Originally Posted by Bucco

YEP....because he had to do what he did...paying off folks simply because straight up he didnt have the votes for this total trainwreck of a bill EVEN AMONG HIS OWN PARTY. This bill, and you can write it down, is going to be an albatross around all our necks for some time. Yep, also because it was the TOTAL OPPOSITE of what he said over and over again that he would do, AND he did despite most americans being opposed. We see a bit of the irony as people are backing away in droves even those who originally supported him on it.

And please cease and desist on the Bush rhetoric. I am not, nor ever been a Bush supporter and you actually weaken and cheapen everything you say when you say that stuff. You sound like lad on the playground with the constant harping on Bush. He has been gone for over THREE YEARS and if you mean to say that Obama can lie about issues because Bush did, then we have a far more serious problem AND THAT IS WHAT YOU IMPLY....by always saying Bush did it...or something to that affect.

I have been criticizing this man...Obama....since well before he was even the candidate so it is not sour grapes. Search just this forum and you will find that to be the truth so this is not some party hack. He never had what it takes to fill this job and he is gettting worse. I am not a "johnny come lately" and jumping on the pile on Obama..I called him not capable before he was even a serious threat for the candidacy.

This is not a referendum on Bush...it is on Obama.....he has been in the Oval office for over 3 years now. He has not surpised me on bit on how he has acted. He never had any leadership positions, had no leadership skills and has never done much in his life but TALK. He is a very smart man and very articulate but he had none of his own ideas and floats around trying to satisfy folks.

He had many chances to show leadership and we have mentioned the health bill...that was one. He chose TO IGNORE the majority of americans who opposed it...he chose TO IGNORE the majority of politicians, even in his own party, who opposed it. He chose TO IGNORE the chance to have a viable public debate on the subject.

Again, understand, I am not posting here to set up 2012...I have been posting anti Obama on here, as I said WELL BEFORE he was even the candidate...when it looked like Clinton would be the nominee.

I invite you to read about this President...read his autobiographies (TWO of them and they even differ)...read about his time in Chicago.what he said..what he did (most times different)...WHO he was associated with at the time which is what made up the man.

His non decisive positions on things will not surprise anyone who has read his background

points and are certainly entitled to your feelings about the president. BTW, by bringing up Bush and his failures as a leader, I feel that I am pointing out the hypocrisy that runs rampant on this forum. They are quick to identify things about Obama that they were only too happy to ignore in previous administrations. One thing you have to admit. It takes courage to push through legislation that as you indicate most Americans were opposed to. How many political leaders have we had that would stick their fingers in the air, and base every decision on what was at the moment the popular thing to do? BTW, Obama's healthcare bill, as you know, is pretty much the same as the one advocated by then Governor Romney who may very well be his opponent in 2012. I'll be curious to see how Mitt Romney explains this in the campaign.

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

lol...

What's lol?

Originally Posted by actor

points and are certainly entitled to your feelings about the president. BTW, by bringing up Bush and his failures as a leader, I feel that I am pointing out the hypocrisy that runs rampant on this forum. They are quick to identify things about Obama that they were only too happy to ignore in previous administrations. One thing you have to admit. It takes courage to push through legislation that as you indicate most Americans were opposed to. How many political leaders have we had that would stick their fingers in the air, and base every decision on what was at the moment the popular thing to do? BTW, Obama's healthcare bill, as you know, is pretty much the same as the one advocated by then Governor Romney who may very well be his opponent in 2012. I'll be curious to see how Mitt Romney explains this in the campaign.

"It takes courage to push through legislation that as you indicate most Americans were opposed to."

You keep reading what you posted above and tell me what is wrong with THAT picture.

There were differences between Obama's and Romney's....the most glaring to me is one was a STATE law and the other for the ENTIRE COUNTRY...that is a HUGE difference,

But as you said..it takes guts to push something through that Amerians did not want !

Originally Posted by Bucco

"It takes courage to push through legislation that as you indicate most Americans were opposed to."

You keep reading what you posted above and tell me what is wrong with THAT picture.

There were differences between Obama's and Romney's....the most glaring to me is one was a STATE law and the other for the ENTIRE COUNTRY...that is a HUGE difference,

But as you said..it takes guts to push something through that Amerians did not want !

sometimes things that appear unpopular to begin with, end up being very successful. Up until the 1980's and even beyond that, it was the goal of most Republicans, especially RR, to kill Medicare. Now Medicare is hugely popular. And yes, Romney will have a difficult time explaining why a program he pushed through in Mass is not a good thing for the rest of the country.

Originally Posted by villagegolfer

OK...got a deal. I bet your not that arrogant in person. I bet you hide behind that computer like a coward. Yup, that is what I bet.

guy. Oops, I promised not to respond to you. My bad.

Originally Posted by actor

guy. Oops, I promised not to respond to you. My bad.

don't go around calling people morons and stupid. I think we all should try to "talk" to people here like your actually looking that person in their eyes.

Originally Posted by villagegolfer

don't go around calling people morons and stupid. I think we all should try to "talk" to people here like your actually looking that person in their eyes.

we can all use a little more civility on this forum. I'll be the first to admit that I'm guilty of overreacting.

1-Mitt Romney is not a viable option for the presidential candidacy for any person who is truly a conservative.
2~Medicare is hugely popular?!?! With whom is it popular and for what reason do the "whom's" think that it is popular? My mother-in-law has blood work done every month with the bill being over $200 and Medicare only pays the lab $11. She is of the generation that was happy to go with the "Medicare in my future" plan/social experiment. However, she is not far gone enough to wonder how the lab can afford to remain in operation with that piddly reimbursement. A physician friend of mine lost close to 20% of his annual revenue at his family practice office just because of reductions in reimbursement. How can he afford to take on anymore Medicare patients! He is not an extravagant man either! Also, I have paid into the Medicare system all my working life, but I would have preferred to been able to keep my money and tried my own "XXX in my future" plan/experiment. But that freedom to choose was taken from me long before I ever got my first job. Anyway, I am a little confused how the blanket statement can be made about the popularity of Medicare...."cool:

Originally Posted by rubicon

What's lol?

LMAO...

Originally Posted by KatzPajamas

1-Mitt Romney is not a viable option for the presidential candidacy for any person who is truly a conservative.
2~Medicare is hugely popular?!?! With whom is it popular and for what reason do the "whom's" think that it is popular? My mother-in-law has blood work done every month with the bill being over $200 and Medicare only pays the lab $11. She is of the generation that was happy to go with the "Medicare in my future" plan/social experiment. However, she is not far gone enough to wonder how the lab can afford to remain in operation with that piddly reimbursement. A physician friend of mine lost close to 20% of his annual revenue at his family practice office just because of reductions in reimbursement. How can he afford to take on anymore Medicare patients! He is not an extravagant man either! Also, I have paid into the Medicare system all my working life, but I would have preferred to been able to keep my money and tried my own "XXX in my future" plan/experiment. But that freedom to choose was taken from me long before I ever got my first job. Anyway, I am a little confused how the blanket statement can be made about the popularity of Medicare...."cool:

when politicians talk about cutting Medicare. Seniors go through the roof.

Katz: Here's an ugly secret that not too many people know. Insurance companies pay a FRACTION of what "Joe off the street" pays for every medical procedure. They negotiate with the hospitals and clinics to get the best rate possible which is an enormous discount from the "list price". Medicare, as far as I know, sets their price largely based on what those negotiated rates are.

For a continuing problem I had, each ER visit would "cost" $2500 or more (typically 2-4 attack per year). My insurance company paid nowhere near that. When the same thing hit me in Montreal while on vacation, I saw the FULL 'retail' bill was $550. (I paid $50 and my insurance paid the rest)

I learned about these 'negotiated rates' while working at Boston's Beth Israel Hospital. Just to give you an idea of what was going on - in the mid 1990s, as everyone is complaining about rising insurance rates, most insurance companies were lowering what they paid the hospital for inpatient admissions. We HAD been getting $1600/day and the next year many companies came in at $1200/day (looked suspiciously like collusion).

Yes - they paid by the day NO MATTER WHAT PROCEDURES YOU HAD DONE OE HOW MANY!!!

So the insurance companies were hiking their rates while paying us less. Guess where the extra money went. (Hint: The people who own the insurance company)

Originally Posted by djplong

Katz: Here's an ugly secret that not too many people know. Insurance companies pay a FRACTION of what "Joe off the street" pays for every medical procedure. They negotiate with the hospitals and clinics to get the best rate possible which is an enormous discount from the "list price". Medicare, as far as I know, sets their price largely based on what those negotiated rates are.

For a continuing problem I had, each ER visit would "cost" $2500 or more (typically 2-4 attack per year). My insurance company paid nowhere near that. When the same thing hit me in Montreal while on vacation, I saw the FULL 'retail' bill was $550. (I paid $50 and my insurance paid the rest)

I learned about these 'negotiated rates' while working at Boston's Beth Israel Hospital. Just to give you an idea of what was going on - in the mid 1990s, as everyone is complaining about rising insurance rates, most insurance companies were lowering what they paid the hospital for inpatient admissions. We HAD been getting $1600/day and the next year many companies came in at $1200/day (looked suspiciously like collusion).

Yes - they paid by the day NO MATTER WHAT PROCEDURES YOU HAD DONE OE HOW MANY!!!

So the insurance companies were hiking their rates while paying us less. Guess where the extra money went. (Hint: The people who own the insurance company)

Where do I start...? I have worked in the healthcare field for 36 years, been an x-ray, CT, and MRI technologist, director of an outpatient imaging center, and currently manage 40 employees in the departments of CT, MRI, Ultrasound, Nuclear Medicine and PET/CT. For the last 10 years I have overseen budgets in the millions and ensured patient satisfaction in numerous settings.
Having said that, I feel I have laid some ground work to be able to speak with a smidgen of authority and experience on certain matters...First of all I think that you have it backwards about who sets the price. Medicare sets the price that they are going to pay, no questions asked. We take a beating on the reimbursement that they give. If we only got what CMS (Medicare) deems proper, we would never be able to afford the purchase let along maintenance of the cutting edge technology that we use to SAVE lives.
It is set up that we should charge for what we use even tho CMS is not going to reimburse. Every several years, CMS will take these charges into account and MAYBE change their minds and pay us a little more. So Medicare sets the bar and we cannot negotiate that reimbursement. On the other hand, hospitals and insurance companies negotiate in and attempt to keep cost down by "bulk purchasing". The average CMS reimbursement for an MRI without IV contrast is about $250. The charge is about $2500 and the average payment made by insurance companies is $1600.
The average MRI scanner costs approx 2million dollars and maintnance fee is about $15,000-20,000/month. The average MRI tech (highly skilled, intelligent person-it's not just a video game we are playing) makes about $28/hr with approx $7/hr for benefits. A scan without contrast takes 45minutes so the facility can do about 20 exams/day...are you getting the drift? Insurance companies are the big bad horrible greedy companies that are still helping us out to be able to afford to help the American population prolong their happy lives.
Montreal? Dare we ever compare what goes on in the USA with what goes on in Canada in the healthcare arena?!?! I live in the Detroit/Toledo area, and as of 10 years ago there are more MRI scanners in my town than in the whole of Canada. We could and still can get a person in TODAY for the same exam that would have a waiting time of 6months to one year in Canada! I know, because we serve the overflow of Canadians that can afford to come here to have life savings measures done in a timely manner. You might have to just trust me on these facts...again, I refer to my experience, but you be the judge.
PAY BY THE DAY NO MATTER WHAT IS DONE...Yes this is another CMS mandated reimbursement protocol. It is called a DRG=Diagnosis related group. That means that is Mr. Jones comes into the hospital to have his Gall bladder removed and happens to mention that he has been having some neurological problems, like vertigo, ...guess what...His doctor decides that he needs an MRI to check for an acoustic neuroma. So, we bring him down and take the scan-Free of Charge! These free exams can take up about 15% of our workday, so go back and do the math to see the money we lose per day per month per year, etc,etc,etc.
It gets even better...with the advent of ObamaCare, the amount we are going to be paid as of July 1, 2011, will be determined by our HCAHPS Satisfaction scores! In order to get paid the full amount, 99% of the people surveyed need to answer ALWAYS to the questions that they are asked. (In the case of Mr. Jones, he could potentially complain that he had to wait til the evening to have his MRI. An MRI that could have waited until he recovered from his GB surgery and he could have returned @ his convenience). In the case of the university hospital that I work at, it has been nationally determined that if you come to our facility, you have TWICE the chance of surviving vs any other university hospital in the nation! That is the ULTIMATE SATISFACTION as far as I can tell...
Tell me what survey you have ever filled out in which you gave the place in question perfect scores across the board.
Our politicians made these rules. Maybe we should pay them according to their satisfaction ratings...hmmm, pretty sure it isn't anywhere near 99%. Think of the money we could save! We may have found a way to put a dent in the current deficit in DC!
Off my soap box for now...Oh, I failed to mention that if we provide a service to a person who has no insurance but doesn't qualify for Medicaid/Medicare, and we charged them something less than the CMS rate, it is considered Medicare fraud!...Ok, I'm done for now.

I'm not being sarcastic with this question.. Do you have any insight on how Medicare determines what prices they'll pay? I know in some cases it seems like it comes "out of a hat" but I beleive there is a review of SOME kind.

The "more MRI scanners in City X than Canada" isn't nearly as true as it used to be. The count for Canada is 222 as of June 2010 and the US has 7950 as of July 2010 (latest figures from NumberOf.net). Canada has 1/10th our population so a more accurate, adjusted comparison would say 222 to about 800. Now, other surveys say that doctors who own their own MRIs order 4 times as many MRIs as doctors who don't, but there's controversy in how those numbers were attained.

Don't get me started on DRG days... How a doctor handled my grandmother concerning DRG days should have been criminal - but that's a story for another time.

But more than anything else, let me say a sincere THANK YOU for taking the time to write what you did.

the subject of the thread was Obama VS Carter ....not ones opinion of the credibility or not of the media involved. What we used to call a "lateral arabesque" ....a more polite way of stating BS!!!!!

How about an opinion on the subject presented....Obama VS Carter.

In my humble opinion, on the subject of the thread, Obama makes Carter look good!! Carter was a wishy washy, take no risks and offend no one president....and acted that way. And there were times one felt some of what he did was for the good of the country.

Obama is a wishy washy, takes no risks and offend none president...but TALKS as if he isn't/wasn't. And there is nothing we have seen this president do that is for the good of the country.

Subject....CARTER VS OBAMA!!!!

btk

Carter was ineffective and weak. Obama is very dangerous. Bailouts, Obamacare etc. is shaping the USA's future.