Comments on: Right Wing Rhetoric on Health Care – A Page from Last Century’s Playbook

By: james travassos

james travassos — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 21:11:52 +0000

cooler heads are NOT needed! read the house bill. i did. it reads like the worst piece of garbage, socialized junk, vague retoric ever written. big government never knows what’s better for the people than they know what is good for themselves! this total piece of trash, proves it! read it stupid!!!!

By: Jennifer Dennard

Jennifer Dennard — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 11:52:12 +0000

It’s sad that this debate has reached such hysterical levels, when cooler heads are definitely needed. There are so many people out there who are uninsured or underinsured that their medical expenses are overwhelming their budgets. Everyone deserves some form of medical coverage. Let’s just be adults and come up with a solution sooner rather than later.

By: Nathan Moore

Nathan Moore — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:14:30 +0000

A radio version of this story aired on Free Speech Radio News on Friday, for those who are interested: http://www.fsrn.org/audio/history-us-health-insurance-industry/5237

BETTER STILL, you can see a brief history of U.S. health care reform efforts in images at http://www.fsrn.org/content/history-us-health-care-reform-images/5262

By: Namaimo

Namaimo — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 23:24:46 +0000

Thom Hartmann, on his radio show today, spoke about a plan for “Medicare that citizens of any age can join in, if they want to”, a solution that can be called a “public option” but that is voluntary. It would be revenue neutral inasmuch as the citizens who joined the plan would contribute whatever the CBO determines is a just amount. It would cost a lot less than the present “premiums” paid to for-profit, private insurance, because of the economies of scale, and it would cover the poor by subsidies, and a surcharge on those earning well. Best of all, it wouldn’t require “starting from scratch” because the framework for Medicare is already in place and is well understood (it would need beefing up, of course, but it would be paid for by contributions). Thought I’d pass it along.

By: hsr0601

hsr0601 — Sun, 16 Aug 2009 20:34:47 +0000

Good News !

A staff writer at The New Yorker and some experts have examined Medicare data from the successful hospitals of 10 regions, and they have found evidence that more effective, lower-cost care is possible. Thankfully, the provisions in the reform include more expansive policies than they have.

Please be ‘sure’ to visit http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/13/opinion/13gawande.html?hp for credible evidences !

Some have followed the Mayo model with salaried doctors employed, Other regions, too, have found ways to protect patients against the pursuit of revenues over patient.
And a cardiac surgeon of them said they had adopted electronic systems, examined the data and found that a shocking portion of tests were almost certainly unnecessary, possibly harmful.

According to analysis, their quality scores are well above average. Yet they spend more than $1,500 (16 percent) less per Medicare patient than the national average and have a slower real annual growth rate (3 percent versus 3.5 percent nationwide).

Surprisingly, 16 % of about $550 billion (the total of medicare cost per year) is around $88 billion per year, except for Medicaid (total cost of around $500 billion per year), medicare ‘alone’ can save $880 billion over the next decade.

In addition, under the reform package, along with the already allocated $583 billion, the wastes involving so called “doughnut hole” , the unnecessary subsidies for insurers, abuse, exorbitant costs by the tragic ER visits etc are weeded out, the concern over revenue (below) might be a thing of the past.

(( Net Medicare and Medicaid savings of $465 billion + the $583 billion revenue package = $1048 billion – the previously estimated $1.042 trillion cost of reform = $6 billion surplus – $245 billion (the 10-year cost of adjusting Medicare reimbursement rates so physicians don’t face big annual pay cuts) = the estimated deficit of $239 billion ))

In modernized society, the business lacking IT system is unthinkable just like pre-electricity period, nevertheless, the last thing to expect is happening now in the sector requiring the best accuracy in respect to dealing with human lives. Apparently the errors by no e-medical records have spawned the crushing lawsuits (Medical malpractice lawsuits cost at least $150 billion per year), and these costs have led to the unnecessary tests, treatments, even more profits so far. And in different parts of the U.S., patients get two to three times as much care for the same disease, with the same result.

Thank You !