Who else got an insurance rate hike?
in [Golf]
|
Prev: Jock strap recommendations for low hanging balls?
Next: Media buries story about convictions for massive election rigging
From: John B. on 11 Apr 2010 18:16 On Apr 10, 11:11 pm, Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Apr 10, 3:53 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > >news:2db963a2-1832-4516-89da-57f94a233a34(a)u31g2000yqb.googlegroups.com.... > > On Apr 10, 7:12 am, "Kommienezuspadt" <NoS...(a)NoThanks.net> wrote: > > > > "BAR" <sc...(a)you.com> wrote in message > > > >news:MPG.26299218c29dda33989dc6(a)news.giganews.com... > > > > > In article <2VMvn.98948$sx5.6...(a)newsfe16.iad>, NoS...(a)NoThanks.net > > > > says... > > > > >> > so -- you are saying you support loopholes like this? > > > > >> > interesting --- that's far too loose with money for my taste. > > > > >> Very stupid policy, IMHO. > > > > >> The whole free drug for seniors policy is/was a bad policy. This is > > > >> typical of these sorts of things though, IMHO. Some "deal" has to be > > > >> made to satisfy some contingency. How about "you use a product, like > > > >> say drugs, you pay for it"? Why is that so bad? And who is going to > > > >> pay for it if the user doesn't...and where are those people going to > > > >> get the money? > > > > >> === > > > >> except -- it is not free... facts -- darned liberal facts. > > > > > What portion of the cost is born by the direct beneficiary? > > > > That depends on factors --- you should look it up -- but Medicare Part D > > has > > > a deductible -- > > > > read this for a start -- or in your case -- have someone read it for you. > > > > then run along > > > > Beneficiary cost sharing (deductibles, coinsurance, etc.) > > > The MMA establishes a standard drug benefit that Part D plans may > > offer.[6] > > > The standard benefit is defined in terms of the benefit structure and not > > in > > > terms of the drugs that must be covered. In 2008, this standard benefit > > > requires payment of a $275 deductible. The beneficiary then pays 25% of > > the > > > cost of a covered Part D prescription drug up to an initial coverage limit > > > of $2,510. The defined standard benefit is not the most common benefit > > > offered by Part D plans. Only 10 percent of plans for 2008 offer the > > defined > > > standard benefit. Most eliminate the deductible and use tiered drug > > > co-payments rather than coinsurance.[7] > > > > Once the initial coverage limit is reached, the beneficiary is subject to > > > another deductible, known officially as the Coverage Gap but referred to > > > more commonly as the "Donut Hole," in which they must pay the full cost of > > > medicine. When total out-of-pocket expenses on formulary drugs for the > > year, > > > including the deductible and initial coinsurance, reach $4050 (now $4350 > > in > > > 2009[8]), the beneficiary then reaches catastrophic coverage, in which he > > or > > > she pays $2.25 for a generic or preferred drug and $5.65 for other drugs, > > or > > > 5% coinsurance, whichever is greater. The $4050 amount is calculated on a > > > yearly basis, and a beneficiary who amasses $4050 in out-of-pocket costs > > by > > > December 31 of one year will start his or her deductible anew on January > > 1. > > > Most low-income subsidy patients are exempt from all or part of the donut > > > hole and the deductible. > > > > The only out-of-pocket costs that count toward getting out of the coverage > > > gap or into catastrophic coverage are True Out-Of-Pocket (TrOOP) > > > expenditures. TrOOP expenditures accrue only when drugs on the enrolled-in > > > plan's formulary are purchased in accordance with the restrictions on > > those > > > drugs. Any other purchases do not count toward either the coverage gap or > > > catastrophic coverage. Monthly premium payments do not count towards > > > TrOOP. > > > ...and isn't it *TERRIBLE* that these poor people have to pay for some > > of the drugs they consume...so how do you pay for even this when > > everyone is consuming drugs? > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > There isn't a part D plan out there that doesn't have co-pays and/or > > deductibles. The participants are paying a portion of their meds plus the > > premium. What's so wrong with that? > > > -Greg > > Why don't they just buy their own meds? What % of the population can't > buy their own meds? How many people with golf memberships have their > meds discounted via a govt program?...for what...to give the > recipients enough free cash to have a golf memberships? In the mean > time unemployment for young people is 20%, and if they get a job 1/2 > of what they make goes to someone else. How much goes to either > deadbeats or people who have far more assets than the young person? A substantial percentage of Americans can't buy their own meds, including me. I take three prescription drugs. My wife takes three. If we had to pay for them ourselves it would cost several thousand dollars a month. Your ignorance of how people live is utterly amazing.
From: John B. on 11 Apr 2010 18:18 On Apr 10, 11:24 pm, Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote: > On Apr 10, 6:42 pm, "John B." <johnb...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Apr 10, 12:50 pm, Dinosaur_Sr <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> > > wrote: > > > > On Apr 9, 6:34 pm, "dene" <d...(a)remove.ipns.com> wrote: > > > > > "Dinosaur_Sr" <frostb...(a)dukesofbiohazard.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:fd1a94bf-aa15-46ab-81c1-4461ac8c077b(a)w42g2000yqm.googlegroups.com... > > > > > Very stupid policy, IMHO. > > > > > The whole free drug for seniors policy is/was a bad policy. This is > > > > typical of these sorts of things though, IMHO. Some "deal" has to be > > > > made to satisfy some contingency. How about "you use a product, like > > > > say drugs, you pay for it"? Why is that so bad? And who is going to > > > > pay for it if the user doesn't...and where are those people going to > > > > get the money? > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > Grandma on SS and a small pension paying $300/mo. for medication, just to > > > > stay alive. "Why is that so bad?" > > > > > -Greg > > > > Fine, so you can pick up the costs then? > > > > The aspect of this that some, like Gray Asphalt for example, don't > > > seem to get is that health care has expanded and improved dramatically > > > over the last few decades, and that is great. Driven a lot of economic > > > activity and given people access to better health care. > > > > For example, in the 1970's, how many people were on blood thinners and > > > statins? Today? In the 1970's how many people had angioplasty and > > > stents? Today? These kinds of things cost money, and that fact has to > > > be accounted for. The people talking about this today seem to me to be > > > using 1970's based logic on the costs of health care. > > > > The fact is that *EVERYONE* is going to have use of, in some sense or > > > another, expensive, modern health care. So my question remains: who > > > pays for it? IMHO, the fairest solution is for the user to pay for it.. > > > If the taxpayer pays you wind up, at best, having working people > > > working solely to pay for health care. > > > > Everyone can't have everything, the best, whatever. That applies to > > > housing, food, transportation, health care, clothing, > > > education...whatever aspect of society you want to look at. > > > > So who is the decider? The govt. giving one size fits all to everyone, > > > like in the UK, so John Bs mom couldn't spend her 2 million being as > > > comfortable as possible with her ALS, but gets the one size fits all > > > daily visits from some nurse, like in the UK? Or how about you get > > > what you can earn...and the govt helps out people in legitimate > > > need...but no universality to any entitlement. > > > A UK-style system would not have prevented my mother from spending her > > money on medical and nursing care. > > Depends. If she needed access to specialists and specialized > facilities it would have. They are tightly rationed, and money doesn't > buy access. You are dead wrong and you have no idea what you're talking about.
From: BAR on 11 Apr 2010 19:40 In article <45d14ed4-d005-4e38-bd4d- 00a2fec1e9fb(a)c1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > > > Why don't they just buy their own meds? What % of the population can't > > buy their own meds? How many people with golf memberships have their > > meds discounted via a govt program?...for what...to give the > > recipients enough free cash to have a golf memberships? In the mean > > time unemployment for young people is 20%, and if they get a job 1/2 > > of what they make goes to someone else. How much goes to either > > deadbeats or people who have far more assets than the young person? > > A substantial percentage of Americans can't buy their own meds, > including me. I take three prescription drugs. My wife takes three. If > we had to pay for them ourselves it would cost several thousand > dollars a month. Your ignorance of how people live is utterly amazing. > Is it society's fault that you and your wife's health is screwed up? No. You could stop playing golf. You could stop high speed Internet. You could stop cable TV. You could going out to eat luch and dinner. You could stop your cell phones. There are many things you could do to rearange your finances so that you can pay for your own drugs rather than brudening your friends, neighbors, and fellow citizens to support your health and life style.
From: John B. on 11 Apr 2010 19:53 On Apr 11, 7:40 pm, BAR <sc...(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <45d14ed4-d005-4e38-bd4d- > 00a2fec1e...(a)c1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, johnb...(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > Why don't they just buy their own meds? What % of the population can't > > > buy their own meds? How many people with golf memberships have their > > > meds discounted via a govt program?...for what...to give the > > > recipients enough free cash to have a golf memberships? In the mean > > > time unemployment for young people is 20%, and if they get a job 1/2 > > > of what they make goes to someone else. How much goes to either > > > deadbeats or people who have far more assets than the young person? > > > A substantial percentage of Americans can't buy their own meds, > > including me. I take three prescription drugs. My wife takes three. If > > we had to pay for them ourselves it would cost several thousand > > dollars a month. Your ignorance of how people live is utterly amazing. > > Is it society's fault that you and your wife's health is screwed up? No. > > You could stop playing golf. You could stop high speed Internet. You > could stop cable TV. You could going out to eat luch and dinner. You > could stop your cell phones. > > There are many things you could do to rearange your finances so that you > can pay for your own drugs rather than brudening your friends, > neighbors, and fellow citizens to support your health and life style. Explain to me, please, how relying on insurance to pay for our meds is a burden on our friends, neighbors and fellow citizens.
From: William Clark on 11 Apr 2010 20:09
In article <MPG.262c27fef07c901b989dd7(a)news.giganews.com>, BAR <screw(a)you.com> wrote: > In article <45d14ed4-d005-4e38-bd4d- > 00a2fec1e9fb(a)c1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>, johnb505(a)gmail.com says... > > > > > > Why don't they just buy their own meds? What % of the population can't > > > buy their own meds? How many people with golf memberships have their > > > meds discounted via a govt program?...for what...to give the > > > recipients enough free cash to have a golf memberships? In the mean > > > time unemployment for young people is 20%, and if they get a job 1/2 > > > of what they make goes to someone else. How much goes to either > > > deadbeats or people who have far more assets than the young person? > > > > A substantial percentage of Americans can't buy their own meds, > > including me. I take three prescription drugs. My wife takes three. If > > we had to pay for them ourselves it would cost several thousand > > dollars a month. Your ignorance of how people live is utterly amazing. > > > > Is it society's fault that you and your wife's health is screwed up? No. > > You could stop playing golf. You could stop high speed Internet. You > could stop cable TV. You could going out to eat luch and dinner. You > could stop your cell phones. > > There are many things you could do to rearange your finances so that you > can pay for your own drugs rather than brudening your friends, > neighbors, and fellow citizens to support your health and life style. John, why don't you do as Bert says, and just go out, lie down in the street, and die? That would save him from the appalling possibility of ever having to do the right thing for any human being other than himself. |