 |
It only improved because the private sector came to the rescue, and the claim that it's operating at private sector efficiency is not flattering to you government solution types. Try and keep up.Quote:
Try to keep up. It's a collaboration between public and PRIVATE sectors. The website has gone from 43% to 90% efficient in 60 days. That's progress. Therewill be more progress, on many fronts.
Dem Keith Ellison in his attempted defense of Obama's lies played the "Americans are to blame for misunderstanding what he said" card, aka, the "we're too stupid for our own good so we need a government nanny" card.
Quote:
KEITH ELLISON: You know, I just want to say I think that everything that the president said and did was in pursuit to get all Americans health care, so, I think, even though he may have said, if you like your decent insurance, your insurance that works, then you can keep it, I think that people really get that. When -- he owned it. He said, look, if you misunderstood what I was trying to say, I'm sorry about that. I think that shows integrity.
Read more: Dem Keith Ellison Interprets Obama: 'If You Misunderstood What I Was Trying to Say, I'm Sorry' | NewsBusters
I agree with you Tom, it is a state run operation. One of the over riding concerns about crossing state lines is the 50 different set of rules. But don't states have a right to set those rules? Of course they do and selling a product from state to state means taxes, tariffs or duties.
That's why the ACA is so complex because it sets a standard for ALL 50 states to follow. The law specifically tells states they have to make state rules that meet those standards but SCOTUS said one part, Medicaid, was voluntary to each state.
Fact is the fixes to poor people getting health care by the states left a whole lot of people uninsured, and uninsurable. Lack of funding being the chief cause. One in four in my state for example, and guess who bears those costs... us Texans, and it's a similar situation in every state.
So what's your fix to this dilemma, since cable companies and insurance companies set the rates and policies of their own businesses, with regulations set and administered by the state run cartels, and before you blame it on the left, keep in mind that Texas and many others have been run by right winger cartels for decades.
What's your fix?We have seen the private sector fix, make mo' money. What's yours?
Okay Speech, what's YOUR fix my fellow Texan?
I can hear the doctors now using the old soviet worker's slogan ... 'they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work' .Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, tom:
And, if my Social Security check stopped, or they stopped paying Medicare, I'd be saying the same thing.Quote:
I can hear the doctors now using the old soviet worker's slogan ... 'they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work' .
But, THIS isn't that.. Maybe THAT'S the problem.. You think it IS.
excon
Tal my solution starts with giving consumers More choices ,not less. I also think part of the cost problem that Ex showed is because the true costs of medical care gets hidden from the consumer. All these elaborate tests that doctors give to cover their a$$ from lawsuits is an expensive way to do business.
Doctors unveil "Choosing Wisely" campaign to cut unnecessary medical tests - CBS NewsQuote:
Some doctors may be used to prescribing these seemingly "routine tests," but the "Choosing Wisely" initiative from the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation says these procedures are often unnecessary and besides driving up the country's skyrocketing health care costs, can put patients at risk.
According to The New York Times, up to one-third of the $2 trillion of annual U.S. health care costs is spent on unnecessary hospitalizations and tests, ineffective new drugs and medical devices, unproven treatments, and unnecessary end of life care.
Hello again, tom:
This is just ONE example of the market gone awry.Quote:
All these elaborate tests that doctors give to cover their a$$ from lawsuits is an expensive way to do business.
There's a couple ways to deal with it.. Instead of taking away both MINE and YOUR right to SUE, why don't we simply PAY for the stuff that IS medically necessary?? If the government is writing the checks, the government can decide which procedures to pay for...
But, HOLD ON!!! If the government STOPPED all the elaborate tests you speak of, I can hear you yelling DEATH PANELS all the way over here.
excon
Must be a good idea, Tom, it's in the bill. And the prez has talked about paying for outcomes and not just treatments or CYOA tests many times. That was part of doctors changing over to electronic records so extra tests by one is unnecessary, and they could share the results between them.
No wonder they save money in the UK, besides the extreme pressure to cut costs and meet efficiency standards they just neglect the patients.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Quote:
More than a thousand care home residents die thirsty
More than 1,000 care home residents have died of thirst or while suffering severe dehydration over the past decade, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.
Elderly and vulnerable patients were left without enough water despite being under the supervision of trained staff in homes in England and Wales.
The Coalition has failed to improve the situation, with more people dying while dehydrated last year than when David Cameron took office, although the total was lower than the 2006 peak.
Charities called for an urgent overhaul in social care, saying that the general public would be outraged if animals were treated in the same way.
“How can we call ourselves civilised when people are left to starve or die of thirst? … It is an utter disgrace that they are ever left without the most basic care,” said Dr Alison Cook, a director at the Alzheimer’s Society
Send those b@stards to jail for abuse!! That's the wrong way to cut cost don't you agree? We can be better and still be more efficient than this example can't we? Even though we didn't show it with no child left behind testing.
Winterborne was a private nursing home. Apparently private nursing homes run for profit rate poorly compared to non-profit nursing homes in England.The problem is not just with the public sector. The article forgot to mention this.
I'll take you on tour of the publicly run nursing homes here . Conditions are horrible . Be sure to bring a mask so you won't have to experience the smell of urine unwashed ...and make sure you carry extra Purell in case you happen to need to touch an elevator button . Maybe grab some ear plugs so you don't have to listen to the moans of the patients left unattended .
Well Tom seems we have certain problems in common, not that we have publicly run nursing homes but conditions in some privately run nursing homes are remarkedly similar to those you describe for your publicly run homes and worse, kerosene baths, starvation, even murder. Seems the management of the elderly is a universal problem; out of sight, out of mind. me, I think I'll die with dignity
Tom, you don't have to take me on a tour of public nursing homes. In exactly the same way you don't have to take me on a tour of private nursing homes. Why?
Because the reality is that there are very good private nursing homes. In exactly the same way as there are very good public nursing homes. As surprising as it might seem there are actually very bad public nursing homes and very bad private nursing homes.
In my post I was actually trying to point out the problem with the usual false dichotomy.
a ploy Tom is very familiar withQuote:
the usual false dichotomy.
All regulated by the government.
Medicare.gov - About Nursing Home Inspections
Two Deaths, Wildly Different Penalties: The Big Disparities in Nursing Home Oversight - ProPublica
Nursing Home Inspect
Seems states do there own inspecting and regulating.
Still the government.
Can you elaborate on your point?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:50 AM. |