This post will shock Wanda the Teabagee Troll

crazy_ideas


This will shock Wanda the Teabagee Troll, but I favor national healthcare – Single-Payer or Socialized Medicine. Yep, that’s right. That’s why I said that my ideology doesn’t have a name.

I have no illusions. What I envision is not politically feasible and won’t be any time soon. But it’s what we should do. These are the main points of my healthcare reform plan:

1. The old system is convoluted, irrational, and extremely inefficient. Access to health care is uneven and we pay too much for what we get. The new system (Obamacare) is far worse. We NEED healthcare reform.

2. This is the United States of America. We are the wealthiest and most powerful nation in human history. There is no excuse for not having the best system in the world.

3. Every person in this country should have access to quality, affordable healthcare, but not unlimited or unnecessary healthcare.

4. Access to healthcare should not be dependent on employment status. Once upon a time it made sense to link the two but not anymore.

5. Private “for-profit” healthcare insurance companies need to be eliminated. They are leeches on the system.

6. Billing and administrative overhead needs to be drastically reduced. We spend too much money on people who only handle paperwork, not patients.

7. We need to ensure that medical professionals are adequately compensated for their services. If we don’t pay doctors enough, we won’t have enough doctors. And we need quality people in the healthcare profession, not warm bodies.

8. We need malpractice reform while retaining a system that guarantees appropriate compensation for medical malpractice. The Workers Compensation system may be the way to go. It is no-fault but places caps on pain & suffering as well as attorney’s fees. Getting injured should not be like winning the lottery.

9. We need to screen out incompetent doctors.

10. We need to ensure access to healthcare for people in rural areas and inner-cities.

11. The free-market system will not meet our needs.

12. National healthcare will not be cheap, but neither is our education system, our highway system, or our system of police and courts. It is doable, however.

13. There will be problems. No system is perfect, but we can do a lot better.

14. There will be waste, fraud and abuse. Some people will cheat. We can try to control it, but we can’t eliminate it.

15. Local control is better than a large federal bureaucracy.


I have some other ideas as well, but I’m hungry and I can’t think of what they are right now. Feel free to disagree.

Just be polite.


Advertisements

About Myiq2xu™

Being an asshole is all part of my manly essence.
This entry was posted in Health care reform, Klown Musings and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

130 Responses to This post will shock Wanda the Teabagee Troll

  1. The Klown says:

    BTW – I do not consider most cosmetic surgery to be medically necessary. Stuff like that should not be covered.

    • We certainly shouldn’t be requiring everyone–even the males & children who can’t breed yet–to have maternity coverage. It would have made more sense to require comprehensive contraception coverage, and leave maternity care optional, even for Medicaid. A policy that says you can have all the birth control you want, but making a baby should be a conscious choice that you plan for makes far more sense. And it’s cheaper, too.

    • John Denney says:

      You know the market has been distorted when an uncomplicated appendicitis costs $50,000+, but breast enhancement costs less than one tenth of that.

  2. helenk3 says:

    agree we need GOOD, and Universal healthcare. But does the expression “close enough for government work” strike a bell?

    Making private insurance companies accountable is the best way The marketplace is a better way then the government

    Just read a comment about how the government health care does nothing to help the native American but they are stuck with it.
    Many people in countries that have government run insurance are not happy with it.

    The veteran’s government run health care seems to have a lot of complaints. I know you have said that that is where you get your health care. Is it good or mediocre?

    • r u reddy says:

      A friend of mine was a veteran of Combat Arms in the Vietnam War. He then went on to do other things in the Army. Semi-recently he got a kind of cancer and he told me he was very satisfied with his VA treatment at every step.

      • The Klown says:

        My cousin who died of cancer last month had VA coverage but it’s not their fault he died.

        • r u reddy says:

          That is not good to hear. Some cancers remain incurable, unfortunately. My friend is very nearly cured, so far as we know. It was a curable cancer.

    • The Klown says:

      It’s better than what I had but it’s not Hank M.D.

      • The Klown says:

        Can you imagine what it would cost to have Dr. House treating you? Very few people could afford that kind of intense, 24/7 care from a team of specialists.

