[ETWolverine]

Ok, I'll bite, show me the language in the bill that advocates death panels.

Sections 1233, 141 & 142.

As well as several places where it mentions "efficiency testing" or "efficiency measuring" because they aren't talking about the efficacy of the medicines and therapies themselves, but rather the COST EFFECTIVNESS of giving those meds to some people instead of others.

These are death panels, regardless of what you want to call them. If their purpose is to determine who gets therapies based on age or life expectancy, they are a death panel. If they are counseling people to sign away their rights to health care via DNRs and DNIs and "living wills"... if they are trying to convince people that it is better that they die than that they live... they are death panels.

Joseph Mengele would have been proud.

Elliot

[tomder55]

As I said the "commission " became law when the President signed HR1 which creates the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.

HR3200's provisions will be decided by the "commission" .

[spitvenom]

ET do you really think that your and my private insurance companies don't do this already?

[NeedKarma]

Sections 1233, 141 & 142.

No, no... quote the TEXT of the bill that supports these death panels you speak of.

[ETWolverine]

ET do you really think that your and my private insurance companies don't do this already?

Sure they do.

But as I have pointed out before, if they deny me a therapy or a medicine, I can purchase it on my own out of pocket or try to get another form of insurance, including SUPPLEMENTAL INSURANCE that covers what primary insurance doesn't cover. I can work out a payment plan with the doctor to pay over time. I can even try to obtain charity to get the services that I need. AND I can challenge the insurance company via it's own internal systems... and win more often than I lose such an appeal.

But in a single-payer national health system, if you are denied, you die. There are no other options to pay for it yourself or get other insurance, or obtain charity, because it is a SINGLE-PAYER SYSTEM.

Furthermore, have you ever heard of an insurance company sending in counselors to get patients over the age of 65 (who may have as many as 20 more years of life ahead of them or more) to sign DNIs or DNRs or living wills? Only the government plan calls for this. This isn't something happening in private insurance.

Elliot

[ETWolverine]

No, no ... quote the TEXT of the bill that supports these death panels you speak of.

I did. Several times in this thread alone, and several other times in other threads. You ignored it. I have no interest in doing your homework for you again. Look it up yourself.

[excon]

Hello NK:

Dining room tables can't read text. But, they can hear right wing radio.

excon

[ETWolverine]

Hello NK:

Dining room tables can't read text. But, they can hear right wing radio.

excon

Apparently the 15 times that it has been posted in various places on this board by me, Steve and Tom wasn't enough for you... but WE'RE the ones who can't read text.

Riiiiigggghhhht.

[NeedKarma]

I did. Several times in this thread alone,

Show the several times in this thread where you posted text from the bill that supported your assertion. It's only a 3 page thread it shouldn't be hard.

[ETWolverine]

Been there, done that. Look it up yourself.

I don't have the time to waste on you anymore.

Elliot

[NeedKarma]

Hahahahahhhahaha. Buh-Bye!

[ETWolverine]

Don't go away angry. Just go away.

[NeedKarma]

Don't go away angry. Just go away.

Ah yes, the passive-aggressive. Sorry mate, I'll call bull$hit when I see it and I won't go away just because you screech the same stuff every day.

[spitvenom]

Et you really think if the government says to your Dr. no we will not cover that procedure and you tell your Dr hey I'll pay for it myself the Dr is going to say no to you. Come on now.

[inthebox]

NK


Tell me why the government has to have this section, in a 1000 page plus bill, when in fact COUNSELING FOR ADVANCED DIRECTIVES ALREADY OCCURS?

I think advanced directives are good and they can save the system money, because care in the last 6 months of life when people are obviously ill is what costs money.

Have you ever asked a critically ill person and or there family what their advanced directive may or may not be? I have, on a fairly regular basis.

Remember, even though this may be an endstage Alzheimer's patient who has not been out of bed in the past month or so and has other chronic medical problems like heart disease and stroke, you are speaking to their spouse, children, and other loved ones. Some may want him to just be comfortable and a DNR, [ which is my opinion ] and some may want everything possibly done just to gain another few weeks. Do you think the cost to the government/ taxpayor should be the ultimate decider of code status?

What do you tell the parents of a child with CF or Down's or the middle aged spouse who's husband/ wife has no ability to care for themselves, due to a car accident?


These are individual decisions best left between doctor and patient['s family].





G&P

[ETWolverine]

Et you really think if the government says to your Dr. no we will not cover that procedure and you tell your Dr hey I'll pay for it myself the Dr is going to say no to you. Come on now.

Yes. Because it will be illegal to pay for it myself. That is, in fact, the definition of SINGLE-PAYER.

I MIGHT be able to do it in the "black market", but do you want a system of black-market medicine to supplement medical care in the USA? Is that how you want to be taken care of? (Remember how awful black-market back-room abortions were? Imagine an entire medical system based on that sort of thing.)

That's how things work in both Canada and the UK. It is ILLEGAL to pay for services outside of the government system. That's why so many people come to the USA for their care. That's the law in those places.

Certain parts of Canada are changing that now, and UK is looking in to changing that... which means that while NK is lauding the greatness of the single-payer system, the Canadian government is actually PRIVATIZING parts of the Canadian health system. Ditto for the UK. And Sweden, by the way. (Norway too, I think, but I need to double-check that.)

So while we're going socialist, the rest of the world is trying to find ways to privatize their health care.

Bottom line, though, in answer to your question: yes. If Obamacare passes and the government insurance denies me my care, I will NOT be able to legally go to the doctor and pay out of pocket.

Why? Because nationalized health care is as much about social engineering as it is about health care. (Moreso, really). It is about making sure that everything is fair. If I am denied care but have the ability to pay out of pocket, I am in a preferential position over the person who cannot afford to pay out of pocket. Such preferential treatment for me is "unfair" and a function of my wealth. Therefore, my ability to receive preferential, unfair treatment needs to be stopped. Thus, the only group that is permitted to pay for my medical care is the government... so that everything is fair for everyone.

There's a REASON for this madness.

Elliot

[NeedKarma]

These are individual decisions best left between doctor and patient['s family].

And that's exactly what would happens. What do you think is going to occur?

[NeedKarma]

If Obamacare passes and the government insurance denies me my care, I will NOT be able to legally go to the doctor and pay out of pocket.

Se, that's the mentality you have to get out of. You have grown up knowing that insurance companies deny health care all the time and you have to fight to get some care that has been denied by an insurance agent. You don't get denied in universal healthcare, I've never known anyone who has.

[inthebox]

Then why is it in this bill? What is the MOTIVE

That is like putting a section that says people should stop at red lights. There is no need for this section and it has been removed.


The politicians who wrote this bill are not like Nicholson's character in "A few good men,"
And blurt out "you can't handle the truth, - we need everyone to be DNR to keep costs under control!" ;)



G&P

[NeedKarma]

Then why is it in this bill? What is the MOTIVE

The motive is simple to understand. The universal healthcare system would now be your provider of healthcare i.e.. That's how the doctor gets paid, so those provisions lay out the procedure to follow for a doctor to keep up to date with a very ill patient.