Driving Affordable Health Care Over A Cliff
Driving Affordable Health Care Over A Cliff
[ED. UPDATE: Sen. Daschle will be stopping by a little later to respond to your comments. Sen. Daschle got tied up today, but we are going to reschedule a time soon for him to answer your questions on this topic.]
We face a major crisis in this nation. Our health system is collapsing. We now spend a record-high 16 percent of our economy on health care. Premiums have risen by 73 percent since 2000. And businesses now spend nearly $450 billion on health benefits – not counting their Medicare payroll taxes. In a few short years, the health costs of Fortune 500 companies will exceed their profits. Despite these costs, the U.S. ranks 34th on life expectancy, 41st in infant mortality, and 37th, according to the World Health Organization, in health system performance. In short, we need fundamental change.
The problem is not a lack of ideas. It is a lack of leadership. The only answer that the President has to this crisis is so-called consumer-driven health care. This means shifting costs to people through high deductibles, and shifting risk and responsibility to patients.
This is a bad idea for three reasons:
1. It makes the wrong assumptions about health care. A person with chest pain is not in a position to decide on which tests to take and what drugs he needs. A $1,000 deductible is not going to make a person switch hospitals to get an extra hour of hospital care, which is all that the deductible can buy. Health care is not a commodity. When we buy a car, we don’t want to have the parts dropped off on our front lawns. Consumer-driven care just doesn’t make sense for health care.
2. It assumes that individuals can go up against industry and win. Look at the Medicare drug benefit. My mother has to choose from 73 plans. It is impossible for her to figure out which has the lowest prices. Rather than pooling the purchasing power of seniors to leverage lower prices, this drug benefit allows for drug companies to charge higher prices and insurers to profit. So, if you like the Medicare drug benefit, you will love consumer-directed health care.
3. It pits the healthy against the sick. About 70 percent of costs in the U.S. health system are for the top 10 percent most expensive people. These people’s costs are well above the deductible, so a high deducible won’t change their behavior.
Consumer-directed health care is not the answer, and it will make matters worse. Instead, we should embrace comprehensive health reform based on four simple pillars. It should provide affordable health care for all Americans, ensure choice of doctors and plans, contain costs, and prioritize prevention.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Let’s hear the trolls tell us how this is because of Pres. Clinton, or liberals.
Just because the Republicans are the party currently in power doesn’t mean they should take responsibility for their actions!
January 25th, 2006 at 11:55 amThank you Tom. We are going to clobber them on this one.
January 25th, 2006 at 11:56 amTom, how about convincing your ex-colleagues in Congress to support HR 676, the Single-Payer bill? If Republicans are putting forth a non-plan, let’s counter by getting behind a good one.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:02 pmThe only answer that the President has to this crisis is so-called consumer-driven health care. This means shifting costs to people through high deductibles and cost sharing, shifting risk and responsibility to patients.
I do not know what the answer is. Period. I believe that government intervention and the so-called nanny state is responsible for much of the problems described in the introduction to this thread and that something has to give. If I’m right and the alphabet soup of government funded medical programs has driven the price increases then there is only one solution that comes to my mind; get the government out of the health care business. If we do not then there will only be one solution, raise taxes and make everyone a slave to the state until the entire society is crushed beneath its own weight.
What freedom is it that is just another word for nothing left to lose? It’s the freedom the socialist state promises.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:03 pmObviously, this issue is like Reagan’s “welfare queens”. It was a catchy concept even if it was not true and the same is the case for consumer driven health care. It seems to make sense until you consider the facts. Unfortunately, in health care as in most things, Americans can not be bothered to get the facts only the sound bites. One other tid bit which should get some traction is the conflict of interest posed by health care providers being bribed by the drug companies. Does anyone really think that the proposed new ethics rules for doctors will have any effect? When I resist my physician’s suggestion that I start taking statins although my cholesteral is still below the guidelines, am I debating medical science or fighting the influence of the manufacturer of the statin? How can I help keep medical costs down when it is not even a fair debate?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:03 pmas a UK citizen, resident in the US, i have seen something of both systems. now i know the UK isn’t perfect, but the National Health Service is one of its good points.
invididuals benefit from free treatment at the point of use, workers don’t face losing health benefits if they are retired, leave due to ill health, the economy takes a nosedive, etc.
as a consequence of having a free health service, there is also no aggressive TV marketing of drug company products, or the same preponderance of “health news” on TV. there is no self-medicating underclass, there is no ordering medicines from abroad. besides the social benefits of old people and working families not being bled dry, business benefits from having a healthy workforce.
the US “system” disenfranchises masses of people from the healthcare they need on the basis of their ability to pay. when it comes to providing affordable healthcare, the giant drug corporations have taken over the market and established an effective cartel. intervention is urgently required to redress this.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:05 pmbelieve that government intervention and the so-called nanny state is responsible for much of the problems described in the introduction to this thread and that something has to give.
And I believe that for every drop of rain that falls, a flower grows.
Trouble is, believing something doesn’t make it so. And all actual evidence — like the fact that entire civilized world has government-financed health care, generally providing good coverage to everybody while spending a lot less than we do — shows that you’re wrong.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:06 pmSweet, It’s great to have Tom D giving us stuff.
Now if you could only re-print your 12/23 Wash Post article where you stated you didn’t give the bush43 administration the OK to wiretap without a warrent. That still wouldn’t satisfy our right leaning friends, but we’d be gleeful.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:08 pmWhat IRI believes has been proven false in every country on the planet. American exceptionalism strikes again!
January 25th, 2006 at 12:11 pmyes my mother hasn’t any idea what to do. She thot she was on the medicare d plan tried to get her meds was told by her phram that she wasn’t in their system.She is one very ill person with just one kidney that is poorly functioning.
If congress can’t or won’t step up to the plate and impeach this goon and his mafia then is country is doomed.
Tom we need you to run for office again!!!!!!
January 25th, 2006 at 12:13 pmFolks,
Leave a message to the students in Georgetown who protested Abu Gonzales and his American Gestapo Roadshow.
http://hammeroftruth.com/2006/01…e-constitution/
It will do your hearts and minds some good.
-GSD
January 25th, 2006 at 12:13 pmlike the fact that entire civilized world has government-financed health care, generally providing good coverage to everybody while spending a lot less than we do — shows that you’re wrong.
Comment by Gary Kleppe
I’ve read the horror stories of the health care systems in the socialist states you call “the entire civilized world”. Saying I’m wrong doesn’t make it a fact and you’ll note I did not say I was right.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:13 pmShorter I’m-Really-an-Idiot:
Idiotology is more important than facts and cost effective health care!
January 25th, 2006 at 12:14 pmI’ve read the horror stories of the health care systems
You do know they were all written by Stephen King and can be found in the library, (private in your idiot world) under “fiction”, don’t you?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:15 pmyes my mother hasn’t any idea what to do. She thot she was on the medicare d plan tried to get her meds was told by her phram that she wasn’t in their system.She is one very ill person with just one kidney that is poorly functioning.
If congress can’t or won’t step up to the plate and impeach this goon and his mafia then is country is doomed.
Tom we need you to run for office again!!!!!!
Comment by thot’s
Congress isn’t responsible for your mother. I suggest you get off the computer and take over the responsibility of getting her coverage straightened out yourself. Or, is that too much trouble?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:16 pmSenator
Ignore the squatting eunuchs, they can only muster up enough courage to leave their “duck tapped” terror basements for a few minutes at a time.
That said, this is an important issue that deserves of our attention. I would only argue that it should occur after we have control all three elected branches.
My question to you Sir is why is the leadership not attacking the GOP’s only strong point; security/terrorism?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:16 pmi am willing to dip into my own pocket to have i-r-i’s lobotomy reversed
January 25th, 2006 at 12:16 pm’ve read the horror stories of the health care systems in the socialist states you call “the entire civilized worldâ€.
Try reading something that isn’t written by people making a profit off the American system nor by right-wingers with an intellectual axe to grind. Better yet, try actually talking to the people who live in those countries. I’m sure you can find some of them commenting here.
Saying I’m wrong doesn’t make it a fact
No, it’s the evidence that makes it a fact.
and you’ll note I did not say I was right.
Good for you, because in fact you aren’t.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:17 pmin #6, i already commented on standard practice in a “socialist state” (dear me, how uninformed can someone be), ie: the United Kingdom
January 25th, 2006 at 12:18 pm# 12 unlike you I didn’t read about the countreis in europe, i joined the Army and was stationed there, while I was there i met quite a few locals and they had a fairly good system, yes i know that was back in the 70’s but I never heard one say that they couldn’t get treatment or affoord their drugs or their grandparents had to eat canned pet food in order to afford their meds however what you read trumps my first hand expierence, since I didn’t drink the kool-aid
January 25th, 2006 at 12:21 pmI’ve read the horror stories of the health care systems in the socialist states you call “the entire civilized worldâ€. Saying I’m wrong doesn’t make it a fact and you’ll note I did not say I was right.
Instead of reading “horror stories” you might want to hear it firsthand from people who live in those countries. #6 for example. And I can tell you that my b/f who is Canadian, has never had a single problem with the Canadian health care system and neither has anyone in his family. They’ve had some serious health problems over the years (stroke, heart transplant, etc.) but the Canadian health care has taken very good care of them all. And none of them are having to file for bankruptcy because they couldn’t pay their medical bills.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:23 pmHe knows it’s fiction. He just doesn’t care. These guys are the modern day Captain Ahab. They will sail to the ends of the earth to harpoon their own great white whale. The non-existent threat of socialism. It’s a threat to perhaps the 1% to 5% of the world’s population who own over 90% of the world’s wealth and he isn’t even in that rareified group and never will be. The true example of a “useful idiot“. A term created and used by anti-communists. Never by Lenin. You all know how Capt. Ahab ended up.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:24 pm#4 We got the government out of the health care business back in the 60s and 70s because we were told deregulation would lead to better and cheaper health care. That didnt happen as we now see. You need to start learning facts before making suggestions. A government ran system minus the corruption is the best solution over all. The people pool their money so they can get the most services for the least amount of money. No cronies, lobbyists, ear marks, or bill riders should be let near that money.
Then if the drug companies and insurance companies cannot make money because we demand lower prices since we are buying as one huge purchasing group then we hire all the scientists directly like we did to make the nuclear bomb and we let them do the same work they are doing now minus the influence from the bean counters and marketing teams. We replace insurance companies altogether with a nonProfit that is funded from the pooled health care money. If we run a national nonProfit then we can do everything the companies do and more since the profits and money wasted on marketing and lobbying (bribes) can go directly to benefits.
The deregulation of the health care system that started in the 1960s and 70s failed and is about to explode. TEAMWORK is the answer… not for profit pooling of our money can do everything the capitalists are doing and cheaper as long as we keep the politicians greasy fingers out of the money.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:25 pmYou don’t even know what a non-sequitur is.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:27 pm#11 – Link not workee.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:28 pmRepost that link, GSD.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:29 pmI opted for a MSA plan last year to save on premium. To keep the plan I had ($2500 ded with copay) would have cost me more than $14000/year, up from $12000. (Plus the copay went up of course.) I saved $5000 by switching to MSA. The deductible is $5000. What a coincidence. When my family medical expenses reach 5K, I don’t pay anything, not even a copay.
Am I a sucker or was I forced into it? I make about $75k and I can’t pay my bills. I have one child in college and she gets 2/3 of her costs in loans. Prior to this year, she got about 1/4. Guess I’ve crossed an income barrier.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:29 pmIRI should move to some real state where the cost of living would crush him.
Shorter IRI: I live in S*****ville, it’s cheap and my pappy owned the farm free and clear. I inherited it. I got mine. f*** the rest of you. I’m a proud merkin patriot!
January 25th, 2006 at 12:33 pmI’m sure the healtcare problems have nothing to do with latigious society, greedy pharmaceautical companies, administrative costs for the “paper chase”. Right?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:34 pmSorry Senator D. This is life in the trenches.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:34 pmI hope IRI’s mother is lucky enough to be healthy. Damn, what a cold heart.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:35 pmi-r-i’s becoming a good thing, now he knows he can’t abuse anyone (Judd-o-phobia) and has to limit himself to saying stupid things. i’ve just got this horrible vision of him kneeling down and praying 5 times a day in front of a giant portrait of The Gipper. “tell me what to say, oh master…”
January 25th, 2006 at 12:36 pmM Lib
That is what is really at the heart of what middle America is facing, total financial ruin (if catastrophic) or a lot of out of pocket cash.
G. Liddy
IRI is a boychild sent to fight for the eunuch cowards. Of course he is awkward and incoherent.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:36 pmIdeology is the curse of public affairs because it converts politics into a branch of theology and sacrifices human beings on the thoughts of abstractions.
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.
We could forego the namecalling and vitriol if we could get IRI to admit that he would be opposed to any healthcare system on ideological grounds regardless of any other factors. Debating him, and them is a waste of time. Facts are irrelevant.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:40 pmIn point of fact, he actually has admitted that, so I propose we ignore him unless he has an argument based on facts and figures and statistics that might be credible and convincing. That excludes all the tripe and drivel from the right-wing propaganda mills..
January 25th, 2006 at 12:43 pmI work in the Healthcare industry. I work for a physician owned & run non-profit. It’s an HMO for all practicle considerations, it differs in that it’s physicians making the calls on members care, not accountants.
Having said that, I still think that a National Health Care is the best way to cheaply provide BASIC & ACUTE health care. What does that mean? I think a clinic could easily cover your normal medical appointments (annual check-ups, routine tests, follow ups from previous injuries/illnesses, diagnosing and treating a recent illness or injury).
You want a nose job? Go pay for that yourself. You’d still be free to buy additional health insurance, in my perfect world, to cover things that your own insurance doesn’t cover now (ie – vainity surgery).
