created by: Rick | Jun 8, 2010

Arkansas

5,706 votes

Did you vote today?

Click on an option to vote

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other (explain below)

Comments (Page 660)

Showing posts 13,181 - 13,200 of27,882
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Reality Check

Sherwood, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13853
Aug 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
You will have a hard time pulling this one off with the timeline.
Notice the date on your c&p.
Doctors limit new Medicare patients
Updated 6/21/2010 8:04 AM | Comments1,909
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-...
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA),[1] informally referred to as Obamacare,[2] is a United States federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010. Together with the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act,
PPACA includes numerous provisions to take effect over several years beginning in 2010.
You can say what you want about timelines. Besides, some of the bill went into effect immediately after it was signed into law. I don't know what parts went into effect when but, given the reduction in medicare patients taken, I would assume that the cut in payments to doctors for medicare patients was one of the first things to go into effect. My original post said that there are more doctors declining to take medicare patients and that is correct. You tried to divert the conversation and you couldn't even do that right. I don't know what to say about you Barn. Maybe you should get on another topic like the one about the birds falling from the sky. Seems to fit you better.
Old Army

Sheridan, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13854
Aug 13, 2012
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
You really need to work on those reading skills, observe;
"Have you ever seen anyone any more full of himself than Barney"
did you notice the word "seen" in that sentence.
"And what would be the remedy for someone more full of himself"
I have no answer for that question, however, if you had ask me,
What would be the remedy for someone to (see)another more full of himself than you?
I would be happy to enlighten you.
Let me answer my own question as simply as I know how. You are full of shit.

Level 1

Since: Dec 10

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13855
Aug 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
My original post said that there are more doctors declining to take medicare patients and that is correct. You tried to divert the conversation and you couldn't even do that right. I don't know what to say about you Barn. Maybe you should get on another topic like the one about the birds falling from the sky. Seems to fit you better.
"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/...
peachy keen

Ravenden Springs, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13856
Aug 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13857
Aug 13, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

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

Oxford, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13858
Aug 14, 2012
 
Why bother....
Super Troll

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13861
Aug 14, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13864
Aug 14, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

3

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

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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

Washington DC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#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?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 13,181 - 13,200 of27,882
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

197 Users are viewing the Paragould Forum right now

Search the Paragould Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Change "1" letter =ONLY= (Feb '13) 17 min luci 962
Keep A Word - Drop A Word (Dec '09) 18 min luci 15,057
4 letter game (Dec '08) 19 min luci 10,360
Three Word Game (Aug '08) 20 min luci 10,343
Silverwood Apartments 24 min nasty trash 4
State excuses six days of school for Paragould 27 min guest 34
Dr. Paul Becton Jr. OBGYN (Nov '09) 34 min Barbie 79
how to pass hair follicle test in 3 hours (Feb '12) 6 hr real talk 518
•••
•••
•••
•••

Paragould Jobs

•••
•••
•••

Paragould People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••