[JoMar]

Originally Posted by Schneil

We are so disappointed in the healthcare program and restrictions. The advertising which sold us on TV while house hunting was and continues to be misleading. I particularly love the following advertisement that "health care is just a short golf cart ride away...." There is no disclaimer of: "only if you belong to UHC! Shame on the Morse family!

Copied from the Village Website:

An important part of a great retirement lifestyle is convenient access to wellness facilities and quality health care.

The Villages Health and USF HEALTH, a major academic health resource, are partnering to make The Villages America's Healthiest Hometown.

Staying healthy is easy in The Villages. Neighborhood fitness centers and health care facilities are located throughout The Villages -- just a golf car ride away. The Villages Healthcare Centers, The Villages Regional Hospital, Moffitt Cancer Center, VA outpatient clinic, senior living facilities, and a long term acute care hospital are all located here.

First error is making decisions only based on what is on the internet. Second error is not talking to a real person to understand the "rules". Your sales person could have put you into the right place to call someone. You will get past this at some point and then you can just enjoy where you are.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by goodtimesintv

The ACA and the feds have given more power and market share to the biggest insurers and United Healthcare-AARP than they have ever had!!

"These Medicare supplement insurance companies are the biggest of all the companies and most of them have been around the longest.

AARP– AARP is the largest and most recognized company for senior insurance. They are in every state and at the top of the food chain for all the Medicare supplement insurance companies. Find out more about an AARP Medicare supplement HERE.

Mutual of Omaha– Second only to AARP Mutual of Omaha is one of the most respected insurance companies in the U.S. They have made a big push to be a major competitor in the Medicare supplement market. Get more information on a Mutual of Omaha Medicare supplement HERE.

Humana – By forming a relationship with Wal-Mart for Medicare Part D, Humana has catapulted itself into a bigger part of the medigap market. Learn more about a Humana Medicare supplement HERE.

Gerber– Gerber made a huge splash when they entered the Medicare supplement market and moved quickly from the new guy to a major competitor. Get more information on a Gerber Medicare supplement HERE."

Medicare Supplement Insurance Companies - View Rates Online

Just how did you come to this conclusion? I have no love for the ACA, but in fairness, it has absolutely nothing to do with medicare or medicare supplemental policies. You then go on to list the 4 largest supplemental insurance companies, that had the overwhelming majority of market share both before and after ACA. The reason these companies have that market share is because CONSUMERS BUY them, not "the feds". They fill a niche, and therefore they sell their product. This may be the clearest example of the free market ay work in the whole mess

Even in the non-medicare market, about 12 million have signed up under ACA, but 7 million lost their coverage in the individual market, net gain = 5 million. In a country of 330 million, do you think this is a tremendous increase in market share? And you didn't think all the insurers have tremendous power over the care you receive both before after ACA?

[dotti105]

One of my big concerns with the huge monopoly type insurance companies who buy up their competition is the fact that they have a very large lobby which is an industry in and of itself. They are proud of the fact that they line the pockets of the house and senate members who are elected to represent OUR best interests. Our representatives are no longer representing us, they are representing the special interests who pay them well to do so.

Citizens United needs to be overturned and term limits in place before we will have elected officials who are willing to represent the citizens who voted them into office. $$ is running politics now, and big business supplies the big bucks. The insurance industry is one of the largest and most successful in getting laws drafted to their advantage.

When ACA came out with Insurance Companies in charge, we were guaranteed to have higher premiums, co-pays and less option for seeing the provider/specialist of our choice.

As they have put out the programs for 2016, there have been many changes and most are again in the favor of the insurance companies.

Our healthcare system, like our political system would be better run without the SuperPacs, and lobbyists who have the insidious power to determine our political future and the future of our healthcare, to a much greater degree than the citizens who elected those officials.

That is a recipe for disaster for all except the big boys with the big bucks.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by dotti105

One of my big concerns with the huge monopoly type insurance companies who buy up their competition is the fact that they have a very large lobby which is an industry in and of itself. They are proud of the fact that they line the pockets of the house and senate members who are elected to represent OUR best interests. Our representatives are no longer representing us, they are representing the special interests who pay them well to do so.

Citizens United needs to be overturned and term limits in place before we will have elected officials who are willing to represent the citizens who voted them into office. $$ is running politics now, and big business supplies the big bucks. The insurance industry is one of the largest and most successful in getting laws drafted to their advantage.

When ACA came out with Insurance Companies in charge, we were guaranteed to have higher premiums, co-pays and less option for seeing the provider/specialist of our choice.

As they have put out the programs for 2016, there have been many changes and most are again in the favor of the insurance companies.

Our healthcare system, like our political system would be better run without the SuperPacs, and lobbyists who have the insidious power to determine our political future and the future of our healthcare, to a much greater degree than the citizens who elected those officials.

That is a recipe for disaster for all except the big boys with the big bucks.

While I would agree in principle that lobbies and superpacs diminish the influence of individual citizens with their elected representatives, I think there may be room for debate on your health insurance statements.
Here is a list, from CNN, of the top 10 lobbies in Wash DC:
The full list: Here are the publicly traded companies that have done the most direct lobbying since 2009, plus a bonus:

1. General Electric (GE): $134 million
2. AT&T: (T, Tech30) $91.2 million
3. Boeing Co (BA): $90.3 million
4. Northrop Grumman (NOC): $87.9 million
5. Comcast Corp (CMCSA): $86.4 million
6. Verizon Communications: (VZ, Tech30) $86.4 million
7. FedExCorp (FDX): $85.7 million
8. Exxon Mobil (XOM): $85 million
9. Lockheed Martin (LMT): $78.8 million
10. Pfizer (PFE): $77.8 million
...
16.Google (GOOG): $62.2 million
CNNMoney (New York) October 1, 2014: 11:36 AM ET

I don't see any insurers here

"When ACA came out with Insurance Companies in charge, we were guaranteed to have higher premiums, co-pays and less option for seeing the provider/specialist of our choice."

Actually, when ACA came out, period, with 40 million who for the most part could not pay their own premiums destined to enter the system, no exclusion for pre-existing conditions, and children up to 26 on their mommy's policy (and couch) who were not paying their own premiums, WE WERE GUARANTEED TO HAVE HIGHER PREMIUMS regardless of who was running it. The concept that the 3 TRILLION in cost over 10 years would be offset by more efficient care, EMRs and decreasing so called "fraud" was a joke from the beginning. So, as Obama exits next year and Obamacare gets fully implemented, hold on to your wallets. So far his $2000 saving/family has been a $5000 increase, not including higher deductibles, and will go up even further. If you think you are safe on medicare, NOT. Obamacare takes 550 billion from that program which already has financial problems, especially part B.
Remember, ACA had very little to do with health care reform and everything to do with being the largest tax increase and power grab by the federal government in our history. If they were serious about health care reform, the targets would have been pharmaceutical costs, tort reform, slashing regulation, and durable medical equipment costs---none of which were touched

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

While I would agree in principle that lobbies and superpacs diminish the influence of individual citizens with their elected representatives, I think there may be room for debate on your health insurance statements.
Here is a list, from CNN, of the top 10 lobbies in Wash DC:
The full list: Here are the publicly traded companies that have done the most direct lobbying since 2009, plus a bonus:

1. General Electric (GE): $134 million
2. AT&T: (T, Tech30) $91.2 million
3. Boeing Co (BA): $90.3 million
4. Northrop Grumman (NOC): $87.9 million
5. Comcast Corp (CMCSA): $86.4 million
6. Verizon Communications: (VZ, Tech30) $86.4 million
7. FedExCorp (FDX): $85.7 million
8. Exxon Mobil (XOM): $85 million
9. Lockheed Martin (LMT): $78.8 million
10. Pfizer (PFE): $77.8 million
...
16.Google (GOOG): $62.2 million
CNNMoney (New York) October 1, 2014: 11:36 AM ET

I don't see any insurers here

"When ACA came out with Insurance Companies in charge, we were guaranteed to have higher premiums, co-pays and less option for seeing the provider/specialist of our choice."

Actually, when ACA came out, period, with 40 million who for the most part could not pay their own premiums destined to enter the system, no exclusion for pre-existing conditions, and children up to 26 on their mommy's policy (and couch) who were not paying their own premiums, WE WERE GUARANTEED TO HAVE HIGHER PREMIUMS regardless of who was running it. The concept that the 3 TRILLION in cost over 10 years would be offset by more efficient care, EMRs and decreasing so called "fraud" was a joke from the beginning. So, as Obama exits next year and Obamacare gets fully implemented, hold on to your wallets. So far his $2000 saving/family has been a $5000 increase, not including higher deductibles, and will go up even further. If you think you are safe on medicare, NOT. Obamacare takes 550 billion from that program which already has financial problems, especially part B.
Remember, ACA had very little to do with health care reform and everything to do with being the largest tax increase and power grab by the federal government in our history. If they were serious about health care reform, the targets would have been pharmaceutical costs, tort reform, slashing regulation, and durable medical equipment costs---none of which were touched

Ok Doc, now you're really making me sick. I thought you were supposed to first do no harm.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by outlaw

Ok Doc, now you're really making me sick. I thought you were supposed to first do no harm.

How so?? Just posted some facts about insurance lobbies, health care costs, and the ACA. Yes, I might have done it differently, but for now it is what it is, so we should all understand it

[outlaw]

People blaming the insurance companies are going to be so disappointed when/if the US ever goes to universal single payer healthcare. If health insurance companies were getting so rich off of healthcare, why would investors own any other stocks? Why wouldn't health insurance companies dominate market capitalization? Why wouldn't the health insurance companies be the most expensive stocks? If you think it's difficult getting a doctor now. Wait until universal health care. Forget a knee replacement so you can continue playing golf or pickleball. That's what walking canes are for. Watch the new miracle drug line dry up because the government decides that the drug companies profit margin is too high and arbitrarily sets the price for these drugs. It's coming. Remember, you asked for it.

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

How so?? Just posted some facts about insurance lobbies, health care costs, and the ACA. Yes, I might have done it differently, but for now it is what it is, so we should all understand it

Actually, I was kidding. I agree with your post. You see, your truthful explanation of the state of our health care system was so sad that it was making me sick...get it. You're a doctor; making me sick....get it. Knock knock. Anyone there?

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by outlaw

Actually, I was kidding. I agree with your post. You see, your truthful explanation of the state of our health care system was so sad that it was making me sick...get it. You're a doctor; making me sick....get it. Knock knock. Anyone there?

Way too early for me to get it

Primum non nocere

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Way too early for me to get it

Primum non nocere

I guess it would have been funnier if I would have posted in Latin.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by outlaw

I guess it would have been funnier if I would have posted in Latin.

Way, way, way too early for THAT

[dotti105]

Golfing Eagles, I appreciate the negative information you have presented on the ACA and it's management by our mega insurance companies.

As I understand it, the US is one of the few developed nations that does not have a single payer system. Are they all wrong? I worked in the bay area with RNs from Canada who would not get US citizenship because they do not want to give up their excellent medial insurance in Canada. Why would that be?

While traveling in Australia, the people we met were all very happy with their universal health care.

No "death committees" in either country. Health care is considered a right in those countries as well as in the many other developed countries who rank above us in quality and outcomes.

I don't understand how that works. If universal health care is such a bad idea, why has it been so successful and well received in so many other nations? And why have we consistently ranked so low in outcomes?

Costs have increased dramatically during my years working as a RN, the pay....not so much. The Hospital corporations are flush with cash, HCA for example, (Governor Rick Scott's former "ATM card") where I worked for the last 10 years has made record profits year after year. Their hospitals are 12 of the top 25 in profits year after year.

Some one is making a lot of $$ on the back of the health care industry, it's healthcare providers, and patients alike.

Please enlighten me? No sarcasm intended. I really want to hear your reasoning for the situation here compared to the other 1st world countries.

I do enjoy your posts and respect your opinions.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by dotti105

Golfing Eagles, I appreciate the negative information you have presented on the ACA and it's management by our mega insurance companies.

As I understand it, the US is one of the few developed nations that does not have a single payer system. Are they all wrong? I worked in the bay area with RNs from Canada who would not get US citizenship because they do not want to give up their excellent medial insurance in Canada. Why would that be?

While traveling in Australia, the people we met were all very happy with their universal health care.

No "death committees" in either country. Health care is considered a right in those countries as well as in the many other developed countries who rank above us in quality and outcomes.

I don't understand how that works. If universal health care is such a bad idea, why has it been so successful and well received in so many other nations? And why have we consistently ranked so low in outcomes?

Costs have increased dramatically during my years working as a RN, the
pay....not so much. The Hospital corporations are flush with cash, HCA for example, (Governor Rick Scott's former "ATM card") where I worked for the last 10 years has made record profits year after year. Their hospitals are 12 of the top 25 in profits year after year.

Some one is making a lot of $$ on the back of the health care industry, it's healthcare providers, and patients alike.

Please enlighten me? No sarcasm intended. I really want to hear your reasoning for the situation here compared to the other 1st world countries.

I do enjoy your posts and respect your opinions.

Wow, there's a lot in there, I could write a book! So I'll try to be short and answer point by point---but while I back this with facts, it is still only my opinion and I'm sure others will disagree.

Golfing Eagles, I appreciate the negative information you have presented on the ACA and it's management by our mega insurance companies.

Actually, I believe the only negative part (that I mentioned) was the cost and how it was misrepresented as well as the lack of scope in addressing the true problems in healthcare

As I understand it, the US is one of the few developed nations that does not have a single payer system. Are they all wrong? I worked in the bay area with RNs from Canada who would not get US citizenship because they do not want to give up their excellent medial insurance in Canada. Why would that be?

I guess the tongue in cheek answers would be yes, and dementia. However, part of the problem is comparing apples and oranges. At the risk of the ire of the right, I would have developed a single payer system in the US as well, but I just wouldn't let our government run it. There is a big difference between how our government works and that of Luxembourg. What "works" there might not work here for a whole array of reasons, more on that later. As far as the Canadian system being "excellent", for some things it is. They are very good at preventative care, prenatal care, immunizations and simple problems. I assume your nurse friends never had a serious problem. They might think differently if they needed an MRI or open heart surgery, as they got sicker and sicker on a long waiting list. Seattle, Detroit, Buffalo, Albany, and to a certain extent Boston has a thriving business providing advanced care to Canadians who cross the border to utilize these services

While traveling in Australia, the people we met were all very happy with their universal health care.

Again, they tend to be happy as long as they don't get seriously ill.

No "death committees" in either country. Health care is considered a right in those countries as well as in the many other developed countries who rank above us in quality and outcomes.

I think "death committees" was a fear tactic of Sarah Palin and the far right. But you can only pay for universal health care either by higher taxes or rationing. European socialist republics do it with a little of both, something that Americans probably would not stand for.

I don't understand how that works. If universal health care is such a bad idea, why has it been so successful and well received in so many other nations? And why have we consistently ranked so low in outcomes?

Now here is the real fallacy with the arguments we hear all the time in the media. How successful is it, really. In Scandinavia, their 80% income tax is "well received"? And just ask the Greeks how it is working out for them. Italy, Spain, Portugal and Ireland are right on the same precipice. But more importantly, let's take a close look at the "low rank" of the US in health care
These so called rankings are generally based on life expectancy---the CIA World Fact Book ranks the US 43rd in this category. However, life expectancy to a large degree is a function of infant mortality, which the CIA ranks the US 57th in. But why? Almost every other country reporting infant mortality only counts live births after 34 weeks, some 36 weeks. We count every live birth---25 weeks, botched abortions, miscarriages--as long as the baby took 1 breath, we count it, therefore skewing the statistics.
There is also probably a genetic component to life expectancy as well. Japan is #1 or 2 on all the lists. The following is not racist, repeat that to all liberals, NOT RACIST, but fact--40 of the 42 lowest life expectancy countries are in Africa (the other 2 are Haiti and Afghanistan). Yes--- war, poverty, HIV and other disease and starvation are huge factors, but I wonder if some genetics is at play as well, as noted below
Even within the US, there is a large variation from state to state---from 81.3 years down to 75.0. Guess which state is #1----Hawaii, coincidentally a state with a high percentage of Japanese DNA. Which state is #50?---Mississippi, which in addition to some poverty and lack of access to care has a high percentage of African DNA (again, to liberals, fact, NOT RACIST)
Now let's look at the criteria by which the WHO rank the US system 37th in the world:
The rankings are based on an index of five factors:[2]
Health (50%) : disability-adjusted life expectancy
Overall or average : 25%
Distribution or equality : 25%

Responsiveness (25%) : speed of service, protection of privacy, and quality of amenities
Overall or average : 12.5%

Distribution or equality : 12.5%

Fair financial contribution : 25%


So, you can see how ridiculous this ranking is---every statistical factor works against the US and works in favor of small, genetically demographically homogenous populations that all pay high taxes.

I prefer the following test of the quality of the US health system:
When world leaders, royalty and billionaires get really sick, do they flock to NY City and Boston, or do they flock to "Luxembourg"?

Costs have increased dramatically during my years working as a RN, the
pay....not so much. The Hospital corporations are flush with cash, HCA for example, (Governor Rick Scott's former "ATM card") where I worked for the last 10 years has made record profits year after year. Their hospitals are 12 of the top 25 in profits year after year.

Some one is making a lot of $$ on the back of the health care industry, it's healthcare providers, and patients alike.


Well, it certainly wasn't me! But the last figures I saw 4 years ago showed 78% of all US hospitals were in the red. And doctors only account for 9% of every health care dollar. And if it's the "mega insurance companies", let's all go out and buy Humana stock. Remember, it's possible to take in tremendous amounts of money and still lose--just look at the federal budget!!

Well, "that's all folks" My arm is tired

[bimmertl]

Originally Posted by rxatkin

We just got a call from The Villages Health Care telling us that The Villages Health Care System is no longer taking new patients with Medicare as primary insurance and Tricare For Life as secondary insurance. That's just gone into effect today. We just got off the phone with the call center supervisor. Anyone else in our situation? They have too many patients and not enough doctors. Good luck to us veterans and our spouses.

Be sure to read the article in todays Daily Sun on page C1 title Villages Health Takes An Important Step . It states "Effective immediately the grassroots health care organization (Villages Health) will accept only United Healthcare Medicare Advantage plans for new patients."

So yes, there is room for new patients as long as you belong to the only Medicare Advantage plan that pays commissions to Morse. Nobody else can get in.

So don't believe the BS about Villages Health having to many patients. There's plenty of room if Morse gets a cut.

[dbussone]

Originally Posted by bimmertl

Be sure to read the article in todays Daily Sun on page C1 title Villages Health Takes An Important Step . It states "Effective immediately the grassroots health care organization (Villages Health) will accept only United Healthcare Medicare Advantage plans for new patients."

So yes, there is room for new patients as long as you belong to the only Medicare Advantage plan that pays commissions to Morse. Nobody else can get in.

So don't believe the BS about Villages Health having to many patients. There's plenty of room if Morse gets a cut.

You didn't need a program to see this coming. In fact I will predict that the developer's exit strategy for the so called health system ultimately involves a sale to UHC.