Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/23/2009 2:12:13 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		Did you see those words typed somewhere from a post of mine?

Did you ever look into who actually managed Medicare claims?

Did you look into the fraud, and how it occurs?

There is very little insentive to stop Medicare fraud, as it only comes out of the taxpayers pocket. If it were to come out of Palmetto GBA's pocket, then they may crack down on it more, like private insurance companies do. But then Medicare gets away with much more than a private insurance company does, legally speaking of course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Is it your claim that no fraud or unnecessary procedures are done when it is private insurance?


_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 81
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/23/2009 4:35:32 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Did you see those words typed somewhere from a post of mine?

Did you ever look into who actually managed Medicare claims?

Did you look into the fraud, and how it occurs?

There is very little insentive to stop Medicare fraud, as it only comes out of the taxpayers pocket. If it were to come out of Palmetto GBA's pocket, then they may crack down on it more, like private insurance companies do. But then Medicare gets away with much more than a private insurance company does, legally speaking of course.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Is it your claim that no fraud or unnecessary procedures are done when it is private insurance?


You're once again trying to take my comment out of context.

You made this claim:
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
There is just very little oversight of this company, and that is one of the reasons for so much fraud. 3% overhead my ass, if you charge back all the fraud and unnecesary medical procedures.

So I asked if you were actually claiming that private insurance overhead would also not be significantly higher under the same standard. So answer the question or drop the subject.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 82
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/23/2009 7:21:00 PM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		Private insurance fraud is charged back to their overhead on their P&L. It is part of GAAP, and is reported accordingly. Medicare does not have a P&L now do they? The people that handle the Medicare money do not feel any kind of fiduciary responsibility for the accountability if it, beyond keeping it to a level below political radar.

Not sure what you are trying to prove, but if you are trying to prove that Medicare is a shining example of government efficiency of medical coverage, then you are either very ignorant of the actual facts that happen at Palmetto GBA, Medicare, and of the people handling everything or you are a being deceitful.

Either way, I am done with trying to educate you from the benefit of my first hand knowledge in dealing with Medicare from a vendor side, and now as the Attorney-in-fact for both of my elderly parents.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 83
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/23/2009 8:39:07 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline 		Once more I'm making one point and one point only. Private insurance spends 24+% of premiums paid on overhead. Medicare's overhead is 3%. For whatever reason private insurance companies are grossly inefficient at managing their operations compared to Medicare.

Your claims were never about the point I made and I only had to point it out to you 3 times so far.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 84
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 5:31:54 AM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		Willfully deceitful then. That is what I thought, but wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 85
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 7:50:18 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Willfully deceitful then. That is what I thought, but wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt.

I hate to get personal with people because I hate getting those little notes from XI but I won't tolerate being called a liar by a liar.

Your first reply to me was a whine about the prices Medicare pays for medical supplies. the post you replied to was about Medicare and private insurances overhead. IOW your response was a non sequitur at best.

I pointed out both that your response was unrelated to the point I made and that Medicare was legally required to pay those prices. Your response was another whine about how much Medicare pays for medical supplies.

I point out yet again that how much Medicare pays for medical supplies doesn't affect how much money Medicare spends in overhead. Your response was to claim that fraud and unnecessary procedures were only a problem for Medicare.

I asked indirectly and then directly if you really were claiming that no fraud or unnecessary procedures ever occured under private insurance. You then claimed that private insurance's overhead was greatly affected by how much they had to charge back due to fraud and unnecessary procedures which I kindly ignored because we both know you won't be able to back that claim up.

I point out once again that all I've been discussing is Medicare and private insurances overhead costs and that your responses have been mostly non sequiturs and red herrings.

You then have the gall to call me a liar. Pathetic.

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 86
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 8:08:09 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Once more I'm making one point and one point only. Private insurance spends 24+% of premiums paid on overhead. Medicare's overhead is 3%. For whatever reason private insurance companies are grossly inefficient at managing their operations compared to Medicare.

Your claims were never about the point I made and I only had to point it out to you 3 times so far.



Maybe because your one point is an irrelevant one. Per claim/per capita medicare costs are higher. They are only lower as a % of premiums/claims because the comparison is between a low cost/claim population and a high cost/claim population. If the government has the exact same level of efficiency after they expand their purview, then their administration costs will be higher.

As always, you keep ignoring the clear facts when they are inconvenient to your argument.

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 7/24/2009 8:10:19 AM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 87
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 8:09:23 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf

Willfully deceitful then. That is what I thought, but wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt.


Don't. Thats been proven numerous times to be a bad assumption

(in reply to OrionTheWolf)
Profile   Post #: 88
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 8:57:38 AM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Once more I'm making one point and one point only. Private insurance spends 24+% of premiums paid on overhead. Medicare's overhead is 3%. For whatever reason private insurance companies are grossly inefficient at managing their operations compared to Medicare.

Your claims were never about the point I made and I only had to point it out to you 3 times so far.



Maybe because your one point is an irrelevant one. Per claim/per capita medicare costs are higher. They are only lower as a % of premiums/claims because the comparison is between a low cost/claim population and a high cost/claim population. If the government has the exact same level of efficiency after they expand their purview, then their administration costs will be higher.

As always, you keep ignoring the clear facts when they are inconvenient to your argument.

Their admin costs will be higher but lower by percentage of dollars spent which is what efficiency is about.

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 89
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 10:18:07 AM   
DemonKia


Posts: 5521
Joined: 10/13/2007
From: Chico, Nor-Cali
Status: offline 		&, DomKen, the thing I notice in this issue is that the private insurers cherry pick the healthiest patients & have the higher overhead percentage, & MediCare gets the sickest & most expensive patients & has the lower overhead percentage . . . . . Which makes the comparison even more extreme than the bare numbers implies . . . . .

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 90
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 10:19:44 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

Once more I'm making one point and one point only. Private insurance spends 24+% of premiums paid on overhead. Medicare's overhead is 3%. For whatever reason private insurance companies are grossly inefficient at managing their operations compared to Medicare.

Your claims were never about the point I made and I only had to point it out to you 3 times so far.



Maybe because your one point is an irrelevant one. Per claim/per capita medicare costs are higher. They are only lower as a % of premiums/claims because the comparison is between a low cost/claim population and a high cost/claim population. If the government has the exact same level of efficiency after they expand their purview, then their administration costs will be higher.

As always, you keep ignoring the clear facts when they are inconvenient to your argument.

Their admin costs will be higher but lower by percentage of dollars spent which is what efficiency is about.



Bullshit. The only thing that matters is efficiency in the actual dollars spent, not some bogus denominator.

< Message edited by willbeurdaddy -- 7/24/2009 10:24:33 AM >

(in reply to DomKen)
Profile   Post #: 91
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 10:22:57 AM   
willbeurdaddy


Posts: 11894
Joined: 4/8/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DemonKia

&, DomKen, the thing I notice in this issue is that the private insurers cherry pick the healthiest patients & have the higher overhead percentage, & MediCare gets the sickest & most expensive patients & has the lower overhead percentage . . . . . Which makes the comparison even more extreme than the bare numbers implies . . . . .



The premise is incorrect, and the effect of the actual situation is the reverse. Medicare is the primary provider for EVERYONE over 65. Private insurers in that space provide only supplemental coverage. As such their claims tend to be lower than Medicare's, raising the administration costs as a percentage of claims, just as insuring a younger population than medicare does.

(in reply to DemonKia)
Profile   Post #: 92
RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations - 7/24/2009 10:32:19 AM   
OrionTheWolf


Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline 		Not to mention Medicare does not manage their own claims, it is a third party that does it for them. I believe the third party gets a percentage of dollars administered, which is a good incentive to not be so picky about fraud. Since the third party out the actual management, it is considered a direct cost, and is not posted in an overhead area.

_____________________________

When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."

(in reply to willbeurdaddy)
Profile   Post #: 93
RE: Big Government v. Big Corporations - 7/25/2009 9:06:50 AM   
Lorr47


Posts: 862
Joined: 3/13/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

quote:

I think it can be done too, but not with the kind of politician we have in the US.
I have come across this arguement in health care debates both here on CM and elsewhere and I find it troubling to say the least. The thought that the most powerful nation in the world is being run by either corrupt crooks or utter nincompoops worries me, as does the seeming acceptance of this situation. Oddly enough, here in Canada, where we really are very culturally similar, we manage to find politicians who are honest and competant enough to run a health care system, as do they in France, Germany, the UK, and many other places.

This begs the question...what is it about the US that renders its political leaders incapable of doing something that other countries' political leaders seem capable of doing with little difficulty?


Your question is truly worrisome.

I would rather try to educate nincompoops than reform crooks.

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 94
RE: Big Government v. Big Corporations - 7/26/2009 8:32:55 AM   
Mercnbeth


Posts: 11766
Status: offline
quote:

This begs the question...what is it about the US that renders its political leaders incapable of doing something that other countries' political leaders seem capable of doing with little difficulty?

The comparison itself is the problem. No disrespect intended, but Canada's economic and political decisions have little or no impact on global economics or global politics. In the US the least significant change of policy impacts Trillions of invested resources. The point isn't regarding US status and ego. I give it as a cause of corruption. Local politics, gets limited attention and influence. The ability to impact the globe sets up a situation where corrupting influence comes from a global village of special interests.

When PAC's, legal corrupting influence centers, were created through the "Bi-Partisan" politicking of Senators McCain/Feingold, it insured that every issue would be contingent on how much political influence could be bought. The 'common man', or middle America is not a consideration. There are no PACs set up to pay off politicians for them. You need a 'religion'; Evangelic global warming or teaching creationism.

Any thought that "CHANGE!" was coming from this Administration dies on Saturday. The day itself, a non news day, signifying how under the radar they wanted this announcement. You may remember:
quote:

In March, President Obama announced that government officials would not be allowed to consider the views of lobbyists regarding specific stimulus projects unless the requests are put in writing. The materials also had to be posted on an agency’s website within three business days of receipt. Lobbyists have said that the policy was one more example of the administration's disdain for their industry.


The Saturday announcement:
quote:

In a significant change, the Obama administration will now allow lobbyists to meet and have telephonic discussions with government officials regarding economic recovery projects. The lifting of the ban comes after K Street has cried foul for months and has challenged the White House on its restrictions.


Source: CORRUPTING INFLUENCE

"K Street" for those uninformed, is a place where Congress sends their interns to pick up their election 'bag-money'.

There is too much at stake, too much money involved. Senator McCain's efforts on behalf of his Congressional community insured that any policy decision coming from the US is determined by what special interest group paid the most. When the group itself has to die, as in the case of unionized auto workers, again the negative impact is only felt by the grass roots union workers. Their "representatives" as well as top level management on the other side of the table, cash in and retire safe within their golden parachutes.

It is so obvious. What businessman in their right mind would spend millions of dollars to "serve" in a public office paying less than $200k per year? It seems ridiculous until you look at the assets of any Congressmen or Senator before they were elected and after they "retire". Exactly how do you accumulated Millions in assets working a public service job paying $174k/year? I know they are smart enough to exempt themselves from the SS debacle they require us citizens to pay into, but there has got to be some other great insider investments they know about too.

For example: On October 11, 1978, Hillary Clinton, a neophyte investor with an annual income of $25,000, opened a commodity-futures account with a deposit of $1,000. Her first trade was the short sale of ten live-cattle contracts at a price of 57.55 cents a pound: a commitment to deliver in December of that year 400,000 pounds of cattle with a market value of $230,200. One day later, she bought the contracts back at a price of 56.10 cents, just 0.15 cent above the low of the day, pocketing $5,300 for a return of 530 per cent.

And that was in 1978 when her only influence was pillow talk. Imagine the information you could learn if you had a Senate vote in your pocket?

< Message edited by Mercnbeth -- 7/26/2009 8:37:15 AM >

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 95
RE: Big Government v. Big Corporations - 7/26/2009 8:35:40 AM   
TurboJugend


Posts: 481
Joined: 6/15/2009
Status: offline
quote:

This begs the question...what is it about the US that renders its political leaders incapable of doing something that other countries' political leaders seem capable of doing with little difficulty?


perhaps it is not the leaders, but the system ( .. how your politics work)

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 96
RE: Big Government v. Big Corporations - 7/26/2009 9:16:07 AM   
Arpig


Posts: 9930
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: Increasingly further from reality
Status: offline
quote:

The comparison itself is the problem. No disrespect intended, but Canada's economic and political decisions have little or no impact on global economics or global politics. In the US the least significant change of policy impacts Trillions of invested resources. The point isn't regarding US status and ego. I give it as a cause of corruption. Local politics, gets limited attention and influence. The ability to impact the globe sets up a situation where corrupting influence comes from a global village of special interests.
You may well have it Merc, maybe the opportunities are just to damn available and to damn tempting. An awful lot of people seem to retire from congress a whole fuck of a lot richer than they went in.

_____________________________

Big man! Pig Man!
Ha Ha...Charade you are!

Why do they leave out the letter b on "Garage Sale" signs?

CM's #1 All-Time Also-Ran


(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 97
RE: Big Government v. Big Corporations - 7/26/2009 9:37:39 AM   
subfever


Posts: 2895
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

It is so obvious. What businessman in their right mind would spend millions of dollars to "serve" in a public office paying less than $200k per year?


Yes, it is obvious, and it should be obvious to most people here. What amazes me is that most people will still willingly support the system, in spite of this.

(in reply to Mercnbeth)
Profile   Post #: 98
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Big Government v. Big Corportations Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 4 [5]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.096