Mr. T Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department. Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. There are 5 versions of Bill Number H.R.1 for the 111th Congress link: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.+1: This whole Spending Porkulus Bill reminds me of the let them eat cake quote supposedly said by Marie Antoinette But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446). These provisions in the stimulus bill are virtually identical to what Daschle prescribed in his 2008 book, link: http://www.amazon.com/Critical-What-About-...8804&sr=8-1 ” According to Daschle, doctors have to give up autonomy and “learn to operate less like solo practitioners.” Elderly Hardest Hit Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt. Sorry Grandma & Grandpa! http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aLzfDxfbwhzs Is this the beginning of socialized healthcare? or is this just sticking it to those who allready rely on federal assistance to live? the author notes: The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted February 11, 2009 Report Share Posted February 11, 2009 Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt. Sorry Grandma & Grandpa! first time i heard this, i about lost it. but, its better than our current healthcare, right? i mean, it is the gov't....a well oiled machine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted February 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 first time i heard this, i about lost it. but, its better than our current healthcare, right? i mean, it is the gov't....a well oiled machine. They pulled that from the Mighty Daschle's book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 but, its better than our current healthcare, right? i mean, it is the gov't....a well oiled machine. The HMOs have done a real bang-up job destroying healthcare. Ask any doctor. As little faith I have in the gov't, it is more trustworthy and well-oiled than those complete scumbags currently providing healthcare. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 They pulled that from the Mighty Daschle's book. One of Obammy's many crooked picks that didn't survive scrutiny. The bark is indeed falling off the Obumbla tree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 The HMOs have done a real bang-up job destroying healthcare. Ask any doctor. As little faith I have in the gov't, it is more trustworthy and well-oiled than those complete scumbags currently providing healthcare. you think letting the elderly die is better than what we have? really? whats your folks think about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted February 12, 2009 Report Share Posted February 12, 2009 you think letting the elderly die is better than what we have? really? whats your folks think about it? Those HMOs really care about people, man. How is gov't-run healthcare "letting the elderly die?" That's an unbelivably outlandish statement. If anything, whenever cost/profit is involved in healthcare decisions, the results will be unsatisfactory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicopee John Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 The HMOs have done a real bang-up job destroying healthcare. Ask any doctor. As little faith I have in the gov't, it is more trustworthy and well-oiled than those complete scumbags currently providing healthcare. Reminds me of a conversation I had with my PHP a few years ago. I mentioned to him that I liked HMOs from the standpoint that they provided a check and balance against the AMA and that, otherwise, physicians would continue to prescribe medications based on Sales Rep relationship (golf) even though a suitable generic drug was available. As you might expect, he disagreed and claimed that he wouldn't let one 18-hole round of golf compromise his art and science. I said that I appreciated the checks and balances among HMOs and Physicians/AMA. Not a bad solution, however. One thing I believe HMOs are guilty of, though, is making people feel that every ailment, every trip to the doctor, every medication should be covered by insurance. Insurance is protection against catastrophic loss, not a transaction-based means toward managed health care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Reminds me of a conversation I had with my PHP a few years ago. I mentioned to him that I liked HMOs from the standpoint that they provided a check and balance against the AMA and that, otherwise, physicians would continue to prescribe medications based on Sales Rep relationship (golf) even though a suitable generic drug was available. As you might expect, he disagreed and claimed that he wouldn't let one 18-hole round of golf compromise his art and science. I said that I appreciated the checks and balances among HMOs and Physicians/AMA. Not a bad solution, however. One thing I believe HMOs are guilty of, though, is making people feel that every ailment, every trip to the doctor, every medication should be covered by insurance. Insurance is protection against catastrophic loss, not a transaction-based means toward managed health care. Great post John. Particularly what I italicized. I've also got to agree with your physician. How do you not have enough of a relationship with your physician where he isn't providing you with all of the info (name-brand vs. generics)? I hope to continue the tradition, but before my father writes a script, he checks with the girl who handles all insurance matters in the office to see what the best financial option for each patient is. If it works out that the patient (or their insurance) can financially handle name-brand medications, then bam, the lunch with the pharm-rep(or round of golf) is justified. If not, generics - and he makes sure to tell the patients this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 Those HMOs really care about people, man. How is gov't-run healthcare "letting the elderly die?" That's an unbelivably outlandish statement. If anything, whenever cost/profit is involved in healthcare decisions, the results will be unsatisfactory. well, 'letting the elderly die' was simply a easy way of stating the quote in RED if you had read what Daschle said, you may have been able to infer what i meant. this comes in the form of denying prescriptions, denying surgery, decreased services in retirement homes (if they even continue to exist).... you WILL be denied coverage...the same way the evil HMO's do....if the treatment is too much, too bad. so hows this any different? i dont think youre a crazy lib, mz the pussy.....but you really need to think about this. they're telling you that your parents will have to accept decreased care, and youre simply pluggin your ears and humming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mz. Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 youre simply pluggin your ears and humming. Thank you for telling me what I'm doing. To me, it's all about the profit here, and just because we don't agree doesn't mean I'm blind to the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 you think letting the elderly die is better than what we have? really? whats your folks think about it? By all means. Keep every human alive, or at least showing brain wave activity for as long as possible regardlerss of outcome or cost. Doesn't that contradict what most of us say about living in a vegetative state? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choco Posted February 13, 2009 Report Share Posted February 13, 2009 good job steve. equating the elderly to a vegetable. you must be proud. discussion here is pointless, because it seems the only thing you all can do is site an extreme case and think that proves a counterpoint. sure steve....i guess its OK to deny one arthritis medication on the ground that its "keeping every human alive".....but a poor baby gets killed and you all freak out like its a xxxxing tragedy. guess we'll just wait and see.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.