The Fournier Transform
Lifted from Robert’s Stochastic Thoughts:
The Fournier Transform
Near Stupidoclypse Alert
It looks as if Ron Fournier may sweep the left blogosphere.
I read this by Joan McCarter at DailyKos
The nation’s most stubborn and willfully ignorant pundit, Ron “why won’t Obama lead and make Republicans like him” Fournier, strikes again.
On health care, we needed a market-driven plan that decreases the percentage of uninsured Americans without convoluting the U.S. health care system. Just such a plan sprang out of conservative think tanks and was tested by a GOP governor in Massachusetts, Mitt Romney.
Honestly. He wrote that. In November, 2014. Four and a half years after the Affordable Care Act—modeled after a Heritage Foundation proposal and Mitt Romney’s Massachusetts law—passed. After a presidential election in 2012 that featured Mitt Romney going through insane contortions trying to differentiate between Romneycare and Obamacare because they are almost exactly the same.
I thought it would be absurd for this blog (traffic about zero) to link to DailyKos (daily traffic much less than the population of China). McCarter goes on to quote Fournier again
Instead of a bipartisan agreement to bring that plan to scale, we got more partisan warfare. The GOP resisted, Obama surrendered his mantle of bipartisanship, and Democrats muscled through a one-sided law that has never been popular with a majority of the public.
So a bill to bring that plan to scale became a one-sided muscled through law that essentially brought that plan to scale (the main difference is that the Federal Government funded both, as the USA can’t send the bill to the One World Government (yet)). So how did bringing RomneyCare to scale become “a one-sided law” ? That would be the famous Fournier transform, in which Ballance beats reality if reality is embarrassing to Republicans. I also note that Jon Gruber has become an un-person. It is very likely that, before his “stupidity” leaked, McCarter would have quoted RomneyCare architect Jon Gruber saying that it’s the same damn plan. Jon Gruber, the wonk who must not be named (even though it is reasonably likely that you or someone you care about will owe him your, his or her life some day). Now I see that Paul Krugman and Matthew Yglesias are on the case. Yglesias even brought up Jon Gruber, reminding me that Yglesias is doubleplusungood at being a hack. Last I checked Chait hadn’t checked in (he does have a genuinely great post on ObamaCare Uber Ales which you really ought to read) Update: Jim Newell too “DC pundit takes troll game to new level: Ron Fournier’s strange history of Obamacare” Aaron Carroll (via Jonathan Bernstein) Gary Legum at Wonkette (that hit is going to leave a snark)
Ron Fournier has written many dumb columns in his career. In fact, Ron Fournier has written only dumb columns in his career. But today he has outdone himself by gracing our political centrists, yearning as they are for some bipartisanship, with the dumbest column of his, nay, of any pundit’s career.
Because Ron is dumb?
Thou Obama care may correct some of the health care insurance worst abuses, it still does not insure health care for the sick. And aside from the abuses Romney care did not address, they are the same and Romney care has not lower health care cost.
What Obama care does is preserve a parasitic part of health care that has only added cost to health care system.
You are drinking too much of the NC kool-aide. The PPACA is also similar to many of the European healthcare models with the difference being in Europe, they tell the healthcare industry what it will pay. The healthcare industry is still protected by Congress. You will have to explain your healthcare for the sick comment to me as I am not sure where you are going with it.
Did you really mean to write “ObamaCare Uber Ales”? Were you thirsty at the time?
But, do think anyone who thinks ACA is anything other than more rent extraction for health care insurers has already had more than their share of fluids.
Reason, we all know that the majority of Americans need help with health care. Someone needs to pay for that care. What we do not need to pay for is an industry that has produced no benefits only cost to health care.
Need I mention we already have a system in place that does save money and those who have it like Medicare. And almost everyone is already paying for Medicare.
