Is the Summit the biggest news this offseason?
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
Same shtick, new target.
Surprised someone has lived so long being that dumb < hoping a father's kids don't exist, plus feeling passive-aggressively sorry for them, plus a homophobic slam
Oh stop being your drama queen self.
I didn’t say anything about wanting Bert dead because he disagrees with me. That’s just trolling BS, and you know it. I made an over the top comment about him being dumb as shit.
And I don’t care that Bert ignores me, although I really don’t get it... I don’t think I am nearly annoying enough to be put on ignore!
But yeah, people who display that mix of out of control anger, painful ignorance, and insane arrogance... that I struggle with that, and that’s Bert to a t
And yeah, Bert is dumb. Saying someone is hella dumb isn’t being super upset; it’s recognizing truth. I mea... like, for example, surely you aren’t dumb and salty enough to believe that Obama or either Bush or whoever couldn’t have met with either Il or Un, right? (Sung is a different story... not sure China and Russia would have allowed that, but you wouldn’t expect Berty to have any form of subtle thought.)
And I don’t act. I don’t lie. I really don’t. I do get confused sometimes. Most of the time I just see that “ignored whatever” thing on the bottom and account for it. Sometimes I don’t, and the context of the posts confuses me.
You love being *so* overdramatic and stirring things up
Okay, have at me... not around today, so have fun going after me or whatever
. Somehow doubt this discussion will go anywhere worthwhile...?
Last edited:
This is a very overdramatic post accusing me of being overdramatic. Your stance on bert is very dramatic, like, overdramatic. Haha. That will be the extent of me "going after" you.Oh stop being your drama queen self.
I didn’t say anything about wanting Bert dead because he disagrees with me. That’s just trolling BS, and you know it. I made an over the top comment about him being dumb as shit.
And I don’t care that Bert ignores me, although I really don’t get it... I don’t think I am nearly annoying enough to be put on ignore!
But yeah, people who display that mix of out of control anger, painful ignorance, and insane arrogance... that I struggle with that, and that’s Bert to a t
And yeah, Bert is dumb. Saying someone is hella dumb isn’t being super upset; it’s recognizing truth. I mea... like, for example, surely you aren’t dumb and salty enough to believe that Obama or either Bush or whoever couldn’t have met with either Il or Un, right? (Sung is a different story... not sure China and Russia would have allowed that, but you wouldn’t expect Berty to have any form of subtle thought.)
And I don’t act. I don’t lie. I really don’t. I do get confused sometimes. Most of the time I just see that “ignored whatever” thing on the bottom and account for it. Sometimes I don’t, and the context of the posts confuses me.
You love being *so* overdramatic and stirring things up
Okay, have at me... not around today, so have fun going after me or whatever
The North Korea summit? Yeah, big, but the outcome sort of determines how big it really is. If they meet and not much comes of it, it isn't that important. If we get real movement in terms of ending a threat in the penninsula, sure, that would be a HUGE deal, and a real feather in the cap of Trump. Fingers crossed it works out well!
BTW... on our last summit, with all our friends? Man, this picture made me cringe.
Why? We took away the purse strings and the little babies are sad
For ER pricing, I understand where hospitals are coming from; they have to increase the cost of ER trips in order to subsidize care for people who can't/don't pay their bills. I think they take it too far in a lot of cases, but it's hard to know for sure without seeing their financials and it varies from hospital to hospital. Either way, it's tough to swallow the fact that the price of your ER visit is mostly comprised of paying for other people's ER visits, or just to support the fact that the ER exists.
The biggest problem is in the cost of surgeries (both minor and major) and other non-ER care that hospitals provide, like maternity care and cancer treatment, etc. Hospital costs can vary based on location, subsidies, and what kind of care they specialize in, among other factors. We all understand that, but what's hard to understand is how some of them justify charging 3x, 4x, 5x more than other hospitals for the same exact procedure. You can't justify prices like that by saying you have better doctors or better facilities. Factors like that could MAYBE double the price over the average, but that's the max that could be justified, imo. They get away with it because healthcare pricing is not transparent and patients don't - often can't - shop around for better prices. Since insurance is usually footing most of the bill, patients don't usually even care what the price is. This isn't exclusive to hospitals but I think they're the most egregious offenders, on the whole.
I think healthcare pricing transparency would go a long way in alleviating the above issues. If we can't apply proper pricing regulation, making the information more readily accessible to the public might at least shame some of the hospitals into more ethical pricing. I have a high-deductible plan with an HSA, so the price of care matters to me. When I looked at hospitals within an hour drive while my wife was pregnant, it blew me away that hospitals all located in Central New York (same costs, basically) had such widely different pricing for deliveries, and it definitely wasn't tied to the quality of the hospital staff or maternity ward. Stuff like that shouldn't happen. When I brought my daughter to the ER (urgent care was closed) because she had a really bad cough and trouble breathing, a bill for $1,400 after insurance seemed excessive. We saw a nurse for about 10 minutes and the doc diagnosed croup in about 4 minutes. Hospitals have fixed costs associated with keeping the ER open that they have to recoup but, damn, $1,400 for a 30 minute visit and a quick, relatively benign diagnoses really just knocks the wind out of you.
Also, its almost impossible to hospital shop. What other type of business can you run where people use your service and they cant tell you how much it will be, you just have to wait and see? For example, people preparing to give birth---why cant they shop doctors and hospitals? How does one family with an uncomplicated birth have a bill of $7500 and the next hospital over only charged $3700 for the same procedure? Its like solving the davinci code to get a ballpark figure to give birth. Add in insurance variables, deductibles, co-insurance, non covered services.....basically you pay what they tell you to pay and don't have any control over the process.
One of my best friends is a thoracic surgeon who had a great career and now works for the UK medical school. Nearly all his surgeries were elective so it they would have ended poorly he would have been sued. He never had a malpractice suit; however, his insurance was still over six digits a year.
A good portion of our medical cost is because of trial lawyers. Hospitals and doctors must try to cure you without financial liability. It becomes cumbersome. With some of the government involvement in medicine there are limits on what a doctor can charge for some procedures. Often with Medicaid the pricing will not cover cost. Also, a hospital can’t turn a patient away. Because of this all the uncovered (illegals and fvck ups never have insurance) patients are covered by the rest of us.
With all these problems our government makes things worse, both parties. Obamacare was about to run a bunch of doctors out of business. The Republican taking apart of Obamacare may well ruin some of the insurance companies. We can’t seem to have any logical discussions on the matter as we are too politically divided and too many interests lobby so hard that solutions will never happen. All the time we wrangle on medicine and insurance coverage the trial attorneys are filing suits all the time and their prime target is doctors and hospitals as they pay well whether right or wrong.
A good portion of our medical cost is because of trial lawyers. Hospitals and doctors must try to cure you without financial liability. It becomes cumbersome. With some of the government involvement in medicine there are limits on what a doctor can charge for some procedures. Often with Medicaid the pricing will not cover cost. Also, a hospital can’t turn a patient away. Because of this all the uncovered (illegals and fvck ups never have insurance) patients are covered by the rest of us.
With all these problems our government makes things worse, both parties. Obamacare was about to run a bunch of doctors out of business. The Republican taking apart of Obamacare may well ruin some of the insurance companies. We can’t seem to have any logical discussions on the matter as we are too politically divided and too many interests lobby so hard that solutions will never happen. All the time we wrangle on medicine and insurance coverage the trial attorneys are filing suits all the time and their prime target is doctors and hospitals as they pay well whether right or wrong.
I'd be interested in hearing how Obamacare would have run doctors out of business. The whole purpose of it was to get more people to pay into their own healthcare instead of free-loading. It, arguably, hurt insurers. I'm not certain that it hurt doctors, unless people moved to plans where the doc was no longer in-network, but that happened with or without Obamacare.
It 100% affected physicians, and particularly the ones doing it the right way in smaller clinics not associated with huge monopolized hospitals. Most of the people that obamacare helped get insurance had low premiums and high deductibles. What that means for that demographic was now they paid a semi affordable monthly fee....to have have nothing covered before they reached their 5k-7k deductible plan. In no instance were they able to afford that amount of money in a years time and now they are paying a premium every month on top of that to basically have catastrophic care. It gave them a card to put in their wallet and not much else in the big picture. It hurt doctors b/c insurances decreased allowables, which decreased payment to doctor, which in turn bills the patient, who still cant afford the fee---doctor gets stiffed. Also, it wiped out a large contingent of middle class folks who previously had solid insurance. It now asked them to pay more for less coverage---less people seek the care they need unless its an emergency---bye bye wellness and preventative care. There are about 12-15 other really simple and really problem ways it affected individual physicians trying to work out affordable prices with patients so they wont have to be owned by hosptials. It increased the workload, it decreased re-imbursement, sky rocketed paperwork, and literally took insurance away from people that were paying what it actually costs to make the system work---all to overload the system for those that don't pay and it doesn't even give those guys reasonable coverage. It had a few really cool parts to it in theory---but as a whole the ACA was pushed thru way too prematurely/haphazardly just b/c it was going to be that presidents legacy-------and its turning out to be a legacy nobody wants to be attached to.
You're in the field, so you have more intimate knowledge than I do about this. But anyway, this is how I viewed it:
- Poor people didn't have insurance before Obamacare, so doctors were billing them and getting nothing back. With Obamacare, these poor people now have insurance that covers preventative care and usually a percentage of other care before hitting their deductible. Doctors went from getting no money, to getting all of the money billed for preventative care and at least some of the money for other care (from insurers). On the surface at least, this seems like a win for the doctors, no? They had to and have to provide the care, regardless, getting some of the money is better than none of the money.
- Middle class people had their premiums go up for potentially worse insurance, but this was the trend before Obamacare. Premiums were/are skyrocketing. I'm not convinced the premiums would be much better had Obamacare not been implemented. Middle class people also tend to pay their bills, on average. I had to pay $7,000 for my daughter's delivery. I put some of that on a zero interest credit card and set up a billing plan for the rest. Within my demographic/economic class, I don't think I'm an exception.
I'll buy the increased workload and paperwork arguments.
Actually, rather than working with President Obama's administration to build on those cool parts, the GOP has been heckbent on spinning it into a horrible legacy. Their obstruction was unprecedented. It was so extreme, the only reasonable conclusion I can see is that it had something to do with... that other thing that was so unique about President Obama.
1-This is true, but also plan based. Some very minor stuff is covered...and only once per year. The idea of wellness care is to catch problems before they happen or progress to a point where it creates damage or higher costs to fix. The thing is....we get audited all the time for medical necessity and anything they determine as wellness care is denied b/c it is elective. They even pay doctors and then audit them the next year and claw back all fees paid. Its insane. I have colleagues paying back 10k over services they 100% provided and the patients 100% needed.
2- Yes, premiums have always been going up---but coverages rarely went down. Now coverage was significantly decreasing WHILE premiums were going up...then you add in increased deductibles---it was like getting hit in the shorts three times. I've witnessed this personally with my families insurance as well as a plethora of my patients. My patients that are financially secure starting opting for the lowest possible catastrophic coverage with highest deductible b/c its cheaper to pay out of pocket than to cover these insane premiums. No healthy family should be shelling out 15k a year in premiums for terrible coverage, just to semi support those that cant afford any. I personally pay $1200+ for my wife and 2 year old. I haven't filed a BCBS for myself in 13 yrs of paying premiums. DO the math on that one. I could have paid off a rich guys home. The problem is the middle class is what makes the world go round. This isn't boat owning, country club attending, fancy car driving members...its coaches, fireman, construction workers, nurses, lawyers, teachers, company men.
The increased paperwork thing is also a huge part of our liability structure. The healthcare world is so sue happy you cant do anything without a dictionary's worth of documentation---even on simple conditions. Its out of control. Docs are paying huge sums for note taking programs, and then they are charged 100's per month for the subscription fees....just to take absurd notes that the companies still deem insufficient to prove medical necessity. You basically have to have a 24hr team to treat patients and do notes----thus creating absurd overhead.
Now if i wasn't objective I would try to invalidate your point, but it is/was totally a problem that the two sides are so immature they cant come up with a better plan. I do buy into the fact that the conservative side really hindered the program and at the same time there were some major things in the ACA that categorically make the entire plan unsustainable---so how do you compromise or help out with a plan that is doomed to fail. Obama's fault wasn't that the ACA was formed in good faith and genuine goal to be effective---but they forced the roll out knowing it wasn't ready and would have catastrophic fail points. AND they still did it anyway. You have to come up with a plan that helps the most people in a fair manor.....while still being viable. The second you cross the line into helping more people than it can handle is irresposible. You help those you can and have a healthy system and then try to develop a system for those that fall outside that realm. Not poison the well for the majority and create problems for a significantly greater population of people. This isn't an obama vs trump, lib v con argument.........it doesn't matter who comes up with it---it just needs to work.
If the ACA had been such a good plan, Congress would have opted into it as well. "Here, eat this, it's good for you." "Will you eat it too?" "No, it's terrible, I mean I'm not hungry."
Before ACA, my insurance expense could make payments on a motorcycle. Now it could buy a nice F150. For worse coverage.
It seems like people blow the changes out of proportion when talking about them, but if you actually look at the numbers and the benefits....its sadly very true. I would love to know what percentage of americans pay more for their family insurance premium than they do on their mortgage. How is it that people that are health responsible and take care of their bodies get zero breaks and now are forced into steep charges for a service they do not utilize unless they are hit by a bus or get cancer?
Perhaps you were being gracious, but in case you overlooked it, I want to be clear: I think racism majorly played into the extreme animosity toward Obamacare and pretty much all things Obama. I'll repeat: "majorly played into," not "the end-all, be-all, all-all-alltudiness-allnosity-allness." I have a polite, thorough, probably long-winded analogy lined up for clarification, if necessary... Until such time, moving on...
Overall, good post. I appreciate the effort to be open-minded and even-handed.
About the bold... I would add to the "it just needs to work" part that if we waited until something was absolutely perfect and guaranteed to work perfectly before we rolled it out, we'd never roll it out. Yes, we want something that works, but first, to get there, we have to take that first step without full certainty that it's going to work. That is absolutely necessary and it takes courage. Other than to quip about how the courage to risk failure sure played out exactly like that, conservatives have never given President Obama the slightest credit or respect for that. That absolutely deserves to be a positive part of his legacy, but -- I have to return to what I said in the last post you replied to -- the predetermined goal of destroying his legacy has immorally warped this conversation. Instead of acknowledging his courageous and compassionate effort, conservatives have demonized his very intentions as a justification for not working with him.
The failure so far to repeal-and-replace stands as evidence, as does the whispers that what it's really going to be eventually is a revision that is still called a "repeal." They aren't willing for the narrative to contain any credit or respect for President Obama at all, and racist influences help pave that storyline.
So on that bold, I have to call shenanigans on the idea that it doesn't matter who comes up with it as long as it works. (Not on you -- I think you're representing what ought to be, and I don't blame you that that is not the reality -- but on the idea itself.) I can't/won't/shouldn't see it any other way: It did matter who was going to get credit for it. President Obama was going to get credit for it, and that was unacceptable, so it was sabotaged, obstructed, resisted, and spun. I don't think we can move on toward, "Oh, it shouldn't matter who..." until that is accounted for.
I can't buy this. It was pushed out in a hurry (by Washington speed) because Democrats had full control during his first couple years.
The sad reality is it all comes down to votes. This was poorly thought out, but done so before the Republicans won the House. Like I said, if it was so good of a plan, why didn't the politicians have to do the same?
Senator Kennedy died in August of 2009, 8 months into President Obama's first term, ending the filibuster-proof Democratic supermajority in the Senate. It was another 7 months before the ACA was signed into law. There were 31 bipartisan meetings to develop the bill and another 6 months of discussion, debate, and revision.
It was not "pushed out in a hurry." That false narrative has been promoted to justify things that have most definitely been pushed more hurriedly since. Democrats also did not have "full control" for his first two years, and they absolutely did not abuse that leverage like it has been ever since.
No one has ever claimed the product was perfect, but the process and President Obama's character have been illegitimately maligned.
How does it protect manufacturers? It keeps away competition... Which ultimately failed here in the US. It was also a major reason we split with England and became the United States. It sure doesn't help the average citizen.
Alienating allies because Trump does not know how to negotiate, is not a good thing. China is chomping at the bits for us to pull out of S. Korea. Trump is one big cluster f^ck...
Not sure saying it wasn’t pushed out in a hurry helps you at all on this one. As bad as it was, you might as well take the hurried roll out as reason for how bad it was.
You really think an issue this big was stunted majorly.... by obama being part black? I wont deny people have their prejudices, but you think over half the people voted against it b/c of race and not other issues? Ill answer the rest in a bit.
I don't truly believe obama had an important role in the developing of the ACA other than being the figure head to push it thru. I don't think he understood the ins and outs at all. Listening to him speak about it kinda reinforced it. It mainly looks bad on obama b/c it is not a success and his name is attached to it. Its not like he was in the strategy room trying to understand line items and allowables. Replacing a broken system with one that so many people insisted wouldn't work doesn't seem like an acceptable risk.
Uh... "part black" means black. It always has. Don't play that.
No, I do not presume that the Congressional motive centered around race. However, I do think race was why they were allowed to get away with some outrageous antics.
I'll compare it to things I've witnessed in public schools: kids push buttons and teachers sometimes cross the line in addressing it. They may not intend to go further in overcorrecting the black kid, but they can get away with it more than with the white kid, on average. It's systemic and has to do w/ implicit bias. Or a different Obama example you might agree on: the birther thing. That had way more legs than it should've because people were more willing to buy it about a black guy, and even more so, a black guy with that name. (That's also why conservative trolls are so fond of including his middle name.)
Last edited:
LOL---i intentionally added 'part' in there to needle you. I'll concede some stuff could have been b/c he was black and thats disappointing....but reality. Just like people who voted for or against him b/c of his skin color-----people like that don't deserve to have a vote.
I'm not sure how the BC thing even became a thing. Its spreads like wild fire b/c of social media. The troubling thing is the "educated men and women" that brought it up....even after reading some very detailed conspiracy stories ( i know you've read some and seem pretty realistic)......did they really think the Gov't doesnt VET the ever living eff out of stuff like that? Its just silly. The internet trains people, feeds people.....what they want to hear and in convincing fashion. People make up evidence....like really convincing evidence and pass it off. It would be nice if they put that skill to use honestly.
The Obamacrats say that ACA was the answer to all the world’s problems. Not supporting it fvcked everything up and was probably a racist act. All insurance companies should go broke because they are run by capitalist crooks who force medical costs up and up.
Truth was the ACA forced a bunch of folks to buy something they hated and something that did not work. Many people who had good insurance lost it. Many doctors were planning on getting out contrary to what the libs lie about. The cost of Obama care was up and up and up, instead of down, down, down and on top of that people lost their plans and doctors. (My sons insurance went from $500 a month to $1,400 so he could subsidize someone else’s ACA).
Now because of ACA and the GOP's reactions last year, medicine is more screwed up than ever before, yet the dems want the insurance companies to go bankrupt and a one payer system be set up to deliver shity medicine.
Some things never change.
In 2009 the Dems had majorities in both sides of the house and the Presidency. They pass ACA and in eight years they have nothing. ACA forced middle class people to subsidize lazy people. It restricted your medical choices down to three stupid policies. The structure of the ACA screwed things up.
Yet to this day they say ACA is what people wanted. The only reason the dems lost the Presidency, House and Senate was because of America being a basket of deplorables. Anyone with half sense would love getting forced to buy outrageous insurance so they could be “their (lazy) brother’s keeper”.
How stupid can some folks get?
Truth was the ACA forced a bunch of folks to buy something they hated and something that did not work. Many people who had good insurance lost it. Many doctors were planning on getting out contrary to what the libs lie about. The cost of Obama care was up and up and up, instead of down, down, down and on top of that people lost their plans and doctors. (My sons insurance went from $500 a month to $1,400 so he could subsidize someone else’s ACA).
Now because of ACA and the GOP's reactions last year, medicine is more screwed up than ever before, yet the dems want the insurance companies to go bankrupt and a one payer system be set up to deliver shity medicine.
Some things never change.
In 2009 the Dems had majorities in both sides of the house and the Presidency. They pass ACA and in eight years they have nothing. ACA forced middle class people to subsidize lazy people. It restricted your medical choices down to three stupid policies. The structure of the ACA screwed things up.
Yet to this day they say ACA is what people wanted. The only reason the dems lost the Presidency, House and Senate was because of America being a basket of deplorables. Anyone with half sense would love getting forced to buy outrageous insurance so they could be “their (lazy) brother’s keeper”.
How stupid can some folks get?
Sorry dude, but Bert is an asshole. Thedudes comments were uncalled for, totally agree, but Bert literally cusses you out and calls you every name in the book if you disagree with him. He’s the definition of a keyboard warrior.
I know you don’t like thedude, but I think you are out of line with what you said about him. I’m sure you’ll disagree with me, but he’s a great dad and his kids are lucky to have him. He does everything for them and his family.
You know we agree on a lot SNU (not college hoops, but you get my point
) but i don’t think you would say these things about thedude if you knew him outside this board. Just my two cents.
