By:
Advanced search…

Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Deficits not matter when Republitard is prez, hurr

tomdalton22 said:
I'm not freaked out. You are claiming that there will be national healthcare by 2030 or sooner...I am just curious where you are getting your information. I know Mother Jones is one of your favorite sites. Maybe that's where you are getting it.
Click to expand...

Mother Jones is a great site . A million times better then Fixed News coming from state tv but no that is not it. I'm keeping my info a secret from you although I have mentioned it many times . You will figure it out don't worry.
 
Last edited:
Gulo Blue said:
Then Obama claimed wrong. ACA is what you get when the government asks insurance companies to write the law.

Insurance Companies: "Let's write a law where everyone is required to pay us money."

Obama: "Will everyone have insurance?"

Insurance Companies: "It's in the law!"

Obama: "Will everyone actually be able to afford healthcare?"

Insurance Companies: "Wellllll..."

Obama: "I'll just say everyone will have insurance. That's progress."
Click to expand...


The original draft of the ACA was later revised by Republicans, when Obama/Congressional Democrats attempted to reach across the aisle, and made it a bipartisan legislative effort. However, and despite having input into the bill, exactly zero voted on it.

Fast-forward to 2017, where both the failed Trumpcare (American Health Care Act) and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act were/are strictly one-party legislation.


The ACA as originally created would have been more successful and frugal, but since Republicans and Big Insurance got their greedy fingerprints all over it, the rolllout and associated costs were slower and higher than intended.

Trumpcare & Pre-Existing Conditions – The Most Common Conditions That Most Likely Will Not Be Covered




You might be thinking, “I don’t have a medical problem, so this doesn’t concern me.” Think again. Kaiser Family Foundation analyzed pre-ACA medical underwriting practices nationwide and determined that about 27 percent of U.S. adults have a condition that would make them uninsurable under the old guidelines. We’ve outlined 25 conditions that could count as “pre-existing” under Trumpcare in a handy infographic, along with how common they are among the U.S. population. To learn more about the prevalence of these conditions, check out our source links:

acid reflux | adult acne | anxiety | arthritis | asthma | C-section | cancer | COPD | depression | diabetes | disability | eating disorders | heart disease | high blood pressure | high cholesterol | infertility | kidney disease | mental disorders | migraines | obesity | paralysis | peptic ulcers | pregnancy | postpartum depression | sleep apnea



https://trumpcare.com/trumpcare-pre-existing-conditions
 
Last edited:
turok said:
The original draft of the ACA was later revised by Republicans, when Obama/Congressional Democrats attempted to reach across the aisle, and made it a bipartisan legislative effort. However, and despite having input into the bill, exactly zero voted on it.

Fast-forward to 2017, where both the failed Trumpcare (American Health Care Act) and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act were/are strictly one-party legislation.


The ACA as originally created would have been more successful and frugal, but since Republicans and Big Insurance got their greedy fingerprints all over it, the rolllout and associated costs were slower and higher than intended.

Trumpcare & Pre-Existing Conditions ? The Most Common Conditions That Most Likely Will Not Be Covered




You might be thinking, ?I don?t have a medical problem, so this doesn?t concern me.? Think again. Kaiser Family Foundation analyzed pre-ACA medical underwriting practices nationwide and determined that about 27 percent of U.S. adults have a condition that would make them uninsurable under the old guidelines. We?ve outlined 25 conditions that could count as ?pre-existing? under Trumpcare in a handy infographic, along with how common they are among the U.S. population. To learn more about the prevalence of these conditions, check out our source links:

acid reflux | adult acne | anxiety | arthritis | asthma | C-section | cancer | COPD | depression | diabetes | disability | eating disorders | heart disease | high blood pressure | high cholesterol | infertility | kidney disease | mental disorders | migraines | obesity | paralysis | peptic ulcers | pregnancy | postpartum depression | sleep apnea



https://trumpcare.com/trumpcare-pre-existing-conditions
Click to expand...

The part about making it law that everybody buys their product is the individual mandate. It is very surprising that either party is against it (if you assume they just do what big donors tell them to do.)
 
Gulo Blue said:
The part about making it law that everybody buys their product is the individual mandate. It is very surprising that either party is against it (if you assume they just do what big donors tell them to do.)
Click to expand...


I have had health insurance through my employers and while self-employed since age 18, even though I rarely used it other than for minor ailments or checkups over the next 35 years. Eliminating the individual mandate would only benefit young, healthy and fortunate people who would opt out of coverage, but they should be aware of the fact that if they later in life become ill or injured, the youngsters who do likewise won't be contributing or jumping into their deeper pool of risk either.
 
Last edited:
turok said:
I have had health insurance through my employers and while self-employed since age 18, even though I rarely used it other than for minor ailments or checkups over the next 35 years. Eliminating the individual mandate would only benefit young, healthy and fortunate people who would opt out of coverage, but they should be aware of the fact that if they later in life become ill or injured, the youngsters who do likewise won't be contributing or jumping in their deeper pool of risk either.
Click to expand...

Lots of people, not just young, healthy, fortunate people, have been bumped to 1099 work and don't get it anymore.
 
Gulo Blue said:
Lots of people, not just young, healthy, fortunate people, have been bumped to 1099 work and don't get it anymore.
Click to expand...

As an independent contractor, I would look into joining a trade group or perhaps becoming a member of a local Chamber of Commerce to obtain individual or family coverage under less expensive group rates. The latter is what I did as an independent insurance agent in the mid-80s. Or get married to someone who still has health insurance under their employer...lol.


The ACA is really catastrophic coverage, and helps hospitals b/c they aren't forced to eat all of the costs of BK former uninsured or under-insured patients who can't/won't pay their exorbitant medical expenses. You would think that they would put up a fight by lobbying for most of the provisions of Obamacare to remain in effect.
 
Last edited:
turok said:
The ACA is really catastrophic coverage, and helps hospitals b/c they aren't forced to eat all of the costs of BK former uninsured or under-insured patients who can't/won't pay their exorbitant medical expenses. You would think that they would put up a fight by lobbying for most of the provisions of Obamacare to remain in effect.
Click to expand...

Who is "they?"
 
related: CA is now investigating Aetna after one of their claims doctors admitted on the record that he never reviewed patients' records or the recommendations of the treating physicians when denying coverage. link.

boy... best healthcare in the world, eh?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
michchamp said:
related: CA is now investigating Aetna after one of their claims doctors admitted on the record that he never reviewed patients' records or the recommendations of the treating physicians when denying coverage. link.

boy... best healthcare in the world, eh?
Click to expand...


"Dr. Arthur Caplan, founding director of the division of medical ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center, described Iinuma’s testimony as “a huge admission of fundamental immorality."


But..but..but...here I thought the the "free market" of competition would police itself?!?

Maybe legislating for more tax-cuts would work...>:D
 
Last edited:
michchamp said:
related: CA is now investigating Aetna after one of their claims doctors admitted on the record that he never reviewed patients' records or the recommendations of the treating physicians when denying coverage. link.

boy... best healthcare in the world, eh?
Click to expand...

I was actually just this minute listening to Dr. Drew Pinsky talking about this on his radio show.
 
"Aetna....I'm so glad that I met ya"

Still remember that old jingle from the 70s.

I wonder how many of Iinuma's rejections caused unnecessary physical, mental, and financial misery for those individuals and/or families who were affected by his gross negligence?
 
Who Actually Is Reviewing All Those Preauthorization Requests?

Milton Packer thinks you should know how the system works:




https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/revolutionandrevelation/69125h

Ya really have to be (or become) a stone-cold sociopath to essentially be employed on a death panel for Big Insurance.

"Thou shalt abandon all Hippocratic oaths, all of ye physicians who enter here"
 
Last edited:
michchamp said:
related: CA is now investigating Aetna after one of their claims doctors admitted on the record that he never reviewed patients' records or the recommendations of the treating physicians when denying coverage. link.

boy... best healthcare in the world, eh?
Click to expand...

His patients probably regret not having been covered by one of our government funded and operated health care providers...like the VA, for example.
 
Insuring for the high costs of dental treatment are even less likely to be offered as a fringe benefit by most Murkin businesses (including the federal government). This although I was able to get very good coverage for ~a decade from my wife's former employer who offered premium Delta Dental coverage. Now we have dental coverage as an FEHB retiree benefit. Not nearly as good, but better than none.

Having bad teeth and gums WILL negatively affect peoples' overall health, but for some odd reason, it is rarely if ever brought up when discussing Murka's heathcare by the M$M and our reps in DC.
 
Last edited:
tinselwolverine said:
His patients probably regret not having been covered by one of our government funded and operated health care providers...like the VA, for example.
Click to expand...


Or what our government provides to its employees prior to the ACA, which was the "gold standard" in BCBS major medical insurance,...which the GOP want to get back, instead of having to participate in the ACA's exchanges.
 
turok said:
"Dr. Arthur Caplan, founding director of the division of medical ethics at New York University Langone Medical Center, described Iinuma?s testimony as ?a huge admission of fundamental immorality."


But..but..but...here I thought the the "free market" of competition would police itself?!?

Maybe legislating for more tax-cuts would work...>:D
Click to expand...

Don't blame free markets for health care. There are no free market forces involved. Big employers make decisions alongside big insurance companies, big pharma, and big hospitals. The customer has no voice.
 
turok said:
As an independent contractor, I would look into joining a trade group or perhaps becoming a member of a local Chamber of Commerce to obtain individual or family coverage under less expensive group rates. The latter is what I did as an independent insurance agent in the mid-80s. Or get married to someone who still has health insurance under their employer...lol.


The ACA is really catastrophic coverage, and helps hospitals b/c they aren't forced to eat all of the costs of BK former uninsured or under-insured patients who can't/won't pay their exorbitant medical expenses. You would think that they would put up a fight by lobbying for most of the provisions of Obamacare to remain in effect.
Click to expand...

Things have changed. These options aren't always available. Some people refer to the gig economy. There's usually no trade group and this article says it 34% of the economy now.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/24/news/economy/gig-economy-intuit/index.html
 
Gulo Blue said:
Don't blame free markets for health care. There are no free market forces involved. Big employers make decisions alongside big insurance companies, big pharma, and big hospitals. The customer has no voice.
Click to expand...

That particular post was meant to poke fun @ Republicans who claim that free market competition will reduce consumer/subscriber prices/premiums.

As well as shopping across state lines for coverage, since back when I was working for an independent insurance agency, out of about a dozen for-profit health insurers that we represented, half were located out of state....and that was 30 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

Founded in 2011, Detroit Sports Forum is a community of fanatics dedicated to teams like the Lions, Tigers, Pistons, Red Wings, Wolverines, and more. We live and breathe Detroit sports!

Stay Connected

Forum statistics

Threads
32,867
Messages
1,108,639
Members
939
Latest member
Ebony Bongo Hoedown

Affiliates

    Discussion Hub
Back
Top