The christian value is charity, not robbery. The Christian thing would be to donate to a free clinic or one of the many christian health facilities, not be forced into it. To pay for the proposed plan thats around $450/month for everyone. Do you know what kind of killer medical insurance I can get for $450/month? Its simply to wasteful which means it isn't about giving the sick treatment, its about conning the american people out of money under that pretext.
Yes your right. The christian thing to do would be to donate healthcare to everyone who needed it.
Feel free to do that any time. The catholic church alone has more than enough money to insure a few big cities worth of people, yet they would rather have massive multi-million dollar chapels with gold plated jesus statues.
Sabiancym, stop acting like religion is some evil selfish entity. Its disgraceful to what church groups have done. The US is the most charitous nation because of these groups, and they don't do it because the government tells them they have to. However, not everyone is Jesus. There is a limit to what people want to do for Charity.
The main problem with national healthcare on the pretext of charity is that it stems from selfishness not charity. Even a person on welfare can afford Health Insurance. The difference is they choose not to.
Another economic concept that perhaps eludes the OP is that of price elasticity of demand: People are willing to pay any amount to save their own lives and companies are more than willing to exploit this to maximize their profits.
What this means is that the discrepancy between the cost of goods and services provided and the price is huge to fill up some asshole's pockets and on a macroeconomic level social welfare is transferred to the pricks who control such services.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
Without looking too far and thinking too deeply, let me guess, the health care lobby does not want to (a) pay taxes and (b) still receive government subsidies?
IADMD's membership requirement is that all doctors must uphold their sworn oath to give everyone the best care. This includes everyone, not just those with the ability to pay, and even those not covered , and will not be properly diagnosed by Obamas plan. You see for years, THESE doctors have been treating people for free, not being reimursed for all their services, and not recieving a tax break for it. Many doctors for years now have been paying for patients treatment out of pocket. Many doctors are not focused on what they get, no instead focus on who they can save.
The problem with doing this as is, is that they only have so much money before that runs out. The demand is simply too high. Rather than make a huge tax burden on the people by catering to pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, the doctors plan will reduce the costs of treatment and agree to accept less for their services. They agree to get paid less, and get taxed less so they can provide better treatment to all people, not just those that can afford it. YOu can call the number on their site and discuss their plan with them, I am sure they would be more than happy to.
Yes, they should receive government subsides and have taxes reduced when they are paying for paitents treatment out of their own pockets, that is the least our government could do to help them treat the poor of this country without placing a huge burden on the tax payers.
Obamas propsals hurt these efforts by removing the funding they currently have to treat people, yet they will still be paying for patients care out of pocket. Their services will still be needed under Obamas plan because his textbook agenda and with the government deciding who needs to be in a hospital bed and who doesn't , there will be many people that will be left out. AS IS the insurance companies do not allow patients to be treated properly, and this will only get worse under the government plan. These doctors want to make sure everyone gets treated the best they can be, and they will not accept leaving anyone out because it is their sworn oath to care for these people regardless of what the government says, the insurance company says, or their ability to pay.
What's the AMA's opinion on this if you know or can link me to an opinion? I've searched but turned up nothing.
I ask because obviously the government is taking their cues from the AMA right now, so where does that organization sit with the AMA?
The AMA is part of the problem, not the solution. They want to keep medical and dental separate when IADMD combines them to give the best overall care. They want to keep their " elite club" and do not want intruders. Dental health is part of your overall health and they need to be treated together. IADMD requires all members to uphold their hippocratic oath, and wants to place unbiased doctors on several boards in order to keep corruption out of the system. Most of those supporting Obamas plan are more concerned about them getting paid than people getting treated. IADMD doctors are more concerened about patients getting treated rather than them getting paid. They need the funds to be able to treat more people. They already have been treating people from their own pockets for years, and want to be able to continue to do so.
Sabiancym, stop acting like religion is some evil selfish entity. Its disgraceful to what church groups have done. The US is the most charitous nation because of these groups, and they don't do it because the government tells them they have to. However, not everyone is Jesus. There is a limit to what people want to do for Charity. The main problem with national healthcare on the pretext of charity is that it stems from selfishness not charity. Even a person on welfare can afford Health Insurance. The difference is they choose not to.
About 1.5 million families lose their homes to foreclosure every year due to unaffordable medical costs. You're telling me that they just chose to put themselves in that situation? They decided they would rather move from a home into an apartment, or a car, than to pay for health insurance?
I find the whole back-and-forth about health care to be more that a little perplexing to be quite honest. Most especially considering stance taken by the 2 major political parties in America. The right-wing Christian conservatives want everyone to pay for health care. How great would Jesus have been if he asked for money when he healed the leper? When he gave the blind back their sight? When he brought Jairus’ daughter back from death? If I were a Christian I think I would ask myself what Jesus would do before making up my mind on a decision; isn’t the whole point to be Christ like? Instead they look at repercussions in the market place and how it will affect their pocket-books. On the other side it’s the heathen liberals who want to destroy family values and corrupt our kids, and now they want everyone to receive medical attention when sick. Who are willing to pay extra in taxes to make sure that their fellow American’s don’t have to worry about being in debt for the rest of their lives because they broke their leg. Let’s be honest, if you’re calling yourself a Christian yet wanting to deny someone health-care because it might result in you paying a bit more in taxes, then you’re fucking pathetic. Way to love thy neighbor guys. I’m sure Jesus is proud.
IADMD's membership requirement is that all doctors must uphold their sworn oath to give everyone the best care. This includes everyone, not just those with the ability to pay, and even those not covered , and will not be properly diagnosed by Obamas plan. You see for years, THESE doctors have been treating people for free, not being reimursed for all their services, and not recieving a tax break for it. Many doctors for years now have been paying for patients treatment out of pocket. Many doctors are not focused on what they get, no instead focus on who they can save. The problem with doing this as is, is that they only have so much money before that runs out. The demand is simply too high. Rather than make a huge tax burden on the people by catering to pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, the doctors plan will reduce the costs of treatment and agree to accept less for their services. They agree to get paid less, and get taxed less so they can provide better treatment to all people, not just those that can afford it. YOu can call the number on their site and discuss their plan with them, I am sure they would be more than happy to. Yes, they should receive government subsides and have taxes reduced when they are paying for paitents treatment out of their own pockets, that is the least our government could do to help them treat the poor of this country without placing a huge burden on the tax payers. Obamas propsals hurt these efforts by removing the funding they currently have to treat people, yet they will still be paying for patients care out of pocket. Their services will still be needed under Obamas plan because his textbook agenda and with the government deciding who needs to be in a hospital bed and who doesn't , there will be many people that will be left out. AS IS the insurance companies do not allow patients to be treated properly, and this will only get worse under the government plan. These doctors want to make sure everyone gets treated the best they can be, and they will not accept leaving anyone out because it is their sworn oath to care for these people regardless of what the government says, the insurance company says, or their ability to pay.
My days of posting are numbered. I have come to realize when it comes to (a) taxes and (b) medical care, most people really do not know what they are talking about. That is fine. I am not worried about ignorance anymore because it is so pervasive (see my previous posts discussing the USA's world ranking for Math and Science). The health care industry is simply an exploitative industry. Exploitative. You mention "oath" and that means very little. Anyone can take an oath to provide the best care, but it is a system of incentives to provide MORE --not the best; not the highest quality; not the needed care-- tests and services for the well-insured to pay more. It is a business, not a practice. The last professional practice is law.
(When Pres. Truman called for universal health care, the AMA sent our fliers and ads of this painting ("The Doctor" by Sir Luke Fildes) with a large caption, "keep politics out of this picture." The argument was that if the government became involved in health care, doctors would no longer, as depicted in the painting, do house calls with their attentive eyes toward the ill child).
NOW IS THE TIME FOR REAL HEALTH CARE REFORM
(my sense is that you "regular" or "little" people will just end-up paying more taxes and more for insurance when the smoke clears on "health care reform")
The drug companies, AMA, and insurance comapnies do not want our government involved in health care because it would have the effect of reducing costs. YOU DO NOT SAY! Doctors in the United States are wealthy, have the MOST powerful union in the world (I would argue that the AMA is perhaps more powerful than federal, state, county, and municipal employees union).
Its disgraceful to what church groups have done. The US is the most charitous nation because of these groups, and they don't do it because the government tells them they have to.
This is so uninformed and biased, it's not funny. Why? Because he assumes too many things.
He's assuming that only church groups donate and deserve the credit, when the reality is richer, non-religious people give WAY more.
He's assuming that people only give because of their religious convictions when plenty of people give because they are wealthy and need tax shelters that come from philanthropy. When times get tight, they stop giving. There are rich individuals who give simply to leave a "legacy" for their name on a building, or some fund that has nothing to do with religion.
Bill Gates is one of the biggest charity givers in the United States and he's no religious group member. He's not even sure about God. So is Warren Buffet. They give because they feel it's the right thing to do; help those who can't help themselves. Not because God told them to.
In 1994, the foundation was formed as the William H. Gates Foundation with an initial stock gift of $94 million. In 1999, the foundation was renamed the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. After a merger with the Gates Learning Foundation in 2000, Gates gave an additional US$126 million.[9][10] During the foundation's following years, funding grew to US$2 billion. On June 15, 2006, Gates announced his plans to transition out of a day-to-day role with Microsoft, effective July 31, 2008,[11] to allow him to devote more time to working with the foundation.
Bill and Melinda Gates, along with the musician Bono, were named by TIME as Persons of the Year 2005 for their charitable work. In the case of Bill and Melinda Gates, the work referenced was that of this foundation. On May 4, 2006, the foundation received the Prince of Asturias award for International Cooperation.[12]
The Warren Buffett donation
On June 25, 2006, Warren Buffett (then the world's richest person, estimated worth of US$62 billion as of April 16, 2008) pledged to give the foundation approximately 10 million Berkshire Hathaway Class B shares spread over multiple years through annual contributions, worth approximately US$30 billion in 2006.[13] Buffett set conditions so that these contributions do not simply increase the foundation's endowment, but effectively work as a matching contribution, doubling the Foundation's annual giving: "Buffett's gift came with three conditions for the Gates foundation: Bill or Melinda Gates must be alive and active in its administration; it must continue to qualify as a charity; and each year it must give away an amount equal to the previous year's Berkshire gift, plus another 5 percent of net assets. Buffett gave the foundation two years to abide by the third requirement."[14] The Gates Foundation received 5% (500,000) of the shares in July 2006 and will receive 5% of the remaining earmarked shares in the July of each following year (475,000 in 2007, 451,250 in 2008).[15][16]
New York City - Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg can now claim to be No. 1 in a category he cares deeply about: giving his money away.
