Obamacare
Quote: KeyserI love it! "Low information voters". That is a great way to describe many of the democrats.
It's a term coined by Rush. And I agree, it sums up Dems perfectly. ;)
Watch that youtube link that I posted it. It really says it all.
Quote: s2dbakerLike I said earlier, suffer. Our side won, your side lost. The adults are in charge now.
On Citizens United: "Suffer! Our side won, your side lost. The adults are in charge now!"
On gay marriage bans in 30+ states: "Suffer! Our side won, your side lost. The adults are in charge now!"
On the right to bear arms: "Suffer! Our side won, your side lost. The adults are in charge now!"
On drugs being illegal: "Suffer! Our side won, your side lost. The adults are in charge now!"
...but for some reason, I doubt s2dbaker will buy his own argument now. ;)
Quote: s2dbakerThen that really is too bad for you, isn't it? I got my better insurance at less expense. Thank You President Obama.
You've said that repeatedly but have not really answered the entire "less expensive" question with regards to deductibles, etc. I just changed my insurance within the options open to me as retired military and I made sure to compare all of those things before picking the best option.
Of course...people with canceled policies don't even have that option. They have just been told Obamacare is better; not only can they not sign up for it, they can't choose between their current policy and a new one because they are already out of a policy.
The President lied...yes, he won. Fair and square. He won and a lie was part of how he won. How proud you must be!!!
Quote: s2dbakerIf you don't like the law then go ahead and get rid of it. I suggest that you start with the next election. Liberals won and along with us, the rest of America wins. Like I said earlier, suffer. Our side won, your side lost. The adults are in charge now. If private health insurance companies are cancelling their policies and blaming Obamacare then go throw a tantrum about it. The rest of us will enjoy our less expensive and better health insurance and make certain that your side will never takes that away.
You aren't even listening to the words coming from your own side, let alone being open to what folks from the other side might say. People--the very people the President said he would help--are being thrown out of policies that worked for them. Those evil rich people? They'll still be able to afford whatever policy they want. If their costs go up, they'll cut loose the maid or something...but they will survive.
Your side isn't providing better health care at a better price for more people yet...but you keep on gloating like it is a done deal.
This is a no-win situation. The President is a proven liar. He would rather campaign than fix the problems with Obamacare. They had journalists in yesterday to help with the spin. Really? Why not have folks in to make it better?
In your world, it is still all George W. Bush's fault.
I'd blame Romney for Obamacare before George W. Bush. But it's really The Heritage Foundation's idea in the first place.Quote: RonCIn your world, it is still all George W. Bush's fault.
Quote: s2dbakerI'd blame Romney for Obamacare before George W. Bush.
How about just blaming Obamacare on....oh, heck, Obama?
Quote: s2dbakerBut it's really The Heritage Foundation's idea in the first place.
Wherever the idea came from, the only one responsible for it is the President and the folks who voted for it.
The fact that someone had an "idea" one day and then someone else totally screwed it up does not make the screw up belong to the person who had an "idea"...nice try, but I am almost sure all of us here are smart enough to realize how stupid that comment sounds.
Perhaps it was stupid of me to try to figure out what George W. Bush was all about. But in the end, we liberals won and America wins as well; whether you like lower cost health insurance or not.Quote: RonCHow about just blaming Obamacare on....oh, heck, Obama?
Wherever the idea came from, the only one responsible for it is the President and the folks who voted for it.
The fact that someone had an "idea" one day and then someone else totally screwed it up does not make the screw up belong to the person who had an "idea"...nice try, but I am almost sure all of us here are smart enough to realize how stupid that comment sounds.
Quote: s2dbakerPerhaps it was stupid of me to try to figure out what George W. Bush was all about. But in the end, we liberals won and America wins as well; whether you like lower cost health insurance or not.
Keep clinging to your "lower cost health insurance"...if you say it often enough, people might think it is true. So far, more people are seeing increases in health care costs than are seeing decreases.
Are you listening to your fellow Americans? Not many of them feel like they are "winning" right now...yet you keep saying America wins.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2013/11/21/russell-simmons-obamacare-saved-millions-already
You fit right in with this guy...
Quote: Beethoven9ths2dbaker used to have a great sense of humor, but he lost it at some point. These days, you can hear the anger & vitriol in his voice. Sad...because I liked the old s2dbaker so much better.
"But in the end, we liberals won and America wins as well; whether you like lower cost health insurance or not."
s2dbaker
He is pretty much down to one reply...
Quote: RonC"But in the end, we liberals won and America wins as well; whether you like lower cost health insurance or not."
s2dbaker
He is pretty much down to one reply...
No, he also calls me a low-information voter.
But to be fair, if you had to defend Obamacare how many replies would you have?
Quote: s2dbakerBut in the end, we liberals won and America wins as well; whether you like lower cost health insurance or not.
The point you are missing s2Baker, is Republicans (now) CARE about American's having affordable healthcare. They always have. They were hiding it until now.
Had you known how much they cared, you would have never been for Obamacare. Republicans were on the job, behind the scenes, (I guess). They were getting it done. (behind a curtain maybe).
Now that we see how much they care about the uninsured people, how could we have not known they believe in affordable healtchcare for Americans.
They were on the job (perhaps in an underground bunker with no communication) doing the job.
Quote: AZDuffman
But to be fair, if you had to defend Obamacare how many replies would you have?
lol, quote of the day! Indeed, your quiver would be
out of arrows at this point. All they can do now is
try and delay the inevitable complete collapse of
the monstrosity.
which you shall remain, forever.Quote: AZDuffmanNo, he also calls me a low-information voter.
Quote: rxwineThe point you are missing s2Baker, is Republicans (now) CARE about American's having affordable healthcare. They always have. They were hiding it until now.
Had you known how much they cared, you would have never been for Obamacare. Republicans were on the job, behind the scenes, (I guess). They were getting it done. (behind a curtain maybe).
Now that we see how much they care about the uninsured people, how could we have not known they believe in affordable healtchcare for Americans.
They were on the job (perhaps in an underground bunker with no communication) doing the job.
I don't mindlessly follow one party or the other...perhaps the Republicans weren't putting affordable healthcare at the right priority level, just as Democrats don't put some things at the right priority level. Damn...wait...they never really had a chance for any real input on the bill that passed, but we'll say bad things about them to distract from the totally screwed up bill that we passed in spite of their opposition.
Getting something done is not always better than getting nothing done...that is not saying we didn't need to do something about health care issues (tort reform, selling insurance across state lines, etc.)--we just didn't need to do THIS to it!!
You won't say it, but you want it to fail as much as anyone else because failure could actually lead to "success" (as Harry Reid said already) in the form of single-payer.
I hope we can stop that train...but if the no-information voters continue to think we can do everything for everybody by raising the taxes on the people who actually work for a living, we'll have a hard time stopping it.
And I bet you like that.
Quote: RonC
I hope we can stop that train...but if the no-information voters continue to think we can do everything for everybody by raising the taxes on the people who actually work for a living, we'll have a hard time stopping it.
And I bet you like that.
I see it more as "one god less" argument. An atheist sometimes resorts to finally stop arguing whether god is needed and simply says he believes in one god less than the other person.
I believe in small government. Just not as small as you do.
Quote: rxwineI believe in small government. Just not as small as you do.
Everyone, remember those liberal language games? Well, here we go again.
I can just as easily say that I believe in big government. Just not as big as they do.
Quote: Beethoven9thEveryone, remember those liberal language games? Well, here we go again.
I can just as easily say that I believe in big government. Just not as big as they do.
To some Libertarians and perhaps anarchists you may just be another big government person, just not as bad. I see no problem at all.
Quote: Beethoven9thYou missed my point. As usual.
Works for me.
We hear stories all of the time of deteriorating health coverage for those who are insured in employer covered hands, and the end result IS that costs are going up for everyone, leaving less money for the middle class. It deteriorates at the economy and gives everyone less money to spend. The market isn't working in the United States for health care. Something has to be done.
Countries with socialized medicine use various ways to charge its citizens for the costs and attempts to equalize the cost among citizens based on income and generally charge the richer more than the poor. It uses their size and scale to purchase goods and services for less, and uses its resources to ration care. It treats health care as an essential service, like roads, national parks, etc. I can understand the libertarian argument. My view is different.
Back to ObamaCare. Here is a piece of legislation where the govenrment manage to really screw it up, where some provision that actually help people were passed like the inability to deny coverage for preexisting conditions....
God, I'm sitting here in a hotel in London England, and I am watching a british comedy routine making fun of Rob Ford. God, what a worldwide embarassment.
"I know you are, but what am I?"
"Look how much I've won from the matches!"
"DOES NOT COMPUTE. DOES NOT COMPUTE."
Sad to see what reality can do to someone whose preconceived notions turn out to have firmer roots than their core processor. (Comparisons to some people last November might be in order...)
Quote: boymimbo
Countries with socialized medicine use various ways to charge its citizens for the costs and attempts to equalize the cost among citizens based on income and generally charge the richer more than the poor. It uses their size and scale to purchase goods and services for less, and uses its resources to ration care. It treats health care as an essential service, like roads, national parks, etc. I can understand the libertarian argument. My view is different.
No thanks. I do not want the government deciding what we will buy and what we will not, from synfuels in the 70s to electric cars to today the feds have a terrible record. The feds tried price controls on food and gasoline in the 70s, the result was empty shelves. And as to rationing, again no thanks as we have a government fascinated with handing out preferences based on sex and skin color.
Socialism always fails in one way or another. Cheap health care is not worth anything if you cannot find a doctor, which is the case in more and more countries with socialized medicine.
Nice spin, jackasses!!!
This is such a mess that our fearless leader (We won, we won....screw the country, we won, to paraphrase some here) can't allow the enrollment period to take place on time next year for fear of losing more seats in the House and control of the Senate.
You can't enroll in October because, the Presidential SpokesIdoit says, they need more time to get the rates out there...even though the rates are set in the spring.
No, stupid, y'all need them delayed so less of your constituency figures out their rates are going to skyrocket before the election. Those no information voters may just get a tiny bit upset once their better, cheaper health care gets even more expensive.
C'mon supporters...will you just give the same lame comments or can you put out a good argument for these delays...or, heck, can you even just admit we're screwed???
Please don't take the above as an endorsement of the ACA. Until our leader tells me how it will be paid for.....
Here's some reality. My insurance premiums will go down starting in January for a better insurance plan. Obamacare has helped me. It would be illogical to assume that I'm the only one that Obamacare helped. Obamacare is working. Hundreds of links to brightbart or foxnews will not change that reality.Quote: 24BingoSad to see what reality can do to someone whose preconceived notions turn out to blah blah blah
Here's a quote from a recent article in The New Yorker:
"But, as Obama is finding, it’s hard for one party to make government work when the other party is determined to make government fail. Yes, the healthcare.gov debacle is manifestly “on us,” as Obama had to concede last week. But it happened in the face of a relentless campaign by the G.O.P. to do everything possible to prevent the law from taking effect, or from working if it did."
You guys may laugh at me now, but just watch them blame Republicans for this. Hell, there are 300+ million people in the US, but even if there was just one Republican in the entire country, he would get blamed for the failures of the other 300+ million.
Quote: Beethoven9thTo all of you conservatives who think that Democrats will automatically get the blame for the failure of Obamacare, think again. Dems (and the media) will do everything they can to blame REPUBLICANS for the debacle. It's already starting.
Here's a quote from a recent article in The New Yorker:
"But, as Obama is finding, it’s hard for one party to make government work when the other party is determined to make government fail. Yes, the healthcare.gov debacle is manifestly “on us,” as Obama had to concede last week. But it happened in the face of a relentless campaign by the G.O.P. to do everything possible to prevent the law from taking effect, or from working if it did."
You guys may laugh at me now, but just watch them blame Republicans for this. Hell, there are 300+ million people in the US, but even if there was just one Republican in the entire country, he would get blamed for the failures of the other 300+ million.
That is a brilliant political statement, of course. His writers are very good. Yes, the problems Obamacare is having are all because the dastardly Republicans don't like it, don't think it is they way things should be done, and want to change it. Some folks will fall for that, which is what they need to stay in power. The fact that the Republicans have absolutely no responsibility for Obamacare because they didn't vote for it, were not allowed to amend or compromise on the issue, and were not allowed to change it even in the face of failure won't matter.
It is sad. It is more about "the win" to the President and those who follow him than it is about actually helping Americans. Sure, I want the other side to win but I am okay if true leaders with vision from either side try to really fix the problems of the country. That kind of work is usually done in the daylight; this group does their work at night.
...and to this the blind loyalists will say..."We Won"...
Quote: SOOPOOI have a fact to add to this discourse. I negotiate rates for my group from all private insurance companies, and I then decide whether or not we accept those rates and become 'participating providers' or choose to be 'out of network' and bill the patient directly. I was quite concerned that the "Obamacare" options would pay so little that we would not accept it. Much to S2dbaker's happiness, the first exchange I dealt with will pay us competitive rates with other local 'regular' insurance plans. This is a single example, and I will have to continue this process with the rest of the Obamacare options, but at least I am now more hopeful that Obamacare will seem like 'regular' insurance to the doctors.
Please don't take the above as an endorsement of the ACA. Until our leader tells me how it will be paid for.....
I am sure there will be good stories about things that happen with Obamacare; our member reporting the lower rates (but not comparing actual costs in the spirit of this site) is another one. There will be thousands; maybe even millions of "good" things that happen. The issue is that I think that the number of bad stories will far outweigh them.
Yet another one who is feeling the pressure of Obamacare's current precarious situation. For the country, the sooner they all get it, the better. Perhaps they can find some fixes that make this taste more like gruel and less like pure crap. Politically, that would hurt my side, of course, but I also hate to see Americans on both sides of the aisle, the average guy and gal, hurt by policies that just won't work in their current configuration.
We have Senators running for the exits, poll numbers falling consistently, and all we have for it--so far--is a President and his supporters who are looking for a way to spin things. Sometimes it is better to just say "this is screwed up and it is not what it was supposed to be" and then lock yourself into doing nothing besides the affairs of state and fixing it. That is what a leader does. When the time comes to dig in, they dig in. No fundraising, no golf, no vacations, no spin until there is a decent solution to the problems.
There it is, my liberal friends, I am not asking for anything more than the President to do his job. If he actually did it he might be able to say "We won again" instead of just "we won"...
We deserve better than Obamacare.
Quote: RonCSometimes it is better to just say "this is screwed up and it is not what it was supposed to be" and then lock yourself into doing nothing besides the affairs of state and fixing it. That is what a leader does. When the time comes to dig in, they dig in. No fundraising, no golf, no vacations, no spin until there is a decent solution to the problems.
This is a problem with our modern society and the office of POTUS. Sometimes the best thing to do is nothing, or do something small. Obamacare did not need to be done, it is the equivalent of swapping an engine in a car when you just needed to change the oil. But nobody watched "Counting Cars" to watch an oil change.
Good leaders know when to do nothing. Not every issue needs attention, fewer still need massive attention. A smart leader would have said, "OK, what are the problems with the system?" If it was "uninsured people" they would find out why the people were uninsured. Then they would see what is already in place to insure them. If it was "cost of insurance" the smart leader would ask *why* the cost is high? How can a person reduce cost? Ask the insurance companies what government was doing that made costs high and could that be modified.
Notice the key here is the smart leader was intellectually curious and asked people who knew about the problem or need every step of the way. None of this was done. It is as if GM said from now on they will only sell loaded, 4WD mid-sized 4-door sedans. Many customers only need and want a small hatchback to scoot around in, but if they buy that they must pay a fine, er-tax, because Obama feels they need the 4-door.
I do not expect a behavior change. Obama needs to be the center of attention too much. And with his name effectively on the law he is terrified of it becoming the Edsel of laws, which it is well on the way to doing.
Quote:We deserve better than Obamacare.
We deserved better than Obama.
Senator Al Franken is not running for any exit but thanks for the laugh.Quote: RonCWe have Senators running for the exits.
Quote: s2dbakerSenator Al Franken is not running for any exit but thanks for the laugh.
""I think then we have to consider extending the deadline for the mandate, but let’s hope that doesn't happen," Franken told MPR."
For someone who wholeheartedly supported all aspects of the law, he is distancing himself from it. If things don't get better, he will try to get further away.
I used a strong term to emphasize that the troops are not happy and that they are, in varying degrees, working to distance themselves from the President and Obamacare.
Your can ignore it, repeat your only mantra ("We won, screw the country, we won!!"), or demand that your side do the hard work of fixing something they screwed up. What you do as one individual is of little consequence to anyone, but the collective work of your side will set the course for the upcoming elections.
I don't see it. It looks like he's embracing the law and trying to make it better.Quote: RonC""I think then we have to consider extending the deadline for the mandate, but let’s hope that doesn't happen," Franken told MPR."
For someone who wholeheartedly supported all aspects of the law, he is distancing himself from it.
I love that, I can say the same thing but make it more universal: If a something happens then a lot of other things might happen, or not.Quote: RonCIf things don't get better, he will try to get further away.
I see it as working to improve Obamacare, not "distance themselves" from it. What "Distance Themselves" means to me is someone saying, "I may have voted for it way back when, but it really sucks now so don't think of me as the guy who voted for it because it can't be fixed."Quote: RonCI used a strong term to emphasize that the troops are not happy and that they are, in varying degrees, working to distance themselves from the President and Obamacare.
My mantra is that Liberals won and with them, so did America.Quote: RonCYour can ignore it, repeat your only mantra ("We won, screw the country, we won!!")
We're already on it, The President has already offered to allow people to keep their crappy insurance policies for another year. Claire McCaskill is offering an amendment in the Senate to keep private insurance companies from ever cancelling policies so long as the insured party keeps paying the premium.Quote: RonCor demand that your side do the hard work of fixing something they screwed up.
And we will win those elections and your side will have to move to a country more in tune with your philosophy. May I suggest one with a really small government like Somalia.Quote: RonCWhat you do as one individual is of little consequence to anyone, but the collective work of your side will set the course for the upcoming elections.
Quote: s2dbakerMy mantra is that Liberals won and with them, so did America.
Based on what? Fewer civil rights? A weaker military? Invasions of privacy? A lower standard of living? Is this what you mean by "won"? If so, then we certainly can't afford to win anymore elections.
Quote: s2dbakerWe're already on it, The President has already offered to allow people to keep their crappy insurance policies for another year. Claire McCaskill is offering an amendment in the Senate to keep private insurance companies from ever cancelling policies so long as the insured party keeps paying the premium
The president shouldn't have lied about it in the first place. What every happened to transparency?
Quote: KeyserWhat every happened to transparency?
Just another lie..."but we won"...the most transparent administration in history is shutting more and more reporters out of events so they can control the media spin even further..."but we won"...
The whole "we won" thing is just a pile of crap. The United States and the citizens of it, even those ardent supporters of the President, lost. Some are just too drunk on their win to figure it out.
The economy? Our unemployment numbers have ALWAYS (as long as I remember) been a fabrication because people who get discouraged and stop looking magically don't become employed; they just stop counting. The numbers have gone down some, both because of that and also because there are more part time jobs...lots of them replacing full time jobs.
Foreign affairs? No coherent policy. There is less and less respect for the President from foreign leaders. He failed to do what he promised, of course. You don't show strength by showing weakness. He doesn't get it.
Immigration reform? Of course they don't want border security as part of it. What Reagan did became a failure because the borders remained open in spite of all the good intentions. Close the door. Let people in as we always have, but don't let them cheat their way in and supplant those who are waiting their turn.
Healthcare reform? See this thread...looks pretty bad at this point.
Yes, Mr. s2dbaker, you did win. In winning, you've earned the opportunity to do great things. Your team is failing miserably. For a low expectation voter like you, that is probably enough!
Quote: s2dbakerClaire McCaskill is offering an amendment in the Senate to keep private insurance companies from ever cancelling policies so long as the insured party keeps paying the premium.
Yet another attempt to tell a private business how to do things...part of the reason we are in this mess in the first place.
Quote: s2dbakerAnd we will win those elections and your side will have to move to a country more in tune with your philosophy. May I suggest one with a really small government like Somalia.
So I guess in your little fairy tale world everyone who disagrees with you must be evil. I had more respect for you, but after that stupid response, I realize it was misplaced.
After visiting the NevadaHealthLink website and filling in all of the appropriate information the website said to hit the "Next" button to see all available plans and prices. I hit the "Next" button and .............................. "ERROR, this error will be reported to the site administrator."
wrote most of the law that's in Obamacare. It sure wasn't
politicians, they know squat about anything. It was done
over the last 20 years by insurance companies, for the
most part, in league with Lib politicians. But it's not working
out like they planned, all the younger people that were
supposed to join, the people the insurance companies could
never touch before, aren't joining and they won't join. Without
all the people in their 20's and 30's, the healthy people who
don't need insurance, the whole thing will collapse. Which its
doing already.
+1Quote: RonCI had more respect for you, but after that stupid response, I realize it was misplaced.
I used to have a lot of respect for s2dbaker too. I don't know what happened to him, but as of late, he's just mad at the world for no particular reason. A sad, sad story.
Quote: Beethoven9th+1
I used to have a lot of respect for s2dbaker too. I don't know what happened to him, but as of late, he's just mad at the world for no particular reason. A sad, sad story.
It has been going on for quite a while. Go back and read what he said about people from Utah after a man from Utah was sucker punched and killed in a restroom in Vegas. It is the most hateful, bigoted rant I have seen on this site. It truly showed what kind of a person he is. That is when I started paying 0 attention to anything he had to say.
It was in New Low for Sin City thread about two years ago.
Quote: AZDuffmanNo thanks. I do not want the government deciding what we will buy and what we will not, from synfuels in the 70s to electric cars to today the feds have a terrible record. The feds tried price controls on food and gasoline in the 70s, the result was empty shelves. And as to rationing, again no thanks as we have a government fascinated with handing out preferences based on sex and skin color.
Socialism always fails in one way or another. Cheap health care is not worth anything if you cannot find a doctor, which is the case in more and more countries with socialized medicine.
I understand your point of view, but the government does all kinds of things for public health, including Medicare, Medicare, smoking laws, drinking ordinances, safety laws, etc. Promoting public health by insuring everybody gives the population financial security that their bad health won't make them poor.
And I'll ask it, perhaps in a different way. There has been no debate that costs for healthcare are spiraling out of control. What would you suggest to drive down costs, or is the cost just the costs? Competition certainly isn't open, any many states have only one provider covering 80 - 90% of services. So open up competition by allowing insurers to compete in the nation. What else?
How about a national health cap? That is, after you or your family spends an amount on health care, the government pays the rest and it comes out of everyone's costs as an increase to FICA. Call it medi-help. Make it something like $10,000 / year / individual. Then health insurance prices can be meted out truly based on risk, knowing that the maximum payout would be 10,000 per year + optional expense such as private beds, etc. It's sort of pseudo-socialized health care.
Just spitballing.
Quote: boymimboI understand your point of view, but the government does all kinds of things for public health, including Medicare, Medicare, smoking laws, drinking ordinances, safety laws, etc. Promoting public health by insuring everybody gives the population financial security that their bad health won't make them poor.
And I'll ask it, perhaps in a different way. There has been no debate that costs for healthcare are spiraling out of control. What would you suggest to drive down costs, or is the cost just the costs? Competition certainly isn't open, any many states have only one provider covering 80 - 90% of services. So open up competition by allowing insurers to compete in the nation. What else?
How about a national health cap? That is, after you or your family spends an amount on health care, the government pays the rest and it comes out of everyone's costs as an increase to FICA. Call it medi-help. Make it something like $10,000 / year / individual. Then health insurance prices can be meted out truly based on risk, knowing that the maximum payout would be 10,000 per year + optional expense such as private beds, etc. It's sort of pseudo-socialized health care.
Just spitballing.
You'RE KIDDDING ME. Tort reform will lower prices drastically. Why dont you search malpractice insurance. Some mds pay individually 150k a year. Imagine what hospitals pay out. In this country if something bad happens to you its the juries feeling that someone has to pay. Do when someone puts hot coffee between their legs in a car, and scalds their groin...someone has to pay millions accirding to the american jury.
If you are walking down the street and trip over your oen feet and break your kneecap...well whoever owned that propery gets sued. They ask for your homeowners insurance to file a claim...even though there was no faulty pavement or cracks.
Insurance companies "settle" all the time because they know juries have this feeling that people are entitled to have someone else with bigger pockets pay for their bad luck or carelessness
So now we get to medical claims. Well if the above is going on all the time..what do you think happens when someone is unhapppy with the outcome of complex surgery,. The hospital gets sued for 100 million and insurance settles for 5 million. Turn on the tv, and note how many law firms are begging for people who took this drug or that drug or had a certain device implanted.
Did u use to see this 20 or 30 years ago? Well medical care was alot cheaper 30 years ago. YOuknow the good old days where lawsuites in the 10 million or more range were not common.
People in hospitals are often critically ill, they die....it happens. That doesnt mean its the hospitals fault. And that doesnt mean family is entitled to multi million dollar settlements
But Tort reform was tried to be passed by BUsh.....and the trial lawyers are too strong to let it go thru
If u have a country with reasonalbe medical care rate..i will show you a country with limitations on legal claims
Of course I asked why, they had the equipment [fluoroscopy] and they said that their insurance just for necks was 40K per month and it just wasn't worth it.
It seems in the past when the topic of tort reform has been brought up that there were those that wanted to limit it to 300k. That's a pretty small amount if someone is ruined for life. But these monster settlements are absurd. Just no common sense. If a person is damaged for life and needs care do to negligence that has to be allowed for, put some reason back in punitive damages.
Keep settlements to some reasonable lifetime expected earnings and make md's insurance affordable instead of running doctors out of the profession because of insurance rates.
Hard to find a family practitioner anymore let alone one that can afford their own practice. These front line medical professionals are more of hero to me than fireman who don't even have to pay their own insurance, and the fire dept is paid for through taxes. You may never have a fire, but chances are most will need medicine.
Quote: LarrySTort reform will lower prices drastically. Why dont you search malpractice insurance. Some mds pay individually 150k a year.
Pulling nonsense out of thin air doesn't make it so. Malpractice insurance in the U.S. is actually around just $3k/year. So no, tort reform would not lower prices drastically, or even significantly, at least according to the actual facts here on Planet Earth.
Quote: petroglyphI received an epidural in my neck in '04 and when I wanted another one the clinic quit doing necks and would only do low backs.
Of course I asked why, they had the equipment [fluoroscopy] and they said that their insurance just for necks was 40K per month and it just wasn't worth it.
It seems in the past when the topic of tort reform has been brought up that there were those that wanted to limit it to 300k. That's a pretty small amount if someone is ruined for life. But these monster settlements are absurd. Just no common sense. If a person is damaged for life and needs care do to negligence that has to be allowed for, put some reason back in punitive damages.
Keep settlements to some reasonable lifetime expected earnings and make md's insurance affordable instead of running doctors out of the profession because of insurance rates.
Hard to find a family practitioner anymore let alone one that can afford their own practice. These front line medical professionals are more of hero to me than fireman who don't even have to pay their own insurance, and the fire dept is paid for through taxes. You may never have a fire, but chances are most will need medicine.
I agree. Sure is a hospital is neglegent...fine get a reasonable settlement . But people expect medical procedures to be garunteed in its results. Sh*t happens when u cut someone up and poke around for a few hours. The can get infections even though all protocold are followerd. they can die from a blod clot that developes even though precautions to prevent it were taken, they can have lingering pain that doesnt go away . All kinds of stuff that can occur in the world of medical care that is a possible offshoot of various procedures. Its amazing allthe success that DOES occur considering all that can go wrong. All things that cant be seen with the naked eye that can come back and bite you and make your life miserable or lkill you. But poor results is not malpractice.
Drugs have side effects. People get a whole list of them in a legally mandated information sheet with all their Rxs. But god forbid they get one of those side effect which may cause them serious issies...wellthen...a lawsuit is filed.
THeRE are benefits and side effects to all drugs and procedures. There is even a risk associated with getting a simple flu shot.
Quote: MichaelBluejayPulling nonsense out of thin air doesn't make it so. Malpractice insurance in the U.S. is actually around just $3k/year. So no, tort reform would not lower prices drastically, or even significantly, at least according to the actual facts here on Planet Earth.
So you pull an article from the Huffington Post. That's freaking hilarious!
Malpractice insurance costs only $3k p/yr. That's even funnier!
You should stick to tying to convince gullible idiots that global warming (oops, I mean climate change) is real.
