge John D. Bates, Aetna made its decision at least partially in response to a federal antitrust lawsuit blocking its proposed $37-billion merger with Humana. Aetna threatened federal officials with the pullout before the lawsuit was filed, and followed through on its threat once it was filed. Bates made the observations in the course of a ruling he issued Monday blocking the merger.
Quote:
Bates found that this rationalization was largely untrue. In fact, he noted, Aetna pulled out of some states and counties that were actually profitable to make a point in its lawsuit defense — and then misled the public about its motivations. Bates’ analysis relies in part on a “smoking gun” letter to the Justice Department in which Chief Executive Mark Bertolini explicitly ties Aetna’s participation in Obamacare to the DOJ’s actions on the merger, which we reported in August. But it goes much further.

Among the locations where Aetna withdrew were 17 counties in three states where the Department of Justice asserted that the merger would produce unlawfully low levels of competition on the individual exchanges. By pulling out, Aetna could say that it wasn’t competing in those counties’ exchanges anyway, rendering the government’s point moot: “The evidence provides persuasive support for the conclusion that Aetna withdrew from the on-exchange markets in the 17 complaint counties to improve its litigation position,” Bates wrote. “The Court does not credit the minimal efforts of Aetna executives to claim otherwise.”

Indeed, he wrote, Aetna’s decision to pull out of the exchange business in Florida was “so far outside of normal business practice” that it perplexed the company’s top executive in Florida, who was not in the decision loop.

“I just can’t make sense out of the Florida dec[ision],” the executive, Christopher Ciano, wrote to Jonathan Mayhew, the head of Aetna’s national exchange business. “Based on the latest run rate data...we are making money from the on-exchange business. Was Florida’s performance ever debated?”


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 27 17, 1:06 pm 
Offline
Hall Of Famer
User avatar

Joined: April 18 06, 9:40 pm
Posts: 23654
Whoa. The Washington Post received leaked audio from the GOP meeting in Philly.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... 2354dc576b




Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 27 17, 1:23 pm 
Offline
Snayke's Bottomline
User avatar

Joined: August 3 16, 9:44 am
Posts: 3821
Incredibly damning story.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 27 17, 1:32 pm 
Offline
Consider him admonished
User avatar

Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Posts: 7641
Location: Charleston, SC via Arkansas
Quote:
“We’d better be sure that we’re prepared to live with the market we’ve created” with repeal, said Rep. Tom McClintock (R-Calif.). “That’s going to be called Trumpcare. Republicans will own that lock, stock and barrel, and we’ll be judged in the election less than two years away.”


That is what happens when you rail on something for 6 or so years and make it a rallying cry.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 27 17, 11:07 pm 
Offline
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22733
Location: Thinking of the Children
Took the newborn to the pediatrician for a well child visit which is covered 100% with no copay under ACA and most insurance policies. But, enough insurance companies were not paying for the well child visit and the patient was getting stuck with 100% of the $300 cost that the doc office decided to code as many well child visits as office visits (aka, a sick kid needs to see a doctor) as possible to avoid the patients getting popped at $300. Instead the insurance would pay for the sick child visit/office visit and the patient would pay the copay....which seems unethical to even do that....though they did it for the right reasons I guess. But, still it seems wrong to force everyone to pay a copay even though their insurance technically covers the visit at 100%.

Tough to know who to even be mad at here. Well, I take that back. It's the insurance companies, but sheeeit.

$300 well child visit seems like a lot for a 10 minute conversation about height, weight, sleeping habits, feeding habits, and [insert miscellaneous concern here] but with a doc, nurse, tech, and admin, it's really not that unreasonable.

The ACA requires well child visits be paid at 100% by insurance with no copay. But, some policies were grandfathered in. Seems like a lot of those that wree grandfathered in decided to stop paying this at 100% or never did. The fact the doc office that's been open for at least a decade now JUST switched this a couple months ago leads me to believe it's the later. And, really, what good is the visit being covered 100% if the doc office has to code it differently to avoid their patients getting dinged for $300?

So, yeah, let's blame the insurance companies. But, obviously insurance companies are going to do [expletive] like this. It's how they make money. The value they provide is completely nothing. Well, there are some life insurance policies that make sense due to tax breaks. And, it makes sense to require liability vehicular insurance.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 27 17, 11:16 pm 
Offline
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22733
Location: Thinking of the Children
ghostrunner wrote:
Whoa. The Washington Post received leaked audio from the GOP meeting in Philly.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... 2354dc576b



Where's the audio?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: January 28 17, 1:25 am 
Offline
MLB.TV Customer Support
User avatar

Joined: July 3 06, 2:19 pm
Posts: 8159
Location: Indianapolis
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
So, yeah, let's blame the insurance companies. But, obviously insurance companies are going to do [expletive] like this. It's how they make money. The value they provide is completely nothing.

Wait; are you on board with single payer health care?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 52 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: dmarx114, Secret Weapon and 23 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group