OBAMA/TRUMPCARE MEGATHREAD

[Jenksismyhero]

Actually 60 minutes's piece was terrible. The majority of people applying for benefits under that program are still denied, and the appeal rate has actually fallen since the collapse rather than increased.

 

The program itself is heavily audited by the GAO because of misleading claims like the one you just made and it is constantly found to have fraud rates that are well below 1%. The people getting disability under social security meet the standards for disability. In fact, under more reasonable standards, more people probably should be able to receive that. A university of Michigan study found that out of the people who applied are turned down, nearly 80% are still not working 2 years later.

 

The main reason why disability claims have increased since the recession is an aging population. The Social Security program trustees in 1994 predicted that there would be an increase in disability claims necessitating an infusion of extra funds into the program by 2016 solely as a consequence of an aging population, putting it right on schedule for exactly what we've seen. The program itself has sent back cash to the treasury before and basically will remain close to long-term balance once what was predicted 2 decades ago happens.

 

There was also an increase in the retirement age for OASDI benefits a couple years ago from 65 to 66, leaving quite a few more people disabled who would otherwise have been covered by regular social security benefits.

 

That is so unbelievable it's laughable. That would basically mean every single claim was legit except for what 60 minutes reported. They literally found every case of fraud in the country. GMAB. SS disability is just like workers' compensation: you find Petitioner-whore doctors to opine about over stated injuries and there's really nothing an arbitrator/admin judge can do but accept what that doctor says in his/her medical records.

 

Edit: Looks to me like that 1% rate has nothing to do with fraud so much as errors in calculating benefits when someone had been working or could have worked:

 

"The first population received potential overpayments due to work activity during the DI program's mandatory 5-month waiting period--a statutory program requirement to help ensure that SSA does not pay benefits to individuals who do not have long-term disabilities. Prior to receiving benefits, individuals must complete a 5-month waiting period, in which the individual cannot exceed a certain level of earnings, known as substantial gainful activity, during any month in order to be eligible for DI benefits. Earnings that exceed program limits during the waiting period indicate that individuals might not have long-term disabilities. The second population received potential overpayments due to work activity beyond the program's trial work period--the trial work period consists of up to 9 months in which a DI beneficiary may return to work without affecting her or his benefits. However, beneficiaries whose earnings consistently exceed program limits after completing a trial work period are generally no longer entitled to benefits."

 

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-635

Edited October 8, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[Jenksismyhero]

The evidence is that the greatest cost of practicing medicine is the malpractice insurance. This is why many physicians are getting into group practice to share expenses and cut costs. The cost needs to come down and the cost of medicine will come down. Experience does count for something. It may be lower on evidence based theory but it does count.

 

When you have the power to kill someone or seriously injure them for life because of your mistake, you better have adequate insurance coverage.

 

And if malpractice is a real problem in this country, taking away the economic penalty for being s***ty at your job won't help that problem. Doctors will get even more negligent/careless.

[Jenksismyhero]

$120k from three students wouldn't come close to covering the cost of a single professor, given how many ways that $120k would be split before it went to a professor's salary.

 

Gotta pay the coach!

[StrangeSox]

That is so unbelievable it's laughable. That would basically mean every single claim was legit except for what 60 minutes reported. They literally found every case of fraud in the country. GMAB. SS disability is just like workers' compensation: you find Petitioner-whore doctors to opine about over stated injuries and there's really nothing an arbitrator/admin judge can do but accept what that doctor says in his/her medical records.

 

Edit: Looks to me like that 1% rate has nothing to do with fraud so much as errors in calculating benefits when someone had been working or could have worked:

 

 

 

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-635

NPR had to issue a bunch of corrections to their stories after they were very heavily criticized. The 60 Minutes piece repeats essentially all of the same errors.

[NorthSideSox72]

Gotta pay the coach!

I can't speak for all schools, but I know at many DI schools, the athletic department is required to be financially self-sufficient. They need to generate enough revenue or funding to cover their costs, often including scholarships.

 

I have no idea how many schools do and don't have that rule, but some do. And of course many schools don't have any significant intercollegiate sports at all.

 

[Balta1701]

I can't speak for all schools, but I know at many DI schools, the athletic department is required to be financially self-sufficient. They need to generate enough revenue or funding to cover their costs, often including scholarships.

 

I have no idea how many schools do and don't have that rule, but some do. And of course many schools don't have any significant intercollegiate sports at all.

The requirement that they balance their budgets may exist but it's fungible. For example, the University of Tennessee just had to offer up a couple million dollars to balance the budget of their athletic program because they've had to repeatedly buy out the contracts of fired coaches at a time when they're not filling their football stadium to capacity.

[EvilMonkey]

It's not just salary. There is the massive research costs. Salary is less than 25% of the cost for a professor's work at a research institution.

Unless you don't want much of the advancement in medicine that we currently see (again just my field) the money needs to be there.

 

I completely agree with the administration cost.

Not to discount research, but why is that the responsibility of the tuition paying student? If I was paying tuition, I am paying it to be taught, not so he can go publish papers, research things and add a little to his prestige.

