An Inconvenient Truth

[SkinEmAll]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

No, it's the way it is. The fact of the matter is, pro athletes ARE worth more than most other professions. If they weren't, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

I completely disagree. Am I against pros making alot of money? not at all. I know the supply and demand point you are making, but its still not right. All Im saying is, as a whole when you think of all the problems we have here in our country that need money, it just makes you think a little different.

[saden1]

Let see, people pay good money to watch the NFL. TV companies pay the NFL ridiculous amount of money to broadcast games. The owners make a ton of money and they players get a good cut of that. Some players get a lot of money, others don't.

Nothing is wrong with this picture IMO.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by saden1

Let see, people pay good money to watch the NFL. TV companies pay the NFL ridiculous amount of money to broadcast games. The owners make a ton of money and they players get a good cut of that. Some players get a lot of money, others don't.

Nothing is wrong with this picture IMO.

I agree. So the guys who sit and passively watch the value of their teams go up deserve to make money, but the guys whose knees, backs, hands, etc. are going to be wrecked don't? I really don't understand that logic.

[saden1]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I agree. So the guys who sit and passively watch the value of their teams go up deserve to make money, but the guys whose knees, backs, hands, etc. are going to be wrecked don't? I really don't understand that logic.

Most owners have worked hard to have enough money to own a team. They took a lot of risks and came out on top. And running a team isn't cake walk either. You look at the NFL combine and it's pact. All those guys are making a decision to play in the NFL because they'll get a better paycheck than they would elsewhere. It's hard for me to feel sorry for them because they can walk away anytime (a hard decision). They just keep playing and playing.

[SkinEmAll]

My point is simple. There is sickening amounts of money given to the major pro atheletes. Im not saying they dont deserve to make alot of money. But its disgusting to think of the tons of money spent on entertainment in this country with all the problems we have. Im the first to support my team, you guys dont want to know how much I have spent on the redskins over the years, but I also help out with alot of charitys and such. And my whole thing about a 'player cap' instead of a team cap, is that NO player is truly worth making some of these insane amounts of money, which we all know is much more in baseball.

[That Guy]

well then, are you proposing a cap on the income of all people making over X dollars? if not, why pick on athletes and no one else?

if so, you realize that discourages innovation and anyone with half a brain would relocate to whichever country decided to advertise its low taxes afterwards. something similar killed the swedish clock making industry, though i'm sure there are only about 2 million other examples across many socialist nations. Either you let people use their money as they see fit or you tell them how to use it, but the later means you'll be taking 60% of nothing instead of 25% of massive piles of cash.

I mean, yeah it sucks that some people make obscene amounts of money and could care less about anyone else, but that's not the player's fault, that's how the system is set up. If anything you should be looking to blame the capitalist system that allows that kind of transfer of money, or you should blame someone truly worthy of being called greedy, like the waltons, who make these $50 and $100mill deals look like peanuts.

personally, i don't mind letting people try to get what they're perceived to be worth or care to see capped allowable income.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by saden1

Most owners have worked hard to have enough money to own a team. They took a lot of risks and came out on top. And running a team isn't cake walk either. You look at the NFL combine and it's pact. All those guys are making a decision to play in the NFL because they'll get a better paycheck than they would elsewhere. It's hard for me to feel sorry for them because they can walk away anytime (a hard decision). They just keep playing and playing.

I don't think anyone has to feel sorry for NFL players - they've got the best jobs in the world, albeit ones that can result in horrible physical ailments. My only point was that the players deserve the share in the pie. All of the owners are making boatloads of money that make players' salaries look ridiculously small. So I don't support decreasing players' salaries. Who would the additional money go to, the owners?

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I suppose you are quoting the estimates that say 40 million people in our country are uninsured or underinsured.

Yes I do believe those numbers. If you want to argue them with me, be my guest, but I have to warn you you're stepping right into my wheelhouse. I'm a financial analyst for the biggest provider to uninsured/underinsured patients in Pennsylvania: Temple University Health System.

That was in the interests of full disclosure. Did you know that as of July 1 2007, there will be only 5 hospitals delivering babies within Philadelphia city limits? Obstetrics is such a financial loser that hospitals have closed the program down.

Since 2002, 9 hospitals within Philadelphia city limits have closed. No new ones have opened.

What's driving this? Underinsured patients don't reimburse hospitals; they have no money and no insurance, and consequently hospitals don't get paid. So in low-income areas, like the part of Philly I work in, hospitals are suffering financially and are forced to cut programs. The end result? Not only do these people not have the money for health care, they don't even have enough places nearby that can provide the care.

I believe the numbers if you want to just use a #. 10 million of those are very temp. while people are changing jobs. So if I quit one job on 3/05/07 and then take a week off between jobs I'm counted on that list. If I'm a younger person who decides I do not need health insurance. I'm on that list. From those two things from what I've read the number would drop to around 25 million. Now how many of those drive new cars have HBO, Cell phones and everything else and just don't buy health insurance? I'd say that number is around 5 to 10 mill easy but no one knows the answer to that part. Now we are down to around a real number of 20 to 15 million uninsured Americans because I do not count the above. That is still a big number but now I'd have to get into the poor and all of that stuff which I will avoid getting into.

The reason doctors do not want to deliever babies is they are always getting sued. Malp. Ins is way up and the doctors and Hosp. just don't want to deal with it anymore. Its a shame.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by That Guy

i do part time financial needs analysis, and from what i've personally seen, i have NO reason to doubt scheed or those numbers.

it sucks that those that can't afford basic health care can't even get preventive services, and it's short sighted. (ie, see the post's article on how a kid couldn't get a 80$ tooth extraction, needed 250,000$ worth of medical care (including emergency brain surgery) and still ended up dead. just because he had a cavity and the paperwork and willingness of practioners to deal with it was too much to ask.... for every case like that, 3124 other kids could also get tooth extractions when needed and the taxpayer still comes out ahead, as well as lower income families).

I'm not sure what its called but the goverment does provide health insurance for children from poor families. The problem in our area is that the parents are too lazy or do not know they have to sign the children up. I'd also like to know the dentist that will do an $80.00 tooth extraction.

[Daseal]

This thread made quite a strange progression. From Al Gore to health insurance, to NFL players getting paid too much.... Wow.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Daseal

This thread made quite a strange progression. From Al Gore to health insurance, to NFL players getting paid too much.... Wow.

You're a salty vet, you know how these things go.

[paulskinsfan]

Originally Posted by firstdown

I believe the numbers if you want to just use a #. 10 million of those are very temp. while people are changing jobs. So if I quit one job on 3/05/07 and then take a week off between jobs I'm counted on that list. If I'm a younger person who decides I do not need health insurance. I'm on that list. From those two things from what I've read the number would drop to around 25 million. Now how many of those drive new cars have HBO, Cell phones and everything else and just don't buy health insurance? I'd say that number is around 5 to 10 mill easy but no one knows the answer to that part. Now we are down to around a real number of 20 to 15 million uninsured Americans because I do not count the above. That is still a big number but now I'd have to get into the poor and all of that stuff which I will avoid getting into.

The reason doctors do not want to deliever babies is they are always getting sued. Malp. Ins is way up and the doctors and Hosp. just don't want to deal with it anymore. Its a shame.

That's somewhat misleading. Lots of independent contractors and/or sole proprietors don't have health insurance, they simply cannot afford it. Im 34, and the last quote I got for health insurance was $650 a freakin month! I cant afford that. People take for granted health insurance provided by their employers. In addition, I think its crap that an insurance company pays such a reduced amount, while someone without insurance gets stuck with the full bill. There was a Dateline story on this recently. Someone without insurance goes in for surgery and gets hit with a $100k bill, but when someone else who has insurance goes in, their insurance company pays like half that amount. Shouldn't the guy without insurance get at least as good a rate as the insurance company when its coming out of his own pocket? Just doesn't seem fair.

[gibbsisgod]

Originally Posted by paulskinsfan

That's somewhat misleading. Lots of independent contractors and/or sole proprietors don't have health insurance, they simply cannot afford it. Im 34, and the last quote I got for health insurance was $650 a freakin month! I cant afford that. People take for granted health insurance provided by their employers. In addition, I think its crap that an insurance company pays such a reduced amount, while someone without insurance gets stuck with the full bill. There was a Dateline story on this recently. Someone without insurance goes in for surgery and gets hit with a $100k bill, but when someone else who has insurance goes in, their insurance company pays like half that amount. Shouldn't the guy without insurance get at least as good a rate as the insurance company when its coming out of his own pocket? Just doesn't seem fair.

I have never heard this but if its true than something needs done about it. That sure sounds like discrimination(sp?) to me.

[FRPLG]

This the little thread that could. Almost aweek and only 72 replies but constantly on the front page.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by gibbsisgod

I have never heard this but if its true than something needs done about it. That sure sounds like discrimination(sp?) to me.

No actually it's called fee scheduling and it's 100% legal.

There is an agreed upon rate for medical services, medical equipment, etc.

Insurance companies never pay the full amount, I guess you can say it's a bulk discount rate.

Or you could look at it from the other side and say medical providers are overcharging those without insurance. Don't always be so quick to blame the big bad insurance companies.