The Emporia Gazette

create (anonymous) says...

Media coverage with regard to national health care reform legislation is practically constant. Surely there must be a great deal of local interest as well. I'm interested in what our local thinkers have to say. What say all of you?

July 25, 2009 at 8:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

admireed (anonymous) says...

No more medicare/govt funded health care to anyone over 70. Pay your own way or

July 25, 2009 at 10:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

I buy my own insurance, at the present time it is affordable. I know people who go to work every day and are struggling to afford insurance, I know people who are uninsured, I know people with insurance that have to battle the company to get the care they need. I also know people who work for both the private sector and public sector with excellent insurance who don't see a problem. Judging by the number of fund raisers I have been involved with over the years that related to one medical condition or another, I would say our system definitely needs to be refined.

I have stated before I am a Republican and fairly conservative, although I don't consider myself far right. I am ashamed of my party, because they seem to admit there is a problem, and it is a long running problem(Hillary brought it up umpteen years ago), yet they really haven't seemed too concerned with doing anything about it, even (or maybe I should say especially) when they ran the whole show. I am also a Christian, and the GOP holds itself up as the moral party. I do not see anything moral about standing by and seeing friends and neighbors struggle with healthcare issues. The prevailing attitude among the GOP elite seems to be, "hey, I don't have a problem, so I don't care".

Something needs to be done. Am I convinced Obama and his crew has a good plan? No I am not. But, that doesn't mean my own party should do nothing. I want to hear what the GOP has in mind to remedy this situation. A country that can bail out Wall Street speculators to the tune of a couple trillion, stands by and watches CEOs of failing companies award themselves bonuses in the millions, using taxpayer money, and talks with a straight face about putting men on Mars surely can find a way to get affordable healthcare to all the citizens of this country. It doesn't have to be free, but it needs to be affordable, and it needs to cover everyone.

July 25, 2009 at 10:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I would have responded but alfalfa pretty much said everything I could have said...and probably said it better. I too am not convinced that Obama's plan is the best one....but something needs to be done quickly....and his is the only real plan I see on the table. In my opinion....the Republicans no plan does not count as a plan. So If the Republicans have some real ideas for a real fix they need to be figuring out a way to articulate them soon....or they may be left standing at the station.

But time is of an essence. As President Obama alluded to the other night.....one of the things Washinton does best is talk things to death.

July 26, 2009 at 4:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

A side note....

One of the many smokescreens being put out by those wanting to maintain the status quo is the horrer stories about the lack of care in the British and Canadian sytems.....and the implication that our sytem would ipso facto be the same way.

The British system was designed to be minimalist, which is in keeping with the Brits national view of themselves....stiff upper lip and all you know. The Cnadian system is the off-spring of the British one and as such follows suit.

The American system would not have to be that way...depending on how it was written......and how much taxpayers were willing to pay for it. But therein often lies the rub. When it comes to health care for ourselves we want Mercedes Benz coverage...when it come to health care for others we want a Kia price.

July 26, 2009 at 5:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

With both alfalfa and biscuitboy making such thoughtful and intelligent comments, I find that I don't have much more to add. I have, however given this some thought. It is only fair that I report that I am on Medicare, and my required secondary insurer is Tricare which is also U.S. government military. So truth be told, that makes me lucky. But if all I cared about was myself, I may as well just shut up and become a recluse.

I have read where doctors and nurses spend half their time dealing with insurance companies. Those companies turn over 30% of what we pay them into profit, advertising, and the cost of dealing with doctors and nurses.

Watched TV lately? We are currently being inundated with loud scare tactics being launched by health care reform opposition designed to drown out any information or definitions we may be seeking. In fact, from what I have read, lobbying efforts have spent about $40 million in the last three months. It goes without saying that the health insurance industry cannot afford any type of reform and will do anything in its power to oppose it.

I am in favor of the single payer system because it seems most fair. It would work just like Medicare does. Here, in fact, is an explanation by the Clinton administration Secretary of Labor Robert Reich who agreed that "single payer" is the best idea even though it would be politically impossible. He believes, however, that the "public option" should be enacted anyway.

“[The public option] means that average members of the public have a choice, if they want it, of either their private-for-profit insurers like they now use or a public not-for-profit insurer. That public insurer would resemble ideally Medicare, [with] low administrative costs and it would have the economies of scale. It would be so large that it could actually negotiate low drug prices and very low premiums. That’s what the private insurers are scared of, because that means that their profits will be squeezed... Unless they are going to be genuinely pressured to reform through a public option, there is nothing that’s going to change them... The single payer system would be the best of all... Unfortunately, we can’t get there from here because the political forces are just too strong against single payer.”

July 26, 2009 at 8:01 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

to continue...

I don't agree with those who tout this as becoming a social system. If that is true, then a single payer system would be as "socialist" as our highway system, libraries, water, sewer, schools, etc.

Finally, with regard to such scare tactics as warning us that we will wait forever to be seen by a doctor, or that we may not get the prescription drugs we need, I can only offer my own experience as a retort. I have been cared for by the military health-care system since I was first married to my late Marine husband. Not only have I always received excellent care, never once have I had to wait for care. Never once have I been unable to get prescribed medication. Now that I live in a civilian area, I get civilian health care. As I said before, I am lucky in that respect.

July 26, 2009 at 8:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

People seem to talk a lot about the monetary cost of this but can we consider for a moment or nine what it will have to cost us so that it won't cost them(the government) as much? More bans? More regulations on private companies? More government? More power for the government? If you think it's worth it, that's fine. I'm not sure I am.

July 26, 2009 at 8:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Good question, seriously. I can only say that if we can regulate the banking industry, why not the health care one? Business needs to be taken out of medical care completely. Besides, private insurance companies are not going to protect the interests of individuals anyway.

July 26, 2009 at 8:17 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

The only thing private insurance companies are ever going to really protect....is the same thing they have protected up until now......their bottom line. Any body that really believes the insurance companies are spending all this money opposssing health care reform because of their concern for their patients....has a fool for a patient.

After watching the AIG debacle.....can you really believe the insurance industry has your best interest at heart. Given the choice between trusting AIG and trusting the government ....I'd have to take the latter.

July 26, 2009 at 8:53 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Duuuuh, no comment !

July 26, 2009 at 8:59 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

One thing that is needed is tort reform. It would help more than just the healthcare industry. But, because our nation is run by lawyers, that doesn't seem to ever happen. Malpractice insurance rates are through the roof, that just gets tacked onto our healthcare costs.

The whole idea that the individual is going to lose control, that this is the path to socialism..well, maybe those are the facts under Obama, but the fact remains, the GOP has had a long time to deal with the problem, and they have done nothing. No tort reform, no crack down on insurance companies, nothing. The belief that capitalism and the private sector can solve everything is a little misguided, because greed and other human factors come into the equation...that is why we have situations like AIG. I have also read quite a few comments that the Constitution does not promise healthcare to all, therefore the federal government needs to stay out of it. My first response to that is, when the Constitution was written one of your basic healthcare choices was, do you want a shot of whiskey when we cut your leg off, or not? The founding fathers could not have seen what miracles or the cost of those miracles were coming down the pike. Second, somewhere there is a phrase, "we hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal". So, why do elected officials and most if not all government employees have access to some of the best healthcare, while millions of others who work everyday to pay taxes to pay for the ruling classes healthcare not have that equal access?

July 26, 2009 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Probably one of the best ways to ever achieve tort reform in this country would be to stop electing so many lawyers to serve in our legislative bodies.

July 26, 2009 at 9:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

I know a couple that was forced into bankruptcy over a $60000 medical bill. They were young, both working, and paying it off at the rate of $$400 per month, for some reason the hospital did not think that was fast enough. They had health insurance but a problem pregnancy and severely ill newborn went through the lifetime limit. I know another young guy with insurance but a very high deductable. He had to undergo some unintended tests that left him owing $2000, the hospital wanted it in 3 months. One things the GOP could have done was draft some regulations with regard to finance...in both cases the bills could have been paid in full, if only the hospitals in question(2 different ones) would have been willing to accept payment over a longer period of time.

July 26, 2009 at 9:33 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Hospitals employ people to demand payment from people. I know a woman who quit working for Humana in Kansas City because they expected her and a team of others to pressure people and get ugly with them about payment of bills. That needs to stop too. It is this sort of thing that has brought us to the reform table. I just hope something concrete and sensible passes soon.

When I saw some round numbers recently, they convinced me that a single payer system can't be all wrong. For example, we have over 300 million people in the U.S. If only 100 million were old enough to work, and actually had a job, and they paid $100 a month for health care, it would generate $1 trillion, 200 billion a year. Now, that's a lot of jack. I'd bet that most people would be very happy to pay only $100 a month premium. I have friends who are paying five and six times that. And I bet there isn't a company in this country that wouldn't be glad to pay that for their employees. The Democrats have something going here and need to pay attention to the details and answer people's questions. I hope they can get this done. If not, they may be very sorry one day if they push a bill through that fails to do a good job.

Good point, biscuitboy. Those lawyers are going to protect their flanks.

July 26, 2009 at 11:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Good ole Newman Regional Health told me that they expected full payment within eight months on money owed them. So they "graciously" helped me arrange financing to pay it off through a bank thereby adding interest to principal. Ironically...I later learned the money in question should have been paid by Medicare but NRH had just decided to hang it all on the old man.
To make a long story short....after much wrangling....they finally agreed to correct their "human error".....but I still had to pay the interest to date.

July 26, 2009 at 11:38 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

Only one comment, from the lofty height of my high horse.
Newman Regional Health is no longer the Newman Hospital of old. It is now owned and operated by a large corporate health care facility as is Medical Arts Clinic, whose only concern is to turn a huge profit, any way possible and as quickly possible ! And here is the real kicker, a person at the last joint County, City public budget hearing suggested that the County consider raising the tax mil levy even more than the anticipated raise, because Newman Regional Health needed more money !
Thats the price of progressing and forward moving, thinking !
Nuff, said. LOL with progression and moving forward.

July 26, 2009 at 12:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

P.S., Sorry, just one more.
And there are those who think that the runaway health care costs and private insurance companies that provide health care insurance don' t need to be regulated, if need be, by the federal government . I say to those who think this way, what are you complaining about, you get exactly what you ask for, because you tolerate the status quo.
Thank you, thats all .

July 26, 2009 at 12:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

So I'm getting the impression that people are willing to trade liberty for health care. You may want to pretend it won't happen but it will. Things have a way of growing and growing in the government and they will have to look for ways to keep costs down, this will come in the way of bans and new laws and such. If you are cool with that now you batter be cool with it when it happens. I will remember and will remind you when you start to complain.

Big bad evil horrible scum of the earth less than human %^$#%&*&%$@!# health insurance companies as they are popularly called are scared of reform not because it will hurt them but because it will be the death of them. They cannot compete with the federal government and it's ludicrous to believe they can.

You may be comfortable with all this and that's fine but I'm still not.

July 26, 2009 at 1:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

It's funny how I used to always hear about how Medicaid and Medicare sucked from old folks that were on it and from their family members now all I hear is how great it is. Did they change things a lot recently or something? If so maybe they can make it work really well. I still reserve the right to have my doubts even if it is the unpopular position to take. OK?

July 26, 2009 at 2:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

YY4u
How is this reform going to improve the memory of doctors? I think you overestimate the power of Obama's pretty.;)

July 26, 2009 at 2:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Liberty is a concept that sounds great and you can really wrap a
patriotic song around it.....but it doesn't pay your bills....it doesn't put food on your table....and it certainly doesn't get you in to see a doctor when your sick.

Some people on here seem to believe that the health care system we have now is the best that we can do. I have more faith in us than that. You may be comfortable with what we now have,,,,,but I'm not

July 26, 2009 at 2:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I have never once heard anyone say that they believe "that the health care system we have now is the best that we can do". It seems to me that the ones singing the prettiest song are those that are pushing it so hard and they are the ones that refuse to see any down side to it. I believe it is going to happen no matter what we say. Obama's team controls everything, it's his deal, it's going to happen. I just ask you to look at it for a few micro seconds without your rosy colored glasses on. That is it. If I am wrong and this is the greatest thing since cut cheese, GREAT we all win. If however I am right, I can at least say I told you so.

July 26, 2009 at 2:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

seriouslyfolks.......I'm not saying there won't be any down sides.....there might be. But much of that will depend on how the final bill is written.....so if all people that feel as you do are concerned this might be a time for some constructive criticism rather than just saying that any change will be terrible. What are your concerns and how might they be eliminated.?

But if you are asking me to lose sleep over the plight of those paragons of vrtue and human compassion...a.k.a. the insurance companies....I'm afraid I will be sleeping quite well thank you.

July 26, 2009 at 3:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I do believe much of what carried President Obama to his strong victory in the last election was an overwhelming desire...in fact demand....for health care reform. Because of that I believe failure to deliver such reform will be a lose--lose for the democrats and the republicans alike.

Most of the people I have spoken with about this are going to have no sympathy for either side if reform is not delivered now.

July 26, 2009 at 3:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Now it takes a lot of faith to believe that everyone that works for insurance companies is evil. Do they not employ janitors and other folks that aren't evil capitalists? I guess when their companies are slayed by the great equalizer they can just get a government job thus increasing the size of government all the more. It seems that it is bad to try to amass money but power is OK to amass as long as it's the government doing it. Corrupt people trying to get money that really don't have any authority over me or corrupt people(except Obama of course) trying to grab all the power they can who have authority over me? I don't think my discomfort is that hard to understand.

July 26, 2009 at 3:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Obviously you have more faith in some insurance company executive that you have no control over whatsoever....than you do in some government official that you at least have the ability to vote against. Life experiences cause people to view things different ways...so you view it your way and I will view it mine.

But to claim that a negative view of an insurance company carries over to all of its employees...is no more valid than saying that a negative view of government extends to every janitor and secretary that works there. lol

July 26, 2009 at 3:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

I don't know who is evil and who is not, I just know there is nothing fair or right about the system we have in place today. A person in prison is guaranteed healthcare, a guy who has never done anything wrong and is working a minimum wage job is not. If Obamas plan is bad, the GOP needs to be burning the midnight oil with so called moderate Democrats to come up with an alternative. Health care doesn't have to be free, but it does need to be in reach of everyone with a job, and truthfully in what is supposed to be such and advanced nation, everyone should have access to healthcare they can afford. My chief concern with my own health insurance since I am self-employed is what happens if I do have a serious illness that forces me to quit working for a year or two and I can't afford the premiums, then what? Of course, there is the other issue, my policy is about as thick as the Bible, in all honesty I really don't know what is covered and what is not, until I get a bill.

July 26, 2009 at 4:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

Ha ha YY4. So true. I just went through basically that same scenario at the beginning of the year. I'm about $500 shy of hitting my $1500 deductable so my insurance will pay anything but the $25 co-pay to the first doctor. Oh wait they did save me around $400 for the insurance wright off the doctors give ya. What a crock.

July 26, 2009 at 4:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

Oops, That should read write off not wright off.

July 26, 2009 at 5:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

seriouslyfolks,
I'm one of those singing a pretty song about health care reform because I can personally see how Medicare is working out for me. I don't use it very often, but when I do, it works.

Also, I can certainly see where small businesses will be able to find it easier to provide health insurance for their employees if the premiums are not so high. As it is now, those small businesses who do offer insurance pay significantly higher premiums for less than generous coverage because they don't have a large enough base. Those higher expenses are passed on to the employees in the form of lower wages. That's not fair all the way around.

I do have a question or two that may relate to the downside. What about those who remain uninsured despite more affordable premiums? Will they be forced to pay a premium? How? What about the unemployed? What about illegal aliens? We need more education on all this. What really torques me is that last week, when we could have had lots of information forthcoming, the media spent all their air time on Professor Gates, racism, how Obama handled it, and the Cambridge police. We needed to focus on health care reform, last week in particular. In the meantime, TV ads from the opposition have continued to tell lies.

Yes, I can see where there will be job loss for support people who work for insurance companies. But, where have those insurance companies been all this time? Why haven't they been working within their own industry to bring about reform of some sort? Instead they've been busily collecting their premiums, deciding what not to cover next, and how to best cover their asses. You know damn well they've seen the writing on the wall. They did nothing!

If you and I can talk this much about this issue now, don't you think the experts in the industry have known something is up for a long time? The Clinton administration tried health care reform too so this is not news to insurance execs. They used the time to collect premiums and get fat.

YY, change doctors. He's a rapist. I'm guessing your scenario is really not true. If it is, I'm not kidding, you have a bad doctor.

When I had specific abdominal pain a couple of years ago, my doctor treated it immediately with a pretty powerful antibiotic. Then she scheduled me for a colonoscopy which proved her diagnosis correct. After the colo, the surgeon came to me in the recovery room to speak to me about his findings. Then he mailed me his findings on top of that, with a list of stuff not to eat. I'm on Medicare, and I pay a premium of $92 a month. I didn't get a bill. I will sing the pretty song. Oh yeah, my prescriptions all cost me $3. Yes indeed, I will sing the pretty song.

July 26, 2009 at 5:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Weltha (anonymous) says...

I can't wait to retire.

July 26, 2009 at 6:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"I called the pharmacy to refill a prescription. The pharmacy called me back a said my doctor will not refill the prescription. I contacted the doctor and he said he needed to see me before he could refill the prescription. I made the appointment, paid the co-pay and while talking with the doctor, he wanted me to get an MRI. I asked him what was wrong with the MRI he ordered a few months back. He asked me "What MRI"? I reminded him that he ordered me to get an MRI a few months ago. He didn't remember ordering an MRI, never looked at the MRI, my insurance paid $1200. I paid $400. all for what? I'm not a medical doctor but I believe something needs to change in my humble opinion."

Could someone explain to me how this will be fixed with with reform?

July 26, 2009 at 6:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

I think I have finally figured out the biggest problem. There is a little nugget of profound wisdom that my parents taught me that may help some of you:
"Insurance and warranties are always calculated on odds that are in the issuer's favor. Buyer be smart."

I am on the record already as to my feelings/opinion on this topic and I am worn out on the subject, but just for those who may have missed it, I believe the system is broken and that the first step is to fix the found problems in what exists before launching any new system that is sure to have problems we can't see yet, but already has many visible ones. If you want more clarification on my position, click on my user name and read the pages 8, 7, 6 & 5 of my comments on "Another Right Gone" and "Another Right Gone Part 2."

I am curious, however, as to why no one here is using the Lyon County Health Department to stick it to the insurance companies and to support the public health care system?

July 26, 2009 at 7:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Thanks for the answer YY. Does anyone else have an answer. It doesn't even have to be that scenario, you can answer the question for your own scenario. I understand that people who don't have insurance now will have insurance(whether they want it or not) and the government will "encourage" as many people to get into the "pool" as they can so they can have more money to work with. What I don't understand is how actual care/service is supposed to improve. Can someone explain this to me. If you don't know, why do you keep telling these stories that really don't have anything to do with it? Does anyone have any specifics that they can point to and say I like this or I like that or is just "change" enough for you. We've already gone over all the vague theories and we've established who's bad and should be punished, let's hear some specifics. Shall we?

July 26, 2009 at 7:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

I have been pondering this for a few hours, now and I just can't understand this statement. "....we have over 300 million people in the U.S. If only 100 million were old enough to work, and actually had a job, and they paid $100 a month for health care, it would generate $1 trillion, 200 billion a year."

Now I am an English person, not a math one, but I can only figure this as a 9 - 0 billion, not a 12 - 0 billion or a 12 - 0 trillion. Am I wrong? As I said, I am not a math person.

Even if my math is wrong, logically speaking, these dollars even though cited as premiums, still equal $100 per month for every third person or $33.33 per person in medical care, if they filter back through at 100%. That would mean the actual cost of health care to the provider or pharmaceutical would have to be very low for anyone in the system to receive wages, much less department heads and agencies that will have to be instituted.
Like I said, maybe I'm missing something, but I have a feeling I'm not.

July 26, 2009 at 8:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

Seriously, the answer is far from simple, and I will be the first to admit I probably don't know exactly what has to be done. One of the first things the "alfalfa" health plan would do is decouple health insurance from employment. I know this would send people into the streets to riot, but here is the reason why. I heard not long ago that healthcare was costing GM more per car than the components in the car, yet I am willing to bet that the UAW did not see increasing healthcare costs as an increase in compensation, my experience serving on a school board many moons ago reflected that, our health insurance costs continued to escalate each year, but the teachers never saw that as an increase in pay...yet those of us who actually write a check every month to BC/BS or some other insurance company know for a fact what a great benefit health insurance is to an employee. IF everyone who is covered today by their employer whether they work in the public or private sector actually wrote a check each month for their coverage, there would be alot more interest in keeping costs down, and, it would end the disadvantage small businesses find themselves in when it comes to providing healthcare coverage. It would also end alot of apathy on the part of elected officials, because they couldn't duck under the safety net of a cushy government insurance program.

July 26, 2009 at 8:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

The second part of the alfalfa plan would make purchasing health insurance mandatory unless you could prove you had the net worth to self insure. We require that of drivers with liability insurance, I see no reason why we can't do that with health insurance. The government would lay out a set of rules for a basic plan, if people wanted one with more frills and could afford it they would be able to buy it. There would have to be a graduated income scale of some sort with a government subsidy for the poorest people. Even these basic plans would need to emphasize preventive care, and encourage some of the proven routine testing known to aid in detecting diseases such as hearth disease and some types of cancer. Plastic surgery and the like would need to be paid for 100% by the user, unless required to repair damage from things like a car accident or mastectomy.

July 26, 2009 at 9:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

I am thinking this up as I go, if I come up with a workable plan, do you suppose there is a snowballs chance in hades I might be able to sell it to the GOP??? Another thing that would hopefully end under the alfalfa plan is the old "hospital bills Joe User $1000 for a procedure, but settles for $750 from the insurance company" routine. It costs what it costs, no more smoke and mirrors. Also, rather than rely so much on drug companies funding research through obscene profits, I wonder if more research could be done by universities, much like is done with the land grant colleges today and agriculture, and the results shared with the private sector. I am speaking from a position of ignorance on this one because I don't know the split as it is today between public and private research, I just know often drug makers justify high costs of their products by using the high cost of developing new treatments.

July 26, 2009 at 9:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Wow. You put a lot of thought into that but I am more looking for what people like about Obama's plan or the plans being considered now in other parts of the government. Like you said the alfalfa plan ain't going to happen so let's hear some specifics that people get so excited about with what is actually going to happen.

July 26, 2009 at 9:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

The problem with the Obama plan and alot of employer provided plans now is all they do is mask the cost of healthcare. There never will be "free" healthcare, for that matter there never will be free anything. The government does not have a very good track record running things efficiently, I don't expect government healthcare to be any more efficient than anything else the government does. Unlike alot of people though, I think the fault for the governments mishandling of many issues can be found by looking in the mirror. Way too many people don't take being a thinking voter seriously. I still believe we have the best democracy on the planet, the problem is many of us don't participate in it as much as we should.

July 26, 2009 at 10:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

There is no way that private companies can compete with the government. As people leave the private companies "pool" they will have to raise rates and more people will "choose" the government route. You see were this is going. Eventually there will be no choice so what they are saying now about being able to choose between private and government is essentially a lie.

"They will require medical providers to standardize records keeping and billing systems that prevent duplicate procedures and duplicate billing."

The way things are now a guy gets his left leg amputated but because our system is so screwed up they do it again.
In the "new system" he only get it amputated once.
Oh, I get it now. lol

July 26, 2009 at 10:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

Pingeon (anonymous) says...

YY - They are already raising taxes on tobacco. I also saw an article the other day saying there are talks already started on taxing soda.

I see the tax rates going up and up and up and up. I see the national health care bringing new taxes in. I do believe the current system needs some changes, but I am very uncomfortable with the government running the show. They don't exactly have the best track record when it comes to efficiency.

I received this link from a friend the other day talking about Canada's health care system. This is very slanted, but does bring some good points out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2jiju...

July 26, 2009 at 10:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

slippery slope?????

July 27, 2009 at 12:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

So, no one has any serious specific things that they can point to that makes them like Obama's plan or the plans being talked about by other parts of the government?

July 27, 2009 at 12:54 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

What about your specifics seriouslyfolks...We haven't heard any of your specifics yet.

I will give you one specific I like about Obama's plan that is not currently available under our present wonderful system......health care coverage for millions of people that at present don't have any.

That's what I am seeking. Now you have agreed the system is in need of repair. So give me some specifics about how you would repair it that would provide coverage for those millions of people. If you can do that then I might well jump on your band wagon. But I fail to see where constant criticism of Obama's plan.... without offering any alternative plan.....while all the time admitting the current system has problems.... moves the conversation forward. And yet that is about all I seem to hear from the opposition.

July 27, 2009 at 4:21 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

What I seem to be hearing is;

The current system is not working well.
We don't like any of the ideas we have heard for fixing it.
We don't have any ideas of our own on how to fix it.
So here's a great idea....lets just not fix it!

July 27, 2009 at 4:25 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

Obama hasn't given any specifics that I know of...what few generalizations I have heard are contradicted by some sources.

As I have thought about this since yesterday, I have finally gotten through my head the major flaw of an all encompassing plan that doesn't require most people to pay something....it gives the illusion it is free. Absolutely nothing is free, but some people try to make us think it is. I am with biscuitboy, seriouslyfolks how about YOU tell us some specifics. I don't know that this thread is meant only to deal with Obamas plan. I thought it was to deal with healthcare reform in general, and throw everyones ideas out for discussion.

July 27, 2009 at 6:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I agree wholheartedly with alfalfa that there is no free lunch....nor health care for that matter.

That having been said...I still agree with create in having a preference for a single payer system. But I also see that as being politically out of the question.....and it does lend itself more readily to the illusion of being free.

So my second choice is the government option plan whereby all citizens would be required to have insurance they pay for either through a private plan.....or by choosing a government plan similair to the current Medicare system. To insure compliance, premium collection might even be tied to payment of income taxes or something like that. The government plan would have a sliding fee schedule where only the poorest would pay nothing out of their pocket...similair to the Medicaid system we now have. I fail to see where Medicare is any more inefficient.....nor prone to denying health service....than the myriad private plans we now have...and is much better that many of those plans.

As to the complaint that this would eventually drive the private insurance companies out of business.....that may or may not be true. If they are adept at adapting they could adjust to a new way of doing things......especially if there are enough of you that hate the government so much that you are willing to pay more for this private coverage. They might also thrive on covering those areas where the government plan might not want to go...such as giving kidney transplants to eighty year olds.....again if people are willing to pay for such cost-benefit poor procedures.

But the argument that we should not change what we have now because it might cost some people in the private insurance business there jobs...even though that leaves millions without insurance.... is ludicrous on its face.

July 27, 2009 at 7:26 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

It doesn't do any good to talk about how I would fix it because I'm just a greasemonkey from Kansas. I don't really know too much about fixing a problem like we've got. I do think the problem is being exaggerated to sell the idea which I don't like, People didn't like it when it was Iraq. As a greasemonkey I do know how to trouble shoot problems and even anticipate them from time to time. What I've read and heard from someone who used to work for BC/BS is that the larger the pool that is in a group(my terminology may be off but you get my drift) the better it can operate because they have more money to work with. That makes sense. Now the government plan needs to operate the same way from what I have read. The problem is that the folks they want to get in the pool first are those that can't afford or barely can afford insurance now so you have no money coming in from them. This is a problem. The pool also needs to be made up of people that are healthy and only have insurance "in case of emergencies" as well as sicken's. The healthies basically pay for the sicken's. This is a problem too. With the government running the show and knowing(sorta) how this works they are going to need a very big pool with healthies and sicken's and both groups are going to have to pay(or be payed for). Most of the people that are going to jump into the pool first are going to be the ones who can't afford it now and are likely not in the greatest of shape(most Americans aren't) so they will contribute nothing and cost something. Math works and that doesn't. So they will need to get more people into the pool to get more money to pay for the others. This isn't going to be the rich people who can easily afford good insurance, it will be the next group up from the previously uninsured, it will be the working class. Enter Seriously R. Folks. I don't really want to get on the government dependency list(ever) but I probably won't have a choice. My rates will continue to go up because private insurance won't be able to compete because they can't just print more money or steal from Peter to pay Judas so the will keep raising prices as their pools shrink in order to keep afloat and grab as much dough as the can while their ship sinks. So it would be stupid for a workin' class folk like me to keep payin' more and more when Uncle Sam and his bottomless pockets has something cheaper, it's really no choice at all. So what ends up happening is that the working class ends up with lesser(sorta) insurance so the poor can have the same crappy insurance and the wc pays for it. I also read somewhere about the cigarette tax helping to pay for it which is essentially a tax on the lower classes because that's who smokes most. I know that this whole idea of stickin' it to the man(insurance companies and rich people) really appeals to some people but it never really ends up that way and .................... grow up.

July 27, 2009 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"As to the complaint that this would eventually drive the private insurance companies out of business.....that may or may not be true. If they are adept at adapting they could adjust to a new way of doing things" biscuitboy

"As to the complaint that this(smoking ban) would eventually drive the bars out of business.....that may or may not be true. If they are adept at adapting they could adjust to a new way of doing things"

I knew I heard that somewhere before. lol

July 27, 2009 at 9:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Allright.....now those were some specifics.....and some good ones. You raise some interesting questions and potential for problems. Some of them could be handled by the way the law was writtten...others are more problematic.

But that is the type of input this conversation needs, I on my lunch hour now with little time so will talk to you again later.
The only thing I would dispute on its face is the conclusion that the government insurance would automatically be less satisfactory than private coverage.

July 27, 2009 at 12:21 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I went to Congressman Jerry Moran's website earlier today. He has a little ticker on his site where folks can vote whether or not they agree with the health reform plan as is. The vote is an overwhelming "no," but that only smacks of partisanship to me. Both parties need to be hard at work on this Bill and not turning it down because they don't like Obama or they are pleased with the status quo. I e-mailed him and offered a link to this forum in the hope that he reads our discussion, some of which is very thought provoking and highly intelligent. I do know for a fact that his aides read this stuff because one of them is a former student of mine. I hope our ideas have an impact.

I'd be interested to know how much people in Congress pay for their plans. I know it's a government plan of some sort. Funny how they all seem to accept that for themselves, but then they leave their constituents to suck wind. I have a real problem with that.

July 27, 2009 at 1:28 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Thank you YY. I'll look at that in a moment.

I just saw the president of the American Medical Association interviewed on CNN. He states that the AMA is endorsing the health plan as it is being offered with the knowledge that it does need some further work. When asked why, he said it was because the status quo is not working. Too many people are uninsured. It's good to see that he's on the same page with so many of us.

Thanks again, YY.

July 27, 2009 at 2:51 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I have just received Jerry Moran's newsletter. Here's what he has to say about health care reform:

"This week, I introduced a resolution to strengthen Medicare and Medicaid programs before funding a new government-sponsored health care program. The resolution urges Congress to invest Medicare and Medicaid savings back into these programs before creating additional government programs.

During the health care reform debate, as we work to fix our health care system, we must preserve Medicare and protect the 45 million seniors across the country that depend on Medicare for their health care needs. Also, right now, states are struggling to pay their Medicaid obligations and need to be shielded from unfunded Medicaid mandates.

We need to bring some common-sense thinking to health care reform. Swapping money from cash-strapped programs simply to expand other government programs will not help seniors or the disadvantaged. Click here to view my remarks on the House floor about protecting seniors."

OK Jerry, this does nothing to reform anything about health care spiraling out of control as it is doing now. This does nothing to bring health care to the ordinary working people who don't have health care because it's too damned expensive or their employer doesn't offer it for the same reason. Thanks, but no thanks, Jerry.

July 27, 2009 at 3:06 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

What is so unreasonable about what the above republican says?

I'm still waiting for specifics that people like about Obama's plan or other plans being proposed by others in government that makes them feel good about this reform. Moran's is obviously poop because he's on the losing team, I get that. What I want to know is why are people so excited about it(reform). Do you know why, or are you just so fed up with the way things are that anywhere is better than here? I can't really "get on board" when people are just pointing out how bad it is now without telling me exactly where we are going. Does that make sense?

For the record, I have never said that "our" current system is good. I don't even really know if I buy into the concept of "our".

July 27, 2009 at 5:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

The only specific that is of great importance to me is that healthcare coverege be provided for the estimated thirty to forty five million people in this country at present who have none. The one thing I know for certain is continuing with the status quo will not provide that health care. This is the overriding predominent specific to me...everything after that is secondary.

All these other specifics of "Obama's Plan" to my knowledge are still being worked out......thus making it a little hard at the moment to talk in specifics that don't even exist in any final form. But...as I said a moment ago.....I will look favorably on any plan that accomplishes universally available coverage.....and will oppose any that doesn't.

The affect of all this on the insurance companies is their concern not mine. I guess I feel about them the same way many republicans felt about the auto maker's......let them go under....what emerges on the other side will be stronger and better.

July 27, 2009 at 7:17 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I first ask for specifics ..... what? ............ Saturday? And have recieved specifics on what people would like to see happen but none on what is being actually discussed in our government. I can only assume that this means people don't know and are researching it so they can answer or they don't care to answer. If you don't care to answer that's fine. If you don't really know, why push for it so hard? Like I've said before I believe it's going to happen, so our discussion is really nothing more than getting to know each other better or something of that nature which is great. We may disagree on this but I really do enjoy discussing it with you all, sometimes I even like to discuss silly stuff too. I don't know if you've noticed that about me or not. This is going to be a huge HUGE change in this country and I can't help but feel as if people aren't excited about it because of the excitement of living in such a history making time. Obama's election was HUGE and although I didn't vote for him I was excited he won and proud of America for taking such a great stride in getting past our past. I don't however think that that(the excitement) is enough to warrant this reform at this time. Maybe there is enough to warrant it, I'm not saying there isn't, I just haven't really heard enough to convince me. I agree that having everybody covered is a great reason but that comes with problems too. So if you really want to discuss this lets do it. Convince me.

July 27, 2009 at 7:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Thanks biscuitboy. I was typing while you were posting. It takes me awhile some times. It's hard trying to be "serious".;)

July 27, 2009 at 7:39 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"The affect of all this on the insurance companies is their concern not mine. I guess I feel about them the same way many republicans felt about the auto maker's......let them go under....what emerges on the other side will be stronger and better."

The problem with that is that there is no other side for the insurance companies. If the government gets a corner on the insurance market there is nothing private ones can do to compete. The government doesn't have to show a profit to stay afloat they simple raise taxes somewhere and they're good to go. Is the government going to allow private insurance companies to tax people so they have a level playing field? Gee I hope not and I hope I didn't give them any ideas.LOL I know it's easy to dehumanize the insurance companies because they have money and love it a lot too much but they are still people with families and lives and such. It certainly is a mess. I'm just trying to see this from as many angle as I can. I don't really know why, I can't control any of it.

July 27, 2009 at 7:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I thought I was being specific when I said

"I am in favor of the single payer system because it seems most fair. It would work just like Medicare does."

Then I agreed with Clinton Labor Sec'y Robert Reich when he said, "It would be so large that it could actually negotiate low drug prices and very low premiums."

I also said, "I can certainly see where small businesses will be able to find it easier to provide health insurance for their employees if the premiums are not so high."

So, I like the plan because

1. it offers health insurance to large numbers of people who would like to have it but can't afford it. That's my number one reason.

2. it will allow small businesses that are either struggling with paying premiums for small staffs, or cannot offer it at all, to be able to offer insurance to their employees.

3. I don't like the part of the plan which will allow people to choose between private plans or government plans because eventually, people will drop their private plans because of cost; the private sector cannot compete with the government.

That's all I know for now. They're taking it apart in Washington this week. As the week goes on, we'll all get more information providing we watch the news and pay attention.

July 27, 2009 at 8:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Would it be possible for a two tier system whereby the government insured virtually everybody....[perhaps excluding the very rich, people like me Ha-Ha]......with a Ford or Toyota level of coverage. Thus leaving another Caddilac or Mercedes level of coverage to the insurance companies for the people who wanted it enough to pay for it.

This may be a really stupid idea....like many that pop into my head at this time of the day.....but it's just a thought.

When I express my lack of concern for the insurance companies however.......that is a lack of concern for our buddies at AIG and their big-wig, high spending, large living cohorts that are living fat off of the lucrative profits they have made off of our fears and misfortunes

It does not extend to the people that work there just trying to make a living so they to can afford their company's own product. I feel as much sympathy for them as I do for the autoworkers that stand to lose their jobs if we just allow their high spending, large living bosses to go down.

But...having said that....I do not believe we can justify letting millions remain unisured just to keep their jobs afloat either. That sounds to much like that old pscyho-babble game of who do you throw out of the lifeboat first.

July 28, 2009 at 5:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

With the single payer system would people that don't have the government insurance have to pay? It would almost seem as though they would have to in order for it to work. If that is the case people will be paying for their own and the government plan they are not using? If it does work like Medicare that is the case. I looked at my check stub and sure enough I'm paying for it but not using it. So if I have to pay for it and am unable to use it why would I "choose" to keep my insurance when I have to pay for another one I'm not using? This whole "You can keep your insurance that you have now if you like." is a dangedable LIE. I don't know anybody who can afford to pay for three insurance plans, their current plan, medicare(which we have to pay for now) , and this new one. I wish they would at least be honest about their intentions of taking over health insurance completely. Then I wouldn't feel as though I was being peed on and told it was raining.

"Then I agreed with Clinton Labor Sec'y Robert Reich when he said, 'It would be so large that it could actually negotiate low drug prices and very low premiums.' "
I'd like to know how the government is going to "negotiate" with private companies to lower prices.

create
Your second point is a very good one and I've thought about how in the past their have been jobs that I would love to have but couldn't take them because they didn't pay enough to survive plus pay for insurance. This would eliminate that problem, but then again I may be the only person in America looking to get a job that pays less but has more family friendly hours. I don't know. Anyway this is a very valid point.

July 28, 2009 at 9:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

"Would it be possible for a two tier system whereby the government insured virtually everybody....[perhaps excluding the very rich, people like me Ha-Ha]......with a Ford or Toyota level of coverage. Thus leaving another Caddilac or Mercedes level of coverage to the insurance companies for the people who wanted it enough to pay for it."

I think this will be the way it ends up being, the masses get inferior health coverage while the very wealthy get what ever they want cuz that have the money for it. This will no doubt make a lot of people jealous and complain and demand that the government punish them for being wealthy.

"But...having said that....I do not believe we can justify letting millions remain unisured just to keep their jobs afloat either. That sounds to much like that old pscyho-babble game of who do you throw out of the lifeboat first."

I never said that it justified not insuring people, I said it needs to be considered. We have a growing unemployment rate and from what I have read it won't slow it's growth until a little while after the economy starts to recover. So you have to consider the impact reform will have on jobs, it would be irresponsible not to.

July 28, 2009 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Bicsuit,

Your question and ideas about Mercedes versus Toyota medical coverage is closer than you think. On CNN just a little while ago, they covered nearly the same thing happening at a New York City hospital when they showed how those who are privately insured receive top drawer care in one section of the hospital, while those who are uninsured or on Medicaid are treated in a clinic setting of the same hospital and are not given the same kind of attention.

So after seeing that, I would definitely disagree with a "two tier" system.

AT 12:30 today, President Obama will be speaking about the health care reform bill during a town hall meeting style of broadcast. He will address Medicare and Medicaid concerns as well as give more info on how this will affect people who already have health insurance.

On CNN a few minutes ago, Dr. Sanjay Gupta reported on this issue too. Two things he referred to as covered on the plan are two I don't agree with because these two are preventive measures and should be done annually.

Pap smear -- once every 24 months as opposed to yearly ones by private insurers now.
Cholesterol check-- once every 5 years as opposed to yearly by private insurers now.

The new reform plan does not pay for virtual colonoscopies, only real ones. (Virtual colonoscopy (VC) is a medical imaging procedure which uses x-rays and computers to produce two- and three-dimensional images of the colon (large intestine) from the lowest part, the rectum, all the way to the lower end of the small intestine and display them on a screen).

Who decides what is medically necessary treatment? Yet to be answered.

Reimbursement rates are decided by an executive level agency made up of health care professionals who make recommendations to the white house about changes to the bill.

It isn't known yet how prevention methods will play into this.

I'm getting tired.

July 28, 2009 at 9:19 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Seriously, you and I must have been typing at about the same time. I do want to comment about what you said about paying for Medicare -- " If it does work like Medicare that is the case. I looked at my check stub and sure enough I'm paying for it but not using it."

Before I retired, I too paid for Medicare insurance just as you are doing now. I see it as your contribution to your own Medicare coverage for when you retire as well as to the current pool of users. Don't forget, you are also paying for Social Security in the form of FICA deductions too. Obama's town hall meeting at 12:30 today is supposed to address Medicare questions among others. It is being sponsored by AARP. As it stands now, you won't have private insurance when you retire, you'll have Medicare. The way it works now, retirees get Medicare and then are asked to name a secondary insurance company which picks up the slack and to also pick a drug plan. I don't know how that will change.

July 28, 2009 at 9:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

orlando (anonymous) says...

All these government people---president,congress, etc-- have a health care plan, right? Why do they get special coverage, even after they leave their positions? Shouldn't they have to have the same coverage that we will all have to have, after they make all these new rules?

July 28, 2009 at 10:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

At the age of 35 and being lower working class I have zero faith that I will be able to retire, get medicare, or Social Security. My future looks something like, "Welcome to Walmart. Have a nice day." "Oh hold on I'm going to need to check your bag." Did you see my post on dream vacation destinations?

Seriously S. Depressed

July 28, 2009 at 10:13 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Oh, what you do to a threaded fastener! I'm a greasemonkey I know the proper terminology for screws.

July 28, 2009 at 11:05 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

You don't have to be 35-years-old to worry about not being able to retire. I'm near 70...and have been retired for a couple of years.....but guess what....."Welcome to Wal-Mart." Not literally but I am still working full time.....because I will not be able to live a life any ways near to what I want to live once I can no longer work. The future is here for many of us my friend.
The only thing I really have to be thankful for is Medicare...which might explain why I am so bothered by people negative opinion of it.

July 28, 2009 at 12:42 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Seriously and YY, I really think you guys are going overboard wisth all your skepticism. Keep working and contributing and have some faith. Your turn will come. It really will. I too am bothered by your negative opinions. This country works because most people contribute to it working.

I'm retired now and as long as I am careful about my spending, I'm more than fine. I always have leftover $$ at the end of the month and I do contribute to savings like clockwork. I don't buy new cars and boats and expensive vacations because I just don't need them. I don't eat out all the time because I'm a good cook. I keep my used car in good condition with preventive maintenance. I have a very good mechanic, God bless him, he has never ripped me off. That should be more a worry than social security futures.

Your time is coming. I promise.

July 28, 2009 at 2:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

methusla (anonymous) says...

seriouslyfolks
I see no competition between health insurance companies now anyway, except the competition to see who can sign up as many people as possible. As far as competition to make their insurance affordable to everyone, I see absolutely no or very little competition at all !
And as far as health care providers, there is no competition in that area either. NRH has no local competition in Emporia.
Office visit at NRH ( Medical Arts ) = $180 dollars for approx. 5 to 15 minutes with a doctor. If you have to have any lab work done or ex-rays, you will be lucky if you get out of there with a bill of less than $1000, for maybe an hours worth of actual care. Competition, Ha ! If you don't have any insurance, how long would you have to work just to pay for a 5 to 15 minute office visit at a cost of $180.
In case you haven' t noticed, all helth insurance, health care and all related healthcare fields have become corporatized. And that means profits takes precedence over everything else.

July 28, 2009 at 2:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

Whoa, I don't know about those doctor visit costs. The price of an office visit at my own local doctor's is $72. I thought that was high until I saw what you say about Medical Arts. That is outrageous! I'm gonna ask questions about that claim. I don't believe that's correct.

I'd be changing doctors, dude.

July 28, 2009 at 3:48 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

No offense, create, but you have been indoctrinated by the socialized education system that you worked in to believe that these are things the government should "oversee." There is a naivety among every one of my teaching friends about the government role because of this indoctrination.
Also, I need some clarification. When I read his post, it seemed that seriouslyfolks was lamenting the prospect of THREE insurance deductions from his paycheck, not dogging on Medicare. Maybe I mis-read it. Seriously, could you clarify that for me.
methusla, I would definitely be finding a different doctor, but this is the second time I have recommended this lately. My sister-in-law was quoting the "well-child" check-up price that she needed to set some funds aside for as only immunizations for the baby are covered in my brother's health plan. It was almost triple a regular visit, yet the only difference is the amount of paperwork that mom fills out and the two extra minute's worth of exam by the doctor. I learned by the time my second child came along to just skip those and go for the immunizations and regular check-ups. I did this so that neither I nor my insurance company could be gouged. This refers back to a pondering that seriouslyfolks already touched on that I will expound on a bit. Doctors, but especially pharmaceutical companies, are now salesmen who try to sell office consultations like there is no tomorrow. We fall for it and go to appointment after unnecessary appointment which they charge our insurance companies for. We expect our insurance to pay for these, as we have been sold on their necessity, and so a lot of insurance does in order to sell policies. But, back to my nugget of wisdom about the odds game of insurance and warranties, the insurance companies have to charge enough on premiums to cover these items that they now know they will have to pay as well as the amount that they count on being able to take as profit when we don't end up needing it. Do they take too much? Probably. Did they climb in bed with the pharmaceuticals and doctors? Absolutely. Are we still being snowballed? Without a doubt!! Can we do anything about it? Sure. Do we need government intervention? Possibly. Can we educate ourselves to be wiser consumers? The answer to that determines whether or not we need the government to "oversee" this.
Is the government definition of "oversee" the same as Webster's?
...............................................................................................

July 28, 2009 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

"Do we need government intervention? Possibly." And you accuse me of being naive? No offense, I'm just saying.

Can we educate ourselves to be wiser consumers? We've had all these years to do that. Howcum we haven't done that yet? Howcum drug companies and corporate physicians' services are getting the best of us? Maybe some Chief needs to take charge of the Indians here because they aren't doing anything for themselves.

July 28, 2009 at 6:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

create
That is the sad sad sad sad truth and if one indian trys to give another indian "advice" they just say "don't preach at me! It's my life! Butt out!" now the government has to step in and be our nanny. Good @#$%^&*&^%$#@ job America! We used to be indepent now we are just dependant. All I can say is I did what I could do.

July 28, 2009 at 7:43 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

As this discussion goes on, I find myself doubting my own opinion more and more. I know for a fact our system of healthcare distribution needs an overhaul, but at the same time I have no faith in government, so my fear is whatever they come up with will probably be worse. The more I ponder this issue, the more I am driven to the conclusion the problem is not with our healthcare so much as it is with our government. Our government should have been watching the situation all along, and never let it get to the point there were so many irregularities with billing etc. just as they should have been watching the banking institutions and Wall Street so the TARP could have been avoided. I believe alot of our problems can be traced back to a belief many in our society hold that capitalism is superior to every other form of economic system. I think the shortfall in nearly every system of government is greed and corruption. I think capitalism is a good system, but because of human nature it must be policed constantly by government to insure everyone is playing by the rules. More government intervention in healthcare won't solve any problems if our government isn't taken back by true public servants and not career politicians with their eyes on the next election.

July 28, 2009 at 11:18 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

alfalfa:
I agree with your final statements which is why this discussion always leads me to promote voting any third party you agree with in the next several elections and convincing everyone you know to do the same so we can either intimidate the two parties back into representing us or get rid of them. The way capitalism and the government should be policed is by the people.

create:
None taken, although I don't know that I got what you were calling me naive about, given that my answer to that question was expounded upon and it's indetermination clarified in my next two sentences. I also don't know why we haven't made ourselves smarter--my best guess would be arrogance and laziness. Two generations have thought and taught that we have nothing to learn, seeing as how we are American's and America is the top dog. A third generation is now thinking and teaching that whatever European countries did and however they did it was better and that we should be ashamed of being Americans. We collectively dumped all principles of maintaining a balance of power and using our rights correctly. Why did that happen? I don't know, but I and my children are paying for it.

A poster here implied a while back that people opposed to this impending system are government haters. For the record, while I don't agree that it should be handled this way, I do not in any way hate the government. I get angry at hearing individuals I know say things like "government is evil" or "I hate the government." What I hate is seeing our government misused and our country disintegrating as a result. What I hate is a lack of confrontation and resolution of existing problems.

July 29, 2009 at 12:03 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I may be as dumb as a box of rocks...but it sounded to me like alfalfa was saying that capitolism is good and government is bad. But capitolism is only good as long as bad ole government does a good job of watching over it to make sure it doesn't get to be as bad as government. Now if I misunderstood that I hope some one explains my error to me

If however I didn't misunderstand it then doesn't bad ole governments intervention in good ole business to keep good ole buisness from becoming bad mean then that bad ole government has then become good ole governemnt?. And if good ole business can not stay good ole business with out bad ole government's watchful eye then doesn't that make good ole business more like bad ole business?

July 29, 2009 at 5:12 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

oh4theluvof

I thought that's what we were talking about here....trying to confront amd resolve an existing problem?

July 29, 2009 at 5:20 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Yes....I am aware that capitalism should be spelled with an "a" not an "o". Thank You for not pointing that out to me.

July 29, 2009 at 5:23 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

create (anonymous) says...

I agree with alfalfa's statements about the feds keeping an eye on the private sector. If not, runaway profits and greed by the few kill the many. Oh ho, doesn't THAT sound familiar. We've seen that happen just recently, and we're all hurting as a result. In fact, I'm not shocked at all to hear Bernie Madoff say just yesterday that he is surprised that his Ponzi scheme went undetected for so long. Well, oh4theluvof, you gave the reason for all that when you said, " The way capitalism and the government should be policed is by the people." But you also said, " I also don't know why we haven't made ourselves smarter--my best guess would be arrogance and laziness." Ay, there's the rub. The people have a tendency to become complacent, especially when everything is copacetic. A good example is all that corruption in New Jersey.

I'll tell you what we must have, and that is a very strong Fourth Estate to keep it all above board. But newspapers are so afraid of being sued these days that they don't do as much investigative reporting as they should.

I'd love to keep going on this discussion, but I've got to get a quilt ready for the fair. See you all there. I hope you'll get a chance to look in at the quilts. It's gonna be fantastic.

July 29, 2009 at 8:47 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

oh4theluvof (anonymous) says...

I meant the existing problems in the current operations----like doctors doing unnecessary procedures to bill Medicare or the fraudulent use of the welfare system that we discussed a couple of weeks ago. This new plan is like a rug that we are trying to sweep those problems under before we even know how much we need it. True assessment can only take place when things are all functioning correctly and true need or the true problem can be clearly seen.

July 29, 2009 at 8:49 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I look at it like this, I don't believe we have to pick a side, "I like government" "I like private business." As I have said before, they are made of the same stuff ............. people. To simplify things we tend to demonize one and declare the other to be saint, which they aint. Power corrupts and that is the problem we have now. The ones who now declare government to be their saving saints will realize that power will corrupt their angel politicians too.
Government regulations are good and absolutely necessary to keep corruption out of business but that is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the government getting into the insurance business and taking down the private insurance industry. I have already illustrated how I believe this is going to happen.

July 29, 2009 at 9:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

alfalfa (anonymous) says...

That isn't exactly what I meant Biscuit. I think that any form of economics can be corrupted. On the face of it, communism(the idea) was nearly perfect. Everybody did their best and had a job. In reality, there were still plenty of greedy corrupt people who used the system to get ahead in dishonest or unethical ways. What I tried to say was you cannot have a blind faith that capitalism alone is going to be the perfect system, you have to have someone policing it to root out the constant corruption you get because of human nature. I don't think our government has been doings its job, lots of people don't like it but we do need some government regulation, in a democracy that is in theory actually the voice of the people. Problem is, today we don't elect regular folks to office nationally, usually we elect people who want to make a career out of politics and have no idea what a greasemonkey or farmer go through every day to make a living, and what is worse they don't care, they only care about maintaining power. Government doesn't have to be bad, it just often is.

July 29, 2009 at 9:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

Thank you alfalfa....that makes more sense to me now....like I said...a box of rocks.
In fact I heard a really interesting discussion on MSNBC this morning about how it wasn't so much that government had failed in its watchdog role.....but that career politicians with help from high powered lobbies has sold the farm with all their special interest legislation and tax loopholes to help the very people they were suppossed to be watching.

July 29, 2009 at 12:22 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

Wait. What? Government hasn't failed it was the politicians? That's like saying it's a great car it's just that all the parts that make up the car suck. Um? I really wish I was a used car salesman if this is the kind of "logic" people believe. WOW!

July 29, 2009 at 12:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

seriously my friend......government is a concept on a piece of paper.....politicians make up government....politicians decide what government will do and how government will do it . Without politicians there is no government.....OK!

July 29, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

That's what I said. Politicians are the reality of the concept of government. If they fail the government fails in reality. And you don't have to bet all

July 29, 2009 at 5:29 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I don't know where I was going with that last sentence but I didn't mean to post it. sorry

July 29, 2009 at 5:31 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

biscuitboy (anonymous) says...

I guess we are saying the same thing in a different way. But the discussion was that the failures that have brought us to where we are now...not only in health carre....but in housing....banking....finance....etc, were brought on not as much by failures in oversight as by potiticians from both sides of the aisle caving to political pressure and railroading specialty legislation that allowed the failures to happen.

What they were saying was it was not as much the fault of the bureaucrats charged with oversight.....as it was a failure of the laws written by the politicians the bureaucrats were suppossed to over see. But those same politiicans now only talk about the oversight failure.

July 29, 2009 at 5:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

I guess the way I see it is that we are threaded fastenered either way because people are involved. I still think that government is the worser(is that a word?) of the two evils because they do have actual power and authority. You say we can control them to a degree by our vote. I don't really see it that way because the next one in is usually the same or worse than the one before. Bush grabbed some extra power for the executive branch and people hated it now Obama's grabbin' more. It don't look good either way. I'm just really glad I have dual citizenship, I just can't go to my home country until I'm dead. Health care is not an issue there.

July 29, 2009 at 6:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )

seriouslyfolks (anonymous) says...

When time shall slip its cog in place
And spin its line of lovely lace
Then love and peace come face to face
One of these days

When sorrow can nowhere be found
And greed shall lay its weapons down
And hate give up without a sound
One of these days

When love by tender instrument
Through circumstance and incident
Shall peace and joy again invent
One of these days

To see this from within the soul
We must be patient and consoled
To know the joy that's ours to hold
One of these days

And so with earnest inward eyes
We man the post where duty lies
And seek to win the precious prize
One of these days

July 30, 2009 at 12:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )