What is a Liberal?

[FOTD]

This does not appear to be your writing, Conan.

Did you glean it from some Insurance Cartel member? Perhaps a right wing doctors chat line? Which greedy group did this originate? Do you have a problem with insurance companies being the death panel? Guess that beats the government doing it?

Looks like you have no problem with the current health care situation because you offer up few solutions to the worsening problem.

Coco, that interesting read....it's absurd in the big picture of dying!

[USRufnex]

[FOTD]

Last year the guy swam from Fisherman's Wharf to Alcatraz...Not bad for 95. They don't usually do open heart surgery on 95 year olds as a rule, since they don't expect them to survive the procedure. But Lalanne is in such good shape that he gets a chance.

Fitness Guru Has Open Heart Surgery
By Marc Davis

http://forums.musculardevelopment.com/showthread.php?t=76373

In his signature light-hearted style, 95-year-old fitness guru Jack LaLanne told his family "Dying would wreck my image," before he underwent heart valve surgery on December 8 at a Los Angeles hospital.

From his modest beginnings in 1936 when he opened his first health club, the diminutive, but buff, LaLanne eventually became a world-renowned figure in the health and fitness field. His television program, the Jack LaLanne show, ran a remarkable 34 years, from 1951 to 1985. During that period LaLanne hawked various health products including his celebrated Power Juicer.

Humorous, publicity-grabbing stunts characterize LaLanne's career over the years. He once swam across Long Beach Harbor towing boats while handcuffed. But he was always serious about keeping fit and avoiding the pitfalls of a sedentary lifestyle.

Throughout his 60s, 70s and 80s -- when most men his age were unabashed couch potatoes -- LaLanne made numerous public appearances, working out strenuously and parading his impressive muscular build and marathoner stamina.

LaLanne had been active right up to the time he underwent the recent operation. Last month he appeared on the Jay Leno Show working out with movie star Vince Vaughn and out-exercising the much younger actor.

But at 95 can LaLanne resume his previous level of vigorous activity after open-heart surgery?

"Mr. LaLanne's physical fitness is legendary and should help significantly with his post-operative recovery barring any unforseen medical setbacks," said Sandeep Nathan, M.D., assistant professor of medicine and Director of Interventional Cardiology Fellowship Program at University of Chicago Medical Center.

And on LaLanne's Web site, his motto looms large: "Long Live Living Long."



NOW. WHO PAID FOR THIS? WOULD IT BE CHEAPER TO PUT HIM ON A HEROIN DRIP? JACK, GRIM REAPER'S COMING. A FRIEND OF THE DEVIL TOLD ME SO.

WOULD YOU CONSIDER JACK A LIBERAL GUY?

[Conan71]

This does not appear to be your writing, Conan.

Did you glean it from some Insurance Cartel member? Perhaps a right wing doctors chat line? Which greedy group did this originate? Do you have a problem with insurance companies being the death panel? Guess that beats the government doing it?

Looks like you have no problem with the current health care situation because you offer up few solutions to the worsening problem.

Coco, that interesting read....it's absurd in the big picture of dying!

I'm a cynic and skeptic by nature, FOTD.  I generally try to take an objective look at things but I obviously take a more conservative approach to certain issues.

If single-payer is managed like Medicare, it can't possibly provide a more efficient payment method to healthcare providers (read back to ALL the paperwork required for reimbursement I mentioned) and more and more providers will be reluctant to opt into a system like that, in favor of catering to people who can afford to pay cash for their health care.  Insurance companies provide a maddening series of requirements to get paid too. That's what happens when you rely on someone else to assume the risk of paying for your healthcare instead of you just paying cash. 

If anyone can provide any evidence whatsoever that single-payer will be a far more efficient approach to a payment system both in funding it and the claims system, I will gladly listen.  So far, I've not read or heard a thing which suggests that it will be any different from Medicare and Medicaid.  Show me some anecdotal evidence from providers that shows they embrace this single-payer system and that they are happy with the present Medicare system. 

You are right I'm not offering an alternative at the moment.  I simply think it's time to slow down and truly examine what the alternatives are to the present system and evaluate them carefully instead of ram-rodding a plan through this year to fix a system which slightly more than 1/2 of America thinks is broken and apparently has been broken for many years.  I'm already skeptical enough of this as it is before they started shoveling billions more into this cost simply to help make this pallatable some balky Senators and Representatives.

When incredibly broad questions are asked in opinion polls like: "Does health care need to be reformed?" of course you are going to get a majority who will say yes.  Asked further what needs to be fixed, you start getting puzzled looks out of 75% of those who said it needs to be reformed, some sort of broad answer out of 1/2 the remaining ones and an educated and thoughtful reply out of the rest.

There's no use in BS'ing anyone.  I've got an ideal situation and I'm certainly a "have" when it comes to health care.  My company picks up the tab for all my health insurance, something they do for all employees who have been there over five years.  This is a small company, less than 12 employees.  They used to even pick up the tab for dependent care after that milestone of service.  I'm also capable of paying my co-pays and deductibles and those of my chidren who are on their mother's insurance plan. 

I know this up front that I am partially responsible for my medical costs and that I pay a percentage of every single test, procedure, hospitalization, and emergency room visit.  Unfortunately, even though I strive to do my best at preventative maintenance, I've got orthopedic issues and I've had a couple of ER visits within the last few years.  Those issues have followed me from one provider to another and have never been excluded as "pre-existing".  I'm thankful I've got the coverage I do and thankful I've got a few friends who can get me to the front of the line when services are needed.  It's hardly a Cadillac plan, it's a PPO with $20 doctor visits, a 20% deductible on the major stuff and a decent formulary for the few meds I need from time to time.  I'm not saying that to rub anyone's nose in it, I'm very appreciative of what I've got.  I also realize it's not that way for everyone, but a blind over-haul at the expense of millions of people who are in a similar situation seems very radical to me. 

I had to have two MRI's within the last couple of weeks, both of which wound up saving me (and my insurance provider) the expense of surgery.  I was able to get these rapidly and with little fuss thanks to the plan I have.  I seriously doubt I'd have these issues on the way to successful resolution right now if I were still waiting on approvals from some bureaucrat for justifiable testing.

In other words, the status quo is working for me, so I've definitely got a bias.

There are a lot of people who are capable of paying their share but who choose not to so they can spend their discretionary money elsewhere then they complain when they wind up being sued and their paycheck is garnished by those mean medical bill collectors and they become yet another poster child in the need for health care reform.  Oh the horror to have to sell that 30 ft. boat, BMW, or RV to pay for one's medical care!

One reason I can see for insurance premiums continuing to skyrocket (all while profit percentages are pretty flat for insurers) is a decrease in medicare benefit payments to providers.  Reductions which place an arbitrary value on procedures without really considering what the cost is to provide them.  In order for providers to stay afloat, they must turn a profit. In order to overcome a reduction in government-paid benefits, they must raise the cost to whomever does pick up the tab.  Simple economics.  It's actually a government squeeze which is raising the overall cost.  Look, your health insurance will be deducted as a direct payment to the insurer who covers you or as a tax to your government.  The government cannot arbitrarily drive costs down if it winds up bankrupting an entire healthcare provider system without taking into account the actual cost of providing services.  What then?  More bail-outs?  It's simply shifting cost-centers and control from corporations to the government.  Neither of which has truly altruistic motives when it comes to your life and healthcare other than you being there to vote in your national elections or your patronage as a customer.  The only person who is ultimately responsible for your health is you.  I'm sure not banking on anyone else caring as much as I do about it.

Here's a few solutions I could see which would help:

Pharmaceutical companies severely curtail their marketing budgets, so that primary care providers will learn to provide real health solutions instead of being pill-pushers.  We have a society which is far too dependent on their daily dose of meds, when a change in diet and lifestyle would be the most healthy solution.

Quit subsidizing healthcare costs in other countries by covering the majority of R&D and marketing budgets for equipment and med manufacturers through the costs for their products that we are charged here (that's one way the Euros supposedly pay less of their annual GDP in health care).

Bring in more initiatives and education for better and healthier lifestyles and reward holistic approaches to healthcare.  Tax the smile out of tobacco products and other unhealthy products.  Make the FDA clamp down on food additives.  It's an immutable truth that what you shovel down your cake hole has an affect on overall health with allergies, diabetes, heart disease, certain cancers, etc.  We demand a lot out of the healthcare system to counteract what we do to our bodies via poor nutrition and little fitness.  Taking personal responsibility for our health instead of waiting on the government to do it is ultimately the best solution.

Put up a stiff barrier between the FDA, big pharma, and equipment manufacturers and end the inscestuous relationship that favors certain companies at the expense of ignoring treatments which may be safer and offer greater efficacy.

There's a few ideas, I'd love to stay up and chat but some of us have to work tomorrow.