Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republicans "Take Women To Dinner. They Buy Wom


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

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republicans "Take Women To Dinner. They Buy Wom Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:27:16 AM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
quote:

Why don't you explain exactly how the privacy between a patient/insured and their doctors and insurers is anyone elses fucking business other than the patient/insured?


I can do that. The Hippa privacy does not pertain to the insurance company since it must know why the claim is submitted. Each claim must be justified by a diagnosis or medical procedure covered by the plan. This is how insurance works. It would be impossible to insure anyone if they could simply go to a doctor and decide to "do this" or "do that" and tell the insurance company to pay a certain amount on a "trust me" basis. Thus, privacy between Doctor and patient is only fully respected if you don't file a claim and want to pay fo rit yourself.

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 101
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:30:18 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

No you didnt.  But you often dont.


Yes, I did. Then requoted it.



quote:

Condoms are a piss poor substitute, which is your answer to the problem


No it's not, that's a strawman again, as pointed out already. I'd made a very specific point to a very specific statement, and you're trying to spin it off into something unrelated.


To which I gave a very specific response.

Really, dont you have any ability to admit when you are wrong?

You are here, claiming that women should not be entitled to birth control, free of out of pocket expense for various reasons.

Because its morally repugnant for them to provide it.

Because men use condoms.

Because not everyone has sex.

Because it will cost the risk pool more.

Yet I have given proof that condoms are not as reliable.

You have been given proof that smoking, like pregnancy, costs the risk pool more.

But you are fine with smokers being charged more.

And with those NOT getting pregnant charged more.

If you were intellectually honest, you would see the problem with that belief.

And if you are a virgin... IF... why do you care?

Because you might pay a few dollars more for the woman who doesnt want to get pregnant?

Yet you are more than willing to pay more for the women who do get pregnant?

Back pedal all you want.  You have posted far too much on this topic for anyone to believe anyone but you are being intellectually dishonest.


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 102
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:31:43 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

I can do that. The Hippa privacy does not pertain to the insurance company since it must know why the claim is submitted. Each claim must be justified by a diagnosis or medical procedure covered by the plan. This is how insurance works. It would be impossible to insure anyone if they could simply go to a doctor and decide to "do this" or "do that" and tell the insurance company to pay a certain amount on a "trust me" basis. Thus, privacy between Doctor and patient is only fully respected if you don't file a claim and want to pay fo rit yourself.


Insurance companies already know what is being prescribed and why its being prescribed.  Its called.. ICD 9 coding.


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 103
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:32:00 AM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline 		Wow, lots of strawmen in that post. And you claim I'm being intellectually dishonest, wow.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 104
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:33:55 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

Why don't you explain exactly how the privacy between a patient/insured and their doctors and insurers is anyone elses fucking business other than the patient/insured?


I can do that. The Hippa privacy does not pertain to the insurance company since it must know why the claim is submitted. Each claim must be justified by a diagnosis or medical procedure covered by the plan. This is how insurance works. It would be impossible to insure anyone if they could simply go to a doctor and decide to "do this" or "do that" and tell the insurance company to pay a certain amount on a "trust me" basis. Thus, privacy between Doctor and patient is only fully respected if you don't file a claim and want to pay fo rit yourself.


No. I mentioned INSURERS right there. I'm wondering how the EMPLOYER thinks they get a say...

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 105
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:35:14 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

Wow, lots of strawmen in that post. And you claim I'm being intellectually dishonest, wow.


You do realize that the past. oh... 10 posts, perhaps, have been nothing but claiming people are strawmanning?

Dude, honestly, shit or get off the pot.


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 106
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:36:54 AM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


You do realize that the past. oh... 10 posts, perhaps, have been nothing but claiming people are strawmanning?



If people will stop making claims as to my stance that I didn't make, it wouldn't be necessary.

MM made a statement about men being "free riders". I addressed that one single point with a silly response, and you're making all kinds of wild assumptions about what I meant from it that I never made. It's tiresome.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 107
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:37:53 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		Men are free riders.  They get women pregnant, yet, insurance wise, unless they are married and claim the dependent on their policy, they dont pay more.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 108
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:38:22 AM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

quote:

I am also sure insurance complany assets are ours since most company health plans are in fact only administered by the insurance company and the employees are really self-insured as a group with the employer paying most of the premum as an inducement to get you to hire on with them.


I hope you don't tell that fairytale to the IRS when it's time to put down your Total Compensation...

No employer is paying a dime for an employee's healthcare costs. They're taking that right off the top your total compensation, and to suggest otherwise kinda disqualifies you from the discussion...


Actually, my insurance benefits are Pre-tax and I only pay for them if there is a monetary distribution from that insurance fund because less claims were paid out then originally forcasted. I would be taxed and have been taxed for these assets when they come out of that self-insured plan and into my bank account.

I'm glad for the opportunity to steer you straight on the subject so you now can vote armed with the correct information, the truth. I do wish it were not necessary to read those curse words. Would you mind finding some other way to make your point? Thanks.

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 109
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:39:17 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		So, then clarify everything by definitively stating for the record,

"What happens in a doctor's exam room is private and confidential between the doctor, the patient/insured, and the insurer.

Neither YOU, I, nor ANYONE ELSE has the privilege to infringe upon that privacy by speculating upon or criticizing any aspect of it."



< Message edited by farglebargle -- 3/18/2012 10:41:20 AM >

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 110
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:40:24 AM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Men are free riders.  They get women pregnant, yet, insurance wise, unless they are married and claim the dependent on their policy, they dont pay more.


Hasty generalization. At least the logical fallacy is not a strawman this time.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 111
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:42:55 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

Why is how much extra it is going to cost only an issue for reproductive care?


It's not. My insurance coverage charges higher premiums for smokers than non-smokers. I think applying that logic to other services or at risk factors would be a fair way of handling it.

ummm.. i seriously doubt that the higher premiums cover all the costs associated with treatment and continual care due to the various diseases caused by smoking.. There are some horrid ads on tv right now and the entire ad people are wheezing and coughing constantly due to the emphysema caused by smoking, which those people will have until the day they finally die.. how ever many years that takes..

This is from a 1998 study.. and who knows how the medical costs have increased for treatment & care since the study was done..
"the actual cost of medical care for smoking-related disease in the next 25 years will be an astronomical $1.8 trillion."
http://berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/1998/0916/smoking.html

eta- Not to mention that insurers tend to have a maximum limit on coverage... once you hit that limit then who pays if you cant?

< Message edited by tj444 -- 3/18/2012 10:53:29 AM >

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 112
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:43:52 AM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle


quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas

quote:

Why don't you explain exactly how the privacy between a patient/insured and their doctors and insurers is anyone elses fucking business other than the patient/insured?


I can do that. The Hippa privacy does not pertain to the insurance company since it must know why the claim is submitted. Each claim must be justified by a diagnosis or medical procedure covered by the plan. This is how insurance works. It would be impossible to insure anyone if they could simply go to a doctor and decide to "do this" or "do that" and tell the insurance company to pay a certain amount on a "trust me" basis. Thus, privacy between Doctor and patient is only fully respected if you don't file a claim and want to pay fo rit yourself.


No. I mentioned INSURERS right there. I'm wondering how the EMPLOYER thinks they get a say...



The employer gets a general say because they do pay into the fund and need to keep their employees happy, that is the reason for the insurance fund and benefit to begin with. Thus, if it is necessary to keep the majority of their employees happy and if their employees want to fund that benefit then the employer finds an insurance plan that fits: 1) what the employee can pay for in their contribution, 2) what the employer can pay in that contribution and 3)what the employer can support that is not contrary to their core corporate culture or belief.

< Message edited by Arturas -- 3/18/2012 10:44:53 AM >

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 113
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:47:19 AM   
Arturas


Posts: 3245
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

So, then clarify everything by definitively stating for the record,

"What happens in a doctor's exam room is private and confidential between the doctor, the patient/insured, and the insurer.

Neither YOU, I, nor ANYONE ELSE has the privilege to infringe upon that privacy by speculating upon or criticizing any aspect of it."




To perhaps intrude on this conversation. Nobody cares about that. What they care about is government mandating coverage and the loss of basic liberties represented by that control by the government on private enterprise and our pocket books.

_____________________________

"We master Our world."

(in reply to farglebargle)
Profile   Post #: 114
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:49:09 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline 		The "employer contribution" is a myth. It all comes out of your gross total compensation, and just like your employer gets no say in the contract you sign with Walt Disney World Resorts for vacation, aside from:

1) forwarding the quotes and contract forms from the insurer to you

2) collecting the signed contracts on the insurer's behalf.

3) Telling you some fairy tale about how generous they are and that they're not just cutting their 'contribution' out of your gross compensation numbers.

4) Forwarding the premiums on your behalf to the insurer.

Notice how the EMPLOYER isn't a signatory to the CONTRACT itself. Which, of course, in every court of law in the universe, means, they have no rights in terms of the PRIVATE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE INSURED AND INSURER.

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 115
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:50:44 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		But allowing the church to mandate zero BC OR abortion coverage for female non believers is fine with you?
apparently

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 116
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:51:35 AM   
farglebargle


Posts: 10715
Joined: 6/15/2005
From: Albany, NY
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Arturas


quote:

ORIGINAL: farglebargle

So, then clarify everything by definitively stating for the record,

"What happens in a doctor's exam room is private and confidential between the doctor, the patient/insured, and the insurer.

Neither YOU, I, nor ANYONE ELSE has the privilege to infringe upon that privacy by speculating upon or criticizing any aspect of it."




To perhaps intrude on this conversation. Nobody cares about that. What they care about is government mandating coverage and the loss of basic liberties represented by that control by the government on private enterprise and our pocket books.


On exactly what planet have Insurance Companies never been a product of state regulation?

_____________________________

It's not every generation that gets to watch a civilization fall. Looks like we're in for a hell of a show.

ברוך אתה, אדוני אלוקינו, ריבון העולמים, מי יוצר צמחים ריחניים

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 117
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:51:51 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Raiikun


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl


You do realize that the past. oh... 10 posts, perhaps, have been nothing but claiming people are strawmanning?



If people will stop making claims as to my stance that I didn't make, it wouldn't be necessary.

MM made a statement about men being "free riders". I addressed that one single point with a silly response, and you're making all kinds of wild assumptions about what I meant from it that I never made. It's tiresome.

You also never addressed the point.

Other posters are right--it's about winning an argument for you.

(in reply to Raiikun)
Profile   Post #: 118
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:52:45 AM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

To perhaps intrude on this conversation. Nobody cares about that. What they care about is government mandating coverage and the loss of basic liberties represented by that control by the government on private enterprise and our pocket books.


Sort of like when the insurance company denied coverage to a new born because they were at 99 percentile on a growth chart, therefore being obese?

Or when insurance companies decided to drop patients with aids, regardless of the coverage they were entitled too and had to subsequently fight for?

Private enterprise does not have "our" best interests at heart... only its own wallet.


_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to Arturas)
Profile   Post #: 119
RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republi... - 3/18/2012 10:55:36 AM   
Raiikun


Posts: 2650
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

You also never addressed the point.


When the point is made without a logical fallacy, I'll do more to address it. Or at least try to. It's hard to keep up with the barrage of attacks right now.

< Message edited by Raiikun -- 3/18/2012 10:56:14 AM >

(in reply to Musicmystery)
Profile   Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Rush Suggests GOP Is Not Anti-Woman Because Republicans "Take Women To Dinner. They Buy Wom Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 [6] 7   next >   >>
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

0.125