(07-29-2012 01:54 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 01:51 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 01:17 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  It was totally done behind closed democratic doors. And passed by reconciliation, and get ready because it is the same thing Republicans are going to do to repeal it. The Dims taught them a lesson Americans will pay for from here on out with their blood, sweat and tears.

Liar.

You are the poster child for ignorance and stupidity.

You could have stopped at child. The "ignorance and stupidity" was just piling on.

I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. At least the person will be contributing to their health care. Just because one article of one person's opinion is written, you have taken the piece Maximus and run amuck. You know very little about the health care system and actually tried to pawn the article off as your own article. You copied it onto the page and referred us back to the same article you copied onto this message board. Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take. It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise. In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me.

. Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take. It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise. In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

Naive

Why wouldn't doctors just do as they already are, and not see patients who don't have private insurance or cash? In case you didn't notice, we are already short hundreds of thousands of doctors for the current population, and you just added 50mm more patients.

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. At least the person will be contributing to their health care. Just because one article of one person's opinion is written, you have taken the piece Maximus and run amuck. You know very little about the health care system and actually tried to pawn the article off as your own article. You copied it onto the page and referred us back to the same article you copied onto this message board. Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take. It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise. In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

I'm sorry if for some reason it appeared like I tried to take credit for the article, not my intention at all. I posted it while on my iPhone so I apologize if it appeared that way.

As for my knowledge of healthcare, I've been working in the field as a clinician for over 15 years. I hate to be a Debbie downer but this article is spot on. The writer is a reputable person and very knowledgable about what he is speaking about. The thing that caught my attention about this particular piece is the part about case law and a doctors decision to do what's best for patient. Anyway, read the article carefully and then try and refute anything in the article. I can guarantee I can't find one clinician in a very large hospital system who likes this legislation or thinks it will be a help of any kind.

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

Your jealously is showing. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity. Mental case.

(07-29-2012 10:20 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

Your jealously is showing. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity. Mental case.

Kind of like yours when you talk about teacher pay and benefits.

(07-29-2012 11:10 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 10:20 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

Your jealously is showing. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity. Mental case.

Kind of like yours when you talk about teacher pay and benefits.

huh? mental case.

(07-29-2012 11:10 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 10:20 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

Your jealously is showing. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity. Mental case.

Kind of like yours when you talk about teacher pay and benefits.

How many teachers do you know who have to carry malpractice insurance costing 100k plus a year? How many teachers have to employ people to plow thru the regulations and red tape involved in billing insurance, medicare, medicaid, etc...

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

you have no idea what you are talking about.

Standard class envy position, and Robert never disappoints.

(07-29-2012 11:10 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 10:20 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 06:53 PM)Vewb1 Wrote:  I don't think anyone can predict the future. If a doctor gets paid too little, that's better than not at all, wouldn't you say and then passing on the cost to you and me. ... Doctors are going to have to accept less, less than they may be willing to take.

Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.

Quote:
It's unfortunate that legislation was passed to go into effect 4 years after it was voted on , however that was the compromise.

What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.

Quote:In the long run, I think everyone will be better off.

No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

Your jealously is showing. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity. Mental case.

Kind of like yours when you talk about teacher pay and benefits.

compare the barriers to becoming a doctor vs a teacher... and while many teachers are superior, some are overpaid at minimum wage.

(07-30-2012 11:10 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 11:10 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 10:20 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 09:42 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(07-29-2012 07:18 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Oh, yes, that's the solution. That'll make more people want to be doctors, for sure, just when we add 20 million or so to the insured rolls (not 40 million, remember that Obamacare does not extend health insurance to everyone, despite proponents' claims to the contrary, but then again honesty has never been one of their strong points). And it'll improve quality, too, those brightest and best of this generation who are debating whether to become doctors or lawyers, finding out that they're going to have to accept less that they are willing to take will certainly make them want to be doctors.



What compromise, and with whom? The reason this is phased in over 4 years is to play games with the CBO scoring and to get some of the better provisions in first and get people hooked on them before the bad arts kick in. That is, of course, quite misleading and disingenuous, but then again, honesty has never been highly regarded by those folks.


No, they won't. They absolutely will not. We'll be looking at reduced access to poorer quality, and by the time we get through feeding and watering the additional bureaucracy created, we'll be paying more for it.

Guess they will just have to forego buying a $70,000 Mercedes and be happy with a $40,000 Mercedes and $500,000 house instead of a $750,000 house. This whole "poor broke doctors" is complete and utter BS.

Your jealously is showing. Jealousy is invariably a symptom of neurotic insecurity. Mental case.

Kind of like yours when you talk about teacher pay and benefits.

compare the barriers to becoming a doctor vs a teacher... and while many teachers are superior, some are overpaid at minimum wage.

Robert doesn't care about the costs and time it takes to be a doctor.

He's just bitter about anyone that has become successful.......... because we all know Rob's situation - and it's not successful. Rob's motto: "Take from the successful and give to the failures" - because he fits into the 2nd catagory and he wants some of that "free Sh!t".

It certainly fts with Obama's commmentary on "you didn't build that".


Risk is meaningless to the left. Taking chances... sacrificing... doing what nobody else has ever done. slleeping in your car because you want to build a business, not because you cant afford your rent on your salary.

This couuntry was discovered, fouunded and became great on the backs of those willing to sacrifice current comforts for future potential rewards.... and peeople like Robert want themm tosacrifice again, so that people like him don't EVER have to sacrifice.

(07-30-2012 06:33 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  It certainly fits with Obama's commentary on "you didn't build that".
Risk is meaningless to the left. Taking chances... sacrificing... doing what nobody else has ever done. sleeping in your car because you want to build a business, not because you cant afford your rent on your salary.
This country was discovered, founded and became great on the backs of those willing to sacrifice current comforts for future potential rewards.... and people like Robert want them to sacrifice again, so that people like him don't EVER have to sacrifice.

Robert wants THEM to sacrifice so that HE can sit on his lazy, worthless butt and do nothing, and still enjoy the benefits of spending what THEY earned.

If "you didn't build that" becomes the prevailing philosophy in this country, then why would anyone be willing to invest any money in any enterprise here? We are Argentina in one generation and Zimbabwe in two.

The last two posts are spot on.

I'll add, Robert has no ******* clue what most physicians go through on a daily basis. He would piss his pants at the site of some of the things they must do and deal with, and that also goes for other health care clinicians as well. He thinks its all fun and games and a fat check is cut....couldn't be farther from the truth. I'm not even going to get into training and years of schooling. Idiot.

(07-30-2012 09:41 PM)maximus Wrote:  The last two posts are spot on.

I'll add, Robert has no ******* clue what most physicians go through on a daily basis. He would piss his pants at the site of some of the things they must do and deal with, and that also goes for other health care clinicians as well. He thinks its all fun and games and a fat check is cut....couldn't be farther from the truth. I'm not even going to get into training and years of schooling. Idiot.

Never said that but keep on pretending that is what i said.

tell me robert.

Would you work 80 hour weeks for 8 years and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and give up your social life from about age 16-24, assuming for a moment that you were already amongst the smartest/best students out there... sticking your hands in body cavities and fluids... watching people die, having to TELL them they are going to die.. etc etc etc only to be told that yyou are "lucky" and that other people did it for you, so you have to pay a "success penalty"??

I know that because you will never have to face this situation, you will say yes. But i'm talking about what SMART people would say. Of ALL the people you sshould bbe incentivizing, it should be doctors.


How about you pay doctors 20% less, and make their income tax free?? Think THAT woould incentivise them?