When will Gabrielle Giffords be transferred to a hospital in Cuba or Canada?

[Little-Acorn]

...so she can get the top-notch care we keep hearing (according to certain people) those countries provide? Instead of the substandard third-world care those same people claim the United States gives?

She may not have time to wait for Obamacare to be fully implemented, to bring the U.S. healthcare system to the level of those other countries.

[fj1200]

Clearly she is a multimillionaire otherwise...

[Little-Acorn]

Clearly she is a multimillionaire otherwise...

All the more reason. Shouldn't she get the best care available anywhere?

[NightTrain]

All the more reason. Shouldn't she get the best care available anywhere?

Seems to me that would be logical. If you have millions to spend, and she does, why would she settle for second-rate healthcare?

[Psychoblues]

Wow. You guys have missed the entire point of health care reform. I call that willful ignorance.

Psychoblues

[Palin Rider]

Now it should be obvious why all those freshman Republicans didn't want to drop their cushy new health plan.

[BoogyMan]

Now it should be obvious why all those freshman Republicans didn't want to drop their cushy new health plan.

Psssst: Sarcasm only works when there is a basis in truth, PR. :lol:

[Psychoblues]

Psssst: Sarcasm only works when there is a basis in truth, PR. :lol:

Sarcasm only works when the listener has the intelligence to recognize the genuine nuances that make it funny!!!!!!!!!

lolololololololololololol

Psychoblues

[NightTrain]

Sarcasm only works when the listener has the intelligence to recognize the genuine nuances that make it funny!!!!!!!!!

lolololololololololololol

Psychoblues

So, why are you Laughing Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud?

[Psychoblues]

So, why are you Laughing Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud?

You didn't get it either? lololololololololol

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

Wow. You guys have missed the entire point of health care reform. I call that willful ignorance.

Psychoblues

That's right, raise the cost of health care so much that the private delivery of HC becomes so expensive that a government takeover is the eventual result and then the only ones who get the best care are the politically connected where cost is no option. Everyone else gets shafted.

Oh, I'm sorry, that will be the result which has no connection to the "point."

[Psychoblues]

That's right, raise the cost of health care so much that the private delivery of HC becomes so expensive that a government takeover is the eventual result and then the only ones who get the best care are the politically connected where cost is no option. Everyone else gets shafted.

Oh, I'm sorry, that will be the result which has no connection to the "point."

You're not much in the intelligence department, are you, fj200? The entire point of the healthcare reform is to bring medical costs "DOWN" and to bring the national deficit "DOWN" and to save this country from total healthcare bankruptcy in the short and long term. Do you actually think that the congress negotiated all that time for a bill that would be detrimental to their own constituencies? You are a fool.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

You're not much in the intelligence department, are you, fj200? The entire point of the healthcare reform is to bring medical costs "DOWN" and to bring the national deficit "DOWN" and to save this country from total healthcare bankruptcy in the short and long term. Do you actually think that the congress negotiated all that time for a bill that would be detrimental to their own constituencies? You are a fool.

Psychoblues

So that would be why HC costs have gone up? More regulations on top of regulations that do nothing but raise the costs for all involved?

You sure sucked down that bill of goods didn't you?

[Psychoblues]

So that would be why HC costs have gone up? More regulations on top of regulations that do nothing but raise the costs for all involved?

You sure sucked down that bill of goods didn't you?

The law is comprehensive and as has been positively proven time and again beyond the comprehension of average right wingers. Every credible healthcare study and the most credible source of Governmental efficiency forecasts, the Congressional Budget Office, all agree that the law significantly lowers costs for all involved and the national deficit by many billions in the relative short term. It's a win/win deal as far as the open eye can see!

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

The law is comprehensive and as has been positively proven time and again beyond the comprehension of average right wingers. Every credible healthcare study and the most credible source of Governmental efficiency forecasts, the Congressional Budget Office, all agree that the law significantly lowers costs for all involved and the national deficit by many billions in the relative short term. It's a win/win deal as far as the open eye can see!

Psychoblues

The governement if going to start tying medicare reimbursement to patient scores. Do you know what that means?

All (or most) hospitals call patients after a visit. If that patient doesn't give the hospital an Excellent, the score goes down, Very Good's don't count.


Once VBP launches, a portion (1 percent and eventually 2 percent) of the hospital’s Medicare payment will be tied to a hospital’s performance on these measures.


The reality is that most hospitals will probably be losing some of their Medicare reimbursement under VBP program. But it’s a matter of degree: How much do you really want to give away?

According to Section 3001 of the Affordable Care Act, 1 percent of a hospital’s Medicare dollars is at risk under VBP in FY13. (This rises to 2 percent in 2017.)

http://www.hfma.org/Publications/Leadership-Publication/Archives/E-Bulletins/2010/September/Patient-Experience-Scores-Are-Dragging-Down-VBP-Scores/

Right now between 60-70% of the patient base is on some form of medicare (at the hospital hubby works at). Yep the gov. will save money by not paying their share. WHO do you think will make up the difference?????

PEOPLE WITH PRIVATE INSURANCE.

[fj1200]

The law is comprehensive and as has been positively proven time and again beyond the comprehension of average right wingers. Every credible healthcare study and the most credible source of Governmental efficiency forecasts, the Congressional Budget Office, all agree that the law significantly lowers costs for all involved and the national deficit by many billions in the relative short term. It's a win/win deal as far as the open eye can see!

Psychoblues

Government efficiency? :laugh: Wow, you've got it bad. They sure nailed those Medicare projections back in the '60s didn't they?

There was nothing "reform" about it. They did nothing more creative than tax the rich and create a middle class entitlement. We sure know how those come out.

[Palin Rider]

So that would be why HC costs have gone up? More regulations on top of regulations that do nothing but raise the costs for all involved?

You sure sucked down that bill of goods didn't you?

The law isn't even in effect yet. Even you aren't this obtuse.

[fj1200]

The law isn't even in effect yet. Even you aren't this obtuse.


Within one year of enactment (2010–2011)

* Insurance companies barred from dropping people from coverage when they get sick, ending the practice of rescission. Lifetime coverage limits eliminated and annual limits restricted.
* Young adults able to stay on their parents' health plans until age 26. Many health plans previously dropped dependents from coverage when they turned 19 or finished college.
* Uninsured adults with pre-existing conditions will be able to obtain health coverage through a new program that will expire once new insurance exchanges begin operating in 2014.
* Insurance companies cannot deny group or new (non-grandfathered) individual coverage to children under age 19 due to a pre-existing condition.[63]
* A temporary reinsurance program is created to help companies maintain health coverage for early retirees between the ages of 55 and 64. This also expires in 2014.
* Medicare drug plan beneficiaries who fall into the Medicare Part D coverage gap (the so-called "doughnut hole") will get a $250 rebate. The new law eventually closes that gap completely. (The old law required the sick person to pay 100% of their own annual medicine costs after $2,700 was spent in the coverage year and did not start again until after $6,154 was spent).
* A tax credit becomes available for some small businesses to help provide coverage for workers.
* A 10% tax on indoor tanning services that use ultraviolet lamps goes into effect on July 1.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States

Anything else you want to be wrong on?

[Palin Rider]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform_in_the_United_States

Anything else you want to be wrong on?

No cigar. That's maybe half the law.

Ping me again in 2014.

[SassyLady]

You're not much in the intelligence department, are you, fj200? The entire point of the healthcare reform is to bring medical costs "DOWN" and to bring the national deficit "DOWN" and to save this country from total healthcare bankruptcy in the short and long term. Do you actually think that the congress negotiated all that time for a bill that would be detrimental to their own constituencies? You are a fool.

Psychoblues

Yes.

I don't think they care about the longterm results of their decision and the impact on those that will have to bear the burden of the cost ... our children and grandchildren ... they just wanted to score a political victory while they were in control of Congress.

And, PB, if you don't get this, I have no adjective I can assign to you ... it's incomprehensible.

[fj1200]

No cigar. That's maybe half the law.

Ping me again in 2014.

You said it's not in effect, clearly you were wrong about that. Own it?

But you're right, it's not even half and already HC costs have been going up due to increasing regulations and the administration has had to grant waivers to how many businesses and unions? In 2014, if it's still around, it will suck even more.

[Palin Rider]

You said it's not in effect, clearly you were wrong about that. Own it?
If the entire law is not in effect, guess what? It's not in effect. Despite your act, I know you get this, so I won't bother to keep belaboring the point.


But you're right, it's not even half and already HC costs have been going up due to increasing regulations and the administration has had to grant waivers to how many businesses and unions? In 2014, if it's still around, it will suck even more.
Hope you weren't expecting me to play dueling crystal balls....

[fj1200]

If the entire law is not in effect, guess what? It's not in effect. Despite your act, I know you get this, so I won't bother to keep belaboring the point.

:laugh:


Hope you weren't expecting me to play dueling crystal balls....

Why would I? You can't even see the past so I know you can't see the future.

[Psychoblues]

Yes.

I don't think they care about the longterm results of their decision and the impact on those that will have to bear the burden of the cost ... our children and grandchildren ... they just wanted to score a political victory while they were in control of Congress.

And, PB, if you don't get this, I have no adjective I can assign to you ... it's incomprehensible.

Then I would have to say that you are also a fool. I intended no adjective. Seriously.

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

psycho,

Did you take the time to read the link I posted?


It clearly states that, the gov. will save money on healthcare, by reducing the already low reembursement it give to hospitals and physicians for medicare and medicade patients.

This should worry anyone who knows anything about the European system. They have a major Dr shortage over there, and we aren't much better ourselves. Obamacare is not going to help the situation. People aren't going to spend 10 years in school if they don't think they're going to be able to make money when they get out.



The American Academy of Family Physicians estimates a shortfall of 40,000 general practice physicians by 2020.

According to the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC), 250,000 physicians now practicing were at least 55 years old in 2005. Since America’s residency programs currently graduate only 22,000 new doctors each year, America will not quite replace those physicians likely to retire in all specialties by 2020.

Most of these new doctors graduate with $140,000 in training debt and opt to become specialists of some kind. A recent survey of medical school seniors said only two percent of graduating seniors plan primary care practices. And who can blame them? Primary care physicians average paychecks of around $175,000 yearly

http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-washington-dc/growing-primary-physician-shortage-complicates-reform?do_not_mobile_redirect=1


I can't end this without mentioning Medical Malpractice Insurance which EVERY Doctor has to pay. I've pulled out Cali on this page, since they're one of the states with a large population. All the way at the bottom are the 2009 rates, ranging from 20,000 for general physicians to 80,000 for an OBGYN.

http://www.mymedicalmalpracticeinsurance.com/california-medical-malpractice-insurance.php#historicdata



http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/Medicare/24303

[Psychoblues]

psycho,

Did you take the time to read the link I posted?


It clearly states that, the gov. will save money on healthcare, by reducing the already low reembursement it give to hospitals and physicians for medicare and medicade patients.

This should worry anyone who knows anything about the European system. They have a major Dr shortage over there, and we aren't much better ourselves. Obamacare is not going to help the situation. People aren't going to spend 10 years in school if they don't think they're going to be able to make money when they get out.




http://www.examiner.com/public-policy-in-washington-dc/growing-primary-physician-shortage-complicates-reform?do_not_mobile_redirect=1


I can't end this without mentioning Medical Malpractice Insurance which EVERY Doctor has to pay. I've pulled out Cali on this page, since they're one of the states with a large population. All the way at the bottom are the 2009 rates, ranging from 20,000 for general physicians to 80,000 for an OBGYN.

http://www.mymedicalmalpracticeinsurance.com/california-medical-malpractice-insurance.php#historicdata



http://www.medpagetoday.com/PublicHealthPolicy/Medicare/24303

First off, if you ever want to speak with me seriously then do not refer to our health care reform legislation as "Obamacare". It actually has a name and it is not "Obamacare". Obviously you are not aware that our congress negotiated this law with little to no input from the President. Much of this legislation was left over from the Dole reform actions of 1996. WTF you may ask? Me, too.

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

First off, if you ever want to speak with me seriously then do not refer to our health care reform legislation as "Obamacare". It actually has a name and it is not "Obamacare". Obviously you are not aware that our congress negotiated this law with little to no input from the President. Much of this legislation was left over from the Dole reform actions of 1996. WTF you may ask? Me, too.

Psychoblues

Ok, how should it be referred to and with the wrong before, can you answer the question?

[Psychoblues]

Ok, how should it be referred to and with the wrong before, can you answer the question?

You gotta be kidding me, Kath!!!!!!!! And I don't make it a habit of answering frivolous questions except for personal entertainment purposes.

Do we need to speak privately, Kath? Somehow I feel you expect me to not respond in kind to some of these idiots and seriously I don't most of the time. Underlying activities aside I think I'm doing very well but if someone comes at me guns blazing, so to speak, I reserve the right to return fire.

I also reserve the right to have just as much fun as anyone else on this board. Is that unfair?

Psychoblues

[Little-Acorn]

First off, if you ever want to speak with me seriously

(snicker) :lol:

Not much point in reading the rest.....

[Psychoblues]

(snicker) :lol:

Not much point in reading the rest.....

I know where you're coming from on that one, la!!!!!!!

You devil, you!!!!!! :laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Okay, no response from the gallery. Got it. Hit job and they agree.

[Psychoblues]

Okay, no response from the gallery. Got it. Hit job and they agree.

Is the champagne getting to you, Kath?

Psychoblues

[Kathianne]

Is the champagne getting to you, Kath?

Psychoblues

just the depression of failure. Carry on.

[Psychoblues]

just the depression of failure. Carry on.

I continue to consider and want you as a friend, Kath. I hope your feelings are not as any result of any perceived failures of mine.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

First off, if you ever want to speak with me seriously then do not refer to our health care reform legislation as "Obamacare". It actually has a name and it is not "Obamacare". Obviously you are not aware that our congress negotiated this law with little to no input from the President. Much of this legislation was left over from the Dole reform actions of 1996. WTF you may ask? Me, too.

Psychoblues

Fact: Insurance cost are increasing at higher rates AFTER Obamacare passed

FACT: Insurance companies are cutting back on benfits to customers after Obamacare passed

FACT: Unions are now droping coverage to members due to the INCREASED costs associated with Obamacare

FACT: Nearly 60% of voters want Obamacare REPEALED

You can continue to luve in your bubble and ingore the results of Obamacare but alas, you continue to be in the minority PB

[Trigg]

You gotta be kidding me, Kath!!!!!!!! And I don't make it a habit of answering frivolous questions except for personal entertainment purposes.

Do we need to speak privately, Kath? Somehow I feel you expect me to not respond in kind to some of these idiots and seriously I don't most of the time. Underlying activities aside I think I'm doing very well but if someone comes at me guns blazing, so to speak, I reserve the right to return fire.

I also reserve the right to have just as much fun as anyone else on this board. Is that unfair?

Psychoblues

Well if you're referring to my post as "guns blazing", than I'm confused.

My post also wasn't "frivolous". You posted that the gov. is going to save money and I've outlined just HOW they plan to save money.

I also included an article regarding a Dr. shortage in this country, a problem that is only going to get worse if Dr.'s start making less, yet continue to be charged more for malpractice insurance.

I realize that snarky comments are more your forte, but a serious conversation is nice sometimes.

[Psychoblues]

Well if you're referring to my post as "guns blazing", than I'm confused.

My post also wasn't "frivolous". You posted that the gov. is going to save money and I've outlined just HOW they plan to save money.

I also included an article regarding a Dr. shortage in this country, a problem that is only going to get worse if Dr.'s start making less, yet continue to be charged more for malpractice insurance.

I realize that snarky comments are more your forte, but a serious conversation is nice sometimes.

Trigg, this is an internet message board that contains more evil intent and snark than most. I will not bow down to anyone. That said, I don't accept the premise of what you interpret about the health care reform in this country. I won't go into alot about it with you at this point other than to share with you a few links to more much comprehensive information. Some of it agrees with you and some of it agrees with me. Overall, however, it lays out in certain terms why our healthcare system is a disaster compared to other systems. When your/our system can be easily proven to be miserably insufficient and falling rapidly behind in such areas as infant mortality and life expectancy then I think most anyone would want to see our system of heathcare improved. Otherwise it's not much different than old fashioned death panels, eh?

There are literally hundreds more links that you will find by following these. Wikipedia is nonpartisan and apolitical and every professional I know trusts them and their constant linking to sources for their information. Here goes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

Pay particular attention to the second link. It pertains to something I think you are very confused about and rightfully so. It is comprehensive as is the entire healthcare mess.

No, Trigg. I don't think you came at me guns blazing but I know you are capable of it. Hopefully we can be more civil and understanding in the future?

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

Trigg, this is an internet message board that contains more evil intent and snark than most. I will not bow down to anyone. That said, I don't accept the premise of what you interpret about the health care reform in this country. I won't go into alot about it with you at this point other than to share with you a few links to more much comprehensive information. Some of it agrees with you and some of it agrees with me. Overall, however, it lays out in certain terms why our healthcare system is a disaster compared to other systems. When your/our system can be easily proven to be miserably insufficient and falling rapidly behind in such areas as infant mortality and life expectancy then I think most anyone would want to see our system of heathcare improved. Otherwise it's not much different than old fashioned death panels, eh?

There are literally hundreds more links that you will find by following these. Wikipedia is nonpartisan and apolitical and every professional I know trusts them and their constant linking to sources for their information. Here goes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_reform

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

Pay particular attention to the second link. It pertains to something I think you are very confused about and rightfully so. It is comprehensive as is the entire healthcare mess.

No, Trigg. I don't think you came at me guns blazing but I know you are capable of it. Hopefully we can be more civil and understanding in the future?

Psychoblues

There is no agreeing with me or agreeing with you.

The gov. IS going to tie Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements to hospitals PRC scores. A majority of a hospitals patient base are on either Medicare or Medicaid. This will hurt EVERY hospital out there.

We have a Dr. shortage in this country and it is going to get worse, not better. People just are not going into medicine and if they are they are not becoming general practitioners.

These are just facts.

I'll completely agree that this counties health system needs help. But, that behemoth of a health care bill that NO ONE read before voting on it, just isn't the answer.

[fj1200]

I'll completely agree that this counties health system needs help. But, that behemoth of a health care bill that NO ONE read before voting on it, just isn't the answer.

Of course it is, it's sensible. :laugh2:

[Psychoblues]

There is no agreeing with me or agreeing with you.

The gov. IS going to tie Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements to hospitals PRC scores. A majority of a hospitals patient base are on either Medicare or Medicaid. This will hurt EVERY hospital out there.

We have a Dr. shortage in this country and it is going to get worse, not better. People just are not going into medicine and if they are they are not becoming general practitioners.

These are just facts.

I'll completely agree that this counties health system needs help. But, that behemoth of a health care bill that NO ONE read before voting on it, just isn't the answer.

You listen to the fearmongers and I'll stick with the truth tellers and healthcare professionals. I cannot speak for the health system in your county. Somebody is lying to you, Trigg, and it ain't me.

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

You listen to the fearmongers and I'll stick with the truth tellers and health care professionals. I cannot speak for the health system in your county. Somebody is lying to you, Trigg, and it ain't me.

Psychoblues

This has nothing to do with fearmongers and I am a healthcare professional as is nukeman. Have been for going on 20 years.

The articles I posted come from the Medical Malpractice Insurance Group and the Health care Financial Management Association and is an article outlining the changes will go into affect when the gov. imposes changes to Medicare and Medicaid payments. The other article I posted from come from the American Academy of Family Physicians.

Hardy political entities or county issues.

[Psychoblues]

This has nothing to do with fearmongers and I am a healthcare professional as is nukeman. Have been for going on 20 years.

The articles I posted come from the Medical Malpractice Insurance Group and the Health care Financial Management Association and is an article outlining the changes will go into affect when the gov. imposes changes to Medicare and Medicaid payments. The other article I posted from come from the American Academy of Family Physicians.

Hardy political entities or county issues.

And hardly comprehensive or unbiased. Did you look into the Wikipedia links or have you dismissed them altogether?

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

And hardly comprehensive or unbiased. Did you look into the Wikipedia links or have you dismissed them altogether?

Psychoblues

How exactly is a group offering insurance rates biased??? How exactly is a group talking about Dr. shortages biased??? How exactly is a group explaining the changes in reimbursement biased. These things are FACT. There is no bias. These are NOT political.

I've already agreed that the gov. will save money. The links I provided outlined exactly HOW the gov. plans to save money, by lowering Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements. Hospitals are already planning for these changes, they are going to happen.

I've also agreed that our healthcare system needs changes, but not with this behemoth of a bill.

Yet, you continue to dismiss my links as biased and fear mongering, who's the sheep here?

[Psychoblues]

How exactly is a group offering insurance rates biased??? How exactly is a group talking about Dr. shortages biased??? How exactly is a group explaining the changes in reimbursement biased. These things are FACT. There is no bias. These are NOT political.

I've already agreed that the gov. will save money. The links I provided outlined exactly HOW the gov. plans to save money, by lowering Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements. Hospitals are already planning for these changes, they are going to happen.

I've also agreed that our healthcare system needs changes, but not with this behemoth of a bill.

Yet, you continue to dismiss my links as biased and fear mongering, who's the sheep here?

And I have never intimated the Patients Rights and Affordable Care Act was the best package to solve our healthcare systems problems but it sure beats the hell out of anything that we've ever had before. It will improve as time goes on and the patients and healthcare providers will slowly begin to fully understand and accept the new law as being just as I describe here. Change is very hard, always has been, especially on things this vital and to things like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, people will exploit these changes for all the fear they can arouse and there will always be those who for whatever reason just will not support anything they perceive to be a lefty says or does no matter how much it goes against their own self interests to withdraw that support.

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

And I have never intimated the Patients Rights and Affordable Care Act was the best package to solve our healthcare systems problems but it sure beats the hell out of anything that we've ever had before. It will improve as time goes on and the patients and healthcare providers will slowly begin to fully understand and accept the new law as being just as I describe here. Change is very hard, always has been, especially on things this vital and to things like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, people will exploit these changes for all the fear they can arouse and there will always be those who for whatever reason just will not support anything they perceive to be a lefty says or does no matter how much it goes against their own self interests to withdraw that support.

Psychoblues

I'm going to type slowly.

This has nothing to do with politics, at least the way I see it.

I do not think the healthcare bill should be totally scraped, there are probably good provisions in it.

However, the gov. is planning to save money in a way that is detrimental to our hospitals. We ALREADY have a Dr. shortage and lower reimbursement added to HIGHER malpractice insurance rates will only exacerbate those shortages. Europe already has this issue thanks to their universal healthcare. I do not want to see the US go down the road of rationed care. I have a sister in Finland I am not ignorant in regards to the hoops they have to jump through in order to get a timely procedure.

This has nothing to do with fear at this point, the things I posted are FACT.

[Psychoblues]

I'm going to type slowly.

This has nothing to do with politics, at least the way I see it.

I do not think the healthcare bill should be totally scraped, there are probably good provisions in it.

However, the gov. is planning to save money in a way that is detrimental to our hospitals. We ALREADY have a Dr. shortage and lower reimbursement added to HIGHER malpractice insurance rates will only exacerbate those shortages. Europe already has this issue thanks to their universal healthcare. I do not want to see the US go down the road of rationed care. I have a sister in Finland I am not ignorant in regards to the hoops they have to jump through in order to get a timely procedure.

This has nothing to do with fear at this point, the things I posted are FACT.

The things you posted are opinions, not FACTS. They are fearmongering opinions put out by individuals that have interests other than a smooth transition of our healthsystem into a smoother and more efficient one. That is and always has been the so-called free market way when it comes to cleverly disquised monopolies, must have human services and other ways the market can exploit system weakness for personal profit.

We have known for a very long time that our entire healthcare system would be completely overwhelmed by the baby boomers. Not just doctors but the entire industry. That's why you see so many Indian, Korean, Phillipine, Chinese, etc. healthcare professionals around all the hospitals and clinics nowadays and not to mention the needed CT scan equipment, MRI, x-ray and lab equipment, etc.. It was once assumed we would be able to afford this foreign help but that is becoming more and more unlikely as the insurance companies and other go betweens are demanding so much in profits without regard to the quality of the health of their customers/patients. We are already paying more than twice the amount of our closest comparitive health care entities but for only half the patients. We have millions without heath insurance at all, many thousands unnecessarily dying for a lack of treatment, sometimes for nothing more than a 50 cent pill, this is the national emergency number one.

You say that you don't think this has anything to do with politics. You entered this thread spouting at least psuedo politics but the issue from the get go is absolutely political. The title to this thread was something concerning Gabby Giffords going to Mexico or Canada or somewhere looking for healthcare. Just what kind of political snark is that? We've got a health care system problem. We have a solution on the books. We have choices. Build on the improved system or drag out any possible good for the time being for political purposes. Sad, just sad.

Trigg, I mean no disrespect but I think you have been sold a bill of goods and are relying on the salesman to tell you it ain't so. Please refer to the links I provided as I think they provide a more balanced view of the problem that we both recognize as being important to us.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

And hardly comprehensive or unbiased. Did you look into the Wikipedia links or have you dismissed them altogether?

Psychoblues

Here is you and all other supporters of Obamacare ned to deal with




Support for repeal of the national health care law remains high, as does belief that the measure may be repealed.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 54% of Likely U.S. Voters at least somewhat favor repeal of the health care bill, with 44% who Strongly Favor it. Forty percent (40%) are opposed to repeal, including 28% who are Strongly Opposed. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Support for repeal is even higher – at 62% - among those who have discussed the health care law with a doctor, a nurse or other health care professional.

Last week, 60% of all voters favored repeal of the legislation. Support for repeal has ranged from 50% to 63% in weekly tracking since Democrats in Congress passed the law in March of last year.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law





and Doctors will leave the health care profession if Obamacare is not repealed




A recent survey finds that countless MDs will respond to ObamaCare by limiting which patients they’ll see.

The Physicians Foundation asked 2,400 doctors and American Medical Association members what they thought of the new law; a full 67 percent were against it.

More important, it asked how they’d cope with the new rules (which don’t fully kick in until 2014). Sixty percent said they feel compelled to “close or significantly restrict their practices to certain categories of patients.” And 59 percent said the “reform” would oblige them to spend less time with the patients they do have.

Of course, many doctors already limit how many patients they’ll take on who depend on government insurance (whose fees rarely cover an MD’s costs). But it’ll get worse under ObamaCare: In the survey, some 87 percent said they would significantly restrict Medicare patients and 93 percent said they’d significantly restrict Medicaid patients.

[...]All in all, the survey found that 74 percent of doctors will alter how they practice.

To stay in business under ObamaCare, doctors will have to adjust. Some will see fewer patients themselves and hire nurse practitioners to help carry the load; others will work part-time and supplement their income elsewhere. Many will join groups or become salaried employees of hospitals or clinics.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/obamacare_flight_of_the_mds_2zWYU1R9DYG4K6dJ8oj8gP

[red states rule]

There is no agreeing with me or agreeing with you.

The gov. IS going to tie Medicare/Medicaid reimbursements to hospitals PRC scores. A majority of a hospitals patient base are on either Medicare or Medicaid. This will hurt EVERY hospital out there.

We have a Dr. shortage in this country and it is going to get worse, not better. People just are not going into medicine and if they are they are not becoming general practitioners.

These are just facts.

I'll completely agree that this counties health system needs help. But, that behemoth of a health care bill that NO ONE read before voting on it, just isn't the answer.

Liberals do not pay attention to facts - only their desire to shape America the way they deem it should be

And libs rattle off thier BS and are never asked to defend it

Now the AZ shooting happened because of lack of Obamacare sooner

<object width="518" height="419"><param name="movie" value="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UaGkUDk" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><embed type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/eyeblast.swf?v=hd6UaGkUDk" allowfullscreen="true" width="518" height="419" /></object>

[fj1200]

The things you posted are opinions, not FACTS.

What FACTS did you post? The wiki link is a summary of what the law says it wants to do and a rehash of the CBO projections which are suspect in themselves. To take that link as gospel doesn't address the unseen effects that are always present when government enacts massive regulation that in effect changes an industry.

IMO, the bill does nothing to address the underlying causes of where our HC system has gone wrong so in fact will do nothing to improve HC delivery in the US.

But unless you're going to drag out another talking point post like the one above I guess there's nowhere to go with this.

[Psychoblues]

What FACTS did you post? The wiki link is a summary of what the law says it wants to do and a rehash of the CBO projections which are suspect in themselves. To take that link as gospel doesn't address the unseen effects that are always present when government enacts massive regulation that in effect changes an industry.

IMO, the bill does nothing to address the underlying causes of where our HC system has gone wrong so in fact will do nothing to improve HC delivery in the US.

But unless you're going to drag out another talking point post like the one above I guess there's nowhere to go with this.

You know, fj, we have genuine murderers that have been found not guilty by a jury of their peers walking around about every where nowadays. And kids doing 99 to life for insignificant drug charges and petit larceny. We may never agree on anything as everything has at least some components that are opinion rather than demonstrable facts. Like the Democratic Party, I have to consider propensities and past personal experience to form my opinions and actions on issues both significant and those not so much.

And you are exactly correct. Unless new information can be shared then we need to let this one go. But, we never did discuss anything about Gabby Giffords going to Mexico or wherever for medical treatment. I really thought that was ridiculous on it's very premise. Didn't you?

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

You know, fj, we have genuine murderers that have been found not guilty by a jury of their peers walking around about every where nowadays. And kids doing 99 to life for insignificant drug charges and petit larceny. We may never agree on anything as everything has at least some components that are opinion rather than demonstrable facts. Like the Democratic Party, I have to consider propensities and past personal experience to form my opinions and actions on issues both significant and those not so much.

And you are exactly correct. Unless new information can be shared then we need to let this one go. But, we never did discuss anything about Gabby Giffords going to Mexico or wherever for medical treatment. I really thought that was ridiculous on it's very premise. Didn't you?

Psychoblues

SO PB, YOU know what is best for the 56% of people who want Obamacare repealed?

YOU know what is best for the companies that are now NOT hiring due to the expected additional costs associated with Obamacare?

YOU know what is best for folks despite the fact tax increases in Obamacre will increase the cost of life saving drugs and medicial equipment

Damn PB - we are so lucky to have someone with your superior knowledge of the healthcare industry

[fj1200]

You know, fj, we have genuine murderers that have been found not guilty by a jury of their peers walking around about every where nowadays. And kids doing 99 to life for insignificant drug charges and petit larceny. We may never agree on anything as everything has at least some components that are opinion rather than demonstrable facts. Like the Democratic Party, I have to consider propensities and past personal experience to form my opinions and actions on issues both significant and those not so much.

Thanks for those insights. :rolleyes:


And you are exactly correct. Unless new information can be shared then we need to let this one go. But, we never did discuss anything about Gabby Giffords going to Mexico or wherever for medical treatment. I really thought that was ridiculous on it's very premise. Didn't you?

Seeing as how you rejected Trigg's new information it doesn't seem like you're ready to handle anything other than the party line.

Yes, it was a stupid premise but then again so was much of the tripe from whence Obamacare came.

[red states rule]

Seeing as how you rejected Trigg's new information it doesn't seem like you're ready to handle anything other than the party line.
.

That pretty well sums up nearly every post PB has ever put on the board. He does bow at the alter of liberalism and drinks the DNC Kool Aid by the gallon

[Psychoblues]

fj200, I was sending you a pm while you were writing your post. Thanks, fj. We really can do better and no, I reject your premise that I toe any line Democratic Party or otherwise. I tried to make it clear that I follow observable propensities and personal experiences. I can't do better than that.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

fj200, I was sending you a pm while you were writing your post. Thanks, fj. We really can do better and no, I reject your premise that I toe any line Democratic Party or otherwise. I tried to make it clear that I follow observable propensities and personal experiences. I can't do better than that.

Psychoblues

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o275/JinxiBoo/eBay/StickersPinsMoreFeb08/MuttleyGGsticker.jpg


and I thought Burger King was home of the whopper

[fj1200]

fj200, I was sending you a pm while you were writing your post. Thanks, fj. We really can do better and no, I reject your premise that I toe any line Democratic Party or otherwise. I tried to make it clear that I follow observable propensities and personal experiences. I can't do better than that.

Psychoblues

With all due respect, I took the liberty of boiling your previous posts down to what I perceive as Dem talking points:


The things you posted are opinions, not FACTS. fearmongering ... the so-called free market ... cleverly disquised monopolies... market can exploit system weakness for personal profit.

... the insurance companies and other go betweens are demanding so much in profits ... paying more than twice the amount ... millions without heath insurance ... national emergency number one.

... sold a bill of goods ...

While some may be true the mere repetition becomes a talking point especially when the underlying assumption is now allowed to be refuted.

As I said earlier, the "reform" builds on past mistakes that are not removed from the system but are rather built on so it's mistake on mistake which is the worst kind of error. Can the system be reformed? Sure but in my view we need to accept that the free market, which we don't have now, is the superior method of allocating resources and provides the best standard of living for all income levels. AT THAT POINT we can start to address those that are being left behind.

[NightTrain]

fj200, I was sending you a pm while you were writing your post. Thanks, fj. We really can do better and no, I reject your premise that I toe any line Democratic Party or otherwise. I tried to make it clear that I follow observable propensities and personal experiences. I can't do better than that.

Psychoblues

http://i585.photobucket.com/albums/ss293/NightTrain70/128-double-facepalm-when-the-fail-is-so-strong-one-facepalm-is-not-enough.jpg

[Psychoblues]

With all due respect, I took the liberty of boiling your previous posts down to what I perceive as Dem talking points:



While some may be true the mere repetition becomes a talking point especially when the underlying assumption is now allowed to be refuted.

As I said earlier, the "reform" builds on past mistakes that are not removed from the system but are rather built on so it's mistake on mistake which is the worst kind of error. Can the system be reformed? Sure but in my view we need to accept that the free market, which we don't have now, is the superior method of allocating resources and provides the best standard of living for all income levels. AT THAT POINT we can start to address those that are being left behind.

In the case of healthcare, probably any public utility such as power, water, roadways, etc, we may simply have to agree to disagree. I have already seen all of these come out from under direct government control and costs immediately begin to go up and then soar to the point that the population demanded in many cases to return to a more sensible approach. Most times that means at least more stringent oversight and verificational operations from the government if not a full return to governmental agency level operation and administration.

I do not follow Dem talking points therefore I reject your accusal that I repeat them as such. If I do have any propensities towards repetition it is similar if not exactly like any poster here and that is what we all read and hear from the media and otherwise. There are no original thoughts here. Just different ways of expressing old ones. IMHO.

I totally disagree with you that the Patients Rights and Cost Reduction Act is any mistake on top of mistakes. I hear the whining and groaning and the lies and slurs put forth by the rightwingers that do not like the change even though most of the rightwingers supported this practically exact bill in 1996 as presented by then Senator Bob Dole. Tell me it ain't partisan or political. Although it would take some fairly elementary but at least time consuming research for me to give you links to the vast majority of the medical org's and professionals that support the legislation, I simply don't want to do that. Instead I encourage you to follow the links into Wikipedia that I have already provided and the hundreds of links that you might find from there. Understanding the healthcare crises and healthcare legislation in this country would take many PhD's and their subsequent educations to fully comprehend but the Cliff's notes versions in Wikipedia are balanced, relentlessly scoured for accuracy and very easily available to you.

True free market? Every indication to the world's most renowned economists and expressed by them is that mixed markets are bad enough, true free markets would eat themselves and the rest of us up to the point of total financial collapse in a very short time. You, fj, have an extremely short memory. The mortgage and financial industries didn't collapse due to regulation or governmental interference, they collapsed due to the lack of it.

Thanks for the holler back!!!

Psychoblues

[Trigg]

This has nothing to do with fear mongers and I am a health care professional as is nukeman. Have been for going on 20 years.

The articles I posted come from the Medical Malpractice Insurance Group and the Health care Financial Management Association and is an article outlining the changes will go into affect when the gov. imposes changes to Medicare and Medicaid payments. The other article I posted from come from the American Academy of Family Physicians.

Hardy political entities or county issues.

I'm reposting this because I would love for someone to tell me how these are........

They are fear mongering opinions put out by individuals that have interests other than a smooth transition of our health system

Once again one sight simply lists medical malpractice insurance rates and the AAFP states that we have a Dr. shortage. The other one talks about the changes that will take place when the gov. changes the reimbursement rates on Medicare and Medicaid and ties them to satisfaction surveys.

There is No opinion here. I've sat through hospital meetings about the reimbursement changes. They are coming, that isn't fear mongering, it's fact.

It's to bad that you are so in the hip pocket of the dems that you can't differentiate between fact and fear mongering.

[red states rule]

I'm reposting this because I would love for someone to tell me how these are........


Once again one sight simply lists medical malpractice insurance rates and the AAFP states that we have a Dr. shortage. The other one talks about the changes that will take place when the gov. changes the reimbursement rates on Medicare and Medicaid and ties them to satisfaction surveys.

There is No opinion here. I've sat through hospital meetings about the reimbursement changes. They are coming, that isn't fear mongering, it's fact.

It's to bad that you are so in the hip pocket of the dems that you can't differentiate between fact and fear mongering.

http://www.strangepolitics.com/images/content/154039.JPG

[Psychoblues]

I'm reposting this because I would love for someone to tell me how these are........


Once again one sight simply lists medical malpractice insurance rates and the AAFP states that we have a Dr. shortage. The other one talks about the changes that will take place when the gov. changes the reimbursement rates on Medicare and Medicaid and ties them to satisfaction surveys.

There is No opinion here. I've sat through hospital meetings about the reimbursement changes. They are coming, that isn't fear mongering, it's fact.

It's to bad that you are so in the hip pocket of the dems that you can't differentiate between fact and fear mongering.

Yes. It is almost completely fearmongering and opinion. The ulterior motives for those reports and organizations are without doubt in opposition to healthcare reform. For what reason I would be afraid to speculate but I think it might be associated with profit and the way the systems weaknesses have been exploited in the past. IMHO when the lying and stealing is stopped and reforming is complete we will be a much better and healthier society for it.

Again, Trigg, I refer you back to the non-partisan and apolitical Wikipedia links that I gave you or do you just want to stamp your feet and keep yelling for someone to back up your clearly biased medical opinions. I am not going to go any further reading your articles and you can refuse to even consider Wikipedia. Makes no difference to me.

Psychoblues

[red states rule]

Yes. It is almost completely fearmongering and opinion. The ulterior motives for those reports and organizations are without doubt in opposition to healthcare reform. For what reason I would be afraid to speculate but I think it might be associated with profit and the way the systems weaknesses have been exploited in the past. IMHO when the lying and stealing is stopped and reforming is complete we will be a much better and healthier society for it.

Again, Trigg, I refer you back to the non-partisan and apolitical Wikipedia links that I gave you or do you just want to stamp your feet and keep yelling for someone to back up your clearly biased medical opinions. I am not going to go any further reading your articles and you can refuse to even consider Wikipedia. Makes no difference to me.

Psychoblues

So folks, PB would rather let power hungry politicans decide how health care in America is provided then meical professionals who are trained in that area

The nerve of people going to college, medical school, and investing moeny to start a medical procatice and want to make a PROFIT!!!

Yes, in PB's world medical professionals should operate a charity and give their services away after spending years foing to school and investing hundreds of thousands of dolars in their education

[Psychoblues]

Trigg, I just wanted to clear something up with you. I do agree there are some, as you say, FACTS shared in your articles. They really can't be argued with but the conclusions, forecasts, projections, etc. are every bit opinion and nothing more. And some of the FACTS as you call them are no more than observations and subsequent interpretations. There again we have opinions, not FACTS. I desparately want competent and reasonable healthcare for all Americans. We, of all nations on Earth, should be able to settle our political squabbles and achieve that. And I hope you and NukeMan haave very long and very prosperous careers. No one expects any less for you than that.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

In the case of healthcare, probably any public utility such as power, water, roadways, etc, we may simply have to agree to disagree. I have already seen all of these come out from under direct government control and costs immediately begin to go up and then soar to the point that the population demanded in many cases to return to a more sensible approach. Most times that means at least more stringent oversight and verificational operations from the government if not a full return to governmental agency level operation and administration.

But it's not a public utility, you may want it to but that doesn't make it such. It's not a "natural monopoly" created by a government entity. The deregulation of the late '70s provided better services at lower costs.


I do not follow Dem talking points therefore I reject your accusal that I repeat them as such. If I do have any propensities towards repetition it is similar if not exactly like any poster here and that is what we all read and hear from the media and otherwise. There are no original thoughts here. Just different ways of expressing old ones. IMHO.

I can only point out what I see.


I totally disagree with you that the Patients Rights and Cost Reduction Act is any mistake on top of mistakes. I hear the whining and groaning and the lies and slurs put forth by the rightwingers that do not like the change even though most of the rightwingers supported this practically exact bill in 1996 as presented by then Senator Bob Dole. Tell me it ain't partisan or political. Although it would take some fairly elementary but at least time consuming research for me to give you links to the vast majority of the medical org's and professionals that support the legislation, I simply don't want to do that. Instead I encourage you to follow the links into Wikipedia that I have already provided and the hundreds of links that you might find from there. Understanding the healthcare crises and healthcare legislation in this country would take many PhD's and their subsequent educations to fully comprehend but the Cliff's notes versions in Wikipedia are balanced, relentlessly scoured for accuracy and very easily available to you.

What acts of regulation and furthering government controls have ended well? Medicare? Medicaid? Social Security is on sound footing? I've looked at plenty of links regarding health care but a basic knowledge of economics is all that's required to see into the crystal ball. Like I said, Wikipedia just parrots the bills intents and its new regulations.


True free market? Every indication to the world's most renowned economists and expressed by them is that mixed markets are bad enough, true free markets would eat themselves and the rest of us up to the point of total financial collapse in a very short time. You, fj, have an extremely short memory. The mortgage and financial industries didn't collapse due to regulation or governmental interference, they collapsed due to the lack of it.

"Every indication," "most renowned"? Those are quite the grand statements that just can't be refuted now can they? :rolleyes:

And, yes they did.

[Psychoblues]

But it's not a public utility, you may want it to but that doesn't make it such. It's not a "natural monopoly" created by a government entity. The deregulation of the late '70s provided better services at lower costs.



I can only point out what I see.



What acts of regulation and furthering government controls have ended well? Medicare? Medicaid? Social Security is on sound footing? I've looked at plenty of links regarding health care but a basic knowledge of economics is all that's required to see into the crystal ball. Like I said, Wikipedia just parrots the bills intents and its new regulations.



"Every indication," "most renowned"? Those are quite the grand statements that just can't be refuted now can they? :rolleyes:

And, yes they did.

I'm just so weary of this thread and all the round and round and round without getting anywhere. I could argue every point you're making but most of it has already been addressed. What say we call it a tie or better yet I'll just accept defeat, see if I can get myself checked into a Mexican convalescence/rehab center and rest up awhile. I'll give you some positive rep as soon as I can. The machine won't let me do it right now.

Thanks for your excellent thinking skills and committed thread responses, fj200. I hope we can do this kind of banter more often.

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

I hope we can do this kind of banter more often.

This kind is better for the soul than the other.

[Palin Rider]

This kind is better for the soul than the other.

You really suck at picking up on sarcasm, don't you?

Then again, you suck at almost every rhetorical tactic.

[Psychoblues]

You really suck at picking up on sarcasm, don't you?

Then again, you suck at almost every rhetorical tactic.

No, no, PR. Although part of my statement was sarcastic the part about the banter was not. fj and I have lots of arguments and disagreements we will never resolve but based on a few things I've seen said lately and my own purpose for yet another style of posting I really do look forward to some friendly mental jousting. Even with you, PR, you're a hard-headed bitch, too!!!!!!

Goddamit, yall be niiiiiiice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Psychoblues

[fj1200]

You really suck at picking up on sarcasm, don't you?

Then again, you suck at almost every rhetorical tactic.

You should try posting when you have all the facts so... ;)

:salute: PB.

[red states rule]

You should try posting when you have all the facts so... ;)

:salute: PB.

and when he is sober

[fj1200]

and when he is sober

The first line was to PR, the salute to PB was genuine.

[red states rule]

The first line was to PR, the salute to PB was genuine.

O know that

PR and PB are both drunk. PR on the Obama Kool Aid and PB on whatever is on sale at the liguor store

Both ignore another reason to repeal Obamaccare. All the tax increases that were in the bill

So much for Dems "promise" not to raise taxes on those making less the $250,000/yr




Individual Mandate Excise Tax

Employer Mandate Tax

Surtax on Investment Income

Medicine Cabinet Tax

HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike

Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka“Special Needs Kids Tax”

Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers

Raise "Haircut" for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI

Tax on Indoor Tanning Services

Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D

Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike

Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals

Tax on Innovator Drug Companies

Tax on Health Insurers

$500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives

Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2

Corporate 1099-MISC Information Reporting
“Black liquor” tax hike

Codification of the “economic substance doctrine”

http://www.atr.org/comprehensive-list-tax-hikes-obamacare-a5758#

[Kathianne]

O know that

PR and PB are both drunk. PR on the Obama Kool Aid and PB on whatever is on sale at the liguor store

Both ignore another reason to repeal Obamaccare. All the tax increases that were in the bill

So much for Dems "promise" not to raise taxes on those making less the $250,000/yr

If PR spent his time forming arguments on issues, rather than blindly attacking others with immature logical fallacies, he would be an asset to the board. Not much hope in that, but whatever.

PB has been making attempts to make his positions clear in recent months. At this point in time I don't care for the personal attacks on what may or may not have been problems in the past. I think he deserves reasonable responses as long as he's giving the same. If he continues to post in generalities, I personally haven't much to add in the way of arguments, but he seems willing to give more specificity a chance.

[Palin Rider]

If PR spent his time forming arguments on issues, rather than blindly attacking others with immature logical fallacies, he would be an asset to the board. Not much hope in that, but whatever.

I make a point of responding to the true idiots around here by striking back just as hard. You expect me to ignore them, and the fact that I don't upsets you no end - but whatever.

That said, you're free to question me on an issue at any time. :happy0203:

[Palin Rider]

I really do look forward to some friendly mental jousting. Even with you, PR, you're a hard-headed bitch, too!!!!!
Indeed I am! :beer: