Home > Thinking Right > Archives > 2006 > July > 24 > Entry
DEL.ICIO.USHow much, doc?
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
The best battles are those where deep-pocketed competitors vie for the love and affection of the huddled masses. So it is that an insurer with 3,300 employees that pays the medical bills for 40 percent of Georgia’s privately insured patients is locked in public tit-for-tat negotiations with a healthcare conglomerate that employs 5,000 and generates net patient revenues of $737 million. The parties: Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Georgia on the one side, Piedmont Healthcare of Atlanta, on the other.
Do we have a dog in this fight? You bet. Blue Cross contends Piedmont’s charges are unreasonably high for the market. Piedmont says that it’s merely asking Blue Cross to pay fees comparable to those charged other carriers.
Not enough about the proposed reimbursements in dispute has been revealed publicly to pick the bad guy — but in principle, this corner’s with Blue Cross, even if it means long-term patients are put in positions where they opt for financial reasons to go elsewhere.
At some point, all of us have to become aware of, and concerned about, what medical services cost. I recently underwent a sleep apnea study that cost about $1,500. Had I been paying the bill, I probably wouldn’t. The physician appeared slightly discombobulated when I asked the cost. He guessed, and assured me that the fee had been negotiated and that I needn’t worry.
But I did. The third-party payment system that keeps us unmindful and unconcerned about what things cost is a major contributor to health care inflation. As with government money, it’s “free.” Until that changes, the nation has no hope of containing, much less curing, inflation.
I do believe the solution is to change the system. A combination of health care savings accounts combined with catastrophic care insurance would give individuals a reason to care what services cost. I believe, too, that every recipient of taxpayer-provided medical care should be charged a co-pay and given financial incentive to avoid over-utilization.
Meantime, though, some payer with clout — Blue Cross, in this case — should be hanging tough, questioning charges and dropping the bomb when they believe them unreasonable, even if it means patients have to go elsewhere. Costs matter. Nothing’s free. Even if we don’t pay on the spot, we pay more in taxes and get less in salaries because of it.
Services »
Comments
By Mid-South Philosopher
July 24, 2006 08:03 AM | Link to this
Good morning, Jim,
I agree that health care coverage (like retirement pensions) needs to move from the public and government sectors to the individual arena. The problem is how to get there.
Currently, I have an adult daughter who is single and in excellent health. She has no health insurance through her job; therefore, she must provide for her own care to the tune of $340.00 per month. She is one of the lucky ones. Were she married with children or (as is all too often the case) a single parent, I shutter to think what the cost of private insurance would be. As in her case, a lot of young workers do not generate sufficient income to meet all the needs of the post-modern world and save for retirement and health care. We have done a great job of raising them to expect “instant gratification” and to “never do today what you can put off until tomorrow”…especially, if it is unpleasant!
Fortunately, my daughter has her “old man” to fall back upon. What if she were one of the thousands…even hundreds of thousands…who have to hump it on their own?
With respect to your physician not knowing what the cost of your sleep apnea test was, that is not surprising at all. Most doctors are now in some sort of corporate configuration for tax and insurance purposes. They have little or no sense of what their services cost. The days when old Dr. Farrar or Dr. Galbraith would make a house call for $3.00 (quite an amount in the ‘50s) are gone. Doctors, today, receive a salary, which is all too often not all that much higher than a “highly qualified, Specialist-level” school teacher!
Again, while I agree that the system should be changed, I am not sure how to accomplish it without a considerable number of people getting hurt in the transition process. If I can’t figure it out, I know the politicians can’t, and if they try, they are only going to mess it up. Heaven help us if we go to socialized medicine or universal health care. By the time two old fossils like us get treated on the “back-log” schedule, it will not make any difference!”
By Blue and Crossed
July 24, 2006 08:35 AM | Link to this
The cost of Blue Cross for family of three with the oldest person in their mid fifties, and a 1K deductible w/RX and 20 dollar copay office visits is 1200 dollars per month. Two years ago it was 640 dollars a month. It’s rising THAT fast. The system: It’s broke, and needs a rx.
By Rod
July 24, 2006 08:37 AM | Link to this
I don’t know the specific stats either, but I’d have to side with Blue Cross on this one. Piedmont has been known as being more expensive for many, many years. I think it was quite telling when Blue Cross wanted to hold the public debate and Piedmont vehemently refused. I think they knew Blue Cross would simply point out several medical procedures and the cost by most hospitals and the cost by Piedmont. The public would have been behind Blue Cross in a heartbeat.
Piedmont’s only argument is that Cigna agreed to the costs so Blue Cross should as well. Obviously, Piedmont knows that if they concede to Blue Cross then Cigna will be making some changes the next time they renew their agreement.
Piedmont isn’t nearly as special as they used to be - now they run in the middle of the pack. It’s time to give up the premium costs they like to charge and start showing concern for the actual patients.
By Blue and Crossed
July 24, 2006 08:52 AM | Link to this
For one chemotherapy session, my doctors charge Blue Cross about $8K, but Blue Cross only pays about $3K. I get charged nothing after my $1000 deductible. I dont know where the other $5K goes. Or why the charges are so much more than what gets paid.
By Mark
July 24, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
I guess I can’t complain at all. I retired from the Air Force after 21 years and pay $460 a year for a family of 4. Funny thing is that it used to be free and when they changed it for retirees there was a lot of griping.
Philospher, what exactly is socialized medicine? Sounds like something that idiot Hannity would say.
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this
I have only this to say regarding health care delivery:
it’s broken. Expect it to change as the rising costs and limited access force Americans in all sectors (patients, providers, government and 3rd party payers) to assess how best to fix it.
Just FYI — the VA has a model that currently costs them nearly one third less per patient than the average hospital. They have done this by combining their purchasing power and negotiating with suppliers (which federal won’t allow Medicare/Medicaid to do and which individual hospital systems don’t have the purchasing power to do)
By deegee
July 24, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this
Not sure whether the $8K chemo session price Blue and Crossed saw was the “retail price” or the “wholesale price”. The insurance company negotiates down the final price for a service. That may explain the $3K difference. When I was without insurance and paying out of pocket for doctor visits and minor medical procedures I could usually negotiate an “out of pocket” price with the doctor. One doctor offered it without my asking.
By Mark
July 24, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this
Seeing thru the smoke,
I was in charge of purchasing for the clinics when I was in the Air Force and can tell you first hand that the price we paid for supplies and equipment are very reasonable. I can almost guarantee you that civilian medical facilities and programs pay the same prices from suppliers that we did. What the military doesn’t do is charge the patient a 1000 percent markup like civiian hospital do. When I read stories about paatients being charged 10 dollars for a 3 ml syringe that costs 30 cents, makes me wonder who receives those profits.
By Been There Done That
July 24, 2006 09:41 AM | Link to this
Jim: Years ago I ended up with a $3,000 physicians bill after my insurance paid. My insurance company informed me that his fees were above & beyond what was reasonable. Like Mid-South Philosopher said, doctors aren’t able to calculate fees until the damage is done. I tried to negotiate with the doctor and the insurance company to no avail.
My solution was to pay $10.00 a month (perfectly legal and within my rights)on the doctor’s bill. I could have paid more, but I didn’t. I was making a point. After paying $10.00 a month for five years, the Doctor wrote off what remained, $2,400. He obviously could have done that in the beginning. He could have saved himself the expense of postage and the collection agency that harrassed me for five years. I did feel a little bad that some other patient got hit with my $2,400 balance, but if everybody did what I did, they’d get the message. His justification for the unreasonable fees was that his practice was on the northside, his service was better.
His treatment of my condition was unsuccessful. How was that better?
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this
Mark —
The VA is doing it right when it comes to providing good care at reasonable prices… unfortunately, there are a lot of providers who are milking a cash cow and making tons of profits. That’s why patients are probably the most important part of the equation when talking about changing health care delivery. I don’t agree that health care savings plans will actually help lower the costs of delivery, because too much is hidden from the consumer. Blue Cross and Piedmont don’t want the patients to really know how they pay or get paid for their treatment.
By Harold
July 24, 2006 09:57 AM | Link to this
Oh boy another surgery and pill story swap.
This is why Harold stays out of the common areas.
By Blue and Crossed
July 24, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this
Ditto Been There. I am paying about ten different doctor offices each about 35 bucks a month to cover the deductible that got split over a change in year so that it’s 2000 bucks. They will agree to make payment arrangements, and I have to pay, because these are the same doctors doing my chemo and radiation etc. (and re-filling the Percoset RX which I now cant do without or the pain is too much). SO I pay. It’s not a catastrophe, but I know now how lucky I was to have the insurance that I have. So far, Blue cross has paid out 50K in chemo and radiation benefits but has been charged twice that easy. That must be the “Retail” price that my doctors send to Blue Cross. Maybe there is some tax write off benefit that the doctors get when they receive less than what they bill. I’d like the 411 on that! Could be a scam we’ve all discovered or some vast right wing conspiracy thing, in fact my life might be in danger now…….ugh…(the ajc regrets to inform the bloggers that this person has been injected with an untraceable poison and his death will be listed as natural causes, anyone want to argue?)
By Blue and Crossed
July 24, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this
Important notice: I urge all bloggers to check their health ins. policy. Believe it or not, this is my second go around with cancer. The first time, my old insurance company refused to pay a dime, even though I had paid them over $100K in premiums over the years. They had fine print that made the $5K deductible renew every 30 days, AND they wouldn’t cover the RX, even though I paid for it, or any of the follow up services after the surgery. So I ended up eating a $25K bill. Please have a professional re-read you policy for poison pill clauses like the one I didn’t discover till too late.
Please.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this
Health care isn’t necessarily any better in the US than many other western countries. Not for the average peasant anyway.
Though if you are - as Rod so moronically asserted - a very rich Republican “racist” or say a limousine Scientologist liberal, (with an aversion to Redneck Al Quaida’s most bewildered, long suffering health care providers - the humble psychiatrist) then your health care is presumably top notch.
But for most of us you pays your money and you takes your Hobson’s choice!!
My HMO - which I now heartily despise but costs virtually the same as any other similar .org as I’ve found to my disgust - is as incompetent/robotic as any other provider.
My fave instance of HMO quackery was when this utter moron of a doctor (from Detroit) after being told I’d had a cold like virus which had now dissipated, but left me with quite a strong residual cough explicitly told me I’d now actually “developed” asthma and needed to be be permanently put on steroid inhalers. Needless to say I didn’t ever use the inhaler and the cough went away.
Beyond their glib Star Trekish advertising about “thriving” the reality of this HMO is that ALMOST every one you go to see practices defensive medicine. Occasionally I have encountered someone competent who actually takes the initiative.
Doubtless this is in good part down to the endless tort abuse of verminous liberal ambulance chasing trial lawyers who are like money grubbing sharks sniffing blood in the water when it comes to suing. Either individually or in their even more lucrative class actions law suits. And ultimately everybody pays for these trial lawyer ‘successes’. And of course the many millions of illegal immigrants add their huge unpaid bills to the monthly premiums/bills the rest of us pay.
As you get older the premiums rocket, even if your health problems dont. Whilst that’s understandable in the case of very poor health, why not offer such customer friendly things as no claims bonuses or partial refunds if no health care is needed during the year?
And it at least mildly amuses me to often see truly obese lumps of lard sitting there either processing your paperwork, or worse taking your BP. Knowing full well the chances are they’re in worse shape with their BP etc than most folks. Not exactly a healthy image to project.
Its a big subject …
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 10:20 AM | Link to this
Don’t LIE Harold - after numerous handbags at the ready incidents you’ve been told to KEEP OUT of the “common areas” for years now!!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this
To the liberal moron Mark
“socialised medicine” means a National Health Service - e.g. U.K. NHS or Canadian like approach, where tax payers fund much/all health care and therefore the actual services are limited by budgetary contraints and medical administrators etc.
The sort of approach Shrillary absurdly and infamously attempted to impose on the US during her unelected Fuehrer period before Travelgate, the missing Whitewater billing records, her corrupt cattle furures scam etc kicked in!!
By That's Right!
July 24, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this
I agree with your position Jim. Leaving the patient with some financial stake will make him/her discriminate among services and their relative costs.
I do think though, that we should keep in mind that the pressure from the insurance companies, for rock bottom rates by the providers, might have a long term effect in significantly lowering compensations for physicians and other medical staff. This could drive bright young minds to pursue other career avenues. Not a positive consequence.
By deegee
July 24, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this
I wonder how many doctors go home every day and muse about the moronic patients that clog their offices every day because they have a cough and the sniffles and want some sort of a medical miracle to cure them within the next 24 hours. They probably prescribe inhalers knowing that in a few days the cough and sniffles will subside and the patient has the satisfaction of not leaving the office empty handed.
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this
deegee — an excellent point about the overuse of healthcare. God love my mother, but she will go to the doctor for every sneeze (not literally, but close) and this phenoma is increasing (or so the AMA says). It is a factor in driving up the cost of medicine.
Time for the truth — Mark asked a good question, which you didn’t answer about “socialized medicine”. there are more models out there than just the UK or Canadian systems and others could create something completely different than those countries have now. How do you know if it is socialized medicine?
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this
@ the moron deegee
In this instance I’d had this cough for nearly three weeks after the cold had gone away - it was a nasty virus which I sincerely wish I could have given to you!!
Clearly I understand the problem with viruses not responding to medicines - but for your future reference some symptons e.g. coughs can be treated.
I saw someone else at the same office and got some cough medicine which OVERNIGHT stopped the cough!!
Telling you you now have asthma - is hardly practicing stroke the patient/ placebo type medicine!!
Its hilarious to see I’ve so easily gotten under your skin that you post personal abuse - hope you really enjoyed my response in kind!!
Many thanks for your usual b__iiitchy comments!!
By JK
July 24, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this
One reason doctors charge so much is that THEIR insurance companies charge them so much for liablity coverage! “Tort reform” laws were sold to us under the premise that malpractice payouts were driving up premiums (BS), which were passed along to patients, so we shoud limit the right to sue. Preventing “frivilous” lawsuits makes health care more affordable for everyone.
Haha! Guess what: your right to sue your incompetent HMO has be severely curtailed, and your costs are not going down. Why? Those laws were crafted by insurance industry lobbyists who make more per year than your doctor, but not as much as insurance company CEOs who pay them. Duped again!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this
smoke - moron mark attacked “the idiot Hannity” - his comment not mine - for no reason - and made himself look stupid. Hannity uses the Canadian example as his usual socialised medicine example because it is similar to the disgraced/discarded Hitllary “plan” and contrasts so badly with the US approach - which is not socialised but has its own problems as we are seeinmg on the blog!!
you make yourself very look stupid by asking that final question!!
NHS/Canadian type plans are socaliased medicine - do your own bloody research!!
By JK
July 24, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this
Deegee, I agree! (Time for Troof: Up your meds, “love.” Your nice pills aren’t working today.)
I used to buy into the billion$$ of advertising that I needed this pill and that pill and tests, and relief. What I needed was to stop ingesting the garbage that’s marketed as food, exercise more, lose some weight, and I felt better all around! Tummy doesn’t hurt, knees don’t hurt, can sleep now, and no longer depressed. Yipee! Take responsibility for your own health, and tell the doctors to shove it!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this
JK
clearly the increased premiums are at least in good part as a result of verminous liberal trial lawyer snouts in the trough lawsuits!!
YOU MAKE MY POINT FOR ME!!
I absolutely agree with you @ HMO’s and I despise them - but currently I have no other choice!! I dont have a large employer who subsidises my health care or has the buying power to reduce any health plans!
By rarringt
July 24, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this
Looks like TFTT got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. He’s succeeded in adding vitriol to what was an unusually civil discussion, and insulting just about everyone on the blog.
TFTT, just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t make them an idiot, moron, or any other name you’ve called them.
Confucious said the path to wisdom begins with the confession of one’s own ignorance. Everyone else in the room is trying to learn more and share their personal accounts. You, on the other hand, have resorted to name-calling.
How does that address the issue at hand?
By getalife
July 24, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this
Everything this administration touches turn to “s-hit”.
Let us wait until there is competence in government before changing anything.
Then change back everything Clinton did that W got rid of and start from there.
Shut down K Street to eliminate the bribery system and lock up all politicians who took advantage of that system.
Vote out the old and bring in the new. We just may get the country back to the people instead of the corporations.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 11:13 AM | Link to this
I simply handed back the abuse mark and deegee handed out …
mark called Hannity an idiot FOR NO REASON -so I called him a moron - a fair exchange of abuse and deeggee made it personal for NO reason but gratuitous abuse.
“insulted just about everyone” … actually just those two jerks and DESERVEDLY now yourself!! But your stupid exaggeration was very amusing!!
your intellectual dishonesty is hilarious!!
Now sod off!!
By Dave
July 24, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this
Be very careful that your medics are not using you as their “profit center” by ordering tests, performed in their offices, that are not neeed to diagnois your health problem. This is a huge rip off of the patient and the insurance companies. Beware. Be an informed patient and do not beocme under the spell of the Doctor’s bedside manner. If you do, it means a new Posche for him/her, and the monthly payments made by you, the sucker.
By Mark
July 24, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
TFTT, what does attacking Hannity have to do with you? Are you his personal blog-protector—scowering blogs everywhere in defense of Fauxnews idiots? Go F yourself you right-wing piece of…
By Oh the Humanity
July 24, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Oh please tell me its not true!!!!!!!
Someone called Hannity an idiot!
Oh the humanity. Oh the humanity.
And for no reason…Waaaaaaaaaaaaa
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this
Dave
HMO’s dont do this - that’s at least one thing in their favour - tests cost them money. But you point is a good one … unlike some earlier one’s!!
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this
TTFT — you might not like every system the great American think tank can come up with… so, it brings us right back to the question of how one defines socialized medicine… right now it seems that as long as it doesn’t look like Canada or the NHS model you don’t like, you’d be OK with it.
Starting with a definition of let’s change health care delivery and the only rule is that it cannot look like the Canadian system but it has to work…. you could wind up with something way worse than Canada currently has.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 11:28 AM | Link to this
@ Mark HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
my first hissy fit of the day …
It was simply banter moron mark!!
I note you descended into four letter abuse!! Whereas I just impugned your seeming ignorant idiocy on health care matters. And I kept it ENTIRELY on topic - YOU just became hysterically and personally abusive!!
I just love effortlessly goading you simpleton, simpering, (Harold’s fave word) effete liberals!! You bite like gooduns every bloody time!!
Poor wittle Pinko moron mark!!
By Mark
July 24, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this
With all your blustering you still didn’t answer the question; are you Hannity’s protector or butt-buddy? Which one is it? Apparently you have a vested interest in defending one of most stupid people the right could poison the airwaves with. I’m sure he’d be happy knowing there are fools like you who believe every lie he repeats over and over.
Go back to watching Faux news and leave the civil conversations to us. I’m sure some Faux idiot is on your TV screen right now giving you today’s Republicans talking points. Have a nice day idiot.
By deegee
July 24, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this
Well, if we don’t learn anything else today we have learned that coughs can be treated with cough medicine. Who would imagine???
By Mark
July 24, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
TFTT, I’m even willing to get past the nastiness in order to respond to your 10:27 post:
How is socialized medicine any different than Medicaid and Medicare?
By rarringt
July 24, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this
TFTT,
I was going to come up with a decidedly different response to your post, but no matter. Looks like you’re just another one of those folks with the “disenfranchised peasant” mentality who feels validated by lashing out against everyone and everything that offends his world view.
By edge770
July 24, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this
Let’s have savings accounts boys and girls.. uh no.. Remove businesses from paying health insurance for their employees. REQUIRE all adults over 18 to purchase their own insurance and for families. Then top 10 health insurance takes 10 percent of the safety net to spread cost. As well as implement other efficiencies such as deny transplants for those that abuse their bodies and other preventive measures.
By Amelia
July 24, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this
The day the government can require someone to purchase anything is the day it’s not America anymore.
By mc
July 24, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this
And what if they don’t. Throw um in jail? Yeh right.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this
@ brainless deegee
read this very slowly love, so you can inwardly digest and chomp on those three big macs at the same time - OTC cough medicines are useless - that’s why for bad residual coughs you need to see a quack to get the prescription strength stuff!!
Clearly your latest petulant drivel was actually entirely redundant!!
@ wittle moron mark
I dont actually need to answer your latest (repeated) moronic question. So I wont!! huge smirk
But that is your second hissy fit today - although admittedly it was more of a limpwristed Harold type effort.
Faux News - WOW - you are truly a veritable pinko comedic genius - which far leftist hate speech blog did you lift that priceless gem from? Let me guess … it wasn’t News Max, Drudge or Rush Limbuagh - who is undoubtedly America’s truth detector!!
Thanks for all the free smirks moron mark … its much appreciated I assure you!!
By Mark
July 24, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this
Hear, hear Amelia. I agree. Speaking of something off topic, did the government require everyone in some metro city to buy a gun? I heard that rumor. Is it true?
By Janine
July 24, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this
Uh-Oh..edge 770 Here comes that nasty government interfering with our freedoms again…I don’t like it when government sneaks in and choice is pushed out.
By deegee
July 24, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
I read recently that Wal-Mart is considering offering low cost health insurance to its customers. On the surface it sounds like a good idea because I would suppose that they could leverage a group discount with insurance carriers similar to large employers. I would also imagine that many of their customers that are presently uninsured and ineligible for medicaid may be attracted to a simple, low cost solution.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this
Time for the Truth: Looks like you’re having fun today. I’ve enjoyed sitting on the sidelines just “watching the game”.
By Amelia
July 24, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this
Yes, quite a few years ago Kennesaw did that.
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this
I’m not a big supporter of government telling us we have to carry health insurance… look at how badly that has turned out for the auto insurance customers (sky high rates, poor service, poor coverage, big penalties).
By Harold
July 24, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
Handbags at the ready incidents?
Harold does not understand.
By Brandon
July 24, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this
What is up with angry pathetic liberals like Mike who can do nothing but b!tch all day about Foxnews and AM talk radio (thank GOD Airhead America got the JACKBOOT from the airwaves HAHAHAHA!!!)? Don’t you buffoons have anything more important to say? I suppose not. It’s like you liberal idiots always say “Nazi!” every time a conservative fires off a post they don’t agree with. Or, said jackholes on the left could be like that loser neocommunist liberal Kieth Olbermann who can’t STAND the fact that FoxNews has kicked his pathetic low-rating backside six ways to Sunday. So what doth the liberal hatemonger Olbermann do at a television critic’s breakfast but hold an O’Reilly mask and giving the Nazi salute. Well isn’t that special, and isn’t that just like the antics of the bedwetting sorelosing, never winning liberal lunatic left:
http://www.broadcastingcable.com/CA6355563.html
Oh yeah, and screw your communist socialized “free” universal healthcare for all, you liberal wallet pirates. It hasn’t worked in Canada and it won’t work here. How would you losers like to wait in line for hours because people in front of you show up for ingrown toenails? Oh sure, isn’t that just like the mentality disorder of liberalism: screw up an entity that 82% of the US population buys into so that the mere 18% of those with no healthcare plan can get “their fare share too.” Liberalism gags me like a greasy fatburger.
By Amelia
July 24, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 11:56 AM Rush Limbuagh - who is undoubtedly America’s truth detector!!
And soon the truth about Rush and all those little girls in the D.R. is going to be detected and we’ll be rid of him just like Ralph Reed.
By Brandon
July 24, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this
Amelia:
“And soon the truth about Rush and all those little girls in the D.R. is going to be detected and we’ll be rid of him just like Ralph Reed.”
I hate to rain on your liberal bedwetting parade, but there is nothing “we” (you) can do about Rush. NOTHIHG! He is #1 in the radio show business. His show stirs hundreds of millions of dollars annually in everything from advertisement revenue to merchandise sales. In short, the MARKET decides on what Rush does. What a shame Airhead America with liberal gutter filth like Randi Rhoadkill flamed out over Atlanta’s airwaves, huh?
And don’t kid yourself sister, Rush’s legal problems are from gung-ho democrat procecuters who are trying the legal system to shut him down (that’s what you liberals do best: use the legal system to get your horseass agendas done).
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this
Damn Right Kidding!!
Mark …
essentially there isn’t a great difference although medicare and medicaid and other similar US health programmes as I understand it are targeted more at specific groups, the elderly, welfare recipients, kids and adult parents with kids, and sadly even perhaps illegals in some of the more vile liberal fiefdoms!!
and of course millions of illegals severely abuse US emergency care- as they have the enshrined legal right to get what they need on demand, even if its not life threatening!!
socialised medicine always has finite resources - the UK NHS could literally spend the entire GDP of the UK on healthcare if everyone’s medical needs were catered for, including sex changes, extremely expensive new drugs and procedures - even new life saving drugs, dialysis on demand, plastic surgery whims, compulsory brain transplants for socialists/Labour party members and so on!!
Thus choices have to be made and medical resources are rationed - often its a postcode lottery in the UK as to how good e.g. cancer care is . Canada is similar and I dont know many folks here who’ve used medicare - I’m eligible as a US citizen when I’m 65 or whatever.
The point is that US health companies/doctors have liberal trial lawyers on one side grasping and lobbyists for the health industry etc on the other side also grasping … and us poor peasants end up paying for it … sadly even with “our lives”.
to make health care truly affordable wont ever happen because its a COURAGEOUS political decision that wont ever be made WITH THE SYSTEM AS IT IS.
so the left endlessly abuses “greedy” health companies etc and the visionary centre-right rightly complains about health insurance hikes etc to cater for punitive law suits etc.
I agree that health care should be low cost and competent etc for everyone, except for say the likes of members of moveon.org, but everything somewhere costs money - just who “pays” for it is the eternal question!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
The high cost of healthcare and health insurance is like so many things wrong with this country today that are NOT going to change until all the big contributions to politicians are STOPPED. I know it’s NOT going to happen BUT as long as the American Medical Association, the pharmaceutical companies, the insurance companies, the trial lawyers, and so many others are allowed their “ACCESS” to our government leaders don’t expect any different. It’s all about BIG MONEY and we’re paying the price. How else can hospitals and doctors continue getting away with robbing their patients. A one cent Tylenol or aspirin costing you $5.00 or more…a 25-50cents costing you $15.00 or $20.00 or more!!! One thousand dollars or more to lie on a cot in the emergency room while in immense pain waiting for a doctor to finally see you!!! If everything was legitimate this would be criminal IF we had true REPRESENTATION in Washington instead of the good ole boy network of BIG BUSINESS!
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this
Brandon — you are talking about roughly 54 million Americans with no access to health care, driving up the cost of health care for everyone (ERs don’t make good primary care facilities).
You and everyone else who pays for Health care (whether it’s through your employers or completely out of your own pocket) should very much care how those people get treated.
Hospitals write off, as uncollectable, approximately 33% of all patient charges. Most of that is accounted for by uninsured patients who have access the healthcare system through the ER. Patients accessing ERs are overwhelming more ill than those accessing their primary care clinics.
By the time a child with a fever is taken into an ER for treatment, it costs 3 times what it costs for treatment in a primary care clinic.
Bottom line: it costs more to provide treatment in ERs. Forcing 50 million Americans to access healthcare through hospital ERs drives up the cost of healthcare.
http://www.ahrq.gov/data/hcup/
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
That should’ve read: A 25-50 cents SYRINGE costing you $15.00 or$20.00 or more.
By Harold
July 24, 2006 12:29 PM | Link to this
Look at Harold’s scar! It’s the longest!
By JK
July 24, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this
Amelia, FYI: It wasn’t little girls Rush went to see in the Dominican Republic.
By Doctor
July 24, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this
time for the truth seems to have serious psychological problems. He can’t seem to get along with anyone and addresses everyone in demeaning and rude comments, even when unprovoked.
time for the truth, why don’t you go back to bed and try to get up on the right side this time. I’m sure Reed will let you get back in later.
By No More Band Camp Stories
July 24, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this
Brandon,
Got anything other than anecdotal evidence to back up the comments of 12:10 where you stated that the Canadian Health Care plan is a failure. I would posit that your position is not the obvious fact you think it to be.
But since you appear to be an expert on Canadian Health Care please provide some verifiable, objective evidence that the Canadian system is as bad as all that so we can all understand. (And keep in mind that Hannity is an entertainer, not an authority. Oh and “everyone knows that …” is not evidence either.)
The reason I ask this question is that I am growing weary of ignorant blowhards on both the right and the left (and I am not saying you fit that position quite yet) parroting what they hear on the radio and TV as if it is settled fact without doing the intellectual work on their own. The sweeping stereotypes do nothing to further a debate and denigrate the speaker.
So I have decided that when I see these sweeping statements I am going to ask for some support. This way you can put up your reasoning (Within say, 30 minutes or so, this will lessen the incidence of substituting a quick Google search for real intellectual work. If you know enough to make a sweeping statement then the facts should be already in the memory banks, no need to look them up) or join the list of the ignorant parrots.
Keep in mind that I am not going to debate with you and you are not answering to me. I just think the blog has the right to understand how you came to the conclusion that prompted your statement.
By deegee
July 24, 2006 01:09 PM | Link to this
Hello Doctor, wouldn’t you love to have TFTT for a patient? It’s a wonder that his cough medicine wasn’t laced with belladonna.
By getalife
July 24, 2006 01:11 PM | Link to this
I see “time for the truth” and “Ugotta B. Kidding” are on board for a change in the system.
We the people, are the only ones who can change it.
By The Way
July 24, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this
Doctor, YOU CANT HANDLE TIME4TRUTH! Mister, we live in a world that has blogs, and these blogs have to be posted by men with puns. Who’se gonna do, YOU? YOU…UGOTTA? Time4Truth lives by words like, bash, flame, and troll. He uses those words as an excuse to defend his dented head; you use them as a punchline. Doctor, you dont want the truth. Cause deep down in places you dont talk about at parties you want Time4Truth on this blog, You NEED him on this blog.
Now I have neither the time nor inclination to explain trolls to a man who posts under the very moronium that trolls provide, and then questions the stupidity under which they provide it. I’d prefer that you just called him a moron and then went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick an invective and blog a post. EITHER WAY, I dont give a damn about how big an idiot you think Time4Truth is.
Did I order the pink belly? Did I order the Pink Belly? YOU’RE G*DDAMN RIGHT I DID!!!!
By Van
July 24, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this
A show of hands please.
Who wants 535 people running your health care? For those in mid-town, that is 435 representatives and 100 senators.
These are the same bozo’s that can not agree on much of anything. The ones in the pockets of cruel big business. The same ones that voted in NCLB and keep funding it. These are the clowns that voted in the recent prescription plan for our seniors.
Who wants Congress to control your health plan, or who wants corporations to administer their employees health plan?
Whom do you trust?
By Doctor
July 24, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this
time for the truth is a moron.
(is that better, The Way?)
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this
I note with just a smidgeon of smugness that when the leftist vermin on here cant actually disagree with my factual observations/comments they simply resort to abuse.
Of course the liberal hypocrisy involved in this blatant double standard is almost as large as the debts the slush fund Deadair America are still running up.
Although goading your average liberal simpleton into bitter, envious name calling of its conservative betters is about the same level of achievement as say getting Sick Willie Clinton to sexually harass a vulnerable female.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this
@ the feminazi Amelia
perhaps you should have the moral courage and integrity to call Rush on his show - the one that has 20 million listeners a day and repeat those despicable allegations “about little girls” on air and see what the response is … oops too late - you’re just a poisonous liberal reject from moveon.org!!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this
Finally something we agree on getalife … even if we come at it from slightly different perspectives - the bottom line is everyone is getting ripped off!!
By Jim Wooten
July 24, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this
How to change the system? That’s Mid-South Philosopher’s question of the morning. Unless something intentional happens, it’s inevitable that we drift into government-sponsored universal health care. We drift by expanding coverage incrementally, as Lt. Gov. Mark Taylor is proposing with PeachKids, which would bring all children into a state plan. Income-based fees would be charged, but taxpayers would subsidize them.
To avoid the drift, I’d certainly go with the Medical Savings Accounts plus catastrophic coverage. Tort reform, certainly. People should have access to any insurance plan sold anywhere, buying the state mandates if they want, choosing policies without them elsewhere if they don’t. Pools, even those with some limited subsidy, should be created for individuals and small businesses and individuals should be required to join and buy insurance — or reimburse taxpayers from future income taxes if they’re hospitalized without insurance. And premiums should be deductible.
I believe that as costs rise and goverment creeps in, employer-provided medical coverage is on the way out. Employers will tuck a few extra dollars into our pay envelopes and invite us to get coverage from government or in the markektplace.
The 33 percent write-off STTS cites strikes me as high. That may very well be 33 percent of posted prices, as opposed to actual costs.
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 02:56 PM | Link to this
TFTT — I notice you have ignored a rational request for illuminating us on how one might go about recognizing that a healthcare system is “socialized” medicine (other than it isn’t Canadian or the failed NHS — perhaps we can add or Medicare/Medicaid). You have been blowing smoke everywhere today but illuminated nothing.
Perhaps all you really want is a place to vent your spleen on healthcare and call names… if so, (and that’s a legitimate position, quite normal for someone who has no ideas and is incapable of engaging in real intelligent discussion) I feel quite comfortable ignoring you completely.
By seeing through the smoke
July 24, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this
Jim — it may be high… the number is from a study conducted by the University of NJ School of Health, I think. I’d have to look it up to quote the exact number and source.
By Toad
July 24, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
Jim advocates health savings accounts which I favor because you are not required to use all your savings in one year like the medical reimbursement plans and you can keep any extra amounts for your retirement. However, my company offered the option of health savings accounts but the problem was the high deductible on prescriptions. I’m currently on a plan with a $1000 medical deductible and $100 prescription deductible. The health savings plan offered by my employer included prescriptions in the high deductible. So, at this point the health savings plan was not feasible for me because I spend more on prescriptions than medical costs and the only way I could take advantage was to go with my company’s plan. I think insurance coverage should be available at group rates but not linked to employment because some people work for small companies that can’t afford a good plan.
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this
Time for the Truth,
I’m trying to get this.
You say that you note with just a smidgeon of smugness that when the leftist vermin on here can’t actually disagree with my factual observations/comments they simply resort to abuse.
Yet today alone you have
Called Rod a moron Lumped all trial lawyers together as * liberal ambulance chasing trial lawyers who are like money grubbing sharks sniffing blood in the water when it comes to suing.*
Called Mark a liberal moron Accused Mark of having a hissy fit Called Mark a poor wittle pinko moron. Called Mark’s opinion on health care matters ignorant idiocy. Avoided like the plague and characterized Mark’s Question “How is socialized medicine any different than Medicaid and Medicare?” as moronic.
Called Hillary Clinton “Shillery” and an “unelected Fuehrer”
Called Deegee a Moron Called Deegee Brainless
Called Seeing Through the Smoke stupid Called rarringt intellectually dishonest and stupid. Called Amelia a “femiNazi” Stereotyped everyone to your left as simpleton, simpering, effete liberals.
And without any sense of irony you say that those who have disagreed with you are the ones who have resorted to abuse? Man. That’s some self delusion.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this
Nope Clarkslawga…That’s THE TRUTH!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this
lawga …
and if you actually look at the context of all of that you’ll see much of it was either in RESPONSE to unprovoked abuse … or was witty/sharp political commentary to folks I’ve bantered with a number of times.
you have shown similar intellectual dishonesty to rarrington … and FAILED abysmally to note the context!!
as for your rib tickling bollocks @ mark - read his highly personal (four letter) abuse to me …
a other few examples … rod called republicans rich white “racists” the other day - and amelia made disgusting, utterly unsupprted moveon.org type allegations about Rush.
Deegee insulted me for absolutely NO reason when I simply posted one HMO experience which was not at all aimed at her and sullenly repeated her originally obtuse “point” - such as it was.
I am not in the least offended /angered by any of what been said to/about me - its hilarious. But I will hand it back as and when I see fit - despite the efforts of the self appointed anal cyber police!!
many liberal Americans fail to spot irony - which makes my “job” that much easier!
Now please sod off!!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this
smoke …
cheers for the several pompous paragraphs “ignoring” me - very effective it was too!!
By zzzzz
July 24, 2006 03:30 PM | Link to this
zzzzz
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
I agree with the idea of HSA’s and making them deductible. I currently self insure using an HSA but recently ran into a problem that would need to be addressed for this way of financing to truly become effective. I had to have an operation on my knee in a non-emergency situation. In order to spend my money in the most efficient manner possible I began to attempt to ascertain from various health centers what the cost of the surgery would be. It was there the brick wall went up. There is NO WAY to get a price for anything prior to having it done.
First, different people are charged different rates. An uninsured person is charged as much as 40% more for a procedure than someone with insurance. There is also a medicare negotiated price that is charged to state assisted patients that is different from either of the before mentioned prices.
Additionally, it takes a virtual act of God himself to get these groups to tell you what you are going to be paying for different elements of the procedure prior to having it performed. I put my surgery off for months as I chased this phantom. I finally had it done, but I never was able to get a full cost disclosure prior. (I realize there are contingencies and emergencies, but this veil of secrecy was ridiculous.)
I know of no other commodity that you have to agree to buy, take non-returnable possession and then are told the price.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 03:32 PM | Link to this
These guys are just too easy. They step in their own S. They attack, then they’re totally shocked when we slap back…just can’t understand it. Then they post 300 words and STILL *AIN’T SAID SH**!!! Notice guys how precise this is. Duh-huh!
By deegee
July 24, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this
Watch out! it looks like TFTT has coughed up another hairball.
By zzzzz
July 24, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
Nobody wants to hear about your sex change operation, Clarkslawga.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
Clarkslawga: You are totally right. Hospital and doctor bills, in MANY cases, are a total scam. Have you ever noticed on your statement from the hospital how many items or services you DIDN’T receive? If any other business INTENTIONALLY did this to you like the medical business THEY WOULD BE INDICTED! Can you even begin to imagine how much the government is bilked on Medicare and Medicaid? It would be staggering.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this
The one sidedness/moral fascism of it is hilarious - but very typical of liberals. Its as if we are supposed to be good silent conservative sheep with NO right of reply to the serial liberal abuser. Kind of like Clinton’s victims were “supposed” to act after pressure - happily Paula and ALL the others (eventually) spoke up!!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this
poor old deegee
the automatic b__itch response is still turned on - it must be a Shrillary donor!!
By zzzzz
July 24, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
zzzzz
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this
Truth: I like “Hitlery” much better.
By zzzzz
July 24, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this
TFTT didn’t “cough” up that hairball…..
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 03:45 PM | Link to this
Sod off. Who are you, Prince Harry? I for one have never bought your little English act. I brand you a fake (and as has been evidenced in this blog repeatedly, once someone brands you a fake, it must be Gospel.)
My point is that you are completely lacking in irony and regardless of context you are the typical arrogant, abusive, ignorant jerk that makes all conservatives look like…well arrogant, abusive, ignorant jerks. And as for your self proclaimed “witty/sharp political commentary” I’ve been reading this blog for quite a while and have seen no evidence of this. From what I’ve seen you add nothing but invective to any debate and are one of the growing list of names that is best ignored.
And to set the record straight, you have ridden Mark all day because he dared call Hannity an idiot. There was no highly personal four letter abuse until AFTER you went on the offensive.
I know, I know. I disagree with you so I’m a moron, poor wittle pinko, ignorant, brainless intellectually dishonest, femiNazi, simpleton, simpering, effete, liberal.
Or perhaps I see you as you really are. Painfully anti-social, unable to hold true and honest debate, and hopelessly deluding yourself that seeing your moniker on this little blog means that your existence no longer requires validation.
You’re a nasty little person. And a fake.
So sod off……..fake.
By Jim Wooten
July 24, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this
There’s an interesting angle to the lawsuits against nonprofit hospitals that trial lawyer Richard “Dickie” Scruggs has filed out in Mississippi and elsewhere. I don’t agree with the thrust of the suits, most or all of which have been dismissed at the federal level, but one element does appeal — and it’s the one you touch on. If you’re paying out of pocket or out of a health savings account, you should be able to get the lowest negotiated fee on check-out. The Scruggs suits are attempting to force nonprofits to provide free and reduced fee care — that’s the part of it I don’t buy. But if you choose to pay, you shouldn’t be charged more. If not the lowest, then certainly the average negotiated fee.
By deegee
July 24, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this
How come you always know beforehand what you are going to pay for cosmetic surgery? Why should quoting a price for a remedial procedure be so much different?
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this
Ugotta,
At 12:25 you hit on the real root of this poison tree. From the ill-conceived and over-reaching Clinton Health Care plan, the mess that is the prescription drug plan, to the political maneuvers of the Democratic Nominee for Governor, it seems that each of the government attempts to address this issue have one thing in common. They all work out great for the politicians putting the dollars in their pockets.
Add this to the veil of secrecy I talked about and it is easy to see why it appears to many that medical care is drifting toward a national Health plan. I mean if we can’t manage it ourselves then we need the big ole’ government to come in and rescue us. Bad ideas all around.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this
WOW … ye trusty, olde unhinged you aint really English ploy!!
Try ignoring me mate PERMANENTLY!!
That was a blinding hissy fit though!!
“riding mark all day?? HEEEHEEEE ” —- oh mummy - please dont beat me again - its so unfair!!
so 3-4 posts is “riding someone all day”!! WOW … SIEG HEIL … MEIN GRUPPENFUEHRER!!
Invective against liberals in all seriousness is consistently really the only thing that gets through though. MOst of them on here peddle abuse at various times - and not just to me - and then they screech like infantile stuck pinko pigs when its handed back!!
Just like you did!!
Remember ALL the continuous liberal hate speech in the senate and house and in the NYT etc @ Bush and Cheney and the GOP.
My invective is extremely mild and restrained, compared with all that!!
You are merely yet another shallow anal liberal CONTROL FREAK jobbie that cannot bear any conservative actually having the gall to answer scum like you back!! Oops did I say scum - that was so fake of me.
Doubtless in what passes for your mind my response to you is just conservative hate speech - whereas your post to me was simply the distilled universal truth that cannot ever be challenged or impugned or laughed and sneered at!!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this
…and Mark, don’t ever say any of that liberal crap against Sean Hannity again! I am in love with him and hope to marry him in Massachusetts by next year where we will laugh and berate all of the local liberals there for letting us tear down the institution of marriage in our ever pinko, liberal, anti-family bliss!!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this
Clarkslawga: It’s all about MONEY, damn who would’ve thunk it??? It doesn’t matter what kind of program anyone comes up with as long as the money from AMA, pharmaceuticals, trial lawyers, and other “interested” groups, you’re peeing in the wind. Where’s the outrage from your Rep. or Senator over all the overcharging and double-billing by the medical business. Want to know why your medical insurance costs are so high? Of course the trial lawyers haven’t helped either! And the good ole boys are smiling ALL THE WAY TO THE BANK while you & I are getting screwed! Pretty nice system for someone isn’t it?
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this
See how easy it is to wind these truly sad, obsessive liberals up. Now they are even using “homophobic” humour and phoney id’s to try and get at their conservative betters!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this
Time: Say it ain’t so!!!
By jbmlaw
July 24, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
I cannot add a lot to the arguments today. Without tort reform, as suggested by many above, all efforts to control healh costs will be futile. I’m doing my part; I’ve had two med checkups since 1980, and visited health practitioners only two other occasions since then (once for a sinus infection, and once after totaling a Ford Taurus.) If we reduce demand, costs fall.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this
Yes it is, Ugotta. I have been trying to get with my own little personal conservative better…Sean Hannity. I dream of him every night.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this
Truth: Yep, it’s the phoney ID’s that some hide behind to keep from being embarassed. Boys, it’s like my wife said as she dragged me out from under the bed, “Come out and fight like a man!”…
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this
TOO FUNNY … TOO FUNNY
The ultimate compliment … I now have an obsessive homosexual liberal cyber stalker!!
Better make sure my concealed carry permit is up to date smirk
By deegee
July 24, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this
jbmlaw,I think you could benefit from yearly preventative checkups, but my point in an earlier statement is that running to the doctor for every ache and pain is driving up the costs. I agree with JK that we could avoid making ourselves sick via better diet and exercise.
By zzzzz
July 24, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
<=3
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this
Time for the Truth: fraudulent; having a misleading appearance [syn: bogus, phony, phoney, bastard]
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 04:38 PM | Link to this
I just don’t believe that you can drive down the costs of medical care by reducing the amount of visits, etc. They’re gonna make their money one way or the other. So instead they’ll just raise prices by arguing that there’s not enough “business” to break even. Stop all the big donations to the politicians and demand term limits and you’ll see a lot of things get better. Big business, the medical profession, the oil companies, and others won’t have such “good friends in high places”. And put more oversight and restrictions on Medicare and Medicaid so that it’s not a cash cow for many in the medical profession.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:39 PM | Link to this
@clarkslawga,
You are a phoney liberal moron!!!! I bet you are one of those people who gave Billy Boy a pass for taking advantage of helpless temps in the White House while condemning the GOP as a bunch of evil racists!
You and your type don’t have a future in this country and I can’t wait unitl the day until we get rid of all you pinkos. You’ll will be deported and put out to see with the rest of the pinkos, illegal immigrants, whining minorities, and liberal celebrity trash!!!!
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this
Time for the Truth: not genuine or real; a sham; being an imitation of the genuine article; “it isn’t fake anything; it’s real synthetic fur”; “faux pearls”; “false teeth”; “decorated with imitation palm leaves”; “a purse of simulated alligator hide” [syn: false, faux, imitation, simulated]
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 04:45 PM | Link to this
jbm
I dont quite agree that simply not going to the quack means costs fall, they still have huge (seemingly always rising) fixed costs to meet so they simply hammer those that do go to their facilities. I too went a few years without any HMO visit and rarely went to the quack in England but obviously this is a collective rather than an individual point.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this
It’s sort of like the “oil embargo” of the 70s for those of you that are old enough to remember them. OIL EMBARGO my A$$!!! The oil companies used that scam to raise prices and when they got them where they wanted them, guess what? There was suddenly all of the oil we could use! Now take your choice, 1) price of oil, 2) not enough refineries, 3) trouble in the Middle East, 4) Hurricane in the Gulf, and on and on and on… How about the Futures Market and the President and Congress who could put an end to it so that gasoline prices would fall. Think that’s going to happen? Yep, when they do something about the medical costs. NEVER!!!
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
There will be no substantive reform in the Medical Arena as long as groups like the MAG hold so much power, and that is just a local example.
Without debating its merits, the Tort Reform law in Georgia would have been open to more discussion and debate without the MAG. Any legislation regarding medical issues in our state must be vetted to see if it is best for the MAG, not if it is best for Georgians.
The MAG is also responsible for the byzantine maze you have to go through to determine the cost of a procedure prior to having it done.
I realize this sounds like a diatribe against the MAG, but the problem is with the web of similar groups that have special interests best interests at heart and use money to make certain that theirs is the only interests that matter. Groups like MAG served a useful purpose once upon a time, but today their strangle hold on our legislature is harming all Georgians here and all Americans nationally.
By Mid-South Philosopher
July 24, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
I have been doing some research most of the day in a private library with no online facility. Looks as though my early morning statement spurred some conversation.
“By time for the Truth” answered “Mark’s” question of me about “what is socialized medicine.”
“Mark” sent Shaun Hannity into apoplexy by suggesting that I would ever say anything that “sounds” like him. Thanks, “Mark!”
I will try to be online more often.
By The Short Hairs
July 24, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this
Ugotta has a point. I think what he said was that the oil embargo was like the time he rubbed petroleum jelly on his a**e, and then expected that he could just raise prices to his customers from the 1)middle east, 2) the gulf, 3)less refined yahoos who wont pay extra no matter what, never!!
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this
And just so you know I haven’t forgotten you (I know how fragile your ego is)…
Time for the Truth: talk through one’s hat; “The politician was not well prepared for the debate and faked it” [syn: b******t, bull]
By The Short Hairs
July 24, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this
Clarkslawga means the Schlitz Malt Liquor Bull.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this
@By The Short Hairs,
You got it all wrong mate. Ugotta meant that he rubbed petroleum jelly on my a**e…
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:06 PM | Link to this
“apoplexy”??????
WOW … you dishonest liberal dweebs sure do have an inflated sense of your own unimportance!!
All I do on here mate is have a bit of a larrrrf and make some sensible, logical points.
You have to be unbelievably sad and pretty anal to ever get angry about the kind of instantly disposable drivel found on most blogs.
Dry topics invariably dont last too long as the only topic. Nowt wrong that I suppose!!
By The Short Hairs
July 24, 2006 05:08 PM | Link to this
Good one, TFTT!!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:11 PM | Link to this
The Short Hairs: Damn you’re funny! Like I said pu* why don’t you post under your original name. Let’s see if you got the ballz. Come on limp-wrist I’ll dance with you.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this
I’ll dance with you and then I’ll give you a back rub.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this
Oh, that’s about what I’d expect from a wuss like you, post something using my screen name at 5:14. That’s real cute. Com on Pu*.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:17 PM | Link to this
What is fabulously entertaining is the way that the more obsessive COWARDLY septic liberals on here so often resort to homosexual type abuse in an effort to niggle folks.
The double standard is hilarious to behold.
Bet their pinko ginger beer chums in Virginia Highlands would be narked at their pony and trap patter!!
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 05:18 PM | Link to this
TFTT,
I see you ratcheted up the limey speak to try and salvage your false identity. Nice try.
But still…
Time for the Truth: a person who makes deceitful pretenses [syn: imposter, impostor, pretender, faker, fraud, sham, shammer, pseudo, pseud, role player]
And that is all I have for the day. I’ll be back later in the week to remind all that my idea of a larff, mate, is to let everyone know what a blowhard fake TFTT is. Some sad lonely guy in Valdosta, sitting in his trailer in his best pair of underoos doing his best to feel important. I’m his personal bloody anal stalker. (Ooo, that’s sounds nasty) It’ll take more than a few mates and bloody’s to repaint this picture….fake.
TFTT, you can have the last word and call me any name you want. If being called names is the price of making certain that a loser like you hates me, then I’ll gladly pay. (But strangely enough if you actually read my other posts you’ll see we think alike on a lot of things regarding this issue. The problem is that I just don’t like a******s.)
I’m going to sod off now….fake.
By The Short Hairs
July 24, 2006 05:19 PM | Link to this
Glad you like the material.
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 05:20 PM | Link to this
Ooooo, gay references. Clever. Your biting wit is killing me.
OK, I’ll be gay for you, if that’s what you really want. Strange request though.
I guess I should expect more from you though….fake.
By clarkslawga
July 24, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this
Wow, you are using words like septic, niggle folks, ginger beer chums, narked, and pony and trap patter. You must be the real deal.
Strange how much more of this crap you are putting out now that you are being exposed.
Time for the Truth: something that is a counterfeit; not what it seems to be [syn: sham, postiche]
That really is all for today. I actually have a life to go lead.
So I’ll just sod off…..fake.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:24 PM | Link to this
Oh, it’s really hilarious and you’re still a pu*! What are you afraid of, surely not an ignorant redneck conservative like me?
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:26 PM | Link to this
@clarkslawga,
Well if you’ll be my special friend mate, in five minutes, I’ll prove to you that I’m the dogs bollacks when it comes to making you purr like a kitten. I’ll be waiting for you…..
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:27 PM | Link to this
Oh dear - the anal obsessive is finally slithering off the cyber stage
parting is such sweet sorrow.
I do hope it was nothing I said!!
(slightly) paraphrasing what the luvvies say on the stage …
BREAK YER BLEEDIN’ NECK!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this
Clarkslawga: The judges have scored it— Time for the truth 9 — clarkslawga 1. But at least I give you credit for having the ballz to post under your regular screenname, unlike the wuss that’s attacked me using different names for the past few days.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:34 PM | Link to this
Well TFTT, it looks like that it’s just me and you buddy. All alone, on this forum, on this romantic evening. Tell me about Sean Hannity….
By The Short Hairs
July 24, 2006 05:35 PM | Link to this
Here’s a discussion topic. Is 21 posts in 90 minutes by only two trolls too much posts and does that constitute hogging the blog.
Nobody likes blog hogs, and well, 2 trolls posting 21 times in 90 minutes does seem excessive.
By Political Foreskin
July 24, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this
I must admit it’s me, Political Foreskin, that’s been shamefully attacking Ugotta under different names, as I did in the 5:34 post using his screenname. I’m off my medications for this liberalism disease I have and I’m really ashmed of my chickenS* antics.
By Barbara
July 24, 2006 05:40 PM | Link to this
Ugotta & TFTT, I’m still here. Been enjoying your antics all day. You boys keep it up. I’ve been entertained.
Short Hairs, since you have so much time on your hands, please tell us how many times others posted insults at, and asked for responses from Ugotta and TFTT during that same 90 minutes.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this
Well hello Barbara! Glad you could join us. I’m also glad that P.F. finally “fessed up”.
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this
Well, I’ll be…I guess I must’ve got The Short Hairs by the short hairs. And I was waitin’ for a dance. Come back you sweet thang!!!
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this
PF, have you been attacking me too mate?
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:50 PM | Link to this
I’m sure that Jim really appreciates all this. These pathetic pillocks whose moral cowardice has turned the blog into a circus for nothing other than their selfish ego gratification need shooting!
AS for the nutter who spent the last couple of hours attempting to witlesly upbraid me … anytime you can get a complete total stranger to obsess over you like that - you’ve utterly beaten them. You’ve bypassed their critical factor to point of demented irrationality … its kind a cool!!
And in all honesty I wasn’t even really trying with this arsewipe!!
Alright Barbara … Kidding …
I’m off to Big Lots to do my weekly food shopping in a few mins.
By Barbara
July 24, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this
Hey Ugotta! Yeah, I’ve been with you all day, but I was just enjoying watching ;-)
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:54 PM | Link to this
Hey man, that’s my favorite shopping store. I have to go once a week to see what kind of new closeouts they have. It doesn’t take much to entertain me, shopping Big Lots and kicking liberals A$$$$! Enjoy your trip Truth.
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 05:57 PM | Link to this
I usually only food shop at the Dollar Tree but my minimum wage pay rise finally came through so we’re living large this month!!
By Ugotta B. Kidding
July 24, 2006 05:58 PM | Link to this
Well Barbara, I guess they stopped counting. Have a good evening and remember you still owe Truth & me some of that good cornbread. lol
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this
Ugotta, Barbara,
High fives everyone?
By time for the truth
July 24, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this
Ugotta, Barbara,
High fives everyone?
By catlady
July 24, 2006 06:04 PM | Link to this
I agree with Jim about the co pay thing. In addition, I think that folks having babies on the public dole (medicaid) should have to repay our largess for care and delivery, even if it means at $5 a week for the rest of their lives. Nothing is free—we all know it—but some folks sure do act like it! It burns me that unmarried young women I know, with men in their lives, avoid marriage because their men cannot afford to pay for the baby! They sure get fancier care than I ever got, working full time to pay for the insurance and fees. And, although I love my Latino friends, I don’t think we should be paying for baby after baby for illegal aliens, either. There is a family near me that has had 8 medicaid babies since coming here 11 years ago.
By jack
July 25, 2006 08:51 AM | Link to this
Jim,
You’re a big idiot. Obstructive sleep apnea can cause a heart attack among other risks. You mean to tell me that risk is worth $1500? Why don’t you compare the cost of a trip to the emergency room for treatment and posiibly being impaired the rest of your life or dead. It’s a no brainer. Moreover, this is a disease that can be treated.
Despite what you think doctors are mindful of costs and often have to tailor their treatments to what they can be reimbursed for. Instead of the doctor treating the patient. A lot of time it is the HMO or insurance company.
I really think it’s hillarious that you have decided to take the side of the insurance company over the doctors.
By ed
July 26, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this
This is truly a subject where emotion overloads logic. The gross charges that the patient should see (but does not)would appropriately trigger some questions to the providers that should be asked! Answers based on cost shifting for uncompensated care and rising fixed costs are answers but are unlikely to be persuasive. What is the answer? I’m a doctor employed by an agency that works like an insurance company and I haven’t a clue. There are efficiencies and policy changes that can make a difference in costs but political pandering and meddling on the issue as well as unrestrained profit motive erode my optimism for meaningful change.
By Harold
July 26, 2006 01:14 PM | Link to this
You look familiar.
Didn’t Harold see you at Wildwood Park?