FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
The South will never rise again. They're too unhealthy.
Lowest % of uninsured: Massachusetts
- Thread starter FistedSister
- Start date
LJ_Reloaded
バクスター の
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Posts
- 21,217
That's because people are forced to get insurance in Massachusetts. In the biggest corporate welfare giveaway scheme in the world, prior to Obamacare.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
They're against food inspections too. That's big government. They love grilled pink slime (meat processing waste).
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
Me too. Thanks Romney.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
Of course RomneyCare IS ObamaCare.
LJ_Reloaded
バクスター の
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Posts
- 21,217
http://www.cato.org/policy-report/januaryfebruary-2008/lessons-fall-romneycare
Billion-Dollar Overrun
According to insurance industry insiders, the plans are too costly for the target market, and the potential customers — largely younger, healthy men — have resisted buying them. Those who have signed up have been disproportionately older and less healthy. This should come as no surprise since Massachusetts maintains a modified form of community rating, which forces younger and healthier individuals to pay higher premiums in order to subsidize premiums for the old and sick.
Thus, between half and two-thirds of those uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so. That's a far cry from universal coverage. In fact, whatever progress has been made toward reducing the ranks of the uninsured appears to be almost solely the result of the subsidies. The much ballyhooed mandate itself appears to have had almost no impact.
The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money. Originally, the plan was projected to cost $1.8 billion this year. Now it is expected to exceed those estimates by $150 million. Over the next 10 years, projections suggest that Romney-Care will cost about $2 billion more than was budgeted. And the cost to Massachusetts taxpayers could be even higher because new federal rules could deprive the state of $100 million per year in Medicaid money that the state planned to use to help finance the program.
Given that the state is already facing a projected budget deficit this year, the pressure to raise taxes, cut reimbursements to health care providers, or cap insurance premiums will likely be intense. Romney likes to brag that he accomplished his health care plan "without raising taxes." Unless something turns around, that is not likely to be the case much longer.
Moreover, the cost of the plan is also likely to continue rising, because the Massachusetts reform has failed to hold down the cost of health care. When Romney signed his plan he claimed "a key objective is to lower the cost of health insurance for all our citizens and allow our citizens to buy the insurance plan that fits their needs." In actuality, insurance premiums in the state are expected to rise 10–12 percent next year, double the national average...
Billion-Dollar Overrun
According to insurance industry insiders, the plans are too costly for the target market, and the potential customers — largely younger, healthy men — have resisted buying them. Those who have signed up have been disproportionately older and less healthy. This should come as no surprise since Massachusetts maintains a modified form of community rating, which forces younger and healthier individuals to pay higher premiums in order to subsidize premiums for the old and sick.
Thus, between half and two-thirds of those uninsured before the plan was implemented remain so. That's a far cry from universal coverage. In fact, whatever progress has been made toward reducing the ranks of the uninsured appears to be almost solely the result of the subsidies. The much ballyhooed mandate itself appears to have had almost no impact.
The Massachusetts plan might not have achieved universal coverage, but it has cost taxpayers a great deal of money. Originally, the plan was projected to cost $1.8 billion this year. Now it is expected to exceed those estimates by $150 million. Over the next 10 years, projections suggest that Romney-Care will cost about $2 billion more than was budgeted. And the cost to Massachusetts taxpayers could be even higher because new federal rules could deprive the state of $100 million per year in Medicaid money that the state planned to use to help finance the program.
Given that the state is already facing a projected budget deficit this year, the pressure to raise taxes, cut reimbursements to health care providers, or cap insurance premiums will likely be intense. Romney likes to brag that he accomplished his health care plan "without raising taxes." Unless something turns around, that is not likely to be the case much longer.
Moreover, the cost of the plan is also likely to continue rising, because the Massachusetts reform has failed to hold down the cost of health care. When Romney signed his plan he claimed "a key objective is to lower the cost of health insurance for all our citizens and allow our citizens to buy the insurance plan that fits their needs." In actuality, insurance premiums in the state are expected to rise 10–12 percent next year, double the national average...
LJ_Reloaded
バクスター の
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Posts
- 21,217
http://www.economicpolicyjournal.com/2012/08/the-disaster-that-romneycare-is-becoming.html
The claim then, as with the Affordable Care Act, was that health care would be less expensive if everyone had insurance. Soon Massachusetts Democrats leaked that their political strategy all along was to expand coverage only, because had RomneyCare seriously squeezed providers it never would have overcome industry opposition. "Bending the curve" on costs could be saved for another day, once a vast new government liability was locked in.
Sure enough, 79% of the newly insured are on public programs. Health costs—Medicaid, RomneyCare's subsidies, public-employee compensation—will consume some 54% of the state budget in 2012, up from about 24% in 2001. Over the same period state health spending in real terms has jumped by 59%, while education has fallen 15%, police and firemen by 11% and roads and bridges by 23%.
Meanwhile, Massachusetts spends more per capita on health care than any other state and therefore more than anywhere else in the industrialized world. Costs are 27% higher than the U.S. average, 15% higher when adjusted for the state's higher wages and its concentration of academic medical centers and specialists...
The health-care postman always rings twice, and now medicine itself is the target, instead of unsympathetic insurance companies. Under the plan, all Massachusetts doctors, hospitals and other providers must register with a new state bureaucracy as a condition of licensure—that is, permission to practice. They'll be required to track and report their financial performance, price and cost trends, state-sanctioned quality measures, market share and other metrics...
An 11-member board known as the Health Policy Commission will use the data to set and enforce rules to ensure that total Massachusetts health spending, public and private, grows no more than projected gross state product through 2017, and 0.5 percentage points lower thereafter. (And Paul Ryan's Medicare projections are unrealistic?)
No registered provider is allowed to make "any material change to its operations or governance structure," the bill says, without the commission's approval. The commission can also rewrite the terms of provider contracts with insurers and payment levels and methods if they are "deemed to be excessive."
The claim then, as with the Affordable Care Act, was that health care would be less expensive if everyone had insurance. Soon Massachusetts Democrats leaked that their political strategy all along was to expand coverage only, because had RomneyCare seriously squeezed providers it never would have overcome industry opposition. "Bending the curve" on costs could be saved for another day, once a vast new government liability was locked in.
Sure enough, 79% of the newly insured are on public programs. Health costs—Medicaid, RomneyCare's subsidies, public-employee compensation—will consume some 54% of the state budget in 2012, up from about 24% in 2001. Over the same period state health spending in real terms has jumped by 59%, while education has fallen 15%, police and firemen by 11% and roads and bridges by 23%.
Meanwhile, Massachusetts spends more per capita on health care than any other state and therefore more than anywhere else in the industrialized world. Costs are 27% higher than the U.S. average, 15% higher when adjusted for the state's higher wages and its concentration of academic medical centers and specialists...
The health-care postman always rings twice, and now medicine itself is the target, instead of unsympathetic insurance companies. Under the plan, all Massachusetts doctors, hospitals and other providers must register with a new state bureaucracy as a condition of licensure—that is, permission to practice. They'll be required to track and report their financial performance, price and cost trends, state-sanctioned quality measures, market share and other metrics...
An 11-member board known as the Health Policy Commission will use the data to set and enforce rules to ensure that total Massachusetts health spending, public and private, grows no more than projected gross state product through 2017, and 0.5 percentage points lower thereafter. (And Paul Ryan's Medicare projections are unrealistic?)
No registered provider is allowed to make "any material change to its operations or governance structure," the bill says, without the commission's approval. The commission can also rewrite the terms of provider contracts with insurers and payment levels and methods if they are "deemed to be excessive."
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
Thanks for the bump.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
Really, thanks.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
Texas Head Start is for
10 year olds.
10 year olds.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
They teach English as a second language in Texas.
Their first language is grunting.
Their first language is grunting.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
You can still graduate if you can bang two rocks together without breaking your fingers. Actually, they'll still let you graduate if you do break your fingers. There's no health insurance, so they'll just want you out of their hair.
FistedSister
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2012
- Posts
- 1,887
And don't get me started on
thievangelicals.
thievangelicals.
Before posting, you really should check out the stats first
http://nccd.cdc.gov/DHDSPAtlas/
Alot of the south is indeed unhealthy, as is the north, west and east.... just look at Mass......
However, the south and the west are having more people move into their regions from the north and east.....
http://nccd.cdc.gov/DHDSPAtlas/
Alot of the south is indeed unhealthy, as is the north, west and east.... just look at Mass......
However, the south and the west are having more people move into their regions from the north and east.....
Ishmael
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2001
- Posts
- 84,005
Your posts remind me of another poster one here
who argues that the oil that is located in the Gulf is miles out in the water... it is not, actually we could drill less than half a mile out from the beach to reach it (in about 30 feet of water). Why do we not, the environmentalists who think the planet needs saving. Hate to break the news, but asteroids hit the Earth, it really is not concerned with a plastic bag floating around, etc......
1970's, liberals swore that the Earth was cooling
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2...th-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley/
Now they say the Earth is warming (the last Ice age ended 10,000 years ago aprox., so they are sort of correct), however they are not sure about the truth of Global Warming either (based on a flawed report).....
just agendas to further their cause....
It is time to use common sense..... and I have seen very little from the overall leadership in the Federal Government, they just want to spend more of the money they (and we) do not have......or from the media, they just want to further the "agenda"
who argues that the oil that is located in the Gulf is miles out in the water... it is not, actually we could drill less than half a mile out from the beach to reach it (in about 30 feet of water). Why do we not, the environmentalists who think the planet needs saving. Hate to break the news, but asteroids hit the Earth, it really is not concerned with a plastic bag floating around, etc......
1970's, liberals swore that the Earth was cooling
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2...th-and-time-magazine-covers-by-david-kirtley/
Now they say the Earth is warming (the last Ice age ended 10,000 years ago aprox., so they are sort of correct), however they are not sure about the truth of Global Warming either (based on a flawed report).....
just agendas to further their cause....
It is time to use common sense..... and I have seen very little from the overall leadership in the Federal Government, they just want to spend more of the money they (and we) do not have......or from the media, they just want to further the "agenda"