[iamshack]

Not to discount research, but why is that the responsibility of the tuition paying student? If I was paying tuition, I am paying it to be taught, not so he can go publish papers, research things and add a little to his prestige.

Well he sort of needs to do those things to provide you with valuable teachings.

 

This is akin to saying I just want to pay for the ingredients in my actual dinner or my actual drink when you go out to eat. Life doesn't work that way...

[Jenksismyhero]

Well he sort of needs to do those things to provide you with valuable teachings.

 

This is akin to saying I just want to pay for the ingredients in my actual dinner or my actual drink when you go out to eat. Life doesn't work that way...

 

Education shouldn't be a for-profit game though, especially if it's being paid with government funds.

[iamshack]

Education shouldn't be a for-profit game though, especially if it's being paid with government funds.

So farming/food production shouldn't be either?

[Jenksismyhero]

In a perfect world, no, they shouldn't be subsidized.

[Soxbadger]

Education shouldn't be a for-profit game though, especially if it's being paid with government funds.

 

Healthcare probably shouldnt be a for-profit game either. And I actually think that about law as well.

[StrangeSox]

Not to discount research, but why is that the responsibility of the tuition paying student? If I was paying tuition, I am paying it to be taught, not so he can go publish papers, research things and add a little to his prestige.

 

A lot of research is funded by outside grants, but many institutions are research institutions and students know this full-well before attending. Some colleges, like Rose-Hulman, are teaching facilities first, but your flagship schools are primarily research-based. If they weren't it'd be hard to attract grad students and professors who either are training or have trained for a life of research.

 

It's not about "adding a little to their prestige," it's one of the primary reasons professorships exist.

[StrangeSox]

Education shouldn't be a for-profit game though, especially if it's being paid with government funds.

 

Most colleges are non-profit. Do you mean to say that people working in the education field should take a vow of poverty?

[StrangeSox]

So farming/food production shouldn't be either?

 

 

In a perfect world, no, they should be socialized.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

Commie.

[Texsox]

Not to discount research, but why is that the responsibility of the tuition paying student? If I was paying tuition, I am paying it to be taught, not so he can go publish papers, research things and add a little to his prestige.

 

Wouldn't you rather be a physics student at the University of Chicago and doing research using a particle accelerator or learning about it in a book later? Which employee would you rather hire?

[ptatc]

Education shouldn't be a for-profit game though, especially if it's being paid with government funds.

It's not for profit. Everything goes back into the research, salary or something else for public schools.

[ptatc]

Not to discount research, but why is that the responsibility of the tuition paying student? If I was paying tuition, I am paying it to be taught, not so he can go publish papers, research things and add a little to his prestige.

Professors do not have the latest and new information to impart to the students without research. Somebody needs to do the research and the state and federal government are not funding it. If you want an institution of higher learning this is what needs to be done.

[ptatc]

Healthcare probably shouldnt be a for-profit game either. And I actually think that about law as well.

Now we're getting towards way to decrease the cost of healthcare. Like in the VA system. You can't sue the doc for exaggerated amounts.

[ptatc]

A lot of research is funded by outside grants, but many institutions are research institutions and students know this full-well before attending. Some colleges, like Rose-Hulman, are teaching facilities first, but your flagship schools are primarily research-based. If they weren't it'd be hard to attract grad students and professors who either are training or have trained for a life of research.

 

It's not about "adding a little to their prestige," it's one of the primary reasons professorships exist.

External funding is dropping dramatically, most of it was federal.

[southsider2k5]

Now we're getting towards way to decrease the cost of healthcare. Like in the VA system. You can't sue the doc for exaggerated amounts.

 

Mostly because it is nearly impossible to see a doctor...

[ptatc]

When you have the power to kill someone or seriously injure them for life because of your mistake, you better have adequate insurance coverage.

 

And if malpractice is a real problem in this country, taking away the economic penalty for being s***ty at your job won't help that problem. Doctors will get even more negligent/careless.

That's true if it was only the very serious cases. How about a 2 million dollar settlement when a person got an infection (not necessarily the physician's fault) because the patient was delayed in returning to work for 4 weeks? These are the cases to which I'm referring. If you screw up you screw up and there should be penalties.

[Balta1701]

That's true if it was only the very serious cases. How about a 2 million dollar settlement when a person got an infection (not necessarily the physician's fault) because the patient was delayed in returning to work for 4 weeks? These are the cases to which I'm referring. If you screw up you screw up and there should be penalties.

Remember how I said there was "way too much malpractice"? Infection in hospitals is a problem that can be significantly reduced simply by following proper procedures. This has been repeatedly established in trials of basic checklist use, for example, but many hospitals have simply treated them as a cost of doing business.

[ptatc]

Remember how I said there was "way too much malpractice"? Infection in hospitals is a problem that can be significantly reduced simply by following proper procedures. This has been repeatedly established in trials of basic checklist use, for example, but many hospitals have simply treated them as a cost of doing business.

Agreed. However, that is not the physician's fault and was definitely not worth the 2 million judgement with no permanent disability. They write it off as expense but the amount of the judgments are the outrageous part.