Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Do Corporations 'Believe'?Follow

#177 Mar 28 2014 at 11:30 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Jophiel wrote:
I didn't any depth of detail on it but I'm guessing store policy isn't to leave Walgreen's unmanned except for one lone pharmacist in the corner guarding the Vicodin and pseudoephedrine from marauders.
You wouldn't need additional employees if you'd just let the pharmacists bring guns.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#178 Mar 28 2014 at 11:35 AM Rating: Good
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Or you're one of those many Americans who had/have a car, mortgage, and minimal or no insurance. Grated only something like 12% of the uninsured pay their entire bill or whatever, but it's not like people are just walking out the door scot-free and paying nothing.

For emergency care? Yes, they are mostly going to emergency rooms and paying nothing. Very few people have mortgages and no medical insurance, for obvious reasons. Those that do will have a lien put on the house, I guess, that if they can't afford they'll just ignore until they sell the house or die.

You have to understand that's the way the US system was designed. The safety net is catastrophic care guarantees. Someone has to take emergency cases who don't have insurance or cash in hand. Depending on the municipality, they might end up a ****** hospital or rushed out of a good one without adequate care, but they will get treatment. Hence the "ER as primary care doctor" problem that drives US costs through the sky.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#179 Mar 28 2014 at 12:38 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
Nope; he's a slavishy devoted minion of Ayn Rand.

Don't be silly, he hasn't read Rand. You need to think of what an 11 year old may have read that would be similar. Terry Goodkind, maybe, or Heinlien. He could be a devoted minion of one of them.
...Scrooge McDuck?
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#180 Mar 28 2014 at 12:42 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
stuff
You know, the most annoying thing about this conversation is I'm having a world of trouble finding statistics on it.

You got anything?

Edit: I mean I can find stuff that lists dollar amounts unpaid and what not, that's not hard to find; and obviously found the "12% of uninsured pay their whole bill" and such. However something like "What percentage of Emergency room patients pay nothing for their visit?" or similar questions seem to be eluding my interweb skills.

Edited, Mar 28th 2014 11:46am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#181 Mar 28 2014 at 12:52 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
www.aha.org/content/13/1-2013-uncompensated-care-fs.pdf

I'm not super invested in the exact number, really. A lot, though, seems to be the consensus. I realize what you are looking for is total default on the complete bill, which I'm sure stats exist for, but I'm not about to log into Truven to find out.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#182 Mar 28 2014 at 1:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Yeah I was hoping to have a quick "aha!" moment or an "ahhh so Smash was right!" moment without too much work on the subject myself. Sadly both outcomes proved elusive. Smiley: frown

I dunno, I was under the impression that while lots of times we'll discount services, but most people don't walk out with free treatment. However without anything to support it that's about as concrete as that dam Bob built on the Simpsons. Anyway, I don't know what's more concerning about that table you linked. That there's 10x the uncompensated care cost there was 30 years ago, or that it represents a consistent 5-6%ish of operating expenses. Maybe I should feel apprehensive about both...
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#183 Mar 28 2014 at 1:11 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
That there's 10x the uncompensated care cost there was 30 years ago, or that it represents a consistent 5-6%ish of operating expenses

One would assume a likely causal link there..."How much do we have to charge to maintain pro bono at 6%"
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#184 Mar 28 2014 at 1:12 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Limbaugh was reading some hilarious Ann Coulter column today where Ms. Coulter expressed how incompetent she was at buying insurance. I doubt that was the intended take-away but reading through her inability to find out what insurance plans her preferred medical providers accept and then using that information to select a purchase a plan, it's all you can logically get from it. My favorite bit:
Ann Coulter wrote:
With zero help from the Obamacare website, I eventually figured out that there was one lone insurance plan that would cover treatment at a reputable hospital. The downside is, no doctors take it.

So my only two health insurance options -- and yours, too, as soon as the waivers expire, America! -- are: (1) a plan that no doctors take; or (2) a plan that no hospitals take. You either pay for all your doctor visits and tests yourself, or you pay for your cancer treatment yourself. And you pay through the nose in either case.

So Ms. Coulter presupposes a hospital where they accept no insurance plans except one and which hires doctors who refuse to accept that plan (or any other)? Do these doctors and hospital staff eat mice and paint flakes since they refuse to accept any income or to see any patients? She honestly thinks that there's hospitals and physicians that refuse to accept any legitimate ACA-approved insurance plans?

See, now I would think "Hey, I'll call Dr. Smith and see which providers he accepts and then call those insurance companies and see what plans they offer." This simple one-two step never occurs to her. Instead she blunders blindly from place to place, eventually blaming all her woes on the Obamacare website that she refuses to put her data into. Meanwhile, as previously cited, millions of smarter, clearer thinking Americans are contacting the companies directly and walking away with new plans. Ah, good ole self-reliant conservatism shines once again Smiley: laugh
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#185 Mar 28 2014 at 1:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Smasharoo wrote:
That there's 10x the uncompensated care cost there was 30 years ago, or that it represents a consistent 5-6%ish of operating expenses

One would assume a likely causal link there..."How much do we have to charge to maintain pro bono at 6%"
That makes sense, but I think I was more concerned with the idea that it meant operating expenses jumped 10x as well. Not that that's really a news flash or anything, we've all been talking about rising health care costs forever, the table just puts it in an interesting context.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#186 Mar 28 2014 at 1:22 PM Rating: Good
She picked the most expensive hospital twenty states away as her test case or something?
#187 Mar 28 2014 at 1:29 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Catwho wrote:
She picked the most expensive hospital twenty states away as her test case or something?
Was she going to choose one that might have the common dreg lounging around, leeching off the system?

Edited, Mar 28th 2014 3:35pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#188 Mar 28 2014 at 1:45 PM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Maybe she went to UCLA English dept. looking for docs and mental institutes looking for hospitals.

This is probably worth the 8mins if you want a fairly comprehensive blurp about healthcare in the US. The guy talks fast so crams in a lot of info.

____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#189 Mar 28 2014 at 1:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Catwho wrote:
She picked the most expensive hospital twenty states away as her test case or something?

Interestingly, she claims that her previous insurance was cancelled for being "illegal" so it must not have met the minimum criteria under the ACA, yet her "reputable" hospital accepted that but won't accept any other insurance plan in the state. Fascinating business model.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#190 Mar 28 2014 at 2:02 PM Rating: Good
Either that or she's a secret homeopath and her "reputable" holistic doctor's clinic won't be covered by any insurance plan, period, since they're quacks.
#191 Mar 28 2014 at 2:15 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Either that or she's a secret homeopath and her "reputable" holistic doctor's clinic won't be covered by any insurance plan, period, since they're quacks.

Fellow who used to be our neighbor did his PhD thesis on the cost effectiveness of acupuncture (fellow who bought his house and lives there now is a PhD astrophysicist. Not sure why we can't have down to earth blue collar neighbors) . Anyway, he found that there was no efficacy to acupuncture *at all*...shocker....but that interestingly, many insurers would cover it because it defrayed costs and load on "real" clinicians and was a net benefit as many of their customers would be satisfied with the acupuncture treatment. So I wouldn't assume no one would cover homeopathy. If it nets them an extra nickel, they'll cover it.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#192 Mar 28 2014 at 2:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Smasharoo wrote:
Not sure why we can't have down to earth blue collar neighbors

Tough to get a high risk mortgage approved for an ivory tower Smiley: frown
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#193 Mar 28 2014 at 2:32 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
I was going to make a comment about tusks, but now I'm kind of curious what an elephant steak tastes like. I've got to stop skipping lunch.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#194 Mar 28 2014 at 2:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Or move someplace with more elephants.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#195 Mar 28 2014 at 2:38 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
670 posts
Kuwoobie wrote:
Forcing people to pay for contraceptives > forcing people to have unwanted pregnancies.

Unless gbaji is a devout Catholic, there is no reason at all for there to be debate over this. So Hobby Lobby does not want its employees to use contraceptives... Why not? I know it looks obvious that they are using it as an excuse to drag their feet on employee benefits, but let's assume for a moment that they really believe contraceptives are evil or something. Why single out contraceptives of all things? What "religious belief" does this fall under, exactly, and why does it matter to anyone?

Its not that they have a problem with contraceptives. The problem is that they are plugging their ears and shouting NOPE when it comes to facts. In this case, they are ignoring the fact that it is in fact a contraceptive, not an abortion pill.
#196 Mar 28 2014 at 2:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
I thought part of the problem was because birth control pills could help prevent a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Since the subset of the population believed life began at fertilization (Just used to justify the discrimination against the haploid members of our species, IMO. The haters...) there wasn't any fundamental difference for them between the birth control pill and an abortion.

Others of course take a more nutty view that we're messing with God's will or something along those lines, and for those that take a more extreme view than that, well I've stopped listening by that point.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#197 Mar 28 2014 at 3:05 PM Rating: Good
I always rebut that by scraping the inside of my cheek, showing them them the scum, and cheering that I'd just killed off several thousand of my own cells JUST LIKE AN ABORTION
#198 Mar 28 2014 at 3:43 PM Rating: Excellent
******
27,272 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Or move someplace with more elephants.
Like a Danish zoo.
#199 Mar 28 2014 at 3:47 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Kuwoobie wrote:
Unless gbaji is a devout Catholic, there is no reason at all for there to be debate over this.


If you're not willing to fight to protect the rights of others, then no one will fight to protect yours.

Quote:
So Hobby Lobby does not want its employees to use contraceptives... Why not?


Hobby Lobby doesn't want to have to pay for its employees to use contraceptives. Do you understand that Hobby Lobby prohibiting its employees from using contraceptives would be an infringement of their employees rights, but requiring Hobby Lobby to provide contraceptives to its employees infringes Hobby Lobby's rights (well, the owners anyway). There's a middle ground. We don't pick a side and demand full compliance. Any sane application of liberalism has to recognize the point where your rights end and the other persons begin.

Quote:
Why single out contraceptives of all things? What "religious belief" does this fall under, exactly, and why does it matter to anyone?


Doesn't matter why it matters to them.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#200 Mar 28 2014 at 3:48 PM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
If you're not willing to fight to protect the rights of others, then no one will fight to protect yours.
Fight the good fight, oh Internet Forum Warrior.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#201 Mar 28 2014 at 3:56 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
I find the coffee argument odd. We do set a standard for minimum requirements for food all the time. We also set a standard for minimum requirements for vehicles, I think I saw car choice as an option as well.


Sure. But there's a difference between say quality standards for the components in food and mandates for what food can be sold at all. So "no ******* in the coffee" is fine. But "must contain mocha, steamed milk, and at least one flavoring" is not.

Obamacare uses the latter form of mandate. It's not saying "Plan B birth control must meet these requirements to be legally sold in the US", but "Everyone must have insurance that pays for Plan B birth control". The former is fine because it sets quality standards on the good itself, but leave the consumer free to decide to purchase it. Just like mandating the standards for doughnuts doesn't force anyone to buy them (or insert any of a zillion other things you can choose to buy but aren't forced to).

The government stepped well beyond merely regulating standards with the passage of this law. Can we please agree on this?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 267 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (267)