"In the midst of major changes in health care, UnitedHealthCare has sent thousands of pink slips to Connecticut doctors.
Termination letters went to physicians caring for Medicare patients. Those letters were sent out to doctors caring for 'Medicare Advantage' patients. It's a plan, marketed to Seniors to provide additional services through UnitedHealthCare.
A mix of primary care and specialty doctors are affected by it. And it comes at a questionable time.
Open enrollment for Medicare starts next Tuesday, and it's still not clear at this time as to which doctors are still in the United network.
The Connecticut State Medical Society is fighting back. The biggest concern is patient access to healthcare."
Analysis: Budget talk ideas delay, don't resolve | Connecticut | onPolitix
Thousands of people are getting an early welcome to the age of no healthcare but health insurance for everyone. This isn't the first example and it will not be anywhere near the last. Obamadon'tcare is a bad idea and bad ideas do not get better with time.
For your sake, I hope you never get sick or hurt because Obama and the Dems have set up a plan that destroys healthcare. Not to mention the budget and jobs and....
You do know that Medicare enrollment mentioned is an annual thing, right? Has been for many years, as people need to sometimes change plans and others become of age to get onto the plan? Nothing to do with ACA, timing is simply similar because it's nearing year end.
Technically Medicare is not part of the ACA. But the 200 billion that the ACA cut from the Medicare advantage plans is. One of the many points that has been made over and over is in doing such, people on Medicare will have fewer choices on where to get healthcare. In this case, that is what United healthcare is doing. And it is what others have already done and many more will do, limit choices which rations care which allows them to stay in business for a little while longer. Correlation equals causation here.
But back to the issue of Medicare. The IPAB will set the fees for Medicare. The IPAB will operate under the authority of the ACA. They are going to cut the payment to Medicare providers. This will cut the number of providers for people on Medicare. This will ration care for those on medicare. Correlation will equal causation here as well, it's just a matter of time.
If either of those actions don't get the costs down to what the government or the Secof health and Human services want, then the Sec of health and human services will be allowed to set the fees as he or she sees fit. All under the authority of the ACA. See here's more correlation that will equal causation, it's just waiting on it's time.
The question is, for people who aren't all me me me, is if not, what are those that my tax and/or insurance dollars help take of going to do? No bleeding heart here, just seriously. Are they supposed to die in the streets? Are we supposed to continue as tax payers to be drained at ER rates instead of insurance rates? I'm sorry but any mathematical competent libertarian would see that ACA is not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot more fiscally responsible and will cost less tax dollars than what we have had. But it seems that libertarians and republicans don't believe in responsibility of the government to the people who pay taxes, but instead believe in the responsibility of the government to the employers of We, the People. I guess it's a reflection of how much all libertarians and republicans love their bosses.... yeah, right.
Any decisions by UHC are driven by maximizing profitability and have nothing to do with health care quality.
If they can throw up a BS smokescreen blaming ACA (or anything else), they will in order to have something to hide behind.
It is much too early to see how the thing will play out. But it seems quite certain that there will be groups that will hurt, at least in the short and middle term.
In the long term, the pain and suffering will end.
It always does if you wait long enough.
That is convenient.
In the long run we are all dead.
Any decisions by UHC are driven by maximizing profitability and have nothing to do with health care quality.
If they can throw up a BS smokescreen blaming ACA (or anything else), they will in order to have something to hide behind.
Thanks for the off-topic response. I was referring to the OP of this thread. Please do not attempt to derail the thread.
Last I recall Obama is not at fault for anything, it's always someone else fault.
It is much too early to see how the thing will play out.
This is a quote of what you posted:
"Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan
Can you tell me exactly how this is linked with Obamacare?"
Your post was asking what the layoff of medical employees has to do with Obamacare.
WOW that is a WOPPER of a lie.
Funnything is, there IS NO PROFIT in UHC to "maximize". This just shows you have NO CLUE what UHC is.
There is no CEO.
No wall street.
No extorsion
no jets
no yachts
No insurance at all
Only a Dr that gets paid a SET SALARY no matter if he treats 100 or 1000 a year. (and no bribes by mega corps)
you walk in , and get any and all HC you need. SIMPLE.
No, it is not. When you plan on failure, you will always get what you plan for. Failure.
I'll stop you right there, because that's where you made your mistake.
My question had nothing to do with medical employees in general and everything to do with the OP that started this thread.
This is the post to which you responded:
" Originally Posted by ItAin'tFree
"In the midst of major changes in health care, UnitedHealthCare has sent thousands of pink slips to Connecticut doctors."
You asked that poster how this is linked with Obamacare and I provided the link to answer your confusion.
I'm sorry if getting information when you ask for it somehow is an inconvenience for your reality.
No, you provided a link to another subject -- hospital layoffs. I didn't ask about hospital layoffs. I asked about how UnitedHealthCare laying off doctors was related to Obamacare.
I'm sorry that you can't see you aren't answering my question.
Well, you seem to be challenged when the dots need to be connected.
Here is a link that connects them for you:
Dr. Saffir says the State Medical Society is in contact with UnitedHealthcare. They are also asking doctors to call United to find out why they were terminated without cause as notified in the letter.
No, I was merely asking the person who started this thread to connect them. That allows me to address their actual point rather than assume what their point was.
From one of the links in that link:
In other words, the doctors don't know why they were fired, and the article you linked to didn't provide any evidence to back up its assertion as to why this happened.
As such, while I'm sure you feel your link answers my question, it in fact does not.
The question is, for people who aren't all me me me, is if not, what are those that my tax and/or insurance dollars help take of going to do? No bleeding heart here, just seriously. Are they supposed to die in the streets? Are we supposed to continue as tax payers to be drained at ER rates instead of insurance rates? I'm sorry but any mathematical competent libertarian would see that ACA is not perfect, but it's a hell of a lot more fiscally responsible and will cost less tax dollars than what we have had. But it seems that libertarians and republicans don't believe in responsibility of the government to the people who pay taxes, but instead believe in the responsibility of the government to the employers of We, the People. I guess it's a reflection of how much all libertarians and republicans love their bosses.... yeah, right.
So correct me if I'm wrong, but you're admitting here that you are creating a theory that has no link to any real data regarding these particular firings? Which would mean to say you are creating a conspiracy theory. Conspiracy theories are great and vague conincidents always seem to support the POTENTIAL for the theory, but until you have some viable linkage, it's just a conspiracy theory.Pulling 419 billion dollars of revenue out of any system is bound to be reflected in a reduction of the costs that those revenues support.
It is possible that the terminations were merely coincidental and would have happened in any event. It sounded from the article as if the Minnesota based firm was making reductions exclusive to Pennsylvania.
It could be something in the State of Pennsylvania that is driving this.
The fact that this is occurring while 9000 other health care workers, including other doctors, are falling victim to cuts driven by the ACA funding changes seems to be more than just a coincidence. Perhaps the ACA in Pennsylvania exchanges arranged a contract with a different physicians group and UHC has projected there will not be sufficient work to keep their network intact in that state.
Is there anyone from Pennsylvania reading this?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?