[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]

Live Music - oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 3:24pm
 
What Makes You Laugh? - oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:49pm
 
Trump - rgio - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:46pm
 
Israel - R_P - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:32pm
 
Ask an Atheist - miamizsun - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:29pm
 
Remembering the Good Old Days - miamizsun - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:28pm
 
NY Times Strands - geoff_morphini - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:20pm
 
Robots - miamizsun - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:18pm
 
Wordle - daily game - geoff_morphini - Apr 18, 2024 - 2:15pm
 
NYTimes Connections - geoff_morphini - Apr 18, 2024 - 10:42am
 
Song of the Day - oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 10:22am
 
The Obituary Page - ptooey - Apr 18, 2024 - 9:57am
 
Radio Paradise Comments - GeneP59 - Apr 18, 2024 - 7:58am
 
Museum Of Bad Album Covers - Steve - Apr 18, 2024 - 6:58am
 
Today in History - Red_Dragon - Apr 18, 2024 - 6:39am
 
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance - haresfur - Apr 17, 2024 - 7:04pm
 
Europe - haresfur - Apr 17, 2024 - 6:47pm
 
Country Up The Bumpkin - KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 17, 2024 - 5:23pm
 
Name My Band - GeneP59 - Apr 17, 2024 - 3:27pm
 
What's that smell? - Isabeau - Apr 17, 2024 - 2:50pm
 
USA! USA! USA! - R_P - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:48pm
 
Business as Usual - black321 - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:48pm
 
Things that make you go Hmmmm..... - dischuckin - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:29pm
 
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum - VV - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:26pm
 
Russia - R_P - Apr 17, 2024 - 1:14pm
 
Science in the News - Red_Dragon - Apr 17, 2024 - 11:14am
 
Magic Eye optical Illusions - Proclivities - Apr 17, 2024 - 10:08am
 
Ukraine - kurtster - Apr 17, 2024 - 10:05am
 
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos - Alchemist - Apr 17, 2024 - 9:38am
 
Just for the Haiku of it. . . - oldviolin - Apr 17, 2024 - 9:01am
 
HALF A WORLD - oldviolin - Apr 17, 2024 - 8:52am
 
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •  - oldviolin - Apr 16, 2024 - 9:08pm
 
Little known information... maybe even facts - R_P - Apr 16, 2024 - 3:29pm
 
songs that ROCK! - thisbody - Apr 16, 2024 - 10:56am
 
260,000 Posts in one thread? - oldviolin - Apr 16, 2024 - 10:10am
 
WTF??!! - rgio - Apr 16, 2024 - 5:23am
 
Australia has Disappeared - haresfur - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:58am
 
Earthquake - miamizsun - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:46am
 
It's the economy stupid. - miamizsun - Apr 16, 2024 - 4:28am
 
TV shows you watch - Manbird - Apr 15, 2024 - 7:28pm
 
Republican Party - Isabeau - Apr 15, 2024 - 12:12pm
 
Vinyl Only Spin List - kurtster - Apr 14, 2024 - 11:59am
 
Eclectic Sound-Drops - thisbody - Apr 14, 2024 - 11:27am
 
Synchronization - ReggieDXB - Apr 13, 2024 - 11:40pm
 
Other Medical Stuff - geoff_morphini - Apr 13, 2024 - 7:54am
 
What Did You See Today? - Steely_D - Apr 13, 2024 - 6:42am
 
Photos you have taken of your walks or hikes. - KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 12, 2024 - 3:50pm
 
Things You Thought Today - Red_Dragon - Apr 12, 2024 - 3:05pm
 
Poetry Forum - oldviolin - Apr 12, 2024 - 8:45am
 
Dear Bill - oldviolin - Apr 12, 2024 - 8:16am
 
Radio Paradise in Foobar2000 - gvajda - Apr 11, 2024 - 6:53pm
 
Mixtape Culture Club - ColdMiser - Apr 11, 2024 - 8:29am
 
Joe Biden - black321 - Apr 11, 2024 - 7:43am
 
New Song Submissions system - MayBaby - Apr 11, 2024 - 6:29am
 
No TuneIn Stream Lately - kurtster - Apr 10, 2024 - 6:26pm
 
Caching to Apple watch quit working - email-muri.0z - Apr 10, 2024 - 6:25pm
 
April 8th Partial Solar Eclipse - Alchemist - Apr 10, 2024 - 10:52am
 
Bug Reports & Feature Requests - orrinc - Apr 10, 2024 - 10:48am
 
NPR Listeners: Is There Liberal Bias In Its Reporting? - black321 - Apr 9, 2024 - 2:11pm
 
Sonos - rnstory - Apr 9, 2024 - 10:43am
 
RP Windows Desktop Notification Applet - gvajda - Apr 9, 2024 - 9:55am
 
If not RP, what are you listening to right now? - kurtster - Apr 8, 2024 - 10:34am
 
And the good news is.... - thisbody - Apr 8, 2024 - 3:57am
 
How do I get songs into My Favorites - Huey - Apr 7, 2024 - 11:29pm
 
Pernicious Pious Proclivities Particularized Prodigiously - R_P - Apr 7, 2024 - 5:14pm
 
Lyrics that strike a chord today... - Isabeau - Apr 7, 2024 - 12:50pm
 
Dialing 1-800-Manbird - oldviolin - Apr 7, 2024 - 11:18am
 
Why is Mellow mix192kbps? - dean2.athome - Apr 7, 2024 - 1:11am
 
Musky Mythology - haresfur - Apr 6, 2024 - 7:11pm
 
China - R_P - Apr 6, 2024 - 11:19am
 
Artificial Intelligence - R_P - Apr 5, 2024 - 12:45pm
 
Vega4 - Bullets - nirgivon - Apr 5, 2024 - 11:50am
 
Environment - thisbody - Apr 5, 2024 - 9:37am
 
How's the weather? - geoff_morphini - Apr 5, 2024 - 8:37am
 
Frequent drop outs (The Netherlands) - Babylon - Apr 5, 2024 - 8:37am
 
Index » Radio Paradise/General » General Discussion » Health Care Reform Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 32, 33, 34  Next
Post to this Topic
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Feb 18, 2020 - 4:02pm

looks like a beta program?

Amazon Care, the company’s virtual medical clinic, is now live for Seattle employees

CNBC previously reported that Amazon was working on an employee health clinic, and that the plans kicked off in the summer of 2018 with a few hires, including a top Seattle doctor who ran a network of health clinics.

Although the service is just for Amazon employees in Seattle today, if it succeeds in improving employee satisfaction and lowering costs, Amazon could theoretically offer it more broadly to other companies or directly to consumers. 

Amazon has a number of open roles, including product managers and designers, for Amazon Care as it looks to expand the team. Its care providers, including the physicians and nurses, are technically employed by a separate subsidiary called Oasis Medical. That provision ensures that Amazon won’t possess knowledge about its employees’ health that it’s not legally entitled to have.

Amazon isn’t the only technology company to set up its own primary care clinics for its workers. Apple has its own clinics, called AC Wellness, which are intended to provide high-quality care to employees working out of its California headquarters.

Amazon Care is just one part of Amazon’s overall health care strategy. As an employer, it is working with J.P. Morgan and Berkshire Hathaway on an effort called Haven to reduce costs and bolster the quality of care for the companies’ combined 1.2 million workers. The company is also working on health initiatives within its cloud group, where it has focused on voice technology and machine learning tools; the Alexa voice assistant team; and its pharmacy division, PillPack, which the company acquired in 2018.

pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Aug 30, 2018 - 9:40am

I was watching the Rainmaker the other day.  How relevant that was and still is 20 years later.  Nothing has been done to change the fact that people die waiting for operations that are denied everyday with a stroke of a pen.
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Aug 30, 2018 - 5:32am

looks like this guy is married to a doctor and has some observations...

How Formerly Independent Doctors Were Pushed Out of Business

Rules and regulations intended to reform health care are driving private practices out of business by overconfident design.

Like many American physicians, my wife no longer works for herself. Under the same pressures that have forced many once-independent practices to consolidate, she was lucky enough to find a large health-care organization willing to purchase her practice and ensure continuity of care for her patients. "Is the independent doctor disappearing?" U.S. News & World Report asked earlier this summer. The answer is: yes—and to a significant extent, that's a result of deliberate policy.

Your doctors didn't jump out of business; they were pushed. And they were pushed by people way too convinced of their qualifications to redesign the world around them.

Just 33 percent of physicians "identify as independent practice owners or partners," the Physicians Foundation reported in its last last survey, conducted in 2016. That's down from 48.5 percent in 2012.

But while a majority of doctors now opt to work as employees, "most physicians, even many who are themselves employed by hospitals, do not believe hospital employment of physicians is a positive trend," the foundation reported. So, why are doctors going to work for large organizations when they seem so resistant to the idea?

Factors including "government insurance mandates and changes to health insurance design to new reporting requirements, escalating costs and the rise of urgent care clinics" feature in the U.S. News article, which also notes that "Unique for physicians are certain requirements surrounding electronic health records and new reporting requirements regarding patient visits as part of the Affordable Care Act."

"The factor cited most frequently by physicians as being least satisfying is 'regulatory/paperwork burdens' followed by 'erosion of clinical autonomy,'" the Physicians Foundation survey notes. "Medicare compliance rules and regulations alone running into the tens of thousands of pages" in addition to the miles of red tape contained in the Affordable Care Act.

more...


sirdroseph

sirdroseph Avatar

Location: Not here, I tell you wat
Gender: Male


Posted: Apr 1, 2017 - 5:20am

Here is why a Libertarian supports single payer healthcare, it is not about ideology for me. I actually think that health care cost are so out of control, insurance premiums and deductibles so high and the insurance coverage is so poor that financially we have nothing to lose, the added taxes could not possibly supersede the present cost and poor coverage that the majority of us presently suffer. In addition the public sentiment for government control as opposed to pure free market is so overwhelming that that full free market healthcare is highly unlikely to get the support anytime in the near future and demographic forecast does not indicate this is going to change. The only drawback and it is a huge one, is that our healthcare will be run in a similar fashion as the other paragons of customer service, the IRS, DMV, Veterans Administration and so forth, kwal-a-dee. Perhaps it will force us to rethink what it means to be healthy and how the present system of poisoning with chemicals and fake food with little or no nutrients and then treating the illness caused by this, making bank for the pharmaceutical and health care industries is a scam of the highest proportions and will take more stock in eating real, nutritious non processed food and avoiding man made drugs at all cost along with regular exercise avoiding the sickness in first place. Do not be fooled that this will be a panacea for the poor, quite the contrary even with single pay healthcare, the poor will get their care, but as aforementioned, the care will be of poor quality, long wait times, uncaring staff etc. and the poor also cannot afford to eat properly and take care of themselves so the scam will continue to be in full force for them sadly. All in all though it is probably the best option out of no good options. Bottom line, humanity has made their bed through our "cleverness" of technology and industrialization and I do not believe we will be clever enough to survive.

R_P

R_P Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 31, 2017 - 2:05pm

GOP Lawmakers Now Admit Years of Obamacare Repeal Votes Were a Sham

It is hard to overestimate the role of the Affordable Care Act in the Republican resurgence.

Over the last seven years, the GOP has won successive elections by highlighting problems with Obamacare, airing more than $235 million in negative ads slamming the law, and staging more than 50 high-profile repeal votes. In 2016 every major Republican presidential candidate, including Donald Trump, campaigned on a pledge to quickly get rid of it.

Now in total control of Congress and the White House, some GOP legislators are saying that the political assault on Obamacare was an exercise in cynical politics, and that an outright repeal was never on the table. (...)


kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Mar 29, 2017 - 9:49pm

THIS is the swamp that needs to be drained. The USA is turning into a series of opaque rip-offs of the average citizen.  

Those Indecipherable Medical Bills? They’re One Reason Health Care Costs So Much.

...What’s less understood is the extent to which our current medical-billing system itself is responsible for the high prices patients are charged. There are, of course, many factors that have led to the United States’ record-breaking $3 trillion health care bill: runaway drug prices, excessive testing and sky-high charges for even the most basic medical interventions. But all of those individual price increases have been enabled — indeed, aided and abetted — by the complex system of billing and coding that underlies bills like those sent to (patient Wanda) Wickizer. That system, with its lines of alphanumeric codes and arcane medical abbreviations, has given birth to a gigantic new industry of consultants, armies of back-room experts whom medical providers and insurance companies deploy against each other in an endless war over which medical procedures were undertaken and how much to pay for them. Caught in the crossfire are Americans like Wanda Wickizer, left with huge bills and indecipherable explanations in languages they cannot possibly understand. 
Red_Dragon

Red_Dragon Avatar

Location: Dumbf*ckistan


Posted: Mar 29, 2017 - 6:10am

Kansas moves to expand Medicaid as GOP legislatures face pressure after ‘Trumpcare’ failure
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Mar 27, 2017 - 1:04am

 kurtster wrote:
this was mentioned:


socializing the burden of addiction, obesity, and other unhealthy behaviors. 

it's past time to for politicians on both sides to quit playing politics with the health of the citizens
 
Let's look at that in particular.  The burden of unhealthy behaviours.

I think that we can all agree that there are legal unhealthy behaviours.  Smoking is one and consuming soda pop is another.

There is a majority held argument that those who partake should pay more for their health related expenses in at least the form of higher premiums for their HC insurance.  Its hard to argue against that at any honest level.

But ... the ACA is a tax and nothing more.  The SCOTUS said so.  Its not an insurance plan.  It only allows certain types of health insurance plans to be sold.  It collects taxes from certain unrelated things and transfers that money to subsidize participants in these plans.  It also mandates that everyone must have certain types of coverage regardless of need so that the cost is spread out.  

So why must smokers pay more ?  When all the taxes on cigarettes is added up ( I did the math 5 years ago), its at least $100 billion per year.  So why in the hell should smokers pay anything for their health care let alone more ?  Smokers are being taxed twice.  Now we're applying this to soda pop ala NYC and Philly.  Just where is all this money going to go ?  

Its all about money and little more now (duh).  Its making the noble act of caring for the human condition and turning it into something to exploit for financial gain and make work for unnecessary administrators (cough, bureaucrats) with the power of life and death in their hands. 

Its a way of thinking that has to be addressed in order to get our healthcare system's ducks in a row.  It was written below that we need to establish actual costs of medical goods and services and I couldn't agree more.  How big is this pie ?  $600 billion per year for a round number ?  So what percent of that is the $100 billion per year that cigarette smokers pay per year in taxes ?  Want to talk about the burden of unhealthy behaviours, then let's start talking about them seriously and honestly and determine just who is the real burden and why.

Point being that that $100 billion smokers pay in taxes, not one dime goes to pay towards the healthcare of the smokers.  Smokers are paying for everyone else's bad behaviour and getting nothing in return.  Its a shell game of bullshit.  And the game is only going to get bigger unless the way we tax ourselves is over hauled and repurposed.

ymmv ...

 
or we make tobacco illegal and stop collecting all that tax and level the playing field  ...

 
"There is a majority held argument that those who partake should pay more for their health related expenses in at least the form of higher premiums for their HC insurance.  Its hard to argue against that at any honest level."

Who holds this majority argument? This is not how Obamacare works. Before the ACA, a policy holder's ill health would drive up his/her premium—often leading to disaster when the premium became unaffordable and that person's health spiraled downwards. Insurance companies wouldn't  always kick a person off his insurance—they'd just jack up his rates until he quit paying. 

