Digest for rec.sport.football.college@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 2 topics

Monday, June 26, 2017

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:24PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:18:21 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> Don't tell me, go on and post to her Twitter feed.
 
Why? What's the point? To be a dick in the midst of personal anguish?
 
Is this the same reason you don't go on the thread of families who have had a loved one die at the hands of a VA waiting list and proclaim it was for their benefit?
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:25PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:05:27 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> Need to log into Twitter and tell this freeloader that life ain't fair.
 
ok...me: "life isn't fair"
 
 
 
> This mom's viral tweets about her son's medical bills show what's at stake if the ACA is repealed
 
So what happened to patient's like the one in this story before Obamacare? They all just died? Oh wait...they didn't. Or insured pt's and their families maybe had to spend more than 500 dollars to receive hundreds of thousands of dollars of care? Like I do now??
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:25PM -0700

Doesn't it seem like a dick move for the wealthiest country ever (more or less) to let children die in order to reduce taxes on the wealthy?
 
I understand that you can imagine this argument being used even if the tax rate were %99, but that's not really the case and much weaker economies than ours supply this care.
GrtArtiste <nineorbs@yahoo.com>: Jun 26 03:26PM -0400

On 6/26/2017 3:05 PM, Some dued wrote:
> Need to log into Twitter and tell this freeloader that life ain't fair.
 
> This mom's viral tweets about her son's medical bills show what's at stake if the ACA is repealed
> https://mic.com/articles/180850/this-moms-viral-tweets-about-her-sons-medical-bills-show-whats-at-stake-if-the-aca-is-repealed
 
If not for modern medicine, I would've died 9 yrs ago. 75% of the folks
I personally know over 60 would be dead. I have 2 rellies under 25 who
would also be dead. You want a solution to the healthcare mess? All we
have to do is turn modern medicine off. Let's go back to medicine as it
was in 1900. As long as you don't mind the death rate, all other
problems would soon be gone.
 
Let's bring back tobacco advertising!
Let's make opioids available OTC!
Legalize Marijuana!
Not only will Social Security become solvent...it won't be needed any
more! National Debt? What National Debt???
 
See how easy that was? You're welcome.
 
GrtArtiste
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:28PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:25:35 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> Doesn't it seem like a dick move for the wealthiest country ever (more or less) to let children die in order to reduce taxes on the wealthy?
 
Do you advocate ANY sort of cap for patient care? There's literally no end to this line of reasoning - until you run out of money.
 
> I understand that you can imagine this argument being used even if the tax rate were %99, but that's not really the case and much weaker economies than ours supply this care.
 
And they also ration care. Frankly, this child might well have been denied care in many countries - or certainly limited.
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:30PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:28:08 PM UTC-5, GrtArtiste wrote:
> Not only will Social Security become solvent...it won't be needed any
> more! National Debt? What National Debt???
 
> See how easy that was? You're welcome.
 
That's certainly a solution - free healthcare for all - but super restrict coverage - no cat scans, no vaccines, no xrays.....
 
Unlimited free modern medical care for all is simply not possible - despite the emotional arguments.
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:37PM -0700

I don't necessarily disagree, but then my children are healthy (so far).
"Con Reeder, unhyphenated American" <constance@duxmail.com>: Jun 26 02:39PM -0500


> life isn't fair.
 
> we all know it.
 
> the best part of Ocare is how we all be immortal
 
Before we grant how many people are going to die if Obamacare
is repealed, we need to count how many people it has saved.
 
Death rates have actually risen for many demographics under the reign
of Obamacare. Overdose deaths are way up. Where have lives been saved
to offset this?
 
--
The tenor's voice is spoilt by affectation,
And for the bass, the beast can only bellow;
In fact, he had no singing education,
An ignorant, noteless, timeless, tuneless fellow. -- Lord Byron
Eric Ramon <ramon.eric@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:41PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 12:28:48 PM UTC-7, The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:25:35 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> > Doesn't it seem like a dick move for the wealthiest country ever (more or less) to let children die in order to reduce taxes on the wealthy?
 
> Do you advocate ANY sort of cap for patient care? There's literally no end to this line of reasoning - until you run out of money.
 
assuming anything he says is true, mia is an example of one of the three biggest problems. His talk of his income (and he's a fairly small fry in the system) shows that medical people simply make too much money. I don't go for this extortion of overcharging because they can. In this particular case, if you look at the itemized costs, they got charged $20,000+ for a couple of weeks "room and board". Why did the hospital charge that much? Because they could.
 
And this gets paid, at least for now in this instance, by insurance money. That's one of the other big problems. Again, it's "what are you going to do about it?" Insurance companies are partners with the doctors to squeeze as much money as possible out of people. And oh yeah, there's the deductible, not that I'm telling anyone anything they don't already know.
 
Then there's malpractice insurance and payouts. It all comes down to greed. I know many of you feel very protective of your right to be greedy. It's not a good look, though.
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:43PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:37:17 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> I don't necessarily disagree, but then my children are healthy (so far).
 
Like a lot of things - it's easier when it's impersonal rather than directly affecting us - like job loss due to tech or whatever
 
We "know" we're all "better off" in the long run - but when it impacts us *directly*.....
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 12:46PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Eric Ramon wrote:
 
> assuming anything he says is true, mia is an example of one of the three biggest problems. His talk of his income (and he's a fairly small fry in the system) shows that medical people simply make too much money. I don't go for this extortion of overcharging because they can. In this particular case, if you look at the itemized costs, they got charged $20,000+ for a couple of weeks "room and board". Why did the hospital charge that much? Because they could.
 
> And this gets paid, at least for now in this instance, by insurance money. That's one of the other big problems. Again, it's "what are you going to do about it?" Insurance companies are partners with the doctors to squeeze as much money as possible out of people. And oh yeah, there's the deductible, not that I'm telling anyone anything they don't already know.
 
> Then there's malpractice insurance and payouts. It all comes down to greed. I know many of you feel very protective of your right to be greedy. It's not a good look, though.
 
I have zero disagreement with any of this - which is why I'm so much in favor of getting the gov OUT of h/c as much as possible.
 
Removing price caps where can, open the door for competition and turn loose the Silicon Valley folks on this.
 
Look at Lasik - the price has done nothing but go down and quality of service go up. No Medicaid/Care involved, little to no insurance involvement.
 
Coincidence? I think not....
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: Jun 26 01:21PM -0700

Lasik is something with a big demand. A lot of these insane costs are due to being for rare problems. Without insurance to pay exorbitant costs a lot of these procedures would probably never be developed solving the problem by saying "there's no known cure" instead of "there's a 10 million dollar cure".
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jun 26 01:24PM -0700

Wouldnt it be more charitable for you to start a charitable "healthcare" practice and give away everything to people that need it?
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 01:24PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 3:21:43 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> Lasik is something with a big demand. A lot of these insane costs are due to being for rare problems. Without insurance to pay exorbitant costs a lot of these procedures would probably never be developed solving the problem by saying "there's no known cure" instead of "there's a 10 million dollar cure".
 
Which is certainly a dilemma - do we all pay up for a very rare cure - or not?
 
That's a Deep Question I don't have the answer to
"wolfie" <bgbdwolf@gte.net>: Jun 26 05:32PM -0400

"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" wrote
 
> quality of service go up. No Medicaid/Care involved, little to
> no insurance involvement.
 
> Coincidence? I think not....
 
It's entirely optional. Don't have the money? Fine, wear
glasses or squint. As such, they have to price where people
can afford it to make sales, just like anyone else.
 
That doesn't work when you either pay for it or die.
 
I'm all for free markets. Healthcare isn't one and can't be.
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:41PM -0700

I wonder if penicillin were just developed in today's medical climate what a shot would cost, I am not saying it would necessarily be astronomical but am curious.
YosemiteSam <YosemiteSam@byteme.com>: Jun 26 02:43PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 3:41:27 PM UTC-4, Eric Ramon wrote:
 
> assuming anything he says is true, mia is an example of one of the three biggest problems. His talk of his income (and he's a fairly small fry in the system) shows that medical people simply make too much money. I don't go for this extortion of overcharging because they can. In this particular case, if you look at the itemized costs, they got charged $20,000+ for a couple of weeks "room and board". Why did the hospital charge that much? Because they could.
 
> And this gets paid, at least for now in this instance, by insurance money. That's one of the other big problems. Again, it's "what are you going to do about it?" Insurance companies are partners with the doctors to squeeze as much money as possible out of people. And oh yeah, there's the deductible, not that I'm telling anyone anything they don't already know.
 
> Then there's malpractice insurance and payouts. It all comes down to greed. I know many of you feel very protective of your right to be greedy. It's not a good look, though.
 
$20k for a couple of weeks? Like hell.
 
