Page 62 of 143 FirstFirst ... 1252575859606162636465666772112 ... LastLast
Results 1,221 to 1,240 of 2855
  1. #1221  
    It is not up to the government to make the choice for ME or MY loved ones if THEY should pull the plug. I couldn't imagine someone I love being in a car accident with major injuries, and the government gets to choose if they are worth spending money on or just killing them. It is not up to the government to determine OUR WORTH.
    I refuse to pay for health insurance for a family of 6 on welfare who couldnt figure out that HAVING BABIES COSTS MONEY. If they didn't have health insurance, maybe they shouldn't have had kids! There needs to be more personal responsibility in this country, you can't just expect the government to bail you out all the time.
  2. #1222  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleighc1892 View Post
    It is not up to the government to make the choice for ME or MY loved ones if THEY should pull the plug. I couldn't imagine someone I love being in a car accident with major injuries, and the government gets to choose if they are worth spending money on or just killing them. It is not up to the government to determine OUR WORTH.
    I refuse to pay for health insurance for a family of 6 on welfare who couldnt figure out that HAVING BABIES COSTS MONEY. If they didn't have health insurance, maybe they shouldn't have had kids! There needs to be more personal responsibility in this country, you can't just expect the government to bail you out all the time.
    Whoooohaaaaaa! I don't think I can add anything to that. Of course, you realize you will be looked at as an uncaring person and quite selfish. I bet you hate paying taxes to!
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  3. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #1223  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleighc1892 View Post
    It is not up to the government to make the choice for ME or MY loved ones if THEY should pull the plug. I couldn't imagine someone I love being in a car accident with major injuries, and the government gets to choose if they are worth spending money on or just killing them. It is not up to the government to determine OUR WORTH.
    I refuse to pay for health insurance for a family of 6 on welfare who couldnt figure out that HAVING BABIES COSTS MONEY. If they didn't have health insurance, maybe they shouldn't have had kids! There needs to be more personal responsibility in this country, you can't just expect the government to bail you out all the time.
    While I agree with you in principle.... those kids didn't screw up, their parents did. I don't mind helping to pay for their healthcare.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  4. #1224  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    While I agree with you in principle.... those kids didn't screw up, their parents did. I don't mind helping to pay for their healthcare.
    I don't think anyone advocates putting babies on the street....but rather our system seems to reward people having babies. I confess...I don't know how this works so maybe someone in here has some info, but don't many welfare programs give more monay based on # of children? Again, I may be wrong on this...just don't know! But, if so, then I think the point was that certain behavior is rewarded and it comes back to people having to pay for the bad behavior of others. I would never want to force a person to be limited to one hamburge at lunch, but, if that person decides to weigh 500 lbs and have health issues because of that, should I be responsible for their decisions? Interesting question though....does certain personal responsibility come with true freedom?
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  5. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #1225  
    The following is one of my biggest concerns regarding Obama's healthplan, and so I hope you don't mind me posting it here, rather than just a simple link:


    Sarah Palin: Concerning the "Death Panels"
    08/12/2009 at 8:55pm

    Yesterday President Obama responded to my statement that Democratic health care proposals would lead to rationed care; that the sick, the elderly, and the disabled would suffer the most under such rationing; and that under such a system these “unproductive” members of society could face the prospect of government bureaucrats determining whether they deserve health care.

    The President made light of these concerns. He said:

    “Let me just be specific about some things that I’ve been hearing lately that we just need to dispose of here. The rumor that’s been circulating a lot lately is this idea that somehow the House of Representatives voted for death panels that will basically pull the plug on grandma because we’ve decided that we don’t, it’s too expensive to let her live anymore....It turns out that I guess this arose out of a provision in one of the House bills that allowed Medicare to reimburse people for consultations about end-of-life care, setting up living wills, the availability of hospice, etc. So the intention of the members of Congress was to give people more information so that they could handle issues of end-of-life care when they’re ready on their own terms. It wasn’t forcing anybody to do anything.” [1]

    The provision that President Obama refers to is Section 1233 of HR 3200, entitled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.” [2] With all due respect, it’s misleading for the President to describe this section as an entirely voluntary provision that simply increases the information offered to Medicare recipients. The issue is the context in which that information is provided and the coercive effect these consultations will have in that context.

