|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
TomCADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 12:42 AM Original message |
Who Gives A S**t About The Public Option, What About Balance Billing? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Oregone (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 01:09 AM Response to Original message |
1. "I really do think that the controvery about the Public Option is really obscuring some vital areas" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
European Socialist (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 03:55 AM Response to Original message |
2. Yup, this happened to me on a much smaller scale. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FlaGranny (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 05:38 AM Response to Original message |
3. The public option |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 07:28 AM Response to Reply #3 |
5. This is the media creating another distortion. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MH1 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 07:58 AM Response to Reply #3 |
8. But if I understand correctly, many (most?) of us will not be eligible for the Public Option |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Teaser (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 06:56 AM Response to Original message |
4. As I've said before, reforming "fee-for-service" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 07:31 AM Response to Original message |
6. That issue is going to be addressed through competition, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WinkyDink (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 07:41 AM Response to Reply #6 |
7. "Over time", eh? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ProSense (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 08:13 AM Response to Reply #7 |
9. No, the day after it's signed into law. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AwakeAtLast (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 08:27 AM Response to Original message |
10. Get rid of the networks |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RichGirl (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 08:39 AM Response to Original message |
11. Well...maybe...but.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TomCADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 12:41 PM Response to Reply #11 |
14. Lets Say You Get Injured And Are Taken To A Private Hospital |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Midwestern Democrat (238 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 09:08 AM Response to Original message |
12. Yes - I've experienced this very issue with a family member. State law |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TomCADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 12:43 PM Response to Reply #12 |
15. This is the point I'm trying to make. For all the attention paid to the PO.... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Phoebe Loosinhouse (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-08-09 05:49 AM Response to Reply #12 |
20. WOW! Sickening. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
FormerDittoHead (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 09:33 AM Response to Original message |
13. ..but... Our PRESENT system lets you see the doctor of your CHOICE! If you PAY for it! n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
shimmergal (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 01:28 PM Response to Original message |
16. The other way to tackle that-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mwooldri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 02:13 PM Response to Original message |
17. Then in a case like above, the out-of-network should be treated in-net by the insurer. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TomCADem (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 11:31 PM Response to Reply #17 |
19. It Is Not The Insurer's Restriction. Rather, Its The Lack Of A Contract... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mwooldri (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Tue Sep-08-09 05:56 AM Response to Reply #19 |
21. That's part of the problem... I'm just speaking from own experience with my employer-provided ins. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
snake in the grass (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Sep-07-09 04:33 PM Response to Original message |
18. This is simply insane. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Sat Jun 15th 2024, 05:00 PM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC