And you wonder why they are called "death panels"...

[TheHumanAlphabet]

If you think this won't happen here with the IPAB (Independent Payment Advisory Board) in Obamadon'tcare...


then you are a fool!!!!!



From the UK Health Ministry, Here is what you can expect as time goes on... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2240075/Now-sick-babies-death-pathway-Doctors-haunting-testimony-reveals-children-end-life-plan.html#ixzz2DcUKj73D)

[Midtowner]

And you know just how unpopular the UK Health Ministry is compared to the U.S.?

Oh right... a lot more popular.

http://media.gallup.com/GPTB/healthcare/20030325_1.gif

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Yeah, dead people don't vote (except in Chicago of course).

[okie52]

Yeah, dead people don't vote (except in Chicago of course).

Heh, lucky stiffs.

[Soonerjeepman]

well, at least here it isn't going to be called death panel...~

[SanJoaquinSooner]

What do you want, for the taxpayers to spend $10 million to keep an 80-year-old alive?

[C&CDean]

What do you want, for the taxpayers to spend $10 million to keep an 80-year-old alive?

Nah, just put a clean finishing shot under their chin...

[TheHumanAlphabet]

What do you want, for the taxpayers to spend $10 million to keep an 80-year-old alive?

The fallacy in your arguement SJS is that people of substance will...just likely you and me won't be able to because we have to be in this **** for health care program... Those people will be Pelosi, her ilk, all the liberal "illuminati" like all of Hollywood, Soros, the Waltons of Wallyworld and the Costco people... you and I will ever be precluded from aspiring to those lofty wealth goals by passage of The Socialist's increased income tax. He wants it here just like Europe, where theold have the money and the working stiffs will never, ever be able to become rich based on their life efforts...

[yermom]

and that is different than now, how?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

and that is different than now, how?

It is truly sad that you do not see the great American experience as an ability to reach lofty wealth goals in this country. It does happen, frequently.

[Curly Bill]

It is truly sad that you do not see the great American experience as an ability to reach lofty wealth goals in this country. It does happen, frequently.

Some people have no hope nor dreams it could happen to them, nor do they aspire to even try, they'd rather hope the government take care of em. You can call those people liberals, progressives, democrats, donks, or losers - they're all of the same ilk.

[pphilfran]

Like it or not that is the direction we are headed...the rate of increase in healthcare costs is going to eat our lunch and one way to slow some of that cost growth is to minimize super expensive care to those with limited life expectancy...

That sounds bad...damn bad...wish I hadn't typed it...

[badger]

yeah... i suspect there will be political and popular influence on who to save as well -- let the celebrity beyond saving live... let the poor kid die... let the congressman's terminal grandmother live... let the woman without a 401k die...

[pphilfran]

It is you damn women that cause the cost to increase so much since you live too long.... :)

Go into a nursing home and count the number of men to women...you will be astounded...

[rock on sooner]

The fallacy in your arguement SJS is that people of substance will...just likely you and me won't be able to because we have to be in this **** for health care program... Those people will be Pelosi, her ilk, all the liberal "illuminati" like all of Hollywood, Soros, the Waltons of Wallyworld and the Costco people... you and I will ever be precluded from aspiring to those lofty wealth goals by passage of The Socialist's increased income tax. He wants it here just like Europe, where theold have the money and the working stiffs will never, ever be able to become rich based on their life efforts...

THA, don't forget about the person in Arizona and the one in Missouri....

[pphilfran]

Some of this is already going on with our current system...there are some cancer procedures that are experimental and are not covered by any health care coverage...only the rich can afford to go after those premium services...

And then the person that has no coverage...they are not going to get every treatment available unless they pay out of pocket...

[KantoSooner]

Fran has an excellent point. This 'death panel' will differ from denial of insurance benefits in exactly what way?

[KABOOKIE]

Fran has an excellent point. This 'death panel' will differ from denial of insurance benefits in exactly what way?

The previous method cost nothing and the new and improved method will brankrupt the country. What do I win?

[KantoSooner]

'cost nothing'? As I recall one example is that health benefits add about $3,000 to the cost of each and every US made car. A little 'cost' in terms of exports, jobs and thus taxes? mmm hmmm.

Again, since the question was really more, "What's the difference between having an insurance agent deny coverage and having a government bureaucrat deny benefits?", is there any difference? I don't see one.

