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

Thu Oct 30 08:20:50 EDT 2008

Very good Mike.  I got it on the first go-round this time. Three gold stars.
By the way I don't refer to myself as a litigation lawyer. I'm just a simple
country lawyer looking for justice for my clients. 

Keep it up. Your sharp eye must be valuable on the water.

Ben C.    

R22MikeW wrote:
> 
> 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
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> 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-tp20208884p20245751.html
Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.