A case may be made that it was money well spent and the actual cost to taxpayer may be relatively low:

at the same time, there may be an argument that the stimulus spending was just too small to kick start the economy:

from "The White House looks for work"

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/23/ma...nomy-t.html?hp

fairly long article, but which gives a fairly good overview of the economic theories of the Obama team.

Im fortunate enough to personally know a lot of the medical staff at one of my local hospitals.

a vascular surgeon, a radiologist, 4 CRNAs, an anesthesiologist, various therapists and numerous ER nurses and Doctors.

all total about 15 people

they all feel that the standard of care will be driven down by the health care bill

they all believe that fewer people will enter the health care practice because of the health care bill.

they all believe that many professionals will exit the practice of medicine due to the effects of the bill - themselves included

they all feel that the wages of the medical professional will be driven down by the health care bill.

and on the subject i asked them all"

"Would you go on working in the ER (or trauma, or surgery or whatever dept) if it werent for the money?"

unanimously the answer was "No." with the inflection in their voice as if i were crazy to even ask.




there has to be a better health care bill... just nobody has thought of it yet

well thats all well and good..but our system is broken. Cry all you want about "ohh less people going into the profession" or "lower standard of care" (if thats even true). But at the end of the day, when the time comes when its impossible for the average american to even afford a major operation, we'll all be sorry.

Stop whining and go to med school, then work for free.

Nah, you'll just keep whining.

Government is the problem with our system to the extent there is a problem. 46+ % of US healthcare is already "government." The government care is why the rest is so FUBAR. The current expense of the US system is because those paying for insurance are also paying for the fact that the government systems pay too little. Fee for service, combined with artificial (and arbitrary) reimbursements means that there is incentive to "do more stuff" to the nearly 50% on charity care. That and CYA (defensive medicine).

Since no one is actually paying for the care themselves (insurance, gov care does), there is no incentive for shopping for cost, so there is no incentive to deliver savings. Look at cash-only medical practices, and you'll see that while they may keep their rates high, they always offer more and more for those rates. Better Lasik, more effective vasectomy reversal, etc. Lasik used to be really expensive. It's not any more. Why not? The government is not involved, that's why.

The current US system incentivizes all the wrong things, and almost entirely because of the government mucking around.

:haha:
I have to laugh because my wife (who'se a NICU nurse of 30+years) tells me the hospital where she works must bill at 200% because medicare only pays 50% of the bills for their covered patients and expects the hospital to cover the rest. The hospital has changed hands 4 times in the last 15 years because all the 'freebie' care threatens to run the hospitals parent company into bankruptcy.

...if only the junkies and baby-momma's would stop coming into the hospital's ER they may stay afloat, and the bills would shrink, but NOOO, all these illegal 13 year old girls having babies are killing the industry...

Because they're ENTITLED to

true

Medicaid is way worse than medicare, too. A few years ago we had dinner with a friend who is a surgery dept head at the U, and he said their collection rate was 17%.

Ie: their end of year collections were 17% of what they billed "retail." The bulk of their patients are medicaid, followed by medicare, followed by BCBS (distant 3d).

BCBS pays "retail" the rest pay so low it is often below cost. The rest? Gets paid by taxpayers since it's a State university. The private hospitals are not so lucky. They are torn because they need to have an ER for their 'real" patients, but the ERs cannot turn away anyone unless on "divert," so the private hospitals are screwed, too.

Obamacare has a provision that makes making new "Doctor's Hospitals" impossible, too (many docs were talking about making new hospitals that ONLY took private pays, and therefor would drop off the grid of government care, but now it's impossible).

Waste of time and money? Maybe, but at least they're spending their time doing something remotely constructive, instead of talking about the Florida Gators and Guam tipping over into the Pacific Ocean.

"My concern is that the island might... tip over."


"we dont.......... anticipate that." :-?


wow

this guy is good at maintaining his composure

You guys have a point but so does Gimpy. The cost of even the most basic medical care is already beyond most peoples ability to pay without insurance or complete financial ruin.

Now I don't think that most Americans are gonna choose death, infirmity and disease over doing something drastic, like nationalizing health care, so if the the GoP want's to avoid this it would be wise to come up with an actual solution to the problem, if for no other reason than because just badmouthing the Dems plan alone isn't going to help them much in 2012.

Search hosipitals closing down and you'll see many can't.

So you admit you're paying for others care through your own policy, plus any cash you spend. Would it not be better if people could afford their own care? Again, the GOP wouldn't even be talking about the issue unless the Dems made it one....remember Hillary, if only we addressed the issue then, now it's mass chaos.

Your Aunt is lucky. My wife deals mostly with unemployed that deal with chronic illness. You'll get better care if you have a one time problem, even more if it's life threatening...they have to treat you.

My wife see's many now that were middle class just a few years ago, mainly in construction, because it died here. I'm talking skilled labor. Most owned homes, not castles...With a job loss, the only income they have may be unemployment...it doesn't even pay the normal bills. If they were ill, on meds, working disabled, ect...they lost insurance with the job. The issue for many is they either keep a roof over their kids heads or buy meds...most parents will go without healthcare to feed their kids. Some of them deal with illness that could be controlled, but they chose to take care of family over themselves, end up getting worse and in the hospital. This effects millions of people.

So since we already pay for it, the issue is how to make it affordable for all. Study the history, healthcare went to hell when it became corporate controlled for mass profit, both in medicine and insurance, both have become political monopolies.,,thanks mostly to the GOP, they've now become a corportate controlled party.

Better hope they fix it, if not, in ten years your insurance premiums will take 30-50% of your salary depending on the plan.

My guess is if the GOP had their way, if they get controlled, they'll talk a lot about it, do little or nothing and find a way for corps to get even richer off the illness of people.

The reality is they don't have to. Show up at the ER and you get treated, period.

People FLY here to ABQ from Mexico (affluent Mexicans), then come to the ER, with symptoms of, say, prostate cancer, then get treated—and a follow up appointment for surgery, etc.

But you are right, if you have to pay cash, it's insane because you're paying for the XX% that are paying well below cost (medicaid), and the larger % paying at or slightly below cost (medicare).

My wife has comped her fee a few times to patients, and that doesn't help since the OR and hospital cost WAY more than her fee (in this case she got paid ~$300 and the hospital part of the bill was over 20 grand). The trick is that the 20 grand was the rate assuming it was through insuarnace, etc. If my wife comped, then insurance would not pay, and the CASH price was like double that. So she ended up charging them the $300 (and had them pay $1 a month or something).

Government is the problem, not the solution (to borrow a phrase from from Ronald Reagan).

Well part of the problem is the redefinition of what constitutes "Middle class". It used to describe the owner of a construction company, not the guys who worked for him, skilled laborers or not.

I agree, to be honest, we are talking about the health of our citizens. whatever can be done to help that is a good thing. Im a dem and i think the bill is crap, or at least parts of it

I think we can all agree that the whole mandate thing needs to go. but I do like the parts that make it harder to deny coverage

too be honest, the medical profession is in a bind. If a person comes into my store and can't pay..tough luck unless they have food stamps, but that pays Olesons 100%. but then we go on to only give 50% to our health care providers. where does that work out?

:rotfl2: