Health insurance

[Guest guest]

Judy,

I am not looking to start another political discussion here, but you appear to

be terribly misinformed as are many in relation to health care.

The government is NOT giving away medicare to everyone. That would be a much

improved system to what we have. What they are doing is making certain that

people who have been denied coverage will be able to purchase private insurance,

not medicare.

Also there is not going to be a cut back in services but a cut back in subsidies

to the insurance companies for providing medicare advantage plans.

Jeff

________________________________

From: judymcglothlin <dreamcatcherdoxi@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 9:59:36 AM

Subject: Re: Health insurance

When I first became eligible for Medicare I did sign up for an HMO...Secure

Horizons.  I had Secure Horizons for several years until it became necessary to

have hip replacements.  I found that no doctors except those who are willing to

accept Secure Horizons payments were available to me.  Same thing with the

hospitals. 

So I dropped Secure Horizons and went with straight Medicare.  My surgeon

doesn't accept any insurance so he was out of pocket, but the hospital was paid

in full, minus the deduction. 

Also, my optomotrist had been after me for some time to see an opthamologist

because of narrow angles in my eyes.  I did not have insurance under Secure

Horizons for that...at least not for someone I trusted.  But when I went to

straight Medicare I was able to go to Loma and under Medicare have the eye

surgery necessary to correct that problem.

Of course who knows what the future will bring now that the government is freely

giving away Medicare to all and cutting back on benefits.

Judy McG

> >

------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Thank you Jeff. You summed it up and were very polite. Joan

________________________________

From: Scharff <zinsdad@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 3:31:42 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Health insurance

Judy,

I am not looking to start another political discussion here, but you appear to

be terribly misinformed as are many in relation to health care.

The government is NOT giving away medicare to everyone. That would be a much

improved system to what we have. What they are doing is making certain that

people who have been denied coverage will be able to purchase private insurance,

not medicare.

Also there is not going to be a cut back in services but a cut back in subsidies

to the insurance companies for providing medicare advantage plans.

Jeff

________________________________

From: judymcglothlin <dreamcatcherdoxi@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 9:59:36 AM

Subject: Re: Health insurance

When I first became eligible for Medicare I did sign up for an HMO...Secure

Horizons. I had Secure Horizons for several years until it became necessary to

have hip replacements. I found that no doctors except those who are willing to

accept Secure Horizons payments were available to me. Same thing with the

hospitals.

So I dropped Secure Horizons and went with straight Medicare. My surgeon

doesn't accept any insurance so he was out of pocket, but the hospital was paid

in full, minus the deduction.

Also, my optomotrist had been after me for some time to see an opthamologist

because of narrow angles in my eyes. I did not have insurance under Secure

Horizons for that...at least not for someone I trusted. But when I went to

straight Medicare I was able to go to Loma and under Medicare have the eye

surgery necessary to correct that problem.

Of course who knows what the future will bring now that the government is freely

giving away Medicare to all and cutting back on benefits.

Judy McG

> >

------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

Hi Joan,

Thanks. Unfortunately so many people are misinformed on this topic and tend to

believe the sound bites they hear or the emails that get sent from one side of

an issue or the other which is propoganda but not necessarily factual, or from a

TV network which has their own political agenda and again repeats the party line

which many take as fact but has no truth to it at all, instead of researching

what the truths are. This has become the way of all our political campaigns here

where facts are secondary to what a candidate can get people to believe might be

true usually with some type of fear factor.

It's completely up to us citizens to delve through the rumor and innuendo in

order to make an informed decision and many of us do not go through the trouble.

Again in no way am I attempting to start a political discussion here.

Thanks again,

Jeff

________________________________

From: Joan Kell <kell_joan@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 10:59:17 AM

Subject: Re: Re: Health insurance

Thank you Jeff.  You summed it up and were very polite.  Joan

________________________________

From: Scharff <zinsdad@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 3:31:42 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Health insurance

 

Judy,

I am not looking to start another political discussion here, but you appear to

be terribly misinformed as are many in relation to health care.

The government is NOT giving away medicare to everyone. That would be a much

improved system to what we have. What they are doing is making certain that

people who have been denied coverage will be able to purchase private insurance,

not medicare.

Also there is not going to be a cut back in services but a cut back in subsidies

to the insurance companies for providing medicare advantage plans.

Jeff

________________________________

From: judymcglothlin <dreamcatcherdoxi@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 9:59:36 AM

Subject: Re: Health insurance

When I first became eligible for Medicare I did sign up for an HMO...Secure

Horizons.  I had Secure Horizons for several years until it became necessary to

have hip replacements.  I found that no doctors except those who are willing to

accept Secure Horizons payments were available to me.  Same thing with the

hospitals. 

So I dropped Secure Horizons and went with straight Medicare.  My surgeon

doesn't accept any insurance so he was out of pocket, but the hospital was paid

in full, minus the deduction. 

Also, my optomotrist had been after me for some time to see an opthamologist

because of narrow angles in my eyes.  I did not have insurance under Secure

Horizons for that...at least not for someone I trusted.  But when I went to

straight Medicare I was able to go to Loma and under Medicare have the eye

surgery necessary to correct that problem.

Of course who knows what the future will bring now that the government is freely

giving away Medicare to all and cutting back on benefits.

Judy McG

> >

------------------------------------

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/4/2010 7:31:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

zinsdad@... writes:

Also there is not going to be a cut back in services

Batteries for my hearing aids used to be free, now I have to buy them.

Somebody cut back on furnishing batteries, the government maybe?

Brickey

[Guest guest]

Hearing aids are not covered by Medicare so batteries would not

covered either. Glasses aren't covered either.

If your batteries were being provided for free, it was by some other

organization.

On Sep 4, 2010, at 2:00 PM, Skippyfj@... wrote:

>

> In a message dated 9/4/2010 7:31:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

> zinsdad@... writes:

>

> Also there is not going to be a cut back in services

>

> Batteries for my hearing aids used to be free, now I have to buy them.

> Somebody cut back on furnishing batteries, the government maybe?

> Brickey

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Brickey,

Actually what I should have & meant to write is that most of the cuts are the

susidies.

However I didn't think batteries are a medicare covered item. Perhaps if you

have a supplemental policy they might have been picking up the cost of them.

Jeff

________________________________

From: " Skippyfj@... " <Skippyfj@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sat, September 4, 2010 5:00:04 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Health insurance

In a message dated 9/4/2010 7:31:55 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 

zinsdad@... writes:

Also  there is not going to be a cut back in services

Batteries for my hearing aids used to be free, now I have to buy them. 

Somebody cut back on furnishing batteries, the government maybe?

Brickey

[Guest guest]

Ah, Jeff. But what about the people who are here illegally and who are

demanding and getting things I have worked for all my life...free medical care,

etc. That is what I meant.

Judy McG

> > >

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Judy,

Those people will not be getting free medical care. That was another of the

scare tactics being used. Actually almost no one will be getting it for free.

Yes there will be subsidies for lower income people to help purchase insurance

and they will have to prove their citizenship and will be paying for their

insurance.

Jeff

________________________________

From: judymcglothlin <dreamcatcherdoxi@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sun, September 5, 2010 9:57:17 AM

Subject: Re: Health insurance

Ah, Jeff.  But what about the people who are here illegally and who are

demanding and getting things I have worked for all my life...free medical care,

etc.  That is what I meant.

Judy McG

> > >

>

>

>

>

> ------------------------------------

>

>

[Guest guest]

I really need to jump in and correct another one of the egregious

misstatements of facts which you have just emailed.

US and state law has ALWAYS required that emergency care be given to

anyone without regard to ability to pay or proof of citizenship.

Because many CITIZENS of this country can not obtain health insurance

and use emergency rooms as their only means of receiving medical care,

the cost of providing this care is passed along to EVERYONE in the

form of higher health insurance costs but these higher costs are

because of CITIZENS receiving care.

Those who are in the country illegally are not eligible for any

government subsidies; free medical care under the new law except to

the extent that emergency care has always provided. Ironically illegal

aliens working in the US are actually providing a subsidy for our

Social Security system and Medicare system since many of them do pay

taxes including the SS/Medicare portion and will never collect on

their payments.

Really this is not the forum for debate or discussion of what is a

complex issue. However, if you persist in polluting the list with your

un-truths regarding what is actually contained in the new health

insurance reform act, I will continue to have to provide factually

correct information.

On Sep 5, 2010, at 6:57 AM, judymcglothlin wrote:

> Ah, Jeff. But what about the people who are here illegally and who

> are demanding and getting things I have worked for all my

> life...free medical care, etc. That is what I meant.

>

> Judy McG

>

>

> > > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ------------------------------------

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Thank you also for your cogent remarks.

Now could we get back to what this forum is for?

________________________________

From: " jujulabee@... " <jujulabee@...>

Joint Replacement

Sent: Sun, September 5, 2010 3:30:58 PM

Subject: Re: Re: Health insurance

I really need to jump in and correct another one of the egregious

misstatements of facts which you have just emailed.

US and state law has ALWAYS required that emergency care be given to

anyone without regard to ability to pay or proof of citizenship.

Because many CITIZENS of this country can not obtain health insurance

and use emergency rooms as their only means of receiving medical care,

the cost of providing this care is passed along to EVERYONE in the

form of higher health insurance costs but these higher costs are

because of CITIZENS receiving care.

Those who are in the country illegally are not eligible for any

government subsidies; free medical care under the new law except to

the extent that emergency care has always provided. Ironically illegal

aliens working in the US are actually providing a subsidy for our

Social Security system and Medicare system since many of them do pay

taxes including the SS/Medicare portion and will never collect on

their payments.

Really this is not the forum for debate or discussion of what is a

complex issue. However, if you persist in polluting the list with your

un-truths regarding what is actually contained in the new health

insurance reform act, I will continue to have to provide factually

correct information.

On Sep 5, 2010, at 6:57 AM, judymcglothlin wrote:

> Ah, Jeff. But what about the people who are here illegally and who

> are demanding and getting things I have worked for all my

> life...free medical care, etc. That is what I meant.

>

> Judy McG

>

>

> > > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > ------------------------------------

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

The problem is that you provide no sources for what you claim are facts. By

definition a politician can not be a source of fact so leave them out of any

sources you want to cite. I know that you are wrong that hospitals " always " had

to provide emergency care. I don't think you also don't understand how the

economics of medical care work. The cost of providing this emergency care is

not passed on to everyone in the form of higher health insurance costs.

Insurance companies negotiate and pay lower rates than would be billed to the

un-insured. Medicare and Medicaid pay pennies on the dollar for what would be

billed to the un-insured. Costs for care to those unable to pay increase costs

for everyone in several ways.

I don't intend to reply to this thread again and I hope this thread will end

quickly.

> > > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > ------------------------------------

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

This is not the venue for a discussion but I stand completely behind

what I stated

Federal and state law require every hospital to treat people on an

emergency basis. Once they can safely be out of the hospital, there is

no duty to provide further care. But if someone has a heart attack or

is giving birth or has been involved in a serious accident, a hospital

must treat that person regardless of ability to pay.

To say that the costs are not passed on indicates you don't know

anything about economics of health care delivery. Obviously insurance

companies negotiate rates with hospitals but hospitals have to find a

way to be paid for that so they attempt to pick up the costs by

spreading them to all consumers of health care. As stated, it's a very

complex issue and some hospitals that serve a high percentage of non-

insured are closing up -- which impacts even those with insurance.

Again, I apologize for responding to something not entirely on topic,

but misinformation is dangerous when not corrected.

I don't feel the need to provide a cite because anyone with even the

basic knowledge of health care delivery knows that hospitals have

always been required to treat all on an emergency basis and the health

reform act does not alter that in any manner.

On Sep 5, 2010, at 10:12 AM, Curtis wrote:

> The problem is that you provide no sources for what you claim are

> facts. By definition a politician can not be a source of fact so

> leave them out of any sources you want to cite. I know that you are

> wrong that hospitals " always " had to provide emergency care. I don't

> think you also don't understand how the economics of medical care

> work. The cost of providing this emergency care is not passed on to

> everyone in the form of higher health insurance costs. Insurance

> companies negotiate and pay lower rates than would be billed to the

> un-insured. Medicare and Medicaid pay pennies on the dollar for what

> would be billed to the un-insured. Costs for care to those unable to

> pay increase costs for everyone in several ways.

>

> I don't intend to reply to this thread again and I hope this thread

> will end quickly.

>

>

> > > > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ------------------------------------

> > > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

You guys are funny. Noone wants to have a discussion; but y'all just keep

writing....

On 9/5/10 10:34 AM, " jujulabee@... " <jujulabee@...> wrote:

> This is not the venue for a discussion but I stand completely behind

> what I stated

>

> Federal and state law require every hospital to treat people on an

> emergency basis. Once they can safely be out of the hospital, there is

> no duty to provide further care. But if someone has a heart attack or

> is giving birth or has been involved in a serious accident, a hospital

> must treat that person regardless of ability to pay.

>

> To say that the costs are not passed on indicates you don't know

> anything about economics of health care delivery. Obviously insurance

> companies negotiate rates with hospitals but hospitals have to find a

> way to be paid for that so they attempt to pick up the costs by

> spreading them to all consumers of health care. As stated, it's a very

> complex issue and some hospitals that serve a high percentage of non-

> insured are closing up -- which impacts even those with insurance.

>

> Again, I apologize for responding to something not entirely on topic,

> but misinformation is dangerous when not corrected.

>

> I don't feel the need to provide a cite because anyone with even the

> basic knowledge of health care delivery knows that hospitals have

> always been required to treat all on an emergency basis and the health

> reform act does not alter that in any manner.

>

> On Sep 5, 2010, at 10:12 AM, Curtis wrote:

>

>> The problem is that you provide no sources for what you claim are

>> facts. By definition a politician can not be a source of fact so

>> leave them out of any sources you want to cite. I know that you are

>> wrong that hospitals " always " had to provide emergency care. I don't

>> think you also don't understand how the economics of medical care

>> work. The cost of providing this emergency care is not passed on to

>> everyone in the form of higher health insurance costs. Insurance

>> companies negotiate and pay lower rates than would be billed to the

>> un-insured. Medicare and Medicaid pay pennies on the dollar for what

>> would be billed to the un-insured. Costs for care to those unable to

>> pay increase costs for everyone in several ways.

>>

>> I don't intend to reply to this thread again and I hope this thread

>> will end quickly.

>>

>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> ------------------------------------

>>>>>

>>>>>

[Guest guest]

Amen, Jackie

Dorie

Re: Re: Health insurance

You guys are funny. Noone wants to have a discussion; but y'all just keep

writing....

On 9/5/10 10:34 AM, " jujulabee@... " <jujulabee@...> wrote:

> This is not the venue for a discussion but I stand completely behind

> what I stated

>

> Federal and state law require every hospital to treat people on an

> emergency basis. Once they can safely be out of the hospital, there is

> no duty to provide further care. But if someone has a heart attack or

> is giving birth or has been involved in a serious accident, a hospital

> must treat that person regardless of ability to pay.

>

> To say that the costs are not passed on indicates you don't know

> anything about economics of health care delivery. Obviously insurance

> companies negotiate rates with hospitals but hospitals have to find a

> way to be paid for that so they attempt to pick up the costs by

> spreading them to all consumers of health care. As stated, it's a very

> complex issue and some hospitals that serve a high percentage of non-

> insured are closing up -- which impacts even those with insurance.

>

> Again, I apologize for responding to something not entirely on topic,

> but misinformation is dangerous when not corrected.

>

> I don't feel the need to provide a cite because anyone with even the

> basic knowledge of health care delivery knows that hospitals have

> always been required to treat all on an emergency basis and the health

> reform act does not alter that in any manner.

>

> On Sep 5, 2010, at 10:12 AM, Curtis wrote:

>

>> The problem is that you provide no sources for what you claim are

>> facts. By definition a politician can not be a source of fact so

>> leave them out of any sources you want to cite. I know that you are

>> wrong that hospitals " always " had to provide emergency care. I don't

>> think you also don't understand how the economics of medical care

>> work. The cost of providing this emergency care is not passed on to

>> everyone in the form of higher health insurance costs. Insurance

>> companies negotiate and pay lower rates than would be billed to the

>> un-insured. Medicare and Medicaid pay pennies on the dollar for what

>> would be billed to the un-insured. Costs for care to those unable to

>> pay increase costs for everyone in several ways.

>>

>> I don't intend to reply to this thread again and I hope this thread

>> will end quickly.

>>

>>

>>>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>>

>>>>> ------------------------------------

>>>>>

>>>>>