12

One-Quarter Of All Doctors Refuse ObamaCare

Posted by IndianaGary 6 years, 5 months ago to News
23 comments | Share | Flag

The law of unintended consequences: ObamaCare separates us into those who have some semblance of health-care and those who don't. The law of supply and demand cannot be thwarted no matter the scale or number of temper-tantrums from the left. This can only get worse until this piece of crap is repealed.
SOURCE URL: http://www.dickmorris.com/one-quarter-doctors-refuse-obamacare-dick-morris-tv-lunch-alert/?utm_source=dmreports&utm_medium=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Snoogoo 6 years, 5 months ago
    The best way to prepare for what is to come in the health care industry thanks to Obamacare is to get a gym membership, eat healthy, take lots of vitamin C, and try to avoid unfortunate accidents as much as possible. I say that as a person who works in the health care industry. Taking a first aid class would also be helpful. Make sure you can treat wounds, stitch, and can get a hold of some common remedies. Order some antibiotics from Canada or Mexico just in case. Have a nice day everyone!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 6 years, 5 months ago
    Some comments I've read indicate that my point of view may not be clear: as an Objectivist, I am opposed to any form of government control or intervention in ANY economic endeavor, including medical care. The purpose of my post is to highlight the latest attempt by our government to "manage" a significant element of our economy. We need to dismantle ObamaCare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. However, one must swallow an elephant (or a whale) one bite at a time and the repeal of ObamaCare appears to me the first order of business. To do this requires that we refute progressivism and its adherents and promote capitalism as the solution to the problems that such governmental intervention has caused.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ winterwind 6 years, 5 months ago
      I think your position is perfectly clear, and I'm mostly in the same gang. I lean more towards the anarchist side because I can't navigate the slippery slope.
      I think repealing Ocare is the first step because it has not had as long a time to get its tentacles into everything. And always, ALWAYS have a Capitalist/freedom-oriented solution or reply.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 6 years, 5 months ago
        I would also say that one step in the right direction would be to eliminate all employer-sponsored plans and substitute them all with personal plans. This would have the following effects:
        1) when a person changes employment, their insurance provider wouldn't change - allowing for more seamless coverage and virtually eliminating the issues with pre-existing conditions. If one is in the same geographical area, it even means that the patient could retain their same family practice physician and all that personal medical history and knowledge.
        2) all insurance premiums would be individually evaluated just like all other insurance programs. Individuals of high risk would have a commensurately high premium (encouraging people to more proactively manage their lifestyles and health habits) and those with low premiums (due to low risk) aren't paying for the high rates of others!

        Now this would in no way prevent businesses from offering offsets for insurance costs as part of their benefits packages, but it would surely cut down on the costs of HR to the business, as well as improving employee mobility. I think the most dramatic effect would be cutting down on the current third-party-payer problem that currently infests our healthcare system, encouraging people to over-consume because they don't have to pay for the costs.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 6 years, 5 months ago
          Outlawing employer plans would be a bad thing. But we should certainly get rid of the WW2-era tax law (which makes them deductible to employers) that resulted in the creation of so many employer plans.

          The big problems in insurance now, though, are these:

          1. The ban on insurance companies discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions. This pretty much guarantees that adverse selection will destroy the private health insurance industry.

          2. The requirement that most people buy insurance, including people too poor to pay the deductible.

          And 3. The requirement that insurance policies cover a laundry list of things the leftists find desirable.

          Items 1 and 2 are entirely results of ObamaCare. Item 3 existed but has been made much worse by ObamaCare.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ blarman 6 years, 5 months ago
            I'm not saying we have to outlaw them. That would be a governmental control of business I don't support. I wholly support eliminating the tax laws giving preferential treatment because - again - I view it as interference in business. I still believe that health insurance plans should be treated no differently than auto insurance or homeowner's insurance and be individually acquired and maintained for the reasons mentioned. I don't object to employers providing money specifically targeted to defray deductibles, etc. in order to attract employees, but I am looking at the issue specifically through the lens of the problem of the third-party-payer problem: the issue that people consume more of something if they are subsidized in doing so. When either the government or a business absorb part of the costs of healthcare, individuals make less efficient decisions.

            I completely agree with your list and its results, but feel that adding the third-party payer problem is also critical, as are tort reform (which affect physicians' malpractice insurance) and red tape reform (ie bureaucracy and reporting nonsense that limit a physician's effective time with patients).
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ blarman 6 years, 5 months ago
        I am trying to find the article I saw, but there is a healthcare center that offers treatments and surgeries where they advertise the entire cost up front and at a fraction of what a similar procedure would cost via insurance. The catch? They specialize in a cash-only or payment-plan business - they don't accept most insurance plans. But their patients are overwhelmingly positive about the experience - not only the bill but the level of service. I'd appreciate some help finding the link again - I want to say the place was in Texas...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ richrobinson 6 years, 5 months ago
    ObamaCare is a disaster. If Republicans control all three branches in 2016 they will most likely gut it. I doubt we will see a full repeal. There is just too much money and too many special interest groups involved.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rballan 6 years, 5 months ago
    I just came across a site whose concept sounds like a very viable alternative to govt-mananged health care, called Liberty HealthShare. It works similar to the old fraternal organizations that existed before the govt took over everything. Organizations that work similar to this essentially enable their members to choose their own physicians, hospitals, and methods of treatment. The organization negotiates with the health care provider for a price that reflects the savings of not having to meet all the regulations and paperwork requirements imposed by the govt. The patient instructs the health organization to send the bill to the fraternal organization managing medical expenses, and the monthly payments made by all of the members go towards paying the bill. It's not an insurance organization as it is only paying actual bills and not anticipating statistical expenses. Monthly expenses paid by the members reflect the annual expenses incurred by the members. The healthier the members remain, the lower the expenses. The members have to agree to make certain lifestyle changes in order to participate in the program. This can exist in lieu of medical insurance or as a supplement to it. Something like this might be a good concept for people who have no insurance, can't afford the increasing cost of insurance, or who are healthy, retired, and don't want the inferior Medicare.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jlc 6 years, 5 months ago
      rballen -

      You have to take into account that if you qualify for Obamacare, you MUST buy Obamacare - or you pay a penalty fee. So whatever the cost of the new healthcare you purchase, it has to be lower by at least the cost of that fee in order to 'break even'. Right now the fees are not too high, and many >50 employee companies are paying the penalties and cancelling healthcare for their employees. (Our insurance rep says that 80% of his clients have now significantly reduced or entirely dropped employee coverage.)

      I suspect that the current penalty fees are just the camel's nose, and that they will be raised to be as much as the Obamacare payments.

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Technocracy 6 years, 5 months ago
    I think a lot of that discrepancy is created by how their practice is run rather than philosophical issues.

    If they are part of a large practice with many doctors and rafts of patients they are going to be more likely to accept obamacare patients.

    If they are in a small practice their business model won't support the sub-par payments of obamacare.

    Additionally the insurance carriers are dropping providers that won't meet their terms, so that too contributes to the shrinking of the providers.

    In any case it is likely to continue to get worse.

    Especially once some of the other mandates hit and religious based facilities drop out of Obamacare on religious grounds.

    Will be an ugly dilemma for me if that happens in my state. Anthem, our only carrier until next year, has already dropped half the hospitals in the state.

    The one I use is a faith based one, and I use it because my wife and I receive better care there. If they either get dropped by Anthem next year, or leave the network on their own, it will triple the distance for me to the nearest hospital my insurance accepts. At that point my options become even more constrained, either change to the further provider, or not use insurance. Neither option is a good one.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 6 years, 5 months ago

    Seventy-five per cent of doctors do not refuse ObamaCare. The other 25% is significant, and important. Rather than focusing on the headlines of the moment, it would be more productive to look at the philosophical assumptions of that other 75%, as they are no different from a similar number of other people in other professions. The cartelization of medical care - also legal advice, barbering, interior decorating, and dozens of other occupations - is rooted in old and deep assumptions. Adam Smith noted in the opening to _Wealth of Nations_ that it seldom happens that any tradesmen get together for dinner without discussing ways to restrict the markets to their own benefit.

    _Atlas Shrugged_ in particular and Objectivism in general are not rants against socialism, but rather, an knowledge set based on metaphysics and epistemology. Reality and reason - identifying the facts of existence - ultimately lead to correct thinking in economics and politics (as also in physical science and fine art). Establish an effective philosophical foundation and the rest will follow.

    I do not disagree with you Gary. I only point out that there is a deeper and more important problem.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 6 years, 5 months ago
    My general medical doctor's opinion about Obamacare: "They don't know what they are doing."
    I think that pretty well sums up la-la-land idealist socialist politicians, bumbling bureaucrats and dozy overpaid can't-be-fired government workers all playing doctor.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by peterchunt 6 years, 5 months ago
    This is just the beginning. As ObamaCare is fairly new, more and more doctors will be refusing it. Then what will the government do: dictate that a doctor can’t refuse ObamaCare?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 years, 5 months ago
    I wonder what percentage of doctors don't take HMOs clients. I think this is a similar phenomenon. I imagine providers will get started taking low-paying clients, those paying through gov't programs or low-paying HMOs. As they build their practice, they stop taking those and try to get higher-paying customers. This happens in other industries as well.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 6 years, 5 months ago
    Being a doddering old guy, I visit many doctors. Prior to Obamacare I asked them what they thought would happen if it became law. About half them had negative responses, even though no one fully understood it then. The various responses were about retiring, or going on staff at a hospital or going to a cash business. This article comes at no surprise to me.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo