|
|
President Obama's promised healthcare reform is now in the house. Nothing is definite yet, the detail to be hammered out. What components would you like to see included in the legislation? Are you in favor of a single payer system? Why or why not?
|
Posts:
2,191
Registered:
6/23/09
|
|
(656 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 1:59 AM
|
> > I read an article today about Rahm Emanual.Mr.
> > Emanual says that "medical care should be
> reserved
> > for the nondisabled, not given to those who are
> > irreversibly prevented from being or becoming
> > participating citizens an obvious example is
> not
> > guaranteeing health services to patients with
> > dementia". He sees basic amenities as luxuries
> and
> > says Americans expect too much."Hospital rooms
> in the
> > US offer more privacy... physicians offices are
> > typically more conveniently located and have
> parking
> > nearby and more attractive waiting rooms"(JAMA
> June
> > 18 2008)
>
> Who cares? What about all the children today
> suffering from Autism who will soon be adults?
> Insurance could care less about helping these
> individuals now, as there is no coverage in many
> states. Hopefully their parents don't die before them
> or hopefully, they will have siblings to take care of
> them, once their parents are gone.
That is the problem with gov't trying one size fits all approach. One bill will not change the system or fill the cracks. It will have to be many bills, with ideas outside of the box. More than just tax and gov't control.
|
|
|
Posts:
2,191
Registered:
6/23/09
|
|
(655 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 1:57 AM
|
> freespeechguy
>
> There are a lot of ethical questions about end of
> life care we have yet to come up with standard
> solutions. I think each doc makes his or her own
> judgement call when possible. You could have a bright
> or dull doctor. A raving Rapture awaiting doctor. A
> greedy callous doctor. I think of them as body
> technicians not ethical experts. We need to work on
> that.
>
> When Emanuel said perhaps we shouldn't guarantee
> treatment to demensia sufferers, well, if you had
> advanced dimensia and came down with cancer would you
> want the med system to put you through the rigors of
> slash poison and burn to prolong your life? when you
> were in no condition to even recognize who you were,
> who your kids are, what cancer is? Maybe he was
> thinking of situations like that.
And you say I don't care. Why should gov't or anyone else decide what treatment you get. I guess the gov't can decide who lives and dies. Nice.
|
|
|
Posts:
2,191
Registered:
6/23/09
|
|
(654 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 1:55 AM
|
> sunaz:
>
> Politicians have no clue about health care and the
> insurance woes of their constituents. Congress gets
> free health care for life, so those without health
> care pay for them, but have none of their own.
But, some how right bills about to solve these problems.
|
|
|
Posts:
99
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(653 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 12:47 AM
|
> Friday, July 24, 2009
>
>
> New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a
> Profit
>
>
> How about this for a New Rule: Not everything in
> America has to make a profit. It used to be that
> there were some services and institutions so vital to
> our nation that they were exempt from market
> pressures. Some things we just didn't do for money.
> The United States always defined capitalism, but it
> didn't used to define us. But now it's becoming all
> that we are.
>
> Did you know, for example, that there was a time when
> being called a "war profiteer" was a bad thing? But
> now our war zones are dominated by private
> contractors and mercenaries who work for
> corporations. There are more private contractors in
> Iraq than American troops, and we pay them generous
> salaries to do jobs the troops used to do for
> themselves -- like laundry. War is not supposed to
> turn a profit, but our wars have become boondoggles
> for weapons manufacturers and connected civilian
> contractors.
>
> Prisons used to be a non-profit business, too. And
> for good reason -- who the hell wants to own a
> prison? By definition you're going to have trouble
> with the tenants. But now prisons are big business. A
> company called the Corrections Corporation of America
> is on the New York Stock Exchange, which is
> convenient since that's where all the real crime is
> happening anyway. The CCA and similar corporations
> actually lobby Congress for stiffer sentencing laws
> so they can lock more people up and make more money.
> That's why America has the world;s largest prison
> population -- because actually rehabilitating people
> would have a negative impact on the bottom line.
>
> Television news is another area that used to be roped
> off from the profit motive. When Walter Cronkite died
> last week, it was odd to see news anchor after news
> anchor talking about how much better the news
> coverage was back in Cronkite's day. I thought, "Gee,
> if only you were in a position to do something about
> it."
>
> But maybe they aren't. Because unlike in Cronkite's
> day, today's news has to make a profit like all the
> other divisions in a media conglomerate. That's why
> it wasn't surprising to see the CBS Evening News
> broadcast live from the Staples Center for two nights
> this month, just in case Michael Jackson came back to
> life and sold Iran nuclear weapons. In Uncle Walter's
> time, the news division was a loss leader. Making
> money was the job of The Beverly Hillbillies. And now
> that we have reporters moving to Alaska to hang out
> with the Palin family, the news is The Beverly
> Hillbillies.
>
> And finally, there's health care. It wasn't that long
> ago that when a kid broke his leg playing stickball,
> his parents took him to the local Catholic hospital,
> the nun put a thermometer in his mouth, the doctor
> slapped some plaster on his ankle and you were done.
> The bill was $1.50, plus you got to keep the
> thermometer.
>
> But like everything else that's good and noble in
> life, some Wall Street wizard decided that hospitals
> could be big business, so now they're run by some
> bean counters in a corporate plaza in Charlotte. In
> the U.S. today, three giant for-profit conglomerates
> own close to 600 hospitals and other health care
> facilities. They're not hospitals anymore; they're
> Jiffy Lubes with bedpans. America's largest hospital
> chain, HCA, was founded by the family of Bill Frist,
> who perfectly represents the Republican attitude
> toward health care: it's not a right, it's a racket.
> The more people who get sick and need medicine, the
> higher their profit margins. Which is why they're
> always pushing the Jell-O.
>
> Because medicine is now for-profit we have things
> like "recision," where insurance companies hire
> people to figure out ways to deny you coverage when
> you get sick, even though you've been paying into
> your plan for years.
>
> When did the profit motive become the only reason to
> do anything? When did that become the new patriotism?
> Ask not what you could do for your country, ask
> what's in it for Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
>
> If conservatives get to call universal health care
> "socialized medicine," I get to call private health
> care "soulless vampires making money off human pain."
> The problem with President Obama's health care plan
> isn't socialism, it's capitalism.
>
> And if medicine is for profit, and war, and the news,
> and the penal system, my question is: what's wrong
> with firemen? Why don't they charge? They must be
> commies. Oh my God! That explains the red trucks!
>
> BILL MAHER
>
>
>
> Bill absolutely rocked with this essay
Agreed!
|
|
|
Posts:
35,295
Registered:
12/1/04
|
|
(652 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 12:42 AM
|
Friday, July 24, 2009
New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a Profit
How about this for a New Rule: Not everything in America has to make a profit. It used to be that there were some services and institutions so vital to our nation that they were exempt from market pressures. Some things we just didn't do for money. The United States always defined capitalism, but it didn't used to define us. But now it's becoming all that we are.
Did you know, for example, that there was a time when being called a "war profiteer" was a bad thing? But now our war zones are dominated by private contractors and mercenaries who work for corporations. There are more private contractors in Iraq than American troops, and we pay them generous salaries to do jobs the troops used to do for themselves -- like laundry. War is not supposed to turn a profit, but our wars have become boondoggles for weapons manufacturers and connected civilian contractors.
Prisons used to be a non-profit business, too. And for good reason -- who the hell wants to own a prison? By definition you're going to have trouble with the tenants. But now prisons are big business. A company called the Corrections Corporation of America is on the New York Stock Exchange, which is convenient since that's where all the real crime is happening anyway. The CCA and similar corporations actually lobby Congress for stiffer sentencing laws so they can lock more people up and make more money. That's why America has the world;s largest prison population -- because actually rehabilitating people would have a negative impact on the bottom line.
Television news is another area that used to be roped off from the profit motive. When Walter Cronkite died last week, it was odd to see news anchor after news anchor talking about how much better the news coverage was back in Cronkite's day. I thought, "Gee, if only you were in a position to do something about it."
But maybe they aren't. Because unlike in Cronkite's day, today's news has to make a profit like all the other divisions in a media conglomerate. That's why it wasn't surprising to see the CBS Evening News broadcast live from the Staples Center for two nights this month, just in case Michael Jackson came back to life and sold Iran nuclear weapons. In Uncle Walter's time, the news division was a loss leader. Making money was the job of The Beverly Hillbillies. And now that we have reporters moving to Alaska to hang out with the Palin family, the news is The Beverly Hillbillies.
And finally, there's health care. It wasn't that long ago that when a kid broke his leg playing stickball, his parents took him to the local Catholic hospital, the nun put a thermometer in his mouth, the doctor slapped some plaster on his ankle and you were done. The bill was $1.50, plus you got to keep the thermometer.
But like everything else that's good and noble in life, some Wall Street wizard decided that hospitals could be big business, so now they're run by some bean counters in a corporate plaza in Charlotte. In the U.S. today, three giant for-profit conglomerates own close to 600 hospitals and other health care facilities. They're not hospitals anymore; they're Jiffy Lubes with bedpans. America's largest hospital chain, HCA, was founded by the family of Bill Frist, who perfectly represents the Republican attitude toward health care: it's not a right, it's a racket. The more people who get sick and need medicine, the higher their profit margins. Which is why they're always pushing the Jell-O.
Because medicine is now for-profit we have things like "recision," where insurance companies hire people to figure out ways to deny you coverage when you get sick, even though you've been paying into your plan for years.
When did the profit motive become the only reason to do anything? When did that become the new patriotism? Ask not what you could do for your country, ask what's in it for Blue Cross/Blue Shield.
If conservatives get to call universal health care "socialized medicine," I get to call private health care "soulless vampires making money off human pain." The problem with President Obama's health care plan isn't socialism, it's capitalism.
And if medicine is for profit, and war, and the news, and the penal system, my question is: what's wrong with firemen? Why don't they charge? They must be commies. Oh my God! That explains the red trucks!
BILL MAHER
Bill absolutely rocked with this essay
|
|
|
Posts:
125
Registered:
10/8/08
|
|
(651 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 12:34 AM
|
|
I'm speaking as a person who will be 66 next month. I currently have arthritis in both shoulders and sciatica. The attitude seems to be your old get over it
|
|
|
Posts:
125
Registered:
10/8/08
|
|
(650 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 12:34 AM
|
|
I'm speaking as a person who will be 66 next month. I currently have arthritis in both shoulders and sciatica. The attitude seems to be your old get over it
|
|
|
Posts:
99
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(649 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 12:08 AM
|
> I read an article today about Rahm Emanual.Mr.
> Emanual says that "medical care should be reserved
> for the nondisabled, not given to those who are
> irreversibly prevented from being or becoming
> participating citizens an obvious example is not
> guaranteeing health services to patients with
> dementia". He sees basic amenities as luxuries and
> says Americans expect too much."Hospital rooms in the
> US offer more privacy... physicians offices are
> typically more conveniently located and have parking
> nearby and more attractive waiting rooms"(JAMA June
> 18 2008)
Who cares? What about all the children today suffering from Autism who will soon be adults? Insurance could care less about helping these individuals now, as there is no coverage in many states. Hopefully their parents don't die before them or hopefully, they will have siblings to take care of them, once their parents are gone.
|
|
|
Posts:
35,295
Registered:
12/1/04
|
|
(648 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 25, 2009 12:01 AM
|
freespeechguy
There are a lot of ethical questions about end of life care we have yet to come up with standard solutions. I think each doc makes his or her own judgement call when possible. You could have a bright or dull doctor. A raving Rapture awaiting doctor. A greedy callous doctor. I think of them as body technicians not ethical experts. We need to work on that.
When Emanuel said perhaps we shouldn't guarantee treatment to demensia sufferers, well, if you had advanced dimensia and came down with cancer would you want the med system to put you through the rigors of slash poison and burn to prolong your life? when you were in no condition to even recognize who you were, who your kids are, what cancer is? Maybe he was thinking of situations like that.
|
|
|
Posts:
125
Registered:
10/8/08
|
|
(647 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 24, 2009 11:53 PM
|
|
I read an article today about Rahm Emanual.Mr. Emanual says that "medical care should be reserved for the nondisabled, not given to those who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens an obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia". He sees basic amenities as luxuries and says Americans expect too much."Hospital rooms in the US offer more privacy... physicians offices are typically more conveniently located and have parking nearby and more attractive waiting rooms"(JAMA June 18 2008)
|
|
|
Posts:
1
Registered:
7/24/09
|
|
(646 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 24, 2009 11:15 PM
|
|
hey Bill: What i really wonder is the truthfulness of healthcare reform as proposed by Obama. I am a big supporter of semi socialized medicine as adopted by France (70% government/30% private insurance). Under the current proposition we would actually grant for profit corporations with the power of deciding how much care we recieve. WHAT'S NEW IN THAT??
|
|
|
Posts:
99
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(645 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 24, 2009 11:15 PM
|
sunaz:
Politicians have no clue about health care and the insurance woes of their constituents. Congress gets free health care for life, so those without health care pay for them, but have none of their own.
|
|
|
Posts:
99
Registered:
3/16/09
|
|
(644 of 3746)
It's about time some things are non-profit
Jul 24, 2009 11:11 PM
|
I spent a year arguing with an insurance company over an $11,000+ bill, which they finally paid along with a few smaller ones I ended up having to pay.
These companies have a license to rob people. I now work for a doctor, and go to bat for patients with the insurance companies.
|
|
|
Posts:
3
Registered:
4/25/03
|
|
(643 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 24, 2009 11:08 PM
|
|
When are people going to realize that we are not, I repeat, Not going to have socialized health care. What we are going to have is socialized health insurance.
|
|
|
Posts:
5
Registered:
3/13/09
|
|
(642 of 3746)
Re: Healthcare in the house
Jul 24, 2009 10:42 PM
Rate this post:
|
I think the major problem with this plan ? and any government-backed healthcare plan for that matter ? is the fallacy of the very premise upon which it is based. And that is, that we have a health care "crisis" in this country.
According to my records, I now spend anywhere from $25 to $50 more a week in groceries than I did last year at this time. To me, THAT'S a crisis ? another "cost of living" that has skyrocketed and, yet, where is the government to implement a program to control the costs of groceries so that millions of Americans don't have to struggle to come up with the money that guarantees they can eat every month? After all, I can live without healthcare for a month, but I won't last a week without food.
My point being, isn't healthcare really a cost of living, and if we returned it to a free market, got the middle men (insurance companies) out of the picture, wouldn't costs then adjust downward and, thus, we would all be able to budget for our healthcare, just like we do for our groceries, utilities, toiletries, etc.? Why is healthcare any different?
|
|
|
|
|