        • helenk3 says:

          truthfully , I would not want Dr House treating me. too much experiment medicine. well lets try this, ok that did not work, lets try this. I want a doctor who knows what he is doing the first time

  3. r u reddy says:

    If Obamacare can crash and burn as fast and as badly as its opponents predict, it may scorch the private profit insurance earth so totally that a winning movement for national single payer may grow and succeed.

    Federal Bureaucracy versus Local Control is worth thinking about.
    But a Federal Bureaucracy need not be needlessly large. How large is the actual Social Security Bureaucracy, for example? Very little of the money going into Social Security remains with the Social Security Civil Servants. Almost all of it goes back out to beneficiaries or through the Trust Fund into the General Budget Government (which keeps borrowing Trust Fund money from Social Security.)

    Perhaps general Federal intake and payout of the National Healthcare tax money with regional control of regional concerns and local control of local concerns? Perhaps something like CanadaCare? Socialize the payments and keep the practice private?
    Perhaps something exactly like VA Medicine, where I believe the doctors, nurses, etc. are paid salaries and paid well? Colonel (Ret) Pat Lang has mentioned several times at Sic Semper Tyrannis that he and all other military servicepeople lived and still live with Socialized Medicine).

    • Propertius says:

      f Obamacare can crash and burn as fast and as badly as its opponents predict, it may scorch the private profit insurance earth so totally that a winning movement for national single payer may grow and succeed.

      From your mouth to God’s ears, as my shtetl-dwelling ancestors would say – but I think you’re wrong here. I think the whole point of the ACA is to so discredit government involvement in healthcare that nobody will even think about single-payer for a generation. Like it or not, the ACA isn’t identified in the public mind as a boondoggle for for-profit private health insurers – most people think of it as “government health insurance”, even though it is nothing of the kind. The bill was, after all, drafted by Liz Fowler (former VP and chief lobbyist for Wellpoint, and now chief lobbyist for Johnson and Johnson and PhRMA).

      Your point about the size of bureaucracy needed to administer an insurance program effectively is well-taken. I’d offer the Medicare as an additional example. The last time I looked, less than 5% of Medicare payments go to administrative costs (as compared to 35-40% for private insurance). Medicare’s financial issues aren’t due to government bloat and inefficiency – they’re due to the fact that (as intended) it insures that segment of the populace which is most likely to experience serious illness. A universal Medicare scheme wouldn’t suffer from this disadvantage.

    • t says:

      The only problem is all of the people Obamacare is going to take out with it when it crashes and burns. The plans are horrible because of they’re rediculously short on doctor selection. People are going to die or experience financial catastrophe because of it, because they’ll think they’re covered and then get the bills.

      I don’t want anyone to be a guinea pig for this fiasco of a travesty.

      • r u reddy says:

        But since the law is already in place, those who are forced onto it are already preselected to be guinea pigs anyway. The only way to change that would be to repeal the law. The longer the law remains in effect, the more people will die.

        If it crashed and burned so fast and so totally as to be removed real soon, it will kill fewer people overall because it won’t have so much time to kill so many people.

  4. DeniseVB says:

    While we’re educating Wanda, here’s an oldie but a goodie …. and remember it was everyone who disagreed with Obama that got called this, as this still do now, so it just makes the name callers look ridiculous now…… 😀

  5. DeniseVB says:

    Love your bullet points Klown, especially #8. Hopefully wmcb will weigh in with her medical expertise, but malpractice insurance premiums are driving the rest of the costs up.

    • The Klown says:

      Like any other profession, a small percentage of the doctors are responsible for a big chunk of the malpractice claims. Another big chunk are just frivolous. Shit happens, but not every injury is malpractice.

      • wmcb says:

        Tighten the standards as to what actually constitutes malpractice (i.e. real negligence totally outside the accepted standard of care.) Then come down like a ton of bricks on docs who violate it.

        They lose their license to practice. Period.

      • t says:

        Yes, and the medical community needs to stop protecting these lousy doctors.

        • wmcb says:

          It’s mostly the AMA. Which only 30% of practicing docs belong to, and even fewer (around 17%) even approve of.

          But they have ALL the power, baby.

    • driguana says:

      Totally agree that #8 is a significant problem with the existing system. eliminate the abuse of medical malpractice suits would be a significant change.

      But that also raises another important issue….where to start to try and fix the problems??? It’s back to the need to have problem solvers as leaders. Your 15 points are really good but where to start? Obamacare just threw out a whole new package and said “go”!! Seems like a completely different process could have been set up to go after the real weak links in the system first and then build from there.

  6. wmcb says:

    I prefer a mixed system. Private insurance is a great way to spread risk for catastrophic events. It sucks as an extended payment plan for daily needs.

    I agree w/decoupling healthcare from employment. That started as a response to FDR’s wage controls and later to high taxes – employers couldn’t offer higher salaries, so offered more and more complex healthcare plans instead. This has fucked the natural pricing mechanisms up entirely. Decouple it.

    I’m open to lots of ideas that do involve govt pooling of resources to offer subsidies, etc. I am not open to “programs” that involve thousands of pages of govt control and regulation. As much as everyone loves Medicare, it’s an unsustainable model. It WILL go bankrupt in the future if it continues as is.

    I’d love to see the vast majority of our daily healthcare taken care of on a cash basis – with direct subsidies via some sort of HSA-type card to individual patients whose income is too low. Govt is completely hands off – no claims to file, no red tape, no massive bureacracies to “run” anything, because there is nothing to “run”. Cash-only medicine is by far THE cheapest way to deliver routine care. It’s been proven in the real world over and over. Singapore is doing just this with smashing success.

    Make catastrophic insurance alone (for hospitalizations, end of life care, etc) mandatory. Again with subsidies for the needy. Or, if you want to go with a govt-run catastrophic-only single payer, I wouldn’t complain too loudly. That’s the safety net, for sudden overwhelming need that people simply can’t budget for or pay cash for in a million years.

    I want “loser pays” lawsuit legislation for medical malpractice. Please note that these laws, as they function in Europe, do NOT mean that you pay merely because you lost. They stipulate that if you lose AND the judge/jury also decides that you were just unreasonably golddigging, you get hit with the bill for the whole proceeding, including all attorney fees. Because the problem is not malpractice insurance, the problem is very expensive defensive medicine being practiced by every doc in this country, just in case there’s a .000001% chance some patient gets pissed off that “everything” was not done. I’m open to having some sort of board that sets the standards for what is normal, expected treatment and diagnosis, and if the doc was within those guidelines, the case is thrown out – regardless of medical outcome. The world is not perfect. Doctors aren’t God. Shit happens. It’s not always someone’s fault.

    • The Klown says:

      Shit happens. It’s not always someone’s fault.

      GMTA

    • The Klown says:

      I am not wedded to any one way of doing things. I want healthcare reform that accomplishes certain things. How we get there is another story.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Found some state averages for malpractice rates, whoa :

      http://www.ehow.com/about_5514154_average-cost-medical-malpractice-insurance.html

      Did you ever read John Edwards’ Four Trials ? I don’t think he was an ambulance chaser though his political opponents wanted us to believe that. Those mega-awards he won were decided by juries who set the amount.

      • wmcb says:

        And that culture is part of the problem. Juries are not infallible. They are perfectly capable of awarding piles of money “just because” in one case, and nothing in the next. Thus, the lawsuit lotto.

        We need set guidelines for what constitutes a reasonable standard of care. Based on reality, not emotion. You can sue if the doc went outside those standards, but if he didn’t, you don’t even get into a courtroom.

    • angienc says:

      This.
      Best solution I’ve seen/heard. It’s almost like you have intimate knowledge of how health care billing and treatment works. 😉

  7. helenk3 says:

    has anyone heard just how many people are uninsured now due to the coming of obamacare?

    employers cut hours to avoid paying for health insurance
    employers not including family in health care policies.
    employers closing businesses

    Have no problem with employees paying part of the cost of a benefit their employers offer.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Maybe the media can investigate these stats ? Ha, what am I thinking? Might make Obama look bad or something.

    • The Klown says:

      Have no problem with employees paying part of the cost of a benefit their employers offer.

      Employees pay ALL the cost. Ask any bookkeeper.

      • wmcb says:

        I may not have this exact, but roughly 90% of people in this country spend less than $4000 annually on healthcare costs.

        If you and your employer, between you, are paying $300/month for insurance, plus you have deductibles, copays etc, you’d come out cheaper having that as cash money to put into an HSA.

        And if all routine doc visits go to a cash basis, the visits get much cheaper, because nothing is being filtered through insurance, with the attendant staff, paperwork, claims specialists, etc. So the money goes further.

