Free Market Healthcare

Message boards : Politics : Free Market Healthcare
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64942
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 983523 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 15:07:46 UTC - in response to Message 983508.  
Last modified: 25 Mar 2010, 15:12:08 UTC

Dr Sanjay Gupta on CNN has a story on that Here(Flash Video on the page).


The prices for those things do sound ridiculous so I'm wondering what the prices for equivalent products are. For the titanium screws too.

Dr. Gupta was also talking about the cost for covering people that don't have insurance or can't pay. This is a huge problem. It means that health care is a reality only for those that can afford it. It's even a problem for the many people with private policies that may not cover serious illness or long term treatments. Then there's the people that can't get insurance because of preexisting conditions that they or their family members might have and those that get dropped when they start costing the insurance company too much. A lot of people.

Well from what CNN has said the people Who are uninsured now will need to get insurance and If they need help they'll get the help, for the moment those with preexisting conditions will have to suffer with a high risk pool for the next 4 years, After that they can not be refused insurance on that basis.

Now one thing I find disturbing and very wrong is the hooliganism going on right now, Where People on the web are saying to people to go break windows of democratic party legislators(members of congress, senators and their employees are protected by Federal Law), As this is very wrong and should stop as the people doing this have crossed the line and have committed a Federal crime by breaking windows, As the FBI is on the case now. Protesting peacefully is allowed, Other violent acts, like spitting and such by Tea Baggers could be considered law breakers and It seems the militia movement of the 90's may be back too. This behavior is simply unacceptable and has to stop...
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 983523 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983526 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 15:16:02 UTC - in response to Message 983508.  

Gupta is another Right-wing nut. He clearly doesn't grasp the concept that Americans are already paying for the uninsured. Its called the ER visit. Perhaps he'd get a clue if he actually checked the cost of a Primary care provider visit vs an ER visit. the cost is about 20:1 when you include the hospitals need to staff departments 24/7. The US gov't already funnels money to private and public hospitals under the auspices of treating all that grace their doors. The losers are

Here is a much cheaper solution. Doc in a box(urgent care facilities) that see patients for non emergencies that cost about 10% of an ER visit. sure its more than the family Dr. but these Drs. are still cheaper than an ER visit. Both ER and Doc in a Box can triage patients. which means an ER can and should not see non Emergency patients anymore. Non ER patient should be directed to DOc in the BOx offices. and likewise a DIAB can forward patients to ER.

DIAB offices can and should refer patients to a primary care provider in their area. Again, patients seeing a PCP for non-emergent events. I see a great deal of cost savings.

what I dont like is the cost estimates that are provided for this new health care law when we don't even know what we are paying for the old one.
Its all about the cost.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983526 · Report as offensive
Profile Robert Waite
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 07
Posts: 2417
Credit: 18,192,122
RAC: 59
Canada
Message 983538 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 15:50:20 UTC - in response to Message 982635.  
Last modified: 25 Mar 2010, 15:50:48 UTC


The next step (in my opinion) should be medical malpractice tort reform. Let's hope it doesn't take another 45 years.


Did you know that this expense ranges from 1/3 of 1% up to 1.5% depending on which source is giving the information.
Naturally, I did not include anyone on Faux Network or that drug addict Limbaugh as one any the sources because they make tort costs out to be the highest cost in health care.

It isn't an issue.
I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.
ID: 983538 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983544 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 16:10:15 UTC - in response to Message 983538.  

medical tort reform only saves the insurance companies money. Lower payouts do not equate to lower medical malpractice insurance. It also doesnt help those grievously injured by medical malpractice because their lifetime of pain or injury isn't considered.

One thing that Texas encouraged when it reformed its malpractice law. Bad Doctors come here. they run less of a risk of malpractice suits because the injured aren't going to get much even if the Dr. is found to be bad.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983544 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983550 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 16:31:49 UTC - in response to Message 983538.  


The next step (in my opinion) should be medical malpractice tort reform. Let's hope it doesn't take another 45 years.


Did you know that this expense ranges from 1/3 of 1% up to 1.5% depending on which source is giving the information.
Naturally, I did not include anyone on Faux Network or that drug addict Limbaugh as one any the sources because they make tort costs out to be the highest cost in health care.

It isn't an issue.

Wow. Surgeons pay over $100,000 a year for malpractice insurance. If your numbers are right, that means they are making around $30,000,000 a year.
ID: 983550 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983553 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 16:40:39 UTC - in response to Message 983544.  

medical tort reform only saves the insurance companies money. Lower payouts do not equate to lower medical malpractice insurance. It also doesnt help those grievously injured by medical malpractice because their lifetime of pain or injury isn't considered.

One thing that Texas encouraged when it reformed its malpractice law. Bad Doctors come here. they run less of a risk of malpractice suits because the injured aren't going to get much even if the Dr. is found to be bad.

Big problem with the medical community is that they don't police their own. We do need tort reform to reduce false malpractice suites but we also need the doctors to clean up their own act as well. If you want to add a third party, you also need to add the lawyers who know what they are doing is wrong but still do it because they see a big pay check. The reason tort reform was not in this health care bill was because of the payback for the lawyers help in the Democrats election in 2008.

As with many problems, on solution will not solve the problem.
ID: 983553 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64942
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 983556 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 16:42:45 UTC - in response to Message 983526.  
Last modified: 25 Mar 2010, 17:16:10 UTC

Gupta is another Right-wing nut. He clearly doesn't grasp the concept that Americans are already paying for the uninsured. Its called the ER visit. Perhaps he'd get a clue if he actually checked the cost of a Primary care provider visit vs an ER visit. the cost is about 20:1 when you include the hospitals need to staff departments 24/7. The US gov't already funnels money to private and public hospitals under the auspices of treating all that grace their doors. The losers are

Here is a much cheaper solution. Doc in a box(urgent care facilities) that see patients for non emergencies that cost about 10% of an ER visit. sure its more than the family Dr. but these Drs. are still cheaper than an ER visit. Both ER and Doc in a Box can triage patients. which means an ER can and should not see non Emergency patients anymore. Non ER patient should be directed to DOc in the BOx offices. and likewise a DIAB can forward patients to ER.

DIAB offices can and should refer patients to a primary care provider in their area. Again, patients seeing a PCP for non-emergent events. I see a great deal of cost savings.

what I dont like is the cost estimates that are provided for this new health care law when we don't even know what we are paying for the old one.
Its all about the cost.

I don't think He's a right winger(He'd be on Fox if He were and He's not), He's a Doctor(a Qualified Surgeon I think), As to Doctors they said most medical school graduates go for the higher income specialties cause of their debt load(the new law will help this, If they go into service as a GP instead of as a specialist), Instead of the lower paying General Practitioners and that was mentioned and explored last night on CNN.

As to ER's and such I agree, ER's should not be used for non Emergency stuff that isn't life threatening(like a broken leg, heart attack, etc).

Oh and while on Hospitals, Patients should have the Patients Bill of Rights protecting them and Hospitals and Ambulances should abide by the Patients wishes or at least by the next of Kins if the Patient is out cold or somehow unable to communicate, Instead of Hospitals treating people like their slaves as It's demeaning and totally wrong. I know of one Hospital and Ambulance service where the ambulance will not treat You unless one agrees to go to this one Hospital where even the insured aren't covered, I was a victim of this back in 2002 and was made to sign under pain and duress(I couldn't walk out as I was in a gurney and they denied Me access to a phone or pain killers until I signed, Once I did It was pain killers and then surgery), I was made to sign while being tortured by My own broken leg back then(It's that painful), They ruined My life by doing this, My brother wouldn't go there at all as they'd wouldn't honor His Military coverage, As He was Retired from the US Navy back then, That Hospital only allows their in house coverage and that isn't right. The ankle still doesn't work too well to this day, the 3 screws and the scars on each side of My ankle don't bother Me though as I can live with those, But the weight gain and the pain I experience(No rehab either, Doctor ordered It, But the dammed Hospital ignored His prescription) when I walk more than whatever distance that sets It off(varies), I have to stop for a bit. I'm lucky the leg brace they finally gave Mt after 5 days was not like the first one that was painful as It was made of fiberglass(the Hospital wanted Me out as they fitted tried putting It on Me twice), The one I finally got was the more expensive model as It was made of metal, plastic and foam and It caused Me no pain, So needless to say (for profit)Hospitals(Desert Valley) are not to be trusted and neither are city ambulance services that contract with them. Especially If one lives in the city of Hesperia California, Victor Valley or Saint Marys(in Apple Valley) are Ok, But the ambulance in Hesperia will not go anywhere outside of Desert Valley...

Of course I'd sue them for Medical Malpractice, But the statute of limitations for that in California expired long before I knew I'd never really fully recover, So It's too late for Me.
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 983556 · Report as offensive
Profile zoom3+1=4
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 30 Nov 03
Posts: 64942
Credit: 55,293,173
RAC: 49
United States
Message 983574 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 17:47:24 UTC
Last modified: 25 Mar 2010, 17:48:00 UTC

Medical Malpractice as It says in the link(in My last post) has a $250,000.00 limit in California, Which would have been fine for Me. :D
The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's
ID: 983574 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983587 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 18:40:15 UTC - in response to Message 983553.  

medical tort reform only saves the insurance companies money. Lower payouts do not equate to lower medical malpractice insurance. It also doesnt help those grievously injured by medical malpractice because their lifetime of pain or injury isn't considered.

One thing that Texas encouraged when it reformed its malpractice law. Bad Doctors come here. they run less of a risk of malpractice suits because the injured aren't going to get much even if the Dr. is found to be bad.

Big problem with the medical community is that they don't police their own. We do need tort reform to reduce false malpractice suites but we also need the doctors to clean up their own act as well. If you want to add a third party, you also need to add the lawyers who know what they are doing is wrong but still do it because they see a big pay check. The reason tort reform was not in this health care bill was because of the payback for the lawyers help in the Democrats election in 2008.

As with many problems, on solution will not solve the problem.

We have something to prevent false medical claims. Its called the US court system. A judge should look at evidence that a person must provide to start a suit and deem it valid to proceed. Apparently our judges are getting a bit lazy and need to be reminded that they have the ability to toss out a case. Also it would be nice if the Insurance companies wouldn't cave and payout to "save money" in case they lose. Guess what. Ambulance chasers are betting that the insurance companies will cave and pay before they actually use an attorney to defend a client. So instead of paying an attorney to defend clients they instead pay the lawyers to do nothing


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983587 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983589 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 18:56:50 UTC - in response to Message 983574.  

Medical Malpractice as It says in the link(in My last post) has a $250,000.00 limit in California, Which would have been fine for Me. :D

$250,000 may sound like a lot of money but when a person is paying $50,000(for example) a year for the rest of their life for nursing care, that number doesn't seem all that big.

Don't get me wrong. theirs a reason they call it medical practice and not medical perfection. The problem is that a Doctor has to be wholesale bad at his job before he loses it. If a fry cook at Mcdonalds messed things up like some Drs. they wouldnt and shouldnt last long.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983589 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983593 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 19:16:41 UTC - in response to Message 983587.  

medical tort reform only saves the insurance companies money. Lower payouts do not equate to lower medical malpractice insurance. It also doesnt help those grievously injured by medical malpractice because their lifetime of pain or injury isn't considered.

One thing that Texas encouraged when it reformed its malpractice law. Bad Doctors come here. they run less of a risk of malpractice suits because the injured aren't going to get much even if the Dr. is found to be bad.

Big problem with the medical community is that they don't police their own. We do need tort reform to reduce false malpractice suites but we also need the doctors to clean up their own act as well. If you want to add a third party, you also need to add the lawyers who know what they are doing is wrong but still do it because they see a big pay check. The reason tort reform was not in this health care bill was because of the payback for the lawyers help in the Democrats election in 2008.

As with many problems, on solution will not solve the problem.

We have something to prevent false medical claims. Its called the US court system. A judge should look at evidence that a person must provide to start a suit and deem it valid to proceed. Apparently our judges are getting a bit lazy and need to be reminded that they have the ability to toss out a case. Also it would be nice if the Insurance companies wouldn't cave and payout to "save money" in case they lose. Guess what. Ambulance chasers are betting that the insurance companies will cave and pay before they actually use an attorney to defend a client. So instead of paying an attorney to defend clients they instead pay the lawyers to do nothing

I forgot about cave and pay. I was involved in a work stress case as a witness. The insurance company ask my boss if he wanted it payed or if he wanted to fight. My boss said fight so we showed up on time and waited. The guy was very late and when they found we were still there, the insurance company paid a few hundred to settle. He would have got about $10,000 if we had not showed up.
This guy had done this in the past and we weren't the first. We may have been the first to fight back.

Medical Malpractice as It says in the link(in My last post) has a $250,000.00 limit in California, Which would have been fine for Me. :D

I figure that it would take between half a million and a million in the stock market just for a minimal existence for most of your life. If you want to add medical care it could take far more. Some people do need the jackpot payouts at levels far higher that but many people don't deserve a cent.
ID: 983593 · Report as offensive
Profile Robert Waite
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 07
Posts: 2417
Credit: 18,192,122
RAC: 59
Canada
Message 983603 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 19:46:08 UTC - in response to Message 983550.  



Wow. Surgeons pay over $100,000 a year for malpractice insurance. If your numbers are right, that means they are making around $30,000,000 a year.


Or perhaps I'm talking about the tiny bite tort takes from the total spending in all of health care.

I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.
ID: 983603 · Report as offensive
Profile Robert Waite
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 23 Oct 07
Posts: 2417
Credit: 18,192,122
RAC: 59
Canada
Message 983608 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 19:53:35 UTC - in response to Message 983593.  



I figure that it would take between half a million and a million in the stock market just for a minimal existence for most of your life. If you want to add medical care it could take far more. Some people do need the jackpot payouts at levels far higher that but many people don't deserve a cent.


I suppose you'd still refer to a judgement in your favour as a "jackpot payout" if a surgeon removed your left lung when you were supposed to have a hernia repaired.

As for who deserves compensation? The courts will decide.
If someone has been damaged by another, that damaged someone has recourse through the court system.

*note to self*
Sarah Palin isn't an anomaly



I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.
ID: 983608 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983609 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 19:57:20 UTC - in response to Message 983608.  


*note to self*
Sarah Palin isn't an anomaly


[/quote]
Not as long as she has her 2 cheat sheets still attached



In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983609 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983610 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 19:59:00 UTC - in response to Message 983603.  



Wow. Surgeons pay over $100,000 a year for malpractice insurance. If your numbers are right, that means they are making around $30,000,000 a year.


Or perhaps I'm talking about the tiny bite tort takes from the total spending in all of health care.

In that case, someone isn't trying very hard to lower doctor malpractice. In this country insurance adjust according to the risk. I have seen insurance rates go up and I have seen proper laws make insurance rates fall.Those laws didn't regulate the insurance company but instead addressed problems in the courts.
ID: 983610 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983611 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 20:01:59 UTC - in response to Message 983609.  
Last modified: 25 Mar 2010, 20:02:37 UTC


*note to self*
Sarah Palin isn't an anomaly



Not as long as she has her 2 cheat sheets still attached

And Obama his two teleprompters.
ID: 983611 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983615 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 20:19:03 UTC - in response to Message 983608.  



I figure that it would take between half a million and a million in the stock market just for a minimal existence for most of your life. If you want to add medical care it could take far more. Some people do need the jackpot payouts at levels far higher that but many people don't deserve a cent.


I suppose you'd still refer to a judgement in your favour as a "jackpot payout" if a surgeon removed your left lung when you were supposed to have a hernia repaired.

As for who deserves compensation? The courts will decide.
If someone has been damaged by another, that damaged someone has recourse through the court system.

*note to self*
Sarah Palin isn't an anomaly



The question is how much it effect the quality of their life. In you example, yes there needs to be a payout. How much I am not sure because the lack of a lung many not effect you now but as you get older and your lung function is reduced by age it may effect your life.

We have people who sue doctors for back pain and then when they think nobody is looking, they play a game of golf with no indication of pain. These people are far to common in this country and the problem needs to be addressed. Sometime the insurance companies use private investigators to follow these people and capture film that would make you believe in a god.

We are not hard hearted down here, but this is a mess that has accumulate over years and nobody seems to want to clean it up. The solution has to involve many things and it's possible that the people who deserve a big payout would receive even more when the cheaters are removed.
ID: 983615 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983621 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 20:48:01 UTC - in response to Message 983611.  


*note to self*
Sarah Palin isn't an anomaly



Not as long as she has her 2 cheat sheets still attached

And Obama his two teleprompters.

very few politicians give a speech without one. I don't see the significance. Heck I pretty much remember all the way back to President Carter using one. So how is this significant.

whats significant is some that tries to remember talking points, and can't, then writes the talking point on their hand


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983621 · Report as offensive
Dena Wiltsie
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 19 Apr 01
Posts: 1628
Credit: 24,230,968
RAC: 26
United States
Message 983636 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 21:41:33 UTC - in response to Message 983621.  


*note to self*
Sarah Palin isn't an anomaly



Not as long as she has her 2 cheat sheets still attached

And Obama his two teleprompters.

very few politicians give a speech without one. I don't see the significance. Heck I pretty much remember all the way back to President Carter using one. So how is this significant.

whats significant is some that tries to remember talking points, and can't, then writes the talking point on their hand

Ever been to a doctor and forget to tell him something? Ever hang up on a telephone call and then think of something you should have said? If you haven't you have an outstanding memory. I often write notes to my self and most of the time I don't need them but for someone who is in the public like she is its cheap insurance. When she did that it was an interview and not a speech so there was no teleprompter. She is a very down to earth person who know she is not perfect. I prefer that to someone who acts like they are perfect.
ID: 983636 · Report as offensive
Profile skildude
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9541
Credit: 50,759,529
RAC: 60
Yemen
Message 983661 - Posted: 25 Mar 2010, 22:58:32 UTC - in response to Message 983636.  
Last modified: 25 Mar 2010, 22:59:51 UTC

thats all well and good but we are talking about a person that promised to not have anything prewritten for herself and yet she has talking points which in itself are prewritten ideas and then she needed to write them down on her hand like a 7th grade cheater instead of just bringing a few notes with her.
the REpublican talking points are easy to follow and have the same general text. If you doubt it read Al Frankens book Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot and other observations he points out that Newt Gingrich made a list of key words to say about our side and words to say about their side. CLearly, Dear Sarah only needed the topics because shes versed in the "key" words to say about "them"
BTW yes I have an outstanding memory. But I am not averse from actually taking notes and writing down a grocery list.

/edit
I would also like to point out that I wouldn't make a promise to everyone that I would shop without a list then just write the major things I needed on my hand.


In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope
ID: 983661 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Free Market Healthcare


 
©2022 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.