Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'News / Current Events' started by Crabtownboy, Nov 21, 2013.
Insurance companies have death panels choosing what will and what will not be covered.
:laugh: Some people do not understand what a death panel actually is.
He must be running out of arguments. He's recycling old ones.
The DNC is panicked right now.
Look at the far left-wing website he's using for his source on this! That's laughable!
There aren't death panels in the ACA, and there aren't death panels in current insurance companies.
Basically I agree with you. There are others who insist there are death panesl in ACA and if there are then there are in insurance companies. However those folk are not honest enough to admit it ... just playing politics.
There are individuals and panels in insurance companies who do make life and death decisions on individual cases.
Everyone knows there are death panels in Obamacare. It would not work without them.
Why don't you send that woman in my link one of your hateful cartoons ?
As usual you did not do your homework. She and her family would have saved money under ACA. Thanks for providing additional proof that ACA is not all that bad. Read on ....
You don't get it, as usual. The woman's current plan with her current doctors are not available with Obamacare. Even your own "article" says that.
And I won't debate it. You still owe me some answers in another thread. I won't invest the time engaging you on it, because you will disappear, and come back with, "I don't check all the threads", or "your not being rational", or any one of a host of other reasons you come up with to mask the fact that you don't have the respect for anyone enough to treat them honestly.
There are death panels in the ACA. There will be people who decide who lives, and who dies. There is nothing like this in the insurance industry.
Under Medicare, which is now gutted by the Democrats, if you are 76 and have a heart attack or something you cannot be admitted into a hospital without the permission of your family doctor unless you assume responsibility for the bill.
If that is not a Democrat death panel, what is?
Because it is such a bad plan it did not meet the minimum requirements. And her costs were higher under her plan as the graphic below shows.
It is from: http://thinkprogress.org/health/201...-street-journal-buy-cheaper-obamacare-policy/
I trust my family doctor much more than I do an insurance employee death panel to make that decision. If you do not trust your family doctor I'd suggest you find a new doctor.
That "bad plan" spent 1.2 million dollars to keep her alive.
You don't know what you are talking about. We're used to that, here. This post of yours shows us what you really care about.
What if that new family doctor isn't covered by Obamacare ?
Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Your excusing Obama's lies betray where your heart really is.
No there aren't death panels. The actual ACA has language built into the bill to prohibit such things. This is a lie developed by folks on the far right to scare everybody else about a bill they couldn't defeat.
Listen, I don't like the ACA and think what is happening around it in DC is an abomination to the intent of our Founders. However, it is simply wrong to say death panels exist in the ACA.
I don't have much time today to devote to looking back through some old threads and the actual bill, but I've made this point before and backed it up with the actual bill. There is language in the bill and about the regulatory powers of various agencies that prohibits 'death panels.'
Here's a quick look at where the ACS prohibits "death panels"
The health care law directs a new national board -- with 15 members who are political appointees -- to identify Medicare savings. It's forbidden from submitting "any recommendation to ration health care," as Section 3403 of the health care law states. It may not raise premiums for Medicare beneficiaries or increase deductibles, coinsurance or co-payments. The IPAB also cannot change who is eligible for Medicare, restrict benefits or make recommendations that would raise revenue.
What it can do is reduce how much the government pays health care providers for services, reduce payments to hospitals with very high rates of re-admissions or recommend innovations that cut wasteful spending. Some argue that because the IPAB can reduce the money a doctor receives, this could lead to an indirect form of rationing.
But the board wouldn't make any health care decisions for individual Americans. Instead, as PolitiFact Georgia reported, it would make broad policy decisions that affect Medicare's overall cost. [PolitiFact, 10/3/12]
No, I was simply saying that I trust my family doctor over an insurance company employee making such a decision.
How about you. Would you rather have the insurance company make such a decision?
No one said, but you implied, that ACA would not have covered her. The article shows you are wrong ... and she would have saved money. Be honest now.