BarBri was fun - more fun than being a lawyer. However, law has its perks too.
One of those perks is being able to join bar associations and their listservs. One such bar association is the New York State Bar Association, and one such listserv is for "General Practice." The emails are usually mundane, but last week things started to get absurd.
Below you will see the long ranging debate on the healthcare law. Enjoy the people claiming to be experts based on anecdotal experience and the total disregard for the inboxes of the hundreds of others lurking in the background.
Everyone who has posted has shared their email addresses with the entire listserv, so I have no qualms about reposting their names here. I will leave out their email addresses because they create enough spam and don't need more. My comments are in Red Courier because I can. Emails are posted in their entirety in the order I received them. I left out the quoted stuff unless it was relevant and the vast majority of people's signatures.
If you're studying for the bar, remember - follow the lead of these people and you too can do something besides the practice of law with your law degree.
Subject: OFF TOPIC - Health insurance
Thursday, November 14, 2013
1. It all begins fairly innocuously.
4:47 PM, David Aronstam
Counselors:
I subscribe to the NYSBA health insurance plan.
I am a solo practitioner and my premium is a higher than those practicing in a group because the insurance lobby managed to have such a provision inserted into the law.
I was wondering if anyone has looked into what is available on the NYS health insurance exchange and how it compares to the NYSBA plan?
Thank you.
I subscribe to the NYSBA health insurance plan.
I am a solo practitioner and my premium is a higher than those practicing in a group because the insurance lobby managed to have such a provision inserted into the law.
I was wondering if anyone has looked into what is available on the NYS health insurance exchange and how it compares to the NYSBA plan?
Thank you.
2. And then a genuine response, in an attempt to be helpful (but with the necessary side-track complaining about something or other that's totally irrelevant).
4:59 PM, Joanne Fanizza
David,
I was insured through NYSBA until the premiums
skyrocketed. I even wrote a letter to our attorney representative to tell
them what happened, and I didn't even get a response. That was sorely
disappointing, so I went out in the market and found a policy with almost
identical coverage for a little more than half the price. I think the
health exchanges are pretty close to what I'm paying, also. It's worth a
look.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
3. The followup.
5:02 PM, David Aronstam
Thanks Joanne.
Can you share where you got your policy?
Can you share where you got your policy?
4. Ooooh - me too! (Forgetting that everyone will reply to the entire listserv anyway).
5:42 PM, Esther Bryan
Joanne,
I would like to know where you got your policy, also.
Esther
5. The first political comment. Lacking substance and attempting to make an easy - and not very funny - joke. Clearly an attempt to move the conversation forward. I appreciate the automatic "Yours truly," included at the end.
7:24 PM, Paul F. LaGattuta III
Isn't Obama saving us one at a time?
Yours
truly,
Paul
F. LaGattuta III
6. This email was started three hours earlier. It is clearly off-topic, and veiled in an attempt to be "helpful" while admittedly being a "soap box." That last line - who was being thanked? Those who read the email? Enjoy - now you're being thanked too. And dear reader, maybe this is it - 9:19 at night, last one for the day. Go to bed thinking that your email box won't be too full in the morning.
9:19 PM, Nancy Delain
David,
I can’t tell you how the Exchange compares to the NYSBA plan (since I don’t have the NYSBA plan), but I CAN tell you that the Exchange compares VERY unfavorably to the health insurance I now have in place and will lose, despite Mr. Obama’s speechifying today, on 1 January. I was paying $158/month for a health insurance plan that suits me excellently through my Chamber of Commerce (that $158/month is about $20/month higher than it would be if I had a partner or an employee; we’ve dealt with that inequity for years now), but will now have to pay $520/month for “better” insurance that also covers, by mandate, the expensive areas of pediatrics and obstetrics. Understand that I am pushing 60 and have no plans to conceive or adopt a child.
I am NOT happy. Unfortunately, for “individuals” (aka solo lawyers) there seems to be little alternative to the Exchange. Obamacare is upon us, and it will spread like a virus to larger employment groups next year. Verbum sapiente to all those who practice in groups: watch out; it’s comin’ at you, too!
“If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. Period.” Horsehockey. I just hope Mr. Obama’s line about keeping your doctor is more accurate, but that would surprise me.
Thanks for the soap box opportunity!
Nancy
Friday, November 15, 2013
7. Another attempt at being helpful. The early morning hour must of meant that the poster had no idea what he was getting into.
3:15 AM, Thomas Rothschild [Located in Brooklyn, NY according to the signature, so yes, this is in the middle of the night.]
Just
remember that health insurance is rated county by county, so Joanne's
experience may not be helpful to you if you are in a different part of the
state.
Tom
Rothschild
8. Only woke up to one. Phew. This could have been bad.
10:57 AM, Joanna Fanizza
David,
I have a United Healthcare plan (Oxford). My agent is JCD
Planning Corp d/b/a Proactive Benefits of Setauket. My contact there is [REDACTED - It's clearly not the contact's fault].
I've had trouble with United, too, but not as much as I did with
MVP.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
9. Wait a minute ... there's more to be said here. And I get to feign outrage too!!
11:02 AM, Joanne Fanizza
Only those who want to be saved. There is still a large
number of fools out there who like buying illusory policies and throwing their
money out the window. And still others who are shocked -- shocked!
I tell you -- that we would dare regulate an insurance industry. They're
the ones bent over.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
10. Time to pick a fight. And written quickly too. [Also when I stopped reading every word of every email.]
11:10 AM, Robert Larson, Esq.
I don't know about that. Tell the person who purchased
the insurance that he/she, not some other individual, selected and that he/she,
not some other individual, felt meet his/her needs that the policy was faulty
or inadequate. High deductible policies are in existence because they
meet a need and are not garbage. People want them because they are a
value to the consumer who purchase the product. Now the person who
purchased the high deductible policy is basically being told your choice was
dumb/stupid/foolish/choose your word to indicate the imbecile here. When
did government get to be the one who told the voter/electorate that he/she is
an idiot and not the other way around? All this healthcare spin would be
a lot easier to take if Congress/White House was in the same boat and receiving
the same cancellation notices, but they receive healthcare that the term
"premium" would not even adequately describe. To condescend to
their constituents that the policies, high deductibles or otherwise, they have
been purchasing are now junk is just too much to stomach.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
11. "I'm not going to read all the emails of a subject and then reply at the end. I'm going to reply to each one individually, progressively, and get more outraged as I go."
11:11 AM, Joanne Fanizza
Nancy,
What in the world did you get for $158/month? I haven't
seen premiums like that in decades. Was it simply for catastrophic
hospital coverage?
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
12. I think this email is supposed to be helpful, but I'm not sure what it means. It was clearly hastily sent from a smart phone.
11:16, Florian Bruno, Esq.
For
those of us who just recently started their firms - healthy New York. You
cannot make more than - I think $26,000 per year as a couple. That is firm
profits after all deductions. They look at the last 6 weeks or so.
If
you qualify you can get 50 - 60% off on existing plans - like Aetna or
Oxford.
11:17 AM, Joanne Fanizza
Who used the word "imbecile"? Not me. The
only reason why those illusory policies are purchased is because people who
can't afford health insurance would at least like to have catastrophic
coverage, which usually have incredible deductibles, like $10,000.
Let's see, you drive a car, don't you? And you're required
to have minimum coverage, aren't you? And the gov't tells you that,
doesn't it?
So what's the difference? We want you to have a healthy
body, like we want you to have a healthy car.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
14. There is no good way to write this sound: "na-ah."
11:29 AM, Robert Larson, Esq.
I used the word. It is analogous to the ones all the
politicos are using, just more succinct. And yes, the government does
tell me to buy car insurance. The only problem with that argument is that
it is not the Federal government it is the State government who is regulating
that market. The State governments were the traditional regulators of
insurance, but now the Fed feels it knows how to regulate health insurance.
We see how well that is going. The other problem is that the auto
deductibles are not set in stone. The insured can set the amount of the
deductible to match the specific comfort level of the individual. If you
don't want a $500 deductible then go for a $1,000 or $2,500.
The high deductible policies are not illusory. They
are not out there for the poor, the policies are there for people who do not
frequent the health care system often and chose to purchase the policies.
None of those individuals purchase them because they have been forced to
purchase them. Which is odd because now they are being forced to purchase
policies they actually don't want. People who know what they need and
when they need it. The individuals who purchase high deductible types of
policies understand their risk tolerance and are comfortable with the level of
the deductibles and the type of coverage the policy provides.
Robert B. Larson, LPN, JD
15. I miss the autumn of 2012. Don't you? Can't wait for 2016! Rah Rah Rahmney. And I think Massachusetts is a commonwealth, not a state. Maybe we can start emailing about that?
11:34 AM, Joanne Fanizza
It's going exceptionally well in MASSACHUSETTS, the state after
which Obamacare was patterned.
It was called Romneycare, and not a Republican dissed it.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
16. Alex, I'll take "Getting My Jeopardy References All Screwed Up" for $200.
11:40 AM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Correct, and it should have stayed state specific and not
been done by the Federal system. Perfect argument against it. Last
question...how many times were people told they could keep their insurance
(Period.) before they were summarily canceled? I'll take what is greater
than 25!
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
17. The one-sided Fact Check. (First of many.)
11:48 AM, Joanne Fanizza
The full quote, which I saw on MSNBC, but which you will not see
on Fox, was:
"You will be able to keep your insurance if you like
it. Except some people will lose their policies because they won't meet
the new standards. Those people will get better policies and help buying
them."
We have become a nation of partial information, rush to
judgment, and general overall stupidity. As a former newspaper reporter,
I'm flummoxed by the crap that passes for media today.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
18. The reasonable liberal steps in to try to concede a little and steady the boat. Does it work? [Hint: Never.]
11:50, Joel Gaffney
The state/federal argument is a legitimate argument, but it
misses the point. The point is that the healthcare system in the United
States has been, and continues to be, a complete failure for the vast majority
of Americans.
You are probably right that mandatory, regulated individual
insurance policies were not the best way to address the systemic problems with
the healthcare system. But it is simply wrong to argue that
high-deductible health insurance plans were not predatory. They may not
have preyed on the individuals who purchased them, but they preyed upon the
public at large, by shifting most of the cost of their healthcare to taxpayers.
Requiring individuals and businesses to internalize the
systemic costs of their healthcare decisions is a good thing, because it is
individuals and their doctors who make the decisions that determine the costs
of the healthcare system. Requiring everyone to contribute to the
nation's health and well-being is reasonable, too, because a nation's health is
a public good, much like transportation infrastructure, law enforcement, and
disaster relief.
Maybe it would have been better to simply implement a public
payer system so that the government pays for what is a public good, like it
does for other public goods, but that wasn't an option that could have passed
in Congress. So instead, you have mandatory health insurance for
everyone, so the insurance companies can get their bite of the apple.
19. The original poster realizes that this is no longer about him or his concerns and therefore must chime in. Also I have no explanation for why the time of this is so much earlier, but came in after the other, later posts. Stupid interwebs.
11:38 AM, David Aronstam
And
when an individual who has a low cost limited coverage policy gets ill and it's
not covered by the policy, who pays the bill?
David Aronstam
David Aronstam
20. But Fox News is Fair and is Balanced. Just like a fat kid on a seesaw. And the President is a liar.
12:01 PM, Robert Larson
And when did he say that? Before or after the numerous
promises?
And dare I say, I have been a nurse for over two
decades and am quite sure I am not stupid of the many things I am. I
would make that charge of the politicians, regardless of party, who are
supposed to represent our communal best interests. I dread what our
healthcare system is going to become in the next few years. Wherever you
sit, stand or lay down on the political spectrum this fiasco is going to affect
you. And the media, especially MSNBC, is not doing the job they
should--ever. P.S.--Yes, that quote was and has been on Fox numerous
times.
Regardless, you don't fix a bad problem with a bad problem.
Why not require all employers to provide group insurance to all
employees? Pool the applicants, make small businesses join together (like
unions did) and purchase together to attain an acceptable risk pool? There
are other ways to attain coverage without involving the government messing up
the system and spending $636,000,000 on a website that can't handle any traffic
and then saying OOPPS!
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
21. Selective use OF all-caps IS LOTS of fun When Coupled with capitalizing Certain adjectives.
12:03 PM, Joanne Fanizza
Thank you, Joel. I always wanted us to adopt what every
other First World country, and what many Second World countries, have adopted,
which is UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE.
I would love nothing more than to have Medicare for All.
NOW.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
22. OK. Even with new posters, I've stopped reading every word. My comments are also going to get sporadic. This poster might not have intended to fan the flames of the war. But maybe he did.
12:14 PM, Jason Lowe
I am not so interested in a
political discussion - I am more interested right now about how this affects my
pocket book in the immediate term. My plan was cancelled for next year so
I have been shopping around. Here is what I have found:
The NYSBA plan is still expensive. The broker told me NYSBA may come up with another plan but don't count on it for 2014.
The NYSBA plan is still expensive. The broker told me NYSBA may come up with another plan but don't count on it for 2014.
If you live in NYC then NYCLA
has a plan. It is a little less than $600 a month. It is solid in
that it has little (or possibly no) deductible. The provider network is
not robust though. It is a pre-ACA plan that has been grandfathered
in. If you sign up before the year ends you will be grandfathered in
too. I don't know if that grandfather will apply if you sign up after the
start of the new year. The other disadvantage is you have to be an area
covered by the plan (I think Long Island, NYC, and Westchester). You can go
on the NYCLA website for more info. I can also say the broker here was
nice and very helpful.
Health NYer - someone else
suggested that. You need to have very low income to qualify. Also,
I heard it may be canceled because of the ACA.
I still think as attorneys we can't qualify for the
freelancers insurance (unless you do a lot of IP, entertainment law, or some
other specific areas). It is worth exploring though just in case you
qualify.
The exchange:
I have poked around there a bit. If you want a lower tier plan there are plans in the low to mid $300 a month range (at least that show up for me here in NYC). Those plans obviously have higher deductibles (ie $3000 per person and $6000 per family). They also have plans in the $530-$550 a month range with much lower deductibles (ie $600-$1000 per person and $1200-$2000 per family). If you want even smaller deductibles and co-pays the exchange has plans in the $620 a month range with deductible in the $0-$200 per person and $0-$400 per family range.
I have poked around there a bit. If you want a lower tier plan there are plans in the low to mid $300 a month range (at least that show up for me here in NYC). Those plans obviously have higher deductibles (ie $3000 per person and $6000 per family). They also have plans in the $530-$550 a month range with much lower deductibles (ie $600-$1000 per person and $1200-$2000 per family). If you want even smaller deductibles and co-pays the exchange has plans in the $620 a month range with deductible in the $0-$200 per person and $0-$400 per family range.
One other note - I think if you are not solo there is a way
to sign up your business for the exchange. I do not know how this works
because it doesn't apply to me, but there may be a way to get cheaper coverage
on the exchange that way (as others have noted we are for some reason penalized
for being solo).
Anyway, that is what my
research has shown. I am happy to hear if anyone else has any other
ideas.
Jason
23. Let me insult America based on some absurd comment. That should lead to a positive conversation.Jason
1:20 PM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
We've stopped being a first world country a while ago. Have you recently driven a car on New York city's streets?
24. Calling back to 11:35 AM (post 15) and last night (post 6):
1:28 PM, Meyer Y. Silber
Joanne, are you kidding? Respond to Nancy’s email re the
options she is required to pay for yet will NEVER use.
25. The bombshell! I.e., that this flamer can be classified as part of a stereotypically liberal group. Reminds of a "republican" on a stereotypically liberal television network.
1:35 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Government in it's infinite wisdom has deemed that a 60 year
old woman and a gay man (like myself) need maternity coverage. I also am
not having children, period. I wonder if I get GNY visits too (doubt I'll
take advantage of that benefit)!
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
26. See ¶ 3 (blaming Obama). Now blaming the media too. And it's Kool Aid. And truly, he is still yours. Or mine. I'm not sure.
1:39 PM, Paul F. LaGattuta III
Media has ALWAYS been pushing crap and now they are
awakening from the Obama Koolaide they drank
Yours
truly,
Paul
F. LaGattuta III
27. What you really want is something less like what you want, you just don't know it.
1:39 PM, Joel Gaffney
No Robert, that's incorrect.
"Government in its infinite wisdom" has determined
that maternity coverage for all women is a public good to which everyone should
contribute. Because the method used to distribute the costs of healthcare
that the majority of Congress found most palatable was the
"privatization" of that distribution, that means that everyone has to
have an insurance policy that covers maternity coverage, so that the costs of
maternity coverage are spread evenly across the entire country.
If you're unhappy with the system because you can pull out
individual case studies that seem unfair (and admittedly, when you look at them
in isolation, they do seem unfair), then you should be supporting a
single-payer system.
28. The ever informative response. (Responding to 26).
1:40 PM, Paul F. LaGattuta III
Funny
Yours
truly,
Paul
F. LaGattuta III
29. Oooh. Oooh. I have some barely related personal anecdote that makes me anything but an expert (even under Daubert) so I must chime in.
1:48 PM, Marla Pilaroscia
Having
performed external review for Medicare programs (Medicare Advantage and
prescription drug plans) for 15 years, I am not sure that Medicare enrollees
are satisfied with these products.
Marla
Pilaroscia
30. Doesn't this man have any clients?
1:48 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Thank you Paul and Marla. Doesn't Medicare take like
9-12 months to pay it's suppliers (both medical and DME)?
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
31. A new voice - who unfortunately doesn't add anything to the conversation. But here's a spoon. Go ahead, stir the pot.
1:58 PM, Rebecca Oliver
I agree that the Affordable Care Act is fatally
flawed and Medicare isn't much better. It is corporate welfare for insurance
companies
I am lucky to have employer based coverage, which covers my
family for $150 a month, and it is the highest level of coverage and covers
EVERYTHING. I am afraid that the costs will rise and eventually
this will go away. All of the choices available on the exchange are inferior
to what I currently have. The plans on the exchange offer a basic, minimal
benefit, not what many of us may be used to. Also, exchange
plans will cost ten times as much.
The employer mandate had already been delayed a year. How do
we know this will not become indefinite? Employers are also cutting hours
and forcing people onto the exchange by dropping coverage all together. So they
have escaped all responsibility, and all costs are being pushed onto middle
class consumers and taxpayers.
What we really need is a real employer mandate, to cover
everyone with a job regardless of the hours with no exceptions. And Medicaid or
Medicaid buy in for everyone else, with basic and not comprehensive benefits.
Then if you want more you can buy more (like dental, vision, etc).
32. RWC (Replied Without Comprehension)
2:09 PM, Joanna Fanizza
Rebecca,
I want to know where you're getting health insurance for
$150/month. I will sign up RIGHT AWAY.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
33. Another new voice, this time with historical references and everything. Also, you'd think with a mouse and keyboard and delete key, post-script messages wouldn't be necessary.
2:12 PM, Richard I. Leff
If the democrats had
balls and the republicans had brains we'd get together and have universal
health care; I don't know, let's call it Medicare (and combine it with
Medicaid), where everyone would have 100% coverage for all medical (and, yes,
optical and dental and even prescription drug) treatment, with no deductibles
and no co-pays and no coinsurance and the world would be good. It would be paid
for by taxes on everyone, proportionate to income. We could regulate the
drug companies as to what their products were actually worth and regulate the
medical device providers as to what their products were actually worth, (of
course we can't/haven't regulated the military industrial complex as to what
their products are worth [$1,000.00 toilet seats and $500.00 hammers
anyone?]and cut out the insurance companies altogether (except as to maybe
being administrators of the paper work involved) and maybe we'd have a system
that fit and served everyone, since we already pay in taxes for treatment of
the uninsured indirectly in any event.
But that would be
labeled "socialist" or even "communist" by red-necks who
can't even read.
The lobbyists for the
drug, insurance and medical device people will never give up their stranglehold
on the current system which should be canned in favor of universal healthcare.
No one should lack
access to or treatment by our healthcare system. And if that means that
those of us who are able have to pay for those who are not (and in the long run
we do anyhow) so be it.
P.S.: Don't you
love when some a-hole who carries minimum coverage totals a $60,000.00 car and
can't pay because he has minimum insurance coverage and is otherwise judgment
proof? Who pays the difference in the end? Obviously, we all do
since the insurance companies are not in the business to post a loss.
They just increase everyone's policy for the next few years, ad infinitum.
P.P.S.: And I
agree that it sounds absurd to require 60 year old, single women to have
pediatric or contraceptive coverage, but it pays for the medicaid patients'
coverage in the long run, which would be paid by everyone in increased taxes or
increased premiums in any event.
And yes, the poverty
level people won't be paying anyhow. They even get an EIC tax
credit/refund for not earning enough. So what's the difference?
Just saying.
I hereby affirm under
penalty of perjury that I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of the
communist (or socialist) party.
So there-Joe McCarthy.
34. Dear RWC-er. Please begin comprehending.
2:16 PM, Rebecca Oliver
My husband's employer provides it.
35. RTS (Responded Too Soon). This is in response to number 25.
2:18 PM, Richard I. Leff
Why don't you try. You
might even like it. (Disclaimer: That's only meant as a joke-it's the
Robin Williams in me that somehow just pushes itself out [double entrendre
intended]).
36. I wonder which Senate she worked for. And, damnit people, persons be dying.
2:33 PM, Marla Pilaroscia
I am
not sure it is that simple. In the late 80s I worked for a US Senate that
has jurisdiction over Medicare and Medicaid. We researched other models
extensively and to our surprise, we ended up not being in favor of a single
payor plan. I don't have any answers, but the other countries
(Canada, Europe) we researched had significant flaws and gaps in access to care
resulting in mortality.
37. Again, I don't know why the time stamp ended up coming in after a later time. I think it's Marx's fault.
2:32 PM, Phil Byler
Richard:
It is unaffordable socialism, with its defective world view, that
you are advocating that ignores there are some real and terrible costs in terms
of lost lives and poor health care that results from socialized medicine.
Such socialism has failed elsewhere; what makes you think that it can work in a
large country with a complex economy such as the United States?
Phil
38. I bet he was eating lunch, and not tending to clients, for the last hour and six minutes (well, maybe he spent six minutes writing this email).
2:54 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
I went to law school in St. Paul, MN. When I took
health law courses one of the interesting things we talked about was the fact
that our local healthcare system dealt with Canadians who used the system and
paid cash to access it for all types of procedures they could not get in Canada
in a "timely" fashion. It ranged from new knees to heart
surgery. I was astounded.
I visited a cousin with cancer in Leichester, England at the
hospital in 1995. Being a nurse I was terrified by the conditions she was
in. I felt like I had stepped back 50-75 years. I would not want to
be in the hospital in any other country. So for those that think we have
it bad, or are second/third world I say try getting the type of care you get in
this country anywhere (and I mean that literally). Go to anywhere else in
the world and think about IV antibiotics or dressing changes and not worry
about nosocomial infections (hospital acquired). You think we have a
problem with our healthcare system? Think about those that are coming to
this country for treatment.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
39. Wait -- I thought you were on the other side of this. No matter. Now this person's personal anecdotal experience makes her an expert.
3:03 PM, Rebecca Oliver
That is the propaganda. Does anyone have any data showing
"poor health care", higher wait times, and lost lives from the
European and/or Canadian systems?
My understanding is that the outcomes are equal or better in other developed countries, at much less cost. Wait times are also the same or less. Has anyone tried getting an appointment with a specialist lately?
I have also lived in France, Spain, and The Netherlands;
plus my husband is from Italy. In all of those countries, we had exceptional
care and paid little or nothing. My husband walked into an emergency room
in France for a minor problem, and was referred to a head and neck surgeon who
operated the next day at no cost. I was also sick in France. The doctor made a
house call, then he called an ambulance, and I spent a day in the
hospital. Excellent quality care, and it cost nothing out of pocket,
except 5-10 euros for medications. Europeans all complain about their
system, but they agree it is better than ours- and they do not worry about care
and costs like we do.
There are many "mixed" systems, like in Germany
and the Netherlands. Some basic benefits are provided for all and private
insurance for co-pays and extra benefits. They also work well and cost less.
I am mostly happy with the insurance I have, and would
like to keep my insurance situation the way it is for now. That being said,
don't believe everything politicians say. I am still waiting to see data
proving our system is superior and others inferior.
40. You don't believe me? My off-the-cuff remarks and personal anecdotes are proof, damnit. Yours are imaginary and illustrative of my point, not yours.
3:20 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Rebecca:
Propaganda? Did you read my email? I gave
specific instances. Either you are saying I am lying, writing incorrectly
or just posting wonderful fallacies to fulfill your claim of propaganda.
France, Spain and the Netherlands are all beautiful countries, but...the
difference is that we are a nation that actually produces stuff and we have a
higher standard of living, GDP, name it. France won't allow you to speak
freely or practice your religion freely. Spain is bankrupt. The
Netherlands allows rampant drug use and I don't mean professionally prescribed
drugs either. All three will tax you to the grave. Need I say more.
Your husband went to a doctor for a minor injury and then was seeing a
surgeon? Wouldn't that be a waste of economic resources? Couldn't
the doctors time have been used for someone who didn't have a "minor"
issue. Propaganda, I'll say.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
41. In response to 34, which was in response to your 32. And what does any of this have to do with the general practice of law? (Oh, we'll get there my friends. We'll get there.)
3:25 PM, Joanna Fanizza
Thanks a lot. What does that have to do with Obamacare?
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
42. Touche.
3:29 PM, Joel Gaffney
Way to completely ignore Germany there, Mr. Larson.
Also, it's worth noting that the Netherlands actually has a
lower per capita consumption of drugs that are illegal in the U.S. than the
U.S. has.
43. IRWT (In Robert We Trust) because really, his personal anecdotes support my political views so much better than everyone else's. God bless Murrica.
3:30 PM, Phil Byler
Robert, there are some of us here who know you are absolutely
correct.
Phil
44. I rate Antarctica's health care system the best. Freeze it off! Unless global warming is real, then oops.
3:31 PM, Joanna Fanizza
This is all old information. I've had multiple Canadians
and Brits inform me and all my friends that they have everything they need
now. They may have had to work out a few kinks, but they are covered.
They are not in need of American health care. In fact, theirs is rated
better. (And before the anti-universal health care people start yelling,
"Then why do so many of them come here for treatment?" I will
answer: Most of the treatment they come here for is cosmetic or extremely
experimental.)
It's tiring hearing old arguments that no longer apply.
But of course, it sounds to me like some of you prefer having a
country with millions completely uninsured, many millions more underinsured,
and the rest of us picking up the tab through taxes paying for Medicaid or
higher premiums due to bankruptcy filings (most of which are necessitated by
medical bills), etc.
Nothing like going backward.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
45. I don't think Marla said that.
3:33 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Read the email. Obamacare is going to affect all of
our premiums regardless of group or individual plan eventually. Marla was
saying she is concerned what this is going to do to her costs. Well I can
tell her, sorry, but eventually it will be more expensive.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
46. Two in a row. If the last one didn't make anyone respond, this one might.
3:37 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
I was in law school from 2006 to 2009 and was taking health
law classes during that time. Wow, the Canadians must have really pulled
together since then. Great for them. I still would not want to be
in the hospital in Canada, England, Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Uganda,
Russia, Costa Rica, Mexico, Burma, (insert name of country here) if I had my
druthers. Thanks, but I'll take the United States of America's healthcare
system anytime.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
47. It's hard to take you seriously when you can't spell There, Their, or They're correctly. I thought about starting that sentence with "Its," but I feared nobody would get my joke.
3:38 PM, Rebecca Oliver
Robert,
The examples you used were 1) something someone in a class
claimed to observe (no data), and 2) one visit to a cousin in England many
years ago. I shared my personal experience living in three countries and the
health care experience myself and my family had. If you have never experienced
it you cannot really know. This isn't the data I was asking for anyway.
Do you have any research proving your opinion? That is what I am requesting.
The economy of the Netherlands is doing great. It is a tiny
country but it has one of the top 20 GDPs in the world. There GDP per capita is
not significantly different than ours. They produce, produce, produce. Where do
you think your flowers and tomatoes come from? Though a tiny country, they
accounted for 1/3 of all tomatoes sold in the US (we can't even produce that).
They also have a system with private insurance and an individual mandate, and
government covers some costs for all like hospital care. The system works very
well.
You'd be surprised how rich France is too, and what they
produce. As for Spain and Italy, nobody is suggesting their economic problems
are because of health care. Unlike us, that is not the major factor.
No need to insult other places you don't fully understand.
Just what are we producing nowadays? Maybe you been to Upstate New York lately
and seen all of the abandoned factories? My husband is a mechanical
engineer, who has been through five factory closings already in his career.
If your opinion is fact and not propaganda, show us the
proof.
3:39 PM, Joanne Fanizza
My premiums were sliced almost in half due to Obamacare.
Please. Not everybody
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
49. At one point, I thought Florian was a spanish name. I guess the last name should have told me I was wrong.
3:42 PM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
What
has cost lives and provided poor health care is the fact that many Americans
had no health insurance . That the uninsured and underinsured would just walk
into an emergency room for any ailment. And of course not pay. At great expense
to the public as ER is the most expensive medicine.
In
the country of my birth (Germany) there is a dual healthcare system - basic
coverage is provided by large corporations that are government controlled - and
the rates are set and anyone employed can join. You can opt and buy your own
coverage with rates based on your age and health record. Better service,
shorter waits etc.
My
parents back then chose not to opt out though they would have qualified -
because with 3 kids it was cheaper to stay in the government regulated system.
One could say that a couple with no kids may have paid a bit more so that my
parents could have coverage for 3 kids.
Not
the most conservative person in Europe would dispute the need for government
regulated health care. What else is government there for if not for that, they
would say.
So,
the point is that a 60 year old woman may have to pay a bit more so that a 25
year old woman can go see an obgyn - and a childless man may pay a bit more so
that parents with kids can get covered. It's the principle of solidarity.
I am of the firm believe that that's what makes a country and a nation - and
not waiving flags at gun shows etc.
50. For the 50th post, let's try something new. Going inline!
3:52 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Sorry,
just couldn't think how to adequatly respond so see my response below in bold.
Robert Larson
The examples
you used were 1) something someone in a class claimed to observe (no data), and
2) one visit to a cousin in England many years ago. I shared my personal
experience living in three countries and the health care experience myself and
my family had. If you have never experienced it you cannot really know.
This isn't the data I was asking for anyway. Do you have any research
proving your opinion? That is what I am requesting. THis is what law
school classes are based on, case law and surprisingly data (which
law school and other academic classes are generally based on). That is
why the teacher who was a JD and had a PhD in public health administration
presented the information. Thank you. As a nurse I seem to be highly
trained to understand what is going on in a hospital. How about you?
You present your own personal experience. That is not data, that is
subjective experience. Thank you.
The
economy of the Netherlands is doing great. It is a tiny country but it has one
of the top 20 GDPs in the world. There GDP per capita is not significantly
different than ours. They produce, produce, produce. Where do you think your
flowers and tomatoes come from? California and Florida. At least
that is where the little sticker on the fruit says when I pick it up at the
Stop and Shop in New York. The flowers come from South America usually. Though
a tiny country, they accounted for 1/3 of all tomatoes sold in the US (we can't
even produce that). They also have a system with private insurance and an individual
mandate, and government covers some costs for all like hospital care. The
system works very well. Amazingly so did we until it was broken quite
recently.
You'd
be surprised how rich France is too, and what they produce. That would
explain the riots. As for Spain and Italy, nobody is suggesting
their economic problems are because of health care. Unlike us, that is not the
major factor. Spain and Italy are bad because they produce nothing and
don't care to. Wonderful countries but they lack the desire to do
something.
No
need to insult other places you don't fully understand. How about read
my email. I did not insult anything. When you go back and read my
email/s, don't read anything into them that I don't explicitly state. Just
what are we producing nowadays? Umh, pharmaceutical for the rest of
the world? How about that for a start? Maybe you been to
Upstate New York lately and seen all of the abandoned factories? My
husband is a mechanical engineer, who has been through five factory closings
already in his career.
If
your opinion is fact and not propaganda, show us the proof. Read my
posts. I am a nurse aside from being an attorney. I have seen and
been in other countries health care system. I have studies them as a
student of the law. Not everyone believes the government is the solution
to the problem.
51. Now she's invested.
3:52 PM, Rebecca Oliver
Robert,
I agree with you that the affordable care act will cause
everyone's costs to rise, except the "poor". That is why I brought up
my insurance. I am also afraid it will cause employers to stop offering
coverage. It is already going in that direction as the employer mandate was
already delayed a year and many people were made part time as a result of the
law.
The law has many problems. But I think a German or
Dutch style system would be the fix that would work.
Also, Joel is right. There are fewer illegal drug
abusers in the Netherlands and those that exist are mostly non-Dutch. How you
feel about marijuana is an entirely different debate. The crime rate is much,
much lower as well, as a consequence.
52. This man's emails are too long. Be more like the Obama hater. See ¶ 5. Not that this guy likes the President, see the end.
3:59 PM, Richard I. Leff
I'm not sure what
you're saying. Certainly, Canada has problems with not enough providers to
provide needed services (I think the doctors there went on strike because
they weren't making enough money under the program; too bad).
If everyone (and I
mean everyone) had the same coverage for basically everything we wouldn't have
the problems with health care coverage that we have now. Without a
comprehensive overhaul, we still pay higher and higher taxes to cover medicaid
and uninsured people to get basic health care.
So why not just revamp
the whole system, where everyone gets everything. And, if doctors want to
op out, like they did in Canada, they better have a big wealthy following,
because they won't have patients if everyone waits for treatment by doctors who
accept coverage available.
It's a vicious
circle. Doctors won't accept new patients because they don't get paid
what they think the market should bear, so patients go under treated and
doctors will lose money in order to make a point.
We should all have the
same health care coverage, at least, if not better, than our congressmen and
senators have voted in for themselves (and their staffs).
Maybe if congress had
to go to an exchange and pay for coverage like everyone else we'd have a
workable, affordable, comprehensive health care policy in the US.
I, for one, would love
to have the President's health care coverage, where I could call in my personal
doctor (is he an admiral or a general?) every time I had an ache or pain,
without worrying about cost.
53. IDK, my BFF Jill? JK. BFF!
4:06 PM, Joanne Fanizza
Colleagues,
Before I dash off for the weekend, I just want to say that I've
enjoyed this discussion!
Have a good weekend, all.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
54. I swear he started this email the second he finished his last one.
4:15 PM, Richard I. Leff
I don't have and don't
presume to quote statistics, I can't give you exact numbers, but I am pretty,
pretty, pretty sure that the US ranks very low in world rankings as to
providing health care for its population.
And Phil, it won't
cost us more to revamp a failed system where most of the money goes to lining
the pockets of insurance companies and drug makers and medical device providers
and lobbyists for all of the above. We're all still paying higher taxes
to pay for medicaid and uninsured people who get below standard treatment but
we all still pay for it. So instead we have to buy insurance (all of us)
to make sure everyone gets coverage-which should lower medicaid costs in the
end.
And Robert, what's
wrong with drugs in Holland? But, I'm not going to expound on that
issue right now.
55.
4:22 PM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
The
US rank very poorly.
I can personally testify that the health system here
is below par compared to most other developed countries. We are not speaking
about the health care the top 1% can afford (private everything) but the
average care for the average person. It sucks. And it is crazy expensive. Sorry
to say that. 56. I thought you went home for the weekend? Lies, damn lies, and statistics!
4:25 PM, Joanne Fanizza
We were # 37, and I believe we've fallen to #40. The first
39 are First and Second World countries with UNIVERSAL health care.
Imagine!
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
57. P.S., there are times post scripts might make sense.
4:25 PM, Richard I. Leff
P.S.: Robert:
Could you please explain your statement, and I quote: I "am
quite sure I am not stupid of the many things I am". It sounds like
something Rob Ford, Toronto's mayor, might have said. Just asking for
clarification.
58. "You don't know what you just said." And folks, don't confuse Richard and Robert. With Rebecca, they're the three Rs.
4:28 PM, Rebecca Oliver
Richard,
I completely agree. Every article I have seen has shown
other systems perform better at a much lower cost.
59.
4:31 PM, Joel Gaffney
The problem is that those other systems don't provide the
same high-end care that the U.S. system does. And since the consumers of
the high-end care are the ones who pay for all the politicians, nothing ever
gets fixed.
60. There's something fishy here.
4:32 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Richard:
Here is the best way to elucidate what I was trying to get
at:
I am not stupid, I am gay, I am independent (politically) I
am Catholic (really I would put that one first), I am a proud American, I am a
descendant of immigrants, I am the first to graduate from college in my family,
I am troubled by the baggage return at Heathrow (for those of you who are Monty
Python fans). That is what I meant.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
61. Or worse. But definitely one of these.
4:35 PM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
Sorry but that's compete nonsense. Level of care for the average person is much
better outside the US in many countries. Or it is the same.
62. I think he's calling you a chicken.
4:36 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Thank you Joel. I know I don't complain when you put
the chicken beak compress on my fractured femur to help it heal.
Robert Larson, LPN, JD
63.
4:41 PM, Joel Gaffney
Okay, now I'm confused. Florian is saying that what I
said is complete nonsense, and Robert is thanking me...did I stumble into
bizarro world?
64. Who thought they were done for the weekend? Pshaw.
5:40 PM, Phil Byler
According to the CBO’s projections, in 2023, ObamaCare will leave
30 million Americans uninsured. So, we wreck the well functioning health
care system we have in order to address the uninsureds and have roughly the
same number of uninsureds. Brilliant!
Phil
65.
5:45 PM, Joel Gaffney
More recent information shows that the price of coverage
under the new law will be substantially lower than what the CBO predicted back in
May, when it made those projections. I wouldn't be surprised if the next
time the CBO updates its projections, that number is significantly decreased.
66. Ok. Now that I've put in my thoughts, nobody else should, and we should get back to the original question. (Let's start counting the number of people that think they're ending the question.) (I don't know if I can count that high.)
5:48 PM, Anthony Emmi
Robert,
Your arguments are dead on. But let's get back to the initial
question: What are the names of these insurance companies that are reasonably
priced that Sole Practitioners can check out. Anyone willing to share
that info.
Anthony Emmi, Esq.
67.
5:49 PM, Florian Bruno
What
"well working" system are you taking about?
68. If you thought I stopped caring earlier, you had no idea. And we're still on Friday folks.
5:50 PM, Phil Byler
We did not have a failed system. You can cite all the flawed
studies by left academics favoring socialism you want, but in the real world,
we had the best functioning health care system in the world. There were
market based reforms that would have made it better, but adopting Government
run health care will destroy that system and will show all of you what a bad
system socialized medicine is. Under any system of socialized medicine,
health care costs skyrocket and health care rationing takes place.
Phil
69. WFRL (Write First, Read Later).
5:53 PM, Phil Byler
Richard, did you ever take an economics course?
Phil
70. Daubert, Frye, Academic Regalia - just give me something to tell who is really an expert and who is spouting nonsense based on their own personal experiences.
6:07 PM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
I don't know anything about studies - "flawed" (in your opinion) or not - but from my very own personal experience I can tell you that the system here is a not good when compared to the health care system in other countries. In many ways. Plus it's too expensive for what you get.
71.
6:07 PM, Joel Gaffney
My favorite part of this response is that it comes with the
inevitable implication that the Affordable Care Act is not a "market-based
reform." I hate to break it to you, Phil, but it definitely is.
All the Affordable Care Act does is establish a minimum standard that
health insurance policies must meet, and require everyone to purchase one in
order to spread the costs of those minimum standards across the whole
population.
There is still a market for health insurance policies, and
there will still be haves and have-nots. It's just that now the have-nots
are a little better off than they were before.
Markets are not the panacaea they are made out to be by
conservatives and libertarians. They can be an efficient way of pricing
goods and services, but they are a horribly inefficient way of policing
external costs. Healthcare is a prime example of a system with huge
external costs. The cost that uninsured people put on society is far more
than just the tax money that is spent on their treatments when they do
eventually get them (which treatments, as has been discussed already, end up
being far more expensive than they would have been if the person had access to
preventative care). The cost also appears in decreased productivity as
unhealthy citizens are less efficient workers (no matter their field).
The costs appear in so many seemingly-disconnected ways that individuals
making decisions about their own personal health insurance cannot truly
appreciate their effect.
Government regulation is really the only way those external
costs can be adequately addressed. The market is designed to ignore them
whenever the actors involved in it think they can avoid being caught pushing
their costs onto someone else.
72. Now who's being overly simplistic?
6:17 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Market based cannot under any circumstance come from the government. That would by definition make it not a market based solution but a socialist/ communist based solution
Robert B. Larson, LPN, JD
73. Let's make that something besides the wikipedia page you just edited.
6:20 PM, Joel Gaffney
Citation needed.
74. Responding to 50.
6:20 PM, Rebecca Oliver
MANY drug companies are based in France, Germany, Belgium and Isreal.
Does research prove your point? Can you cite any studies? Or is it your second hand opinion?
I also took health law in law school in 2009. The consensus was that our system is broken.
75. I started this email chain and I'll cite Mayor Mike if I want too.
6:26 PM, David Aronstam
Here is a link from Bloomberg
showing ranking of healthcare systems:
http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries
United States is ranked 46!
http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries
United States is ranked 46!
76.
6:30 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
If you are so bent on cites, give me yours. Practice what you preach and give over. Even if I listed cite after cite I doubt it would be adequate for individuals who adamantly want to make the government the decision maker and the provider for healthcare . The studies would be faulty or deficient in one way or another. Sorry, I had little to no faith in the government before this and it (Obamacare) and its implementation has not helped.
Robert B. Larson, LPN, JD
77. Translation: I have no support for this (see ¶ 73).
6:31 PM, Phil Byler
You mean like a case that discusses why the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure apply to civil cases in federal court?
Phil
78. See how he responds to two different emails in one? If everyone else learned from this, we'd only be at number 72. Which would be no better. Never mind.
6:32 PM, Joel Gaffney
Bloomberg? Come on now, everyone knows that
Bloomberg's obsession with facts and data gives him a clear liberal bias.
And Robert, all I want is a citation for the assertion that
anything coming from the government is "by definition"
socialist/communist. I mean, if it's really a matter of definition,
surely you have a dictionary to point me to to show that I'm mistaken?
79.
6:35 PM, Phil Byler
Joel, good grief, no, ObamaCare is NOT a market based
reform. ObamaCare, with its 1,992 grants of statutory authority to the
Secretary of HHS to dictate what happens in the health care industry and over
20,000 pages of implementing regulations, is a form of socialized medicine.
Phil
80. What would Judge Posner think?
6:36 PM, Joel Gaffney
Hey Phil, that's easy. The Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure apply to civil cases in federal court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 1.
Look, it's even in Bluebook format.
81. Someone forgot Article I, § 7, cl. 3.
6:37 PM, Phil Byler
Just wait until you see what ObamaCare delivers, assuming Congress
does not have the good sense to repeal it.
Phil
82. This lawyer and nurse has been on this issue all day. I really hope he was defending a deposition this whole time.
6:38 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
If the "market" wanted a product a certain way it would be that way. Ifvthe market does not want or demand it, the it is not created/ produced unless big brother gets involved. Efficient market theory
Robert B. Larson, LPN, JD
83. I bet this guy reads all the rules too.
6:40 PM, Joel Gaffney
Basically, my point is that Robert's answer makes it clear
that he is using definitions of "market-based" and
"socialist" and "communist" that I do not understand.
So in order to have a meaningful discussion, I'd like to know where his
definitions are coming from, or at least what they are.
84. WBR. Tsk tsk.
6:42 PM, Joel Gaffney
Okay, so if that's what the "market" means, how
exactly is it possible to have any kind of "market-based" reform?
Wouldn't the market just act on its own automatically? Efficient
market theory is only correct to the extent that you ignore external costs.
85. Gotcha! (see ¶ 80).
6:50 PM, Phil Byler
My point. I asked for a case.
Phil
86. Does anyone else realize that it's almost 7 on a Friday night?
6:51 PM, Joel Gaffney
It sounds like, by your definition, any government
regulation whatsoever would be a form of "socialized" whatever.
If that is true, then the meaning of "socialized" becomes
useless as a demonizing phrase. If you honestly believe that there is no
place for government in addressing the points where markets transfer the costs
of individual actions to uninvolved third parties, then there is certainly no
point in continuing this discussion at all.
If, on the other hand, you do believe that is a legitimate
role for government, then our argument is one of degree rather than of kind,
and throwing around labels like "socialist" and "communist"
are just distracting from the real issues.
87. All the straw man ever wanted was a brain.
6:52 PM, Joel Gaffney
Right, but all I asked for was a citation, so your rebuttal
was an obvious straw man. As such, I chose to ignore it.
88.
6:53 PM, Rebecca Oliver
Robert the cite David provided is perfect. I am open minded but nothing I have ever read has put the US in any top category for health care. We do rank highest in costs and among the worst in most health indicators.
I have mixed feelings about the Affordable Care Act. Some good has resulted as has some bad. Only time will tell.
My point is, there is no need to repeat mindless propaganda about every other developed country. Data, such as that cited by David, and the experince of people who have actually lived in these countries and have been part of these other health systems, shows the your allegations are baseless.
89. I had a long day saying things I think. I need a rest.
7:05 PM, Robert Larson, Esq.
Rebecca,
Have a nice weekend.
Robert B. Larson, LPN, JD
Saturday November 16, 2013
90. In response to 46. I think you missed a few emails, sir.
1:29 PM, Patrick Wang
Amen for that.
Patrick Wang, Esq.
91. And the weekend name calling starts.
3:18 PM, Ken Metnick (? - not entirely clear)
Some of the right wingers on this list serve have been listening to morons like Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, etc. The goal is to get people insured .It is simple as that . Because it is not perfect does not mean it is an unworthy goal. We are not talking about starting another war here. Do you anti Obama people also believe climate change is a hoax. Because if you do you should move to Northern Florida or some where else in the South. The right wing Republicans are anti intellectual and an embarrassment to this country. As attorneys you should have enough analytical abilities to realize the right wing Republican agenda is crazy and moronic.
92. That bait is delicious.
4:33 PM, Phil Byler
Excuse me, Ken, but if anything is moronic, it is your post.
Your rhetoric does not cover for the lack of intelligent analysis. It is you
who are anti-intellectual and an embarrassment.
If your goal is to get people inured, then consider three points:
(1) under the prior system, most people who wanted insurance, had it and liked
their plan; (2) right now under ObamaCare, there are over 50 million uninsureds
and counting because of the plan cancellations caused by ObamaCare; and (3)
according to the CBO, under ObamaCare, there will be 30 million
uninsureds. So, we go to a system in which people have to pay much higher
premiums and don’t get to choose their doctor and there is health care
rationing, all in order to get people insured and we end up with the same
number of insureds. That is really smart of you Leftists!
What, Ken, do you mean by “climate change”? Do you use
those words because the statistics don’t support “climate warming”?
You do understand, don’t you, that over time, the Earth’s climate has been
continually changing? From 1000 to 1200, there was the Medieval warm
period, with the Earth warmer in 1000 than it is now. From the 16th to
the 19th centuries, we went through a mini Ice Age. So why bring up
“climate change” here unless you think that it clearly justifies Government
regulation and control. Sorry, it does not.
Ken, what marks the political Leftist is not intellectual ability,
but belief. David Horowitz, a one-time New Left figure back in the 1960’s
who became a conservative by 1984 when he voted for Ronald Reagan, once talked
to an old left wing friend about what he, David, was thinking. David’s
old friend told him, “David, you no longer believe.” David Horowitz has
written that it was not on the Left that he found true intellectual exchange
and discussion, but on the conservative Right. Horowitz is
correct.
Phil
93. Please? Stop it. Please? Pretty Please?
5:08 PM, Leonard Sienko
oKay….There
is nothing in the guidelines which prevent political discussions, although over
the years, no one has really engaged in any type of politics as there was an
unspoken understanding that the list shouldn’t degenerate into name-calling
etc.
Incivility
is prohibited by the guidelines.
More
importantly, you are expected to delete any materials not directly needed for
the context of your reply. I don’t care if you want to argue how many
doctors can stand on the head of an insurance actuary; but please stop
cluttering up the list with unedited responses that scroll on and on.
94. In the future, the enter button on the right side of your keyboard is your friend, btw.
5:09 PM, Rebecca Oliver
Resorting to personal insults is what shows a lack of intelligent thought. As educated professionals, we should be able to have a conservation based on facts and evidence, not propaganda.
I saw some pretty outrageous claims, such as Canadians have longer wait times, masses of Canadians come here for treatment, British hospitals are filthy, and other systems are much worse than ours. Since I have never encountered this in reality, and every article I've ever read indicates otherwise, I asked what evidence these ideas were based on, if there is any other than a third hand biased opinion.
Insulting or dismissing a request for information shows you have no evidence to support such ridiculous claims. If there are masses of Canadians fleeing here, or if British hospitals infect the most patients with staph, there should be an article or research to support that, right? Instead some resort to name calling ("socialism!" Morons!) To cover.
It is also tired propaganda to claim almost "everyone" who wanted insurance had it and LOVED it before the affordable care act. I haven't met anyone who was crazy about their insurance. Most people are lukewarm at best. And denying there was a problem before is basically denying the existence of the middle class and the poor, which I guess is normal for some people.
Many of the people without coverage will be undocumented immigrants, btw.
Sunday, November 17, 2013
95. "Dude, he totally started it." And I don't think Leonard did anything to indicate that he was only responding to the righties. I think Phil's being a little touchy.
7:05 AM, Phil Byler
Leonard, I only wrote it was “moronic” because Ken called postings
reflecting conservative views “moronic.” It was Ken’s word in what was a
political broadside of a post by Ken. I quote Ken: “As attorneys you
should have enough analytical abilities to realize the right wing Republican
agenda is crazy and moronic.” If you want to cite incivility, don’t single
out conservative push back and pretend you did not see the original instance of
it because it was a liberal writing, or admit that you are citing incivility to
silence conservatives.
Phil
96.
7:29 AM, Phil Byler
Rebecca, other than responding to Ken’s political broadside of a
post calling conservative views “moronic,” I was arguing facts; yet, it was to
my pushback you objected. In any event, are you are really denying that
under the prior system, most people who wanted insurance, had it and liked
their plan? If you say you have not encountered such people, perhaps you
are having conservations like the Manhattan resident right after the 1972
election who said she did not know anyone who voted for Nixon. even though
Nixon had won a landslide victory with well over 60% of the vote. Are you
really denying that right now under ObamaCare, there are over 50 million
uninsureds and counting because of the plan cancellations caused by ObamaCare?
Are you turning a blind eye to Obama’s pledge that people could keep their plan
and their doctor? Are you really denying that denying that according to
the CBO, under ObamaCare, there will be 30 million uninsureds in 2023?
Are you really arguing that there are not serious problems afflicting the Brit
national health insurance system don’t exist? I know left wing members of
the Brit Labor Party say that, but I was always thought that was the product of
ideological belief trumping reality.
Phil
97. This is really good. Nobody had offered a personal anecdote in a while now.
11:52 AM, Ken Metnick
By the way I have a lot of clients from Canada and they like their health care system
98. Here fishie fishie...
11:50 AM, Ken Metnick
Do you also believe women who are raped should not be
allowed to have abortions. You are not using your analytical abilities. You are
making things up and resorting to Sarah Palin, Ted Cruz , and Michelle Bachman
logic.
99.
1:28 PM, Rebecca Oliver
Phil
I totally agree with you on some things. The Affordable Care Act was poorly planned and implemented. It has many flaws. I am not fond of government mandates and taxes, especially when the employer mandate was delayed and the individual one was not. Yes Obama was wrong about keeping your doctor and your non compliant plan.
Let's not pretend that everything was wonderful prior to the Affordable Care Act, however. To do so is denying reality.
A huge proportion of the working class and lower middle class could not access insurance. Even those that had it went bankrupt from non covered medical bills. How many of us love our insurance and never had a problem? I like mine, but we still had to file 3 or 4 appeals this year.
And of course other systems have problems too. Cost is NOT a problem like it is here, however. These systems produce better outcomes by every measure ever thought up, and NOBODY dies from lack of care, like they did here.
I don't know the numbers on how many people had their polices canceled. But let's wait a few months and see. My bet is that the vast majority of them will have better coverage at a lower price next year.
100. Mmm. Crimson.
2:49 PM, Phil Byler
Ken, no, I am not making anything up, and Ted Cruz is a fellow
Harvard Law School alum. But you are such a rabid ideologue that it is
best to discontinue the exchanges.
Phil
101. Wait for it. "People really did not die under the prior system." He actually wrote that.
3:11 PM, Phil Byler
Rebecca:
I was not claiming perfection for the prior system. There
were certain reforms that were in order before Obama took us down the road of
ObamaCare, such as allowing insurance companies to sell insurance cross state
lines. What I do argue is that the prior system was better than ObamaCare
will ever be, and we would have been far, far better off staying with the prior
system and implementing market based reforms.
It is not true that a huge portion of the “working class” and
“lower middle class” could not afford insurance. Most people in lower
income levels had employer provided insurance. There will be less of that
under ObamaCare and there will be plenty of people who will be working 29 hours
a week so that employers do not have to provide insurance to such employees.
Also, according to the CBO, ObamaCare will in 10 years leave uninsured the same
number of people some people claim were uninsured under the prior system.
It is also not true that cost is not a factor in other
systems. Cost is always a factor; we never escape the economic problem of
scarcity. In Government run health care systems, cost may seem less a factor
only because the Government is attempting to dictate results. The problem
is that the cost is still there and will manifest itself in poorer health care
quality, wait times, and failure of coverage. And people do die under
socialized medicine, just as they will under ObamaCare, because of wait times
for care or Government dictated denials of care. People really did not
die under the prior system.
Your faith in ObamaCare providing for better coverage at lower
cost is just that -- faith in a system of socialized medicine that does not
warrant that faith. The early reports indicate that premiums under
ObamaCare are doubling, which many families simply cannot afford.
I believe that ObamaCare needs to be repealed and replaced for the
sake of everyone in
society.
Phil
102. Like this will stop before there are at least another 50 emails. Bwa ha ha. And it was 101 emails, not 100. But pretty close.
3:16 PM, Adam Kalish
Dear
politicians
99%
of the people on this LS don't care for the 100 emails that you just sent.
If
you want to run for office on your platforms, please do everyone and favor and
act on it. Just stop sending these asinine emails berating each other.
Stick to trolling in the comment section of CNN or Fox News and leave the
emails to important questions and responses that the legal community need.
103. Is it okay to kill someone to show that killing is wrong?
3:27 PM, George Williams
It
was my understanding that listserv is solely to help other practitioners and
discuss legal issues. Not someone's ideological and political views.
Please respect others concerns and limit correspondence to items if legal
interest. Maybe your views are best suited for "
politicalsez"
George Williams Esq., CPA
George Williams Esq., CPA
104.
3:10 PM, Edward Papa
Good Idea Phil.
I have been watching these "exchanges" and by last
count we got a Ted Cruz, Sarah Palin, War on Women, Climate Change and pretty
sure a tea bagger or two in there somewhere.
