Health Care Thread

Erronius: I think that woman has the pre-existing condition of "head too big for body" syndrome - she should be saving a ton with the ACA.

Vaclav_sl said:

Five Guys when they opened their first spot around here was doing any burger all you can eat $1 a person - and ran out of supplies by something like 2pm EST and had to shut down for the day besides selling fries (at $0.50 a large to go with the cheap theme) - as a day one promo.

So I don't imagine they served that many people, with tons being turned away - last I checked that spot is still going super strong and the chain is doing gangbusters with everyone loving them and giving huge kudos to the CEOs of the chain.

Perhaps lower management felt a sting for it, not sure - but the big dogs didn't even take a hit for it. Hell, it might have been a regional or store manager idea to get the word out the first time. (Although IIRC one of the CEOs was actually working there for Day One...)

Click to expand...

Still a bad comparison.

The website wasn't giving healthcare for $1 and they ran out, so were giving dental for .50). If they had friggin blocked the roads themselves so no one could even get close, that would be a different story). It's a working system that got overloaded (even though there was planning for volume) against a system that didn't work.

The Five Guys promo also got the word out (in a good way) about a new product and was a very successful marketing tactic. Startups and venues do it all the time. Free beer and buffet til it runs out (I go to these all the time. Free food and even better - free networking).

"Dude, this place was so good, they ran out by 2:00. I got me one though, you should check it out" vs. "Dude, I can't login to see if my burger is $1 or $6".

I was just running with your own take on the burger analogy, shrug - perhaps it would've been better to just say it's a bad analogy rather than trying that method.

But if we stick with just things with "Logins" that can have issues... How many people were actually able to play EQ1 on Mar 15, 1998 (might be goofing the year) when it first launched? I've heard only a dozen or so were able to play longer than a few minutes without a disconnect, and really me with my working time then it took me a full month before I was able to get a real play session in personally. Sounds like a similar rollout to me - and it had tons of bumps along the road with various monumental fuckups - but at the end of the day was an excellent product.

States were supposed to set up their own ACA websites, and the couple states that did had no problems during the launch. It's the states that decided they didn't need to spend any money on this and maybe even wanted to disrupt the reform whose residents get to deal with the BS. Yes, it'd be nice if government contracting weren't so screwed up that one could actually get a functioning website in 3 years. Alas, that's not how things work. But overall it seems rather disingenuous for a party to slash government funding, do everything they can to derail the implementation of health care reform, shut down the government prior to the program's launch, and then complain that the website doesn't work properly.

What's next? Republican governors complaining about the Medicaid gap, after refusing to take the free money to fund it? Yes, it's only funded for a couple years by the federal government, but there's nothing stopping state legislatures from providing the extension only for those few years. If only with the expectation that federal funding will be extended.

fanaskin_sl said:

Hey if strong central authority is whats best then the website and backend insurance company sharing should have come out better being one government agency was in charge instead of different all these different states with different standards OMG!, this should have all come out super efficiently.

Click to expand...

A coherent thought, better luck next time with that.

LMFAO at this shit!

Three Guys Built a Better Healthcare.gov
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/techn...caregov/71195/

http://www.thehealthsherpa.com/

Damn you, central authoritarian policies!

That's just a different layout for the cost estimator. Comparing that to healthcare.gov is bad.

The central authoritarian policy was for the states to make their own exchanges, which many did, and those work fine.

Picasso_sl said:

That's just a different layout for the cost estimator. Comparing that to healthcare.gov is bad.

Click to expand...

No shit comparing it is bad. This actually works.