Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 203

Thread: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

  1. #161
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    NO Govt pays the cost of its Health Care.

    Wow....liberals
    Great Britain, France, Cuba, etc
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  2. #162
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    NO Govt pays the cost of its Health Care.
    Wow....liberals
    Were they born that way or were they made that way? Studies show they can't really help themselves.

    Scientists discover moral compass in the brain which can be controlled by magnets | Mail Online

  3. #163
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    09-17-17 @ 05:48 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    59,990

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Were they born that way or were they made that way? Studies show they can't really help themselves.

    Scientists discover moral compass in the brain which can be controlled by magnets | Mail Online
    I see that you can't refute my proof that you were wrong about how 3rd parties always result in cost increases
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  4. #164
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    What do you mean it doesn't matter. I made a claim, you denied it. You said you would offer evidence and then try to pass off some silliness that is far from the point.
    I explained why it doesn't matter. The problem isn't the third party payer, but the way unfortunately profit works. It worked that way before and after, only there are more restrictions against such deception with the third party payers paying attention.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  5. #165
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I explained why it doesn't matter. The problem isn't the third party payer, but the way unfortunately profit works. It worked that way before and after, only there are more restrictions against such deception with the third party payers paying attention.
    And you feel that the government can pay better attention than a private company? Do you have any stats to support this claim?

    The fact remains that when a third party comes between a doctor and his patient costs go up,. They have to because that third party has to make money also. The government employees have to make money for their role and private company employees for theirs. What will happen is that the government bureaucracy will grow like no other and within a few years will challenge the NHS as one of the largest employers in the world.

    No doubt there was room for 'reform' but all Obama and his Czars created was a hugely expensive and inefficient bureaucracy, with ideas that predate the 1950's.

  6. #166
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    And you feel that the government can pay better attention than a private company? Do you have any stats to support this claim?

    The fact remains that when a third party comes between a doctor and his patient costs go up,. They have to because that third party has to make money also. The government employees have to make money for their role and private company employees for theirs. What will happen is that the government bureaucracy will grow like no other and within a few years will challenge the NHS as one of the largest employers in the world.

    No doubt there was room for 'reform' but all Obama and his Czars created was a hugely expensive and inefficient bureaucracy, with ideas that predate the 1950's.
    It's not. Either or, but like now both. I do keep mentioning two tiered. But, having the focus being the care and not profit is better for services like medicine.

    And while spout absolutes about costs going up, explain why countries with UHC care ay less? Perhaps your absolute isn't all that accurate.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  7. #167
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    It's not. Either or, but like now both. I do keep mentioning two tiered. But, having the focus being the care and not profit is better for services like medicine.

    And while spout absolutes about costs going up, explain why countries with UHC care ay less? Perhaps your absolute isn't all that accurate.
    Before we go any further do you now understand that when third parties get involved, costs go up?

    In those cases you referred it seems there was actually a fourth party involved.

  8. #168
    Sage
    Boo Radley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    11-22-17 @ 04:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    36,858

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    Before we go any further do you now understand that when third parties get involved, costs go up?

    In those cases you referred it seems there was actually a fourth party involved.
    I understand the claim and the rational, but often it is a limited view those using it arE looking at. The FACT remains, those countries with UHC pay less. We pay more than anyone. And yes, if we remove third party payers, growing the number without adequate access, we will also pay less, maybe even less than they do. But this is a two sided issue. We're looking to get the best access for the least cost. I think the evidence suggests UHC does that best.

    AUSTAN GOOLSBEE: I think the world vests too much power, certainly in the president, probably in Washington in general for its influence on the economy, because most all of the economy has nothing to do with the government.

  9. #169
    Guru
    BWG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    South Coast
    Last Seen
    12-04-17 @ 11:59 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,203

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by buck
    I have no doubt that Dr's do order unecessary tests for alot of reasons, one of which is defensive medicine.
    Dr. Robert Boyd, an orthopedic surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston also mentioned “insecurity, inexperience and the potential for economic gain”, but that's OK, most seem to reach for the defensive (i.e. malpractice protection) angle and ignore the others.

    Quote Originally Posted by buck
    But, I would guess that one of the problem with your point, is that Dr.s in NHS systems are still sending their patients to have MRIs. It's just that those wait times for the MRI are much-much higher there then here. High enough that it could b ecosting lives.
    Not trying to defend the NHS in England or the system in Canada, as there are no proposals in the U.S. even remotely approaching anything similar to those programs, but what caught my attention was trying to use the number of MRI machines as a measure of a 'good' vs. 'bad' health care system.

    The overuse, abuse and unnecessary use of some technology does cause, as has been proven in the U.S., inflate the cost of healthcare. So having 'x' number of MRI machines per 'x' number of people doesn't mean much, except we spend a bunch more $$$ on health care.

    What your article doesn't say is, how many of those that have to wait longer are considered 'low risk' by their physicians and how many of those that actually do need the tests right away get them right away. Like your post, there were a lot of "could', "may', and "potentials" in the article. No hard facts of actual causation.

    A colonoscopy is generally recommended at age 50 and if the results are normal, another in about ten years. Depending on what is found, a followup could be in three to five years. So a six week wait, after seeing a doctor would not be life threatening.

    A sigmoidoscopy is a less invasive, usually a precursor to a colonoscopy. Recommended every five years. Six weeks isn't a problem.

    An echocardiogram is nothing more than a sonogram (like a pregnant mother gets) of the heart and blood flow. It's generally used by a cardiologist in diagnostic and followups with their patients. No rush. Again the physician will prioritize the patients and those with urgent needs will be moved to the front of the line.
    “We just simply don’t know how to govern” - Rep. Steve Womack (R-AR) a member of the House Budget Committee

  10. #170
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Health care law may mean less hiring in 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Boo Radley View Post
    I understand the claim and the rational, but often it is a limited view those using it arE looking at. The FACT remains, those countries with UHC pay less. We pay more than anyone. And yes, if we remove third party payers, growing the number without adequate access, we will also pay less, maybe even less than they do. But this is a two sided issue. We're looking to get the best access for the least cost. I think the evidence suggests UHC does that best.
    You keep going back to the same song without looking at the least inexpensive way, which is the direct relationship between the doctor and patient. Can we agree on that?

Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •