This is what I will support. (def of person is US citizen or legal residents) After a detail study by a group of health actuaries. A bill that will spell out 1) the basic coverages, 2) max premium for the basic coverages, 3) require all citizens and legal residents to buy at min the basic coverages, 4) all health insurance companies must have a plan with that coverage and premium no higher than the set premium by the panel. 5) expend medicare coverages to the person (or family) who can not afford the basic coverage set up by earlier, 6) increase medicare budget to cover the poor with a clear definition, 7) tort reform that at lease limit the pay to lawyers to 20% or $20,000 which ever is lower, 8) medical arbitration board before court case, 9) adjust service payment to medical service to no higher than inflation, 10) No public option!
what you don't like about your health care system? is warren buffett or bill gates asking these questions (of course WB owns insurance and re-insu companies--thats not the point...)? they must be out there helping the needy because they have much to spare. we have to take care of ourselves physically and financially. what's wrong with us people? we go to universities, get our degress, find a job and from there started working for others...paying premiums for life insurance, health insu, home mort, car payments, whipping out that platic for things we can't afford...gosh, did we learn nothing at school? why not invest it wisely and prudently and if and when (God forbids), we can take care of ourserlves instead of going through tons of paperwork that are supposedly what we paid for in the first place but can not gain immed access to? ...don't blame the government or the insurance or anyone for that matter, it's on us! wake up! what do we expect? elect our officials and wait for them to whip that magic wand and perform wonders especially on our healthcare?
Sorry I have been away for a while Some interesting quotes. I mention tort reform again - it's fundamentally important. Obama is a lawyer by training. He'll not want to upset other lawyers. Looked on facevalue, it looks bad. But the public system also prioritises according to clinical needs. That patient may not have had the same urgency as a different patient and hence goes down the line. Dr Chu's patient eventually pays for the colonoscopy. Is that wrong? The patient pays for a faster access to service out of their own choice. It's good! What is the concern? Did anybody propose a totally different system for private and public. It is actually the philosophy to the public system in HK to cater for those unaffordable health costs. I don't think that private and public should be so compartmentalised. Counterargument - the ones with the better choices in private have paid for it - they free up public resources for the public patients. Why, in the real world, don't the underprivileged get to travel so much, need public transport, don't have Porches, HDTV etc? You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out. So what about the the previous patient whose private insurance couldn't afford the expensive operation in private care, In the same article, they were the ones getting too much advantage, now they are classed as being an unadvantaged group. a) re the middle class, this is the whole point of paying for medical insurance!! b) re doctors, some stay and some go. To keep more doctors in public, offer them better working conditions and pay. It's happening now. With all due respect to Tim Pang, he's the spokesman for patient rights and is the patient advocate. But please be pragmatic and work for society and not just one group of people. Try to move forward.
All sound good except I think a public option is required for basic services. You complained about the numbers of uninsured in a previous post - they still need a safety net, even if it wouldn't be a great one.
This article caught my eye. A public health need but private money distorting the need. You need compromise between the two. This is why private insurance cannot be too big an industry. In Europe, most swine flu shots by invitation only LONDON – In Britain, there are no long lines of people seeking swine flu vaccine. Doctor's offices aren't swamped with desperate calls. And there are no cries of injustice that the vaccine is going to wealthy corporations or healthy people who don't really need it. Here, and across most of Europe, vaccine to protect against the pandemic flu is mostly given by invitation only to those at highest risk for flu complications. "That is one of the great advantages of the British health system," said Dr. Steve Field, president of the Royal College of General Physicians. "We have a list of all the names of patients who qualify to be vaccinated." When Britain unrolled its pandemic vaccination program last month, it designed its campaign to ensure that priority groups — including pregnant women, health workers and those with chronic health problems like diabetes, cancer and AIDS — get the shots first. Instead of advertising that vaccine had arrived and waiting for the lines to form, Britain's National Health Service sent letters, inviting all those who qualify to make an appointment and get the shots first. Field said Britain's socialized health care system allows the country to target people who need to be vaccinated quickly: "It's not like the U.S., where it's the survival of the fittest and the richest." Just this week, Americans learned that Wall Street giants Goldman Sachs and Citigroup got swine flu vaccine, even as many doctor's offices and community clinics still had none. The companies obtained the vaccine through standard procedures, and it was targeted to employees who met criteria for vaccination. But the perception of unfairness set off an outcry. In the United Kingdom, the general population will be offered the shot after priority groups have been taken care of, probably in about two months. For now, only children with health problems are a priority; healthy children are not. Similar programs are being carried out in other European countries, all of which have socialized medicine: • In Germany, doctors have also been contacting high-priority patients to come in for their swine flu shot, though other people who have asked for one have not been turned away. • In Sweden, Denmark and Finland, some local governments are sending invitations to people in high-risk groups or posting information about vaccine availability on their Web sites. • So far, France is only vaccinating health care workers. Its health minister said 6 million people in priority groups would start getting invitations to be vaccinated next week. In North America, swine flu vaccination has largely been a free-for-all, although some U.S. states have recently beefed up their screening process to ensure pregnant women, children and people with health problems get shots before healthy older people. In Canada, which has a form of socialized medicine, health officials began an investigation this week after professional hockey and basketball players got the vaccine ahead of thousands of children. Another trend has also affected the trans-Atlantic vaccination picture: While Americans and Canadians appear to be clamoring for the vaccine, many Europeans appear indifferent. Verona Hall, a London-based midwife, said that among her dozens of pregnant patients none has accepted the invitation to take the shot. The reluctance among pregnant women stems in part from fears the vaccine could hurt their babies, but other priority groups have also shown little interest in the flu shot. Hall herself recently received a text message asking her to book an appointment to get the vaccine. She declined. "It just doesn't seem that serious here," she said. "Maybe if there are a lot more cases, more people will consider having it. But right now it isn't a priority." British officials estimate there have been more than 600,000 swine flu cases since the virus was identified in April. In the U.S., experts say there have been millions. In the U.S., the federal government is paying for the vaccine and rationing supplies to each state. Then state and local health departments decide where it goes next — from schools to doctor's offices to community health clinics and even some large companies with health directors. On Thursday, the director of the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention wrote to local health departments, asking them to ensure the vaccine is getting to high-risk groups first. Dr. Thomas Frieden warned that decisions that appear to send vaccine beyond high-priority groups "have the potential to undermine the credibility of the program." Lenny Marcus, a public health expert at Harvard University, said the anxiety among Americans about vaccine shortages may have a snowball effect. Early on, U.S. officials predicted there would be 120 million vaccine doses available by October. They later slashed that estimate, and as of this week there were only about 38 million doses in the country. "When people believe there's a shortage, that increases demand," Marcus said. "The images of people lining up for hours to get the vaccine, which is in short supply, has a big impact. ... Parents with kids may suddenly be desperate to get them immunized." In contrast, there are no pictures in the British tabloids of crowded clinics. And the Department of Health won't reveal how many doses are available, saying only that enough vaccine to cover the entire population — 60 million people — had been ordered. For now, the biggest problem confronting Britain's vaccination effort is not a shortage or public demand. In recent weeks, postal strikes have delayed delivery of about 35 million letters. Health officials worry that high-risk patients waiting for their swine flu vaccine invitation letters might never get them. "The timing isn't great," said Field, adding doctors would also be telephoning or sending patients text messages if they qualified to get a swine flu vaccine. "So far we have not had a lot of terribly anxious people here."
^^It only passes the House..^^ ..it still needs to be debated and passed in the Senate...that's where it's going next...
Good or bad??...So, this is what the healthcare reform is all about.. (okay, we're back to this topic..) ..well, the Dems in the Senate apparently got their 60th vote (though they are still running mock tests just to see that they do have the 60th vote)..through, yep, you guessed it: BRIBERY & (LEGAL) CORRUPTION. Just like Mary Landrieu (who received a $300 million bribe for her Louisiana state) who put in her vote for the bill in the House, Ben Nelson got his goodies. Apparently all that "principle" and "anti-abortion" talk, last week, by Ben Nelson from Nebraska was just that, all talk. At the end, yep, you all guessed it, he was bribed and he decided to put in his vote!!! At the end of the day, his state's Medicaid program, will be funded by the other 49 states, FOREVER. http://rightsoup.com/harry-reid-unv...eed&utm_campaign=Feed:+RightSoup+(Right+Soup) Fox news just announced that former holdout Ben Nelson (D-NE) has caved. Nelson admitted last night that he was trying to get more goodies for his state…so it wasn’t really about abortion after all. Nelson scored a Medicaid exemption for Nebraska which keeps the state from paying it’s burden FOREVER. That’s a biggie, because this plan throws incredible financial burdens on the states. We’ll be picking up Nebraska’s tab. What the hell. ... ========================================================== http://biggovernment.com/2009/12/19/sen-nelsons-bribe/ Exhibit A is the outright bribe extracted by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Corn Huckster State) from Sen. Harry Reid. As a result of Nelson’s performance in his role of Hamlet in the health care deliberations, we will have two health care systems in this country; one for Nebraska and one for the other 49 states. ... ========================================================== Going back to the healthcare issue and the option of injecting competition (amongst insurance companies & across states) to reduce the cost. I'd like to make another comparison to the cellphone industry. As we all know, not too long ago, many people would consider cellphone and owning one to be expensive and there were only about 2-3 companies controlling everything. Well, as we can see now, there are hundreds of options and choices and companies for people to choose their cellphones and services from. Even the poor folks, who couldn't afford cellphones, are able to do so now. Why? because of competition, brought forth by the private businesses, which brings the cost down. Not by the govt. Out of so many types of business competition across state lines, i wonder why is the healthcare insurance service the only one being restricted???..
New Year drunks should pay for hospital care? Thu Dec 31, 11:02 am ET LONDON (Reuters Life!) – Excessive drinking over New Year's Eve could cost Britain's National Health Service as much as 23 million pounds, according to a report on Thursday which recommends drunks be charged a hospital admission fee of 532 pounds ($845.9). "Alcohol misuse in Britain is at a level where it constitutes a public health epidemic," said the report by the right-leaning Policy Exchange think-tank. Direct costs to the state-funded NHS, which provides free health care for Britons, are nearly 3 billion a year, with hospital admissions for alcohol intoxication doubling in a decade, it added. The government should review its entire strategy for tackling the harms from alcohol misuse, it advised. "We recommend that the costs of being admitted to hospital to sleep off alcoholic excess should be met by individuals, not the NHS," said Henry Featherstone, head of the think-tamk's health unit. "Those admitted to hospital for less than 24 hours with acute alcohol intoxication should be charged the NHS tariff cost for their admission of 532 pounds." That amount would be reduced for those paying the costs of their own alcohol education and awareness course. Department of Health figures confirm that total annual healthcare cost relating to alcohol misuse amounts to about 2.7 billion pounds a year. (Reporting by Stephen Addison; Editing by Stefano Ambrogi and Paul Casciato)
The fate of the healthcare (corrupt) bill is gonna come tomorrow.. ..wow, who woulda thunk it?? the most liberal state in the whole United States is about to give Prez B.O. the biggest shaft of his presidency?!?!...maaan.. Yes, the fate of the (corrupt) healthcare bill could possibly be decided tomorrow in Massachusetts' special election for Senate?!?!..Bottom line, if Republican Scott Brown wins tomorrow, then the chance of the h.c. bill passing will be less than 10%. And if he does win, then this coming Wednesday, Jan. 20th, exactly 1 yr removed from Broke OWEbama's inauguration, his biggest domestic agenda could be over... master silentheart, mind giving your prognostication on what will happen??..i know you'll be jumping for joy should Scott Brown wins the Senate seat.. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31621.html ======================================================= New poll: Martha Coakley 'in freefall' A new poll shows Martha Coakley slipping further behind Scott Brown. By DAVID CATANESE | 1/18/10 4:01 PM EST A new InsiderAdvantage poll conducted exclusively for POLITICO shows Republican Scott Brown surging to a 9-point advantage over Martha Coakley a day before Massachusetts voters trek to the ballot box to choose a new senator. According to the survey conducted Sunday evening, Brown leads the Democratic attorney general 52 percent to 43 percent. ...
Filibuster time!!.. ..Barring any last minute back room deals w/one of the Republican senators putting in a vote, i'd say master silentheart's prayers have been answered and Obamacare is basically dead...over..done with...goner...
I have to disagree with you on this. In US, we already have Medicare and Medical to cover the older and low low income people. I would like to point out also that, when you have people paying $300 for iPhone or buying a Wii or buying designer bag for themselves for their kid and crying they do not have money to pay for health insurance. I don't think my tax dollar should be subsidize to pay for their health insurance. If we keep on subsidize all these lazy @$$es shouldn't we also take a way their expensive unnecessary luxury items?
So, there are folks who purchase unncessary goodies instead of medical insurance? Is there empirical evidence for that?
This is what I have said about Bullsh*t Omama all this time. He will take credit if it is good. He will put fault on other if it is his screw up. Here is a article from AP http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100127/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_dealmaking Right after the Senate version passed, he said it is a good bill. In the article, during ABC interview, he said he did not make bunch of deal. Here is the quote from the article Obama, speaking to ABC News this week, said, "I didn't make a bunch of deals." But he acknowledged making "a legitimate mistake" by letting White House and congressional negotiators include the items during last month's closed-door negotiations. So if he did not agree with the back door deals, shouldn't he object to it when it was anounced before it goes into a vote? Does he even read what the Senate is proposing? How about the House version? This is exactly what he did when he was in IL, he is pulling the same trick again.
Yes, South Central LA and South Side Chicago. Queens in NY and City of Philadelphia. New Orland lower 9th ward. The list goes on and on.
yes, i do recall a post i made which the article tells how a high school experiement that give kids money to buy foods, books and stationary but the kids end up buying bling blings, tatoo job, trips, etc
Doing what he's only good at.. ..maybe all the time while he was sitting in the Senate, as a Jr Senator from Illinois, he was daydreaming & thinking to himself, "Since i can't get any of my laws or legislations passed in Senate (let alone anyone wants to read them) cos their content is so far left, why don't i try and apply to be the President? Let the rest of my colleagues do the hard work and fight over each other. I'll just sign here and sign there. Besides, i'm a pretty eloquent speaker myself. Maybe i can fool the American folks into buying my supposed opposition to W and voting for me instead of Hellary. Hey, why don't i try that."...a few months later, he applied to run for the Democratic presidential primary. And here we are... Overall, i think BO has tried to use the healthcare issue/debate as a sideshow to distract the American folks from the real issue at the moment: economy/jobs/unemployment. Since he can't find the solution, he made it his "primary" domestic issue. Well, the Dems controlled Congress got found and got exposed with their corrupt, real intent.
Obama admits health care overhaul may die on Hill By ERICA WERNER, Associated Press Writer Erica Werner, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 41 mins ago WASHINGTON – After insisting for a year that failure was not an option, President Barack Obama is now acknowledging his health care overhaul may die in Congress. His remarks at a Democratic National Committee fundraiser Thursday night sounded contradictory at times, complicating congressional leaders' effort to revive health care legislation as Democrats hunger for guidance from the White House. Even while saying he still wanted to get the job done, Obama counseled going slow, and bowed to new political realities. Democrats no longer command a filibuster-proof Senate majority, and voters and lawmakers are far more concerned with jobs and the economy than with enacting sweeping and expensive changes to the health system.
Danny boy prefer using US healthcare ------------------------------------------------- Oh Danny boy, the pipes are clogging Posted By PETER LAPINSKIE Posted 1 day ago If you have been following the controversy over Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams' sudden disappearance to the United States to undergo heart surgery, you probably find yourself asking the same questions we are: What business is it of anyone where Williams wants to have life-saving surgery done? Of course, there is a caveat to that and we won't get an answer until Williams is back home and recovered from the procedure he underwent. The caveat is: Who paid the piper? If he used his own money, of which he has plenty, then it is his own business, especially given the fact that the procedure in question was not available (reportedly) in his own province. If, however, he used taxpayers' money to fund what must be an expensive medical intervention, then the taxpayers have every right to demand accountability. If indeed the procedure was not available at home, was it not available at any other top-notch Canadian medical facility, like the Ottawa Heart Institute? They perform cutting-edge surgery at that facility on a daily basis and are one of the world's most highly-regarded cardiac institutions. The reality of our medicare system in Canada is that it does not have the resources to be all things to all people, which is why you often hear of people going south of the border to get medical services not easily available at home. Wouldn't you do the same thing if you had the cash and if the procedure you needed was life-saving? There is, after all, nothing more important than our health so we should be able to get the best medical care money can buy, if we can afford it. And bollocks to those bleeding hearts who claim it sets a different standard for the rich. Yes, it does, and that's life. Those with the scratch get things most of us can't afford, and that goes for health care. As long as we are entrenched in this public medicare system, we will never have the best opportunities because those only money can buy. Remember the debate a couple years ago about a two-tier health care system? It is not here, but it is coming. Already there are private facilities as close as Gatineau (Hull) where you can get a CT-scan or an MRI with only a day's wait -as long as you can afford it. So while Danny Williams may have some questions to answer upon his return, we should think about what we would do had we been in his shoes.
