Unversal Health Care FOR IRAQ but NOT FOR the USA?
Karl
astounded that Pres. Bush favors universal health care in IRAQ but NOT
here. I wanted to check this out, so I found the USAID 'Request for
Proposal' here at this link:
http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/web_health.pdf
The pertainant section is section C here:
"SECTION C - STATEMENT OF WORK
HEALTH SYSTEM STRENGTHENING IN A POST-CONFLICT IRAQ"
"The Objective of this contract is to help facilitate rapid, universal
health service delivery to the Iraqi population and strengthen the
overall health sector to ensure medium- to long-term viability. The
implementation of this program shall not take place until a permissive
environment exists and USAID instructs the contractor to proceed. See
special provision in Section H.15."
SOURCE : United States Agency for International Development ( USAID )
Request for Proposal (RFP) M/OP-03-8520
_______________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________
I can't get health coverage because of pre-existing conditions here in
the US and would LOVE universal health care HERE. Bush does FAVOR
universal health care...just for IRAQ!
It seems we alway seem to treat our former ENEMIES better than our own
citizens! Truthfully I hope they make the Iraqi Unversal System the
best in the world. It's just frustating that Americans die for lack of
care or post-poned care when we care do more!
Skeptic
policies.
"Karl" <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com...
DWood78828
>From: "Skeptic"
>
>Postwar reconstructive policies are not the same as long term societal
>policies.
They aren't? Is Iraq going to dismantle them after we pull out.
Denise
Jerome Bigge
>
>I can't get health coverage because of pre-existing conditions here in
>the US and would LOVE universal health care HERE. Bush does FAVOR
>universal health care...just for IRAQ!
>
>It seems we alway seem to treat our former ENEMIES better than our own
>citizens! Truthfully I hope they make the Iraqi Unversal System the
>best in the world. It's just frustating that Americans die for lack of
>care or post-poned care when we care do more!
In a word: "Politics". We badly need to look good to the Arab world.
As for the uninsured here in the US, what "threat" are they to anyone?
The Iraquis also have a lot of OIL that we want. Our American
dollars will pay for their universal health care system. Our own
uninsured lack the necessary "bargaining power" to get anything.
Jerome Bigge
Member of Muskegon Astronomical Society.
Author of the Warlady & Wartime series of SF
novels at "http://members.tripod.com/~jbigge
Herman Rubin
Jerome Bigge <jerb...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>On 5 Apr 2003 07:30:19 -0800, kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote:
>>I can't get health coverage because of pre-existing conditions here in
>>the US and would LOVE universal health care HERE. Bush does FAVOR
>>universal health care...just for IRAQ!
Does he? Or is it a stopgap, until they can get their
own system going.
Only a totalitarian would allow a government bureaucrat
to decide what health care a person gets.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
Karl
Universal Health Care System that Gearge Bush will build. Iraqi Oil
Money will pay and probably do a better job there than the mess we
have here!
Just tell me WHY DOES BUSH 'support Universal Care overseas' but here
at home that's Socialism to him? What are Conservative Republicans
Like George Bush Conservative-in-the-USA & Socialist-overseas?
I mean if he has real philosophical differences with Unversal Health
Care he SHOULD oppose it everywhere: USA, Mexico, England, AND IRAQ?
Could it be that Blue Cross or Aetna can't write insurance polices in
Iraq and the best chance of selling expensive drugs will be if some
Health Care System EXISTS to buy the drugs?
Jerome Bigge <jerb...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:<qs1u8v81p8u0h1uim...@4ax.com>...
Gretchen Evans
Yep, Bushie is asking for around $80 Billion to be spent to rebuild
Iraq... and based on the track record that will probably triple.
Yet the little ass totally ignores the huge numbers in the US that are
without insurance.
No real problem, though.. He's a one-termer for certain.
pixie
Gretchen Evans
Rubin) wrote:
>In article <qs1u8v81p8u0h1uim...@4ax.com>,
>Jerome Bigge <jerb...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>On 5 Apr 2003 07:30:19 -0800, kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote:
>
>
>>>I can't get health coverage because of pre-existing conditions here in
>>>the US and would LOVE universal health care HERE. Bush does FAVOR
>>>universal health care...just for IRAQ!
>
>Does he? Or is it a stopgap, until they can get their
>own system going.
>
>Only a totalitarian would allow a government bureaucrat
>to decide what health care a person gets.
Since the US is planning on paying for it do you really think that
anyone in Iraq will complain?
Besides that, Bushie apparently strongly favors a totalitarian form of
government... Look at what he's done to civil rights during his term
under the guise of 'Homeland Defense'. Another boondoggle to lay at
his doorstep.
pixie
pixie
Founding Father
"Gretchen Evans" <glev...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:umf09v8rnrij1li1j...@4ax.com...
Oh sure. Totalitarian governments are noted for letting people keep more of
their own money rather than taxing it away for its bureaucracy, trusting the
people to own guns, promoting freedom of religion, opposing racial
discrimination (like the University of Michigan's stealth quota system of
admissions) and reducing oppressive government regulations. The previous
administration did exactly the opposite, even going so far as to tax the
dead.
(If FDR were president after 9/11, he would have rounded up every single
Muslim, even American citizens, put them in concentration camps and
confiscated all their property.)
Founding Father
> Universal Health Care System that Gearge Bush will build. Iraqi Oil
> Money will pay and probably do a better job there than the mess we
> have here!
>
> Just tell me WHY DOES BUSH 'support Universal Care overseas' but here
> at home that's Socialism to him? What are Conservative Republicans
> Like George Bush Conservative-in-the-USA & Socialist-overseas?
>
> I mean if he has real philosophical differences with Unversal Health
> Care he SHOULD oppose it everywhere: USA, Mexico, England, AND IRAQ?
>
> Could it be that Blue Cross or Aetna can't write insurance polices in
> Iraq and the best chance of selling expensive drugs will be if some
> Health Care System EXISTS to buy the drugs?
You overlook the fact that Saddam imposed a heavily socialized economy after
he took power - one reason why Iraq went from a GDP of $9000 in 1979 to
$1000 in the latest figures (constant dollars).
We'll be lucky enough if they get the concept of voting (the Democrat run
precincts of Florida are still having problems :-). Trying to impose a
totally free market system at the same time is asking an awful lot.
Politically they are little children and may need a nanny state for a while.
Let's just hope they don't become liberals and never outgrow the need.
Founding Father
> citizens! Truthfully I hope they make the Iraqi Unversal System the
> best in the world. It's just frustating that Americans die for lack of
> care or post-poned care when we care do more!
You have data, perhaps, that more people in America die waiting for care
than other countries? I read some time ago that in the UK patients over 55
generally do not get kidney dialysis. Perhaps that's changed. As for
postponed care, aren't average wait times in many other countries with
universal care systems significantly longer than in the U.S.?
DWood78828
>You overlook the fact that Saddam imposed a heavily socialized economy after
>he took power - one reason why Iraq went from a GDP of $9000 in 1979 to
>$1000 in the latest figures (constant dollars).
No one is overlooking the type of economic state Saddam imposed.
>We'll be lucky enough if they get the concept of voting (the Democrat run
>precincts of Florida are still having problems :-). Trying to impose a
>totally free market system at the same time is asking an awful lot.
>Politically they are little children and may need a nanny state for a while.
>Let's just hope they don't become
>liberals and never outgrow the need.
Funny, I lived in Florida from 1980 to 2000. I never saw any Democratic run
precincts in Florida. Yes, there is a major problem with their antiquated
polling system, with their obsolete punch hole ballots. But they sure worked in
favor of little Bush. Maybe his little brother Je4b had something to do with
it.
Denise
amp_spamfree
You didn't bother to read the entire RFP did you.
What is it about "reestablishment" that you don't get. What is it
about "support and build on the existing public health system" that
you had problems with?
The RFP was designed to solicit administrative and logistic support to
repair, not replace, the current system of health care delivery in
Iraq. Obviously, this is consistent with the administrative policies
of the US across all aspects of the Iraqi situation and from what has
been publically said regarding the rebuilding of Iraq.
You latched on to the use of the term "universal" and assumed
CanadaCare?
Next time - READ first, then post.
Gretchen Evans
wrote:
Which might not have been a bad idea at all.
pixie
Karl
About waiting. We don't waiting in the US for anything. Alot of what
you hear about these long wait times is anecdotal. We overuse our
health care system here. When I was in the hospital for a blood clot.
I was tested day 1 which said I had a blood clot, later that day they
wanted another test to confirm the first, then Day 2 they wanted the
'gold-standard' of tests where they shot me full of die to again just
to confirm the clot. I saw the bill and the wasted money.
I don't go to the doctor as much as I should because of health
insurance issues. Preventative care is much cheaper than waiting for
someone to go critcal and have something major happen.
For example, MRIs are used everywhere for the most minor injuries.
This is a $600 + test! But the only want to do this test if you have
coverage.
I spoke to people from Canada and they love their system. People the
world love their unversal systems too. What we hear all the time is
the mantra 'socialized medicine'. But if can get to doctor on a
regular basis then little problem won't grow into bigger ones!
Karl
Yes I saw "reestablishment". But the US could whatever it wants to
in Iraq. The point I wanted to make is that if this Universal System
was so evil we won't want to impose it or even REPAIR it. We would
replace it?
What if we had a war with a communist country would you think we would
just repair that system? I think we would replace the whole system,
right?
I did READ first. I guess you have great health coverage?
(null)
Current analysis shows that the longer you are without health
insurance in the USA, the worse your outcomes. It is the length
of time without any insurance (including Medicaid) which
correlates best with bad outcomes, not the source of care
(government vs. private).
--
George Conklin, Durham, NC: Medicare For All Ages
If HMOs ran the post office, the AMA (American Mail Association)
would declare that getting mail was a privilege, not a right
and 43 million Americans would get no mail delivery.
(null)
TPM is full of comfortable providers whose interest is in
higher fees for themselves.
Karl
Postwar reconstruction policies??? What I'm saying if Universal
Health Care is a bad thing, which the Republican Party, the Health
Insurance Industry, The Pharmacuetical Industry, and most
conservatives say then why would strive to BUILD a UNIVERSAL HEALTH
CARE SYSTEM ANYWHERE. If that system is BAD you would avoid it.
Maybe here in the USA alot companies make ALOT of money and they want
to PROTECT their 'profit center' namely the US Health Care System.
Karl
You afraid of government bureacrat who gain little if you go or don't
go to the hospital? Or should you trust the health insurer who
profits if they deny you access? Better a sick person dies eh? Less
of a drain on their system!
Herman Rubin
>You afraid of government bureacrat who gain little if you go or don't
>go to the hospital? Or should you trust the health insurer who
>profits if they deny you access? Better a sick person dies eh? Less
>of a drain on their system!
The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
There are two main types; those who go by the book, and
cannot consider that the situation might not have been
considered by those who wrote the book; these can delay
care for long enough to be fatal. But the others are
those who are in it for the power to "do good for people",
and who delight in telling people what to do; these are
a curse on humanity, and they are the ones who are the
main preachers, social engineers, etc.
I have argued against the existence of the present prepaid
care, masquerading as "insurance"; it is not real insurance.
Set up MSA's, and you would not have 16% "uninsured", but
many more. Take off the low limits, and these will become
an important type of tax-free savings.
>> In article <qs1u8v81p8u0h1uim...@4ax.com>,
>> Jerome Bigge <jerb...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>> >On 5 Apr 2003 07:30:19 -0800, kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote:
>> >>I can't get health coverage because of pre-existing conditions here in
>> >>the US and would LOVE universal health care HERE. Bush does FAVOR
>> >>universal health care...just for IRAQ!
>> Does he? Or is it a stopgap, until they can get their
>> own system going.
>> Only a totalitarian would allow a government bureaucrat
>> to decide what health care a person gets.
(null)
Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>In article <911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>,
>Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) wrote in message
>news:<b6nh84$1a...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>...
>
>>You afraid of government bureacrat who gain little if you go or don't
>>go to the hospital? Or should you trust the health insurer who
>>profits if they deny you access? Better a sick person dies eh? Less
>>of a drain on their system!
>
>The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
>costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
>worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
Well, that has not happened. No one has kept costs down, and
there is no evidence that the extra we spend on health care has
resulted in better outcomes, just more procedures and more and
more tests to document what cannot be chanaged.
>There are two main types; those who go by the book, and
>cannot consider that the situation might not have been
>considered by those who wrote the book; these can delay
>care for long enough to be fatal.
Well, HMOs did delay high-dose chemotherapy for breast cancer,
and they were right to do so. And a good deal of cardiac surgery
ought to dropped, but no one has the guts to point out that it
adds only 3 months in 9 years to your life.
But the others are
>those who are in it for the power to "do good for people",
>and who delight in telling people what to do; these are
>a curse on humanity, and they are the ones who are the
>main preachers, social engineers, etc.
What about all the ranting and raving from the AMA that they
are in it 'for the patient,' and not for the money? Herman, you
don't like bureaucracy only if it is government. The rest you
seem to love. Why?
>I have argued against the existence of the present prepaid
>care, masquerading as "insurance"; it is not real insurance.
It is health care, right?
>Set up MSA's, and you would not have 16% "uninsured", but
>many more. Take off the low limits, and these will become
>an important type of tax-free savings.
But would not change health care, i.e. lower costs. Physicians
simply change what they want to earn, and we have to pay it.
Karl
"TPM" ???? what does that mean?
amp_spamfree
Go figure. Build a private sector insurance infrastructure?
> The point I wanted to make is that if this Universal System
> was so evil we won't want to impose it or even REPAIR it. We would
> replace it?
Who ever said "universality" was evil? and why do you capitalize it?
Maybe you are having a bit of a problem with the term? I'm all for
access. What is it about universal health care that you think makes
some people think it's evil?
> What if we had a war with a communist country would you think we would
> just repair that system? I think we would replace the whole system,
> right?
What system of care is there in Germany?
> I did READ first. I guess you have great health coverage?
Yeh - UK NHS - speaking of universality. You?
(null)
You are posting to tpm: talk.politics.medicine
Karl
Some people do in fact feel Universal Health care is evil. They
equate any Universal System ( there are MANY types ) with "Socialized
Medicine". People dwell on waiting for care, but we do that now. In
some cases waiting, especially for ROUTINE procedures is a good thing.
I waited for care for a shoulder injury and you know what the Doctor
was wrong because I needed was some Physical therapy!
About waiting. How many of you are older and remember the 1950s,
1960s, or early 1970s? I remember then, or at least the late 1960s
and early 1970s EVERYONE had health insurance OR health care was
affordable. Consequently, if you got sick or injured you went to the
Doctor or Hospital. My Mom got sick, with a MINOR ailment, and she
had TO WAIT FOR A HOSPITAL BED. She had Blue Cross/Blue Shield (and
the best plan they had). But she waited and it was OK.
Now lets place "universal health care" aside for a second. Lets say
the COuntry as a whole came into some money. Lets say we discovered a
POOL of oil that we could export everywhere and the way the government
diecided to use the money was to BUY health insurance from the private
sector for EVERYONE. Now everyone would have access. Guess what?
Alot of people would soon discover WHOO NOW I have to wait to have
that procedure done.
In my opinion, the reason we don't wait long for care in this country
is alot of people don't go to the doctor till a small problem becomes
a big problem! Since we perevent people from READY ACCESS by denying
health coverage or pushing people away from care because of
pre-existing conditions we free up availability for others who have
health coverage.
As for Germany I believe they have some sort of Universal Care and so
does the UK but the UK is, I believe alot closer to socialized
medicine. I think Germany may be be private sector, but to be honest
I haven't researched theirs. The one thing I hear is we here in the
USA have the last and only helath system of the INDUSTRIAL nations
that don't have some sort of Universal Health care. Now all the
UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS do vary. Most of these systems were
built upon the systems that were in place already. The UK is at one
end of the Spectrum and Australia's Health System I heard leans more
on the private sector. So Universal Health can be contructed many
ways.
It's in everyone interest to reform this. You have a heart attack or
you're hit by a car and you have no insurance hospitals aren't going
to just let you bleed to death in the emergency room parking lot. But
if that heart patient was seeing a doctor and could afford medication
to keep him healthier then MAYBE the hospital would not have to EAT a
huge hospital bill form a patient who is not able to pay a huge bill.
Forty percent...yes 40 PERCENT of personal bankruptcies in the USA are
from medical bills! Just remember those bills get paid....guess who
pays? You have health insurance? Well why do you think premiums are
so high. Just like Credit Cards they pass on the cost to you!
We can lower costs by giving access to care and drugs sooner.
(null)
There is an article forthcoming in a certain health affairs
magazine which will show that the longer a person is without
health insurance, the worse the outcome. Right now those of us
with insurance have to pay expenses of those who don't contribute
to the system while healthy, but then want care if and when they
get sick. Medicare for all Ages is the only way to go.
Founding Father
"DWood78828" <dwood...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20030407040020...@mb-cm.aol.com...
> >Subject: Re: Unversal Health Care FOR IRAQ but NOT FOR the USA?
> >From: "Founding Father"
>
> >precincts of Florida are still having problems :-). Trying to impose a
> >totally free market system at the same time is asking an awful lot.
> >Politically they are little children and may need a nanny state for a
while.
> >Let's just hope they don't become
>
> >liberals and never outgrow the need.
>
> Funny, I lived in Florida from 1980 to 2000. I never saw any Democratic
run
> precincts in Florida. Yes, there is a major problem with their antiquated
> polling system, with their obsolete punch hole ballots. But they sure
worked in
> favor of little Bush. Maybe his little brother Je4b had something to do
with
> it.
>
> Denise
>
I guess you never were in Dade County, Broward County or Palm Beach County -
all heavily Democrat. And in Florida, the counties are responsible for the
mechanics of elections, as is the case in many states. If it were a state
problem, one would expect problems in more counties than the three most
heavily Democrat.
Founding Father
"Karl" <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com...
> "Founding Father" <f...@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:<_E9ka.1572$FV4.1...@news.uswest.net>...
> > "Karl" <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com...
> > >
> > > It seems we alway seem to treat our former ENEMIES better than our own
> > > citizens! Truthfully I hope they make the Iraqi Unversal System the
> > > best in the world. It's just frustating that Americans die for lack of
> > > care or post-poned care when we care do more!
> >
> > You have data, perhaps, that more people in America die waiting for care
> > than other countries? I read some time ago that in the UK patients over
55
> > generally do not get kidney dialysis. Perhaps that's changed. As for
> > postponed care, aren't average wait times in many other countries with
> > universal care systems significantly longer than in the U.S.?
>
> About waiting. We don't waiting in the US for anything. Alot of what
> you hear about these long wait times is anecdotal. We overuse our
> health care system here. When I was in the hospital for a blood clot.
> I was tested day 1 which said I had a blood clot, later that day they
> wanted another test to confirm the first, then Day 2 they wanted the
> 'gold-standard' of tests where they shot me full of die to again just
> to confirm the clot. I saw the bill and the wasted money.
A lot of that is the result of the fear of malpractice suits. Introduce
meaningful tort reform and that will get better. The other problem, of
course, is that the consumer (the patient) doesn't pay the bill. If it were
coming out of the patient's pocket, they would be more attentive to such
things. As it is, it costs them nothing. A government run universal health
care system would, of course, make that much worse.
> I don't go to the doctor as much as I should because of health
> insurance issues. Preventative care is much cheaper than waiting for
> someone to go critcal and have something major happen.
I have read that recent studies indicate much so-called "preventive care" is
largely ineffective. Mammograms to screen for breast cancer is one notable
example.
> For example, MRIs are used everywhere for the most minor injuries.
> This is a $600 + test! But the only want to do this test if you have
> coverage.
Again, make the consumer pay the bill and such abuse will go away. And if
people choose to spend their own money (like so many are conned into doing
for all these non-invasive whole body screenings - and yes, I know they are
not covered by most insurance) then at least it's not imposing a burden on
the rest of us.
> I spoke to people from Canada and they love their system. People the
> world love their unversal systems too. What we hear all the time is
> the mantra 'socialized medicine'. But if can get to doctor on a
> regular basis then little problem won't grow into bigger ones!
Regular doctor visits - for most people - will do far less to prevent
disease than healthy living habits - regular exercise (more important than
losing weight), not smoking, moderate drinking, no risky sexual behavior,
etc. And those are largely free or even save money directly.
Founding Father
"(null)" <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote in message
news:3e932...@news.buzzardnews.com...
>
> There is an article forthcoming in a certain health affairs
> magazine which will show that the longer a person is without
> health insurance, the worse the outcome.
So does this study control for socio-economic and life style differences?
Most people who go without health insurance for long periods would be
expected to be near the bottom of the socio-economic ladder (irrespective of
any health care costs, which they rarely pay anyway). They would also be
expected to have less healthy life style habits.
> Right now those of us
> with insurance have to pay expenses of those who don't contribute
> to the system while healthy, but then want care if and when they
> get sick.
That's right - and it's not fair. Everyone should have to pay for their own
health care. We can pay for that by converting the Social Security and
Medicare taxes the working poor pay into health care premiums. For the
truly indigent, they should get some assistance for basic coverage, but not
Cadillac coverage.
> Medicare for all Ages is the only way to go.
Medicare is bankrupt. Why would any sane person want to force everyone into
a bankrupt system?
Founding Father
"Herman Rubin" <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
news:b6sj0u$g...@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
>
> The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
> costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
> worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
I totally disagree. Were that the case, Medicare would not be bankrupt.
The bureaucrat knows well that behind him is the authoritarian power to
extract whatever the system costs from the people, even against their will.
In many cases the bureaucrat gains power by having a larger budget to
administer.
As you said, they don't have to worry about being fired. But insurance
workers, including contracted physicians ARE fired for exceeding cost limits
and rewarded for meeting them.
Either system is wrong. The consumer should be responsible for cost
control, and the only way to make that happen is make the consumer bear the
cost. The old 80-20 rule of the Blues was more effective than the system we
have now. If the doctor ordered an optional $1000 CAT scan the patient
would pay $200 out of pocket under the old system. Today, in most cases
they pay nothing or an insignificant co-pay.
Founding Father
Once again your irrational hatred of physicians blinds you to reality.
Doctors' incomes have fallen precipitously in recent years. If they had the
control you think, that would not be the case.
amp_spamfree
Who? Do you differentiate between universal access and single-payer
systems, or are they interchangeable in your mind? Perhaps it is the
term UC being used to define SP systems that has lead to your
(mis)impressions.
> They
> equate any Universal System ( there are MANY types ) with "Socialized
> Medicine".
No, "they" do not. Those of us who are informed equate tax based
single payer with socialization of medical care financing.
> People dwell on waiting for care, but we do that now.
I'm going to make the assumption the "we" is a US "we". How long do
"we" wait for an MRI? What is the typical wait for emergency room
services? What is the lag time between primary care referral and
actual specialist care visit?
I'll give you a clue - two days, 51 - 67 minutes, and two weeks in the
"we" country; 6 months, 4 hours and 3 months in my country.
>In
> some cases waiting, especially for ROUTINE procedures is a good thing.
Sure - I'll wait for that x-ray - maybe my arm will heal before then
and I won't need it. Waiting for routine PROCEDURES when they are
medically indicated is rarely good medicine. In fact, YOU even say
that at the end of your post:
"We can lower costs by giving access to care and drugs sooner."
So, which is it - waiting is good or quick access is good?
> I waited for care for a shoulder injury and you know what the Doctor
> was wrong because I needed was some Physical therapy!
Delaying care seeking is NOT the same as delaying care delivery once
care is sought.
> About waiting. How many of you are older and remember the 1950s,
> 1960s, or early 1970s? I remember then, or at least the late 1960s
> and early 1970s EVERYONE had health insurance OR health care was
> affordable. Consequently, if you got sick or injured you went to the
> Doctor or Hospital. My Mom got sick, with a MINOR ailment, and she
> had TO WAIT FOR A HOSPITAL BED. She had Blue Cross/Blue Shield (and
> the best plan they had). But she waited and it was OK.
Anecdotes are rarely convincing data - especially in this NG.
> Now lets place "universal health care" aside for a second. Lets say
> the COuntry as a whole came into some money. Lets say we discovered a
> POOL of oil that we could export everywhere and the way the government
> diecided to use the money was to BUY health insurance from the private
> sector for EVERYONE. Now everyone would have access. Guess what?
> Alot of people would soon discover WHOO NOW I have to wait to have
> that procedure done.
How did you figure this out? If in fact the demand increases because
of lower barrier to access, one would expect that the market should
expand to meet that need. Obviously, with an unending pool of money,
everyone will be clamouring to get sick.
BTW, those who argue in favour of universal access have decried that
this will not happen. In part, they are right, but then again,
rationing is a given in any case where resources are constrained.
> In my opinion, the reason we don't wait long for care in this country
> is alot of people don't go to the doctor till a small problem becomes
> a big problem!
It's fine and dandy that you have an opinion, though I would be
interested in the data underlying your opinion.
> Since we perevent people from READY ACCESS by denying
> health coverage or pushing people away from care because of
> pre-existing conditions we free up availability for others who have
> health coverage.
Now you lost me - what exactly is "ready access" and how is this
related to denial of coverage or pre-existing conditions? Now
reconcile this with the US insurance market under present regulations
(start with OBRA).
> As for Germany I believe they have some sort of Universal Care
No, they do NOT have universal care - they have universal insurance.
The German system is designed on a health insurance model - not a
socialized delivery model. Please, do not "believe" things - if you
are unsure, search them out.
> and so
> does the UK but the UK is, I believe alot closer to socialized
> medicine.
The UK system of care delivery is NOT similar to the German system of
care. The operation of NHS Trusts is compeltely different than the
German Krankenkasse. These are just basic introductory facts that
anyone with a modicum of knowledge of health care (internationally)
knows. This isn't the rocket science level data or analysis.
The UK system of medical care financing is NOT similar to the German
system of medical care financing. In fact, the German system of
financing shares a lot of similarities with the US system. The UK
system shares more with the Swedish method - Trusts and County
Councils as rationing agents.
> I think Germany may be be private sector, but to be honest
> I haven't researched theirs.
Bingo - and until you bring your level of knowledge up past innuendo
and supposition, your opinions add no value.
> The one thing I hear is we here in the
> USA have the last and only helath system of the INDUSTRIAL nations
> that don't have some sort of Universal Health care.
And you hear this from the lunatics in Washington? What do you think
Medicare is? I'd say it's some sort of "universal" care for the
elderly. What is Medicaid if not universal for those below the
"poverty" line? What is BC/BS but universal for its policy holders?
The fact that you can choose which plan you want hardly makes it "un"
universal. Or are you implying that the US is the only country not
providing "universal" meaning all aspects of care? Canada doesn't
provide drug coverage universally, nor dental or eye care. Does that
make the Canada system "un" universal?
> Now all the
> UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS do vary. Most of these systems were
> built upon the systems that were in place already.
UK's NHS was designed in 1948 and totally redesigned in the early
70's. As of 2001, it is in the process of being redesigned once more.
> The UK is at one
> end of the Spectrum and Australia's Health System I heard leans more
> on the private sector. So Universal Health can be contructed many
> ways.
Obviously you are having an issue differentiating between the delivery
of care and the financing of care. The NHS is not at one end of the
spectrum - the Swedish system is generally considered to be the most
"socialized" in both financing and delivery. 30% of health care in
Australia is delivered and funded privately. Where would you put
Canada? Where do you think the US falls (private versus public
funding)?
> It's in everyone interest to reform this.
Why?
> You have a heart attack or
> you're hit by a car and you have no insurance
Why don't you have insurance? It's a fair question. Explain why you
wouldn't have insurance. Choice, low income, illegal immigrant, what?
> hospitals aren't going
> to just let you bleed to death in the emergency room parking lot.
How about that.
> But
> if that heart patient was seeing a doctor and could afford medication
> to keep him healthier then MAYBE the hospital would not have to EAT a
> huge hospital bill form a patient who is not able to pay a huge bill.
> Forty percent...yes 40 PERCENT of personal bankruptcies in the USA are
> from medical bills!
Not without a reference. I've seen the lay press articles and their
data are quite suspect.
> Just remember those bills get paid....guess who
> pays? You have health insurance? Well why do you think premiums are
> so high. Just like Credit Cards they pass on the cost to you!
Bad debt - OK, I agree. How is eliminating bad debt going to change
resource utilization and cost?
> We can lower costs by giving access to care and drugs sooner.
Can we now. Does that require that the finacing or delivery of care
model be changed? Or does it require both?
I'm all for providing access to health insurance on an equitable and
open basis. I'd even advocate that employers in the private sector be
OBLIGATED to provide at least a minimum of contribtion, sufficient for
basic levels of care (whatever those are). I also would suggest that
individuals be held responsible for personal actions impacting on
health. And I wouldn't allow anyone, nada, zero, zip, to opt out and
in no case would I allow tax-based financing EXCEPT in bonafide cases
of financial need. What the system requires is plenty of choices on
benefit design and coverage limits, plenty of competition between
programs, plans, delivery parameters, and prices; plenty of
competition between providers, lots of market dynamics...
What a system of care doesn't need is centralized decisionmaking one
size fits all budget constrained inefficient bureaucracy based on
redistribution of income without personal responsibility.
Thanks for playing - but in all the arrogance I can muster - you are
way out of your league here.
(null)
Founding Father <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>"(null)" <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote in message
>news:3e91f...@news.buzzardnews.com...
>> In article <b6sj0u$g...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>> Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>> >Set up MSA's, and you would not have 16% "uninsured", but
>> >many more. Take off the low limits, and these will become
>> >an important type of tax-free savings.
>>
>> But would not change health care, i.e. lower costs. Physicians
>> simply change what they want to earn, and we have to pay it.
>
>Once again your irrational hatred of physicians blinds you to reality.
Once again stupid comments dominate irrational postings by
people too ashamed of their postings to admit their real names,
by first class cowards like you, Oreck amp and all the other
shame-faced posters like you.
And the liars who post that the article in Health Affairs
documenting the fact I reported above is just an 'editorial.' Go
write to Health Affairs and I am tired of responding to 10th
graders posting as physicians.
(null)
Founding Father <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>"Herman Rubin" <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
>news:b6sj0u$g...@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
>>
>> The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
>> costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
>> worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
>
>I totally disagree. Were that the case, Medicare would not be bankrupt.
Herman is right that bureaucrats crave power and control. But
he is wrong to leave out physicians as bureaucrats who are
physicians craving power over patients and furthermore getting
away with by claiming that their power is for the benefit of the
patient, the biggest lie in medicine.
Physicians marching in Raleigh, NC, yesterday, tried to fool
the public by saying that their selfish interests are all for the
benefit of the patient. We patients need to stop accepting such
fake information as fact.
(null)
That's right. Once more the big lie: if physicians can do
anything they want, then all will be well. Let patients pay
bills directly--for only one reason: you can raise your fees
sky high and sniker at the results.
We already spend twice as much as the industrialized nation
average, and we have nothing to show for it but so-so and even
bad results (37th actually) and overpaid physicians.
(null)
Founding Father <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>
>"(null)" <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote in message
>news:3e932...@news.buzzardnews.com...
>>
>> There is an article forthcoming in a certain health affairs
>> magazine which will show that the longer a person is without
>> health insurance, the worse the outcome.
>
>So does this study control for socio-economic and life style differences?
>Most people who go without health insurance for long periods would be
>expected to be near the bottom of the socio-economic ladder (irrespective of
>any health care costs, which they rarely pay anyway). They would also be
>expected to have less healthy life style habits.
>
>> Right now those of us
>> with insurance have to pay expenses of those who don't contribute
>> to the system while healthy, but then want care if and when they
>> get sick.
>
>That's right - and it's not fair. Everyone should have to pay for their own
>health care. We can pay for that by converting the Social Security and
>Medicare taxes the working poor pay into health care premiums. For the
>truly indigent, they should get some assistance for basic coverage, but not
>Cadillac coverage.
>
>> Medicare for all Ages is the only way to go.
>
>Medicare is bankrupt. Why would any sane person want to force everyone into
>a bankrupt system?
>
Medicare is not bankrupt. Your lies are.
Gretchen Evans
>In article <911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>,
>Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message
>>news:<1192abe3.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>>> kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message
>>news:<911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>>> > amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message
>>news:<1192abe3.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>>> > > kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message
>>news:<911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>>> > > > I saw Pres. Clinton and Sen. Dole on 60 Minutes last night and was
>>> > > > astounded that Pres. Bush favors universal health care in IRAQ but NOT
>>> > > > here. I wanted to check this out, so I found the USAID 'Request for
>>> > > > Proposal' here at this link:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > http://www.usaid.gov/iraq/pdf/web_health.pdf
>>> > > > REMAINDER SNIPPED >>> >> >
>
>
> There is an article forthcoming in a certain health affairs
>magazine which will show that the longer a person is without
>health insurance, the worse the outcome. Right now those of us
>with insurance have to pay expenses of those who don't contribute
>to the system while healthy, but then want care if and when they
>get sick. Medicare for all Ages is the only way to go.
Just what magazine, Georgie? Or don't you think that we can
comprehend a citation?
So typical... Or could the 'magazine' be the "Conklin Journal of
Irrational Healthcare"
Pixie
Gretchen Evans
wrote:
>
>"(null)" <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote in message
>news:3e932...@news.buzzardnews.com...
>>
>> There is an article forthcoming in a certain health affairs
>> magazine which will show that the longer a person is without
>> health insurance, the worse the outcome.
>
>So does this study control for socio-economic and life style differences?
>Most people who go without health insurance for long periods would be
>expected to be near the bottom of the socio-economic ladder (irrespective of
>any health care costs, which they rarely pay anyway). They would also be
>expected to have less healthy life style habits.
>
>> Right now those of us
>> with insurance have to pay expenses of those who don't contribute
>> to the system while healthy, but then want care if and when they
>> get sick.
>
>That's right - and it's not fair. Everyone should have to pay for their own
>health care. We can pay for that by converting the Social Security and
>Medicare taxes the working poor pay into health care premiums. For the
>truly indigent, they should get some assistance for basic coverage, but not
>Cadillac coverage.
>
>> Medicare for all Ages is the only way to go.
>
>Medicare is bankrupt. Why would any sane person want to force everyone into
>a bankrupt system?
>
No, Medicare is not 'bankrupt' by ANY definition of the word. But
that's a subject for a different discussion.
You asked, 'why would any sane person.........? But forgot that you
were dealing with Georgie. There's your answer.
pixie
Karl
my opnions so please go away because "I" am_spamfree knows best!
First let me tell you I have been denied coverage because I take a
blood thinner. I haven't really been ill since 1987. I'm not
counting when I injured my arm. The first the Doctor wanted to do was
surgery, but when the insurance issue came up, the Doctor decided that
physcical therapy was a good idea. And you know what it was that
worked great. He thought I had torn something. Waiting is good if
you are forced to get that second opinion, most insurance providers
require it anyway. Waiting is bad if obiviously you have a broken arm
or are having a heart attack. Are you telling me someone shows up a
the hospital in Canada or Germany or England and they tell them to
leave because they can't set their braken arm? That's hard to
swallow.
I think we overtest here. Sometimes it has to be self-defense
medicine to guard against lawsuits. Then you have patients clamoring
for some test and the Doctor gives the OK. You have to wonder how
many of these test are necessary?
I don't see how you fix that. Maybe have deductibles on certain
diagnostics? But we need "ready access" to routine health care. By
'ready access' I mean people can see a Doctor when they need to
without worrying about affording it. It's like when you have an HMO
or PPO and you have that $10 or $20 co-pay yo are more likely to go to
the Doctor. Maybe you don't have the $150 or $200 to pay the Doctor,
some people do live pay to pay and don't have alot of cash.
Now did you say you want to FORCE or mandate through law that
employers pick up the tab for workers? Conservatives hate that idea
and you always hear how it will destroy businesses. They do have a
point if we don't somehow figure out a way to control cost and allow
businesses to purchase insurance the way bigger organiztions and
corporations do it in large pools. Bush actually is proposing
"Association Health Plans" to make it easier for people and small
businesses to buy coverage at group rates.
Now what you say about the market filling the need if say everyone had
coverage. Ever take an economics class. Ever hear of inelastic
demand and elastic demand. Some things will decrease in supply and
increase in deamnd when prices decline. For example, wheat prices
collapse then a farmer might not even waste his time harvesting the
wheat or maybe he uses it for cattle feed, and the supply available is
decreased because he can't make a profit. And the opposite occurs
too, he'll plant more wheat if he sees prices increase.
But some things like prescription drugs aren't like that, at least
totally. If prices for a cancer drug increase will demand fall? Not
really. People will do what they have to to pay for it. Now if
prices skyrocket of course they won't be able to find the money to pay
for it. But supplies are not as controlled by price in some
instances.
Medical services can't be grown over night. It takes years to train
doctors and nurses. Hospitals are long-term and huge projects to
construct.
I never said we should abolish our system and move to something like
what they have in England. And what Germany has sounds great.
What we need is help be people get access to care that they will be
able to use iit to prevent illness.
"Anecdotes are rarely convincing data - especially in this NG." What
the heck is that about? Are you 'amp' the guardian here?
"No, "they" do not. Those of us who are informed equate tax based
single payer with socialization of medical care financing." I by
informed, you mean 'those who know better'? Please, grow up we have
opinions....they are different, OK?
I want to able to apply for health coverage and be accepted! I don't
want to find out oh yeah we will sell you insurance and like $1000 a
month just for me. Arizona Blue Cross told me that. They also told me
if I stopped taking my Coumadin for 10 years and I didn't die THEN
they could sell me insurance at the regular rates. They rejected me
because I take Coumadin. Oh sorry, that's an ANECDOTE? So that
doesn't count?
What country are you from you wait 6 months to great treatment? I'm
just curious, not trying to mean or anything.
"Bingo - and until you bring your level of knowledge up past innuendo
and supposition, your opinions add no value." If my opinions have NO
value to you then why do read them and RESPOND?
"Can we now. Does that require that the finacing or delivery of care
> model be changed? Or does it require both?
>
> I'm all for providing access to health insurance on an equitable and
> open basis. I'd even advocate that employers in the private sector be
> OBLIGATED to provide at least a minimum of contribtion, sufficient for
> basic levels of care (whatever those are). I also would suggest that
> individuals be held responsible for personal actions impacting on
> health. And I wouldn't allow anyone, nada, zero, zip, to opt out and
> in no case would I allow tax-based financing EXCEPT in bonafide cases
> of financial need. What the system requires is plenty of choices on
> benefit design and coverage limits, plenty of competition between
> programs, plans, delivery parameters, and prices; plenty of
> competition between providers, lots of market dynamics...
>
Here you confuse me. You want to force people to have coverage?
Whether by having an employer pay for all or part. Or require us all
to buy coverage. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. That's what I meant
about the whole bad debt issue with unpaid medical bills. Even the
lower income people can pay SOMETHING towards the system and their
health care. When you say the system requires plenty of choices...I
can live with that. But what about someone priced out of the market?
Are you going to support a system subsidizes a policiy for a poorer
person or a person with a genuine health problem that inflates the
price of his or her insurance? Are you going support allowing every
one of say a certain age to buy coverage for the same price? (like if
you and I were in the same large insurance group...say we both worked
for the same large company are rates would be the same ) Now I can see
doing alot to get people from abusing their health by smoking or
taking illegal drugs, etc. But you would have to somehow get people
to change behavior maybe through sin-taxes on tobacco or
bacon...whatever.
> What a system of care doesn't need is centralized decisionmaking one
> size fits all budget constrained inefficient bureaucracy based on
> redistribution of income without personal responsibility.
>
> Thanks for playing - but in all the arrogance I can muster - you are
> way out of your league here.
As for 'playing' cut the arrogant crap. You have NOW idea of the
league I'm in. Just because I have trouble finding insurance coverage
doesn't mean I'm some poor schmuck. Trust me. You get a problem with
your health...and you will most likely...and you will find that our
system of health care here in the USA is the best but it will deny you
access if it can.
If you feel I'm out of YOUR LEAGUE? Please don't strain yourself and
type to much you might strain a finger muscle. Just sit back. And
breath deep and move right along to the next NG post.
I don't have to prove ever point by point issue with you as if I was
in court. What is your problem. You don't like what I wrote? I feel
your pain! :) Really take it easy. You have points to make VIOLA!
Great. I welcome any and all discussion. You feel that I am not in
your league then why do stoop down and respond? Don't flatter
yourself. This is all about disussion, debate, points of view, and
discovering things you don't know.
All I want is health insurance. All I want is to be able to move to
another state and buy heath insurance. All I want is to pay my way.
I just need help getting in to the system. I don't give a damn what
kind of system either, single-payer, a collection of private
companies, or some other system I can't even imagine. We certainly
have to figure a way to control costs. We have to look at the way
Drugs are pushed on us. (Diarectics are a cheaper and sometimes more
effective for blood pressure than more costly and newer drugs-)
And don't forget Health Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, and large
Hospital Health Care Chains aren't alturisitic. Remember the
California Electricity debacle? You had Enron manipulating the system
and sending power back and forth to Nevada and other Western States
then reselling it back to California to drive up prices. Health
Insurers, Drug Companies, and their like can do the same. Sen Bill
Frist's family, the Majority leader, owns a large health care provider
system and they have been in the news about settlements they made with
Medicare for services not rendered.
You have this deluded idea about your importance! Get OVER IT, move
on! But your post was a gas I must say! :) It's like talking a
lawyer.
Just chill out. You don't want to give yourself a heart attack! I
just hope you have good coverage if you do!
Really take it easy...Who do you think you are the DEFENDER OF
NEWSGROUPS? Just relax and ignore my post if it strikes a nerve.
Have a nice day :)
DWood78828
>From: "Founding Father"
>I guess you never were in Dade County, Broward County or Palm Beach County -
>all heavily Democrat. And in Florida, the counties are responsible for the
>mechanics of elections, as is the case in many states. If it were a state
>problem, one would expect
>problems in more counties than the three most
>heavily Democrat.
Yes, I've been in all three counties. And I lived on the Southwest portion of
the state, which was heavily Republican. And who did many of the same things
you accuse the three demoncratic counties of doing-campaigning too close to the
polling place, hanging chads complaints, especially when a democrat won, etc,
etc.
The only problem with little Bush's run in Florida, was that blatant
mishandling of voting problems. And as you pointed out, counties are
responsible for voting policies and equipment. Funny, I lived in one county
that used punch hole ballots and another that used machines. Guess which one
had the most mistakes and errors?
Denise
(null)
No, the paper won a prize and will be forthcoming in a journal.
When it is released, I'll be glad to post the reference, but the
methods are far beyond your comprehension. You couldn't even get
past the first line.
>Pixie
amp_spamfree
> my opnions so please go away because "I" am_spamfree knows best!
>
> First let me tell you I have been denied coverage because I take a
> blood thinner. I haven't really been ill since 1987.
So now the vested interest comes out. You take this much too
personally.
> I'm not
> counting when I injured my arm. The first the Doctor wanted to do was
> surgery, but when the insurance issue came up, the Doctor decided that
> physcical therapy was a good idea. And you know what it was that
> worked great. He thought I had torn something. Waiting is good if
> you are forced to get that second opinion, most insurance providers
> require it anyway. Waiting is bad if obiviously you have a broken arm
> or are having a heart attack. Are you telling me someone shows up a
> the hospital in Canada or Germany or England and they tell them to
> leave because they can't set their braken arm?
In England. Two cases in a local community hospital (2002) where no
x-ray was taken to determine if there was a fracture. One was a small
child. Now that is what sucks. You want anecdote, you got it.
> That's hard to
> swallow.
Well, swallow.
> I think we overtest here. Sometimes it has to be self-defense
> medicine to guard against lawsuits. Then you have patients clamoring
> for some test and the Doctor gives the OK. You have to wonder how
> many of these test are necessary?
You argue that there isn't enough access and now you are arguing there
is too much? Please, stay focused.
> I don't see how you fix that. Maybe have deductibles on certain
> diagnostics? But we need "ready access" to routine health care. By
> 'ready access' I mean people can see a Doctor when they need to
> without worrying about affording it. It's like when you have an HMO
> or PPO and you have that $10 or $20 co-pay yo are more likely to go to
> the Doctor. Maybe you don't have the $150 or $200 to pay the Doctor,
> some people do live pay to pay and don't have alot of cash.
You waver between fiancing and delivery. What is it you really want?
Access to free care or access to reasonably priced health "insurance"?
> Now did you say you want to FORCE or mandate through law that
> employers pick up the tab for workers? Conservatives hate that idea
> and you always hear how it will destroy businesses.
It is an expensive alternative for small business. It is already what
bih business is doing. Conservatives do NOT hate the idea - I suspect
most conservatives dislike legislating competitive advantage. The tax
burden on small business is already fairly steep so I can imagine that
there's some push back on another "tax".
>They do have a
> point if we don't somehow figure out a way to control cost and allow
> businesses to purchase insurance the way bigger organiztions and
> corporations do it in large pools.
Who says they can't?
> Bush actually is proposing
> "Association Health Plans" to make it easier for people and small
> businesses to buy coverage at group rates.
There are already a variety of vehicles and products offered for small
business and individuals to take advantage of more competitive rates
through group purchasing. Providing incentives for more insurers to
do this is an option that works within the current delivery system.
> Now what you say about the market filling the need if say everyone had
> coverage. Ever take an economics class.
Ever taught a graduate course in health economics?
> Ever hear of inelastic
> demand and elastic demand.
Let me ask you two very simple economics questions - in a static
model, how does one calculate the point elasticity of demand and once
characterized, does the elasticity stay constant over the range of the
function?
> Some things will decrease in supply and
> increase in deamnd when prices decline. For example, wheat prices
> collapse then a farmer might not even waste his time harvesting the
> wheat or maybe he uses it for cattle feed, and the supply available is
> decreased because he can't make a profit.
LOL
> And the opposite occurs
> too, he'll plant more wheat if he sees prices increase.
> But some things like prescription drugs aren't like that, at least
> totally. If prices for a cancer drug increase will demand fall? Not
> really. People will do what they have to to pay for it. Now if
> prices skyrocket of course they won't be able to find the money to pay
> for it. But supplies are not as controlled by price in some
> instances.
And this is a bad thing in your mind? Let me ask you - is your
Coumadin the same as a bushel of wheat?
> Medical services can't be grown over night. It takes years to train
> doctors and nurses. Hospitals are long-term and huge projects to
> construct.
So, your point is?
> I never said we should abolish our system
Yes you did - you want "universal" whatever in financing and delivery.
> and move to something like
> what they have in England. And what Germany has sounds great.
What Germany has is not much different than what the US has - and
along with it the same kinds of problems and pressures.
> What we need is help be people get access to care that they will be
> able to use iit to prevent illness.
And with few exceptions, they do.
> "Anecdotes are rarely convincing data - especially in this NG." What
> the heck is that about? Are you 'amp' the guardian here?
The only thing I guard is what shows up in my newsreader. Georgy is
our anecdote King, Denise has snippets of historical anecdotes, Ryan
has the single continuous ER anecdote. I don't do anecdote except
when forced and certainly understand that the plural of anecdote is
not data.
> "No, "they" do not. Those of us who are informed equate tax based
> single payer with socialization of medical care financing." I by
> informed, you mean 'those who know better'? Please, grow up we have
> opinions....they are different, OK?
Informed opinions are fine - uninformed, gross generalizations, or
worse, op-ed page snippets as data, are my pet peeve. I'm entitlted.
> I want to able to apply for health coverage and be accepted! I don't
> want to find out oh yeah we will sell you insurance and like $1000 a
> month just for me.
So you DO have access, you just don't like the price. You weren't
refused insurance, you were refused the opportunity to take MY risk
exposure and apply it to YOUR situation. You wanted ME to pay part of
YOUR freight.
> Arizona Blue Cross told me that. They also told me
> if I stopped taking my Coumadin for 10 years and I didn't die THEN
> they could sell me insurance at the regular rates. They rejected me
> because I take Coumadin. Oh sorry, that's an ANECDOTE? So that
> doesn't count?
They didn't reject you - they priced your policy according to your
risk. Do you honestly believe that a 16 year old with three tickets
and two accidents should get the same car insurance rate as a middle
age mother who only drives the kids to soccer practice?
> What country are you from you wait 6 months to great treatment? I'm
> just curious, not trying to mean or anything.
Here is a link to the waiting lists at the NHS.
http://www.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes/
Isn't it amazing that the government is REQUIRED by law to publish
these lists quarterly?
> "Bingo - and until you bring your level of knowledge up past innuendo
> and supposition, your opinions add no value." If my opinions have NO
> value to you then why do read them and RESPOND?
I call it finger exercise.
> "Can we now. Does that require that the finacing or delivery of care
> > model be changed? Or does it require both?
> >
> > I'm all for providing access to health insurance on an equitable and
> > open basis. I'd even advocate that employers in the private sector be
> > OBLIGATED to provide at least a minimum of contribtion, sufficient for
> > basic levels of care (whatever those are). I also would suggest that
> > individuals be held responsible for personal actions impacting on
> > health. And I wouldn't allow anyone, nada, zero, zip, to opt out and
> > in no case would I allow tax-based financing EXCEPT in bonafide cases
> > of financial need. What the system requires is plenty of choices on
> > benefit design and coverage limits, plenty of competition between
> > programs, plans, delivery parameters, and prices; plenty of
> > competition between providers, lots of market dynamics...
> >
> Here you confuse me. You want to force people to have coverage?
Yep. No freeloaders. That is how the German system works. And
premiums are based on age, gender, and maybe some health factors
(personal controllables perhaps) but NOT income.
> Whether by having an employer pay for all or part. Or require us all
> to buy coverage. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. That's what I meant
> about the whole bad debt issue with unpaid medical bills. Even the
> lower income people can pay SOMETHING towards the system and their
> health care. When you say the system requires plenty of choices...I
> can live with that. But what about someone priced out of the market?
"Priced" out of the market? I'm sorry, but $1000 per month with an
annual income of $50,000 hardly qualifies for being priced out of the
market. It may mean you need to give up a few things - no more SUV,
no 4 bedroom house, no vacations in Vegas.
> Are you going to support a system subsidizes a policiy for a poorer
> person
Medicaid already exists.
> or a person with a genuine health problem that inflates the
> price of his or her insurance?
I am compassionate - but I would expect that genuine is subject to an
interesting interpretation. I would be against subsidizing higher
premiums for someone who smokes, for example.
> Are you going support allowing every
> one of say a certain age to buy coverage for the same price? (like if
> you and I were in the same large insurance group...say we both worked
> for the same large company are rates would be the same )
It would be advantageous for those of equal risk to purchase
equivalent coverage at the same relative cost.
> Now I can see
> doing alot to get people from abusing their health by smoking or
> taking illegal drugs, etc. But you would have to somehow get people
> to change behavior maybe through sin-taxes on tobacco or
> bacon...whatever.
That hasn't worked very well in Canada. I like the idea of carrots
instead of sticks. In the UK there is an interesting approach to
pricing in the automobile insurance market - there's a standard price
and then for every year of claim free driving you get a discount.
> > What a system of care doesn't need is centralized decisionmaking one
> > size fits all budget constrained inefficient bureaucracy based on
> > redistribution of income without personal responsibility.
> >
> > Thanks for playing - but in all the arrogance I can muster - you are
> > way out of your league here.
>
>
> As for 'playing' cut the arrogant crap. You have NOW idea of the
> league I'm in.
> Just because I have trouble finding insurance coverage
> doesn't mean I'm some poor schmuck.
You are inconsitent, you ramble, and you have admitted to not making
an effort to become informed yet you rant off on all that is wrong
supporting it with an anecdote.
At the begining of the thread, you said this:
"First let me tell you I have been denied coverage because I take a
blood thinner. I haven't really been ill since 1987."
And now you admit having "trouble" finding health insurance. Do you
have health insurance coverage now?
> Trust me. You get a problem with
> your health...and you will most likely...and you will find that our
> system of health care here in the USA is the best but it will deny you
> access if it can.
Another grandiose generalization. In the UK, we have a better
solution - we don't deny coverage and we don't deny access - we just
qualify access to mean access to a waiting list.
Do you know that a group of UK seniors SUED the UK NHS (actually the
government) to force the UK to abide by EC regulations regarding
access to care? And they WON. The joke now is that UK's newest
export product is sick seniors looking for surgery.
> If you feel I'm out of YOUR LEAGUE? Please don't strain yourself and
> type to much you might strain a finger muscle. Just sit back. And
> breath deep and move right along to the next NG post.
Thanks - I'll consider your advice.
> I don't have to prove ever point by point issue with you as if I was
> in court.
Fine - if your threshold of evidence for conclusions is because you
believe it to be true - great. I find it to be a very lazy approach.
You have access to the internet, so if you want to post about how
great "universal" care is in Europe, perhaps you could have taken a
moment to find out what it really is.
> What is your problem. You don't like what I wrote? I feel
> your pain! :) Really take it easy. You have points to make VIOLA!
> Great. I welcome any and all discussion. You feel that I am not in
> your league then why do stoop down and respond? Don't flatter
> yourself. This is all about disussion, debate, points of view, and
> discovering things you don't know.
Perhaps you now have discovered something you don't know?
You said that "...And what Germany has sounds great." Implies, to me
at least, that you did learn something, considering you originally
wrote "As for Germany I believe they have some sort of Universal Care
and so does the UK but the UK is, I believe alot closer to socialized
medicine. I think Germany may be be private sector, but to be honest
I haven't researched theirs."
> All I want is health insurance. All I want is to be able to move to
> another state and buy heath insurance. All I want is to pay my way.
$1,000 a month was offered to you.
> I just need help getting in to the system.
http://info.insure.com/health/highriskpool.html
> I don't give a damn what
> kind of system either, single-payer, a collection of private
> companies, or some other system I can't even imagine.
You want others to pay for your risk. The reason why the German
system works is that everyone pays into the system at the approximate
same rate from cradle to grave - so whatever happens down the road is
truly a shared risk. Your in and out of the insurance market, buying
it when you think you need it and not buying it when you don't, is
dishonest.
> We certainly
> have to figure a way to control costs.
Why? Do you have any evidence to suggest that 15% GDP spend is a bad
thing?
> We have to look at the way
> Drugs are pushed on us. (Diarectics are a cheaper and sometimes more
> effective for blood pressure than more costly and newer drugs-)
Diuretics CAN be the most appropriate first-line therapy, and often
are. Of course, hypokalemia can be a problem...and it doesn't do much
for some folks...
Do you know that aspirin is a cheaper alternative to your
Coumadin...what do you think about that?
> And don't forget Health Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, and large
> Hospital Health Care Chains aren't alturisitic.
Nor should they be. GM, Pepsicola, and Safeway aren't either.
> Remember the
> California Electricity debacle? You had Enron manipulating the system
> and sending power back and forth to Nevada and other Western States
> then reselling it back to California to drive up prices. Health
> Insurers, Drug Companies, and their like can do the same. Sen Bill
> Frist's family, the Majority leader, owns a large health care provider
> system and they have been in the news about settlements they made with
> Medicare for services not rendered.
Fraud is fraud. Last week a consultant physician in Portsmouth (if I
remember correctly) lost his license and was sent to jail for billing
the NHS for services he didn't provide. So your point is?
> You have this deluded idea about your importance! Get OVER IT, move
> on! But your post was a gas I must say! :) It's like talking a
> lawyer.
Good - I'm happy to have had the opportunity to provide you with at
least entertainment value. I take offense to being called a lawyer -
I have much higher ethics than that.
> Just chill out. You don't want to give yourself a heart attack! I
> just hope you have good coverage if you do!
I have NHS and BUPA-like supplemental. We call it queue jumping care.
Know why? The waiting list that most of the "poor" people have to
get on disappear for me because I can go private. You see, the
delivery of care in the UK isn't all public...there is a very distinct
and thriving private market - for insurance as well as care. About
10% (and rising) UK residents have this supplemental insurance and if
you need an MRI, you go right to the front of the line. You need
chemo, we start on Monday, not Monday, 2004.
Gotta love it.
> Really take it easy...Who do you think you are the DEFENDER OF
> NEWSGROUPS? Just relax and ignore my post if it strikes a nerve.
I usually don't respond to posters that present a cogent argument that
provides a basis in fact - either by citing a policy paper, or a
government report, or a journal article. I will respond to the
content of the evidence.
I don't do anecdotes very well and newspaper articles (or other lay
prress) are absolutely the single worst source of credible science.
> Have a nice day :)
You bet.
amp_spamfree
> >> There is an article forthcoming in a certain health affairs
> >>magazine which will show that the longer a person is without
> >>health insurance, the worse the outcome. Right now those of us
> >>with insurance have to pay expenses of those who don't contribute
> >>to the system while healthy, but then want care if and when they
> >>get sick. Medicare for all Ages is the only way to go.
> >
> >
> >Just what magazine, Georgie? Or don't you think that we can
> >comprehend a citation?
> >
> >So typical... Or could the 'magazine' be the "Conklin Journal of
> >Irrational Healthcare"
>
> No, the paper won a prize and will be forthcoming in a journal.
> When it is released, I'll be glad to post the reference, but the
> methods are far beyond your comprehension. You couldn't even get
> past the first line.
Magazine???
Is this like the infamous editorial abstract posing as journal
science? It won a "prize"? You don't have the citation?
pfffft Georgy. I can smell your manure from here.
Gretchen Evans
>In article <B1Pka.502$2b6.1...@news.uswest.net>,
>Founding Father <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>>
>>"Herman Rubin" <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
>>news:b6sj0u$g...@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
>>>
>>> The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
>>> costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
>>> worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
>>
>>I totally disagree. Were that the case, Medicare would not be bankrupt.
>
>
> Herman is right that bureaucrats crave power and control. But
>he is wrong to leave out physicians as bureaucrats who are
>physicians craving power over patients and furthermore getting
>away with by claiming that their power is for the benefit of the
>patient, the biggest lie in medicine.
>
> Physicians marching in Raleigh, NC, yesterday, tried to fool
>the public by saying that their selfish interests are all for the
>benefit of the patient. We patients need to stop accepting such
>fake information as fact.
Goodness Georgie, don't let those SOB's get away with that! Organize
your own counter-demonstration, The "George Conklin March to Idiocy"..
I'm sure you could get a few of your playmates at the mental health
center to participate along with you.
pixie
Gretchen Evans
wrote:
Don't be hypercritical, ampie... Teacher could have given Georgie a
star for staying within the lines and being neat.. Or possibly it was
a prize from the last show and tell session.. where Georgie told his
classmates about that rare vaccine the DC Health Department finally
received.
pixie
Gretchen Evans
You won't even let me try? Awhhhhhh come on, Georgie, play fair.
I've even altered my opinion of you.. I used to think that you were
only slightly wacko... now I'm convinced that you're certifiably
insane... And isn't that an improvement?
pixie
DWood78828
>Awhhhhhh come on, Georgie, play fair.
>I've even altered my opinion of you.. I used to think that you were
>only slightly wacko... now I'm convinced that you're certifiably
>insane... And isn't that an improvement?
>
>pixie
Now, now Pixie, we are suppose to show understanding, compassion and empathy
for the mentally ill.
Denise
Karl
> kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>...
> > Wow. Way out of my league? I can believe it! So you disagree with
> > my opnions so please go away because "I" am_spamfree knows best!
> >
> > First let me tell you I have been denied coverage because I take a
> > blood thinner. I haven't really been ill since 1987.
>
> So now the vested interest comes out. You take this much too
> personally.
>
Yes sir, I do have a vested interest. I don't take it personally,
sorry you feel that way. Truthfully, I heard Clinto and Dole talking
and it struck me as kind of odd. I just want some sort of reform.
> > I'm not
> > counting when I injured my arm. The first the Doctor wanted to do was
> > surgery, but when the insurance issue came up, the Doctor decided that
> > physcical therapy was a good idea. And you know what it was that
> > worked great. He thought I had torn something. Waiting is good if
> > you are forced to get that second opinion, most insurance providers
> > require it anyway. Waiting is bad if obiviously you have a broken arm
> > or are having a heart attack. Are you telling me someone shows up a
> > the hospital in Canada or Germany or England and they tell them to
> > leave because they can't set their braken arm?
>
> In England. Two cases in a local community hospital (2002) where no
> x-ray was taken to determine if there was a fracture. One was a small
> child. Now that is what sucks. You want anecdote, you got it.
>
No that does suck I agree with you. But don't you think if you had a
minor ailment. Don't you think you could wait? broken bones, cancer,
or diagonostic test where you suspect something serious OK move to the
head of the line. Hopefully you could build a system that doesn;t
have that many waiting for service. But come on be honest, don't you
think some medical problems are minor and don't require immediate
attention? Don't you think some tests are overused? Don't you feel
some drugs are over-prescribed? (antibiotics for one)
> > That's hard to
> > swallow.
>
> Well, swallow.
>
> > I think we overtest here. Sometimes it has to be self-defense
> > medicine to guard against lawsuits. Then you have patients clamoring
> > for some test and the Doctor gives the OK. You have to wonder how
> > many of these test are necessary?
>
> You argue that there isn't enough access and now you are arguing there
> is too much? Please, stay focused.
Focused yes I'm focused. What we need is to focus and use some common
sense. We have to keep people going to the doctor to screen early to
catch problems sooner, don't you think? We just get overtested
because Doctor fear lawsuits and people will pester Doctor for a
prescription. I guess some go to the Doctor and expect a prescription
or some simple solution. I met ALOT of people after 9/11 with there
Cipro prescription already filled. And Antibotics as I said earlier
are overused so much that some bugs are resisitant.
>
> > I don't see how you fix that. Maybe have deductibles on certain
> > diagnostics? But we need "ready access" to routine health care. By
> > 'ready access' I mean people can see a Doctor when they need to
> > without worrying about affording it. It's like when you have an HMO
> > or PPO and you have that $10 or $20 co-pay yo are more likely to go to
> > the Doctor. Maybe you don't have the $150 or $200 to pay the Doctor,
> > some people do live pay to pay and don't have alot of cash.
>
> You waver between fiancing and delivery. What is it you really want?
> Access to free care or access to reasonably priced health "insurance"?
I don't want FREE care. I want coverage. That's all. Hey if they
decide we're putting together the same thing England has I would be
happy with that. If they put together Association Health Plans that I
could join and be covered great! I'm not picky. And don't want
anything for free. But you did mention you wanted to mandate under
law that business cover their workers. Every time I hear Washington
wants to boost minimum wages small business really complains. And I
can see their point. Did you also want to mandate individauls carry
health insurance? What about if a patient can't get coverage?
Let me mention the HIPAA, the Health Insuance and Portablility and
Accountability Act of 1996. If you have coverage a health insurance
company has to insure you in theory. But the fine print of the act
states that you have to had a Group Plan from your employer, a Church
Plan (I have no idea about that oner ) , or a government plan ( I
guess federal, state local employee) . If you are self-employed and
pay your premiums yourself you don't quailify. They can turn you
down. Also under that act you are still subject to underwriting and
can be turned down OR forced into a policy with MUCH MUCH higher
premiums. What are you going to do if someone can't afford the
premium? Are you prepared to lock them up for violate the mandated
coverage you proposed? Or are you prepared to turn them away from a
hospital?
>
> > Now did you say you want to FORCE or mandate through law that
> > employers pick up the tab for workers? Conservatives hate that idea
> > and you always hear how it will destroy businesses.
>
> It is an expensive alternative for small business. It is already what
> bih business is doing. Conservatives do NOT hate the idea - I suspect
> most conservatives dislike legislating competitive advantage. The tax
> burden on small business is already fairly steep so I can imagine that
> there's some push back on another "tax".
>
> >They do have a
> > point if we don't somehow figure out a way to control cost and allow
> > businesses to purchase insurance the way bigger organiztions and
> > corporations do it in large pools.
>
> Who says they can't?
You think heath care cost are under control? You haven't noticed them
rising alot faster than inflation?
>
> > Bush actually is proposing
> > "Association Health Plans" to make it easier for people and small
> > businesses to buy coverage at group rates.
>
> There are already a variety of vehicles and products offered for small
> business and individuals to take advantage of more competitive rates
> through group purchasing. Providing incentives for more insurers to
> do this is an option that works within the current delivery system.
>
> > Now what you say about the market filling the need if say everyone had
> > coverage. Ever take an economics class.
>
> Ever taught a graduate course in health economics?
So are you an Economics Professor?
>
> > Ever hear of inelastic
> > demand and elastic demand.
>
> Let me ask you two very simple economics questions - in a static
> model, how does one calculate the point elasticity of demand and once
> characterized, does the elasticity stay constant over the range of the
> function?
>
Ok Profressor. Lets get real simple here. If the price of Coumadin
doubles I will pay it and use the same amoount. (my Coumadin is $39
for 100 5mg pills and $25 in Canada) If it goes to $100 a month I'll
pay it. If it goes to $400 a month I'll pay it and again take the
same amount. If it goes $2000 a month even though it's medically
necessary and I could die without it, I'll have to find some way to
pay for it. But at some point I would have to stoop take it.
So the demand for my Coumadin I suppose you would describe as
In-elastic. But even then the my demand for Coumadin will decline as
I run out the ability to pay for it. The same hold true for Health
Coverage. Now I asked, Arizona Blue Cross about coverage, and that's
how I learned about HIPAA (and I didn't apply) but I asked if I had
creditble coverage they could insure me for over $1000 a month. Now,
I know in your model that doesn't present a problem. But in the real
world you have to pay for these costs. Isn't it better people at
least something towards their health care? I mean I could sit back
and improvish myself and just welch on any mendical bills I ouwld
incur. I just to pay my way if I can.
> > Some things will decrease in supply and
> > increase in deamnd when prices decline. For example, wheat prices
> > collapse then a farmer might not even waste his time harvesting the
> > wheat or maybe he uses it for cattle feed, and the supply available is
> > decreased because he can't make a profit.
>
> LOL
>
> > And the opposite occurs
> > too, he'll plant more wheat if he sees prices increase.
> > But some things like prescription drugs aren't like that, at least
> > totally. If prices for a cancer drug increase will demand fall? Not
> > really. People will do what they have to to pay for it. Now if
> > prices skyrocket of course they won't be able to find the money to pay
> > for it. But supplies are not as controlled by price in some
> > instances.
>
> And this is a bad thing in your mind? Let me ask you - is your
> Coumadin the same as a bushel of wheat?
>
Wheat you can switch to eating corn or soy or something else. I have
to take Coumadin, which is fairly cheap. Other drugs are not.
