An alternative to Obamacare, starting with advice from Whole Foods

I agree with the above, and I think that all of us on this thread can agree with this. I mean, c'mon, no one on this discussion wants anyone to be denied health care. Let's all agree that we have good intentions.

But, there's a vast difference between "government regulation" via laws, and "government control". Unless we're just arguing semantics here.

Mia wrote about "tort reform, fraud and insurance industry practices".

First of all, can we all agree that the present Medicare system needs to be revamped to prevent fraud? That's not government control or regulation, that's simple law-and-order. Last Sunday, "60 Minutes" showed how it was so easy to pull in hundreds of thousands of dollars a month in Medicare fraud that there is even an underground industry that support the fraud. The reason why is that the federal government deliberately has the system set up so that the fraud can easily happen and go unpunished.Again - it is deliberately set up to allow Medicare fraud. Example: there is only one fraud investigator for all of Southern Florida. People report hundreds of acts of Medicare fraud every week. None of them are investigated (watch the 60 Minutes episode).

Which raises the question of the government's involvement with organized crime.

HOW will all of this get worse if government expands the program?

 

Sounds like we need to regulate tinfoil hats. Oh my, what is this world coming too...

 

Your right. There's no such thing as organized crime, and every single Democrat that is pushing for health reform is completely honest.

And tonight, all the little devils in hell are going ice skating...

 

Oh, of course there are no lobbyists and congressmen making a fuckton of cash off both the insurance carriers and the drug companies... No, no way that could happen. After all, what's this whole plan about if its not about legitimizing the Pelosi Presidency.

 

Political corruption is hardly limited to a single party. The Republicans have done a fine job of demonstrating that over the past decade.

That said, if we now governed by organized crime then our problems are far greater than insurance fraud.

Have you been taking lessons from blogmaster?

My bad, I thought corwin was talking about organized crime, not a fouled up political system that is taken advantage of on a daily basis by cowboy capitalists.

Lobbying is bad.

Corruption is an entirely different matter...

Oops, maybe I do need a tin foil hat!

 

Well, the Bush White House certainly wasn't plagued with the scandals of the Clinton presidency. Maybe Republicans are just more careful about getting caught. Or, maybe they just lacked the ambition.

But it's pretty much standard that any time one political party dominates a region, rampant corruption takes over. Here in Massachusetts, corruption by Democrats (which control 98% of the state) is pretty much taken for granted. Every month, some new scandal is uncovered. No one ever seems to get punished.

Organized crime requires a fouled-up political system (see Chicago,or Miami).

I don't mean Don Corleone organized crime, I mean a group of dishonest people that conspire to rip people off under the cover of government. The most blatant corruption I've ever known about were the Republicans that ran Nassau County NY 20 years ago. Because they controlled the unions, and the unions ran the police and the newspapers, the police looked the other way and the newspapers were silent. Except one - the Long Island Press regularly reported scandals amongst the Republicans. There was a solution to that: the unions called a strike on the LI Press until they folded in 1977.

 

Ha ha. That is a good one. You are about 5 months too early though.

Clinton got caught getting a blow job.

Besides my above reference we could add the outing of CIA agents (including perjury and obstucting justice), violation of Internation Law in regards to torture and illegal rendition, and a whole lot more.

Slick Willy may have been slick, but he had nowhere near the teflon coating of Georgy Porgy.

 

Which wasn't illegal (thank God, or many of my former GF would be under indictment*). Although maybe that still qualifies as a scandal? Bill just handled it badly - he should have admitted the affair then gotten past it. Instead, in covering it up he bribed witnesses, encouraged perjury, and in 1998 got the House to impeach him - he really made a mountain out of a molehill.

The outing of a CIA agent was massive, and I'm shocked that it wasn't as scandalous as it deserved to be. I think the whole torture thing was overblown - personally, I don't think waterboarding is torture if college students do it for fun. However, John McCain believes that waterboarding is torture and more than anyone else we should take his word for it.

I think the allegations of illegal rendition were based more on rumor than any actual facts, but I admit I haven't looked into it.

* "under" indictment. Get it? Yuk Yuk Yuk!

 

Actually, the Supreme Court determined that el-Masri had no standing in the case since he is foreign born. This even though he was snagged at the New York airport, and ultimately it was determined to be a case of mistaken identity.

Canada has already issued a formal apology to him for their role in this, as have several members of Congress.

Kidnapping people on US soil from a highly public place such as a major city's airport, and then whisking them off to a middle eastern country where they are tortured for a year or more is a bit troubling to me...

 

Interesting discussion of tort reform, defensive medicine, etc. on NPR yesterday.

Turns out even Doctors can't agree on these issues.

Some tidbits (from memory, so don't quote me)

1. States that have instituted tort reform have not experienced any reduction in health care costs.
2. The overall rate of malpractice claims has remained pretty constant over the past 15 years. (About 15 claims per 100 doctors, which does seem excessive. They didn't say what the rate is per patient, which might be more revealing. I mean, if a doctor has 500 patients, then that rate would drop from 15% to 0.3%)
3. There have been 3 "malpractice insurance crisis" in the past 20 years, and each coincided with stock market downturns. The implication here is that malpractice insurance rates have far more to do with insurance company profits (from investment of premiums) than anything going on in the health care system.

On the other hand, there were a number of physicians that were convinced that defensive medicine is adding a great deal of cost to the system.

As it currently stands, doctors must report in claims made against them whether or not the plaintiff prevailed. Thus, even the most frivolous of claims have a negative impact on the doctor's practice and career.

It was also pointed out that defensive medicine may well be placing patients at unnecessary risk. CAT scans, for instance, expose patients to high levels of radiation that may represent long term health risks.

All in all, I came away appreciating more how complex the problems are, and how unlikely any quick fix as represented in a short news story or opinion piece is likely to impact it.

 

A bit more on this issue from BBC news this morning...

It would appear that the facts are slowly coming out...

 

Anyone else think it's odd that the President that is pushing so hard for Health Care reform, admits that he smokes at least a pack a day of cigarettes?

 

Anyone else, in the middle of all that's going on, find that even remotely important?

 

I don't. I think he kicked off his health care proposal and left it entirely up to Pelosi and company with truly high hopes of pulling off the "socialized healthcare" dream most Democrats spank to. He figured if she screwed it up, which she did, he could always distance himself from "her" proposal and put out something of his own, which he has. It has gone way beyond the socialized healthcare dream at this point. It has even gone beyond the required payoffs for campaign contributions by certain doctors organizations, big pharma, and the trial attorneys lobby. At this point, it is all about saving face and reputation. It is just a damn shame it isn't about bringing down the real cost of healthcare by cutting waste and opening up competition. While I savor the idea of throwing the people out of office who further this insane agenda, the financial consequences of the legislation passing, and the difficulty getting it annulled outweigh the value of any landslide election in 2010/2012. Besides, most of them already figure their jobs are forfeit in the upcoming election for the debacle to this point, so why not pull the trigger.

I suspect the country is going to get its first view of what it looks like when middle class Americans riot during the upcoming congressional break.

 

@Obamanation, well said, all well said!

It's hypocrisy that always gives away the Democrat's bad intentions. Obama says he wants universal health care, but he smokes a pack a day. Pelosi says she wants universal health care, but meanwhile she's raking in bribes at an amazing rate to NOT pass health care.

As to saving face - the Dems have absolutely no excuse. For the past year they have had their "super majority" that relegated the Republicans to zero influence. And the Dems got no health care passed.

As Jon Stewart says over and over again - "the Democrats are pussies".

It was their saving excuse that Scott Brown got elected, so finally the Dems can blame the Republicans - and then in a brilliant twist of strategy, Scott Brown torpedoes the Democrats by voting WITH them!!!

Like Obamanation said - for the Democrats, it's all about saving face now.

 

Speaking of Super Majority and GITMO is still open for business. We're still in Iraq. We still don't have Bin Laden. No change. No hope. Just status quo.

 

to me healthcare seems like a good idea beyond the politics.

most of the civilaized countries in the world have universal health care and it seems like something our society should have by now.

 

But the countries that have the best universal health care - like Taiwan and Japan - had their healthcare systems developed by doctors - NOT politicians looking for a handout!

I also think that healthcare should be provided for all Americans. But shouldn't it be provided EQUALLY?

If, as the Democrats insist, that healthcare is a "right" - and that's a very significant word - then the availability and quality of treatment should not discriminate against race, creed, color, religion, or financial status.

This is NOT what the Democrats want. They are treating health care as a handout - and so the wealthiest will have access to the best healthcare. That is not healthcare - it's class segregation.

 

That is correct. The scope of the problems left by the the Republican administation are so huge and difficult that it will take a long time to undo them.

Iraq. Seems to me that after years of saying "we're not leaving till we've accomplished the goal....Bush signed a treaty to pull Americans out of Iraq. Just like that. Totally changed his tune. Now we are leaving in accord with that treaty. Taking time. no doubt.

Gitmo: The world hated the way the US has mirrored the worst in nations. Most Americans hate it. Undoing it is a difficult issue.

Bin Laden: Aren't you the guy that has kept saying bin Laden is dead. Haven't you repeated that several times, regardless of no evidence. Meanwhile if Bush/Rumsfeld hadn't refrained from aggressively attacking Al Queda when bin laden was holed up in Afghanistan he might have been dead in 2001.

Now....after years of hiding the Afghanistan issue by Repubs...Obama is doing something about. Another huge problem that will take time, effort, money, manpower...to resolve...another problem the Pugs didn't deal with but swept under the rug.

Oh and don't forget the recession caused by the Pug administration and Pug non action. That one will take years to resolve.

Yup its gonna take years to clean up after the pugs

 

Wow nice cop out earl... way to shift the blame once again.

Excuses, excuses... Hope Change? nada... what a lame response. Shameful at best.