Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

    Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
    I don't know about medicare but medicaid would be hard to fraud here in my state. I heard this morning on right wing talk radio that only 1 half of one percent of all that try to get medicaid here qualify. I gotta feeling some folks that actually need it cannot get it.

    Try this. Try being unemployed, and your unemployment ran out and you are working the only job you can find, for minimum wage. I know several folks in this boat personally. Now try to go and get food stamps if you do not have children at home. You will not qualify. The right wing folks think it is easy to get on a social safety net. That all that need it and deserve it can get it. That is a totally false assumption.

    And that is a reason that we have seen burgularies go up exponentially in my area. We catch em, lock em up, just to have it repeated by other people. The last one was done by a guy with a family who lost his job when one of our last old factories went to china. Never been a criminal in his entire life. Never even had a speeding ticket the paper said. He is looking at a long stretch in prison, and told the cops he was doing what he had to do to care for his grown kids who had lost their jobs and moved back in with him. He robbed the wrong folks, who have money, its old money, and instead of getting probation, they sent em away for 15 years this month when circuit court convened. Robbing the wrong folks seems to have affected how they generally treat first time offenders who are older and never been in trouble.

    Off shoring explodes social safety nets and drives some generally good folk to crime. So, they better catch as much fraud as they can, as there are way too many people who need help badly.
    That is exactly why Obama has to go. He has no clue how to create jobs, or worse yet he does not want too. He will not close the border so he lets in illegals to take good American jobs. He killed Keystone, he will not open up new lands for exploration. He is a job killer.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • #32
      Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

      Originally posted by Blue Doggy View Post
      I don't know about medicare but medicaid would be hard to fraud here in my state. I heard this morning on right wing talk radio that only 1 half of one percent of all that try to get medicaid here qualify. I gotta feeling some folks that actually need it cannot get it.

      Try this. Try being unemployed, and your unemployment ran out and you are working the only job you can find, for minimum wage. I know several folks in this boat personally. Now try to go and get food stamps if you do not have children at home. You will not qualify. The right wing folks think it is easy to get on a social safety net. That all that need it and deserve it can get it. That is a totally false assumption.

      And that is a reason that we have seen burgularies go up exponentially in my area. We catch em, lock em up, just to have it repeated by other people. The last one was done by a guy with a family who lost his job when one of our last old factories went to china. Never been a criminal in his entire life. Never even had a speeding ticket the paper said. He is looking at a long stretch in prison, and told the cops he was doing what he had to do to care for his grown kids who had lost their jobs and moved back in with him. He robbed the wrong folks, who have money, its old money, and instead of getting probation, they sent em away for 15 years this month when circuit court convened. Robbing the wrong folks seems to have affected how they generally treat first time offenders who are older and never been in trouble.

      Off shoring explodes social safety nets and drives some generally good folk to crime. So, they better catch as much fraud as they can, as there are way too many people who need help badly.
      And when we 'lock 'em up', it costs taxpayers somewhere around $30,000 per year. This country has really lost its way.

      When I listen to conservative scorn of our minimal social safety net and that it must end, I can't help but think of the fate of Robert Frost's hired man; the fate of having "nothing to look backward to with pride, and nothing to look forward to with hope."

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • #33
        Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

        Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
        And when we 'lock 'em up', it costs taxpayers somewhere around $30,000 per year. This country has really lost its way.
        So how would you advocate handling someone who burglarizes houses?

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • #34
          Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

          Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
          And when we 'lock 'em up', it costs taxpayers somewhere around $30,000 per year. This country has really lost its way.
          You're right. We used to just shoot em or hang 'em in the town square at noon. Much more efficient, far less expensive, and a genuine deterrent.
          Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
          When I listen to conservative scorn of our minimal social safety net and that it must end, I can't help but think of the fate of Robert Frost's hired man; the fate of having "nothing to look backward to with pride, and nothing to look forward to with hope."
          You're more than welcome to provide as much of your personal wealth to assist those whom you believe are deserving. Personally, I'm getting a little tired of being told I have to give up an ever increasing amount of my wealth to provide for those who will not provide for themselves - not CAN not mind you but WILL not.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • #35
            Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

            Originally posted by jviehe View Post
            Then taxpayer funded healthcare should be going down. Its not. I dont see how you can spin it any other way. Since the ACA passed, taxpayer funded healthcare has gone up by 20%.
            I didn't try to spin anything. What I posted shows Medicare spending slowed sharply. Why would you expect medical costs to decrease? Did the ACA change who treats patients? Did Obama open open his own hospitals? Are any other costs in our country decreasing? Are doctors, hospitals, pharmaceuticals or medical facilities lowering their charges?

            Health-care security, who is to blame for high costs

            Health-cost trends shows that these players, in roughly descending order, contributed the most to rising costs:

            Hospitals and doctors. Doctors and hospitals account for by far the largest share, 52 percent in 2006, of all national health spending. There's abundant evidence that some of that spending is unnecessary. Under the present system, hospitals and doctors earn more money by doing costly interventions than by keeping people healthy. And more medical care doesn't necessarily mean better care, according to research on Medicare expenditures by the Dartmouth Medical School's Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice.

            Drug companies. Prescription drugs account for only one-tenth of total health-care expenditures. But drug spending has increased as a share of overall expenditures over the past decade.

            Insurance companies. Health-insurance premiums have grown faster than inflation or workers' earnings over the past decade, in parallel with the equally rapid rise in overall health costs. Industry spending on administrative and marketing costs, plus profits, consumes 12 percent of private-insurance premiums.

            Politicians and government regulators. Although the government directly controls only 46 percent of national health spending, many of its policies affect the bottom line of the health-care industry, for example, by setting Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors on which private insurers base their rates, or by regulating health insurance. Between 1999 and 2006, the health-care lobby spent more than any other business sector, according to a study by the Institute for Health & Socio-Economic Policy, a nonprofit policy and research group.

            Lawyers. Malpractice-insurance premiums and liability awards account for less than 2 percent of overall health-care spending, according to a 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office. Defensive medicine, the practice of ordering extra tests or procedures to protect against lawsuits, might add another few percentage points, according to some estimates.

            Health-care consumers. "Modifiable" risk factors, such as eating too much, exercising too little, or smoking, are to blame for an estimated 25 percent of U.S. health-care costs, according to expert estimates. But even if every American took up healthful living overnight, our health-care expenses would still be the second highest in the world (after Luxembourg).

            "Patients have little control over the amount that hospitals and doctors charge. Our exorbitant medical prices are a result of the fragmented structure of our health-care system, not the choices of patients."

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • #36
              Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

              Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
              So how would you advocate handling someone who burglarizes houses?
              When it reaches that point something has to be done. But should a guy who fits Blue Doggy's scenario deserve 15 years Matt?

              I do know something is seriously wrong in this nation. The one constant in society is human nature, so something else has drastically changed.

              The United States has less than 5 percent of the world’s population. But it has almost 25% of the world’s prisoners.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • #37
                Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                We have a lot of people in prison for non-violent drug crimes that should not be incarcerated, IMHO.

                I don't really have a problem with a burglar getting 15 years, though. That's a very serious crime.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • #38
                  Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                  Originally posted by goober View Post
                  It has to do with costs.
                  Checking every claim costs far more than the fraud that would be uncovered, you are looking for the ideal level of enforcement.
                  Where the fear of being caught deters most of the fraud, and the cost/benefit ratio is lowest.
                  Are you really in this world or just visiting? You think it will cost more than 4 Billion a year to curb fraud? If so do you think it will curb the 90 billion estimated in fraud to check everyone who applies?

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • #39
                    Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                    Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                    We have a lot of people in prison for non-violent drug crimes that should not be incarcerated, IMHO.

                    I don't really have a problem with a burglar getting 15 years, though. That's a very serious crime.
                    15 years is a very stiff sentence. That is $450,000 on the taxpayer. IMO that is a sentence for violent crimes, not property theft.

                    BTW, I totally agree on the drug policy. IMO, no one should be incarcerated for using drugs.

                    WE could learn from Portugal.

                    Decriminalizing Drugs in Portugal a Success, Says Report - TIME


                    Under the pressure of the cares and sorrows of our mortal condition, men have at all times, and in all countries, called in some physical aid to their moral consolations - wine, beer, opium, brandy, or tobacco.
                    Edmund Burke
                    Last edited by Bfgrn; 02-14-2012, 04:45 PM.

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • #40
                      Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                      Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
                      15 years is a very stiff sentence. That is $450,000 on the taxpayer. IMO that is a sentence for violent crimes, not property theft.
                      So what would you advocate for this burglar?

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • #41
                        Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                        Originally posted by Bfgrn View Post
                        I didn't try to spin anything. What I posted shows Medicare spending slowed sharply. Why would you expect medical costs to decrease? Did the ACA change who treats patients? Did Obama open open his own hospitals? Are any other costs in our country decreasing? Are doctors, hospitals, pharmaceuticals or medical facilities lowering their charges?

                        Health-care security, who is to blame for high costs

                        Health-cost trends shows that these players, in roughly descending order, contributed the most to rising costs:

                        Hospitals and doctors. Doctors and hospitals account for by far the largest share, 52 percent in 2006, of all national health spending. There's abundant evidence that some of that spending is unnecessary. Under the present system, hospitals and doctors earn more money by doing costly interventions than by keeping people healthy. And more medical care doesn't necessarily mean better care, according to research on Medicare expenditures by the Dartmouth Medical School's Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice.

                        Drug companies. Prescription drugs account for only one-tenth of total health-care expenditures. But drug spending has increased as a share of overall expenditures over the past decade.

                        Insurance companies. Health-insurance premiums have grown faster than inflation or workers' earnings over the past decade, in parallel with the equally rapid rise in overall health costs. Industry spending on administrative and marketing costs, plus profits, consumes 12 percent of private-insurance premiums.

                        Politicians and government regulators. Although the government directly controls only 46 percent of national health spending, many of its policies affect the bottom line of the health-care industry, for example, by setting Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors on which private insurers base their rates, or by regulating health insurance. Between 1999 and 2006, the health-care lobby spent more than any other business sector, according to a study by the Institute for Health & Socio-Economic Policy, a nonprofit policy and research group.

                        Lawyers. Malpractice-insurance premiums and liability awards account for less than 2 percent of overall health-care spending, according to a 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office. Defensive medicine, the practice of ordering extra tests or procedures to protect against lawsuits, might add another few percentage points, according to some estimates.

                        Health-care consumers. "Modifiable" risk factors, such as eating too much, exercising too little, or smoking, are to blame for an estimated 25 percent of U.S. health-care costs, according to expert estimates. But even if every American took up healthful living overnight, our health-care expenses would still be the second highest in the world (after Luxembourg).

                        "Patients have little control over the amount that hospitals and doctors charge. Our exorbitant medical prices are a result of the fragmented structure of our health-care system, not the choices of patients."
                        So then your arguement is 'it could be worse'.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • #42
                          Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                          Originally posted by lutherf View Post
                          First off....it's absolutely pathetic that somehow or other some people seem to be confused that fraud detection for federal programs is something that the government is supposed to do anyway....ACA or not. The very fact that it's "special" when the government actually does something that they are supposed to do anyway belies a great truth as to the inefficiency of government and the cost to taxpayers of that inefficiency.

                          Second, the article cited in the OP doesn't mention the Affordable Care Act at all....not once. The Salon article cited farther down the thread mentions the ACA but only to the extent that it increases penalties for Medicare fraud, not that it does anything to prevent that fraud or otherwise "save taxpayers money".

                          So, for the benefit of the rest of us, can someone explain how the ACA is saving taxpayers money?

                          The federal government is only supposed to do what is required by law. "Obamacare" is federal law. I know the kneejerk reaction for the right is to look for bad things to say about Obamacare but they also preach about how the federal government should be reduced. To say that "fraud detection" is a federal responsibility implies that there should be federal agents or employees (more government) doing the detecting. You can't have it both ways. The right opposed the law and want to reppeal it. They want to reppeal every section of it including the "fraud detection". Same thing with corporate fraud, in principle they claim to be against fraud but when it comes to laws that hold the perpetrators of fraud accountable, they want to reppeal Dodd-Frank which also federal law.

                          The truth is that healthcare costs are intertwined with all current and future budgets and to simply ignore that fact is ignorant. Obama is the only one who even put forward a plan. It is great to attack Obama but what have the republicans offered as a solution besides providing more representation to corporate lobbyists than individual American citizens?

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • #43
                            Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                            bluesman
                            so you are saying that the gov had no law enforment at all until the great and god like obama created with a wave of his hand with obama care
                            lmfao the gov has law enforcement that is suppose to be looking into fraud.
                            all your great obaam care dies is increase gov spending and raise taxes and make hte gov all powerful in that now if it passeds hte supreme court we are slave to the whim of hte gov.
                            they wil now be abloe to telolo people where they can live where they can go to school where tehhy can work what tehy can buy. all under teh guise of the commerce clause.
                            NYC over populated with people the gov can now say you have to move to toleado they have a smaller population and you will work as a plumber becasue they have a shortage of plumbers. it is for the good of the country so we invoke the commerce clause. and to pay for this we will have ot raise taxes on your paycheck.
                            as for what eh republcans offered nothing they proposed got out of the dem controlled committees. they refused to listen to anything they had their mind set that rasing taxes and making people dependent on the gov is the way to go.

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • #44
                              Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                              Originally posted by MattInFla View Post
                              So what would you advocate for this burglar?
                              First of all I am going by BD's description. No previous record and extenuating circumstances. So I would require retribution to the victims and probation.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • #45
                                Re: Affordable Care Act saving taxpayer money at record pace

                                Originally posted by sailorman126 View Post
                                bluesman
                                so you are saying that the gov had no law enforment at all until the great and god like obama created with a wave of his hand with obama care
                                lmfao the gov has law enforcement that is suppose to be looking into fraud.
                                all your great obaam care dies is increase gov spending and raise taxes and make hte gov all powerful in that now if it passeds hte supreme court we are slave to the whim of hte gov.
                                they wil now be abloe to telolo people where they can live where they can go to school where tehhy can work what tehy can buy. all under teh guise of the commerce clause.
                                NYC over populated with people the gov can now say you have to move to toleado they have a smaller population and you will work as a plumber becasue they have a shortage of plumbers. it is for the good of the country so we invoke the commerce clause. and to pay for this we will have ot raise taxes on your paycheck.
                                as for what eh republcans offered nothing they proposed got out of the dem controlled committees. they refused to listen to anything they had their mind set that rasing taxes and making people dependent on the gov is the way to go.
                                What I "am saying" is what I said in my post. Your attack on the strawman character is boring.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X