Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
18. That sounds like
Sun Oct 6, 2013, 09:07 PM
Oct 2013

"I am not sure what you are talking about

Every doc I know is thrilled that people will be able to get insurance including my husband who has had a pre existing condition for decades and has been unable to buy insurance till now.

That is not what we were discussing. We were discussing some administrative docs deciding how care should be given and deciding what care they will deny payment for, just as insurance companies do now. I was making a point that all patients will not fit in a pigeon hole and that may be an issue in the future. You then changed the subject."

...a RW talking point, a misrepresentation of the board.

<...>

Medicare, on the other hand, is a big budget problem. But raising the eligibility age, which means forcing seniors to seek private insurance, is no way to deal with that problem....The answer is to do what every other advanced country does, and make a serious effort to rein in health care costs. Give Medicare the ability to bargain over drug prices. Let the Independent Payment Advisory Board, created as part of Obamacare to help Medicare control costs, do its job instead of crying “death panels.” (And isn’t it odd that the same people who demagogue attempts to help Medicare save money are eager to throw millions of people out of the program altogether?) We know that we have a health care system with skewed incentives and bloated costs, so why don’t we try to fix it?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/16/opinion/life-death-and-deficits.html

The OP is primarily about the tax on high income earners.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

They are subservient to Grover and his no tax pledge. liberal N proud Oct 2013 #1
Greed. n/t ProSense Oct 2013 #3
republicans hate whatever their donors tell them to hate.... spanone Oct 2013 #2
And this is a small tax. n/t ProSense Oct 2013 #4
it's totally irrational. as is the republican party. spanone Oct 2013 #5
Some of them are lunatics. n/t ProSense Oct 2013 #7
Exactly gopiscrap Oct 2013 #6
The other reason is that ProSense Oct 2013 #8
Kick! n/t ProSense Oct 2013 #9
Another! ProSense Oct 2013 #10
There will have a real fight on their hands depending on what Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #11
Of course ProSense Oct 2013 #13
No, it will meet resistance from good doctors Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #14
Yeah, ProSense Oct 2013 #15
I am not sure what you are talking about Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #16
That sounds like ProSense Oct 2013 #18
You posted the link with the quote I was commenting on Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #19
Not only ProSense Oct 2013 #21
As I told you before Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #23
Well, ProSense Oct 2013 #24
Pushing doctors into practicing within narrowly defined standards of care Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #25
Actually, ProSense Oct 2013 #27
No you do not know what I am talking about. It is obvious from your links and your responses. Mojorabbit Oct 2013 #29
It's a misrepresentation ProSense Oct 2013 #31
It is good to keep all of these details in check. FarPoint Oct 2013 #12
ProSense, this is the democraphic that will NOT be hurt by shutdown or default: freshwest Oct 2013 #17
These people are ProSense Oct 2013 #20
Not to make light of this point ProSense Oct 2013 #22
Texas needs help i getting state exchanges set up but I am hopeful Wendy Davis will bring great Thinkingabout Oct 2013 #26
liars and losers........... Historic NY Oct 2013 #28
K&R Jamaal510 Oct 2013 #30
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Another reason Republican...»Reply #18