Author Topic: Government health care  (Read 69715 times)

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #120 on: September 11, 2009, 07:24:50 PM »
Dear MLG,

Good food for thought.  

Did you know the big ever expanding government post office is reducing staff this year?  (Leno joked that they didn't know why but the layoff notices were being emailed by the end of the week.)

$200!  WOW!  Back when I was in the game - pre Medicare and paying for my health insurance by check I was paying $250 for an HMO.  My wife was another $250.  It was the largest single purchase per year we made.  When she qualifies for Medicare her monthly premium will drop to about $120.  She could stay with the private $250 program but I think she'll opt for the $120.  Oh, same HMO.
Quote
Second, my $200 a month church sponsered medical plan
The whole family or per person?  And then
Quote
First, I have nothing to do with Social Security and Medicare. zip, zilch, nada.
How do you have $2400 a year “Second” and yet have none of the “First”?  

I'm sure you give thanks for your special wonderful life.  You live in a disappearing world that is simply not available to most US citizens.  In my neighborhood; fire, police, education (majority) and many other services are delivered by well paid government employed professionals.  I too respect and appreciate their service and their choice of career.  But in most of the US (by population) these services are PAID FOR by tax dollars.  Ah, the tyranny of the majority. ;)

Malpractice accounts for about 10% or $20 of your insurance premium.  It is not the driving force of rising costs.  The 30% management overhead may have more to do with the rising prices.  Unhealthy people are the other driving force of rising healthcare costs.  While I agree that some settlements are outrageous most are pretty reasonable.  Did you know that the McDonalds coffee woman first just asked for her medical costs?  That’s all she asked for in her second letter as well.  How many strikes does an incompetent doctor get before she is sent packing or to jail or driven out of business because his mal practice insurance is just too too too costly?

Ever wonder why it’s wrong to depend on the government and smart to be dependent on “for profit” poly-national corporations?  It’s a complicated world out here in the “real” Amerika.  We need to band together if we’re going to succeed.

Casey
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

mkdutchman

  • mkdutchman at gmail dot com
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #121 on: September 11, 2009, 10:11:34 PM »
Quote
...plain old mediocrity?


I know one thing for a fact, I've never become more involved in the political process other than voting every chance I had. I always thought I was doing my duty and that was good enough, this year and the next that's going to change.........

<snip>

I am SO tired of the whole govt workers=mediocrity line of thinking.

I for one am no doorknob and would welcome your experience, intelligence, business accumen, etc to help out.

But beware, you might just figure out first-hand that most of the people that you and others are so quick to criticize are actually fairly sharp and on the ball; and that there are legit reasons for things being done the way they are done.

Yes they are sharp in some ways. No argument with that. What I have a problem with is the way they use their sharpness.

Just for example -

My mailman - who shall not be named - was in here a couple days ago. Seems that with post office revenue falling they need to drum up more business, and they do the mail count in Feb. (which is what their salary is based on)

Bottom line is he proposed that we start sending our catalogs in small boxes instead of the usual envelopes, and then he would pay us the difference in postage until the mail count is over. It would be a winning situation for him because his salary is based on the mail count. Very nice man, very sharp. All nicely legal.

Need I say more?

govt run business=mediocrity

Quote
PS - Regarding the $200 church sponsored medical plan, how much of your cost is being underwritten by others taken from the congregation collection basket??? 

Actually.....there is no money taken from the congregation collection basket. I said "church sponsered" but more factual would be "church administered". monthly costs per member reflects monies paid out. My costs per month dropped from $250 to $200 this spring because monies coming in exceeded monies going out. Iit is in fact a self supporting system, paid for by the persons being covered, and has nothing to do with the collection basket.

Quote
What is the difference between that and having the govt do the exact same thing across the board?  At least you'd have another reasonably priced option from which to choose.

um, not exactly. first of all, my tax money will be used to pay for anything and everything that wants to be covered. And if I would be wanting to opt out that looks like it will be highly impossible. And the healthcare bill will phase out what I have now, BTW

Need to run now, later

apogee_man

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 288
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #122 on: September 12, 2009, 12:34:10 AM »
Mk,

Thanks for the thoughts!

I disagree with your postman's methodology; please understand that not all govt employees operate in that manner.  I would also submit that whether private or public sector, there are "ethically challenged" individuals in every bunch.

I think that it's interesting that the Post Office manages to make over a billion dollars a year in profit and it happens to be a govt run agency...  So much for it being a poorly managed business!  I do think they should just remain revenue neutral like they are supposed to, but that's my opinion and another topic.

The point is, they do a good job for relatively low cost compared to the rest of the world.  And gee, they're govt run...  hmmm....

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/uspsabout.htm

Regards,

Steve
« Last Edit: September 12, 2009, 12:37:07 AM by apogee_man »

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #123 on: September 12, 2009, 12:56:09 AM »
Wow.  I didn't know post office folks were commissioned.  (yes I know, but kinda).  He should be selling Priority Mail to Hawaii, Alaska and Puerto Rico because they just kick ass on shipping to the "Other" parts of Amerika.  Perhaps an ad on Ebay.  My policy is if they don’t ship USPS I don’t shop.

Quote
um, not exactly. first of all, my tax money will be used to pay for anything and everything that wants to be covered. And if I would be wanting to opt out that looks like it will be highly impossible. And the healthcare bill will phase out what I have now, BTW
I can opt out of Medicare each November.  Now I think any time I want would be better but I can opt out. 
What part phases out your church organized health care insurance program?  Do you know how many people your insurance company requires for this group policy ?

Casey
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

SHIPCHIEF

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #124 on: September 12, 2009, 01:06:20 AM »
One thing might bear consideration. The 22% increase in cost of health care in one year:
Every politician is involved in a lie when they state the inflation rate. Oh, it was only 4.5% last year........
Inflation has been a steady 13% per year since Nixon was pres, with variations of course. Now it's much worse with a 60% drop in the value of the dollar in the last year.
Medical costs can not be hidden from this event. They reflect true inflation, not the BS inflation that says substituting hot dogs for salmon is a revenue neutral event. Or unemployment stats that drop unemployed people after a year.
When you need cancer care, a cheap a**ed substitution just does not cover it. You can switch from premium gas to regular in your car, buy hot dogs for dinner, heck even feed grandma cat food, but you really can't go cheap on health care.
The 900 pound gorilla in the room is the economy. It's not health care. May I say it again? IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID (remember that Clinton campaign slogan?)
Ashwamegh 25/2 & ST12
Lister SR2 10Kw 'Long Edurance' genset on a 10 gallon sump/skid,
Onan 6.5NH in an old Jeager Compressor trailer and a few CCK's

mbryner

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
    • View Profile
    • Marcus & Emily's personal website
Re: Government health care
« Reply #125 on: September 12, 2009, 08:07:28 AM »
Quote
I know there are some real doctors on here. What do they have to say?

I've been wanting to respond to some of the comments on this thread but just haven't had the time.   Yesterday, I was on call and worked until 10:30 pm, then paid bills, etc. until 2 am.   Today back at work.    Now getting ready for a family trip to visit friends and relatives in Switzerland (leaving tomorrow).   

What I really want to say will take a while to write.  Also, I've been quite afraid it will be taken the wrong way.   Please, no one interpret this as bragging or any such thing, because the background is helpful to see where I, and other doctors, are coming from with our opinions.

I'm a radiologist, so this is coming from that perspective, and most of my examples follow.   If you don't know what that means, let me give you some background.       

I read all the plain x-rays, CT scans, MRI's, ultrasounds, nuclear medicine, barium swallowing studies, barium enema, etc., as well as do CT or ultrasound guided biopsies, abscess/infection drainages, perform angiograms, and other kinds of image guided procedures.    Though you don't see me physically taking the pictures, the x-ray technologists running the equipment come to me for questions, because I'm supposed to know how to run the equipment, too, and tell them how I want the pictures taken.     The scope of my practice brings me in contact with all the other specialties, from pediatrics to geriatrics.   I have to know quite a bit about most specialties as a general radiologist.   Radiologists are sometimes referred to as the "doctor's doctor" because they come to the radiologist  to discuss patients, while the patients don't have a lot of interaction with me.   When you get a scan and go to your doctor or he/she calls you with the results, they are reading a report I sent them.    I average about 60 hours of work per week, on call about every 4th night on average.    My education involved 4 years of college, then 4 years of medical school.   Then 1 year of surgery internship (basically the first year of surgery residency), then 4 years of radiology residency.   I also had 1 year of advanced training after that, a fellowship in interventional radiology (like another year of residency).    That's 14 years of training after high school before I could go to work.   Of course some specialties have a shorter residency, like ER -- 3 years, family practice -- 3 years, and some are longer like some of the surgical subspecialties, cardiothoracic comes to mind at 7-8 years.    Some specialties are highly sought after because of either higher pay or perceived or real lifestyle benefits.   The highly sought after specialties are therefore very competitive.   To get into medical school, you have to be near the top of your college class.    To get into certain specialties, you have to be at the top of your med school class.    Medical school is very expensive  (it was $25-30k/year just for tuition when I was there btwn 1996-2000).   In residency, because you are a real doctor now, they pay you, but not a lot.   About $35-40k/year.  Of course that was 5 years ago, those figures have risen for sure.    Residency is like slave labor, 60-80 hours/week depending on the specialty.   Then going home to study after work.   The gov't has now limited the total amount of time a resident can work contiguously and over the course of a week (to 80).   Great news for residents, but sometimes bad for continuity of care for patients.

True, most physicians go into medicine for altruistic reasons, not just money.   We want to help people.   But you can also see that after spending all that study, with no social life, many broken marriages, etc., it's not unreasonable for MD's to expect to get reimbursed at a fair, decent rate.   What a decent rate is is another question!  :)    My dad is a surgeon, and he makes less every year but works just as hard.   Now he makes less than when he started working in the late 1970's  !!!!   That's really how is it across the board.   The days of a doctor automatically having an exorbitant mansion are gone.   Look at our doctors parking lot at the hospital: mostly average cars, Toyotas, Hondas, P/U trucks, only a few BMW's or Mercedes.   One internal medicine doc drives a beat up 3 cyl microcar with duct taped windows!   One surgeon rides a little scooter.   I mostly walk.    Maybe it's just our area.   Honestly, I can't complain because I get paid quite well as a radiologist, at the top of the chain so-to-speak.   Then again I worked hard both in getting top grades and putting in hours to get here, because it was very competitive.    How do you really expect anyone to go through the training, both book studies and hands-on training, to be a physician if there is no reward?  Altruism is fine but there has to be incentive.    While medicine used to attract the brightest minds, now it is losing them to other fields, like business.   And it's not just because of money.   Do you have any idea the amount of paper work in a day?   Gov't bills to make less paperwork just make more!!   Patients used to be grateful and polite.   Now we frequently see folks who abuse their body all their life by obesity, tobacco use, alcohol, etc., want it fixed for free because it is their "right", but have plenty of money for the boat, new car, etc.   Patients come in self-diagnosed by the internet (arrogant and sure of their diagnosis), telling you what test they want and what specialist they want to see, even though they could be far off on the diagnosis.   You tell me how to attract the best students into medicine with an environment like this???      Now you understand why your doctor has an Indian accent!    The government provides incentives for foreign medical graduates to take residencies in the USA and then work in underserved areas, with the expectation that they will eventually get a Green Card.   And many of these foreign docs are quite good.

Now, we pay a company to do our billing and I don't know for sure exact dollar amounts of what things cost, but I have a general idea from talking with the billing people (good friends).   Medicare pays just barely over the break even point  for a primary care doc (family practice, internal med, pediatrics, etc.) per office visit to pay the office staff, the electricity, etc.    Physicians in all specialties take big hits when we see Medicaid, Medi-Cal, Oregon Health Plan type patients.   We have to pay to see them!   What about the "no-pays", you may ask?   It's no wonder we or the hospital bill the good insurance co's so much.   You may think that would make incentive for MD's to see more patients, cramming you into a tighter "time slot" and spending less time with you.   It's true to a point.   But for the most part, doctors are just overbooked because that's how many patients want to be seen.    People want to be seen *now*.

Some of the biggest issues causing spiraling health costs as I see them:

1.   Defensive medicine, which needs TORT REFORM !!!!!!!   But remember who the politicians are: lawyers.   Not going to happen.   Casey, your statement about malpractice insurance being only a small cause of the problem is not really true.   About 20% of my income goes to malpractice IIRC, and it's much higher for some other specialties, up to 40%.   Of course is not just doctors who have malpractice insurance.   Hospitals, nursing homes, PT offices, etc. etc.   It's not just the malpractice insurance, though, which raise costs.  It's the whole pervasive practice of "defensive medicine", so we don't "miss something".    That's not good medicine.    It's looking for zebras in the forests of the pacific NW.    I haven't been out of residency for a long time, but just in the past 3 years I've seen the number of imaging studies skyrocket.   While we/I try to hold them back, the ER will say, "it's a rollover MVA (motor vehicle accident), new protocol says we have to get a CT of the head, cervical spine, chest, abdomen, and pelvis, because they may have lost consciousness or may not be accurate in their level of abdominal pain".   Etc. Etc.     That's a multi-thousand dollar workup for the remote possibility of  injury.   When I first moved here, our 100+ bed hospital had only 1-2 cross sectional imaging studies per night after 10 pm (i.e. CT scans) on average.   Now we have had to resort to sending our scans to US trained radiologists in Europe to get preliminary reports so we can sleep a little.   Of course, we pay out of pocket for this luxury, and not everything can be sent.    In every specialty, doctors will admit to doing something because they might get sued if they didn't, even though the science is not there to back it up.

2.   Too many tests, lab tests or imaging.   This dovetails with #1 above.   Patients come into offices demanding to have, say, an MRI for their back pain.   The family practice doctor knows problem is not something serious, but gives into the patient's request.    If he says no, the patient goes "doctor shopping".   This is especially noticable with imaging requests from PA's and FNP's  (physician assistants and nurse practitioners).    They have some training but not enough pathophysiology or anatomy to really understand what is happening.    They are great for colds, flus, sore throats, sprains, etc., but you won't find me or may family going to one for anything serious.    That's one place where the gov't has it totally backwards:  by trying to save money, encouraging more lower level practicioners to do more and shifting patients to them from MD's, they are actually causing waste because these guys order a lot of tests that aren't necessary.     Of course, overutilization is happens from PA's and nurses all the way up to high subspecialized MD's.   Then, there's the problem of ordering tests without even seeing the patient first:   it's now protocol in the ER to be seen by a triage nurse or secretary who asks why you are there.   Hand pain = automatic hand X-ray.   Leg swelling = ultrasound for possible DVT (clot).   Then wait 4 hours until the doc or NP can see you.      Boom.   See where I'm going with this?

3.   It has been estimated that 50% of health care $$ are spent in the last 6 months of a person's life.    In other countries, if grandma is spiraling ("down-the-drain") in the ICU, non-recoverable, you pull the plug.   Particularly in those with socialized medicine.   Here that's termed "playing God."    We must keep them alive at all costs, down to the last minute.   That's the mentality.    There no "Let's celebrate the life well lived, and let them die in peace."    Especially in cancer patients, we do absolutely everything possible, whether it is futile chemotherapy or radiation or life support.     It's basically our mentality in the USA.    As a Christian, this seems unnatural and more "playing God"/interfering with nature than letting someone go.   Death is part of life.    Of course, we all have our own beliefs and this thread isn't a religious thread.

4.   Overutilization of emergency departments.    There is a very high percentage of the population who uses the ER as their primary care doc, especially as people lose their health insurance.   An ER visit costs at minimum about $700.   Compare that to maybe $100 for the same problem when seen in the regular clinic.   Who foots the $700 bill?

5.   No cost control for pharmaceuticals.   Drug co's can charge whatever they want.   How many of you try to buy cheaper drugs from Canada?

6.   No cost controls for durable medical equipment (i.e. motorized wheelchairs, O2 tanks, etc.).    There's a reason why you see so many ads on TV for the motorized wheelchairs.   The people selling them buy them from the manufacturers, then sock a huge bill to Medicare, which then pays quite happily.

7.   No cost controls for all sorts of other medical equipment.    That package of gauze I just opened to help clean your wound cost a few pennies to make, but the manufacturer can charge hundreds of times that, which the hospital or MD's office has to recoup somehow.    Now imagine an IV line with bag.   Just 2 simple examples.

