Don'tcha love their 'logic'?
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Friday, October 30, 2009 03:04
VIEWED: 11384
PAGE 6 of 19
Quote:Are you talking about "millions more" illegals, or "millions more" currently uncovered citizens? Because if you're talking about the "millions more" currently uncovered citizens... that's a kind of dog-in-the-manger attitude isn't it? And in any case, I dont' see that as a problem. Since supply goes where money flows, more people will go into doctoring and nursing, and supply will meet demand.
It will only get worse in terms of general access and costs when you add in millions more seeking regular everyday care.
But maybe you can enlighten me: How is this supposed to work? In order to get "everyday" care (except at county ERs) I have to show my insurance card. How would that be any different from a public plan? Wouldn't public plan participants be required to show THEIR insurance cards, since competing systems would be in place? (I'm sure that the public plan does NOT want to pay for procedures already covered by a private plan,so SOME form of ID has to be used!) So then, how does one get a public plan card? Wouldn't one have to show some form of ID?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
RIPWASH: The report was disputed by the California Nurses' Association:
Quote:This doesn't take into account that Medicare is the insurer of last resort and represents the oldest, sickest and/or poorest. In addition, insurances will simply DROP you if they can, and thus you dont' show up in the "denied service" data.
Researchers from the California Nurses Association/National Nurses Organizing Committee analyzed data reported by the insurers to the California Department of Managed Care. From 2002 through June 30, 2009, the six insurers rejected 45.7 million claims -- 22 percent of all claims.
For the first half of 2009, as the national debate over healthcare reform was escalating, the rejection rates are even more striking.
Claims denial rates by leading California insurers, first six months of 2009:
• PacifiCare -- 39.6 percent
• Cigna -- 32.7 percent
• HealthNet -- 30 percent
• Kaiser Permanente -- 28.3 percent
• Blue Cross -- 27.9 percent
• Aetna -- 6.4 percent
More here
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/10/6/05110/6076
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"The average person does not 'have' to do anything in a free market society."
The average person HAS to breathe, drink, eat, and be sheltered from exposure to extremes.
So, how does that person economically relate (and by that I mean exchange of resources) to the world around her ?
To start out simply, I propose a magic-woman. This woman appears full-grown out of thin air, with all the knowledge requisite for her own survival. In other words, she owes nothing to parents who cared for her when she couldn't care for herself, to an immediate society that supported the parents and her through customs and exchange of goods, or to a historical society that developed language, knowledge, and skills, and husbanded those along through generations, and from which she benefits.
Suppose there is a freely available world to her, and no one around to contest her use of any resources. At that point I would say that though her chances of a long life are poor (because despite her efforts she is one broken bone or infected tooth or poor season or hungry bear away from death), she is free and completely independent.
Now suppose this magic-woman is living among people. These people lay claim to some of the resources for their own use. Her chances of survival have actually gone down, since she must now also contend with others for resources. So while she is still independent, she is less free to maintain her own life.
Suppose, instead, this woman is living in a fully developed free-market economy. All the land is owned. All the water is private. All the places to find shelter are claimed. All the food belongs to someone. She is NOT free to do as she might, since her actions are considerably constrained by her circumstances. Though, she is still independent, but her chances of survival have sunk to zero.
UNLESS
She can come to an economic agreement with those around her.
So - what is her bargaining position ? She NEEDS things to survive. Given that, she cannot refuse too many offers for exchange for too long.
And what is the bargaining position of the society around her ? Well, they do know that she is utterly dependent on them for life. Knowing that, they would be likely to make as advantageous (to them) bargain as they could. And they can wait, since they do have the resources to do it.
That is capitalism.
One is not free when the other side holds power over your survival.
And I haven't even addressed the issue of how much does one 'owe' to society (parents, community, history) for your existence, your skills and your knowledge.
The myth that somehow people are independent actors of equal power is just that - a myth. But that is the assumption on which your logic is based.
***************************************************************
Silence is consent.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
But maybe you can enlighten me: How is this supposed to work? In order to get "everyday" care (except at county ERs) I have to show my insurance card. How would that be any different from a public plan? Wouldn't public plan participants be required to show THEIR insurance cards, since competing systems would be in place? (I'm sure that the public plan does NOT want to pay for procedures already covered by a private plan,so SOME form of ID has to be used!) So then, how does one get a public plan card? Wouldn't one have to show some form of ID?
The point of the matter is HOW you get that important card in the first place. Didn't you have to provide some basic identification providing residency or identity proof? If you have insurance through your job, then they should already have an I-9 on you attesting to citizenship verification. Outside of insurance through work, if you buy it now privately do they just give you a card over the phone? I'm afraid the Govt., without any verification mechanism, will just be an invitation for vast fraud and misuse.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Seems to me that you should have to show a Social Security card in order to get a public option card. I know there are a LOT of duplicated SSNs out there- Social Security didn't mind because it meant more $$ coming in... $$$ that some peeps wouldn't claim later on. Now that a dup SSN might cause an outlfow of $$$, I would HOPE that would trigger a much closer look at duplicates. (The online verification system is very easy- as a household employer I do NOT hire illegals, and I have used the system.) Or, if peeps just pay into the system to get the card.. than what the frak do I care if they're illegal or not, as long as they're paying their way? The devil- or god, or something- is in the details.
But if you're telling me there would be no verfication in a tax-funded system... that would be just plain silly. It wouldn't be enough to make me drop the idea of a public plan bc I think much more good than harm would come out of it, but it WOULD make me agitate for reform!
But I don't believe that is what the "You lie!" shout was about. It seems to me that the perceived issue was the peeps would not have to show citizenship AT THE TIME OF SERVICE. And, of course they wouldn't.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Seems to me that you should have to show a Social Security card in order to get a public option card. I know there are a LOT of duplicated SSNs out there- Social Security didn't mind because it meant more $$ coming in... $$$ that some peeps wouldn't claim later on. Now that a dup SSN might cause an outlfow of $$$, I would HOPE that would trigger a much closer look at duplicates. (The online verification system is very easy- as a household employer I do NOT hire illegals, and I have used the system.) Or, if peeps just pay into the system to get the card.. than what the frak do I care if they're illegal or not, as long as they're paying their way? The devil- or god, or something- is in the details.
But if you're telling me there would be no verfication in a tax-funded system... that would be just plain silly. It wouldn't be enough to make me drop the idea of a public plan bc I think much more good than harm would come out of it, but it WOULD make me agitate for reform!
But I don't believe that is what the "You lie!" shout was about. It seems to me that the perceived issue was the peeps would not have to show citizenship AT THE TIME OF SERVICE. And, of course they wouldn't.
Look, the reality I see is:
(1) The record of the current system is hard to defend.
(2) Public Option Healthcare will pass and that's just gonna be how it is. We'll see how it works out. There's a reasonable chance all will work out, and the debt will just mount a bit. So what! I've seen plenty of govt. debt during my life. It's ridiculous to keep fighting against it, although it will forever be a political issue whether it passes now or later. Finger pointers will campaign with their self-requested statistics, hurl hyperbolized accusations of blame or success, and the debate will go on through the next few election years. Yawn...wake me up on Healthcare sometime in the future.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Hello Rue,
You have often proposed this vision of the capitalist system, but in addition to the variables that you freely state in your 'magic woman' scenario, you also make two unstated assumptions. Without these assumptions, your scenarios would fall apart.
The first assumption you make is that there is an infinite supply of labor.
The second assumption you make is that all labor is of equal quality.
Under these assumptions, it is hardly surprising that your magic woman is reduced to subsistance living at the whims of tyrannical entities who can replace her without thought on a whim, and who have no incentive to pay her any more than she absolutely needs in order to survive.
In real world practice, labor supply is limited and of varying quality. There are incentives for companies to pay people more than the minimum required to sustain an employee's life. It is the limited supply and varying quality of available labor that explains why not everyone in America earns minimum wage, even though that is theoretically the only legally required wage.
--Anthony
"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:At the same time, we have an effective 20% unemployment. DOOD. Why do you suppose peeps around the world are starving? Its certainly not for lack of motivation and not for lack of work that needs to be done! Capitalism works HARD to automate, and to make peeps as replaceable, standarized, and commodified as nuts and bolts. Its to make labor redundant. Even capitalists will tell you that! Do you also believe that health insurances exist to make us healthy? It sounds like you went to capitalism happycamp or something.
In real world practice, labor supply is limited and of varying quality. There are incentives for companies to pay people more than the minimum required to sustain an employee's life. It is the limited supply and varying quality of available labor that explains why not everyone in America earns minimum wage, even though that is theoretically the only legally required wage.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:I believe that Signy; the Tooth Fairy said I should.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Do you also believe that health insurances exist to make us healthy?
The laughing Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Gullible double post
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME