Have we discussed the Obamacare decision?

13»

Replies

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @NZ Indicator said:

    @fishingcomic said:
    What would those choices be? Do we have imperiacal evidence for this or are simply generalizing on people from WV because you watched an episode of Beverly Hillbillies?

    You need to read previous links in this thread.

    Everything in that quote can be said about all 50 states.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    @fishingcomic said:

    @Steven said:

    @fishingcomic said:

    I just said I'm with you. Find a way, I'll vote for your plan.

    I'll even take the risk of being called a communist.

    How about we go with who needs it more urgently. You might have to wait to get that pimple removed.

    Now that we agree that scarce resources have to be rationed, are we going to set up an entire government bureaucracy to decide who needs what more urgently? We do this for organ transplants, how about hip replacements?

    Maybe they should decide who deserves it more?

    We do that now on their ability to pay. Protest all you want, but you like it that way.

    Actually, no.

  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    So, Ruth Bader Ginsburg just got operated on at the nation's premier cancer center - Sloan Kettering - for removal of a cancerous growth on her lung.

    Now, she's 85 and a Supreme Court Justice (we'll ignore for the time being that she might be senile). In a system where the government decides who goes first, one can make a very good case that she shouldn't be operated on at all. Or maybe she should be operated on immediately because of her importance.

    Who's making that call?

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #65

    @Steven said:

    @fishingcomic said:

    @Steven said:

    @fishingcomic said:

    I just said I'm with you. Find a way, I'll vote for your plan.

    I'll even take the risk of being called a communist.

    How about we go with who needs it more urgently. You might have to wait to get that pimple removed.

    Now that we agree that scarce resources have to be rationed, are we going to set up an entire government bureaucracy to decide who needs what more urgently? We do this for organ transplants, how about hip replacements?

    Maybe they should decide who deserves it more?

    We do that now on their ability to pay. Protest all you want, but you like it that way.

    Actually, no.

    But you won't give it up unless the replacement is perfect. You set the bar as high as you do because you are quite comfortable having a person's worth determined by their income.

    The Canadian system works quite well and I think we can do it better.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @Steven said:
    So, Ruth Bader Ginsburg just got operated on at the nation's premier cancer center - Sloan Kettering - for removal of a cancerous growth on her lung.

    Now, she's 85 and a Supreme Court Justice (we'll ignore for the time being that she might be senile). In a system where the government decides who goes first, one can make a very good case that she shouldn't be operated on at all. Or maybe she should be operated on immediately because of her importance.

    Who's making that call?

    I am assuming the same person who did it this time, her doctor.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • BufordBuford Senior Member Posts: 2,970 Senior Member

    @fishingcomic said:
    What would those choices be? Do we have imperical evidence for this or are simply generalizing on people from WV because you watched an episode of Beverly Hillbillies?

    I believe they were from Tennessee.

    Just look at the flowers Lizzie just look at the flowers.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    @fishingcomic said:

    I am assuming the same person who did it this time, her doctor.

    That would be a nice assumption. The thing is I don't think that's the case in at least some systems, for example - England.

  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,965 Senior Member

    It> @Steven said:

    @fishingcomic said:

    I am assuming the same person who did it this time, her doctor.

    That would be a nice assumption. The thing is I don't think that's the case in at least some systems, for example - England.

    Again you are assuming that there are no options beyond Medicare for all, and that we would precisely mirror the English system. Neither assumption is true. And again, let me point out that private, employer-provided insurance exists in England.

    The current problems in the NHS are due to underfunding and staffing shortages because of the loss of European doctors and nurses who have left because of BREXIT worries.

    Here's a good summary of England's NHS system, warts and all, the chief wart being rationing. They do it via NICE (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence). Here's a quote from the head of NICE:

    _As NICE chairman Sir Michael Rawlins recently told TIME, "All health-care systems have implicitly, if not explicitly, adopted some form of cost control. In the U.S., you do it by not providing health care to some people. That's a rather brutal way of doing it." _

    Read the whole article, please

    http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1916570-2,00.html

    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #70

    I'm well aware that there are private options in England, George. But that doesn't speak to 'comic's objections. Doctor's won't be choosing who gets treated when for those in the national system.

    Anybody who thinks in a system rationed by the government that individual doctors will be solely making care decisions is delusional. You can't have individuals making individual decisions and expect rationing to work.

  • George KGeorge K Super Moderator Posts: 9,965 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #71

    Doctors mostly do not choose who gets treated when here either - it's just that waiting lists usually are shorter in non-emergency cases. It depends on where and with whom you want an appointment or to have a procedure done, when an operating theater and support staff are available, when insurance pre-approvals are available, when a hospital bed is free etc. Doctor's in England choose who gets treated; they do have less input as to when (and in rare instances, as described in the Time article, how).

    Or are you seriously suggesting that here in the United States anyone can pick up the phone and get an appointment with a well regarded specialist for the next day, or schedule elective surgery for the following week or that insurance companies do not restrict or deny access to some procedures or expensive drugs? If so, whatcha been smokin' Steven?

    Why is it OK with you for an insurance company drone in a cubicle to deny access to an expensive cancer treatment, but not OK for a panel of medical experts to do so?

    In England, as here, in a true emergency patients are treated/surgery done right away.

    Keep your stinkin' government hands off my Medicare.
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @Steven said:
    I'm well aware that there are private options in England, George. But that doesn't speak to 'comic's objections. Doctor's won't be choosing who gets treated when for those in the national system.

    Anybody who thinks in a system rationed by the government that individual doctors will be solely making care decisions is delusional. You can't have individuals making individual decisions and expect rationing to work.

    I would rather a government I could petition decide than a corporation that is more interested in a profit than my life decide.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    TL;DR George. But what I did skim didn't address what I'm saying. No, I'm not suggesting that I can suddenly get the best doctor in the land.

    What I am suggesting is that whatever doctor I do have can decide my treatment without looking for approval from some government board.

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #74

    currently they seek permission from someone who will let you die to save money

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    Without arguing your point, so would a government bureaucrat.

    All scarce resources must be rationed.

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #76

    You're just more comfortable with them doing that to protect their investors and you are okay with rationing based on ability to pay, because you can afford it and you never have to wait in line behind the riffraff.

    BTW those resources can always be expanded.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #77

    And you'd rather have shitt*y medical care for all.

    See? I can do that too.

  • Green Mt BoyGreen Mt Boy Senior Member Posts: 1,044 Senior Member

    @Steven said:

    What I am suggesting is that whatever doctor I do have can decide my treatment without looking for approval from some government board.

    Your doctor already has to get approval for many procedures and Rx scripts from your insurance company—it is called prior authorization.

    Health care utilization has to be “managed” one way or the other in order to have any degree of cost containment. Faceless government bureaucrats can do it or faceless insurance bean counters can do it. Six of one, half a dozen of another. Another way is to have the doc bear some risk via a capitated budget system. We’re trying that in VT. The jury is out as it is a multi year program that has just begun.

    The bottom line is that health care utilization has to be managed or it will simply suck all of the money out of the economy.

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @Steven said:
    And you'd rather have shitt*y medical care for all.

    See? I can do that too.

    Yes I would rather have poopie medicare for all than a system that decides because a father has a sick child he has to live his life in poverty or worry that his kid can get the care they need when they older without also having to spend their lives in poverty.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @Green Mt Boy said:

    @Steven said:

    What I am suggesting is that whatever doctor I do have can decide my treatment without looking for approval from some government board.

    Your doctor already has to get approval for many procedures and Rx scripts from your insurance company—it is called prior authorization.

    Health care utilization has to be “managed” one way or the other in order to have any degree of cost containment. Faceless government bureaucrats can do it or faceless insurance bean counters can do it. Six of one, half a dozen of another. Another way is to have the doc bear some risk via a capitated budget system. We’re trying that in VT. The jury is out as it is a multi year program that has just begun.

    The bottom line is that health care utilization has to be managed or it will simply suck all of the money out of the economy.

    However the current system sucks all the money out of the system and puts it in the pockets of medical oligarchs.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • jbillyjbilly Senior Member Posts: 5,251 Senior Member

    I still wish I could have kept the healthcare plan I had. I liked it.

    New plan blows

  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    Medical Oligarchs. There's a new one.

  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    @fishingcomic said:

    @Steven said:
    And you'd rather have shitt*y medical care for all.

    See? I can do that too.

    Yes I would rather have poopie medicare for all than a system that decides because a father has a sick child he has to live his life in poverty or worry that his kid can get the care they need when they older without also having to spend their lives in poverty.

    I guarantee that Medicare for all (which I absolutely believe will happen) will be a lot "poopier" than you think. It's inevitable.

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @Steven said:
    Medical Oligarchs. There's a new one.

    I like to think of myself as a Trendsetter.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    @Steven said:

    @fishingcomic said:

    @Steven said:
    And you'd rather have shitt*y medical care for all.

    See? I can do that too.

    Yes I would rather have poopie medicare for all than a system that decides because a father has a sick child he has to live his life in poverty or worry that his kid can get the care they need when they older without also having to spend their lives in poverty.

    I guarantee that Medicare for all (which I absolutely believe will happen) will be a lot "poopier" than you think. It's inevitable.

    It will could possibly be poopier for you and your friends because you will no longer have an advantage and you will have to wait behind the riff raff.

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • StevenSteven Senior Member Posts: 3,515 Senior Member

    Well, according to George there will still be a private option. But assuming there's not, it will be poopier for everybody - from the indigent to the 0.1%.

    I guaranty.

  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member

    If it were so bad, you would think all those countries with socialized medicine would be working to repeal it. I mean they passed Brexit, could this really be harder?

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • fishingcomicfishingcomic Senior Member Posts: 24,092 Senior Member
    edited December 2018 #88

    @Steven said:
    Well, according to George there will still be a private option. But assuming there's not, it will be poopier for everybody - from the indigent to the 0.1%.

    I guaranty.

    How would it be worse for someone who dies because they are poor?

    'I've spoken of the Shining City all my political life. …In my mind it was a tall, proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, windswept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace; a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity. And if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it, and see it still.'" Ronald Reagan
  • Shawn C.Shawn C. Senior Member Posts: 6,956 Senior Member

    Yes. I'm thinking the indignant guy who blows his brain out due to a long-term undiagnosed mental illness might be slightly better off. I'm sure there will be an op-ed in the National review explaining why not.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file
Magazine Cover

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

Temporary Price Reduction.

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Give a Gift   |   Subscriber Services

PREVIEW THIS MONTH'S ISSUE

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.

Get the top Fly Fisherman stories delivered right to your inbox.