Page 7 of 41
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:20 pm
by Pudfark
Pudfark wrote:Pudfark wrote:The meaning, seems to have "flown over" yer head.
So, here/hear ya go....a "simples" define for ya....
ObamaCare is as affordable and usable to most folks......as.....owning a jet plane is.
Old Pudfark sez: "
Six dollar prescriptions sound great !!!! If'n ya can find a Doc, to write them...? "
CALIFORNIA: OBAMACARE TURNING CANCER PATIENTS AWAY
The Los Angeles Times reports that once Obamacare customers navigate the confusing websites and pay the (often higher) premiums, they face a new problem:
many doctors do not accept Obamacare insurance policies. It tells the story of a cancer patient who was turned away at the oncologist's office, and was
only seen by a doctor once state regulators came to her rescue. Her story is not alone: millions will face the same problem.
There are
two reasons patients will be turned away: one that President Barack Obama hid, and one that he lied about. The
first is that there is a shortage of doctors. There simply are not enough doctors (or nurses) to see a population of patients that grows bigger, suddenly, by some 30 million people (in theory). The second reason:
insurance companies have to cut certain doctors and hospitals out of their plans in order to keep prices within a reasonable range while still covering all the things the law requires. So you can't necessarily "keep your doctor."
The LA Times' story about a cancer patient is particularly ironic, considering that
Obama used cancer as a prop to sell the legislation--both to tout the law's coverage for pre-existing conditions, and to tell misleading stories about how his own mother was abandoned by insurance companies when she was being treated for cancer.
As the
Washington Examiner and Breitbart News reported last December, as many as 70% of California doctors will not participate in Obamacare. That is a reality
many patients are discovering as they lose insurance policies they once enjoyed and discover that the doctors in their new Covered California policies are little more than "phantom networks." They are victims of Obamacare's cost controls--and they are finding out "what's in it."
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ients-Away
So, pretty much
I predict a one sentence re-butt-all from Slick saying something quotable like "BS"...from the White House, something like "We got 3 million signed up".....while the painful truth will be ignored by both.
callmeslick wrote:ask anyone in California on any health plan, public or private. They will set you straight. IE-more bullshit from Breitbart.
There ya go again demonstrating yer "selective" comprehension and debate skillz, Slick.
Washington Examiner and Breitbart News reported last December, as many as 70% of California doctors will not participate in Obamacare.
Since ya can't/won't/unable to comprehend? The Washington Examiner was the "lead" on the story.
So, on yer last comment, above.....What are the fine folks in California gonna
set me straight on?
Moral Conduct or ObamaCare?
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 3:57 pm
by callmeslick
both of those articles were/are complete bullshit. Nothing of the sort is happening. Just because you read something on one of those ridiculous right-wing no-brainer websites, doesn't make it fact. I repeat, ask people from California. I have(several flyfishing buddies out on the left coast), and to a person they say such assertions are utterly foolish.
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 4:01 pm
by callmeslick
here ya go:
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik ... z2sTnoso8G
Pud, you have to find out what a 'real' news source is.......seriously, you are getting played.
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Wed Feb 05, 2014 6:46 pm
by Pudfark
Quoted myself from another thread that SLick started....about the link above...
"
ya finally...threw a link out there that says this "That article was wrong," says Molly Weedn, spokeswoman for the CMA. "We have no idea how many doctors are participating. We don't collect that data."
And
you have the naivete to call this proof....
It's pretty apparent ya don't read what you link....and it's been very obvious, you don't, for the last several years...sheeesh !
"
Jeeez...how'd ya make it through/threw school?
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:35 am
by callmeslick
directly from the linked article:
"In fact, according to Covered California, the only source with verifiable numbers, some 58,000 doctors, or more than 80% of the state's practicing physicians, will be available to enrollees in the exchange's health plans"
80% is a bit different that 20%, huh, Pud? Yeah, I made it through school, and kept on learning after my Master's Degree. That's why I don't buy into every piece of bullshit that folks try to feed me on the Interweb.
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 10:41 am
by callmeslick
this one is from a more ideological source, but I like the summary sentence: "Thanks for the laughs, Brietbart!"
NO, they aren't turning cancer patients away. In fact, the closer look shows that cancer patients can find BETTER coverage. Oh, well, let's not let
the truth muck up a good Obamacare-hate session.
http://politix.topix.com/story/10276-fa ... ients-away
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 12:49 pm
by Pudfark
callmeslick wrote:directly from the linked article:
"In fact, according to Covered California, the only source with verifiable numbers, some 58,000 doctors, or more than 80% of the state's practicing physicians, will be available to enrollees in the exchange's health plans"
80% is a bit different that 20%, huh, Pud? Yeah, I made it through school, and kept on learning after my Master's Degree. That's why I don't buy into every piece of bullshit that folks try to feed me on the Interweb.
So, you're saying this quote from the same link is wrong?
"We have no idea how many doctors are participating. We don't collect that data." I see, you just see what ya want....Sorta makes a discerning person wonder...why, it was hidden 1/3 of the way...deep in the article linked. I'd say, if'n it was in the first sentence? There would exist no reason to read further. Ya think?
Pretty much denotes that the numbers you threw out above....are Bull Shit...not because I say so, because they, your source, says so.
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 1:05 pm
by callmeslick
no, if you read for comprehension, you would see what is being said is that they KNOW that 58% of Doctors are participating(verifiable numbers),but that they don't know the total(which would be 58% PLUS SOME YET NOT KNOWN NUMBER). Those two factoids alone make it OBVIOUS that your numbers, sourced from the Examiner and Breitbart are blatant lies. Now, the question becomes, why do you insist on standing by them, now that I've proven them to be lies? Can't bring yourself to examine your choice of sources? Too stupid to grasp simple English? Just want to keep hating anything to do with Obama? What is it....maybe all of the above?
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 1:12 pm
by Pudfark
callmeslick wrote:this one is from a more ideological source, but I like the summary sentence: "Thanks for the laughs, Brietbart!"
NO, they aren't turning cancer patients away. In fact, the closer look shows that cancer patients can find BETTER coverage. Oh, well, let's not let
the truth muck up a good Obamacare-hate session.
http://politix.topix.com/story/10276-fa ... ients-away
Certainly not the truth...what's yer posted links..professional reputation? Paid mouthpiece for Lib's?
Anybody wanting to know the source that Slick cites and I slight? Click on the link below:
http://politix.topix.com/
Pure Drivel....another bunch of unrecognizable "bloggers".....paid for by "Soros" (most likely).....
Seem's funny in a sad way....that's the best you can come up with, Slick?
Some "backwater", "back alley" shill fer libs site...to refute this disaster...do ya really think the folks here and around this country...will rely on crap like that.......anymore?
Here ya go....a recognizable/respected News Source that's number 1 in the U.S. and a few others..
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02 ... or-choice/
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... TopStories
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-0 ... s-low.html
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... ients-Away
Re: Three days..Three weeks..Three months..
Posted: Thu Feb 06, 2014 1:19 pm
by Pudfark
callmeslick wrote:no, if you read for comprehension, you would see what is being said is that they KNOW that 58% of Doctors are participating(verifiable numbers),but that they don't know the total(which would be 58% PLUS SOME YET NOT KNOWN NUMBER). Those two factoids alone make it OBVIOUS that your numbers, sourced from the Examiner and Breitbart are blatant lies. Now, the question becomes, why do you insist on standing by them, now that I've proven them to be lies? Can't bring yourself to examine your choice of sources? Too stupid to grasp simple English? Just want to keep hating anything to do with Obama? What is it....maybe all of the above?
This is what I know...you posted it in the link you supplied.
Not my fault, ya don't like it. However, if ya got a "lick of sense" you'd know it negates everything else in the link.
"We have no idea how many doctors are participating. We don't collect that data."
So, keep twisting away at the handle bars...in yer feeble attempt to steer away from the truth...that they buried and you refuse to recognize. So, keep throwing numbers that are meaningless and inaccurate to try to hide what I "boldly" quoted above. You have every appearance of a "Cat trying to coverup an elephant turd".....so, keep digging..