If you keep it up, Ken or Joanne will invoke either
"It's Bush's Fault" or the race card.
It's all so predictable. Next time you feel
like engaging in a "discussion" with a progressive ideologue
- don't. It's a complete waste of your time and intelligence.
Edward Papa, Esq
105. I really hope he washed his hands before sending this.
5:28 PM, Paul F. LaGattuta III
Bathroom reading.
Yours
truly,
Paul
F. LaGattuta III
106. That bait tastes pretty good too.
6:46 PM, Ken Metnick
You
guys have to be kidding. I wouldn't be proud I went to school with Ted Cruz.
What does law school have to do with anything. I went to George Washington law
school. Is that relevant? The facts are Obama has fixed the economy as Bill
Clinton did.Obama has also not waged any more unnecessary wars like Iraq.
The Republicans have been ruining this country for years . I don't like
paying taxes but that is not a reason to support a party of extremists run by
rich white men who need to get laid.Obama care will work out eventually and
remember Reagan called Medicare socialism before he embraced it. What exactly
is the Republican party platform? Is it to make poor people have babies and
then to abandon the babies by not providing health care, education and food? Is
the platform to destroy the environment? Is the platform to try to push their
right wing anti - intellectual religious beliefs on everybody even when they
say they don't want government to interfere.? Is it to put in power people like
Justice Scalia who believes in the wily devil? Is it to support people like
Michelle Bachman who think the world is ending or Sarah Palin who talks in
tongues? Lastly you think shutting down the government like Ted Cruz wanted to
do is a great idea? Yes Bush did screw everything up and there are many Racists
in the tea party and the Republican party..Do you think Obama was born in Kenya
and is a Muslim?
107.
7:29 PM, James C. Locantro
Name-calling,
distortion of facts, making villains out of those with whom you disagree with,
is what's wrong with politics today. Obamacare, while its' goal was noble, the
politicians forgot the main rule which is " the Devil is in the
details"
Respectfully yours,
Respectfully yours,
James
C Locantro
108. All joking aside, let me tell you what you really believe.
7:36 PM, Ken Metnick
I
think we all agree it is flawed but can be fixed as time goes on. It certainly
is noble and the health care system that pre existed it was not working. I
believe a single payer medicare like system is better but the Republicans would
never have allowed that.My firm has 10 employees not including spouses and
children
My rates will go down in January.It is essential
to have a good health insurance agent.109.
8:02 PM, Meyer Y. Silber
Richard, neither balls nor brains will help. We need to at
least appreciate that a concept you describe just can’t work across our fruited
plain. There are too many people with too many variables. It’s a
nice idea. That’s it.
110.
8:14 PM, Jason Racki
If the republicans want to continue to call themselves
Republicans, they better settle on sturdy platform soon like getting a
manufacturing base back, rocking China back on its heels, or maybe jobs, jobs,
jobs. Something, anything other than don't tax the rich on the hope that they
invest it in American jobs. Nobody has any money anymore, and jobs is the only
solution outside of openly practiced Socialism. But, protecting a economic
system that doesn't serve its people anymore is also stupid. I say, where the
government can do where the corporation can't, then let the government do, even
if it is at a loss. That is what government is there for. When the profit
motive doesn't solve the problem, then the people have to expediently do
something about it. Something resilient enough that only the government can
provide. This is how Capitalism has always been provided for. But now that the
corporations really run things with their unrestricted campaign contributions,
nobody knows what is real or important anymore other than there's no money and
the Democrats seem to be the only political party willing to do anything about
it. If the 1% had to spend even a day in the 99 percent's shoes, there would be
no such thing as the current Republican Party. So, that's my two cents. My
armchair manifesto. Whatever. Doesn't mean a thing in a country where your job
is so closely connected to your vote, unless of course you are hypnotized by
the rhetoric coming from all directions: church, the supermarket, the dinner
table, which is always in front of a TV endlessly blaring Fox News' nonsensical
propaganda.
Jason
Racki
111. Wasn't Hitler a socialist?
9:08 PM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
What
I take offense at is when these people are called "conservatives."
It's not what I understand conservatism means. When I lived in Europe I was a
conservative. Here, the word has become synonymous to a rattle bag of weird
ideas - some of them offensive to human reason (evolution is "lie as from
the pits of hell") held together by Fox News and a completely insane
interpretation of Christianity.
112. Yeah, you too.
9:47 PM, George Williams
And
Florian as well. What/How does your post benefit the legal brethren?
George Williams Esq., CPA
George Williams Esq., CPA
113.
9:58 PM, Mark Dunford
"Obama has fixed the
economy..." The current unemployment rate based upon the US Bureau of
Labor Statistics is 7.3%. When Obama took office the unemployment rate
was 6.5% and it immediately jumped to 7.8% and steadily increased to 10%.
The US GDP was 12.68 trillion in 2000 and at the end of 2008 it was 14.57
trillion. A nearly 2 trillion increase in eight years. In six years
the GDP has gone from 14.57 to 15.79 trillion, a little over a trillion
dollars. The US debt was approximately 5.7 trillion in 2000 and in 2008
it was 10 trillion, an increase of less than 5 trillion. From 2008 to the
current time the US debt is 17 trillion, an increase of 12 trillion. So
tell me again that Obama has fixed the economy. It is not the evil
republicans that have caused this problem it is our politicians as a whole.
You are right in that Obama has
not waged any more unnecessary wars. What he has done is step up drone
strikes and killed many, many, innocent lives. What he has done is
continue to operate Guantanamo Bay, which he vowed to shut down upon his
election. What he has done is vow to send air strikes into Syria against
the wishes of most of the G20 nations. In the end he is a politician just
like George Bush and Bill Clinton were.
The rhetoric I have read from both
sides on this issue, is in a microcosm, the essence of what the problem is in
this country today. There is no compromise between either party. It
is an all or nothing scenario. But as was posted earlier, if the
Affordable Care Act is so great why did the Democrats conveniently exclude
themselves, along with all of Congress, from having to comply with the law.
Why are they able to keep their "cadillac" health care coverage?
Why do the unions, that so heavily support the Democrats, get an
exemption from the Affordable Care Act.
True, the US health care system
needed change to cover those that did not or could not afford coverage.
But I don't believe the answer was a methodology that completely
overhauled a system that essentially worked however it did have flaws.
The answer was to determine a way to cover those that did not have
coverage and allow those that did to remain unchanged. I live on the
border of Canada and have many friends that are Canadian and they like some
aspects of their system and dislike others. Yes, for prescriptions and
routine healthcare visits, their system has proven exceptional. For
transplants, hip, knee or other replacements, there are very long waiting lists.
So it is not perfect. One friend brought his father to the US for
heart surgery because he would have had to wait 7 or 8 months for the surgery
to take place in Canada. By that time his health may have deteriorated to
the point it precluded him from being a surgical candidate.
You see Ken, it is never simply
black and white, nor republican or democrat. By your statements, you have
shown your hatred and biases for those that think differently from you.
So, is it your platform that we all have to drink the kool-aid and drop
in step with your thinking or else we are guilty of being racists,
anti-environment, anti-education, etc. As an attorney you do yourself an
injustice stating that "republicans are rich white men that need to get laid"
thereby debasing your argument to sophomoric levels.
Mark J. Dunford,
Esq.
114. But see ¶ 66.
9:37 PM, Anthony Emmi
Ken
I cannot believe the email exchanges are still going on. Nobody thinks your comments are as brilliant as you do so why don't you just send a post to yourself and quit cluttering up the list serve.
115.
10:08 PM, Ken Metnick
Did you forget about the stock market and real estate? I did not start this conversation . But I am finished debating with irrational people . Thankfully the Republican party will lose the house in 2014 and the presidency again in 2016.This is about party politics.
116. I think people stopped listening.
10:17 PM, Ken Metnick
I did not start the Republican Rhetoric. It started last week. I don't think my comments are brilliant. I am merely discussing what should be common sense. What is shocking that there are so many brain washed tea party people living in New York.One always assumes that states like New York, California etc are populated by reasonable educated people who support the democratic party.This has been an eye opening experience. Did I join the Alabama bar association or is this West Virginia bar association?Hey whats next you guys want to talk about the greatness of the NRA and guns.
117. This guy also but see (saw?) 66.
10:21 PM, David Mejia
Well said Anthony.
118.
10:27 PM, George Williams
Awesome question Anthony ! One that NOBODY has an answer for. All I know us my clients are being dropped by
the carriers and they are desiring part time employees or contractual workers
and looking for advice to to circumvent ACA requirements.
George Williams Esq., CPA
119. "Maybe if I answer the original question, this will all stop." Fingers crossed.
11:01 PM, Marla Pilaroscia
I'm
getting it from my county bar association (Monroe). Hi-deductible for a
single for about $318, up about $20 from last year.
Marla
Pilaroscia
120. 11:11 - Make a wish! Maybe this will all stop?
11:11 PM, David Mejia
Deductible or monthly premium?
Monday, November 18, 2013
121.
6:32 AM, Ken Metnick
Humana. You have to go with large companies.
122. Only the Republicans know what's best for themselves. And for everyone else.
7:12 AM, Phil Byler
Jason, we Republicans will determine our future. In my view,
Reaganite conservatism is where we need to go. Thanks for your advice,
but no thanks.
Phil
123. Going back inline. And this actually looks like some evidence.
9:57 AM, Rebecca Oliver
Phil, I responded
to you in red below.
Ken, I am a
member of the West Virginia Bar Association as well. You would be surprised and
impressed with many of the members and the State in general.
Rebecca:
I was not
claiming perfection for the prior system. There were certain reforms that
were in order before Obama took us down the road of ObamaCare, such as allowing
insurance companies to sell insurance cross state lines. I thought y’all would love state regulation
instead of a federal system. What about the 10th amendment? Or
do you just want no regulation whatsoever? What I do argue is that the prior system was better than
ObamaCare will ever be, and we would have been far, far better off staying with
the prior system and implementing market based reforms. Time will tell.
It is not true
that a huge portion of the “working class” and “lower middle class” could not
afford insurance. Most people in lower income levels had employer
provided insurance. Hmmm…Are
you going with Romney’s version of middle class? $250,000 a year? Here is some
research: More than one in six (18%) of the nonelderly was uninsured in 2012.
76% of them were at or below 250% of the poverty level. http://kff.org/uninsured/report/the-uninsured-a-primer-key-facts-about-health-insurance-on-the-eve-of-coverage-expansions/ Let’s remember, Wal Mart is the largest
employer in America. Retail and Service are the fastest growing job sectors.
The vast majority of these people do not have affordable employer provided
coverage. If they have coverage at all, we foot the bill. There will be less of that under ObamaCare
and there will be plenty of people who will be working 29 hours a week so that
employers do not have to provide insurance to such employees. Also, according
to the CBO, ObamaCare will in 10 years leave uninsured the same number of
people some people claim were uninsured under the prior system. I agree that this is a MAJOR problem. The
solution is to mandate that employers offer coverage to ALL employees.
