Health Care Reform

Now that the Obama administration has opened the door to something other than a public option, I hope that congress will consider the Dole, Baker, and Daschle plan.

White House Appears Open to Insurance Co-ops

Their plan proposes a "Network of State or Regional-Level Health Insurance Exchanges".

That is our best bet at getting people the coverage needed while containing costs.

The plan is here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Health Care Reform talking points.

Since it is mainly Republicans against Health Care, lets target these talking points towards them.

Here are some I use, please add your own. Be sure to stay on topic.

1, Remind the Republican that Mitt Romney created initiated mandatory health care in Massachusetts, and that MA citizens are happy with Romney Care. Also, unlike Romney Care, not having health insurance will not at be a criminal act. You can also remind them that Glenn Beck was a Romney supporter during the Republican primaries.

2, Obama Care will create jobs/improve economy.
Obama Care will create more government jobs which will improve the economy. Many senior citizens also hold part time jobs that younger people can do. Voluntary euthanasia for those over 70 will make these jobs available to a younger generation. Anyone wanting to work, will be able to work.

3, Obama Care includes the NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION CARD ( REAL ID ACT ) Many Republicans are strong supporters of George Bush's REAL ID ACT, and Obama Care includes the same exact thing, just reworded. The Health Care Reform bill will make it mandatory for all Americans to have and carry a national ID. When I tell Republicans this fact they usually get excited, it is a very strong selling point.

4, Health Care Reform will fight terrorism. Not yet realizing they who are the new terrorists, Republicans are still hell bent on fighting terrorism. By allowing the government more access to bank accounts, medical records, and a national ID card, Republicans can be lead to believe it will help fight terrorism.
 
Now that the Obama administration has opened the door to something other than a public option, I hope that congress will consider the Dole, Baker, and Daschle plan.

White House Appears Open to Insurance Co-ops

Their plan proposes a "Network of State or Regional-Level Health Insurance Exchanges".

That is our best bet at getting people the coverage needed while containing costs.

The plan is here.

According to the bill, the co-ops would be created by the government. They’d be funded by the government. They’d be managed by the government. And you’d buy into them through government health care exchanges. Not a good solution IMO.
 
Very interesting Op-Ed piece in the NY Times:

10 Steps to Better Health Care

To find models of success, we searched among our country’s 306 Hospital Referral Regions, as defined by the Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, for “positive outliers.â€￾ Our criteria were simple: find regions with per capita Medicare costs that are low or markedly declining in rank and where federal measures of quality are above average. In the end, 74 regions passed our test.

So we invited physicians, hospital executives and local leaders from 10 of these regions to a meeting in Washington so they could explain how they do what they do. They came from towns big and small, urban and rural, North and South, East and West. Here’s the list: Asheville, N.C.; Cedar Rapids, Iowa; Everett, Wash.; La Crosse, Wis.; Portland, Me.; Richmond, Va.; Sacramento; Sayre, Pa.; Temple, Tex.; and Tallahassee, Fla., which, despite not ranking above the 50th percentile in terms of quality, has made such great recent strides in both costs and quality that we thought it had something to teach us.

If the rest of America could achieve the performances of regions like these, our health care cost crisis would be over. Their quality scores are well above average. Yet they spend more than $1,500 (16 percent) less per Medicare patient than the national average and have a slower real annual growth rate (3 percent versus 3.5 percent nationwide).
(Bold by me)

This can be done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
First off, it happens everyday. Decisions are made every day as to who get to live and who gets to die, or keep waiting. How do you think organ recipients are determined? It's not the lottery. The board who controls the organs has criteria, depending on where you fall will determine how far up (or down) the list you are. A young health child will be far higher on the list (all other things being equal) than a middle aged health adult. That is just the way it works because there are limited resources (organs). If you are the one who is farther down the list and you die, it sucks big time, if you are higher up the list because you fit the criteria and you get a organ and live it's great.

Again, these decisions are made everyday all across this country and all across the world. Look at triage procedures. Those who are most critical AND most likely to survive are first. Someone who has a severed artery and is bleeding out with other issues probably will go behind someone else who has a wond that is more likely to be repairable.

And then there are the insurance companies who deny care because they do not think the procedure is needed, applicable or is experimental. OH well, sucks to be you.

So please do not pretend that these decisions are new to the health care arena.

As a side note. Just took my dog to the vet for a ultrasound. The tech was a mobile unit. Had a specialized lap top and a sensor head thing. Cost me all of $365. So, why exactly does the same procedure cost over $3000 at a doctors office using the exact same equipment? I know this becasue the tech doing my dog used to do it to people before he got fed up with the BS and switched to animals.

