KSB and jerry

[IGotWorms 4,058]

My wife's company has never run a TV ad.

Your wife doesn't have to advertise. She has other methods for pushing her drugs on doctors

[Reality 3,121]

I work in healthcare

I have cable TV, the internet, & the company I work for provides healthcare in over 1500 facilities nationwide.

[Reality 3,121]

Hilarious considering your history of jumping to false conclusions.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I have cable TV, the internet, & the company I work for provides healthcare in over 1500 facilities nationwide.

Hmmm…what do you do for said company? And how did you enjoy reading my link?

[Reality 3,121]

Hmmmwhat do you do for said company? And how did you enjoy reading my link?

Enjoy would be a stretch but, it was an interesting read. I'm not here to try to convince you that our system doesn't have issues, as a Dr. you know first hand that it does. I only contend that I am not willing to trade ours for any other, furthermore I don't think the ACA will alleviate the actual problems of our system.

 

As for my job, I signed a very specific privacy policy to not discuss anything job related publicly. I am in IT management, reluctantly, considering I am much more of a technical person who enjoyed hands on work but, accepted a supervisory roll I couldn't pass up. My department keeps an eye on about 150 hospitals. I deal with doctors on a daily basis. I must say, most I hear from don't share your passion for a single payer/Gov't run system. Quite stunning really sifting through your posts.

[jerryskids 6,829]

So we've established that pharma companies are motivated by profit? Since that was my point, I guess I'll agree.

[Frank M 181]

I'll take that to mean you will continue to compromise your ethics for a paycheck.

 

We don't care how long you have done this in the past, but don't try to fool us in the future with this tripe.

 

 

 

 

I wouldn't expect a right wing Tea Party dooshbag conservatard to understand what the rest of the normal world does, that the world is not black and white, but gray, or that it might be possible to actually find fulfillment and enjoyment in your job without personally caring for the way the company is run, or that it might even be possible to work to change the way things are done from within.

 

I understand that introspection is difficult for you, as is looking at both sides of a situation, but you might find that you learn something if you try.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Enjoy would be a stretch but, it was an interesting read. I'm not here to try to convince you that our system doesn't have issues, as a Dr. you know first hand that it does. I only contend that I am not willing to trade ours for any other, furthermore I don't think the ACA will alleviate the actual problems of our system.

 

As for my job, I signed a very specific privacy policy to not discuss anything job related publicly. I am in IT management, reluctantly, considering I am much more of a technical person who enjoyed hands on work but, accepted a supervisory roll I couldn't pass up. My department keeps an eye on about 150 hospitals. I deal with doctors on a daily basis. I must say, most I hear from don't share your passion for a single payer/Gov't run system. Quite stunning really sifting through your posts.

Well our system costs far more (as a % of GDP) than any comparable ones, including all those mentioned in my link. It is financially unsustainable. What makes you so convinced our system is better than others?

 

Admittedly, changing the system to mirror those utilized elsewhere will hurt my salary. And funding universal healthcare is a nightmare. Perhaps those are a couple reasons other physicians don't want a change, but I can assure you I am not alone:

U.S. Physicians’ Views on Financing Options to Expand Health Insurance Coverage: A National Survey

By Danny McCormick, Steffie Woolhandler, Anjali Bose-Kolanu, Antonio Germann, David H. Bor and David U. Himmelstein

Journal of General Internal Medicine

April 2009

We asked respondents (physicians engaged in direct patient care) to choose the single option they preferred: 1) “The current health care system, in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance”; 2) “A universal insurance program in which everybody is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by government and financed by taxpayers”; or 3) “The current health care system, with the addition of new tax credits for buying, or tax penalties for failing to buy, health insurance”.

9% – The Current Health Care System

42% – Single-Payer National Health Insurance Program

49% – The Current System With Addition of Tax Credits or Penalties

Conclusions: The vast majority of physicians surveyed supported a change in the health care financing system. While a plurality support the use of financial incentives, a substantial proportion support single payer national health insurance. These findings challenge the perception that fundamental restructuring of the U.S. health care financing system receives little acceptance by physicians.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/g6m4153528pq2712/fulltext.html

[Frank M 181]

Well our system costs far more (as a % of GDP) than any comparable ones, including all those mentioned in my link. It is financially unsustainable. What makes you so convinced our system is better than others?

