Davemcc

Davemcc

Audioholic Spartan
The US is far from the only country that was built on greed. Every invading country wanted what it didn't have and could take by force.
True. What makes the US unique is that it's system is not based upon plunder, serfdom or mercantalism...forms of theft or force. The US system is based on creating wealth through trade and free exchange. It is this concept that made the US the sole remaining superpower to emerge from the 20th century and proves the power of free trade over the prior systems, yet greed is still the driving force of individuals within the macro economic system of free exchange.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
True. What makes the US unique is that it's system is not based upon plunder, serfdom or mercantalism...forms of theft or force. The US system is based on creating wealth through trade and free exchange. It is this concept that made the US the sole remaining superpower to emerge from the 20th century and proves the power of free trade over the prior systems, yet greed is still the driving force of individuals within the macro economic system of free exchange.
That's right and now, with the mob we have in power, they want to change it. We'll no longer be the remaining country to use this system. Gore recently said that universal healthcare and energy policy is the first step toward globalization of health and government.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
That's IT -I'm Back in!

OK guys! If all you ever look for, is reasons why the Canadian health care system is bad - that is all you will find! If you look for the good aspects of the Canadian health care system - you will find plenty!

If you want an improved health care system, you have to keep an open mind to all options. The USA should have one of the most cost effective systems in the world. With the technology available and the economies of scale from such a large population - it should be easy. So, why is it THE most expensive system in the world by a large margin? And, why is the US system so poorly rated when compared to other OECD nations?

If you want to maintain the status quo because you don't want any more government involvement, that's fine. But don't claim that you like the status quo because it's the best system in the world - you would be DEAD WRONG!

I'll state, for the umpteenth time, that the Canadian system has plenty of problems and I would not advise the USA to copy it, lock, stock and barrel. BUT, with all its faults, it is a more effective system than that in the USA.

There are more un-insured and under-insured Americans than the entire population of Canada. If you aren't at all concerned about them, I consider that callous and insensitive. Remember the saying: "There, but for the grace of God, go I..."

NOW, I'm done commenting. And Highfigh, I don't mind having differences of opinions. It's all good.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
OK guys! If all you ever look for, is reasons why the Canadian health care system is bad - that is all you will find! If you look for the good aspects of the Canadian health care system - you will find plenty!

If you want an improved health care system, you have to keep an open mind to all options. The USA should have one of the most cost effective systems in the world. With the technology available and the economies of scale from such a large population - it should be easy. So, why is it THE most expensive system in the world by a large margin? And, why is the US system so poorly rated when compared to other OECD nations?

If you want to maintain the status quo because you don't want any more government involvement, that's fine. But don't claim that you like the status quo because it's the best system in the world - you would be DEAD WRONG!

I'll state, for the umpteenth time, that the Canadian system has plenty of problems and I would not advise the USA to copy it, lock, stock and barrel. BUT, with all its faults, it is a more effective system than that in the USA.

There are more un-insured and under-insured Americans than the entire population of Canada. If you aren't at all concerned about them, I consider that callous and insensitive. Remember the saying: "There, but for the grace of God, go I..."

NOW, I'm done commenting. And Highfigh, I don't mind having differences of opinions. It's all good.
I'm positive that a lot of why our health care costs are so bloated is the tendency to sue for malpractice when something goes wrong. That's also the reason the first thing to happen is that some hump comes in to have the patient sign a form that says "In case something goes wrong, I will not sue this hospital....etc" when someone goes to a hospital for a non-life threatening injury. That's what happened when I narfed my left index finger when I was using my router with the brand new tongue & groove bit. There was very little going on there that day and I was still there for 5 hours. After the signature, they took me in for an X-ray to see if it hit the bone (they would have to treat it as an open fracture). I could have told them it hadn't, but they don't care that it was obviously just a flesh wound. Then, after I sat there for an hour, they came in to look at it and wash it out. They looked, conferred, brought in the brains of the operation (no pun intended) and after 5 seconds, said that since the fat layer hadn't come loose with the skin, they wouldn't be able to stitch it closed, so she went to a drawer, got a pair of small scissors and cut the flap of skin off. For that 5 second look and little snip, the bill showed $585 for "outpatient surgery". They put a non-stick pad on it (which was anything but non-stick), made an appointment to see a hand specialist and prescribed an antibiotic and Vicodin. I never used the Vicodin because it never hurt enough, although a little something would have been nice when the non-stick pad was being unstuck.

If I had known what events would have occurred, I would have gone to the walk-in clinic, or snipped the skin off, myself. Five hours for that was absurd.

Also, because of how Medicaid pays for some procedures, doctors need to wear roller skates in order to make enough for it to be worthwhile. This means a doctor may see so many patients that they read some charts, go from patient to patient and eventually, they don't even know who they're dealing with.

I was talking with the guy who pays $2K/mo and he has a customer who's a cardiologist. He gets $64 for a stress test. He had some fat POS come in for that and they flat-lined. He brought them back to life and it took 8 hours for the patient to be stable enough for transport. He submitted the bill and everything except the stress test was denied.

I don't have much faith in the medical profession. Sure, they can do amazing things to repair people in a lot of situations but in a meatball "get-'em in and move 'em out" situation, I don't want some. Too many people take absolutely no care of themselves and expect miracles when they break a leg just from walking down the street or latch up after walking up a flight of stairs. Our system is broken and throwing money at it won't fix it, using a national insurance program, or not. It needs to be repaired, people need to be told that sitting in front of their TV for an evening and eating more than the average Third World person gets in a month isn't a good way to live. Mandatory exercise programs and weight loss programs would be a great start. If more preventive medicine was used, our health care costs would plummet, IMO. The two main causes of death are heart disease and certain cancers, usually from smoking cigarettes.

The status quo isn't good but neither is what the current administration wants. I just read an article that showed the likely cost of the "recovery" will be about $24 Trillion. With a population estimate of 305 Million, that's almost $79K for every single person.

What would we do with all of the extra people if we were to cut the mortality rate?
 
Rickster71

Rickster71

Audioholic Spartan
As it stands now, i pay around $12k/year to insure my family as I am a small business owner and don't have the benefit of employee insurance from a large corporation. For this amount of coin, we have no dental or optical insurance and we each have $500 deductibles on our health care + $500 deductibles on our prescription drugs! We did the research and this was actually the best plan we could find for the money as it provided even more coverage than HSA/MSA accounts.


We truly need reform, especially for the middle class that pays their bills, earns income, and yet gets dictated by large insurance companies on what type of treatments our doctors are allowed to give us.

It seems to me that the sole purpose of health insurance companies in this country is to figure out ways to make you pay your premiums while giving you less and less coverage each year.

Normally I don't speak out publically on these issues but enoughs enough!
Gene, my wife and I are in much the same situation, and pay exactly the same for the two of us.

I agree the system needs fixing; just not from a bunch of politicians, that want to give us government control in an Enema.
 
lsiberian

lsiberian

Audioholic Overlord
Our system needs change

Tort reform is inadequate to solve our problems. To pretend it is. I see as an ignorance of fact.

And FYI even Obama has mentioned the need for it. So don't act like he's ignoring this. The plan currently being proposed will insure everyone is insured, but it won't eliminate the private insurance companies or private care. That fact is we need to insure the uninsured. It's a matter of national security. If someone launches a bio attack we need to make sure people go to the doctor so we can detect and contain it. Nearly every other industrialized nation has a health care system that is all inclusive. For us not too. Is uncivilized and backwards.

The plan isn't universal. But it is a step in the right direction.

Besides can't the rich pay the same thing they paid in the 90s. We were doing better then. So tax cuts appear to be a waste of funds.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Tort reform is inadequate to solve our problems. To pretend it is. I see as an ignorance of fact.

And FYI even Obama has mentioned the need for it. So don't act like he's ignoring this. The plan currently being proposed will insure everyone is insured, but it won't eliminate the private insurance companies or private care. That fact is we need to insure the uninsured. It's a matter of national security. If someone launches a bio attack we need to make sure people go to the doctor so we can detect and contain it. Nearly every other industrialized nation has a health care system that is all inclusive. For us not too. Is uncivilized and backwards.

The plan isn't universal. But it is a step in the right direction.

Besides can't the rich pay the same thing they paid in the 90s. We were doing better then. So tax cuts appear to be a waste of funds.
Tort reform is needed, independent of health care but part of the problem with many of the cases is that one patient will have terrible consequences from their medical care, with little compensation and then, someone has a small procedure and they win millions.

However, what the Health Care Bill will do is make it impossible for someone to keep their original plan after the insurance company make changes to it. They can keep it if it stay as is but that never happens for very long. Also, coming to the floor with a 1000 page bill at 9:00PM and making them vote on it at 8:00Am the next day insures that nobody will read it.

Presenting a health care bill that is mandatory for everyone except unions is bullshid. Same goes for saying that it won't cost anything. This bill will have huge costs for so many small businesses that many will fail if they're forced to pay into it.

Would it help if we used computerized health records, curbs on wasteful and frivolous medical lawsuits and give tax breaks for those who buy their own health insurance?

"It's a matter of national security. If someone launches a bio attack we need to make sure people go to the doctor so we can detect and contain it."

Find a single insurance policy that covers acts of war or terrorism. Have you thought about what an insurance plan really is? It's payment to a company that claims that something bad will eventually happen everyone with hopes that it never does, so they don't have to pay out for it. We all pay for Southern states when they're ravaged by a hurricane or flood, whether we want to admit it, or not. The insurance industry raised their rates in the '80s when they made bad investments. How The F is that our fault? THEY made the bad investments, not us but we ended up paying for their mistakes anyway.

"Besides can't the rich pay the same thing they paid in the 90s. We were doing better then. So tax cuts appear to be a waste of funds"

What's the difference between a tax cut and people coming here illegally and refusing to pay income tax, all of the services they use and cause to be used? Have the expenses of the government stayed the same? No. Have your expenses stayed the same? Not a chance. Why not?

How can you possibly compare now with the '90s? That just doesn't work.
 
G

griffinconst

Senior Audioholic
Tort reform is inadequate to solve our problems. To pretend it is. I see as an ignorance of fact.

And FYI even Obama has mentioned the need for it. So don't act like he's ignoring this. The plan currently being proposed will insure everyone is insured, but it won't eliminate the private insurance companies or private care. That fact is we need to insure the uninsured. It's a matter of national security. If someone launches a bio attack we need to make sure people go to the doctor so we can detect and contain it. Nearly every other industrialized nation has a health care system that is all inclusive. For us not too. Is uncivilized and backwards.

The plan isn't universal. But it is a step in the right direction.

The gov does best in a growing economy and it is tax cuts that spur growth.
The last thing we need now is all this government spending and higher taxes.

When Obama was running for president, I saw an interview where someone asked him how he was going to pay for all his programs. After talking about raising taxes on the rich, the reporter asked him if he was aware that the gov generally brings in more money when everyones taxes are low and he said...but thats not fair.
Redistibuting wealth is more imortant than anything else. UNBELIEVABLE!
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Tort reform is inadequate to solve our problems. To pretend it is. I see as an ignorance of fact.

And FYI even Obama has mentioned the need for it. So don't act like he's ignoring this. The plan currently being proposed will insure everyone is insured, but it won't eliminate the private insurance companies or private care. That fact is we need to insure the uninsured. It's a matter of national security. If someone launches a bio attack we need to make sure people go to the doctor so we can detect and contain it. Nearly every other industrialized nation has a health care system that is all inclusive. For us not too. Is uncivilized and backwards.

The plan isn't universal. But it is a step in the right direction.

The gov does best in a growing economy and it is tax cuts that spur growth.
The last thing we need now is all this government spending and higher taxes.

When Obama was running for president, I saw an interview where someone asked him how he was going to pay for all his programs. After talking about raising taxes on the rich, the reporter asked him if he was aware that the gov generally brings in more money when everyones taxes are low and he said...but thats not fair.
Redistibuting wealth is more imortant than anything else. UNBELIEVABLE!
I saw something on the news this morning about Obama saying that surtaxes may be needed.

Who'll stay in business after all of the wealth has been distributed? Nobody will be able to afford to start a company on their own. He pulled off a great caper- he got the attention of the two types of voters who will be our downfall- people who don't want to work and want handouts and those who want to give handouts but don't want to use their own money.

How the F did he make it that far, so fast? With as little experience as he has, how was he able to suppress so much information about his past? How did he get the media to lay off of his wife?

Oh, yeah. I forgot. This was an historical election.

It sure was.
 
Rickster71

Rickster71

Audioholic Spartan
Obama pulled off a great caper- he got the attention of the two types of voters who will be our downfall- people who don't want to work and want handouts and those who want to give handouts but don't want to use their own money.

How the F did he make it that far, so fast? With as little experience as he has, how was he able to suppress so much information about his past? How did he get the media to lay off of his wife?
George Soros
(The Multi-Billionaire) is the financier/master manipulator behind the unprecedented triumph of an inexperienced community organizer's push toward globalization.
Soros is the individual who has profited enormously and may have been instrumental in causing the financial collapse which conveniently occurred smack dab before the election, causing more "throw the bums out" mentality and increasing the fervor of those seeking a political savior.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
George Soros
(The Multi-Billionaire) is the financier/master manipulator behind the unprecedented triumph of an inexperienced community organizer's push toward globalization.
Soros is the individual who has profited enormously and may have been instrumental in causing the financial collapse which conveniently occurred smack dab before the election, causing more "throw the bums out" mentality and increasing the fervor of those seeking a political savior.
It was more of a general question but if "Throw the bums out!" was the cry and Soros' affiliation to Obama was known, how did he get off without being classified as one of "the bums"? He played both sides of the game about as well as I have seen and got away with it.

Well done. Well done!

How does this not qualify as treason?
 
J

just listening

Audioholic
Tort reform is THE most important first step in reigning in our out of control inflation in health costs. If you don't think so, keep in mind we are not talking about malpractice insurance alone, but the much bigger cost of defensive medicine. For example: A guy goes in to the emergency room having a repeat attack of kidney stones. Many doctors won't proscribe truly effective pain killer until he gets an MRI, even though a simple x-ray will show the stone(s).

The change in Tort laws that would not violate the Constitution is going with the British system of "Loser Pays". That would kill off the bogus lawsuits in a hurry. The British court system moves many times faster, and liability insurance costs are both lower and rise in balance with the overall inflation rate.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Tort reform is THE most important first step in reigning in our out of control inflation in health costs. If you don't think so, keep in mind we are not talking about malpractice insurance alone, but the much bigger cost of defensive medicine. For example: A guy goes in to the emergency room having a repeat attack of kidney stones. Many doctors won't proscribe truly effective pain killer until he gets an MRI, even though a simple x-ray will show the stone(s).

The change in Tort laws that would not violate the Constitution is going with the British system of "Loser Pays". That would kill off the bogus lawsuits in a hurry. The British court system moves many times faster, and liability insurance costs are both lower and rise in balance with the overall inflation rate.
I was discussing our local medical situation here, in Milwaukee. Aurora Health Care has a huge stake in most of the hospitals and clinics here and unfortunately for us WRT costs, they insist on having all state-of-the-art diagnostics equipment at all of them. Now, we all know that there's no reason for this. People with cancer and many other illnesses don't need to be rushed to the closest hospital for treatment because they'll often go to a specialist or cancer treatment center of some kind. Many other ailments are in the same category.

My point was:

People with no health insurance and illegals often use the ER as their primary care giver, right? Many of them go there for minor injuries, headaches, colds, etc, right? Why not have more walk-in clinics for these people, specialty hospitals for difficult cases and a few centers for major trauma like stabbings, car crashes, explosions, fires and shootings? That way, hospitals aren't tying up resources dealing with minor cases, they remain profitable and can stay open, the cost to build, equip and maintain most of the clinics drops drastically and only the major centers need all of the most expensive equipment. Also, clinics don't need to have as many specialists on staff and that would cut the payroll expense.

Any opinions?
 
J

just listening

Audioholic
I wasn't commenting on your post, instead the issue as a whole, and where to start.

As for local care for those uninsured for whatever reason here is an idea:

Young doctors just out of their residency and beginning their practice would give four days a month and work at a "free clinic". In return, the gov't would refund x% of their student loan interest or make a down payment for each year that they complete forty-eight 8 hour days of unpaid service.

These clinics would be set up to handle non-life threatening emergencies and include x-ray, one-time physical therapy, and pre-natal care. Obviously, this is a simple idea and the devil is in the details. For those who are gainfully employed and say either uninsurable or just plain without insurance would contribute a $10-20.
 
D

dylancash

Audioholic Intern
This issue really hits close to home for me now. I am going through a nightmare health care problem.

I had throat problems last year that sent me to 3 doctors for a total of 8 visits. It turns out it was simply acid reflux but it took 1 gp and 2 specialists to correctly diagnose it. 18 days of medicine and I was all cured after a year of being terrified of the worst. I am a 33 year old male who is relatively healthy (had hernia surgery when I was 18) with no lasting medical conditions. I pay about $400 in health insurance a month, and was currently shopping for cheaper options like affordablue from BCBS. I finally decided to leave no matter what when it turns out my $400/month insurance provider wouldn't pay for my ONE TIME $325 aciphex prescription to cure my acid reflux. Fortunately the doctor had a couple coupons that helped but it really ticked me off that for 5k+ a year I can't get an acid reflux prescription?

So I start looking at BCBS and decide to go with their options which were much cheaper. Turns out due to my 8 doctor visits in the last calender year they declined my application. Basically nobody will take me without charging an arm and a leg and to make matters worse, I just got a letter saying my provider was raising my rates to $604 a month (I'm assuming for the last year of visits). So now I have the privilege of paying 50% more than what I was to have them still deny my prescription coverage.

All of this because I had acid reflux and it was incorrectly diagnosed. Its obscene but I just can't afford this. I could barely afford the $400 so now I am going to have to drop my health insurance and hope to god I don't get sick. What kind of country would let somebody fear not getting the care they need if they get cancer because they once had acid reflux? I always paid my bills on time, rarely ever went to the doctor until this year, never had any surgeries or procedures as an adult with my own coverage and one unlucky illness that lasts a year with no lasting effects has me basically uncoverable. Sorry, but this is bs.
 
Davemcc

Davemcc

Audioholic Spartan
Dylan, that sucks and it sounds like fraud to me on the part of your insurance company, at the least a breach of fiduciary responsibility. It seems to be a recurring theme in American insurance that you pay your premiums and you're covered until you need to make a claim then you are magically not covered or dropped altogether. Since insurance companies are heavily regulated, I find it safe to assume that your elected policians have legalized this fraud and/or are complicit in the theft of premiums with no intention of paying benefits.

People routinely elect the worst possible political candidates to public office then wonder why the laws protect the scammers and the fraudsters.
 
john72953

john72953

Full Audioholic
I tought this thread was about the Supertramp- Crisis! What Crisis? album. Guess I was wrong. Sorry.

John
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Dylan, that sucks and it sounds like fraud to me on the part of your insurance company, at the least a breach of fiduciary responsibility. It seems to be a recurring theme in American insurance that you pay your premiums and you're covered until you need to make a claim then you are magically not covered or dropped altogether. Since insurance companies are heavily regulated, I find it safe to assume that your elected policians have legalized this fraud and/or are complicit in the theft of premiums with no intention of paying benefits.

People routinely elect the worst possible political candidates to public office then wonder why the laws protect the scammers and the fraudsters.
Sounds more like medical ineptitude, than fraud. The doctors should have diagnosed this condition much sooner and if they had, BCBS would probably have accepted his application.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
This issue really hits close to home for me now. I am going through a nightmare health care problem.

I had throat problems last year that sent me to 3 doctors for a total of 8 visits. It turns out it was simply acid reflux but it took 1 gp and 2 specialists to correctly diagnose it. 18 days of medicine and I was all cured after a year of being terrified of the worst. I am a 33 year old male who is relatively healthy (had hernia surgery when I was 18) with no lasting medical conditions. I pay about $400 in health insurance a month, and was currently shopping for cheaper options like affordablue from BCBS. I finally decided to leave no matter what when it turns out my $400/month insurance provider wouldn't pay for my ONE TIME $325 aciphex prescription to cure my acid reflux. Fortunately the doctor had a couple coupons that helped but it really ticked me off that for 5k+ a year I can't get an acid reflux prescription?

So I start looking at BCBS and decide to go with their options which were much cheaper. Turns out due to my 8 doctor visits in the last calender year they declined my application. Basically nobody will take me without charging an arm and a leg and to make matters worse, I just got a letter saying my provider was raising my rates to $604 a month (I'm assuming for the last year of visits). So now I have the privilege of paying 50% more than what I was to have them still deny my prescription coverage.

All of this because I had acid reflux and it was incorrectly diagnosed. Its obscene but I just can't afford this. I could barely afford the $400 so now I am going to have to drop my health insurance and hope to god I don't get sick. What kind of country would let somebody fear not getting the care they need if they get cancer because they once had acid reflux? I always paid my bills on time, rarely ever went to the doctor until this year, never had any surgeries or procedures as an adult with my own coverage and one unlucky illness that lasts a year with no lasting effects has me basically uncoverable. Sorry, but this is bs.
Call BCBS and ask for the number of visits that would have allowed you to be accepted and ask how they can deny your app if the reason for the extra visits was due to bad diagnostic practices. Move higher up the food chain, if necessary.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top