How Conservatives Became Karens

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, odas said:

Yes, correct, they do. But not for all, not for everyone.

Question: if you are employed at a company with no or minimum benefits as a pregnant woman, what is the cost of the birth, parental leave, doctor follow ups....? How much would it cost the woman to have all covered by private insurance? How many months do companies cover for parental leave?

 

Every condition you are asking about has multiple answers which depend on too many factors, there is no one answer.  Insurance carriers, doctors, hospitals, employers and pharmaceutical companies and state regulators are constantly negotiating ways to bring the most comprehensive and affordable options to bear and are constantly changing as they work to innovate.  

[+Desertrat56]

17 minutes ago, OverSword said:

He said none of them force you into bankruptcy.  the USA has every feature he mentioned so he is mistaken.

I thought he was including the U.S. so the only part he was mistaken of was that some people can become bankrupt because medical bills.   I am not sure what you are talking about.   If you are jumping on the "forcing" word, then in some ways it can be construed as being forced, as the laws are on the side of the medical industry not the side of the people.

[odas]

3 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

We only have private insurance and employers are required to pay for half of it, the employee pays for the other half.  Employers who don't have to only have part time workers.   And depending on the state they live in some can get Medicaid that will pay for part or most of the medical costs depending on the person's income and assets.   The person you describe would be a part time worker somewhere and in New Mexico would have part of the medical expenses paid, but would not have any paid parental leave.   There are also self employed people who in New Mexico pay 1000 a  month or more for high deductible insurance and more for better insurance.   High deductible means the insurance company does not pay anything until you meet all your deductible amount, which is 5000.00 or more a year.   Out of Pocket is like copay and uncovered expenses.  It becomes ridiculous for a healthy person to pay that just for a checkup once a year  and the possibility of becoming ill.   My sister is self employed and she pays 2200.00 a month for her medical insurance because she has conditions that need medical attention.  She is lucky that she has the money to pay that, but it makes her life less comfortable and any catastrophic medical issue would put her in a position that she  would have to sell her house.

Thanks. Now here is a study from 2015 that I found just randomly. You do have to understand that most of us outside of USA do not even talk yet alone worry about paying the hospital bills.

As it turns out, medical bankruptcy is almost unheard of outside of the United States. Other developed economies (except China) have single-payer health care systems where medical costs are financed by taxes, not by premium-financed insurance. In these countries, there are no out-of-pocket costs for medical care and thus no bankruptcy caused by medical debts.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/medical-bankruptcies-by-country

 

[odas]

17 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Every condition you are asking about has multiple answers which depend on too many factors, there is no one answer.  Insurance carriers, doctors, hospitals, employers and pharmaceutical companies and state regulators are constantly negotiating ways to bring the most comprehensive and affordable options to bear and are constantly changing as they work to innovate.  

That is the problem. Too many questions and even more answers. Where I live I only have one question: Drive and pay parking or take the cab? That is the only concern.

[+OverSword]

13 minutes ago, odas said:

Thanks. Now here is a study from 2015 that I found just randomly. You do have to understand that most of us outside of USA do not even talk yet alone worry about paying the hospital bills.

As it turns out, medical bankruptcy is almost unheard of outside of the United States. Other developed economies (except China) have single-payer health care systems where medical costs are financed by taxes, not by premium-financed insurance. In these countries, there are no out-of-pocket costs for medical care and thus no bankruptcy caused by medical debts.

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/medical-bankruptcies-by-country

 

I notice that it's the four most populous nations in the developed world that don't have single-payer systems.  Personally I wouldn't trust the corrupt US government to run such a program as I know the result would be lower quality, more expensive care with doctors, hospitals, insurers and pharma becoming more profitable than ever all at the expense of the tax payer.  

Edited January 12 by OverSword

[+Desertrat56]

7 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I notice that it's the four most populous nations in the developed world that don't have single-payer systems.  Personally I wouldn't trust the corrupt US government to run such a program as I know the result would be lower quality, more expensive care with doctors, hospitals, insurers and pharma becoming more profitable than ever all at the expense of the tax payer.  

We would have to take insurance companies out of the equation completely before the government could manage it.   

[+OverSword]

5 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

We would have to take insurance companies out of the equation completely before the government could manage it.   

Not really.  The government has zero expertise in the field of underwriting and assessing cost/benefit risk for the purpose of figuring out how to provide cost effective healthcare.  Those factors don't disappear just because the government get's more involved.  Likely the Blue Shields and Blue Cross carriers would absorb the privately owned companies making them larger and more profitable than ever and they would answer to a congressional committee.

[Abramelin]

21 hours ago, Piney said:

No slaves were used. They were well paid craftsmen.

The AE also used POW's.

[+Desertrat56]

22 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Not really.  The government has zero expertise in the field of underwriting and assessing cost/benefit risk for the purpose of figuring out how to provide cost effective healthcare.  Those factors don't disappear just because the government get's more involved.  Likely the Blue Shields and Blue Cross carriers would absorb the privately owned companies making them larger and more profitable than ever and they would answer to a congressional committee.

That is something I know about and it is not true.  There is a government managed insurance fund for the Miners.  It works quite well, even thought rules sometimes change every 6 months, it works better for the people on that plan than most private insurances.  Medicare is also government managed and the problems with it stem from private insurances, because you have to have a Part B plan with a private insurance company or you have to quailify for Medicaid.    The private insurance companies compete for the Medicare subscribers, creating really crappy plans where they manage your medicare and your Part B.   It is a circus and very  hard to navigate.   Even hospitals like Presbyterian have gotten in to the private insurance business so that they can get more Medicare money.

[+OverSword]

4 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

That is something I know about and it is not true.  There is a government managed insurance fund for the Miners.  It works quite well, even thought rules sometimes change every 6 months, it works better for the people on that plan than most private insurances.  Medicare is also government managed and the problems with it stem from private insurances, because you have to have a Part B plan with a private insurance company or you have to quailify for Medicaid.    The private insurance companies compete for the Medicare subscribers, creating really crappy plans where they manage your medicare and your Part B.   It is a circus and very  hard to navigate.   Even hospitals like Presbyterian have gotten in to the private insurance business so that they can get more Medicare money.

I guarantee you that plan is not managed by the government and neither is Medicare.  The government contracts with insurers

Quote

 

Medicare Administrative Contractors

Since Medicare’s inception in 1966, private health care insurers have processed medical claims for Medicare beneficiaries.

 

https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Contracting/Medicare-Administrative-Contractors/MedicareAdministrativeContractors

 

[+OverSword]

20 hours ago, OverSword said:

What is this thread again?  Right winged Karens enslaved by the Chinese?  Yeah, that's it 

Now it is Right winged Karens triggered by single payer health plans 

[+Desertrat56]

4 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I guarantee you that plan is not managed by the government and neither is Medicare.  The government contracts with insurers

https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Medicare-Contracting/Medicare-Administrative-Contractors/MedicareAdministrativeContractors

 

That's true, but the government hires a company to manage it.   With medicare it has become a circus because any health insurance company that wants to can set up a medicare/part b plan.   the miners fund is managed by one company and is overseen by a government agency.   It does work.  Like I said before Medicare is a circus Because Of the Private Insurance companies, not the government.

Edited January 12 by Desertrat56

[+OverSword]

6 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

That's true, but the government hires a company to manage it.   With medicare it has become a circus because any health insurance company that wants to can set up a medicare/part b plan.   the miners fund is managed by one company and is overseen by a government agency.   It does work.  Like I said before Medicare is a circus Because Of the Private Insurance companies, not the government.

You don't understand Medicare if you think it's a circus.  Government only funds certain things on Medicare, what is considered affordable or necessary.  Recognizing that retirees with a little extra money will want more things covered different carriers offer that additional, otherwise unfunded coverage.  It's really just cut down versions of individual plans.

[+Desertrat56]

3 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You don't understand Medicare if you think it's a circus.  Government only funds certain things on Medicare, what is considered affordable or necessary.  Recognizing that retirees with a little extra money will want more things covered different carriers offer that additional, otherwise unfunded coverage.  It's really just cut down versions of individual plans.

Are you 65 yet?

[+OverSword]

7 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

Are you 65 yet?

I am a licensed Life and Health Insurance agent.

[+Desertrat56]

1 minute ago, OverSword said:

I am a licensed Life and Health Insurance agent.

So you are qualified to give someone guidance on what insurance plan to choose when they quit work and start using their medicare?   I still know that the private insurances are why medicare is messed up, the medicare part gets paid like it should unless you choose some Senior plan with an insurance company, then things get messy.

[Robotic Jew]

it's all nonsense. The right promotes obscure stories about the "woke mob" like Dr seuss and Mr. Potato Head in order to gain support the same wat the left promotes stories about anti LGBTQ and other minorities. The only difference is that only one of these "dishonest" practices is used to keep the status quo and keep minorities and under valued communities from having a voice in the national discourse. 

[odas]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

I notice that it's the four most populous nations in the developed world that don't have single-payer systems.  Personally I wouldn't trust the corrupt US government to run such a program as I know the result would be lower quality, more expensive care with doctors, hospitals, insurers and pharma becoming more profitable than ever all at the expense of the tax payer.  

Just for comparison. USA average cost per person for healthcare: ca. 13500/ year. Germany ca. 5500/ year. While yes, USA is in the forefront when it comes to cancer treatment and research, Germany is right next to it for half the price. Even Canada is higher, close to 8500/year per person and still we do not have to worry about expenses.

Yes, waiting times for some are longer but, as I said about the same a few years ago when we had a conversation, most of us in Canada understand that a person with serious injuries has a priority over a broken finger, regardless of his wallet and status.

Healthcare in Canada is far from perfect but I would not change it for the US way if they pay me. Sorry, I know you do not like to hear that but....just about everyone else in the west shakes their head when they see the healthcare cost in America.

[odas]

17 minutes ago, OverSword said:

I am a licensed Life and Health Insurance agent.

The more important question is...are you at work right now? Looks like most of us are on UM while at work.

Edited January 12 by odas

[+OverSword]

20 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

So you are qualified to give someone guidance on what insurance plan to choose when they quit work and start using their medicare?   I still know that the private insurances are why medicare is messed up, the medicare part gets paid like it should unless you choose some Senior plan with an insurance company, then things get messy.

That could be the case.  The reason is that insurance companies negotiate rates with certain provider networks and if you use your private insurance at the wrong place it could get messy.  I do not personally deal in individual plans that is usually the domain of independent small agencies.  The evil corporation I work for does employee benefits.

[+OverSword]

11 minutes ago, odas said:

The more important question is...are you at work right now? Looks like most of us are on UM while at work.

I choose this time to invoke my rights under the fifth amendment of the US constitution. 

[+Desertrat56]

13 minutes ago, odas said:

Healthcare in Canada is far from perfect but I would not change it for the US way if they pay me. Sorry, I know you do not like to hear that but....just about everyone else in the west shakes their head when they see the healthcare cost in America.

It is not that we do not want to hear it, we agree, or rather those of us who have friends in other countries agree.   Our health care system is broken, and expensive.    Back in the time when Nixon was president a proposal for a similar system as Canada has went to Congress and the insurance companies (at a time when employers were not required to provide health insurance to their employees) screamed bloody murder and they had enough congress people in their pockets that it didn't pass, over the years it was address several more times and never passed until it got so hammered down and the one thing that had kept it from passing before was remove - That health insurance companies would not be allowed to raise the rates of their current customers, so my sister went from paying 700.00 a month as a self employed person to 2800.00 a month.  after a couple of years the state stepped in and created a plan for self employed so that they could have a break, but even so it was 1800.00 a month for One Person.    Now it has gone up.

[+Desertrat56]

10 minutes ago, OverSword said:

That could be the case.  The reason is that insurance companies negotiate rates with certain provider networks and if you use your private insurance at the wrong place it could get messy.  I do not personally deal in individual plans that is usually the domain of independent small agencies.  The evil corporation I work for does employee benefits.

I could tell you stories about how Presbyterian Senior plan health insurance takes advantage of people who cannot afford it.   One year the copays are 5.00, the next they are 50.00 then they are 20.00 for this doctor and 50.00 for that doctor etc.   In New Mexico the senior plans managed by private insurance are not helpful, it is not just going to the wrong place, it is getting approved for services or care, being able to afford the medicine etc.  You can pretend like it isn't the "evil coporate insurance companies" but that is exactly what it is.  

I realize I seem to be maligning how you earn your living but wait until you need medicare and see how much research you have to do to get the right plan in your area.   That research needs to include which hospitals are available and which ones have the best care.  And because you have a vested interest in what plan is chosen, you will not be much help.

Edited January 12 by Desertrat56

[odas]

16 minutes ago, Desertrat56 said:

It is not that we do not want to hear it, we agree, or rather those of us who have friends in other countries agree.   Our health care system is broken, and expensive.    Back in the time when Nixon was president a proposal for a similar system as Canada has went to Congress and the insurance companies (at a time when employers were not required to provide health insurance to their employees) screamed bloody murder and they had enough congress people in their pockets that it didn't pass, over the years it was address several more times and never passed until it got so hammered down and the one thing that had kept it from passing before was remove - That health insurance companies would not be allowed to raise the rates of their current customers, so my sister went from paying 700.00 a month as a self employed person to 2800.00 a month.  after a couple of years the state stepped in and created a plan for self employed so that they could have a break, but even so it was 1800.00 a month for One Person.    Now it has gone up.

Thank you. See, this is what I always argue with others from US. Yes, our taxes are higher in Canada. Mine are aproximately 26%.  I paid a bit over 15000 last year. Back in Germany my taxes were 35%. It seems to others very high. But, even though or better yet, because of it, especially back in Germany, my daily life is overall cheaper, more affordable and less worrysome. Yes, some grosseries are cheaper in the US, cars, alcohol...but the ovrall life quality is much better here. There are pros and cons for either or. 

[+Desertrat56]

6 minutes ago, odas said:

Thank you. See, this is what I always argue with others from US. Yes, our taxes are higher in Canada. Mine are aproximately 26%.  I paid a bit over 15000 last year. Back in Germany my taxes were 35%. It seems to others very high. But, even though or better yet, because of it, especially back in Germany, my daily life is overall cheaper, more affordable and less worrysome. Yes, some grosseries are cheaper in the US, cars, alcohol...but the ovrall life quality is much better here. There are pros and cons for either or. 

I think I pay about 26% income tax, so now that I hear you pay about the same, I want to know where my tax money is going.   I had read a study years ago on which country with socialized medicine had the best healthcare system, and Japan was number one for the patients but on the bottom for the doctors; germany was second for the patients and first for the doctors.  I can't remember anything else from it though.  

The doctors have to be happy with their jobs, and the patients have to be able to afford to go to the doctor.  In the U.S. we have unhappy medical staff and suffering patients.   It took me 6 1/2 months to get my 89 year old aunt a doctors appointment.   Then when she was sick we spent 3 days at the ER before she saw a doctor.  It would have been 24 hours if we had stayed the first time but she was too sick to sit in the waiting room so I took her home twice from the ER after too many hours waiting.   Finally the 3rd day I insisted she be put in a room to wait and finally after 10 hours she saw a doctor.   And to make an appointment to check her afterwards it took 2 months to see her regular doctor.   

Edited January 12 by Desertrat56