You want to reduce the cost of health care. The over inflated, patient gouging, health care industry enriching prices might me a good place to start.

PS: I don't buy into all this capitalist horseshite because that's what it is, HORSESHITE plain and simple. Capitalist insurance companies, hospitals and care givers determining who lives and dies based on the $$$$.

Drop the knee jerk reactionary talk will you. Neither extreme is good. There is a middle ground.
 
First off, it happens everyday. Decisions are made every day as to who get to live and who gets to die, or keep waiting. How do you think organ recipients are determined? It's not the lottery. The board who controls the organs has criteria, depending on where you fall will determine how far up (or down) the list you are. A young health child will be far higher on the list (all other things being equal) than a middle aged health adult. That is just the way it works because there are limited resources (organs). If you are the one who is farther down the list and you die, it sucks big time, if you are higher up the list because you fit the criteria and you get a organ and live it's great.

Again, these decisions are made everyday all across this country and all across the world. Look at triage procedures. Those who are most critical AND most likely to survive are first. Someone who has a severed artery and is bleeding out with other issues probably will go behind someone else who has a wond that is more likely to be repairable.

And then there are the insurance companies who deny care because they do not think the procedure is needed, applicable or is experimental. OH well, sucks to be you.

So please do not pretend that these decisions are new to the health care arena.

As a side note. Just took my dog to the vet for a ultrasound. The tech was a mobile unit. Had a specialized lap top and a sensor head thing. Cost me all of $365. So, why exactly does the same procedure cost over $3000 at a doctors office using the exact same equipment? I know this becasue the tech doing my dog used to do it to people before he got fed up with the BS and switched to animals.

You want to reduce the cost of health care. The over inflated, patient gouging, health care industry enriching prices might me a good place to start.

PS: I don't buy into all this capitalist horseshite because that's what it is, HORSESHITE plain and simple. Capitalist insurance companies, hospitals and care givers determining who lives and dies based on the $$$$.

Drop the knee jerk reactionary talk will you. Neither extreme is good. There is a middle ground.

And you throw all your faith into your government who fails miserably in all they do.... :down:
 
what about the comment on the other thread about..

granny getting her new hips!

I mean, its one thing..an organ transplantation, because regardless if someone has the money or not, if the organ is not available, its just not..available.

the point is.. who gets what in universal health care.

...now granny can get some hips..
(you know there is a whole bunch of them on a shelf in a factory being made right now) unlike an organ...

but someone may not feel she needs to get those hips.. because she is too old and its a waste of money... even if the woman is up there saying she wants those hips now!

someone comes behind her and says, no you are not!

that is the disturbing part..who decides who is getting what is starting to appear..well..

a scam!

(they are going to require everyone pay into it and then pick and choose who gets what?) well...I should clarify, they will require those who actually pay taxes to pay into it....

Oh no!

if they are remotely bringing up hips and age now, and who is getting what..then there is going to be a problem when its forced on everyone!
 
that is the disturbing part..who decides who is getting what is starting to appear..well..
Real life scenario:

Joe has a bad hip and needs a replacement.

He get laid off from his job. Cannot afford the COBRA insurance to carry him over until he finds another job ($840/month), who hopefully has the same insurer. No matter, they will not cover his pre-existing hip condition.

He finally finds a new job that thankfully only requires him to pay 30% of his family premium which has now gone to $980/month.

Of course, he had to take a pay cut in his new job.

He is now in the hole from being unemployed for 3 months. He was lucky to have qualified for unemployment insurance, that paid him $375/week.

The procedure costs $60,000. He is trying to catch up on the 3 months of lost pay. If he does not get this done, he may end up in a wheelchair.

He is terrified that he may end up losing his job.

Who decided whether or not his hip got replaced?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
They will not cover my bad hip which needs to be replaced.
Oh they just loOOove to make all the insurance companies out to be the bad guys!

its just another line to get people to swallow this "heath care" horse pill that most are spitting right back out!


Who decided whether or not my hip got replaced?
he is already insinuating granny is not getting any, so its probably already decided right now you arent either!
 
Oh they just loOOove to make all the insurance companies out to be the bad guys!
its just another line to get people to swallow this "heath care" horse pill that most are spitting right back out!
he is already insinuating granny is not getting any, so its probably already decided right now you arent either!
QUOTE (tech2101 @ Aug 17 2009, 09:01 PM) *
Who decided whether or not his hip got replaced?
Answer the question.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Answer the question.
there is no real answer to your question..

simply because,

you made up a theoretical hip replacement denial scenario and then expect a factual answer?

it did not happen.. but for the sake of an answer...

the insurance company paid the claim and you have new hips!

enjoy!