Now the pharmaceutical issues are more complex. That has to be purchased from outside groups as no government I know of, owns and operates a drug making company. However, the government should be able to pool the drug purchases needed to reduce the costs of the medications prescribed. Some stuff, say Viagra, you’d pay for w/ a higher copay.
This doesn’t shut out private practice/for profit medicine. it just makes it so they aren’t the only game in town.
We’d all benefit because care would be cheaper for individuals, our businesses would be on the same footing foriegn corporations are on in their home turf.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:46 pmThe problem with Medical Savings accounts becomes obvious when you consider it for other “insurance” applications.
What if you were encouraged to set up “Automotive Mishap Accounts.” Or “Just in Case the House Burns Down” Accounts.
A) You’d recognize that this defeats the point of any insurance.
B) You’d realize the most folks simply don’t have the assets to tie up for this sort of nonsense, and
C) You’d realize that even if you had such an account — it won’t do a damn thing to make your change the overall cost of medical care, or the cost of an auto accident, etc.
In other words, it’s a classic Republican push-down: Dump the risk onto those who can least afford it, and let the big corporations off scott free.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:46 pmThe system is broke and requires change, particularly for the very young and the very poor BUT what about the 1/3 or so of us who eat ‘way too much of the wrong foods, get no exercise, smoke and drink, and who probably constitute a large part of the ten percent costing seventy percent? Do they get a free pass? Should we subsidize their bad judgment and their self-destructive behavior?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:46 pmJust to add something that may not be known by all, where I live, in CA, if you are poor and on medicaid/medical, you can’t get most private physicians to treat you as it is. You end up going to the emergency rooms or public health clinics. Our system here wasn’t so bad until the wingers screwed it up.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:47 pmif you think about the military for a second, most people, other than wingnuts, would not think that defense belongs in the private sector, to be provided piecemeal by a plethora of private interests. similarly, most people believe there should be free public education. even on a pragmatic level, it is clear to see that america’s current healthcare system benefits chiefly two groups, healthcare corporations and america’s economic competitors, who do not have to factor fast-growing healthcare costs into their business plans.
g g giddy makes a lot of valid points, and he is right to point to the misery of ideology. it shows the the capacity of ideology to tie people’s thoughts in knots, as you have the same people who espouse the free market defending a healthcare system that is becoming very damaging to business.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:48 pmSenator, tell us which major GOP contributors stand to benefit from what Bush is proposing. Whom is he trying to enrich now?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:50 pmThe system is broke and requires change, particularly for the very young and the very poor BUT what about the 1/3 or so of us who eat ‘way too much of the wrong foods, get no exercise, smoke and drink, and who probably constitute a large part of the ten percent costing seventy percent? Do they get a free pass? Should we subsidize their bad judgment and their self-destructive behavior?
Comment by Don
Is that you, Buckshot?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:50 pmSENATOR DASCHLE:
PLEASE STAY ON MESSAGE.
WE NEED A SPECIAL PROSECUTOR AND PRE-IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS FOR THOSE IMPLICATED IN DOMESTIC SPYING.
THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION IS NO LONGER A LEGITIMATE ENTITY. THIS IS A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, BECAUSE THEY VIOLATED THE CONSTITUTION.
PLEASE, PLEASE STAY ON MESSAGE.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:52 pmDon,
Let’s talk about healthcare funding and delivery.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:52 pmIf you want to moralize and talk about “lifestyles” take it up with your pastor and pray more often.
Having lived in Germany for two years, I know that the health care system there is better and less expensive than the one we have here in the USA. The suppliers are not allowed to charge $8,000 for an artificial joint that cost but $35 to make. There are no insurance or HMO middleman. The doctors do not shift costs to the uninsured. I just had some tests that would have cost an uninsured individual $105 but the insurance company forked up $2.52 and my co-pay was 63 cents. Some poor schmuck earning $8 per hour would have had to pay the full amount.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:52 pmToo funny, citizen (#16). I love the image.
I don’t see how anyone can plausibly argue that we have a good healthcare system, unless that person is an insurance company executive. NOBODY likes it. The way right wingers talk, you’d think people would rather pay exorbitant sums for service rather have the government get involved. You want to try building roads privately? Might cost a bit more. You want to provide a modest safety net for old people. No insurance company would go for it, not at %2 or %3 administration costs. Same for Medicare—-it’s a fact that its administration costs amount to %2. Two percent! But nooooooo, you don’t want the government getting involved in healthcare.
I’m with Mr Gibson, #23. Great comments.
I did hear recently that a lot of Canadians are going to the USA for surgery because the waits are very long. What say you Ann?
January 25th, 2006 at 12:53 pmDon is angling towards the old BS arguments from a poster named Buckshot who used to post here until we ran him off. The poor don’t pay their fair share and are poor because they are defective and sick and poor because of who they are. He smells as bad as his arguments and that’s because he is as defective as his arguments.
January 25th, 2006 at 12:56 pmMr. Daschle, while I appreciate your interest in dealing with this issue (i’m in the middle of dealing with some very scary health cost issues as we speak), it’s all just wanking with no chance for having anything done about it when you have a right-wing supreme court, a corrupt whitehouse, a corrupt GOP majority congress, and a corrupt cowardly democratic minority congres, sans testicles.
Unless the democratic party is willing to just get up and fricking fight for us on the whole, and not just individual issues as if they were all unrelated, we’re never going to get anywhere! The GOP is heavily coordinated and are always on message, while the democrats are fractured and can’t agree on anything.
What is wrong with you people? Are you honestly that whipped? Sorry to be so blunt, but I ask because I’m sure I know a few Greens who wouldn’t mind taking advantage of the situation and attempting to be the first of their party to reach a national seat and take your jobs.
Think man, think!
January 25th, 2006 at 12:57 pmShould we subsidize their bad judgment and their self-destructive behavior?
Don
We subsidize the bad judgement and self-destructive behavior of invading Iraq. So I guess we should figure bad judgement into the overall cost of healthcare, too
January 25th, 2006 at 1:00 pmAnd I should add that Iraq was definitely a case of elective surgery.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:01 pmSenator, how do explain the fact that healthcare costs have far exceeded inflation and cost of living increases over the past 30 years? How do explain that the increases by the healthcare industry are in lockstep with litigation costs increases in the industry for the same period? How do you explain that the Association of Trial Lawyers were the largest contributors to Bill Clinton’s presidential campaigns and that they continue to be large contributors to DNC? Why is your party not interested in non medical caps on lawsuit settlements?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:04 pmCrystal W.
I heard the other day that Ms. Clinton is going to make HC an issue in her campaign (we all know she’ll run, getting the nod is another matter). That will take some cajones on her part. But we all feel the way you do. We wonder when these folks are going to grow a spine. If they are going to get whipped anyway, at least put up a fight.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:04 pmYou-wrong-you
Congress isn’t responsible for your mother. I suggest you get off the computer and take over the responsibility of getting her coverage straightened out yourself. Or, is that too much trouble?
My 84 year old month-in-law lives with my wife and me. We asked our phamacist for advice on the Medicare Part D. He graciously had an intern spend several hours comparing the multitude of plans. It is overly confusing and impossible to decipher. In the end we stayed with the insurance provider we have had for 6 years. So when the 1st of the year came along and my wife went to renew my month-in-law’s prescriptions, guess what. The insurance company said that they didn’t honor the phamacy that we had been using for 6 years. It’s one of the best known hospitals in the US! So the pharmacist had to supply her medications for free until he could get this straightened out. It took 3 weeks and many, many hours. He was very angry. He said that this new program was crafted by and favored the drug/insurance companies NOT the elderly.
Lesson 1) Congress doesn’t have to contend with the results of their health care legislation. We do.
Lesson 2) This ‘new’ health care plan fattened the pockets of the insurance and drug companies at the expense of a larger deficit. (Closed door Republican sessions kept 22 billion dollars in spending for insurance/drug companies)
Lesson 3) My wife’s cousin in Canada gets better care for her mother for free.
Lesson 4) The current Administration and Republican Congress are killing Americans with their programs and legislation.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:04 pmcrystal w doesn’t seem to think you can care about a range of issues. i look forward to seeing the results of your fricking righteous indignation, that is not really well spent, visiting it upon the heads of a Senator addressing an issue that is extremely important in the lives of many millions of Americans.
hmmm, crystal w., link us to the Greens website(s) and let’s see if they’ve removed their entire agenda in favor of all-out assault on Bush, as you seem to advocate.
“look, guys, the issue about the mistreatment of chickens is gonna have to wait until we’ve got rid of Bush…”
January 25th, 2006 at 1:05 pmCrystal W
I think you speak for many of us here! If the party does not provoke the nuclear option on Alito, I will be doing some serious thinking about the future of the party.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:06 pmGee whiz, Ben,
Do you think it might have something to do with the larger advertising budget for big pharma and HMOs and insurance companies. TV ads ain’t cheap, are they?
Why is your party not interested in non medical caps on lawsuit settlements?
Troll.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:09 pm#38 Yes they do! Well, not exactly free…. we taxpayers foot the bill for the House and Senate healthcare coverage, for life, no less! Given that most members of Congress are pretty well off, they should be paying for coverage themselves. I think they would be surprised, especially those with multiple “dependents”. CHAA CHING!!!!!
January 25th, 2006 at 1:10 pmWhile I would support any plan that included such ideals or “pillars” that are listed, I would also want to make sure that the plan was adequately understood and researched, and the actual causes for the current problems corrected or their forces counter-balanced.
For instance, just saying “give everyone affordable care” is actually addressing a symptom (a lot of people without health care), not a cause (greed, or any number of others).
And I also know that just saying, “how hard can it be to just review what we have, and how to fix it, and then make it better for everyone?” sounds easy and logical, but also seems to have a lot of resistance.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:11 pm“look, guys, the issue about the mistreatment of chickens is gonna have to wait until we’ve got rid of Bush…â€
Comment by extreme unction
Sadly, EU, there is some truth to that. But we all know we will have to put up with him until 2009. It would be nice to put him through the humiliation of impeachment hearings, however. He certainly is riichly deserving of it. Politics, eh?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:11 pm#57 Cyra has a point. If “socialized medicine” is good enough for them…
January 25th, 2006 at 1:13 pmToys
This is the importance of our progressive think tanks like Center for American Progress. People are doing some serious research on this and many issues.
I would argue it is mute until we control all three elected branches. Hell, we are way ahead on EVERY issue but one. Security/terrorism. This is where the focus and rhetoric needs to be (in my humble opinion).
January 25th, 2006 at 1:16 pmMy 84 year old month-in-law lives with my wife and me. We asked our phamacist for advice on the Medicare Part D. He graciously had an intern spend several hours comparing the multitude of plans.
I saw it suggested that folks do that, but I also heard that most pharmacists were told not to, or didn’t wish to. The thing was a cluster-f@ck from the get-go, like everything these clowns attempt.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:17 pmGee whiz, Gordon,
I happened to work in the insurance industry for over 20 years and you can actaully look up advertising costs as they are a line item in their required annual reports. Sorry, that’s not the reason.
Do you think it might have something to do with the larger advertising budget for big pharma and HMOs and insurance companies. TV ads ain’t cheap, are they?
Dumbass.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:17 pmG. Gordon and his type, who abjure and mock individual responsibility, are responsible for the popularity of all the false prophets now popular, from Pat Robertson to George Bush, because they can’t get it through their thick heads that each one of us is ultimately responsible for his or her own life. ‘Letting George do it,’ as G. Gordon pinted out, is what got us into Iraq. The government has its place,we need them for education, roads, defense, and, I believe, health care, but there has to be some recognition that the best cure for health problems is ofen preventive, better behavior.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:17 pmSay Tom, You Said Three reasons and only Gave Two. Wheres the Third Reason? or am i missing something?
personnally i stay as far away from medical centers as possible. they actually make me sicker.
so, I try not to spend money on them(and to think, here i am a vet and refuse medical benefits)( i guess you could say i am a modern day Ghandi) Refuse this illegal immoral bush tyranny and propaganda, meanwhile, here is a snip on
cindy sheehan.
Video Reports
What do you think? The t r u t h o u t Town Meeting is in progress. Join the debate!
Dear Friends,
There were tens of thousands of people in the anti-war, anti-imperialsm march in Caracas yesterday. Fernando Suarez (another member of Gold Star Families for Peace) and I were among the people who led the march. It is incredibly exciting here. Tens of thousands of people working for peace with justice … But you won’t see this parade and the World Social Forum covered in America … except TruthOut.org is here … stay tuned. I will have a meeting with President Chavez later this week. Will ask him how we can work together to spread peace non-violently.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:19 pmI believe that in Daschle’s piece the first reason should read: “A $1,000 LOWER deductible is not going to make a person switch hospitals to get an extra hour of hospital care, . . .”
January 25th, 2006 at 1:19 pmGee Whiz Ben,
You are the last person I would trust on the issue, working in the insurance biz like you do. No axe to grind, right?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:20 pmHey Ben
When was the last time you saw a Pharma balance sheet? Bet it was before the current wave of advertising, eh?
Dumbass
January 25th, 2006 at 1:20 pmMy father was a doctor, and he always advocated the need for a national health service much like Canada’s. This never won him any friends with his peers, but what he said then still holds true.
We are the only industrialized country in the world who still feels it is good business to bilk the sick and dying out of every last dollar they have. The only block to a national health plan is the big businesses and insurance companies that hold the politicians in their pockets.
Washington is awash in pharma and medical lobby cash. The money wasted on this legal bribery could be spent to assure the health of every American, instead we have record profits for health care and insurance companies and a growing mortality rate.
Michael Moore was supposedly doing a movie on this subject. I hope it comes out soon!