I agree that it some makes sense to charge policyholders more if they smoke, drink a lot, are overweight or otherwise contribute to long-term health problems. I think that the ACA was trying to reduce the insurance industry's abuse of pre-existing conditions. Consider that the industry's past behavior, btw, penalized some policy holders whose bad habits did not show up in the form of poor health: if you smoked but were healthy, you still had to pay a higher premium. Nowadays, individuals pay more in the form of co-pays and deductibles, not higher premiums, when ill health actually does show up. 
"So why must smokers pay more ?" 

An insurance premium covers health costs of the policyholder. (Again, ACA-based policies don't require that smokers pay bigger premiums.) Taxes on tobacco do not cover the health costs of a policyholder: they try to pay for the costs caused by smoking that the smoker otherwise wouldn't pay (see the concept of "negative externality"). 

 
Second-  and third-hand smoke affect the health of non-smokers. Federal, state and local governments make tobacco products expensive so as to reduce rates of cancer, emphysema, COPD, etc. that burden society and healthcare systems. They're also trying to raise tax revenue from a group whose addictions make their demand pretty inelastic (i.e. unresponsive) to the price of tobacco. I think there may also may an element of moralizing behind tobacco taxes. 

You're right that tobacco tax revenue doesn't help smokers quit, at least in MA:  http://boston.cbslocal.com/2010/10/01/curious-where-cigarette-tax-money-goes/

"Its all about money and little more now (duh).  Its making the noble act of caring for the human condition and turning it into something to exploit for financial gain and make work for unnecessary administrators (cough, bureaucrats) with the power of life and death in their hands." 
You could say the same thing about the whole current healthcare system. It's not just the insurance companies. One reason we don't have a lot of generalists as primary care providers is that doctors can make much more money by specializing in radiology, dermatology, etc.
kurtster, I think you and I might agree that a person's healthcare costs should reasonably adjust in accordance with that policyholder's controllable behavior. I lean towards co-pays and deductibles because a policyholder pays more when the consequences of his bad behavior show up as illness. A BETTER APPROACH might be to lower a premium amount for good behavior—going to the gym, quitting smoking, drinking less, eating more fruits and veggies, etc. Good behavior can be hard for insurance firms to monitor, but this approach has been tried experimentally in a few areas with real success. 
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 26, 2017 - 9:40am

this was mentioned:


socializing the burden of addiction, obesity, and other unhealthy behaviors. 

it's past time to for politicians on both sides to quit playing politics with the health of the citizens
 
Let's look at that in particular.  The burden of unhealthy behaviours.

I think that we can all agree that there are legal unhealthy behaviours.  Smoking is one and consuming soda pop is another.

There is a majority held argument that those who partake should pay more for their health related expenses in at least the form of higher premiums for their HC insurance.  Its hard to argue against that at any honest level.

But ... the ACA is a tax and nothing more.  The SCOTUS said so.  Its not an insurance plan.  It only allows certain types of health insurance plans to be sold.  It collects taxes from certain unrelated things and transfers that money to subsidize participants in these plans.  It also mandates that everyone must have certain types of coverage regardless of need so that the cost is spread out.  

So why must smokers pay more ?  When all the taxes on cigarettes is added up ( I did the math 5 years ago), its at least $100 billion per year.  So why in the hell should smokers pay anything for their health care let alone more ?  Smokers are being taxed twice.  Now we're applying this to soda pop ala NYC and Philly.  Just where is all this money going to go ?  

Its all about money and little more now (duh).  Its making the noble act of caring for the human condition and turning it into something to exploit for financial gain and make work for unnecessary administrators (cough, bureaucrats) with the power of life and death in their hands. 

Its a way of thinking that has to be addressed in order to get our healthcare system's ducks in a row.  It was written below that we need to establish actual costs of medical goods and services and I couldn't agree more.  How big is this pie ?  $600 billion per year for a round number ?  So what percent of that is the $100 billion per year that cigarette smokers pay per year in taxes ?  Want to talk about the burden of unhealthy behaviours, then let's start talking about them seriously and honestly and determine just who is the real burden and why.

