American Politics 4.0 - Orangeyou Glad He’s Back?

[ResAlien]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

Only 1.8 million?

Canada's barely at 40k. Better step your game up

[rubecube]

"wE nEeD to ReSpeCt the noRmS and inStituTions."

https://www.businessinsider.com/repu...g-tool-2024-12

More than two dozen House Republicans are asking President-elect Donald Trump to terminate the Internal Revenue Service's free direct tax-filing system as soon as day one of his presidency.

Republican Reps. Adrian Smith of Nebraska and Chuck Edwards of North Carolina sent a letter to the president-elect on Tuesday urging him to end the program via executive order, saying it posed a "threat to taxpayers' freedom from government overreach."

The letter was signed by 27 other Republicans and is also addressed to Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the co-leads of the Department of Government Efficiency.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

This is nonsense, and not why coverage is denied in most cases. If this were true, why does UH reject claims at twice the industry average?

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/12/...-denial-rates/

The inherently wrong part is you take people's money and tell them you will cover stuff, and then, well, delay, deny and depose. Please tell me again how there is nothing wrong with promising a service for payment, then not doing it?

There is nothing wrong with hating the player that is profiting off of the game. And if that person inflicts enough pain and suffering on you while taking your money, well, Americans have access to guns and tend to care less about laws than most. So maybe they should consider that before ruining lives. Don't hate the player, hate the game, as you say. You don't get to pick and choose where the game starts and ends like that, nobody does.

If you don't have coverage, you don't have coverage. And if you don't have coverage you're not entitled to a payout.

If insurance companies pay people out in cases where they don't have coverage, profits will fall. To make up the profits, they will need to increase premiums. As premiums increase, more people will either pass on insurance or look to reduce premiums by reducing coverage. If insurance companies are then asked to make up for that drop off by further granting payouts to people who don't have coverage, they would need to increase premiums further, which in turn results in less people insured and more people reducing coverage. It's a vicious cycle.

The above dynamics have been really well studied by many economists - most who are left leaning - and it can lead to the failure of insurance markets. That's why the government rarely - if ever - strong arms insurers into paying claims where people don't have coverage.

Again, this is not a good system for many people. There are better systems for many people and if the political will was there, things would change. But the problem is the system, not the actors.

[Wormius]

Even Kevin O’Leary is less than sympathetic towards CEOs of predatory companies.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/11/busin...ash-tsr-digvid

wake-up call to the industry that they need to change how they conduct business.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

If you don't have coverage, you don't have coverage. And if you don't have coverage you're not entitled to a payout.

If insurance companies pay people out in cases where they don't have coverage, profits will fall. To make up the profits, they will need to increase premiums. As premiums increase, more people will either pass on insurance or look to reduce premiums by reducing coverage. If insurance companies are then asked to make up for that drop off by further granting payouts to people who don't have coverage, they would need to increase premiums further, which in turn results in less people insured and more people reducing coverage. It's a vicious cycle.

The above dynamics have been really well studied by many economists - most who are left leaning - and it can lead to the failure of insurance markets. That's why the government rarely - if ever - strong arms insurers into paying claims where people don't have coverage.

Again, this is not a good system for many people. There are better systems for many people and if the political will was there, things would change. But the problem is the system, not the actors.

This is just nonsense, because it ignores all the ILLEGAL ways insurance companies get away with denying payouts. Look, you seem to not be very educated on the facts around how insurance companies operate, so maybe go look into it a bit before you say they are just playing the game.


I understand how premiums, coverage, and risk calculation works. That's not at all what this is about. You also ignore the massive profits they make. How do they make those? Ya...

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Wormius

Even Kevin O’Leary is less than sympathetic towards CEOs of predatory companies.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/11/busin...ash-tsr-digvid

That changes it

I'm onboard for capping those mother####ers

[Looch City]

Well now I'm conflicted.

#### O'Leary.

But also #### CEOs.

Who do I #### in the end??

[Locke]

Huh, 1.8 Million seemed a little low at first glance but a wee bit of Google-Fu does confirm that this is the official number.

The Dems wouldnt lie about a thing like that would they?

How big is Biden's Pardon Pad?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Biden pardoning 1.8 million to start total anarchy sounds like a ton of fun. God Bless America.

[GirlySports]

Can they finally free Adnan?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Biden pardoning 1.8 million to start total anarchy sounds like a ton of fun. God Bless America.

NSFW!

"First thing you do is take the entire state of Kansas!"

RIP George...

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

That changes it

I'm onboard for capping those mother####ers

Especially if you are on a lake. His wife will eff you up!

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Can they finally free Adnan?

Joe Exotic first.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Yamer

Joe Exotic first.

First one Drumpf pardons and he's going to get an important position.

Secretary of Wildlife?

[activeStick]

Pardon whoever was the most notorious Jan 6th rioter (maybe the fella with that horned hat?) and then announce him as new Secretary of Security for the Capitol!

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by rubecube

If we're going to invoke MLK, let's also acknowledge that he personally despised people like you and Cliff.

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Article...irmingham.html

This would have been funny regardless but is beautiful to use against the people who probably would have hated MLK and spent all their time trashing him yet still bring him up as the way things ought to be done.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by activeStick

Pardon whoever was the most notorious Jan 6th rioter (maybe the fella with that horned hat?) and then announce him as new Secretary of Security for the Capitol!

And he shall reign Supreme in his hall of Governance with cheeseburgers and orange-drink for all!

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

Sounds like after the premiers met with Trudeau that Canada is going to put real pressure on Trump if he puts those tariffs in place. Doug Ford in Ontario has said he will shut off all exporting of hydro to the US from Ontario. That will affect 1.5M homes that will be without power. There are rumblings Quebec is going to follow suit as well. That's a very strong play and I can't see how Trump can follow through on the tariffs on Canada.

If they shut off exports, are we on the hook to cover the losses for power producers at all? I assume this means cheap power in Ontario and Quebec for a while.

[Nufy]

Biden should pardon Trump...so he will always beholding to him.

[EldrickOnIce]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

This is just nonsense, because it ignores all the ILLEGAL ways insurance companies get away with denying payouts. Look, you seem to not be very educated on the facts around how insurance companies operate, so maybe go look into it a bit before you say they are just playing the game.


I understand how premiums, coverage, and risk calculation works. That's not at all what this is about. You also ignore the massive profits they make. How do they make those? Ya...

Most important thing to understand is that hcp's previously were on the hook for cost of providing care when payment was later denied and patients simply refused to pay the bills. Now procedures are first vetted by insurance, not need. And hcp's provide service only for which they will be paid. So to be accurate/pedantic, people are being denied procedures based on insurance refusal to pay.
The system is hard to understand. Difficult to navigate. You need hcp's advocating on your behalf, with your insurance company. The biggest problem is too many people who must self insure don't wind up having coverage for things they should have a reasonable expectation to be covered for. That basic health care is tied to employment is nonesense - one of the biggest problems with for profit health care.

Edit to add:

Nothing is black/white though, either. There are also great advantages with for profit care. It is 1 year since wife's best friend (in Canada) died of metastatic breast cancer. Penny was diagnosed when her daughter was 7 years old. She wanted to live 10 years, to take her daughter to adulthood before losing her mother. And that's exactly what she got, but the last 5 years only because of US health care. Penny was denied life saving/extending gene sequencing therapy in Canada because no one offers and health Canada will not pay for this therapy - in exactly the same way the under insured in America would be denied. It required outside financial support, but targeted therapies (based on sequencing) gave her those last 5 years, and might have saved her life if offered sooner. Profit also drives innovation.
And #### cancer