What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Rover said:
Tell me MinnFan - do you truly expect the millions of 80, 90 and even pushing 100 year old elderly and/or disabled recipients of Medicare to be able to hop on the internet, read through pages upon pages of legalese contained in any health care plan documentation, be able to do a crackerjack cost vs benefits analysis for their personal needs, re-evaluate coverage every year, make sure that their own doctors actually take said insurance, and avoid any of the countless scams that would no doubt crop up as a result of this "idea" (and I use that term loosely). If so, on what planet in which solar system would this realistically take place, and what is the cost of airfare/spacefare to reach this place? :D
Click to expand...

Not at all - why would individuals need to bother to think when the government will do it for them?

To put you on the spot, Rover: Please describe specifically how Obama's plan will reduce healthcare spending. Define spending however you like: % of GDP, % of government spending, etc. I haven't seen a good explanation yet, so I'd love to hear yours.

Edit: no fair defining spending as "unfunded" government spending. I'm talking about total spending on healthcare, period.
 
Last edited:
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

I think probably the biggest issue right now is this is not considered a crisis and America has no stomach for solving problems that aren't a crisis. So, the President either needs to invent one, or just do nothing (see Bush, the poster child of this methodology).

Despite all the uninsured and all the horror stories of people going bankrupt over health care it just hasn't hit home with a high enough percentage of people to warrant a government intrusion of this magnitude. We should just wait until Medicare (the government program the people who don't want to fix this non crisis seem to love so much cause it's not a government program. What?) collapses under all the weight, or we don't have any doctors left to practice because of malpractice insurance premiums and it just not being worth it.

Once that happens then someone will have something to solve.

After all, no one was in the mood to fix Bush's terrible economic ideas until the whole system collapsed to the point that we were bailing out private enterprises with floods of public money.

Let's all just hide our heads in the sand and wait for the atomic bomb to go off. We're good at that.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ScoobyDoo said:
I think probably the biggest issue right now is this is not considered a crisis and America has no stomach for solving problems that aren't a crisis. So, the President either needs to invent one, or just do nothing (see Bush, the poster child of this methodology).

Despite all the uninsured and all the horror stories of people going bankrupt over health care it just hasn't hit home with a high enough percentage of people to warrant a government intrusion of this magnitude. We should just wait until Medicare (the government program the people who don't want to fix this non crisis seem to love so much cause it's not a government program. What?) collapses under all the weight, or we don't have any doctors left to practice because of malpractice insurance premiums and it just not being worth it.

Once that happens then someone will have something to solve.

After all, no one was in the mood to fix Bush's terrible economic ideas until the whole system collapsed to the point that we were bailing out private enterprises with floods of public money.

Let's all just hide our heads in the sand and wait for the atomic bomb to go off. We're good at that.
Click to expand...
Somnetimes doing nothing is the best course of action.

What I would like to see debated in the salons of the Capitol would be how to our current practices contribute to rising costs of healthcare?

For example, if the doc orders 10 tests just to CYA to keep the lawyers off his back, should tort reform be part of the process? Or should the doc be better trained? Should medical education be publically funded in return for X years of public service before heading off to private practice??? Should cost/benefit analysis be part of any treatment?

It seems that Congress, once again, is enacting legislation to treat the end problem, without adressing the causes of that problem. Instead of rushing willy-nilly to "solve" a "problem" with a massive bill few have read and fewer understand, it would seem to me that the more prudent method would be to draft a bipartisan task force of reps and wonks to hold hearings on EVERYTHING, have it all in the public square for a reasonable debate, and then enact a health care reform package that would actually be understood and would work.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

LynahFan said:
Not at all - why would individuals need to bother to think when the government will do it for them?

To put you on the spot, Rover: Please describe specifically how Obama's plan will reduce healthcare spending. Define spending however you like: % of GDP, % of government spending, etc. I haven't seen a good explanation yet, so I'd love to hear yours.

Edit: no fair defining spending as "unfunded" government spending. I'm talking about total spending on healthcare, period.
Click to expand...

No problem. I'll answer your question first, then you can address mine in more depth.

I'll define "reduce spending" as reducing the growth rate of the program. An ever growing population, particularly in the senior ranks as boomers age, isn't going to lead to a dollar reduction over the years, however slowing the rate of growth is the goal.

To that end, this will reduce that rate in the following areas: 1) Drug and Medical costs. Both pharma and docs on board with reducing their profits approx $250B over the next decade ($85 drugs, $155 maybe is the medical #). In fact the drug industry wants that amount written into the plan so as they won't be asked to do more. 250 billion dollars is real money. 2) Independent review panel looks at program overall and recommends changes that can only be overriden by Congressional vote, or they are enacted. Base closing program works this way and has saved money. 3) Uninsured get insured, which cuts down on costs especially for too frequent ER visits for regular care. 4) Change in Medicare compensation away from payment by # of procedures done, 5) crack down on fraud in system, really the not much discussed by potentially far reaching cost savings potential.

Now, some costs savings are there (250B) and already agreed upon. Some can be calculated but there's some debate over how much savings (less ER visits for insured people). Some we'll have to see what results from them (independent board's effect won't be known until they start making recommendations). However, you're putting in place what you need to start easing the burden on the budget, which is something all should support.

Onto my question - do you seriously expect the 80+ year old crowd to be able to shop around through all of these so called health plans to find a cheaper yet better plan than Medicare as the author suggests? If so, do you plan on kicking them off Medicare to do so?
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

joecct said:
Somnetimes doing nothing is the best course of action.
Click to expand...

Sure. Doing nothing is perfect in this case cause the trend line is moving in such a positive way for everyone involved. In 10 years or so this issue will have solved itself if we just leave it alone.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

ScoobyDoo said:
Sure. Doing nothing is perfect in this case cause the trend line is moving in such a positive way for everyone involved. In 10 years or so this issue will have solved itself if we just leave it alone.
Click to expand...

;)


Seriously though, what you need to do is enact the program and then tweak it if needed as anything arises. So to use the example, lets say overtesting due to threat of legal action is a prevailing problem. Its a lot easier to revisit one issue than to start from scratch.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Rover said:
When you start with the "Barack Hussein Obama" schpiel, you're appealing to the birthers to show up ...
Click to expand...

1. It is the man's given middle name. I guess I'm more approving of that, in a civil discourse, than refering to the Presidency by a lone last name (see: Bush or Clinton) or a derogatory nickname.

2. Your parents were "birthers". (Admittedly there are some big assumptions by me in that statement.)
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

The Sicatoka said:
1. It is the man's given middle name. I guess I'm more approving of that, in a civil discourse, than refering to the Presidency by a lone last name (see: Bush or Clinton) or a derogatory nickname.

2. Your parents were "birthers". (Admittedly there are some big assumptions by me in that statement.)
Click to expand...

1) Its code for racism, but hey, in your case I truly believe that you could indeed be that gullible. ;)

2) I didn't give these wackos that name.

The Sicatoka said:
So then why scap the existing system and start from single-payer, government-control scratch?
Click to expand...

Who's advocating that sort of system? Perhaps a linked source would be helpful.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Rover said:
1) Its code for racism, but hey, in your case I truly believe that you could indeed be that gullible. ;)

2) I didn't give these wackos that name.
Click to expand...

It's not code. It's the man's name. Like it or not, it's the fact. If it was made up or slanderous (think BoSox fans and Bucky Dent) it'd be a different matter.

And you may not have given that derogatory nickname to people like your parents, but you're repeating it (and I'm assuming gleefully).
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

French Rage said:
http://www.freep.com/article/20090807/NEWS06/908070387/Tempers-flare-over-health-care

Yelling and more yelling on both sides, I wonder how many people on either side got to ask an actual question and get an actual response.
Click to expand...

Frenchy,

I read the article, and it seemed there was a lot more shouting from the opponents. I didn't see an instance where proponents shouted anyone down or interrupted an answer as it was written. :confused:
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Rover said:
Frenchy,

I read the article, and it seemed there was a lot more shouting from the opponents. I didn't see an instance where proponents shouted anyone down or interrupted an answer as it was written. :confused:
Click to expand...

The interruptions continued with virtually every question Dingell answered. Many Dingell supporters pleaded, "Let him speak," even as others yelled louder and shouted more.
Click to expand...

Responded to yelling with more yelling only causes the other side to yell some more. Given other stories where there are reports, say, of supporters and union members being let in side doors after the main doors are closed (granted these are reported largely on blogs), it's more than clear chunks of both sides want this to become little more than screaming matches and not anything approaching substantial policy discussion.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

Kepler said:
The perception is that people are being hit with a steam roller, and the people driving it not only haven't explained where they're going but don't know themselves.

The proponents need to go through all the details of the proposal, point by point, and make their case.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% and have said as much myself. That said I still question the level of "outrage" that's been exhibited by some given the free pass the same individuals gave the prior president.
 
Re: America's Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009 - The USCHO debates

http://www.freep.com/article/20090807/NEWS06/908070387/Tempers-flare-over-health-care

But Fadwa Gillanders, a Henry Ford Health System pharmacist, said no changes are needed.
"I work with poor people all the time," she said. "Nothing is left wanting in ... America."
Click to expand...

Is using Ms. Gillanders first name, Fadwa, similar to using Mr. Obama's middle name, Hussein, "racist" too? Either way, it seems Ms. Gillanders disagress with Mr. Obama.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top