    Section 1233 authorizes advanced care planning consultations for senior citizens on Medicare every five years, and more often “if there is a significant change in the health condition of the individual ... or upon admission to a skilled nursing facility, a long-term care facility... or a hospice program." [3] During those consultations, practitioners must explain “the continuum of end-of-life services and supports available, including palliative care and hospice,” and the government benefits available to pay for such services. [4]

    Now put this in context. These consultations are authorized whenever a Medicare recipient’s health changes significantly or when they enter a nursing home, and they are part of a bill whose stated purpose is “to reduce the growth in health care spending.” [5] Is it any wonder that senior citizens might view such consultations as attempts to convince them to help reduce health care costs by accepting minimal end-of-life care? As Charles Lane notes in the Washington Post, Section 1233 “addresses compassionate goals in disconcerting proximity to fiscal ones.... If it’s all about obviating suffering, emotional or physical, what’s it doing in a measure to “bend the curve” on health-care costs?” [6]

    As Lane also points out:

    Though not mandatory, as some on the right have claimed, the consultations envisioned in Section 1233 aren’t quite “purely voluntary,” as Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.) asserts. To me, “purely voluntary” means “not unless the patient requests one.” Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that’s an incentive to insist.

    Patients may refuse without penalty, but many will bow to white-coated authority. Once they’re in the meeting, the bill does permit “formulation” of a plug-pulling order right then and there. So when Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) denies that Section 1233 would “place senior citizens in situations where they feel pressured to sign end-of-life directives that they would not otherwise sign,” I don’t think he’s being realistic. [7]

    Even columnist Eugene Robinson, a self-described “true believer” who “will almost certainly support” “whatever reform package finally emerges”, agrees that “If the government says it has to control health-care costs and then offers to pay doctors to give advice about hospice care, citizens are not delusional to conclude that the goal is to reduce end-of-life spending.” [8]

    So are these usually friendly pundits wrong? Is this all just a “rumor” to be “disposed of”, as President Obama says? Not according to Democratic New York State Senator Ruben Diaz, Chairman of the New York State Senate Aging Committee, who writes:

    Section 1233 of House Resolution 3200 puts our senior citizens on a slippery slope and may diminish respect for the inherent dignity of each of their lives.... It is egregious to consider that any senior citizen ... should be placed in a situation where he or she would feel pressured to save the government money by dying a little sooner than he or she otherwise would, be required to be counseled about the supposed benefits of killing oneself, or be encouraged to sign any end of life directives that they would not otherwise sign. [9]

    Of course, it’s not just this one provision that presents a problem. My original comments concerned statements made by Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, a health policy advisor to President Obama and the brother of the President’s chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel has written that some medical services should not be guaranteed to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens....An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia.” [10] Dr. Emanuel has also advocated basing medical decisions on a system which “produces a priority curve on which individuals aged between roughly 15 and 40 years get the most chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get chances that are attenuated.” [11]

    President Obama can try to gloss over the effects of government authorized end-of-life consultations, but the views of one of his top health care advisors are clear enough. It’s all just more evidence that the Democratic legislative proposals will lead to health care rationing, and more evidence that the top-down plans of government bureaucrats will never result in real health care reform.

    [1] See President Obama Addresses Sarah Palin “Death Panels,” “Wild Representations” - Political Punch.
    [2] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/1...ext-071409.pdf
    [3] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1); Sec. 1233 (hhh)(3)(B)(1), above.
    [4] See HR 3200 sec. 1233 (hhh)(1)(E), above.
    [5] See http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/1...ext-071409.pdf
    [6] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...80703043.html].
    [7] Id.
    [8] See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...81002455.html].
    [9] See Letter to Congressman Henry Waxman re Section 1233 of HR 3200 | New York State Senate.
    [10] See http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/Where_Civic...cracy_Meet.pdf
    [11] See Principles for Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  6. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #1226  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    I don't think anyone advocates putting babies on the street....but rather our system seems to reward people having babies. I confess...I don't know how this works so maybe someone in here has some info, but don't many welfare programs give more monay based on # of children? Again, I may be wrong on this...just don't know! But, if so, then I think the point was that certain behavior is rewarded and it comes back to people having to pay for the bad behavior of others. I would never want to force a person to be limited to one hamburge at lunch, but, if that person decides to weigh 500 lbs and have health issues because of that, should I be responsible for their decisions? Interesting question though....does certain personal responsibility come with true freedom?
    You're talking about the welfare system, and I'm talking about healthcare. I know the two intersect, but its two different arguments. I'm talking about making sure those babies are healthy and have the checkups, nutrition, medications, that they need. The rest of it is for another thread.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  7. #1227  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    You're talking about the welfare system, and I'm talking about healthcare. I know the two intersect, but its two different arguments. I'm talking about making sure those babies are healthy and have the checkups, nutrition, medications, that they need. The rest of it is for another thread.
    Gotcha....but....if someone is having children to get more money from welfare, we are now responsible for the healthcare on the additional children. I understand your point though.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  8. #1228  
    By the way.....per an article on WSJ.com, it appears the crazy Republicans at these town hall meetings have likely put the "stops" on any legislation dealing with "end of life" counseling. So you see, citizens speaking up are starting to let our Congressmen/woman know what they do and don't like. This is how the process should work. It's like the uproar over the plane orders....people complained....and they are gone.

    We must continue to discuss these issues....take things slow....so that this can be done correctly. I'm still opposed to it being a Federal Government issue....should be through the states...but...we tend to not worry about that silly Constituation much anymore. It was written by rich white land owners and doesn't hold much water these days. Oh well.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  9. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
       #1229  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    So, I guess we should just cancel the whole Medicare and Medicard programs too. Let's see how that suggestion goes over...
    Ok... but it was your suggestion, not mine.
    I would love it if the government weren't involved with healthcare. Private insurance, however, has wasted (a.k.a taken for profit) so much that it can't be trusted any longer. Whenever profit is the main motivation, health becomes secondary.
    1. Not all healthcare insurance companies are for profit. I work for one that's not for profit.

    2. For those insurers that are for profit, those healthcare insurance profits account for .6% of the healthcare industry.

    You're attacking the wrong thing. I'm all for reducing costs in insurance, but it's tort reform, waste and abuse, pharmaceutical manufacturers, lawyers, etc., that are the real drivers of healthcare costs. That's where the costs are driven up. The reason why the democratic talking points are focusing on the insurance industry is that they're in bed with the lobbyists for the lawyers and pharmaceutical companies.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  10. #1230  
    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    While a candidate, Obama supported a single payer system because he knows that's the ONLY way to cut costs and increase quality, as evidenced by every other advanced country in the world. As President, has has stated repeatedly (understanding the political realities) that, if he were to start from the beginning, a single payer system would be the best way to go. But, because we have a tradition of private insurance, he would have to build on that tradition.

    The Public Option would give healthcare to the 47 million uninsured. People that the current private insurance companies won't give health insurance to at all because it's too expensive. The same thing happened when Medicare and Medicaid were enacted in 1964. Private companies would not extend cheaper coverage to the elder and poor--so they ignored them. People cried that Medicare would take over everything--but it didn't.

    So, for you, it's better to ignore the health needs of 1/6th of America than succumb to the irrational fear that the government insurance will take over?

