Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

JOHN GALT, M.D

A forum for discussion of regional topics including oil depletion but also government, society, and the future.

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Sixstrings » Thu 17 Sep 2009, 20:52:12

Good points, SPG.. this is a case where I've come to conclusions after listening to the "talking points" -- one of those messages being that Medicare is easier to deal with than all those different insurance companies. You stated your points well and have experience in the field, so I'll have to defer to you.

As for the Baucus plan, everyone agrees it's crap.

I think what we need is a public option, wherein ANY US citizen can participate (insurance companies don't even want a public option, but if there is one they only want those without insurance to participate).

I think competition is a good thing, and in reality private insurance wouldn't be at a disadvantage. Just think about all the sick / unemployed folks whom private insurance doesn't want.. they will invariably cost the public option more than private insurers customers.

So, the competition issue will balance out.. the public option would be non-profit, but that wouldn't an advantage due to higher claims.

Anyway, we know what you're against.. so what are you for? What's your answer? Surely, you agree something has to change.. we can't keep on truckin with the current healthcare inflation rate.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Tyler_JC » Thu 17 Sep 2009, 23:05:45

The German number does appear to be wrong. I found another source (NPR) that shows German doctors earning $123K before taxes (the number quoted above was after taxes and adjusted for cost of living).

So let's say the real number is probably closer to $80,000/$90,000 after taxes for a German doctor?

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91931036

I'm more concerned about this statement:

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')or the American people, one difference would be that $600 billion of insurance company profits would be removed from the healthcare system. What's more important to you, insurance company executive bonuses or using that money to heal the sick?


The entire American health care budget is $2.5 trillion. Almost half of that is government spending.

So the entire private health care industry is only around $1.5 trillion. Do you really think they are getting 40% profit margins?

http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Sixstrings » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 01:31:11

You're right Tyler, I got my numbers mixed up. The round figure of $650 billion is basically what it costs us to have for-profit healthcare in this country.. in other words, that's how much more we spend than we would if we had a non-profit based system like the rest of the civilized world does.

Source:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ccording to one study, of the $2.1 trillion the U.S. spent on health care in 2006, nearly $650 billion was above what we would expect to spend based on the level of U.S. wealth versus other nations. These additional costs are attributable to $436 billion outpatient care and another $186 billion of spending related to high administrative costs.
http://www.nchc.org/facts/cost.shtml

Now either Americans are sicker than the rest of the human race, or the SKIM is too big.

Also, I ran across a chart which illustrates just how much more the insurers have been skimming off the top since 1992:
Image
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2009/08/05/are-health-insurers-making-too-much-money/

You can see that in 1993, the insurers weren't all that evil, paying out on claims a full 95% of what they took in. Then something strange happened (I dunno, CEO mega-bonuses maybe?) and in just a few years they increased their skim from 5% to 15%.. they slowed down a bit after that, but the skim continued to grow until what we have today (looks like 18% as of '06).

Image
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Quinny » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 02:43:41

I think this is a bit naive :roll:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'F')irst of all, 60k is about what a lot of nurses make (locally, they start out at around 45k, some make more). If specialists could just be happy with around 200k, then all our problems would be solved. I say specialists, because as you know, every doctor and his uncle has become a specialist these days so they can bill more. --snip--
Dealing with insurance companies is like a feminine hygiene commercial compared to dealing with medicare or medicaid. When I was in private practice, I eventually started making my receptionist make all the calls to medicare and medicaid. I ended up wanting to scream at them every time I called.
Last edited by Ferretlover on Fri 18 Sep 2009, 17:44:24, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Text deleted per COC 3.1.3 Unnecessary text quotation:.
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby smallpoxgirl » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 03:01:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', 'A')nyway, we know what you're against.. so what are you for? What's your answer? Surely, you agree something has to change.. we can't keep on truckin with the current healthcare inflation rate.


Absolutely! What do I want to change? First off I want us to have a serious heart to heart national dialogue about reconceptualizing medicine. We have been selling medicine as a path to immortality. Everybody wants to walk for a cure, stamp out heart disease, etc. We need to come to grips with the idea that miracle cures don't exist. If it's not curable already, it's unlikely to become so. We're all going to die some day. In some cases medicine can forestall that, but by no means can it change that reality. We need to look at medicine as one service amongst many and reprioritize our spending with a view of what is and isn't cost effective. USPSTF does an excellent job with evaluating preventative medicine in this way. Their standard metric is that anything they recommend should provide one added year of life for each $10,000 spent. We desperately need a similar agency to start looking at other treatments, running them against a similar metric, and recommending which treatments are and aren't worthwhile.

WRT to coverage, what I would love to see is patients placed back in a position of having a significant financial stake in keeping their healthcare costs down. I think that the way to do that is a combination of high deductible insurance and Health Savings Accounts where patients are able to set aside money tax free and roll it over year to year so that they have a vested interest in not spending money stupidly and they pressure their doctors not to spend money stupidly. Our average health expenditure in the US is currently $6700 per person per year. Most of that is hidden behind so many layers of smoke and mirrors that people have no idea what they're spending. I'd much rather see a situation where people can see that $6,700 going out, feel the pain, and feel motivated to quench the tide.

The few patients that honestly can't afford their share of the burden need to continue to have medicare and medicaid available. Enrollment, coding, and claims processing need to be massively simplified, and the regulatory burden needs to be reduced dramatically. CLIA needs to be repealed along with HIPPA. I would love to see RBRVS (medicare's funding scheme) rewritten so that it accurately reflects the value of the work done by primary care docs. You want to make primary care back into a vibrant specialty and kick the specialists in the nuts, its as simple as that. The reason primary care docs make squat and try to cram in so many patients while specialists lavish in luxury is very simple. Medicare wrote the funding formulas that way. Insurance companies generally pay more than medicare, but they follow the same ratios laid out in RBRVS.

We desperately need to reign in pharmaceutical companies. The legalization of direct to consumer marketing of drugs back in the 90's has been a complete disaster. Drug companies are now spending far more on marketing than they are spending on R&D, producing drugs, and distribution combined. I would love to see direct to consumer marketing banned and all their forms of subtle bribery of doctors banned. I would also love to see a national ban on allowing drug reps access to doctor prescribing records. Currently the pharmacies all collect records of which doctors prescribe which meds and the drug reps have access to this data. They use it to shower treats and favors on the docs that prescribe their meds. They call it marketing. It really is poorly disguised bribery.

We DESPERATELY need malpractice reform. Here's an idea for you. Lets completely ditch all the reimbursement crap for medicaid. Set up a government fund to reimburse patients that are harmed by medical errors. If I agree to see a set number of medicaid patient visits for free every year, I'm given immunity from malpractice litigation. If my patients are injured because of an unintentional medical error, they can apply to the government panel for compensation, but they can't sue. It's a win for everybody except the trial lawyers. Taking the fear of litigation out of every patient encounter would create so much better relationships between doctors and patients. It would also empower doctors to practice much more cost effective medicine. I can't begin to tell you how many times doctors do stupid unnecessary testing because of fear of missing some one in a million freak thing that gets them sued. Obviously we don't want to empower the few doctors who really don't provide quality care. We'll assign trained personnel from the state medical boards to review the cases seen by the reimbursement panel and they can recommend additional training, supervision, or revocation of license for any doctor that is in fact providing sub standard care.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Quinny » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 04:29:51

I would agree with much of what you say, the compensation culture we imported from the USA has had a massive negative impact on all aspects of life here in the UK.

The NHS in general is an excellent system though and the main people who are fighting against it are the filthy rich and those who will earn more from it. The dual system we have here where the private practitioner/consultant leeches off the NHS is IMO a major cause of cost escalation. It also skews planning and targets, because the greedy doctors work out the ways they can best milk the system for more money.

I do agree with many of your points re the whole philosophy of medicine, but they are issues that need to be addressed whatever system is in place.

I was unlucky to break my neck surfing in the States.

The first questions asked by the paramedic were all about insurance and who my insurer was. Luckily one of my friends gave them enough to get me in the ambulance. The conversation continued between the driver and the paramedic all the way to the hospital. They were discussing which hospital to go to as my insurance situation wasn't clear. Virtually no discussion of my injury. I was in a pretty difficult situation, but remember thinking it seemed bizarre they were more interested in payment than patient. It also made me think about the consequences if I had been poor with no health insurance.

I was grateful for the care, but it made me realise the value of the NHS, and grateful I wasn't dependent on the US health system.
Live, Love, Learn, Leave Legacy.....oh and have a Laugh while you're doing it!
User avatar
Quinny
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3337
Joined: Thu 03 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby vision-master » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 09:27:23

Instead of those costly drug treatment programs that don't work, Ibogaine is suppose to work wonders. Why is it not an accepted treatment here? :)


Link
vision-master
 

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby AlexdeLarge » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 09:47:06

And you Doctors can treat them for free !!

Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-ties-immigration-to-health-care-battle/?feat=home_cube_position1

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')resident Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage
.

The "change" you "hoped" for suckas??????????????
Viddy well, little brother. Viddy well.
User avatar
AlexdeLarge
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1806
Joined: Tue 20 May 2008, 03:00:00
Location: I have a whole ward
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Ferretlover » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 09:50:14

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', ' ') Hateful diatribes against doctors are not going to make your healthcare any better. I'd be perfectly happy making $60,000 a year, but you try to make.

When you're right, you're right, Dr. We should be more careful about assigning blame, for any problem, against any one group.
Just as in any other career field, doctors come in different catagories. there are great doctors, good doctors and postal workers :)
And, government intervention in anything is rarely a good thing.
"Open the gates of hell!" ~Morgan Freeman's character in the movie, Olympus Has Fallen.
Ferretlover
Elite
Elite
 
Posts: 5852
Joined: Wed 13 Jun 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Hundreds of miles further inland
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby rangerone314 » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 10:43:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '
')What's important is insightful discussion of the problems with our medical system instead of this childish BS about sticking it to the man. Seriously. There are a lot of complex reasons why our medical system is in disarray, but being oppressed by the insurance company isn't on the list.


For patients, being oppressed by the insurance company might be on the list. How about the incentive insurance companies have to drop patients? There have been plenty of incidents where insurance companies refuse to authorize medical treatment where the insured patient has a valid claim simply because they know the fines will not exceed the money they'll save when the patient dies without treatment. Sanctions and lawsuits are just costs of doing business that are factored into their revenue vs expense calculations.

Quotas and bonuses for health insurance workers in terms of dropping claims are certainly not unheard of in the health insurance industry, which has all the moral fiber of Jack the Ripper.

I suppose the health insurance industry CEOs are lucky that sick and dying American sheeple with nothing left to lose are not vengeful. Healthcare may be expensive but said the Joker in Dark Knight: "I'm a man of simple tastes. I like dynamite, and gunpowder... And gasoline! Do you know what all of these things have in common? They're cheap!"
Last edited by rangerone314 on Fri 18 Sep 2009, 10:52:54, edited 1 time in total.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby vision-master » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 10:51:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', 'W')hat's important is insightful discussion of the problems with our medical system instead of this childish BS about sticking it to the man. Seriously. There are a lot of complex reasons why our medical system is in disarray, but being oppressed by the insurance company isn't on the list.

How can smart ppl be so dumb?
Unattainable Health Coverage$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')Insurance discrimination based on pre-existing conditions makes adequate health insurance unavailable to millions of Americans.In 45 states across the country, insurance companies can discriminate against people based on their pre-existing conditions when they try to purchase health insurance directly from insurance companies in the individual insurance market.4 Insurers can deny them coverage, charge higher premiums, and/or refuse to cover that particular medical condition.

A recent national survey estimated that 12.6 million non-elderly adults5 – 36 percent of those who tried to purchase health insurance directly from an insurance company in the individual insurance market – were in fact discriminated against because of a pre-existing condition in the previous three years.6

http://www.healthreform.gov/reports/den ... index.html
vision-master
 
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby rangerone314 » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 10:54:59

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('AlexdeLarge', 'A')nd you Doctors can treat them for free !!
Obama: Legalize illegals to get them health care
http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/18/obama-ties-immigration-to-health-care-battle/?feat=home_cube_position1 $this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'P')resident Obama said this week that his health care plan won't cover illegal immigrants, but argued that's all the more reason to legalize them and ensure they eventually do get coverage
. The "change" you "hoped" for suckas?????

Just out of curiosity, who currently foots the bill when an illegal alien shows up at the hospital ER?

And would providing American citizens National ID cards with biometrics prevent illegals from getting treatment at the ER?

Actually since it is possible in an accident a person might no longer have an ID card on their person (possibly due to a fire burning all their clothes off including their wallet), implanted RFID tags that could be scanned in the hospital ER might be a solution.

Even better, ER rooms could simply turn away patients who's RFID tags indicate they have no health insurance. Or instead of turning patients away entirely, they could be guided to the morgue, where they could patiently wait until they die. Or maybe let them wait in the place where they can collect organs for donation.

That would save a lot of money for all of the people who pay inflated premiums for insurance due to the uninsured who so inconveniently lack coverage due to their job loss.

Its the uninsured people's fault anyway for lacking health coverage, they chose to live in a country that had an economy influenced by Goldman-Sachs and AIG.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby smallpoxgirl » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 12:03:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', 'F')or patients, being oppressed by the insurance company might be on the list. How about the incentive insurance companies have to drop patients? There have been plenty of incidents where insurance companies refuse to authorize medical treatment where the insured patient has a valid claim simply because they know the fines will not exceed the money they'll save when the patient dies without treatment. Sanctions and lawsuits are just costs of doing business that are factored into their revenue vs expense calculations.


That's crap. First off state insurance commisions are very aggressive about investigating and correcting that sort of thing when it happens, and secondly PEOPLE NEED TO BE CUT OFF! Wasting $3million in medical care on someone who's going to spend the rest of his life drooling on himself is not a sane thing to do. We waste WAY too much money trying to find a miracle cure for people with incurable problems. In the process we are bankrupting our country. We'll spend more money on trying to save one guy with pancreatic cancer than we will on textbooks for an entire school district. We desperately need some mechanism for cutting off stupid, ineffective, heroic care. There is a point where we as a society can not afford all the Star Trek crap that would be necessary to give you a 5% chance of survival and you just need to be kept comfortable and deal with reality.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby smallpoxgirl » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 12:07:27

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'I')nsurance discrimination based on pre-existing conditions makes adequate health insurance unavailable to millions of Americans.


Trying to get health insurance for a pre-existing condition is kind of like trying to buy car insurance after you have your accident. That's not the way it works. Every health insurance plan I've ever seen has a delay period before pre-existing conditions are covered. Employer plans are something on the order of 60-90 days. Self-paid plans might be a year. That's not at all unreasonable. You buy insurance against something before it happens, not after.

If you have pre-existing conditions and are poor, medicaid is available. If you have money, didn't buy insurance, and got caught, suck it up.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby dinopello » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 12:26:45

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', '
')Just out of curiosity, who currently foots the bill when an illegal alien shows up at the hospital ER?

And would providing American citizens National ID cards with biometrics prevent illegals from getting treatment at the ER?

Actually since it is possible in an accident a person might no longer have an ID card on their person (possibly due to a fire burning all their clothes off including their wallet), implanted RFID tags that could be scanned in the hospital ER might be a solution.

Even better, ER rooms could simply turn away patients who's RFID tags indicate they have no health insurance. Or instead of turning patients away entirely, they could be guided to the morgue, where they could patiently wait until they die. Or maybe let them wait in the place where they can collect organs for donation.


This raises a lot of the fundamental issues that need to be answered in one way or another. Summed up, it is in what ways are health services a public interest and what elements of freedom or privacy are on the table to achieve the public interest health goals. Then we could talk about the best mechanisms for achieving the public interest goals.

I keep thinking of the Monte Python "Bring out yer dead" scene. There, the public apparently agreed that there was enough public interest in disposing of Black Plague infested bodies. I still can't believe the amount of political hay that was made out of the end-of-life counseling issue. Aka Death Panels.

The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead.
[a man puts a body on the cart]
Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one.
The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: What?
Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not.
The Dead Collector: He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better.
Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.
The Dead Collector: I can't take him.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine.
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor.
The Dead Collector: I can't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
The Dead Collector: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, when's your next round?
The Dead Collector: Thursday.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I think I'll go for a walk.
Large Man with Dead Body: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel happy. I feel happy.
[the Dead Collector glances up and down the street furtively, then silences the Body with his a whack of his club]
Large Man with Dead Body: Ah, thank you very much.
The Dead Collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
Large Man with Dead Body: Right.
User avatar
dinopello
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6088
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 03:00:00
Location: The Urban Village
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Tyler_JC » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 12:56:29

How about we force a little competition on the health insurance companies?

Allow any (legitimate) insurance company to sell insurance in any state. That will instantly break up the oligopolies and force them to compete on quality and cost.

We have states where one or two companies control 80% or more of the market. As a result, these companies are able to wield enough political capital to block new entries to the market. How is that a free market?

Imagine if Ford had 80% market share in Wisconsin and didn't allow any new companies to sell their cars in the state. Care to guess how much a car would cost? :evil:

But of course, Congress's health care plan does NOTHING to break up these entrenched interests and instead merely forks over more taxpayer money to the same corrupt oligarchs who are preventing the health care industry from functioning in the first place.
"www.peakoil.com is the Myspace of the Apocalypse."
Tyler_JC
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5438
Joined: Sat 25 Sep 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Boston, MA

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby smallpoxgirl » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 13:23:47

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'H')ow about we force a little competition on the health insurance companies?

Allow any (legitimate) insurance company to sell insurance in any state. That will instantly break up the oligopolies and force them to compete on quality and cost.


One thing that would really make that a whole lot simpler and easier is to come up with some sort of standard rate for allowable charges and getting rid of participating provider contracts. The insurance oligopolies exist in large part because of the byzantine mesh of participating provider networks and contracts. How about we just all agree on one standard charge for each CPT code. That way docs don't game the system by jacking up their standard fees knowing that half of the charge will be disallowed by most insurances. The game playing with fee schedules totally screws uninsured patients because they end up paying more than any other patient for the same service. In many cases it's double or more of what insurance companies pay for the same service.

Another thing that I'd love to see go away is hospital formulary lists. Hospitals all go out and shop around for which drug company will give them the best deal and then force their doctors to prescribe that brand of drugs through hospital formulary lists. IMHO, they are a total infringement of the practice of medicine and it leads to bad economic consequences. Patients get started on a certain brand of medicine in the hospital and then get continued on it as outpatients even though a different brand may be much cheaper in the outpatient world.
"We were standing on the edges
Of a thousand burning bridges
Sifting through the ashes every day
What we thought would never end
Now is nothing more than a memory
The way things were before
I lost my way" - OCMS
User avatar
smallpoxgirl
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 7258
Joined: Mon 08 Nov 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby rangerone314 » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 14:02:08

The point of this link is to try and imagine 21st century Americans fighting like this:
http://volunteersinparks.blogspot.com/2008/08/sunken-road-in-55mm.html

American's are afraid of death probably more than any other society on Earth.

Curious, for a society that has so many people so heavily religious and invested in the afterlife.

I read about the case of a woman who had TWO different kinds of cancer and she was going to die within months, and she needed some sort of immediate heart surgery for a 3rd issue, and her family was insisting on surgery even though the doctor knew himself there was no real point anymore.

I begin to think as a society we should simply determine what % of the GNP should go to health care, make that a ceiling allocate X dollars for each person for basic and preventative healthcare, and if people want medical coverage or insurance beyond this they pay extra themselves.

Allow people to shop for plans in any state they want, but the key is minding who regulates the insurance, so that you don't have a race to the bottom like with credit card companies, who go to the state with the most lax regulations.

There should be multiple tiers, so if a rich person wants to pay mucho bucks to have $100,000,000 in coverage, then let him.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right

Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take

You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown

Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
User avatar
rangerone314
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4105
Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
Location: Maryland

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Sixstrings » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 16:23:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vision-master', 'I')nsurance discrimination based on pre-existing conditions makes adequate health insurance unavailable to millions of Americans.


Trying to get health insurance for a pre-existing condition is kind of like trying to buy car insurance after you have your accident. That's not the way it works. Every health insurance plan I've ever seen has a delay period before pre-existing conditions are covered. Employer plans are something on the order of 60-90 days. Self-paid plans might be a year. That's not at all unreasonable. You buy insurance against something before it happens, not after.

If you have pre-existing conditions and are poor, medicaid is available. If you have money, didn't buy insurance, and got caught, suck it up.


Uhm.. SPG, it's not just paupers who lack insurance! First of all, most "poor" actually have jobs, and therefore earn too much to qualify for medicaid. Secondly, there are vast millions of Americans who are not even offered health insurance by their employers (incredibly, it's common for doctors, dentists, oral surgeons etc. to give no benefits). And then there are all the independent contractors, sometimes making a living and sometimes not..

If you really think people without insurance can either "get medicaid" or "suck it up," then you're just not aware of the plight of most lower wage workers in this country. The only way to get medicaid is to have somebody else pay your bills, or live on the street. You seem to think there's this choice of "get medicaid" or "get insurance." SPG, private insurance costs a fortune!!! People can barely pay their rent, they're losing their homes.. they simply don't have the $500 a month for insurance (which they can't even get anyhow with a pre-existing condition.. and who doesn't have one of those by the time they hit 30 or 40?).
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: JOHN GALT, M.D

Postby Sixstrings » Fri 18 Sep 2009, 16:42:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('smallpoxgirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', 'T')hat's crap. First off state insurance commisions are very aggressive about investigating and correcting that sort of thing when it happens, and secondly PEOPLE NEED TO BE CUT OFF! Wasting $3million in medical care on someone who's going to spend the rest of his life drooling on himself is not a sane thing to do.


I'm a liberal lefty, but I agree with the religious right-wing on this one. We should always be erring on the side of life.. the decision point for brain dead patients is at two years (statistics show if you don't improve by then, you're not going to). Most families do choose to withdraw food and water at that point. And that's their right, but I believe it should always be up to the family -- government should never make that decision.
User avatar
Sixstrings
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 15160
Joined: Tue 08 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

PreviousNext

Return to North America Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests