 |
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?
I would weep for your seniors if the nursing homes were a totally unregulated free market industry.
Hello again, tal:
The point he's making is that the PATIENTS and their family's need to be the ones paying the nursing home bill...Quote:
Can you elaborate on your point?
Oh, that's right. If that were the case, the nursing homes would go broke, and granny is gonna die in your spare bedroom, or on the street.. Are YOU gonna be the one cleaning up after granny?
excon
No, the point I'm making is it is you guys who keep trying to convince us of the wonderful benefits of a government nanny. What was it you wanted me to be thankful for, the government protecting me from lead based paint? Tal is always wanting me to be thankful for, the government protecting us from all manner of bad stuff.
Yet, neither of you want to acknowledge the government isn't protecting our dads and grandmas?
I don't believe I have ever told you to be grateful, but having been responsible for many elderly relatives I can tell you the government only does so much, and you have to do the rest. Its an overwhelming every day endeavor be it a nursing home, or in their home.
I have been through the process many times. Still going through it. It is what it is.
Hello again, Steve:
Compared to who??? It's YOUR side who wants to give 'em vouchers and cut 'em loose...Quote:
Yet, neither of you want to acknowledge the government isn't protecting our dads and grandmas?
excon
How did we get from protecting seniors in nursing homes to education? Obviously the government isn't doing such a great job at that either, and prefers to force children to stay in failing schools.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Hello again, Steve:
The right wing FIX for Medicare, written by Paul Ryan, was, and still IS, a VOUCHER system.
excon
Your state and local governments are responsible for both issues. The feds write checks. Your blame is a bit misplaced, that's what I was pointing out in previous links that you totally ignore. Who made the schools fail?
I said either way it was a government failure, but you know damn the role the feds plays. From your own link I allegedly ignored.:Quote:
Your state and local governments are responsible for both issues. The feds write checks. Your blame is a bit misplaced, that's what I was pointing out in previous links that you totally ignore. Who made the schools fail?
Now what part of that absolves the feds?Quote:
State governments oversee the licensing of nursing homes. In addition, States have a contract with CMS to monitor those nursing homes that want to be eligible to provide care to Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. Congress established minimum requirements for nursing homes that want to provide services under Medicare and Medicaid. These requirements are broadly outlined in the Social Security Act (the Act). The Act also entrusts the Secretary of Health and Human Services (DHHS) with the responsibility of monitoring and enforcing these requirements. CMS, a DHHS Agency, is also charged with the responsibility of working out the details of the law and how it will be implemented, which it does by writing regulations and manuals.
I absolve no one but the responsibility is a shared one. You would be the first to holler if the feds came and closed those funk a$$ nursing homes down, but you sure support the state closing abortion clinics right now.
In other words they are all government regulated just as I said, and not only that but the feds are 100 percent responsible for enforcing their requirements for any facility that accepts Medicaid/Medicare.
But think about it Tal, why would I holler about anyone shutting down "those funk a$$ nursing homes?" Did I somehow leave the impression I'm pro-elderly abuse?
No they are NOT, the state has sole responsibility for licensing and that means the feds just go by what the state says. That's what the links say. Now if you want the feds to get in your state business just say so. But don't selectively blame the feds for what the state is supposed to do.Quote:
the feds are 100 percent responsible for enforcing their requirements for any facility that accepts Medicaid/Medicare.
I mean you can close abortion clinics for safety, but not elderly care homes for the same reason? WHY is that?
Um, this is surreal. Yes the state licenses nursing homes, the state is still GOVERNMENT which is what I said. Are you denying the state is GOVERNMENT?Quote:
No they are NOT, the state has sole responsibility for licensing and that means the feds just go by what the state says. That's what the links say. Now if you want the feds to get in your state business just say so. But don't selectively blame the feds for what the state is supposed to do.
Additionally, what I said was IF they want to accept Medicaid or Medicare they also have to adhere to federal standards, based on regulations and manuals written by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and monitored and enforced by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, under contract with CMS. Are you denying this from your own source? Either way they are still government regulated so I can only assume you want to shift all blame to the states, which matters not to my point.
This is even more surreal. Where in the hell are you getting the idea I wouldn't come down like a ton of bricks on deficient nursing homes? You certainly did not get it from me so why are you repeating this drivel? You think I want them to abuse my dad or what???????Quote:
I mean you can close abortion clinics for safety, but not elderly care homes for the same reason? WHY is that?
I mean seriously, read my words - don't put them in my mouth. Painting me as a defender of "funk a$$ nursing homes" is below the belt nasty.
Speech, your original article was about nursing homes both private and public failing to do their job properly. All these nursing homes are overseen by government regulators with the idea that they meet a standard that is acceptable.
Clearly the regulators failed to conduct proper inspections and half the blame lies with them. The other half of the blame lies with the private and public nursing homes. Why?
Because in the first instance it is up the nursing home to set up a practice that attempts to meet the regulations that exist. There is no excuse for setting up a practice that doesn't, or can't meet the standards and then blame the regulators for not doing their job. It is a shared responsibility.
Ok, it is a shared responsibility. I'm not the one trying to excuse some of those responsible.
the people who are responsible are those who are derelect in their duty of care, you are trying to make the government responsible, but all they can do is enforcement which is an after the event activity
Clete, I agree that ultimately it is the provider that is responsible but you're missing the point. These lefties here have been arguing about government protecting us from those greedy corporations that would do us harm, but when it's demonstrated that this same government is not protecting us they shift the blame. They can't have it both ways.Quote:
the people who are responsible are those who are derelect in their duty of care, you are trying to make the government responsible, but all they can do is enforcement which is an after the event activity
no speech you're right., but let's stop knocking the government for a while and start knocking the true offenders, the selfseeking capitalists who put profit before care, who prey on the unfortunate and infirm
I won't stop knocking the government, they have not demonstrated at all they have my best interest at heart. This regime has made it clear that politics and power come before the people. At least with the greedy capitalists I have a choice.
Hello again, Steve:
I couldn't agree more.Quote:
I won't stop knocking the government, they have not demonstrated at all they have my best interest at heart.
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:00 AM. |