January 25th, 2006 at 1:21 pmG. Gordon and his type, who abjure and mock individual responsibility, are responsible for the popularity of all the false prophets now popular, from Pat Robertson to George Bush, because they can’t get it through their thick heads that each one of us is ultimately responsible for his or her own life. ‘Letting George do it,’ as G. Gordon pinted out, is what got us into Iraq. The government has its place,we need them for education, roads, defense, and, I believe, health care, but there has to be some recognition that the best cure for health problems is ofen preventive, better behavior.
Comment by Don
I will give trolls like you and Ben credit. But your stealth tech isn’t up to my phased array radar. Try again, kids.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:22 pmGordon and Citizen,
You guys are so typical. You just say bs, do not know if it is true or not, just say it.
Hey Citizen, for starters bud, advertising would be on the statement of income not the balance sheet, dumbass.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:24 pm#59 No G. Gordon it comes from the mindset of the right where admitting any mistake is seen as treason to the party. It’s like they are so insecure in their beliefs of what they actually do that they cannot admit that they are not always right, or that they might be human and therefore falible and therefore not really anydifferent then the people they vilify for not agreeing with them. I mean look at what happens here, they make outrageous statements and never admit when they get called on it, alot of “hot air” and generalisation of complex issues into talking points for the agenda of the corporations who through the K street project have bankrolled the party for a decade. Don’t work to understand the root or underlaying reasons for a particular problem but a jingoistic and simplistic answer designed to fit into a 30 sec TV add. and when the people that actually do their bidding they work in closed rooms without the democrats in the dark of night writing legistration that benifits the those same corporations to the detriment of the middle class and the utter demolition of any chance of advancement of the poor.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:24 pmDon,
Do you have an exercise tape or healthcare product or supplement you would like to flog. Now’s the time.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:26 pmHow do explain that the increases by the healthcare industry are in lockstep with litigation costs increases in the industry for the same period? How do you explain that the Association of Trial Lawyers were the largest contributors to Bill Clinton’s presidential campaigns and that they continue to be large contributors to DNC? Why is your party not interested in non medical caps on lawsuit settlements?
Comment by Ben — January 25, 2006 @ 1:04
Well Ben, since you apparently don’t know, a study was done that showed the “litigation costs” you bray about were primarily – wait for it – BECAUSE OF COMPANIES SUING EACH OTHER!
January 25th, 2006 at 1:27 pmWrong eunuch, it is an expense. Not only that, it is the balance sheet where expenses are NOT hidden, dumbass.
Now go squat back in your basement, I’m sure a scary terrorist has a bead on you.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:27 pmHey Ben; dumbass.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:29 pmMr. Daschle,
Has the sharp increase in federal lobbying and campaign contributions by the healthcare industry to politicians made it impossible to reform the system? Is it possible to reform such a bribery and meals for deals oriented industry with the current campaign process?
In particular I found this quote to be quite enlightening.
And this
And this
And of course the more malicious side of the healthcare industry that attacks its critics with swiftboat tactics.
Mr. Daschle, I frankly don’t see how the politicians of either democratic or republican persuasion hope to change things in this climate of fear, bribery and intimidation that lobbying and corporate financing permits. Can you explain how change is even possible in this environment?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:29 pmHardy,
My dad, my whole family were Doctors. Two of my uncle’s were chairmans emeritii of their respective depts. at well known and respected teaching institutions and universities I will refrain from name-dropping. You and I and our fathers and my uncles are all in agreement. What were you saying, Ben?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:30 pmDon’t worry Dano
He needs to be in the dark for a while to get back some courage.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:30 pmGood question, RightPunch.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:31 pmThe Free Market Concept is wonderful if you are looking for a car, house, or television. However, when you are looking for medical care to save or extend your life, it only works for the very rich. The rest of us end up devoting a significant amount of our income to basic medical care which has become less focused on quality of care than on return on investment. Unfortunately, many, many families do not have the financial resources to buy any health insurance and they suffer even more. If, as a country, we believe that reasonable and effective health care is a basic service to be provided to everyone regardless of wealth, then a National Plan is necessary. Otherwise, we will continue down the current road of medical services being provided to only those who can afford it.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:32 pmHe needs to be in the dark for a while to get back some courage.
Another mushroom conservative?(Kept in the dark and fed manure)
January 25th, 2006 at 1:32 pmOK, so my contribution:
Here’s a link to the life expectancy chart:
http://depts.washington.edu/eqhlth/images/undp_hdr_2005.gif
I notice Canada, Sweden, France Belgium, Germany – all state funded health system, way ahead of the US. Now this may not take into account things like how many soldiers die early in American pre-emptive wars, but I suspect that only skews the number a bit.
So you can go on about personal choice and letting the market decide all you want, but when it comes down to it it is very simple: what do the people want to do with the money they send to government? It seems that polls are consistent that something more like the state-funded care systems in Sweden etc are what they want. Then why can’t American ingenuity give the people what they want? It all leads back to the endemic corruption of the American political system: Big Pharma, Big Hospital, Big Insurance is calling the shots, not you people. So Sen. Daschle – are you part of the problem or part of the solution?
Everyone of the state-funded systems have their horror stories, people dying waiting for transplants and so on. But overall, the life expectancies show that the population at large can expect better quality of life in those systems.
Another point to think about – the bird flu panic of a few months ago revealed more flaws in the market-driven approach:
(1) A lack of a coordinated approach to epidemic response that is completely impossible unless the state is calling the shots.
(2) Flu vaccines (and vaccines like it) are not a very profitable business – flu vaccines were (until maybe last year after the chaos of 2004) manufactured overseas because those countries thought it prudent to do so for their citizens.
My final thought is to refute Adolf’s (#4) ‘get the government out of the health care business’ idea. Adolf also thinks that goverment might be better off out of the law-enforcement business too:
“Warrantless domestic spying on known terrorists and terrorist supporters is a good thing. It smacks of the good old days of vigilante justice when the law was either too far away or impotent to dispense justice, safety and security to the townspeople.”
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 23, 2006 @ 5:21 pm
January 25th, 2006 at 1:33 pm#64 Your ignorance is blinding!!!! Pat Robertson has devoted a great deal of his life to blaming all sorts of “traumas” on people he despises. And when has George W. Bush ever claimed “individual responsibility” for ANYTHING??? Including dragging all of us into endless war, because he just KNEW disaster was about to befall us all. Your assinine attempt to lay blame on the Democrats for demented, dangerous behavior from whacked out righties is just so predictable. Individual responsibility, my arse.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:34 pmWell I like to call them squatting eunuchs who hide in their basements out of fear of “tear-ee-ist attack”.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:34 pmBen since you work for the insurance industry how about a little facts, like admitting the insurance industry does not pay the same as an individual walking in off the street, they negociate their prices with the medical establishment with normal business practices where they offer to pay a certain amount for a certain proceedure or drug, and they never tell their consumers that they are paying discount prices, I mean I know all contractors get a discount at the local home center because they buy in bulk. And if the certain health care facility doesn’t agree the insurance doesn’t cover access to that particular facility, but the geniusses that negociated with the druc companies for the largest purchase of drugs under the guise of any federal program didn’t they agreed to pay retail. Kinda makes the republican leadership look like they didn’t work for the benifit for the american tax payer to get the most for their Tax Dollars, bnut to maximise the profits of the drug companies
January 25th, 2006 at 1:37 pmDumbass Dano,
Those studies only include direct litigation costs. The indirect costs of unnecessary procedures for the sole purpose of avoiding lawsuits is what is driving costs. Try applying some common sense if you actually have any. Are the doctors making that much more? are the hospitals? are the drug companies? Yet they all are charging a lot more. How can that be? See if you can figure out what has changed. It’s called added costs that were not there before. The science of medicine has changed but not enough to warrant the level of these additional expenditures. What’s new and much more prominent than 30 years ago. Answer, unlimited litigation.
Got it, dumbass?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:39 pmPerhaps OT, but it recalls something Hardy said in his post.
My father was a doctor, and he always advocated the need for a national health service much like Canada’s. This never won him any friends with his peers, but what he said then still holds true.
And speaks to a different kind of fear, or peer pressure than RightPunch talks about, but is a fear none the less.
Willian F. Buckley, Jr. (and they don’t get much more conservative and right wing than him) in an interview with Brian Lamb, CSpan Book Notes, April 2-3, 2000:
CALLER: Mr. Buckley, it’s a pleasure to talk to you.
William F. Buckley, Jr.(WFB): Thank You.
CALLER: I’ve heard you describe yourself as a Georgist, a follower of Henry George, but I haven’t heard much in having you promote land value taxation and his theories, and I’m wondering why that is the case.
W.F.B.: It’s mostly because I’m beaten down by my right-wing theorists and intellectual friends. They always find something wrong with the Single-Tax idea. What I’m talking about Mr. Lamb is Henry George who said there is infinite capacity to increase capital and to increase labor, but none to increase land, and since wealth is a function of how they play against each other, land should be thought of as common property. The effect of this would be that if you have a parking lot and the Empire State Building next to it, the tax on the parking lot should be the same as the tax on the Empire State Building, because you shouldn’t encourage land speculation.
Anyway I’ve run into tons of situations were I think the Single-Tax theory would be applicable. We should remember also this about Henry George, he was sort of co-opted by the socialists in the 20s and the 30s, but he was not one at all. Alfred J. Nock’s book on him makes that plain. Plus, also, he believes in only that tax. He believes in zero income tax.
And that brings us right back to this:
Ideology is the curse of public affairs because it converts politics into a branch of theology and sacrifices human beings on the thoughts of abstractions.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:40 pmArthur Schlesinger, Jr.
Sen. Daschle will be stopping by a little later to respond to your comments.
Senator, please tell us whether we can count on your support for HR 676, the Single-Payer bill.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:41 pmGot it, dumbass?
Comment by Ben
So that’s how they sell insurance these days?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:42 pmQuestion for all: since drug prices are such that it makes sense to buy drugs from Canada, why then does the government not support its citizens getting the best deal they can for they medicines? Would that not reduce costs significantly? We’ve outsourced manufacturing of pretty much everything else to China etc, why not drugs to Canada? Its not as if they don’t have laws to protect their people against poor quality drugs.
Second question: why is that Big Pharma spends more on marketing than on R&D? Is it because they have plenty of government funding already for R&D through universities anyway or some other reason?
Third question: if the purpose of a corporation is simply to make a pile of money become a bigger pile of money and a how is that likely to lead to a higher standard of living and/or longer life expectancy? Are these two goals compatible or not?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:43 pmGovernment estimates place billing fraud and abuse at 10 percent of healthcare spending, amounting to over $150 billion a year. If we simply banned investor owned health care sellers that alone should dramatically reduce fraudulent billing.
And Ben, I hate to inform you, but fraudulent billing is significantly more expensive in our healthcare system than the cost of any litigation. In fact much of the litigation comes from companies catching other companies doing fraud. For instance Frist’s hospital was doing large amounts of billing fraud – it’s what made his money. That’s much more of a real problem, but it’s easier to scare people with the ‘lawyers’ problem, even though they are unfortunately the only defense available to someone who had the wrong limb amputated. I’m sorry you don’t have any compassion for those victims – but most of us do.
So Mr. Daschle, what about centralizing paperwork databases and billing practices at least to avoid this sort of problem? I’m sure the healthcare lobby would block it – but doesn’t that seem like one solution to get started with? Cleaning up 10% of the costs from fraud reduction seems like a great way to save money, and get crooked senators evicted from the senate floor :)
January 25th, 2006 at 1:43 pmThe indirect costs of unnecessary procedures for the sole purpose of avoiding lawsuits is what is driving costs.
That is complete bullshit. Do you sell many policies without a gun?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:43 pmI actually doubt he is a salesman. He’s a lobbyist and that’s how he talks to the politicians in his pocket.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:45 pm“Got it, dumbass?”
Clif, there are many ways to structure price and you know it. If it is not that way then it’s another. The question is what are the profits. Are the costs that are shown in the financials legit? Could those costs be reduced? If the costs are inflated and could be reduced then profits would be excessive at prevailing prices. Therefore prices could be reduced. Litigation is the one dynamic that has changed in the last 30 years that was not there before. Take a look at the number of trial lawyers per capita over the last 30 years. There is a reason why so many are entering the field.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:46 pmAre the doctors making that much more? are the hospitals? are the drug companies? Yet they all are charging a lot more.
The drug companies, at least, are making a lot more. As are the insurance companies and HMOs. Hospitals would be making more except for the cost of treating those who can’t afford to pay, and the cost of administrative expenses like bill collection, executive salaries, etc.
And if you are concerned about the high cost of litigation, then work to get single-payer passed. Lawsuits will be far less of a factor when there’s no need to sue for medical expenses.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:46 pm“The indirect costs of unnecessary procedures for the sole purpose of avoiding lawsuits is what is driving costs. [. . .] Try applying some common sense if you actually have any.”
AND THAT DOESN’T APPLY TO COMPANIES SUING OTHER COMPANIES?
LOOPY!
Try posting some facts – if you have any.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:48 pmQuestion for all: since drug prices are such that it makes sense to buy drugs from Canada, why then does the government not support its citizens getting the best deal they can for they medicines?
Because the (current) government is on the side of the drug companies.
Second question: why is that Big Pharma spends more on marketing than on R&D? Is it because they have plenty of government funding already for R&D through universities anyway or some other reason?
Probably because marketing offers more reliable returns for the money spent.
Third question: if the purpose of a corporation is simply to make a pile of money become a bigger pile of money and a how is that likely to lead to a higher standard of living and/or longer life expectancy? Are these two goals compatible or not?
Not.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:49 pmCyra,
I guess my ignorance really did blind you. I called Pat Robertson and George Bush false prophets. You need to understand that the only reason that these clowns have the responsibility that they enjoy is because a lot of American people believe that people like Robertson and Bush know better what to do than they themselves do. I call it the Dr Laura syndrome–Gee, Doctor Laura, tell me what to do next. I just can’t figure it out on my own.
Now, I made no “assinine attempt to lay blame on the Democrats for demented, dangerous behavior,” in fact I made no mention of Democrats at all, but since you brought it up, what exactly is the Democratic Party position on healthcare? If Kerry mentioned health care in the last campaign I missed it.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:51 pmBen,
You won’t win any arguments here, if by winning you mean convincing anyone of your false position. Stay if you like, but try not to be so shrill and uncivil. You are becoming like fingernails on a blackboard.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:51 pmRightPunch, lets say that fraudulent billing is what you say it is. 10% is not what people are bitching about. We are talking about people paying 400 to 500% more than what they used to. How did that happen? Again, the financials do not indicate excessive profits. They indicate that revenues and costs are going through the roof. Why? What is driving the cost increases?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:51 pmDon is definitely Buckshot.
Welcome back, Buckshot. Now ignore him. He’s a moron and a troll.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmY’see, Ben, I think you’re conflating statisics for all lawsuits with those of your industry feel free to post any facts that demonstrate my dumbassed-ness, and we’ll go from there. Ohterwise it just looks like you’re shilling for your “industry”, y’know?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmYou won’t win any arguments here, if by winning you mean convincing anyone of your false position. Stay if you like, but try not to be so shrill and uncivil. You are becoming like fingernails on a blackboard.
Comment by G. Gordon Giddy — January 25, 2006 @ 1:51 pm
Gee whiz, Ben,
Do you think it might have something to do with the larger advertising budget for big pharma and HMOs and insurance companies. TV ads ain’t cheap, are they?
Why is your party not interested in non medical caps on lawsuit settlements?
Troll.
Comment by G. Gordon Giddy — January 25, 2006 @ 1:09 pm
That was your first post to me , Mr. Civility.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:54 pmStill waitin’ on those “facts” Ben – or are you suddenly too busy?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pmAgain, the financials do not indicate excessive profits. They indicate that revenues and costs are going through the roof. Why? What is driving the cost increases?
Comment by Ben
Yes. Enron. Thanks, Ben. Good-bye.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pmAnd take all three sets of your “books” with you.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:56 pmPutting my market hat on again:
The US spends 16% of GDP on health: that’s $1.9 trillion USD. That is more than the GDP of every country below France which is #5 in the 2004 GDP league table. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29
And yet this massive outlay gets a 34th result in the life-expectancy chart?
If I was running this business, I’d get sacked. So where’s the market approach to solving this enormous discrepancy?
January 25th, 2006 at 1:57 pmThe NY Times recently ran an article about diabetetes care and provided an illustration of an outrageous situation. (Not to mention 45 million Americans don’t even have health insurance.) They said that insurance coverage provided for the amputation of a foot at something like $10,000 whereas there was no provision for preventive podiatry care of the same foot at $80. This is a simplistic example but it highlights some of the main problems with insurance as it currently exists. Profit-driven coverage that excludes preventive measures is idiotic and counter-productive to a thriving, healthy population. Not to mention that the statistics of people without health insurance continue to rise (admittedly this is a little dated but still): http://covertheuninsuredweek.org/factsheets/display.php?FactSheetID=101
January 25th, 2006 at 1:57 pmHow can Congress even begin to tackle this complex issue when we are beset by all the illegalities of Bushco,
the spectre of Alito being appointed, etc.? Ideas to institute some kind of national health coverage don’t stand a chance in the current climate of greed, cronyism and cover-ups.
Eat shit and die, Ben. Now that’s incivilty.
January 25th, 2006 at 1:58 pmHere’s an article titled “The Doors Of Perception: Why Americans Will Believe Almost Anything”. Written by Dr. Tim O’Shea. It covers several things that have come up on this thread:
1) How we’ve been sold on current drugs and health care system
January 25th, 2006 at 2:01 pm2) How spin is created and spread
3) Reframing issues
4) How money has re-shaped America for the worse
Anyway, my work is done here. We ran off IRI and Ben and Don showed up. The rest of you folks are old hands at this, and pros, and can handle these two fools and spot any other rodents that show up.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:02 pmIf the purpose of a corporation is simply to make a pile of money become a bigger pile of money and a how is that likely to lead to a higher standard of living and/or longer life expectancy? Are these two goals compatible or not?
I’d say they’re compatible to the extent that owner/operators are benefitted financially (standard of living) and those individuals have the means to provide themselves better nutrition, health care, etc (life expectancy). Most corporations exist to provide a service that adds to stakeholder profitability … the “goals” you mentioned may not enter into the corporation framework as primary, but could be included in benefit packages or are included by the individuals who comprise the corporation or benefit from its existance.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:02 pmextreme unction – #40
Excellent points, except that under Reagan and Bush there have been major efforts to privatize education with vouchers and such. And the military is largely privatized, not just in the mess halls and in the trucks either. We don’t know how many paid mercenaries are fighting in Iraq. We find out about them when they’re kidnapped and/or killed. The men who were burned in Fallujah in April 2004 were “contractors”.
I think the reason that Rumsfeld and Cheney wanted such a small army and an undersized force in Iraq was to leave some room for the Hallilburtons of the world to play a role. And they charge a lot more than the US military does.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:04 pmThink about it: an unemployed truck driver gets a job with Halliburton driving a rig in Iraq for $100K per year. He ain’t gonna turn it down. How much would it cost for an Army private to drive that truck?
Im gonna take a moment and thank Mr Daschle for posting this.
Sometimes it gets a bit ugly here, yet thats only because people feel ignored by this Administration, who to this day is playing partisan games and not concentrating on the Salus populi.
We fight for America, yet we see civil liberies curtailed for reasons unknown. It was not Americans whom attacked on 911. Nor were any public involved in the Plans. There is no reason that I can think of to correllate the two.
Id like to ask the Congressmen to ignore the obvious emotes, and to center on the Underlying issues of the Non-Partisan Majority such as he has done here today.
Kudos Mr Daschle
January 25th, 2006 at 2:04 pmBen you didn’t answer the question, so I ‘ll ask it in a simpler way if negotiating prices works to keep drug prices down for the Veterans Administration why doesn’t it work just as well when we have the same drugs purchased for the medicare program, or are the republications SO stupid that they don’t realise the American public will see the discrepensy ?
January 25th, 2006 at 2:05 pmThat’s it!! G. Gordon is Ryan Neat, same avoidance of issues, same reversion to schoolyard epithets.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:05 pmGordon, do you even know what the Enron case was about?
The short was that it maintained cost values on subsidiary corporation that were no longer doing business that should have been written off. Enron was booking income from those subs as receivables but those subs had no ability to pay. The auditing firm is in trouble because they should have caught the fraud behind the subs.
Dano, there are plenty of articles relating to the true costs of litigation as it pertains to healthcare costs in the US. No, I am not taking the time to list them for you. Do a basic search and you will see all you want to read from legitimate sources. You guys go ahead and continue to keep your heads in the sand while the trial lawyers laugh all the way to the bank. It’s just a basic question that you need to ask. What has changed in the last 30 years that has caused the costs of healthcare to rise at the rates? What has changed?
I am off to a meeting but I will return.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:11 pm“Consumer-driven”, “Consumer-directed” — excuse me but why even concede off the bat that it’s ‘consumer’ anything?
Boy, the first step to losing the debate is to repeat the propaganda of the other side. I’m sorry but Sen. Daschle has almost made a career out of doing exactly this.
If there’s anything Dems should win on it’s heathcare yet if we frame the debate using these terms, we’re starting out with an almost insurmountable disadvantage.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:11 pm#113, but not the customers? The customers simply pay money for a service, which may or may not increase their life expectancy/state of health, but they can reasonably expect that’s what the service does. But that’s it exactly, the corporation is under no (zero) obligation to deliver on the goal of better health. Once they have induced the customer to buy and the product does not damage the customer, they are off the hook. If the customer is satisfied with the service for the price they may come back or they may not. Or they may not be able to afford to. Sounds good if you are selling me an iPod, but insuring me against my kidneys packing up? That’s different.
Alternatively, are you saying if I want to live longer I should start my own drug company? Or just buy shares in GSK?
That’s the problem – the corporation operates within the law (mostly) to make money, end of story. I don’t see a compatibility Giaco, you are robbing Peter to pay Paul. The US health care business is not accountable to its customers – period.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:13 pmWhy? What is driving the cost increases?
Funny that these drug companies spend as much on courting lobbyists curryng laws in their Favor, Yet THE COSTS still skyrocket.
Advertising increases costs dramatically.
has anyone ever seen anyone jump up, after watching a Viagra commercial, and call their Doctor. (as if hes gonna Answer the Phone) Naw, likely he will go to the doctor cause something isnt working right, and he will take the docotors advice.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:14 pmEunuch Ben
We think you a typical coward rightwing spawn. Your arguments show your ignorance. So, just crawl back to your basement.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:16 pmI for one am willing to give Don the benefit of the doubt. I don’t see any obvious evidence that he’s trying to be a troll.
what about the 1/3 or so of us who eat ‘way too much of the wrong foods, get no exercise, smoke and drink, and who probably constitute a large part of the ten percent costing seventy percent? Do they get a free pass? Should we subsidize their bad judgment and their self-destructive behavior?
There should certainly be room in the system for penalizing behavior that puts the cost of health care up. If I had my way, I’d put heavy taxes on cigarettes and those who make and sell them, using the money raised to deal with the problems they cause. The Australian system offers us some other good examples; in Australia, there’s no law against car drivers not wearing seatbelts or motorcycle riders not wearing helmets; but if such a person gets into an accident, he is responsible for his own medical costs.
This doesn’t mean, however, that the wingnuts’ every-man-for-himself approach to health case is a good idea. It’s a lousy one. A lot of what causes some people to need more health care than others are things that the people in question do not have any control over and shouldn’t be penalized for. In such cases, it makes sense to pool the risk, which also provides for the best possible bargaining power.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:18 pmBen please read #115 and kindly answer the same question stated so as not to let you misconstrue it as you did in #95,
January 25th, 2006 at 2:19 pmI’d say they’re compatible to the extent that owner/operators are benefitted financially (standard of living) and those individuals have the means to provide themselves better nutrition, health care, etc (life expectancy). Most corporations exist to provide a service that adds to stakeholder profitability … the “goals†you mentioned may not enter into the corporation framework as primary, but could be included in benefit packages or are included by the individuals who comprise the corporation or benefit from its existance.
Comment by Giacomo — January 25, 2006 @ 2:02 pm
This is all good and well, yet the People existed before the Corporation and they will exist after their self induced demise.
For the Corporation is dependent upon man to make buy and sell their goods. Man does not need any corporation and can exist without them. Perhaps the People shall have to ‘bring down’ the corporate Elitists to root out the Corruption and obtuse thinking that it invites.
Man makes money, Money does not make a Man
January 25th, 2006 at 2:20 pmSounds good if you are selling me an iPod, but insuring me against my kidneys packing up? That’s different.
Agreed … I was speaking of corporations in general.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:23 pmIt is the Corporation that Profits from Man, not as the Business people would like to believe that Man profits from them.
As usual Business puts profits before Life.
Yet Business is depenent on mans life to buy his goods.
Could you Mr Ceo go out and do what your employees do if they were to leave? No.
Would those men that Quit cease to Exist? NO
Would the CEO lose his Company. YES
Would these men, whom quit, produce goods without a CEO? Yes.
Would man grow his own veggies? YES
Do I NEED corporate America? NO.
Can you the CORPORATE WHORES do without Man?
January 25th, 2006 at 2:27 pmNO NO NO
Man does not need any corporation and can exist without them. Perhaps the People shall have to ‘bring down’ the corporate Elitists to root out the Corruption and obtuse thinking that it invites.
I guess we don’t need corporations, but I’m not ready to atrribute to them the title “source of all that’s ill with the world”. Much like money, a corporation’s benefit or detriment is in how it is used (or engaged).
January 25th, 2006 at 2:27 pmIt is the Corporation that Profits from Man, not as the Business people would like to believe that Man profits from them.
There are plenty of examples that show it can be symbiotic.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:30 pm#126 – I guess I put health care, energy, water, transportation infrastructure, education into the same bucket – in general ‘the people’ choose to have their government spend money on these things because they are essential for quality of life. I’m not going open the ‘defense’ issue. In general terms Corporations behave like pool balls on a table – if you tilt the table (market) one way (by setting up laws to govern the market) then the ball rolls without intelligence in that direction (making money as it goes).
January 25th, 2006 at 2:31 pmAgreed … I was speaking of corporations in general.
Comment by Giacomo — January 25, 2006 @ 2:23 pm
As Am I. Yet arent we all the Same Giacomo? So what if one wears a suit, or works outdoors?
I intentionally stayed out of the Office Corporate Environment, Sure I been there done that, but I liked working with my hands, not because Im dumb (=) poor, or lack education. Its what I enjoy. Why should some company want to take advantage of that?
January 25th, 2006 at 2:32 pmAnd as was pointed out earlier, then ‘pool balls’ have too much say in which way the ‘table’ is tilted.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:34 pmHey ben why so silent? I mean with all the expertise you showed everyone here my simple question should be so simple that you wouldn’t have to break out all those actuarial tables.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:34 pmIf Work is defined as energy then let us define Work and pay man for the amount of work done or energy spent.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:35 pm#
And as was pointed out earlier, then ‘pool balls’ have too much say in which way the ‘table’ is tilted.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle — January 25, 2006 @ 2:34 pm
LOL, those damn pool balls.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:38 pmBut what would the Table do with no Balls?
That’s it!! G. Gordon is Ryan Neat, same avoidance of issues, same reversion to schoolyard epithets.
Comment by Don — January 25, 2006 @ 2:05 pm
So we know these are resident trolls by any other name. No, I am not Ryan Neat, I am not that well informed on so many issues that I could clean your clocks as regularly as he did. I am just from NYC originally and we all have this little thing called a BS detector. It’s in our DNA.
Gordon, do you even know what the Enron case was about?
You bet yer ass I do. I live in CA and it effected me directly. It was about “creative book-keeping” if you are a Republican shill like yourself. It was about organized crime and Republican government corruption to the rest of us folks, the little people your kind of slime pissed on.
Any other questions, dickweed?
January 25th, 2006 at 2:41 pmI am off to a meeting but I will return.
Comment by Ben
I hope Ben is meeting with the front end of a speeding bus.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:45 pmCongress isn’t responsible for your mother. I suggest you get off the computer and take over the responsibility of getting her coverage straightened out yourself. Or, is that too much trouble?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #15
Instant-Rectal-Instrument,
Then by YOUR “pull yourself up by ‘ur bootstraps” logic
Bushiva and the Congress aren’t responsible for
“Protectin’ th’ ‘merkin people,” like your god Bushiva is so fond of saying…
Is that right?
January 25th, 2006 at 2:46 pmBen’ sargument about litigation and the cost of healthcare is bullshit that has been debunked, I’m sure most of you know.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:47 pmThat’s it!! G. Gordon is Ryan Neat, same avoidance of issues, same reversion to schoolyard epithets.
Comment by Don
Could be. Old Ryan “fckmefrombehind” Neat is somewhere around here, you can bet on that.
January 25th, 2006 at 2:51 pmYou have to look very hard to find the data and the studies and the research because the crook and liars have spread their lies all over the media and the internet. Hurry up and catch that bus, Ben. I’d gladly drive it so I could back up once and run over you again.
This is just one study, there is another link I have someplace that I just can’t find that explains the what others have said, insurance companies investments cycles is where the true cost increase comes from. Don’t ever cross a street in front of me Ben, or you will need that health insurance. I can’t afford to pay my own and get my brakes done.
An excerpt from
January 25th, 2006 at 2:54 pmThe Medical Malpractice Myth
Tom Baker
Ya’ll, please stop servicing the trolls!
January 25th, 2006 at 2:56 pmFor more on the disturbing data and the early signs of failure for consumer-drive health care, see:
January 25th, 2006 at 2:58 pm“Unhealthy Trends for 2006.”
Aye Gordon, ye be correct;
What the medical societies did not tell my father, or almost anyone else, was that their own research showed that the real problem was too much medical malpractice, not too much litigation. In the mid-1970s the California Hospital and Medical Associations sponsored a study on medical malpractice that they expected would support their tort reform efforts. But, to their surprise and dismay, the study showed that medical malpractice injured tens of thousands of people every year—more than automobile and workplace accidents. The study also showed that, despite the rhetoric, most of the victims did not sue.
So the Problem isnt the poor people, but the incompetence of their Trade. Yet to cloak their incompetence the people who are ‘Sue Happy’ but really arent must be blamed for the Woes.
once again the People take the Brunt of the Rhetoric and the Costs and endure false blame for something they did not create.
Just Like Bushco. Blame Everyone but yourself.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:04 pmNeat stat: Malpractice insurance premiums AND lawsuits come to 24 billion dollars per year. But health costs in the US total over 2 trillion. I still don’t understand how ANY manipulation of that 1.2 percent of health costs is going to reduce health costs.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:04 pmI think “FIX YOUR MEDICARE PRESCRIPTION DRUG PROGRAM FIRST!” is an excellent rejoinder to Bush’s consumer-driven health care scam.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:05 pm#145, got any more insight into the other 98.8%?
January 25th, 2006 at 3:08 pmCongress isn’t responsible for your mother. I suggest you get off the computer and take over the responsibility of getting her coverage straightened out yourself. Or, is that too much trouble?
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #15
LOL, once again IRI is masturbating in the dark. Hope you dont slip and hit yourself in the forehead.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:08 pmG Gordon, on another thread I asked Tracy the same question, and she gave me the OLD government rationing long lines spin that they used in 93. No wingnut can answer that question because it shows the repug leadership will sell everyone out for a K- Street. At least Ben had the creativity to tap dance and spin with misdirection and bluster camoflagued by his academic based insurance industry dodges. Entertaining as well as revealing, that they fear the truth of what K street really did to them.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:09 pmThat’s it!! G. Gordon is Ryan Neat, same avoidance of issues, same reversion to schoolyard epithets.
Comment by Don
Could be. Old Ryan “fckmefrombehind†Neat is somewhere around here, you can bet on that.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 25, 2006 @ 2:51 pm
Don makes noises like a touchy-feely, patchouli oil wearing pansey while IRI makes butthumping jokes like Wonkette. I, on the other hand, talk about running Ben over not once, but twice, with a bus, like my namesake G. Gordon Liddy, who held his hand in the fire, ate rats, and fantasized about stabbing John Dean in the neck with a pencil for turning on Nixon. No wonder mostly Democrats are over in Iraq fighting, bleeding and dying. These little shits who troll here are pathetic wimps.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:11 pmBuschco
January 25th, 2006 at 3:15 pmWhere men are chickens
and the chickens are boneless
a truly mind boggling thing
a chicken speaking of War
G Gordon, on another thread I asked Tracy the same question, and she gave me the OLD government rationing long lines spin that they used in 93. No wingnut can answer that question because it shows the repug leadership will sell everyone out for a K- Street. At least Ben had the creativity to tap dance and spin with misdirection and bluster camoflagued by his academic based insurance industry dodges. Entertaining as well as revealing, that they fear the truth of what K street really did to them.
Comment by Clif
Thank you for your expertise, Clif,
I am just here to add color.
The one thing I know about the insurance industry is that my great uncle was one of the founders of the American College of Underwriters. He helped make the insurance business “respectable” in America, or so the argument goes in the couple of books I read that were written about him. It didn’t last long, did it? That respectability thing? He’s turning over in his grave. If only we could harness all that energy. I know there are lots of famous dead Americans spinning at a high RPM.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:18 pmBAwwwkKK BAWWWK
January 25th, 2006 at 3:22 pmgoes the Hawk
Straining its voice to be heard
Speaking many a warring word
Sacrfice your Life they SAY!
its the American Way!
but when its time fight
the chickenhawks take flight!
Oh ye brave Cowards on the dock
Ye shall be turned into that fighting cock
for men of words are only that
and on your face youll fall flat
for the herd is strong with pride
while you have sat and lied
Gordon, why are you so angry? Lighten up.
Okay here’s a link:
Study was just completed in October of 2005. Litigation costs has it relates to rising healthcare has not been debunked. Just the opposite. But remember that’s what they want you to think. By the way even though I worked in the insurance industry I have been in the financial area for a big hospital for the past 5 years. We take all of the city’s indigent care. I know a little bit about the numbers. It would really be good if the average citizen knew something a little more than anger because the price is high. There are many factors but malpractice insurance and litigation drive every aspect of healthcare and it is much more significant than you can imagine.
Gordon, you just don’t quite understand that Enron thing but that’s okay as I expect that from you. Organized crime, whatever. Explain how the auditing firm allowed the valuation of assets to be carried on the books when those assets were worth a fraction of their stated value. It’s called bribery and people are going to jail. Enron is more about an overly aggressive acquisition story that went very badly. Then the truth about that was hidden through fraud. Then the fraud became a house of cards when debt could not be serviced by non performing assets.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:26 pmOkay I see that did not work quite right.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:28 pm
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=18270
January 25th, 2006 at 3:31 pmGordon, why are you so angry? Lighten up.
Uh, because I hate everything you are and stand for and would use any means necessary to eliminate lying dishonest, criminal filth like you from the world?
Here a link for you.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:34 pmHey ben your back how bout an answer to #115, I mean you know sooo much please enlighten me
January 25th, 2006 at 3:37 pmClif I assume you meant #116. In my building we have the VA clinic for the area. I see the veterans everyday. If you have a link discussing that issue specifically I will be happy to look into why there is a difference. I don’t understand why you think that if there is a differnce it is due to Republicans. If you have a link on why it’s their fault I would be interested in reading it.
Gordon….that’s okay that you are a jackass and that is incapable of having a civil discussion or debate. Think about it. Lighten up because it will be okay. Maybe not the way you want it but it will be alright.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:46 pm“Dano, there are plenty of articles relating to the true costs of litigation as it pertains to healthcare costs in the US. No, I am not taking the time to list them for you.”
That’s what I thought!
Dumbass, huh? See you next time, shill.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:47 pmGee, Ben you seem to be able to find lnks to other “facts” why did you take a pass on my challenge?
January 25th, 2006 at 3:49 pmLinks to the American Enterprise Institute, or the Heritage foundation will be considered as coming from paid shills, so just warnin’ ‘ya.
January 25th, 2006 at 3:51 pmdano ..I posted a link…I think it addresses those issues I have stated. Litigation, costly defensive medicine, etc.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:01 pmIt’s funny to see postings from heartland.org as ‘fact’. The heartland.org organization is largely a mouthpiece of the tobacco lobby – and hence why they have such an idealogue bent against ‘litigation’. Any chance they can lie, misrepresent or exagerate the costs of ‘litigation’, they do – in an attempt to get legislation produced to protect them from their own fraud and legal liability for lying to american consumers for decades.
Ben, I feel sorry for you that you have so much hate for victims of corporate fraud and malfeasance. I feel even more sorry for you that you’ve been so easily duped by such an unreputable and hateful site. I know you want to do the ‘right thing’, but you should improve the sources of your information. If it didn’t come from .gov, edu or another reputable watchdog – and especially if the site says it holds ‘conservative’ values, you can pretty much be assured it’s biased and contains high quantities of lies.
If you’re actually interesting in learning facts about this – I’d be happy to provide you with more reputable resources. Interested?
January 25th, 2006 at 4:02 pmBen,
Maybe these ‘facts’ will help you understand how far away from reality your ‘opinions’ are.
Actual scholarly sources for this information:
Valerie Hans and William Lofquist, Jurors’ Judgments of Business Liability in Tort Cases: Implications for the Litigation Explosion Debate, 26 Law and Society Review 85, 94-95 (1992).
Press Release, Citizens for Corporate Accountability & Individual Rights, New Government Study Disputed Myths About “Out of Control Civil Juries, (June 13, 2002) (on file with author).
W. Kip Vicusi, Towards a Diminished Role for Tort Liability: Social Insurance, Government Regulation, and Contemporary Risks to Health and Society, 6 Yale J. On Reg., 65, 95-97 (1989).
January 25th, 2006 at 4:05 pmHere’s another fun quote, related to the wall street journal’s coverage of this issue.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:07 pm
Ben, since Billy Tauzan wrote the medicade prescription drug bill, and since the bill does not allow medicare to negociate for bulk purchases of drugs, like the VA was authorised by congress to do, I wanted to know why Tom delay ,and dennis Haskert, who worked actively for the passage for the bill ,even to go so far as to keep the vote open until they had enough votes in the republican majority controlled house of representatives, the bill is a republican backed bill, so the republicans who are supposted to by the controll spending, look out for the tax payer party, why did they pass a bill that prevents the government from saving tax payers monet and controlling spending? asking for a link IS ANOTHER DODGE you are good at dodging the question but each time the creeping suspection comes upon me that this looks like a ppay for play favor to the pharma companies where the bills author went to work fro one on the drug companies, that the bill he wrote benifits, feigned ignorance only shows that you do not want to deal with the question, but by not refuting anything I have posted you leave those facts to tajk for themselves and that doesn’t make the republican leadership look very tax payer friendly, seems like they did to the american taxpayer what abrarmoff did to the indians Take money but not provide the service that they were paid for, and the tax payers DO pay all the congressmen, so they work for all the taxpayers not on small isolated group
January 25th, 2006 at 4:08 pmTom’s “four pillars” are just more smoke and mirrors by yet another politician who wants to look good. They’re vague and undefined principles many folks agree on, but once we start to define those terms, that’s where all hell breaks loose. I for one cannot trust an aristocrat like Tom the so-called “liberal” ilk any more than I can trust Shrub and his Imperial winged monkeys to define and specify those four pillars in a way that working people and unemployed people can have meaningful access to functional health care under universal coverage. Both dominant species want only to maintain the status quo, the only difference being that Tom wants a clear conscience and Shrub doesn’t possess one at all while they maintain things just the way they are because their health care access and coverage is purchased by the rest of us. What a dumb piece this “article” is. More smoke and mirrors to make the peasants less likely to go burn down their mansions.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:12 pmConsumer-driven? That in itself is part of the problem- nomenclature. Profit-driven? Sure. Corporate-driven? Almost synonomous, but still appropriate. How commodification of something so necessary can be called “consumer-driven,” is mind boggling.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:21 pmBen, you are a paid whore. And a cheap one at that. You are beneath contempt. Keep the kneepads on a scuttle away. You are making an ass out of yourself and that always gets IRI excited.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:21 pmClif I get asked for links. Dano just did his blasting before realizing that I had come back and posted one. As far as using Heartland or any other website you can’t dismiss information just because of its political leanings. The truth is the truth. So if a side that leans in the direction of the truth makes a statement of facts that are true that doesn’t make it untrue because of those leanings. If that was the case then every remark made here against Republicans could be considered a lie since this site has leanings against conservatives.
If the VA was able to negotiate bulk drug purchases and medicare is not then would have to assume that someone has asked the question and someone has had to provide an answer. I thought since by your question you already knew the answer that you might could tell me what you were basing your answer on. I would like to read it. I fail to see how that is dodging.
RightPunch, here’s a little math for you. Percentages do not absolutely equate to comparable dollars. The dollars can still go up dranmatically over previous years regardless of percentages of outcomes. You could have a 1000% increase in overall litigation.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:23 pmBen,
Go mine some cheese from between your toes.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:25 pmComment by just jack
Who was Don before and Buckshot before that. Got cheese?
January 25th, 2006 at 4:26 pmBen Oh and BTW the link in #156 in a reposted story which I followed to an RW organization that is trying to stop lawsuits against the Tobbacco, Asbestos and insurance called Trial Lawyers Inc. so why do you back up your arguments with a website that does not present the facts but their spin, how about a independent academic study that wasn’t paid for but the industries being sued, PS I would think by throwing Insurance in with two industries that have been accepted to be directially life threatening would cause you to think that the site was trying to sully the reputation of the insurance industry.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pmConsumer-driven? That in itself is part of the problem- nomenclature. Profit-driven? Sure. Corporate-driven? Almost synonomous, but still appropriate. How commodification of something so necessary can be called “consumer-driven,†is mind boggling.
Comment by David
Amen. Tom could use some help with framing.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:27 pm#170 ditto he probably actually works for Trial Lawyers Inc. He seems to know all about them, but can’t seem to see that the government in one department paying one price for a product at the same time in another department paying a higher price for the same product has a fishy smell, Especially when the republican congressman who wrote the bill allowing the Drug companies charge a higher price for the same product got a job in the very same industry, at least the K street project wasn’t in full operation when the VA negotiated their price, I guess to ben ripping off seniors is OK cause they have all that money saved up might as well let the drug companies get as much as they can cause some ends up in Trial Lawyers to defend the fen phen and vioxx fiascoes, and to lobby congress and the FDA to make it harder to sue the druggies when the screw up like they did.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:39 pmYou know what they say about things that are “free” #6.
Majority would pay for faster health care, poll finds
By JANE TABER
SENIOR POLITICAL WRITER
Friday, July 8, 2005, Page A14
OTTAWA — A majority of Canadians are willing to pay out of their own pockets for medical procedures to avoid long waiting lines, according to a new public opinion poll.
The poll suggests, too, that federal politicians are far behind the public in the health-care debate, fearing even to discuss the possibility of private health insurance or a two-tier system.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/Page/document/v4/sub/MarketingPage?user_URL=http://www.theglobeandmail.com%2Fservlet%2FArticleNews%2FTPStory%2FLAC%2F20050708%2FHEALTH08%2FTPHealth%2F&ord=1138225295751&brand=theglobeandmail&force_login=true
January 25th, 2006 at 4:42 pmWhy is your party not interested in non medical caps on lawsuit settlements?
Hmmm… I knew someone was going to go all “it’s Clinton’s fault.” Why is your party corrupt? Why does your party push legislation that only benefits Big Pharma, rather than Americans? If you are so interested in the rise in healthcare costs, why not ask why the profits margins on managed care corporation have gone, and how about those pharmaceutical company profits? Oh, that’s right, it’s all the fault of trial attorneys and you have a talking point to shill. Thanks for playing.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:45 pm#177, surprised to see you using a data point Adolf. But sorry to say it’s not relevant to what Sen Daschle is talking about.
January 25th, 2006 at 4:59 pmI-RIGHT-I,
That’s for ‘elective’ surgery, and the same is true for many americans. Those silicone ‘enhancements’ are exactly the kind of elective surgery that canadians pay for. Interestingly enough in canada there’s no waiting for emergency care, unlike the united states where millions can’t even get access to that except at the rare free clinics which disappear daily.
Ben said,
RightPunch, here’s a little math for you. Percentages do not absolutely equate to comparable dollars. The dollars can still go up dranmatically over previous years regardless of percentages of outcomes. You could have a 1000% increase in overall litigation. Ben
Are you a politician, because what you said made no sense based on what I posted. The awards are decreasing, or didn’t you catch that part. Even the wall street journal said that the claims by rightwing organizations on an anti-litigation bent just don’t add up. In 2002 malpractice insurance only cost the industry 6 billion dollars, and as we all know insurance costs always cover the outlays, because insurance companies are in business to make money. So when you compare 6 billion in malpractice insurance with 150 billion in fraud – it’s clear the entire argument is a red herring brought about by health care companies and doctors who don’t want to pay the price of injuring and killing patience through malpractice.
Sorry Ben, your numbers are just more hate speech against victims of bad doctors – there’s no scientific or factual basis for these wild claims. Heck the poor fellows over at heartland counted ‘budget set aside’ to deal with litigation as actual costs – it’s just silly and a big fat lie.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:00 pmAnd Ben, there are states that limit malpractice torts, and guess what the head of the CBO found when they analyzed this.
So in otherwords, you’ve been duped. I’m sorry your hatred of liberals makes you unable to see the truth – and I forgive you for allowing that hatred to blind you. Maybe someday you’ll return to the place of being an american first, and a republican second – but until that day we’ll happy to continue to educate you out of love, kindness and hope. Until then, it’s sufficient to say that you’ve been proven wrong.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:04 pmBen I have no answer as to why the party of small government would give a large chunk of tax payers money to anyone with out trying to reign in uncontrolled spending, the “market” is supposed to set prices and negotiations are one excellent way for the government to keep costs down therefore not spending anymore tax payers money than is absolutely necessary to purchase the desired product, the fact that the government through the VA sets a price, to then in another government program to accept a higher price for the same product is to deny market forces. Thus the republicans turn their back on limited spending and allowing market forces to work, sorta smells like a big government corporate welfare for the corporation that sells drugs. And I thought they were against that too,
January 25th, 2006 at 5:05 pm16% is spent on health insurance? I wish!!!! We are paying 26% of every pay check. My husband is 63 and I am 61. How eager do you think we are to hear Bush tell us about personal health accounts? My husband was laid off 3 times after Sept 11. He’s finally pretty secure at his present job, but making half the pay. We are suplementing our income with our savings. At 61 and 63 do you have any idea how much we blame George Bush? My husband is at the point that it is far too risky to try for a better job. The health insurance at this job is just too valuable. Yes I do work also.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:08 pmMore interesting news out of Kanaduh….up until just a few months ago if you got stuck in one of those lines and literally didn’t have time to wait…too damn bad.
…”we have socialized medicine in Canada, which means medical care is paid for through our taxes. We show our health card, and billing happens behind the scenes. It does not cover prescription drugs, eye care, and other items, just basic doctor’s visits, as well as operations and other treatments. But here’s the twist. If you had money and you wanted to pay for your own treatment, you’d be breaking the law and you could be charged. The public health system is not just universal, it’s mandatory. The government does not tolerate people getting well outside of the control of the bureaucracy, and actively works to prevent it.”
http://angrygwn.mu.nu/archives/086514.php
Not any more. Citizens had to take the Nanny to the Supreme Court to get the right to save themselves. It is absolutely amazing what people will do to you if they have the power. Socialists are meddlers first and foremost. They know what’s best for you and what’s best must not be better for you than for anyone else.
In a 4-3 decision, the panel of seven justices said banning private insurance for a list of services ranging from MRI tests to cataract surgery was unconstitutional under the Quebec Charter of Rights, given that the public system has failed to guarantee patients access to those services in a timely way.
As a result of delays in receiving tests and surgeries, patients have suffered and even died in some cases, justices Beverley McLachlin, Jack Major, Michel Bastarache and Marie Deschamps found for the majority.
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/06/09/newscoc-health050609.html
Is it any wonder the conservatives are gaining power in Kanookistan? Hell, they might even be an ally of the USA one of these days. Go Canada!
January 25th, 2006 at 5:09 pmStill not relevant to the discussion, Adolf.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:16 pmI-RIGHT-I,
Once again you talk about ‘elective’ surgery and ‘elective’ procedures and pretend they are ‘life threatening’ with your statement. You also fail to mention that Canada spends less than half per capita of what americans do, and yet manage to provide health care to everyone in their country. You also forget that most americans don’t have prescription medicine covered under their insurance either, and the prescription drugs are sold in canada for a fraction of the price you can buy them here.
I know that fear of the commies make many on the rightwing forget that for profit companies mean they take ‘profit’ and thereby increase the cost of healthcare – but that’s the reality of the situation. Corporate healthcare is more expensive. Canada is able to do more than the united states, on less money.
Republicans are so easily fooled by propaganda – poor things. It must be all of the fear and hate that shuts down their thinking cap. I forgive you for being so easily fooled I-RIGHT-I – it’s common among people who don’t like to think through things for themselves and irrationally fear and hate.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:18 pmIRI and the right do that. Manufacture myths and fables to lead countries into war, lead people away from their own economic best interests and do it for no other reason than a failed ideology because they are fearful of ideas.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:25 pmAnd it’s really funny to talk to rightwingers and get them talking about MRIs not being available – when you consider that most insurance companies won’t pay for them either except in the most extreme of circumstances and only with pre-approval. Those canadians could have most readily paid for the MRI out of their own pockets without insurance, just like they do in the US when insurance won’t pay for something. The difference is that in canada you simply have to wait for an ‘elective’ service – whereas in the US, you have to pay for it yourself.
I-RIGHT-I, you did a nice job of showing yet again where Canada is superior to the US – but I know that wasn’t your intention. I guess you went to the Mike Brown school of persuasion :)
January 25th, 2006 at 5:25 pm16% is spent on health insurance? I wish!!!! We are paying 26% of every pay check. My husband is 63 and I am 61. How eager do you think we are to hear Bush tell us about personal health accounts? My husband was laid off 3 times after Sept 11. He’s finally pretty secure at his present job, but making half the pay. We are suplementing our income with our savings. At 61 and 63 do you have any idea how much we blame George Bush? My husband is at the point that it is far too risky to try for a better job. The health insurance at this job is just too valuable. Yes I do work also.
Comment by Mad as Hell
Who are you mad at? George? You’re in a tough spot but there are many worse off and there is the future to consider. The medical savings plan to me sounds like a pretty good idea. Too bad the Donks didn’t come up with it 40 years ago when they began to rule the US political roost. Good luck though. I’m sure you two have pulled yourselves out of bigger messes than this.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:25 pmGood job, RightPunch.
Box their clocks.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:26 pmAnd I-RIGHT-I, weren’t you criticizing all canadians last week? Do your loyalties and generalities switch so readily? You must be a heck of a ‘friend’ to those around you. Poor thing, your hatred, fear and detachment from the world are really sadening. I forgive you for being so weak and unsettled.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:26 pmI-RIGHT-I, you did a nice job of showing yet again where Canada is superior to the US – but I know that wasn’t your intention. I guess you went to the Mike Brown school of persuasion :)
Comment by RightPunch
Yep, throw’n your ass in jail for trying to save your own life or the life of the husband or wife you love sounds like a much superior country to me.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:28 pmWho are you mad at? George? You’re in a tough spot but there are many worse off and there is the future to consider. The medical savings plan to me sounds like a pretty good idea. Too bad the Donks didn’t come up with it 40 years ago when they began to rule the US political roost. Good luck though. I’m sure you two have pulled yourselves out of bigger messes than this.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
You are about as useful as a plumber’s helper in an outhouse and make even less sense.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:28 pmI-RIGHT-I, I can understand how you would be so easily fooled by the medical savings plan, since it’s named so deceptively. I mean, who doesn’t like to save, or have a savings account. But it should be called the insurance scam plan, since the only thing it saves anyone from is affordable healthcare for everyone.
Don’t worry, we’ll help protect you from yourself and your own fear – even if you can’t find the courage yourself. It’s ok, we’ll be strong for you.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:31 pmI wonder why when IRI showed up ben disappeared?
January 25th, 2006 at 5:33 pmYep, throw’n your ass in jail for trying to save your own life or the life of the husband or wife you love sounds like a much superior country to me. I-RIGHT-I
You really should read the articles you post more carefully. It isn’t illegal to get the elective procedures and pay for them out of pocket, it’s illegal to have the scam health insurance that we have in this country. Anyone who believes that an ‘elective’ procedure is required to save someone – and overruling the expertise of a trained doctor is more than welcome to waste their money proving this to themselves. It’s called the hypochondriac plan – where if you happen to be one, you can waste your money an MRI to prove that you still have that nickel in your stomach.
Now I can understand how such a fear based person as yourself might see an ‘elective’ procedure as life threatening – but that’s just your fear talking, and not the argument of a sane or rational man.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:34 pmI hate these people. I don’t apologize for it. I’m proud of it. And if and when civil war breaks out, (or just heats up because in my book, politics is civil war, in a low intensity phase of the conflict, usually with less than lethal weapons and relatively minor bloodshed) I hope I have the honor of firing the first shot. My apologies to Clausewitz who said that war was diplomacy carried on by other means.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:34 pm-RIGHT-I,
Once again you talk about ‘elective’ surgery and ‘elective’ procedures and pretend they are ‘life threatening’ with your statement. You also fail to mention that Canada spends less than half per capita of what americans do, and yet manage to provide health care to everyone in their country.
Comment by RightPunch
The article did not mention the word “elective”. The article mentioned that people died and or suffered and that was a fact the court took into consideration in striking down the law against out of system care. You can read can’t you?
I don’t call that superior health care even if it’s free and of course it is not free. I can give you a “free” meal but if everybody else wants a “free” meal you’re gong to have to settle for something less than you might have expected and you might have to wait. Try waiting for a celery stick when you are starving.