    Let's see, if you lose your job and have to deal with paying for health insurance on your own, who'll be screaming for government aid.
    I'm self employed and even though I post too often on here, not planning on firing me I opted for the HSA so I can better manage my health care costs. I do pray I will never have to "scream" for government aid.

    Heavy sigh....you seem to read all my posts except where I have said repeatedly that I know there are issues with healthcare (please read that sentence several times, thanks). I just disagree with you and the liberals on how to fix it. I believe we should open up the state borders to increase competition....I don't have a problem with the states coming up with ways to insure the uninsured....I have a problem with the Federal Gov handling this because it is not allowed under the Constitution (I realize you believe it is, I refer to the 10th Amendment since it is not mentioned as a duty of the federal gov)....I'm for tort reform as it will clearly save money (I realize democrats are against that because they get tons of money from attorneys).....and I also have a problem with only one group (the wealthy) funding it or forcing businesses to fund it. Businesses, other than I guess yours, don't set up shop to provide health care. That is difficult for some to understand, but it simply is not the duty of small businesses to do so....it can help them (as I've posted many times)....but should not be mandatory as HR 3200 requires (either they go private or make a contribution based on their payroll, it's in there, please read it).

    So....I have plenty of compassion for those that need it and can't get it. I just differ with you on how to go about doing it. You trust the government and I don't. We disagree on that. And yes, medicare does work if you call working going bankrupt.

    Oh....you can believe the new Obama.....I'll believe the one who said we had to start small and build towards single payer system. Another place you and I disagree....you want healthcare like in Canada and the UK and I don't.

    Please read my posts before accusing me of things that aren't true.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  11. #1231  
    Quote Originally Posted by clemgrad85 View Post
    Sounds like a case of "he said she said", or in this case "he said he said". At Obama's democrat healthcare rally on Tuesday, he said (Obama), “The irony is that actually one of the chief sponsors of this bill originally was a Republican — then House member, now senator, named Johnny Isakson from Georgia — who very sensibly thought this is something that would expand people’s options,” Obama said in Portsmouth.

    Obama seems to indicate that Isakson is "one of the chief sponsors of this bill", which according to Isakson is totally false: “I never consulted with the White House in this process and had no role whatsoever in the House Democrats’ bill,” Isakson said. “I categorically oppose the House bill and find it incredulous that the White House and others would use my amendment as a scapegoat for their misguided policies.”

    So....to call Isakson "one of the chief sponsors" is totally incorrect. Palandri says I shouldn't use the word "lie" when it relates to democrat Presidents, so I'lll avoid that word. I think "liar" can only be used in reference to what Republican Presidents say. A bit odd, but apparently is some liberal rule....go figure....but I'm learning!
    Parsing. He sponsored a provision in the Senate bill that called for almost exactly the same thing as exists in the House bill. Read exactly what he said: he didn't have anything to do with the House bill (No kidding. He's in the Senate) and he didn't work with the White House on the wording (and that's because the bills aren't coming from the White House; they're coming from the House and Senate). He opposes the House bill. No kidding. Notice he did not say he didn't sponsor an almost identical amendment in the Senate bill. That's because he did. You can call that "totally incorrect", but like I said, that's parsing. And lying? Yeah, I'd say that's the wrong word for this.
  12. #1232  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Parsing. He sponsored a provision in the Senate bill that called for almost exactly the same thing as exists in the House bill. Read exactly what he said: he didn't have anything to do with the House bill (No kidding. He's in the Senate) and he didn't work with the White House on the wording (and that's because the bills aren't coming from the White House; they're coming from the House and Senate). He opposes the House bill. No kidding. Notice he did not say he didn't sponsor an almost identical amendment in the Senate bill. That's because he did. You can call that "totally incorrect", but like I said, that's parsing. And lying? Yeah, I'd say that's the wrong word for this.
    Ummm.....did you read Obama's quote? He says Isakson is "one of the chief sponsors of this bill". Don't put on me that he is a Senator.....it was your man Obama who said he was one of the chief sponsors of the bill. Most Americans probably didn't even pick up on that fact (that he's a Senator) and that is exactly what they were hoping for, getting some folks to think a Republican is actually sponsoring the bill. Good politics....but sneaky.

    It's like when the 11 year old little girl just happened to be picked from the audience with the note from her Mom. Something "fishy" about that: Malden girl accused of being White House plant - The Boston Globe

    As the article says, not many coincidences in the Obama World.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  13. #1233  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    While I agree with you in principle.... those kids didn't screw up, their parents did. I don't mind helping to pay for their healthcare.
    Yeah i understand that...but the parents will have children just to mooch money off of the government and you know what? During the Great Depression and even before that, parents have taken RESPONSIBILITY fot their actions. They did whatever they could to keep their children healthy even if it meant giving up food for themselves. Maybe now we shouldn't be babying these people, because obviously it's not working so well.
  14. #1234  
    This is kind of off topic but did ya'll see the video of Sheila Jackson Lee answering her phone at a town hall meeting right in the middle of a woman asking her a question? Once again, she manages to make a complete *** out of herself.
  15. #1235  
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleighc1892 View Post
    This is kind of off topic but did ya'll see the video of Sheila Jackson Lee answering her phone at a town hall meeting right in the middle of a woman asking her a question? Once again, she manages to make a complete *** out of herself.
    Yeah, it's been posted about already. It was great to see no one took the bait then, hopefully they won’t now either.
    Iago

    "Good name in man and woman, dear my lord, Is the immediate jewel of their souls: Who steals my purse steals trash . . . But he that filches from me my good name Robs me of that which not enriches him
    And makes me poor indeed."


    Criminal: A person with predatory instincts who has not sufficient capital to form a corporation.
    - Howard Scott
  16. #1236  
    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    Yeah, it's been posted about already. It was great to see no one took the bait then, hopefully they won’t now either.
    "take the bait"? So I guess you think she is a fine, upstanding citizen and what she did wasn't absolutely rude? I guess nobody should say anything about it, right? That's whats wrong with America...
  17. #1237  
    Quote Originally Posted by Iago View Post
    Yeah, it's been posted about already. It was great to see no one took the bait then, hopefully they won’t now either.
    I think people didn't take "the bait" because this woman has proved time and time again she is a loser. I don't think anyone was really all that surprised. She is black, a white woman was expressing her concerns, so she was going to ignore her. I'll bet if the woman asking the question was black, Lee would have been listening intently to her. Had the colors been reversed, it would have been a case of racism. Anyway....how is that for taking the bait? LOL Of course, now Palandri will accuse me of "stirring the pot".
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton
  18. #1238  
    You are so wrong.

    Quote Originally Posted by zelgo View Post
    Everyone is racist. That racism only affects you if you are not in the group with power.
  19. #1239  
    Well heres my opinion:

    I have great health insurance. I was in a terrible car accident due to someone being drunk and causing the suv to flip. The person was an ***** for drinking and I'll never forget/forgive the person for drinking and driving.

    Anyways I was in Intensive Care for a week and had 6 procedures done on my neck. I was life flighted and was paralyzed for 3 days and regained feeling (thank God) later on the 3rd day.

    My medical bills came to a whopping total (after PT for a year) $219,000. Whats funny is, I didn't have to pay for any of this, their insurance did. Whats really funny is this. While, if I was at fault and didn't have insurance, I would have to pay the total $219,000. BUT, Since I wasn't at fault and it was covered by insurance, the insurance companies paid a discounted (Yes thats right, discounted) price of $98k. How do I know this? My lawyer decided to let me know. He had to. I had to sign papers stating that I allowed them to review and pay my medical bills.

    I think its COMPLETE BS that insurance companies can get away with this load of crap. What if it was someone who was involved in a hit and run and didn't have insurance? What if it was a college grad that just graduated, was looking for a job, and their insurance kicked them off their parents insurance because they are out of school?

    I'm so sick of this horse shat. I was fortunate, but I know many aren't. These insurance companies have been making bank for decades like this. It's time that things change. They may still have to pay out a decent amount of money, but believe me, they make it back 10 fold.

    Its unfortunate that people only care about themselves any more. They don't realize that many people are hurting because of the current system. They are just satisfied with their cozy way of life.

    Ahh I don't even feel like continuing this rant.

    btw I'm a registered Republican. I'll be changing over to Democrat soon because of this very subject and the recent shenanigans the Republicans have been pulling.
  20. #1240  
    Quote Originally Posted by tntsniper View Post
    Well heres my opinion:

    I have great health insurance. I was in a terrible car accident due to someone being drunk and causing the suv to flip. The person was an ***** for drinking and I'll never forget/forgive the person for drinking and driving.

    Anyways I was in Intensive Care for a week and had 6 procedures done on my neck. I was life flighted and was paralyzed for 3 days and regained feeling (thank God) later on the 3rd day.

    My medical bills came to a whopping total (after PT for a year) $219,000. Whats funny is, I didn't have to pay for any of this, their insurance did. Whats really funny is this. While, if I was at fault and didn't have insurance, I would have to pay the total $219,000. BUT, Since I wasn't at fault and it was covered by insurance, the insurance companies paid a discounted (Yes thats right, discounted) price of $98k. How do I know this? My lawyer decided to let me know. He had to. I had to sign papers stating that I allowed them to review and pay my medical bills.

    I think its COMPLETE BS that insurance companies can get away with this load of crap. What if it was someone who was involved in a hit and run and didn't have insurance? What if it was a college grad that just graduated, was looking for a job, and their insurance kicked them off their parents insurance because they are out of school?

    I'm so sick of this horse shat. I was fortunate, but I know many aren't. These insurance companies have been making bank for decades like this. It's time that things change. They may still have to pay out a decent amount of money, but believe me, they make it back 10 fold.

    Its unfortunate that people only care about themselves any more. They don't realize that many people are hurting because of the current system. They are just satisfied with their cozy way of life.

    Ahh I don't even feel like continuing this rant.

    btw I'm a registered Republican. I'll be changing over to Democrat soon because of this very subject and the recent shenanigans the Republicans have been pulling.
    Before you go blaming the insurance companies, and by the way that would be auto, not health, but still, this issue comes up quite a bit when folks see this "discount" through insurance vs if you had to pay straight up for it. It's call "negotiated discount" via your network. This is actually good! The insurance company sets up networks of providers and if you use those, the providers have agreed to accept set prices for that particular service (in exchange they get patients directed towards them). This discount can be quite substantial. I've seen MRI's billed at $1500 and end up getting processed for $600 or less. Of course, the patient sometimes think they owe that difference (often cussing the no good insurance company) only to find out that they can't be billed for that difference (of course, that doesn't stop the doctor from sometimes trying to bill for the difference, but that's another issue). Anyway, these discounts are good in that they are an attempt to keep medical costs down. Isn't that what we want?

    As for your situation, glad you came through fine but really not sure what you're upset about. Is it because they worked out a discount with the provider? Why would you not be mad at the provider for wanting to charge you one price, only to negotiate with the insurance company a lower cost. I'm baffled as to why you would be mad at the insurance company...and again...didn't you say this was covered by the auto insurance company of the person who hit you?

    If you're leaving the Republican party over this one issue, then you must not have been a very strong Republican/Conservative to begin with. I will say I was disappointed in the Republicans during the last term of Bush as they strayed from what I believe was fiscal responsibility....but...I think (fingers crossed) they might be getting back on track.
    PalmPilot, PalmIIIc, Treo 650, Pre, Pre 3, Nokia 1020, Lumia 950

    "It's good to be the King" - Mel Brooks, History of the World, Part 1

    "I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me." General George S. Patton

Posting Permissions