[dbapig]

[quote=Ricechex]Health insurance needs to be REGULATED, rather than entire “reform.” What is the point of creating a new program? Fix what we have.

The “public option” will increase revenues for private parties, and we will pay for it. Here is my take on how it will play out:

Government will outsource the “public option” to private company of its choice. Usually, the lowest bidder or a “known” party, such as Halliburton/KBR.

If it is a “fee for service” contract, then the company will employ as little laborers/medical professionals as possible, because the company owners are in it for profit. Thus, if the job calls for 10 M.D.s, only 6 will actually be employed. Of those 6, 5 will be interns, new to the field, and/or stormy and unstable job history. Why? Because the company wants profit, so people of these backgrounds will take a low salary.

The management positions will be government, and those chosen will have little knowledge about medical care and few qualifications, other than to respond to the higher ranking government employees trying to build their empire.

Medical treatment decisions will be decided by a “committee” of people that know little about health care. If any of you are government employees, I correlate this to NSPS “pay pool” and their mission will be to deny care.

As far as the folks getting booted from insurance due to disability, pre-existing conditions, they will take the “public option” for care. Thus, “Halliburton/KBR” will demand more money from the government/taxpayers to pay for long term and or chronic illnesses. However, that will be small potatoes compared with amount of disenfranchised people receiving benefits. That is going to cost us big.

This is just another entitlement program, disguised as “helping everyone”. This is creation of another monster that will spiral out of control. Politicians will herald its success.[/quote]

Good points.
So are you rooting for Single Payer system?

[dbapig]

[quote=Ricechex]Health insurance needs to be REGULATED, rather than entire “reform.” What is the point of creating a new program? Fix what we have.

The “public option” will increase revenues for private parties, and we will pay for it. Here is my take on how it will play out:

Government will outsource the “public option” to private company of its choice. Usually, the lowest bidder or a “known” party, such as Halliburton/KBR.

If it is a “fee for service” contract, then the company will employ as little laborers/medical professionals as possible, because the company owners are in it for profit. Thus, if the job calls for 10 M.D.s, only 6 will actually be employed. Of those 6, 5 will be interns, new to the field, and/or stormy and unstable job history. Why? Because the company wants profit, so people of these backgrounds will take a low salary.

The management positions will be government, and those chosen will have little knowledge about medical care and few qualifications, other than to respond to the higher ranking government employees trying to build their empire.

Medical treatment decisions will be decided by a “committee” of people that know little about health care. If any of you are government employees, I correlate this to NSPS “pay pool” and their mission will be to deny care.

As far as the folks getting booted from insurance due to disability, pre-existing conditions, they will take the “public option” for care. Thus, “Halliburton/KBR” will demand more money from the government/taxpayers to pay for long term and or chronic illnesses. However, that will be small potatoes compared with amount of disenfranchised people receiving benefits. That is going to cost us big.

This is just another entitlement program, disguised as “helping everyone”. This is creation of another monster that will spiral out of control. Politicians will herald its success.[/quote]

Good points.
So are you rooting for Single Payer system?

[dbapig]

[quote=Ricechex]Health insurance needs to be REGULATED, rather than entire “reform.” What is the point of creating a new program? Fix what we have.

The “public option” will increase revenues for private parties, and we will pay for it. Here is my take on how it will play out:

Government will outsource the “public option” to private company of its choice. Usually, the lowest bidder or a “known” party, such as Halliburton/KBR.

If it is a “fee for service” contract, then the company will employ as little laborers/medical professionals as possible, because the company owners are in it for profit. Thus, if the job calls for 10 M.D.s, only 6 will actually be employed. Of those 6, 5 will be interns, new to the field, and/or stormy and unstable job history. Why? Because the company wants profit, so people of these backgrounds will take a low salary.

The management positions will be government, and those chosen will have little knowledge about medical care and few qualifications, other than to respond to the higher ranking government employees trying to build their empire.

Medical treatment decisions will be decided by a “committee” of people that know little about health care. If any of you are government employees, I correlate this to NSPS “pay pool” and their mission will be to deny care.

As far as the folks getting booted from insurance due to disability, pre-existing conditions, they will take the “public option” for care. Thus, “Halliburton/KBR” will demand more money from the government/taxpayers to pay for long term and or chronic illnesses. However, that will be small potatoes compared with amount of disenfranchised people receiving benefits. That is going to cost us big.

This is just another entitlement program, disguised as “helping everyone”. This is creation of another monster that will spiral out of control. Politicians will herald its success.[/quote]

Good points.
So are you rooting for Single Payer system?

[dbapig]

[quote=Ricechex]Health insurance needs to be REGULATED, rather than entire “reform.” What is the point of creating a new program? Fix what we have.

The “public option” will increase revenues for private parties, and we will pay for it. Here is my take on how it will play out:

Government will outsource the “public option” to private company of its choice. Usually, the lowest bidder or a “known” party, such as Halliburton/KBR.

If it is a “fee for service” contract, then the company will employ as little laborers/medical professionals as possible, because the company owners are in it for profit. Thus, if the job calls for 10 M.D.s, only 6 will actually be employed. Of those 6, 5 will be interns, new to the field, and/or stormy and unstable job history. Why? Because the company wants profit, so people of these backgrounds will take a low salary.

The management positions will be government, and those chosen will have little knowledge about medical care and few qualifications, other than to respond to the higher ranking government employees trying to build their empire.

Medical treatment decisions will be decided by a “committee” of people that know little about health care. If any of you are government employees, I correlate this to NSPS “pay pool” and their mission will be to deny care.

As far as the folks getting booted from insurance due to disability, pre-existing conditions, they will take the “public option” for care. Thus, “Halliburton/KBR” will demand more money from the government/taxpayers to pay for long term and or chronic illnesses. However, that will be small potatoes compared with amount of disenfranchised people receiving benefits. That is going to cost us big.

This is just another entitlement program, disguised as “helping everyone”. This is creation of another monster that will spiral out of control. Politicians will herald its success.[/quote]

Good points.
So are you rooting for Single Payer system?

[dbapig]

[quote=Ricechex]Health insurance needs to be REGULATED, rather than entire “reform.” What is the point of creating a new program? Fix what we have.

The “public option” will increase revenues for private parties, and we will pay for it. Here is my take on how it will play out:

Government will outsource the “public option” to private company of its choice. Usually, the lowest bidder or a “known” party, such as Halliburton/KBR.

If it is a “fee for service” contract, then the company will employ as little laborers/medical professionals as possible, because the company owners are in it for profit. Thus, if the job calls for 10 M.D.s, only 6 will actually be employed. Of those 6, 5 will be interns, new to the field, and/or stormy and unstable job history. Why? Because the company wants profit, so people of these backgrounds will take a low salary.

The management positions will be government, and those chosen will have little knowledge about medical care and few qualifications, other than to respond to the higher ranking government employees trying to build their empire.

Medical treatment decisions will be decided by a “committee” of people that know little about health care. If any of you are government employees, I correlate this to NSPS “pay pool” and their mission will be to deny care.

As far as the folks getting booted from insurance due to disability, pre-existing conditions, they will take the “public option” for care. Thus, “Halliburton/KBR” will demand more money from the government/taxpayers to pay for long term and or chronic illnesses. However, that will be small potatoes compared with amount of disenfranchised people receiving benefits. That is going to cost us big.

This is just another entitlement program, disguised as “helping everyone”. This is creation of another monster that will spiral out of control. Politicians will herald its success.[/quote]

Good points.
So are you rooting for Single Payer system?

[dbapig]

[quote=ucodegen]

Since 1974, Hawaii has required all employers to provide relatively generous health care benefits to any employee who works 20 hours a week or more. If health care legislation passes in Congress, the rest of the country may barely catch up.

And Hawaii has almost no high paying businesses other than the military base. It also has a disproportionate number of people living at or below the poverty line. No businesses want to locate there because of all the mandated social costs. My S.O. lived in Hawaii.. she is paid much better on the mainland than she was in Hawaii and she mentioned that jobs are much more plentiful here. Many Hawaiians are relocating to the mainland because of the jobs situation in Hawaii.[/quote]

So by your logic the businesses will leave USA if they are required to insure more employees? Where will they go? Especially the high paying businesses, the ones who can afford to pay for more health insurance coverage?

I disagree businesses are moving out of Hawaii mainly due to the health insurance issue. The bigger reason is that it’s more pensive there because of the distance from the mainland.

[dbapig]

[quote=ucodegen]

Since 1974, Hawaii has required all employers to provide relatively generous health care benefits to any employee who works 20 hours a week or more. If health care legislation passes in Congress, the rest of the country may barely catch up.

And Hawaii has almost no high paying businesses other than the military base. It also has a disproportionate number of people living at or below the poverty line. No businesses want to locate there because of all the mandated social costs. My S.O. lived in Hawaii.. she is paid much better on the mainland than she was in Hawaii and she mentioned that jobs are much more plentiful here. Many Hawaiians are relocating to the mainland because of the jobs situation in Hawaii.[/quote]

So by your logic the businesses will leave USA if they are required to insure more employees? Where will they go? Especially the high paying businesses, the ones who can afford to pay for more health insurance coverage?

I disagree businesses are moving out of Hawaii mainly due to the health insurance issue. The bigger reason is that it’s more pensive there because of the distance from the mainland.

[dbapig]

[quote=ucodegen]

Since 1974, Hawaii has required all employers to provide relatively generous health care benefits to any employee who works 20 hours a week or more. If health care legislation passes in Congress, the rest of the country may barely catch up.

And Hawaii has almost no high paying businesses other than the military base. It also has a disproportionate number of people living at or below the poverty line. No businesses want to locate there because of all the mandated social costs. My S.O. lived in Hawaii.. she is paid much better on the mainland than she was in Hawaii and she mentioned that jobs are much more plentiful here. Many Hawaiians are relocating to the mainland because of the jobs situation in Hawaii.[/quote]

So by your logic the businesses will leave USA if they are required to insure more employees? Where will they go? Especially the high paying businesses, the ones who can afford to pay for more health insurance coverage?

I disagree businesses are moving out of Hawaii mainly due to the health insurance issue. The bigger reason is that it’s more pensive there because of the distance from the mainland.

[dbapig]

[quote=ucodegen]

Since 1974, Hawaii has required all employers to provide relatively generous health care benefits to any employee who works 20 hours a week or more. If health care legislation passes in Congress, the rest of the country may barely catch up.

And Hawaii has almost no high paying businesses other than the military base. It also has a disproportionate number of people living at or below the poverty line. No businesses want to locate there because of all the mandated social costs. My S.O. lived in Hawaii.. she is paid much better on the mainland than she was in Hawaii and she mentioned that jobs are much more plentiful here. Many Hawaiians are relocating to the mainland because of the jobs situation in Hawaii.[/quote]

So by your logic the businesses will leave USA if they are required to insure more employees? Where will they go? Especially the high paying businesses, the ones who can afford to pay for more health insurance coverage?

I disagree businesses are moving out of Hawaii mainly due to the health insurance issue. The bigger reason is that it’s more pensive there because of the distance from the mainland.

[dbapig]

[quote=ucodegen]

Since 1974, Hawaii has required all employers to provide relatively generous health care benefits to any employee who works 20 hours a week or more. If health care legislation passes in Congress, the rest of the country may barely catch up.

And Hawaii has almost no high paying businesses other than the military base. It also has a disproportionate number of people living at or below the poverty line. No businesses want to locate there because of all the mandated social costs. My S.O. lived in Hawaii.. she is paid much better on the mainland than she was in Hawaii and she mentioned that jobs are much more plentiful here. Many Hawaiians are relocating to the mainland because of the jobs situation in Hawaii.[/quote]

So by your logic the businesses will leave USA if they are required to insure more employees? Where will they go? Especially the high paying businesses, the ones who can afford to pay for more health insurance coverage?

I disagree businesses are moving out of Hawaii mainly due to the health insurance issue. The bigger reason is that it’s more pensive there because of the distance from the mainland.

[dbapig]

[quote=CDMA ENG]

So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

Question is, are some PhDs willing to do the work of the nurses, cleaning up poop, night shifts, people dying on your…

[dbapig]

[quote=CDMA ENG]

So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

Question is, are some PhDs willing to do the work of the nurses, cleaning up poop, night shifts, people dying on your…

[dbapig]

[quote=CDMA ENG]

So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

Question is, are some PhDs willing to do the work of the nurses, cleaning up poop, night shifts, people dying on your…

[dbapig]

[quote=CDMA ENG]

So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

Question is, are some PhDs willing to do the work of the nurses, cleaning up poop, night shifts, people dying on your…

[dbapig]

[quote=CDMA ENG]

So true about market driven… Best case in point… Nurses. 2 Years and they come out making more than some PhDs…[/quote]

Question is, are some PhDs willing to do the work of the nurses, cleaning up poop, night shifts, people dying on your…

[Author]

Posts