RichmondPhilsFan wrote:

pacino wrote:Bills for people without insurance are higher, too. Then hospitals apply for Medicaid to cover 60% of those bills, then the rest is on the uninsured person. If you are into 'fixing' Medicaid, third and nursing homes sucking off the teat of the government are issue 1 through 10.

That's pretty simplistic. Most often, Medicaid coverage creates an insurance-like situation (if not outright insurance through a private reinsurer) where the recipient merely is responsible for a co-pay. The hospital is already an approved Medicaid provider (much like they'd be an approved, e.g., Anthem provider) with specified rates for repayment, so after the claim is approved by Medicaid, the balance is adjusted based upon the coding of the charges and payment is applied. The rate of repayment can be anywhere from 15-20% or 110% (don't laugh, it actually does happen in rare occurrences).

There are some Medicaid programs with deductibles, but I can't think of any off the top of my head with a coinsurance. I'm sure there is one, but they're rare.

At least, that's how it's set up here in Virginia by our Department of Medical Assistance Services. Other states are different, I'm sure.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Honestly, that's a pretty damn bizzare system. It provides very little benefit to the patients, who are likely still responsible for thousands of dollars in bills that they can't afford. The only entity that benefits is the provider.

pacino wrote:

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:Honestly, that's a pretty damn bizzare system. It provides very little benefit to the patients, who are likely still responsible for thousands of dollars in bills that they can't afford. The only entity that benefits is the provider.

I agree. What our legislature went after to 'reform' the welfare system this past year was to eliminate a $205/mth payment to temporarily and permanently disabled people waiting for RSDI and SSI to be approved (which gets recouped from SSA after the recipient is approved for RSDI or SSI). They don't even care about this.

jerseyhoya wrote:

td11 wrote:

This is a much better graph. So we're getting back to a range where the labor market can be stable but have a bit to go before we're making a significant dent in the deep losses from the 2008-09 hole.

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:nevermind that it probably costs 2-3x more than it should.

jerseyhoya wrote:

My night will be made if Biden tells Ryan he has a higher IQ

Youseff wrote:

mozartpc27 wrote:I guess Biden must have gotten hair implants? BUt then why are they so crappy? Is he a Rogaine user or something?

Soren wrote:FFS don't be such a blasé dick twaddler

pacino wrote:We have a fundamental difference on what grows the economy, but to say it makes no sense is a bit non-sensical itself. I believe in creating demand by investing in our infrastructure and our workforce. That's a pretty mainstream idea. Cutting every program except defense does nothing towards putting people in jobs.

pacino wrote:Trying to set policies to stop the growth doesn't help.

Doll Is Mine wrote:

Soren wrote:FFS don't be such a blasé dick twaddler

Umm...

Werthless wrote:Who is trying to set policies to stop growth?
Why does trying matter more than actually passing legislation?
You posted in response to a poster critiqing the small window of a graph showing that jobless claims have been falling, and I felt it didnt respond to it in any way.
But really, what specific pieces of legislation are "stopping growth?" Presumably, your point is that the Obama adminstration and Democrats in general should not be held responsible for legislative actions passed by the Republican House. The one action/inaction I can think of that the Republicans have their hands dirty on is the lack of action on the fiscal cliff.

Werthless wrote:But really, what specific pieces of legislation are "stopping growth?" Presumably, your point is that the Obama adminstration and Democrats in general should not be held responsible for legislative actions passed by the Republican House. The one action/inaction I can think of that the Republicans have their hands dirty on is the lack of action on the fiscal cliff.

An election-year Democratic measure designed to ensure that women don't face pay discrimination was blocked Tuesday by Republicans who complained that the bill was politically inspired and would reward trial lawyers at the expense of employers.
[...]
The bill, which Democrats said would close loopholes in the 1963 Equal Pay Act, would require employers to prove that differences in pay were related to job performance, not gender; would prevent employers from forbidding employees from sharing salary information with each other; and would allow women who believe they were discriminated against to sue for damages.

Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked a bill that would have frozen student loan interest rates before they are set to double on July 1.
[...]
The vote wasn't much of a surprise: Republicans have been signaling they would filibuster the bill because of its cost offsets. Democrats would cover the $6 billion cost of keeping student loan interest rates at 3.4 percent for another year by raising Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes on certain high-earners. By contrast, Republicans have called for nixing a preventive health fund to pay for it.

Senate Republicans blocked legislation for new economic sanctions on Iran’s oil sector on Thursday, saying they needed more time to study the bill, a surprise move that drew anger from Democrats who wanted approval ahead of nuclear talks next week.

Senate Republicans blocked President Obama's $447 billion jobs package on Tuesday, putting the brakes on a bill Mr. Obama has been vigorously promoting over the past month.
The jobs package includes $250 billion in tax cuts, including reduced payroll taxes on both workers and employers; $60 billion in extended unemployment benefits; and $140 billion in spending on education, transportation projects and public workers, including police officers.

The bill includes plans to tax corporations and the wealthiest Americans in order to pay for it.

Federal transportation funding pumps about $1 billion a week into the economy, with much of it focused on the construction season that will get underway in most states next month.
[...]
“Projects that are underway might not come to a halt,” said Matthew Jeanneret of the American Road and Transportation Builders Association. “But if this drags on a long time, states are going to have a greater degree of uncertainty.”
[...]

If funding expires, however, so will the government’s authority to collect the 18.4 cent-per-gallon gasoline tax that pays, in large measure, for transportation funding.