Socialized medicine has costs attached to it that free men should never consider paying. If you like it fine, move to Kanaduh but it looks to me like the country is on the verge of a conservative revolution similar to the USA’s.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:36 pmG,
It’s important to understand that for the most part republicans and even right wingers are good and decent people. They’re just weak, and easily fooled. They need our patience, understanding and strength to help prevent them from making the mistakes they so naturally commit. They really do want to do the ‘right thing’, but their fear, hatred and ignorance prevent them from doing so. That’s why it’s important to have an open heart, and a strong hand with them. Think of them as your children having a tantrum – that’s the easiest way of handling them. It’s the I love you, but you’re misbehaving school of managing them.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:38 pmDamn! I just realized something. They fired the first shots, like as far back as when they killed Alan Berg, bombed abortion clinics and gay bars and murdered doctors who performed abortions. And blew up a federal building along the way. Oh well, I guess I will just get to fire the first shot from our side. Lord knows we haven’t returned fire yet.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:38 pmG,
It’s important to understand that for the most part republicans and even right wingers are good and decent people. They’re just weak, and easily fooled
RP,
I used to feel that way. I was pissed as hell about Ruby Ridge and even Waco. No more. Lot’s of them are fvcking whackos and deserve what they got coming to them. In spades.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:41 pm“The article did not mention the word “electiveâ€. The article mentioned that people died and or suffered and that was a fact the court took into consideration in striking down the law against out of system care. You can read can’t you? I-RIGHT-”
Of course it didn’t – because canadians already know this, and american rightwing people don’t want to know. One court struck down the restriction on ‘insurance’, not on treatment. But reread your own postings and you’ll see MRI tests to cataract surgery is the list of services – and these are elective procedures, not life threatening. Canada provides immediate care for ALL life threatening services – so your posting is entirely deceptive and misleading.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:41 pmwonder why when IRI showed up ben disappeared?
Comment by Clif
Too many cooks in the kitchen? How many right thinking men does it take to keep you losers whining and seething anyway? HA!
January 25th, 2006 at 5:43 pm“I used to feel that way. I was pissed as hell about Ruby Ridge and even Waco. No more. Lot’s of them are fvcking whackos and deserve what they got coming to them. In spades. G. Gordon Giddy”
Many are whackos, but the vast majority have good intentions but are just easily led astray. Many don’t have strong enough wills, good enough moral convictions or forgiving enough hearts to realize that they’re supporting extremism. That’s why it’s important to remain strong, but to realize that they are in fact just weak and misled – just like most cult followers.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:44 pmConservative revolution, they didn’t even get 50% of the vote, like bushes mandate 51%, and it looks like he ain’t gonna get that one again.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:44 pmCanada provides immediate care for ALL life threatening services – so your posting is entirely deceptive and misleading.
Comment by RightPunch
Sorry if I don’t take your word for it.
As a result of delays in receiving tests and surgeries, patients have suffered and even died in some cases, justices Beverley McLachlin, Jack Major, Michel Bastarache and Marie Deschamps found for the majority.
http://www.cbc.ca/ story/ canada/ national/ 2005/ 06/ 09/ newscoc-health050609.html
January 25th, 2006 at 5:45 pmToo many cooks in the kitchen? How many right thinking men does it take to keep you losers whining and seething anyway? HA!
Comment by I-RIGHT-I
Like I said, you’d wet your pants and soil yourself if you ever had to hold a loaded weapon on another human being, much less have one leveled at you. Been there, done both. You are a pathetic little wimp.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:45 pm“Too many cooks in the kitchen? How many right thinking men does it take to keep you losers whining and seething anyway? HA! I-RIGHT-I”
When a right wing thinking man arrives, I’ll be sure to answer that question. In the meantime we’re stuck with people who post sad hate filled speeches, and rightwing talking points that don’t show any thinking from anyone involved. Sigh.
Oh well, we work with the army of rightwing propagandists we’re given, not the army of actual thinkers we’d prefer to debate.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:46 pmMany are whackos, but the vast majority have good intentions but are just easily led astray. Many don’t have strong enough wills, good enough moral convictions or forgiving enough hearts to realize that they’re supporting extremism. .
Comment by RightPunch
Translation: We know what’s best for everyone, trust us.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:46 pmNo IRI you’ve only got one set of knee pads and one towel
January 25th, 2006 at 5:47 pm“The medical savings plan to me sounds like a pretty good idea.”
IRI
Spoken like someone who thinks they will never have to rely on it.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:48 pmGot a crystal ball in your back pocket?
“As a result of delays in receiving tests and surgeries, patients have suffered and even died in some cases, justices Beverley McLachlin, Jack Major, Michel Bastarache and Marie Deschamps found for the majority. I-RIGHT-”
And so have numerous americans, many of whom died without treatment or insurance, and many other’s families sued for malpractice. The difference is that Canada actually has rules about immediate care – here, you’re stuck with whatever stupid emergency room might be open, and assuming you have the right insurance.
Once again this proves nothing other than even with the best system, people will fall through the cracks – the difference is that canada doesn’t let 50 million fall through those cracks.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:48 pmLike I said, you’d wet your pants and soil yourself if you ever had to hold a loaded weapon on another human being, much less have one leveled at you. Been there, done both. You are a pathetic little wimp.
Comment by G. Gordon Giddy
I’ve been shot at. It is a little disconcerting. I’ve never shot anyone or pointed a gun at anyone. I guess in your book that makes you a better man. I’d be willing to give it a try though under the right circumstances. That’s why I carry.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:53 pmHere’s the problem: I own a small business and we try to provide health insurance for our employees. Our costs have gone up about 25% per year every year. Our gross income in no way has kept pace. Soon, we will be unable to offer health care insurance. Every year for the last 5 years, fewer people have been covered by employer offered plans. That means a whole bunch more people unable to pay, about 45 million now. The number 1 cause of bankruptcy? Health care bills. My son’s laparoscopic appendectomy with one night in the hospital was $13,000. If we hadn’t had insurance, I’d be filing bankruptcy.
Because people can’t pay, the hospitals and Drs charge those who can, more. Therefore, those with insurance or those with enough money to pay their own bills subsidize those who can’t. Medicaid pays so little, we’re subsidizing that too. Why would it be so bad to have everyone subsidize everyone, instead of just those of us who are still fortunate to have insurance?
It’s easy to say that the Canadian or some other system is bad if you’re not the guy trying to renew the health ins and writing the checks every month to the ins co. Let me tell you, this system is going to collapse real soon because the only people with health insurance will be govt employees. Oh yeah, isn’t that paid for with tax dollars?
January 25th, 2006 at 5:54 pm“Translation: We know what’s best for everyone, trust us. I-RIGHT-I “
Translation, I ‘believe’ know what’s best for everyone, so I’ll ignore all facts, details and conversations that disprove this ‘belief’, just as my preacher taught me to.
I’m not asking anyone to ‘trust’ anything, I certainly don’t trust you. And I wouldn’t expect you to trust me. But as a rational and reasonable adult, I know I can trust a corporation that has no elections and no public accountability in its leadership or practices less than I can trust my government. And when we have a government owned by corporate interests as we do know, I know the real problem is that corporate influence and not the government.
Too bad your fear, hatred and preconceptions don’t permit you to see the world as it truly is. I pity you – you poor tragic creature. Everything is a tragedy of your own making, and you’re too wrapped up in your own fear and hatred to know it. You have my compassion and forgiveness for being so weak of mind, and spirit.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:54 pm“I’ve been shot at. It is a little disconcerting. I’ve never shot anyone or pointed a gun at anyone. I guess in your book that makes you a better man. I’d be willing to give it a try though under the right circumstances. That’s why I carry. I-RIGHT-I”
Gee, I wonder why you of all people have been shot at – I find that hard to believe – does anyone else? ;)
You should empty the diaper when it gets full, that will prevent you from having to ‘carry’ so much. It’s a good practice to put hygiene first. Especially as you get older.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:56 pmMany are whackos, but the vast majority have good intentions but are just easily led astray. Many don’t have strong enough wills, good enough moral convictions or forgiving enough hearts to realize that they’re supporting extremism. That’s why it’s important to remain strong, but to realize that they are in fact just weak and misled – just like most cult followers.
Comment by RightPunch
I don’t disagree with you. I just have enough anger for both of us. It’s just that 20-30% of the dead-enders, to borrow Rummy’s term, that I would torch in their compounds in a NY minute, unless they surrendered. That’s what the Federal government does, like it or not. It will do it no matter which party is in office. The only difference is who they will end up doing it to. You can see who this administration has placed on the list of high priority “domestiic terrorist” organizations. Not a dangerous right wing group on the list.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:57 pm“The medical savings plan to me sounds like a pretty good idea.â€
IRI
Spoken like someone who thinks they will never have to rely on it.
Got a crystal ball in your back pocket?
Comment by dano347
Why would you say that? Tax free savings earning a return that is used to purchase what we all will need from time to time. I really don’t know much about it but it seems like a reasonable way to pay as you go. I’m used to paying cash for the things I need. Pay as you go. If you can’t pay, don’t go and save your money until you can.
January 25th, 2006 at 5:57 pmALF and ELF
Anyone who takes these GOP losers seriously, about 25% of the moorons in this country, is just taking up space and air.
The rest of the world laughs at us. IRI knows a conservative government in Canada is just a bit to the right of this website’s political turf.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:02 pmI know the banking and investment industry is just drooling over the prospect of having all that personal health savings account money to play with. That’s whose health this is all about. Moneychangers and lenders.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:04 pmI really don’t know much about it but
A for honesty there.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:05 pmI repost #45:
Having lived in Germany for two years, I know that the health care system there is better and less expensive than the one we have here in the USA. The suppliers are not allowed to charge $8,000 for an artificial joint that cost but $35 to make. There are no insurance or HMO middleman. The doctors do not shift costs to the uninsured. I just had some tests that would have cost an uninsured individual $105 but the insurance company forked up $2.52 and my co-pay was 63 cents. Some poor schmuck earning $8 per hour would have had to pay the full amount.
Comment by WaltTheMan — January 25, 2006 @ 12:52 pm
Where is the grey matter in some of the people(conservatives) posting on this thread? Is a lobotomy a prerequisite for enrollment in the GOP?
January 25th, 2006 at 6:08 pmTerror From the Right
Almost 60 terrorist plots uncovered in the U.S.
This administration goes after ALF and ELF. Who I don’t think have ever harmed one human.
Yeah, whackos.
one of the guys implicated in OKC is getting released from prison soon. Not Terry Nichols, his friend. Prolly get a Presidential Medal of Freedom too.
It was a Clinton Era Federal building, after all. I sure feel safer, don’t you?
January 25th, 2006 at 6:12 pmGee, I wonder why you of all people have been shot at – I find that hard to believe – does anyone else? ;)
Comment by RightPunch
In some counties failure to yield the right of way (stop)to an emergency vehicle (deputy Dawg’s 428 police interceptor)will get you shot. (at) At the tender age of 19 I was under the mistaken idea that my 425 hp 160 mph hot rod Chevy could out run a 428 Mercury highway patrol car. I was wrong about that but not convinced. But, not being able to out run the .357 slug made a believer out of me. My lawyer and the slug they took out of the trunk of the car got me off. The cop who shot me ended up in State prison for stopping and sexually molesting female citizens some ten years later. There is a God.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:13 pm#224, IRI -
January 25th, 2006 at 6:20 pmToo bad he missed between the I’s. That would have increased the IQ in whatever country you live in by two or three percentage points.
I-RIGHT-I,
It’s amazing how much people can go through without gaining as much as a speck of insight.
The incident you relate should have taught you there bigger asses & bullies out there than you. Too bad you are too thik-skulled to have connected the dots and made the right conclusions.
Oh, and 19 is no ‘tender age’. You were an adult.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:23 pm#224, IRI -
January 25th, 2006 at 6:36 pmSchiesa, I missed the key point in your message – you’re a pimp. So the cop reaped some of your profits.
“In some counties failure to yield the right of way (stop)to an emergency vehicle (deputy Dawg’s 428 police interceptor)will get you shot. (at) At the tender age of 19 I was under the mistaken idea that my 425 hp 160 mph hot rod Chevy could out run a 428 Mercury highway patrol car. I was wrong about that but not convinced. But, not being able to out run the .357 slug made a believer out of me. I-RIGHT-I”
So I see your belief that you’re above the law, and self righteous enough to believe that acting in a criminal manner shouldn’t have any consequences have been a lifelong pursuit. Like I said, I wonder why anyone would ever shoot at you – what a shocking outcome ;)
And I don’t suppose republican criminals feel like their getting caught, shot at, or otherwise ‘pinched’ might be a consequence of their own reckless and irresponsible disregard for the law? Kind of like all of the 150 billion in fraud that Frist and similar doctors perpetrate on the healthcare industry every year? Or kind of like the disregard for the constitution that the ‘prez’ has shown? Clearly rightwing folks admire bush because he gets away with his reckless disregard for the law, in the same way they wish they could?
It’s official, republicans are those in our society that are the most easily corrupted by greed, fear and criminal tendencies. Poor thing, they need us to be strong, because they can’t help themselves. Criminality is just something that seems to come naturally to them.
January 25th, 2006 at 6:57 pmInteresting that the trolls are celebrating Canada’s election here and on other threads. Students of Canada already know that political corruption and the exhaustion of a Liberal party in power for 11 years were the main reaosns behind the narrow minority win for the Conservatives. Of course what passes for the right wing in Canada, like most other nations, can be found in the conservative side of the US Democratic party.
I would hardly class a narrow swing to the right in Canada as the rollback of social democracy everywhere. At the same time as Canada went to the polls, Chile and Bolivia swung left, dooming the Monroe Doctrine to the Latin American Israel, Colombia and to maybe Uraguay.
January 25th, 2006 at 7:07 pmMr. Senator,
January 25th, 2006 at 7:26 pmI have never had insurance, except while in college. Now middle aged, I would love to have insurance. Instead, I have decided that should anything of consequense happen to my health, it would simply be less stressful to die. Preventing myself from declaring bankrupcy and loosing my main possession-my home.
Do you really think that our system will work IF the government gets out of the health care industry? If we could somehow cap the special interests on this matter, we as a people might be able to salvage a workable plan. As things stand now, the deck is stacked. A people are suffering greatly.
Mr. Senator,
I have never had insurance, except while in college. Now middle aged, I would love to have insurance. Instead, I have decided that should anything of consequense happen to my health, it would simply be less stressful to die. Preventing myself from declaring bankrupcy and loosing my main possession-my home.
Comment by concerned
I wish more liberals felt the way you but that aside, this has got to be the most idiotic thing I’ve ever read on this site.
January 26th, 2006 at 9:12 amI would hardly class a narrow swing to the right in Canada as the rollback of social democracy everywhere. At the same time as Canada went to the polls, Chile and Bolivia swung left, dooming the Monroe Doctrine to the Latin American Israel, Colombia and to maybe Uraguay.
Comment by TerrytheTurtle #229
Terry,
When one becomes increasingly ISOLATED, he/she will take any modicum of perceived affirmation (canada’s election results) as a complete vindication…
You’ll probably need to provide an educational pictorial in order for these inbreds to fully comprehend the hemispheric political dynamics being tilted waaaay away from Yanqui “conservative” ‘good ‘ol boy’ Al Crackerism…
January 26th, 2006 at 9:18 amI-RIGHT-I,
It’s amazing how much people can go through without gaining as much as a speck of insight.
Comment by Gregor Samsa
I’d hardly say that’s the case. I did eventually turn from a life of stupidity and self centered idiotarianism to become a Christian and a social conservative. If anyone can be said to be dim and lacking insight it would be the majority of supporters of this site’s policies and philosophy. That would include you too you know.
The incident you relate should have taught you there bigger asses & bullies out there than you. Too bad you are too thik-skulled to have connected the dots and made the right conclusions.
At the time was pretty surprised that there are officers of the law out there that consider a little high speed cat and mouse to grounds for summary execution. Of course now I know there are people like that and I’m one of them.
Oh, and 19 is no ‘tender age’. You were an adult.
I don’t think so. That’s not to say I shouldn’t have been.
January 26th, 2006 at 9:21 amMy business is selling group medical plans to small employers. Quite frankly, Mr. Daschle really has no idea how “consumer directed health care” works. It’s about controling one’s lifestyle. If you are paying the bills you most likely will change your way of life; ie. stop smoking, cut down on drinking, eat better and exercise. These steps have been proven time and again to promote good health which directly lowers the use of medications and health care.
With respect Medicare Part D, while I am not a fan of this program, it is now here and we will have to live with it. Actually it is not that hard to understand and many seniors are receiving help from family and friends while selecting a plan that best suites their needs. In fact, many of the plans offered eliminate the Part B deductible and cost sharing, as well as the hospital deductible at very affordable pricing. Once again, liberals think making a profit is evil. It was the very profit making businesses that gave Mr. Daschle many of his campaign contributions.
Finally, and to Mr. Daschle’s last point of pitting the healthy against the sick. If we as a Nation support unhealthy lifestyles then we will always enable bad behavior. Similar to supplying more alcohol to a druck and concluding they will never change.
Consumer Directed Health Care plans work well for both the sick and healthy. Most purchasing these plans have annual incomes of around $50,000 or less, with a signicant number of purchasers formerly uninsured.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:28 amAs the new owner of an HSA, this plan has been the best insurance plan my family has ever had. We have been able to pay all of our health related bills out of our HSA account and will still have over $1,000 in the account at the end of the plan year. We have been able to use the money in the account to pay for the services that we actually use.
We paid $400 in coinsurance for a crown that was in excess of what dental insurance covered. We also paid over $100 for an eye exam contact lenses for 2 family members, all paid for out of our HSA account that would not have been covered under a traditional insurance plan.
In addition, we have been able to pay for several doctors office visits, prescription drugs and a few over the counter drugs all through the HSA account and will still have money left over at the end of the plan year to roll to the next.
January 26th, 2006 at 10:57 amWhy does every argument that Democrats and Critics make about HSAs, totally opposite of what we are seeing on the front lines of healthcare. Because unlike reporters, critics and Senators, we actually sell insurance to the public. This means we know something about HSA and traditional plans. Every argument Daschle makes is flat our wrong. But most reporters won’t publish the facts……
January 26th, 2006 at 12:46 pmI did eventually turn from a life of stupidity and self centered idiotarianism to become a Christian and a social conservative.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I #233
COUGH, COUGH, COUGH
That’d be the “Inquisition”, Dark Ages, “Burn Witch Burn” brand most likely…
January 26th, 2006 at 1:01 pmMy business is selling group medical plans to small employers.
Comment by Tim Duffy #234
In other words, you’re the middle man profiteer with whom we could do without…
Universal/Single Payer Healthcare for all…
That would relieve business of the burden (and brighten that bottom line they’re always crying about in btwn giving their executives those six and seven figure bonuses)…
We’re paying more for healthcare in america than all of the industrialized countrie with universal healthcare, and contrary to the Republiscum talking point myths we’re getting less for our dollars…
January 26th, 2006 at 1:07 pmThat’d be the “Inquisitionâ€, Dark Ages, “Burn Witch Burn†brand most likely…
Comment by big papa
Witches should burn.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:16 pmWe’re paying more for healthcare in america than all of the industrialized countrie with universal healthcare, and contrary to the Republiscum talking point myths we’re getting less for our dollars…
Comment by big papa
We get more and we get it faster. There’s a reason people come to this country from all over the world to get cared for and it has nothing to do with bang for the buck.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:18 pm#224, IRI -
Too bad he missed between the I’s. That would have increased the IQ in whatever country you live in by two or three percentage points.
Comment by WaltTheMan
The bastard didn’t miss by much. According to where the bullet hit the sheet metal had it been a little higher my IQ would have been cut in half, literally. But as it is today I brighten every room, heighten every conversation and give lousy husbands incentive be nicer to their wives whenever I walk in the door.
January 26th, 2006 at 3:25 pmI did eventually turn from a life of stupidity and self centered idiotarianism to become a Christian and a social conservative.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 26, 2006 @ 9:21 am
Turned from, or further into? Your comments on minorities and women would seem to indicate the bullet did not miss you.
If anyone can be said to be dim and lacking insight it would be the majority of supporters of this site’s policies and philosophy. That would include you too you know.
You are so fond of dishing out insults and make sweeping generalisations. That is another sign that you lack insight.
At the time was pretty surprised that there are officers of the law out there that consider a little high speed cat and mouse to grounds for summary execution.
Why is that surprising to you? You consider dissent grounds for execution.
Also, you missed the moral of the story -which is, again, a sign of lack of insight: You were clearly not happy to find yourself on the receiving end of an unjust action. But you have no problem with bullying others.
You pay lip service to your Christian beliefs.
And again, at 19yo you were legally an adult. Stop telling yourself you were not. Learn to take responsibility.
January 27th, 2006 at 2:30 amAccording to where the bullet hit the sheet metal had it been a little higher my IQ would have been cut in half, literally.
Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 26, 2006 @ 3:25 pm
What’s the half of zero?
January 27th, 2006 at 2:31 amWhat’s the half of zero?
Comment by Gregor Samsa
Your SAT score? Just guessing.
January 27th, 2006 at 10:29 am[...] Former Senator Tom Daschle has a great post over at ThinkProgress that highlights the most basic reasons why the health care system in this country is broken (this is also why it’s ludicrous for our fearful leader to be advocating HSAs [Health Savings Accounts] at any time, let alone right now). I’ll try to post other links regarding the issue of health care in this country later when I get a chance, but for most people outside the corrupt republican policy machine, this country has a pretty flawed health care system. Explore posts in the same categories: Uncategorized [...]
June 15th, 2006 at 2:15 amI need help not pundit cuties with no knowledge. My health insurance is so expensive I will be forced by my greedy insurance company to join the 50 million Americans with no health insurance. I’m not old enough for Medicare but forced into the street with early retirement after a lifetime of working. I need a LOWEST COST comprehensive plan to cover us baby boomers and my 18 yr old daughter. Health insurance is not a problem or an issue. It is a national emergency. I’d like a plan no less the quality or price that our polititians in D.C. have. Help Me. Thanks.
November 17th, 2006 at 2:45 pmt’s like they are so insecure in their beliefs of what they actually do that they cannot admit that they are not always right, or that they might be human and therefore falible and therefore not really anydifferent then the people they vilify for not agreeing with them. I mean look at what happens here, they make outrageous statements and never admit when they get called on it, alot of “hot air†and generalisation of complex issues into talking points for the agenda of the corporations who through the K street project have bankrolled the party for a decade. Don’t work to understand the root or underlaying reasons for a particular problem but a jingoistic and simplistic answer designed to fit into a 30 sec TV add.
November 20th, 2006 at 6:17 amI’ve taken a quick look at your postings, which are very interesting. Lots of material and ideas! Congrats on being so focused!
November 20th, 2006 at 6:18 amI’ve taken a quick look at your postings, which are very interesting. Lots of material and ideas! Congrats on being so focused!
November 20th, 2006 at 6:18 amHi! Very nice site! Thanks you very much! 6sJG9XvpyP8LnJ
January 12th, 2007 at 1:24 amAdult Baby Diaper Change
I enjoyed reading your blog. What a great thing it is to be able to share information like this on the Internet.
March 21st, 2008 at 1:28 amFountain Lover
Why would you say that, when you can see that what you sy is not correct.
March 21st, 2008 at 2:16 amInsurance Small Business Health Insurance Nationwide Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 2:42 amGay Incest Gay Cumshots Gay Jock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 2:52 amGuy Less Lee
Wow, I completely agree.
March 21st, 2008 at 3:53 amTop Tier Universities
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 21st, 2008 at 8:37 amHealth Insurance California Health Insurance Michigan Health Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 9:05 amConsolidation Consolidation
Basic consolidation with consolidation services that lends debt management.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:15 pmFree Legal Advice For The Elderly
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:57 pmWeight Loss Low Carbohydrate Diet The Zone Diet
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 8:31 pmInsurance Automobile Insurance Home Owners Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 21st, 2008 at 9:23 pmLenders Association
I don’t mean to be too in your face, but I’m not sure I agree with this. Anyhow, thanks for sharing and I think I’ll come to this blog more often.
March 21st, 2008 at 9:25 pmHealth Insurance Gulf Breeze Insurance Flood Insurance
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 12:04 amCock Very Young Boy Cock Small Cock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 6:25 amCock Mommy Loves Cock Cocks
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:22 pmTop Medical Malpractice Insurers
Thanks for creating this blog. I thought it was a very interesting read. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
March 22nd, 2008 at 8:33 pmKristen
A bank accepts deposits from lenders, on which it pays the interest.
March 23rd, 2008 at 5:10 amBad Credit Loans Personal Loan Auto Loan Calculator
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 23rd, 2008 at 10:31 pmsuites metal
Nice Post… do you know what is the first? Maybe You can se My Post Here
March 24th, 2008 at 1:11 amCock Massive Cocks Cumshots Big Gay Cock
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 4:12 amYoung Girls Young Girl Models Young Puffy Nipple
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 10:22 amDistance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 24th, 2008 at 6:55 pmquick cash ideas
I came across your site while I did a search on Google for %KEYWORD% and your article on %TITLE% was informative.
March 25th, 2008 at 5:19 amBankruptcy Laws How Often Can You File
Thanks for this post!
March 25th, 2008 at 5:51 amYoung Girls Youngest Boys Gallery Young Girls Naked
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pmNational Savings And Investments
This article sounds well, but how everything is related together?
March 25th, 2008 at 9:11 pmWww Nationwide Co Uk Internet Banking
Nationwide Building Soc
March 26th, 2008 at 12:07 pmWeight Loss Pill Identifier Pills
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 26th, 2008 at 12:14 pmJessie
This is similar to comment spam but avoids some of the safeguards designed to stop the latter practice. This enables authors to keep
March 27th, 2008 at 9:58 amliability insurance uk
Good post. I am looking into these issues on my blog.
March 27th, 2008 at 5:16 pmZo
Remember not only to say the right thing in the right place, but far more difficult still, to leave unsaid the wrong thing at the tempting moment.
March 27th, 2008 at 6:18 pmEric
Such a fun and informative blog! Please visit my site when you can.
March 28th, 2008 at 8:35 amCollege Financial Aid Services Inc
Interesting – because that is the same thing I found out last Thursday.
March 28th, 2008 at 1:25 pmAccounting Financial Financial Success
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
March 29th, 2008 at 12:02 pmSam
Your site looks great! I have seen many other so-called sites and they have been far from good quality.Your site has all the key ingredients to pulling in visitors.
March 31st, 2008 at 3:05 amCarpet Boy
I never thought about this until i saw your post, nice going here bookmarked your blog for further reference.
March 31st, 2008 at 9:27 pmAlbertha
After reading this, I can see why people keep leaving comments. I hope this isn’t rejected, cause i would really like to read more. Can you post some more good literature?
April 1st, 2008 at 2:16 amChubby Grannies Chubby Granny Masturbate Pussy Big Tit Chubby Grannys
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 1st, 2008 at 6:18 pmcar loans
The term is used colloquially for any kind of Linkback.) Some individuals or companies have abused the TrackBack feature to insert spam links
April 2nd, 2008 at 2:42 pmBusiness Studies Lesson Plans
I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.
April 2nd, 2008 at 7:30 pmNutritional Supplements Weight Loss Weight Loss
I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view
April 2nd, 2008 at 8:55 pmcustomer massachusetts
Very interesting post. A little bit confusing, but still ok. do you know what is the first? i`ve the new album at my blog http://sumpit.info
April 4th, 2008 at 6:28 amus government loans and grants
Hey. I just stopped by and I’ve got to say you have a kewl website. You can see my government loan and grant for debt consolidation webpage when you get a sec.
April 5th, 2008 at 11:30 pmwomens government grants for small business
Hi there. I just stopped by and I’ve got to say you have a cool website. Come check out my united states government grant site.
April 8th, 2008 at 4:36 pm