Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reelya]

Anyways, while my own insurance (Tricare btw) is unaffected as far as I know, the whole ACA was an attempt at universial healthcare, but the problem is that there is no such thing as 'one size fits all' when it comes to healthcare.

I don't know how 'universial healthcare' works in other countries though, maybe other forumers can chime in on that.

Medicare is a publicly funded universal health care scheme in Australia. Operated by the government authority Medicare Australia, Medicare is the primary funder of health care in Australia, funding primary health care for Australian citizens and permanent residents (except for those on Norfolk Island). Residents are entitled to subsidised treatment from medical practitioners, eligible midwives, nurse practitioners and allied health professionals who have been issued a Medicare provider number, and can also obtain free treatment in public hospitals. The plan was introduced in 1975 by the Whitlam Government as Medibank, and was supplemented in 1976 by a government-owned private health insurance fund, Medibank Private, established by the Fraser Government. Medibank was renamed Medicare in 1984.

Basically, if you go to a doctor for a regular checkup, you'd never come away with a bill. If you need to go to a hospital they get your medicare details, but I've never actually been billed for any treatment I've been provided. Overall, Medicare coverage costs $18 billion to provide, or under $1000 per capita per year. That's basically what it costs to provide universal coverage when your tax money isn't being funneled off by for-profit middlemen.

Meanwhile America's government spends a whole lot more than $1000 per person on Medicare and Medicaid, yet most people aren't allowed to get treatment without paying again (you already pay a tax higher than we do, and don't even get the right of basic hospital treatment for that money).

It's definitely do-able, as you can read about how Australia had a situation comparable to America before 1973, with private insurance schemes, and about about 17% of the country completely unisured. That's pretty comparable to the U.S. situation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medicare_%28Australia%29

[wierd]

There's also a lot of outright medicare and medicaid fraud in the US, where practitioners overbill elderly/scenile people, and nobody catches it.

Additionally, there's a lot of suspicious/unnessary items being billed to those services. Like mobility carts for people who can walk, but just dont want to.

[sluissa]

There's also a lot of outright medicare and medicaid fraud in the US, where practitioners overbill elderly/scenile people, and nobody catches it.

Additionally, there's a lot of suspicious/unnessary items being billed to those services. Like mobility carts for people who can walk, but just dont want to.

You stop making health a for-profit enterprise and maybe that'll stop.

[mainiac]

There's also a lot of outright medicare and medicaid fraud in the US, where practitioners overbill elderly/scenile people, and nobody catches it.

Additionally, there's a lot of suspicious/unnessary items being billed to those services. Like mobility carts for people who can walk, but just dont want to.

Know what goes great with complaints like this?  Facts and numbers.

[wierd]

http://www.medicarenewsgroup.com/news/medicare-faqs/individual-faq?faqId=6a130489-e387-476d-a358-c77cfba68367

There you go.

[mainiac]

It's a nice link.  Following it gives information about multi-million dollar confidence schemes and kickback arrangements.  I didn't see anything about

mobility carts for people who can walk, but just dont want to.

[RedKing]

Trump to Iowans: "What the hell are you people doing to me?"

I'm thinking that How to Win Friends And Influence People isn't on The Donald's top 10 reading list.

[wierd]

I'm sorry that your reading comprehension is so poor that you cant parse what

"There is no exact data on Medicare fraud for the following reasons:

1. Broad definitions: Estimates may not differentiate between fraudulent payments (resulting from knowing and willful schemes to defraud Medicare), incorrect reimbursements that resulted from waste (resulting from inefficient claims processing and administration, redundant procedures, preventable readmissions, unnecessary ER visits and other medical errors and wasteful behaviors) and abuse (provider actions that depart from accepted medical, business or financial practices). Estimates might also cover the whole health care system without singling out Medicare."

means, and instead have to fall back on arguments about how a specific kind of that activity is not specifically mentioned in a general article about that kind of abuse.

In other words, your "I dont believe you, so you are wrong" argument wont fly with me. After a recent stint of unexpected unemployment, I now actually work in geriatric healthcare, and have seen this shit first hand. Trust me, it happens a fair bit.

[mainiac]

Rude.

[wierd]

I was merely responding in kind, when you blandly asserted that you "saw nothing" to support the claim in the linked article.

Needless to say, I found your tone to be rude, so I responded rudely. Please be more polite in the future, and I shall reciprocate gladly.

[mainiac]

So you thought that if your opinion is correct, anyone who arrives at a different opinion should face name calling.

[RedKing]

Hey now, mainiac is rarely rude. He's passive-aggressive. 
And in this case, I don't even see that. He just stated that your link doesn't seem to discuss the point at hand.


So....any predictions for the GOP debate tonight?

[wierd]

I fail to see where I called him any names at all. I simply rudely pointed out where in the linked article the behavior would have fallen, to point out that he clearly did not read it, or decided not to acknowledge it.

The bolded text comes directly from the linked page.

[RedKing]

I'm sorry that your reading comprehension is so poor that you cant parse

Not a "name" exactly, but also not polite. Since we're getting into semantics here....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[wierd]

LOLOL. Wiener strikes again. comic gold.


I openly admit that the tone was antagonistic, and rude.  However, I still stand behind stating that I responded in kind. Mainiac could have asked for his link more politely, instead of implying "Bullshit!!" the way he did, and could have actually read the link before shooting from the hip. The first one I gave a pass on. The second one I did not. I dont tolerate that kind of tone well, so I reciprocated it, with a little amplification.

I am earnest in my statement that should he be more polite in the future, I shall gladly reciprocate.