Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

In article ,
says...

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 05:03:31 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

But no surprise there.
Omelet = (eggs + broken)
Hey, if anybody actually read this, let me know.
The answer might save me some time.
In real life, do you talk like you write? In little bites? :)

Yes - I read the whole thing.

The problem is that there are many ways to look at this issue. I'm not
in favor of government run health care for a variety of reasons.

I've got some ideas, but nobody listens to me and our chattering class
and entrenched political elites don't seem to understand the issue
either.
They are all listening to Barry telling them that the republicans have
no ideas. Like one pundit said today, the White House is the champion of
misinformation in the health care issue, that's why so many folks don't
trust them... The republicans put out a bill last week, HR3400 which
addresses health care from a sensible point of view, and at no
additional cost to taxpayers, but of course like all of the other bills,
the dems don't only dismiss it, but they deny it was even proposed..
It's straight up lying, that's why nobody trust the Pres and his
hoods...

Oooh, the Small Business Health Reform Act?? It only addresses a very
few issues and problems, first of all. And hey, you dismissed Obama's
speech to school kids as propaganda and indoctrination before you ever
knew what was in it!

Nope again. This is getting old, I think you only read what you want to
read. I clearly noted my concern with the lesson plans and the teachers
personal agendas that will follow the speech, and of course the
collection of letters to the president and eventual use of those as
political props like the little girl in Mass. at the Obama health care
forum.

You didn't say he wanted to indoctrinate children??

Take her to the track on the 8th. That's the BO school kid
indoctrination speech. Happens at 11 am, eastern. If Jesse's lucky,
she'll be at lunch where their are no TV's.

Nope, she will be there. She knows already her History teacher is a Bush
Basher so she will just have to play the game for another semester.

She saw what an intolerant teacher can do to a kid a couple of years
back, she felt real bad for her friend but was just a small child. If
there is any bullying this year, I am sure she will stand up and be
noted;) I can't even begin to tell you how strong and confident she has
become in the last year.

I have not been posting too much about her MX but this kid is just
driven, like her older sister. The other thing I am noticing is she is
not dreaming pie in the sky, she has a very good understanding of
reality and what is possible, she still aims pretty high, but so far is
on schedule to achieve her short and long term goals. Maybe ahead of
schedule, but not to her.

Today is day 4 of the 6 day marathon practice session... ugh, I am
getting tired...;)



--
Wafa free since 2009

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:22:48 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 08:00:41 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


Tort reform also has to be addressed - this could actualy be the water
shed of health care reform. I saw the bill my kids pay for their
malpractice insurance - it's simply amazing what they charge to protect
doctors from malpractice claims.

I could see some sort of threshold before allowing a suit. That would
keep the minor and frivolous law suits at bay, but generally what people
talk about when addressing tort reform, is the high end payouts.
Personally, I wouldn't want that touched. If some incompetent doctor
screws up, and makes me a paraplegic, I want to know my family is taken
care of.

I don't disagree with you, but the case has to have some merit. In
this case, I'd be in favor of a review panel type of situation to
decide on merit.

The problem is, and will always be, what rates as "merit" and what
rates as "frivilous". I've told the story of my own run in with
malpractice as a paramedic - to my mind, the lawyer should have just
told the plaintiff that her kid was lucky to be alive, but...

I think, and I would hope that most rational people would think this
way, that the whole issue needs careful deliberation - not radical
change in the space of two months. This is going to take years to fix.

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:44:12 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

So I agree with you there. This isn't to say that a malpractice suit
can't be pursued, but that there are caps on punitive damages, and
loser pays. Doesn't mean you can't get legit compensatory damages.
Still severe reform. England has loser pays I think.

That idea has been around for a while and it does have some value.

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:14:11 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:50:50 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


On the face of it, it's a sound idea - actually, a little like an HMO in
concept which seem to work well.

But you pointed out the problem yourself - depending on how they are set
up.

It's my understanding that Blue Cross/Blue Shield started as a co-op. In
some states it is still the dominate player in health insurance. Don't
quote me on these numbers, but I believe collect 90% of the premiums in
North Dakota, and 70% in Iowa and South Dakota, clearly the big player.
I wonder how well they perform in keeping costs down.

The simple truth is this - a public option would not be more efficient
or cost effective than private plans. You just have to look around at
various government run health care systems to see how inefficient they
are - the Indian Health Service is one good example. The VA is another,
although the VA has cleaned up it's act over the past few years quite a
bit and the general care levels are becoming much better. I'm going
into the VA system myself shortly - I looked at it hard and was
satisfied that my situation will be handled well.

So will a co-op work? It does in some states and they seem to be very
effective and efficient in patient care. The few that I know about are
small, self-contained (all-in-one service centers from testing to care)
and being non-profit, the costs are containable and in general, less
than standard health plans.

I was in a similar system quite a few years ago - it was a non-profit
health care system run by Hanneman Hospital in Worcester. To tell the
truth, it was high quality care, the specialists were top rank and in
general, the feeling was of a small doctors office where people knew who
you were - a very nice. Everything was contained within one facility -
you see the doctor, get an x-ray (or CAT/PET/MRI) on the spot readings,
go back and see the NP or PA and if they needed to get the doc, they got
the doc. It was good.

So in my experience, the co-op seems like a good idea. Run by the
government though? No - I can't see that. The very nature of
government does not allow for efficiency, cost containment and
effective.

It's my understanding that it wouldn't be run by the government, but set
up as a non-profit, owned by the subscribers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/he...n.html?_r=2&hp

Well, then it's a good idea that needs some investigation.

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:01:07 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


I don't disagree with you, but the case has to have some merit. In this
case, I'd be in favor of a review panel type of situation to decide on
merit.

It might work, but I would think it might be difficult to set up.


The problem is, and will always be, what rates as "merit" and what rates
as "frivilous". I've told the story of my own run in with malpractice
as a paramedic - to my mind, the lawyer should have just told the
plaintiff that her kid was lucky to be alive, but...

I would agree things should be done to keep malpractice insurance costs
down. There are clearly cases that are brought that aren't malpractice,
and they shouldn't have been brought. OTOH, there are doctors that live
in court rooms, constantly being sued. Perhaps, pulling a few specific
licenses would keep the insurance rates down. All in all, it is going to
be a tough and interesting debate.



I think, and I would hope that most rational people would think this
way, that the whole issue needs careful deliberation - not radical
change in the space of two months. This is going to take years to fix.

You know, I've heard several pundits say that this isn't going to be
fixed all at once. No one is going to get everything they want, but, the
Sacred Cow will be popped. Health care reform will be being tweaked for
decades.

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
JustWait wrote:
In article ,
says...
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 05:03:31 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

But no surprise there.
Omelet = (eggs + broken)
Hey, if anybody actually read this, let me know.
The answer might save me some time.
In real life, do you talk like you write? In little bites? :)

Yes - I read the whole thing.

The problem is that there are many ways to look at this issue. I'm not
in favor of government run health care for a variety of reasons.

I've got some ideas, but nobody listens to me and our chattering class
and entrenched political elites don't seem to understand the issue
either.
They are all listening to Barry telling them that the republicans have
no ideas. Like one pundit said today, the White House is the champion of
misinformation in the health care issue, that's why so many folks don't
trust them... The republicans put out a bill last week, HR3400 which
addresses health care from a sensible point of view, and at no
additional cost to taxpayers, but of course like all of the other bills,
the dems don't only dismiss it, but they deny it was even proposed..
It's straight up lying, that's why nobody trust the Pres and his
hoods...

Oooh, the Small Business Health Reform Act?? It only addresses a very
few issues and problems, first of all. And hey, you dismissed Obama's
speech to school kids as propaganda and indoctrination before you ever
knew what was in it!
Nope again. This is getting old, I think you only read what you want to
read. I clearly noted my concern with the lesson plans and the teachers
personal agendas that will follow the speech, and of course the
collection of letters to the president and eventual use of those as
political props like the little girl in Mass. at the Obama health care
forum.

You didn't say he wanted to indoctrinate children??

Take her to the track on the 8th. That's the BO school kid
indoctrination speech. Happens at 11 am, eastern. If Jesse's lucky,
she'll be at lunch where their are no TV's.

Nope, she will be there. She knows already her History teacher is a Bush
Basher so she will just have to play the game for another semester.

She saw what an intolerant teacher can do to a kid a couple of years
back, she felt real bad for her friend but was just a small child. If
there is any bullying this year, I am sure she will stand up and be
noted;) I can't even begin to tell you how strong and confident she has
become in the last year.

I have not been posting too much about her MX but this kid is just
driven, like her older sister. The other thing I am noticing is she is
not dreaming pie in the sky, she has a very good understanding of
reality and what is possible, she still aims pretty high, but so far is
on schedule to achieve her short and long term goals. Maybe ahead of
schedule, but not to her.

Today is day 4 of the 6 day marathon practice session... ugh, I am
getting tired...;)



Scotty, I quoted you, those were your words. Neal Boortz who is very
conservative although he calls himself Libertarian has quite the article
about how Republicans are burying themselves deeply because they lie
about things like the speech, his healthcare reform etc. either without
knowledge of what it says, or outright lies.

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
Whew... I don't think I could do that, even if the alternative is watching
the clothes dryer. Hats off to you!

I was a computer systems analyst, so it was no problem.
It's much more fun seeing real people make spoken arguments than
extracting them from silent data flows and technical mumbo-jumbo.
sorry for the big snip

Hey, if anybody actually read this, let me know.
The answer might save me some time.

Hey, I read it! Nice thoughts. I have a light day sleeper here, so I can't
really watch TV even if I wanted to.. also, my head might explode. I can
only take so much political speak in one year.

Many people bitch/moan about high taxes, but we pay so many hidden taxes,
I'd rather just get it all done at once.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Tue, 08 Sep 2009 07:50:50 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:


On the face of it, it's a sound idea - actually, a little like an HMO in
concept which seem to work well.
So will a co-op work? It does in some states and they seem to be very
effective and efficient in patient care. The few that I know about are
small, self-contained (all-in-one service centers from testing to care)
and being non-profit, the costs are containable and in general, less
than standard health plans.

I was in a similar system quite a few years ago - it was a non-profit
health care system run by Hanneman Hospital in Worcester. To tell the
truth, it was high quality care, the specialists were top rank and in
general, the feeling was of a small doctors office where people knew who
you were - a very nice. Everything was contained within one facility -
you see the doctor, get an x-ray (or CAT/PET/MRI) on the spot readings,
go back and see the NP or PA and if they needed to get the doc, they got
the doc. It was good.

So in my experience, the co-op seems like a good idea. Run by the
government though? No - I can't see that. The very nature of
government does not allow for efficiency, cost containment and
effective.

It's my understanding that it wouldn't be run by the government, but set
up as a non-profit, owned by the subscribers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/he...n.html?_r=2&hp


This would be similar to what Congress has... they pick and choose among
plans all run by regular insurance companies? I think that's the focus off
the "public option" that's gotten so much attention lately. It's not gov't
run. Re co-ops... they would work if they have enough bargaining power with
the insurance companies. Most aren't big enough to have much impact on
costs. That would be a major efficacy stumbling block.

--
Nom=de=Plume

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:57:51 -0700, jps wrote:

When the media wants to highlight the conflict of birthers, deathers,
teabagger and speechers, how the hell are you supposed to explain
something of any complexity to the public.

They don't even try, which is why I turn to C-Span . Lame asses.
But when you watch commercial TV, take some comfort that behind every
face you see is a fat salary and excellent health care.
And an empty head.


Your idea of being able to buy into Medicare early is the best idea
I've heard floated. It's gaining traction in the public domain.

Damn, already!? I just mentioned it!
But it makes sense only if it doesn't drive Medicare further in the
red.

--Vic


I believe it's projected to go into the red in 2019. The first report
whereby it would draw more than 45% of its money from the general fund
happened in 2006 (legislated reporting mandate). The big problem is the
looming baby-boomer bulge. I think we need some death panels sooner vs.
later. lol

--
Nom=de=Plume

Can Anybody Here Talk Turkey?
 

On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 11:31:20 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 07 Sep 2009 23:57:51 -0700, jps wrote:

When the media wants to highlight the conflict of birthers, deathers,
teabagger and speechers, how the hell are you supposed to explain
something of any complexity to the public.

They don't even try, which is why I turn to C-Span . Lame asses.
But when you watch commercial TV, take some comfort that behind every
face you see is a fat salary and excellent health care.
And an empty head.


Your idea of being able to buy into Medicare early is the best idea
I've heard floated. It's gaining traction in the public domain.

Damn, already!? I just mentioned it!
But it makes sense only if it doesn't drive Medicare further in the
red.

--Vic


I believe it's projected to go into the red in 2019. The first report
whereby it would draw more than 45% of its money from the general fund
happened in 2006 (legislated reporting mandate). The big problem is the
looming baby-boomer bulge. I think we need some death panels sooner vs.
later. lol


Let's just off some of the elderly GOP.

They've already predicted we'd do it so what's the harm?