Time For Single Payer System

Quoted message said:

All it demonstrates is your lack of knowledge as it pertains to our health and economic systems and
how they surpass any other.

Utter nonsense. We spend more money and get less care than many, many other nations. Our health
system is not the best, not even close.

Arguing that a single payer system will stifle medical innovation is an argument you haven't come
close to adequately making.

Quoted message said:

Emergency health care is for whoever needs it. That's what taxes should

provide.

Quoted message said:

That is not how sick care for the uninsured is paid for.

It is paid by you and me, us folks that pay for our own insurance, and our own uninsured care.

It is padded onto our bills.

Point taken.

Mic Chek 123 said:

"George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mic Chek 123 said:

"George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr." <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Let's take whatever it is that you do for a living. You do work for a

living

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

don't you?

I own my own business.

Quoted message said:

Let us assume that a bunch of us think you are charging too much for your product and we think
you are making too much money. How long would you be willing to provide your labor at prices me
and some of my friends set for you?

Why talk around the issue? We have a system with a single payer, and it works. It demonstrably
costs a lot less than our own system. You can not deny that. It delivers thirty percent more
visits to the doctor per person than our system does. You can not deny that. Its consumers are
far happier with their system than our consumers are happy with our system I think. You could
deny that with data which contradicts my memory on that point.

So instead of making up dumb irrelevant hypotheticals, why don't you just look at the real world
instead?

Oh, I get it. If it's your sacred cow getting gored, it's dumb. Well, maybe I'm in the healthcare
field so your [censored] is just as dumb.

It's not a sacred cow of mine, and it wasn't gored.

Why not just compare actual systems as they function, instead of making claims about what you THINK
would happen.

What HAPPENs is more important than what you think WOULD happen.

Hank said:

Quoted message said:

But YOU elitist fascists CAN be choosey. Think about it. Why should our Congressmen have a
government run health care plan, which is incidentally the best in the world, while at the same
time these very Congressmen vote against letting the rest of us have any kind of health care
plan at all?

Hypocracy, thy name is Republican.

I take it no Democrats use the system? Do all Democratics in Washington go to the public hospitals
for thier health needs?

I think not.

The Democrats are not the ones crying about "socialized medicine". The conservative medical policy
is do what we say not what we do.

--
To reply via e-mail please delete one c from paccbell

Jeffrey Turner said:

Captain Compassion said:

George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. said:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:43:24 GMT, [email hidden] (Captain Compassion) wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 06:42:10 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:22:28 GMT, "Mic Chek 123" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I'm all for a single payor system. I, and no other person, making me the single person in my
>>>case will pay for my care, and you pay for yours. If a poor person needs help, that's what we
>>>give tax deductions to churches and charities for. It is a great system, many poor use it,
>>>they have some of the finest medical facilities in the world, so why not use that source
>>>instead of piling up more money for the crooks in DC to steal.
>>
>>Because a single payer system would cost a lot less than we pay now, and would deliver a lot
>>more medical care to boot.
>>
>>We're burning up an incredible amount of wasted money with our inefficient system, plus tens of
>>millions live in fear that they might have to call an ambulance - and then file for bankruptcy.
>>
>>If you ask Canadians how they like their system, and ask Americans the same thing - I bet the
>>Canadians would be incredibly more satisfied.
>>
>>Isn't that pretty much proof that their system is better?
>>
>>The ratings of medical consumers?
>
>If this is such a good idea why doesn't the government offer a health care plan in competition
>with the private plans. The government can use VA hospitals or build their own. Hire their own
>doctors.

I am not proposing that the government provide health care. Only that it - or something else - be
the single payer. To get rid of all those armies of needless workers - the marketers, the
advertisers, the accoutants, all that.

You have confused socialized medicine with the single payer system.

In a single payer system private parties provide health care, but are paid by just one source.

Does the "one source" decide what to pay for procedures or does the medical provider?

The "marketplace" remember? Jeez.

So hospital A can charge $1,300 for a medical procedure and Hospital B can charge $2,000 for the
same procedure and both would get paid? Guess what. If this were true then all hospitals would
charge at least $2,000 for the same procedure. For your scheme to work the single payer (government)
would have to have fixed amounts for certain procedures that they would pay and the providers would
have to take that payment as payment in full. Just like Medicare does today.

When the government is the only payer you can't have a marketplace.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If the
>service is cheaper and better then the people will flock to it. Why force doctors, hospitals and
>a population who really doesn't want it into state servitude.

To get more care, for all, at far less cost.

In a system proven by conusmer ratings to be superior.

Why exactly do you want a system which costs more, does less, and which consumers have many more
complaints about?

Are you a masochist or what?

As I said I'm self insured so as far as I'm concerned there is 0nly one single payer for medical
care... Me. I'm also one of the 40 million uninsured. A couple of years ago I had to go to
Emergency with a possible bowel obstruction. They poked and proded and x-rayed they said it was a
combination of the flu and bad chickin. The bill was 1,400 dollars. I got a 35% cash discount.
Many doctors in private or small practices are willing to give you even more.

The high costs of medical care is due to HMOs, Medicare and high legal costs.

It doesn't sound like you were even hospitalized. I'm glad it wasn't anything serious, but if it
had been... Does Ms. Compassion have recipes for dog food handy? Still, there are plenty of people
who would have had problems coming up with even $1400 (vast understatement).

No. Only 3 hours in emergency. Actuall I've been lucky. I was covered by my employer in 1981 when my
son was delivered by C section. Shortly after his birth I became self employed. I paid for Blue
Cross for three years until just after my Daughter was born. Another C-Section. From 85-90 I didn't
have insurence from 90 to 95 I and all my employees were covered by my coporste policy. From 1996 to
present I have not carried insurence.

Old Brazilian saying: Once you become insured you stop living.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life. --Will Durant

"Madmen reason rightly from the wrong premisis" -- Locke

"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is
always evil." -- Ayn Rand

Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate -- William of Occam

Joseph R. Darancette [email hidden]

George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. said:

(Captain Compassion) said:

George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. said:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:43:24 GMT, [email hidden] (Captain Compassion) wrote:

>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 06:42:10 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:22:28 GMT, "Mic Chek 123" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>>I'm all for a single payor system. I, and no other person, making me the single person in my
>>>case will pay for my care, and you pay for yours. If a poor person needs help, that's what we
>>>give tax deductions to churches and charities for. It is a great system, many poor use it,
>>>they have some of the finest medical facilities in the world, so why not use that source
>>>instead of piling up more money for the crooks in DC to steal.
>>
>>
>>Because a single payer system would cost a lot less than we pay now, and would deliver a lot
>>more medical care to boot.
>>
>>We're burning up an incredible amount of wasted money with our inefficient system, plus tens of
>>millions live in fear that they might have to call an ambulance - and then file for bankruptcy.
>>
>>If you ask Canadians how they like their system, and ask Americans the same thing - I bet the
>>Canadians would be incredibly more satisfied.
>>
>>Isn't that pretty much proof that their system is better?
>>
>>The ratings of medical consumers?
>>
>If this is such a good idea why doesn't the government offer a health care plan in competition
>with the private plans. The government can use VA hospitals or build their own. Hire their own
>doctors.

I am not proposing that the government provide health care. Only that it - or something else - be
the single payer. To get rid of all those armies of needless workers - the marketers, the
advertisers, the accoutants, all that.

You have confused socialized medicine with the single payer system.

In a single payer system private parties provide health care, but are paid by just one source.

Does the "one source" decide what to pay for procedures or does the medical provider?

They reach an agreement, just as I reach an agreement with my clients about what they pay me for
what I do.

I agree that the single payer has enormous power in that relationship.

The important question is - how does that work out in practice?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If the
>service is cheaper and better then the people will flock to it. Why force doctors, hospitals and
>a population who really doesn't want it into state servitude.
>

To get more care, for all, at far less cost.

In a system proven by conusmer ratings to be superior.

Why exactly do you want a system which costs more, does less, and which consumers have many more
complaints about?

Are you a masochist or what?

As I said I'm self insured so as far as I'm concerned there is 0nly one single payer for medical
care... Me.

Your standard of living is reduced because such a large share of our economy goes for medical care.
Were we able to move several million workers out of the health care management business into other
areas then there would be more goods and services produced for you and I to share.

That's why a single payer system would be good for you. even if you never get sick and just drop
dead one day.

I'm also one of the 40

Quoted message said:

million uninsured. A couple of years ago I had to go to Emergency with a possible bowel
obstruction. They poked and proded and x-rayed they said it was a combination of the flu and bad
chickin. The bill was 1,400 dollars. I got a 35% cash discount. Many doctors in private or small
practices are willing to give you even more.

It would be better if the cost was less. If you didn't have to worry that calling an ambulance will
force you into bankruptcy.

Quoted message said:

The high costs of medical care is due to HMOs, Medicare and high legal costs.

Legal costs? That's absurd. Even President Bush, the smart one, not the current guy, only claimed,
when he ran on that stupid claim, that malpractice costs altogether, including legal costs and
awards, came to twenty billion dollars a year.

Tell that to the Dr's in West Virginia.

Quoted message said:

That's about two percent.

And that was what he claimed when he had an incentive to exaggerate the cost.

I aslo think HMOs lower costs, but I don't know what the implications of medicare are.

Quoted message said:

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life. --Will Durant

"Madmen reason rightly from the wrong premisis" -- Locke

"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is
always evil." -- Ayn Rand

Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate -- William of Occam

Joseph R. Darancette [email hidden]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Progress is the increasing control of the environment by life. --Will Durant

"Madmen reason rightly from the wrong premisis" -- Locke

"There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is
always evil." -- Ayn Rand

Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate -- William of Occam

Joseph R. Darancette [email hidden]

Captain Compassion said:

Jeffrey Turner said:

Captain Compassion said:

On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:33:15 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <[email hidden]> wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:43:24 GMT, [email hidden] (Captain Compassion) wrote:
>>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 06:42:10 -0800, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr. <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>On Tue, 30 Dec 2003 13:22:28 GMT, "Mic Chek 123" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I'm all for a single payor system. I, and no other person, making me the single person in my
>>>>case will pay for my care, and you pay for yours. If a poor person needs help, that's what we
>>>>give tax deductions to churches and charities for. It is a great system, many poor use it,
>>>>they have some of the finest medical facilities in the world, so why not use that source
>>>>instead of piling up more money for the crooks in DC to steal.
>>>
>>>Because a single payer system would cost a lot less than we pay now, and would deliver a lot
>>>more medical care to boot.
>>>
>>>We're burning up an incredible amount of wasted money with our inefficient system, plus tens
>>>of millions live in fear that they might have to call an ambulance - and then file for
>>>bankruptcy.
>>>
>>>If you ask Canadians how they like their system, and ask Americans the same thing - I bet the
>>>Canadians would be incredibly more satisfied.
>>>
>>>Isn't that pretty much proof that their system is better?
>>>
>>>The ratings of medical consumers?
>>
>>If this is such a good idea why doesn't the government offer a health care plan in competition
>>with the private plans. The government can use VA hospitals or build their own. Hire their own
>>doctors.
>
>I am not proposing that the government provide health care. Only that it - or something else -
>be the single payer. To get rid of all those armies of needless workers - the marketers, the
>advertisers, the accoutants, all that.
>
>You have confused socialized medicine with the single payer system.
>
>In a single payer system private parties provide health care, but are paid by just one source.

Does the "one source" decide what to pay for procedures or does the medical provider?

The "marketplace" remember? Jeez.

So hospital A can charge $1,300 for a medical procedure and Hospital B can charge $2,000 for the
same procedure and both would get paid? Guess what. If this were true then all hospitals would
charge at least $2,000 for the same procedure. For your scheme to work the single payer
(government) would have to have fixed amounts for certain procedures that they would pay and the
providers would have to take that payment as payment in full. Just like Medicare does today.

That's not how a marketplace works, jeez! Sounds like how HMOs work, though. If Hospital A can do
the procedure for $1,300 then no one would go to Hospital B and they'd have to bring their costs
down to compete. Try replacing things with Supermarket X, Supermarket Y and "pound of generic
spaghetti." The reading for week two of Economics 101 is...

You figured out how to use your web browser and Google yet?

--Jeff

--
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.

--That to secure these rights, Governments ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ are
instituted among Men, deriving their ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ just powers from the consent of
the governed,

--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the
People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such
principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect
their Safety and Happiness."

Steven Litvintchouk <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Then I guess you don't consider Dean, Lieberman, Kerry and Gephardt as having "compassion"--since
NONE of them favors single-payer. (AFAIK the only two Dem candidates who favor single-payer are
the also-rans Carol Moseley Braun and Dennis Kucinich.)

All four of these leading Dem candidates has proposed ways to incrementally expand health-care
coverage in the U.S. But not single-payer.

Go argue it with them.

Because if none of them is going to advocate single-payer either, then while this might be an
intellectually interesting concept to discuss (along with a manned expedition to the planet
Pluto), for the 2004 campaign it's a non-starter.

Anyone who wants to help me get signatures to get on the ballot in as many states as possible I will
declare my candidacy right NOW on the Single Payer Plank.

Axinar

On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 10:45:52 -0800, Trent Duke <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

SOCIALISM is not "compassion."

Why should I or you have to pay for a cigerette smoker's lung cancer?

Oh, so you think you are immune? Just play by the rules and nothing bad will happen to you, right?
What should we do with those who cannot afford medical care? Unless your answer is: "let them die",
then how do we pay for their treatment? It appears that you do not have health insurance right now.
What should we do with you if you have a catastrophic illness or injury and you do not have the
funds for the required treatment?

Currently society does not accept "let them die" as a general medical care policy. We care for our
needy. So we do share the costs of providing medical treatment to all in need. However the way we do
this in this country right now is irrational and needlessly expensive, and seems mostly designed, or
rather evolved, to benefit the health care industry at the expense of tax payers and large
corporations.

By the way, Canadian health care stats are superior to ours, as are the stats for all of the major
industrial democracies, all of whom except for our nation have long had universal health care, and
all of whom spend less per capita than we do. Other than ideological purity, there is no rational
reason to prefer our system over universal health care as practiced in the rest of the first world.

The Washington NeoClowns can't even get their clown shoes on right, and there is no wrong way
to do that.

==
Mark Roddy

"Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a
long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbor."

-- Project for a New American Century, -- the neocon cabal's blueprint for world empire.
newamericancentury.orgnewamericancentury.orgOpen ↗

Trent Duke said:

SOCIALISM is not "compassion."

Why should I or you have to pay for a cigerette smoker's lung cancer?

Why should I or you have to pay for some obese person (30% of the population here compared to 7%
in France) who cannot keep their car out of the Burger King's drive thru window?

Why should I or you have to pay for people who won't get off their lazy asses or the couch to
exercise?

Why should I or you have to pay for some [censored] ABORTION (Billary's

Quoted message said:

dead body.

Why should I or you pay for someone's liver problems cause they are an alcoholic?

Why should I or you be forced into a single payer system cause so called 40 million people cannot
manage their money/finances correctly to pay for healthcare? Rather they spend it on cigs,
alcohol, drugs, gold teeth, $1000 stero systems and car rims and on and on and on...

Oh and btw...that 40 million is not the same people. That gap is people going in and out of
insurance due mostly to job changes, etc.

What I have come to find Dems, especially the left fringe who wanna make us like Europe is that
the definition of liberalism has become...

To take from those who have and make good decisions and choices and give to those that do not.
Simply put, spreading misery around equally. Hardly "compassion."

And guess what? I am part of that infamous 40 million without insurance right now. Get the govt
involved and what the quality go down. Watch the govt close hospitals like they do in Canada cause
the govt cannot afford it leaving many without care. Watch what England is threatening to do and
that is FORCE obese people on a diet or lose your benefits. Do we really want the govt doing that?
If so, where does it stop?

I rather live in a society where we have CHOICES free from govt intervention

Quoted message said:

ups.

You're obvious a perfect person who always makes perfect choices. Too bad mortality won't be
rescinded in your case.

--Jeff

--
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of
Happiness.

--That to secure these rights, Governments ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ are
instituted among Men, deriving their ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ just powers from the consent of
the governed,

--That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the
People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such
principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect
their Safety and Happiness."

[email hidden] (bushmustlose.com) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

All it demonstrates is your lack of knowledge as it pertains to our health and economic systems
and how they surpass any other.

Utter nonsense. We spend more money and get less care than many, many other nations. Our health
system is not the best, not even close.

Arguing that a single payer system will stifle medical innovation is an argument you haven't come
close to adequately making.

Certainly having a "single payer system" in defense hasn't stifled innovation ... in fact we have
more ways of causing death, destruction, and debilitation than ever before.

In fact, a steady stream of defense spending has kept ALOT of industries in business.

In fact I'm beginning to find it utterly unfathomable that we are the only substantive "developed"
country in the world that has not made the decision that health care is every bit as important to
the security of the country as having enough firepower to wipe out the entire biosphere.

The whole situation begins to remind me of the classic line from WW II -- "First they came for the
Jews -- I wasn't Jewish, so I said nothing. Then then came for the trade unionists -- I wasn't one,
so I said nothing. Then they came for me and there wasn't anyone left to say anything."

It is really beginning to concern me even associating myself with this country any more. For
instance, when faced with escalating prescription drug costs, just about every other developed
nation in the world used the collective buying power of the ENTIRE COUNTRY to drive down drug costs.
In fact it is so effective you have American senior citizens by the busload streaming over the
border to Canada to get their prescription drugs.

What do American companies do to try to drive down drug costs? They cut you off. In the new Medicare
prescription drug coverage gap coverage has been made ILLEGAL to FORCE seniors to potentially spend
THOUSANDS of dollars a year, potentially into bankruptcy.

Used to be that if you got a "decent job" you could get some decent coverage. Not any more. One of
the major providers in our area is charging between the "employee" part and the "employer" part
$300/mo just for single coverage. Then they charge $20 for an office visit. THEN they charge $12 for
generic, $24 for brand formulary and 50% up to $80! for brand non-formulary for prescriptions. Fixed
dollar co-pays no longer count towards out-of-pocket maximums. On top of that their re-imbursement
rates are so low that many doctors are refusing to accept their payments. In fact it is SO bad that
the largest chain of hospitals and doctors in the area looks like they are going to refuse to do
business with them.

Why this seems to be acceptable to the American people I have no idea.

Ax

On 30 Dec 2003 21:19:03 -0800, [email hidden]

(bushmustlose.com) said:

Quoted message said:

All it demonstrates is your lack of knowledge as it pertains to our health and economic systems
and how they surpass any other.

Utter nonsense. We spend more money and get less care than many, many other nations. Our health
system is not the best, not even close.

Reference your claims....

Quoted message said:

Arguing that a single payer system will stifle medical innovation is an argument you haven't come
close to adequately making.

Your not exactly proving anything so give it a try.....

Why don't you guys take a shot at the truth for once. The costs of medical care started going up at
exactly the time the government became involved in it. Ever since that time, the costs associated
with the medical care industry has risen twice the rate of inflation of all other industries. The
only other field that comes close when costs are compared to healthcare is the education field whose
costs have risen almost twice the rate of the inflation rate of others EVER SINCE THE GOVERNMENT
BECAME INVOLVED WITH THAT INDUSTRY AS WELL.

Get the government OUT of the healthcare field if you want lower costs.

If you need convincing, go check out these numbers:

Bureau of Labor Statistics for CPI, Towers Perrin for Employer Health Costs and the National Center
for Education Statistics for Education Costs. You will find healthcare cost increases at twice the
rate of all other inflation. You will also find that projected increases at 8 TIMES MORE THAN THE
CPI now that the prescription benefit has been added. So, yea, let's just turn it all over to the
government. Like P.J. O'Rourke said "If you think health care is expensive now, wait until
government gives it away for free."

--
A famous person once said:

"I can't hear my damn monitor!"

Mic Chek 123

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Mic Chek 123 writes:

Mic> Why don't you guys take a shot at the truth for once. The costs of medical care started
Mic> going up at exactly the time the government became involved in it. Ever since that time, the
Mic> costs associated with the medical care industry has risen twice the rate of inflation of all
Mic> other industries. The only other field that comes close when costs are compared to
Mic> healthcare is the education field whose costs have risen almost twice the rate of the
Mic> inflation rate of others EVER SINCE THE GOVERNMENT BECAME INVOLVED WITH THAT INDUSTRY AS
Mic> WELL.

Mic> Get the government OUT of the healthcare field if you want lower costs.

Mic> If you need convincing, go check out these numbers:

Mic> Bureau of Labor Statistics for CPI, Towers Perrin for Employer Health Costs and the National
Mic> Center for Education Statistics for Education Costs. You will find healthcare cost increases
Mic> at twice the rate of all other inflation. You will also find that projected increases at 8
Mic> TIMES MORE THAN THE CPI now that the prescription benefit has been added. So, yea, let's
Mic> just turn it all over to the government. Like P.J. O'Rourke said "If you think health care
Mic> is expensive now, wait until government gives it away for free."

Much of the increase in the cost of health care is expansion of services, not inflation.

Think of all the treatments and diagnostic equipment now available that was not there 20 years ago.

Comparing increases in the cost of health care to increases in the price of gasoline is absurd!

--
Andrew Hall (Now reading Usenet in talk.politics.misc...)

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>> Mic Chek 123 writes:

Mic> Why don't you guys take a shot at the truth for once. The costs of

medical

Quoted message said:

Mic> care started going up at exactly the time the government became

involved in

Quoted message said:

Mic> it. Ever since that time, the costs associated with the medical

care

Quoted message said:

Mic> industry has risen twice the rate of inflation of all other

industries. The

Quoted message said:

Mic> only other field that comes close when costs are compared to

healthcare is

Quoted message said:

Mic> the education field whose costs have risen almost twice the rate

of the

Quoted message said:

Mic> inflation rate of others EVER SINCE THE GOVERNMENT BECAME INVOLVED

WITH THAT

Quoted message said:

Mic> INDUSTRY AS WELL.

Mic> Get the government OUT of the healthcare field if you want lower

costs.

Quoted message said:

Mic> If you need convincing, go check out these numbers:

Mic> Bureau of Labor Statistics for CPI, Towers Perrin for Employer

Health Costs

Quoted message said:

Mic> and the National Center for Education Statistics for Education

Costs. You

Quoted message said:

Mic> will find healthcare cost increases at twice the rate of all other inflation. You will
Mic> also find that projected increases at 8 TIMES

MORE THAN

Quoted message said:

Mic> THE CPI now that the prescription benefit has been added. So,

yea, let's

Quoted message said:

Mic> just turn it all over to the government. Like P.J. O'Rourke said

"If you

Quoted message said:

Mic> think health care is expensive now, wait until government gives it

away for

Quoted message said:

Mic> free."

Much of the increase in the cost of health care is expansion of services, not inflation.

Think of all the treatments and diagnostic equipment now available that was not there 20
years ago.

Comparing increases in the cost of health care to increases in the price of gasoline is absurd!

So what? It's still a fact that healthcare costs rise at twice and soon to be 8 times the rate of
anything else and it started when government got involved in healthcare.

That's the fact of the matter.

--
A famous person once said:

"I can't hear my damn monitor!"

Mic Chek 123

"Mic Chek 123" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>>>> Mic Chek 123 writes:

Mic> Why don't you guys take a shot at the truth for once. The costs

of

Quoted message said:

medical

Quoted message said:

Mic> care started going up at exactly the time the government became

involved in

Quoted message said:

Mic> it. Ever since that time, the costs associated with the medical

care

Quoted message said:

Mic> industry has risen twice the rate of inflation of all other

industries. The

Quoted message said:

Mic> only other field that comes close when costs are compared to

healthcare is

Quoted message said:

Mic> the education field whose costs have risen almost twice the rate

of the

Quoted message said:

Mic> inflation rate of others EVER SINCE THE GOVERNMENT BECAME

INVOLVED

Quoted message said:

WITH THAT

Quoted message said:

Mic> INDUSTRY AS WELL.

Mic> Get the government OUT of the healthcare field if you want lower

costs.

Quoted message said:

Mic> If you need convincing, go check out these numbers:

Mic> Bureau of Labor Statistics for CPI, Towers Perrin for Employer

Health Costs

Quoted message said:

Mic> and the National Center for Education Statistics for Education

Costs. You

Quoted message said:

Mic> will find healthcare cost increases at twice the rate of all

other

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mic> inflation. You will also find that projected increases at 8

TIMES

Quoted message said:

MORE THAN

Quoted message said:

Mic> THE CPI now that the prescription benefit has been added. So,

yea, let's

Quoted message said:

Mic> just turn it all over to the government. Like P.J. O'Rourke said

"If you

Quoted message said:

Mic> think health care is expensive now, wait until government gives

it

Quoted message said:

away for

Quoted message said:

Mic> free."

Much of the increase in the cost of health care is expansion of services, not inflation.

Think of all the treatments and diagnostic equipment now available that was not there 20
years ago.

Comparing increases in the cost of health care to increases in the price of gasoline is absurd!

So what? It's still a fact that healthcare costs rise at twice and soon to be 8 times the rate of
anything else and it started when government got involved in healthcare.

That's the fact of the matter.

--
A famous person once said:

"I can't hear my damn monitor!"

Mic Chek 123

That's not the case in countries that practice "not for profit" healthcare. The USA has the highest
per patient cost around. That's because it's "for profit". I'm not about to debate which is better,
but there are a lot of misunderstandings in the US that have been perpetrated by the Insurance
industry and have been gobbled up as fact by the people.

It's worth looking into how it works in other places, not by reading the headlines, not by reading
newsgroups and certainly not by reading it from your own countries propaganda.

The fact remains, the US "for profit" system is the highest per patient cost by a long shot. Do a
Google search and find out for yourself.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Mic Chek 123 writes:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

[email hidden]> wrote in message Much of the increase in the cost of health care is
expansion of services, not inflation.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Think of all the treatments and diagnostic equipment now available that was not there 20
years ago.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Comparing increases in the cost of health care to increases in the price of gasoline is
absurd!

Mic> So what? It's still a fact that healthcare costs rise at twice and soon to

So that is an important fact, one that we have to deal with.

Mic> be 8 times the rate of anything else and it started when government got involved in
Mic> healthcare.

I do not give government much of the credit for the incredible expansion of service in medicine.
Some, I guess, because of research grants, and state universities/hospitals.

Mic> That's the fact of the matter.

You seem rather confused.

--
Andrew Hall (Now reading Usenet in talk.politics.misc...)

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 07:22:41 GMT, [email hidden] (Captain

Compassion) said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The high costs of medical care is due to HMOs, Medicare and high legal costs.

Legal costs? That's absurd. Even President Bush, the smart one, not the current guy, only claimed,
when he ran on that stupid claim, that malpractice costs altogether, including legal costs and
awards, came to twenty billion dollars a year.

Tell that to the Dr's in West Virginia.

You mean the ones who do so much damage to patients through their malpractice, and then want to be
spared the cost of compensating the victims?

There is a lot of malpractice. For instance, the Rand Corporation some years ago found that in many
areas there are many phony stupid lawsuits, such as in auto accidents. They estimated that in LA
county half the claims were bogus. But in medicine, they estimated that claims were filed only one
time in ten examples of malpractice. They concluded that lawsuits were "out of control" in some
areas, but too infrequent for our common good in other areas. Medicine was one where they felt that
there were too FEW claims. Lawsuits can make medical providers put safeguards in place which
prevent harm.

As to West Virginia, from a consumers rights group

"Extrapolating from Institute of Medicine findings, we estimate that medical errors cause 283 to 630
preventable deaths in West Virginia each year. The cost resulting from preventable medical errors to
West Virginia's residents, families, and communities is estimated at $109 million to $186 million
each year. But the cost of medical malpractice insurance to West Virginia's doctors is less than $77
million a year."

medical-malpractice-attorney-source.comwest virginia.htmlOpen ↗

And of course a cost of 77 million for the insurance for a whole state is not very high. That's
something like forty dollars per person per year. We spend certainly more than a trillion dollars a
year on medical care here, which is more than three thousand dollars per year per person for medical
care. That is a bit more than one percent.

In addition, has the reform passed in West Virginia, limiting the amount of maximum claims for pain
and suffering and so on, lowered insurance costs? No.

In addition, only a very small percentage of doctors in West Virginia has had to pay more than one
malpractice claim. The bulk of the amounts paid come from a small number of repeat offenders in the
medical community. I have read, though I don't know if it's true, that the medical community
protects even grossly incompetent doctors from having their licenses removed.

My point is that maybe malpractice costs are good for us in this field. There is a lot of damage
done by medical errors. Paying a little bit to provide an incentive for avoiding harm sounds like a
good idea to me, in this field. Some other field - auto insurance claims for whiplash? Different
story. But in this one? I don't see the evidence that the costs are not appropriate, and wise.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's about two percent.

And that was what he claimed when he had an incentive to exaggerate the cost.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> writes:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Mic Chek 123 writes:
[email hidden]> wrote in message Much of the increase in the cost of health care is
expansion of services, not inflation.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Think of all the treatments and diagnostic equipment now available that was not there 20
years ago.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Comparing increases in the cost of health care to increases in the price of gasoline is
absurd!

Mic> So what? It's still a fact that healthcare costs rise at twice and soon to

Quoted message said:

So that is an important fact, one that we have to deal with.

Mic> be 8 times the rate of anything else and it started when government got involved in
Mic> healthcare.

Quoted message said:

I do not give government much of the credit for the incredible expansion of service in
medicine. Some, I guess, because of research grants, and state

universities> hospitals.

Mic> That's the fact of the matter.

Quoted message said:

You seem rather confused.

I thought I would add two examples to illustrate:

[censored] Cheney: 20-30 years ago he would have been given a cheap scrip for nitroglycerin tablets, and
sent home to die. Now he has had several bypass operations, at least two stent operations, and is
apparently healthy. Net increase in cost, 100's of thousands.

My step-mother. Leukemia. Twenty years ago, she would have died within a month, with morphine the
only (cheap) treatment. She was treated with chemo four times, this kept her alive until she got a
bone marrow transplant. After that took, her original leukemia came back, and she died 15 months
after diagnosis. Net increase in cost, 750k.

Now do you understand the difference between inflation and an increase in service?

--
Andrew Hall (Now reading Usenet in talk.politics.misc...)

"Gord Webster" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Mic Chek 123" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

>>>>> Mic Chek 123 writes:

Mic> Why don't you guys take a shot at the truth for once. The

costs

Quoted message said:

of

Quoted message said:

medical

Quoted message said:

Mic> care started going up at exactly the time the government

became

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

involved in

Quoted message said:

Mic> it. Ever since that time, the costs associated with the

medical

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

care

Quoted message said:

Mic> industry has risen twice the rate of inflation of all other

industries. The

Quoted message said:

Mic> only other field that comes close when costs are compared to

healthcare is

Quoted message said:

Mic> the education field whose costs have risen almost twice the

rate

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

of the

Quoted message said:

Mic> inflation rate of others EVER SINCE THE GOVERNMENT BECAME

INVOLVED

Quoted message said:

WITH THAT

Quoted message said:

Mic> INDUSTRY AS WELL.

Mic> Get the government OUT of the healthcare field if you want

lower

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

costs.

Quoted message said:

Mic> If you need convincing, go check out these numbers:

Mic> Bureau of Labor Statistics for CPI, Towers Perrin for Employer

Health Costs

Quoted message said:

Mic> and the National Center for Education Statistics for Education

Costs. You

Quoted message said:

Mic> will find healthcare cost increases at twice the rate of all

other

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Mic> inflation. You will also find that projected increases at 8

TIMES

Quoted message said:

MORE THAN

Quoted message said:

Mic> THE CPI now that the prescription benefit has been added. So,

yea, let's

Quoted message said:

Mic> just turn it all over to the government. Like P.J. O'Rourke

said

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

"If you

Quoted message said:

Mic> think health care is expensive now, wait until government

gives

Quoted message said:

it

Quoted message said:

away for

Quoted message said:

Mic> free."

Much of the increase in the cost of health care is expansion of services, not inflation.

Think of all the treatments and diagnostic equipment now available that was not there 20 years
ago.

Comparing increases in the cost of health care to increases in the price of gasoline is
absurd!

So what? It's still a fact that healthcare costs rise at twice and soon

to

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

be 8 times the rate of anything else and it started when government got involved in healthcare.

That's the fact of the matter.

--
A famous person once said:

"I can't hear my damn monitor!"

Mic Chek 123

That's not the case in countries that practice "not for profit"

healthcare.

Quoted message said:

The USA has the highest per patient cost around. That's because it's "for profit". I'm not about
to debate which is better, but there are a lot

of

Quoted message said:

misunderstandings in the US that have been perpetrated by the Insurance industry and have been
gobbled up as fact by the people.

It's worth looking into how it works in other places, not by reading the headlines, not by reading
newsgroups and certainly not by reading it from your own countries propaganda.

The fact remains, the US "for profit" system is the highest per patient

cost

Quoted message said:

by a long shot. Do a Google search and find out for yourself.

Well wake up and smell reality pal. This is America built on the free enterprise system and we ain't
in those other countries. And as long as we live in a democracy, I doubt we will ever become like
those other countries. If you are having to beg for healthcare, check out your church or a charity.