Oh, for crying out loud. You are on a thread entitled "Obamacare is a Complete Failure". What exactly did you expect? And regarding your response, I guess what you are saying is that we should assess all challenges and judge all legislation by the one person it hurts the most. So if Joe Blow's rate increases 15%, we should pretend that everybody's rate increased by 15%, even though that's completely untrue. And, AGAIN, like so many others on this thread you completely ignore the fact that the increasing out of pocket costs trend is no greater than it was pre ACA.
Website has been working correctly for some time now. Talk about absurd conclusions.
lol not trying to point you out, but this is how I always imagine this conversation when I see it pop up on SDN (mostly in the sociopolitical forum)
Yeah, I get it, the roll out had issues. They fixed them. So what does that have to do with anything at all today? And, I recognize that you like many on this site lack, well, age and so you maybe don't remember things like HMOs, OBRA, HIPAA, DRGs, ICD-9, ICD-10, MAPD, and a dozen other government mandates that all impacted healthcare delivery, insurance claim processing, IT, administration, and on and on. This is nothing new.
No argument there. Change is often painful, but do you think that EMR is completely hopeless and without any possible upside? EMR technology will advance. Voice recognition and leveraging of thorough historical health data will, I think, eventually make doctors more effective. I've talked to many doctors about EMR and most of them echo your sentiments. I don't doubt them. But I also see how every other industry has used this sort of data availability to their benefit. There's projected to be a 90,000 physician shortfall in just 10 years here in the US. Necessity is the mother of invention, and in this case the necessity is clear. I don't see any means to increasing physician productivity without an IT component. And without EMR, there really can be no IT component.
Yes, I'm aware. Everything has been getting cut. My peace corps placement got delayed 8 months because of budget cuts in 2011 on peace corps' 50th anniversary, and that is program dems are very proud of and has enormous bipartisan support. And the government desperately wants more GPs. I guess maybe this is part of their plan. BTW, these cuts are not being proposed by dems only. SEE: http://www.crainsdetroit.com/articl...-budget-cuts-rural-hospitals-graduate-medical
Well, they've been trying to encourage EMR for years with no luck. And they seem to think that in the long run, it will drive down costs, which I can see as a possibility given the low hanging fruit of $900 per capita for administrative costs. I think that once it matures, and it will mature, the benefits will become obvious. We're just in the sucky stage now.
acceptmeplease. I apologize for calling you a *****. It was inappropriate and I'm sure you're quite intelligent.
Except it's really just shifted costs. The average EMR and billing systems required these days run an office over 80k. That's an entire primary care PA's salary.
The deductibles are so cheap because it's a limited-access HMO plan, which actually tend to be the cheapest plans out there. Plus if she had a high deductible plan, it would be next to worthless for her anyways- what good is insurance with a $5,000 deductible when you only make $22,800/year? You'll never be able to hit the deductible before your insurance pays off. She's 60 and has a low income- her plan makes a lot of sense on every level.
It doesn't matter. The White House can propose whatever the hell they want. With a GOP congress, it won't happen.
Patience, man. Going digital involves some growing pains. It's not a small project.
It's not about being visionary or not- the systems are extremely expensive and require annual software fees that will essentially destroy small private practice in this country.
It's not about growing pains- these EMR systems cost a fortune per year due to annual fees. It depends on the design of the system, but for most you're looking at a minimum of 10-20k/year per provider just to keep it running. That's insane. There's no way physicians were spending 10-20k on paper per provider per year in the 90s.
I see what you're saying, and it does seem like the system is engineered to encourage larger physician groups or a migration to hospital based medicine. But I can't see how you or anyone could think that remaining pen and paper based while the rest of the world moved on would be feasible.
I made my specific grievances known in the OP of this thread. I'm too lazy to restate them on a smartphone.
Ok, so you ended up paying what exactly? Roughly what everybody else pays in terms of premiums? And who exactly would be taxed? If the company is providing you the benefit, then it would be you who would be taxed as part of the benefit would be seen as income, right? Just making sure I understand you.
Companies lose their ability to claim tax exemptions on insurance over a certain amount each year, and if their employees do not pay a certain amount of the premium. Now, these changes did nothing but shift more of the burden of healthcare onto the mostly middle and working class members of the hospital staff. How is that in any way a good thing? It's ridiculous, and it seriously hurt a lot of the lower paid staff (CNAs, techs, etc), effectively slashing their incomes by 5-10%, depending on whether they covered their family or just themselves. It hurt part-time workers, who already had higher premiums, even more. and all for what?
Doctors have always been in the cross hairs. You selected a job where you simply don't have any power over the administration. This isn't Wall Street, this isn't some Main Street business, you are in medicine. The day you decided you wanted to be a physician was the day you decided you wanted to be plugged into a very rigid system that really doesn't care about what you think from an administrative perspective. If you want to change it, it's going to take a hell of a lot more than complaining on a forum. An entire generation of physicians allowed this BS to occur. You can sit on the sidelines and cry foul, or you can realize that nobody is going to come to your rescue besides yourselves. What's wrong with you goes all the way through you. Wake up.
Yeah, i mentioned this earlier. Search on "transference" if you are interested. Insurance companies were trying to figure out how they could pull this off as early as 2004. Again, please recognize that the impact you experienced wasn't only a result of the ACA, but a result of how the company you work for decided to react to the ACA.
You are doing just fine. Got it. It's about how you are doing. The trajectory isn't your concern.
Or, maybe somebody that worked as a management consultant with insurance companies 15 years and has an MBA with a concentration in health administration from Lehigh and worked as a CNA full time as an undergrad and lived overseas for 3 years working in an ARV clinic and a tuberculosis hospital in Namibia with the Peace Corps and is now has a really good chance of getting into a good medical school after finishing a postbac with a 3.9 because he was bored. OR, maybe he isn't. We're all anonymous here after all. Maybe I'm just a liar.
Which means, if it has, you have found doubt in yourself.
Run on sentences and full time CNA? We are going places in this thread.
So u feel like your experience helps you how in med school?
Because I'll be starting medical school in 2016, at 42 years old. That's why.
Well, maybe you could answer that question yourself. Tell me how your lack of experience outside of academia and diapers helps you in medical school.
Your daily practice is not so mysterious. Not like a CEO or even an exec.
OOOOH SNAP!!! Devastating. I have to take a knee...get my breath.