I thought Maggie pretty much explained this here Medicare does “NOT PAY FOR ITSELF”
We could not afford to implement Medicare for all. And even then if we did, Medicare has various commercial insurance aspects to it which you and others appear to rail about. Part B is not 100% and leaves 20% to be picked up by the insured plus a deductible and a copay. You have to buy supplemental insurance for this portion as 20% is one large deductible to handle. Part D is also covered by commercial insurance and the costs of it vary by the tier of drugs you take. Tier 2 through 4 are more expensive and the insurance has higher premiums as well as deductibles to be satisfied.
While it is not cheap to have healthcare insurance, what are the alternatives? Return to what the Repubs want which is “nothing.” Improve what we have today and allow Medicare to negotiate with the healthcare industry the same as in Europe. Even so, the monthly costs for individuals in the market will not be similar to Medicare.
Amazes me that people believe if they write or talk about the way things should be(or think they should be) it means something.
No thought seems to be spent on how to make things the way they should be.
EMichael, have any suggestions aside from getting ride of those democrats and republicans that send crap like ACA and refuse to even aloud single payer to be offered. Voted for the piece of crap (Obama) that sent us an updated version of Bush II part D.
Obama’s slogan was great; change you can believe in, seen none aside from his efforts to not to put boots on the ground and trying to bring the troops home.
Under Obama a number of progressive polices were passed. Most of them are quite flawed, but nonetheless, here are some:
Health Care Reform
Wall Street Reform
Allow gays in military
Reversed Bush Torture Policies
Kicked Banks Out of Federal Student Loan Programs
Boosted Fuel Efficiency Standards
Increased Support for Veterans
Created Conditions to Begin Closing Dirtiest Power Plants
Passed Credit Card Reforms
Eliminated Catch-22 in Pay Equality Laws
Protected Two Liberal Seats on Supreme Court
Expanded Wilderness and Watershed Protection
Gave FDA Power to Regulate Tobacco
Passed Fair Sentencing Act
Invested Heavily in Renewable Technologies
Cracked Down on Bad For-Profit Colleges
Improved School Nutrition
Expanded Hate Crimes Protections
Brokered Agreement for Speedy Compensation to Victims of Gulf Oil Spill
Expanded Health Coverage for Children
Provided Payment to Wronged Minority Farmers
Can you give me a list of the Democrats who were against the public option?
I lost mine.
You may find what you want here……..http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/01/29/list-of-51-senate-democrats-who-support-a-public-option-whats-stopping-them-now/
The site for political information I like is opensecrets.org as it seems the less partisan.
The problem with list IMHO is that many representatives sell votes when they are not coming up for re-elections. I try to vote on what representatives have voted for in the past. It is like my congresswomen supported cutting SS and is a democratic.
No. There is nothing there.
Democrats against public option? Joe Lieberman and he was enough.
There has never been a vote. The leadership would not bring single payer up for a vote. Think the single payer bill was 676 (?).
The list in the URl I gave you list the various reasons given by democrats on single payer.
But, in truth thou Baucus will get the most blame; I would blame the democratic leadership in the house, senate and the president. Remember single payer was on the table when the democrats had a majority in both houses and was never brought up for a vote.
Baucus retire and receive a posting to China.
We talked about this also. 99% of those countries claimed to have single payer actually have a similar two tier system as the US.
“You will have to explain your healthcare for the sick comment to me as I am not sure where you are going with it.” run
Run, health care is simply that, taking care one’s health. Health Insurance only takes care of health problems you can afford to pay a health insurer for; which most Americans can not afford.
Since regardless of system employed the American tax payer is going to foot the bill in taxes or premiums to insurers. Since health insurance has no positives and in the past dropped the insured when they were likely to collect on what they were paying insurance provider. Then these sick were then picked up by the tax payer threw the government program called Medicaid.
The cheapest and best option for all concerned is Medicare for all. Under ACA we pay premiums to insurers at different levels and still no grantee that we will not have bills we cannot pay should we become really ill.
You have the same level of bills with Medicare also unless you buy insurance to fill the gap. Furthermore, Medicare is limited as to what it covers also. Aren’t you on Medicare?
Run, can not quote the savings to the tax payer on single payer, but read some where it was in the single digit billions.
Do you trust Congress? The issues with healthcare in England is the result of Thatcher cutting the funding for healthcare. What you are talking about is negotiation by Medicare which is something Congress has not allowed Medicare to do. I will repeat what I said 99% of all countries cited as having Single Payer are two tier systems. Canada and England most notably are single payer along with a few others. Healthcare in Europe Whenever anyone says single payer, it is most likely they can not define it.
It is not BS as far as Medicare, it is fact. Neither are either of us using it as a reason not to have Medicare; but, neither is it being paid 100% by the Medicare payroll taxes. In reality if it was, the tax would be much higher. Furthermore if we were to fund it by Medicare commercial Insurance such as Supplemental or Pharmaceutical insurance, those premiums would be much higher. The fact remains the costs are much higher than single payer advocates acknowledge. The issue remains that Medicare is not allowed by CONGRESS to negotiate how much it pays for pharma, hospital supplies, doctor services, and hospital charges. The closest thing the US has to sible payer is Medicare.
“I thought Maggie pretty much explained this here Medicare does “NOT PAY FOR ITSELF” run
Run, this is the same BS as the reason to cut SS. When the real reasons is to let WS extract fees for investing the monies. I say again that small capital markets work most of the time. But, let us look simply at the progress that private market has made by privatizing the internet and phone systems. The USA has the slowest and most expensive system in the world.
Plus most people are not even aware that they can have a phone system that cost less than ten dollars a month.
the savings to the tax payer on single payer, but read some where it was in the single digit billions.
$9 bn divided by 120 million households = $75.00 of savings per
household, or 0.15% of median household income.
You do not know such.
run75441, the short answer is no I do not trust either party.
It either party was really worth a D**. I would not read on the cool aide site that we have a 200+ year old settle law that says a contract is valid regardless of the means it was achieved.
My argument is if we can pass a law about school yard bullies. Why is it not possible to eliminate a parasite like Health Insurance, an save a few billion dollars and insure that all get health care when needed.
“$9 bn divided by 120 million households = $75.00 of savings per household, or 0.15% of median household income.” M. jed
M.jed, thanks for the numbers.
“You have the same level of bills with Medicare also unless you buy insurance to fill the gap. Furthermore, Medicare is limited as to what it covers also. Aren’t you on Medicare?” run
Run, yes I have Medicare and am lucky have always had good health, and no serious accidents.
Run, do believe if we eliminated health insurance, and eliminated the no bargaining with drug companies we could achieve excellent health care for all.
Healthcare insurance is not healthcare, it is a means of paying for healthcare today. A healthcare which is still very much a service for fees. The PPACA is a start to changing the cost model from service for fees to one of evidence based better outcomes. It will drive much of the cost out; but, it still remains for Medicare to lead the way in setting pricing. What Medicare does healthcare insurance will emulate.
France has one of the better two tiered systems in place. I gave you one post of Maggies, she had another one up. Read them again and her comments back at us. She had good answers to much of what we were discussing.
I will look at this again tomorrow. I am tired and not feeling very well tonight. A lot of stress these last few days.
Run, have been looking into supplemental in case my luck runs out.
One policy that covers everything is just over 200. But it pains me to conceder giving any encouragement to insurers.
I would not screw around with coverage on this. Check out AARP (United Healthcare) which discounts to members. Plant F is the most extensive coverage and plan N is the next level which goes for ~$94/month at 65 if you sign up for it then. Plan N will get you the Part B $147 deductible (which exists anyway), $50 ER visits, and $20 doctor visits. It also picks up what is not covered or limited in coverage with Part A & B. AARP is cheap yearly membership.
Years ago, I signed up for nursing home and assisted care coverage when it was cheap as we were young then. Again, it is not 100% and is supplemental; but, it probably makes the difference between a Knights Inn and a Marriott Courtyard stay. It takes much of the burden off of my children.
Correction in above post I said it covers everything, forgot about drugs and they are not covered.
Beene HR 676 was covered here at Angry Bear in real time.
The reason it was never lit up for a vote is that it never was able to be scored by CBO, a requirement for such things. It identified five or so sources of funding but never quantified any of them instead using modifiers like “modest” to explain tax increases and not incidentally zeroing out all federal funding for such things as the VA Medical System, the Indian Health Service, the federal Public Health Service, and federal funding for military retiree funding via Tri-Care etc in favor of a total theoretical Single Payer system that as written did not remotely resemble existing Medicare. Which also would have been defunded.
HR 676 would have also prohibited profit oriented service providers which as the bill was written would not only have outlawed doctor owned hospitals and clinics (arguably a good thing) but as written every drugstore and eye clinic and joint dental practice across the country. Is is because all drug and vision and dental services would have been covered for everyone with no co-pays. In fact it might well have been deemed illegal to sell prescription glasses with designer frames or advanced optical coatings if their was any profit involved whatsoever.
I pointed all this out in detail at FDL and in return had Jane H demanding that Dan of Angry Bear censor me and also had any Firepup remotely aware of the issues referring to me as “that guy”.
Because HR 676 was not remotely the “Medicare for All” suggested by its title. It was instead a Single Payer proposal that went far beyond any of Canada’s Medicare, Britain’s NHS or any system in Western Europe. The kindest thing anyone who had read the bill and considered it’s real world implementation and implications could describe it as was “aspirational”. And that was ME. Certainly nobody at FDL had ever read it, except perhaps prime promoter Kip Sullivan of PNHC (Physicians for National Health Care) who shamelessly oversold it as just some sort of Public Option Plus/Medicare for All instead of the root and branch socialization of medicine it proposed.
Read the Bill. Quite apart from the merits of total socialization of all U.S. Health care delivery its financials literally could not be scored. Its sponsors never sought to have it marked up by the Committees with jurisdiction because it was not in that sense a serious piece of legislation.
I discussed this all at length at FDL (before being banned ) and in a series of posts here at AB and at DKos. And never got substantive pushback based on actual readings of the text. Just some ad homs.
Bruce, thanks for the input on HR 676.
I like aspirational; we have many things that are socialized in USA, thou few would call it socialization. There are good reasons for most of them. What I object to is when the public pays for the development of a service that is then given to private enterprise. Which then proceeds to bilk the tax payer and the service declines. In the case of health insurance companies which should be out lawed for if nothing else as usury without benefit for the most part.
Here is a neat article on healthcare for the elderly by Phillip Longman on Washington Monthly. Just a quote:
That one quote kind of sums up healthcare in America. If you get a chance read the article, it is an easy read, and should not take too long. 🙂
Run, sorry you’re having a bad evening. Hope you have a good rest.
Fighting off a cold and very close on another job. The interview process is stressful. Even though I do not look my age, there is a great deal of age discrimination out there. They know you are some age older than themselves.
I worked with one younger guy (late thirties) whose father threw him out of the house at 19. I guess I got blamed for his dad’s actions and it would come out every once and a while. He was also a contractor in Iraq which is no comparison to doing active duty so that was something else I had which he did not. Another couple of years, the bills are paid, and I am out of the work force. My daughter (NP) keeps pushing us to move to AZ and she and her husband will buy the house for us to live in there. I have one other issue to fix with my youngest son and then I am gone.
It is also very frigid in Michigan right now and depressing.
Health insurance is not healthcare.
Amazing how totally clueless people who read Naked Capitalism are about health reform.
You do not know such.
Actually I’m pretty confident my math is right.
You may want to take note that I didn’t assert the savings was in the single-digit billions.
