Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Taylor J. Smith wrote: Ed Storms wrote on 4-21-08: "This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American "Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship ... They, the Allopathic Healers, MD's, have done just that. The only people controlling them are the lawyers. Between the two of them they have run the price up to what it is today. --- Get FREE High Speed Internet from USFamily.Net! -- http://www.usfamily.net/mkt-freepromo.html ---
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Harry Veeder wrote: > Winston Churchill proposed a better analogy for universal free > healthcare. He said it is like the fire department. . . . The problem with that analogy is that healthcare is more than just putting out fires. There is the matter of fire prevention and coping with the after effects of a fire. . . . Well, it is only an analogy after all. Not a perfect fit. As you point out fire prevention (inspections, smoke alarms and so on) is somewhat analogous to preventive health care and regular checkups. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
On 22/4/2008 9:29 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote: > Harry Veeder wrote: > >> If you are opposed to a "free" health care system thean you must have >> been opposed to the "free" interstate highway system. > > Winston Churchill proposed a better analogy for universal free > healthcare. He said it is like the fire department. He said, as I recall: > > * When a house is on fire, the fire department goes at once, without > stopping to ask if the owner is rich or poor. > > * A fire is never voluntary; people do not want their house to burn > down. Disease also strikes at random and the victim does not want or > ask to be sick. > > * It benefits the whole of society to put out fires and cure disease quickly. > > I believe the U.K. adapted universal health care partly as a result > of their experiences in WWII. The problem with that analogy is that healthcare is more than just putting out fires. There is the matter of fire prevention and coping with the after effects of a fire. However, this may explain why health care costs are rising because we demand more from our health care system which was originally designed to cover the costs of emergency management only. Harry
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Jed Rothwell wrote: Sometimes they go after the disease has become very serious, and then they are bankrupted by the system, which -- as I said -- may charge a patient his entire net worth in a few days. Healthcare costs are the largest cause of middle-class bankruptcy. Ironically, I've read recently that the same thing is true in the worker's paradise of China. Government initiatives to provide universal health care -- Mao's "barefoot doctors" program -- are a thing of the past, and these days it's mostly pay as you go. Consequently health care costs are a leading cause of destitution in China today. "It is glorious to become rich", said Deng ... flip side: "It is terrible to remain poor in China today"
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Harry Veeder wrote: If you are opposed to a "free" health care system thean you must have been opposed to the "free" interstate highway system. Winston Churchill proposed a better analogy for universal free healthcare. He said it is like the fire department. He said, as I recall: * When a house is on fire, the fire department goes at once, without stopping to ask if the owner is rich or poor. * A fire is never voluntary; people do not want their house to burn down. Disease also strikes at random and the victim does not want or ask to be sick. * It benefits the whole of society to put out fires and cure disease quickly. I believe the U.K. adapted universal health care partly as a result of their experiences in WWII. Jeff Fink wrote: If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. It should be around 60% cheaper, based on results in all other first world countries. Mind you, healthcare costs are increasing worldwide, in Europe and in Japan. Costs are ~60% less than the U.S. but they are still rising. In Japan it is a major problem. Fink wrote that the death rates in the U.K. for colon cancer are higher because treatment is delayed, or rationed. First, this is incorrect. For the population as a whole, mortality rates from most diseases are lower in the U.K. than the U.S. Colon cancer rates are about the same in both countries; 19 or 20 per 100,000 (see the two links below). Mortality rates for colon cancer are declining in the U.K. See Figs. 1.5 and 1.7 here: http://info.cancerresearchuk.org/cancerstats/types/bowel/incidence/ U.S. rates, 19 per 100,000: http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparemaptable.jsp?cat=2&ind=585 Second, healthcare is rationed everywhere, most severely in the U.S. It is "rationed" here by scarcity, rather than by plan. Many poor people cannot afford to go to the doctor, so they often suffer or die from treatable disease. Sometimes they go after the disease has become very serious, and then they are bankrupted by the system, which -- as I said -- may charge a patient his entire net worth in a few days. Healthcare costs are the largest cause of middle-class bankruptcy. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Jeff Fink wrote:-> Where did you read this? It doesn't sound like the National health Service I know. It's possible that this means that 30% die because they are diagnosed too late but this doesn't mean that surgery is delayed once diagnosis is made. Here is a 2004 link to stuff they are doing to improve diagnosis.Links within it suggest that any trouble may be with GPs not referring people early enough for further investigation. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3957531.stm