 

Admittedly, changing the system to mirror those utilized elsewhere will hurt my salary. And funding universal healthcare is a nightmare. Perhaps those are a couple reasons other physicians don't want a change, but I can assure you I am not alone:

 

I can tell you exactly why guys like Reality/RP et al think our health care system is better than others without actually taking the time to learn about it: this is America, therefore it is the best.

 

Unfortunately, it is the prevailing sentiment in many corners, and it is a significant stumbling block when it comes to change.

[penultimatestraw 473]

So we've established that pharma companies are motivated by profit? Since that was my point, I guess I'll agree.

Being motivated by profit is often OK, but can have bad consequences as well. You seem convinced the good (innovation, ?working harder) outweighs the bad (greed, placing profit above optimizing health). I differ in my opinion, and have presented data that suggest major pharm companies have a financial cushion which could allow them to set their moral compass straight while still earning a living.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

I can tell you exactly why guys like Reality/RP et al think our health care system is better than others without actually taking the time to learn about it: this is America, therefore it is the best.

 

Unfortunately, it is the prevailing sentiment in many corners, and it is a significant stumbling block when it comes to change.

I think you're partially correct. Plus people are scared of change.

 

A bigger part of it may be they both can afford good healthcare, and aren't too concerned with other people's problems.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

 

I can tell you exactly why guys like Reality/RP et al think our health care system is better than others without actually taking the time to learn about it: this is America, therefore it is the best.

 

Unfortunately, it is the prevailing sentiment in many corners, and it is a significant stumbling block when it comes to change.

The funny thing is, they really hate America at the same time. Nearly everything they post about the country is negative. Most Americans are free-loading amoral focktards in their mind. The president is a traitor and the country's going to hell in a hand basket. But when it comes to changing things, oh no, we like it just the way it was because this is America g0ddammit

[IGotWorms 4,058]

I think you're partially correct. Plus people are scared of change.

 

A bigger part of it may be they both can afford good healthcare, and aren't too concerned with other people's problems.

And our current system of employer-provided healthcare obscures the true cost of the system. People know that premiums keep rising at astronomical rates but they only pay a part of that--most of it is born by the employer. Of course employers could pay more in actual salary if they didn't have to throw so much money at health insurance, but folks like Reality Pilot are far too short-sighted to grasp that.

[Bert 1,128]

The costa are what is killing our health care system. I believe the quality of our system is better overall. My god in Canada if you screw up an ankle the doctor makes the best guess about what is wrong and treats it because the waiting list for an MRI for a non-critical problem is 9 months.

 

 

The biggest problem with Obamacare other than the tremendously expensive and massive government bureaucracy it created is that it does nothing to control costs.

[NewbieJr 541]

Your wife doesn't have to advertise. She has other methods for pushing her drugs on doctors

gulp gulp gulp gulp

 

The docs call her The Swallow

[IGotWorms 4,058]

The costa are what is killing our health care system. I believe the quality of our system is better overall. My god in Canada if you screw up an ankle the doctor makes the best guess about what is wrong and treats it because the waiting list for an MRI for a non-critical problem is 9 months.

 

 

The biggest problem with Obamacare other than the tremendously expensive and massive government bureaucracy it created is that it does nothing to control costs.

That's not really true. Obamacare does contain a variety of measures aimed at controlling costs: http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2011/rwjf71451

 

The measures are piecemeal though, whereas I would've preferred a broader approach such as a switch to universal single-payer coverage. But that was never going to happen, maybe in a couple of decades it will be a possibility but we're seeing how much opposition there is to even a conservative, market-friendly approach to healthcare overhaul right now.

[Reality 3,121]

I think you're partially correct. Plus people are scared of change.

 

A bigger part of it may be they both can afford good healthcare, and aren't too concerned with other people's problems.

By the time the true cost of the ACA comes to fruition I believe that we could have outright paid for the uninsured 15% and saved money. I'm not naive enough to think that would be sustainable either but, I do believe putting our heads together we could have come up with something better.

[Reality 3,121]

The funny thing is, they really hate America at the same time. Nearly everything they post about the country is negative. Most Americans are free-loading amoral focktards in their mind. The president is a traitor and the country's going to hell in a hand basket. But when it comes to changing things, oh no, we like it just the way it was because this is America g0ddammit

Once again your posts are so absurd it's laughable. This garbage simply doesn't apply to me.

[Bert 1,128]

That's not really true. Obamacare does contain a variety of measures aimed at controlling costs: http://www.rwjf.org/content/dam/farm/reports/issue_briefs/2011/rwjf71451

 

The measures are piecemeal though, whereas I would've preferred a broader approach such as a switch to universal single-payer coverage. But that was never going to happen, maybe in a couple of decades it will be a possibility but we're seeing how much opposition there is to even a conservative, market-friendly approach to healthcare overhaul right now.

Token is the proper word for the cost control measures in ACA. The cost of the bureaucracy far out ways these tiny costs control measures.

 

ETA: Taxing people with good insurance isn't cost control.

[Reality 3,121]

Well our system costs far more (as a % of GDP) than any comparable ones, including all those mentioned in my link. It is financially unsustainable. What makes you so convinced our system is better than others?

 

Admittedly, changing the system to mirror those utilized elsewhere will hurt my salary. And funding universal healthcare is a nightmare. Perhaps those are a couple reasons other physicians don't want a change, but I can assure you I am not alone:

I do wonder if those physicians would answer those survey questions as similarly today as they did in 2009.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Token is the proper word for the cost control measures in ACA. The cost of the bureaucracy far out ways these tiny costs control measures.

 

ETA: Taxing people with good insurance isn't cost control.

Taxing people with "Cadillac plans" is a cost control measure on the Affordable Care Act itself. The idea is the Act controls costs through the insurance exchange and then the various revenue provisions pay for the Act, e.g. the subsidies available to many people who purchase insurance through the exchange.

 

Again, it's not perfect but that's the market-driven solution you get. I know there's no way in hell you would support a single payer plan so I don't really understand what your complaint is here.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

I do wonder if those physicians would answer those survey questions as similarly today as they did in 2009.

Why? Most physicians are smart enough to see how things play out rather than engaging in premature knee-jerk assessments like, well, you.

[Reality 3,121]

Why? Most physicians are smart enough to see how things play out rather than engaging in premature knee-jerk assessments like, well, you.

One again your responses are moronic and ignorant but, I'll answer anyway. Physicians adjusting to the new lower Medicare and Medicaid payouts, treating patients has now more than ever turned into a numbers game where quantity is more important than quality when it comes to a physicians bottom line.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

One again your responses are moronic and ignorant but, I'll answer anyway. Physicians adjusting to the new lower Medicare and Medicaid payouts, treating patients has now more than ever turned into a numbers game where quantity is more important than quality when it comes to a physicians bottom line.

As I said earlier, a lot of Drs are not seeing any Medicare patients because of the lower payouts.

 

These basic market forces are beyond Worms' cognitive abilities. He has no idea people actually react to things in the marketplace.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

One again your responses are moronic and ignorant but, I'll answer anyway. Physicians adjusting to the new lower Medicare and Medicaid payouts, treating patients has now more than ever turned into a numbers game where quantity is more important than quality when it comes to a physicians bottom line.

Well yes quantity has gained in importance. The entire goal is to get 50 million additional people insured

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Well yes quantity has gained in importance. The entire goal is to get 50 million additional people insured

And yet millions have been added to the uninsured pool.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

And yet millions have been added to the uninsured pool.

It'll take some time for the whole thing to take effect and enact a substantial difference. People like you and Reality Pilot want to judge the results yesterday but fact is you can't intelligently judge the results for years.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

It'll take some time for the whole thing to take effect and enact a substantial difference. People like you and Reality Pilot want to judge the results yesterday but fact is you can't intelligently judge the results for years.

I judge the results we have. So far, it's a clusterfukk of epic proportions.

 

I wll let you believe somehow years from now this will be the first such gubmint program that isn't a bloated disaster.

[jerryskids 6,829]

Being motivated by profit is often OK, but can have bad consequences as well. You seem convinced the good (innovation, ?working harder) outweighs the bad (greed, placing profit above optimizing health). I differ in my opinion, and have presented data that suggest major pharm companies have a financial cushion which could allow them to set their moral compass straight while still earning a living.

I'm not necessarily convinced one is better than the other. My point is that, like all things gov, there are unintended consequences. Liberal policies rarely consider them, believing we can have our cake and eat it too.

[DankNuggs 305]

Why? Most physicians are smart enough to see how things play out rather than engaging in premature knee-jerk assessments like, well, you.

Real doctors don't like it. They get paid less for the beggars, and they know their compensation is next on the chopping block as the insurance companies aren't taking a haircut...

 

Why do you think consierge service is the new thing for every doctor in decent demand? They control patient load and compensation, and they control quality of care and access...

[DankNuggs 305]

.gov railed against banks forcing deceptive mortgages with hidden cost onto people(who had the freedom of choice whether to sign or not)... Yet here they are forcing by law deceptive cost HC plans onto people...

 

Its really insane when you look at the principle of it...

[NewbieJr 541]

I judge the results we have. So far, it's a clusterfukk of epic proportions.

 

I wll let you believe somehow years from now this will be the first such gubmint program that isn't a bloated disaster.

Ain't nobody claiming "mission accomplished" on this thing, Hare Lip

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Real doctors don't like it. They get paid less for the beggars, and they know their compensation is next on the chopping block as the insurance companies aren't taking a haircut...

 

Why do you think consierge service is the new thing for every doctor in decent demand? They control patient load and compensation, and they control quality of care and access...

Just because you read a few articles on a practice ("concierge services") doesn't mean it's the new thing that's going to totally supplant things as we know them. I, for one, have not heard a damn thing about a person using or offering concierge services from anyone I know.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Just because you read a few articles on a practice ("concierge services") doesn't mean it's the new thing that's going to totally supplant things as we know them. I, for one, have not heard a damn thing about a person using or offering concierge services from anyone I know.

You should step out of the outhouse more often.

[Bert 1,128]

Taxing people with "Cadillac plans" is a cost control measure on the Affordable Care Act itself. The idea is the Act controls costs through the insurance exchange and then the various revenue provisions pay for the Act, e.g. the subsidies available to many people who purchase insurance through the exchange.

 

Again, it's not perfect but that's the market-driven solution you get. I know there's no way in hell you would support a single payer plan so I don't really understand what your complaint is here.

The exchanges will not control the costs of health care. How is taxing people with good insurance controlling health care costs?

[IGotWorms 4,058]

The exchanges will not control the costs of health care. How is taxing people with good insurance controlling health care costs?

Yes, the exchanges will, by aggregating the buying power. Or at least that's the theory. It's a pretty simple one, really.

 

Taxing people with Cadillac plans will help pay for the subsidies given on the exchanges. It will not itself reduce the cost of healthcare, but it's part of what makes the exchanges and subsidies possible.

 

It's really startling how little most people know about this law. Everybody's got an opinion but 90% of them seem to be uninformed.

[Bert 1,128]

Yes, the exchanges will, by aggregating the buying power. Or at least that's the theory. It's a pretty simple one, really.

 

Taxing people with Cadillac plans will help pay for the subsidies given on the exchanges. It will not itself reduce the cost of healthcare, but it's part of what makes the exchanges and subsidies possible.

 

It's really startling how little most people know about this law. Everybody's got an opinion but 90% of them seem to be uninformed.

Condensed much?

 

 

Reading tax legislation to determine the impact on my company is what I do for a living, what do you do again?

 

 

You and RP really are opposite sides of the same coin. Completely incapable of having a reasonable conversion with someone you disagree with.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Condensed much?

 

 

Reading tax legislation to determine the impact on my company is what I do for a living, what do you do again?

 

 

You and RP really are opposite sides of the same coin. Completely incapable of having a reasonable conversion with someone you disagree with.

I don't see any substantive response there. You read tax legislation for a living? Great, good for you. Either Obamacare doesn't qualify as "tax legislation" in that regard or you aren't looking at the bigger picture.

 

I mean, how can you ask me how aggregate buying controls costs and then get mad when I don't take your viewpoint seriously?

 

And I've had plenty of reasonable conversations with people on the other side. In this very thread, for example, I agreed that Jerry's concerns re: R&D of new drugs is a legitimate concern when profits are (hopefully) slashed. Because that was a good point jerry actually had, not just a complete misunderstanding of the law's underpinnings.

[DankNuggs 305]

Yes, the exchanges will, by aggregating the buying power. Or at least that's the theory. It's a pretty simple one, really.

 

Taxing people with Cadillac plans will help pay for the subsidies given on the exchanges. It will not itself reduce the cost of healthcare, but it's part of what makes the exchanges and subsidies possible.

 

It's really startling how little most people know about this law. Everybody's got an opinion but 90% of them seem to be uninformed.

Aggregating buying power = limiting competition = less efficiency = inflated costs.

 

If single buyers and single producers were the most efficient market mechanism, it would mean communism is the idea formation of society.... History has proven that flagrantly wrong.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

Aggregating buying power = limiting competition = less efficiency = inflated costs.

 

If single buyers and single producers were the most efficient market mechanism, it would mean communism is the idea formation of society.... History has proven that flagrantly wrong.

The exchanges increase competition: http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/0530/Obamacare-starts-soon-Choices-will-increase-but-will-premiums