lizish Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 All of those factors (except maybe religion, but who knows) plus whether the baby has any defects and any sort of abuse or neglect by the parents. As far as ranking all those for other countries, no thanks. I'm not that bent on convincing you. Chickenshit Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 ikol, I remember that you once mentioned that you planned to go to medical school. Are you happy with the status quo? If not, what changes would you like to see? I'm between my first and second year of med school. I'm not at all happy with the status quo, but I don't see socialism as the answer. First of all, I think we need to have tort reform with not only caps on noneconomic damages but also caps on the amount lawyers can get paid for malpractice cases. Second, individuals should get the same tax breaks as businesses for providing health insurance. One problem I see with our current system is that people expect their insurance to cover everything, including their routine stuff. I think people could save a lot of money if they got high-deductible health insurance and then got (tax free) health savings accounts to pay for small things. I also think the FDA should be abolished. This is not to say that drugs shouldn't be thoroughly tested (and they still would be since drug companies would still face lawsuits), just that individuals should have the option to get experimental treatments especially for life-threatening illnesses. Chickenshit Name-caller Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lizish Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 I'm between my first and second year of med school. I'm not at all happy with the status quo, but I don't see socialism as the answer. First of all, I think we need to have tort reform with not only caps on noneconomic damages but also caps on the amount lawyers can get paid for malpractice cases. Second, individuals should get the same tax breaks as businesses for providing health insurance. One problem I see with our current system is that people expect their insurance to cover everything, including their routine stuff. I think people could save a lot of money if they got high-deductible health insurance and then got (tax free) health savings accounts to pay for small things. I also think the FDA should be abolished. This is not to say that drugs shouldn't be thoroughly tested (and they still would be since drug companies would still face lawsuits), just that individuals should have the option to get experimental treatments especially for life-threatening illnesses.Name-caller So individual doctors get tort reform with a limitation of damages and corporations would still face lawsuits? You sure about being right wing there boy? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Atticus Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 I'm not sure any group opposes tort reform more than trial lawyers, who by and large vote left, and according to some women, always think they're right, even when arguing over the most trivial of household matters. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 So individual doctors get tort reform with a limitation of damages and corporations would still face lawsuits? You sure about being right wing there boy? Even with tort reform, individual doctors could still get sued, there just wouldn't be ridiculous awards for noneconomic damages. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Is tort reform another term for Michael Moore's new diet? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lizish Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Even with tort reform, individual doctors could still get sued, there just wouldn't be ridiculous awards for noneconomic damages. Yet you still want large jury awards as a incentive for drug companies to test their products? I'm sorry, nothing that you have said logically connects A to B. I certainly hope your future highly satisfied patients can get in on these ridiculous awards. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted July 12, 2007 Author Share Posted July 12, 2007 ...people expect their insurance to cover everything, including their routine stuff... umm, maybe i missed something, but isn't the routine stuff kind of important, like physicals each year. the whole preventative medicine thing. take care of yourself in advance and that will help reduce medical costs because small things that show up in the routine stuff can be treated/taken care of early on before they become big things that take a lot more treatment (and money).?. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tweedling Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 You think we could get MM to make a documentary for Universal Food Care? I think it should be the governments duty and my RIGHT to have food. Sure, I'll pay a little more tax. He could call it Food-O.Then he could do one for housing....cause that should be my RIGHT too. He could call it Home-O.....uh then again.....I like this idea! I mean shit, for the people by the people. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 umm, maybe i missed something, but isn't the routine stuff kind of important, like physicals each year. the whole preventative medicine thing. take care of yourself in advance and that will help reduce medical costs because small things that show up in the routine stuff can be treated/taken care of early on before they become big things that take a lot more treatment (and money).?.Yes. If I had not gone to the doctor for a case of pinkeye back in 1998, I wouldn't have found out that I was having a case of Type II diabetes. Prior to that, I did not go to the doctor much, if at all, and only when something was really wrong with me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
ikol Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Yet you still want large jury awards as a incentive for drug companies to test their products? I'm sorry, nothing that you have said logically connects A to B. I certainly hope your future highly satisfied patients can get in on these ridiculous awards. Lawsuits against drug companies would have large awards because one drug affects several thousand people. Even with caps on noneconomic damage, that adds up to a lot. You don't have to apologize for not seeing the logic in my posts, but hoping that I get sued is a bit immature. umm, maybe i missed something, but isn't the routine stuff kind of important, like physicals each year. the whole preventative medicine thing. take care of yourself in advance and that will help reduce medical costs because small things that show up in the routine stuff can be treated/taken care of early on before they become big things that take a lot more treatment (and money).?. The routine stuff is very important. I just think it would be better for patients to pay for it out of pocket instead of having insurance cover it. If health insurance were more like car insurance (covers expensive stuff like wrecks but not routine oil changes and tire rotations), then premiums would be lower. Of course, in a completely privatized system, the type of health insurance plan is the patient's choice. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
MrRain422 Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 The thing is, routine car maintenance generally isn't all that expensive compared to health care. Most people can afford an oil change, but even a routine checkup can be beyond a lot of people's means, even though it's way more important. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted July 12, 2007 Share Posted July 12, 2007 Chickenshit wow - way to elevate the discussion. Good going! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted July 13, 2007 Author Share Posted July 13, 2007 The thing is, routine car maintenance generally isn't all that expensive compared to health care. Most people can afford an oil change, but even a routine checkup can be beyond a lot of people's means, even though it's way more important. yes! and a routine oil change usually doesn't show something really dramatic like a cracked engine or worn ball joints that are extremely dangerous problems and very expensive to fix. a yearly physical would reveal all sorts of things. and the price of health care is not even close to comparable to auto maitenance. $150 for 15 minutes is quite the racket. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
lizish Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 wow - way to elevate the discussion. Good going! Got me. I'm trying to understand how someone can want excessive liability on the part of a drug company and then excuse doctors, or a collection of doctors in large partnership from that same kind liability. Coulterish logic with blinders. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bobbob1313 Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Got me. I'm trying to understand how someone can want excessive liability on the part of a drug company and then excuse doctors, or a collection of doctors in large partnership from that same kind liability. Coulterish logic with blinders. "Chickenshit." Quote Link to post Share on other sites
stooka Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 My youngest son broke his wrist this week. ... Anyhow, I mentioned to the doctor that I saw this movie and said that it made a compelling argument, just to see what he thought. He got pissed! He basically cursed Michael Moore and said it was all complete bull. I know he didn't see the movie, but I'm sure he knows enough to know that it will effect his bottom line and he, along with the AMA is not going to have it. p.s. We got the bill from the orthopedic surgeon already, $1000 bucks. He was in the room for about 2 minutes to say that he needed a cast. Seems like a lot of $$$$, unless you take into consideration the x-ray charge, x-ray technician salary, salary of PA, tech or Nurse who put the cast on (assumption), casting materials and ultimately the liability insurance in case of complication or deformity. Oh, let's not forget the Porsche 911 turbo. all kidding aside, I hope things work out for the best and your son gets a good result. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 Still seems a like a lot of money. Unless all those people are being paid $100/hr. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dreamin' Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 My personal experiences with universal health care have been overwhelmingly positive. Maybe I've been lucky, but I honestly haven't encountered any barriers to receiving timely care. I'm usually able to see the GP (of my choice) within a few days. If I don't want to wait that long, I go to a walk-in clinic and bring a book to read while I wait. (I've spent much more time waiting to catch a flight than waiting to see a doctor.) I received excellent prenatal care, I was able to book a private hospital room for peanuts, and a public health nurse visited me at home after the birth to help with breastfeeding, screen for postpartum depression, and make sure that I was aware of community resources for new mums & families, etc. She also followed up by phone several times during the first 6 weeks to see how we were doing. My daughter goes for regular "well baby" check-ups, scheduled vaccinations, etc., and her referrals to a pediatrician and a physiotherapist at Children's Hospital were quick and hassle free. Best of all, I am currently enjoying a full year of maternity leave, which has made it much easier to breastfeed my daughter. IMO, that's a great investment in the future health and productivity of our society. Not to mention lower health care costs for Canadian employers. As for paying higher taxes, I believe it's a privilege to be able to help all Canadians access medically necessary care, regardless of income. Our system certainly isn't perfect, but how is this so bad? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 As for paying higher taxes, I believe it's a privilege to be able to help all Canadians access medically necessary care, regardless of income. Our system certainly isn't perfect, but how is this so bad?I think that speaks to both the difference between American and Canadian societies - we don't at heart cooperate as well and we think of life as bellum omnium contra omnes or "devil take the hindmost" - and the pervasiveness of the anti-single-payer propaganda effort over the last decade or so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Duck-Billed Catechist Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 All that baby care stuff is fine and well, Dreamin', but this is America and we believe in family values. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dreamin' Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 For me, the hardest stuff to watch in SiCKO was the stories about the kids. I was thinking about Kate and your daughter, too, Graham. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
anodyne Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 the thing about sicko that was killing me was most of those people had insurance. if medical malpractice premiums are past the ceiling (supposedly driving up the cost of healthcare across the board) and we have all these problems obtaining and effectively using health insurance, isn't it about time people start looking into the insurance industry as an obstacle rather than the piece of mind they market themselves as? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
isadorah Posted July 13, 2007 Author Share Posted July 13, 2007 the thing about sicko that was killing me was most of those people had insurance. if medical malpractice premiums are past the ceiling (supposedly driving up the cost of healthcare across the board) and we have all these problems obtaining and effectively using health insurance, isn't it about time people start looking into the insurance industry as an obstacle rather than the piece of mind they market themselves as? here here! bravo! (imagine clapping smiley here) Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dreamin' Posted July 13, 2007 Share Posted July 13, 2007 if medical malpractice premiums are past the ceiling (supposedly driving up the cost of healthcare across the board) and we have all these problems obtaining and effectively using health insurance, isn't it about time people start looking into the insurance industry as an obstacle rather than the piece of mind they market themselves as?I agree. It seems like a conflict of interest to me. After seeing SiCKO, I understand why Americans can be so litigious. I think I would sue anything that moved. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.