St Francis Hospital + 9 days for nothing but 3 hots and a cot = $59,000.
 
That 59k didNot include any treatment or care. It was to help pay for the indoor waterfall made of polished marble as was the entire massive front lobby. Just like all the main corridors.
 
It had the look of a 5 star hotel when you walk through the main lobby doors.
 
How do you pay a doctor who was in the top 10% of his/her class vs those in the bottom 25% of the class?
 
A few decades from now when health can be controlled health care will be under control.
 
~YS~
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:46PM -0700

My quality of life is focused on cars, boats, and beach houses.
 
Why aren't they free?
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:48PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 4:41:09 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> I wonder if penicillin were just developed in today's medical climate what a shot would cost, I am not saying it would necessarily be astronomical but am curious.
 
Darn good question
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:49PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 4:32:55 PM UTC-5, wolfie wrote:
> glasses or squint. As such, they have to price where people
> can afford it to make sales, just like anyone else.
 
> That doesn't work when you either pay for it or die.
 
Most of health care is "pay or die" - we both know this.

> I'm all for free markets. Healthcare isn't one and can't be.
 
Price controls sure aren't working well.
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:50PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 3:24:45 PM UTC-5, The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior wrote:
> On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 3:21:43 PM UTC-5, Some dued wrote:
> > Lasik is something with a big demand. A lot of these insane costs are due to being for rare problems. Without insurance to pay exorbitant costs a lot of these procedures would probably never be developed solving the problem by saying "there's no known cure" instead of "there's a 10 million dollar cure".
 
> Which is certainly a dilemma - do we all pay up for a very rare cure - or not?
 
the problem is there are hundreds upon hundreds of 'rare' diseases....but added up as a whole they arent that rare.
 
It's not really appropriate to look at each disease state like that.....grouping them into cats like pediatric cancer, congenital heart defects, etc makes more sense. And when you do it like that they arent that rare.
"The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior" <iamtj4life@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:50PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 4:49:15 PM UTC-5, The Cheesehusker, Trade Warrior wrote:
> > can afford it to make sales, just like anyone else.
 
> > That doesn't work when you either pay for it or die.
 
> Most of health care is "pay or die" - we both know this.
 
IsN'T
 
stupid typos
 
cue the Freudian slip jokes
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:54PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Eric Ramon wrote:
> > > Doesn't it seem like a dick move for the wealthiest country ever (more or less) to let children die in order to reduce taxes on the wealthy?
 
> > Do you advocate ANY sort of cap for patient care? There's literally no end to this line of reasoning - until you run out of money.
 
> assuming anything he says is true, mia is an example of one of the three biggest problems. His talk of his income (and he's a fairly small fry in the system) shows that medical people simply make too much money.
 
I feel like I'm underpaid sometimes. I work 60 hours of week and others that are as efficient as me, do the volume i do in the settings I do, etc make 40-50% more. Hopefully I can be there in a couple years.
 
But again, I didn't start making really good money until 8 years after I started medical school. And had 6 figures in loans. So someone who graduates with a bachelors degree and then starts working had an 8 year head start on income(plus the less debt) on top of that. that takes a long time to make up.
 
 

 
> And this gets paid, at least for now in this instance, by insurance money. That's one of the other big problems. Again, it's "what are you going to do about it?" Insurance companies are partners with the doctors
 
huh? Thats news to me. It seems they are always fighting with us to lower our reimbursements or deny days of care. I make more money on medicare per pt(counting all the denied days insurers hit me with) than most insurances. But I'm in a unique specialty for that; probably isn't the case for most. That said we certainly arent 'partners'....
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:55PM -0700

On Monday, June 26, 2017 at 4:43:38 PM UTC-5, YosemiteSam wrote:
 
> That 59k didNot include any treatment or care. It was to help pay for the indoor waterfall made of polished marble as was the entire massive front lobby. Just like all the main corridors.
 
> It had the look of a 5 star hotel when you walk through the main lobby doors.
 
> How do you pay a doctor who was in the top 10% of his/her class vs those in the bottom 25% of the class?
 
in a lot of cases probably less....a lot of those AOA(top 10% types) end up going into academic medicine which pays less in many cases.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jun 26 02:50PM -0700

Theater is a right.
 
I want my free theater.
 
http://freebeacon.com/culture/feds-spend-20000-musical-illegal-immigrant-lesbian/
You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to rec.sport.football.college+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

0 comments:

Post a Comment