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.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lhn5 who wrote (8083)	4/18/2006 12:40:35 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24758

Perhaps but at higher end cost to...not the end user, but the 'end payer', most often a corporation, or the US Government. Risk management means reducing a highly probable higher end cost. A committee exists to rubber stamp appropriate care The committee doesn't believe that. Why do you? I am not sure that the committee cares. The committee doesn't care but it does care that it's recommendations are expected to be accurate. If they aren't, then the committee members will be replaced. Why? They will have failed to deliver risk management. The committee gets a paycheck for sitting there and they can have coffee and doughnuts and talk instead of having to try to cure sick patients...what's harder? You've answered the original question of why you believe the committee is a rubber stamper with an assertion that you believe the committee is rubber stamper. Regarding the rubber stamp accusation, a committee chair once said..."I know...I know...but we have to do it. The insurance companies expect it" You only could have such intimate knowledge if you were on the committee. About 25 years ago, NY State decided that any medicaid patient having prostate surgery needed a questionaire filled out by their doctor.before it would be approved. A year and a half later...99.5%........well maybe not that exact number, but the program was cancelled that quickly. Which implies...? 2) Care is delayed. Patients lose more time from work. Diseases progress and the ultimate care needed is more costly than if provided in a more timely manner. Do you accept your company's health care coverage? Where in the world does that question come from? It comes from the fact that you don't believe others are acting responsibly. Accordingly, you should apply that to your own situation. If you don't apply it, you believe others are acting responsibly. If you do, then you have no business accepting your company's coverage. In any event, you do accept, but not because of your own logic, but because you think you get something cheaper than it would otherwise cost, and this secret reasoning is inconsistent with how you see the system. This is standard American thinking: the system is rotten, but as long as I'm getting something for nothing, I prefer to keep the system. Well here is the answer: My company lets me pick any coverage I want. (It is a pretty small company) Most small companies do. Large companies have risk management of various forms to keep the cost/quality equation under control. So how can you reach the conclusion that middlemen, committees, rubber stampers, are defrauding the public?