Did you vote today?

Created by Rick on Jun 8, 2010

6,110 votes

Click on an option to vote

Yes

No

Other (explain below)

peachy keen

Mountain Home, AR

#13856 Aug 13, 2012
Nobama wrote:
Hey Barn Barn, you wet fart of a human turd. I have a little assignment for you. Get your copy/paste motor going and try and disprove these facts. All the blood sucking liberals are so very excited about Obamacare, how we will be as peachy keen as Canada. There is one teeny tiny little fact the Dems are bending over backwards to keep from the public, the truth. Did you know about the wait times for healthcare in Canada? well, here's some average waits. Hip replacement, 1 year. Knee replacements, 8 months. Heart Surgery, 7 months. And my personal favorite, Cancer. The average wait for Cancer surgery in Canada is 5 months. If there is one thing we all know it's that when fighting Cancer taking your time and delaying treatment is a really good idea.
Now many people with tiny brains say "it was modeled after Romney's Mass. healthcare plan". By that rationale, if a State can do it, a Nation can. Typical liberal thinking, in other words, moronic. How much does Mass. pay for it's military? how much does Mass. pay in foreign aid? how much does Mass. pay out in social security benefits? Heck, by using Democrats rationale, I can shoot baskets in my driveway. I must be able to play in the NBA. Oh, one more little thing Barney. Look up the percentage of Canadian Dr's who need serious surgery that choose to have it done in the States. You'll find that number to be 80%. Get to work Barney, see what Rachael Madcow say's about it.
hey idiot wher you get that idea that some dem said this peachy keen canada stuff but yo cant name 1
Nobama

Batesville, AR

#13857 Aug 13, 2012
peachy keen wrote:
<quoted text>
hey idiot wher you get that idea that some dem said this peachy keen canada stuff but yo cant name 1
I'll respond to your post but I need time. I need to go to a rehab or special needs facility and pay someone to translate for me. I am not versed in moron. Maybe some glue sniffer of 22 year old 6th grader can tell me what you said.
Guest

Mountain Home, AR

#13858 Aug 14, 2012
Why bother....
Super Troll

United States

#13859 Aug 14, 2012
peachy keen wrote:
<quoted text>
hey idiot wher you get that idea that some dem said this peachy keen canada stuff but yo cant name 1
Sounds like someone was hitting the rock last night.
Reality Check

Warren, AR

#13860 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"My original post said that there are more doctors declining to take medicare patients and that is correct"
You are sadly mistaken, it is not correct.
Overall, beneficiary access to physician services is good or better than that reported by privately insured patients age 50 to 64. For example, in 2010, 75 percent of beneficiaries reported that they had no problem scheduling timely routine-care physician appointments.
Multiple surveys show that most physicians are accepting Medicare patients. For example, the 2008 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey found that 90 percent of physicians with at least 10 percent of their practice revenue coming from Medicare accepted at least some new Medicare patients.
Medicare’s payment for physician fee-schedule services in 2009 averaged 80 percent of private insurer payments for preferred provider organizations, a figure unchanged from the preceding year.
A recent study found that in 2007, hourly compensation rates for some specialties were more than double the rate for primary care. The Commission has recommended enhancements to primary care, such as increasing Medicare payments for primary care services provided by primary care practitioners.(Note: The 2010 Affordable Care Act increased payments to primary care doctors by 10%.)
In 2009, the Medicare margin for the median efficient hospital was 3.0 percent.(We define efficient hospitals as those that consistently perform relatively well on cost, mortality, and readmission measures.) While most of these relatively efficient hospitals generate profits on Medicare patients, about one-third do not.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/medicare/2011/08/23/...
You are cherry picking again. For example, the unemployment rate in N. Dakota is 3.8% but you can't take that and say that America is doing just fine because we are not. That is exactly what you are doing. I never said that no doctors are taking new medicare patients. I said that the number of doctors not taking new medicare patients is on the rise. Let's assume your argument is correct that payments have increased 10%. On Feb. 26, 2010 Congress failed to stop a 21% decrease in payments doctors already considered to be too low so that means that a 10% increase still keeps reimbursement payments too low. Besides, the stats you quote are irrelevent because they were pre-Obamacare and about half of them were pre-Obama. That makes a huge difference. The stats I quoted were there because of Obamacare and Obama's policies. What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama. I didn't think you had that in you.
guest

Blytheville, AR

#13861 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"My original post said that there are more doctors declining to take medicare patients and that is correct"
You are sadly mistaken, it is not correct.
Overall, beneficiary access to physician services is good or better than that reported by privately insured patients age 50 to 64. For example, in 2010, 75 percent of beneficiaries reported that they had no problem scheduling timely routine-care physician appointments.
Multiple surveys show that most physicians are accepting Medicare patients. For example, the 2008 National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey found that 90 percent of physicians with at least 10 percent of their practice revenue coming from Medicare accepted at least some new Medicare patients.
Medicare’s payment for physician fee-schedule services in 2009 averaged 80 percent of private insurer payments for preferred provider organizations, a figure unchanged from the preceding year.
A recent study found that in 2007, hourly compensation rates for some specialties were more than double the rate for primary care. The Commission has recommended enhancements to primary care, such as increasing Medicare payments for primary care services provided by primary care practitioners.(Note: The 2010 Affordable Care Act increased payments to primary care doctors by 10%.)
In 2009, the Medicare margin for the median efficient hospital was 3.0 percent.(We define efficient hospitals as those that consistently perform relatively well on cost, mortality, and readmission measures.) While most of these relatively efficient hospitals generate profits on Medicare patients, about one-third do not.
http://tucsoncitizen.com/medicare/2011/08/23/...
You may want to get some more "up to date" facts.
http://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media-room/n...
http://www.physiciansforreform.org/hcr08medi....
http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx...

"Thirty-six percent of doctors say they are no longer accepting new Medicaid patients due in large part to declining reimbursements, a new national survey has found.
The survey of 2,232 physicians across all specialties conducted in late April by Jackson Healthcare in Atlanta — the fourth-largest health care staffing company in the U.S."

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/23/survey-more...

According to Richard L. Jackson, chairman and CEO of Jackson Healthcare, the low reimbursement rate paired with the large influx of new Medicaid patients will be a problem.

“This is creating the perfect storm that will make it very difficult for the poor and elderly to access a doctor,” Jackson said.“Physicians say they just can’t afford to be part of a system that generates so many patients for so little compensation.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/23/survey-more...
mary smith

Toledo, OH

#13862 Aug 14, 2012
Well you finally got it. "The poor and elderly and that includes 99% of America wont be able to afford dctors and acess medical care." They will force us to use our last dollars to pay premiums for policies we cant afford to use due to copays and lack of doctors willing to take decreased fees. The well to do will simply leave the country as they are doing now and that includes the doctors.

Unemployment numbers are a joke. Most people unemployed gave up long ago or are working part time and are not counted. Just look aroundyour towns and you can figure the real pecentage either not employed or under employed.

As long as we keep paying for derivatives we dont owe on our nation will be bankrupt. The government is preparing for civil war when they implode the economy. They will take our guns and any food and wter you have stored and that includes livestock and crops in the fields. You need to decide now how you plan on dealing with it.
guest

Jonesboro, AR

#13863 Aug 14, 2012
mary smith wrote:
Well you finally got it. "The poor and elderly and that includes 99% of America wont be able to afford dctors and acess medical care." They will force us to use our last dollars to pay premiums for policies we cant afford to use due to copays and lack of doctors willing to take decreased fees. The well to do will simply leave the country as they are doing now and that includes the doctors.
Unemployment numbers are a joke. Most people unemployed gave up long ago or are working part time and are not counted. Just look aroundyour towns and you can figure the real pecentage either not employed or under employed.
As long as we keep paying for derivatives we dont owe on our nation will be bankrupt. The government is preparing for civil war when they implode the economy. They will take our guns and any food and wter you have stored and that includes livestock and crops in the fields. You need to decide now how you plan on dealing with it.
Who is "they"? I have heard that "they" are going to do all sort of evil things my entire life and even when "they" are in office, those evil things never happen. I know that you are willing to sacrifice the future generations to avoid addressing the issues today, but I really don't believe that "they" are out to get you.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#13864 Aug 14, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>You may want to get some more "up to date" facts.
http://www.jacksonhealthcare.com/media-room/n...
http://www.physiciansforreform.org/hcr08medi....
http://www.texmed.org/Template.aspx...
"Thirty-six percent of doctors say they are no longer accepting new Medicaid patients due in large part to declining reimbursements, a new national survey has found.
The survey of 2,232 physicians across all specialties conducted in late April by Jackson Healthcare in Atlanta — the fourth-largest health care staffing company in the U.S."
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/23/survey-more...
According to Richard L. Jackson, chairman and CEO of Jackson Healthcare, the low reimbursement rate paired with the large influx of new Medicaid patients will be a problem.
“This is creating the perfect storm that will make it very difficult for the poor and elderly to access a doctor,” Jackson said.“Physicians say they just can’t afford to be part of a system that generates so many patients for so little compensation.”
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/05/23/survey-more...
The topic was MEDICARE, NOT MEDICAID patients.

Two different programs.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#13865 Aug 14, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
You are cherry picking again. For example, the unemployment rate in N. Dakota is 3.8% but you can't take that and say that America is doing just fine because we are not. That is exactly what you are doing. I never said that no doctors are taking new medicare patients. I said that the number of doctors not taking new medicare patients is on the rise. Let's assume your argument is correct that payments have increased 10%. On Feb. 26, 2010 Congress failed to stop a 21% decrease in payments doctors already considered to be too low so that means that a 10% increase still keeps reimbursement payments too low. Besides, the stats you quote are irrelevent because they were pre-Obamacare and about half of them were pre-Obama. That makes a huge difference. The stats I quoted were there because of Obamacare and Obama's policies. What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama. I didn't think you had that in you.
"What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama"

LMAO-Sure I did, read on.......

March 4, 2010 – The legislatively mandated cut in Medicare’s pay to physicians of 21.2 percent has been delayed until at least April 1 by a bill passed by the Democrats late Tuesday and signed by President Obama.
guest

Blytheville, AR

#13866 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
The topic was MEDICARE, NOT MEDICAID patients.
Two different programs.
What? Don't the poor count in your world anymore? You expose a darker liberal side to yourself everyday. Besides, read the text, the Jackson Health survey was for MEDICARE AND MEDICAID.
guest

Jonesboro, AR

#13867 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama"
LMAO-Sure I did, read on.......
March 4, 2010 – The legislatively mandated cut in Medicare’s pay to physicians of 21.2 percent has been delayed until at least April 1 by a bill passed by the Democrats late Tuesday and signed by President Obama.
Cutting the pay to the employees of the healthcare system is something to brag about?
guest

Blytheville, AR

#13868 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
"What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama"
LMAO-Sure I did, read on.......
March 4, 2010 – The legislatively mandated cut in Medicare’s pay to physicians of 21.2 percent has been delayed until at least April 1 by a bill passed by the Democrats late Tuesday and signed by President Obama.
Watch out, Realy Check, oppressive slave master BARNEYII will no try to claim ownership over your ass because you did not live up to standards expected of you but not of himself.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#13869 Aug 14, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
You are cherry picking again. For example, the unemployment rate in N. Dakota is 3.8% but you can't take that and say that America is doing just fine because we are not. That is exactly what you are doing. I never said that no doctors are taking new medicare patients. I said that the number of doctors not taking new medicare patients is on the rise. Let's assume your argument is correct that payments have increased 10%. On Feb. 26, 2010 Congress failed to stop a 21% decrease in payments doctors already considered to be too low so that means that a 10% increase still keeps reimbursement payments too low. Besides, the stats you quote are irrelevent because they were pre-Obamacare and about half of them were pre-Obama. That makes a huge difference. The stats I quoted were there because of Obamacare and Obama's policies. What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama. I didn't think you had that in you.
Would you mind giving me the post number for the "stats" you say you quoted.

"The stats I quoted were there because of Obamacare and Obama's policies"

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#13870 Aug 14, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
You are cherry picking again. For example, the unemployment rate in N. Dakota is 3.8% but you can't take that and say that America is doing just fine because we are not. That is exactly what you are doing. I never said that no doctors are taking new medicare patients. I said that the number of doctors not taking new medicare patients is on the rise. Let's assume your argument is correct that payments have increased 10%. On Feb. 26, 2010 Congress failed to stop a 21% decrease in payments doctors already considered to be too low so that means that a 10% increase still keeps reimbursement payments too low. Besides, the stats you quote are irrelevent because they were pre-Obamacare and about half of them were pre-Obama. That makes a huge difference. The stats I quoted were there because of Obamacare and Obama's policies. What you just essentially did is give Bush credit for a healthier medicare program than under Obama. I didn't think you had that in you.

The fact is, this decrease in payments to doctors, began long before the H.C.R.A. was ever thought of.

“In 1992, Congress adopted Hsiao's physician-payment scale, and it worked - but only for a few years.

There are different explanations for what happened. Hsiao blames lobbyists. Lobbyists and doctors say health care is just expensive, and most of the time Medicare actually underpays doctors.

“Congress tried to slow the growth of doctor pay by saying total payments to doctors could not grow faster than the overall economy. When the total amount Medicare was paying to doctors grew faster than the overall economy, the rates for each procedure and service were supposed to be cut.

“But doctors, naturally, lobbied against letting those cuts take effect. And Congress passed short-term measures, again and again, blocking the planned cuts. That's where things stand now — cuts about to kick in, doctors lobbying Congress to block the cuts and no clear answer for the best way to pay them.

http://seniorjournal.com/NEWS/Medicare/2010/2...
Reality Check

Warren, AR

#13871 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact is, this decrease in payments to doctors, began long before the H.C.R.A. was ever thought of.
“In 1992, Congress adopted Hsiao's physician-payment scale, and it worked - but only for a few years.
There are different explanations for what happened. Hsiao blames lobbyists. Lobbyists and doctors say health care is just expensive, and most of the time Medicare actually underpays doctors.
“Congress tried to slow the growth of doctor pay by saying total payments to doctors could not grow faster than the overall economy. When the total amount Medicare was paying to doctors grew faster than the overall economy, the rates for each procedure and service were supposed to be cut.
“But doctors, naturally, lobbied against letting those cuts take effect. And Congress passed short-term measures, again and again, blocking the planned cuts. That's where things stand now — cuts about to kick in, doctors lobbying Congress to block the cuts and no clear answer for the best way to pay them.
http://seniorjournal.com/NEWS/Medicare/2010/2...
What are you trying to say? 1992? Really? I am talking about 2012 and doctors reimbursement rates dropping and you are trying to pin it on the 1992 Congress. Is there nothing that you will blame this president for? There is a lot to choose from in that category and none of it good besides his war on terror. Why don't I just say that Lyndon Johnson cut doctors medicare reimbursements to $0 in 1963 and that means the Democrats want to cut out medicare. It shouldn't matter that there was no medicare in 1963. We are just trying to find a party to blame by any means neccessary. You are impossible.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

#13872 Aug 14, 2012
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
What are you trying to say? 1992? Really? I am talking about 2012 and doctors reimbursement rates dropping and you are trying to pin it on the 1992 Congress. Is there nothing that you will blame this president for? There is a lot to choose from in that category and none of it good besides his war on terror. Why don't I just say that Lyndon Johnson cut doctors medicare reimbursements to $0 in 1963 and that means the Democrats want to cut out medicare. It shouldn't matter that there was no medicare in 1963. We are just trying to find a party to blame by any means neccessary. You are impossible.
OMG, you are as dense as a brick, where/when do you think the mandate to cut reimbursements came from?
guest

Jonesboro, AR

#13873 Aug 14, 2012
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
OMG, you are as dense as a brick, where/when do you think the mandate to cut reimbursements came from?
Twenty years and you still can't get it done, he might not be the dense one.
Reality Check

Conway, AR

#13874 Aug 14, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Twenty years and you still can't get it done, he might not be the dense one.
Liberals will fail miserably 100 times and then get one small thing right and claim total success. It appears we are somewhere in the middle of the 100 epic failures and Barney just doesn't realize it.
Super Troll

United States

#13875 Aug 14, 2012
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Twenty years and you still can't get it done, he might not be the dense one.
Do you have a political opinion any more, or is out gonna be screw with Barney day every day?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Paragould Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Stephanie Fields 4 min guest 4
Last word + 2 (Mar '12) 1 hr luci 3,626
Keep A Word - Drop A Word (Dec '09) 1 hr luci 15,822
Change one letter in the word ! (Nov '09) 1 hr luci 10,289
Wreck on 49 in front of Carriage Hills 2 hr thetruthsuglyandi... 102
Amber Trammell, Laura Stone, Melissa Howard & J... (Oct '13) 2 hr thetruthsuglyandi... 35
Ivey Herren Jr 2 hr guest 26
how to pass hair follicle test in 3 hours (Feb '12) 9 hr need some help 631
Paragould Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Paragould People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Paragould News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Paragould

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 9:43 am PST

Bleacher Report 9:43AM
Offseason Should Start with Trading for Cutler
NBC Sports12:38 PM
Dexter McCluster out Thursday, likely out Week 17 as well
NBC Sports 2:15 PM
Should fantasy owners bench Eli Manning in Week 16?
NBC Sports 2:48 PM
Titans RB McCluster ruled out of game vs. Jaguars - NBC Sports
Bleacher Report 9:09 PM
Breaking Down New York's Game Plan