Another Place to go (4.00 / 1)

Great post. So many helpful links.

Another place to go is to Your Congress Your Health which asks congress to fill out a full questionnaire regarding their views on health. Now, more than ever, we deserve to know what our congressional leaders think about health. Go to the website here

http://www.yourcongressyourhea...

And e-mail congress today.

---

by: takaoada5 @ Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 19:11:17 PM UTC

Great link! (0.00 / 0)

Thanks for adding it.

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

---

by: mataliandy @ Wed Jul 22, 2009 at 19:30:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

reform (4.00 / 1)

These are all great links.  They will all help.  Let's get on the phones and e-mails.  There is also an editorial in free press today seeking thoughts from Vermonters on what their ideas on health care reform are for local health care reform.  That's an open invitation to jump all over the health care spreadsheet people.  

When you wake up each morning look around you.  It might be the last time you get to do it.  

---

by: Watercloset @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 05:23:37 AM UTC

Bad night and a bad plan (1.50 / 2)

This plan is dead.  Our president had difficulty trying to explain an unworkable solution to a receptive audience last night and the American public is catching on.  His rush will be the undoing of his attempt at health reform.  He and the citizens of this country would do well to step back, take a breath, identify the real problem, and create a solution to address that specific problem.

Here is my solution to the real problem... "unchecked cost increases as a result of no cost accountability to the user of the service"

Step one.  The state of Vermont creates and mandates a catastrophic insurance plan that covers all Vermonters and is paid for by ALL Vermonters.  That's right, the first dollar of everyones income is taxed at "x"% and that money goes to cover major medical for everyone in the state, no exceptions.

Step two.  Private insurance plans are encouraged to offer bridge insurance to individuals or groups to cover any pharmacy expense or boutique service up to the state plan.

Step three. Consumers of health care pay for normal health services out of their own pocket with cash, a check, or a payment plan from their doctor.

Will there be a few people who have trouble under this or any system, yes.  That is why we have charity.  However, direct accountability for the actual cost of the service is the only way to ever cut the cost of that product.

Jim

---

by: truth @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 15:32:34 PM UTC

what a crock (4.00 / 2)

you have not addressed administrative costs or insurance & drug company BS and profits

you think "a few people" may have trouble?!
you need a reality check

but wait, "charity" will take care of the problem
give me a break

private insurance is part of the problem and cannot be part of a meaningful long-term solution

---

by: Doug Hoffer @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 16:10:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

where's your solution ? (0.00 / 0)

Doug,

I don't believe anything can run without administration costs and I know private enterprise can't keep it's doors open without profit.  

It is a FACT that without private enterprise profit, we can't afford to run our government.  Profit is not evil.  Not in the insurance market, not in the housing market, not in the renewable energy market, and not in the food market.

My plan addresses the influence of private insurance by limiting it to a bridge policy between zero and $25,000 (? pick a number TBD) before the State managed catastrophic policy would kick in.

My plan addresses the influence of drug companies by forcing the user of insurance to make a choice where they spend their money. The choice to spend their money on the most cost effective drug on the market or the new brand name is to be born by the patient.

My plan addresses availability.  Everyone pays in and everyone is covered for a catastrophic health event.  Those that choose to seek the bridge insurance may reduce their out of pocket risk.  Those who are young, or healthy could choose to accept a higher level of risk.  If anyone is faced with a larger than normal expense, they can pay it off over time like they do with a car on a payment plan through their hospital.

My plan addresses the truly indigent through charity, which is happening today, everywhere in the country.  If you demonstrate you have no resources or assets, you don't pay.  If you have a fixed asset, you can borrow against it for care today and leave a little less for your heirs.

Again, direct accountability for the actual cost of the service is the only way to ever cut the cost of that product.

It's time to grow up and realize that you will have to be responsible for yourself.  You can't whine and demand that someone else who works harder or smarter than you pays for your necessities while you watch your cable TV and talk/text/twitter your day away.

Jim

---

by: truth @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 17:26:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

nice dodge (4.00 / 3)

it isn't a question of whether there are admin. costs or not, only what % of the total spent is wasted on needless activity; ask any doctor how much staff time is spent navigating the private ins. world; your plan does not address that and will perpetuate the waste

I love this: "It is a FACT that without private enterprise profit, we can't afford to run our government.  Profit is not evil."

I didn't say we should eliminate private enterprise; only that the private health ins. system does not serve the interests of the people; we used to have private roads - gone; private water systems - gone; the appropriate line between public & private activity has moved many times over the decades; if, as a society, we choose to say that henceforth service X is best provided by a public entity then we have every right to do that (as have most modern democracies); in my view, we're way past that point in health care; having said that, there's still room for private activity within the system - just not insurance companies

your rap on curbing the power of drug companies is equally specious; you assume (foolishly) that consumers have perfect information and/or that doctors will always tell us what's best; get real (or as you said, grow up)

this is good too: "My plan addresses the truly indigent through charity, which is happening today, everywhere in the country.  If you demonstrate you have no resources or assets, you don't pay.  If you have a fixed asset, you can borrow against it for care today and leave a little less for your heirs."

what you have ignored is that the poor go to emergency rooms for - yes, emergencies, when preventive care will - yes, prevent many such problems; so the charity you applaud is actually a huge waste of money and an ass backwards way to run a health care system (if your goal is better health)

BTW - I like the part about leaving a little less for your heirs. Low-income people don't worry too much about their "heirs" since they're struggling to eat and pay the rent. What an elitist attitude.

speaking of which, your finale was spectacular: "It's time to grow up and realize that you will have to be responsible for yourself.  You can't whine and demand that someone else who works harder or smarter than you pays for your necessities while you watch your cable TV and talk/text/twitter your day away."

First, how arrogant and rude. You think all poor people are lazy & stupid? Screw you.

As for paying for necessities, we already share the cost of infrastructure and core services. Where have you been? If health care is a necessity (duh), why shouldn't it be provided for all and funded through taxes, just like roads and public safety?

your plan will not solve the problem, but it certainly reflects your jaded worldview

---

by: Doug Hoffer @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 20:26:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Splinter Cat ! (4.00 / 3)

That reply needs a Splinter Cat rating .Splinter Cat It flies through the air with terrific speed and when it hits a large tree, it knocks the branches off, withers the trunk and leaves it standing like a silvery ghost.
Felynx arbordiffisus

---

by: BP @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 21:42:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not a dodge (0.00 / 0)

Easy to throw stones.  

But in response to your comments...

You will never have a system that eliminates paperwork and endless recording/justification for actions.  You may try to hold Medicare up as an example, but I'll counter with the IRS, DMV, HHS, etc...  

Your arguement that private enterprise doesn't serve the interest of the common good in health care can just as easily be applied to food, housing, energy, personal transportation... all are ever increasingly expensive essentials for human life.  

I'm sorry you think that people are too ignorant and doctors are too deceptive to make honest, intelligent decisions regarding prescription drugs.  I'd love to hear how a government plan would change this perception of yours?

Great logic of yours.  Screw everyone with insurance so those that abuse the emergency room or choose not to purchase insurance are taken care of.  

Keep your eye on the ball here.  The goal is to reduce the cost of providing quality health care.  Payment out of pocket for regular doctor visits and payment over time if needed is the only way to connect cost with service provided  The working poor can afford to pay for their regular health care if it can be made a household budget item.  Charity must be for the indigent only, not the working poor.

I never said poor people were lazy or stupid.  I said that the producers of the world work harder and smarter than the non-producers.  Find someone you know who is successful and watch how hard they work.  Then do the same for for the average joe.  I think you will be able to predict the result.

Lastly, necessities.  If food, water, power, personal transportation, housing,... they are all a greater necessity than health care.  Why not start there with your plans?

Again, where is your solution?

Jim

 

---

by: truth @ Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 22:02:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

you just keep digging holes (4.00 / 2)

1.  never said we could eliminate admin. costs (check your reading comprehension)
2.  re. private enterprise: nice try; references to other screwed up essential goods & services may divert attention from the issue at hand but don't address the problem at hand (we see this "debate" tactic all the time from folks like you)
3.  didn't say people are ignorant; only challenged your naive assumption that consumers have perfect information (a common fallacy among Libertarians & Right Wingers who tend to think all economic theory actually represents the real world; can you say billions spent on BS advertising & (some) doctors who make choices based on relationships with drug companies?
4.  so now you say that the charity cases "abuse" the emergency room; gosh, such a different attitude from your original post; I thought it was salvation for the poor (your new age tenderness no doubt); sadly, your true colors shine through
5.  as for "Screw[ing] everyone with insurance", this is just another version of your offensive view of all low-income / poor Americans as parasites; try this (if you're old enough to remember), speaking of Barry Goldwater we used to say that hey, not everyone is lucky enough to inherit a chain of hardware stores (kind of like John McCain's wife and the Budweiser franchise)
6.  and yet another statement illustrating how you are  completely out of touch with reality: "The working poor can afford to pay for their regular health care if it can be made a household budget item"

sure, no problem; just fit it into your budget; clearly, you know absolutely nothing about the working poor

7.  and this is precious: "I never said poor people were lazy or stupid.  I said that the producers of the world work harder and smarter than the non-producers.  Find someone you know who is successful and watch how hard they work.  Then do the same for for the average joe.  I think you will be able to predict the result."

What exactly are "producers" and "non-producers"? What is "successful"?
People who work hard every day but don't make a bundle are non-producers"? And people who have money are necessarily producers? You don't have a clue. Was the retiring CEO of VT BCBS who got a multi-million dollar golden parachute more of a "producer" than the woman who cleaned up after his mother in the nursing home? How about the nice arugala you had in your dinner salad? Are the farmworkers who picked it non-producers?

Your "values" are what is wrong with this country.
This is tiresome.  

---

by: Doug Hoffer @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 01:58:35 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Socialism (4.00 / 1)

Your arguement that private enterprise doesn't serve the interest of the common good in health care can just as easily be applied to food, housing, energy, personal transportation... all are ever increasingly expensive essentials for human life.

Good call- so instead of a society based on competition (capitalism) maybe we should consider a society based on cooperation, to do away with the very (superfluous and unnecessary) problems that you've pointed out.

"GMD's once proud libertarian-socialist"

---

by: wdh3 @ Sun Jul 26, 2009 at 06:22:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not even close to realistic (4.00 / 1)

It is a FACT that without private enterprise profit, we can't afford to run our government.  Profit is not evil.  Not in the insurance market, not in the housing market, not in the renewable energy market, and not in the food market.

It is a FACT the housing and energy sectors offer a tangible benefit through a tangibly beneficial business model, at least in theory and often in practice too.  We receive public goods and their business models are generally consistent with sound public policy.

The business model of private insurance - a gatekeeper of a public good -- is as follows.  
1. Take health care dollars.  
2. Deny access to health care through any means possible and use health care dollars to devise and maintain system of preventing access to health care.
3. Make a profit.  
Every incentive in the private insurance business model is based on denying access to health care, denying coverage to people who need health care and rationing health care to the maximum extent possible if there is no viable/legal ability avoid allowing access to health care.

The rationing incentive does not exist with a public option.  Both plans have a finite amount of resources.

Public/single payer -- We all pay into the system.  The extent to which health care $$s are unavailable reflects the extent to which there are no resources to pay for it, i.e., the money has been spent on health care pursuant to the choices of the people covered with minimal administrative costs;

Private insurance -- Health care $$s and other resources, which we pay to private insurers, are immediately rationed away from us and away from health care. Only partial amount of those dollars go to health care pursuant to the choices & decisions of the people who purchased a policy. A substantial proportion - the maximum the company can squeeze from the health care $$s - goes to elaborate administrative costs or the dollars are withheld from policy holders or $$s are spread among highly paid executives or awarded to shareholders.

Private insurance is the biggest health care rationing scheme this country has.

My plan addresses the influence of drug companies by forcing the user of insurance to make a choice where they spend their money. The choice to spend their money on the most cost effective drug on the market or the new brand name is to be born by the patient.

Cost effective vs. brand name is not always mutually inclusive.  Sometimes they are functionally equivalent, sometimes they are apples and oranges or apples and poison apples. The other stuff about people becoming scientists as the mix and match regulated substances is poor fantasy. Consumers have no "influence" with drug companies.

It's time to grow up and realize that you will have to be responsible for yourself.  You can't whine and demand that someone else who works harder or smarter than you pays for your necessities while you watch your cable TV and talk/text/twitter your day away.

You've obviously well acquainted yourself with the economics of 30 years of regressive taxation and conservative policies of wealth redistribution from the highly taxed working class to minimally taxed uber-wealthy receiver class.  

The "lazy couch sitter" is a right wing canard. The use of resources on the less fortunate (for example the people who now have drug resistant TB seen coughing in public places thanks to 30 years of conservative health care rationing) reflects de minimus economic impact. There is a good argument to be made that investing assistance programs does far more good for the economy and our local small businesses than the bailouts to the wealthiest companies.  

The real drag on our economy is the massive amount of resources from the working class that our national government has been taking to subsidize an extravagant military budget, banking bailouts and inflated health insurance swindling.

The expense to society and to the economy comes from too little public investment in health care, not too much.  

sláinte,
cl

-- Religion is like sodomy: both can be harmless when practiced between consenting adults but neither should be imposed upon children.

---

by: Caoimhin Laochdha @ Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 15:30:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

do your homework (0.00 / 0)

Jim, I dont often rate posts as low as this, but your comments earned it. You have obviously not given this issue much thought or researched the various aspects that are involved.

This is not even a conservative position you have taken, it is simply an ignorant one. Your comments make Congress look wise in comparison.

---

by: greenvtster @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 14:12:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

doa (0.00 / 0)

Sadly, Obama's health plan is dead.  It never got off the ground. The congress was too deeply embedded with the insurance companies to do otherwise.  They do not want change.  

When you wake up each morning look around you.  It might be the last time you get to do it.  

---

by: Watercloset @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 06:13:51 AM UTC

If you keep repeating it... (0.00 / 0)

it still wont be true, WC.

HC is not dead just because the most widereaching legislation in half a cnetury didnt get fast-tracked.

It's under some challenges for sure, but far from dead.

---

by: greenvtster @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 14:15:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

State legislators signed on the public option (0.00 / 0)

Here is a link to the list of VT legislators who have signed on to the Progressive States Network's letter of support for a public option:

http://progressivestates.org/s...

We're well-represented.

---

by: greenvtster @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 14:17:33 PM UTC

We have a good set of legislators up on the Hill (0.00 / 0)

That's why I think the organize for America tools are the most useful for Vermonters: use them, for example, to find people in Harry Reid's district to ask Reid to cancel the Senate's August recess unless a strong Public Option is in place.

Beware the Everyday Brutality of the Averted Gaze

---

by: mataliandy @ Fri Jul 24, 2009 at 18:49:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

long shot (4.00 / 1)

"Harry Reid's district to ask Reid to cancel the Senate's August recess unless a strong Public Option is in place."

Man, that's a long shot, but I like it:)  

When you wake up each morning look around you.  It might be the last time you get to do it.  

---

by: Watercloset @ Sat Jul 25, 2009 at 05:52:20 AM UTC

vacation (0.00 / 0)

Most Americans do not even get the luxury of a vacation never mind a month-long one, though in other developed countries this is what the typical vacation is.   But considering how many Americans are losing their health care every month, Reid and company should work through the entire month or until this bill is passed.  Fat chance, I know.  

When you wake up each morning look around you.  It might be the last time you get to do it.  

---

by: Watercloset @ Sun Jul 26, 2009 at 06:15:01 AM UTC

right (0.00 / 0)

Greenvster,I wish that I believed you, but unfortunately I see it otherwise, that a delay like this will kill it off.   I hope that you are right, but am expecting that I am.  

When you wake up each morning look around you.  It might be the last time you get to do it.  

---

by: Watercloset @ Mon Jul 27, 2009 at 01:44:21 AM UTC