65
   

IT'S TIME FOR UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

 
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 05:32 pm
@spendius,
Darn good point! I notice there are absolutely no education requirements for Representative, Senator, or President. Matter of fact, Supreme Court Justices have no such requirements, either, and darn good job security.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Tue 8 Sep, 2009 07:33 pm
another direct hit on the already thoroughly discredited argument that America has "the best healthcare in the World"

Quote:
t's not clear exactly how widespread vaccine cutbacks are, but in a recent industry survey, 5% of pediatricians and 11% of physicians indicated that they're seriously considering no longer offering immunizations. Currently there are about 350,000 pediatricians and family physicians in the U.S.

"These are fantastically alarming numbers," said Dr. Richard Lander, a Livingston N.J.-based pediatrician who chairs a committee on administration and practices at the American Academy of Pediatricians. (AAP)

"It's an example of how health care is being driven by managed care in the United States," Lander said.

Doctors have to absorb any costs that insurance doesn't cover because in most states insurance contracts prohibit providers from charging patients the difference.

Dr. Jim King, a family physician in Selmer, Tenn. is another medical professional who is dropping expensive vaccines because of "insufficient" reimbursement from insurers.

"The vaccine for shingles is fairly expensive, about $75 to $150 per vaccine," said King, who is also board chair of the American Academy of Family Physicians.

"The profit margin on it is very small, so we're not giving that. If we lose money on one, we need to administer nine to break even," he said. Like McIntosh, doctors at King's practice are referring patients to public clinics for shots that they no longer administer.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/08/news/economy/health_care_vaccinations/index.htm

there is no reason for vaccines to cost more than a few dollars per dose to make, if the private sector continues to refuse to sell them at a reasonable mark-up then the government should take over production on an emergency basis.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 06:43 am
@Cycloptichorn,
That's the one they are presenting as the front runner, but there are two other house bills (maybe more?), HR 676 and HR 956. I haven't seen a senate bill.
0 Replies
 
Green Witch
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:06 am
I've been staying off of this thread and working in the real world for change, but I wanted to post this excellent article from The NYTimes about what new doctors are experiencing:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/09/health/policy/09medschool.html?_r=1&th&emc=th
revel
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:41 am
@Green Witch,
Your right, that is a really good article.

I know tort reform gets thrown out a lot, but from I have read, malpractice suits really don't account for the sheer cost of health care overall.



WellPoint Institute of Health Care Knowledge Releases Report on Health Care Costs

Quote:
According to the report the "key drivers" of spiraling U.S. health care costs
are:

-- Advances in medical technology and subsequent increases in
utilization.
-- Price inflation for medical services that exceeds inflation in other
sectors of the economy.
-- Cost-shifting from people who are uninsured and those receiving
Medicare
and Medicaid to the private sector.
-- High cost of regulatory compliance.
-- Patient lifestyles, such as physical inactivity and increases in
obesity.


cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:27 am
@revel,
Betcha that facts list doesn't get absorbed by the majority of Americans. They always believe everything is caused by government, and that's the reason they fear higher costs by a government takeover of health care.

They can't seem to see the obvious that a government option for health insurance will reduce cost in the long run, because the government option doesn't require profit to be shared with stockholders, and those multi-million dollar pays for CEOs and officers of those insurance companies. They don't seem to get it that the insurance industry are the ones spending millions every day on tv ads to misinform and lie to spread their fear-mongering.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:50 am
@cicerone imposter,
That's really naive ci. It displays a lack of understanding of the economic system that in a man of your age and experience beggars belief. It's at the level of a little girl having jars to divide her spending money so she can allocate her scarce resources to various objectives in a disciplined manner.

Your basic view of your fellow Americans as residents of a doll's house, which you often express on the evolution threads, is as useful in economics as it is in education policy.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:19 pm
@spendius,
spendi, I may be naive, but you're a drunk.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 07:51 pm
@roger,
They don't have any requirements to run for office, but I think the majority of congress members are attorneys.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:10 pm
@cicerone imposter,
that's a comforting thought... Shocked

(and spendi is not as think as you drunk he is.)
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:17 pm
@Rockhead,
I went to emergency hospital today in Austin, because I've been having black stool for about one week, and the advice doctor back home (in CA) told me to go to emergency. The doc ordered a blood test, and after about two hours learned that the hemoglobin was okay. $65 out of pocket plus the $14 cab back to the hotel. It was good to know that it wasn't stomach cancer, and I'll still be able to travel to Vietnam later this month.

Actually, Rockhead, I have to send you a picture I took at Easter Island earlier this year of a real rockhead, and let you use it on your avatar. Let me know if you want one.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
any pix are always appreciated.

glad to hear you are ok.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 08:26 pm
a search of yahoo news shows no results on the ratings.....this will matter more than what was said. There has been a line of reasoning that America has already tuned out, already made up its mind that OBAMACARE is a no-go.
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 09:16 pm
@hawkeye10,
I think your sense of public opinion is wrong. In any case, it will be a congressional decision, based on it's perceived balance between campaign funding and votes. There. That's my cynical little opinion.
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 09:32 pm
@roger,
diest posted on FB on the reaction of folks in an airport in Missouri watching the t.v. If general public reaction is anything like what diest reported, I'll be happily amazed.
Diest TKO
 
  2  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 10:47 pm
@ehBeth,
ehBeth wrote:

diest posted on FB on the reaction of folks in an airport in Missouri watching the t.v. If general public reaction is anything like what diest reported, I'll be happily amazed.

I'm landed ans settled back in DC. I can type up more freely what I saw now that I'm not typing on my phone.

My flight left St. Louis at 8:45. I figured, I'd go early so I could make it through check in and security then find some place I could hear the speech. I figured there would be at least one place I could see the speech. Pleasantly to my surprise, every TV was on the speech and I found a gate which had no flights in or out and sat there (if for only less pedestrian traffic and noise).

I had my head fixed upward at the screen for most of the speech, but I had looked down on occasion to post on my FB wall my thoughts in real time.

I can't remember the point of the speech I became aware of it, but the empty gate which I was sitting at had become full like a theater, and many people were now sitting fixed on the screen. Quiet.

I looked in the terminal, and their were people just stopped, with their luggage, in no particular hurry to get home, or not wishing to miss this speech. I saw many anxious children ready to get home tugging on their parents arms. I saw people crying. I saw a few couples smiling, and a I received a few smiles directed at me when I not so silently cheered when Obama specifically spoke about the public option.

After the speech, the people began to move again, and I made my way to my own terminal. I got to my terminal as the republican response was aired. The people at the terminal watched, but I didn't see anybody stopping to listen.

I took in more of the speech, and was enthusiastically happy to hear three major things.

1) It will be illegal to deny coverage based on pre-existing conditions
2) Coverage will include preventative care measures
3) There must be a public option.

I was fond of other details, but these are what i find most important to me.

T
K
O

0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 10:51 pm
@ehBeth,
You have to remember that not everyone reads. There is a big segment of the population that doesn't believe they are going to have to pay for anything. They get their news from "some guy" at work.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 11:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Not particularly fun to read the gory details of your medical situation, but seriously ci, I wish you well and hope your health is okay. I am very serious about that.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 9 Sep, 2009 11:10 pm
@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:

a search of yahoo news shows no results on the ratings.....this will matter more than what was said. There has been a line of reasoning that America has already tuned out, already made up its mind that OBAMACARE is a no-go.

I think the issue is becoming more about Obama, not Obamacare. I think we have a credibility crisis in this country, and it is spelled "OBAMA."

This is more than a partisan comment, I admit it is partisan, but I do think Obama has developed a problem of credibility wherein he is going to have a tough time selling anything. Same for Congress. It has been caused by a chronic lack of candor, detail, and open honest policy. We still do not know who Obama is. Or at least most people do not. A used car salesman must first develop some kind of connection to the potential buyer, more than just beginning hype produced by the advertising, it must then be developed on a personal level, something more than just the beginning hype. Beginning hype may work for some impulse buyers, but the more analytical and thoughtful buyers require more than that, it requires trust. And mixed messages, changed messages, only create more confusion and distrust.

One example, health care for illegals, perhaps not technically, but practically yes, as House Bill 3200 provides no sound mechanism to insure only legals are covered.
Debra Law
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Sep, 2009 02:20 am
@okie,
okie wrote:
One example, health care for illegals, perhaps not technically, but practically yes, as House Bill 3200 provides no sound mechanism to insure only legals are covered.


That's just plain stupid, okie. HR 3200 establishes an insurance exchange. Low income people who are lawfully in the country and who purchase an insurance plan through the insurance exchange may qualify for an income tax credit. HR 3200 requires that the eligibility for all individuals who apply for an insurance affordability credit is determined by the applicant's most recent income tax return. In other words, an applicant for an affordability credit must have a valid social security number. How many illegal aliens have a valid social security number in order for the government to track their income or wages? Your fear that undocumented aliens will get free healthcare through HR 3200 is wholly without merit.

Quote:
SEC. 245. INCOME DETERMINATIONS.

(a) In General- In applying this subtitle for an affordability credit for an individual for a plan year, the individual's income shall be the income (as defined in section 242(c)) for the individual for the most recent taxable year (as determined in accordance with rules of the Commissioner). The Federal poverty level applied shall be such level in effect as of the date of the application.

(b) Program Integrity; Income Verification Procedures-

(1) PROGRAM INTEGRITY- The Commissioner shall take such steps as may be appropriate to ensure the accuracy of determinations and redeterminations under this subtitle.

(2) INCOME VERIFICATION-

(A) IN GENERAL- Upon an initial application of an individual for an affordability credit under this subtitle (or in applying section 242(b)) or upon an application for a change in the affordability credit based upon a significant change in family income described in subparagraph (A)--

(i) the Commissioner shall request from the Secretary of the Treasury the disclosure to the Commissioner of such information as may be permitted to verify the information contained in such application; and

(ii) the Commissioner shall use the information so disclosed to verify such information.

(B) ALTERNATIVE PROCEDURES- The Commissioner shall establish procedures for the verification of income for purposes of this subtitle if no income tax return is available for the most recent completed tax year.


Link to HR 3200
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 04/24/2024 at 11:11:05