Page 23 of 29 FirstFirst ... 131819202122232425262728 ... LastLast
Results 441 to 460 of 567
  1. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #441  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    There's a difference between Medicare denying payment for something that isn't necessary (which might upset the provider but not necessarily the patient), and patient satisfaction with their insurance providers. Medicare denial rates are actually almost identical to Aetna's but higher than most other private companies. Additionally, it turns out that Medicare compares very favorably if not better than private insurers with regard to delays in payment, transparency, and does significantly better in terms of paying what was contracted for. This last little bit probably more than makes up for a higher denial rate, since you actually get what you think you will get from Medicare.

    If you want to look through lots of specific data about this, here it is. Have at it.

    http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upl...reportcard.pdf

    After looking through all of it, then see if you really think there's much difference between having Medicare as a provider or Aetna. Based on my experience, I'll take Medicare.
    You may have to. Of course, you and I both know that your medical care will be higher than the average person on Medicare. That could partly explain your position but this is not for me to say.
  2. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #442  
    Quote Originally Posted by sublimobile View Post
    I never said these were the democratic successes I was referring to....You self-servingly assumed this.
    Oh really. From Post 422--by you.

    Quote Originally Posted by sublimobile View Post
    This will turn out like every other major democratic bill. The republicans will whine all day, not cast a single vote, the bill will be a total success, then the republicans will just act like they were all for it.
    Yes, exactly what other "major democratic bills" are you referring to then?

    You are right--I did assume that you were talking about hallmark democrat welfare programs like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security. If those aren't it, then which "total successes" are you referring to?

    KAM
    Last edited by KAM1138; 03/22/2010 at 01:30 PM.
  3. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #443  
    Quote Originally Posted by sublimobile View Post
    So who are you blaming?
    Did you miss what you just replied to? I just said government.

    KAM
  4. #444  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    To pretend that a vote for Obama was about THIS plan--this mangled piece of political crap is what's not genuine.

    KAM
    Then be specific on what campaign points are not in the bill? What points in the bill are contrary to the campaign?

    Don't dare say bipartisan. There are hundreds of republican amendments in that bill and they all still stuck to their waterloo plan and not a single republican voted for it. blech
  5.    #445  
    Quote Originally Posted by groovy View Post
    You may have to. Of course, you and I both know that your medical care will be higher than the average person on Medicare. That could partly explain your position but this is not for me to say.
    Interesting comment. I wasn't aware that bouts of reason, ironclad logic and first-hand knowledge of the content were associated with higher Medicare costs. But maybe you know something I don't.
  6. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #446  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Then be specific on what campaign points are not in the bill? What points in the bill are contrary to the campaign?
    For that analysis to take Place Obama would have had to be consistent, and he was not. He said one thing to one audience and a different thing to another.

    The point is--you shouldn't pretend that people vote for a concept and then are obligated to agree with the end result as justification to do whatever a politician wants. It simply does not work that way.

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Don't dare say bipartisan. There are hundreds of republican amendments in that bill and they all still stuck to their waterloo plan and not a single republican voted for it. blech
    Too late, I already did. You are correct though--opposition to this mess was bipartisan.

    It's interesting how identifying this as "Waterloo" which is proven out by the "damn everything, just pass it" attitude we've seen on display is a REPUBLICAN problem. This is totally about politics, and that is on perfect display amongst Democrats.

    Pro-Choice President Obama issues an Executive Order AGAINST funding Abortions to buy off a gullible (or lying) Stupak. He cuts special deals with anyone and everyone necessary to get this passed. He (or his allies) bribe many members of Congress so they will vote AGAINST their Constituents.

    Or are you going to tell me that this is the "hope and change" that people voted for--The most abject political maneuvering this country has ever seen.

    Yep--all you Obama supporters should be cheering--this is the hope and change you asked for, and boy, you are getting it.

    KAM
  7. groovy's Avatar
    Posts
    941 Posts
    Global Posts
    955 Global Posts
    #447  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Interesting comment. I wasn't aware that bouts of reason, ironclad logic and first-hand knowledge of the content were associated with higher Medicare costs. But maybe you know something I don't.
    You level of medical care will be higher, not your costs. In fact, your costs will in all likelihood be lower. Just the way it goes.
  8. #448  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    For that analysis to take Place Obama would have had to be consistent, and he was not. He said one thing to one audience and a different thing to another.
    That is absolutely an untruth. The campaign platform was clearly stated and posted on the campaign website including the individual health care reform points. Don't pretend otherwise.

    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Or are you going to tell me that this is the "hope and change" that people voted for--The most abject political maneuvering this country has ever seen.

    Yep--all you Obama supporters should be cheering--this is the hope and change you asked for, and boy, you are getting it.
    Yup, gonna tell you that. People now able to get insurance for a child with pre-existing conditions aren't going to analyze political maneuvering. And btw, I can't wait to watch the republicans campaign on taking that away.

    The republican leadership has played this very poorly, very poorly indeed. Seems the only thing they're left with is a rabid, racist, homo-phobic fringe group.
  9. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #449  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    That is absolutely an untruth. The campaign platform was clearly stated and posted on the campaign website including the individual health care reform points. Don't pretend otherwise.
    What evidence do you have that the people that voted for him, did so for that reason? Please--this was a beauty contest, misdirection campaign from start to finish. He ran against Bush more than anything.

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Yup, gonna tell you that. People now able to get insurance for a child with pre-existing conditions aren't going to analyze political maneuvering. And btw, I can't wait to watch the republicans campaign on taking that away.
    Yes, I'm sure your efforts to tout the benefits while ignoring the detriments will continue unabated.

    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    The republican leadership has played this very poorly, very poorly indeed. Seems the only thing they're left with is a rabid, racist, homo-phobic fringe group.
    As if you'd say anything else. Keep up the Propaganda--it SEEMS to be working.

    You're making arguments that I'm sure many peasants in Russia heard almost 100 years ago, and Chinese peasants heard 65-70 years ago. "Don't worry--government will take care of you. We're here to help you." The siren song of the tyranny of government. It's always "for the people."

    Yeah, how are those people dependent on the government doing after over 70 years of the New Deal and almost 50 of the Great Society. Oh right--poverty is going ahead full steam isn't it? Proof positive that politicians are content with dependency. Without creating dependency, the Democrats wouldn't have a snowball's chance, so they MUST perpetuate it, and continue spreading serfdom throughout our country.

    Perhaps this is the "Total success" that was referred to earlier.

    KAM
  10. #450  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    [...] It's always "for the people." [...]
    No, sometimes it's 'for the children'. Other times, it's to 'protect us from terrorism'.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  11. #451  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    What evidence do you have that the people that voted for him, did so for that reason? Please--this was a beauty contest, misdirection campaign from start to finish. He ran against Bush more than anything.
    Let's not ignore the primary either. The Obama campaign was majorly focused on these changes to health care. Again, to deny that the American people were not voting in favor of that change is absolutely disingenuous.
  12. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #452  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    No, sometimes it's 'for the children'. Other times, it's to 'protect us from terrorism'.
    True. It's a variation on a theme.

    KAM
  13. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #453  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Let's not ignore the primary either. The Obama campaign was majorly focused on these changes to health care. Again, to deny that the American people were not voting in favor of that change is absolutely disingenuous.
    Oh please--the campaign was about all sorts of things which changed depending on who he was talking to. To pretend that all those voters went to his website, learned exactly what he wanted on healthcare, and that what he wanted is what ended up in the Senate bill is just stupid.

    If it was, then why was he "looking for good ideas" or changing things now late in the process. You're making ridiculously unsupportable claims.

    You have no idea why individuals voted for him, so stop pretending that you do.

    KAM
  14. #454  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Oh please--the campaign was about all sorts of things which changed depending on who he was talking to. To pretend that all those voters went to his website, learned exactly what he wanted on healthcare, and that what he wanted is what ended up in the Senate bill is just stupid.
    Actually, the campaign stayed on point very well. Many analysts pointed that out during the campaign.

    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    You're making ridiculously unsupportable claims.

    You have no idea why individuals voted for him, so stop pretending that you do.
    Actually it's completely supportable, they're called exit polls.
  15.    #455  
    Quote Originally Posted by KAM1138 View Post
    Oh please--the campaign was about all sorts of things which changed depending on who he was talking to. To pretend that all those voters went to his website, learned exactly what he wanted on healthcare, and that what he wanted is what ended up in the Senate bill is just stupid.

    If it was, then why was he "looking for good ideas" or changing things now late in the process. You're making ridiculously unsupportable claims.

    You have no idea why individuals voted for him, so stop pretending that you do.

    KAM
    Maybe. But I bet I know why teabaggers didn't vote for him.
  16. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #456  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Let's not ignore the primary either. The Obama campaign was majorly focused on these changes to health care. Again, to deny that the American people were not voting in favor of that change is absolutely disingenuous.
    You keep saying that. The bill did not exist then, so voting on it was impossible. Lots of people who oppose this bill agree that healthcare needs fixing. Your logic is flawed. Agreeing that healthcare needs fixing, and voting to change it, does not mean you have to eat whatever crap they shovel down your throat later.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  17. Micael's Avatar
    Posts
    736 Posts
    Global Posts
    739 Global Posts
    #457  
    On second thought... I take that back. We are, in fact, eating it.
    The Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.
  18. #458  
    Quote Originally Posted by Micael View Post
    You keep saying that. The bill did not exist then, so voting on it was impossible. Lots of people who oppose this bill agree that healthcare needs fixing. Your logic is flawed. Agreeing that healthcare needs fixing and voting to change it does not mean you have to eat whatever they shovel down your throat later.
    Again you keep trying to say "this bill". Cut it out, you're playing word games. Read what I'm saying, this vote last night is the delivery of the major health care points President Obama campaigned on. Simple fact.
  19. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #459  
    Hello Everyone,

    Here's an article explaining the fiscal issues a bit.

    The Lie of Fiscal Responsibility - Reason Magazine

    Excerpt:
    Why does all this matter? It's not just the cherry-picking of figures and the rhetorical deception, it's the country's overall fiscal future. Thanks to a spiraling deficit, the economy is chugging merrily towards a broken bridge over a rocky canyon—a fact that almost no one from either party is willing to do anything about. America, according to the CBO, is on an "unsustainable" path, and the nation's solid-gold credit rating may be at risk. So it doesn't matter how many times blinkered legislators repeat to themselves, "I think I can, I think I can": Nothing short of significant cutbacks to entitlement spending is going to magically transform the U.S. budget into the little engine that could.

    Instead, politicians are paying for new entitlements by shifting money from unsustainable programs—money that ought to have gone toward getting America's fiscal house in order.

    Democrats made history all right—but only by sacrificing the future.

    End Excerpt

    KAM
  20. KAM1138
    KAM1138's Avatar
    #460  
    Quote Originally Posted by davidra View Post
    Maybe. But I bet I know why teabaggers didn't vote for him.
    I'm sure you are well aware of all the nonsense that you decide you "know."

    KAM

Posting Permissions