jamesgangnc wrote:
On Apr 16, 3:48 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:26:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"

wrote:
Interesting about the stabilize and transport model... just curious where he
thinks they get transferred to? Some places have been "transporting" people
to skid row.
In DC it was DC General;. In Lee County it is Lee Memorial, both
government supported hospitals. Basically it still comes back on the
taxpayer.
The real question is where will they go when they do get their
Medicaid this year? Probably the same place.
The real question is, what's cheaper, letting the hospital eat the
bill and put it on the government tab or create a whole insurance
bureaucracy to pay them through the normal channels?

BTW did you watch Frontline this week?
They did a show on the back room dealing in this health care bill and
pointed out the senate bill was really written by 2 former United
Health Care lobbyists who went around the revolving door and work for
the government now. It is no surprise how things came out

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

Frankly I think we could save a whole lot from the administrative
costs and returning insurance back to the non-profit state. Right now
we have two layers of profit and two layers of administrative costs
coming out of every health care dollar.

I heard that two thirds of Medicare spending is for the last year of life.
That's why the Dems want death panels.
Lowers the cost. Got nothing to do with hangnails.
Remember how they killed that Schiavo girl down here?
Took her off life support. Too expensive.
Then you got your trial lawyers.

Jim - Watch what you wish for. You might get it.

"Jim" wrote in message
...
jamesgangnc wrote:
On Apr 16, 3:48 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:26:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"

wrote:
Interesting about the stabilize and transport model... just curious
where he
thinks they get transferred to? Some places have been "transporting"
people
to skid row.
In DC it was DC General;. In Lee County it is Lee Memorial, both
government supported hospitals. Basically it still comes back on the
taxpayer.
The real question is where will they go when they do get their
Medicaid this year? Probably the same place.
The real question is, what's cheaper, letting the hospital eat the
bill and put it on the government tab or create a whole insurance
bureaucracy to pay them through the normal channels?

BTW did you watch Frontline this week?
They did a show on the back room dealing in this health care bill and
pointed out the senate bill was really written by 2 former United
Health Care lobbyists who went around the revolving door and work for
the government now. It is no surprise how things came out

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

Frankly I think we could save a whole lot from the administrative
costs and returning insurance back to the non-profit state. Right now
we have two layers of profit and two layers of administrative costs
coming out of every health care dollar.

I heard that two thirds of Medicare spending is for the last year of life.
That's why the Dems want death panels.
Lowers the cost. Got nothing to do with hangnails.
Remember how they killed that Schiavo girl down here?
Took her off life support. Too expensive.
Then you got your trial lawyers.

Jim - Watch what you wish for. You might get it.



Lots of Medicare spending is about like medicade spending. My mom's
stockbroker is in Jacksonville, FL. They are next to a major hospital. The
seniors come down, get a small checkup and then come over and check their
stocks. Couple times a week. No copays. Cheap entertainment. I am a
medicare participand and always figured there should be a copay.

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:26:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Interesting about the stabilize and transport model... just curious where
he
thinks they get transferred to? Some places have been "transporting"
people
to skid row.

In DC it was DC General;. In Lee County it is Lee Memorial, both
government supported hospitals. Basically it still comes back on the
taxpayer.
The real question is where will they go when they do get their
Medicaid this year? Probably the same place.
The real question is, what's cheaper, letting the hospital eat the
bill and put it on the government tab or create a whole insurance
bureaucracy to pay them through the normal channels?

As you said, funnelling it back to the state doesn't equate to the hospital
"eating" the bill.

In the long run, a single-payer system is less expensive with better
results. But, what you're talking about happening so far isn't a "whole
insurance bureaucracy" either. And, even if it were, it wouldn't happen
overnight.


BTW did you watch Frontline this week?
They did a show on the back room dealing in this health care bill and
pointed out the senate bill was really written by 2 former United
Health Care lobbyists who went around the revolving door and work for
the government now. It is no surprise how things came out

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

The current bill that passed has problems. No doubt, but it's the beginning,
and probably the best that could be had in the short term. I'll check out
the show later tonight.


--
Nom=de=Plume

On 16/04/2010 2:56 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:26:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Interesting about the stabilize and transport model... just curious where
he
thinks they get transferred to? Some places have been "transporting"
people
to skid row.

In DC it was DC General;. In Lee County it is Lee Memorial, both
government supported hospitals. Basically it still comes back on the
taxpayer.
The real question is where will they go when they do get their
Medicaid this year? Probably the same place.
The real question is, what's cheaper, letting the hospital eat the
bill and put it on the government tab or create a whole insurance
bureaucracy to pay them through the normal channels?

As you said, funnelling it back to the state doesn't equate to the hospital
"eating" the bill.

Why not have the voters in each state choose. Seriously! If the
residents want it, they get both the service and the bill. If you don't
want the bill you can move out.

In the long run, a single-payer system is less expensive with better
results. But, what you're talking about happening so far isn't a "whole
insurance bureaucracy" either. And, even if it were, it wouldn't happen
overnight.

Debatable.

BTW did you watch Frontline this week?
They did a show on the back room dealing in this health care bill and
pointed out the senate bill was really written by 2 former United
Health Care lobbyists who went around the revolving door and work for
the government now. It is no surprise how things came out

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

The current bill that passed has problems. No doubt, but it's the beginning,
and probably the best that could be had in the short term. I'll check out
the show later tonight.

Blank check to **** away money. You should see the plans on spending
more and increasing taxes... I see a national sales tax coming soon...
there isn't that much money in the 2% "rich".


--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 20:01:15 -0600, Canuck57
wrote:

On 16/04/2010 2:56 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

The current bill that passed has problems. No doubt, but it's the beginning,
and probably the best that could be had in the short term. I'll check out
the show later tonight.

Blank check to **** away money. You should see the plans on spending
more and increasing taxes... I see a national sales tax coming soon...
there isn't that much money in the 2% "rich".

aint that much in the middle class, either.

didn't stop the rich from stealing it.

"Canuck57" wrote in message
...
On 16/04/2010 2:56 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:26:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Interesting about the stabilize and transport model... just curious
where
he
thinks they get transferred to? Some places have been "transporting"
people
to skid row.

In DC it was DC General;. In Lee County it is Lee Memorial, both
government supported hospitals. Basically it still comes back on the
taxpayer.
The real question is where will they go when they do get their
Medicaid this year? Probably the same place.
The real question is, what's cheaper, letting the hospital eat the
bill and put it on the government tab or create a whole insurance
bureaucracy to pay them through the normal channels?

As you said, funnelling it back to the state doesn't equate to the
hospital
"eating" the bill.

Why not have the voters in each state choose. Seriously! If the
residents want it, they get both the service and the bill. If you don't
want the bill you can move out.

The voters in each state do choose. They choose their Federal
representatives who vote in either the majority or the minority. It was
decided at the federal level.


In the long run, a single-payer system is less expensive with better
results. But, what you're talking about happening so far isn't a "whole
insurance bureaucracy" either. And, even if it were, it wouldn't happen
overnight.

Debatable.

Only by idiots.


BTW did you watch Frontline this week?
They did a show on the back room dealing in this health care bill and
pointed out the senate bill was really written by 2 former United
Health Care lobbyists who went around the revolving door and work for
the government now. It is no surprise how things came out

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

The current bill that passed has problems. No doubt, but it's the
beginning,
and probably the best that could be had in the short term. I'll check out
the show later tonight.

Blank check to **** away money. You should see the plans on spending more
and increasing taxes... I see a national sales tax coming soon... there
isn't that much money in the 2% "rich".

According to PhD Canuck, who's barred from entering the US. Uh huh.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On 16/04/2010 1:48 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:26:40 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Interesting about the stabilize and transport model... just curious where he
thinks they get transferred to? Some places have been "transporting" people
to skid row.

In DC it was DC General;. In Lee County it is Lee Memorial, both
government supported hospitals. Basically it still comes back on the
taxpayer.
The real question is where will they go when they do get their
Medicaid this year? Probably the same place.
The real question is, what's cheaper, letting the hospital eat the
bill and put it on the government tab or create a whole insurance
bureaucracy to pay them through the normal channels?

BTW did you watch Frontline this week?
They did a show on the back room dealing in this health care bill and
pointed out the senate bill was really written by 2 former United
Health Care lobbyists who went around the revolving door and work for
the government now. It is no surprise how things came out

Check it out on the PBS.ORG web site. Called "Obama's Deal".

That should be a red flag. Governemtn hiring consultants to sell the
governemtn view.

GM having lobbiests yet it is Government Motors!

Sounds like voters and listening to the people does not mater any more.

--
The Liberal way, take no responsibility.

On Apr 16, 3:40*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:16:10 -0700 (PDT), jamesgangnc





wrote:
On Apr 16, 1:50*pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:16:17 -0700 (PDT), jamesgangnc

wrote:
Here's my question. *We all know that the present system can't go on
working. *We can't have 15% of the population not have some way to pay
for health care and at the same time pass laws that force hospitals to
care for them anyway. *That's like having a law that a restaurant has
to serve you even though you are obviously not going to pay. *Hey, you
could be starving. *Do both sides agree that what we have now isn't
going to go on working forever? *If so then at the end of the day
don't we really just have 2 options.

Option 1, figure out some way to get those people back into the system
with some minimal benefits as the rest of us.

Option 2, *no tickey, no laundry. *You can't pay the the hospital is
within it's rights to turn you away.

I'm not advocating one or the other with this post. *I'm just asking
at the 20,000 foot level is there a 3rd choice I'm missing?

Those people just got thrown back to the states in the Medicaid plan.
There was no federal money that went along with this (unless you are a
corn husker) . That is how this was "revenue neutral" for the feds. It
is the broke assed states who will be paying these bills. BTW there
are already plenty of hospitals and doctors who will not take Medicaid
patients unless they come in through the ER and even then, they just
stabilize and transport.
I know that a lot of hospitals simply don't have an ER, that
eliminates the problem.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sure, there are loopholes that some hospitals use. *But eventually the
people end up getting treatment somewhere and can't pay for it.

So do you want # 1 or # 2? *Or do you see a # 3 I've missed. *And I
mean a #3 that isn't just a variation of 1 or 2.

I think the real solution is to get some cheaper care on the street
for routine and minor problems. You don't need 12 years of school to
fix a hangnail but it is illegal to do it.
If we are dumping 15 million under served people into the system we
need more practitioners today, not in 2022. I still suggest mining the
pool of former military medics.
If we would just come home from our mid east misadventures we would
have the perfect people to deal with the kind of injuries that come
into an inner city ER along with being the initial contact for the
normal ailments of life..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That trend is already happening. Most of these things like "minute
clinic" are staffed by nurse practictioners rather than drs. And even
when you see a dr a lot of triage has already been done by others so
that the dr doesn't need to waste time with the routine. You have an
injury and a dr might look at during the evaluation process but actual
treatment is often done by someone else.

"jamesgangnc" wrote in message
...
On Apr 16, 3:40 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 11:16:10 -0700 (PDT), jamesgangnc





wrote:
On Apr 16, 1:50 pm, wrote:
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:16:17 -0700 (PDT), jamesgangnc

wrote:
Here's my question. We all know that the present system can't go on
working. We can't have 15% of the population not have some way to pay
for health care and at the same time pass laws that force hospitals to
care for them anyway. That's like having a law that a restaurant has
to serve you even though you are obviously not going to pay. Hey, you
could be starving. Do both sides agree that what we have now isn't
going to go on working forever? If so then at the end of the day
don't we really just have 2 options.

Option 1, figure out some way to get those people back into the system
with some minimal benefits as the rest of us.

Option 2, no tickey, no laundry. You can't pay the the hospital is
within it's rights to turn you away.

I'm not advocating one or the other with this post. I'm just asking
at the 20,000 foot level is there a 3rd choice I'm missing?

Those people just got thrown back to the states in the Medicaid plan.
There was no federal money that went along with this (unless you are a
corn husker) . That is how this was "revenue neutral" for the feds. It
is the broke assed states who will be paying these bills. BTW there
are already plenty of hospitals and doctors who will not take Medicaid
patients unless they come in through the ER and even then, they just
stabilize and transport.
I know that a lot of hospitals simply don't have an ER, that
eliminates the problem.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Sure, there are loopholes that some hospitals use. But eventually the
people end up getting treatment somewhere and can't pay for it.

So do you want # 1 or # 2? Or do you see a # 3 I've missed. And I
mean a #3 that isn't just a variation of 1 or 2.

I think the real solution is to get some cheaper care on the street
for routine and minor problems. You don't need 12 years of school to
fix a hangnail but it is illegal to do it.
If we are dumping 15 million under served people into the system we
need more practitioners today, not in 2022. I still suggest mining the
pool of former military medics.
If we would just come home from our mid east misadventures we would
have the perfect people to deal with the kind of injuries that come
into an inner city ER along with being the initial contact for the
normal ailments of life..- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That trend is already happening. Most of these things like "minute
clinic" are staffed by nurse practictioners rather than drs. And even
when you see a dr a lot of triage has already been done by others so
that the dr doesn't need to waste time with the routine. You have an
injury and a dr might look at during the evaluation process but actual
treatment is often done by someone else.


Also, there are lots of Physician Assistants coming on board. As you said
otherwise...
--
Nom=de=Plume

In article ,
says...

Sure, there are loopholes that some hospitals use. But eventually the
people end up getting treatment somewhere and can't pay for it.

So do you want # 1 or # 2? Or do you see a # 3 I've missed. And I
mean a #3 that isn't just a variation of 1 or 2.

I think the real solution is to get some cheaper care on the street
for routine and minor problems. You don't need 12 years of school to
fix a hangnail but it is illegal to do it.
If we are dumping 15 million under served people into the system we
need more practitioners today, not in 2022. I still suggest mining the
pool of former military medics.
If we would just come home from our mid east misadventures we would
have the perfect people to deal with the kind of injuries that come
into an inner city ER along with being the initial contact for the
normal ailments of life..

I do know that they are sending military doctors into city ERs to deal
with knife wounds and bullet wounds. This isn't experience you get at
most military hospitals stateside.

The should be sending medics and Corpsman out with the ambulances and
EMTs to gain experience with handling issues in the field. The problem
is you may get the unions up in arms if the military guys apply a band-
aid to a boo-boo.