[Rhodes22-list] Politiical- More Bad News About McCain HealthPlan comment by Ugh

Michael D. Weisner mweisner at ebsmed.com
Wed Oct 29 23:59:36 EDT 2008 

Ben,

Gee, I wonder exactly what a ligation lawyer does.  Interesting thought, the 
objective of a ligation practice must be to tie the involved parties 
together.  Yeah, that might work.  Then again, there's always the libation 
practices ...

Mike
s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
       Nissequogue River, NY

From: "Hank" <hnw555 at gmail.com>Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 12:59 PM
> Ben,
>
> You being a ligation lawyer, how much of the cost of our healthcare can be
> attributed to the current system of tort law in the US.  I know when my
> father passed away from a massive heart attack, we were told by the 
> hospital
> that they could not have saved him if he had been in the operating room at
> the time of the heart attack.  However, that didn't prevent the emergency
> room from performing about 5K worth of work on him that they ended up 
> eating
> as he had no estate or health insurance.  I'm sure a good bit of what they
> did was to avoid any potential law suits.
>
> Hank
>
>
> On 10/29/08, Ben Cittadino <bcittadino at dcs-law.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Brad;
>>
>> Singapore, Sweden, Japan, Hong Kong, Iceland, France, Finland, Anguilla,
>> Norway, Malta, Czech Republic, Germany, Andorra, Switzerland, Spain,
>> Israel,
>> Macau, Slovenia, Denmark, Austria, Belgium, Australia, Lichtenstein,
>> Guernsey, Luxunbourg, Netherlands, Portugal,Gibraltar, United Kingdom, 
>> New
>> Zealand, Jersey,Canada,Ireland, Monaco, Greece, San Marino, Taiwan, 
>> Italy,
>> Isle of Man, Cuba, and South Korea ALL HAVE A LOWER INFANT MORTALITY RATE
>> THAN THE USA. (Source, CIA World Factbook, Jan 1, 2008.)
>> (Tootle, How about THAT source.)
>>
>> Do you think there is any more objective measure of the delivery of 
>> quality
>> health care than the infant mortality rate? We can do some spectacular
>> things in our specialty hospitals (I should know, I had my quadruple
>> by-pass
>> surgery at Cleveland Clinic, a wonderful major center, but my surgeon was 
>> a
>> Swede, Gosta Pettersson, MD, who I highly recommend).
>>
>> The major difference I think you and I have on this subject is that I
>> understand WE ARE ALREADY PAYING for health care for the poor.  The
>> taxpayers are picking up the tab for a very inefficient and ultimately
>> sub-standard system.  If we include a lot more folks the economies of 
>> scale
>> will cost us less.
>>
>> If you believe the poor and unemployed are in that condition by choice, 
>> and
>> that the only way to get them to work is to set up the system so they
>> starve
>> to death if they don't get their fannies out of bed in the morning, then 
>> we
>> probably can't get to common ground on this issue.
>>
>> I do agree about one thing. We do spend way too much on heroic
>> "end-of-life"
>> care. I read somewhere that fully 80% of all medicare money is spent on
>> patients in the last three months of their lives. I sure hope if I end up
>> like poor Terry Schiavo in Florida a few years ago someone has the good
>> grace to give me the old .45 caliber craniotomy. (Herb, I think this is
>> where you come in--I mean the pro-life argument, not the volunteer to
>> perform the craniotomy).
>>
>> Ben C.
>>
>>
>>
>> Brad Haslett-2 wrote:
>> >
>> > Ben,
>> >
>> > As Ed pointed out, the New York Times, especially the editorial page,
>> > is hardly an unbiased source for anything.  The AP is no better.  Take
>> > the Iraq war for example - the AP coverage was so slanted and
>> > misleading I quit paying attention to it other than out of curiosity
>> > to see where others were getting their information.  The coverage from
>> > independent reporters such as Michael Yon, both good and bad, was much
>> > better.
>> >
>> > That said, let's tackle the "health care" crisis.  First, a history
>> > lesson.  The whole idea of employer provided health insurance started
>> > during WW2 because wages were frozen and providing company sponsored
>> > health insurance was a way to attract workers at the same wage other
>> > companies were paying.  That still holds true but the costs of that
>> > coverage has risen dramatically.  The old adage of "you don't get
>> > something for nothing" still applies.  Any employee only has x amount
>> > of economic value to any entity, and if you force companies to provide
>> > health insurance, that economic benefit will flow to the employee in
>> > lieu of cash wages. That is certainly true in my own personal
>> > situation as a collectively bargained employee.  Near the end of every
>> > negotiation cycle as both sides start sharpening knives, the company
>> > throws down a final "this is the size of the pie" last proposal and
>> > then we have to determine how we want it sliced, health care or cash?
>> > Nothing in either of these candidates proposals will escape that basic
>> > fundamental truth.
>> >
>> > What gets lost in all this election cycle marketing bullshit (and
>> > Obama is much better at marketing bullshit than McCain) is the real
>> > nature of health insurance versus health care and the
>> > inter-relationships of economic and social policies.  The reason most
>> > of us get out of bed in the morning and go to work is because we like
>> > to enjoy nice things, ie, housing, food, toys, etc.  When government
>> > intervenes in the marketplace and provides those basic things,
>> > especially housing and food, a large segment of the population is
>> > happy to stay in bed.  This is fact and President Clinton recognized
>> > this basic social principle and "reformed welfare" as a result.  To
>> > add "free" health insurance to the mix without personal responsibility
>> > only adds to the problem, so one needs to tread lightly when
>> > government imposes itself in any fashion into the issue. We know (or
>> > should know) that we don't want nationalized health care.  Find me a
>> > country that has better health care than the United States (provided
>> > you can afford access) and I'll consider changing my assessment.
>> > Health insurance is no different than any other insurance, it is to
>> > provide for losses that you cannot afford.  Part of the 45 million
>> > Americans without health care we hear so much about are young people
>> > who have the opportunity to purchase health insurance but don't want
>> > to, some are temporarily un-employed or self employed, and some you
>> > are never going to get to work.
>> >
>> > Any government sponsored health care scheme is going to "break the
>> > bank" if you don't solve the two ends of the tails of the health care
>> > cost curve.  The individual must be responsible for the initial, minor
>> > costs of "going to the doctor" or you get the kind of abuses that
>> > TennCare discovered (Tennessee's attempt at health care).  The other
>> > end of the tail is the vast sums of money spent on incredibly
>> > expensive medical treatments that are often offered to extend life by
>> > a few weeks or months.  I know this sounds harsh but it's economic
>> > reality.
>> >
>> > Both the Obama and McCain plans pose the risk of some employers
>> > dropping health care because the government may provide lower cost
>> > options.  The Obama campaign is lying (I know that's hard for you to
>> > imagine) when it says their plan doesn't have the same inherent risks
>> > associated with it.  I like the McCain plan better because it allows
>> > more options and responsibility to the individual. The $2500 rebate
>> > ($5000 for families) applies to everyone regardless of income or even
>> > employment.  It will in fact probably cost me money in higher taxes
>> > (but then what doesn't?). Of the two, I see it as the most socially
>> > responsible. Which plan will be the most expensive?  I don't know and
>> > neither do they but I do know who is going to pay for it - the same
>> > people who pay for everything else in this country, the "rich".
>> >
>> > None of this applies to me (except for the paying part) because health
>> > insurance is covered by my collective bargaining agreement.  I'll be
>> > happy to give career advice to anyone looking for flying lessons if
>> > you want in on this "gravy train".
>> >
>> > This campaign has boiled down to "who is the better Santa Claus" in
>> > the closing days.  Both McCain and Obama are being irresponsible to
>> > some degree.
>> >
>> > Brad
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Herb Parsons <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> The ERs are being used for this, but you're overlooking the nature of
>> >> what's involved. You have to go and wait, typically for anywhere 
>> >> between
>> >> 3-8 hours for "minor" issues. This discourages the "I don't feel good,
>> >> let me go see the dr" stuff that Brad and Ed are talking about.
>> >>
>> >> Personally, I'm not happy with that either. My guess is that they 
>> >> could
>> >> clear up about 70% of the backlog at ER's by having an INS office 
>> >> there
>> >> as well.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Ben Cittadino wrote:
>> >>> Brad and Ed;
>> >>>
>> >>> Brad- you're forgetting something. We are already paying for 
>> >>> healthcare
>> >>> for
>> >>> the uninsured. It's illegal for ER's to turn people away, insured or
>> >>> not. We
>> >>> are just paying more, getting lousy care (because ER's are not set up
>> to
>> >>> be
>> >>> primary care providers), more expensively (because ER's are overkill
>> >>> (pardon
>> >>> the pun) in most situations, and we taxpayers are footing the bill
>> >>> anyway.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ed- the second post is from the AP, not NYTimes.
>> >>>
>> >>> Best,
>> >>>
>> >>> Ben C.
>> >>>
>> >>> Tootle wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Mr. Philadelphia Lawyer,  The New York Times has been taken over by
>> >>>> Communists.  Your source material is too biased.  Find something 
>> >>>> with
>> >>>> an
>> >>>> American viewpoint.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Consider an alternative local newspaper such as:
>> >>>> http://www.thebulletin.us/site/news.asp?brd=2737
>> >>>>
>> >>>> How is your retirement funded?  Or how was it funded?  See your 
>> >>>> local
>> >>>> Philadelphia newspaper:
>> >>>>
>> http://www.thebulletin.us/site/index.cfm?newsid=20179546&BRD=2737&PAG=461&dept_id=576361&rfi=8
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Or since you like Times in the heading, consider the:
>> >>>> http://www.washingtontimes.com/
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Or just go to church on sunday and get their bulletin.  Read 
>> >>>> something
>> >>>> other than that Communists Rag.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ed K
>> >>>>  http://www.nabble.com/file/p20218848/Philadelphia%2BBulletin.gif
>> >>>> Philadelphia+Bulletin.gif
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >> __________________________________________________
>> >> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> >> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> >> __________________________________________________
>> >>
>> > __________________________________________________
>> > To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> > http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> > __________________________________________________
>> >
>> >
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://www.nabble.com/POLITICAL%3AHealth-Care-Plans.-NYTimes-Endorses-Obama%27s-tp20208884p20229674.html
>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>

More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list