Mayor Micheal Bloomberg, the self-made billionaire founder of the Bloomberg financial information firm, donated $235 million in 2008, making him the leading individual living donor in the United States, according to a list released online on Monday by The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Religious groups are NOT the reason the United States is the most charitable nation. Rich individuals who gain tax reductions and want to give are.
You mention "oath" and that means very little. Anyone can take an oath to provide the best care, but it is a system of incentives to provide MORE --not the best; not the highest quality; not the needed care-- tests and services for the well-insured to pay more.
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with that poster unless you are bored. She mentions "oath" as if doctors are REQUIRED to take the oath. In fact, doctors today are not required to take any Hippocratic Oath and it is seen only as "traditional." There doesn't have to be any sincerity connected to it at all. Case in point? Plastic surgeons.
They are doctors. They have patients. But when it comes to building another addition onto their house, they will easily agree to do a surgery on some woman for her 25 facial surgery to look like Farrah Fawcett, even though the woman does not need anymore surgery. But when she writes that check for $25,000 the "oath" goes right out of the window. Same thing with lipo doctors. Or doctors that give people bigger schlongs. They don't have the patient's long term health at all, or why would they knowingly put silicone that causes physical problems inside of people for aesthetic reasons for the most part?
"Above all, do no harm". Yeah, gimme a break. Should be "Above all, do no poor revenue stream."
You hit the nail right on the head declared. But unfortunately you've been talking to someone with a vested interest in the healthcare field staying richand doctor's making more so they can pay her more. I wouldn't take too much of what she says seriously. After all, it's all in red print and she thinks she's a devil... how serious of a person can she really be, lol?
Sabiancym, stop acting like religion is some evil selfish entity. Its disgraceful to what church groups have done. The US is the most charitous nation because of these groups, and they don't do it because the government tells them they have to. However, not everyone is Jesus. There is a limit to what people want to do for Charity. The main problem with national healthcare on the pretext of charity is that it stems from selfishness not charity. Even a person on welfare can afford Health Insurance. The difference is they choose not to.
The US is not only charitable because of religion. The U.S. is charitable because of humanity. Something a lot of people have without being promised a reward when they die.
And you proclaiming that everyone can afford healthcare but choose not to is proof that you are too ignorant to even be in this discussion.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
IADMD's membership requirement is that all doctors must uphold their sworn oath to give everyone the best care. This includes everyone, not just those with the ability to pay, and even those not covered , and will not be properly diagnosed by Obamas plan. You see for years, THESE doctors have been treating people for free, not being reimursed for all their services, and not recieving a tax break for it. Many doctors for years now have been paying for patients treatment out of pocket. Many doctors are not focused on what they get, no instead focus on who they can save. The problem with doing this as is, is that they only have so much money before that runs out. The demand is simply too high. Rather than make a huge tax burden on the people by catering to pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, the doctors plan will reduce the costs of treatment and agree to accept less for their services. They agree to get paid less, and get taxed less so they can provide better treatment to all people, not just those that can afford it. YOu can call the number on their site and discuss their plan with them, I am sure they would be more than happy to. Yes, they should receive government subsides and have taxes reduced when they are paying for paitents treatment out of their own pockets, that is the least our government could do to help them treat the poor of this country without placing a huge burden on the tax payers. Obamas propsals hurt these efforts by removing the funding they currently have to treat people, yet they will still be paying for patients care out of pocket. Their services will still be needed under Obamas plan because his textbook agenda and with the government deciding who needs to be in a hospital bed and who doesn't , there will be many people that will be left out. AS IS the insurance companies do not allow patients to be treated properly, and this will only get worse under the government plan. These doctors want to make sure everyone gets treated the best they can be, and they will not accept leaving anyone out because it is their sworn oath to care for these people regardless of what the government says, the insurance company says, or their ability to pay.
My days of posting are numbered. I have come to realize when it comes to (a) taxes and (b) medical care, most people really do not know what they are talking about. That is fine. I am not worried about ignorance anymore because it is so pervasive (see my previous posts discussing the USA's world ranking for Math and Science). The health care industry is simply an exploitative industry. Exploitative. You mention "oath" and that means very little. Anyone can take an oath to provide the best care, but it is a system of incentives to provide MORE --not the best; not the highest quality; not the needed care-- tests and services for the well-insured to pay more. It is a business, not a practice. The last professional practice is law.
(When Pres. Truman called for universal health care, the AMA sent our fliers and ads of this painting ("The Doctor" by Sir Luke Fildes) with a large caption, "keep politics out of this picture." The argument was that if the government became involved in health care, doctors would no longer, as depicted in the painting, do house calls with their attentive eyes toward the ill child).
NOW IS THE TIME FOR REAL HEALTH CARE REFORM
(my sense is that you "regular" or "little" people will just end-up paying more taxes and more for insurance when the smoke clears on "health care reform")
The drug companies, AMA, and insurance comapnies do not want our government involved in health care because it would have the effect of reducing costs. YOU DO NOT SAY! Doctors in the United States are wealthy, have the MOST powerful union in the world (I would argue that the AMA is perhaps more powerful than federal, state, county, and municipal employees union).
Have you even been reading my posts or my links? This is not the AMA, in fact the AMA is part of the problem. This organization with both doctors and dentists wants to solve the problems partially caused by the AMA. They want to rid the medical community of the corruption, as well as make sure NO ONE falls through the cracks. This organization was founded by doctors who work at free clinics, doctors who often do not get paid for their services and are trying to make sure everyone gets the best healthcare , not just textbook cases. This organization doesn;t want the AMA, no instead they want to combine healthcare to inclyde dental and medical health and guarantee everyone has access to it. The AMA wants to keep their elite club and does not want the intrusions. They want unbiased doctors on several boards in order to prevent it from becoming corrupted again. I don;t think you have even been reading my posts at all because your replies do not even apply to what I have posted. The AMA wants to make sure doctors get paid and they maintain control, this organization wants to combine medical and dental to improve overall healthcare and make sure EVERYONE will be treated , They are concerned about patients being treated , and have doctors pharamaceutical companies and insurance companies agree to be paid LESS, and have unbiased doctors making these decisions instead of the current corrupt board members.
You mention "oath" and that means very little. Anyone can take an oath to provide the best care, but it is a system of incentives to provide MORE --not the best; not the highest quality; not the needed care-- tests and services for the well-insured to pay more.
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with that poster unless you are bored. She mentions "oath" as if doctors are REQUIRED to take the oath. In fact, doctors today are not required to take any Hippocratic Oath and it is seen only as "traditional." There doesn't have to be any sincerity connected to it at all. Case in point? Plastic surgeons.
They are doctors. They have patients. But when it comes to building another addition onto their house, they will easily agree to do a surgery on some woman for her 25 facial surgery to look like Farrah Fawcett, even though the woman does not need anymore surgery. But when she writes that check for $25,000 the "oath" goes right out of the window. Same thing with lipo doctors. Or doctors that give people bigger schlongs. They don't have the patient's long term health at all, or why would they knowingly put silicone that causes physical problems inside of people for aesthetic reasons for the most part?
"Above all, do no harm". Yeah, gimme a break. Should be "Above all, do no poor revenue stream."
You hit the nail right on the head declared. But unfortunately you've been talking to someone with a vested interest in the healthcare field staying richand doctor's making more so they can pay her more. I wouldn't take too much of what she says seriously. After all, it's all in red print and she thinks she's a devil... how serious of a person can she really be, lol?
No, many medical organizations do not require doctors to uphold their oath, but THIS ONE DOES. If the doctor fails to uphold their oath they cannot be a part of this organization, and that is why many doctors choose not to support them. They do not have the finacial backing and support they need because they spend their funds on treating patients not buying off politicians. You keep talking about things that do not apply to IADMD. This organization wants to make sure all people everywhere around the world can receive the best care by combining dental and medical diciplines and have doctors, insurance companies, and pharamceutical companies agree to accept less money. This is not the AMA and this organization wants to put a stop to the corruption that has come from the AMA.
DID you not read on their site where all of their members must treat everyone regardless ? You just want to oppose something even if it is better than the plan you are proposing just for the sake of giving your party more control regardless of it is the right thing to do. You say I don;t take this seriously, when I am the one going around to every damn clinic in the area gathering up all the free medication I can get my hands on to take to the free clinic, wheras all I see you doing to solve the problem is argue about things you know nothing about and oppose the people who are actually treating these people. What are you doing personally to solve this problem other than support a plan that will leave people out and allow for more preventable deaths? Our plan covers EVERYONE. Does yours? Who has the right to pick and choose who lives and who dies?
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
yes the federal government is so much more qualified to provide medical for my family. -not.
The government is for regulation they cannot run these programs more effectively than private companies. This is not saying people should be denied healthcare because that is the extreme side of the issue, but the government should not take over something that has been working.
US citizens are not denied medical services when they are in dire need. If they government wants to get more involved in the healthcare issues they should look to offering more preventative means measures and programs, many medical issues when caught early are very inexpensive to resolve.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
You make it sound like Rahm Emanuel is going to be doing colonoscopies.
You see what happens when civilians have their own military (Blackwater). Things don’t go so well. When we look at the military and say that the government can handle that, but can’t handle running a hospital it makes no sense. I can guarantee you that hospitals are easier to run than an entire military.
Let’s just be honest man, you’re towing the party line like you always do. Your views can’t seriously be a mirror image of everything the Republican Party tells you to think. When everyone is thinking alike, someone isn’t thinking.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
You make it sound like Rahm Emanuel is going to be doing colonoscopies.
You see what happens when civilians have their own military (Blackwater). Things don’t go so well. When we look at the military and say that the government can handle that, but can’t handle running a hospital it makes no sense. I can guarantee you that hospitals are easier to run than an entire military.
Let’s just be honest man, you’re towing the party line like you always do. Your views can’t seriously be a mirror image of everything the Republican Party tells you to think. When everyone is thinking alike, someone isn’t thinking.
Rahm Emanuel IS going to be telling doctors how much it costs. so ya
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
How you can accuse someone of "kneejerkness" (is that even a word?) after writing the statement that prompted my response is at best laughable at a worse hypocritical since you label everyone, EVERYONE who disagrees with you are a liberal with even know if they are or not! And even if they are....so what? It's not a crime. THAT is a knee-jerk reaction!
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US.
No. I'm saying the Federal government can't do any worse than the insurance companies have done in making the US heathcare system into a logistical failure that it has become. What's the point of having the best medical technology in the world if it's not available to everyone without going bankrupt or having to sell the house to afford it? All you seem to be interested in is if it fits your very narrow political views and not if it might be beneficial to the citizens of this country. That is the very essence of ingorance.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
You make it sound like Rahm Emanuel is going to be doing colonoscopies.
You see what happens when civilians have their own military (Blackwater). Things don’t go so well. When we look at the military and say that the government can handle that, but can’t handle running a hospital it makes no sense. I can guarantee you that hospitals are easier to run than an entire military.
Let’s just be honest man, you’re towing the party line like you always do. Your views can’t seriously be a mirror image of everything the Republican Party tells you to think. When everyone is thinking alike, someone isn’t thinking.
Rahm Emanuel IS going to be telling doctors how much it costs. so ya
Edit: This response was changed because the statement was not worth of it and neither was warning I would have gotten from the admin.
Rahm Emanuel IS going to be telling doctors how much it costs. so ya
You know, it’s almost unfair that I set you up for that, but I’ll admit that was where I was hoping you would go.
You’ve been talking about letting doctors make decisions and how they will do it better than the government. I used the example of a colonoscopy purposefully because it’s actually a very lucrative procedure. They cost little to perform, at a high cost to the patient. The reason the balance of cost to charge is unbalanced in this case isn’t because the doctor decided to charge more, it’s because the doctors themselves don’t actually decide how much they charge for the procedure. The RUC does.
The RUC is a group that sets the pricing structure for both general practitioners and specialists. It’s a group made up almost entirely of specialists, which have decided that specialists get paid 2 ½ times as much as general practitioners, for the same amount of time. Now it’s fair that they make more, they are specialists, but the price increase is completely imbalanced. It’s imbalanced because a group of their peers decided they needed to make more money. This is literally a group of 29 doctors choosing how much every doctor will charge, so it’s no surprised that they decided specialists should make an unbalanced amount, considering they’re specialists themselves.
So the illusion you seem to cling to, that doctors opening an office is like a normal entrepreneur opening a restaurant, is a fallacy. They’re forced into a set pricing structure whether they agree with it or not.
I’ll cite a source just so you know I’m not just making stuff up. Read this.
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with that poster unless you are bored.
Someone has persuaded people to vote against and advocate against their own, and their country's, best interests. It has been my experience that Republicans are much (much) more apt to vote-against their own self-interest.
It troubles me and I feel embarrased for people, when I see them support public policies and industries that are literally working against their health.
It is irrational.
People need a total and complete reinvention of their notions of security and health. Our problems are complex, unpredictable, interconnected (globally), and defy our efforts at managing risk and control (financial crises to terrorism to the environment to universal health care). We - - SHOCKINGLY - - have people advocating for the AMA, drug companies, and insurance companies, although THOSE PEOPLE's health care is the most expensive in the world, least accessible, and very low ranked in terms of global standards concerning quality. THIS THINKING TROUBLES ME. I anticipate more trying times ahead that require a resilience as well as a flexibility that is alien to most people. The current system of health care in the United States required a total reinvention . . . which requires a total reinvention about how people approach and think about problems.
Comments
Yes your right. The christian thing to do would be to donate healthcare to everyone who needed it.
Feel free to do that any time. The catholic church alone has more than enough money to insure a few big cities worth of people, yet they would rather have massive multi-million dollar chapels with gold plated jesus statues.
Good job, I'm sure jesus would be proud.
The Official God FAQ
Sabiancym, stop acting like religion is some evil selfish entity. Its disgraceful to what church groups have done. The US is the most charitous nation because of these groups, and they don't do it because the government tells them they have to. However, not everyone is Jesus. There is a limit to what people want to do for Charity.
The main problem with national healthcare on the pretext of charity is that it stems from selfishness not charity. Even a person on welfare can afford Health Insurance. The difference is they choose not to.
Another economic concept that perhaps eludes the OP is that of price elasticity of demand: People are willing to pay any amount to save their own lives and companies are more than willing to exploit this to maximize their profits.
What this means is that the discrepancy between the cost of goods and services provided and the price is huge to fill up some asshole's pockets and on a macroeconomic level social welfare is transferred to the pricks who control such services.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
Without looking too far and thinking too deeply, let me guess, the health care lobby does not want to (a) pay taxes and (b) still receive government subsidies?
IADMD's membership requirement is that all doctors must uphold their sworn oath to give everyone the best care. This includes everyone, not just those with the ability to pay, and even those not covered , and will not be properly diagnosed by Obamas plan. You see for years, THESE doctors have been treating people for free, not being reimursed for all their services, and not recieving a tax break for it. Many doctors for years now have been paying for patients treatment out of pocket. Many doctors are not focused on what they get, no instead focus on who they can save.
The problem with doing this as is, is that they only have so much money before that runs out. The demand is simply too high. Rather than make a huge tax burden on the people by catering to pharmaceutical companies and insurance companies, the doctors plan will reduce the costs of treatment and agree to accept less for their services. They agree to get paid less, and get taxed less so they can provide better treatment to all people, not just those that can afford it. YOu can call the number on their site and discuss their plan with them, I am sure they would be more than happy to.
Yes, they should receive government subsides and have taxes reduced when they are paying for paitents treatment out of their own pockets, that is the least our government could do to help them treat the poor of this country without placing a huge burden on the tax payers.
Obamas propsals hurt these efforts by removing the funding they currently have to treat people, yet they will still be paying for patients care out of pocket. Their services will still be needed under Obamas plan because his textbook agenda and with the government deciding who needs to be in a hospital bed and who doesn't , there will be many people that will be left out. AS IS the insurance companies do not allow patients to be treated properly, and this will only get worse under the government plan. These doctors want to make sure everyone gets treated the best they can be, and they will not accept leaving anyone out because it is their sworn oath to care for these people regardless of what the government says, the insurance company says, or their ability to pay.
What's the AMA's opinion on this if you know or can link me to an opinion? I've searched but turned up nothing.
I ask because obviously the government is taking their cues from the AMA right now, so where does that organization sit with the AMA?
The AMA is part of the problem, not the solution. They want to keep medical and dental separate when IADMD combines them to give the best overall care. They want to keep their " elite club" and do not want intruders. Dental health is part of your overall health and they need to be treated together. IADMD requires all members to uphold their hippocratic oath, and wants to place unbiased doctors on several boards in order to keep corruption out of the system. Most of those supporting Obamas plan are more concerned about them getting paid than people getting treated. IADMD doctors are more concerened about patients getting treated rather than them getting paid. They need the funds to be able to treat more people. They already have been treating people from their own pockets for years, and want to be able to continue to do so.
About 1.5 million families lose their homes to foreclosure every year due to unaffordable medical costs. You're telling me that they just chose to put themselves in that situation? They decided they would rather move from a home into an apartment, or a car, than to pay for health insurance?
yes the federal government is so much more qualified to provide medical for my family.
-not.
The average christian conservative is a paradox.
My days of posting are numbered. I have come to realize when it comes to (a) taxes and (b) medical care, most people really do not know what they are talking about. That is fine. I am not worried about ignorance anymore because it is so pervasive (see my previous posts discussing the USA's world ranking for Math and Science). The health care industry is simply an exploitative industry. Exploitative. You mention "oath" and that means very little. Anyone can take an oath to provide the best care, but it is a system of incentives to provide MORE --not the best; not the highest quality; not the needed care-- tests and services for the well-insured to pay more. It is a business, not a practice. The last professional practice is law.
(When Pres. Truman called for universal health care, the AMA sent our fliers and ads of this painting ("The Doctor" by Sir Luke Fildes) with a large caption, "keep politics out of this picture." The argument was that if the government became involved in health care, doctors would no longer, as depicted in the painting, do house calls with their attentive eyes toward the ill child).
NOW IS THE TIME FOR REAL HEALTH CARE REFORM
(my sense is that you "regular" or "little" people will just end-up paying more taxes and more for insurance when the smoke clears on "health care reform")
The drug companies, AMA, and insurance comapnies do not want our government involved in health care because it would have the effect of reducing costs. YOU DO NOT SAY! Doctors in the United States are wealthy, have the MOST powerful union in the world (I would argue that the AMA is perhaps more powerful than federal, state, county, and municipal employees union).
This is so uninformed and biased, it's not funny. Why? Because he assumes too many things.
He's assuming that only church groups donate and deserve the credit, when the reality is richer, non-religious people give WAY more.
He's assuming that people only give because of their religious convictions when plenty of people give because they are wealthy and need tax shelters that come from philanthropy. When times get tight, they stop giving. There are rich individuals who give simply to leave a "legacy" for their name on a building, or some fund that has nothing to do with religion.
Bill Gates is one of the biggest charity givers in the United States and he's no religious group member. He's not even sure about God. So is Warren Buffet. They give because they feel it's the right thing to do; help those who can't help themselves. Not because God told them to.
Religious groups are NOT the reason the United States is the most charitable nation. Rich individuals who gain tax reductions and want to give are.
"TO MICHAEL!"
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with that poster unless you are bored. She mentions "oath" as if doctors are REQUIRED to take the oath. In fact, doctors today are not required to take any Hippocratic Oath and it is seen only as "traditional." There doesn't have to be any sincerity connected to it at all. Case in point? Plastic surgeons.
They are doctors. They have patients. But when it comes to building another addition onto their house, they will easily agree to do a surgery on some woman for her 25 facial surgery to look like Farrah Fawcett, even though the woman does not need anymore surgery. But when she writes that check for $25,000 the "oath" goes right out of the window. Same thing with lipo doctors. Or doctors that give people bigger schlongs. They don't have the patient's long term health at all, or why would they knowingly put silicone that causes physical problems inside of people for aesthetic reasons for the most part?
"Above all, do no harm". Yeah, gimme a break. Should be "Above all, do no poor revenue stream."
You hit the nail right on the head declared. But unfortunately you've been talking to someone with a vested interest in the healthcare field staying richand doctor's making more so they can pay her more. I wouldn't take too much of what she says seriously. After all, it's all in red print and she thinks she's a devil... how serious of a person can she really be, lol?
"TO MICHAEL!"
The US is not only charitable because of religion. The U.S. is charitable because of humanity. Something a lot of people have without being promised a reward when they die.
And you proclaiming that everyone can afford healthcare but choose not to is proof that you are too ignorant to even be in this discussion.
The Official God FAQ
Every liberal in this thread has made a doubled effort to paint ANYONE not in favor of SOCIALIZED health care as some kind of tyranical bastard.
NO SALE.
edit:
link
http://people-press.org/report/?pageid=1534
Less suport for health care now than when Clinton tried it. enough said
God bless america.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
My days of posting are numbered. I have come to realize when it comes to (a) taxes and (b) medical care, most people really do not know what they are talking about. That is fine. I am not worried about ignorance anymore because it is so pervasive (see my previous posts discussing the USA's world ranking for Math and Science). The health care industry is simply an exploitative industry. Exploitative. You mention "oath" and that means very little. Anyone can take an oath to provide the best care, but it is a system of incentives to provide MORE --not the best; not the highest quality; not the needed care-- tests and services for the well-insured to pay more. It is a business, not a practice. The last professional practice is law.
(When Pres. Truman called for universal health care, the AMA sent our fliers and ads of this painting ("The Doctor" by Sir Luke Fildes) with a large caption, "keep politics out of this picture." The argument was that if the government became involved in health care, doctors would no longer, as depicted in the painting, do house calls with their attentive eyes toward the ill child).
NOW IS THE TIME FOR REAL HEALTH CARE REFORM
(my sense is that you "regular" or "little" people will just end-up paying more taxes and more for insurance when the smoke clears on "health care reform")
The drug companies, AMA, and insurance comapnies do not want our government involved in health care because it would have the effect of reducing costs. YOU DO NOT SAY! Doctors in the United States are wealthy, have the MOST powerful union in the world (I would argue that the AMA is perhaps more powerful than federal, state, county, and municipal employees union).
Have you even been reading my posts or my links? This is not the AMA, in fact the AMA is part of the problem. This organization with both doctors and dentists wants to solve the problems partially caused by the AMA. They want to rid the medical community of the corruption, as well as make sure NO ONE falls through the cracks. This organization was founded by doctors who work at free clinics, doctors who often do not get paid for their services and are trying to make sure everyone gets the best healthcare , not just textbook cases. This organization doesn;t want the AMA, no instead they want to combine healthcare to inclyde dental and medical health and guarantee everyone has access to it. The AMA wants to keep their elite club and does not want the intrusions. They want unbiased doctors on several boards in order to prevent it from becoming corrupted again. I don;t think you have even been reading my posts at all because your replies do not even apply to what I have posted. The AMA wants to make sure doctors get paid and they maintain control, this organization wants to combine medical and dental to improve overall healthcare and make sure EVERYONE will be treated , They are concerned about patients being treated , and have doctors pharamaceutical companies and insurance companies agree to be paid LESS, and have unbiased doctors making these decisions instead of the current corrupt board members.
I wouldn't waste my time arguing with that poster unless you are bored. She mentions "oath" as if doctors are REQUIRED to take the oath. In fact, doctors today are not required to take any Hippocratic Oath and it is seen only as "traditional." There doesn't have to be any sincerity connected to it at all. Case in point? Plastic surgeons.
They are doctors. They have patients. But when it comes to building another addition onto their house, they will easily agree to do a surgery on some woman for her 25 facial surgery to look like Farrah Fawcett, even though the woman does not need anymore surgery. But when she writes that check for $25,000 the "oath" goes right out of the window. Same thing with lipo doctors. Or doctors that give people bigger schlongs. They don't have the patient's long term health at all, or why would they knowingly put silicone that causes physical problems inside of people for aesthetic reasons for the most part?
"Above all, do no harm". Yeah, gimme a break. Should be "Above all, do no poor revenue stream."
You hit the nail right on the head declared. But unfortunately you've been talking to someone with a vested interest in the healthcare field staying richand doctor's making more so they can pay her more. I wouldn't take too much of what she says seriously. After all, it's all in red print and she thinks she's a devil... how serious of a person can she really be, lol?
No, many medical organizations do not require doctors to uphold their oath, but THIS ONE DOES. If the doctor fails to uphold their oath they cannot be a part of this organization, and that is why many doctors choose not to support them. They do not have the finacial backing and support they need because they spend their funds on treating patients not buying off politicians. You keep talking about things that do not apply to IADMD. This organization wants to make sure all people everywhere around the world can receive the best care by combining dental and medical diciplines and have doctors, insurance companies, and pharamceutical companies agree to accept less money. This is not the AMA and this organization wants to put a stop to the corruption that has come from the AMA.
DID you not read on their site where all of their members must treat everyone regardless ? You just want to oppose something even if it is better than the plan you are proposing just for the sake of giving your party more control regardless of it is the right thing to do. You say I don;t take this seriously, when I am the one going around to every damn clinic in the area gathering up all the free medication I can get my hands on to take to the free clinic, wheras all I see you doing to solve the problem is argue about things you know nothing about and oppose the people who are actually treating these people. What are you doing personally to solve this problem other than support a plan that will leave people out and allow for more preventable deaths? Our plan covers EVERYONE. Does yours? Who has the right to pick and choose who lives and who dies?
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
The government is for regulation they cannot run these programs more effectively than private companies. This is not saying people should be denied healthcare because that is the extreme side of the issue, but the government should not take over something that has been working.
US citizens are not denied medical services when they are in dire need. If they government wants to get more involved in the healthcare issues they should look to offering more preventative means measures and programs, many medical issues when caught early are very inexpensive to resolve.
Fight my Brute Clicky!!
Memon 40 WH War-PT
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
You make it sound like Rahm Emanuel is going to be doing colonoscopies.
You see what happens when civilians have their own military (Blackwater). Things don’t go so well. When we look at the military and say that the government can handle that, but can’t handle running a hospital it makes no sense. I can guarantee you that hospitals are easier to run than an entire military.
Let’s just be honest man, you’re towing the party line like you always do. Your views can’t seriously be a mirror image of everything the Republican Party tells you to think. When everyone is thinking alike, someone isn’t thinking.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
You make it sound like Rahm Emanuel is going to be doing colonoscopies.
You see what happens when civilians have their own military (Blackwater). Things don’t go so well. When we look at the military and say that the government can handle that, but can’t handle running a hospital it makes no sense. I can guarantee you that hospitals are easier to run than an entire military.
Let’s just be honest man, you’re towing the party line like you always do. Your views can’t seriously be a mirror image of everything the Republican Party tells you to think. When everyone is thinking alike, someone isn’t thinking.
Rahm Emanuel IS going to be telling doctors how much it costs. so ya
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
How you can accuse someone of "kneejerkness" (is that even a word?) after writing the statement that prompted my response is at best laughable at a worse hypocritical since you label everyone, EVERYONE who disagrees with you are a liberal with even know if they are or not! And even if they are....so what? It's not a crime. THAT is a knee-jerk reaction!
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US.
No. I'm saying the Federal government can't do any worse than the insurance companies have done in making the US heathcare system into a logistical failure that it has become. What's the point of having the best medical technology in the world if it's not available to everyone without going bankrupt or having to sell the house to afford it? All you seem to be interested in is if it fits your very narrow political views and not if it might be beneficial to the citizens of this country. That is the very essence of ingorance.
So, stay the course until our bloated health system finally collapses in on itself Faxxer? Let more and more people fall through the cracks just because it benefits the markets. Exactly when did "The Market" become more important than the well being of the citizens of the country? How do you explain to hard working people who have families that lose their health insurance ( more and more over the years) due to no fault of their own that this is just how the "free markets works"? Huh? Just how do you explain that to them with out looking like a tyranical bastard??
how does anyone reason with such kneejerk-ness?
Just look yourself in a mirror and ask if the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT can do a better job than doctors. if you can't do it, then your ignorance surpasses all the dropout rate in all the US
You make it sound like Rahm Emanuel is going to be doing colonoscopies.
You see what happens when civilians have their own military (Blackwater). Things don’t go so well. When we look at the military and say that the government can handle that, but can’t handle running a hospital it makes no sense. I can guarantee you that hospitals are easier to run than an entire military.
Let’s just be honest man, you’re towing the party line like you always do. Your views can’t seriously be a mirror image of everything the Republican Party tells you to think. When everyone is thinking alike, someone isn’t thinking.
Rahm Emanuel IS going to be telling doctors how much it costs. so ya
Edit: This response was changed because the statement was not worth of it and neither was warning I would have gotten from the admin.
You know, it’s almost unfair that I set you up for that, but I’ll admit that was where I was hoping you would go.
You’ve been talking about letting doctors make decisions and how they will do it better than the government. I used the example of a colonoscopy purposefully because it’s actually a very lucrative procedure. They cost little to perform, at a high cost to the patient. The reason the balance of cost to charge is unbalanced in this case isn’t because the doctor decided to charge more, it’s because the doctors themselves don’t actually decide how much they charge for the procedure. The RUC does.
The RUC is a group that sets the pricing structure for both general practitioners and specialists. It’s a group made up almost entirely of specialists, which have decided that specialists get paid 2 ½ times as much as general practitioners, for the same amount of time. Now it’s fair that they make more, they are specialists, but the price increase is completely imbalanced. It’s imbalanced because a group of their peers decided they needed to make more money. This is literally a group of 29 doctors choosing how much every doctor will charge, so it’s no surprised that they decided specialists should make an unbalanced amount, considering they’re specialists themselves.
So the illusion you seem to cling to, that doctors opening an office is like a normal entrepreneur opening a restaurant, is a fallacy. They’re forced into a set pricing structure whether they agree with it or not.
I’ll cite a source just so you know I’m not just making stuff up. Read this.
Someone has persuaded people to vote against and advocate against their own, and their country's, best interests. It has been my experience that Republicans are much (much) more apt to vote-against their own self-interest.
It troubles me and I feel embarrased for people, when I see them support public policies and industries that are literally working against their health.
It is irrational.
People need a total and complete reinvention of their notions of security and health. Our problems are complex, unpredictable, interconnected (globally), and defy our efforts at managing risk and control (financial crises to terrorism to the environment to universal health care). We - - SHOCKINGLY - - have people advocating for the AMA, drug companies, and insurance companies, although THOSE PEOPLE's health care is the most expensive in the world, least accessible, and very low ranked in terms of global standards concerning quality. THIS THINKING TROUBLES ME. I anticipate more trying times ahead that require a resilience as well as a flexibility that is alien to most people. The current system of health care in the United States required a total reinvention . . . which requires a total reinvention about how people approach and think about problems.