8.  No mandates for insurance company efficiency.    Don't get me going on this !!

There's been a lot of talk about how great socialized medicine systems work in other countries, but there's a reason why people with money come to the US for their care.   And you have to remember that where it works well, like Switzerland, it is still a combination of private and public payors,  the popluation is 7 million instead of 250 million, the the gov't is not bloated beyond reason.

Once, I saw some numbers that the actual overall cost of the health care bill which is attributable to the physicians fees was only a couple percent.    Don't know if that's true or not.   But I do know that doctors wages have decreased for years while overall health care costs are skyrocketing.    Hmmm.   Now the gov't wants to take away more from reimbursements and forcing people to get insurance (without insurance reform) thinking it will help.   I see doctors leaving medicine in droves in the future, but, hey, one of my partners thinks a single payor system is the panacea.    As you see from above, creating a single payor system or making sure everyone is enrolled in a plan won't fix the deficiencies I mentioned.

Lastly, I did take a Hippocratic Oath when graduating medical school.   It basically says I have an obligation to treat everyone in need, and to first do no harm.

Marcus

---------------------------------
Marcus A. Bryner, M.D.
Grants Pass, OR

P.S.  Why would I put my full name out here if I didn't believe this?    Sorry if I rambled too much.   It's midnight, I still have to pack, and my little ones will be awake in a few hours.....  Arrgh.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2009, 08:18:29 AM by mbryner »
JKson/Powersolutions 6/1, 7.5 kw ST head, propane canister muffler, future off-gridder

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin, 1775

SHIPCHIEF

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #126 on: September 12, 2009, 05:00:41 PM »
Marcus;
Thanks for the coherent post. As a recent healthcare consumer (belly button hernia repair) bits and pieces of your letter show thru as something I could relate to.
As a person with technical training and license, other parts of your letter ring true.
Combine that with political trends and economic trends, and it makes more sense how we got here. We can use that to figure where it's going if we 'stay the course' or try an NHS or a private care provider scheme with single payer.
Scott
Ashwamegh 25/2 & ST12
Lister SR2 10Kw 'Long Edurance' genset on a 10 gallon sump/skid,
Onan 6.5NH in an old Jeager Compressor trailer and a few CCK's

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #127 on: September 12, 2009, 06:11:55 PM »
Hi Marcus,

FIRST:  My Lister brother, never use your full name on this site.  It is monitored by google.  Go there and search on “mbryner” and then “Marcus A. Bryner”.  You may not be bothered but not everyone at TRRA may share your opinions.

I agree with Scott.  Great credentials and I want to revise my opinion on malpractice insurance costs but remember that I was talking about our side of the fence and not yours.  Isn’t it interesting that the insurance companies complain that the cost of consumer insurance is a function of malpractice?  And yet you pay for the coverage too.  I love double billing scams.  You may notice that I haven’t blamed the income of doctors as a major force in raising insurance premiums.  Costs are nice to know but the market determines the cost of insurance.  This market is simply too closely managed.

Is the doctor’s side of the insurance premium rated as a matter of how many suites or settlements have occurred?  As a person that regards the quitting of tobacco addiction 40 years ago as one of the top five decisions of my life and haven’t tasted a piece of pie in 14 months – 12 days do wish our side premiums were health loaded.  I watched my mother die for four years.  I look at her photos of the last year and wonder why we worked so hard to keep this once extraordinary person alive to wallow in a warm death. 

So my burning question is:  What are these people with something like 30 years of education going to do when they leave medicine besides pharmaceutical sales?  I guess my critique of the new doctor working as a lackey on CSI may also need revising.

Thanks for your side of the story.

LowGear
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

M61hops

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 299
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #128 on: September 13, 2009, 07:55:19 AM »
The entire economic system is dead, broken beyond repair!  And the people most responsible for breaking it got big bonuses for doing it!  I think Shipchief is right but the problems are way larger than just his points.  I can't help wondering if the powers that be know that many more large corporations are going to lay off many more people or just won't be able (or won't want to) pay for health coverage.  It's just not a good thing to have a majority of the workforce not have access to health care and there is no reason to put up with such a thing when it would be simple to re-arrange the system to cover everybody.  There are a lot of smart people in the USA who could design an efficient, fair and cost effictive single payer system that would cover everybody.  The only reason not to have a system like this is because the people that would lose out have bought off the politicians that could make it happen.  Just watch the TV coverage and it's obvious who owns whom!  I'm still willing to give Obama the benifit of the doubt that he is trying to do the right thing for the USA even though I didn't vote for him.  I try to look at any situation from as many different viewpoints as possible and then use plain common sense to form my personal opinions.  Right at this point in history I'm afraid that the USA and the western world is right at the start of a very large train wreck and when it's over we might not recognize what's left!  I really hope I'm wrong about this but I don't see any of the problems that I think need to be addressed even being talked about!  The banks got enough of a bailout to stall off the big collapse for awhile and for the big campaign donors to pocket some taxpayer cash.  But going forward from here the working class could really suffer; it might be a good time for us to all learn help each other and watch out for our neighbors.  At least if the USA had a well run universal health care plan it would help the working class and allow US companies to be more competitive on world markets.  It would also take a big burden off small businesses .  The positive aspects of a well thought out single payer system look to far outweigh the drawbacks and something needs to be done; the present system is outdated and has failed too many people for too long.       Leland
I pray everyday giving thanks that I have one of the "fun" mental disorders!

SHIPCHIEF

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 728
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #129 on: September 13, 2009, 06:18:23 PM »
I'm reading a book call Hitler's Nemesis.
It's a statistical and policy book about the German - Russian front during WWII
The point is, that the Russians feilded and equipt 700 divisions after a long period of decline, what with the October revolution, a civil war, famine, losing WWI, etc. They were at the bottom of a deep well when WWII hit them hard and they lost 40% of their population and the best real estate to the Germans.
They turned it around. But it took everything to do it. Conscription for the army took all 18 yr olds and men up to 55. Women and children worked in factories, women served in combat and communications as well a support service. Wounded returned to their units unless very seriously wounded, then they became trainers. There was a 'man shortage'. All national effort was expended on survival.
We have a spending problem. That's pretty small potatoes compared. The question is national will. Some believe that can't be done with a capitalist 'selfish' system. Others believe it can't be done without free market capitalism's discipline. Corruption is still corruption, no matter what economic system is used.
More effort needs to be spent on keeping the dollar in America. I think the Federal Reserve is the root of the problem, congress is supposed to mint money and control monetary policy, not some consortium of private bankers who skim off the cream. Deficit spending for imported oil, cars, TV's, shoes etc is part of the problem.
Retireing at 65 and living to 90 was not expected. That's a long time for a free ride, even tho- I'm aiming for it too.
 Lots of things need to be adjusted. It's been a long period since WWII and everyone has been feathering their own nest without regard the the health of the whole system.
Ashwamegh 25/2 & ST12
Lister SR2 10Kw 'Long Edurance' genset on a 10 gallon sump/skid,
Onan 6.5NH in an old Jeager Compressor trailer and a few CCK's

Doug

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3386
  • Why don't pictures ever work for me?
    • View Profile
    • Doug's Petteroid Stuff
Re: Government health care
« Reply #130 on: September 13, 2009, 06:55:15 PM »
Thats about the best post I think I have read in this thread yet.

I have issues myself I would like to retire at 65 and untill recently that was not an option but a fact . Now I see myself working into my 70s possibly....

But who is going to hire me?
Why would you hire a 70 year old man realisticly I do physical labour and I am apt to drop dead on you.......

Here is my alternative take:

We all work a 40 hour week because of Job sharing int he 1930s.
I would like to see it done again maybe 30 hour week. Its not like we are not productive enough to to make it cost effective. It might mean some reduction in take home pay but with more poeple working the ecconomy would over all be more productive.
An old man who is not broken down and worn out at 70 could probably continue to do some part time work with a little help from somne kind of pension.

The rate I am going however  know I will not be in any kind of shape to compete with a kid 40 years younger than me pulling cable and when the dust settles after this strike I won't have a pension anymore....

Truth is I have already seen the old men staying on after 65 and it scares me because I don't want to be suing a long pair of plyers to pull on my boots because my back doesn't bend anymore. I would like to die in my sleep between some sheets at home instead of face down of a heart attack on a dusty concreat slab in some forsaken place ( and I have seen that too ).

There is going to be push back from Employers they already are trying to get out of pension buisness on most fronts....
But think about it in your final years your going to loose your marbles as well as control of your bladder. Its not realistic to think your going to be a productive worker after 70 and your going to have health issues our goverment and buisness leaders know this and they want no part in caring for us and that realy scares the crap out of me, Under the current system its better I work my balls off and wear out dying as soon as possible after my productive years
It's a Good Life, If You Don't Weaken

compig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1264
  • 1953 Lister CS 6/1 SOM owner
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #131 on: September 13, 2009, 09:00:00 PM »
Marcus , thankyou for taking the time to share that enlightening information with us , much appreciated.
DON'T STEAL , THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T LIKE COMPETITION !!!
Lister A
Onan W3S Genny
Petter A1
Villiers C45 industrial
Continental flat six powerpacket
ANOTHER Lister 6/1 CS SOM , temporarily !!!

jzeeff

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 218
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #132 on: September 14, 2009, 12:46:31 AM »
I was talking to a PA and things are pretty messed up right now with the insurance companies making crazy decisions about what they will and will not pay for.  Things like: got pneumonia at the hospital - not covered, it must have been a hospital mistake.

Rationing at some level is fine (and occurs everywhere in life) - if you want some unusual, low success rate treatment,  there will always be places to get it if you pay for it or have supplemental insurance.

Dr. Bryner's post was very good although it didn't include the problem of the AMA restricting the number of doctors and other wage inflating tactics.

 I certainly hope we aren't at the point where people have hide their thoughts behind pseudonyms.  If something is wrong, stand up for what is right and put  your name behind it.
« Last Edit: September 14, 2009, 02:16:09 PM by jzeeff »

LowGear

  • Casey
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2130
  • What? My diesel had fries for lunch?
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #133 on: September 14, 2009, 06:41:55 AM »
Dear jzeeff,

You don't need to hope any more.

Quote
I certainly hope we aren't at the point where people have hide their thoughts behind pseudonyms.

http://www.igopogo.com/we_have_met.htm  You might be very disappointed by how many people will try to ruin you because they don't like your opinion on one thing or another.  I was "warned" (in the warmest of ways) by a client of my business to be aware that everything on this site was easily available on google by searching unique information about you or your business.  That is why I mentioned to Marcus that discretion might be the better part of valor.

And, of course, I agree with compig.

Cheers,  Casey LowGear
NPR Tipper/Dump Truck
Kubota BX 2230
Witte BD Generator
SunnyBoy 6000 + SolarWorld 245

mkdutchman

  • mkdutchman at gmail dot com
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 357
    • View Profile
Re: Government health care
« Reply #134 on: September 14, 2009, 01:23:57 PM »
Mk,

Thanks for the thoughts!

I disagree with your postman's methodology; please understand that not all govt employees operate in that manner.  I would also submit that whether private or public sector, there are "ethically challenged" individuals in every bunch.

I think that it's interesting that the Post Office manages to make over a billion dollars a year in profit and it happens to be a govt run agency...  So much for it being a poorly managed business!  I do think they should just remain revenue neutral like they are supposed to, but that's my opinion and another topic.

The point is, they do a good job for relatively low cost compared to the rest of the world.  And gee, they're govt run...  hmmm....

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/consumerawareness/a/uspsabout.htm

Regards,

Steve

Quite true, not all govt employees operate in that manner. But the point I am making was that this postmaster is quite sharp, will do anything for us, and is a very nice guy. Obviously its not the man that's the problem, it's the system!! And yes, there are ethically challenged individuals in every organization, very true. But ultimately, accountability is very different at a lot of govt run organizations. Not all of them, but a lot of them.

You might want to recheck the claims on that page how the post office makes over a billion a year profit. Did you notice that number was averaged out? And it doesn't tell you over how many years it's averaged out? It also doesn't say that post office business has been dropping like mad (which it has) It also states that the post office is not subsidized, there seems to be a lot of conflicting information on this

In my opinion the fact (if it is a fact) that it needs public money to stay afloat trumps any "profit" it might make

http://www.lewrockwell.com/alston/alston21.html

http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/23182/FTC_Report_US_Postal_Service_Needs_More_Freedom_and_Less_Protection.html

this is by far the most damning report, by a govt agency itself
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09937sp.pdf

ran out of time, will address LG's post later
« Last Edit: September 14, 2009, 01:25:48 PM by mkdutchman »