DiscussMormonism.com

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/09 ... html?hp=l6

And he repeats the tired lie about how Obama has funneled $700 billion from Medicare.

Being boo'd by the AARP is good news telling us that Ryan is on the right track as that organization represents not the elderly, but the interests of a few left-wing insurance companies seeking to make money by preying on the elderly.

AARP has grown wise to to both drug companies purporting to be Senior Citizens organizations (such as the one headed by LDS Mac Hadlow) and political policies that would throw many of them on the street.

bcspace wrote:Being boo'd by the AARP is good news telling us that Ryan is on the right track as that organization represents not the elderly, but the interests of a few left-wing insurance companies seeking to make money by preying on the elderly.

"Left wing insurance companies"? Who are these companies and what makes them left wing?

bcspace wrote:Being boo'd by the AARP is good news telling us that Ryan is on the right track as that organization represents not the elderly, but the interests of a few left-wing insurance companies seeking to make money by preying on the elderly.

You are losing it, bc. One of the few groups of voters that Mitt was leading in was the seniors. Now that is slipping:

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/24/us-usa-campaign-medicare-idINBRE88N04Z20120924

The only hope Mitt has at this point is to do something magical during the debates. Literally magical. Mitt's stage personality is just a little less stirring than Calvin Coolidge and he will be seen on stage, one on one, with Obama.

It would take an act of God for Mitt to come off looking good by comparison. I suspect that you fully believe an act of God is in the cards, but it didn't happen for Joseph in Carthage and there is no reason to believe it will happen for Mitt.

Actually, Ryan has a point. Most of the reductions will come in amount of money hospitals and doctors will receive in payouts, lower payments to home health providers and cutting of extra benefits doled out to Hospitals who see a higher number of uninsured patients.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezr ... heres-how/

This looks fine on the surface, but already many doctors are saying they will refuse to accept Medicare patients.
http://news.yahoo.com/boomers-retiring- ... 44311.html

What's the next step, the government forcing doctors to accept medicare patients?

This is all a game, and the democrats are hiding where the money is going and where it is coming from. You can't get medical care for free, so where do you think that money is going to come from?
Ryan made a good point about this when he owned Obama during his own Health Care Summit back in 2010.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs

mledbetter wrote:This looks fine on the surface, but already many doctors are saying they will refuse to accept Medicare patients.
http://news.yahoo.com/boomers-retiring- ... 44311.html

What's the next step, the government forcing doctors to accept medicare patients?

Only the most highly sought after specialists will be able to refuse Medicare payments. That is essentially how it is now. Most hospitals and physicians accept Medicare now and will continue to do so in the future. A doctor can't make any money if he (or she) has no patients.

A helpful solution would be to help doctors and hospitals work out a better situation with malpractice insurance. That is one of the very large problems with profitability for heath care professionals.

mledbetter wrote:Actually, Ryan has a point. Most of the reductions will come in amount of money hospitals and doctors will receive in payouts, lower payments to home health providers and cutting of extra benefits doled out to Hospitals who see a higher number of uninsured patients....many doctors are saying they will refuse to accept Medicare patients....What's the next step, the government forcing doctors to accept medicare patients?

Critics of the Affordable Care Act tend to say the following things:

1- It is bad because it is going to raise everybody's costs.
2- It is bad because it radically cuts the amount of money doctors will make (forcing them to leave the profession, stop seeing patients, etc.).
3- It is bad because ....

Let's just stick with 1 and 2 for now. Do you think 1 and 2 are both valid criticisms of the ACA? Do you think the American Medical Association (AMA) endorsed the ACA? Why would they do that?

bcspace wrote:Being boo'd by the AARP is good news telling us that Ryan is on the right track as that organization represents not the elderly, but the interests of a few left-wing insurance companies seeking to make money by preying on the elderly.

You got that right. AARP insurance is a big rip-off. They pretend to be on the side of older people, but they are about selling a magazine, selling insurance, sell, sell, sell...

LittleNipper wrote:You got that right. AARP insurance is a big rip-off. They pretend to be on the side of older people, but they are about selling a magazine, selling insurance, sell, sell, sell...

My brother-in-law is an actuary and was the CEO of a well known insurance company for many years. I lean on him for advice about that sort of thing. I asked him about AARP insurance for my elderly mom. He looked into it and said it was a pretty good deal.