It is also not
true that cost is not a factor in other systems. Cost is always a factor;
we never escape the economic problem of scarcity. In Government run health care
systems, cost may seem less a factor only because the Government is attempting
to dictate results. Actually
no. Cost seems less of a factor because government doesn’t allow drug and
medical device companies to overcharge, and what doctors can charge is limited
as well. Guess what? They still produce drugs and still work and still profit,
but everyone in society can also access care. The problem is that the cost is still there and will
manifest itself in poorer health care quality, wait times, and failure of
coverage. Many studies
demonstrate this to be TOTALLY untrue. WE have longer wait times, poorer health
care quality, and failure of coverage, much more so than any developed country,
under the “perfect” system we had. See: http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries, http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2013/01/new-health-rankings-of-17-nations-us-is-dead-last/267045/, http://www.policymic.com/articles/46063/7-countries-that-show-us-how-health-care-should-be-done, (“moving past
the mythical tradeoff between time and cost, Germany is one of the few
countries to have quick access to specialty services with very little
out-of-pocket costs.”, “In 2010, 72% of Dutch adults saw their doctor the same
or next day when they were sick, compared with only 57% of adults in America.
And, whereas one third of U.S. adults did not see a doctor when sick, went
without recommended care, or failed to fill prescriptions due to costs, only 6%
of adults in the Netherlands faced these issues.”) And people do die under socialized
medicine, just as they will under ObamaCare, because of wait times for care or
Government dictated denials of care. Can you provide one shred of evidence in support of this nonsense? http://www.drsforamerica.org/blog/the-waiting-times-myth (“Beyond anecdotes,
there is actual data, such as the Commonwealth Fund study showing
that "U.S. patients reported relatively longer waiting times for doctor
appointments when they were sick, but relatively shorter waiting times to be
seen at the ER, see a specialist, and have elective surgery.” ) Insurance
companies, with a profit motive, ration all of the time, much more than a
non-profit system. It is common knowledge that European countries will spare no
expense when someone’s life is on the line, paying for treatments that our
insurance companies never would. People really did not die under the prior system. http://www.pnhp.org/excessdeaths/health-insurance-and-mortality-in-US-adults.pdf (“Given that an estimated 45,000 Americans are estimated to die
every year due to lack of access to health care services,
rationing in America is particularly troublesome, and oddly overlooked.”) Sadly I have a relative
that worked at Wal Mart, was uninsured for ten years so did not see a doctor
the entire time, and it turned out he had cancer at least ten years, and now it
is terminal although it could have been cured completely ten years ago if he
could have had treatment for the symptoms he was having. Oh and Medicaid has
already spent MILLIONS on care that will do nothing, now that it is too late.
It will probably be tens of millions by the end. He was only able to get
Medicaid because he is terminally ill. And this is not the only person I know
to have had a similar experience. I knew a man in his thirties who died from a
heart attack. He was prescribed BP meds and could not afford them because he
had a wife and children and did not make enough.
Your faith in
ObamaCare providing for better coverage at lower cost is just that -- faith in
a system of socialized medicine that does not warrant that faith. I believe in what I see working. Take a look
at the data again, or maybe apply for a passport. The early reports indicate that premiums
under ObamaCare are doubling, which many families simply cannot afford. My costs haven’t gone up.
I believe that
ObamaCare needs to be repealed and replaced for the sake of everyone in
society. Too bad that your viewpoint is still the
minority. I do agree that it must be improved.
124. It's all flyover to me.
10:04 AM, Ken Metnick
I apologize . I used Alabama and West Virginia as examples of
red states that have alot of right wing Republicans. Obviously there are
democrats in those states and Republicans in New York.Have a great day.
125.
10:07 AM , Rebecca Oliver
Phil:
About the people who will remain uninsured: Currently, accoriding to CBO, there are 53 million uninsured
persons in the United States, including
uninsured illegal aliens. The CBO
estimates that in 2022--8 years after the Affordable
Care Act has been fully implemented--30 million people will remain uninsured. -
See more at: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/cbo-obamacare-will-leave-30-million-uninsured#sthash.jn41wyee.dpuf
How many undocumented immigrants do you think
there are? Hint: Not 11 million, not even 15 million. It is at least 20 million
and probably closer to 30. Plus remember that LEGAL immigrants face a five year
bar to Medicaid. Many immigrants live in states like Texas and Florida where
they will not expand Medicaid, and many more will also fall into the coverage
gap where they cannot get Medicaid (by income or immigration status) but do not
make enough for subsidies.
There are most of your 30 million uninsured.
126. One piece of bad information and it's ALL WRONG.
10:35 AM, George Williams
Rebecca,
your last comment in your diatribe is without merit. a majority want it
repealed
Unless
a minority in your book is some other Mathematical computation.
55%
Favor Repeal of Obamacare
Most
voters view the new national health care law as bad for the country and want to
repeal it.A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that just 35% of Likely U.S. Voters now believe the trouble-plagued health care law is good for America. Fifty-five percent (55%) consider it bad for the country. Only two percent (2%) think it will have no impact.
George Williams Esq., CPA
127. I didn't check, but if George just sent me porn, that would be HI-larious.
10:36 AM, George Williams
http://m.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/november_2013/55_favor_repeal_of_obamacare
George Williams Esq., CPA
George Williams Esq., CPA
128. "I don't disagree that we should be annoying most of the listserv members, but I do think we should have some integrity while doing it."
10:41 AM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
Now
y r writing here despite having scolded others for contributing to this off
topic thread
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
129.
10:48 AM, Joel Gaffney
"Likely voters" are a deliberately distinct group
from the general population. Rasmussen's likely voter polls are
traditionally skewed older, whiter, and more conservative than the general
population. And in recent elections, they've been older, whiter, and more
conservative than the actual voting population, too.
Also, I wouldn't hang my hat on a 55% result from a question
that didn't give respondents the option to say they don't care.
130. It's not the size of the post that matters. It's what you do with it.
10:51 AM, Rebecca Oliver
George,
I was merely responding to a comment directed at me. My
response was not any longer than the original comment I replied to.
If the majority of people supported a repeal, then there
would be momentum to repeal it. A repeal has been brought up for a vote dozens
of times and gotten nowhere.
131. This is beginning to sound like Nixon's secret plan to end Vietnam.
10:53 AM, Phil Byler
Actually, Rebecca’s last comment was reflective of how all of her
comments were mistaken. People such as Rebecca sincerely but I believe
erroneously believe what they do about Government run health care, insisting on
its success that denies reality by citing various “studies” done to promulgate
Government run health care and ignoring economic constraints.
Phil
132.
10:55 AM, James Quinn
with a nod to the tyranny of the majority, those
with health care coverage, don't get to weigh in on whether those without
health care coverage are entitled to it....
133. This is why Lincoln wanted the 13th Amendment.
10:55 AM, Joyce Goldstein
Please everyone reply offline to this thread if it is of
interest to you. You are flooding my inbox with a conversation that doesn't
pertain to the purpose of the board. I do not wish to be a captive audience.
Joyce M. Goldstein
134.
10:58 AM, Florian Bruno
As we know many voters favor repealing "obamacare," that socialist monster. But they all LOVE the affordable care act...
135.
11:02 AM, Rebecca Oliver
Do you have any studies at all that support your point???
You are making some outrageous claims, but have not yet identified any source
of relevant information.
Also, if you talk to people from different places or at
different economic levels you may learn something.
136. I'm not being pejorative. Really.
11:09 AM, Phil Byler
With all of Obama’s changes to the law done by executive order (of
dubious constitutionality), it is more accurate to refer to the law as
ObamaCare.
Phil
137. How long do you think he can hold out before he writes again?
11:10 AM, Phil Byler
OK. I am done anyway. I have paying client work I need
to do.
Phil
138. Responding to post 37. Yes - 101 posts earlier. Where have you been all this time?
11:12 AM, Charles Oliver Wolff, Esq.
The Nordic Model seems to be working quite well.
Chuck Wolff
139. Subject changed to be "OFF TOPIC - Health insurance PLEASE TAKE THIS CONVERSATION OFFLINE ALREADY." This subject pops up a few more times, but as expected, most people ignore this.
11:13 AM, Joyce Goldstein
In my opinion this has become rude and inconsiderate of yoru
fellow listserv members. This is not a listserv topic and many members, myself
included, have requested that you take the conversation offline should you wish
to pursue. We do not wish to be a captive audience so please stop this.
Joyce M. Goldstein
140. If you disagree with me - or ever support an untenable position - you're a bad lawyer.
11:14 AM, Rebecca Oliver
Phil
Do you go to trial, with no evidence whatsoever, and simply
say something is true because you say it is? I gave some studies as well as
what I have personally seen and experienced. I totally agree that no study is
perfect and people's impressions differ greatly. But when you make outrageous
claims about rationing and death and wait times and who can access health care,
I truly wonder where this information comes from.
Also, many of the countries ranked higher than us on health
care (like Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, and Switzerland) are also more
capitalist than us, even according to the Heritage Foundation http://www.heritage.org/index/ .
Every advanced economy has a mixed system; you cannot ignore economic history
either.
141. Not a very long email to be responding to 132.
11:19 AM, George Williams
James,
I see you want us not to chime in but you want us to pay for it.
George Williams Esq., CPA
George Williams Esq., CPA
142. Subject changed to: "Political Debate." Only for that one post.
11:33 AM, Billie Gray
Only attorneys would call this a discussion of health
insurance.
143. The answer was 22 minutes. And only because he had to prove he was in fact a good lawyer. But he still sounds like Nixon.
11:32 AM, Phil Byler
Rebecca:
One last comment: I won my last two trials decisively, one in
state court and one in federal court, by a compelling presentation and handling
of the evidence. I can assure you that in a more structured situation
than a List Serve, I would hammer your position with trustworthy evidence and
undermine your “expert” evidence.
Now, I have to earn a living.
Phil
11:39 AM, James Quinn
George - there is always a price to pay, whether you have civil rights or you don't...
James F. Quinn, Esq.
145. Responding to post 102. Maybe he was being ironic.
11:45 AM, Charles Oliver Wolff, Esq.
Amen.
146.
12:00 PM, Richard I. Leff
I have only one
statement, really a question, to add regarding telephone polls: What
are, in this day and age, the demographics of those individuals with land line
phones who are home in the middle of the afternoon (or for that matter, even at
night, given that caller ID is pretty much the norm) who will answer a
telephone poll? Therefore, as a corollary, how accurate are these polls?
147. The posts start repeating! Phew.
12:03 PM, David Mejia
And
none of this comes close to answering the original question posed on Thursday,
which was:
I subscribe to the NYSBA health insurance plan.
I am a solo practitioner and my premium is a higher than those practicing in a group because the insurance lobby managed to have such a provision inserted into the law.
I was wondering if anyone has looked into what is available on the NYS health insurance exchange and how it compares to the NYSBA plan?
Thank you.
148. Um. This isn't a party line. And don't you think the last 147 posts (or at least 140 of them) indicate that the answer is "no"?
12:04 PM, Tom Fazio
Is there a moderator for this listserv?
Thomas R. Fazio, Esq.
149. Hey look. You're David. I'm David. We're both lawyers. Oooh!!
12:10 PM, David Aronstam
Thank you, David Mejia.
In the several hundred responses, there were 3 that tried to address my post. And I thank the respondents for that.
I contacted the NYSBA directly and I got a call back from the insurance carrier for their health plan. I will call them back and share any useful information that I receive.
In the several hundred responses, there were 3 that tried to address my post. And I thank the respondents for that.
I contacted the NYSBA directly and I got a call back from the insurance carrier for their health plan. I will call them back and share any useful information that I receive.
David
J. Aronstam
150. You're welcome. Congrats on hitting 150.
12:22 PM, Anthony Emmi
Thank you!!
151.
12:32 PM, Diane E. Ungar
Any answers to this one, Joanne
or others out there - after the off-oFf-topic deluge of mails I'm afraid the
answer to the original questions got lost. Still seeking
comparison/alternative/better health insurance company actual names and/or
agent names (since NYSBA rate hikes and coverage changes) for solos especially.
Anyone able to share?
152.
12:59 PM, Patrick Wang
Joyce:
If you are not interested in, just please delete it. you
don’t have to read it. As long as it is civil way discussing back and forth I
am interested in reading forum members’ opinion. And it says in its title, “OFF
TOPIC” .
Patrick Wang, Esq.
153.
1:37 PM, Forrest Strauss
I'm sorry Patrick but I must respectfully disagree with
you.
OFF-TOPIC in the subject line is fine for an occasional joke
or a one-off observation, but when it becomes the subject of a vituperative
non-law related thread with some 30+ posts, it's no longer a momentary thing
and has, instead, taken over the domination of this list.
However, this is not FaceBook - its a professional tool that
most of us signed up for to use for professional purposes. Would you post
a request for Thanksgiving turkey stuffing recipes on this list? I think
not. Why? Because this list is not the Julia Child show. It
IS, however, for lawyers, asking for help with client based legal issues, as
part of a collegial association of peers engaged in the service of the
public. This is why those of us, who want to continue using this list for
its stated purpose, should not have to "just delete it." The posters
violating the listserve's posting guidelines should, instead, in my humble
opinion, be the one's we "just delete" from the listserve itself.
If you want to hear member's opinions about political
issues, I think that's great - more power to you. I just don't think it
belongs here. If that's what you seek, there are dozens of
political blogs and ostensibly, allegedly, arguably,
"independent" news channels to seek out whatever your
particular flavor is and/or debate with those who have other perspectives.
But the "GENERAL PRACTICE" listserve is NOT one of
them and it is NOT the place for a political free-for-all. Quite frankly,
the whole situation has become absurd. If this doesn't stop, and right
now, I'm going to ask the listserve administrator at NYSBA to get
involved because I, for one, have certainly had enough detritus in my
"inbox" for today.
-Forrest
154.
1:56 PM, Joanne Fanizza
Diane,
I found my original response to this (at 10:15 a.m. Friday), as follows:
David,
I have a United Healthcare plan (Oxford). My agent is JCD Planning Corp d/b/a Proactive Benefits of Setauket. My contact there is Jill McKnight, 631-751-5401.
I've had trouble with United, too, but not as much as I did with MVP.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
155. Not really that interesting.
1:56 PM, James C. Locantro
This off-topic thread has gone off topic regarding the OP
question about comparative health plans for
sole practitioners.
I just don't want the OP question to be thrown out with the
"bathwater. It is a question that is on a lot of minds both in and out of
our profession at this time and deserves a response from those with knowledge
without the poster/responder being drawn into an admittedly
interesting, but way off topic.
Thank you.
Respectfully your,
James C Locantro
156. It's a telephone that's connected by wire that ........ wait a minute ........ I don't think you really want to know.
1:40 PM, Paul F. LaGattuta III
What's
a landline? ;-)
I love how juvenile this has become...immaturity is not
determined by age.
Yours
truly,
Paul
F. LaGattuta III
157.
3:54 PM, Diane E. Ungar
Many thanks, Joanne. I probably speak on behalf of others as
well, as to how difficult to impossible it's become, finding half-way decent,
half-way affordable coverage - especially for solos and out of network
Again, with gratitude,
158.Again, with gratitude,
4:01 PM, Joanne Fanizza
And that's why I hope for Medicare for All before I go on
Medicare at 65. J
You're very welcome. I hope the info helps.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
159.
4:40 PM, Patrick Wang
Forrest:
Let's agree to disagree. I do not want to prolong this thread. So I will stop here.
Patrick Wang, Esq.
Tuesday, November 19, 2013
160. This is beginning to feel like the middle of the Cuban Missile Crisis.
1:16 AM, Diane E. Ungar
I know that in researching the nycity bar assn, they - as of
this year (their open enrollment was April 1) essentially got rid of their PPO
(out of network provider) payments. It's still there, but eviscerated. Rather
than them pay a low amount like 65% of reasonable and customary, they only pay
an EVEN LOWER virtually sham amount - it's based upon what Medicare would pay
the out of network PPO provider (extremely little) and then they pay us, the
'insured' a small percent of what Medicare would have paid that health care
provider
I was encouraged by their agent (city bar) that if I do have out of network providers, and if I already have a plan that covers them (I do, NYSBA, lousy and uber-expensive as it is) I should keep it. Because my out of network will be barely compensated under their oxford-united health care plans.
Another listserv member did refer us to her insurance agent to use in lieu of NYSBA for cheaper better oxford/united care plans. I'm not sure if that agent deals with SOLO practitioners (such as myself and many of us) or if this plan seemed better because the listserv attorney has all in-network providers. Or maybe this plan from this agent does NOT do the medicare based PPO reimbursement system.
Enough said, it's late. -but interested still in others' research and coverages found in this terrible economy and terrible time for medical care costs and medical care insurance coverage.
Many thanks,
I was encouraged by their agent (city bar) that if I do have out of network providers, and if I already have a plan that covers them (I do, NYSBA, lousy and uber-expensive as it is) I should keep it. Because my out of network will be barely compensated under their oxford-united health care plans.
Another listserv member did refer us to her insurance agent to use in lieu of NYSBA for cheaper better oxford/united care plans. I'm not sure if that agent deals with SOLO practitioners (such as myself and many of us) or if this plan seemed better because the listserv attorney has all in-network providers. Or maybe this plan from this agent does NOT do the medicare based PPO reimbursement system.
Enough said, it's late. -but interested still in others' research and coverages found in this terrible economy and terrible time for medical care costs and medical care insurance coverage.
Many thanks,
161. Now the crazy starts to set in.
6:04 AM, Florian Bruno, Esq.
All solos should start a gigantic law firm with 50,000 members or so and then buy cheap group coverage!!!
162.
6:20 AM, John Castro
Or we should put some fire under the NYSBA to start a
lobbying group or group to unite all attorneys for group health insurance,
highly reduced insurance plans, fedex rates etc. retirement plans and the
like. Did you know that most professions have vanity plates for their professions,
but checking the DMV website, nothing exist for lawyers. While this is a minor
point, it shows what very little power/influence we display when it comes to
pushing for attorney discounts.
NYSBA achieves some discounts, they barely equate to what
any organized group buying in bulk would receive.
If other city agencies have unions that wield should great
power, shouldn't the lawyers who draft policy and are vested in every aspect of
policy making, drafters of policy and law wield the same amount of power to
influence these things as the rest of our fellow workers.
JUST A THOUGHT!!!
163.
8:05 AM, Ken Metnick
I won my last three trials all seven figures for a total of 15 million approximately and you are wrong. You continue to spout out Republican propaganda after many people have asked you to stop.
164. This flame war was years in the making.
8:54 AM, David Aronstam
A few years ago a group
of listserve members got together to see what we could do about getting the
NYSBA use its power to get a better deal on health insurance. My main
motivation was that solos pay a higher rate than groups of 2 or more. The
NYSBA did nothing.
165.
12:34 PM, Joanne Fanizza
And let me tell you why I think NY lawyers are disadvantaged about
ALL things legislative in this state. It comes from my experience being a
member of The Florida Bar.
We do not have a strong integrated bar that is recognized as the
voice for all lawyers. OCA takes care of regulating our admissions, but
that's it; no specialty committees or anything like that that work with
branches of gov't or outside groups. NYSBA has a minimal amount of clout
dealing with the legislature because it is a voluntary bar.
In Florida, The Florida Bar is an integrated bar: It is
the only entity that admits, regulates and disciplines lawyers in the
state. It has a very high profile in the state, and also has committees
for a variety of specialties, which committees work closely with the state
legislature to propose and pass changes to laws and keep them up-to-date.
(And because of that clout, the committees are very successful in this regard,
avoiding the morass of overlapping, antiquated stuff you see in the NYS.)
You can belong to any number of specialty voluntary bars, but TFB is key.
They also have respect from the public because they take
seriously their job of disciplining lawyers -- and disciplinary proceedings are
made public. Do people here even know where to file a complaint against a
lawyer? NYSBA probably gets most inquiries, but who -- other than us --
knows about OCA? And really, who gets disciplined here, and do you ever
hear about it? Unless the public knows they are being protected, they
will not have faith in this system.
You have to practice elsewhere and see how things are done in
other ways to learn that things can be done more efficiently and
effectively.
Joanne Fanizza, Attorney at Law
166. There's no place like home. There's no place like home.
12:45 PM, James Quinn
be careful what you wish for...
167. Now I'm looking forward to 150 emails on whether George Bush was properly elected.
12:54 PM, Bruce J. Robbins
joanne
not
intending to quarrel with your principal points, but only to with clarify a
little your suggestion that the Florida Bar and not the Court (Florida Supreme
Court) is the attorney disciplining entity, I think you will find that the
rules/law may now be a little different. it may also depend upon which
entity the complaint is made to.
thankfully
i am not an expert on that subject, but within the past week at a CLE at which
the new Chief Judge of Florida Supreme (Hon Jorge Labarga, he was the FL
circuit court judge in West Palm presiding in Bush v Gore that went to
SCOTUS 2000) addressed that issue as did our local (Pinellas) committee chief
and that distinction was one of those that was made.
168. You're not even in NY?
1:01 PM, Ken Metnick
Ditto. I practice in Florida also after starting out in my home
state New York.Besides the bar we also have the Florida justice association
which supports plaintiff personal injury lawyers against tort reform efforts.As
far as business litigation like life insurance disputes or probate litigation
which my firm does I dont think there is much of a difference between the
States. Florida is far from perfect though. Clients are encouraged to file bar
complaints in the statement of clients rights which must be signed with a
personal injury contract. This results is alot of bogus bar complaints and
threats from clients if you dont reduce your contractual fee. We also have
a conservative Governor and Congress. South Florida is mainly a bunch of
liberal ex New Yorkers but the rest of the state is conservative. Also, who can
forget the 2000 election ballot mistake and the hanging chads. Lastly
what about some of our criminal cases like Casey Anthony and George
Zimmerman.The weather is great though but once a New Yorker always a New
Yorker.
169. Totally relevant to the issue of where to buy the best affordable health care plan.
1:05 PM, Ken Metnick
The Florida bar investigates, files the lawsuit if
necessary,and makes recommendations. A judge/ referee makes the ruling if
necessary and the Supreme Court rubber stamps it or disagrees and
makes their own determination.
If I missed any, I apologize (or you're welcome). If there are more, maybe I'll post them.
Updates:
1. 1:35 PM, 165-169