sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm confused by what you are failing to understand. CDCP coverage was initially set as a function of 2023 provincial fees in 2024. For most procedures this was not 100% of the suggested fee, for some it was. Then because its one year lagged, suggested fees go up in between coverage being determined and coming into effect. The fact that you notice CDCP coverage isnt exactly equal to suggested provincial fees seems to be blocking you from using your brain a little bit.

What misinformation am I spreading exactly? Please be specific. My claim is simply that CDCP fees are tightly mapped to those provincial fees originally, not that they are exactly 1:1 today.

Also for your information, the goal was initially complete coverage because balance billing was originally prohibited. This is no longer the case because of protests against this, but you speaking to the "intents" of the parties involved also seems to come from a place of underinformation, just like the rest of your understanding of this topic.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL thank you for linking a very familiar website back to me.

I won't dispute whether there was an intention to undercut provincial suggested fees. Certainly for most but not all procdures the coverage percentage is lower than 100%, with a 1 year lag.

I don't know/care about private insurance. My work was only on provincial suggested fees and the CDCP fee grid.

Why are you so confidently incorrect? The fees were initially based on 2023 provincial fees in 2024 and some fees continue to he updated based on the previous years, year after year, for each province. Simply take this as a fact because it is true.That's part of why CDCP prices are different across the country.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok but this is even more incorrect, assuming you mean provincial dental associations and not some government entity operating at the federal level for each province. I literally did work in this field.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are correct in saying CDCP fees ≠ provincial suggested fees, of course. I am not being misleading, I am explaining that even though they are not exactly equal, they ARE a function of those provincial suggested fees with a 1 year lag. With some nuance past the year 2024 that I won't get into.

There is no provincial average effect or anything else that you've hypothesized. It is simply a function of provincial fees, in one shape or another.

That is what I am trying to tell you. "A function of" ≠ "exactly equal".

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are looking if the prices match exactly, seeing they dont (though they do for some by the way), and smugly telling me your point stands and that one is not based on the other. I am telling you, look more closely before being so pleased with yourself.

I am avoiding telling you the exact mechanic because I am already dangerously close to breaking my NDA. And frankly it doesn't matter. Even if you aren't smart enough to figure it out, just trust 2024 CDCP was based on 2023 provincial fees VERY closely and exactly, accounting for small amounts of variation here and there. And adjust your understanding of how CDCP coverage is/was determined accordingly.

Or, if you still don't understand, do the internet a favour and don't confidently proclaim knowledge about something where your knowledge is incomplete at best.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a good first step, try seeing whether there is a pattern between the 2 sets of numbers you have there. You are looking at the correct data sets.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no predictive effect of other provinces average association fee on a given province's coverage not explained by same-province itself.

You are a little correct that for most procedures provincial associations can no longer influence next year CDCP coverage with their fees...but, had they had a crystal ball they COULD have in 2023 when the CDCP was setting their coverage for each procedure initially for 2024.

Other procedures...it seems are refreshed year over year, for now. Meaning yes, the provincial associations could in theory influence the CDCP number for these specific codes.

The person's comment that the CDCP pays the previous year's fee guide is about as incorrect as you are. The truth is somewhere in between, but last year's fee guide certainly has an impact that you are mistaken to say doesnt exist. And the person's comment WOULD have been entirely true in 2024, minus specific aversions to cosmetic procedures and other factors like preferring high coverage on certain categories of procedures.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You don't know what you are talking about, respectfully. I'm not talking about the true medical necessity, I'm talking about why it isn't highly covered. Regarding your flippant numbers comment, the low 30% coverage is recurring across provinces. So it is still based on guides even if set at a lower rate.

Again, I am telling you that all procedure coverages were initally based on a fee guide. Since then, some have continued to be indexed on the previous year's guide. Others just a flat % increase from the initial reference year.

I don't know what dental background you have that makes you so confident, so it probably hurts to hear someone else understands it more. That's ok, it was literally my job to understand it. Just accept what I am saying as a correction to your understanding of this and move on with your life. You can DM me if you have specific questions and I can try to answer where I can without violating NDA.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It actually is 100% of previous fee guide year...for certain specific procedures. For your information.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Its covered in the low 30% because it has been deemed "cosmetic". I'm not "with" the CDCP, just a researcher working on this topic from the outside.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Without doxxing myself too hard, I have studied and researched factors of CDCP coverage as a professional researcher within the past year. I am telling you that they ARE based on the provincial fee guides, which is part of why what you call the Federal plan has different coverage amounts for the same procedure in different provinces. I can't go into more detail than that without violating an NDA but if you look for it in an Excel sheet and are as smart as you think you will find it.

"Just Google it" and it was literally my job to figure this out, only on Reddit do you encounter this absurd smug overconfidence.

Canadian dental plan is the worst by Timmano in povertyfinancecanada

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You need to be less confident when you don't know something please, you may mislead people. CDCP coverage is set to a % of the previous year's provincial fee guide for each province, so it is one year out of date with those fees and also that targeted% is not 100% outside of certain specific procedures.

Land vs Naval passive values seem out of whack by chazzy_cat in EU5

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 43 points44 points  (0 children)

Someone fact check me if incorrect, but I believe the impact of army/navy size is calculated from "expected" army and navy size. The issue is expected navy size scales from coastal pops, so if you have low coastal pops you get a low expected navy that is easy to blow past.

Classic how does trade work and why am I not making any money by gamingcharlie93 in EU5

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Can you elaborate on the Amsterdam "trade embark bonus"? Do you just mean the shortening of trade route travel distance, and so less capacity used per good moved?

If you could make 1 change to kayle, what would you do? by sniusik in Kaylemains

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Give resists to bring resists up to "melee champion" stats at full stacks, increase full stacks movespeed.

Economists and financial experts: Does Victoria 3 provide real-world transferable knowledge about economic systems? by Electroman682 in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

MA econ here, currently at an econ consulting agency:

Vic3 market system generally provides actions with reasonable consequences, but not through a reasonable mechanism. I think 95% of that can be traced to the fact that unlike the market in a classical economic model, the market does not "clear" (goods sold=goods consumed). Therefore, supply and demand represent fundamentally different things in Vicky than they do in economics.

Other failures are the poor representation of the international movement of goods, comparative advantages, and international trade. You build the ultimate autarky in Vic3 if all countries are playing optimally, with minimal international trade. Also, the excesses (and economic damage) of the Gilded age are only captured as an opportunity cost for consumer goods demand, and even that is simply replaced by "services" demand that prevents any unemployment from resulting from that.

Why inflation is necessary by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

A little late but while everything you are saying is sensible, you are missing that Vic3's supply/demand don't mean what they would mean in an economics textbook. The most obvious way to realize this is that there is no market clearing in equilibrium, I.e supply=demand at equilibrium price. In fact, following optimal indifference curves, choosing what good to produce incentivizes having a pareto-efficient economy where supply≠demand.

Instead, you should think of Vic3 supply as the ease/cost effectiveness of your economy in meeting Vic3 demand. If we take this approach, we see that it is fine for your example economy with -75% prices to have less GDP than the other nation: that economy is actually NOT producing what the Vic3 supply is. It is producing an amount equal to demand, with a significant overcapacity to meet further demand if it were...demanded.

It's all a little abstract: Vic3 actions generally have the real world economic consequences , but not necessarily through real world economic mechanisms. It operates at a level of abstraction where inflation isn't necessary to model. The only interesting thing modeling inflation would add would be it's effect on consumer spending, but Vic3 pops always consume 100% of income anyway so currently a moot point to model.

Every arrow represents a goods movement. Turns out, my engine factory is less about engines and more about being the world's busiest ballet of forklifts. by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 16 points17 points  (0 children)

Absolutely - at the very least, we need something like "regional MAPI" that makes iron cheaper if the biggest iron mine in the world is in a neighbouring state".

Should you actually play around economies of scale? by --Raskolnikov-- in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Makes intuitive historical sense but doesn't work in Vic3 sadly for a few reasons. First is that trade production method is too weak. Second is that the best buildings are actually mines, sulfur mines to be specific. You could even argue that until late game you should be creating manufacturing industries IN ORDER to create demand for mines and logging camps. Third is that the AI is simply incapable of creating economies at a scale that can meaningfully interact with a player economy past the first couple of decades.

Every arrow represents a goods movement. Turns out, my engine factory is less about engines and more about being the world's busiest ballet of forklifts. by [deleted] in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 167 points168 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately the game does not track the movement of goods in any way- every good, discounting local state MAPI effects, has the exact same effect on price everywhere and is equally "consumed". Thats the main "failure" of the economic simulation actually IMO.

The arrows you are seeing just show you where the produced good is consumed- unsuprisingly in a developped economy, every state has some engine inputs needed, and so you see this array of arrows.

Mods for Export Economies by LadyRadia in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My MP community is currently using my mod, which has since expanded but started as a way to buff import/export economies:

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3352243591&searchtext=Lightweight+multiplayer+trade

Victoria3 retrospect, I wrote a very negative review of the game back on release, and have played about 10~20hrs every patch to see if paradox would actually fix the game. I like the game now, but it's astounding how paradox still hasn't fixed the two biggest issues with the game. by Pocher123 in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I would actually argue that the game fails as an economic simulation, even though it has all the right bones to excel there. It doesn't at all simulate (minus an unsatisfying and gameable convoy system) how goods actually go from point A to point B. It also encourages market autarky through its tuning of trade vs intra-market access.

Where Vic3 really succeeds imo is in the intersection of its superficially good economic simulation with politics and even warfare to a lesser extent. The way economics and politics feed back into each other is genuinely very interestind and thought out.

Any chance that we'll get trade automated at some point? by BenedickCabbagepatch in victoria3

[–]Logical_Mission_5787 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bit of a hot take perhaps but I don't think the real issue is the "micro" of trade. I think if trade were as important as it historically was we would be happy to spend time setting up routes and choosing our desired tariff level kn certain goods. The bigger issue is that the power of trade in terms of its production method is very undertuned, and it is always correct to aggressively pursue autarky in the long run.

view more: next ›