I am definitely not concerned about your math skills. 🙂
First to Run…..Michigan (my husband’s a Michigander) just got more depressing, when an appellate court judge said Michigan isn’t required to provide a decent education to its kids.
As to health care, costs, etc. May I share a conversation my husband and I had with one of the residents at an area teaching hospital last week? This was in the cardiac dept. We were discussing the for profit model of health care (Dr. X is from India) and he pointed out that they are told by the bean counters what kind of equipment they must use in the operating room, not what the doctors have used and can recommend, or know to be reliable, but what the bean counters can get the best ‘deal’ on. He also was blown away at what they are made to charge for an EKG. This isn’t the first American system he’s worked in; he moved here from Pennsylvania to complete his residency.
My point is, one thing that seems to get lost in the discussion are the actual CHARGES, which, of course, we can’t ‘shop’ for, because the info is not freely (pardon the expression) available. Besides, the INSURANCE COMPANIES do the negotiating, ‘so you don’t have to’. The whole system is a giant cluster *uck, in my not so humble opinion.
“Court of Appeals rejected the constitutional claim, saying the constitution encourages education, but does not mandate it.”
You do know Michigan has the worst Supreme Court in the nation? I hope the ACLU pursues this into the federal courts. It has been a long time since Milliken versus Bradley when SCOTUS basically walled Detroit off from the suburbs for desegregation of schools. Much of the problems in Detroit stem from that one SCOTUS decision.
There is a hospital pricing chart called the Charge Master which sets pricing for all services provided. If you ever look at your bill from an operation, you can see evidence of it by what the price was and what you pay when you are insured. I was operated on twice at MedCentral in Mansfield, Ohio. It is a nice advanced community hospital located between Cleveland Clinic and Columbus. The second time was serious; but, MedCentral was top 5% for bypass operations so we did not transfer to either Cleveland or Columbus. When I got back to UofM, I told the Cardiologist if he wanted to do a walkabout in my heart to do it now as my deductible was paid. That little excursion was a hefty $10,000 for 1 day. At MedCentral things were a whole lot cheaper and the nurses and PAs took excellent care of me.
Maggie has often said name brand hospitals can charge more and get away with it as they are vital to be on the list of acceptable in network hospitals. If you have the time (which I didn’t, I drove myself to the ER [after the blood test and the imaging, they were waiting for me]), sometimes it pays to look around and check out the reputation of the hospital.
I am aware of the Charge Master and the way coding is done. A friend used to write AR code for not-for-profit hospitals in SC.
Don had by-pass surgery in 1985, in Charlotte, NC, and I think the bill was $25K – definitely under $30K. The recent vascular surgery on one leg in Chapel HIll was $26k and change. Then the second leg, for which we haven’t gotten the bill. He is on Medicare, but he was under his employer coverage for the by-pass. He still has that coverage as a retiree (comes from working in a union shop for 30 years), as his secondary coverage, so hasn’t had to buy a Medigap policy. We are very lucky.
Frontline did a show on health coverage in five other developed countries about 5 years back. Germany, Japan, England, I think Switzerland, and France. If I remember correctly, England was the only truly single payer, yet with the option to have private insurance, if you can afford it and want it. Switzerland, if I recall, was private coverage, limited number of providers, but it was heavily regulated – ditto Germany. I highly recommend going to PBS’s website and watching it online – it was impressive. In France, a new mother not only has maternity care, she has a home health nurse come daily for 3 months, I think it was.
This from Mark Thoma’s page today was pertinent, I think: http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2014/11/encouraging-work-tax-incentives-or-social-support.html
It discusses much more than health care, but the bottom line is, in countries that are heavily taxed, but use those taxes to reduce the costs and stresses on families, who is better off? Them, or countries like the US, where we want rock bottom taxes, and we’re pretty much on our own for everything. I know, I know – we’re rugged individualists and we all pull ourselves up by our bootstraps, and John Wayne and Liberty, etc. etc.
“Freedom’s just another word for nuthin’ left to lose…………………” Someone famous said that once.
Hope you feel better, and good luck with the job!
“Me and Bobby McGee” sung by Janis Joplin, Grateful Dead, etc. and written by Kristofferson and Foster. You pulling my leg on this? We loved Janis in the service.
Lets start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Europe If you go to this site you are going to get a vision of how much each European commits to healthcare in public funds. You will find most European countries are two tiered in providing healthcare. A certain percentage of public funds are committed and the rest of the cost is yours a lot like Part B of Medicare. England is single payer and as Dr. Rosser reminded me, the healthcare workers in England work for the gov. not at all like Canada which is also Single Payer. I am not so sure we want single payer with a Congress deciding how much it will pay. Thatcher cut funding for the healthcare and there is rationing in England.
France does have good healthcare, as does Germany, etc. Both are two tier systems, a combination of public and private funding. The WHO likes France as #1 and Germany as #25. If you slide down to the next ranking Euro Health Consumer Index, the Netherlands comes in at #1 and the Swiss at #2. Take a look at the charts, they are informative. The difference( and somewhere I said this) between us and them is they tell healthcare what they will pay. In the US, we believe in a free market. Perhaps giving healthcare “common carrier” status would change much of the cost and the way it reacts to people.
Just read Thoma’s Economist View article with Anne providing a healthy dose of stats as usual. I tend to agree with what is being said. perhaps rather than flying money in, we should provide services so single moms and dads can work? Try getting the Repubs to agree they do not like the EITC either.
I spend a lot of time explaining things like Charge Master, Two Tier and Single Payer, the PPACA because most people do not know or understand or deliberately misinterpret. Someone has to tell them and I do make mistakes once and a while too. Thanks for the reply Sandi.
“That one quote kind of sums up healthcare in America. If you get a chance read the article, it is an easy read, and should not take too long.” run
Run, thanks for the article. I have already taken care of the end of live issue. With a legal form, as to what may not be done to continue my life.
As the article says palliative care seems the best route for most people.
“It is also very frigid in Michigan right now and depressing.” run
Run, wishing you the best, in your pursuits.
Little jealous of you having snow.
🙂 Yeah, I was pulling your leg on Bobby McGee, or as we say around here, “I was messin’ with ya!”
Thanks for the more complete answer than I cobbled together. I know I over simplified it.
“For profit” health care has become quite a twisted mess, IMNSHO. Today’s news has a story about the increase in profits for generic drugs, which are being scrutinized by a Senate panel, apparently. One generic anti-biotic, doxycycline hyclaste, rose 8280%. http://news.yahoo.com/soaring-generic-drug-prices-draw-senate-scrutiny-141933064–finance.html
I’m old enough to remember medicine before the ‘age of specialization’, when you went to your local doc and he charged ya $10 and maybe gave you a script for something. I realize that those horse and buggy days of medicine were far from perfect, but there is much about the modern system that stinks.
For instance, newly minted docs with hundreds of thousands in student loans, head for the highest paying specialties (my neighbor’s son), as Atul Gawande pointed out. You aren’t a patient any longer; you’re a gallbladder or a hip joint, or a GI tract. The more we learn about the mind/body connection, the less we seem to incorporate that into our health care regime. Almost no one treats ‘the whole patient’ any longer.
And even at that, who can get any real sense of a situation in the 15 minutes doctors are allotted now, per patient?
It would be one thing if we really were getting the world’s best health care, as we love to tell ourselves we are; but we’re not. The system is broken in so many links along the chain. I don’t have any answers, but feel we, as consumers, let alone patients, need to start asking our lawmakers some hard questions, as they seem to be working hand in glove with the healthcare industrial complex.
Live long and prosper,
Sand, we need to encourage change from specialist being paid the most to GP’s is paid the most. Along with changing the cost of education, which is the only thing in America that has risen quicker than drug and insurance cost.
Within the PPACA are provisions to change pay for GP and at the expense of specialists.
Education is a different beast as Alan Collinge and I have written on this topic also. Everyone believes it is important to have a college education hence an instant selling point for colleges/universities. If the gov. raises the limits on borrowed money, the cost of college goes up and there are fewer grants and scholarships given out. The burden shifts to the student and parents. Michigan reduced public support for state colleges going from 60% in 1994 to 20% in 2012. This burden shifts to the student and the parents. Pell Grants from the gov. has not kept pace with the cost of college either.
Professional administrator count has more than doubled over the years. Where there was one per several profs (adjunct or tenured), it has changed and the ratio has reversed. Demos writes about this quite a bit. Where replacing tenured profs with adjuncts was supposed to lower costs, it was eaten up by administrators.
Non-profits have a bad habit of spending the budget whether it makes sense to or not and at what amount? There are no true controls on cost and increases. Recently the Dept. of Education tried to cap costs by placing controls on colleges through monitoring the percentage of defaults on student loans (which can not be discharged in bankruptcy). This last year, there were issues and the gov. allowed the colleges to slide. If they had enforced the “rules,” these colleges would have been eliminated from the Federal Loan process.
Even though Jason Delisle, Jason Winehouse, Matt Chingos, and Beth Akers of the New America Foundation Heritage, and the Brookings Institute claim interest rates do not matter; they do matter on student loans as the impact is cumulative. They especially matter on those seeking their graduate and doctorate degrees which doctors, researchers, and nurses need. Student loans are not the cheapest in the world in the US. Why they exceed 3% interest when the costs of making loans is relatively cheap and the return on them is good and better when in default is beyond me. Literally, the nation is stealing the future wealth and purchasing power of the college educated through student loans which impacts the overall economy.
Kind of slipped off topic here.
Amen, brother! I agree with both points.
Also, re: advance directives, etc., here’s a cautionary tale
Which is not to say we shouldn’t all have the necessary paperwork, just know it might be ignored. We all also need a patient advocate.
For now, I’m able to maintain the premiums on my long term care insurance, but who knows what the future holds? To quote yet another little ditty, “And the best that we can hope for, is to die in our sleep.” (The Gambler-Kenny Rogers)
Sandi, thanks for the article, it does show I may need to do some more work on the issue of DNR.
It also seems we have a similar wish, “And the best that we can hope for, is to die in our sleep.” (The Gambler-Kenny Rogers)
“Within the PPACA are provisions to change pay for GP and at the expense of specialists.” run
Run, at least there is one thing in ACA that’s not a give away to the health insurance industry, that we both like.
The problem with many government programs is that if you fail to spend the funds allotted for the year, you will get a cut in the future. I do not know if the above is true today, but it was when we were both young men. The reason I know this is from a time that I worked for a special hospital.
Run, true bankruptcy is off subject; but the students are not the only one’s. About the only people who can file bankruptcy today are corporations.
“Reason, we all know that the majority of Americans need help with health care. Someone needs to pay for that care. What we do not need to pay for is an industry that has produced no benefits only cost to health care. – See more at: http://angrybearblog.strategydemo.com/2014/11/the-fournier-transform.html#comments”
I guess you didn’t understand that I was making a pun on your spelling error.
It wasn’t Beene who made the spelling error it was Dan.
Reason, the confusion was caused by rarely used sp checker. But yes understood you found a spelling error. If your an English teacher you will be disappointed a lot with my posting. But did appreciate your
use of anguage skill. Wish I had an appreciation of value of my English teacher when I was young.
If I might add a link to another concern re: medical payments, who decides, etc?
I am reminded of the fire-breathing hyperbole from the likes of Sarah Palin about ‘death panels’, and many calmer voices pointing out we already had/have death panels – they’re called ‘insurance companies’. Now I suppose we can add Big Pharma.
Medical Blind Man’s Bluff –
We hear so much about doctors ordering so many tests to CYA and ward off malpractice suits. So, how would patients electing not to have tests they can determine the cost of, play into that calculus?
Random thoughts on who pays…….
Employer based health insurance wasn’t always considered “normal”. No one I knew growing up had it. Small town, lots of small businesses, etc. Regardless of the history that says companies used benefit packages to entice workers after WWII because of wage freezes, I suspect that the people who most benefited were white collar folks in large cities.
Which makes me wonder what would happen to wages if health care COSTS weren’t continuing to rise? Employers are already forcing workers to pick up more of the tab for their insurance, both in premiums and co-pays and deductibles. And wages are in the porcelain appliance. Surely this isn’t ONLY about paying the CEO bigger bucks?
One veterinary professor claims in his TED talk that there is little difference between spaying your great dane and your wife’s hysterectomy. One costs $400 and one costs $12,000. I can’t vouch for how closely the two can be compared, but I do know pets usually aren’t insured (though that is changing – pet insurance is a growth industry these days), and most vets are small business people, not part of large practices or hospital complexes run by bean counters looking to “maximize shareholder value”.
Apparently there is ample evidence that having insurance makes us less cautious consumers of health care (along with the lack of transparency, etc. discussed here already). So, does the insurance industry drive costs? And are these rising costs driving our lack of wage growth?
PS – Run says it’s miserable in Michigan – I was told Michigan’s four seasons are: snow, mud, deer flies followed by black flies. Is that correct? 🙂
My Elk Hound and I would walk miles in the Spring, Summer, and Fall on the dirt roads and in the woods where they were accessible to us. It can be nice at times. I am in Repub central and these people are throwbacks akin to several decades ago. When we lived in MadCity, it was a different lifestyle all together. We would just get up and take our three out to walk Blue Mounds, Mirror Lake, or Devils Lake and just wear them out. Trips up to Madeline Island for a few days opened a whole new world for them. It was cold there and the snow was deep; but, it was not as deep as Cazenovia, NY.
Do not forget, you are battling a legislature which is tied to the healthcare industry. If it does not change its approach to protecting it, healthcare costs will continue to rise. It is there were we must change the attitude towards people.
Devil’s Lake – near where my husband grew up. He lived all around the Jackson area – Leonie, Grass Lake (before it got gentrified), etc. His greatest love is the UP – Grand Mariais area, which I agree is beautiful. The Lower can be quite beautiful, too, even in January. New snow sparkling like silver flakes makes you forget how the dull grey slush is going to wear you down.
And NC has its own problems, climate-wise, for sure. Though we didn’t have any deer flies this year, for some reason. Not that I missed them………….
Madeline Island was in Lake Superior off of Bayfield. We did the Porkies also.
I’m sure there were plenty of Democrats against the public option, but they didn’t matter. In the Senate
Yes JackD in the end, only Lieberman opposed Medicare buy in (IMHO it was even better than the public option) . However, at the time, he was the Connecticut for Libermaner not a Democrat. All Democrats in the Senate supported Medicare buy in.
Against the public option, there were definitely, Blanche Lambert Lincoln, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu (well worse than against, she asked what was the middle way on the public option), Kent Conrad (budget committee chairman so with a veto on use of reconciliation – he always just said there weren’t 60 votes for the public option). I think Mark Pryor. Maybe Claire McCaskill (I just googled — the problem isn’t my memory — it is here double talk).
Notably only Todd “legitimate rape” Akin, can keep an Democrat who was opposed to the public option in the Senate. Basically, they were Democrats in red states who were determined to oppose sometihng supported by the other Democrats.
It is my understanding that not one of those Dems you mentioned helped the Reps in continuing the filibuster. They all said they would wait to see the bill until they voted.
Now, I would say they may have been against the public option or Medicare buy in, but they did not stop the vote.