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Jeff Fink wrote: With the system the way it is in the US, if you need an operation for something you can get it quickly. Hmm... this looks like the old "We pay a lot but we have better care" argument. The United States has, if I recall correctly, the most expensive health care system in the world. Let's cut the chase. Does this horribly expensive health care actually benefit us? How long do people live in the United States live? Check out the Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy Wiki lists the life expectancies a couple different ways. Their first list is taken from the "made in the USA" CIA world factbook; it lists the United States as #29 in life expectancy among the countries of the world. According to the United Nations list, which they show later on the page, the United States ranks #38, just behind Cuba. Not so hot, eh? Here's the CIA list, down to and including the United States: Rank CountryLife expectancy at birth --- 1Andorra83.52 2Japan 82.02 3San Marino 81.8 3Singapore 81.8 5Sweden 80.63 6Australia 80.62 6Switzerland80.62 8France (metropolitan) 80.59 9Iceland80.43 10 Canada 80.34 11 Italy 79.94 12 Monaco 79.82 13 Liechtenstein 79.81 14 Spain 79.78 14 Norway 79.78 14 Israel 79.78 17 Greece 79.38 18 Austria79.21 19 Malta 79.15 20 Netherlands79.11 21 Luxembourg 79.03 22 New Zealand78.96 23 Germany78.95 24 Belgium78.92 25 United Kingdom 78.7 26 Finland78.66 27 Jordan 78.55 28 Bosnia and Herzegovina 78.17 29 United States 78 You can no doubt quibble with some of the numbers, and you can no doubt lay a lot of the blame at the door of McDonalds rather than the HMO's, but none the less the overall picture is pretty clear: We're not getting what we pay for here. Incidentally, while a lot of the difference in life expectancies is due to heart disease (McDonalds-related deaths) most of the rest is probably due to differences in infant mortality. That's another area where, in the United States, we pay a fortune and don't get much in return. Again, Wiki lists the numbers provided by the U.N. and by the CIA: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_infant_mortality_rate_(2005) I won't reproduce the list here, but I will note that, according to the CIA, 42 countries, including Cuba, have lower infant mortality rates than the United States.
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Actually, i am. I favor tolls on the goods being shipped by companies along said system using public tax dollars. on the goods, not the trucks, because the truckers have it hard enough as is. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 10:29 PM, Harry Veeder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > If you are opposed to a "free" health care system thean you must have > been opposed to the "free" interstate highway system. > > > Harry > > > > > > > Jeff Fink wrote: > > > >> If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. > >> > >> Jeff > >> > > -- That which yields isn't always weak.
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Ed Storms wrote on 4-21-08: "This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so ..." Hi All, Unfortunately, using "the state to protect the individual," as evidenced by our current military adventure in Iraq, founders on human greed and egotism. I have chronic Lyme disease, a condition which is claimed not to exist by powerful elements in the medical and pharmaceutical establishment. The disease is suppressed as long as I take antibiotics (which are relatively cheap when compared with the antibody destroyers used to treat, for example, multiple sclerosis and other so-called autoimmune diseases.) I know that I would not be able to legally obtain antibiotics with a centralized health care system in the United States, regardless if it fascist or socialist. Benjamin Rush, M.D., Physician to George Washington and signer of the Declaration of Independence wrote: "Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship ... All such laws are un-American and despotic and have no place in a republic. The Constitution of this republic should make special privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom." Source: "The Autobiography of Benjamin Rush" My fear of the power of the state, which inevitably leads to corruption and despotism, compels me to work for medical freedom despite the arguments of compassion and efficiency. Jack Smith
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
With the system the way it is in the US, if you need an operation for something you can get it quickly. I read that in Great Britain 30% of the people with curable colon cancer are dying from colon cancer, because, by the time the operation is scheduled it is no longer curable. You can bet that these delays do not apply to the political leaders. Top of the line medical insurance is over $12,000 per yr now in the US. I pay a fraction of that for $5000 deductible disaster insurance. The money I save in a year easily pays that deductible. The only problem I have is that I don't get the tests done that I should have done. As one example, I can't bring myself to pay $1200 out of pocket for a colonoscopy. If all these tests were "free" I would get them but, the waiting list would be months or years long, and the tax burden to pay for it all would be overwhelming. Medical technology has become a curse. Most of us feel like we have the right to any million dollar procedure that will extend our life a few more years as long as someone else pays for it, but ultimately that someone is you and me. We cannot afford to finance every impractical procedure that some researcher comes up with. We must put a lid on medical madness before we are all bankrupt. We will all die from something sometime. At some point we will have to let death happen. Jeff -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:38 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance Yes Jeff, that is an argument that is always raised when some form of socialized medicine is suggested. The fact is that under no successful system is the service completely free. For example, I'm one of the lucky people who has good insurance. Nevertheless, I have to pay part of the service and I have to actually be sick to want to endure the process of seeing a doctor. However, I don't have to worry about emergencies nor not being able to afford to get well. Of course, if everyone had such insurance, more doctors would be needed to handle the increased load. Simply making more low-interest loan money available to attend medical school would eventually solve this problem. Again, this money would have to be provided by a government program because we now see what happens when the process is turned over to private companies. After all, an advancing society needs to make getting a higher education in any field much easier, so why not encourage an education in medicine along with the other options? Meanwhile, the government would be free of the influence being applied by the combination of powerful insurance and medical providers. Influence in the government would be more evenly balanced through the efforts of employers and voters. Gradually, a single payer, government run system will be created simply because all other options have obviously failed. Eventually, we will have a process similar to Social Security, but in health instead of income. Why not start sooner rather than later? How much more suffering must occur before the conclusion becomes obvious? Ed No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.3/1390 - Release Date: 4/21/2008 4:23 PM
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Howdy Vorts, A Medivac chopper cost 15k to transport a patient 100 miles. Look around at the medical industry and notice the never ending construction of medical facilities on a huge scale. These new hospital facilities represent a "new industry" of unprecedented scope and costs. There is no expense spared in treating a patient and the equipment, supplies and services are so advanced that it requires skilled workers to operate simple devices. The record keeping for drugs,procedures, insurance and liability costs alone is beyond the scope of any other industry. Like the stock market and social security, the medical system is unsustainable. Most societies collapse, not from lack of planning, but from the lack of understanding the principle of the laws of human nature. The desire to stay alive. There is real money in feeding this desire... well.. err.. until.. the money runs out.. then it's every man for himself... the poor dumb saps left in Berlin after WW2 must have had some difficulty reconciling exactly what happened. However, as in Paris and London, they rose again... along with the Euro.. In the USA, we have a strangely connected atmosphere like Europe and Japan after WW2. Not caused by bombed out cities but by affluence. Moscow is another strangely connected atmosphere.. caused not by bombed out cities nor affluence.. but by criminal minds running government. The USA is now entering a triad of the above events in a strangely connected way. Richard Jeff Fink wrote: If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
If you are opposed to a "free" health care system thean you must have been opposed to the "free" interstate highway system. Harry > > Jeff Fink wrote: > >> If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. >> >> Jeff >>
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Yes Jeff, that is an argument that is always raised when some form of socialized medicine is suggested. The fact is that under no successful system is the service completely free. For example, I'm one of the lucky people who has good insurance. Nevertheless, I have to pay part of the service and I have to actually be sick to want to endure the process of seeing a doctor. However, I don't have to worry about emergencies nor not being able to afford to get well. Of course, if everyone had such insurance, more doctors would be needed to handle the increased load. Simply making more low-interest loan money available to attend medical school would eventually solve this problem. Again, this money would have to be provided by a government program because we now see what happens when the process is turned over to private companies. After all, an advancing society needs to make getting a higher education in any field much easier, so why not encourage an education in medicine along with the other options? Meanwhile, the government would be free of the influence being applied by the combination of powerful insurance and medical providers. Influence in the government would be more evenly balanced through the efforts of employers and voters. Gradually, a single payer, government run system will be created simply because all other options have obviously failed. Eventually, we will have a process similar to Social Security, but in health instead of income. Why not start sooner rather than later? How much more suffering must occur before the conclusion becomes obvious? Ed Jeff Fink wrote: If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. Jeff -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:10 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Indeed, Senator Kyle a couple of years ago had a talk in the Scottsdale galleria, a large office building where I worked, in a town hall format. He talked about medicare D, and the beauty of how it made the us government the largest single buyer, and how it gave med d such bargaining rights. my voice from the crowd. "But Senator Kyle, YOU wrote the rider on medicare part D that removed its right to bargain, and forced Medicare patients to pay whatever the drug companies charged!" His handlers attempted but failed to escort me out, when I showed the badge stating i worked there. Then he mentioned drugs from canada. But senator Kyle, those drugs are often the same drugs from the same batches sent here to the us, sent to canada where they have price controls, and sent back, in factory original sealed condition. How could they be unsafe? On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Edmund Storms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, I agree. However, even if I were paying the bill, how would I, while > sick, bargain with the doctor to lower my payment? The insurance company and > the government are supposed to do this for me, in their own self-interest. > If the government were the single payer, they would have a bigger stick to > keep the costs under control. I suggest, the problem is that the medical and > insurance companies are in bed together. Together, they have paid for a > government that won't intervene. As long as the employer/employee pay, and > the government won't stop the rape, why change a profitable system? The > medical/insurance companies have no reason to lower costs because both gain > profit from the situation, the insurance companies with higher premiums and > the medical companies with more income. Every time the government tries to > bring the situation under control, both scream socialized medicine and > predict loss of quality. The voters buy the nonsense and continue to pay. > Unfortunately for the medical/insurance companies, the rest of the system is > stating to hurt and is starting to put pressure on the government. Perhaps > if a few more of the purchased congressmen are voted out of office, things > will change. > > Ed > > > > leaking pen wrote: > > > > Unfortunately Ed, health insurance is in part the problem. When > > insurance and not a person was paying the bill, doctors and hospitals > > found they could charge more. Insurance companies raise prices to > > compensate, but are thus willing to pay more, and the cycle continues. > > > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Edmund Storms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. > The > > > basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that > life > > > in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with > > > socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to > > > protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are > accepted > > > by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their > > > self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and > would > > > not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though > > > variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we > > > vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government > we > > > deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause > > > people to reexamine their criteria for voting. > > > > > > Ed > > > > > > > > > > > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is > not > > > > > > > > > > a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot > or > > > problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered > > > from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware > superstore. > > > They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that > is > > > usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He > was > > > there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He > is > > > much better now. > > > > > > > > > > At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some > cat > > > > > > > > > > scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA > > > hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and > declared > > > him okay. > > > > > > > > > > Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that > Grady > > > > > > > > > > just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, > middle > > > class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, > > > four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost > > > enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. > healthcare > > > system is unsustainable. > > > > > > > > > > Bush corr
RE: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it's free. Jeff -Original Message- From: Edmund Storms [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 21, 2008 11:10 AM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: > A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is > not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a > lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he > suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware > superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, > because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured > patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him > from moving. He is much better now. > > At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some > cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to > the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and > declared him okay. > > Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that > Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, > ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a > year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively > minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is > insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. > > Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured > poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend > did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be > billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors > until they run you out of house and home. > > - Jed > > No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1388 - Release Date: 4/20/2008 3:01 PM
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Yes, I agree. However, even if I were paying the bill, how would I, while sick, bargain with the doctor to lower my payment? The insurance company and the government are supposed to do this for me, in their own self-interest. If the government were the single payer, they would have a bigger stick to keep the costs under control. I suggest, the problem is that the medical and insurance companies are in bed together. Together, they have paid for a government that won't intervene. As long as the employer/employee pay, and the government won't stop the rape, why change a profitable system? The medical/insurance companies have no reason to lower costs because both gain profit from the situation, the insurance companies with higher premiums and the medical companies with more income. Every time the government tries to bring the situation under control, both scream socialized medicine and predict loss of quality. The voters buy the nonsense and continue to pay. Unfortunately for the medical/insurance companies, the rest of the system is stating to hurt and is starting to put pressure on the government. Perhaps if a few more of the purchased congressmen are voted out of office, things will change. Ed leaking pen wrote: Unfortunately Ed, health insurance is in part the problem. When insurance and not a person was paying the bill, doctors and hospitals found they could charge more. Insurance companies raise prices to compensate, but are thus willing to pay more, and the cycle continues. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Edmund Storms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
OrionWorks wrote: >I agree with Jed, and especially with Mr. Storm's assessment of the >situation. Some form of a modified (Americanized) socialism is >probably the only way we will be able to survive the health cost >crisis. Something like Medicare for everyone would be fine with me. It is silly to call such things "socialism." We have always been a collectivist society, quite unlike Europe and Japan. The Japanese were astounded by the behavior of American GIs after WWII for many reasons, not least of which was their collectivist, socially responsible, volunteerism. For example, when a cart full of fruit being pushed by an old lady spilled on the street in front of a trolley car, the GIs on board jumped out, picked up the fruit, loaded it on to the cart and jumped aboard again. In 1945 anyone would have done that, civilian or soldier. Nowadays we would probably look the other way, but someone with my upbringing would instantly volunteer. The GIs were not being kind-hearted so much as they wanted to get on their way without destroying the fruit. No Japanese person would have done that back then, and I doubt many would today. Our tradition of helping other Americans -- and also, on the dark side, interfering with their personal lives -- goes back to the Mayflower. In Colonial New England, when people who did not teach their children the ABCs by age 6, the government took the children away. The rugged individualist American is mostly mythology. You don't build a civilization in the wilderness without collectivism. See H. B. Parkes, "The American Experience," (Alfred A. Knopf, 1947) But regarding health care, it is a complex problem, and especially the technical side admits no easy solutions. That's a subject the readers here can understand. Medical technology has improved tremendously, but it tends to be expensive, high-tech stuff, and there is a built-in imperative to use whatever we invent. For example, when kidney dialysis came along, many patients died because they could not afford it. The Johnson administration eventually pushed through a law making it available to everyone who needed it. That cost a tremendous amount back in the 1960s, although it improved the state of the art and today dialysis machines are mass produced and much cheaper. As I have pointed out here before, many diseases cost nothing in the 1960s because they were incurable and the patient died quickly, but today they cost tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands to fix. I expect that my friend who suffered a stoke would have gotten no treatment 40 years ago, except for bedrest and nursing, which would have cost practically nothing. He would have recovered just as well as he did, because they performed no surgery or invasive diagnostics. They spent $82,000 on stuff like MRIs to determine that: 1. It wasn't so bad. 2. There was nothing they could do anyway. If I were the patient, I would want them to do the same thing! I have seen what stokes can do to people. There are other factors driving up the cost of medical care such as greedy insurance companies and so on, but the technical conundrum is something we can all sympathize with. It is not caused by villains or unreasonable people. It is like traffic jams: no one is at fault, but collectively we cause the problem. The only solution is also collective. - Jed
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
Unfortunately Ed, health insurance is in part the problem. When insurance and not a person was paying the bill, doctors and hospitals found they could charge more. Insurance companies raise prices to compensate, but are thus willing to pay more, and the cycle continues. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 8:10 AM, Edmund Storms <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The > basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life > in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with > socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to > protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted > by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their > self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would > not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though > variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we > vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we > deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause > people to reexamine their criteria for voting. > > Ed > > > > Jed Rothwell wrote: > > > > A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not > a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or > problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered > from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. > They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is > usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was > there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is > much better now. > > > > At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat > scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA > hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared > him okay. > > > > Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady > just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle > class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, > four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost > enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare > system is unsustainable. > > > > Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor > person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He > did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more > than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you > out of house and home. > > > > - Jed > > > > > > > > -- That which yields isn't always weak.
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
>From Edmond Storms: > This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The > basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life > in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with > socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to > protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted > by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their > self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would > not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though > variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we > vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we > deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause > people to reexamine their criteria for voting. > > Ed I work for the state of Wisconsin. As a humble public servant we have, relatively speaking, some of the best HMO heath insurance the common man & woman can get in our country. Like most health insurance costs the state's aggregate expenses have steadily increased along with everyone else's, often well over 10% each year, year after year. Predictably, these relentless increases eventually hit the state coffers in unpleasant ways. About three to four years ago our state unions were informed of the fact that we would actually have to start PAYING a small monthly premium OUT OF OUR OWN POCKETS. Boy! Did the ka-ka hit the fan! I don't expect much sympathy from the Vort membership, especially from those few brave souls who are actually trying to make a living pursuing the American dream of private entrepreneurship. Unfortunately, it would seem that some of my colleagues prefer to gloss over the fact that the common taxpayer, the private business man & woman who pays our state salaries are struggling each day to make ends meet, let alone pay their own draconian health insurance premiums. As best as I can figure most Wisconsin state employees are now required to fork out somewhere around $30 (single) to $80 (family plan) a month from out of their own pocketbooks to pay their share of the premium. Meanwhile the state kicks in somewhere around five hundred (single) to a thousand (family) a month tax free to pay the remainder of the premium. This is, of course, not taxable. I consider myself extremely lucky. The smarter of my colleagues consider themselves extremely lucky as well. Few of us well get rich on our government salaries. OTOH, it's not likely that any of us will need to declare bankruptcy as a result of an unexpected trip to the emergency room followed by a few days stay at the local hospital. I agree with Jed, and especially with Mr. Storm's assessment of the situation. Some form of a modified (Americanized) socialism is probably the only way we will be able to survive the health cost crisis. Unfortunately, I fear too many of us still consider the "s" word to be as unspeakable and un-American as uttering the "n" word in mixed company. We are getting what we paid for. Regards Steven Vincent Johnson www.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
I HAVE insurance, but failed to read the deductible part of it. Went to the emergency room for a cut open hand, like, you could see fat tissue and nerves, that cut. Was told as i was leaving they had my insurance info, no problem. Turns out theres a 1 grand deductible on emergency room visits that are not life threatening, even though THEY told me to go to the emergency room and not urgent care. for 5 hours sitting in a waiting room, 15 minutes seeing a doctor, and 3 stiches, 890 dollars. I net about 500 a week. Thats not bankrupting, but it is bank busting for me. and i HAVE insurance. On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Jed Rothwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a > problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or > problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered > from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. > They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is > usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was > there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is > much better now. > > At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat > scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA > hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared > him okay. > > Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady > just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle > class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, > four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost > enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare > system is unsustainable. > > Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor > person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He > did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more > than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you > out of house and home. > > - Jed > > -- That which yields isn't always weak.
Re: [Vo]:OFF TOPIC A friend without health insurance
This is indeed a sad story, Jed, that is repeated many times each day. The basic problem is that the American people have accepted the idea that life in this country should be based mainly on the individual effort, with socialism being un-American. Liberalism, which tries to use the state to protect the individual, is considered a dirty word. These ideas are accepted by the ordinary working person even though this is not in their self-interest to do so. Your friend probably even voted for Bush and would not support a politician who proposed socialized medicine, even though variations of this approach work well in other countries. We get what we vote for. If we are too ignorant to vote wisely, we get the government we deserve. Hopefully, the pain inflicted by the Bush philosophy will cause people to reexamine their criteria for voting. Ed Jed Rothwell wrote: A friend of mine in his 50s has no health insurance. Normally this is not a problem because he is a vet who goes to the VA hospital. He has a lot or problems, including some service related ones. The other day he suffered from a minor stroke and passed out while at a Lowe's hardware superstore. They called an ambulance, which took him to Grady Hospital, because that is usually the only hospital in Atlanta that take uninsured patients. He was there for 4 days, mostly doped up or asleep to keep him from moving. He is much better now. At Grady they did not have to do much for him other than to take some cat scans and keep him immobilized. They sent him home and he went to the VA hospital a few days later, where they did a bunch more tests and declared him okay. Anyway, the point of this story is to relate the appalling fact that Grady just sent him a bill for $82,000. This is an self-employed, ordinary, middle class guy who probably doesn't earn that much in a year. In other words, four days of hospitalization for a relatively minor health problem cost enough to bankrupt an ordinary person. This is insane. The U.S. healthcare system is unsustainable. Bush correctly pointed out that anyone in the U.S., even an uninsured poor person, can get healthcare at an emergency room, just as my friend did. He did not say that after a few days in the hospital you will be billed more than your net worth, and then hounded by bill collectors until they run you out of house and home. - Jed