> > Medical services can't be grown over night. It takes years to train
> > doctors and nurses. Hospitals are long-term and huge projects to
> > construct.
>
> So, your point is?
You can't adapt to expanding the system very fast to adapt to a
changing market that fast.
>
> > I never said we should abolish our system
>
> Yes you did - you want "universal" whatever in financing and delivery.
No I didn't Professor. What I wanted is reform. If they wanted to
drastically change or abolish it I wuoldn't stand in anyone's way to
be sure. I watched a thing on my local PBS station and they had Sec.
of Health from the Carter, Ford, Reagan, and Bush Adminstrations on
and the common theme was that most of these changes made abroad done
to health care systems were built upon the previous system. If
granting access to health coverage to those with pre-exisitng
conidtions or banding together in Associations is 'abolishment' then
I'm there. But I would be happy with even modest reform.
Just remember the market can't solve all societies problems.
Sometimes you need government involvement, like the employer mandated
coverage you yourself propose.
>
> > and move to something like
> > what they have in England. And what Germany has sounds great.
>
> What Germany has is not much different than what the US has - and
> along with it the same kinds of problems and pressures.
>
> > What we need is help be people get access to care that they will be
> > able to use iit to prevent illness.
>
> And with few exceptions, they do.
>
People delay care if they are poorer or uninsured. I know you going
to ask for data. But you showed none yourself.
> > "Anecdotes are rarely convincing data - especially in this NG." What
> > the heck is that about? Are you 'amp' the guardian here?
>
> The only thing I guard is what shows up in my newsreader. Georgy is
> our anecdote King, Denise has snippets of historical anecdotes, Ryan
> has the single continuous ER anecdote. I don't do anecdote except
> when forced and certainly understand that the plural of anecdote is
> not data.
>
> > "No, "they" do not. Those of us who are informed equate tax based
> > single payer with socialization of medical care financing." I by
> > informed, you mean 'those who know better'? Please, grow up we have
> > opinions....they are different, OK?
>
> Informed opinions are fine - uninformed, gross generalizations, or
> worse, op-ed page snippets as data, are my pet peeve. I'm entitlted.
>
Yes you are entitled. Indulge your pet peeve! Don't want to stand in
your way Professor!
> > I want to able to apply for health coverage and be accepted! I don't
> > want to find out oh yeah we will sell you insurance and like $1000 a
> > month just for me.
>
The $1000 dollars was if I had Group Coverage under HIPAA. I didn't.
Oh If you have data about the group plans small businesses have access
to please let me know. Really I would find it useful for myself
maybe.
But one thing about cost. What are you going to do if you payed youor
own Helath coverage and an Insurance company would come out with
genetic testing to find what will eventually kill you then palce a
rider on YOUR policy that excludes that illness. You would have an
'accident policy'. But the heart attack of cancer that would get you
in end was your responsibily. You might as well not even carry
coverage for an accident. You probably are covered elsewhere, (auto
insurance or someone else liability coverage)
> So you DO have access, you just don't like the price. You weren't
> refused insurance, you were refused the opportunity to take MY risk
> exposure and apply it to YOUR situation. You wanted ME to pay part of
> YOUR freight.
But yes I would LIKE YOU Professor to pay my freight!
Do you think it's right to charge $1000, $2000, $3000, or $5000 a
month? What price per month would you think is excessive? Any price
can be charged? If you would have a worker in a grocery store would
you expect him or her to carry such insurance? You mentioned you
would not want anyone to be able to opt out. Did you want government
assistance to pay these bills? Medicaid in most states is strained
financially. Many governors are haivng deficit problems and one of
the biggest cost is under-funded government mandated programs. Just
think of the help just allowing those without coverage to buy into
Medicaid. They could contribute alot of money to the system.
> > Arizona Blue Cross told me that. They also told me
> > if I stopped taking my Coumadin for 10 years and I didn't die THEN
> > they could sell me insurance at the regular rates. They rejected me
> > because I take Coumadin. Oh sorry, that's an ANECDOTE? So that
> > doesn't count?
>
> They didn't reject you - they priced your policy according to your
> risk. Do you honestly believe that a 16 year old with three tickets
> and two accidents should get the same car insurance rate as a middle
> age mother who only drives the kids to soccer practice?
Again if you price someone out of the health care market everyone
loses. They will avoid care and if they are taken sick to the
hospital who's going to pay? You will Professor. Yeah lets price
coverage according to risk. Sounds great. But if car insurance is
too high, I can take the bus. If I can't afford health coverage and I
get sick who will pay the bill? You will, thourgh higher premiums.
Don't you think it makes more sense that I chip in something? I want
to!
And Ariizona Blue Cross said to me, it was their right under the law
to refuse health insurance to anyone (not covered by HIPAA) they
wanted to. Just business. which is true.
>
> > What country are you from you wait 6 months to great treatment? I'm
> > just curious, not trying to mean or anything.
>
So Professor you are writing here from the United Kingdom???
I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU ARE ENGLISH.
I'm sorry your system in England has serious problems. If it is so
bad why didn't the conservative party change it? Truthfully does the
population in England want to abolish their system. I guess a polical
movement would blossem rather quickly if everyone had such problems.
Well does the general population in the UK disire to abolish the
system?
> Here is a link to the waiting lists at the NHS.
>
> http://www.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes/
>
> Isn't it amazing that the government is REQUIRED by law to publish
> these lists quarterly?
Yeah I wish they would publish the names of screw-up doctors here who
get sued all the time. In the USA you can't find out if your doctor
has been sued repeatly.
>
> > "Bingo - and until you bring your level of knowledge up past innuendo
> > and supposition, your opinions add no value." If my opinions have NO
> > value to you then why do read them and RESPOND?
>
> I call it finger exercise.
Exercise is good. Please vent all you want, it's good for the system
to get all that off your chest Professor.
>
> > "Can we now. Does that require that the finacing or delivery of care
> > > model be changed? Or does it require both?
> > >
> > > I'm all for providing access to health insurance on an equitable and
> > > open basis. I'd even advocate that employers in the private sector be
> > > OBLIGATED to provide at least a minimum of contribtion, sufficient for
> > > basic levels of care (whatever those are). I also would suggest that
> > > individuals be held responsible for personal actions impacting on
> > > health. And I wouldn't allow anyone, nada, zero, zip, to opt out and
> > > in no case would I allow tax-based financing EXCEPT in bonafide cases
> > > of financial need. What the system requires is plenty of choices on
> > > benefit design and coverage limits, plenty of competition between
> > > programs, plans, delivery parameters, and prices; plenty of
> > > competition between providers, lots of market dynamics...
> > >
> > Here you confuse me. You want to force people to have coverage?
>
> Yep. No freeloaders. That is how the German system works. And
> premiums are based on age, gender, and maybe some health factors
> (personal controllables perhaps) but NOT income.
I think that's a good idea. What about affordability. Say they find
I take Coumadin and price it excessively high I can't pay. Who do I
pay the IRS which can send me to jail and sieze my stuff or the health
insurer. I mean, would you support keeping prices at the reasonable
levels for those with health factors? What did you mean by 'personal
controllable'? The Coumadin I take I have no control over. I don't
smoke or drink or take illegal drugs--is that 'personal
controllables'. If so I have no problem there.
Then if this is how the German System works then wunderbar Professor
sign me up! If they price the policy so high because of the Coumadin,
then I'm screwed! Really, I'd gladly pay the rates as long I can.
>
> > Whether by having an employer pay for all or part. Or require us all
> > to buy coverage. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. That's what I meant
> > about the whole bad debt issue with unpaid medical bills. Even the
> > lower income people can pay SOMETHING towards the system and their
> > health care. When you say the system requires plenty of choices...I
> > can live with that. But what about someone priced out of the market?
>
> "Priced" out of the market? I'm sorry, but $1000 per month with an
> annual income of $50,000 hardly qualifies for being priced out of the
> market. It may mean you need to give up a few things - no more SUV,
> no 4 bedroom house, no vacations in Vegas.
Not everyone in the USA makes $50,000. Maybe in the UK they do
Professor not here.
>
> > Are you going to support a system subsidizes a policiy for a poorer
> > person
>
> Medicaid already exists.
You should do alittle research on Medicaid. If you make even alittle
you don't qualify. And states are having big budgetary problems with
it.
>
> > or a person with a genuine health problem that inflates the
> > price of his or her insurance?
>
> I am compassionate - but I would expect that genuine is subject to an
> interesting interpretation. I would be against subsidizing higher
> premiums for someone who smokes, for example.
No problem. I'd encourage treatment to stop smoking or lose weight.
Waht about me Professor. I take Coumadin just because I am geneticall
pre-disposed to have blood clots form. My father died from it at 33.
I am 42 and fine. Had he taken Coumadin ( it wasn't in use then ) he
might be alive today. I have not been the hospital since 1987 when I
put on Coumadin for my first and only clot. The only other time I was
in the hospital was when i got bit by a cat. Actaully with the
Coumadin I could be in a better position than you health wise. They
give it to senior citizens to prevent stroke and heart attacks.
So Professor should my insurance policy be priced higher? Maybe
priced 8 or 9 times higher? Would my condition be 'personal
controllable health factor'?
Sorry yu feel that way Professor.
It wasn't offered to me. It would have been had I been qualified
under HIPAA.
>
> > I just need help getting in to the system.
>
> http://info.insure.com/health/highriskpool.html
>
> > I don't give a damn what
> > kind of system either, single-payer, a collection of private
> > companies, or some other system I can't even imagine.
>
> You want others to pay for your risk. The reason why the German
> system works is that everyone pays into the system at the approximate
> same rate from cradle to grave - so whatever happens down the road is
> truly a shared risk. Your in and out of the insurance market, buying
> it when you think you need it and not buying it when you don't, is
> dishonest.
>
> > We certainly
> > have to figure a way to control costs.
>
> Why? Do you have any evidence to suggest that 15% GDP spend is a bad
> thing?
>
> > We have to look at the way
> > Drugs are pushed on us. (Diarectics are a cheaper and sometimes more
> > effective for blood pressure than more costly and newer drugs-)
>
> Diuretics CAN be the most appropriate first-line therapy, and often
> are. Of course, hypokalemia can be a problem...and it doesn't do much
> for some folks...
>
> Do you know that aspirin is a cheaper alternative to your
> Coumadin...what do you think about that?
Aspirin won't sut it for me. Coumadin isn't pricey either. It just
requires monthly blood tests which are not that expensive.
>
> > And don't forget Health Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, and large
> > Hospital Health Care Chains aren't alturisitic.
>
> Nor should they be. GM, Pepsicola, and Safeway aren't either.
>
Yeah why do you think they market new drugs like Clarinex and Nexium
which are very very similiar to other drugs. Clairitin is on the
over-the-counter market and it's cheaper for people with insurance to
buy the more expenise NEW Clarinex because it's a prescription.
> > Remember the
> > California Electricity debacle? You had Enron manipulating the system
> > and sending power back and forth to Nevada and other Western States
> > then reselling it back to California to drive up prices. Health
> > Insurers, Drug Companies, and their like can do the same. Sen Bill
> > Frist's family, the Majority leader, owns a large health care provider
> > system and they have been in the news about settlements they made with
> > Medicare for services not rendered.
>
> Fraud is fraud. Last week a consultant physician in Portsmouth (if I
> remember correctly) lost his license and was sent to jail for billing
> the NHS for services he didn't provide. So your point is?
Health providers and Drug Companies now how to 'work' the system and
in alot of cases here in the USA they don't even get sent to jail or
fined. Sen. Bill First's family business 'settled' with the feds over
some bogus billing issues under medicare. Nobody went to jail, I
thought even some fines or some punitive action could have brought in
play.
>
> > You have this deluded idea about your importance! Get OVER IT, move
> > on! But your post was a gas I must say! :) It's like talking a
> > lawyer.
>
> Good - I'm happy to have had the opportunity to provide you with at
> least entertainment value. I take offense to being called a lawyer -
> I have much higher ethics than that.
So you're an Economics Professor? Really?
>
> > Just chill out. You don't want to give yourself a heart attack! I
> > just hope you have good coverage if you do!
>
> I have NHS and BUPA-like supplemental. We call it queue jumping care.
> Know why? The waiting list that most of the "poor" people have to
> get on disappear for me because I can go private. You see, the
> delivery of care in the UK isn't all public...there is a very distinct
> and thriving private market - for insurance as well as care. About
> 10% (and rising) UK residents have this supplemental insurance and if
> you need an MRI, you go right to the front of the line. You need
> chemo, we start on Monday, not Monday, 2004.
>
> Gotta love it.
>
I guess your life is alittle more valuable eh? The guy working in the
fast food place serving your food can just fend for himself. I'm
curious this private supplemental policy you have. The services you
receive is it hospitals PAID for with public money? You pay taxes,
the fast food worker pays taxes. That MRI machine if it is owned and
operated by a public hospital you are like paying a BRIBE to jump to
the head of line, it seems to me.
If the MRI machine is owned by a private outfit, then that's fine. I
don't like it but it's fine.
> > Really take it easy...Who do you think you are the DEFENDER OF
> > NEWSGROUPS? Just relax and ignore my post if it strikes a nerve.
>
> I usually don't respond to posters that present a cogent argument that
> provides a basis in fact - either by citing a policy paper, or a
> government report, or a journal article. I will respond to the
> content of the evidence.
Really Professor, I feel honored by you comments. But let me tell you
one thing. I see you are in England and I am the USA. I wanted to
let "AMERICANS" no about a little odd fact that I heard about
President Bush.
Do I care about the English health system, your wait times and the
fact you have to Bribe (yeah I see it as a bribe if the state owns the
MRI )your way to the head of the line? I feel bad that you have
problems there. Maybe the NHS is underfunded, maybe it could be run
more effienciently, maybe it is the worst way to deliver health care.
I never have been to the UK so I don't know.
But I am "AMERICAN" and Americans will do what we need to do
politcally to solve this issue. This issue in the polical area is
still being talked about even with this war in IRAQ.
As an Oberserver from a forgein country I appreciate your input and
views. What you do in England that's your business. American's are
the ones with the first hand knowledge of the problems or OUR health
care system.
We Americans will decide over the coming series of elections.
We may reform it or we might replace it or we might put off action.
Who knows?
If you have such a problem with the NHS why not start a campaign to
abolish it? Run for Parliment, start a petition drive, or protest!
Could it be as broken as NHS is in your eyes (it very well may be - I
have no knowledge of it) people in the UK WANT IT?
I thought you lived in a democraacy. Maybe you should move to
germany? Apply for a visa to the USA?
> I don't do anecdotes very well and newspaper articles (or other lay
> prress) are absolutely the single worst source of credible science.
>
> > Have a nice day :)
>
> You bet.
It's been a riot Professor. Don't bribe to many doctors now :)
(null)
Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In England. Two cases in a local community hospital (2002) where no
>> x-ray was taken to determine if there was a fracture. One was a small
>> child. Now that is what sucks. You want anecdote, you got it.
>>
>No that does suck I agree with you. But don't you think if you had a
>minor ailment. Don't you think you could wait? broken bones, cancer,
>or diagonostic test where you suspect something serious OK move to the
>head of the line. Hopefully you could build a system that doesn;t
>have that many waiting for service. But come on be honest, don't you
>think some medical problems are minor and don't require immediate
>attention? Don't you think some tests are overused? Don't you feel
>some drugs are over-prescribed? (antibiotics for one)
When my wife broke a finger in 3 places, yes, there was the
x-ray, although it was obvious it was broken. But guess what: it
was declared not to be an emergency, and she was sent home to
await a time when they wanted to pin it. And that was with
insurance in the USA. Do you want a broken bone to go unset for
a week? Happens here every day.
Herman Rubin
>> kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>> > amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message news:<1192abe3.03040...@posting.google.com>...
>> > > kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>...
.................
>> Yeh - UK NHS - speaking of universality. You?
>Some people do in fact feel Universal Health care is evil. They
>equate any Universal System ( there are MANY types ) with "Socialized
>Medicine". People dwell on waiting for care, but we do that now. In
>some cases waiting, especially for ROUTINE procedures is a good thing.
>I waited for care for a shoulder injury and you know what the Doctor
>was wrong because I needed was some Physical therapy!
>About waiting. How many of you are older and remember the 1950s,
>1960s, or early 1970s? I remember then, or at least the late 1960s
>and early 1970s EVERYONE had health insurance OR health care was
>affordable. Consequently, if you got sick or injured you went to the
>Doctor or Hospital. My Mom got sick, with a MINOR ailment, and she
>had TO WAIT FOR A HOSPITAL BED. She had Blue Cross/Blue Shield (and
>the best plan they had). But she waited and it was OK.
Even back then, there was too much of going to a doctor for
minor problems. You did not say how long she had to wait,
but having to wait for a hospital bed for what is clearly a
minor problem may not be bad; overuse is a major problem,
and drives up costs. It is the "tragedy of the commons".
>Now lets place "universal health care" aside for a second. Lets say
>the COuntry as a whole came into some money. Lets say we discovered a
>POOL of oil that we could export everywhere and the way the government
>diecided to use the money was to BUY health insurance from the private
>sector for EVERYONE. Now everyone would have access. Guess what?
>Alot of people would soon discover WHOO NOW I have to wait to have
>that procedure done.
>In my opinion, the reason we don't wait long for care in this country
>is alot of people don't go to the doctor till a small problem becomes
>a big problem!
Not all small problems call for going to the doctor. If
people went to the doctor whenever they had any kind of
respiratory problem, the medical profession would be
overwhelmed by this alone. Or if they went for every tummy
ache, etc. The ones least likely to go would be the ones
who can most afford it, and are not willing to waste their
time instead of doing something else of value.
More than 50 years ago, there was a local medical plan
where I was, covering all services at a particular clinic.
My wife and I had some respiratory problems, so we went,
which we would not have if it was not covered. I would
have to say we were overtreated, and when asked, the doctor
said that they would not be given us that much treatment if
it was not free. BTW, that plan was not renewed.
Make it cheap, and it will be overused, and especially by
those who are contributing least to society. Then the
overuse will cause large waits for those who come for it,
taking into account the value of their time. It will also
drive up costs, by increasing demand.
This is not irresponsible behavior by those who overuse
the system. If their time is worth little, it costs them
little to take the time to go to the medical facility, to
wait in the waiting room, to see the doctor and get treated,
and to go back home or elsewhere. But this makes it harder
for those who have more serious problems. And if there is
an expensive treatment which is likely to give a modest
improvement, if it is covered by "insurance", a member of
the group homo economicus will have it.
Rational decision making requires balancing the good points
and bad points of a decision. If the patient and the doctor
do not have to undergo the costs themselves, they should not,
as rational people, consider them. But now we have a major
conflict, and it can be shown that there is no "rational"
way of coming up with a self-consistent (at one moment of
time) social welfare function.
TANSTAAFL. If the individual does not have to consider the
costs, only rationing can be used, and this excludes those
who use medical care more cautiously from getting it. So
it is those who overuse it who benefit the most.
(null)
Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>Make it cheap, and it will be overused, and especially by
>those who are contributing least to society.
So we have the world's most expensive medical care, by an
average of twice too expensive. How come, according to your
theories, people still go to doctors? Those with no coverage
still go some. Your path is clear: make medicine even more
expensive. How high is too high? $500 per office visit for 3
minutes?
Herman Rubin
>"Herman Rubin" <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
>news:b6sj0u$g...@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
>> The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
>> costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
>> worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
>I totally disagree. Were that the case, Medicare would not be bankrupt.
>The bureaucrat knows well that behind him is the authoritarian power to
>extract whatever the system costs from the people, even against their will.
>In many cases the bureaucrat gains power by having a larger budget to
>administer.
Bureaucrats do not have unlimited power. You are right about
the rest.
>As you said, they don't have to worry about being fired. But insurance
>workers, including contracted physicians ARE fired for exceeding cost limits
>and rewarded for meeting them.
I agree.
>Either system is wrong. The consumer should be responsible for cost
>control, and the only way to make that happen is make the consumer bear the
>cost. The old 80-20 rule of the Blues was more effective than the system we
>have now. If the doctor ordered an optional $1000 CAT scan the patient
>would pay $200 out of pocket under the old system. Today, in most cases
>they pay nothing or an insignificant co-pay.
The co-pay may or may not deter the procedure. Right now, the
doctor does not indicate how the information will be used, so
the patient cannot be meaningfully involved in the decision.
I have once refused an MRI, because I did not think it would
provide any useful information which could not be delayed, to
a considerable extent based on the information as to how the
result might be used. On another occasion, I did have an MRI,
which produced only negative information, because I thought
there was a reasonable chance it would produce useful results.
We do need major medical insurance, and this is hard to get,
because of the "insurance" schemes. Put in MSA'a, and those
with any reasonable income will prefer to opt out of all
prepaid plans, especially if major medical insurance again
becomes available. The only reason the present plans pay
is because of the tax laws.
Herman Rubin
(null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>In article <B1Pka.502$2b6.1...@news.uswest.net>,
>Founding Father <f...@qwest.net> wrote:
>>"Herman Rubin" <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote in message
>>news:b6sj0u$g...@odds.stat.purdue.edu...
>>> The government bureaucrat is under more pressure to keep
>>> costs down than the insurer, and also does not have to
>>> worry about being sued, or even about being fired.
>>I totally disagree. Were that the case, Medicare would not be bankrupt.
> Herman is right that bureaucrats crave power and control. But
>he is wrong to leave out physicians as bureaucrats who are
>physicians craving power over patients and furthermore getting
>away with by claiming that their power is for the benefit of the
>patient, the biggest lie in medicine.
> Physicians marching in Raleigh, NC, yesterday, tried to fool
>the public by saying that their selfish interests are all for the
>benefit of the patient. We patients need to stop accepting such
>fake information as fact.
"If someone from the government says he is there to help
you, shoot first and ask questions later." - Heinlein
The same hold for physicians (or priests, or social
engineers) claiming to be all for the benefit of those
they claim to be "helping".
Herman Rubin
(null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>In article <b74f59$b...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>Make it cheap, and it will be overused, and especially by
>>those who are contributing least to society.
> So we have the world's most expensive medical care, by an
>average of twice too expensive. How come, according to your
>theories, people still go to doctors? Those with no coverage
>still go some. Your path is clear: make medicine even more
>expensive. How high is too high? $500 per office visit for 3
>minutes?
Most medical care is subsidized now. Those who elect no
coverage will still go when they consider the time and
expense worth it. I did this when I had only major medical.
I want to make medical care LESS expensive by removing the
overhead of government and insurance bureaucracy, most of
which is borne by health organizations, including physicians,
and therefore added to the bills. It is prepaid health care,
which costs little to many of the patients, which raises the
overall costs.
DWood78828
> When my wife broke a finger in 3 places, yes, there was the
>x-ray, although it was obvious it was broken. But guess what: it
>was declared not to be an emergency, and she was sent home to
>await a time when they wanted to pin it. And that was with
>insurance in the USA. Do you
>want a broken bone to go unset for
>a week? Happens here every day.
Gee, I guess Tennessee is backwards as well. My granddaughter was taken to the
ER, x-ray and my daughter informed that her finger was broken and need to be
pined. Then sent home to return to two days for the surgery.
Hate to tell you this Goergie, pinning a finger is not major surgery or a life
and death situation. Pain medication managed my granddaughter quite well. and
I'm sure it managed your wife just as well.
Denise
Karl
> In article <911abb80.03041...@posting.google.com>,
> Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> In England. Two cases in a local community hospital (2002) where no
> >> x-ray was taken to determine if there was a fracture. One was a small
> >> child. Now that is what sucks. You want anecdote, you got it.
> >>
> >No that does suck I agree with you. But don't you think if you had a
> >minor ailment. Don't you think you could wait? broken bones, cancer,
> >or diagonostic test where you suspect something serious OK move to the
> >head of the line. Hopefully you could build a system that doesn;t
> >have that many waiting for service. But come on be honest, don't you
> >think some medical problems are minor and don't require immediate
> >attention? Don't you think some tests are overused? Don't you feel
> >some drugs are over-prescribed? (antibiotics for one)
>
>
> When my wife broke a finger in 3 places, yes, there was the
> x-ray, although it was obvious it was broken. But guess what: it
> was declared not to be an emergency, and she was sent home to
> await a time when they wanted to pin it. And that was with
> insurance in the USA. Do you want a broken bone to go unset for
> a week? Happens here every day.
No that DOES suck. Nobody should be waiting that long with broken
bones! I hope your wife's OK.
I'm glad I waited when I hurt my shoulder, it wasn't that bad, and
that was covered under a workmen comp policy. I know my sister gets
jerked around on her HMO and some of these health plans are insane.
My Doctor has this huge office that handles the billing for maybe
under 10 Doctors in the practice. they have over thirty people doing
billing. I know I went back and we were tyring to figure out my
shoulder injury claim for forty bucks. it was so weird. So many
different plans and these guys really put alot of time into figuring
all the different ways you can submit these bills. There has to be way
they can clean up the billing a bit. I kept getting that one bill for
over 8 months! They must have spent alot more than $40 just
submitting then re-submitting the bill.
Karl
She only waited a few days maybe a week. Waiting does have good AND
bad points if it helps you consider the implications or choose
different options. I know I've heard from people I know oh that was
covered by insurance and you don't worry about cost. They sure wanted
to cut my shoulder open real fast when I was hurt. Doctors must love
Workmen's Comp. It must pay off nice and easy???
Over the last year and a half my Doctor saw a liver test that was
performed by the Doctor I had perfore him. It showed some enzyme or
something elevated in my liver and he was all concerned. So he wanted
to redo this liver test to see if the same thing would come up. I
told him I thought the Doctor said not to worry that the Coumadin
could do that on the test. But he was kind of scarring me so we did
the test again. Same thing came up. This guy was making such a fuss
he ordered a songram of my liver checking for tumors and I was
concerned. Turns out his boss puts a stop to it all and says this is
all a side effect of the Coumadin and no big deal. Had me scarred for
awhile.
>
> >Now lets place "universal health care" aside for a second. Lets say
> >the COuntry as a whole came into some money. Lets say we discovered a
> >POOL of oil that we could export everywhere and the way the government
> >diecided to use the money was to BUY health insurance from the private
> >sector for EVERYONE. Now everyone would have access. Guess what?
> >Alot of people would soon discover WHOO NOW I have to wait to have
> >that procedure done.
>
> >In my opinion, the reason we don't wait long for care in this country
> >is alot of people don't go to the doctor till a small problem becomes
> >a big problem!
>
> Not all small problems call for going to the doctor. If
> people went to the doctor whenever they had any kind of
> respiratory problem, the medical profession would be
> overwhelmed by this alone. Or if they went for every tummy
> ache, etc. The ones least likely to go would be the ones
> who can most afford it, and are not willing to waste their
> time instead of doing something else of value.
Yeah I don't run to the Doctor with a cold and sometimes they get all
worked up over nothing. But you should go to the docotor for check
ups regularly and certainly pay attention t your body.
I hear you about overuse. You just have to use common sense.
I checked those High_risk pools. Some of them limit access to
according to state funding. California CAPS the number of people that
can GET into theirs and the lifetime limit is small like 250K last
time I checked.
Karl
> In article <3e95c117$1...@news.buzzardnews.com>,
> (null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
> >In article <b74f59$b...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
> >Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>
> >>Make it cheap, and it will be overused, and especially by
> >>those who are contributing least to society.
>
> > So we have the world's most expensive medical care, by an
> >average of twice too expensive. How come, according to your
> >theories, people still go to doctors? Those with no coverage
> >still go some. Your path is clear: make medicine even more
> >expensive. How high is too high? $500 per office visit for 3
> >minutes?
>
> Most medical care is subsidized now. Those who elect no
> coverage will still go when they consider the time and
> expense worth it. I did this when I had only major medical.
>
> I want to make medical care LESS expensive by removing the
> overhead of government and insurance bureaucracy, most of
> which is borne by health organizations, including physicians,
> and therefore added to the bills. It is prepaid health care,
> which costs little to many of the patients, which raises the
> overall costs.
Don't you wonder if Medical Costs are made overly complex for a
reason? I wonder what would the cost be if nobody had insurance and
say Malpractice would be handled by the state?
I saw the Doctor for less than 10 minutes (I clocked him!) He charged
me $75, which I paid with a check as I left! But if I had insurance
the cost would be less beacause insurance provider negotiate lower
fees. My Mom uses the same guy and was in LONGER and her bill was
less, she has Blue Cross. That's weird.
Seems this issue does have legs though and I think it will be around
awhile. I don't care how they reform it. I want to hear alot of
talk and different ways they can reform it. But I think with time it
will get reformed, changed, or replaced. I honestly don't think they
will ever come up with RADICAL changes. I think that's where Clinton
blew it. He wanted too much. If did small incremental fixes and
reforms things might be better.
I still can't understand why they can't simplify billing. Can anyone
come up with a common system that works and then have all the
insureres use it? I sure know I had one stupid bill coming back to
haunt me for months.
amp_spamfree
> jep...@shell.ntrnet.net ((null)) wrote in message news:<3e95b484$1...@news.buzzardnews.com>...
> > In article <911abb80.03041...@posting.google.com>,
> > Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> In England. Two cases in a local community hospital (2002) where no
> > >> x-ray was taken to determine if there was a fracture. One was a small
> > >> child. Now that is what sucks. You want anecdote, you got it.
> > >>
> > >No that does suck I agree with you. But don't you think if you had a
> > >minor ailment. Don't you think you could wait? broken bones, cancer,
> > >or diagonostic test where you suspect something serious OK move to the
> > >head of the line. Hopefully you could build a system that doesn;t
> > >have that many waiting for service. But come on be honest, don't you
> > >think some medical problems are minor and don't require immediate
> > >attention? Don't you think some tests are overused? Don't you feel
> > >some drugs are over-prescribed? (antibiotics for one)
> >
> >
> > When my wife broke a finger in 3 places, yes, there was the
> > x-ray, although it was obvious it was broken. But guess what: it
> > was declared not to be an emergency, and she was sent home to
> > await a time when they wanted to pin it. And that was with
> > insurance in the USA. Do you want a broken bone to go unset for
> > a week? Happens here every day.
>
>
> No that DOES suck. Nobody should be waiting that long with broken
> bones! I hope your wife's OK.
Actually, Karl (and you too Georgy), until the inflamation is
controlled, you don't do an open reduction - it's ludicrous. Waiting
a few days is appopriate therapy in this case. And there's not much
need to keep them as an inpatient.
Happy to know that neither you or George practice medicine.
amp_spamfree
> amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message news:<1192abe3.03041...@posting.google.com>...
> > kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.03040...@posting.google.com>...
> > > Wow. Way out of my league? I can believe it! So you disagree with
> > > my opnions so please go away because "I" am_spamfree knows best!
> > >
> > > First let me tell you I have been denied coverage because I take a
> > > blood thinner. I haven't really been ill since 1987.
> >
> > So now the vested interest comes out. You take this much too
> > personally.
> >
>
> Yes sir, I do have a vested interest. I don't take it personally,
> sorry you feel that way.
Three or four times in the thread you made "reform" a personal issue.
You don't want to pay $1000 per month for your health insurance. You
want others to pay part of that for you.
> Truthfully, I heard Clinto and Dole talking
> and it struck me as kind of odd. I just want some sort of reform.
You call it "reform"? You start with a crack ate George Bush about
Iraqi Universal Health Care and you think there's some kind of
hypocrisy in it. Iraq will have a nationalized oil industry - should
the US nationalize its oil industry as well?
> > > I'm not
> > > counting when I injured my arm. The first the Doctor wanted to do was
> > > surgery, but when the insurance issue came up, the Doctor decided that
> > > physcical therapy was a good idea. And you know what it was that
> > > worked great. He thought I had torn something. Waiting is good if
> > > you are forced to get that second opinion, most insurance providers
> > > require it anyway. Waiting is bad if obiviously you have a broken arm
> > > or are having a heart attack. Are you telling me someone shows up a
> > > the hospital in Canada or Germany or England and they tell them to
> > > leave because they can't set their braken arm?
> >
> > In England. Two cases in a local community hospital (2002) where no
> > x-ray was taken to determine if there was a fracture. One was a small
> > child. Now that is what sucks. You want anecdote, you got it.
> >
> No that does suck I agree with you. But don't you think if you had a
> minor ailment. Don't you think you could wait? broken bones,
It was a "minor sprain". Put ice on it.
> cancer,
3 months for a consultant visit. When a women discovers a lump on her
breast in the US, do you know how long it takes from that to an office
visit with a specialist for evaluation? Days, not months.
> or diagonostic test where you suspect something serious OK move to the
> head of the line.
The only way to the head of the line in the UK is private insurance.
You want two tier, I'll give you two tier.
> Hopefully you could build a system that doesn;t
> have that many waiting for service. But come on be honest, don't you
> think some medical problems are minor and don't require immediate
> attention?
There are plenty of medical problems that are mionor and require
nothing more than bed rest and fluids. The point is, when a patient
isn't qualified to make a diagnosis or assess the severity, then
access to care is paramount to effective care. In the US, the ONLY
potential barrier to this care is economic. In the NHS it is waiting
lists. They have tried throwing money at the waiting list issue and
it is a miserable and expensive failure.
> Don't you think some tests are overused? Don't you feel
> some drugs are over-prescribed? (antibiotics for one)
I have in the past supported tort reform as a possible vehicle to
limit unnecessary testing for the purpose of legal documentation. To
be brutally frank, if the test reveals one in 1000 cases and early
detection improves outcomes, wouldn't it be just a real pisser if you
were the 1,000ths patient?
Antibiotics are not overprescribed - they have been misprescribed,
there is a difference. You do not want to get into a pissing contest
with me on this - I will smother you with data.
> > > That's hard to
> > > swallow.
> >
> > Well, swallow.
> >
> > > I think we overtest here. Sometimes it has to be self-defense
> > > medicine to guard against lawsuits. Then you have patients clamoring
> > > for some test and the Doctor gives the OK. You have to wonder how
> > > many of these test are necessary?
> >
> > You argue that there isn't enough access and now you are arguing there
> > is too much? Please, stay focused.
>
> Focused yes I'm focused. What we need is to focus and use some common
> sense. We have to keep people going to the doctor to screen early to
> catch problems sooner, don't you think?
You rant on about overtesting. Here's one for you - mammograms?
Appropriate or overtesting? Colonoscopies - appropriate or
overtesting. Cholesterol levels? When, how often, for what reason?
You are working both sides of the issue and not very well. First, we
test too much but now we need to test more?
> We just get overtested
> because Doctor fear lawsuits
Then TORT reform is the solution, not health care reform.
> and people will pester Doctor for a
> prescription.
First off - the data don't support you in this. FDA just released a
study to that effect. I've posted the link before - find it yourself
or go to www.fda.gov. Second - one more time you contradict yourself
- you argue that docs try and protect themselves from lawsuits yet now
you want us to believe that they will prescribe without medical
justification because they are "pestered"?
> I guess some go to the Doctor and expect a prescription
> or some simple solution. I met ALOT of people after 9/11 with there
> Cipro prescription already filled. And Antibotics as I said earlier
> are overused so much that some bugs are resisitant.
Like I said - don't even go there. Ask Denise.
> >
> > > I don't see how you fix that. Maybe have deductibles on certain
> > > diagnostics? But we need "ready access" to routine health care. By
> > > 'ready access' I mean people can see a Doctor when they need to
> > > without worrying about affording it. It's like when you have an HMO
> > > or PPO and you have that $10 or $20 co-pay yo are more likely to go to
> > > the Doctor. Maybe you don't have the $150 or $200 to pay the Doctor,
> > > some people do live pay to pay and don't have alot of cash.
> >
> > You waver between fiancing and delivery. What is it you really want?
> > Access to free care or access to reasonably priced health "insurance"?
>
> I don't want FREE care. I want coverage. That's all.
And it was offered to you for what you believed was too high of a
price? You want someone else to pay for some of your care.
> Hey if they
> decide we're putting together the same thing England has I would be
> happy with that.
No, you would not. No one in the UK who has a medical condition of
any severity is happy with it.
> If they put together Association Health Plans that I
> could join and be covered great! I'm not picky.
I gave you a link.
> And don't want
> anything for free. But you did mention you wanted to mandate under
> law that business cover their workers. Every time I hear Washington
> wants to boost minimum wages small business really complains. And I
> can see their point. Did you also want to mandate individauls carry
> health insurance? What about if a patient can't get coverage?
Damned right - every individual from birth to death should have health
insurance. They should choose and pay for the coverage they want but
NO one should breath uninsured. How is it that the government can
mandate that all drivers carry insurance for there vehicles but cannot
require health insurance?
> Let me mention the HIPAA, the Health Insuance and Portablility and
> Accountability Act of 1996. If you have coverage a health insurance
> company has to insure you in theory. But the fine print of the act
> states that you have to had a Group Plan from your employer, a Church
> Plan (I have no idea about that oner ) , or a government plan ( I
> guess federal, state local employee) .
Creditable coverage - understand the term? Qualified plans? Got it?
Good.
>If you are self-employed and
> pay your premiums yourself you don't quailify.
Which is the siliest thing anyone can do. And it affects a very small
number of people - and it likely is an area where HIPAA could use a
tweak.
> They can turn you
> down. Also under that act you are still subject to underwriting and
> can be turned down OR forced into a policy with MUCH MUCH higher
> premiums. What are you going to do if someone can't afford the
> premium?
Prove to me they cannot afford the premium and I will support access
through offsets and credits.
> Are you prepared to lock them up for violate the mandated
> coverage you proposed? Or are you prepared to turn them away from a
> hospital?
Cry me a river. I get my proverbial knickers in a knot when I here
that in the US, 8% of those folks earning MORE than $75,000 opt out of
buying health insurance.
> > > Now did you say you want to FORCE or mandate through law that
> > > employers pick up the tab for workers? Conservatives hate that idea
> > > and you always hear how it will destroy businesses.
> >
> > It is an expensive alternative for small business. It is already what
> > bih business is doing. Conservatives do NOT hate the idea - I suspect
> > most conservatives dislike legislating competitive advantage. The tax
> > burden on small business is already fairly steep so I can imagine that
> > there's some push back on another "tax".
> >
> > >They do have a
> > > point if we don't somehow figure out a way to control cost and allow
> > > businesses to purchase insurance the way bigger organiztions and
> > > corporations do it in large pools.
> >
> > Who says they can't?
Who says small business cannot access health care insurance with the
same level of risk spreading?
> You think heath care cost are under control? You haven't noticed them
> rising alot faster than inflation?
Have they now? Tell me, is the US any different than the UK, Sewden,
France, Germany, Spain, Australia, Canada...in this regard? You want
to differentiate between prices, costs, and expenditures? That would
be a good start.
> > > Bush actually is proposing
> > > "Association Health Plans" to make it easier for people and small
> > > businesses to buy coverage at group rates.
> >
> > There are already a variety of vehicles and products offered for small
> > business and individuals to take advantage of more competitive rates
> > through group purchasing. Providing incentives for more insurers to
> > do this is an option that works within the current delivery system.
> >
> > > Now what you say about the market filling the need if say everyone had
> > > coverage. Ever take an economics class.
> >
> > Ever taught a graduate course in health economics?
>
> So are you an Economics Professor?
Not my current role.
> > > Ever hear of inelastic
> > > demand and elastic demand.
> >
> > Let me ask you two very simple economics questions - in a static
> > model, how does one calculate the point elasticity of demand and once
> > characterized, does the elasticity stay constant over the range of the
> > function?
> >
> Ok Profressor.
You didn't answer the question. How does one calculate the point
elasticity of demand in a static model?
> Lets get real simple here. If the price of Coumadin
> doubles I will pay it and use the same amoount. (my Coumadin is $39
> for 100 5mg pills and $25 in Canada) If it goes to $100 a month I'll
> pay it. If it goes to $400 a month I'll pay it and again take the
> same amount. If it goes $2000 a month even though it's medically
> necessary and I could die without it, I'll have to find some way to
> pay for it. But at some point I would have to stoop take it.
>
> So the demand for my Coumadin I suppose you would describe as
> In-elastic.
Would you? Since you are willing to pay as much as $400 yet are only
asked to pay $12 per month, seems someone is getting one heck of a
bargain.
> But even then the my demand for Coumadin will decline as
> I run out the ability to pay for it.
Under the assumption of no substitutes, every commodity is a
monopolists dream.
> The same hold true for Health
> Coverage. Now I asked, Arizona Blue Cross about coverage, and that's
> how I learned about HIPAA (and I didn't apply) but I asked if I had
> creditble coverage they could insure me for over $1000 a month. Now,
> I know in your model that doesn't present a problem. But in the real
> world you have to pay for these costs.
Look - all you want to do is pay less than $1000 for coverage - who is
picking up the rest of the tab? The other members of the "group", the
shareholders of the insurer, the government?
> Isn't it better people at
> least something towards their health care? I mean I could sit back
> and improvish myself and just welch on any mendical bills I ouwld
> incur. I just to pay my way if I can.
There are some words missing in the above. Go right ahead, impoverish
yourself if you think you would be better off.
> > > Some things will decrease in supply and
> > > increase in deamnd when prices decline. For example, wheat prices
> > > collapse then a farmer might not even waste his time harvesting the
> > > wheat or maybe he uses it for cattle feed, and the supply available is
> > > decreased because he can't make a profit.
> >
> > LOL
> >
> > > And the opposite occurs
> > > too, he'll plant more wheat if he sees prices increase.
> > > But some things like prescription drugs aren't like that, at least
> > > totally. If prices for a cancer drug increase will demand fall? Not
> > > really. People will do what they have to to pay for it. Now if
> > > prices skyrocket of course they won't be able to find the money to pay
> > > for it. But supplies are not as controlled by price in some
> > > instances.
> >
> > And this is a bad thing in your mind? Let me ask you - is your
> > Coumadin the same as a bushel of wheat?
> >
>
> Wheat you can switch to eating corn or soy or something else. I have
> to take Coumadin, which is fairly cheap. Other drugs are not.
Once again the assumption of no substitutability. If every drug
manufacturer had a spot monopoly on each product...now that would be
great, for their bottom line at least. Why is it that your coumadin
is fairly "cheap"? Not because it is the only player in town, you
think? Are you really getting the branded product for $39, or is it
the "generic". Pretty much makes it a commodity product, like wheat,
doesn't it.
> > > Medical services can't be grown over night. It takes years to train
> > > doctors and nurses. Hospitals are long-term and huge projects to
> > > construct.
> >
> > So, your point is?
>
> You can't adapt to expanding the system very fast to adapt to a
> changing market that fast.
Not if a government is running it.
> > > I never said we should abolish our system
> >
> > Yes you did - you want "universal" whatever in financing and delivery.
>
> No I didn't Professor. What I wanted is reform. If they wanted to
> drastically change or abolish it I wuoldn't stand in anyone's way to
> be sure. I watched a thing on my local PBS station and they had Sec.
> of Health from the Carter, Ford, Reagan, and Bush Adminstrations on
> and the common theme was that most of these changes made abroad done
> to health care systems were built upon the previous system. If
> granting access to health coverage to those with pre-exisitng
> conidtions or banding together in Associations is 'abolishment' then
> I'm there. But I would be happy with even modest reform.
All you want is HIPAA protection for individual policy holders?
How's this for insurance - you drive without insurance until you have
an accident. Then you quickly buy insurance to fix your car. Seems
fair to me. How's this working for you?
> Just remember the market can't solve all societies problems.
The market finds solutions valued by the members of society.
> Sometimes you need government involvement, like the employer mandated
> coverage you yourself propose.
I said the solution to lack of insurance is to get people like you
from exempting yourself until you need it. Insurance isn't only for
the sick.
> > > and move to something like
> > > what they have in England. And what Germany has sounds great.
> >
> > What Germany has is not much different than what the US has - and
> > along with it the same kinds of problems and pressures.
And no pithy retort?
> > > What we need is help be people get access to care that they will be
> > > able to use iit to prevent illness.
> >
> > And with few exceptions, they do.
> >
>
> People delay care if they are poorer or uninsured. I know you going
> to ask for data. But you showed none yourself.
I spent 4 years consulting with a public health clinic system - there
was plenty of access though there always was a wait. They do not
delay care because they are poor, in fact, access for the poor is
often better than for the marginally insured.
> > > "Anecdotes are rarely convincing data - especially in this NG." What
> > > the heck is that about? Are you 'amp' the guardian here?
> >
> > The only thing I guard is what shows up in my newsreader. Georgy is
> > our anecdote King, Denise has snippets of historical anecdotes, Ryan
> > has the single continuous ER anecdote. I don't do anecdote except
> > when forced and certainly understand that the plural of anecdote is
> > not data.
> >
> > > "No, "they" do not. Those of us who are informed equate tax based
> > > single payer with socialization of medical care financing." I by
> > > informed, you mean 'those who know better'? Please, grow up we have
> > > opinions....they are different, OK?
> >
> > Informed opinions are fine - uninformed, gross generalizations, or
> > worse, op-ed page snippets as data, are my pet peeve. I'm entitlted.
> >
>
> Yes you are entitled. Indulge your pet peeve! Don't want to stand in
> your way Professor!
>
> > > I want to able to apply for health coverage and be accepted! I don't
> > > want to find out oh yeah we will sell you insurance and like $1000 a
> > > month just for me.
> >
>
> The $1000 dollars was if I had Group Coverage under HIPAA. I didn't.
When did you drop yuour insurance coverage, and why?
> Oh If you have data about the group plans small businesses have access
> to please let me know. Really I would find it useful for myself
> maybe.
I posted the link - start there.
> But one thing about cost. What are you going to do if you payed youor
> own Helath coverage and an Insurance company would come out with
> genetic testing to find what will eventually kill you then palce a
> rider on YOUR policy that excludes that illness. You would have an
> 'accident policy'. But the heart attack of cancer that would get you
> in end was your responsibily. You might as well not even carry
> coverage for an accident. You probably are covered elsewhere, (auto
> insurance or someone else liability coverage)
Hypotheticals and strawman arguments. Pffft.
> > So you DO have access, you just don't like the price. You weren't
> > refused insurance, you were refused the opportunity to take MY risk
> > exposure and apply it to YOUR situation. You wanted ME to pay part of
> > YOUR freight.
>
> But yes I would LIKE YOU Professor to pay my freight!
Thanks - income redistribution is not my idea of health insurance
reform.
> Do you think it's right to charge $1000, $2000, $3000, or $5000 a
> month?
Do you understand how health care insurance works? You pay premiums
hoping never to use the benefits - you don't pay premiums only when
you need the benefits.
I'm not a big fan of prepaid medical care, either - and there is a
difference.
> What price per month would you think is excessive? Any price
> can be charged? If you would have a worker in a grocery store would
> you expect him or her to carry such insurance?
You missed the point, didn't you. When everyone pays into the system
equally and continuosly, the risk of one member having a medical event
is shared in that the individual's risk across group members is
assumed constant. Then, when the event occurs, that individual
benefits. The value of insurance is that going into it, no one knows
which member will experience the event. The fact that we all now know
that our newest member, who hasn't paid a dime until now, is more
likely to have an event than the rest of us would give the group pause
to allow him membership, at least at the same rate.
> You mentioned you
> would not want anyone to be able to opt out. Did you want government
> assistance to pay these bills?
If you put the oneous on employers and that requirement is equal
across all employers then no single employer is at a competitive
disadvantage. That leaves the unemployed (for which you already have
unemployment insurance), the truly indigent (for whom Medicaid
exists), and the elderly (for whom Medicare exists).
You drive cost sharing based on individual decisions (a basic plan is
inexpensive, Cadillac plan is very expensive, etc - sort of how things
are usually priced).
> Medicaid in most states is strained
> financially.
Another reason why the private sector approach makes a lot more sense.
> Many governors are haivng deficit problems and one of
> the biggest cost is under-funded government mandated programs. Just
> think of the help just allowing those without coverage to buy into
> Medicaid. They could contribute alot of money to the system.
So the uninsured but financially capable buy into a system to help
offset the cost over runs of the system. Like a subsidy? Now that
makes sense. Tell you what, I'll set up a program and instead of
calling it a subsidy, I'll just call it profit.
> > > Arizona Blue Cross told me that. They also told me
> > > if I stopped taking my Coumadin for 10 years and I didn't die THEN
> > > they could sell me insurance at the regular rates. They rejected me
> > > because I take Coumadin. Oh sorry, that's an ANECDOTE? So that
> > > doesn't count?
> >
> > They didn't reject you - they priced your policy according to your
> > risk. Do you honestly believe that a 16 year old with three tickets
> > and two accidents should get the same car insurance rate as a middle
> > age mother who only drives the kids to soccer practice?
>
>
> Again if you price someone out of the health care market everyone
> loses. They will avoid care and if they are taken sick to the
> hospital who's going to pay? You will Professor. Yeah lets price
> coverage according to risk. Sounds great. But if car insurance is
> too high, I can take the bus. If I can't afford health coverage and I
> get sick who will pay the bill?
Until you become indigent, you will. Once you are below the poverty
line, like everyone else, you can avail yourself of the public welfare
saystem of care delivery. Sort of like the NHS.
> You will, thourgh higher premiums.
> Don't you think it makes more sense that I chip in something? I want
> to!
Pay your freight. Make your choices.
> And Ariizona Blue Cross said to me, it was their right under the law
> to refuse health insurance to anyone (not covered by HIPAA) they
> wanted to. Just business. which is true.
> > > What country are you from you wait 6 months to great treatment? I'm
> > > just curious, not trying to mean or anything.
> >
>
> So Professor you are writing here from the United Kingdom???
> I WANT TO KNOW IF YOU ARE ENGLISH.
No need to shout. No, I am not English by birth.
> I'm sorry your system in England has serious problems. If it is so
> bad why didn't the conservative party change it?
Actually, Maggie tried, and in 1997 they threw all the privatization
out the window. The English have never been real astute at
privatizing public inefficiency. In part it has to do with the need
to retain government "oversight" - Railtrack is the current whipping
boy for the anti-privatization pundits.
> Truthfully does the
> population in England want to abolish their system.
Those with economic wherewithall are opting to go private - almost 10
million of the 60 million residents are now covered by supplemental
private insurance and the number is increasing. A number of larger
companies, and even some smaller ones, are using this as a recruitment
and retention tool.
> I guess a polical
> movement would blossem rather quickly if everyone had such problems.
Tony and Gordon are throwing money at it to quell the revolt.
> Well does the general population in the UK disire to abolish the
> system?
They use the term "reform".
A somewhat dated overview of trends in satisfaction:
http://society.guardian.co.uk/NHSstaff/story/0,7991,413299,00.html
Those getting NHS care outside the UK are happy, though.
http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/presspr/pressreleases/nhs.htm
> > Here is a link to the waiting lists at the NHS.
> >
> > http://www.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes/
> >
> > Isn't it amazing that the government is REQUIRED by law to publish
> > these lists quarterly?
>
> Yeah I wish they would publish the names of screw-up doctors here who
> get sued all the time. In the USA you can't find out if your doctor
> has been sued repeatly.
Yes you can. You just need to know where to look. Try starting with
your states medical board.
> >
> > > "Bingo - and until you bring your level of knowledge up past innuendo
> > > and supposition, your opinions add no value." If my opinions have NO
> > > value to you then why do read them and RESPOND?
> >
> > I call it finger exercise.
>
> Exercise is good. Please vent all you want, it's good for the system
> to get all that off your chest Professor.
I have insurance.
what if what if - hypothetical hyperbole.
> Then if this is how the German System works then wunderbar Professor
> sign me up! If they price the policy so high because of the Coumadin,
> then I'm screwed! Really, I'd gladly pay the rates as long I can.
Are you employed?
> > > Whether by having an employer pay for all or part. Or require us all
> > > to buy coverage. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. That's what I meant
> > > about the whole bad debt issue with unpaid medical bills. Even the
> > > lower income people can pay SOMETHING towards the system and their
> > > health care. When you say the system requires plenty of choices...I
> > > can live with that. But what about someone priced out of the market?
> >
> > "Priced" out of the market? I'm sorry, but $1000 per month with an
> > annual income of $50,000 hardly qualifies for being priced out of the
> > market. It may mean you need to give up a few things - no more SUV,
> > no 4 bedroom house, no vacations in Vegas.
>
> Not everyone in the USA makes $50,000. Maybe in the UK they do
> Professor not here.
And how much do you make?
The median 4-person family income in the US in 2000 was $61K.
That means more than half of families make more than 60K.
The personal median annual pay in 2000 was $35K.
> > > Are you going to support a system subsidizes a policiy for a poorer
> > > person
> >
> > Medicaid already exists.
>
> You should do alittle research on Medicaid. If you make even alittle
> you don't qualify. And states are having big budgetary problems with
> it.
http://www.york.ac.uk/admin/presspr/pressreleases/nhs.htm
How much is "a little"? If you work a minimum wage job and are the
single head of a household, do you qualify for Medicaid in Arizona?
> > > or a person with a genuine health problem that inflates the
> > > price of his or her insurance?
> >
> > I am compassionate - but I would expect that genuine is subject to an
> > interesting interpretation. I would be against subsidizing higher
> > premiums for someone who smokes, for example.
>
> No problem. I'd encourage treatment to stop smoking or lose weight.
And if the person didn't, would you support a premium on the premium?
> Waht about me Professor. I take Coumadin just because I am geneticall
> pre-disposed to have blood clots form. My father died from it at 33.
> I am 42 and fine.
Genetically predisposed to having blood clots form? FVL
thrombophilia? Anything else you aren't telling us?
Does this keep you from gainful employment? "Effort thrombosis" is a
very convenient diagnosis.
> Had he taken Coumadin ( it wasn't in use then ) he
> might be alive today. I have not been the hospital since 1987 when I
> put on Coumadin for my first and only clot. The only other time I was
> in the hospital was when i got bit by a cat.
Now that can be painful ;)
> Actaully with the
> Coumadin I could be in a better position than you health wise. They
> give it to senior citizens to prevent stroke and heart attacks.
Aspirin. Coumadin is indicated in patients with A Fib.
> So Professor should my insurance policy be priced higher? Maybe
> priced 8 or 9 times higher? Would my condition be 'personal
> controllable health factor'?
My supplemental insurance costs about $400 a month...supplemental to
my NHS cover.
and you haven't changed my opinion.
> > At the begining of the thread, you said this:
> >
> > "First let me tell you I have been denied coverage because I take a
> > blood thinner. I haven't really been ill since 1987."
> >
> > And now you admit having "trouble" finding health insurance. Do you
> > have health insurance coverage now?
well?
so, are you insured now? Do you earn more than 133% of the Federal
Poverty level?
So, what is the problem?
> > > And don't forget Health Insurance Companies, Drug Companies, and large
> > > Hospital Health Care Chains aren't alturisitic.
> >
> > Nor should they be. GM, Pepsicola, and Safeway aren't either.
> >
>
> Yeah why do you think they market new drugs like Clarinex and Nexium
> which are very very similiar to other drugs.
Call it consumer choice. No one is forcing anyone to take these
medications.
> Clairitin is on the
> over-the-counter market and it's cheaper for people with insurance to
> buy the more expenise NEW Clarinex because it's a prescription.
You have no idea, do you. Three things - first, Clarinex is priced at
a discount to Claritin (as a prescription). Second, most insurers do
not cover Clarinex routinely (prior auth required). Third, those few
insurance schemes that cover Clarinex have it as a tier 3 or 4 - that
means the copay required is about the same (or in some cases even
higher) than the equivalent OTC cash price for Claritin.
So the answer is - no, it is not usually cheaper - though that is what
Schering was hoping for. The only place that this happens is in state
MEDICAID programs - and what is it you were saying about cost control?
> > > Remember the
> > > California Electricity debacle? You had Enron manipulating the system
> > > and sending power back and forth to Nevada and other Western States
> > > then reselling it back to California to drive up prices. Health
> > > Insurers, Drug Companies, and their like can do the same. Sen Bill
> > > Frist's family, the Majority leader, owns a large health care provider
> > > system and they have been in the news about settlements they made with
> > > Medicare for services not rendered.
> >
> > Fraud is fraud. Last week a consultant physician in Portsmouth (if I
> > remember correctly) lost his license and was sent to jail for billing
> > the NHS for services he didn't provide. So your point is?
>
> Health providers and Drug Companies now how to 'work' the system and
> in alot of cases here in the USA they don't even get sent to jail or
> fined. Sen. Bill First's family business 'settled' with the feds over
> some bogus billing issues under medicare. Nobody went to jail, I
> thought even some fines or some punitive action could have brought in
> play.
You are free and easy with your accusations. A little light on
evidence. And even lighter on context.
> >
> > > You have this deluded idea about your importance! Get OVER IT, move
> > > on! But your post was a gas I must say! :) It's like talking a
> > > lawyer.
> >
> > Good - I'm happy to have had the opportunity to provide you with at
> > least entertainment value. I take offense to being called a lawyer -
> > I have much higher ethics than that.
>
> So you're an Economics Professor? Really?
Not my current role.
> > > Just chill out. You don't want to give yourself a heart attack! I
> > > just hope you have good coverage if you do!
> >
> > I have NHS and BUPA-like supplemental. We call it queue jumping care.
> > Know why? The waiting list that most of the "poor" people have to
> > get on disappear for me because I can go private. You see, the
> > delivery of care in the UK isn't all public...there is a very distinct
> > and thriving private market - for insurance as well as care. About
> > 10% (and rising) UK residents have this supplemental insurance and if
> > you need an MRI, you go right to the front of the line. You need
> > chemo, we start on Monday, not Monday, 2004.
> >
> > Gotta love it.
> >
>
> I guess your life is alittle more valuable eh? The guy working in the
> fast food place serving your food can just fend for himself. I'm
> curious this private supplemental policy you have. The services you
> receive is it hospitals PAID for with public money?
Do your homework, OK.
> You pay taxes,
> the fast food worker pays taxes. That MRI machine if it is owned and
> operated by a public hospital you are like paying a BRIBE to jump to
> the head of line, it seems to me.
That wouldn't exactly be it. Let me put it into terms you might
appreciate. The NHS "buys" a certain number of units of service (be
it beds or x-rays) from "private" hospitals, it runs it's own trust
hospitals where it sells certain services to the private sector, and
then there are hospitals with "trust" wings and "private" wings.
I get to access either the public or private side - and the line to
the private side is almost always shorter.
> If the MRI machine is owned by a private outfit, then that's fine. I
> don't like it but it's fine.
You don't "like" it?
> > > Really take it easy...Who do you think you are the DEFENDER OF
> > > NEWSGROUPS? Just relax and ignore my post if it strikes a nerve.
> >
> > I usually don't respond to posters that present a cogent argument that
> > provides a basis in fact - either by citing a policy paper, or a
> > government report, or a journal article. I will respond to the
> > content of the evidence.
>
> Really Professor, I feel honored by you comments. But let me tell you
> one thing. I see you are in England and I am the USA. I wanted to
> let "AMERICANS" no about a little odd fact that I heard about
> President Bush.
>
> Do I care about the English health system, your wait times and the
> fact you have to Bribe (yeah I see it as a bribe if the state owns the
> MRI )your way to the head of the line? I feel bad that you have
> problems there. Maybe the NHS is underfunded, maybe it could be run
> more effienciently, maybe it is the worst way to deliver health care.
> I never have been to the UK so I don't know.
But you want the system for the US. Interesting.
> But I am "AMERICAN" and Americans will do what we need to do
> politcally to solve this issue. This issue in the polical area is
> still being talked about even with this war in IRAQ.
>
> As an Oberserver from a forgein country I appreciate your input and
> views. What you do in England that's your business. American's are
> the ones with the first hand knowledge of the problems or OUR health
> care system.
What makes yoiu think that I don't have first hand knowledge of the US
system, its structure, function, and issues?
> We Americans will decide over the coming series of elections.
Like the overwhelming success in Oregon last year?
> We may reform it or we might replace it or we might put off action.
> Who knows?
Like I said - the overwhelming success in the Oregon referendum was
inspiring.
> If you have such a problem with the NHS why not start a campaign to
> abolish it? Run for Parliment, start a petition drive, or protest!
Nope - economic solutions - BUPA supplemental. I don't have a problem
with my health care in the UK - its lovely as they say.
> Could it be as broken as NHS is in your eyes (it very well may be - I
> have no knowledge of it) people in the UK WANT IT?
People without access to private care are willing to live with it in
the current system but the system is being pressured politically,
socially, and economically. Tony Blair and his government are working
extremely hard to improve what they themselves have termed a system
needing major change.
> I thought you lived in a democraacy. Maybe you should move to
> germany? Apply for a visa to the USA?
I've had the opportunity to experience health care delivery in four
distinct models.
> > I don't do anecdotes very well and newspaper articles (or other lay
> > prress) are absolutely the single worst source of credible science.
> >
> > > Have a nice day :)
> >
> > You bet.
>
> It's been a riot Professor. Don't bribe to many doctors now :)
Facilitating payments.
Gretchen Evans
I always had a great deal of difficulty in the little psych work I did
during training. Couldn't separate the real ones from those
faking...and it's difficult to have much compassion and empathy under
those circumstances. But I've got to admit that if Georgie and Ryan
aren't truly loose, then they're excellent actors.
pixie
Gretchen Evans
And, as usual, Georgie didn't think of the scheduling element. Day of
the week, hour of the day, availability of physicians and staff, a
whole host of variables. Just that the finger wasn't surgically
reduced that moment. So typical
pixie
(null)
Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>We do need major medical insurance, and this is hard to get,
>because of the "insurance" schemes. Put in MSA'a, and those
>with any reasonable income will prefer to opt out of all
>prepaid plans, especially if major medical insurance again
>becomes available. The only reason the present plans pay
>is because of the tax laws.
>--
>This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
>are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
>Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
>hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
No, Herman, the tax laws have NOTHING to do with current
schemes of insurance. The AMA outlawed organizations such as
fraternal organizations hiring a physician as they used to do.
That made every doctor a small businessman. And the only way a
business can now privide for health care for its workers is with
insurance. You ignore medical history and substitute libertaian
wish-fulfillment. If you were a true libertarian, there should
be NO insurance. If you have a heatlh issue, that is your own
personal problem and don't ask me to pay for your bad health. Of
course, I am not a libertarian, but YOU are.
--
George Conklin, Durham, NC: Medicare For All Ages
If HMOs ran the post office, the AMA (American Mail Association)
would declare that getting mail was a privilege, not a right
and 43 million Americans would get no mail delivery.
(null)
Of course when the NHS does this, you blast UK. If it is for
the convienece of providers in the USA, then that is just fine
with you. You are a health care disaster. Oh yes, a woman with a
broken shoulder had to wait 2 weeks. They had to REBREAK her
shoulder and that made the revover time much longer. If that had
happened in the UK, you would have a lot to say. Here you just
don't give a right royal damn.
\
(null)
(null)
Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>In article <3e95c117$1...@news.buzzardnews.com>,
>(null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>>In article <b74f59$b...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>>Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>>Make it cheap, and it will be overused, and especially by
>>>those who are contributing least to society.
>
>> So we have the world's most expensive medical care, by an
>>average of twice too expensive. How come, according to your
>>theories, people still go to doctors? Those with no coverage
>>still go some. Your path is clear: make medicine even more
>>expensive. How high is too high? $500 per office visit for 3
>>minutes?
>
>Most medical care is subsidized now. Those who elect no
>coverage will still go when they consider the time and
>expense worth it. I did this when I had only major medical.
Just who subsidizes those well-off physicians? Medicare, that
is who. Take that million $ training subisdy out of the
hospitals and lets see what happens.
So Herman. What % of medical visits would you get rid of?
50% 75%. And do you really think the medical business is going
to allow any drop in their cash-flow? We already know the anwer
to that is NO. They will just charge the remainder more and more
and more and use the prescription laws to enforce more and more
and more office visits for less and less and less.
>I want to make medical care LESS expensive by removing the
>overhead of government and insurance bureaucracy,
See above Herman. They won't accept less money.
(null)
10 minutes is pretty good for an office visits these days Karl.
The GAO back when Hillarcare (that is what the libertarians on
TPM called it) calculated that we could provide covereage for
100% of the American public for the time wasted by duplicate
insurance companies and all those clerks whose only goal is to
deny care.
--
George Conklin, Durham, NC: Medicare For All Ages
If HMOs ran the post office, the AMA (American Mail Association)
would declare that getting mail was a privilege, not a right
and 43 million Americans would get no mail delivery.
(null)
>Over the last year and a half my Doctor saw a liver test that was
>performed by the Doctor I had perfore him. It showed some enzyme or
>something elevated in my liver and he was all concerned. So he wanted
>to redo this liver test to see if the same thing would come up. I
>told him I thought the Doctor said not to worry that the Coumadin
>could do that on the test. But he was kind of scarring me so we did
>the test again. Same thing came up. This guy was making such a fuss
>he ordered a songram of my liver checking for tumors and I was
>concerned. Turns out his boss puts a stop to it all and says this is
>all a side effect of the Coumadin and no big deal. Had me scarred for
>awhile.
You know the old saying: there is nothing worse than a doctor
'being careful.'
(null)
Well, physicians should just admit that they do what they do
to raise their incomes. Would your trust the more Herman if they
were honest about it? Maybe they believe their own propaganda,
at least in public!!!
Karl
Alot employers here don't give any sort of access to health coverage.
You are on your own. Great if you work for a big company that
provides it though.
My condition? They found some called a 'lupus anti-couagulatant
factor' in my blood in 1987. Anti-couagulant sounded like the
opposite to clotting but MANY Doctors over MANY years from
Hemotologist to Vascular Surgeons and Internist tell me that Coumadin
is the what they think I should be on. So that's where I'm Staying on
it. I had a recurring leg wound for over ten months and wear
compression stockings because the valves in my leg were so damaged by
the clots. (NOTE: Any body needing good compression stockings by the
way I found a great company that makes cheap and effective ones-just
ask me) My last employer didn't offer health coverage! Right know
hopefully I am 95% healed and should be back soon. The biggest
problem I have is standing for excessive periods of time because my
leg will swell and left ankle is all black, which is wear my leg
opened up. I just worry about losing a foot eventually.
How MANY TIMES do I have to say this? I WASN'T OFFERED $1000/MONTH
HEALTH COVERAGE. I asked if I worked under a group plan or something
that HIPAA offered THEN they would sell me insurance, 'I wanted to
know GEE WIZ what would I pay?' ! BUT AGAIN I did NOT qualify because
I wasn't under an employer's plan. GOT THAT?
Please be informed that some of 'US' here don't MAKE what 'YOU DO' in
the UK! There are plenty of us here making $18-22K a year. Yes my
pay ranged in that range! Even if they amended the HIPAA law, paying
$12K a year out of EVEN $20K. Rent at even $3500. Taxes at just
$3000. Add it up? Forget about a CAR, professor. I take the bus
which costs me another $500 or $600 a year. Expenses 12K + 3.5K + 3K
+ .5k = 19K. YOU REALLY THINK I would pay $12k a year for insurance
at my wages? And I can't be critical of my employer. They were very
nice about letting me off when I needed too to go to the Doctor. it
just isn't common here for employers to give access to health coverage
for some of us. Remember I have been fighting this since 1987! They
thought I was as good as dead then...surprise! This will kill me
eventually or I'll lose a limb then be covered under Medicare
disability.
I even access the net from the public library! So don't be beating up
on me for wasting money! I do have to eat food and I am not the party
animal wasting money on bars and vacations and the wild night life.
We on the lower rungs of society still VOTE though. Although not
enough, Im afraid. But I do ever time.
I take Warfarin Sodium Tablets 5 mg, the generic type. My Doctor
didn't like it, he wanted the Coumadin name brand, but it seems to
work OK. Coumadin is around $60. The cost of MY drug really isn't
that bad. My Mom's Accupril is $140 a month, but her plan takes care
of her and so it's cheaper.
Please know that the High Risk Pools are not OPEN for all. They limit
the NUMBERS that can get in to the high-risk pools in some states.
California does.
Medicaid you have to earn hardly nothing. I mean way below minimum
wage. And this varies from state to state. What is done in Medicard
in Wisconsin is different than Pennsylvania or California. But if you
are among the working poor you have a problem.
Stay on track. I don't know how you figure I want to nationlize the
Oil Industry??? How manys can i put this? I want reform.
But England apparantly is content with the current model. You don't
like it which is cool. But if it was that bad i doubt you would still
have it. Again if it's so bad why don't you yourself do something
about it?
As for me. I'll be back to work soon enough. Hopefully I can find an
employer that will even allow me to buy into health insurance
coverage. The economy is improving here, my last boss was asking
about me just a few days ago.
You paint a broad picture of America though. Not all things are rosy
here. But this is my home. And I certainly will use the power I have
as a Citizen and support change here and vote.
I'm sure you will jump all over this and snip and pick. Please...bon
apetite!
But I'll worry about the US health care system and MY politicans. Why
don't you worry about yours? I guess 60 Million or 'the majority that
voted' support keeping the NHS in the UK. You should focus on
changing these mis-informed folks!
Professor we here in "the Colonies" can take care of our own politics.
I for one have never missed an election. I look forward to reform.
I don't give a hoot if you think me a freeloader. Just run for
Parliment and change your system if you hate it so much. I'll worry
about mine here.
DWood78828
Georgie, after all the time you have spent on this board, you know that Amp is
not a physician. Not only are you an idiot but you are an idiot with a very
poor recall.
Denise
DWood78828
>From: jep...@shell.ntrnet.net
> Of course when the NHS does this, you blast UK. If it is for
>the convienece of providers in the USA, then that is just fine
>with you. You are a health care disaster. Oh yes, a woman with a
>broken shoulder had to wait 2 weeks. They had to REBREAK her
>shoulder and that made the
>revover time much longer. If that had
>happened in the UK, you would have a lot to say. Here you just
>don't give a right royal damn.
What woman are you ranting about. You were complaining about your wife's
broken finger.
Broken shoulder-just what do you mean by broken shoulder? The clavicle, the
humeral neck, the scapular neck, the acromioclavucular joint or the
sternoclavicular joint? Well, which one?
Denise
Gretchen Evans
>In article <b74gk5$2o...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>We do need major medical insurance, and this is hard to get,
>>because of the "insurance" schemes. Put in MSA'a, and those
>>with any reasonable income will prefer to opt out of all
>>prepaid plans, especially if major medical insurance again
>>becomes available. The only reason the present plans pay
>>is because of the tax laws.
>>--
>>This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
>>are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
>>Herman Rubin, Deptartment of Statistics, Purdue University
>>hru...@stat.purdue.edu Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558
>
> No, Herman, the tax laws have NOTHING to do with current
>schemes of insurance. The AMA outlawed organizations such as
>fraternal organizations hiring a physician as they used to do.
>That made every doctor a small businessman. And the only way a
>business can now privide for health care for its workers is with
>insurance. You ignore medical history and substitute libertaian
>wish-fulfillment. If you were a true libertarian, there should
>be NO insurance. If you have a heatlh issue, that is your own
>personal problem and don't ask me to pay for your bad health. Of
>course, I am not a libertarian, but YOU are.
Quoth Georgie; "The AMA outlawed............." and to quote ampie,
"Pffffffffffft.
pixie
Gretchen Evans
1. Please show where I've 'blasted' NHS for anything, Georgie? Aside
from mentioning from time to time that they appear to have problems
I've barely mentioned that organization other than to say that it's
one of the many UC organizations currently operating.
2. Lovely anecdote... But I doubt the truth of your claims...
Citations, please.
3. Accurate statement at last... I DON'T give a 'right royal damn', or
a left one for that matter, about your statements since the vast
majority of them are either outright lies or totally inane.
pixie
Herman Rubin
(null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>In article <b74gk5$2o...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>We do need major medical insurance, and this is hard to get,
>>because of the "insurance" schemes. Put in MSA'a, and those
>>with any reasonable income will prefer to opt out of all
>>prepaid plans, especially if major medical insurance again
>>becomes available. The only reason the present plans pay
>>is because of the tax laws.
> No, Herman, the tax laws have NOTHING to do with current
>schemes of insurance.
Wrong. The cost of providing someone with $1000 of
employer-provided healthcare by allowing the individual to
do it himself is about $1750. With MSAs, it would go back
down to $1000. More people would opt out of insurance in
this case.
The difference is that employer-provided care uses untaxed
money, while the other is taxed that $750. That some of
the taxes are paid by the employer makes no difference;
the employer cannot use that money to pay the employee.
The AMA outlawed organizations such as
>fraternal organizations hiring a physician as they used to do.
I am opposed to such restrictions. But it still should
be the case that each person should pay, or arrange his
own method of financing.
>That made every doctor a small businessman.
So what is wrong with this?
And the only way a
>business can now privide for health care for its workers is with
>insurance. You ignore medical history and substitute libertaian
>wish-fulfillment.
Before WWII, there was little medical insurance. The
current practice is NOT insurance.
If you were a true libertarian, there should
>be NO insurance. If you have a heatlh issue, that is your own
>personal problem and don't ask me to pay for your bad health. Of
>course, I am not a libertarian, but YOU are.
Libertarians do not object to true insurance. In such,
the individual buys the insurance, with stated goals and
payments, with his own money. If someone at age 18 wants
to buy a policy which cannot be cancelled as long as the
premiums are paid, and which provides up to a million
dollars of medical care for old age, again as specified,
and the insurance company is willing to sell it, there
is no libertarian objection, just as one can buy life
insurance or accident insurance or home-owners' insurance.
You make the decision, and you pay the money; if the
catastrophe does not occur, you are out the money plus
interest; if it does occur, you gain. THAT is what
real insurance is. But don't ask someone else to pay
for your insurance. The amount paid for Medicare does
not determine the benefits; this means that it cannot
be considered as insurance.
Remember that the insurance company has to make a profit.
This is why there are large deductibles, and large firms
often "self-insure".
>--
>George Conklin, Durham, NC: Medicare For All Ages
>If HMOs ran the post office, the AMA (American Mail Association)
>would declare that getting mail was a privilege, not a right
>and 43 million Americans would get no mail delivery.
Herman Rubin
(null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>In article <b74l54$15...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>In article <3e95c117$1...@news.buzzardnews.com>,
>>(null) <jep...@shell.ntrnet.net> wrote:
>>>In article <b74f59$b...@odds.stat.purdue.edu>,
>>>Herman Rubin <hru...@odds.stat.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>>>Make it cheap, and it will be overused, and especially by
>>>>those who are contributing least to society.
>>> So we have the world's most expensive medical care, by an
>>>average of twice too expensive. How come, according to your
>>>theories, people still go to doctors? Those with no coverage
>>>still go some. Your path is clear: make medicine even more
>>>expensive. How high is too high? $500 per office visit for 3
>>>minutes?
>>Most medical care is subsidized now. Those who elect no
>>coverage will still go when they consider the time and
>>expense worth it. I did this when I had only major medical.
> Just who subsidizes those well-off physicians? Medicare, that
>is who. Take that million $ training subisdy out of the
>hospitals and lets see what happens.
Medicare does not pay enough to cover physicians' expenses
at this time. Many refuse to accept Medicare patients at
all, and many are willing to take the loss to continue
seeing those they have seen before.
> So Herman. What % of medical visits would you get rid of?
>50% 75%.
Probably 20% to 30%. This would be offset by the savings
in paperwork. For the expensive visits, there would not
be much decrease.
And do you really think the medical business is going
>to allow any drop in their cash-flow? We already know the anwer
>to that is NO. They will just charge the remainder more and more
>and more and use the prescription laws to enforce more and more
>and more office visits for less and less and less.
There is enough competition to take care of this. As an
example, when laser eye treatments were introduced, they
cost about $5000 in the US and Canada subsidized them at
$2000. They are about $1000 in the US now.
>>I want to make medical care LESS expensive by removing the
>>overhead of government and insurance bureaucracy,
> See above Herman. They won't accept less money.
They will be happy to if they can get rid of the overhead.
I did not follow up on it, but there was a health group
which charged about 1/3 less, but would not accept any
form of "insurance". MSAs are not insurance, but money
belonging to the individual put aside for medical purposes,
and untaxed from the beginning.
amp_spamfree
Your inconsistencies are starting to become humourous. Your inability
to address specific points in the thread and resorting to anecdote
looking for empathy because you have suffered so at the hands of
fate...
> First professor. No I don't make 61k, 50K, or 40K. I make alot less.
You are unemployed - we call that being on the dole.
> Alot employers here don't give any sort of access to health coverage.
Agreed - some employers do not include medical insurance as a benefit.
Most are either extemely small or the employee works part time.
> You are on your own. Great if you work for a big company that
> provides it though.
Great if you work.
> My condition? They found some called a 'lupus anti-couagulatant
> factor' in my blood in 1987.
You are 42. The diagnosis was made in 1987 - at age 26. Were you
employed? Did you have insurance prior to that?
> Anti-couagulant sounded like the
> opposite to clotting but MANY Doctors over MANY years from
> Hemotologist to Vascular Surgeons and Internist tell me that Coumadin
> is the what they think I should be on. So that's where I'm Staying on
> it. I had a recurring leg wound for over ten months and wear
> compression stockings because the valves in my leg were so damaged by
> the clots.
I am well aware of PTD and its cause and consequence.
(NOTE: Any body needing good compression stockings by the
> way I found a great company that makes cheap and effective ones-just
> ask me) My last employer didn't offer health coverage!
Have you ever had health insurance? If in fact you had a serious
medical condition, why did you give up medical insurance? Did your
new job without insurance pay better than the one with?
> Right know
> hopefully I am 95% healed and should be back soon. The biggest
> problem I have is standing for excessive periods of time because my
> leg will swell and left ankle is all black, which is wear my leg
> opened up. I just worry about losing a foot eventually.
In your months of unemployement, what effort did you make to improve
your career possibilities? Did you enroll in any educational programs
or participate in government funded retraining? Wouln't it have made
sense to pursue technical training for a job that didn't require you
to stand?
> How MANY TIMES do I have to say this? I WASN'T OFFERED $1000/MONTH
> HEALTH COVERAGE. I asked if I worked under a group plan or something
> that HIPAA offered THEN they would sell me insurance, 'I wanted to
> know GEE WIZ what would I pay?' ! BUT AGAIN I did NOT qualify because
> I wasn't under an employer's plan. GOT THAT?
Like I said - you waffle and weave with your story it is a bit hard to
keep up.
> Please be informed that some of 'US' here don't MAKE what 'YOU DO' in
> the UK! There are plenty of us here making $18-22K a year. Yes my
> pay ranged in that range!
The majority do not. The majority have health care coverage. The
majority don't require public assistance. The majority pay taxes.
> Even if they amended the HIPAA law, paying
> $12K a year out of EVEN $20K. Rent at even $3500. Taxes at just
> $3000.
Taxes? You paid $3,000 in taxes?
> Add it up? Forget about a CAR, professor. I take the bus
> which costs me another $500 or $600 a year.
Where are you taking the bus?
> Expenses 12K + 3.5K + 3K
> + .5k = 19K. YOU REALLY THINK I would pay $12k a year for insurance
> at my wages?
You said you were unemployed.
> And I can't be critical of my employer. They were very
> nice about letting me off when I needed too to go to the Doctor. it
> just isn't common here for employers to give access to health coverage
> for some of us. Remember I have been fighting this since 1987!
Why did you let your insurance lapse? Or as a 26 year old did you
decide that you didn't need insurance because you were young and
healthy. Now that you do, you gripe because it is expensive?
> They
> thought I was as good as dead then...surprise! This will kill me
> eventually or I'll lose a limb then be covered under Medicare
> disability.
>
> I even access the net from the public library! So don't be beating up
> on me for wasting money! I do have to eat food and I am not the party
> animal wasting money on bars and vacations and the wild night life.
> We on the lower rungs of society still VOTE though. Although not
> enough, Im afraid. But I do ever time.
Its interesting how that happens.
> I take Warfarin Sodium Tablets 5 mg, the generic type. My Doctor
> didn't like it, he wanted the Coumadin name brand, but it seems to
> work OK. Coumadin is around $60. The cost of MY drug really isn't
> that bad. My Mom's Accupril is $140 a month, but her plan takes care
> of her and so it's cheaper.
>
> Please know that the High Risk Pools are not OPEN for all. They limit
> the NUMBERS that can get in to the high-risk pools in some states.
> California does.
>
> Medicaid you have to earn hardly nothing. I mean way below minimum
> wage.
Agian you demonstrate your ignorance of medical programs. Do me a
favour - get out your calculator, run the numbers, look up the federal
poverty level, than look at the medicaid requirements in your state
and tell me again how a minimum wage earner doesn't meet the threshold
income requirements.
> And this varies from state to state. What is done in Medicard
> in Wisconsin is different than Pennsylvania or California. But if you
> are among the working poor you have a problem.
>
> Stay on track. I don't know how you figure I want to nationlize the
> Oil Industry??? How manys can i put this? I want reform.
You started out by posing the rhetorical question, if it is promoted
for Iraq, why not in the US. The simple answer - because in Iraq, the
money comes from oil and oil is not a private enterprise, in Iraq.
> But England apparantly is content with the current model.
I posted a number of links to demonstrate exactly that the opposite is
true. What is it about URLs that you are having problems with?
> You don't
> like it which is cool. But if it was that bad i doubt you would still
> have it.
Since 1997 the structure, function, financing, and delivery of NHS
based care has changed, in some parts quite dramatically. Since 1997,
the amount of private care has almost doubled. It is already evident
that the private sector will take a leadershp role going forward.
> Again if it's so bad why don't you yourself do something
> about it?
We are.
> As for me. I'll be back to work soon enough. Hopefully I can find an
> employer that will even allow me to buy into health insurance
> coverage. The economy is improving here, my last boss was asking
> about me just a few days ago.
See, one more wobble in your story.
> You paint a broad picture of America though. Not all things are rosy
> here. But this is my home. And I certainly will use the power I have
> as a Citizen and support change here and vote.
The responsibility of all voters is to be informed. Live up to your
responsibility.
> I'm sure you will jump all over this and snip and pick. Please...bon
> apetite!
You make it all too easy.
> But I'll worry about the US health care system and MY politicans. Why
> don't you worry about yours? I guess 60 Million or 'the majority that
> voted' support keeping the NHS in the UK.
No. The majority want change and changes are being made. The move is
away from UC/SP. Lessons learned. In fact, look across all of Europe
and you'll quickly see two things - first, health care is becoming
more and more costly and second, the private sector is playing a
bigger role every day.
> You should focus on
> changing these mis-informed folks!
Been there, done that, and have effected change.
> Professor we here in "the Colonies" can take care of our own politics.
Yes you certainly can - and the resoundung defeat of the UC/SP
referendum in oregon is testament to that.
> I for one have never missed an election. I look forward to reform.
> I don't give a hoot if you think me a freeloader. Just run for
> Parliment and change your system if you hate it so much. I'll worry
> about mine here.
Unfortunately, your freeloading costs me money. You see, I pay taxes
to the IRS as well as the Inland Revenue. And in 2002 I paid more in
personal income taxes than the median salary for a family of 4. Yes,
I too have a vested interest in how Bush spends money.
My recommendation to you is focus on improving your skill set and make
yourself marketable to employers.
Karl
before 1987. I can however move from Pennsylvania to outside my
general area unless I lose the coverage I have NOW. It doesn't for
office visits or drugs or certain diagnostic testing because of
deductibles. Since I pay for my coverage here in Pennsylvania myself
and am not covered by a group as required under HIPAA I can't
AUTOMATICALLY be accepted by Arizona Health Insurance providers, where
I would like to move too.
And I am not on 'the dole'. I have NEVER received welfare, public
assistance, Medicaid. I EXPECTED to by off for a series of weeks and
I bugdeted for this by saving up and preparing to be off so My leg
could heal.
Being on the "DOLE", to me at least, is receiving PUBLIC WELFARE
MONEY. I do not.
As for Medicaid you can make what I did and qualify for it. You
obvivously feel you know so much about EVERYTHING I saw you 2300+
posts! Wow that is alot of writing. Amazing you have any time left
to do anything else.
As for Oregon. Does it mean if a political question is defeated ONCE
then you give up? Since those in Oregon have decided this then I
should just forget about it? Amazing. Even if it was defeated
nationally I would still support trying to change it. Hopefully
change will come. Maybe we could even RAISE YOUR taxes to pay for it?
I don't mind paying taxes. I don't even fiddle trying to cheat the
IRS.
As for $3000 in taxes. Add up Federal income taxes, state income
taxes, wage taxes... around 15% isn't that bad. I know poor Professor
you pay a much higher percentage...as it should be? What NO SUV for
you? Sad.
The BUS I take is to work? Remember Work? Also I have to get to the
Doctor, store, et al.
You said YOU Professor you were quite happy with the 2 tier system.
Oh you whine about the waiting lists. An bemoan the lack of
privatization in the UK.
So I should live up to my responsibility and be informed so I can vote
the way the Professor wishes? No No if I decide I would like a
different system then I will vote that way.
My freeloading on YOU? Please. I pay my taxes, I pay most of my
medical expenses WITHOUT health insurance even kicking in. You just
can't keep about whining about the taxes you pay.
You profess all this knowlege about all things like some grand Oracle.
But you have know idea about Medicaid. You THINK you have knowledge
about High RisK pools but you don't know anything about waiting lists
there. Actually california limits the NUMBER that can get inot those
high risk pools. Pennsylvania HAS a program for low income people
without insurance BUT it is currenly closed and HAS a waiting list
too. I wanted to MOVE and this is HOW all this about Heath Insurance
was discovered by me.
If you feel you KNOW SO FREAKING MUCH. Then why not respond with
actually facts about Medicaid? You present the picture you ARE an
expert on Health care but I suspect you are NOT.
You are probable some Puesdo-intellectual with alot of time on his/her
hands.
If you do in fact pay alot of taxes the USA I hope you get to pay
more!
And in future be careful prescribing drug alternatives. I can tell
you are NO Doctor. Aspirin instead of Coumadin. What next Professor
take BOTH? Tell me professor what happens If I take Aspirin while I
take Coumadin TOGETHER?
What are the side effects of Aspirins? Is is sound medical judgement
to STOP taking Coumadin?
You try and present this vast medical knowledge but a REAL medical
Professional will be very reluctant to tell what INR is the safe range
and when does that INR become UNSAFELY high. Do not even bother
posting numbers, because I doubt your MEDICAL knowledge. Real medical
professional are very careful about dispensing advice over the net.
It took my three Doctors to PIN down what INR would warrant corrective
action. It took Bristol Myers to give me in details the side effects
of too much Coumadin in the short term (I'm not talking aobut bleeding
but before that)
You quickly jumped right in with the offer of a replacment for
Coumadin. Do you JUMP in with other medical advice to others? Be
very careful! Should someone take you advice they could trace it back
to you! IP addresses are there for a reason. They can be used to
trace right back to you through your IP. Not to mention killing or
causing serious medical consequences for others you could be liable
for damages. I know this is what will most bother you.
Before you go nuts. ARE GOING TO ALLEGE YOU ARE A DOCTOR? To quote
YOU in advance : "Pffffffffffffffft !!!"
You are very adept at yanking statistical snippets but you don't
understand the real world. But you miss alot. 8% of those over
$75000 OPT out. You just through stuff like that out there.
My biggest beef is not being able to move out west and be covered. I
paid for health coverage for decades. So I paid into the system. If
it takes crashing the whole US heath Care system and TAXING your
miserable English butt till you cry for mercy so be it. Funny the
cheapest people I know are the ones making the most.
Next time you whip out facts and allege YOU know everything about life
here in the US do some research Professor. YOU shoould know to the
penny about Mediacid Programs since YOU yourself are the
self-proclaimed expert! You shoudl KNOW about waiting lists for
HIGH-Risk Pools but you don't.
You sit by that computer somewhere pulling snippets of web sites to
reguratate web links and snippets of statistics lifted of the net to
make yourself out as some expert.
Am I an expert? Hell no. I am a voter who wants change. ANY CHANGE!
Big change or small change.
Really 2300+ posts? Do you actually remember what the outdoors look
like? This is what you must do all the time.
As for me I can wait to keep pounding away at this issue with my
politicians.
I have no problem helping out my fellow Americans. I do alot of work
with my church and don't shy away doing something for others to help
out. But you seem to be so so insecure and fearful of the MASSES
coming for your money through taxes.
You should spend less time on the net POSTING medical advice on things
you know little about to belittle and enjoy life alittle. It's a
beautiful day here nice and sunny and warm. Step away form the net
see the real world alittle. Be less free with the medical advice
until you attend medical school and are actively practicing for
awhile.
Mean while if you don't like paying taxes in the US. Give up your US
citizenship if you have dual citizenship.
You whining about your excessive taxes.............SO SAD! Live up to
responisbilties and learn what a gradualted tax system is all about.
US TAXES are among the lowest aren't they? I don't mind paying taxes.
I would even pay MORE taxes.
Venture outside Professor. Life in the real warld can be fun.
Karl
I stated I "can" qualify or so it looked. I CAN NOT QUALIFY FOR
MEDICAID. As for Minimum wage workers which I am not. I was typing
so fast I miss word sometimes...sorry about that.
No Medicaid is, in Pennsylvania and othet states like Wisconsin, a
"limited time thing" You get it for so long and then that's it.
My efforts to get retrained? For 3 weeks straight my leg was elevated
and only recently have I been OUT an about except for trips to the
Wound Care people.
Again be careful about your MEDICAL ADVICE before you kill someone.
(null)
>
>I take Warfarin Sodium Tablets 5 mg, the generic type. My Doctor
>didn't like it, he wanted the Coumadin name brand, but it seems to
>work OK. Coumadin is around $60. The cost of MY drug really isn't
>that bad. My Mom's Accupril is $140 a month, but her plan takes care
>of her and so it's cheaper.
>
>Please know that the High Risk Pools are not OPEN for all. They limit
>the NUMBERS that can get in to the high-risk pools in some states.
>California does.
>
You are a good example of why we need national health insurance
in the USA, just like in every other industrialized democracy.
Of course you physician wants you to spend more money. $60 to
them is lunch money.
(null)
Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
>before 1987. I can however move from Pennsylvania to outside my
>general area unless I lose the coverage I have NOW. It doesn't for
>office visits or drugs or certain diagnostic testing because of
>deductibles. Since I pay for my coverage here in Pennsylvania myself
>and am not covered by a group as required under HIPAA I can't
>AUTOMATICALLY be accepted by Arizona Health Insurance providers, where
>I would like to move too.
>
>And I am not on 'the dole'. I have NEVER received welfare, public
>assistance, Medicaid. I EXPECTED to by off for a series of weeks and
>I bugdeted for this by saving up and preparing to be off so My leg
>could heal.
>
>Being on the "DOLE", to me at least, is receiving PUBLIC WELFARE
>MONEY. I do not.
>
here. I am, but I certainly did not say you were on the dole.
You are a good example of why we need national health insurance.
(null)
You did not respond to the question. Medicare supplements
medical training expenses. Take Medicare out of the training
formula and see what kind of subsidy really is there.
And given with CU reported was average physician overhead, a
physician with an average Medicare fee and 6 weeks off could
clear $195,000 a year on Medicare.
>> So Herman. What % of medical visits would you get rid of?
>>50% 75%.
>
>Probably 20% to 30%. This would be offset by the savings
>in paperwork. For the expensive visits, there would not
>be much decrease.
Every visit would then become expensive.
> And do you really think the medical business is going
>>to allow any drop in their cash-flow? We already know the anwer
>>to that is NO. They will just charge the remainder more and more
>>and more and use the prescription laws to enforce more and more
>>and more office visits for less and less and less.
>
>There is enough competition to take care of this. As an
>example, when laser eye treatments were introduced, they
>cost about $5000 in the US and Canada subsidized them at
>$2000. They are about $1000 in the US now.
And much less in Canada.
marika
> Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
> before 1987.
{...]
>
>
> Venture outside Professor. Life in the real warld can be fun.
maybe his diplomba is in his teeth
amp_spamfree
> Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
> before 1987.
Your story is becoming more and more bizare. So, you do have
insurance. What is your complaint?
> I can however move from Pennsylvania to outside my
> general area unless I lose the coverage I have NOW. It doesn't for
> office visits or drugs or certain diagnostic testing because of
> deductibles. Since I pay for my coverage here in Pennsylvania myself
> and am not covered by a group as required under HIPAA I can't
> AUTOMATICALLY be accepted by Arizona Health Insurance providers, where
> I would like to move too.
So, you want to move to Arizona? That's your complaint. Why is it you
can't get Arizona coverage if you have had continuous coverage in
Pennsylvania?
> And I am not on 'the dole'. I have NEVER received welfare, public
> assistance, Medicaid.
Workers Comp?
> I EXPECTED to by off for a series of weeks and
> I bugdeted for this by saving up and preparing to be off so My leg
> could heal.
Sure.
> Being on the "DOLE", to me at least, is receiving PUBLIC WELFARE
> MONEY. I do not.
No? But you are advocating that medical insurance become nationalized
and I imagine you would like to see progressive taxes to fund it (the
rest of your post is pretty much an indictment of that). Since you
are opposed to nationalizing the oil industry to pay for universal
health care, I can only surmise that you would need to fund it through
taxes.
> As for Medicaid you can make what I did and qualify for it.
My point was that at minimum wage, medicaid eligibility is not out of
range, and under a variety of state programs, subsidized medical care
is available even for those above 166% of the federal poverty line.
> You
> obvivously feel you know so much about EVERYTHING I saw you 2300+
> posts! Wow that is alot of writing. Amazing you have any time left
> to do anything else.
It is amazing, isn't it. Did you bother to read any of the posts?
> As for Oregon. Does it mean if a political question is defeated ONCE
> then you give up?
The "political" question in Oregon has been on their agenda for 15
years and has routinely been defeated by the majority. The Hillary
system was soundly defeated. There is no evidence of any initiative
toward a tax based "universal" health care system being even
marginally successful in the US that I am aware of. You?
> Since those in Oregon have decided this then I
> should just forget about it? Amazing. Even if it was defeated
> nationally I would still support trying to change it. Hopefully
> change will come. Maybe we could even RAISE YOUR taxes to pay for it?
That would be the objective. Someone in the US at my level of income
would see a fourfold rise in health care insurance costs under the
Oregon model.
> I don't mind paying taxes. I don't even fiddle trying to cheat the
> IRS.
At $20K there's not much you need to fiddle. Your liability is about
10% and depending on family circumstances, you could end up not paying
a dime - or in some cases, actually getting a tax credit.
> As for $3000 in taxes. Add up Federal income taxes, state income
> taxes, wage taxes... around 15% isn't that bad. I know poor Professor
> you pay a much higher percentage...as it should be? What NO SUV for
> you? Sad.
It should be? Who says? Karl Marx?
>
> The BUS I take is to work? Remember Work? Also I have to get to the
> Doctor, store, et al.
Now you are employed again. Amazing.
> You said YOU Professor you were quite happy with the 2 tier system.
> Oh you whine about the waiting lists. An bemoan the lack of
> privatization in the UK.
No, I said that the private segment provides satisfactory care. I'm
not fond of paying twice. I also pointed out that the public sector
UC/SP results in waiting lists.
> So I should live up to my responsibility and be informed so I can vote
> the way the Professor wishes? No No if I decide I would like a
> different system then I will vote that way.
Ignorance is bliss.
> My freeloading on YOU? Please. I pay my taxes, I pay most of my
> medical expenses WITHOUT health insurance even kicking in. You just
> can't keep about whining about the taxes you pay.
And you want me to pay more so you can get more?
> You profess all this knowlege about all things like some grand Oracle.
> But you have know idea about Medicaid. You THINK you have knowledge
> about High RisK pools but you don't know anything about waiting lists
> there. Actually california limits the NUMBER that can get inot those
> high risk pools. Pennsylvania HAS a program for low income people
> without insurance BUT it is currenly closed and HAS a waiting list
> too. I wanted to MOVE and this is HOW all this about Heath Insurance
> was discovered by me.
Your inconsistencies are quite telling.
> If you feel you KNOW SO FREAKING MUCH. Then why not respond with
> actually facts about Medicaid? You present the picture you ARE an
> expert on Health care but I suspect you are NOT.
What facts would you like?
> You are probable some Puesdo-intellectual with alot of time on his/her
> hands.
At least I make an effort to write in complete sentences, use words in
correct context, and spell them accordingly. I am guilty of the
occasional typo.
> If you do in fact pay alot of taxes the USA I hope you get to pay
> more!
Wonderful attitude. This confirms what I've been saying all along.
Your penchant for freebies is much to obvious.
> And in future be careful prescribing drug alternatives. I can tell
> you are NO Doctor. Aspirin instead of Coumadin.
As an anticoagulant (technically an antiplatelet agent), aspirin is
quite effective. Makes those platelets nice and slippy. In cases of
factor V Leiden mutation or LA, aspirin is one therapeutic option:
"Only a positive lupus anticoagulant and moderately elevated ACA IgG
were found. The ACA IgG was moderately elevated on repeat testing 18
months later. Laser to nonperfused retina caused some regression of
retinal neovascularization. Aspirin was recommended to reduce the risk
of future thromboses."
> What next Professor
> take BOTH? Tell me professor what happens If I take Aspirin while I
> take Coumadin TOGETHER?
Your insurance problems would be solved.
> What are the side effects of Aspirins? Is is sound medical judgement
> to STOP taking Coumadin?
Is this a quiz? Eat lots of broccoli.
> You try and present this vast medical knowledge but a REAL medical
> Professional will be very reluctant to tell what INR is the safe range
> and when does that INR become UNSAFELY high.
> Do not even bother
> posting numbers, because I doubt your MEDICAL knowledge. Real medical
> professional are very careful about dispensing advice over the net.
Wasn't it you who said: "Actaully with the Coumadin I could be in a
better position than you health wise. They give it to senior citizens
to prevent stroke and heart attacks."
> It took my three Doctors to PIN down what INR would warrant corrective
> action.
Do you know what INR means?
> It took Bristol Myers to give me in details the side effects
> of too much Coumadin in the short term (I'm not talking aobut bleeding
> but before that)
Okey dokey dockey. What I find interesting is that although you
purchase a low priced generic, you rely on BMS to provide you
information about your therapy. Another freeload.
> You quickly jumped right in with the offer of a replacment for
> Coumadin.
You were moaning about how expensive things were. Obviously, in terms
of antithrombotic agents, aspirin is an accepted and frequently used
prophylactic therapy. Gee, how about that. If you are in doubt, try
PubMed and search terms aspirin and stroke as a start.
> Do you JUMP in with other medical advice to others? Be
> very careful! Should someone take you advice they could trace it back
> to you! IP addresses are there for a reason. They can be used to
> trace right back to you through your IP. Not to mention killing or
> causing serious medical consequences for others you could be liable
> for damages. I know this is what will most bother you.
And a lawyer you aren't either.
> Before you go nuts. ARE GOING TO ALLEGE YOU ARE A DOCTOR? To quote
> YOU in advance : "Pffffffffffffffft !!!"
You're catching on.
> You are very adept at yanking statistical snippets but you don't
> understand the real world. But you miss alot. 8% of those over
> $75000 OPT out. You just through stuff like that out there.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/hlthins/hlthin01/hi01tb3.html
No, I don't just throw stuff out there - twit.
> My biggest beef is not being able to move out west and be covered. I
> paid for health coverage for decades. So I paid into the system. If
> it takes crashing the whole US heath Care system and TAXING your
> miserable English butt till you cry for mercy so be it. Funny the
> cheapest people I know are the ones making the most.
Isn't that a remarkable change in attitude. What happend to wanting
to pay your fair share?
> Next time you whip out facts and allege YOU know everything about life
> here in the US do some research Professor.
Getting a bit defensive? What facts do you disagree with? I'll
provide the references if you like.
> YOU shoould know to the
> penny about Mediacid Programs since YOU yourself are the
> self-proclaimed expert! You shoudl KNOW about waiting lists for
> HIGH-Risk Pools but you don't.
Interesting.
> You sit by that computer somewhere pulling snippets of web sites to
> reguratate web links and snippets of statistics lifted of the net to
> make yourself out as some expert.
Expert is what others call you.
> Am I an expert? Hell no. I am a voter who wants change. ANY CHANGE!
> Big change or small change.
You are a freeloader that wants something for nothing.
> Really 2300+ posts? Do you actually remember what the outdoors look
> like? This is what you must do all the time.
> As for me I can wait to keep pounding away at this issue with my
> politicians.
And you'll be so damned successful - I'm sure your representatives are
responsive to personal tirades from illiterates.
> I have no problem helping out my fellow Americans. I do alot of work
> with my church and don't shy away doing something for others to help
> out. But you seem to be so so insecure and fearful of the MASSES
> coming for your money through taxes.
No - not at all.
> You should spend less time on the net POSTING medical advice on things
> you know little about to belittle and enjoy life alittle. It's a
> beautiful day here nice and sunny and warm. Step away form the net
> see the real world alittle. Be less free with the medical advice
> until you attend medical school and are actively practicing for
> awhile.
>
> Mean while if you don't like paying taxes in the US. Give up your US
> citizenship if you have dual citizenship.
Who said I have dual citizenship? Tax law another one of your
forte's?
> You whining about your excessive taxes.............SO SAD! Live up to
> responisbilties and learn what a gradualted tax system is all about.
Learn to spell. I never whined about "excessive" taxes, I just
commented on how easy it is for you to rationalize freeloading.
> US TAXES are among the lowest aren't they? I don't mind paying taxes.
> I would even pay MORE taxes.
At your tax rate, certainly. You see, in Europe, the top rates kick
in at fairly low incomes - your $20K would be taxed at about 30%, not
15%, and that before the 20% VAT. (OK, not every European country,
but Sweden, Belgium, Germany, France, and probably a few more.)
> Venture outside Professor. Life in the real warld can be fun.
Too funny.
amp_spamfree
> In article <911abb80.0304...@posting.google.com>,
> Karl <kar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
> >before 1987. I can however move from Pennsylvania to outside my
> >general area unless I lose the coverage I have NOW. It doesn't for
> >office visits or drugs or certain diagnostic testing because of
> >deductibles. Since I pay for my coverage here in Pennsylvania myself
> >and am not covered by a group as required under HIPAA I can't
> >AUTOMATICALLY be accepted by Arizona Health Insurance providers, where
> >I would like to move too.
> >
> >And I am not on 'the dole'. I have NEVER received welfare, public
> >assistance, Medicaid. I EXPECTED to by off for a series of weeks and
> >I bugdeted for this by saving up and preparing to be off so My leg
> >could heal.
> >
> >Being on the "DOLE", to me at least, is receiving PUBLIC WELFARE
> >MONEY. I do not.
> >
> I am not sure if there are any genuine professors posting
> here. I am, but I certainly did not say you were on the dole.
> You are a good example of why we need national health insurance.
Georgy - had you bothered to read, you would have seen that karl has
medical insurance. His complaint is that it is not as portable as
he'd like. Seems he wants to move to Arizona.
I really found your statement hunourous - about not being sure if your
professorship was genuine.
Thanks for playing.
Karl
> kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.0304...@posting.google.com>...
> > Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
> > before 1987.
>
> Your story is becoming more and more bizare. So, you do have
> insurance. What is your complaint?
>
> > I can however move from Pennsylvania to outside my
> > general area unless I lose the coverage I have NOW. It doesn't for
> > office visits or drugs or certain diagnostic testing because of
> > deductibles. Since I pay for my coverage here in Pennsylvania myself
> > and am not covered by a group as required under HIPAA I can't
> > AUTOMATICALLY be accepted by Arizona Health Insurance providers, where
> > I would like to move too.
>
> So, you want to move to Arizona? That's your complaint. Why is it you
> can't get Arizona coverage if you have had continuous coverage in
> Pennsylvania?
>
> > And I am not on 'the dole'. I have NEVER received welfare, public
> > assistance, Medicaid.
>
> Workers Comp?
Worker's comp is insurance employer's are required to pay to cover
injuries incurred while on the JOB. It's not FREELOADING.
>
> > I EXPECTED to by off for a series of weeks and
> > I bugdeted for this by saving up and preparing to be off so My leg
> > could heal.
>
> Sure.
>
> > Being on the "DOLE", to me at least, is receiving PUBLIC WELFARE
> > MONEY. I do not.
>
> No? But you are advocating that medical insurance become nationalized
> and I imagine you would like to see progressive taxes to fund it (the
> rest of your post is pretty much an indictment of that). Since you
> are opposed to nationalizing the oil industry to pay for universal
> health care, I can only surmise that you would need to fund it through
> taxes.
Progressive taxes are fine with me. At the lower and lower rates of
income people can't be expected to pay the same rates. Society has
allowed for income to be taxed at higher and higher rates as the
ability to pay increases.
Don't like the graduated tax system write the your MP.
>
> > As for Medicaid you can make what I did and qualify for it.
>
> My point was that at minimum wage, medicaid eligibility is not out of
> range, and under a variety of state programs, subsidized medical care
> is available even for those above 166% of the federal poverty line.
You obiviously STILL don't understand Medicaid do you? Medicaid and
Welfare are temporary programs in more and more states.
>
> > You
> > obvivously feel you know so much about EVERYTHING I saw you 2300+
> > posts! Wow that is alot of writing. Amazing you have any time left
> > to do anything else.
>
> It is amazing, isn't it. Did you bother to read any of the posts?
No professor I do have more important things to do.
>
> > As for Oregon. Does it mean if a political question is defeated ONCE
> > then you give up?
>
> The "political" question in Oregon has been on their agenda for 15
> years and has routinely been defeated by the majority. The Hillary
> system was soundly defeated. There is no evidence of any initiative
> toward a tax based "universal" health care system being even
> marginally successful in the US that I am aware of. You?
>
Good I don't care if it's on for another 15 years. I will keep
support change.
> > Since those in Oregon have decided this then I
> > should just forget about it? Amazing. Even if it was defeated
> > nationally I would still support trying to change it. Hopefully
> > change will come. Maybe we could even RAISE YOUR taxes to pay for it?
>
> That would be the objective. Someone in the US at my level of income
> would see a fourfold rise in health care insurance costs under the
> Oregon model.
The one plan in California I heard in their State Senate had a 6%
Payroll Tax AND a 3% wage tax. If you are a business and you can't
bump up from paying $7.00 and hour to $7.42 an hour your business has
some serious problems. In my region of the US alot of businesses pay
above minimum wage anyway. They just don't out access to health
insurance.
>
> > I don't mind paying taxes. I don't even fiddle trying to cheat the
> > IRS.
>
> At $20K there's not much you need to fiddle. Your liability is about
> 10% and depending on family circumstances, you could end up not paying
> a dime - or in some cases, actually getting a tax credit.
Sorry very wrong. I pay for alot even under my health plan.
Providers don't care how much you make here. No Free Care plans kick
in as seem to think. I pay far more than the "dime" you allege.
>
> > As for $3000 in taxes. Add up Federal income taxes, state income
> > taxes, wage taxes... around 15% isn't that bad. I know poor Professor
> > you pay a much higher percentage...as it should be? What NO SUV for
> > you? Sad.
>
> It should be? Who says? Karl Marx?
No the Ways and Means Committee of the US House of Representatives.
That's what really irks you eh? You just can't stand paying taxes.
>
> >
> > The BUS I take is to work? Remember Work? Also I have to get to the
> > Doctor, store, et al.
>
> Now you are employed again. Amazing.
Glad you fell that way. I wonder if you really are?
>
> > You said YOU Professor you were quite happy with the 2 tier system.
> > Oh you whine about the waiting lists. An bemoan the lack of
> > privatization in the UK.
>
> No, I said that the private segment provides satisfactory care. I'm
> not fond of paying twice. I also pointed out that the public sector
> UC/SP results in waiting lists.
>
You said you were happy with it. GO back and read it!
> > So I should live up to my responsibility and be informed so I can vote
> > the way the Professor wishes? No No if I decide I would like a
> > different system then I will vote that way.
>
> Ignorance is bliss.
>
You must be very happy then. You live in your own little world where
professor knows best. Tell me is Prozac covered under your NHS, maybe
you should try some. After a Doctor's visit of course.
> > My freeloading on YOU? Please. I pay my taxes, I pay most of my
> > medical expenses WITHOUT health insurance even kicking in. You just
> > can't keep about whining about the taxes you pay.
>
> And you want me to pay more so you can get more?
America is very under-taxed by your own admission and YOU can't keep
from complaining about it!
>
> > You profess all this knowlege about all things like some grand Oracle.
> > But you have know idea about Medicaid. You THINK you have knowledge
> > about High RisK pools but you don't know anything about waiting lists
> > there. Actually california limits the NUMBER that can get inot those
> > high risk pools. Pennsylvania HAS a program for low income people
> > without insurance BUT it is currenly closed and HAS a waiting list
> > too. I wanted to MOVE and this is HOW all this about Heath Insurance
> > was discovered by me.
>
> Your inconsistencies are quite telling.
>
> > If you feel you KNOW SO FREAKING MUCH. Then why not respond with
> > actually facts about Medicaid? You present the picture you ARE an
> > expert on Health care but I suspect you are NOT.
>
> What facts would you like?
>
> > You are probable some Puesdo-intellectual with alot of time on his/her
> > hands.
>
> At least I make an effort to write in complete sentences, use words in
> correct context, and spell them accordingly. I am guilty of the
> occasional typo.
You are adept at cut and paste though. Try putting things in you own
words Proffessor or do you just find something that looks right and
cut and paste it from a web site?
>
> > If you do in fact pay alot of taxes the USA I hope you get to pay
> > more!
>
> Wonderful attitude. This confirms what I've been saying all along.
> Your penchant for freebies is much to obvious.
What freebies? I pay for Health Care, I pay for drugs, and I pay for
Diagnostic testing until my deductible is met. A CALL TO BRISTOL
MYERS IS A FREEBIE? Amazing.
You don't want to pay more in taxes? Too bad. Try running for
Parliment or support tax cuts in the UK.
>
> > And in future be careful prescribing drug alternatives. I can tell
> > you are NO Doctor. Aspirin instead of Coumadin.
>
> As an anticoagulant (technically an antiplatelet agent), aspirin is
> quite effective. Makes those platelets nice and slippy. In cases of
> factor V Leiden mutation or LA, aspirin is one therapeutic option:
>
> "Only a positive lupus anticoagulant and moderately elevated ACA IgG
> were found. The ACA IgG was moderately elevated on repeat testing 18
> months later. Laser to nonperfused retina caused some regression of
> retinal neovascularization. Aspirin was recommended to reduce the risk
> of future thromboses."
>
At least you used quotation marks. If you were a medical professional
you could have put it in you own words. Again you just lifted off a
website. What profressor are you FREELOADING know?
> > What next Professor
> > take BOTH? Tell me professor what happens If I take Aspirin while I
> > take Coumadin TOGETHER?
>
> Your insurance problems would be solved.
Amazing. And you wonder why some don't cry about unfair taxtion for
you?
>
> > What are the side effects of Aspirins? Is is sound medical judgement
> > to STOP taking Coumadin?
>
> Is this a quiz? Eat lots of broccoli.
Broccoli? It makes wonder if you read alittle off the drug companuy
website. Certainly you're not a medical professional. Maybe you're a
wanna be Doctor?
Did you flunk out of medical school and went into teaching economics.
Well those that can't do teach!
>
> > You try and present this vast medical knowledge but a REAL medical
> > Professional will be very reluctant to tell what INR is the safe range
> > and when does that INR become UNSAFELY high.
>
> > Do not even bother
> > posting numbers, because I doubt your MEDICAL knowledge. Real medical
> > professional are very careful about dispensing advice over the net.
>
> Wasn't it you who said: "Actaully with the Coumadin I could be in a
> better position than you health wise. They give it to senior citizens
> to prevent stroke and heart attacks."
That what I heard on TV. A long term study was done and they stopped
in because Senior Citizens taking coumadin were found to fewer strokes
and heart attacks than the Seniors taking a placebo. Truly I don't
you you feel me a medical expert! I made no allusions to it.
>
> > It took my three Doctors to PIN down what INR would warrant corrective
> > action.
>
> Do you know what INR means?
you know what years ago I was act the Doctor and he asked: "what's
your INR" and I had no clue because I trusted the Doctors to tell me
when to change my dosage as bllod was done. For 15 years I was steady
like a rock at 5mgs per day. But he had a point so I begin to follow
my INR just as a benchmark so I could have an idea how thin my bllod
was. I never alluded to have any medical knowledge where I could
change my own dosage or anything I leave that to REAL experts, my
Docotors.
>
> > It took Bristol Myers to give me in details the side effects
> > of too much Coumadin in the short term (I'm not talking aobut bleeding
> > but before that)
>
> Okey dokey dockey. What I find interesting is that although you
> purchase a low priced generic, you rely on BMS to provide you
> information about your therapy. Another freeload.
Freeload. Amazing. How many times would people come into my store
and ask me questions about their software. Software they bought
elsewhere. I never considered it a freeload. Maybe in England you
have to pay people to tell you the time of day. But here in America
we have no problem answering a question.
Again this is what really be the problem for you. It looks to me like
you can't stand anyone paying less than you because their income is
less. Sorry Professor the FLAT TAX has always been defeated rather
well here in the US. But don't give up. I will of course oppose it
since I favor a graduated tax system.
>
> > You quickly jumped right in with the offer of a replacment for
> > Coumadin.
>
> You were moaning about how expensive things were. Obviously, in terms
> of antithrombotic agents, aspirin is an accepted and frequently used
> prophylactic therapy. Gee, how about that. If you are in doubt, try
> PubMed and search terms aspirin and stroke as a start.
Not a substitute for pulmonary thrombosis or DVT therapy according to
my Doctors. Maybe as the TV adds for Bayer aspirirn and Bufferin
Aspirin for the long use to prevent heart attacks. But again I'm not
a physician as YOU are not a Physician either!
>
> > Do you JUMP in with other medical advice to others? Be
> > very careful! Should someone take you advice they could trace it back
> > to you! IP addresses are there for a reason. They can be used to
> > trace right back to you through your IP. Not to mention killing or
> > causing serious medical consequences for others you could be liable
> > for damages. I know this is what will most bother you.
>
> And a lawyer you aren't either.
No not a lwayer but I would love to see you get sued if some poor soul
would take your medical advice and gets sick. You would be so very
surprised how easily it is to trace someone too. Ever notice those IP
addresses?
>
> > Before you go nuts. ARE GOING TO ALLEGE YOU ARE A DOCTOR? To quote
> > YOU in advance : "Pffffffffffffffft !!!"
>
> You're catching on.
You no Doctor that's for sure.
>
> > You are very adept at yanking statistical snippets but you don't
> > understand the real world. But you miss alot. 8% of those over
> > $75000 OPT out. You just through stuff like that out there.
>
> http://www.census.gov/hhes/hlthins/hlthin01/hi01tb3.html
>
> No, I don't just throw stuff out there - twit.
You just did with that link. Cut and paste ersatz expert or wanna be
Doctor.
Sad you don't or can't put what you evidence is in you're own words.
>
> > My biggest beef is not being able to move out west and be covered. I
> > paid for health coverage for decades. So I paid into the system. If
> > it takes crashing the whole US heath Care system and TAXING your
> > miserable English butt till you cry for mercy so be it. Funny the
> > cheapest people I know are the ones making the most.
>
> Isn't that a remarkable change in attitude. What happend to wanting
> to pay your fair share?
If I pay 15 % and you pay 38 % I consider that more than fair. We
don't have a Flat Tax here in America. It's graduated for a reason.
If everyone had the same ability to pay we would pay the same rate.
>
> > Next time you whip out facts and allege YOU know everything about life
> > here in the US do some research Professor.
>
> Getting a bit defensive? What facts do you disagree with? I'll
> provide the references if you like.
You only cut and paste the facts. You don't demonstrate your
knowledge of the facts just and ability to mine information off the
net.
>
> > YOU shoould know to the
> > penny about Mediacid Programs since YOU yourself are the
> > self-proclaimed expert! You shoudl KNOW about waiting lists for
> > HIGH-Risk Pools but you don't.
>
> Interesting.
Yes I find it interesting too. I thought you should KNOW the facts.
I really thought an expert would know about waiting lists for
High-risk pools, for example.
>
> > You sit by that computer somewhere pulling snippets of web sites to
> > reguratate web links and snippets of statistics lifted of the net to
> > make yourself out as some expert.
>
> Expert is what others call you.
Well well, Please note I don't consider you an expert. I hope others
don't.
>
> > Am I an expert? Hell no. I am a voter who wants change. ANY CHANGE!
> > Big change or small change.
>
> You are a freeloader that wants something for nothing.
You obiviously have no idea about the term "freeloader".
Getting testy are we?
I pay my way TOTALLY professor. You just think you should pay the
same rate in taxes as someone who makes a fraction of what you make.
Sorry but there are alot of those people and they vote often enough to
prevent it.
Stop you complaining. You say you make so much. Count your blessings
and pay your taxes.
> > Really 2300+ posts? Do you actually remember what the outdoors look
> > like? This is what you must do all the time.
> > As for me I can wait to keep pounding away at this issue with my
> > politicians.
>
> And you'll be so damned successful - I'm sure your representatives are
> responsive to personal tirades from illiterates.
My my still testy are we? Actaully my politicians are quite
responsive to all their constituants. You see that's how democracy
works professor on person one vote. Enough people express an opinion
things happen.
Democracy a wonderful thing. Don't you agree?
>
> > I have no problem helping out my fellow Americans. I do alot of work
> > with my church and don't shy away doing something for others to help
> > out. But you seem to be so so insecure and fearful of the MASSES
> > coming for your money through taxes.
>
> No - not at all.
Yes you do. How many times have you exclaimed how much you oppressed
by the tax system? It makes me laugh.
> > You should spend less time on the net POSTING medical advice on things
> > you know little about to belittle and enjoy life alittle. It's a
> > beautiful day here nice and sunny and warm. Step away form the net
> > see the real world alittle. Be less free with the medical advice
> > until you attend medical school and are actively practicing for
> > awhile.
> >
> > Mean while if you don't like paying taxes in the US. Give up your US
> > citizenship if you have dual citizenship.
>
> Who said I have dual citizenship? Tax law another one of your
> forte's?
You say you pay US taxes and you feel abused by our tax system then
stay out of it! Glad to hear your not an American though one less
opponent eh?
>
> > You whining about your excessive taxes.............SO SAD! Live up to
> > responisbilties and learn what a gradualted tax system is all about.
>
> Learn to spell. I never whined about "excessive" taxes, I just
> commented on how easy it is for you to rationalize freeloading.
>
Oh you do all the time. Buy some Kleenex and cry your eyes after you
send your check to the IRS. Let me thank you from all the welfare
mothers you are supporting in the US for all your money.
That's a riot and sadly very common here. Don't like a social program
so you complain someone is getting something for nothing. But the
first time you need help I'd bet you'd be first in line on 'DOLE'.
The difference about us. I have no problem is someone is in a
position that requires my help through my tax dollars. You however
feel ANYONE, even making a call to a Drug Company, is a freeloader if
they get something they didn't pay for directly.
That's what democracy and societies do. They make choices for what is
best for society. You just think yourself above it?
> > US TAXES are among the lowest aren't they? I don't mind paying taxes.
> > I would even pay MORE taxes.
>
> At your tax rate, certainly. You see, in Europe, the top rates kick
> in at fairly low incomes - your $20K would be taxed at about 30%, not
> 15%, and that before the 20% VAT. (OK, not every European country,
> but Sweden, Belgium, Germany, France, and probably a few more.)
If taxation was too excessive I would think the voters would have
changed it. Bush is fighting a war and still is asking for tax cuts.
The House is blocking legislation from the floor to stop Companies
like Haliburton (Dick Cheny's old company) ffrom moving offshore ON
PAPER and avoid paying taxes. But that will change, for companies
like Haliburton.
>
I have no problem paying more in taxes if that's what is requred of
me. I never cheated on my taxes and I pay them on time! Never even
waited till Apirl 15th either. Always paid early. Didn't even thing
my country was FREELOADING when they hold my tax refund for a few
months.
> > Venture outside Professor. Life in the real warld can be fun.
>
> Too funny.
I'm glad your amused.
amp_spamfree
>
> I stated I "can" qualify or so it looked. I CAN NOT QUALIFY FOR
> MEDICAID. As for Minimum wage workers which I am not. I was typing
> so fast I miss word sometimes...sorry about that.
You stated cvategorically that minimum wage earners cannot qualify for
Medicaid. You are wrong - the threshold income for a single head of
household is 150% of the federal poverty level - $16,391. That
represents an hourly wage of $7.88 - and the minimum wage in PA is
$5.15 - or about 1.5X
And how about Pennsylvania's "adultBasic" program? Why haven't you
looked into that? Certainly you might qualify for it. It has no
previous condition exclusion and costs only $30 per month.
Or what about MAWD? you bitch and moan aboput your plight yet there
are a number of possible solutions. What is it about solutions that
address specific problems that you find so problematic? Here's a
situation where low income folks have a difficult time getting health
care insurance and your solution is to drive all folks into programs
that the majority don't want. In the meantime, there are solutions
but for some reason, you aren't happy? Why? Are you that po'd about
folks that actually earn a decent wage because they worked hard? Do
you really have that strong of a hatred for those who through
sacrifice, hard work, and maybe a bit of luck actually have achieved
something with their lives?
> No Medicaid is, in Pennsylvania and othet states like Wisconsin, a
> "limited time thing" You get it for so long and then that's it.
So you want a handout for the rest of your life? There is no
incentive to improve? What a sorry state of affairs. Are you opposed
to workfare, too?
> My efforts to get retrained? For 3 weeks straight my leg was elevated
> and only recently have I been OUT an about except for trips to the
> Wound Care people.
>
> Again be careful about your MEDICAL ADVICE before you kill someone.
Yeh, right.
Karl
insurance under a group, Church plan (please what's a 'church plan'),
or government health plan (federal, state, or local government
worker).
Under HIPAA if you pay your health insurance yourself you aren't
"protected" under HIPAA. Then you have to go through medical
underwriting. If you so much as take a blood pressure pill they will
reject you. I only take Coumadin and that's all! Except for the
wound on my leg I didn't go to the Doctor except for routine blood
work and screening (or physicals).
"Professor" please note that the way the health care system works here
in the USA is if you move you have go through the whole process of
applying for coverage again. Each state and sometimes even in
different parts of states have different health insurance that apply.
You can't take the coverage you have in Pennsylvania and TAKE it to
Arizona or wherever you choose to move to. In Pennsylvania itself I
can't even change the current plan I have to another company without
going through underwriting.
I'm not talking about waiting periods. You mentioned buying
insurance for a car when it breaks so you could fix it. Waiting
periods would be fine if I could buy insurance out west and if I could
maintain coverage in Pennsylvania at the same time so I have no
insurance gaps. But Arizona won't let me in the door to start
coverage. And Arizona was just one state I called. My family is all
over the general southwest. That's how I found out about the waiting
period and limited coverage in California high risk pools.
This is what has frustrated me. Most of my family lives out west NOW
and I would like to join them.
So that's why I want reform. Any kind of reform. I have a tough time
seeing all or a significant number of the 41 million Americans,
without health coverage, as 60K+ income earners driving SUVs too and
from their 4 Bedroom homes who have just opted out. I'm sure it
happens and I would support forcing everyone into some health plan or
some health system, public, private, semi-private with government
offsets or credits, whatever. I don't care. At the end of the day if
you AND I pay more in taxes FINE. If I pay for MORE in new taxes than
the the health insurance premiums I pay NOW in Pennsylvania...SO WHAT!
I don't mind paying taxes. If you pay even more because the
POPULATION voted a gradauted tax system under a duly elected
democratic government....SO FREAKING WHAT!
Karl
> FOLLOW UP:
>
> I stated I "can" qualify or so it looked. I CAN NOT QUALIFY FOR
> MEDICAID. As for Minimum wage workers which I am not. I was typing
> so fast I miss word sometimes...sorry about that.
You stated cvategorically that minimum wage earners cannot qualify for
Medicaid. You are wrong - the threshold income for a single head of
household is 150% of the federal poverty level - $16,391. That
represents an hourly wage of $7.88 - and the minimum wage in PA is
$5.15 - or about 1.5X
My income is higher than 16,391
And how about Pennsylvania's "adultBasic" program? Why haven't you
looked into that? Certainly you might qualify for it. It has no
previous condition exclusion and costs only $30 per month.
Adult basic is CLOSED and has a waiting list.
Nice program paid for by tobacco settlement money.
Or what about MAWD? you bitch and moan aboput your plight yet there
are a number of possible solutions. What is it about solutions that
address specific problems that you find so problematic? Here's a
situation where low income folks have a difficult time getting health
care insurance and your solution is to drive all folks into programs
that the majority don't want. In the meantime, there are solutions
but for some reason, you aren't happy? Why? Are you that po'd about
folks that actually earn a decent wage because they worked hard? Do
you really have that strong of a hatred for those who through
sacrifice, hard work, and maybe a bit of luck actually have achieved
something with their lives?
I already said I would take whatever reform is presented that fixes my
problem. But if the majority decides to go big and make some grand
new system I won't whine about it. I'll live it and if it doesn't
work try and fix it.
Great, if the Majority don't want a new plan then it they can't be
FORCED into one. Democoracy remember that? You do have the vote in
the UK we have had it here a while!
> No Medicaid is, in Pennsylvania and othet states like Wisconsin, a
> "limited time thing" You get it for so long and then that's it.
So you want a handout for the rest of your life? There is no
incentive to improve? What a sorry state of affairs. Are you opposed
to workfare, too?
What are you plagued by vision problems. What did I say Professor?
1. I said I would Pay WHATEVER TAXES the government says.
2. I said I would pay for health coverage myself if I'm allowed to buy
a plan in Arizona or wherever.
I do say if someone can show that they can't afford to pay...I will
gladly pay by taxation into a system that subsidizes it. I will NOT
IN ANY way block anyone from health coverage because they can't afford
a premium as an "incentive to improve". As Mediacaid is qualified on
income and so would I grant health coverage to others.
We can fix these problems by redoing the whole thing. Or we can fix
small problems as they occur. I don't care. I don't alot in the way
of the little fixes in my case. HIPAA was in 1996 I believe.
Handout! So you don't feel someone who is unemployed should have no
health care? That's what say HANDOUT so you don't want a poor
person's life extended through heath services. Yet you probably wish
their families turn over their poor souls' organs for transplantation.
Is the donation of an organ tainted by your handout lable? Workfare
is fine and I support it. I guess it's a 'handout' to you because you
pay a higher Percentage in taxes as others maybe. Debate the pros and
cons of the graduated tax system in another forum perhaps.
> My efforts to get retrained? For 3 weeks straight my leg was elevated
> and only recently have I been OUT an about except for trips to the
> Wound Care people.
>
> Again be careful about your MEDICAL ADVICE before you kill someone.
Yeh, right.
Yeah right indeed. You obiviously have little expertise about actual
medical problems though you profess to be knowledgable on it.
amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message news:<1192abe3.0304...@posting.google.com>...
Stephen Gallagher
> Health Care is a bad thing, which the Republican Party, the Health
> Insurance Industry, The Pharmacuetical Industry, and most
> conservatives say then why would strive to BUILD a UNIVERSAL HEALTH
> CARE SYSTEM ANYWHERE. If that system is BAD you would avoid it.
>
> Maybe here in the USA alot companies make ALOT of money and they want
> to PROTECT their 'profit center' namely the US Health Care System.
Don't change the US system. Those high profits that they
make in the US are what enable the pharmaceutical companies
to sell their drugs in the other countries (that impose cost controls),
without grumbling too much. If they lose the US cash cow, they
may stop manufacturing altogether. We can't have that.
(null)
This is just like American doctors. If they cannot make
enough money here, they may all move to Cuba.
DWood78828
>From: jep...@shell.ntrnet.net
>This is just like American doctors. If they cannot make
>enough money here, they may all move to Cuba.
Now that makes a hell of a lot of sense, George. Just like all your other
witism.
Denise
Karl
> Or what about MAWD? you bitch and moan aboput your plight yet there
> are a number of possible solutions. What is it about solutions that
> address specific problems that you find so problematic? Here's a
> situation where low income folks have a difficult time getting health
> care insurance and your solution is to drive all folks into programs
> that the majority don't want. In the meantime, there are solutions
> but for some reason, you aren't happy? Why? Are you that po'd about
> folks that actually earn a decent wage because they worked hard? Do
> you really have that strong of a hatred for those who through
> sacrifice, hard work, and maybe a bit of luck actually have achieved
> something with their lives?
You said: "your solution is to drive all folks into programs
> that the majority don't want."
Were you suggesting I wanted to organize a Coup? In a democracy it's
difficult to force the majority to do anything it does not WANT to do.
Lawyers aren't that good to force anything like UC through the
courts.
I am intrigued on how you feel I COULD 'drive' or force the majority
to do my bidding. Our politics here in the US can get fun and very
entertaining.
The last President was presented in the press as having murdered his
old friend (Vince Foster) , having that done in a government safe
house. They fished and fished on Whitewater to remove Clinton and
what did they 'get' him on? Lying about an affair with an intern. A
stupid act of course. But you got to admire the balls to go after a
sitting president who defeated his opponents soundly in the general
election. Al Gore's mistake was NOT using him in the general election
more! I'd bet he could have gained the electoral votes he needed. As
it is a politician who can't win his home state should have lost
anyway. Oh well it's not over. Elections are like trains there's
always another coming. Gore's done but who's NEXT?
The actual election of Bush jr. was an even greater thrill. Poorly
designed ballots in one county cost Al Gore his shot. Still Gore
didn't deserve it, losing Tennessee.
But you can not really force or "drive" the majority no matter how
hard you try. The only way I can think of us is the direct approach.
But Americans are a very stubborn bunch who don't to take crap from
anyone. We complain over simple little things to increase our
security, forcing or 'driving' them to something big ain't gonna
happen! And you think anyone could 'drive' the majority anywhere they
don't to go? Oh, professor.
Really Professor, for an allegedly well educated person, I thought you
could better than: illiterate, twit, and freeloader for insults! :)
But then again you did say you weren't born English. You're not
really in a cave in
Afghanistan are you? That would explain the excessinve posting! I'd
be afraid of the outdoors myself! :)
Karl
days FIRST to qualify, even when enrollment is opened again!
Competitive wages in Pennsylvania are higher than minimum as well.
But as I said before fewer companies than you would believe employing
those at those levels don't grant access to health coverage.
You wanted to mandate coverage and FORCE those companies to cover
their employees, you did say that didn't you? My, my, forcing the
majority again. But you would have to pass legislation to require
either an employer offer coverage to employees (handout?) - (NO I
wouldn't call it that either). If you mandated under law that an
employer covers their workers you would have to specify WHAT the
company would cover them with. Set some standards under the law so to
say. Then you would probably have to make allowances for those firms
pleading proverty. So what then? Force said proverty stricken
companies to chip in to their worker's health care cost? What, a
payroll tax on the company? So you would have to give the companies a
choice (politcs,lobbyists, elections remember). So you give them a
choice to PAY for the coverage (or at least partly pay) or allow them
to "OPT OUT" but still not allow them the FREELOAD you accuse me of
wanting. You would have to TAX them to provide some sort of health
coverage option. So you would have "pay or play" is that what you
propose Professor?
Funny sounds rather universal. Just allow anyone not having coverage
in the private sector to buy-in at increasing levels of cost as income
and ability to pay rise to cover those not working or those judge
disabled then wow you have access for all? Does that sound
universal? Does to me.
But maybe you would just pass a law and say employers must buy
coverage for all workers working 40 hours a week? Of course everyone
would then find themsleves working 39 or 30 or less hours a week, no?
So adjust it at employers pay 40 hours worked at 100% (or the fraction
you demand they cover) . (Co-pays of health premiums are fine) Then
at 30 hours worked it would be 30/40 or 75%. So we wouldn't let
companies have that FREELOAD you often quote eh?
But "pay or play" sounds yummy. whether the state gets the money or
it all goes to private insurers it's fine by me. As long as money is
flowing into the system from everyone who can pay.
I'm sorry though "PAY or Play" seems Universal to me? Symantecs
maybe.
You see I agree 100% with I'm not expert. I will listen to politcians
and vote for what sounds most appealing. If I have any problems I
write and call my Congressmen, Senators, and legislators. Democracy
you gotta love it huh? You can't 'drive' the majority anywhere Prof.
but you can yell where you wanna go and if enoughof us yelling
sometimes those at the wheel here what's being yelled and turn?
Elections, democracy, and politics! Why would you ever want to paly
video games when real life is so much more fun!
And Prof. before you start whining about "pay or play" you did
respond to me you wanted madated coverage. I just wanted to AGREE
with your point of view!
Work on your insults a bit more. I did expect more from you! :)
Seriously we just disagree of this issue politically. Forget about
it. Don't want to piss you off to much! :)
amp_spamfree
> days FIRST to qualify, even when enrollment is opened again!
Cry me a river. Here is an example of how YOUR state accomodates the
small number of folks who fall in the gap and you complain because it
isn't first dollar first day cover AND you might be asked to be put on
a waiting list.
> Competitive wages in Pennsylvania are higher than minimum as well.
Do you know how to respond to posts? By top posting and snipping the
previous posters response, you lose the chain rapidly. Perhaps you
need to see how others due it and then post accordingly - some refer
to it as netiquette.
> But as I said before fewer companies than you would believe employing
> those at those levels don't grant access to health coverage.
Data free.
> You wanted to mandate coverage and FORCE those companies to cover
> their employees, you did say that didn't you?
I pointed out that the German solution has certain attractiveness
because it is employer based.
> My, my, forcing the
> majority again. But you would have to pass legislation to require
> either an employer offer coverage to employees (handout?) - (NO I
> wouldn't call it that either). If you mandated under law that an
> employer covers their workers you would have to specify WHAT the
> company would cover them with.
This hasn't been an issue for the Germans. In the US, standards for
basic cover exist.
> Set some standards under the law so to
> say. Then you would probably have to make allowances for those firms
> pleading proverty. So what then? Force said proverty stricken
> companies to chip in to their worker's health care cost? What, a
> payroll tax on the company? So you would have to give the companies a
> choice (politcs,lobbyists, elections remember). So you give them a
> choice to PAY for the coverage (or at least partly pay) or allow them
> to "OPT OUT" but still not allow them the FREELOAD you accuse me of
> wanting. You would have to TAX them to provide some sort of health
> coverage option. So you would have "pay or play" is that what you
> propose Professor?
As you have demonstrated no competency in either health care or
economics, the only suggestion I have is to explore the German system
as a model.
> Funny sounds rather universal.
It is universal health insurance access, not universal health care.
You still have a problem differentiating between health care financing
and health care delivery. This is your problem, not mine.
> Just allow anyone not having coverage
> in the private sector to buy-in at increasing levels of cost as income
> and ability to pay rise to cover
And that is the entitlement crap that is repulsive to many. In an
employer based system, contributions are not based on income - they
are based on headcount. Each employee costs the same - each employee
can, out of their own pocket, upgrade their policy - everyone gets the
same basic package for the same cost and every employee gets a choice.
> those not working or those judge
> disabled then wow you have access for all? Does that sound
> universal? Does to me.
Medicare and Medicaid already exist. There is no reason to change
that.
> But maybe you would just pass a law and say employers must buy
> coverage for all workers working 40 hours a week? Of course everyone
> would then find themsleves working 39 or 30 or less hours a week, no?
> So adjust it at employers pay 40 hours worked at 100% (or the fraction
> you demand they cover) . (Co-pays of health premiums are fine) Then
> at 30 hours worked it would be 30/40 or 75%. So we wouldn't let
> companies have that FREELOAD you often quote eh?
Are always this dense Karl. Like I said, take a look at how the
German system is structured. It has a fairly rational and reasonable
approach to managing all these tangential and relatively
inconsequential one off situations. You once again show a desire to
legislate the outliers.
> But "pay or play" sounds yummy. whether the state gets the money or
> it all goes to private insurers it's fine by me. As long as money is
> flowing into the system from everyone who can pay.
Everyone who "can" pay? Marxism again?
> I'm sorry though "PAY or Play" seems Universal to me? Symantecs
> maybe.
Your lack of comprehension is not semantic.
> You see I agree 100% with I'm not expert. I will listen to politcians
> and vote for what sounds most appealing. If I have any problems I
> write and call my Congressmen, Senators, and legislators. Democracy
> you gotta love it huh? You can't 'drive' the majority anywhere Prof.
> but you can yell where you wanna go and if enoughof us yelling
> sometimes those at the wheel here what's being yelled and turn?
> Elections, democracy, and politics! Why would you ever want to paly
> video games when real life is so much more fun!
>
> And Prof. before you start whining about "pay or play" you did
> respond to me you wanted madated coverage. I just wanted to AGREE
> with your point of view!
One more time - your inability to understand the German strucure for
health care financing is not my problem. But your agreement that an
employer-based contribution scheme to provide access to basic health
insurance cover for all employees regardless of income with the
flexibility to select insurer is preferable to the Iraqi scheme is
taken as resolution. If you continue to insist on a tax based single
payer delivery scheme, then you hardly agree with me.
What you need to recognize is that 85% of the US population already
participates in a Germany-like program.
> Work on your insults a bit more. I did expect more from you! :)
Try posting consistent with NG standards.
> Seriously we just disagree of this issue politically. Forget about
> it. Don't want to piss you off to much! :)
I find your ignorance and vocality to be an indictment to the major
failing of democracy. Anyone can vote simply by being born and
staying out of prison.
Why is it you need to pass a test to drive but not to vote?
Do you know that to become a naturalized citizen of the US you need to
demonstrate competency in government?
amp_spamfree
> > are a number of possible solutions. What is it about solutions that
> > address specific problems that you find so problematic? Here's a
> > situation where low income folks have a difficult time getting health
> > care insurance and your solution is to drive all folks into programs
> > that the majority don't want. In the meantime, there are solutions
> > but for some reason, you aren't happy? Why? Are you that po'd about
> > folks that actually earn a decent wage because they worked hard? Do
> > you really have that strong of a hatred for those who through
> > sacrifice, hard work, and maybe a bit of luck actually have achieved
> > something with their lives?
>
>
> You said: "your solution is to drive all folks into programs
> > that the majority don't want."
>
> Were you suggesting I wanted to organize a Coup? In a democracy it's
> difficult to force the majority to do anything it does not WANT to do.
> Lawyers aren't that good to force anything like UC through the
> courts.
Your political solution is untenable - that was the point.
> I am intrigued on how you feel I COULD 'drive' or force the majority
> to do my bidding. Our politics here in the US can get fun and very
> entertaining.
You and the state of Oregon can't.
> The last President was presented in the press as having murdered his
> old friend (Vince Foster) , having that done in a government safe
> house. They fished and fished on Whitewater to remove Clinton and
> what did they 'get' him on? Lying about an affair with an intern. A
> stupid act of course. But you got to admire the balls to go after a
> sitting president who defeated his opponents soundly in the general
> election. Al Gore's mistake was NOT using him in the general election
> more! I'd bet he could have gained the electoral votes he needed. As
> it is a politician who can't win his home state should have lost
> anyway. Oh well it's not over. Elections are like trains there's
> always another coming. Gore's done but who's NEXT?
>
> The actual election of Bush jr. was an even greater thrill. Poorly
> designed ballots in one county cost Al Gore his shot. Still Gore
> didn't deserve it, losing Tennessee.
>
> But you can not really force or "drive" the majority no matter how
> hard you try. The only way I can think of us is the direct approach.
> But Americans are a very stubborn bunch who don't to take crap from
> anyone. We complain over simple little things to increase our
> security, forcing or 'driving' them to something big ain't gonna
> happen! And you think anyone could 'drive' the majority anywhere they
> don't to go? Oh, professor.
>
> Really Professor, for an allegedly well educated person, I thought you
> could better than: illiterate, twit, and freeloader for insults! :)
Twit - a silly annoying person. I thought it was a pretty good
characterization of you.
Illiterate - having little or no education (which obviously is your
situation); and showing or marked by a lack of acquaintance with the
fundamentals of a particular field of knowledge (economics, health
care, medicine, politics, law...and who know's what else in your case)
Freeloader - to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality
without sharing in the cost or responsibility involved (describes your
approach to health care financing).
> But then again you did say you weren't born English. You're not
> really in a cave in
> Afghanistan are you? That would explain the excessinve posting! I'd
> be afraid of the outdoors myself! :)
cute.
amp_spamfree
> amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message news:<1192abe3.0304...@posting.google.com>...
> > kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.0304...@posting.google.com>...
> > > Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
> > > before 1987.
> >
> > Your story is becoming more and more bizare. So, you do have
> > insurance. What is your complaint?
Well?
> > > I can however move from Pennsylvania to outside my
> > > general area unless I lose the coverage I have NOW. It doesn't for
> > > office visits or drugs or certain diagnostic testing because of
> > > deductibles. Since I pay for my coverage here in Pennsylvania myself
> > > and am not covered by a group as required under HIPAA I can't
> > > AUTOMATICALLY be accepted by Arizona Health Insurance providers, where
> > > I would like to move too.
> >
> > So, you want to move to Arizona? That's your complaint. Why is it you
> > can't get Arizona coverage if you have had continuous coverage in
> > Pennsylvania?
> >
> > > And I am not on 'the dole'. I have NEVER received welfare, public
> > > assistance, Medicaid.
> >
> > Workers Comp?
>
> Worker's comp is insurance employer's are required to pay to cover
> injuries incurred while on the JOB. It's not FREELOADING.
I never said it was.
> > > I EXPECTED to by off for a series of weeks and
> > > I bugdeted for this by saving up and preparing to be off so My leg
> > > could heal.
> >
> > Sure.
> >
> > > Being on the "DOLE", to me at least, is receiving PUBLIC WELFARE
> > > MONEY. I do not.
> >
> > No? But you are advocating that medical insurance become nationalized
> > and I imagine you would like to see progressive taxes to fund it (the
> > rest of your post is pretty much an indictment of that). Since you
> > are opposed to nationalizing the oil industry to pay for universal
> > health care, I can only surmise that you would need to fund it through
> > taxes.
>
> Progressive taxes are fine with me.
Sure - at an annual gross income of 20K your tax liability is close to
zero. In fact, under the 2002 tax code and 1040A, you would have a
liability (federal) of about $1500 (<8%) if you AGI is 20K. At 50K AGI
you have a liability of almost 8K (16%), and at 200K, almost 58K (just
short of 30%)
> At the lower and lower rates of
> income people can't be expected to pay the same rates.
Why not? I'm not suggesting that the amount paid should be the same,
but certainly the percentage should be. Do "poor" people get a
discount at the grocery store?
> Society has
> allowed for income to be taxed at higher and higher rates as the
> ability to pay increases.
I love it - the "ability to pay". What a piece of trash
rationalization.
> Don't like the graduated tax system write the your MP.
The funny thing is, the top rate of 40% in the UK is reached fairly
quickly so that the disparity because of progressive rates is less
pronounced.
> > > As for Medicaid you can make what I did and qualify for it.
> >
> > My point was that at minimum wage, medicaid eligibility is not out of
> > range, and under a variety of state programs, subsidized medical care
> > is available even for those above 166% of the federal poverty line.
>
> You obiviously STILL don't understand Medicaid do you? Medicaid and
> Welfare are temporary programs in more and more states.
So WHAT! That doesn't change the fact that low income people have
access to these programs. And no, Medicaid eligibility is NOT time
dependent in ANY state.
> > > You
> > > obvivously feel you know so much about EVERYTHING I saw you 2300+
> > > posts! Wow that is alot of writing. Amazing you have any time left
> > > to do anything else.
> >
> > It is amazing, isn't it. Did you bother to read any of the posts?
>
> No professor I do have more important things to do.
Obviously - scamming the dole is a full time job.
> > > As for Oregon. Does it mean if a political question is defeated ONCE
> > > then you give up?
> >
> > The "political" question in Oregon has been on their agenda for 15
> > years and has routinely been defeated by the majority. The Hillary
> > system was soundly defeated. There is no evidence of any initiative
> > toward a tax based "universal" health care system being even
> > marginally successful in the US that I am aware of. You?
> >
>
> Good I don't care if it's on for another 15 years. I will keep
> support change.
> > > Since those in Oregon have decided this then I
> > > should just forget about it? Amazing. Even if it was defeated
> > > nationally I would still support trying to change it. Hopefully
> > > change will come. Maybe we could even RAISE YOUR taxes to pay for it?
> >
> > That would be the objective. Someone in the US at my level of income
> > would see a fourfold rise in health care insurance costs under the
> > Oregon model.
>
>
> The one plan in California I heard in their State Senate had a 6%
> Payroll Tax AND a 3% wage tax. If you are a business and you can't
> bump up from paying $7.00 and hour to $7.42 an hour your business has
> some serious problems.
Then economics says you shouldn't be in business. The net effect
isn't $0.42 - since these taxes would be a business expense, the net
effect is actually $0.22, in a $5.15 state like PA.
> In my region of the US alot of businesses pay
> above minimum wage anyway. They just don't out access to health
> insurance.
So, drop the wage rate and subsidize health care insurance costs.
> > > I don't mind paying taxes. I don't even fiddle trying to cheat the
> > > IRS.
> >
> > At $20K there's not much you need to fiddle. Your liability is about
> > 10% and depending on family circumstances, you could end up not paying
> > a dime - or in some cases, actually getting a tax credit.
>
> Sorry very wrong. I pay for alot even under my health plan.
> Providers don't care how much you make here. No Free Care plans kick
> in as seem to think. I pay far more than the "dime" you allege.
Not in taxes.
> >
> > > As for $3000 in taxes. Add up Federal income taxes, state income
> > > taxes, wage taxes... around 15% isn't that bad. I know poor Professor
> > > you pay a much higher percentage...as it should be? What NO SUV for
> > > you? Sad.
> >
> > It should be? Who says? Karl Marx?
>
> No the Ways and Means Committee of the US House of Representatives.
> That's what really irks you eh? You just can't stand paying taxes.
I am an advocate for flat rate tax. Economically, labour output is
not maximized under the condition of progressive taxation.
> > >
> > > The BUS I take is to work? Remember Work? Also I have to get to the
> > > Doctor, store, et al.
> >
> > Now you are employed again. Amazing.
>
> Glad you fell that way. I wonder if you really are?
Consultancy is a wonderful approach to work.
> > > You said YOU Professor you were quite happy with the 2 tier system.
> > > Oh you whine about the waiting lists. An bemoan the lack of
> > > privatization in the UK.
> >
> > No, I said that the private segment provides satisfactory care. I'm
> > not fond of paying twice. I also pointed out that the public sector
> > UC/SP results in waiting lists.
> >
>
> You said you were happy with it. GO back and read it!
Here you go - this is what I said:
"I have NHS and BUPA-like supplemental. We call it queue jumping
care.
Know why? The waiting list that most of the "poor" people have to
get on disappear for me because I can go private. You see, the
delivery of care in the UK isn't all public...there is a very distinct
and thriving private market - for insurance as well as care. About
10% (and rising) UK residents have this supplemental insurance and if
you need an MRI, you go right to the front of the line. You need
chemo, we start on Monday, not Monday, 2004.
Gotta love it."
> > > So I should live up to my responsibility and be informed so I can vote
> > > the way the Professor wishes? No No if I decide I would like a
> > > different system then I will vote that way.
> >
> > Ignorance is bliss.
> >
> You must be very happy then. You live in your own little world where
> professor knows best. Tell me is Prozac covered under your NHS, maybe
> you should try some. After a Doctor's visit of course.
Practicing medicine? Are you a physician or do you just play one on
the NG?
> > > My freeloading on YOU? Please. I pay my taxes, I pay most of my
> > > medical expenses WITHOUT health insurance even kicking in. You just
> > > can't keep about whining about the taxes you pay.
> >
> > And you want me to pay more so you can get more?
>
> America is very under-taxed by your own admission and YOU can't keep
> from complaining about it!
One more area of incompetency - maths.
> > > You profess all this knowlege about all things like some grand Oracle.
> > > But you have know idea about Medicaid. You THINK you have knowledge
> > > about High RisK pools but you don't know anything about waiting lists
> > > there. Actually california limits the NUMBER that can get inot those
> > > high risk pools. Pennsylvania HAS a program for low income people
> > > without insurance BUT it is currenly closed and HAS a waiting list
> > > too. I wanted to MOVE and this is HOW all this about Heath Insurance
> > > was discovered by me.
> >
> > Your inconsistencies are quite telling.
> >
> > > If you feel you KNOW SO FREAKING MUCH. Then why not respond with
> > > actually facts about Medicaid? You present the picture you ARE an
> > > expert on Health care but I suspect you are NOT.
> >
> > What facts would you like?
Well?
> > > You are probable some Puesdo-intellectual with alot of time on his/her
> > > hands.
> >
> > At least I make an effort to write in complete sentences, use words in
> > correct context, and spell them accordingly. I am guilty of the
> > occasional typo.
>
> You are adept at cut and paste though.
I don't believe I've ever snipped anything - at least not without
attribution.
> Try putting things in you own
> words Proffessor or do you just find something that looks right and
> cut and paste it from a web site?
I'm curious - what exactly are you refering to? If I cut and paste
from a website I provide the URL and proper attribution. You have a
problem with this? Or do you find cogent, articulate, consistent and
comprehensible argumentation to require plagerism?
> > > If you do in fact pay alot of taxes the USA I hope you get to pay
> > > more!
> >
> > Wonderful attitude. This confirms what I've been saying all along.
> > Your penchant for freebies is much to obvious.
>
> What freebies? I pay for Health Care, I pay for drugs, and I pay for
> Diagnostic testing until my deductible is met. A CALL TO BRISTOL
> MYERS IS A FREEBIE? Amazing.
You bet. They didn't charge you for the consult and you certainly
aren't their customer.
> You don't want to pay more in taxes? Too bad. Try running for
> Parliment or support tax cuts in the UK.
Gordon and I have exchanged e-mail.
> > > And in future be careful prescribing drug alternatives. I can tell
> > > you are NO Doctor. Aspirin instead of Coumadin.
> >
> > As an anticoagulant (technically an antiplatelet agent), aspirin is
> > quite effective. Makes those platelets nice and slippy. In cases of
> > factor V Leiden mutation or LA, aspirin is one therapeutic option:
> > "Only a positive lupus anticoagulant and moderately elevated ACA IgG
> > were found. The ACA IgG was moderately elevated on repeat testing 18
> > months later. Laser to nonperfused retina caused some regression of
> > retinal neovascularization. Aspirin was recommended to reduce the risk
> > of future thromboses."
> >
>
> At least you used quotation marks.
Gee - how about that.
> If you were a medical professional
> you could have put it in you own words.
I did - twice - and you argued that aspirin is an inappropriate
therapy in cases of LA. I simply pulled out one journal article that
says you are wrong. You didn't believe me - so I gave you a thrid
party verifiable source.
Don't like data, do you.
> Again you just lifted off a
> website.
No, it came from a journal article. I spend a good part of my day
keeping up with the literature - its part of my professional
responsibility.
> What profressor are you FREELOADING know?
Actually, I subscribe to the source publication - I paid for it.
> > > What next Professor
> > > take BOTH? Tell me professor what happens If I take Aspirin while I
> > > take Coumadin TOGETHER?
> >
> > Your insurance problems would be solved.
>
> Amazing. And you wonder why some don't cry about unfair taxtion for
> you?
> >
> > > What are the side effects of Aspirins? Is is sound medical judgement
> > > to STOP taking Coumadin?
> >
> > Is this a quiz? Eat lots of broccoli.
>
> Broccoli? It makes wonder if you read alittle off the drug companuy
> website. Certainly you're not a medical professional. Maybe you're a
> wanna be Doctor?
Missed the sarcasm.
> Did you flunk out of medical school and went into teaching economics.
> Well those that can't do teach!
At least that would indicate a high school diploma - you?
> > > You try and present this vast medical knowledge but a REAL medical
> > > Professional will be very reluctant to tell what INR is the safe range
> > > and when does that INR become UNSAFELY high.
>
> > > Do not even bother
> > > posting numbers, because I doubt your MEDICAL knowledge. Real medical
> > > professional are very careful about dispensing advice over the net.
> >
> > Wasn't it you who said: "Actaully with the Coumadin I could be in a
> > better position than you health wise. They give it to senior citizens
> > to prevent stroke and heart attacks."
>
> That what I heard on TV. A long term study was done and they stopped
> in because Senior Citizens taking coumadin were found to fewer strokes
> and heart attacks than the Seniors taking a placebo. Truly I don't
> you you feel me a medical expert! I made no allusions to it.
OK - I'll play - what long term study? Care to provide a citation?
Or are you a bit confused and "heard" about the AHA guidelines?
AHA Scientific Statement: AHA Guidelines for Primary Prevention of
Cardiovascular Disease and Stroke: 2002 Update, #71-0226 Circulation.
2002;106:388-91
> > > It took my three Doctors to PIN down what INR would warrant corrective
> > > action.
> >
> > Do you know what INR means?
>
> you know what years ago I was act the Doctor and he asked: "what's
> your INR" and I had no clue because I trusted the Doctors to tell me
> when to change my dosage as bllod was done. For 15 years I was steady
> like a rock at 5mgs per day. But he had a point so I begin to follow
> my INR just as a benchmark so I could have an idea how thin my bllod
> was. I never alluded to have any medical knowledge where I could
> change my own dosage or anything I leave that to REAL experts, my
> Docotors.
Do you know what INR means?
> > > It took Bristol Myers to give me in details the side effects
> > > of too much Coumadin in the short term (I'm not talking aobut bleeding
> > > but before that)
> >
> > Okey dokey dockey. What I find interesting is that although you
> > purchase a low priced generic, you rely on BMS to provide you
> > information about your therapy. Another freeload.
>
> Freeload. Amazing. How many times would people come into my store
> and ask me questions about their software. Software they bought
> elsewhere. I never considered it a freeload.
It is, absolutely, freeloading. Your time is paid for by people
buying your product. When someone takes your time in the absence of
any compensation, it is a freeload.
Freeload: to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality without
sharing in the cost or responsibility involved.
You sell computer software at retail. Too funny.
> Maybe in England you
> have to pay people to tell you the time of day. But here in America
> we have no problem answering a question.
It has a cost and someone has to pay it.
> Again this is what really be the problem for you. It looks to me like
> you can't stand anyone paying less than you because their income is
> less. Sorry Professor the FLAT TAX has always been defeated rather
> well here in the US.
The flat tax initiative has seen more success than the universal care
proposal. Certainly the tax rate adjustments made over the past few
years have resulted in a narrower band of tax rates.
> But don't give up. I will of course oppose it
> since I favor a graduated tax system.
As you would - because it benefits you. You aren't interested in
paying your "fare" share, just in getting as much of someone elses
share.
> > > You quickly jumped right in with the offer of a replacment for
> > > Coumadin.
> >
> > You were moaning about how expensive things were. Obviously, in terms
> > of antithrombotic agents, aspirin is an accepted and frequently used
> > prophylactic therapy. Gee, how about that. If you are in doubt, try
> > PubMed and search terms aspirin and stroke as a start.
> Not a substitute for pulmonary thrombosis or DVT therapy according to
> my Doctors.
Look - primary thromboprophylaxis with aspirin is an accepted therapy.
Secondary prophylaxis is also accepted therapy. In a study by Mohr,
Mohr JP, Thompson JL, Lazar RM, Levin B, Sacco RL, Furie KL, Kistler
JP, Albers GW, Pettigrew LC, Adams HP Jr, Jackson CM, Pullicino P;
Warfarin-Aspirin Recurrent Stroke Study Group. A comparison of
warfarin and aspirin for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke.
N Engl J Med 2001;345:1444-51.
The results were equivalent.
No, one does not treat DVT or PE with aspirin.
> Maybe as the TV adds for Bayer aspirirn and Bufferin
> Aspirin for the long use to prevent heart attacks. But again I'm not
> a physician as YOU are not a Physician either!
Okey Dokey Dockey.
> > > Do you JUMP in with other medical advice to others? Be
> > > very careful! Should someone take you advice they could trace it back
> > > to you! IP addresses are there for a reason. They can be used to
> > > trace right back to you through your IP. Not to mention killing or
> > > causing serious medical consequences for others you could be liable
> > > for damages. I know this is what will most bother you.
> >
> > And a lawyer you aren't either.
>
> No not a lwayer but I would love to see you get sued if some poor soul
> would take your medical advice and gets sick.
So, if I am not a physician, can I give medical advice?
> You would be so very
> surprised how easily it is to trace someone too. Ever notice those IP
> addresses?
> >
> > > Before you go nuts. ARE GOING TO ALLEGE YOU ARE A DOCTOR? To quote
> > > YOU in advance : "Pffffffffffffffft !!!"
> >
> > You're catching on.
>
> You no Doctor that's for sure.
> >
> > > You are very adept at yanking statistical snippets but you don't
> > > understand the real world. But you miss alot. 8% of those over
> > > $75000 OPT out. You just through stuff like that out there.
> >
> > http://www.census.gov/hhes/hlthins/hlthin01/hi01tb3.html
> >
>
>
> > No, I don't just throw stuff out there - twit.
>
> You just did with that link. Cut and paste ersatz expert or wanna be
> Doctor.
You wanted source data - you got it.
> Sad you don't or can't put what you evidence is in you're own words.
Excuse me - I told you that 8% of those earning in excess of $75K opt
out of medical insurance - you accuse me of statistical snippets - I
give you the link - now I'm guilty of what? My goodness - you are
having a tough time with this, aren't you.
> > > My biggest beef is not being able to move out west and be covered. I
> > > paid for health coverage for decades. So I paid into the system. If
> > > it takes crashing the whole US heath Care system and TAXING your
> > > miserable English butt till you cry for mercy so be it. Funny the
> > > cheapest people I know are the ones making the most.
> >
> > Isn't that a remarkable change in attitude. What happend to wanting
> > to pay your fair share?
>
> If I pay 15 % and you pay 38 % I consider that more than fair.
A new definition of fair. Sounds Marxist, Karl.
> We
> don't have a Flat Tax here in America. It's graduated for a reason.
> If everyone had the same ability to pay we would pay the same rate.
To each based on need, from each based on his ability to pay.
> > > Next time you whip out facts and allege YOU know everything about life
> > > here in the US do some research Professor.
> >
> > Getting a bit defensive? What facts do you disagree with? I'll
> > provide the references if you like.
>
> You only cut and paste the facts. You don't demonstrate your
> knowledge of the facts just and ability to mine information off the
> net.
Is this your ad hominem? I attack the veracity of your post and you
criticise my use of data?
> > > YOU shoould know to the
> > > penny about Mediacid Programs since YOU yourself are the
> > > self-proclaimed expert! You shoudl KNOW about waiting lists for
> > > HIGH-Risk Pools but you don't.
> >
> > Interesting.
>
> Yes I find it interesting too. I thought you should KNOW the facts.
> I really thought an expert would know about waiting lists for
> High-risk pools, for example.
Like I said - an expert is what others call you.
> >
> > > You sit by that computer somewhere pulling snippets of web sites to
> > > reguratate web links and snippets of statistics lifted of the net to
> > > make yourself out as some expert.
> >
> > Expert is what others call you.
>
> Well well, Please note I don't consider you an expert. I hope others
> don't.
Then stop insisting that I should be expert in everything.
> > > Am I an expert? Hell no. I am a voter who wants change. ANY CHANGE!
> > > Big change or small change.
> >
> > You are a freeloader that wants something for nothing.
>
> You obiviously have no idea about the term "freeloader".
to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality without sharing in
the cost or responsibility involved
> Getting testy are we?
>
> I pay my way TOTALLY professor.
No you don't.
> You just think you should pay the
> same rate in taxes as someone who makes a fraction of what you make.
And what is wrong with that?
> Sorry but there are alot of those people and they vote often enough to
> prevent it.
Oh?
> Stop you complaining. You say you make so much. Count your blessings
> and pay your taxes.
Typical
> > > Really 2300+ posts? Do you actually remember what the outdoors look
> > > like? This is what you must do all the time.
> > > As for me I can wait to keep pounding away at this issue with my
> > > politicians.
> >
> > And you'll be so damned successful - I'm sure your representatives are
> > responsive to personal tirades from illiterates.
>
> My my still testy are we? Actaully my politicians are quite
> responsive to all their constituants. You see that's how democracy
> works professor on person one vote. Enough people express an opinion
> things happen.
Do you know that 50% of people earn more than the median income?
> Democracy a wonderful thing. Don't you agree?
I always find it amusing that when it comes to voting, those with the
most to gain are least likely to vote.
> > > I have no problem helping out my fellow Americans. I do alot of work
> > > with my church and don't shy away doing something for others to help
> > > out. But you seem to be so so insecure and fearful of the MASSES
> > > coming for your money through taxes.
> >
> > No - not at all.
>
> Yes you do. How many times have you exclaimed how much you oppressed
> by the tax system? It makes me laugh.
I'm pleased you find humour in it.
> > > You should spend less time on the net POSTING medical advice on things
> > > you know little about to belittle and enjoy life alittle. It's a
> > > beautiful day here nice and sunny and warm. Step away form the net
> > > see the real world alittle. Be less free with the medical advice
> > > until you attend medical school and are actively practicing for
> > > awhile.
> > >
> > > Mean while if you don't like paying taxes in the US. Give up your US
> > > citizenship if you have dual citizenship.
> >
> > Who said I have dual citizenship? Tax law another one of your
> > forte's?
>
> You say you pay US taxes and you feel abused by our tax system then
> stay out of it! Glad to hear your not an American though one less
> opponent eh?
I do pay US taxes. Define what you believe to be an American.
> > > You whining about your excessive taxes.............SO SAD! Live up to
> > > responisbilties and learn what a gradualted tax system is all about.
> >
> > Learn to spell. I never whined about "excessive" taxes, I just
> > commented on how easy it is for you to rationalize freeloading.
> >
>
> Oh you do all the time. Buy some Kleenex and cry your eyes after you
> send your check to the IRS. Let me thank you from all the welfare
> mothers you are supporting in the US for all your money.
I used to think of it in those terms - it is poignant and quite
sobering.
> That's a riot and sadly very common here. Don't like a social program
> so you complain someone is getting something for nothing. But the
> first time you need help I'd bet you'd be first in line on 'DOLE'.
I take issue with abuse of the system. Moreover, I find the
entitlement attitude to be repulsive.
> The difference about us. I have no problem is someone is in a
> position that requires my help through my tax dollars. You however
> feel ANYONE, even making a call to a Drug Company, is a freeloader if
> they get something they didn't pay for directly.
You read the definition of the term.
> That's what democracy and societies do. They make choices for what is
> best for society. You just think yourself above it?
Democracies and societies don't make choices - individuals do.
> > > US TAXES are among the lowest aren't they? I don't mind paying taxes.
> > > I would even pay MORE taxes.
> >
> > At your tax rate, certainly. You see, in Europe, the top rates kick
> > in at fairly low incomes - your $20K would be taxed at about 30%, not
> > 15%, and that before the 20% VAT. (OK, not every European country,
> > but Sweden, Belgium, Germany, France, and probably a few more.)
>
> If taxation was too excessive I would think the voters would have
> changed it. Bush is fighting a war and still is asking for tax cuts.
> The House is blocking legislation from the floor to stop Companies
> like Haliburton (Dick Cheny's old company) ffrom moving offshore ON
> PAPER and avoid paying taxes. But that will change, for companies
> like Haliburton.
You do like to babble - what has Haliburton have to do with it?
> I have no problem paying more in taxes if that's what is requred of
> me. I never cheated on my taxes and I pay them on time! Never even
> waited till Apirl 15th either.
Like I said - not the economist, are you.
> Always paid early. Didn't even thing
> my country was FREELOADING when they hold my tax refund for a few
> months.
>
> > > Venture outside Professor. Life in the real warld can be fun.
> >
> > Too funny.
>
> I'm glad your amused.
Karl - you have a lot of growing up to do. I wasn't born with a
silver spoon in my mouth - my success is a function of a lot of hard
work and sacrifice. Try it.
Karl
From: "amp_spamfree" <amp_sp...@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2003 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: Unversal Health Care FOR IRAQ but NOT FOR the USA?
> kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message
news:<911abb80.03041...@posting.google.com>...
> > amp_sp...@yahoo.com (amp_spamfree) wrote in message
news:<1192abe3.0304...@posting.google.com>...
> > > kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message
news:<911abb80.0304...@posting.google.com>...
> > > > Profressor. I do intend have health insurance NOW and since LONG
> > > > before 1987.
> > >
> > > Your story is becoming more and more bizare. So, you do have
> > > insurance. What is your complaint?
>
> Well?
>
I wish to relocate and BE able to purchase insurance in Arizona. Got
that?
I feel that HIPAA should require insurers to accept me as they are
forced to
take people with group health insurance. I pay for health insurance
myself
so I feel unjustly discrimenated in that regard. Simple fix I should
think.
You left out state taxes, wage taxes,local taxes in the area, not to
mention Medicare and Social
Security taxes ( but Medicare and SS aren't the same in my view ) the
rates
do add up.
>
> > At the lower and lower rates of
> > income people can't be expected to pay the same rates.
>
> Why not? I'm not suggesting that the amount paid should be the same,
> but certainly the percentage should be. Do "poor" people get a
> discount at the grocery store?
Same percentage is fine with me Professor. Now if you based a Health
Insurance Premium in YOUR UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE ACCESS program on
income, trust me you would be a popular man with liberals here.
Certainly
if you could deliver such a system I would be in favor of it. It
appears we differ on the terms we are using to descibe it I think.
>
> > Society has
> > allowed for income to be taxed at higher and higher rates as the
> > ability to pay increases.
>
> I love it - the "ability to pay". What a piece of trash
> rationalization.
>
I'm glad you do. Politics you see? And you acutally propose require
TESTING
to get access to voting? Funny but it was used with testing in the
south to
prevent African-Americans the right to vote. This is absurb. Maybe
grant
access to the polls to YOUR 'class' eh? Maybe only those who attended
certain
Universities should vote? I don't care if a person can't read the
ballot. But you appear to want to go much much father and TEST
everyone to see if they are worthy. No profressor one man one vote
that is what I
would fight to the death to protect. And fortunately my politicians
would
even be as stupid to even suggest otherwise. You obiviously are much
father to the right than I thought. And you should close that book
and try and discover alittle about political reality. Your Poll
Testing to grant access to voting would never pass here. Any
politican proposing it would see his or her career torn to shreds once
protrayed as trying to STOP people from voting.
Not enough people do vote anyway. We here need to get MORE people to
exercise their RIGHT to vote. The US Constitution is a great legacy
our founding fathers left us. We had to change it from time to time
and fought a civil war over it. But No WAY IN HELL would we EVER try
and prevent a person the RIGHT to vote. For a person not native to
England I would think you would appreciate demoracy more? Maybe you
came from a another democracy? I don't know but for one cherish the
right to vote! I am cautious when our government wants to restrain it
fomr time to time, like now. But I trust my goverenment. However, I
like the abilitie to toss the bastards out on their asses when they
screw up. Voting keeps us in he game. Then they have to listen to
everyone and not JUST those YOU DEEM worthy.
> > Don't like the graduated tax system write the your MP.
>
> The funny thing is, the top rate of 40% in the UK is reached fairly
> quickly so that the disparity because of progressive rates is less
> pronounced.
A Political Question for those in UK. Again don't like the Tax Rate
then
change it. They cut taxes here all the time.
>
> > > > As for Medicaid you can make what I did and qualify for it.
> > >
> > > My point was that at minimum wage, medicaid eligibility is not out of
> > > range, and under a variety of state programs, subsidized medical care
> > > is available even for those above 166% of the federal poverty line.
> >
> > You obiviously STILL don't understand Medicaid do you? Medicaid and
> > Welfare are temporary programs in more and more states.
>
> So WHAT! That doesn't change the fact that low income people have
> access to these programs. And no, Medicaid eligibility is NOT time
> dependent in ANY state.
>
> > > > You
> > > > obvivously feel you know so much about EVERYTHING I saw you 2300+
> > > > posts! Wow that is alot of writing. Amazing you have any time
left
> > > > to do anything else.
> > >
> > > It is amazing, isn't it. Did you bother to read any of the posts?
> >
> > No professor I do have more important things to do.
>
> Obviously - scamming the dole is a full time job.
Again with the "dole". Amazing are you blind as well as arrogant? I
am not
on the 'dole'. I do not scam the 'dole'.
My point exactly. I SUPPORT forcing a business to either provide
coverage,
( at least partly) , to their employees. I would favor providing a
way that companies,
saying they could not pay, a WAY to provide funding for their
employees
so they could be provided access to health insurance (at least partly-
'Co-pay'). Your $0.22 is fine and dandy with me! I would offer a
choice
to provide coverage or pay a tax to be usedto buy insurance.
Hopefully
all companies would find it easier and cheaper
to provide a health plan to workers.
As for the self-employed like yourself Professor. I Would tax you and
use
the money to purchase a plan FOR YOU or allow you to demonstrate you
have
creditable coverage in force all the time. You could price the tax
flatly
in this case too. Progressive income taxes are a different issue.
Again a politcal issue.
Give a straight percentage of income to pay for the
health insurance or allow you to buy it yourself! I'm not picky
there.
I even would give you protection Professor, if you are taking BP
medication
say, and wish to switch form a PPO to and HMO or to an MSA. I would
force the
insurer to take you and allow switching from plan to plan as is done
with large employer
based plans offereing a family of health care options.
> > In my region of the US alot of businesses pay
> > above minimum wage anyway. They just don't out access to health
> > insurance.
>
> So, drop the wage rate and subsidize health care insurance costs.
No problem with that. I would hope you really would be able to do so
fairly
easily. Please please I wish you luck and support you here.
>
> > > > I don't mind paying taxes. I don't even fiddle trying to cheat the
> > > > IRS.
> > >
> > > At $20K there's not much you need to fiddle. Your liability is about
> > > 10% and depending on family circumstances, you could end up not paying
> > > a dime - or in some cases, actually getting a tax credit.
> >
> > Sorry very wrong. I pay for alot even under my health plan.
> > Providers don't care how much you make here. No Free Care plans kick
> > in as seem to think. I pay far more than the "dime" you allege.
>
> Not in taxes.
>
Perhaps compared to you. But again progressive taxes are what the
people
want. Campaign for the Flat Tax. Not that popular here in the States
it
seems. Troubled with Democracy still?
I guess you feel those Poll Testing you propose would block those from
voting those people who would NOT support seeing their taxes raised?
Granted you feel storngly in a Flat Tax. Everyone is entitled to an
opinion. You may be RIGHT economically too. But POLITCALLY it won't
fly. I can't see my Senators or Congressmen staying office too long
after passing one and being exposed to ads explaining that sir/madam
your taxes are going up by X% and the CEO making $20 million is
getting a huge tax cut. Really if conservatives would want to
experience early retirement they should try so. Liberal Politicians
or the smarter conservative who know how to DODGE the issue will
survive and FLOURISH. Unless of course you can amend the Constitution
with you Poll TESTING.
Voter testing - NOT VIABLE POLITICALLY.
> > >
> > > > As for $3000 in taxes. Add up Federal income taxes, state income
> > > > taxes, wage taxes... around 15% isn't that bad. I know poor
Professor
> > > > you pay a much higher percentage...as it should be? What NO SUV for
> > > > you? Sad.
> > >
> > > It should be? Who says? Karl Marx?
> >
> > No the Ways and Means Committee of the US House of Representatives.
> > That's what really irks you eh? You just can't stand paying taxes.
>
> I am an advocate for flat rate tax. Economically, labour output is
> not maximized under the condition of progressive taxation.
>
Again democracy. If it's so wonderful it still has to be SOLD to the
voters. Democracies make choices some of which regarding taxes you
don't
agree with. Oh well that's life. But that's what we have elections
for.
> > > >
> > > > The BUS I take is to work? Remember Work? Also I have to get to
the
> > > > Doctor, store, et al.
> > >
> > > Now you are employed again. Amazing.
> >
> > Glad you fell that way. I wonder if you really are?
>
> Consultancy is a wonderful approach to work.
Self-employed? If you were here in the States buying insurance you
might
have a problem moving from state to state as you age and find little
problems crop up. Then you will be excluded or denied coverage and
then
find your self waiting on a list for a health insurance plan, in the
high risk pool, that has much
lower lifetime benifits and features priced much higher. This, even if
you
had coverage for decades or since long before you had health problems.
You
would find you can't keep what you have unless you are prepared to sit
tight
in one locale.
>
> > > > You said YOU Professor you were quite happy with the 2 tier system.
> > > > Oh you whine about the waiting lists. An bemoan the lack of
> > > > privatization in the UK.
> > >
> > > No, I said that the private segment provides satisfactory care. I'm
> > > not fond of paying twice. I also pointed out that the public sector
> > > UC/SP results in waiting lists.
> > >
> >
> > You said you were happy with it. GO back and read it!
>
> Here you go - this is what I said:
>
> "I have NHS and BUPA-like supplemental. We call it queue jumping
> care.
> Know why? The waiting list that most of the "poor" people have to
> get on disappear for me because I can go private. You see, the
> delivery of care in the UK isn't all public...there is a very distinct
> and thriving private market - for insurance as well as care. About
> 10% (and rising) UK residents have this supplemental insurance and if
> you need an MRI, you go right to the front of the line. You need
> chemo, we start on Monday, not Monday, 2004.
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Gotta love it."
>
You also said : "Nope - economic solutions - BUPA supplemental. I
don't have a problem
with my health care in the UK - its lovely as they say." Your NHS
covers the bulk and it seems your supplemental picks up where NHS
leaves off. It looks alittle like my Mom's Medicare Part A and B and
the Supplemental insurance SHE also carries. First let me assure you
I Don't know if something like your NHS is right or good. And
Universal Care and Universal Health Insurance I think we might be
confusing each other with.
Let me say again I like your theory of Universal Health Insuarance. I
would have to listen in detail to my politicians abuot competiting
solutions. i wouldn't even mind folding Medicare and Medicaid into
some privatized model.
All I know is is my Mom had NO Medicare and she didn't have Insurance
from her employer after she retired, she would not be able to afford
the coverage with all the drugs and becuse of her medical condition.
But if you could design a better model and TAKE the premiums through a
health tax DIRECTLY going towards health insurance fine.
> > > > So I should live up to my responsibility and be informed so I can
vote
> > > > the way the Professor wishes? No No if I decide I would like a
> > > > different system then I will vote that way.
> > >
> > > Ignorance is bliss.
> > >
> > You must be very happy then. You live in your own little world where
> > professor knows best. Tell me is Prozac covered under your NHS, maybe
> > you should try some. After a Doctor's visit of course.
>
> Practicing medicine? Are you a physician or do you just play one on
> the NG?
Just a play one Prof and you? Joking can't you take a joke.
My my you ever heard of CUSTOMER SERVICE. We actually do this
America quite often. We aren't as cut-throat and mercenary as you
would think. Really Most businesses would even direct you to their
competitor if you don't have a product in stock. And helping someone
is what customer service and building a loyal customer base is all
about.
As for giving anything away for free? HMMM? Information off a
website. Could it be it's a strategy of public relations or helping
the community? Stop by Microsoft.com and download IE 6.0 for free?
Or offer medical advice on WebMD.
No what's freeloading to me is not what freeloading to you it seems.
microsoft has GIVIN me thousands of dollars in software. Givin it to
me...really...FREE. They want us to sell it and learn about their
stuff and it's great stuff! My company encourages us to help
customers.
We also help out charities with prizes and raffles. We educate, we
give away, and all in the name of good customer service. Partly to
gain customers and partly to help out. We restrict and INFORM
customers and parent about violent games. Again customer service but
also our civic duty!
No you shouldn't charge everyone for everything. That's sounds great
in an economics book I bet. But in the real world some things you do
for others without ever asking anything in return. I'm saying give
someone a car or computer for free. But asking How do I set up an ISP
or where do I plug this or that in.
Maybe store are different over there? I love chatting and helping
customers. Human contact, remember?
No I didn't. Broccoli thinkens the blood. They told me not to worry
abuot eatin cabbage and the like in 1987 since they said I would have
to eat like bowl and bowls of it. Then later other Doctors said to
watch out not eat much. One thing Bush Senior and I agree on we both
HATE broccoli anyway!
And Cabbage gives me GAS! From your posts I think you must enjoy
cabbage GREATLY! ;)
Oh relax! I do enjoy razzing you.
> > Did you flunk out of medical school and went into teaching economics.
> > Well those that can't do teach!
>
> At least that would indicate a high school diploma - you?
oh yes. I do appoligize for typing fast and not proofing the posts.
I can't get enough of rattle your cage.
>
> > > > You try and present this vast medical knowledge but a REAL medical
> > > > Professional will be very reluctant to tell what INR is the safe
range
> > > > and when does that INR become UNSAFELY high.
> >
> > > > Do not even bother
> > > > posting numbers, because I doubt your MEDICAL knowledge. Real
medical
> > > > professional are very careful about dispensing advice over the net.
> > >
> > > Wasn't it you who said: "Actaully with the Coumadin I could be in a
> > > better position than you health wise. They give it to senior citizens
> > > to prevent stroke and heart attacks."
> >
> > That what I heard on TV. A long term study was done and they stopped
> > in because Senior Citizens taking coumadin were found to fewer strokes
> > and heart attacks than the Seniors taking a placebo. Truly I don't
> > you you feel me a medical expert! I made no allusions to it.
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/healthcast/1621064/detail.html
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/348/15/1425
These are two references to long term studies, I can't find the one I
wanted. I applogize if I mis-informed you however.
Customer Service - hear of it? That's why people come back to your
store. And I think it very wise and good PR to put out information
for others on things in your field. Bristol Myers must feel they wish
to share this information freely if they have a website with all this
info on it. They must offer FREE information to all callers for a
reason? I wonder wht it could be?
Could it be Bristol Myers want to be helpful? Maybe they might think
I owuld switch back. Actually when MY INR hit 7 and I was all
nauseous and very tired maybe I would switch back. I actually did go
back and forth trying which was more effective. And my former doctor
had my INR perhaps too high. This is somthing I'm still not sure of.
For over a decade I probably was at an INR of 2 to 3 then one Doctor
wanted it 3 to 4 and bumped up my dosage. But then after my INR
(international normalized ratio (INR)
{http://www.home.eznet.net/~webtent/inr.html}went to 7 his boss moved
me back to 2 to 3 (which for me is 5mgs). I used Warfarin just
because one pharmcy filled it that way. Didn't even notice it for a
while just thoughtthey redisegn the pill. But it wasn't the generic
drug that did it.
As I said before INRs I am Not a doctor Nor medical professional. The
INR is just what is apparently used to determine the level or amount
of Warfarin or Coumadin I am to take. I went out and looked up wht it
meant for ya Prof!
> You sell computer software at retail. Too funny.
Not too funny would want to hurt you with laughter! Greatful to
please and amuse...:)
>
> > Maybe in England you
> > have to pay people to tell you the time of day. But here in America
> > we have no problem answering a question.
>
> It has a cost and someone has to pay it.
Apparantly your system is bit more mercenary than ours? I don't think
so. We have no problem helping each other at all.
You can't keep charging for everything. A freeloader who uses a
public restroom in the mall and doesn't buy anything. A freeloader?
My my profressor you are tight with a buck.
>
> > Again this is what really be the problem for you. It looks to me like
> > you can't stand anyone paying less than you because their income is
> > less. Sorry Professor the FLAT TAX has always been defeated rather
> > well here in the US.
>
> The flat tax initiative has seen more success than the universal care
> proposal. Certainly the tax rate adjustments made over the past few
> years have resulted in a narrower band of tax rates.
>
> > But don't give up. I will of course oppose it
> > since I favor a graduated tax system.
>
> As you would - because it benefits you. You aren't interested in
> paying your "fare" share, just in getting as much of someone elses
> share.
LOL. As I said campaign Prof. campaign. You'll lose as the majority
can't be 'driven' by you and vote to raise their own taxes. they
might be convinced of it. Probably not though. But try selling it to
the public. Didn't Forbes want a flat tax....? Or was that Perot?
Emmm they both lost.
>
> > > > You quickly jumped right in with the offer of a replacment for
> > > > Coumadin.
> > >
> > > You were moaning about how expensive things were. Obviously, in terms
> > > of antithrombotic agents, aspirin is an accepted and frequently used
> > > prophylactic therapy. Gee, how about that. If you are in doubt, try
> > > PubMed and search terms aspirin and stroke as a start.
>
> > Not a substitute for pulmonary thrombosis or DVT therapy according to
> > my Doctors.
>
> Look - primary thromboprophylaxis with aspirin is an accepted therapy.
> Secondary prophylaxis is also accepted therapy. In a study by Mohr,
>
> Mohr JP, Thompson JL, Lazar RM, Levin B, Sacco RL, Furie KL, Kistler
> JP, Albers GW, Pettigrew LC, Adams HP Jr, Jackson CM, Pullicino P;
> Warfarin-Aspirin Recurrent Stroke Study Group. A comparison of
> warfarin and aspirin for the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke.
> N Engl J Med 2001;345:1444-51.
>
> The results were equivalent.
>
> No, one does not treat DVT or PE with aspirin.
But you're telling to try aspirins a while back? Ok I seriously am
not going to take medical advice here in a NG.
For all I know you're a 14 year old in Iceland bored with the weather.
>
> > Maybe as the TV adds for Bayer aspirirn and Bufferin
> > Aspirin for the long use to prevent heart attacks. But again I'm not
> > a physician as YOU are not a Physician either!
>
> Okey Dokey Dockey.
Please explain OKIE DOKIE DOCKIE? Dockie?
>
> > > > Do you JUMP in with other medical advice to others? Be
> > > > very careful! Should someone take you advice they could trace it
back
> > > > to you! IP addresses are there for a reason. They can be used to
> > > > trace right back to you through your IP. Not to mention killing or
> > > > causing serious medical consequences for others you could be liable
> > > > for damages. I know this is what will most bother you.
> > >
> > > And a lawyer you aren't either.
> >
> > No not a lwayer but I would love to see you get sued if some poor soul
> > would take your medical advice and gets sick.
>
> So, if I am not a physician, can I give medical advice?
No. Or at least qualify it and BOLDLY exclaim to those you advise
that your just an economist?
Some may feel you are a Doctor. Just say your not a Doctor.
>
> > You would be so very
> > surprised how easily it is to trace someone too. Ever notice those IP
> > addresses?
> > >
> > > > Before you go nuts. ARE GOING TO ALLEGE YOU ARE A DOCTOR? To quote
> > > > YOU in advance : "Pffffffffffffffft !!!"
> > >
> > > You're catching on.
> >
> > You no Doctor that's for sure.
> > >
> > > > You are very adept at yanking statistical snippets but you don't
> > > > understand the real world. But you miss alot. 8% of those over
> > > > $75000 OPT out. You just through stuff like that out there.
> > >
> > > http://www.census.gov/hhes/hlthins/hlthin01/hi01tb3.html
> > >
> >
> >
> > > No, I don't just throw stuff out there - twit.
> >
> > You just did with that link. Cut and paste ersatz expert or wanna be
> > Doctor.
>
> You wanted source data - you got it.
>
> > Sad you don't or can't put what you evidence is in you're own words.
>
> Excuse me - I told you that 8% of those earning in excess of $75K opt
> out of medical insurance - you accuse me of statistical snippets - I
> give you the link - now I'm guilty of what? My goodness - you are
> having a tough time with this, aren't you.
No no not at all. Actually I like your "UNIVERSAL HEALTH INSURANCE"
plan.
>
> > > > My biggest beef is not being able to move out west and be covered.
I
> > > > paid for health coverage for decades. So I paid into the system.
If
> > > > it takes crashing the whole US heath Care system and TAXING your
> > > > miserable English butt till you cry for mercy so be it. Funny the
> > > > cheapest people I know are the ones making the most.
> > >
> > > Isn't that a remarkable change in attitude. What happend to wanting
> > > to pay your fair share?
> >
> > If I pay 15 % and you pay 38 % I consider that more than fair.
>
> A new definition of fair. Sounds Marxist, Karl.
Again progressive taxation. Gradually rising. Under our tax code you
have a standard deduction CORRECT? Then you could say ok a fellow
needs X dollars at least to survive minimally in society. He needs
rent, food, etc. So You EXEMPT that level. Now rather than just
exempting say 18,000 a year from taxation (say 18K was X) you start
with the standard deduction and then tax at ever increasing levels as
you ratchet up to the what society feels should be the taxable area of
a person's income.
One guy proposing a flat tax had the first 30K for a family of four
exempt form the flat tax? I could be wrong but that does seem
familiar.
>
> > We
> > don't have a Flat Tax here in America. It's graduated for a reason.
> > If everyone had the same ability to pay we would pay the same rate.
>
> To each based on need, from each based on his ability to pay.
>
> > > > Next time you whip out facts and allege YOU know everything about
life
> > > > here in the US do some research Professor.
> > >
> > > Getting a bit defensive? What facts do you disagree with? I'll
> > > provide the references if you like.
> >
> > You only cut and paste the facts. You don't demonstrate your
> > knowledge of the facts just and ability to mine information off the
> > net.
>
> Is this your ad hominem? I attack the veracity of your post and you
> criticise my use of data?
Nothing wrong with miners Prof. I hear the Welsh are very good at it.
You do it with websites.
Nothing wrong. I could go and pluck and pick but wouldn't that be
freeloading? Kidding. Sorry to rattle the bars again.
>
> > > > YOU shoould know to the
> > > > penny about Mediacid Programs since YOU yourself are the
> > > > self-proclaimed expert! You shoudl KNOW about waiting lists for
> > > > HIGH-Risk Pools but you don't.
> > >
> > > Interesting.
> >
> > Yes I find it interesting too. I thought you should KNOW the facts.
> > I really thought an expert would know about waiting lists for
> > High-risk pools, for example.
>
> Like I said - an expert is what others call you.
>
> > >
> > > > You sit by that computer somewhere pulling snippets of web sites to
> > > > reguratate web links and snippets of statistics lifted of the net to
> > > > make yourself out as some expert.
> > >
> > > Expert is what others call you.
> >
> > Well well, Please note I don't consider you an expert. I hope others
> > don't.
>
> Then stop insisting that I should be expert in everything.
I not suggesting you take a test or anything.
>
> > > > Am I an expert? Hell no. I am a voter who wants change. ANY
CHANGE!
> > > > Big change or small change.
> > >
> > > You are a freeloader that wants something for nothing.
> >
> > You obiviously have no idea about the term "freeloader".
>
> to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality without sharing in
> the cost or responsibility involved
Don't ask anyone for the time then! Somethings we do to help each
other.
>
> > Getting testy are we?
> >
> > I pay my way TOTALLY professor.
>
> No you don't.
yes I do. You just keep crying about taxation. I'll send you some
Kleenex and call it even.
>
> > You just think you should pay the
> > same rate in taxes as someone who makes a fraction of what you make.
>
> And what is wrong with that?
I disagree. How's that? We exempt income at progressive levels.
Society chose. That's why you want to test voters and prevent those
wo would chose to oppose you.
>
> > Sorry but there are alot of those people and they vote often enough to
> > prevent it.
>
> Oh?
> > Stop you complaining. You say you make so much. Count your blessings
> > and pay your taxes.
>
> Typical
I would thing you would be happy you made a bunch of dough! Ungrateful
are we?
>
> > > > Really 2300+ posts? Do you actually remember what the outdoors look
> > > > like? This is what you must do all the time.
> > > > As for me I can wait to keep pounding away at this issue with my
> > > > politicians.
> > >
> > > And you'll be so damned successful - I'm sure your representatives are
> > > responsive to personal tirades from illiterates.
> >
> > My my still testy are we? Actaully my politicians are quite
> > responsive to all their constituants. You see that's how democracy
> > works professor on person one vote. Enough people express an opinion
> > things happen.
>
> Do you know that 50% of people earn more than the median income?
Yippee!
>
> > Democracy a wonderful thing. Don't you agree?
>
> I always find it amusing that when it comes to voting, those with the
> most to gain are least likely to vote.
Yep Prof. Could agree with you more. And you want to prevent them
from even trying!
>
> > > > I have no problem helping out my fellow Americans. I do alot of
work
> > > > with my church and don't shy away doing something for others to help
> > > > out. But you seem to be so so insecure and fearful of the MASSES
> > > > coming for your money through taxes.
> > >
> > > No - not at all.
> >
> > Yes you do. How many times have you exclaimed how much you oppressed
> > by the tax system? It makes me laugh.
>
> I'm pleased you find humour in it.
I do I really do find it amusing. I worked way back in the 1980s
where we sold the company and the owner's shared with us all us a
'sale bonus'. Beautiful. That year I made 38K! NICE. A huge bonus
for me. The tax man cometh and took much. But I was happy as could
be, and gladly filled out my taxes. No complaining. I was very
grateful. We all lost our jobs shortly but that was business. If it
was me I would have sold out too.
>
> > > > You should spend less time on the net POSTING medical advice on
things
> > > > you know little about to belittle and enjoy life alittle. It's a
> > > > beautiful day here nice and sunny and warm. Step away form the net
> > > > see the real world alittle. Be less free with the medical advice
> > > > until you attend medical school and are actively practicing for
> > > > awhile.
> > > >
> > > > Mean while if you don't like paying taxes in the US. Give up your
US
> > > > citizenship if you have dual citizenship.
> > >
> > > Who said I have dual citizenship? Tax law another one of your
> > > forte's?
> >
> > You say you pay US taxes and you feel abused by our tax system then
> > stay out of it! Glad to hear your not an American though one less
> > opponent eh?
>
> I do pay US taxes. Define what you believe to be an American.
You can't vote then your not. You want to emigrate? Apply can't find
our Embassy? I believe there's one in London eh?
Take's awhile and yes you take a test. Me I was born here. Native.
So my voting rights and citizenship are grandfathered eh?
What you think because you pay taxes YOU ARE AN AMERICAN? Ahhhh no
sorry!
>
> > > > You whining about your excessive taxes.............SO SAD! Live up
to
> > > > responisbilties and learn what a gradualted tax system is all about.
> > >
> > > Learn to spell. I never whined about "excessive" taxes, I just
> > > commented on how easy it is for you to rationalize freeloading.
> > >
> >
> > Oh you do all the time. Buy some Kleenex and cry your eyes after you
> > send your check to the IRS. Let me thank you from all the welfare
> > mothers you are supporting in the US for all your money.
>
> I used to think of it in those terms - it is poignant and quite
> sobering.
really don't that bent of shape over it. Can't be that fun for you.
>
> > That's a riot and sadly very common here. Don't like a social program
> > so you complain someone is getting something for nothing. But the
> > first time you need help I'd bet you'd be first in line on 'DOLE'.
>
> I take issue with abuse of the system. Moreover, I find the
> entitlement attitude to be repulsive.
Abuse yes. Make them work, find them jobs, can't be that hard. But
sometimes society chooses to help some in certain situations. you
might Choose to subsidize day care for low income people or NOT.
It's something we all decide when we vote what we choose to want to
support or not support.
>
> > The difference about us. I have no problem is someone is in a
> > position that requires my help through my tax dollars. You however
> > feel ANYONE, even making a call to a Drug Company, is a freeloader if
> > they get something they didn't pay for directly.
>
> You read the definition of the term.
Yes very strict definition eh? If I stop by the web site freeload
too? When I'm on Yahoo Freeload?
Really when I give a person the time so they catch the bus, I'm being
NICE I hope! And I love helping people with their stuff.
>
> > That's what democracy and societies do. They make choices for what is
> > best for society. You just think yourself above it?
>
> Democracies and societies don't make choices - individuals do.
Individuals DO when they exercise there vote in ouor REPUBLIC, sorry
you missed that on Prof.! Isn't the USA NOT A DEMOCRACY in fact?
Isn't it a Republic? democracy were in Greece where everyone got
together and decided what to do...voted with little rocks in a sack or
such? Republics are, according to Websters Dictionary :"
"a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens
entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and
representatives responsible to them and governing according to law"
So the power and decisions rst with our representatives that voted
into office by these UNTESTED twits you dispise?
>
> > > > US TAXES are among the lowest aren't they? I don't mind paying
taxes.
> > > > I would even pay MORE taxes.
> > >
> > > At your tax rate, certainly. You see, in Europe, the top rates kick
> > > in at fairly low incomes - your $20K would be taxed at about 30%, not
> > > 15%, and that before the 20% VAT. (OK, not every European country,
> > > but Sweden, Belgium, Germany, France, and probably a few more.)
> >
> > If taxation was too excessive I would think the voters would have
> > changed it. Bush is fighting a war and still is asking for tax cuts.
> > The House is blocking legislation from the floor to stop Companies
> > like Haliburton (Dick Cheny's old company) ffrom moving offshore ON
> > PAPER and avoid paying taxes. But that will change, for companies
> > like Haliburton.
>
> You do like to babble - what has Haliburton have to do with it?
Haliburton is freeloading Prof. Moving themselves on paper offshore..
They avoid paying the taxes they owe AND they have the balls to ask
for government contacts.
>
> > I have no problem paying more in taxes if that's what is requred of
> > me. I never cheated on my taxes and I pay them on time! Never even
> > waited till Apirl 15th either.
>
> Like I said - not the economist, are you.
Your NOT and economist? Curious now what do you do? Consult or
teach?
I still like to call you Professor...do you mind? ;)
>
> > Always paid early. Didn't even thing
> > my country was FREELOADING when they hold my tax refund for a few
> > months.
> >
> > > > Venture outside Professor. Life in the real warld can be fun.
> > >
> > > Too funny.
> >
> > I'm glad your amused.
>
> Karl - you have a lot of growing up to do. I wasn't born with a
> silver spoon in my mouth - my success is a function of a lot of hard
> work and sacrifice. Try it.
I've sacrifcied alot Professor. More than I can say. I don't
complain or whine about it. We differ on taxation. But at the end of
the day I think we could both live under your UNIVERSAL HEALTH
INSURANCE MODEL?
I think when I said UC then you latched onto SP. I like change and I'm
adventurous at times. But you plan works for me.
I shall beat your balls black and blue over requiring we TEST people
to see if they are WORTHY to vote. And how we tax. Your boys win and
we have a flat tax, alas poor Graduated tax system. But I am here in
the States and first hand knoweldge of those I see tell me a flat tax
will retire alot of those who even propose it. But try it! Who knows
You might actually win....wait did you here oinking noises from those
pigs flying about? Maybe then...politcal reality can be a bitch.
Karl
> kar...@yahoo.com (Karl) wrote in message news:<911abb80.03041...@posting.google.com>...
> > >
> > > Or what about MAWD? you bitch and moan aboput your plight yet there
> > > are a number of possible solutions. What is it about solutions that
> > > address specific problems that you find so problematic? Here's a
> > > situation where low income folks have a difficult time getting health
> > > care insurance and your solution is to drive all folks into programs
> > > that the majority don't want. In the meantime, there are solutions
> > > but for some reason, you aren't happy? Why? Are you that po'd about
> > > folks that actually earn a decent wage because they worked hard? Do
> > > you really have that strong of a hatred for those who through
> > > sacrifice, hard work, and maybe a bit of luck actually have achieved
> > > something with their lives?
> >
> >
> > You said: "your solution is to drive all folks into programs
> > > that the majority don't want."
> >
> > Were you suggesting I wanted to organize a Coup? In a democracy it's
> > difficult to force the majority to do anything it does not WANT to do.
> > Lawyers aren't that good to force anything like UC through the
> > courts.
>
> Your political solution is untenable - that was the point.
It was undoable Politcally? Then you couldn't 'drive' the majority
there correct you would lose in the legislature and congress. The
majority will choose what the majority wants...unless you can prevent
people from voting as you wish to with Voter testing to determine
theirs worthiness to paritcipate in the electoral process.
You have nothing to fear then. Unless you fear the majority's
political choices. Be it a Progressive tax OR anything else.
>
> > I am intrigued on how you feel I COULD 'drive' or force the majority
> > to do my bidding. Our politics here in the US can get fun and very
> > entertaining.
>
> You and the state of Oregon can't.
Exactly. Oregon failed. But if some politicain proposes a UNIVERSAL
HEALH NSURANCE system that YOU SUPPORT ( AND I WOULD LOVE TOO ) would
you be supportive truly? It seems what you don't like is the state
running the hospitals or collecting the money.
Granted you would not allow any business to OPT out. And I would. I
would howver demand they pay for the same health care insurance that
another larger company would. You I'm guessing would disagree with
permitting the government form collecting the money and buying health
insurance from a PRIVATE company. But that's not a big deal. I
really think you would have some small mom and pop places screaming
that they can't pay. I wouldn't waste time forcing the issue. After
all what's the goal get everyone covered?
Oh you wound me! :) I'm annoying YOU? MY my, with all that
consulting I should think you'd be too busy even to respond!
>
> Illiterate - having little or no education (which obviously is your
> situation); and showing or marked by a lack of acquaintance with the
> fundamentals of a particular field of knowledge (economics, health
> care, medicine, politics, law...and who know's what else in your case)
NOW now profressor you are getting annoyed. How's your BP? I hope
I'm not making you too too angry.
>
> Freeloader - to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality
> without sharing in the cost or responsibility involved (describes your
> approach to health care financing).
Hmmm? My approach. As I have said. I don't care what they do. I
just want reform. I realize the world will not revolve about
me...after all I'm not French...so any change that occurs I will have
to be happy to get the best deal I can. If it's your Universal Health
Insurance Plan...GREAT. If the politcians in Washington surprise me
and lift the NHS to hear in the states then I guess I'll be buying the
same suppemental policy as you. Maybe even pay more taxes...BIG DEAL!
You should relax though. I think you're getting very upset over a NG.
Don't you? I'm enjoying this. Very cathartic (is that the term
Dear Professor)?
>
> > But then again you did say you weren't born English. You're not
> > really in a cave in
> > Afghanistan are you? That would explain the excessinve posting! I'd
> > be afraid of the outdoors myself! :)
>
> cute.
>
I thought so. You aren't are you? You didn't say. ;)
> > > > No Medicaid is, in Pennsylvania and othet states like Wisconsin, a
> > > > "limited time thing" You get it for so long and then that's it.
> > >
> > > So you want a handout for the rest of your life? There is no
> > > incentive to improve? What a sorry state of affairs. Are you opposed
> > > to workfare, too?
> > >
> > > > My efforts to get retrained? For 3 weeks straight my leg was elevated
> > > > and only recently have I been OUT an about except for trips to the
> > > > Wound Care people.
> > > >
> > > > Again be careful about your MEDICAL ADVICE before you kill someone.
> > >
> > > Yeh, right.
Then we agree?
So Now you FAVOR UNIVERSAL HEALH INSURANCE? Truly I hope the
politicians do that here. We can name it after you too. I shall
start a fund to build a statue honoring you! REALLY I like the
idea!! See Prof. that's how politcs work. You have sell a Plan to us
illiterate, freeloading,twits who don't like to pay taxes. Don't
screw with our right to vote and then there's no need to borrow
(freeload) that guillotine from the French...ahhh I'd prefer ropes
less blood what?