Digest for rec.sport.football.college@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 9 topics

Tuesday, July 11, 2017

"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:28AM -0700

I was making your point, dumnblebass.
 
Yes, we know where we're balancing costs/competence.
 
Some doctors we won't change regardless of our out of pocket expenses. Others are purely exonomic.
 
...and cancer is a terrible example relative to the critical care example of a kidney stone (which, by the way, I had a couple years back and drive past several adequate facilities to one that met my economic criteria.
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jul 11 10:12AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 9:11:54 AM UTC-5, wolfie wrote:
> veggies. And neither of those pay the mortgage or put
> gas in the car. So they made up for it by charging people
> paying money more than they would otherwise.
 
No, you don't get it. Doctors 'have' to charge uninsured people more in some cases than insured people because they CANNOT charge less than the HIGHEST insurance payment for that code. For example, if my reimburses for a certain code are as follows:
 
medicare- 198
Aetna- 187
Blue Cross- 211
Humana- 234
 
And I take those 4 insurances, then I CANNOT charge less than 234 for self pay patients. Why? Because if I did, Humana would refuse to pay the 234 that they pay now. A lot of people outside health care don't understand that's how we set our self pay rates. It has nothing to do with trying to gouge the uninsured, or trying to make up for uninsured who don't pay....It is simply about making sure we get out contractual rates from the insurance contracts we have.
 
Now in a lot of cases there is one high outlier for any given code in terms of what an insurer will pay, and that's how people get the impression the self pay rates are so much higher.
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 11 10:16AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 1:12:38 PM UTC-4, michael anderson wrote:
> Humana- 234
 
> And I take those 4 insurances, then I CANNOT charge less than 234 for self pay patients. Why? Because if I did, Humana would refuse to pay the 234 that they pay now. A lot of people outside health care don't understand that's how we set our self pay rates. It has nothing to do with trying to gouge the uninsured, or trying to make up for uninsured who don't pay....It is simply about making sure we get out contractual rates from the insurance contracts we have.
 
> Now in a lot of cases there is one high outlier for any given code in terms of what an insurer will pay, and that's how people get the impression the self pay rates are so much higher.
 
This is the most useful piece of information you've poasted in a long time.
"wolfie" <bgbdwolf@gte.net>: Jul 11 02:49PM -0400

"michael anderson" wrote
 
> charge less than 234 for self pay patients. Why?
> Because if I did, Humana would refuse to pay the 234
> that they pay now.
 
You realize you just pointed out exactly what's wrong
with the health care industry? You're willing to provide
the service for $187. WTF are you charging others more?
 
Fix your example, fix the issue. Simple law: "No medical
provider can charge more than they charge Medicare for
any procedure, exam, etc." Of course, single payer would
do exactly that, but it's your example that needs fixing, not
the assortment of payers.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:48AM -0700

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/07/11/opinion/how-we-are-ruining-america.html
 
Terrible article, writing, attitude. Great questions.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:35AM -0700

Not up on all the news, especially RUSSIAN TAKEOVER!!!
 
But correct me if I'm wrong here.
 
The NYT has written an article based on anonymous source(s) that claimed that DJTJ agreed to meet with a RUSSIAN AGENT WHO WAS SEEKING TO PROVIDE INFORMATION THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT UNCOVERED ON HILLARY. All based on an email received by DJTJ from an acquaintance of DJT.
 
However, the acquaintance, the person that sent the email, doesn't recall hearing anything about the Russian government having anything to do with this. He said, he was "...told she [the Russian lawyer] has information about illegal campaign contributions to the D.N.C.,..."
 
So, an anonymously sourced email that no one has seen that a Russian person has dirt on the DNC turns into TRUMP IS A RUSSIAN AGENT WORKING DIRECTLY FOR PUTIN, simply because somebody chatted with a Russian attorney?
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:42AM -0700


> The NYT has written an article based on anonymous source(s) that claimed that DJTJ agreed to meet with a RUSSIAN AGENT WHO WAS SEEKING TO PROVIDE INFORMATION THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT UNCOVERED ON HILLARY. All based on an email received by DJTJ from an acquaintance of DJT.
 
> However, the acquaintance, the person that sent the email, doesn't recall hearing anything about the Russian government having anything to do with this. He said, he was "...told she [the Russian lawyer] has information about illegal campaign contributions to the D.N.C.,..."
 
> So, an anonymously sourced email that no one has seen that a Russian person has dirt on the DNC turns into TRUMP IS A RUSSIAN AGENT WORKING DIRECTLY FOR PUTIN, simply because somebody chatted with a Russian attorney?
 
You're a little late with this denial.
 
DJTJ has published the emails.
https://twitter.com/Nate_Cohn/status/884796275408777216
 
"This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump"
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:47AM -0700

That's pretty freakin awesome.
 
So, are we all looking forward to the Hillary prosecution?
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:48AM -0700

> That's pretty freakin awesome.
 
> So, are we all looking forward to the Hillary prosecution?
 
No, Trump's gonna pardon her on his way out the door, and then pick her up in his private jet and whisk her off to Moscow with his family.
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 11 07:10AM -0700

> Not sooner? I poasted it yesterday.
 
Well in their defense it was the daily "here are the stories featured on the Today show" from WRAL. I hate a lot of their alerts but I keep them because their traffic and weather ones are worthwhile.
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 07:58AM -0700

I gave up on WRAL several years ago. Got my news from google for a while. Then just went to different aggregators and Twitter.
Tonawanda Kardex <tonawandakardex@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:38AM -0700


> In a bean field, lotsa flames
 
Sucks big time, but it's the Confederate military. What do you expect?
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:47AM -0700

Technically, that's a union plane.
"wolfie" <bgbdwolf@gte.net>: Jul 11 11:35AM -0400

"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" wrote
 
> "For imposing taxes on us without our consent:"
 
> Yes. This indicates they felt under taxed.
 
Which part of "without our consent" don't you understand?
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:44AM -0700

> "For imposing taxes on us without our consent:"
 
> Yes. This indicates they felt under taxed.
 
Plenty of people who actually are under taxed don't feel that way.
 
It's like asking if you're overpaid at your job. Are you? Does anyone think he is?
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:40AM -0700

Let me see if I understand your argument.
 
Are you saying they were angry because King George kept lowering their taxes without asking them?
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:44AM -0700

First, there is a distinct difference between income and tax.
 
I'm willing to bet good money not a single lefty on RSFC has donated extra funds to the federal government.
 
(Your $1 election contributions don't count).
 
In case I am wrong, or you would like to start your extra giving in honor of our founding fathers, I offer again.
 
Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Credit Accounting Branch
3700 East-West Highway, Room 6D37
Hyattsville, MD 20782
 
Have at it b
xyzzy <xyzzy.dude@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:47AM -0700

> 3700 East-West Highway, Room 6D37
> Hyattsville, MD 20782
 
> Have at it b
 
I think you missed the point. Let me repeat.
 
"Plenty of people who actually are under taxed don't feel that way. "
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 08:37AM -0700

But the point of the post isn't whether what he did was wrong, it was whether the CONSERBATIVES OF RSFC would condemn him.
 
Yet, we had no outbursts of condemnation from the left of Hillary, Donna Brazille, etc., etc., etc.
 
I think its funny. Everyone is playing by the same rules all of a sudden.
tim.vanwagonerspam@gmail.com: Jul 11 09:13AM -0700

There were plenty of condemnations of Hillary and Brazile. But it is easy to forget those sorts of things.
 
Breitbart and Fox are now unwatchable/readible because they're just lapdogs that sling whatever bs the administration wants out there with almost no questioning. My new favorite site is RedState. It seems to be the best place where real conservatives and not tribal cheerleaders reside.
michael anderson <mianderson79@gmail.com>: Jul 11 10:16AM -0700

On Tuesday, July 11, 2017 at 9:18:50 AM UTC-5, xyzzy wrote:
> https://twitter.com/RWPUSA/status/884427405603024899
 
its not like those close to the bush family have any reason to say bad things about Trump or anything....
"the_andrew_smith@yahoo.com" <agavinsmith@gmail.com>: Jul 11 11:37AM -0700

I anxiously await your links to RSFC lefties condemning Brazille, et al.
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: Jul 11 09:36AM -0700

In article <4de9bbd4-68d6-4c80-ba71-1242e9690ffc@googlegroups.com>,
 
> https://evans.uw.edu/sites/default/files/NBER%20Working%20Paper.pdf
 
No point in explaining the economics.
Those who put it in know exactly what they are doing.
 
--
Michael Press
Some dued <theodoreward@gmail.com>: Jul 10 09:28PM -0700

Nude swimmer survives a rare shark attack on Miami-Dade beach
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/miami-dade/article160633179.html
Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net>: Jul 10 09:26PM -0700

| NFL ratings declined by nine percent in 2016.
|
| Penalties for hits once considered clean, rules largely negating
| the excitement of kick returns, referee involvement slowing the
| pace of the game, the suspension of Tom Brady for four games and
| the retirement of Peyton Manning, and players making a political
| football of football all come up as reasons for the ratings drop.
| A resurgent Dallas Cowboys, the New England Patriots looking to
| extend their dynasty after winning one of the most exciting Super
| Bowls in history, and Colin Kaepernick promising to end his
| protest should he find a suitor in free agency all give the
| league hope for a turn-around in 2017.
 
Really? CK will stand at attention for the national anthem?
49ers: 2-14 in 2016 season.
 
--
Michael Press
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