Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Al Gore vs George Bush: the moderate's perspective -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cage Rattler who wrote (924)	9/26/2000 4:19:28 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 10042

Theodore, Thanks for sharing your concise and well written comments.. If I may offer a few observations of my own that may explain partially why the delivery of health care has suffered.. For one, you are correct that the HMO system is very cost conscious, and of course, is profit oriented. But I think that even private physicians are profit oriented as well, so they tend to want to keep THEIR OWN costs down. However, I believe that under a Bush administration, we would see the same actions taken against price gouging or denial of service actions by HMOs, as well as a return to patient/doctor relationships which are truly necessary for good preventive healthcare (nothing like a personal relationship between doctors and patients to establish trust and proper treatment). But also, I believe that failure to past tort reform has driven many doctors into the "safety net" of the HMO system. Medical malpractice coverage has just risen to ungodly levels for most physicians, deeply impacting their ability to provide proper care. Life is not risk free. Nor are doctors medical "ubermensch" incapable of mistakes or misdiagnosis. But simply the extreme rise in medical malpractice litigation has driven doctors to perform tests that may not necessarily be required, thus jacking up the overall cost of medical care. Thus, in my opinion, medical malpractice litigation has created a situation where costs of medical care and physician insurance have both risen creating the necessity for an HMO system to control costs, while at the same time providing group wide insurance coverage for practicing physicians. Were tort reform enacted, then maybe individual physician networks could re-establish the previous level of personal care that seems to have been lost in the current "assembly line" HMO system. I would be curious to know if you concur. As for what Gore is proposing, what essentially bothers me is that will become another entitlement program that will be as dysfunctional as the HMO system, but possessing that nasty bureaucratic quality of ever increasing budget allocations that create deficits. It's like the proposed Bush tax cuts versus Gore's rainy day fund. Give the money back to the people it belongs to (the taxpayers) and let them allocate it as they see fit. If we find the surpluses are not sustainable, it is far easier to up tax revenues than it is to cut excessive entitlement spending. Regards, Ron

To: Cage Rattler who wrote (924)	9/26/2000 6:13:32 PM
From: John Carragher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10042

What if I don't want hmo and make the sacrifice to pay higher costs for the opportunity to go to whatever doctor or hospital I want to go to. I have been living with life and death situations for last thirty years. I have taken the opportunity to get doctor opinions at University of Pa Hospital and also fly my wife to Mass General Hospital. This insurance although is a lot more costly. However, I maintain my choice of medical coverage rather than go with an hmo or need a gate keeper. Many times I find I am using doctors in the same hmo group but this doesn't bother me. It is my freedom to chose what coverage I feel is adquate for my family. I will give up other things in order to maintain the insurance coverage..