"Interstate insurance purchasing is a sham.  Insurance companies would do
the exact same thing credit card companies did and find the state with the
least amount of regulations and make their home there...ever wonder why
there are so many credit card businesses in Delaware?  "

That's where the gov't should come in.  It should make sure the insurance
industry is regulated properly and fairly.





"Tort reform isn't the answer either.  We need the ability to sue doctors
and hospitals when they fuck up, otherwise there will be nothing to limit
the crackpots that shouldn't be practicing first aid, let alone medicine."

You do understand that tort reform does not mean doing away with lawsuits?
The most common concept of tort reform now deals with limiting punitive
damages (not eliminating punitive damages).  By limiting punitive damages,
doctors would have lower malpractice premiums, leading to lower prices.
Trial lawyers are adamantly against this, therefore, so are most Democrats.





"As far as what drives up costs to us, it's the paperwork and endless hoops
the insurance industry puts the doctors through...medicare is pennies
compared to that.  For profit hospitals are not much better."

No doubt.  Though medicare/medicaid puts doctors through just as many hoops
as regular insurance, maybe even more.  You may or may not know that the
percentage of doctors refusing to take medicare and/or medicaid is steadily
rising.  Here are two links to articles.  One at the right wing
bastion 
CNN<http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/01/news/economy/medicare_cuts_rates_consumer_impact/index.htm>and
the other at the even further right
WSJ <http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123993462778328019.html>.  Also,
Walgreens in some states has stopped accepting medicare/medicaid for
prescriptions.





" It's insane what the insurance companies do to try and not pay doctors."

Medicare/medicaid is just as bad if not worse.  See the links above.


As an aside, do you think there will be more or less paperwork when private
insurance is ran out of business?  I will assume that you think less.





"This industry need to be shot in the head and dumped in a shark filled
lagoon...though I might have some sympathy for the sharks as they would
probably get indigestion. "

It's broken.  It needs to be fixed. Unfortunately, a gov't ran system will
be worse.





"While every system has it's horror stories, ours has more horror stories
than good ones.  The Canadian, UK, and other systems of socialized medicine
have their horror stories too, but those are a drop in the bucket compared
to the success stories. . . . Don't take this as me saying that socialized
medicine is perfect, but it is a lot closer to perfect than ours is by leaps
and bounds."

Wow.  You honestly believe this.  I won't even attempt to address it, but
I'll add that you should probably throw Cuba onto your list.




"The quality of care has nothing to do with the insurance companies...that
has to do with great doctors and all of the research hospitals and schools
we have here as well as breakthroughs made by the pharmaceutical industry
(which to me is only better than the insurance companies in that they
actually do give back in the form of research and new drugs...at least the
new drugs that don't kill people...)"

Actually it does.  I would say that almost all doctors like to get paid (a
few missionaries or civic minded people may not).  In socialized medicine
(ie:  single payer), there will be no incentive to see patients.  As
imperfect as insurance is, at least the doctors get paid.  The more they
see, the more they cure/help, the more they make.

You may try to argue that medicare/medicaid pays, but that contradicts the
trend in doctors refusal to accept those two services.





"The VA's health care is great.  "

Okaaay.  I'll take your word for it.





"I revel in the doom of the insurance industry too...so what's your point."

I can tell you're excited about single payer, regardless of its effect on
healthcare.  The good thing, I guess, is that everyone will have equal
care.  It will be shitty care, but it will be equal.



"Because he no longer had to deal with insurance, and thus did not have to
employ his office staff for me, he was able to drop his
rates for me to 80/hr..."

I have seen doctors who charge two rates.  One for insurance and one
without.  As you say, the latter is cheaper.  Interesting enough, your 80 an
hour figure reminded me of a doctor in New York I read about.  His name is
John Muney.  He started a health service for 79$ per month with $10 a
visit.  The insurance industry and the state did not like him circumventing
their administrative and financial nightmare, so they made him change his
service.  There was a public outcry and he got to change back to a modified
version of his system.  The point:  he used an affordable system that worked
for non-catastrophic illness and the STATE tried to prevent him from doing
it.  You cannot trust government to have anyone's best interest at heart.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now!
http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion
Archive: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317719
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to