Page 104 of 123 FirstFirst ... 45494102103104105106114 ... LastLast
Results 1,031 to 1,040 of 1224

Thread: Health Care Question

  1. #1031
    Sage

    Donc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    out yonder
    Last Seen
    09-20-17 @ 12:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,407

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Check.

    Your move, Conservative.

    (edit: round of beer says he goes back to saying those numbers are made up somehow and his business experience tells him so)

    I like the bolded part of his reply to you; as that is a page out of his posting style.

    quote conservative

    Does it matter who posted it, what about the content? Always destroy the messenger and ignore the message, right? There are many other articles on Medicare Overhead but you want to buy the 3% number. That makes you naive
    The haggardness of poverty is everywhere seen contrasted with the sleekness of wealth, the exhorted labor of some compensating for the idleness of others, wretched hovels by the side of stately colonnades, the rags of indigence blended with the ensigns of opulence; in a word, the most useless profusion in the midst of the most urgent wants.Jean-Baptiste Say

  2. #1032
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    66,337

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Well I didn't find the medicare report I had read previously but here's what an actual source looks like that supports my theory that government can in fact run things efficiently when done right.

    http://www.pnhp.org/publications/nejmadmin.pdf

    Scroll down to the "number of employees per 10,000 enrollees"

    Total Medicare Beneficiaries - Kaiser State Health Facts

    From here we see that Medicare has 44,831,390 enrollees.

    Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Wikipedia says that CMS employs 4100 people.


    Doing the math, that's 0.91 employees per 10,000 enrollments.
    Aetna: 20.8
    Anthem: 18.8
    Cigna: 31.2
    Humana: 22.5
    Mid Atlantic Medical Services: 14.0
    Oxford: 22.8
    Pacificare: 24.2
    United Healthcare: 35.1
    WellPoint: 13.7

    It's not the 3% number but you start to get the picture.
    Interesting that you post a 2003 study and then use those numbers to compare against 2008 beneficiaries. Also very interesting that you claim that for profit companies have inflated expenses which affect profits but non profit agencies have lower overhead thus expenses yet are basically bankrupt. Does any of that make sense to you?

    You certainly have something against private business and for some reason believe that for profit companies are ineffecient but govt. agencies are somehow effecient but that doesn't make a lot of sense.

    Here is another article again that you will attack the messenger instead of the message

    Medicare’s Overhead Medicine and Opera

    The problem you have and continue to have is there is no evidence that the Federal govt. can do any social engineering better than private industry. There is no credible evidence comparing private insurance expenses to govt. run agency expenses. What we do know is part of the govt. funding for their healthcare program comes from cutting Medicare expenses by 500 billion dollars. Where are those expense cuts coming from when overhead is so low?

    Think, I know you can do it.

  3. #1033
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    66,337

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by misterman View Post
    You can put it all caps and repeat it dozens of times and he still won't get it.
    sounds a lot like the budget discussion that you continue to ignore. Obama added 1.47 trillion to the debt in 2009, will add 1.6 trillion this year, 1.3 trillion next year which in three years will exceed the entire 8 years of the Bush Administration. How is that hope and change working out for you?

  4. #1034
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    50,235

    Re: Health Care Question

    There...there weren't any numbers in that article.

    I posted links to verifiable numbers and peer-reviewed journals, and you posted another link to someone's blog that didn't contain any actual data.
    Last edited by Deuce; 02-09-10 at 09:51 AM.

  5. #1035
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    66,337

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    There...there weren't any numbers in that article.

    I posted links to verifiable numbers and peer-reviewed journals, and you posted another link to someone's blog that didn't contain any actual data.
    That is the point, there aren't any numbers in what you offered either nor is there any logic and common sense thus you remain gullible to Govt. rhetoric.

  6. #1036
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    50,235

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    That is the point, there aren't any numbers in what you offered either nor is there any logic and common sense thus you remain gullible to Govt. rhetoric.
    Really. You couldn't find any numbers in my post or my links?

    No numbers. You're saying there were no numbers.


    edit: I figured it out. You're like Stephen Colbert. A caricature of a conservative. Except you aren't funny.
    Last edited by Deuce; 02-09-10 at 12:08 PM.

  7. #1037
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    66,337

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Really. You couldn't find any numbers in my post or my links?

    No numbers. You're saying there were no numbers.

    Should I put them in bold for you?
    Oh, I found numbers, I found a 2003 report and you applied those to 2008 participation. You cannot compare private industry personnel to Medicare personnel until you define the services provided by both. Govt. employees are dedicated to Medicare whereas private insurance employees do various jobs in all facets of the company they work for. Only a true ideologue can apply all private insurance employees to one segment of the business and call that excessive.

    You can make numbers do whatever you want them to do but until you define the parameters those numbers are meaningless. Govt. overhead is different than private insurance overhead just like govt. costs for services is different than private industry costs for service. Keep spinning them in the government's favor when the reality is you continue to ignore the 500 billion that is going to be cut from Medicare. How can any govt. business with such low overhead have 500 billion available to cut?

  8. #1038
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    50,235

    Re: Health Care Question

    So there are numbers now. Nice backpedal.

    Ok, so lets say it's not a totally fair comparison. You're still off by a factor of more than ten. I'll tell you what, we'll be extremely generous and go with the entire social security administration. 64,000 employees. You still end up with 14 employees per 10,000 enrollments, equal to the best of the private businesses and less than half that of the worst. And the majority of the 60,000 people we just added have absolutely nothing to do with Medicare.

    I already addressed the $500billion number, but you ignored it because that's your strawman. You're attacking a point that I never made. How can they cut $500 billion? I don't know. I don't think you can. I've already said I don't buy those numbers. You conveniently skimmed over that so you could repost this again.

  9. #1039
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    66,337

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    So there are numbers now. Nice backpedal.

    Ok, so lets say it's not a totally fair comparison. You're still off by a factor of more than ten. I'll tell you what, we'll be extremely generous and go with the entire social security administration. 64,000 employees. You still end up with 14 employees per 10,000 enrollments, equal to the best of the private businesses and less than half that of the worst. And the majority of the 60,000 people we just added have absolutely nothing to do with Medicare.

    I already addressed the $500billion number, but you ignored it because that's your strawman. You're attacking a point that I never made. How can they cut $500 billion? I don't know. I don't think you can. I've already said I don't buy those numbers. You conveniently skimmed over that so you could repost this again.
    No, you didn't post the 500 billion dollar number but Congress did. The Senate Bill is paid for as they say by cuts in Medicare, the waste, fraud, and abuse. The question you should be asking is where that waste, fraud, and abuse comes from.

    You are the one that seems to believe because of a trumped up, distorted overhead number that the Govt. can operate healthcare better than the private sector but your numbers aren't comparing the same things.

    You don't know what the private sector employees do but we do know that Medicare employees are dedicated to Medicare. Anyone that believes govt. runs anything more effeciently than private industry is naive, gullible, and very, very misinformed.

    You want badly to believe that Govt. run healthcare is going to be effecient, more cost effective, and offer better services but history refutes your opinions.

  10. #1040
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    50,235

    Re: Health Care Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    You want badly to believe that Govt. run healthcare is going to be effecient, more cost effective, and offer better services but history refutes your opinions.
    What history?

    We've never tried it in our country so there's no history here.

    Every country that HAS tried it spends far less than we do and covers 100% of the population.

    You'll have to work me through how they are less cost effective. I assert that the are actually more cost-effective.

    Canadians, for example, spend fewer tax dollars on healthcare per-capita than we do. They don't have to pay out of pocket for health insurance premiums, because their taxes cover health insurance.

    As far as better quality, I'll head off what I already know you're going to say. Waiting times. It's cherry-picked data. You'll always hear it referencing Canadian elective surgeries, usually hip replacement, or in the UK. Did you know that Germany, France, Japan, Spain, Sweden, Iceland, Switzerland, and Australia all have shorter waiting times than we do?

Posting Permissions

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