Comments on: Read All About It In the Sunday Papers-July 19 Edition

By: callerRick

callerRick — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:06:53 +0000

Congratulations, UI….someone in Delaware actually knows it’s ‘preventive,’ not preven-ta-tive.

By: Unstable Isotope

Unstable Isotope — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:20:25 +0000

God, David you are so full of it. Do Republicans remember that there are 50 million Americans with no insurance at all and countless more with junk insurance? Let’s stop pretending that we’re talking about waiting one month or six months for a hip replacement.

I’m sorry anon, but geek is right. Single payer rations healthcare as well. You can’t get everything you want unless you can pay for it. Single payer gives everyone basic care and is much more cost efficient than what we have now. I wish we could get there but it doesn’t seem to be in the cards.

By: liberalgeek

liberalgeek — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 03:28:21 +0000

Of course there is rationing. There will always be some form of rationing. Will your health plan of yesterday, today or tomorrow pay for accupuncture, massage, mandibular myotomy or dolphin therapy (I wish I was joking)? OK, then if these really are the things that will make some portion of the country feel better, then only the people that will be able pay for them will get them. That is a form of rationing.

Just because a procedure is available and effective doesn’t mean that it should or will be done. I think I heard Al Mascitti describe the range of treatments available for prostate surgery. They range from hundreds of dollars in cost to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Which will the new plan pay for?

I am all in favor of getting everyone in America some form of basic care so that we can guarantee that all of our residents have access to safe and effective medical care. But let’s be realistic. There will be compromises, and hopefully they will be in the edges, not the core of care.

By: John Kowalko

John Kowalko — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 01:20:04 +0000

Anon is correct on all points. Dr. Dean, in his Delaware visit was very explicit about that point re public option, (single payer)
John K.

By: anon

anon — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 23:35:19 +0000

You wingnuts! Today, Sunday News Journal had a single payer article, not a frickin word from any of you! Are you all acting like you know something about the issue, when in fact you know so little about the issue you cant even comment on it. So glad 32 statewide organizations are engaged and informed!

There is no rationing of care under the single payer system. Its not a government run program either. In fact, you would have coverage for medical, dental, mental, vision and everything else and it would only cost l.5% to administer right here in Delaware. Want the insurance company beancounters to stop over ruling your doctor? Want you and your doctor to come up with your treatment plan then you must ask yourself this question. Why did the insurance company put another 350,000 lobbyists on the payroll~~paying them out of your insurance premiums to make sure the deadbeat, hate american worker repukes can continue to pull the wool over your eyes.

I thought you all supported Dr. Howard Dean? He says, “if there is no public option, WE should ALL be opposed to the next big giveaway to the health care whores and prostitutes.

By: Republican David

Republican David — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 23:12:36 +0000

Of course all resources are rationed. Ours is quite efficient. Theirs is sometimes inefficient. What is this long wait crap mentioned in the article? I would rather wait 2 to 4 hours than 2 to 6 months. That would be a long wait.

By: Ganzua » Blog Archive » Read All About It In the Sunday Papers-July 19 Edition

Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:47:31 +0000

[...] See the rest here: Read All About It In the Sunday Papers-July 19 Edition [...]

By: Blogs Gazette - 17th Edition |

Blogs Gazette - 17th Edition | — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:31:20 +0000

[...] water was put in car engines. Little girls, done up with fake tan and nails, arrived for their fRead All About It In the Sunday Papers-July 19 Editiondelawareliberal.net says: Were El Somnambulo El Presidente of the Internet World, he would demand [...]

By: Unstable Isotope

Unstable Isotope — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:09:24 +0000

You’re right Cassandra about having rationing front and center so that everyone knows what is and isn’t paid for. I think a lot of people come in for a shock when they run into lifetime limits or get dropped from their insurance because of recission. I think the industry has done a really good job of covering these things up. Honestly, I still don’t understand why people get shocked when these things happen to them.

By: cassandra_m

cassandra_m — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 17:01:26 +0000

Peter Bergen has another view of the American possibilities in Afghanistan. Bergen was one of the saner and more prescient voices on the original effort to topple the Taliban as well as on he Iraq cock-up. Which isn't to say that the al-Jazeera article is wrong, just pointing out other views.

By: cassandra_m

cassandra_m — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 16:48:50 +0000

I was struck by how uncontroversial Singer’s piece actually was, for a guy who pretty routinely causes controversy. Basically he argues for making the hidden decisions already made for rationing of health care much more visible by better quantifying what gets paid for by insurance or by the government. It makes sense to let people know the real limits of their coverage, so you know that you may have to pay directly for extraordinary procedures or drugs or have to get additional insurance to cover that kind of thing. This seems more straightforward than our current system of pretending to have an all-you-can-eat coverage system. Because as everyone with insurance already knows, yearly or lifetime limits on drugs or hospital payments or mental health treatments start the rationing already. And some of this rationing is based on the fact that Americans pay higher prices for almost all medical services; and especially in the case of drugs pay those higher costs to subsidize the drugs sold around the world at a much heftier discount. You can bet there will be much sturm and drang over this article mostly by the wingnuts — largely because they’ll never admit that the healthcare we have now is very much rationed, unless, of course, you walk in the door with cash or credit for procedures or drugs not covered.

By: meatball

meatball — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:46:34 +0000

In the healthcare piece, I’d like to see the data and detail collected in WI that showed the higher mortality in the uninsured MVC customers (page 2). Trauma almost never pays at 100% cost anyway, but those figures seem dubious when weighed against my experience (although I’ve never collected any data of my own). One reason could be the expense of transport from community based hospitals to regional trauma centers. Helicopters are expensive to operate and man therefore could be one of the very things “rationed away” anyway.

By: Unstable Isotope

Unstable Isotope — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 14:55:11 +0000

The rationing piece is really interesting. I believe Americans have a right to basic preventive care, but we don’t have the right to get every treatment we can ever desire – and this is where the ability to pay will come in. Rich people will always be able to get these treatments while poorer people won’t. I think we’ll need to find a system that is fair to everyone, but I think almost anything will be better than what we have now where rationing is strictly on ability to pay.

I’m glad you also picked up the article about the ACU’s flexible ideology. I have no idea why this isn’t a bigger scandal.