[SoonerorLater]

'cost nothing'? As I recall one example is that health benefits add about $3,000 to the cost of each and every US made car. A little 'cost' in terms of exports, jobs and thus taxes? mmm hmmm.

Again, since the question was really more, "What's the difference between having an insurance agent deny coverage and having a government bureaucrat deny benefits?", is there any difference? I don't see one.

Yes, There is the possibility of changing Insurance agents. Not so much so with changing government bureaucrats.

[jkjsooner]

'cost nothing'? As I recall one example is that health benefits add about $3,000 to the cost of each and every US made car. A little 'cost' in terms of exports, jobs and thus taxes? mmm hmmm.

Again, since the question was really more, "What's the difference between having an insurance agent deny coverage and having a government bureaucrat deny benefits?", is there any difference? I don't see one.

Exactly. There is no difference.

Furthermore, most of the people we would be talking about are already covered by medicare. (On a side point, that's why I have a hard time seeing how that ACA can bankrupt us since most of our lifetime medical costs occur when we're at the age to receive medicare anyway.)

I'd also imagine that whatever we have there will always be resources available to the rich. The rich will always be able to buy supplementary insurance or simply pay for services that normal insurance companies won't cover. I don't see the ACA or even a single payer system changing that.

[KantoSooner]

Yes, There is the possibility of changing Insurance agents. Not so much so with changing government bureaucrats.

First, are you paying for your own insurance? I wasn't, either, until about 5 years ago. You talk a big awakening! There's not a spits' worth of difference between any of the major insurers in terms of what's covered. It's just a question of how many doctors take it, and what your deductible is.

Second, when are you going to change? After payment/treatment is denied? Good luck with that.

[LiveLaughLove]

Some people have no hope nor dreams it could happen to them, nor do they aspire to even try, they'd rather hope the government take care of em. You can call those people liberals, progressives, democrats, donks, or losers - they're all of the same ilk.

And just like crabs in a bucket, they are happy just pulling those climbing out back down.

They have this delusion that if they pull enough down they might get to climb out. It doesn't work that way. We are each responsible for getting ourselves out.

[yermom]

It is truly sad that you do not see the great American experience as an ability to reach lofty wealth goals in this country. It does happen, frequently.

sure, you can get lucky and win the lottery and have your business succeed, but how many super successful people right now really come from nothing? you don't think the deck is stacked against the average Joe?

i don't see anything changing that would hinder the individual coming.

the idea of not being crippled financially by a visit to the ER seems nice though.

[FaninAma]

Are there healthcare systems in the world that do a good job at a lower price than the US? Certainly.

Are there healthcare systems in the world that use funds more effeciently that the US? Again, yes.

Is there a healtchcare system othe than the US system I would prefer my family member with a serious health problem be treated at? Hell no.

As we adopt a system similiar to the socialized medicine systems of the rest of the world, patients need to get used to waiting longer for care and having certain treatment options not available to them. Our healthcare system is over-utilized and some changes need to be made. But those who think costs will go down but access to care will remain the same are just dreaming.

[SoonerorLater]

Are there healthcare systems in the world that do a good job at a lower price than the US? Certainly.

Are there healthcare systems in the world that use funds more effeciently that the US? Again, yes.

Is there a healtchcare system othe than the US system I would prefer my family member with a serious health problem be treated at? Hell no.

As we adopt a system similiar to the socialized medicine systems of the rest of the world, patients need to get used to waiting longer for care and having certain treatment options not available to them. Our healthcare system is over-utilized and some changes need to be made. But those who think costs will go down but access to care will remain the same are just dreaming.

Let me debate you on this. Never mind you're right.

[Turd_Ferguson]

Let me debate you on this. Never mind you're right.You're out of your ****ing mind...Never mind no you're not.

[Midtowner]

Is there any evidence that the U.S. healthcare system is the best for treating ALL serious conditions?

Also, consider it costs about double what any other system does, has a lower Dr.:patient ratio than most and in fact delivers pretty similar care to most other systems.

Here's a pretty good site which compares various healthcare systems. In no way are we the best at everything except treating a few isolated diseases like breast cancer. http://www.commonwealthfund.org/

[KantoSooner]

I'll give you the insight of an Aussie friend of mine who's lived in both the US and Aus. "If I were to have my heart explode inside my chest or were to contract a disease that no one had ever seen before, in what country would I have the best chance of survival? The U.S., of course. If I were, however, raising a family and wanted to be sure that my family's medical needs were taken care of and that I would not be financially ruined in a significant percentage of cases in the process, would I choose the U.S.? Not in a million years."

Our ERs are fantastic. No better place in the world to have cancer. But our costs are twice (at least) the going rate. And you're as likely to have decent quality regular medical care as you would be in the upper tier of the third world.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

sure, you can get lucky and win the lottery and have your business succeed, but how many super successful people right now really come from nothing? you don't think the deck is stacked against the average Joe?

i don't see anything changing that would hinder the individual coming.

the idea of not being crippled financially by a visit to the ER seems nice though.


Lets see, my first job in 1982 after graduation from OU I made $16,000/year. I now after hard work, education and being good at what I do earn a large order of magnitude more than $16,000 per year. I am on track to continue to earn. Apply yourself, it ain't too hard to be successful.

To your last point, that is what catastrophic health insurance is for...

[KantoSooner]

Neither our current system nor ACA/Obamacare do anything whatsoever to address the issue of why we pay twice or more what anyone else in the world does for our healthcare.

(and the answer is NOT that we get twice the product. We don't.)

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Kanto, I would agree that costs are not well aligned with other countries. Why is pharma more expensive here than in other countries? or rather, why are we paying for the R&D and others in the world aren't? Why not force practices to list their prices and let the free market work and people choose to go to a doc based on their costs and insurance acceptance.

There are plenty other ways to try to address the cost gap, IMO, other than federalizing the health care system. The French Socialists are saying we are Nationalism the health care, so I think it is fair to call it that...

[pphilfran]

Neither our current system nor ACA/Obamacare do anything whatsoever to address the issue of why we pay twice or more what anyone else in the world does for our healthcare.

(and the answer is NOT that we get twice the product. We don't.)

I agree

[KantoSooner]

THA, I've heard the argument that the US pays for the whole world's medical R&D and that's why our costs are so high. I don't buy it. There's plenty of pharma R&D going on outside the US and the resulting products sometimes aren't even sold here, but go for lower prices than like products that are sold here.
I would lean toward guessing that a great deal of the problem here is that we set up a system in which the sickest of our population, the elderly, have their care paid for by a government bureaucracy's program that is administered by private insurers and provided by private industry. Nowhere in our care for the old is there the slightest motivation to control cost.
Then we turn around and take another large cost share population, the poor/uninsured, and make sure that they don't get preventive care so that we can provide for them in the ultra-high cost centers known as ERs.

None of this is due to us carrying any beneficent burden for the good of mankind. It seems to be because our politicians are ball-less hacks who don't want to take on hard issues and our government administrators are wan timeservers who'd rather clock-in and clock-out until they can get their tasty pensions than do the job they were hired to do: manage.

But, that's just my personal sense of things. Still, I've yet to encounter a doctor, hospital administrator, government worker or anyone else who has a better take on things. It's embarrassing to be forced to conclude that we Americans are twice as stupid as the French, or the British, or the South Koreans. But, I guess we are.

[yermom]

Lets see, my first job in 1982 after graduation from OU I made $16,000/year. I now after hard work, education and being good at what I do earn a large order of magnitude more than $16,000 per year. I am on track to continue to earn. Apply yourself, it ain't too hard to be successful.

To your last point, that is what catastrophic health insurance is for...

1) this isn't about me. i'm not exactly hurting. i'm not Bruce, but i'm relatively comfortable.
2) this isn't 1982.
3) lots of people living paycheck to paycheck don't have catastrophic health insurance, and i'm guessing can't afford it, or don't have the option through their employer because they are "part-time"

personally if i could get a high deductible plan with one of those HSA, i'd be all over it.

[LiveLaughLove]

1) this isn't about me. i'm not exactly hurting. i'm not Bruce, but i'm relatively comfortable.
2) this isn't 1982.
3) lots of people living paycheck to paycheck don't have catastrophic health insurance, and i'm guessing can't afford it, or don't have the option through their employer because they are "part-time"

personally if i could get a high deductible plan with one of those HSA, i'd be all over it.

Obama dropped the amount pf pretax for an HSA to $2500. Won't cover much.

[KantoSooner]

I think that's 2013 onwards, right? I'm trying to top mine up before year's end.

[LiveLaughLove]

I think that's 2013 onwards, right? I'm trying to top mine up before year's end.

Yeah, everything was set to kick in conveniently AFTER the election.

[yermom]

Obama dropped the amount pf pretax for an HSA to $2500. Won't cover much.

that's FSA, if i remember correctly

[TheHumanAlphabet]

that's FSA, if i remember correctly

Correct. Don't know anything about an HSA, though I do not believe I am eleigible as I am covered under a company health plan.

[KantoSooner]

I'm not sure what an FSA is, but an HSA is a Health Savings Account. If you have a high deductible life insurance policy ($5,000 or more? I don't remember the limit), you can open one of these up and deposit pre-tax dollars into it. Current limit is around $5,000 per year if memory serves. You could only use the money on health care, but that was a pretty generous definition. Prescription glasses, for instance, qualify. Used to be that whatever you didn't spend in a given year, you lost. Then it was changed to simply roll over each year. And with a limit of $5,000 investment per year, it could be used as an alternative savings vehicle. Once it got to a certain point, you could pay your insurance premium out of it and you were off to the races. Perpetual motion machine.
Now they're going to tighten it up. Dayum. I always get in on these things too late.

[soonercruiser]

What do you want, for the taxpayers to spend $10 million to keep an 80-year-old alive?

So, why should we spend the same to keep YOU alive???
:welcoming:

[soonercruiser]

It is you damn women that cause the cost to increase so much since you live too long.... :)

Go into a nursing home and count the number of men to women...you will be astounded...

Yah! And they want their contraceptives until death!
Ask Sabndra Fluck!

[yermom]

Yah! And they want their contraceptives until death!
Ask Sabndra Fluck!

there is some biology you might need to look into on this one...

[soonercruiser]

Neither our current system nor ACA/Obamacare do anything whatsoever to address the issue of why we pay twice or more what anyone else in the world does for our healthcare.

(and the answer is NOT that we get twice the product. We don't.)

Does the ACA address the cause & high costs of malpractice insurance?
NOT! You're talking about Comrade Obama's contributors here!

[soonercruiser]

Sorry! We still do not have a "sarcacsm" emoticon folks!

[yermom]

I'm not sure what an FSA is, but an HSA is a Health Savings Account. If you have a high deductible life insurance policy ($5,000 or more? I don't remember the limit), you can open one of these up and deposit pre-tax dollars into it. Current limit is around $5,000 per year if memory serves. You could only use the money on health care, but that was a pretty generous definition. Prescription glasses, for instance, qualify. Used to be that whatever you didn't spend in a given year, you lost. Then it was changed to simply roll over each year. And with a limit of $5,000 investment per year, it could be used as an alternative savings vehicle. Once it got to a certain point, you could pay your insurance premium out of it and you were off to the races. Perpetual motion machine.
Now they're going to tighten it up. Dayum. I always get in on these things too late.

Flexible Spending Account - fairly similar, but you lose the money at the end of the year. sounds like a scam to me.

i had never heard about HSA being used to pay premiums, but not losing the money in the account was the thing that makes it sound reasonable. being somewhat healthy, i don't need prescriptions or whatever else one normally spends that money on, but the occasional dental emergency or whatever would be nice to have a cushion for

[diverdog]

Some people have no hope nor dreams it could happen to them, nor do they aspire to even try, they'd rather hope the government take care of em. You can call those people liberals, progressives, democrats, donks, or losers - they're all of the same ilk.

You work for the government don't you?

[SouthCarolinaSooner]

Daily Mail isn't exactly a great source of un-sensasionalized news. Just check the other headlines to the right...
"It's so embarrassing being Mrs Borat! Isla Fisher says husband Sacha Baron-Cohen is far worse in real life than his alter egos"

[KantoSooner]

Does the ACA address the cause & high costs of malpractice insurance?
NOT! You're talking about Comrade Obama's contributors here!

While I would certainly cap malpractice recoveries (personally, I think it would be more fun to simply demote doctors. Make a mistake? Oooooops, you're an RN now! THAT would motivate some kind 'o attention on the part of doctors, don't you think?) I am not sure that malpractice and insurance together add up to a very large chunk of the cost of healthcare in this country. Single digit percentages, as I recall. Maybe if you threw in defensive medicine, then you'd get a more impressive figure.

And, yes, the Trial Lawyer's Association is one of the most terrible special interest groups to plague America today. They're about as honest, open and public spirited as the Casino Gaming Association, if there is such a thing.