Point being that that $100 billion smokers pay in taxes, not one dime goes to pay towards the healthcare of the smokers.  Smokers are paying for everyone else's bad behaviour and getting nothing in return.  Its a shell game of bullshit.  And the game is only going to get bigger unless the way we tax ourselves is over hauled and repurposed.

ymmv ...

 
or we make tobacco illegal and stop collecting all that tax and level the playing field  ...


miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 26, 2017 - 9:22am

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:

I'm starting to think we have actually outgrown this whole party political thing. In a world of free access to an infinite flow of information and a voting base of increasingly better educated voters (ok, moot point), it gets increasingly hard to vote along party lines. They are ALL bad as all of them are too sclerotic and two dimensional. Why don't we use the internet now to really make our government democratic. It would be easy to set up electronic referendums. Even if these were not binding, it would at least give the people more voice and the government a better guideline on policy. You could have in built safeguards to prevent a wave of hysteria sweeping along ill-chosen policies on a whim or driven by some short-lived internet meme. But it would help to get rid of party politics and all the frikking lobbying that goes with them. It would also make governments more accountable instead of these 4-year quasi-dictatorships. Might also make the voting base a bit more interested in learning something about the issues as well. 

 

yep (and all apologies for my therapeutic denunciation of political manipulation) 

to stop corruption or to reel in corrupt framework we might try something that works well in reality

we could try contractual obligations (i sign contracts daily)

politics clearly isn't well defined and we see the exploitation running rampant

eventually make as much as possible defined where we'll at least have a shot at accountability


NoEnzLefttoSplit

NoEnzLefttoSplit Avatar

Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 26, 2017 - 9:06am

 miamizsun wrote:


this brings up a great point

to the board

rant/on

if we look at the evidence, it's abundantly clear that political leadership doesn't know what they're doing

not only on this subject but many others

just look at what their system has incentivized

massive debt, deficits, unfunded liabilities and violence/war that is never ending

how could intelligent people even think of agreeing or settling for this nuttery?

i mean who thinks this is a good idea or sees wisdom in this?

did they learn this at home?

has the schooling system has churned out compliant statist fodder for decades and decades?

if the masses (especially politicians) continue to make decisions based on feelings instead of logic and reason, we'll continue this decline

services and products become subjected to political force and become (or framed as) rights to justify coercion

we have a system that rewards political corruption and is backed by authoritarian violence

there's no mechanism that's effective to allow for disagreement (to say no to bad ideas)

it means absolutely nothing to be "allowed" to disagree with bad ideas (completely immoral and unethical) and then be forced to pay for it/them

then there's the idiocy of blaming insurance companies, medical equipment/supply companies, doctors and other medical professionals for the current situation

doing this is a flashing neon sign that screams i don't know what i'm talking about

simply put we only elect representatives (it is something we can somewhat control)

how about not selling us out to special interests?

we're taught that it is allowable to have a form of political corruption/lobbying baked into the cake and that we can let them leverage it to get what we want

how does this make any sense?

do we want an increase in the supply of high quality affordable products and services in the health care industry?

how did we achieve this in other areas/markets?

what are the obstructions?

how do we solve these challenges?

rant/off


 
I'm starting to think we have actually outgrown this whole party political thing. In a world of free access to an infinite flow of information and a voting base of increasingly better educated voters (ok, moot point), it gets increasingly hard to vote along party lines. They are ALL bad as all of them are too sclerotic and two dimensional. Why don't we use the internet now to really make our government democratic. It would be easy to set up electronic referendums. Even if these were not binding, it would at least give the people more voice and the government a better guideline on policy. You could have in built safeguards to prevent a wave of hysteria sweeping along ill-chosen policies on a whim or driven by some short-lived internet meme. But it would help to get rid of party politics and all the frikking lobbying that goes with them. It would also make governments more accountable instead of these 4-year quasi-dictatorships. Might also make the voting base a bit more interested in learning something about the issues as well. 
miamizsun

miamizsun Avatar

Location: (3283.1 Miles SE of RP)
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 26, 2017 - 8:45am

 Steely_D wrote:

See, I think that's the problem with democracy. Lotsa folks tried to influence the outcome without being well educated on the topic.
In a situation like this, you need a combination of people who can look at it from many sides: economists, sociologists, medical experts - and they could do a fine job of creating some version of compromise that's best.

Instead, you get politicians, who were elected because of their party affiliation or their race or their gender or their mailing address.
If we were smarter, we'd get the most well educated or most well prepared to work on this incredibly tough problem. But, the GOP and FOX did a fine job of making people contemptible of the "elites." 

 

this brings up a great point

to the board

rant/on

if we look at the evidence, it's abundantly clear that political leadership doesn't know what they're doing

not only on this subject but many others

just look at what their system has incentivized

massive debt, deficits, unfunded liabilities and violence/war that is never ending

how could intelligent people even think of agreeing or settling for this nuttery?

i mean who thinks this is a good idea or sees wisdom in this?

did they learn this at home?

has the schooling system has churned out compliant statist fodder for decades and decades?

if the masses (especially politicians) continue to make decisions based on feelings instead of logic and reason, we'll continue this decline

services and products become subjected to political force and become (or framed as) rights to justify coercion

we have a system that rewards political corruption and is backed by authoritarian violence

there's no mechanism that's effective to allow for disagreement (to say no to bad ideas)

it means absolutely nothing to be "allowed" to disagree with bad ideas (completely immoral and unethical) and then be forced to pay for it/them

then there's the idiocy of blaming insurance companies, medical equipment/supply companies, doctors and other medical professionals for the current situation

doing this is a flashing neon sign that screams i don't know what i'm talking about

simply put we only elect representatives (it is something we can somewhat control)

how about not selling us out to special interests?

we're taught that it is allowable to have a form of political corruption/lobbying baked into the cake and that we can let them leverage it to get what we want

how does this make any sense?

do we want an increase in the supply of high quality affordable products and services in the health care industry?

how did we achieve this in other areas/markets?

what are the obstructions?

how do we solve these challenges?

rant/off



pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 26, 2017 - 12:40am

 Steely_D wrote:

See, I think that's the problem with democracy. Lotsa folks tried to influence the outcome without being well educated on the topic.
In a situation like this, you need a combination of people who can look at it from many sides: economists, sociologists, medical experts - and they could do a fine job of creating some version of compromise that's best.

Instead, you get politicians, who were elected because of their party affiliation or their race or their gender or their mailing address.
If we were smarter, we'd get the most well educated or most well prepared to work on this incredibly tough problem. But, the GOP and FOX did a fine job of making people contemptible of the "elites." 

 
I agree. Governments like the population stupid and uninformed so they can spit out really bad reality programs over and over at them.  They scare them into submission, rape all the money they earn at the measly little jobs, dangling benefits like "healthcare" in front of them and will keep doing so unless we rise up as a whole and say ENOUGH!


ScottFromWyoming

ScottFromWyoming Avatar

Location: Powell
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 25, 2017 - 4:59am

 kcar wrote:

What Hospitals Waste

Experts say the United States might be squandering a quarter of the money spent on health care. That’s an estimated $765 billion a year...The annual waste, the report estimated, could have paid for the insurance coverage of 150 million American workers — both the employer and employee contributions.

As the article notes, $765 billion is more than the Dept. of Defense budget. 

 
Holy crap!
kcar

kcar Avatar



Posted: Mar 25, 2017 - 12:02am

 kurtster wrote:

I pretty much agree with your conclusion.  Everyone has laid their cards on the table and names were taken.  If this doesn't bring the two sides together, nothing will.  Both sides must participate to get this done properly.

 
Your thinking is reasonable, but:

1. The two sides don't seem to want the same thing. The Democrats generally want to fix and improve Obamacare, even if that means added costs. The Republicans want to limit the size and costs of federal programs, even if that means the breadth and depth of healthcare coverage shrink.  

2. Freedom Caucus types seem quite willing to disrupt government power, even if it's held by their own party.

At some point, both parties should press hard for an alliance between individuals and government bodies, an alliance that will bargain with hospitals and insurance companies over costs, prices and waste.

Obamacare has tried to marshal all individuals into the healthcare system to spread the risk and expense of major healthcare. That was the first step.  

The next steps are to determine real costs that healthcare providers and insurers face and then limit prices paid by patients and government programs to a reasonable percentage on top of those costs. We can lower prices through competition between providers, but that doesn't always apply in healthcare. We can also limit prices by collectively bargaining with providers and insurers.

We can also force providers to stop wasting so much.

Another RPer—haresfur? ScottNN? I can't remember—posted the link to this propublica.com article. It's mind-boggling how much hospitals and other groups throw away. It's also a good source of saving money and getting prices paid by patients down. This may be where we can really bend the cost curve, something Obamacare hasn't really done AFAICS. 


What Hospitals Waste



Experts say the United States might be squandering a quarter of the money spent on health care. That’s an estimated $765 billion a year...The annual waste, the report estimated, could have paid for the insurance coverage of 150 million American workers — both the employer and employee contributions.

As the article notes, $765 billion is more than the Dept. of Defense budget. 


Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 11:38pm

 pigtail wrote:

Power to the people!{#War}

 
See, I think that's the problem with democracy. Lotsa folks tried to influence the outcome without being well educated on the topic.
In a situation like this, you need a combination of people who can look at it from many sides: economists, sociologists, medical experts - and they could do a fine job of creating some version of compromise that's best.

Instead, you get politicians, who were elected because of their party affiliation or their race or their gender or their mailing address.
If we were smarter, we'd get the most well educated or most well prepared to work on this incredibly tough problem. But, the GOP and FOX did a fine job of making people contemptible of the "elites." 
pigtail

pigtail Avatar

Location: Southern California
Gender: Female


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 10:08pm

 Skydog wrote:


 
Power to the people!{#War}
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 7:18pm

 ScottFromWyoming wrote:

 Why would they actually want to get rid of the ACA? It's been the GOP candidates' talisman for a decade.

 
As long as they can point OVER THERE to the thing that's GONNA EXPLODE! then it's the inevitable Armageddon that so many religions tell you is just around the corner, and you're only safe if you follow their doctrine.
Steely_D

Steely_D Avatar

Location: Biscayne Bay
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 7:16pm

 kurtster wrote:

I pretty much agree with your conclusion.  Everyone has laid their cards on the table and names were taken.  If this doesn't bring the two sides together, nothing will.  Both sides must participate to get this done properly.

 
It'll be a like two overlapping circles, like a Venn diagram. Inside the middle are the folks from the left and right that can be grownups, and on the far left and far right are the extremists. They will be shunned as folks who prevent progress. Hippies and Hawks.
kurtster

kurtster Avatar

Location: where fear is not a virtue
Gender: Male


Posted: Mar 24, 2017 - 5:50pm

 Steely_D wrote:
Remember when Richard Hatch sat in the tree on the very first Survivor and told them that, when they were through, he'd tell them how to play the game properly?

OK. Now that it's all fallen apart, here's what needs to happen:

Moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans will realize that they can work together and drown out the fringes. They will put aside the partisanship and form their own larger-than-the-idiots'-group core to get some stuff done. 

Instead of the repeal/replace chant, it'll be "We're coming together to fix our health care system." And the issue of Dem/GOP won't be the deciding factor in how they vote. There will be compromise, but progress.

This was the event that will cause both sides to realize that they need to stop acting like the calico cats. It'll all happen behind closed doors until the "Reasonable Caucus" is formed, but something's going to start moving now. 

 
I pretty much agree with your conclusion.  Everyone has laid their cards on the table and names were taken.  If this doesn't bring the two sides together, nothing will.  Both sides must participate to get this done properly.
Page: 1, 2, 3 ... 32, 33, 34  Next