CiscoNurse

Its called the future. Obamacare.

I would tell him I will meet him in the parking lot for further pointed discussion.

U should quit first !! Then ask for an 7$ dollar raise immediately !! Trust me it works

Dead on Shilla. Obama is not implementing any more of the ACA until after the 2016 elections. I can't imagine why.

I would take the course if I was you. It will be a great nostalgic reminder years from now when you will be able to reminisce about when there was actual health care in the USA.

I agree with you, Healthcare run by Ins co. is a mess. It will definitely improve when ran by the IRS. I look forward to all Americans having their health issue placed in a Federal data base. It will be a wonderful day when the %47 of Americans that have still managed to keep their full time jobs get the privilege of paying for the healthcare of everyone else as they should. ACA - what a great concept . The nation's largest drug store chain Walgreens is changing the health care plan for 160,000 of its employees as a result of Obamacare, among the latest employers to make changes as the law's further implementation moves closer. The new plan will reportedly force employees to pay for more of their health care costs, as the company seeks to avoid the rising costs resulting from the law. The Wall Street Journal reports, "Aside from rising health-care costs, the company cited compliance-related expenses associated with the new law as a reason for the switch." Two months ago Walgreens announced it would help promote the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare, along with Blue Cross Blue Shield, in the lead up to the health care exchanges opening on Oct. 1. The two companies launched a website in July and promised to distribute brochures. In January, the individual mandate is set to kick in, requiring every American to buy health insurance. News of yet another company having price troubles comes the same week that President Barack Obama said predictions that rates would rise under the health care law hasn't happened. "There were lot of the horror stories, how this would shoot rates way up, how there were going to be death panels, and all that stuff. None of that's happened," Obama said Monday. H/T The Weekly Standard

Vanderbilt Hospital to let 1,000 go... Lay offs loom at Cleveland Clinic... Obviously doesn't mean a thing.

Emory Health Care in Atlanta knows what to do to prepare for the ACA. Click on the link and wonder how it will be like a few years from now? Healthcare Co to Lay Off Over 100 Employees, Cites Obamacare...

I am not saying do not go in to Nursing which is a wonderful profession. All I am saying is things will get harder under Obamacare for everyone. Doctors and Nurses and patients. Want to know what it will look like ? Check out VA hospitals. By the way, I have worked for Govt for some time, it took me awhile to realize that being efficient and smart was a big no no. Get in trouble for being to productive.

I see it also. I also see more than 90 million Americans unemployed and %62 of all jobs created R part time now. Who exactly do U see paying for all the additional care of Americans once Obamacare is fully implemented ? The Mexican govt or the Canadians ? Maybe U R one of those people who will work for no pay ? U know , a 60 or 80 % tax rate.

U r dead on, I hope u r wrong but as someone who follows money, I am afraid U r correct. Hopefully we R both wrong and the collapse of the dollar is only a figment of the imagination.

Hey trust me, there will be no rationing of care for the people exempt from this debacle. The following is from Forbes, a publication noted for their ability to print lies : ObamaCare supporters are now waging a high-profile public relations campaign to make medical rationing palatable to the general public. The latest front is the opinion pages of the New York Times, which recently published two Op-Eds openly advocating medical rationing. The first was by their economics columnist Eduardo Porter, “Rationing Health Care More Fairly” (8/21/2012). Will Obamacare Play Games With Your Actual Life? Capital Flows Contributor If You Want Human Progress To Stop, Institute A Maximum Income Capital Flows Contributor The Federal Government's War On Medical Innovation Capital Flows Contributor Is President Obama's Prostate Gland More Important Than Yours? Capital Flows Contributor Porter argued that rationing was “inevitable” and the only question was how best to implement it. He advocated a system like Great Britain’s, which doesn’t pay for medical therapies costing more than $31,000 – $47,000 per year of life gained. Similarly, he praised New Zealand’s approach of not paying for vaccines that cost more than $20,000 per year of life gained. For Porter, the only question was the precise dollar value the government should set on a year of a patient’s life. Supporters of government-run health care used to argue against market-based approaches because “you couldn’t put a price on human life.” But that’s precisely what Porter wants the government to do. The second pro-rationing piece was by Obama administration advisor Steve Rattner, “Beyond ObamaCare” (9/16/2012). Rattner stated up front, “We need death panels.” Rattner advocated restricting medical spending on the elderly, especially on patients in their last year of life, because such spending “consumes more than a quarter of the [Medicare] program’s budget.” One big problem with Rattner’s approach is that we often can’t know what will be a patient’s final year of life until after they’ve died. It’s easy for a bureaucrat to say in retrospect, “This unnecessary spending didn’t extend the patient’s life.” But the treating physician doesn’t always know whether a patient will live or die from a surgery or procedure. If the surgery succeeds and the patient lives another 5 years, then it was money well spent. But if the patient dies, a bureaucrat can classify it as “wasteful.” Do we really want the government deciding whether or not a doctor is allowed to save your grandmother’s life? In a recent New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) article, former Obama administration officials have also advocated a more indirect form of rationing. They’ve proposed a fixed cap on aggregate private medical spending (not just government spending). Such a cap has already been enacted into law in Massachusetts and the authors wish to extend that to the rest of the country. Of course, any cap on private medical spending necessarily means the government must restrict Americans’ right to spend their own money for their own medical care. One of the co-authors of this NEJM article, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, has already laid the intellectual groundwork for overt rationing in a 2009 Lancet article, “Principles For Allocation of Scarce Medical Interventions.” Dr. Emanuel is a former White House health care advisor and the brother of Rahm Emanuel, President Obama’s former chief of staff. Dr. Emanuel proposes rationing based on a combination of factors including patient age, expected “quality adjusted life years,” and the patient’s “instrumental value” to “society.” Given that the government would be making (and paying for) these rationing decisions, value to “society” will become “value as determined by the government.” Such rationing completely inverts the relationship between the individual and the state. Rather than the state existing to serve the individual, the individual’s existence is sustained at the discretion of the state. This is the opposite of the American founders’ intention that the government be the people’s servant, not their master. I’m surprised that ObamaCare advocates are discussing overt medical rationing so quickly. Earlier in 2012, the New England Journal of Medicine still exhorted health policy analysts to avoid the “R-word” because it was such a political hot potato and to instead use euphemisms such as “frugality.” If ObamaCare supporters are confident enough to openly promote rationing, it means they’re preparing to put their plans into action in a second Obama term. Rationing is inevitable whenever the government controls medical spending. He who pays the piper calls the tune. Under ObamaCare, government control of health spending will quickly expand to affect most Americans, not only the elderly. Note that we don’t debate how to ration cellphones. That’s because our relatively free market has driven cellphone prices so low that even many of the poorest Americans can afford one. The free market can also work in health care. Many patients can now purchase “calcium scoring” heart scans, which measure how much calcium is deposited in the coronary arteries. These scans are one of the safest and most reliable ways to measure one’s risk of future heart attack. Calcium scoring scans do not require a doctor’s order and are not typically covered by insurance. Because patients generally pay out of pocket, motivated consumers shop around. Normal market forces have thus driven down their price dramatically. Several years ago, these scans cost $500; now some centers offer them for under $100. This pattern of rising quality and falling prices can and should be the norm in all of health care.

death panel care means "rationing". Some people get life saving procedures and others do not. Remember the little girl who was initially denied a life saving lung transplant ? In the future public outcry will have NO bearing on final decisions.

Pretty simple, the wealthy will obtain their care offshore, the average American will be acquainted with Hospice. The money will be in death panel care. Go there for employment and good luck.

U can do it, any problems? Let me know