Blogcritics Comments on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Comment by Rachel A Nearen on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:30:49 EDT

Cool Ben! I support you and your fight for your rights.... You see I recently came outta the closet to my dog and some of my closest friends. I realized that i like women a couple weeks ago while watching oprah.... That's a hell of alot of chocolate lovin! MMMMMMM

Comment by Ben Fuller on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:28:46 EDT

I'm gay and that's why I want Obama to win :)

Comment by Rachel Nearen on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Wed, 24 Sep 2008 14:26:52 EDT

I think that Hillary Clinton is the best and that we need obama to live. I'm a diehard Democrat and I love donkeys and liberal blogs. i also smoke a lotta weed with former democratic candidates.

Comment by Zedd on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Tue, 16 Jan 2007 08:53:51 EST

STM I'll remember to spell it correctly.

Comment by S.T.M on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Tue, 16 Jan 2007 07:45:37 EST

Sorry Zedd ... I'll try to be good next time, I promise ... honest.

Comment by Dave Nalle on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Tue, 16 Jan 2007 00:32:42 EST

My concern is that with the extreme politicized climate in our country today, a plan that is for a certain sector will not be received. My concern is the same, but my thinking is that a plan which helps the needy while not harming the well off will be easier to pass than one which hurts some while helping others. What's more, a less radical departure from the current system ought to be easier to sell as well. We have to make it universal with options for private care like Australia. As I've said before, I think the cost for this here in the US will be astronomicall and it will hammer the middle class with higher taxes and likely far worse service. They'll be asked to pay more in taxes than they do now for the basic program and then even more for supplemental insurance. It'll break them. I feel that this is the perfect time for a major change. People are feeling the weight and the grime of what we have just gone through and are looking for a new start. What we need are legislators who are smart enough and patriotic enough to come up with something that is exceptionally good for everyone that doesn't trigger any of the partisan hot buttons. Well, you can forget national healthcare then. Dave

Comment by Zedd on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 23:24:42 EST

Clavos You and your tiny thrills. You must be in a constant state of giddy. Who cares SMT STM... only you would chime in making sure to write it out so we all know that you know what it means. WHATEVER.... Look out the communists are coming. STM its not like its your real name... get over it.

Comment by Zedd on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:09:05 EST

Dave Nalle My concern is that with the extreme politicized climate in our country today, a plan that is for a certain sector will not be received. We have to make it universal with options for private care like Australia. I feel that this is the perfect time for a major change. People are feeling the weight and the grime of what we have just gone through and are looking for a new start. What we need are legislators who are smart enough and patriotic enough to come up with something that is exceptionally good for everyone that doesn't trigger any of the partisan hot buttons.

Comment by Clavos on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 20:53:33 EST

On, ton yet, Stan Man The... ehh.

Comment by STM on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 20:11:25 EST

When did I become SMT?? Dyslexics rule, KO?

Comment by Dave Nalle on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:30:09 EST

Yes, Zedd. I'm for a rational plan for national healthcare. SMT's description of the Australian system makes it sound very appealing, but I fear that politically the time for that sort of solution without massive upheavals has passed. I think something transitional and simpler might be the best route to follow now, focusing on taking care of those most in need, while leaving the rest of us in the current private system, perhaps with a bit more oversight and appropriate regulation. Dave

Comment by Don Osborn on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 18:19:25 EST

As group health insurance gets more and more expensive for the employer, direct policies are becoming more prevelant. Individual policies with higher deductibles and fewer co-pays will become more popular, and allow the free market to lower costs as people have to pay for services out of pocket. Keep the government out of it, right after they outlaw discrimination, I mean underwriting. Don

Comment by Zedd on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Mon, 15 Jan 2007 14:37:00 EST

Dave et al SMT has eliminated the fact that a universal plan is not as catastrophic as we think it is. Are you going to campaign for it as a patriotic American? If we want to keep our country the best, WE THE PEOPLE need to fight for its excellence. We are lagging, sort of primitive, and unsophisticated in this area. There are so many other areas that we are falling short in right now, we are relying on the ingenuity of the past generation. We need to put our brains together and come up with a new paradigm for health care. We have a combination of the great minds of the planet. Lets forget ideology and focus on SOLUTIONS. Right now, our partisanship is preventing us from doing anything CLEVER. Dave: Also our stubbornness regarding this issue is actually another form of isolationism. We practice what is called structural isolationism.

Comment by Scott Tyson on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:49:27 EST

Hey Dave, Thanks for the comments. A couple of thoughts back at you. 2 of our largest community hospitals were forced to close because of inadequate reimbursement. Again, you are talking about apples and oranges. If an insurer will pay $10 for a vaccine that the hospital or office has to pay $12 for, it doesn't matter--you can't make money. Community hospitals and clinics have been destroyed by the business of medicins. Please, go to some of the clinics and ERs in your area and really see if people are concerned about healthcare. People are ashamed that they don't have healthcare. It is not the kind of thing that people bring up in the corner coffee shop. To imply that since we don't hear about it, it isn't a problem is how racism, sexism, and homophobia continued and do for as long as they have. Yes, our insurance commission felt that 473% reserve was appropriate for our insurer. Now, this is a company that has 67% of the market, takes in $1 billion/month, AND has enough money to plaster the city with ads, billboards, buildings, etc. etc. First, it is not going anywhere, so reserves are a bit of an oxymoron. second, we are not talking about endowment at a college. We are talking about money that WE PAID to get healthcare. To have $3 BILLION sitting around while PA has 1.4 million uninsured should bother all of us. Finally, Dave, you seem like a bright articulate guy. Do you actually believe in your heart that the reason we don't have a single payer universal healthcare system is because we can't, or that the "political" will is not there? It is for one reason and one reason only. There are a handful of people who have the ear of the legislators, and we can't get anything out of committee, let alone passed. Is this paranoia? Look at every bill that has come up for votes in the past couple of decades. When they are nonbinding, they pass with flying colors. However, when there are any teeth, the insurance industry comes out will all guns blaring. William McGuire of USHEALTHGROUP was sitting on options valued at $1.8 BILLION when he was let go, due to options violations. That kind of money buys a lot of favors.

Comment by Arch Conservative on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 14:39:45 EST

Bliffle the aliens are costing us billions a year in uncompensated health care. I know that flies in the face of your left wing rhetoric but it is the truth. I'm not ok with getting screwed over by illegals but it's nice to see that you are.

Comment by Clavos on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 11:56:31 EST

Bliffle says: Medicare sub-contracting paperwork to the ins. cos... Bliffle, you've got it exactly backwards; in Medicare, the gov is sub-contracting the insuring, not the paperwork; the gov (via its agency, CMS) does the paperwork, while the insurance companies continue to get the meaty part of the business. The insurance companies are making a killing on Medicare; which is why they eagerly await the "national healthcare plan", while they work behind the scenes NOW to ensure the form it ultimately takes includes them as the CARRIERS, not the paper handlers. That said, you're right about the disintermediation process in the employer insurance market. But then, private corporations are almost always smarter and better run than the government.

Comment by Dave Nalle on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 10:24:05 EST

A couple of responses. Work in a free clinic? Would you suggest that if teaching was a mess you open your own school to help solve the crisis? Or a law firm? Yes, actually. I know people who have done exactly that, at least with the schools - there's not so much of a crisis in lagal service availability. And it's true in medicine too. There are physicians who have taken the initiative and moved out of the current structure to start subscription medical services where instead of paying for insurance, patients pay to subscribe to the practice which then provides them with the healthcare they need. This kind of set-up runs into problems when it comes to higher-end care and hospitalization, but why not have the government work to facilitate expanding this sort of practice or making it pratical to combine it with critical care insurance? The point here is that we don't necessarily need government to solve our problems. There ARE ways we can do it ourselves and likely get a much better result. Hell, communities can even start hospitals or clinics and then hire doctors to work in the community and provide healthcare to their citizens on a subsidized basis. This kind of solution is overlooked way too often. It's the kind of bottom-up socialism/collectivism which seems to have been forgotten in favor of government imposed, institutionalized socialism. This is a simplistic solution to a HUGE crisis. We are not talking about "charity" care when 15% nationally, and 25% of people in Texas have no insurance. Oddly, no one here in Texas seems nearly as concerned about the 'health care crisis' as people are in the northeast. Where did $800 MILLION go? Come to Western PA and see the billboards, the million dollar sign on top of their prime building downtown, see their 3 multimillion dollar primary care buildings that they are renting out, just go to their website at www.highmarkbcbs.org and see that they don't EVEN hide their profit. And why? Because we allow them to say that they need this large a reserve IN CASE they have to stop getting premiums, and cover expenses. With 67% of the market. Then why doesn't your state board of insurance regulate them as they are supposed to? Surely there's some oversight in Pennsylvania? Or are they actually required by law to keep that kind of huge reserve? I know many states do require that of insurors. And finally, please, please stop doing their job for them. In PA, with a TOTAL payroll tax of 10%, payrollee tax of 3 %, we can cover EVERY person from cradle to grave. I knew there was a reason I left Pennsylvania after college. Isn't this money already being spent on something? If that's the case, then they'll have to add to those taxes to provide healthcare. Is that a lot? For my business, it is a small savings. For me, it is a bit more than I pay. For a person who has no insurance, it may be more, But, it eliminates the worry for all healthcare costs. What is the value of that? Again, why in America can't we do what EVERY other industrialized nation has done, and just do it better? We complicate the picture for the insurers, and my answer is, "show them the door." The have had decades to fix the problem and have just made it worse. I think part of the problem is that we DO want to do it better. And being unable to find a better way to do it which can be agreed on for political reasons, and with negative examples so easy to find in Europe and Canada, we just keep putting it off. Dave

Comment by Scott Tyson on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 09:27:26 EST

Thanks for the thoughts. No, as a pediatrician, I don't take Medicare, but you are right about the Medicaid part of it. A couple of responses. Work in a free clinic? Would you suggest that if teaching was a mess you open your own school to help solve the crisis? Or a law firm? This is a simplistic solution to a HUGE crisis. We are not talking about "charity" care when 15% nationally, and 25% of people in Texas have no insurance. Where did $800 MILLION go? Come to Western PA and see the billboards, the million dollar sign on top of their prime building downtown, see their 3 multimillion dollar primary care buildings that they are renting out, just go to their website at www.highmarkbcbs.org and see that they don't EVEN hide their profit. And why? Because we allow them to say that they need this large a reserve IN CASE they have to stop getting premiums, and cover expenses. With 67% of the market. And finally, please, please stop doing their job for them. In PA, with a TOTAL payroll tax of 10%, payrollee tax of 3 %, we can cover EVERY person from cradle to grave. Is that a lot? For my business, it is a small savings. For me, it is a bit more than I pay. For a person who has no insurance, it may be more, But, it eliminates the worry for all healthcare costs. What is the value of that? Again, why in America can't we do what EVERY other industrialized nation has done, and just do it better? We complicate the picture for the insurers, and my answer is, "show them the door." The have had decades to fix the problem and have just made it worse.

Comment by Bliffle on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:09:06 EST

Medicare sub-contracting paperwork to the ins. cos. is a good deal because they can exploit the experience of the InsCos and facilities while controlling the ins. co. margins. This is just what happened in the 80s when many major US corporations switched from purchased health insurance for employees to self-insurance, then subcontracting paperwork to the ins. cos. You might ask "why would an InsCo agree to such a low margin deal?" and the answer, as given to me by an InsCo exec is that they can't pass up that big a piece of revenue, even if low margin, because a competitor will get it. That's the advantage of collective bargaining as practiced by a corp to reduce it's own costs. This is one component of a corp process sometimes called 'disintermediation', i.e., get rid of the middleman.

Comment by Dave Nalle on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 01:02:03 EST

Exciting information, but have to disagree with everything that you said, Dave. So you disagree with this statement: "Reform of some sort is needed, especially to address the needs of those who cannot qualify for insurance and can't get Medicaid because their income is too high. They shouldn't be forced into bankruptcy to pay their medical bills." I'm surprised. the BIGGEST reason is the profits that have nothing to do with providing healthcare. So perhaps you should do something about it? Work in a free clinic or organize other doctors into a subscription health service or coop. Our largest insurer in Wester PA, a nonprofit, is sitting on $3.1 BILLION in reserves, and made $800 MILLION in "profit" in the past 2. What did it do with that 'profit' if it's a non-profit? That's too much to hide in staff salaries. We have all the money we need, we simply need to address the cash flow (don't scare people with 12% taxes when we all know that money would replace everything that we spend today, just in drips and drabs) Actually, that 12% in taxes only provides for 80% coverage. You would still need to spend a couple of thousand more a year for supplemental health coverage. Dave

Comment by Bliffle on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sun, 14 Jan 2007 00:39:28 EST

Archie is totally unreliable. To support his argument he cites an article in the Washington Times (?!), misquotes the source name, then transforms this clause "...10.5 billion a year for education, health care and incarceration..." into one that better suits him: "...Federation for Immigration reform that shows illagels cost California alone 10.5 billion in uncompensated healthcare." Phooey.

Comment by Clavos on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sat, 13 Jan 2007 22:29:54 EST

Scott, You said upthread that you're a physician. Do you take Medicare assignment in your practice? If so, have you noticed from whom the checks you receive for services are coming? Most likely, they are from CMS, Centers For Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS is the coordinator for Medicare/Medicaid payments. It's a government agency, but the carriers for Medicare/Medicaid are private insurance companies. Among the carriers listed by CMS are: Blue Cross/Blue Shield Mutual of Omaha Connecticut General Life Insurance Company Empire Healthchoice Assurance Etc., etc. Medicare is a single payer system. You're right; single payer is the best type of system for us to adopt. Those same insurance companies (and others wanting a slice of what will be an enormous pie), through their lobbyists, will ensure that ultimately, that's what we'll get, and that THEY are the carriers for it. In other words, the present Medicare/Medicaid system (and its carriers) will form the base of the new system. You heard it here first.

Comment by Scott Tyson on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sat, 13 Jan 2007 21:42:16 EST

Cynical thoughts, and probably realistic, but maybe we can try to dream for once? Universal single payer healthcare is maybe a socialist idea, but isn't it also a democratic ideal? (note I did not say capitalist ideal.) In fact, insurance companies are dead set against a single payer universal healthcare system, which is why we have Mass. and CA plans. Those are NOT single payer systems, but taking the money we are spending and giving it to the insurers to once again decide who gets what, when, how, where, and why. Aren't you really sick(no pun intended) of the insurance industry telling you and your doctor what you can have, when, etc? Initially, it will be contracted out. But, think about it? What does the health insurance industry do? Insure? Nope, they cherry pick who they want, weed out the potential problems, and go after the healthy. Are they providers of care? Nope, they contract with doctors, hospitals, etc. Well then, do they distribute care? Nope, that is usually employers or the governement. So, what does an insurer do? Takes out money, decides how it is spent, and provides NOTHING. Sound simplistic? Tell me another industry where the people who control all the money have nothing to do with the product that is being distributed. As far as illegals, ok, let's give them $100 billion in cost. 5% of our total healthcare dollars. So we'll all stand at the ER door, and what an illegal tries to comes in, we send them on their way and hope that they die quickly. You know what? If I can get the 47 million who are uninsured for 6 months of the past 2 years coverage for primary care, avoiding using the ER for colds and sore throats, avoid higher costs on delayed care, I'll bet you we can find the $100 billion from savings in adminstrative overhead, and YOU can pay people to stand in front of the ERs and check their ids.

Comment by Clavos on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sat, 13 Jan 2007 20:45:55 EST

Insurance companies are NOT against a national healthcare system, they stand to make a LOT of money when it's implemented, as they do now handling Medicare payments for the government. When (not if) national healthcare is implemented, you can bet that the carriers will be the same companies now providing the employer group plans and who are already the carriers for Medicare. The only difference for them will be that the government will be paying their premiums, instead of individuals and/or employers. Whatever system is ultimately adopted, its day-to-day operations will be contracted out. The government can't pour water out of a boot with the instructions printed on the sole; it damn sure won't be able to operate something as complex as a national health plan. Besides, there's too much money involved; the politicians will want their cut, and the health carriers will make sure they get it. In turn, the pols will make sure the right carriers get the business.

Comment by sr on The Impending Healthcare Disaster

Sat, 13 Jan 2007 19:59:49 EST

I have no answers for this promblem and it is a national promblem. Paying the old doc with one or two chickens when he came to the house are long gone. Of course we have all seen the stereotypal guy buying his daily case of Bud to put in his brand new pickup hauling his brand new fishing boat with 6 kids and his women for a day of fun on the water. No health insurance right, but we gonna get some fish today. His priorities are non existence one would think. Of course the premiuns for health care would cost more then the Bud, pickup and boat. How about the people who are down and out and not of their own doing. Millions of them. I myself was in the emergency room of our local facility recently. Thank God my wife and I have a good health plan, however watching many of the people in the ER I wondered about their plight. Like I said, I have no answers but this country just cant allow our American citizens after they walk out of the ER to drop dead on the street. Im also conservative.