Here is the link to the AMA opposing Obama's government public insurance plan:

I think that Obama is screwing this up, kinda putting the cart before the horse. Create a climate for savings before you start cutting funding. This is just old school republican "starve the beast" type stuff.

Serves these docs right for taking care of poor people in the first place.

You can expect to see a lot less of THAT, once Obamacare kicks in. Hope you've got money.

The idea of just cutting payments to take care of the healthcare problem seems equivalent to me saying that I'm going to get my credit card problems under control by just not paying Visa anymore. Problem solved :)

"Serves these docs right for taking care of poor people in the first place."

Yeah, let them die. Got it.

No, you didn't.

No, you didn't.
#6 | Posted by rightisright

Alleviate me of my ignorance on this point then. Thanks in advance.

Hagbard,

RiR was being sarcastic, the fact that Obama is proposing to short the doctors/hospitals. They will invariably be less likely to help the poor in the future, even by just the threat.

Read this as OBAMA is doing it, not that RiR is proposing it. Your #5 should be directed at Obama, so.... take it back ;-)

This destroys the argument that under universal health care, the government won't ration our healthcare, for it is what Obama is proposing. This of course is masked by a diatribe of rhetoric, as men of words are known to do.

"This destroys the argument that under universal health care, the government won't ration our healthcare,"

Anyone who believes health care won't have to be rationed as the baby boomers retire has their head in the sand. The Macro Numbers won't support anything like what we have now when many more are using and many less are paying in.

So Obama is gonna cut medicare and medicaid reimbursements. I wonder how many health care providers will quit taking medicare or medicaid over this. Somewhere leftwing nutbags should be going crazy over this. I could have sworn they went crazy back in the 90's when the republicans suggested slowing the growth of spending on these programs.

Roadkill needs to take a reading comprehension course. The article and the headline have nothing in common.

Insurance company shills like Boner and his party of FAIL comrads are whoring themselves to say whatever lie their insurance company bosses feed them.

Most of the shit spewing forth from these whores was written months before the health care reform plan was even discussed.

Exactly the kind of clusterfuck we'd expect from Republicans.

How's that replacement party (Crazy Crack Whores for Bejus) coming along?

"Roadkill needs to take a reading comprehension course. The article and the headline have nothing in common."

One of the few instances in which a lobotomy might actually lead to some improvement.

What does rationing of healthcare mean?

GreenDad,

'Rationing health care' is a talking point made up by the insurance companies to use when they are trying to disparage any meaningful heath care reform that may endanger their profits.

Talking points like these usually follow the format of "the big lie", in that they are such an outrageous lie that people will tend to believe them.

"One of the few instances in which a lobotomy might actually lead to some improvement."

If the frontal lobe is where the right wing craziness resides then I would concur with your diagnosis Doc.

Hospital emergency rooms are not the equivalent of a doctor's office. Put hospitals out of the business of providing standard care, and you save billions.

Last I checked, Dumb Axe, Danforth isn't an insurance company. But even he's smart enough to see demographics in motion.

Don't worry, though. Obama will take care of everything for you, so you won't have to.

RIR,

He may not be an insurance company, but like the rest of you dumbshit parrots, he repeats what he hears quite well and without understanding 90% of it.

Keep listing to Flush and Orally. They'll take care of you.

Still selling, shithead?

Danforth is a libbie.

And I sell every day. I'm up 26.68% on the year. How is yours doing?

"like the rest of you dumbshit parrots, he repeats what he hears quite well"

You're an idiot if you can't see what megatrends are occurring. I never "heard that" from anyone; the Big Numbers don't lie, and the story they tell is quite clear: demand will spike, supply won't. What do you think happens to prices with that scenario? And the current projections peg medical inflation to equal (i.e. NOT exceed) current inflation. Anyone actually believe that?

"Danforth is a libbie."

Danforth believes in a strong defense, small government, balanced budgets, and supporting Israel, all conservative positions. He also believes in workers' rights, equality for all, and a woman having the final say over her own body, all "libbie" positions.

Label as needed.

"Danforth believes in a strong defense, small government, balanced budgets, and supporting Israel, all conservative positions. He also believes in workers' rights, equality for all, and a woman having the final say over her own body, all "libbie" positions.

Label as needed.

#15 | POSTED BY DANFORTH"

I've been liking Blue Dog Democrat lately. Pretty much seems to sum up what I believe, and seems to match (for the most part) with what you put up there.

And so many of you want to turn you health care over to the government -- FOOLS!

Spice Guy,

No one is turning health care over to the government. Just the running of an alternative health insurance plan. Same doctors, same hospitals, same drug companies. Just a different insurance company that hopefully isn't out to rape the customer.

But keep parroting. I'm sure you enjoy the finger exercise.

Ibuprofin must cost $5/pill and Beds $2000/night. Don't forget, we are part of the Oligarchy that owns Washington.

US Health Care Policy, brought to you by a Corporation near you:

Insure only young healthy people and pocket the profits. Layoff older workers and drop them from the insurance roles. Provide Insurance Company access to everyone's health records. But, if they have a claim, invoke health record privacy as a means for preventing full disclosure of the facts. Institute a universal 6 month pre-existing condition clause. Establish a seperate, better system for the lawmakers.

One set of rules for people, another better set for Corporations and their Washington co-conspirators.

Two words: Single Payer.

Extend medicare to everyone. Game over.

One of the few instances in which a lobotomy might actually lead to some improvement.

#12 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis

Is he ahead of you in line?

No one is turning health care over to the government. Just the running of an alternative health insurance plan. Same doctors, same hospitals, same drug companies. Just a different insurance company that hopefully isn't out to rape the customer.

#23 | Posted by axe

Don't you realize what you are saying? The insurance company (the government) dictates what they will pay for and how much they will pay. If that isn't turning it over to the government, I don't know what is.

Don't you realize what you are saying?

no, he doesn't. He can't distinguish between a provider and an insurance carrier.

He is confused( as are others here) about how costs don't just evaporate because an insurance company is no longer involved.

By their own admission, an insurance company absorbs about 10 more % points of the claims dollars for admin/profit than does medicare.

Even if I conceded that it was a true apples to apples comparison (which I don't) then you don't realy accomplish much with getting rid of insurance companies.

But then again, much of this might make Axeville "feel better".

which is what is most important.

:-(

Corporation = government with bad union. all the corruption with no public feedback.

As usual, the reich is wrong.

Shawn,

You act like the government responds to public feedback.

It's all fucked and if you think it can be fixed short of an all out revolution you are smokin some good shit. The fat rats are too entrenched in their position to ever be dug out through the polls.

So medicare cuts payments which means my payments go up despite my best efforts to keep myself healthy. Since I will tell you know the Hospital was not making money on medicare at the current rates.

The insurance company (the government) dictates what they will pay for and how much they will pay.

#28 | Posted by Sniper at 2009-06-15 09:33 AM

Tell me how that is any different for what HMO's do today?

Except Medicare does it for 3% administration costs while Insurance Cos do it for 15 - 25% administration costs.

Tell me how that is any different for what HMO's do today?

and yet you advocate for more of the same.

Except Medicare does it for 3% administration costs while Insurance Cos do it for 15 - 25% administration costs.

now we are up to 25%?

whatever. you can "wish" that medicare will take over the rest of the healthcare market and eliminate all of that 15 to 25% but it is just a wish.

Ok I'm convinced we need government run health care but the wonderful lady I spoke with in vital records today must train all burecrats who deal in health care.

If we had people like her running it I would not worry about the quality of care.

From the article:

The president suggests trimming federal payments to hospitals by about $200 billion over the next 10 years, saying greater efficiencies and broader insurance coverage will justify the change. Hospitals, especially those with many poor patients, say the proposed cuts are unfair and will harm the sick and elderly.

The big O'tard in the White House may create even more poor people through this.

The president suggests trimming federal payments to hospitals by about $200 billion over the next 10 years, saying greater efficiencies and broader insurance coverage will justify the change.

thanks for posting that sentence LoD.

It appears that Obama feels that private insurance is better because he is cutting $200 billion from the govts end and asking that to come through the insurance companies instead.

With all the huge profit and admin costs private insurance companies incur this is good???

how??

Social Security does it for a 1% administrative cost. Better than any private company. The only reason its in trouble is politicians have robbed the fund for other purpose, like wars.

We cannot afford to be the policeman to the world. Germany and Japan get a pass on these costs. How do you compete with that?

Please don't tell me we can afford the bailout, but not health care. Its bullshit and its bad for you.

What does rationing of healthcare mean?
#13 | Posted by GreenDad

Since no one tried to answer your question (except Axe, and he doesn't count), here goes:

Rationing healthcare means that there is a limited amout of healthcare (i.e. doctors, nurses, hospitals, drugs, etc.) Let's call it "X". There is also a required amount of healthcare need, such as the sick, the elderly, emergencies, home care, etc - we'll call it "Y". When Y is greater than X (and it usually is), healthcare must be rationed; in essence, who gets it {or, more realistically, who pays for it)? Do you give it to the 2 year old for vaccinations, the elderly person with the flu, or the illegal immigrant with a broken leg? In the US, we've rationed healthcare into 3 levels - those with insurance, those with medicare/medicaid, and those with no insurance but still receive care. The "rationing" so far takes place by ability to pay. Those with private insurance generally receive the best care, those with Medicare/Caid receive generally lower quality care, and those with no insurance receive little care. Healthcare is therefore "rationed" to those that can afford it, with the "leftovers" for those that cannot. One example is from Oregon; a 9 year old on Medicaid died from not receiving a liver transplant because the people of the state voted to dissallow this service to be paid by the government. The healthcare had to be rationed because, like always, Y was greater than X.

As the population ages, look for the rationing to increase as the elderly require more care than younger people (as Danforth noted above).

Sorry for the long explanation; hope it helps!

The only reason its in trouble is politicians have robbed the fund for other purpose, like wars.

what does that have to do with the effeciency of a health care system?

Can anybody on the left make a rational argument about anything without vomiting the iraq war onto it?

Social Security does it for a 1% administrative cost.

yawn....

#39 IOW, triage?

#41 | Posted by goatman

Good Summary :) More financial triage than medical though. My worry with government administered healthcare is that more and more procedures will be cut due to their financial impacts rather than their medical impacts.

Many doctors already refuse to see Medicare patients because they have no trouble getting clients that pay the bill either themselves or through insurance. Medicare requires additional paper work and reduced payments. It is possible that some hospitals are also refusing to take on Medicare patients. By reducing payments further, there will be more of both classes refusing to allow Medicare for payment. I had a minor procedure just a couple of weeks ago. The bill came to $1200.00 plus. Medicare paid $225.00 for the procedure and an overnight stay. The hospital lost money on this stay. Reducing even further will make accepting Medicare impossible. Many people, myself included, rely on Medicare for their care. When that care is withheld because of insufficient payment I and others will suffer badly.

Many people, myself included, rely on Medicare for their care. When that care is withheld because of insufficient payment I and others will suffer badly.

Keith, you are neck-deep in this problem so you already understand how limiting medicare can be. Cutting it further will obviously impact many middle class and poorer Americans only.

And I thought the real problem was these rich, wealth insurance companies?

cutting these payments hurts only employees and patients.

whatever. you can "wish" that medicare will take over the rest of the healthcare market and eliminate all of that 15 to 25% but it is just a wish.

#33 | Posted by eberly

Isn't it better to at least try something else or should we just do nothing because we think it's "just a wish"? Private insurance companies already dictate what they will pay for and how much they will pay. This sounds like the definition of rationed healthcare too me! We already have the most expensive healthcare in the industrialized world, so why shouldn't we try a change to a system where much of the profit motive is removed? We might actually end up paying less for the same care.

At this point private insurance has NO motive to provide quality healthcare for a reasonable price. There is no profit in providing such coverage.

I don't know why we couldn't have a system where if people are not happy with the single payer system, there's nothing stopping them from paying for alternative/additional treatment, provided they have the money. If they don't believe that the government plan is adequate, and they can afford it, people could certainly buy supplemental private insurance.

If they don't believe that the government plan is adequate, and they can afford it, people could certainly buy supplemental private insurance.

#45 | Posted by Whatsleft

You would of course allow them to opt out of paying their portion of "healthcare taxes"? After all, they're not receiving the benefit...

Whatsleft, It is not a "can't get any worse" situation. If the current infrastructure is taken down and replaced by a government system what will happen when that fails? I think it is abundantly clear that the government has been able to work in an efficient or even effective manner when it comes to health care. Requiring private insurance, for any sort of decent care, on top of a government system that costs as much or more then private does now will take away any resemblance to what we have now, the best care in the world. There are plenty of solutions, a universal or single payer system would only worsen thing and possibly lead to the collapse of our world class health care.

"so why shouldn't we try a change to a system where much of the profit motive is removed?"

Profit drives excellence.

"We might actually end up paying less for the same care."

Ever been to a VA hospital?

"At this point private insurance has NO motive to provide quality healthcare for a reasonable price."

Exactly how high do you think their margins are?

We already have the most expensive healthcare in the industrialized world, so why shouldn't we try a change to a system where much of the profit motive is removed?

what profit motive are you trying to eliminate?

here is a partial list of "profit motives" regarding healthcare

hospitals
specialty hospitals
doctor groups
PPOs
HMOs
drug companies
medical supply companies
insurance companies (health/malpractice/auto etc)
phone companies
utility companies
industrial supply companies
internet providers
prescription claims 3rd party administrators
pharmacies
construction companies
car makers/dealers
private ambulance/air transport companies
janitorial contractors
home health providers
rehab hospitals
hospice
newspapers
phone books

I could go on and on and on of people who have a "profit motive" regarding their relationship with the healthcare industry.

Go go ahead and tell me who's profits you are most concerned about. They are all private companies who make "profits" from the healthcare industry.

"Go go ahead and tell me who's profits you are most concerned about."

OK, the one's who add to the cost but don't really provide a needed product or service, like the insurance companies.
Others, like the drug companies do provide necessary products but we should be buying those products at the lowest possible cost just most other countries do.

At this point private insurance has NO motive to provide quality healthcare for a reasonable price.

Most business owners I know can get a quote from 5 difference group health carriers.

There is no profit in providing such coverage.

which is it? they are either making a profit or not.

OK, the one's who add to the cost but don't really provide a needed product or service, like the insurance companies.

insurance companies don't provide a needed product or service?

Do you have insurance Danni?

Do you need it?

Some people can't afford medical insurance.

$125/month Cable, with Internet access, and Long distance.

$50/month on cigarettes.

20 Number of times per month eating out (just for dinner)

40 Number of times per month eating out (all meals)

$225 Season tickets

6 Average number of credits cards held with no credit remaining.

6 Number of credit cards maxxed out paying for eating out, season tickets, cigarettes, and campaign contributions.

where will the illegals go for health care now?

"Do you have insurance Danni?

Do you need it?"

I do have it but what I really need though is access to health care that does not rise in cost several times more than the rise in inflation every year so that instead of raises at work we get to keep our health care. A government plan would save me money and so what are these benevolent insurance companies afraid of??? That they couldn't make huge profits and compete??? That pretty much tells us what we need to know. Insurance company profits do not make one person well but they prevent millions from accessing preventive care and thus make people ill.

Danni, how do you feel about this action from the O'Administration?

20 Number of times per month eating out (just for dinner)

I forgot food service companies also. HUGE vendor of hospitals.

"Insurance company profits do not make one person well but they prevent millions from accessing preventive care and thus make people ill."

Ok, you lost me there. Exactly how do the 3-6 percent insurance companies make keep people from getting care? I was always under the impression that insurance allowed many people the care that would otherwise be unattainable.

Many of the charges paid to hospitals now will be unnecessary when people have access to preventive or chronic care. It makes perfect sense to me to redirect payments from hospitals to the places who will be rendering services to poor people with real health care coverage instead of depending on ERs for things that would be better treated in office visits with a doctor.
I suspect you know that but think it makes a good talking point to pretend you don't.

"The president suggests trimming federal payments to hospitals by about $200 billion over the next 10 years, saying greater efficiencies and broader insurance coverage will justify the change. Hospitals, especially those with many poor patients, say the proposed cuts are unfair and will harm the sick and elderly."

I do have it but what I really need though is access to health care that does not rise in cost several times more than the rise in inflation every year so that instead of raises at work we get to keep our health care.

So you willingly purchase a product that you claim isn't needed.

that makes you a hypocrite danni.

how much do expenditures go up every year for medicare? this report shows premiums for medicare going up 11% due to the increase in costs.

"Ok, you lost me there. Exactly how do the 3-6 percent insurance companies make keep people from getting care?"

By making it too expensive for many people to buy.
That is only part of the "profit." Huge CEO and executive salaries add to it, so does other unnecessary expenditures like advertising, etc.
We would save much more than the 3-6% that goes to stock holders by avoiding for profit health care insurance.

"We would save much more than the 3-6% that goes to stock holders by avoiding for profit health care insurance."

And we would lose the quality of care that is available. Would you rather a financial burden but with exceptional results or little cost and even less in the way of results?

Many of the charges paid to hospitals now will be unnecessary when people have access to preventive or chronic care.

that is a theory that can't be proven. I accept it's premise (that better preventative care will lead to less severe charges later) but that doesn't mean that stupid people in this country will take advantage of it.

these same people are obese by choice, smoke by choice, abuse drugs by choice.

people in this country don't value their own health. it's absure to assume they value their health care.

It's funny watching idiots like danni run in circles and get nowhere with their arguments.

She even posts the one thing from the article which indicates that even Obama is trying to shove more dollars through private insurance and less through her precious "medicare".

she doesn't even get that.

EBERLY that was the dumbest post I have ever seen you make, yours usually are fairly intelligent. Calling me a hypocrit for wanting to be able to have affordable health care is ridiculous and the thing is I'm not primarily concerned for myself but for my kids, etc.
The only argument really should be whether you think private health care insurance can deliver the services needed to the population as cheaply as we can proviee those services in a government run system. We both know they can't so really the argument is about whether or not health insurance companies have a God given right to a slice of our health care dollars.
Apparently, you think they do. I don't.

Pet not the old people are poor cause they buy flat screens argument again?

Some people can't afford health care.

1- $90 cable modem/TV/Telephone
2 - Never eat out
3 - Only been to 2 pro or amature sports in 15 years and was given the tickets both times.

Health Care cost - 783 a month
Mortage - 660 a month

Why do you not see a problem?

I spend more on Health care than I spend on food, or mortage, or all my utilities combined? And that ammount goes up 10-15% per year, the others remain mostly constant.

Health Care is fucked in the US and yet you still argue against any change at all?

"It's funny watching idiots like danni"

Sticks and stones will break my bones
but you don't have a logical arument and all the name calling in the world won't give you one.

Just makes you look angry and frustrated because you can't have your way.

Huge CEO and executive salaries add to it, so does other unnecessary expenditures like advertising, etc.

of what companies? Insurance I suppose...

what makes the profits of insurance companies any more evil than any of the industries I posted?

They are all non-govt
they are all for profit
they are all adding to the cost of healthcare.

see the similarities??

I doubt it.

Calling me a hypocrit for wanting to be able to have affordable health care is ridiculous and the thing is I'm not primarily concerned for myself but for my kids, etc.

You are the one who called it a product/service "not needed".

not me

The only argument really should be whether you think private health care insurance can deliver the services needed to the population as cheaply as we can proviee those services in a government run system.

I think the difference would be insignificant in the long term. You believe that removing profit is the answer. Again, it might represent a savings but it isn't going to make a real difference.

At the same time, you have no problem turning over a huge industry to the govt.

Let remind you danni that you are wishing for a system that at some point, will be back in the hands of a republican president and congress.

LOL

TaoWarrior -

Health Care is fucked in the US and yet you still argue against any change at all?

Wait until the first time they or one of their family members gets sick. I mean a major illness. I lknow you have MS. My 40 year old cousin was just diagnosed with MS this past summer. These people who babble they can save their own money to cover their own medical costs and/or don't want to help others out with the extremely high costs of nedical care and insurance are selfish fools. They have no idea what could be awaiting them or their family even one month from now.

but you don't have a logical arument and all the name calling in the world won't give you one.

I might be the only one making a logical argument.

You are obsessed with one problem in health care.

one. and it happens to be rooted in your 100%socialistic beliefs.......that anything private that earns a profit is bad.

Many of the charges paid to hospitals now will be unnecessary when people have access to preventive or chronic care. It makes perfect sense to me to redirect payments from hospitals to the places who will be rendering services to poor people with real health care coverage instead of depending on ERs for things that would be better treated in office visits with a doctor.
I suspect you know that but think it makes a good talking point to pretend you don't.

"The president suggests trimming federal payments to hospitals by about $200 billion over the next 10 years, saying greater efficiencies and broader insurance coverage will justify the change. Hospitals, especially those with many poor patients, say the proposed cuts are unfair and will harm the sick and elderly."

#59 | Posted by danni at 2009-06-15 12:46 PM

"what makes the profits of insurance companies any more evil than any of the industries I posted?"

There is no need to include insurance into health care expenses.

"You are obsessed with one problem in health care."

You don't define me. I am concerned with making health care affordable. I don't really care how it gets done but I know that unnecessary insurance company profits and expenses are partially to blame for the high costs. Prove me wrong. Prove that insurance company profit makes health care more affordable. Show me how high CEO salaries make it affordable. Show me how advertising helps more people afford insurance..
You can't and you know it so you make up nonsensical irrelevant argument to distract from the real problems.

Exactly how high do you think their margins are?

#48 | Posted by salamandagator

Pretty high, considering the increase in premiums is 10-25% per year.

I sometimes do wonder what motives the people who defend for profit health care insurance. Do they pay you to post? They do you know...pay people to post comments in discussion boards like this one.
It's part of their strategy to defeat any real reform of the system that profits them so much.
I've read that the US Chamber of Commerce has a huge, obscene budget to use for what they call "pro-business" legislation or against pro-consumer or pro-labor legislation.
Pro-business, BTW, to them was to lobby INS to ignore our borders and allow illegal immigration because they wanted the cheap labor.

Eb,

You still haven't addressed the basic problem. Health Care cost more than a friggen mortage.

It is fast become out of the reach of the common man to aford to maintain health insurance and the bills are so crazy that if you lack health insurance you will not be able to pay them.

It is not about shopping smarter or wiser it is simply not possible. I am not saying there is a magic bullet, somehow I doubt there is. However any time change is suggested it seems the right (of which I am part ... sorta) resist any kind of change.

Well we need to try something different if you don't like Obama's ideas lets hear some of yours.

"Pretty high, considering the increase in premiums is 10-25% per year."

Danni, you sure are stupid. Insurance companies raise their premiums to match the rise in the cost that hospitals and doctors charge. You seem overly concerned with insurance company profits rather than doctor and hospital profits.

Why does it cost $300 just to walk into an emergency room, or $16 for a nurse to give you 2 tylenol? Why did a doctor charge my wife $2700 to make a 16 centimeter incision and sew it back up? 10 minutes work for $2700. Get over your bias and look at the facts. Insurance companies can only charge higher premiums if their costs rise. To do so otherwise would be to price themselves out of the market because another company would just undercut their price to get market share.

" Health Care cost more than a friggen mortage."

Your mortgage is less then half of my rent. I pay a little over three hundred a month for my daughter and my wife to be insured.

"I pay a little over three hundred a month for my daughter and my wife to be insured."

Is that the extra to be carried on your policy, or a stand-alone deal?

"Do they pay you to post?"

No we just value freedom. Freedom to think, freedom to think. and freedom to live out the American dream. We like that idea and don't like the idea that government gets to decide how you can run a business.

"Is that the extra to be carried on your policy, or a stand-alone deal?"

Honestly, i let my wife take care of that stuff but i can tell you that when it was just my daughter it was only about 125 a month and that was stand alone. When i looked into it i could get the same plan they are on now by myself for a little over 400 a month. So I don't know if it is group discount or if her company is kicking in a hundred a month.

Salam,

Well lets see what happens to your rates should you actualy get sick.

I used to insure my whole family for about 250 a month. Now I spend 3 times that amount. (oh that 738 number is not just insurance it is also additional costs not covered by insurance.)

The only real issue I have with insurance companies is when I read BCBSNC raising rates 10-15% after they just reported 300 million in proft and have had profit for 10 years running, funny that with them being a not for profit company.

At some point they will have enough in the bank and can take a couple years off from raising rates ... right?

"Danni, you sure are stupid. Insurance companies raise their premiums to match the rise in the cost that hospitals and doctors charge."

You're calling me stupid???
That's hilarious.
That you think doctors and hospitals tell insurance companies how much they charge is priceless.

"No we just value freedom."

Oh, my favorite. "they're taking away our freedom".....by providing more choices when we buy health care coverage.

Hilarious.

Of course she needs it. Do they need such a sizable increase every year? Why?

then why did she claim it to be an uneeded product?

why are you asking me instead of her?

Do they need such a sizable increase every year?

why?

here is why.........

FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO INCREASING HEALTHCARE COST IN THE U.S.

The first major factor to consider as a driver of healthcare costs is the hospital system in the United States. Hospitals are at the heart of the healthcare cost crisis. As the primary point of contact for all healthcare activities, hospitals must be able to handle almost everyone who walks through their doors. Within hospitals, emergency rooms contribute most of the costs that seem to be out of control.

Many hospitals have some sort of emergency room or urgent care center. For a growing portion of the population, these have become a primary care provider instead of a dedicated emergency response unit. When non-emergent cases frequent and eventually clog the emergency rooms (FIGURE 2), the quality of overall emergency care is greatly impacted. One of the most frequent complaints from healthcare consumers is that they are forced to wait too long in the emergency room. Because the limited staff and beds are already over utilized processing and disposing of non-emergent cases, waiting rooms fill up. Often a patient's condition can worsen while sitting in the crowded waiting room. This is a major problem and must be addressed.

In urban areas, crime activity can fill even the highest capacity emergency rooms even before midnight. Gun shot wounds and knife stabbings from gang-related fights are some of the leading cost drivers in the urban emergent healthcare arena. With many state budgets facing huge levels of debt from the recent downturn in the national economy, cities are forced to go without critical subsidies for basic services such as police and fire department salaries. As a result of that trend, larger urban communities and their healthcare leaders are desperately trying to find creative solutions to stem the flow of crime-related medical emergencies.

You guys just like to ignore the answers and hash it again.

what am I ignoring?

Why does it cost $300 just to walk into an emergency room, or $16 for a nurse to give you 2 tylenol? Why did a doctor charge my wife $2700 to make a 16 centimeter incision and sew it back up? 10 minutes work for $2700.

I don't know. But if we get rid of insurance companies.....these ridiculous charges will disappear.

-danni and the rest of the stupid left

"Oh, my favorite. "they're taking away our freedom".....by providing more choices when we buy health care coverage."

Obviously, the government deciding on how a business can be run is not infringing on the freedoms of American business, how wrong i am. I mean, how could it possibly be that government control could mean less liberty? Wow, thanks for pointing that out danni, i just always thought the word freedom meant being free to make your own decisions but now i see you are right. Real freedom is the right to bow down to whomever you are told to.

"Well lets see what happens to your rates should you actualy get sick."

My rates did not change on my last plan when my wife gave birth. You want to talk about crazy cost? Over 12,000 dollars for less then 24 hours in a room and a delivery by a midwife. Without insurance that would have been devastating.

You can't and you know it so you make up nonsensical irrelevant argument to distract from the real problems.

I already said that profits and effeciency of admin are notable differences between private insurance and a single pay system.

I simply concluded that removing that doesn't solve any problems.

show me the "nonsensical irrelevant arguments" I have made.

I sometimes do wonder what motives the people who defend for profit health care insurance. Do they pay you to post? They do you know...pay people to post comments in discussion boards like this one.

to combat these arguments?

I do it for free. I'd hate to see what a pro would do to you.

Oohrah...."a section on what the negotiatied rate is..."...that is how much the insurance company pays regardless of what the hospital charges.
Insurance companies determine rates not hospitals.

"they don't mention insurance companies."

Oh, so if we eliminate crime it will bring down the cost of health care. Gee, thanks Eberly. HOw much do they pay you to post???
Taht was the most irrelevant, nonsensical pretense of a post ever.
Hilarious.
Is that the best you got???

Tell us how insurance company profits bring down the cost of health care.

Tell us how paying the CEOs millions brings downt he cost of health care.

That you think doctors and hospitals tell insurance companies how much they charge is priceless.

man, I leave for a little while and danni just shits all over herself.

"I'd hate to see what a pro would do to you."

A pro would still need an argument not just a bunch of irrelevant talking points.

Cure crime. Hilarious.

Eberly,
That you think doctors and hospitals tell insurance companies how much they charge is priceless.

I guess you ignored the part where more providers are going to stop accepting Medicare because it's already a loss to do so.

#73 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-06-15 01:05 PM

I'm not making an argument against NHC, I just don't see how cutting Medicare in the process is going to help. How does this not further alienate providers from accepting government insured people?

Why did a doctor charge my wife $2700 to make a 16 centimeter incision and sew it back up? 10 minutes work for $2700.

Because they can. Why does it cost $15 for a 15 minute haircut - that's $60/hr or $124,800/yr (2080hr/yr).

Thats why I cut my own hair

Can anyone tell me the difference between a Private Insurance Company Administrator telling you what procedures you may have and when you can have it (if at all) and how much they will pay and a Washington Bureaucrat doing the same?

..."...that is how much the insurance company pays regardless of what the hospital charges.
Insurance companies determine rates not hospitals.

you don't understand how discounts work danni.

Tell us how insurance company profits bring down the cost of health care.

Tell us how paying the CEOs millions brings downt he cost of health care.

profits and CEOs! profits and CEOs! profits and CEOs!.

Is that all you got?

YOu aren't listening to me Danni. I already told you that profits and CEOs add the to the cost of insurance.

However, it isn't significant enough to make a real difference.

Perhaps you could pay attention to your own party and your president danni. they believe me......not you.

pay attention for once.

Oh, so if we eliminate crime it will bring down the cost of health care. Gee, thanks Eberly. HOw much do they pay you to post???

To be honest, I would agree that crime isn't contributing to this problem as much as the article contends.

It doesn't matter though. No reform for healthcare will involve crime anyway.

I noticed nobody on the left addressed my point that medicare premiums going up 11%.

no profits, no insurance CEOs and it still went up 11%.

and they are all fine with it.

I guess that means that it doesn't even matter to them how much costs are or how much they go up.

just as long as there are no ceos or profits to have around.

problem solved.

Tell us how insurance company profits bring down the cost of health care.

Tell us how paying the CEOs millions brings downt he cost of health care.

If both went to zero, you would still have a health care problem and you haven't done anything to really impact it.

"Thats why I cut my own hair"

Picking a fight with a running lawnmower is not cutting your own hair.

Thats why I cut my own hair

#102 | Posted by rastaninja

I believe it.

and yet you advocate for more of the same.

Why lookie it is old Scatman Cruthers doing the old soft shoe.

Tell us how paying the CEOs millions brings downt he cost of health care.

Because without the delicate genius of the CEO's at the helm, the cost of insurance would soar. You should thank those CEO's every single day of the year for keeping your insurance affordable.

On March 19, 2003, the SEC charged HealthSouth and its CEO, Richard Scrushy, with accounting fraud. The SEC's complaint alleged that HealthSouth had systematically overstated its earnings by at least $1.4 billion since 1999. Apart from the SEC's finding, the U.S. Justice Department used information gathered from HealthSouth executives to identify another $1.1 billion of overstated earnings.

"Can anyone tell me the difference between a Private Insurance Company Administrator telling you what procedures you may have and when you can have it (if at all) and how much they will pay and a Washington Bureaucrat doing the same?"

Well, if one has the responsibility of increasing profits then I think I can guess which one is more likely to deny the treatment.

Exactly what is your point?

Well, if one has the responsibility of increasing profits then I think I can guess which one is more likely to deny the treatment.

from earlier in this thread from Keith....

Many doctors already refuse to see Medicare patients because they have no trouble getting clients that pay the bill either themselves or through insurance. Medicare requires additional paper work and reduced payments. It is possible that some hospitals are also refusing to take on Medicare patients. By reducing payments further, there will be more of both classes refusing to allow Medicare for payment. I had a minor procedure just a couple of weeks ago. The bill came to $1200.00 plus. Medicare paid $225.00 for the procedure and an overnight stay. The hospital lost money on this stay. Reducing even further will make accepting Medicare impossible. Many people, myself included, rely on Medicare for their care. When that care is withheld because of insufficient payment I and others will suffer badly.

#43 | Posted by keith204 at 2009-06-15 11:35 AM

you see, profits aren't necessarily what motivates difficult choices.

but I guess when medicare does this to someone it's okay in Danni's eyes.

but if an insurance company did it.............whoa hold the phone!!!!! I have to be outraged now!!!!!

It's odd that a discussion on how Obama implements NHC turns into a generic debate on whether or not we should have it all.

Obama's the president, Dems control the government at all levels except the courts. It's going to happen if they want it to (if it doesn't, it's their fault). The discussion now is how best to implement it.

And really, I think this is a bad move in his implementation of new health care policy that will hurt providers and people on government care.

I guess Obama gets a pass on cutting Medicare cuz he's a Dem.

The doctors should shut up. It is obvious that Obama is the most intelligent man in the universe and knows way more about medicine than doctors. Obama knows everything kind of like God.

Look how Obama SAVED GM and Chrysler from bankruptcy after giving them tens of billions of dollars. Ooops!

"The bill came to $1200.00 plus. Medicare paid $225.00 for the procedure and an overnight stay."

And how much do you think an insurance company would have paid. No where near the $1200.

"Reducing even further will make accepting Medicare impossible."

I don't know if you are being purposely incapable of understanding but he wasn't talking about reducing payments, he was talking long term, that overall payments would diminish due to the fact that many of the people now being served in inefficient ways, such as unnecessary ER visits, would now be served through regular doctor visits because they would have health care insurance. That would save Medicare billions in unnecessary reimbursements for unnecessary ER visits.
You want to pretend that Obama is something he is not. He is not a socialist. He is just trying to bring health care to millions more Americans and reform our too expensive, inefficient system.

"I guess Obama gets a pass on cutting Medicare cuz he's a Dem."

Or you could learn to comprehend what you read.

I think this is a bad move in his implementation of new health care policy that will hurt providers and people on government care.

If the liberals on this site would pull their partisian heads out of their asses they would see that this move actually moved dollars from medicare over to more private insurance.

and nothing from them on that. The people who want reform and who believe reform can come from the dems and Obama get THIS and they say nothing.

yeah, I can see that reform is really what they want.

And how much do you think an insurance company would have paid. No where near the $1200.

My insurance company would have paid 100% of that.

"My insurance company would have paid 100% of that."

Insurance companies have deal with hospitals and agreements on what amount of the original charges they will actually pay and it is nowhere near the "retail" cost of services. My daughter works in insurance rebilling and has the specific agreements at her disposal to do her job.

I don't know if you are being purposely incapable of understanding but he wasn't talking about reducing payments, he was talking long term, that overall payments would diminish due to the fact that many of the people now being served in inefficient ways, such as unnecessary ER visits, would now be served through regular doctor visits because they would have health care insurance. That would save Medicare billions in unnecessary reimbursements for unnecessary ER visits.

#117 | Posted by danni at 2009-06-15 02:59 PM

"The pharmaceutical industry is wary of Obama's plan to extract $75 billion over 10 years from Medicare prescription drug spending."

Yeah Eberly, here's more. You'll say, he's cutting 75 billion from seniors when really it means he intends to change the law so that Medicare can negotiate for lower drug prices which, as we all remember, Bush and his buddies specifically put in a prohibition against negotiating....a free gift to drug companies.

You purposely misinterpret the article and then want to debate it as if your interpretation were anywhere close to the real intents.
Totally dishonest and you know it.

You purposely misinterpret the article and then want to debate it as if your interpretation were anywhere close to the real intents.
Totally dishonest and you know it.

you're serious? you assign me a position that I don't have and then contend that my interpretation is totally dishonest?

that was posted because it didn't mention insurance companies. it mentioned other factors that you are willingly ignoring.

Insurance companies have deal with hospitals and agreements on what amount of the original charges they will actually pay and it is nowhere near the "retail" cost of services.

thanks for the info mrs. obvious.

they discount the services and write off the difference. Jesus, you just admitted to the fact that insurance companies and providers negotiate rates down.

what is your point?

Bush and his buddies specifically put in a prohibition against negotiating....a free gift to drug companies.

well, we will get that fixed now won't we. have you heard about when obama and the dems are going to get rid of this?

I ask this because I agree this is a problem also. But I doubt the dems are going to do shit about this.

I will admit danni, at least you found a real problem for once.

what next? the medical supply companies? you know.... sheets, beds, needles???

industries chocked full of CEOs and profit!!!!!

I don't know if you are being purposely incapable of understanding but he wasn't talking about reducing payments,

Keith is currently using this system. You are not.

And you are talking down to him like you know more than him.

LOL

Danforth believes in...small government

#20 | Posted by Danforth at 2009-06-14 07:38 PM Flag: Depends on your definition of "small"

"Keith is currently using this system. You are not."

Completely irrelevant to the discussion about Obama's intentions. I take Aspirin so now I know everything about pharmaceuticals???

The bill came to $1200.00 plus. Medicare paid $225.00 for the procedure and an overnight stay."

Hospitals and doctors offices charge that much, even though they know they are going to get a much lower reimbursement rate, because that is what they want the uninsured to pay. Hospitals don't want universal coverage because the gravy train of soaking the uninsured will be over.

Fuck the AMA - it's in desperate need of a massive overhaul. Fire the LOT of them, including the EPA and FDA fuckers. ALL of them. Not just the admin, but every single fuckwit involved in downer animals in the food supply, importation of toxic materials into food supply, ignoring extreme health risks to communities from industrial and military waste, the insurance scamming, forced unsound vaccinations, dangerous fluoridation, etc.

The AMA are merely shills for insurance and should be hunted down and exterminated from position with extreme prejudice. Their corporate connections will be mightily aware that their contributions are publicly known. Monsanto, Glaxo Smith Kline, etc. are protected by these institutions, so enough said..

Single-payer universal health care will free employers from unnecessary insurance burdens, permit citizens to keep their homes and even plan for new entrepreneurship with the capitol they will retain from the insurance and medical scamming.

We pay more than any nation on the planet for substandard insurance-scamming anti-humanitarian industry to allocate to whom and where I can get which medical treatments from. While Republican assholes squeal that "there shouldn't be a third-party regulator in Warshingtun Dee Cee dictating", isn't that precisely what the issue is regarding insurance denying to cover essential life-saving medical procedures? Many congressional representatives are apparently much more invested in insurance scamming than anyone has previously exposed.

Need over want. People and the gov't don't know the difference and spend money irresponsibly.

I am for change. NO tax increases. Major spending decreases and tax decreases.

Not isolationist. It's called non-interventionism.

Let the States pay for State issues. The Federal Gov't, IMO, should not be welfare for the States.

Need over want. My stupid city if cutting city services while paying for the beautification of the city.

Salam sorry to take so long to get back to you.

A pregnancy is not a major illness and if it was covered it was because of a pregnacy rider on the policy so they were making extra just for the posibility all along.

When I say major illness I mean Heart Disease, ALS, Diabetees (sp), or in my case MS.

Something where the drugs cost 20k+ a year, something where just a maintainance level of treatment is going to cost 5k a year every year for life (thats not counting drugs) so 25k a year for life and that is the minimum.

Now see where your rates are.

That's hilarious.
That you think doctors and hospitals tell insurance companies how much they charge is priceless.

#86 | Posted by danni

No, what is hilarious is that you think insurance companies don't now what hospitals charge for services. They see itemized bills every single day so I think that they have a very good idea of what is being charged.

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but the AMA booed President Obama today:

here is the phrase that makes this a real problem for our future

"comparative effective research"

translation....the government telling you that your proceedure is not cost effective and thus you are not allowed to have it at this time.

Dead on Arrival.

Yep. Can't have a competitive product out there against the bloated health insurance bureacracy, why that might cut into the CEO's fat salaries.

telling you that your proceedure is not cost effective and thus you are not allowed to have it at this time.

In aflac's little world no health inurance company has ever denied treatments to anyone ever.

Dead on Arrival.

Actually the fight is just beginning. This was a shot across the bow.