The ripoff by Insurance companies and medical providers started WAY before the ACA ... I am always amazed at what is billed for services!!!
The last two plans my company has chosen really screwed me, with both my allergist and urologist, I pay as if I have no coverage because it works out cheaper!!! For the allergist, the will pay $15 for the shots, but not cover the serum until the $7k deductible is met ... with insurance $575 for serum, without ... $150 ... shots are $25 ... works out to be far cheaper to go without insurance!!! I think the BIGGEST bullshit thing is the sliding scale of cost based on coverage!!! On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 5:24 PM, 'Perplexed' via PoliticalForum < [email protected]> wrote: > > "They" aren't doing it. It was the DUMBASSES who passed Obamacare who > allowed this whole 340B shit to become what it's become. 100% on your > party, Pitt. That's just a fact. > > And your link from The Economist gets it ALL wrong. The program is open to > any and every hospital in the country that can show that their patients > include 12% of people living at or below the poverty line. That includes > the vast majority of hospitals in America. > > Instead of paying $800 for a drug, the 340B pharmacies pay $300 for the > drug, but still bill the insurance company or Medicare Part D plan as if > they didn't and are fully reimbursed as if they did. So they get like $860 > for that $800 drug, and the hospital they are contracted with keeps all but > about $40 of it in most cases. > > And there was NO requirement that all of this extra profit be spent > providing care for indigents, which was the sole intent of the original > program until democrats turned it into such a joke. > > http://340breform.org/userfiles/May%202016%20AIR340B%20Avalere%20Charity% > 20Care%20Study.pdf > > > > > On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:59:54 PM UTC-5, Pittalum wrote: >> >> Yep, like banking, consolidation is especially pronounced in health care >> - and especially among Providers. We all argue endlessly about insurance >> but never, ever seem to talk about the real heart of the problem with >> healthcare costs. Check this out, which I just found earlier today and >> recommended to Pirate: >> >> http://insights.som.yale.edu/insights/why-is-healthcare-so-expensive >> >> I did look into the 340B program, and yea it looks like just another >> attempt to rein in pharma costs, but is being abused by providers >> (hospitals in this case) for more profit - causing those not able to take >> advantage to whine. Here is what I found on it: >> >> http://healthcare-economist.com/2015/10/25/the-340b-program-an-overview/ >> <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fhealthcare-economist.com%2F2015%2F10%2F25%2Fthe-340b-program-an-overview%2F&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGRu_bvViT1CQkiNWgEhFQYUuBboQ> >> >> Far as I am concerned, the entire healthcare industry is just begging to >> be nationalized. They need to stop what they're doing - but short term >> greed is rampant among those people. >> >> On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:31:11 PM UTC-5, Perplexed wrote: >>> >>> >>> It's a HUGE problem in healthcare, and it only got worse with Obamacare. >>> There were so many things done with that fucking law that have yet to be >>> reported by the media it's incredible. One in particular sanctioned a huge >>> shell game of billions of dollars whereby Medicare and the insurance >>> companies are bilked and the profit is handed over to "non-profit" >>> hospitals that are already making so much money they don't know what to do >>> with it all. And there is no requirement whatsoever that the profits be >>> used to provide care to the indigents - the very purpose of the program the >>> democrats used to enable this massive theft. >>> >>> Research the 340B program and the changes that took effect immediately >>> when Obamacare was signed into law and its implications sometime. It's >>> unfuckingbelievable. >>> >>> On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 2:19:19 PM UTC-5, Pittalum wrote: >>>> >>>> I can't say I disagree with anything you said below - even the hope >>>> that Trump would be a little more *discriminating *in dealing with a >>>> crisis and its causes. Hopefully, we won't need to find out. >>>> >>>> Industry consolidation is a problem all over our economy; banking is >>>> merely especially bad. So much of all the things we argue about can, >>>> honestly, be traced in large part to just that problem. It's the big >>>> gorilla in the room that no one is talking about. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 1:39:02 PM UTC-5, Perplexed wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hey Pitt! >>>>> >>>>> I think he has come to see that the big banks are still operating in >>>>> the same dangerous way they were when they failed. And he also sees that >>>>> between the big banks and Dodd Frank, they are decimating the smaller >>>>> regional banks, and he aims to fix that. >>>>> >>>>> If it were me, I'd have let them fail and disbursed their assets among >>>>> the smaller regional banks - and bought the toxic assets in the process. >>>>> But what the big banks did should have been viewed as inexcusable. I >>>>> realize that due to the morons in Congress and their failure to provide >>>>> real oversight, that what the banks did wasn't illegal. But it was >>>>> inexcusable. And they should have been wiped off the face of the planet in >>>>> the process. >>>>> >>>>> It's hard to say what Trump would do if it were to happen again. But I >>>>> think he is far more into "law and order" and punishing those who deserved >>>>> to be punished than the establishment politicians who go along to get >>>>> along >>>>> with the wealthy donors of all stripes. And I think he'd be creative in >>>>> finding ways to punish them if he couldn't do it using the law. >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 1:20:44 PM UTC-5, Pittalum wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Perp! >>>>>> >>>>>> I am by no means into bank bailouts, and saying no to them is all >>>>>> fine and good. But taking this position in no way shape or form addresses >>>>>> the serious systemic risk the failure of one of our big banks would pose >>>>>> to >>>>>> the entire banking system. >>>>>> >>>>>> You wanna bet if, say, B of A or Citi is on the brink - we're gonna >>>>>> see a *bailout *of some nature or degree, despite this EO? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, February 14, 2017 at 12:51:13 PM UTC-5, Perplexed wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/02/03/presi >>>>>>> dential-executive-order-core-principles-regulating-united-states >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's about time. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- brine http://brineb.blogspot.com/ -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