        • lyn says:

          Cash basis would be so easy to pay for basic healthcare needs.

          • The Klown says:

            A lot of people really don’t need to see a doctor. They just need treatment, like a shot, stitches, a prescription that could be phoned in – all things a trained and experienced nurse could handle. Most of the times I went to a doctor I knew what was wrong and what I needed to fix it before I got there.

          • The Klown says:

            Here’s another thing that needs to go – people having to see a doctor to get a note for work. That’s a huge waste of resources.

        • wmcb says:

          Yep, Lynn. Prices would come down, and you can STILL subsidize the poor. Also, no separate crappy program segregated for the poor, like Medicaid. Everyone gets the same care.

      • Propertius says:

        Exactly. “Employer contributions” to health insurance are just another form of compensation offered in lieu of salary. It’s the employee who is actually paying for it through reduced salary.

      • Lulu says:

        “Employees pay ALL the cost of health care”
        Absolutely. It is comped in as a cost of labor, services, or whatever you want to call it. The cost is going up and will passed to employees who still have it through work. The long term effect will be to depress wages and salaries even more. The enormous increase in deductibles and co-pays will also contribute to a significant lowering of the standard of living for many people and deferral of health care because people cannot afford the admission ticket to obtain care. The preventive care is great for people who are healthy but not so hot for anyone who has any problems that can worsen. Deferred care is a major cause of major health costs.

        • wmcb says:

          Individuals pay all corporate taxes as well. There may be other reasons for taxing them, but don’t pretend it’s all coming from anywhere but the pockets of consumers.

  8. The Klown says:

    What I envision is not politically feasible and won’t be any time soon.

    Even in less dysfunctional times we would never see major reform. There are too many vested interests who like the current system. What we need to do is identify a few key places where we can accomplish positive changes.

    Obamacare just makes things worse.

    • wmcb says:

      Agreed. I’d love to start over from scratch, but politically that’s going to be nigh impossible to do.

      • The Klown says:

        I knew we were fucked when I found out who was writing the bill. Having the healthcare insurance company lobbyists write the bill is like letting the foxes design hen house security.

      • insanelysane says:

        If only there was someone with a lot of Healthcare policy experience
        to take the reins post Bush.

        If only there was someone who spent most of her political life on the issue and who had already fought the Pharma/Insurance lobbyist monsters and almost won…
        If only there was someone like that…
        Maybe if there was just someone who had a vision and a record of accomplishments, then we could have fixed this …
        the right way.
        If only.

    • DandyTIger says:

      Obamacare makes any sane reform less likely. And I think that was the plan.

    • DeniseVB says:

      Why not take each point and we can debate it here. Then send the compilation of posts to people we know who care more about the country than their stupid politics, like Cruz 😀

  9. helenk3 says:

    http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/20/hospitals-face-whole-new-world-under-health-law/3078353/

    hospital face whole new world under health law.
    wonder why they call it health law, has nothing to do with health and everything to do with insurance

  10. The Klown says:

    WOW! Jets just beat the Pats in OT

  11. wmcb says:

    Y’all know that it’s nigh impossible for politicians to have the sane discussions we are having here, right? Because it’s all looking for advantage, looking for where we can demonize the other, looking for ways to yell “YOU HATE GRANDMA AND SICK PEOPLE!!!”

    • The Klown says:

      Meanwhile they are trying to sell you their own brand of magic beans.

      • wmcb says:

        Yep. Lots of things are possible in order to take reasonably good care of the largest number of people. But we won’t get there by touting utopian visions. We have to be coldly practical about the whole thing, and that’s in short supply. And I can hear the squeals now: “Coldly practical??? HOW UNKIND! What a horrible viewpoint!”

        Nope. Being coldly practical is my best shot at making sure my children don’t starve. Promising them endless candy and spending my entire paycheck by Saturday night, out of tender feelings, is the surest way to see that they will.

        Grow the fuck up.

  12. The Klown says:

    If Obama really had delivered on his campaign promises he would be a miracle worker. He promised to add 30 million people to the healthcare insurance rolls while reducing everyone else’s premiums by a bunch.

    That’s better than the loaves and the fishes trick that Jeebus did.

  13. SHV says:

    ” “YOU HATE GRANDMA AND SICK PEOPLE!!!”
    ****
    I think that if it were possible to follow the money, it would show that a lot of the “for and against” Obamacare is Heath industry astroturf. Calling Obamacare “socialized medicine” or one step away from singe payer is exactly the opposite of what it really is, which is more control by the insurance industry, big pharma, etc. Basically $2.6 trillion of new cash flow will be pumped into the system to expand the junk insurance industry and pay top dollar for medications.

    Early in the health reform debate, the Physicians for National Health Care Policy, a group supporting a single payer system, made the case that if the “reform” that evolved into Obamacare become law, it would so poison public opinion that a functional healthcare system would be delayed for a generation. About that time, their website became infested with Obot trolls and any meaningful discussion became impossible.

    The bottom line is that with the cost and utilization health care, the insurance model is no longer a viable option. Insurance is useful for providing economic protection for random, rare events. Today’s healthcare cost is like trying to “insure’ a Ferrari that is gong to get wrecked every year or a beach house that is going to get routinely hit by flooding.

    • wmcb says:

      I agree. My objection to the single payer model is that for routine care, it’s not really any more efficient than cash – in fact, it’s less so.

      I want CONTROL in the hands of the person buying the daily product, regardless of how we fund it for those who can’t afford it. Because that’s what drives innovation and keeps prices lower. Most medical care in this country is not catastrophic, it’s routine. That part is a relatively easy fix.

      The catastrophic part is what gets expensive, and there we have to talk about risk-pooling, whether via insurance or govt.

      • The Klown says:

        The catastrophic part is what gets expensive, and there we have to talk about risk-pooling, whether via insurance or govt.

        And we also need to talk about limits (i.e. “death panels) for catastrophic and end-of-life care. Spending $100,000 to keep an 80 year old alive in a coma for a few more weeks makes no sense.

        Actually, it would probably be more like $500,000

        • wmcb says:

          And that gets sticky, because reality is, people with lots and lots of money will always be able to pay for endless heroic measures if they want. And “that’s not fair”.

          No, it’s not, but it’s true. And yes, it’s an ugly reality that has been true always, in any society ever, regardless of what system exists. And no, I don’t want the govt deciding who lives and dies in any kind of direct way. What’s happening in the UK with the NHS is horrific, and beyond “death panels”, because options outside of the NHS are largely nonexistent.

          I view it like clothing for my kid. I have $40 to buy you a jacket. If you want the $100 jacket, I’m not telling you you can’t have it. I am not going to forbid it. I’m not going to say that stores selling $100 jackets are hereby banned from existing. But you will need to pay the difference yourself. If you can’t, you are shit out of luck. Not because “I don’t care” or because I don’t heartily wish you could have the $100 jacket. But because I can’t afford it.

        • The Klown says:

          Everyone should be able to spend their own money how they see fit. I’m talking about the government teat.

        • wmcb says:

          Yes. But that’s the problem with many. They want the govt teat to provide the exact same medical options as what Bill Gates would have, because “fair”.

          And they refuse to accept that this is just flat not possible. Period.

    • wmcb says:

      In short, whatever we do, we need TWO approaches. One for routine daily care, and one for catastrophic care.

      Things that work well for one are HORRIBLY inefficient for the other.

  14. The Klown says:

    Where is Dandy Tiger? Uncle Sam needs you!

    • DandyTIger says:

      I wouldn’t touch that shit with a ten foot pole.

      • wmcb says:

        LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

        • Lulu says:

          It can’t be fixed. It is a money pit. It is sunk costs times infinity. The stupid website is the least of the problems but it emblematic of the entire fiasco. Obamacare will soon replace Titanic for manmade disasters. Both were advertised as “unsinkable”.

    • angienc says:

      We already spent what — $500 million to get the POS we got (via a no-bid contract). Who’s paying for the “fix” — oh yeah, that would be us taxpayers. What’s another $500 million to emergency correct what should have been done correctly the first time with plenty of time to do it.

      See: too many corrupt; sociopathic; and/or stupid people to give the government *any* control over 1/6th of our economy.

      • The Klown says:
        • angienc says:

          Mitt Romney has been proven right on EVERYTHING he said during the 2012 race.
          Gah — it still pisses me off that we could have had a good & decent man who made his money *before* he entered politics — and thus, didn’t need politics to make himself rich off the public teat (see: Obama; Reid; et al) — as POTUS simply because too many people in this country are (1) corrupt; (2) sociopathic and/or (3) stupid.

  15. wmcb says:

    And this is why the establishment hates him so much.

    BASH: Let me just ask you about this, because one of your colleagues told me it was like an intervention, that there were so many of your colleagues saying, you know, why are you doing this? And really angry at you. And I’m just wondering even on a human level, they told me that you really didn’t flinch.

    On a human level, that’s got to bother you, to be sitting in an institution like the Senate and having your, not Democrats, fellow Republicans, so angry at you.

    CRUZ: Dana, not remotely.

    BASH: Why?

    CRUZ: Because the people I work for are the women and men you just saw. I work for 26 million Texans. That’s my job to fight for them. I don’t work for the party bosses in Washington. I work for the people of Texas, and I fight for them. The reason people are frustrated all over country is that far too many people get elected and they think they’re there to be part of the club.

    You know what was very interesting about some of those closed door discussions? What I said in those closed door sessions, I would have said the exact same thing if CNN’s camera were sitting in the room. What I say privately to my colleagues is the same thing I say publicly. And you know what’s interesting?

    Virtually, every person in that room that was criticizing what Mike Lee and I were doing would have said very different things if the camera was in this room, because what they’re telling their constituents is very different from what they’re saying behind closed doors.

    http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.ca/2013/10/turncoat-senate-republicans-staged.html

  16. The Klown says:
  17. angienc says:

    I used to be in favor of single payer but these last 5 years has made me realize that there are way too many (1) corrupt; (2) sociopathic and/or (3) stupid people for that to work. Look at what has happened to the education system since the feds took over — more money spent for worse results. Healthcare will be the same thing. Best bet is a mix of public (for those in need either directly through medicaid expansion and tax credits) and private.

    • wmcb says:

      Making something layered, and complicated, and weighed down with minutiae, is how they hide their graft and corruption and turf wars.

      I’ve watched them do it over and over and over. Simple, understandable programs never get passed, because they lack the two things politicians adore:

      1) power and control over citizens

      2) The ongoing ability to reward cronies woven into the bill

      If those two things above are always the “price” of govt help? Then I don’t want it. Get back to me when you can offer something understandable that doesn’t contain the above.

      • angienc says:

        Exactly!

        You know the ancient Romans were the first to write down laws, which were posted in public areas — the logic being that all citizens should be able to easily read & understand what was required/legal as well making it more difficult for the government leaders to change the law at will.
        For all intents & purposes, these ridiculous 2,700 page laws are the same as *not* even writing them down. Law needs to be clear, simple and easily understood. Otherwise, they aren’t laws — they are tools of oppression.

        • wmcb says:

          One of the European countries, and I’m thinking it’s Switzerland, actually has as part of their legal code that laws must be understandable by the average educated citizen. They put it into their constitution a few years back, because of exactly the sort of abuses we are discussing here.

  18. The Klown says:
  19. foxyladi14 says:

    Did you get eat Klown? 🙂

  20. The Klown says:
  21. foxyladi14 says:

    CRUZ: Because the people I work for are the women and men you just saw. I work for 26 million Texans. That’s my job to fight for them. I don’t work for the party bosses in Washington. I work for the people of Texas, and I fight for them. The reason people are frustrated all over country is that far too many people get elected and they think they’re there to be part of the club.

    WE need more like him. 🙂

    • The Klown says:

      I agree with the above statement by Cruz. I agree with him on some issues, like the repeal of Obamacare.

      I’m not ready to canonize him however. Lots of politicians say the right things when it suits their purposes.

      • The Klown says:

        Remember all the things that Democrats said about Bush’s abuse of executive power?

      • wmcb says:

        If he screws up, I’ll yell at him. Loudly. While he’s doing/saying the right stuff, I’ll cheer. One of the things that makes me lean toward “Yeah, I think he’s sincere?” His dad. When you grow up with someone tortured by Castro, who drilled lots of those stories into your head, chances are that your aversion to authoritarian govt is genuine and part of you.

        Doesn’t make him always right forever after. But genuine? Yeah, I think he probably is – or at least as much as a pol can be.

        • The Klown says:

          So far I mostly like what I see. But I’m still gonna keep an eye on him.

          I’m gonna keep an eye on ALL of them.

        • wmcb says:

          I have a permanent hairy eyeball where pols are concerned, period.

          But I also believe that like dogs, you need positive and negative reinforcement. Right now Cruz is getting a cookie and a “GOOD DOGGY!” from me.

  22. DeniseVB says:

    😀

  23. The Klown says:

    {{pukes}}

  24. wmcb says:

    From an AoS commenter. When I say that people who want govt goodies are sucking the life out of this country, I do not just mean poor perpetual freeloaders. I mean ALL of them. From the bankers to pharma to big agriculture to the poverty pimps for whom dependency is a sweet deal for keeping them in power.

    The top and the bottom have trapped the middle into bearing the brunt of all the consequences produced by the top and the bottom.

    It can’t go on forever, but almost every politician will try to stretch it out as long as possible.

    The chicken will get fucked and the can will get kicked.

  25. wmcb says:

  26. wmcb says:
  27. DeniseVB says:

    I think this has been posted downstairs, but I thought worth another look, I mean, when a hacking expert is concerned about hacking and draining our bank accounts, it’s EXACTLY why Obamacare’s sign up system worries me ….

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/03/john-mcafee-on-obamacare-this-is-a-hackers-wet-dream-video/#ixzz2gmX8k0xW

  28. 1539days says:

    If you do the math, health care costs are equivalent to $20,000 per household. If you are paying less than that for insurance plus out of pocket, you are a freeloader in Obama’s America.

  29. The Klown says:
  30. wmcb says:

    This is true. I have my issues with Reagan, and he did some shit wrong and still spent too much money. But jobs? Yeah, he fucking nailed that one.

  31. wmcb says:

    Seriously, for daily care, even Medicare gets it all wrong. What would, say, food stamps look like if run that way?

    Grocery stores that wanted to participate in food stamps would have to jump through hoops to get approved. Then there would be a manual, hundreds of pages long, that assigned “codes” to various food items, or combinations of items. The grocer would have to hire lots of extra staff to tally up groceries correctly. Because coding a pound of hamburger and a bottle of ketchup is TOTALLY different from coding a pound of chuck with a squeeze bottle of mustard. Was that a pork roast WITH marinade or without? Because totes different, even if they were the exact same price.

    Oh, and just to make it fun? Those codes would get updated annually. So the codes you used last year wouldn’t necessarily get the grocer paid this year. Then, once you have the tallies (you’re pretty sure, anyways), you get to send those off to an electronic clearinghouse, that charges you 7 – 10% of the total grocery bill to process it. Then you wait to get paid. Oh, and lots of the grocery bills come back denied. Oh, and the cheese slices that were paid for at $5.00 last year now are not paid at all, unless bought in combination with hot dog buns, then it’s reimbursed at $6.00. So you get to hire yet more staff to weed through all the refusals and figure out what was coded wrong, and how to game the system.

    How many grocers would be willing to take on new food stamp customers? And how much would YOUR grocery bill go up, just to compensate the grocers for what they were losing on the foodstamp groceries, and the attendant headaches and staffing for filing them and navigating the maze?

    It’s fucking insane. ALL insurance is, including govt insurance. Make the process for daily colds and broken toes and sniffles and blood pressure followups cash transactions. Give the needy medical dollars in their pocket – via an HSA subsidy or whatever, to shop with as they wish, where they wish.

    • The Klown says:

      Give the needy a HBT card – just like an EBT for medical care.

      • wmcb says:

        Yes. No more stigma, no more separate system for the poor. If employers want to kick in for healthcare like they do now, make it HSA dollars.

        Seriously, there is NO need to go through the insurance rigamarole for every sore throat and physical. It’s gobsmackingly inefficient.

      • wmcb says:

        Medical providers would begin to compete, because prices wouldn’t all be based on what various insurance companies or govt set as reimbursement rates.

        You’d end up with this doctor here who charges $100 for an office visit, and that one over there who charges $50. Maybe the more expensive doc is better. Or just more conveniently located. Or has a more pleasant, upscale waiting room. SO? People would make those choices, just like they choose between Macy’s and Wal Mart. Or who is more conveniently placed on the way home from work. Maybe they are willing to wait in line for cheaper prices. Maybe they are willing to pay more for faster appts. Maybe that doc over there sees kids 2 through 4 at half price if your whole brood is sick – volume discount. (Something a doc cannot legally do w/insured patients, must charge them the same.)

        There are all sorts of factors in achieving varied pricing that DO NOT EXIST with an insurance-based system. A stagnant sytem cannot be efficient, because people do not SHOP for medical care, they just go and it gets paid by some arcane 3rd party algorithm. Or not.

        Would this solve everything? Nope. But it would solve a BIG chunk. Then we work on the end of life and hospitalization/catastrophic stuff.

        • wmcb says:

          And the docs who want to gouge patients? Good luck with that. Because NO anti-fraud dept, I don’t care how good they are, is going to watch that bill closer than you will if it’s YOUR dollars.

          Docs that want to make a bundle while sitting on their ass will also lose out to the young whippersnapper down the street, who has figured out a way to run a scaled down office efficiently, and all the piggy lazy cushy doc’s patients are going to go down there for a better deal.

        • wmcb says:

          One of these days I’m going to properly collect all these healthcare thoughts into some kind of cohesive whole. I promise.

        • The Klown says:

          There are no magic beans. Ignore anyone who claims we can fix the whole shebang with one or two changes. There is A LOT that needs fixing. We need to fix one piece at a time.

        • wmcb says:

          Oh, and I can tell you what the objection of the Left would be to all of this. They won’t come out and say it, exactly. They’ll hem and haw around it, and dress it up it lots of intellectual-sounding words, but their primary objection will be this:

          “People are way too stupid to be trusted with their own healthcare dollars.”

  32. helenk3 says:

    http://dailycaller.com/2013/10/20/obamacare-seeks-to-segregate-patients-doctors-by-race/

    not going to believe this one. the dumb SOBs put race into obamacare
    bring back segregation

  33. Ann says:

    Motley Fool ran this today: http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/10/20/obamacare-penalties-3-things-to-know-before-2014.aspx

    You might also want to know about one other minor detail about the Obamacare penalties: The IRS can’t go after taxpayers who don’t pay up. That’s right — the Affordable Care Act didn’t include any provisions for the tax agency to enforce collection of the penalties.

    2014 tax returns, which aren’t due until April 2015, will include a spot for taxpayers to provide information about health insurance. If any penalties apply, the IRS will subtract the penalty amount out of any refund owed. If you don’t get a refund or the penalty is greater than your refund, the agency will want you to mail a check to them or send funds electronically.

    What happens if you decide not to send the money? The IRS could take it out of any future tax refunds. If your taxes are withheld through your employer, the agency could also get the money through that route. However, it can’t press criminal charges or assess further financial penalties for not paying. The IRS also can’t place a lien on property as it can when seeking payment of overdue taxes.

    I am laughing at the mere thought that this may be true. That means all those people were hired at the IRS for … what? Why pay the penalty? Adjust your withholdings, or quarterlies so that you never get a refund.

    • angienc says:

      I pride myself on the fact that my taxes always come within $100 plus or minus (I’ve never gotten a refund of more than $100 and I’ve never owed more than $100; my best year — 2007 — I owed $10!). I never understood people who get/look forward to big refunds — why the HELL are you giving the government your money for a year — interest free!

    • The Klown says:

      When California passed the seatbelt law initiative the sponsors told people that cops would not be able to pull people over just because they weren’t wearing a seatbelt. About a year after it passed the legislature quietly changed the law so that cops you stop you just for that.

      You can bet there are parts of Obamacare that were held back for later. Tax penalties will be one of them.

      • wmcb says:

        They will roll any unpaid Obamacare penalty in with any other owed taxes, and charge you for the total.

        That way, the IRS is not coming after you specifically for Obamacare, see. The Ocare penalty is no longer distinguishable from your other taxes owed, it’s just one lump sum. A sum for which they can come after you.

        The taxes you already paid via withholding? Yeah, THOSE were what paid for your Obamacare penalty right off the top. You still owe us $500. Not in Obamacare penalty, no, not at all. For the rest of your taxes.

    • abc says:

      I am laughing at the mere thought that this may be true. That means all those people were hired at the IRS for … what? Why pay the penalty? Adjust your withholdings, or quarterlies so that you never get a refund.

      A myth. The truths are plenty ugly. You don’t have to believe this myth.

Comments are closed.