|
Post by webrunner on Jul 22, 2009 8:22:40 GMT -7
"Earned profit" is a lie? In all business or only when referencing doctors? sorry, not biting I understand that you are comfortable with the benefits and deficits of our health care system, Web if you ever lose your insurance coverage but you keep your job as costs continue to rise (God forbid) and we are forced to bear the brunt of a tanking economy....and you develop cancer (again, God forbid) which you can't afford to take care of because costs keep rising and access to care is out of reach you being gainfully employed, but nonetheless suddenly thrust into that microscopically tiny percentage of Americans who aren't covered at all, as cited by that poll (....commissioned by whom, by the way? Oh, never mind....) I'm sure you will continue to enjoy the fruits of your labor as actualized by your non-existent "right" to treatment, let alone a cure, or palliative or end-of-life care Or, perhaps being the malcontent that I am, I'll develop cancer or some other catastrophic illness, and I'll lose my coverage or have it denied as has happened in the past.....and I'll lose my 'right' to health care, even though I have worked longer (I am older) and as hard as you have, albeit in a different profession but in either case, I know I'll support being "forced" to pay for your care, or mine, or anyone else's.....being taxed for that. Because I am nothing but a capitalist-hating socialist. And in either case, I know that people like Paris Hilton or the idle rich who arguably "work" on the golf course, will enjoy the "right" to access, care and treatment, because after all, I am anti-profit, and "pro-entitlement", so.....should I bit*ch while the nurse who tends to the sick on set earnings that are profitable, but she didn't invest well, and over the course of her lifetime, her earnings won't cover the cost of her kid's treatment for Leukemia--after her kid gets dumped from insurance coverage because his treatment costs too much, or the treatment is considered to be "experimental"....? after all, those inequities are part of life, and nobody said life was fair. And in a capitalist society, we need the rich to bear the higher cost of things, right? They know their importance in terms of class and income-based earnings To suggest that any of this is unfair or not right, or needs improvment (each of these examples being real-aside from those including you and me, but for the sake of this discussion, let's argue they are spun from whole cloth as a means to arguing to an extreme because this stuff never happens, and most Americans are happy with our current health care system)....this smacks of instantaneous, treasonous "socialism", and to suggest that we change the debt load or eliminate third party payer and challenge artificial costs and marketing so that a three-day stay for an elderly gentleman who's hospitalization to rule out colon cancer doesn't cost any more than the 400k it cost last year, billed to you and me through medicare (already in the red) because of artificial spikes in costs well, this clearly means that I in fact, support anti-capitalist agendas. I will agree, that in spite of it all, we still have the most envied system of health care delivery in the world, and as evidenced by this example, I clearly know nothing about government-based waste and potential fraud. In fact, as is clearly evidenced by my implicit support of all things "socialist", I support and endorse wasteful spending and fraud that occurs under socialized models of inherently inferior care Do you think I have unfairly characterized you? I haven't. I haven't characterized you at all. On the other hand, you have characterized me, and quite ruthlessly. Now you have me getting cancer? Dang. Tough day to be me.
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 22, 2009 8:41:48 GMT -7
on the contrary, given the notion that all those who disagree with our current health care system are by default believers in anti-American capitalism, I think the implied ignorance and malfeasance in all suggestions that direct attention toward supporting socialized medicine are probably quite accurate Fairness isn't a "right", remember? As such, it's irrelevant and Web, I don't want you to ever develop cancer or any other catastrophic illness. I did, after all, say "God forbid". And then I also said I'd be willing to support and help pay for your care. Because as "anti-profit" and "socialist" as I am... as all who are opposed to our third party system presumably are, (oh, and didn't you suggest, in your "non-characterizations", that I hate doctors too? ) this is what I believe you have a right to as an American and as a human being even though unlike me, you aren't supportive of the "socialist agenda" Tough day to be you? Try being that maid. She's got a job and pays her taxes and feeds her kids. All by her choice, right? Uninsured too. Her choice as well. After all, she has no existing entitlement to higher education. What about the nurse with the kid who is sick? She's real too. Life is pretty dam* hard for them these days too.
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Jul 22, 2009 9:03:13 GMT -7
on the contrary, given the notion that all those who disagree with our current health care system are by default believers in anti-American capitalism, I think the implied ignorance and malfeasance in all suggestions that direct attention toward supporting socialized medicine are probably quite accurate Fairness isn't a "right", remember? As such, it's irrelevant and Web, I don't want you to ever develop cancer or any other catastrophic illness. I did, after all, say "God forbid". And then I also said I'd be willing to support and help pay for your care. Because as "anti-profit" and "socialist" as I am... as all who are opposed to our third party system presumably are, (oh, and didn't you suggest, in your "non-characterizations", that I hate doctors too? ) this is what I believe you have a right to as an American and as a human being even though unlike me, you aren't supportive of the "socialist agenda" Tough day to be you? Try being that maid. She's got a job and pays her taxes and feeds her kids. All by her choice, right? Uninsured too. Her choice as well. After all, she has no existing entitlement to higher education. What about the nurse with the kid who is sick? She's real too. Life is pretty dam* hard for them these days too. Okay, well, I'm getting very close to just accepting your characterizations (of me, of you) on your terms. I do appreciate your willingness to pay for me, free-market capitalist that I might be, but you don't have to sweat it. I got it covered. Did I say you hated doctors? I thought I said you weren't a fan. You, yourself said you didn't "worship" them. Isn't that kinda what fans do?
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 22, 2009 12:39:37 GMT -7
thanks for the clarification, and for the record, I don't endorse Nancy Pelosi. As I've said, I like my doctors and others I have met, just like I like lots of people I've met and know. I don't generally hold one's profession against him/her and being the negative thinker I am, I don't generally worship anybody. Remember? There is no such thing as a "hero" Doctors are after all, people too. .... although, Thomas is quickly coming close to achieving whatever comes closest to such status in my book. Why? Look at the CAD thread. Apparently, it's true: no good deed goes unpunished whatever offense you feel is intended behind my generalizations Webrunner, it really isn't deliberately targeted at but a few individuals I can think of, off the bat. Although, I stand behind what I know of the abuses in our current system for good or for bad, however you want to look at it, I have had a lot of experience with our health care system and doctors (other health professionals and third party payers) who negatively impact it, their patients and the health care system. I've also seen a lot of good health care professionals who have dedicated their time and their excellent skills to their patients and families ....people like my doctors, to whom I have referred friends, acquaintances and family members. unfortunately, I've seen and experienced more of the former, than I have of the latter, so while I understand why you disagree with me, I am speaking from a deeply rooted concern and an even more committed stance which supports earnest efforts to either improve what we currently have, or to create a system by which all can benefit
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 22, 2009 17:12:25 GMT -7
and by the way, one of the most entertaining and bizarre debates I ever engaged in on the issue of merit-based compensation for doctors happened with a doctor, who was very outspoken in advocating merit-based pay (let alone raises) for teachers. During that debate, he quickly and succinctly dismissed the notion that this could be considered unfair, because it was based in part, upon the success of students. A successful outcome in student performance/progress was indicative of a "good" job by the teacher; any other more negative outcome should have, in his mind, resulted in a cut in pay...as a means of "motivating" a teacher to do a better job
When the inherent subjectivity of such a measure was discussed, he pushed his points across, so, with this in mind, I assumed he was doing so because he was firmly married to the idea of merit based pay
when I suggested that the same standards apply to his work, he thought the suggestion was offensive and outrageous, and he argued that his pay should be based on the quality of delivery alone, with no measures in place to test his effectiveness on his patients. When asked to expand his reasoning, he quickly noted that his patients were responsible for what they did to comply with his instructions and take care of themselves when they were on their own.
When I suggested that this was the case with students as well, that they were responsible for applying what they learned in school, studying and doing their homework, etc., etc., he accused me of applying a double-standard which "ignored" the time and investment he had made in his education and his training
in other words, he thought he was (and I guess on many levels you could argue that this is true) "worth" more than the teacher is. When it came right down to it, he didn't appreciate being compared to a blue-collar worker, I guess. One set of undeniable standards of excellence for him, and another more rigid standard for teachers---even though the logic came from the same place
I was supposed to see him for a check up, and after hearing his capacity to reason, I cancelled the appointment and paid for his time out of my pocket. I didn't want the charge hitting my insurance, he didn't examine me, and to this day, I'm pretty convinced that I wouldn't have been able to trust his judgment. When, as we were wrapping up the discussion, I pointed out that I was a teacher, he appeared to be shocked. But he didn't apologize for devaluing the work I did.
I went and saw another doctor who was recommended by a friend, and as it turned out, charged less in both co-pay and reimbursment from my insurance carrier.
|
|
|
Post by Tim Collins on Jul 22, 2009 17:24:02 GMT -7
Since when are teachers blue collar workers. Just to define terms, you can identify which collar you wear by when you bathe. White collar workers bathe before going to work Blue collar workers bathe after work. Think about it
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 22, 2009 17:34:09 GMT -7
Since when are teachers blue collar workers. Just to define terms, you can identify which collar you wear by when you bathe. White collar workers bathe before going to work Blue collar workers bathe after work. Think about it you obviously never saw me teach actually, that term was his, not mine. I decided to act on my belief in "merit-based" pay by rewarding another doctor with my business. It was obvious even to me, there just wasn't enough room in that exam room for either an altar, or both egos. ;D
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Jul 23, 2009 6:47:52 GMT -7
thanks for the clarification, and for the record, I don't endorse Nancy Pelosi. As I've said, I like my doctors and others I have met, just like I like lots of people I've met and know. I don't generally hold one's profession against him/her and being the negative thinker I am, I don't generally worship anybody. Remember? There is no such thing as a "hero" Doctors are after all, people too. .... although, Thomas is quickly coming close to achieving whatever comes closest to such status in my book. Why? Look at the CAD thread. Apparently, it's true: no good deed goes unpunished whatever offense you feel is intended behind my generalizations Webrunner, it really isn't deliberately targeted at but a few individuals I can think of, off the bat. Although, I stand behind what I know of the abuses in our current system for good or for bad, however you want to look at it, I have had a lot of experience with our health care system and doctors (other health professionals and third party payers) who negatively impact it, their patients and the health care system. I've also seen a lot of good health care professionals who have dedicated their time and their excellent skills to their patients and families ....people like my doctors, to whom I have referred friends, acquaintances and family members. unfortunately, I've seen and experienced more of the former, than I have of the latter, so while I understand why you disagree with me, I am speaking from a deeply rooted concern and an even more committed stance which supports earnest efforts to either improve what we currently have, or to create a system by which all can benefit What clarification did I provide? I just went back and reread what I wrote. Something you coulda done before you misquoted me. Rosa, you must really think I'm a idiot. I'm not supposed to believe your generalizations are directed at me? Please. Yours has been nothing but a personal assault on me and how I regard the maid and the nurse (your assumptions about me are wholly inaccurate btw) since I asked one lousy question about the real reasons support for Obama care was waning. And now you modify your post to say you understand my disagreement? Really? I know you have passion and I think that's a good thing. But others have passion too, and personal experiences. Why do yours trump?
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 23, 2009 7:03:50 GMT -7
thanks for the clarification, and for the record, I don't endorse Nancy Pelosi. As I've said, I like my doctors and others I have met, just like I like lots of people I've met and know. I don't generally hold one's profession against him/her and being the negative thinker I am, I don't generally worship anybody. Remember? There is no such thing as a "hero" Doctors are after all, people too. .... although, Thomas is quickly coming close to achieving whatever comes closest to such status in my book. Why? Look at the CAD thread. Apparently, it's true: no good deed goes unpunished whatever offense you feel is intended behind my generalizations Webrunner, it really isn't deliberately targeted at but a few individuals I can think of, off the bat. Although, I stand behind what I know of the abuses in our current system for good or for bad, however you want to look at it, I have had a lot of experience with our health care system and doctors (other health professionals and third party payers) who negatively impact it, their patients and the health care system. I've also seen a lot of good health care professionals who have dedicated their time and their excellent skills to their patients and families ....people like my doctors, to whom I have referred friends, acquaintances and family members. unfortunately, I've seen and experienced more of the former, than I have of the latter, so while I understand why you disagree with me, I am speaking from a deeply rooted concern and an even more committed stance which supports earnest efforts to either improve what we currently have, or to create a system by which all can benefit What clarification did I provide? I just went back and reread what I wrote. Something you coulda done before you misquoted me. Rosa, you must really think I'm a idiot. I'm not supposed to believe your generalizations are directed at me? Please. Yours has been nothing but a personal assault on me and how I regard the maid and the nurse (your assumptions about me are wholly inaccurate btw) since I asked one lousy question about the real reasons support for Obama care was waning. And now you modify your post to say you understand my disagreement? Really? I know you have passion and I think that's a good thing. But others have passion too, and personal experiences. Why do yours trump? the term clarification referred to my use of the word "hate". You were right. You never used that term. I did. I have not directed any personal assaults/attacks at anybody. I used real examples of real people in order to illustrate why I feel the third party payer system doesn't work well, and doesn't work equally well for people who in my opinion, deserve access to and treatment for their health care needs I may not have done a good job in making distinctions about why our current system doesn't work well, and I could certainly come up with more concise points, but as to negative assumptions about you personally via these examples? Not in my head at the time...just not the best job at illustrating why I am so opposed to third party disparities and abuse. And, I suppose my own assumptions that I am being charged with being "anti-free market" and "socialist"
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Jul 23, 2009 7:31:02 GMT -7
see, in order to maintain the illusion of fairness, you have to denigrate that evil "socialism" by employing the idea that we are all the "same". Nobody wants to be "the same" or "equal"....not here we want what we're entitled to and what we have "earned", right? I mean, you make a good living and have coverage, right? You have worked for that, you went to school and earned your degree. There is little that compares you to, say for example, a maid, whose education is limited. Granted, she works too, but really now, is that really enough for her to be considered "the same" with the likes of you, and mid-level managment, whose toilets she scrubs? That is not the way our capitalist and class-based society is structured. Now, with that off my chest: This...is...personal. You talked about the good living I made, and the degree that I got and how I feel that the maid is not the "'same' as the likes of" who? Me. Glad you could get all that off your chest btw. And that's just one post. I could dissect all the others too. Look, I'm not going to spend any more time trying to illustrate how your posts were personal. I think they plainly are but folks, if they care, can read and decide for themselves.
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 23, 2009 7:52:51 GMT -7
see, in order to maintain the illusion of fairness, you have to denigrate that evil "socialism" by employing the idea that we are all the "same". Nobody wants to be "the same" or "equal"....not here we want what we're entitled to and what we have "earned", right? I mean, you make a good living and have coverage, right? You have worked for that, you went to school and earned your degree. There is little that compares you to, say for example, a maid, whose education is limited. Granted, she works too, but really now, is that really enough for her to be considered "the same" with the likes of you, and mid-level managment, whose toilets she scrubs? That is not the way our capitalist and class-based society is structured. Now, with that off my chest: This...is...personal. You talked about the good living I made, and the degree that I got and how I feel that the maid is not the "'same' as the likes of" who? Me. Glad you could get all that off your chest btw. And that's just one post. I could dissect all the others too. Look, I'm not going to spend any more time trying to illustrate how your posts were personal. I think they plainly are but folks, if they care, can read and decide for themselves. you're right, I did. I don't mind if you dissect the others too, Web. I was generalizing and it was unfair. I know lots of other people who feel the way I was illustrating but including you in that was wrong, given that you've never indicated you feel the same way. I apologize.
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 23, 2009 12:16:43 GMT -7
This is off the AP, from Yahoo
Reid: No health care vote in Senate until fall By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, Associated Press Writer 10 mins ago WASHINGTON
Senate Democratic leaders on Thursday abandoned plans for a vote on health care before Congress' August recess, dealing a blow to President Barack Obama's ambitious timetable to revamp the nation's $2.4 trillion system of medical care.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., delivered the official pronouncement, saying, "It's better to have a product based on quality and thoughtfulness rather than try to jam something through."
His words were a near-echo of Republicans who have criticized what they have called a rush to act on complex legislation that affects every American.
Obama shrugged off the delay.
"That's OK, I just want people to keep on working," Obama told a town hall meeting in Cleveland. "I want it done by the end of the year. I want it done by the fall."
Reid said the Senate Finance Committee will act on its portion of the bill before lawmakers' monthlong break. Reid then will merge that bill with separate legislation passed by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee earlier this month.
The process will be difficult since Finance, led by Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., is seeking a bipartisan deal while the health committee bill was passed by Democrats on a party-line vote.
Obama had pushed for votes in the House and Senate before August to ensure that lawmakers had enough time to meld the two bills into comprehensive legislation by December — before the start of a politically charged congressional election year.
Obama has made nearly daily appeals for the overhaul in the past two weeks and has summoned more than a dozen lawmakers to the White House to make his case. At stake is a massive remaking of the system. So is Obama's credibility.
At the town hall, Obama likened his health care effort to the race to put a man on the moon 40 years ago, saying some dismissed President John F. Kennedy's effort as "foolish, even impossible" and were proven wrong.
"Reform may be coming too soon for some in Washington, but it's not soon enough for the American people," Obama said.
Reid said the decision to delay a vote was made Wednesday night in hopes of getting a final bill that can win at least 60 votes in the Senate.
He said he had listened to requests from senior Republicans working with Baucus to allow more time for a compromise to emerge.
"I don't think it's unreasonable," he said.
Some Democrats are frustrated with the pace of fulfilling Obama's goal of expanding coverage to Americans who lack it and containing rising costs.
"The Finance Committee keeps dragging their feet and dragging their feet and dragging their feet. It's time for them to fish or cut bait," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, said in a conference call with Iowa reporters.
But at the same time, nine freshman Senate Democrats, largely from swing states, sent a letter to Baucus urging him to keep working toward a bipartisan solution.
In the House, Democratic leaders are struggling to win over rebellious moderates and conservative rank-and-file party members who are demanding changes to their version of the legislation. The dispute has forced Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif., to postpone work on the bill for three straight days while he negotiates.
Waxman's committee is the last of three House panels trying to finish the $1.5 trillion, 10-year legislation that would create a government-run plan to compete with private insurance, increase taxes on the wealthy and require employers and individuals to get health insurance.
Many of the provisions of the legislation wouldn't take effect until 2013 — after the next presidential election.
Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., the third-ranking House Democrat, said a Thursday morning, 90-minute meeting of the leadership was particularly contentious. He said lawmakers should abandon plans for their monthlong break if the House hasn't passed a health care bill.
"We must stay here and get this thing done," he said at a news conference. "I feel very strongly about that. ... I think it will affect our standing with the American people if we don't do this."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., didn't rule out going into August to get the bill done but said it might not be necessary.
"I'm not afraid of August. It's a month," Pelosi said. "What I am interested in is the sooner the better to pass health care for the American people."
"We will take the bill to the floor when it is ready, and when it is ready we will have the votes to pass it," Pelosi added. She stood by — but didn't repeat — a claim she made Wednesday that she has the necessary votes now.
Underscoring the deep divisions among Democrats was concern among members of the Congressional Black Caucus that Obama and the leadership were making too many concessions to the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrats.
Leaders of the Black Caucus said they had requested a meeting with Obama.
"We felt it was important that more than one voice be heard," said Donna Christensen, the congressional delegate for the U.S. Virgin Islands who is leading the caucus' health care efforts. "When we hear phrases like 'squeezing more savings out of the system' ... we're concerned that what may be taken out will be provisions that are critical to our communities."
The black caucus wants to make sure that any overhaul retains core provisions such as a public health insurance option that guarantees coverage for everyone.
"We don't want to see them negotiated or eroded away," said Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill.
___
Associated Press writers Erica Werner, Ben Evans and Ken Thomas contributed to this report.
|
|
|
Post by webrunner on Jul 23, 2009 20:06:19 GMT -7
This...is...personal. You talked about the good living I made, and the degree that I got and how I feel that the maid is not the "'same' as the likes of" who? Me. Glad you could get all that off your chest btw. And that's just one post. I could dissect all the others too. Look, I'm not going to spend any more time trying to illustrate how your posts were personal. I think they plainly are but folks, if they care, can read and decide for themselves. you're right, I did. I don't mind if you dissect the others too, Web. I was generalizing and it was unfair. I know lots of other people who feel the way I was illustrating but including you in that was wrong, given that you've never indicated you feel the same way. I apologize. It's all good, Rosa. I accept your apology.
|
|
rosa
Full Member
Starting 5-Founding Member
Posts: 185
|
Post by rosa on Jul 25, 2009 16:13:07 GMT -7
Snil, you're famous and an influence for good (for a change ) as appears in "Rob's Blog" www.robschumacher.net/Thursday, July 16, 2009 Try this on for health care A model based on delivering health care to patients...not based on insurance company profits. What a novel idea, right? As you read this article, you might wonder "isn't this how it should always have been"? You might remember a time when the doctor was someone who cared about his patients, and when your insurance was there to help you, not turn you down. Maybe, instead of taxing our benefits or fining those who don't have insurance, we should look at reforming the insurance industry itself. Health care is, as the author states, a moral responsibility of a just society...it's one of those few business areas that really should not be a profit-driven free market. Quite simply, making a profit from something as fundamental to human life as medical care seems morally wrong to me. Especially when the profit comes not from providing actual care, but solely from facilitating the financing of that care.
I cannot say that medical care is an individual right. It is not. But I have no problem at all stating that providing medical care as needed is a moral obligation of a just society. Our current private health insurance system does not contribute to fulfilling this obligation. Its sole reason for existence is profit. A mutual non-profit system is his proposal, and it is a good proposal. Think of it in analogous terms to a local electric co-op...the goal isn't shareholder dividends and/or boosting the CEO pay, it's about providing an affordable service to the community it serves. Quality is improved, costs are kept in check, and fraud/abuse is kept to a minimum. Novel idea? It's actually a somewhat old-fashioned idea that probably needs to see the light of day again. It almost reminds one of the days when we all cooperated to help one another, not for gain, but because it was just the right thing to do. And in many instances, decisions made at the lowest level are better, more responsive, and more attuned to the needs of the end user. ...but how come he didn't provide linky? Tell him to next time.
|
|