Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

BluegrassPreps.com

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

HealthCare Court Ruling Expected on Thursday

Featured Replies

Either Roberts knows what he is doing and trying.to set up Obama for failure in the election

 

Or

 

Some liberal has some bad dirt on Roberts and he was blackmailed into the vote.

  • Replies 242
  • Views 20.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Author
Either Roberts knows what he is doing and trying.to set up Obama for failure in the election

 

Or

 

Some liberal has some bad dirt on Roberts and he was blackmailed into the vote.

 

Very Newsmax-ish of you.

  • Author

Gov Romney's spokesperson says the Gov agrees that the fine is not a tax.

Interesting read. I'm not a fan of their FDA example. Proving that medication is safe is too important.

 

Also, the approach seems too simplistic. Back in the 60s things were good. Big government stepped in, now they're bad. There have been a plethora of changes since the 1960s, not the least of which is a population boom. I guess that it's the scientist in me that says you can't draw a valid conclusion when more than one variable has changed.

 

What part to you think the uninsured play in driving up costs? I haven't seen any figures and am not sure myself.

I read an article a while back that said an advocacy group for health care consumers claimed the average U.S. family and their employers paid an extra $1,017 in health care premiums in 2008 to compensate for the uninsured. I'm sure that sort of thing has been going on since then and likely before, so I'm sure they play a large enough part in it.
Read a report today that a few months ago Roberts was in lock step with the other 4 conservative justices and then changed his mind. Lots of arm-twisting then commenced.

 

If it was on CBS, I read the same thing. Seems like the other four dissenting justices were infuriated by Roberts' switch.

Lots of dramatic threads weaving through this ruling and it's aftermath.

Romney spokesmen says penalty. So much for unity in message from the Repubs! What is in a name? Legally, according the laws and now a formal ruling - it is a tax. Trying to rename it does not change where it fits in the law. If we are a nation of laws the discussion is over. If we are not, then the it can be spun however either side want. The world of 1984 has apparently finally arrived apparently. The government can seem to do anything they want and they only have to use new definitions to feed it to the masses.

 

It is simply amazing (and disheartening) to see the talking head debate this legally defined thing - on both sides.

On lighter side.....

 

Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require hip surgery.

 

The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day, and has a time booked for surgery the following week.

The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn't reviewed for another week, and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then, pending the review board's decision on his age and remaining value to society.

Why the different treatment for the two patients?

 

 

 

 

The FIRST is a Golden Retriever taken to a vet.

The SECOND is a Senior Citizen on Obama care.

 

 

And it came from a doctor....

I do know for a fact that with this Act, hospital admitting procuedures have to change, with respect to how/when a patient is asked financial questions. I'm not sure of all the details, but I know someone on here who is. :D The other person I know is in California right now and I can't talk to them until Sunday. :lol:

I do know for a fact that with this Act, hospital admitting procuedures have to change, with respect to how/when a patient is asked financial questions. I'm not sure of all the details, but I know someone on here who is. :D The other person I know is in California right now and I can't talk to them until Sunday. :lol:

 

How did they change?

How did they change?

 

I'm afraid to recount what I do know, because it's not complete. But, as I understand it, if you arrive at an ER, you are to be assessed by a triage nurse prior to being asked how you will pay. I don't know the particulars, I just know my son just finished revising their procedures because of new requirements.

On lighter side.....

 

Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require hip surgery.

 

The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day, and has a time booked for surgery the following week.

The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn't reviewed for another week, and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then, pending the review board's decision on his age and remaining value to society.

Why the different treatment for the two patients?

 

 

 

 

The FIRST is a Golden Retriever taken to a vet.

The SECOND is a Senior Citizen on Obama care.

 

 

And it came from a doctor....

 

With at least 2 (and probably many more) differences:

 

First, I'll bet the first patient's total cost is only a small fraction of the second patient,

 

Second, the first patient knows up front what the charge will be and is responsible for payment.

On lighter side.....

 

Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require hip surgery.

 

The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day, and has a time booked for surgery the following week.

The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn't reviewed for another week, and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then, pending the review board's decision on his age and remaining value to society.

Why the different treatment for the two patients?

 

 

 

 

The FIRST is a Golden Retriever taken to a vet.

The SECOND is a Senior Citizen on Obama care.

 

 

And it came from a doctor....

 

Of course, for the first patient, if his family can't pay, he is out of luck, even for life threatening illnesses or trauma.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.