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 : A US National Health Care System? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Koligman who wrote (6117)	2/13/2009 2:23:14 PM
From: Lane3	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

I guess I don't understand why it's such a stretch for you It's a stretch because I don't think the folks proposing it have thought it through. Just because the current system has problems does not mean that this is the answer. There are unintended consequences the folks in a headlong rush to nationalizing medicine aren't considering. Sure, it may be more fair. If we all sink together, that's definitely fair. Doesn't mean it's desirable. I earned a living as a systems, policy, and management analyst. I'm used to thinking things all the way through and anticipating consequences, not just jumping to the obvious solution to the conspicuous part of the problem. That's why I'm so sure it would be a mistake and that's why it's a stretch for me. I want to solve the problem with something effective and stable in toto and long term.

To: John Koligman who wrote (6117)	2/16/2009 11:02:23 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Respond to of 42652

the way I see it people die in this country because of the way our healthcare system works, More will die as a result of the National Healthcare Inspector contravening the orders of doctors. It might be you on life support getting the cords yanked by a government bureaucrat.

To: John Koligman who wrote (6117)	2/16/2009 12:35:24 PM
From: i-node	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42652

Well, the way I see it people die in this country because of the way our healthcare system works, and too many people go bankrupt. I guess I don't understand why it's such a stretch for you - I see it kind of like SS - everyone pays into the system, including those who currently do not. Spread the risk around more, and eliminate the worries about portability and bankrupcty. Streamline the payment system, and cut down on the conflict that exists today. I'm not looking for a free ride, just a fair ride. 1. You do understand that SS is technically insolvent by many trillions of dollars if you apply GAAP accounting standards to it? 2. What makes you think that "streamlining" the payment system will make one iota of difference? Because I work in this field and have for the last 16 years, I can tell you that the biggest problem with the "payment" system is Medicare and Medicaid. As an example, last May 23 a new rule went into effect requiring the use of "NPI" (national provider ID) numbers on claims. We had known this was coming for 10 years. A significant number of providers went months (in some cases six months) without a single payment from Medicare because Medicare's internal systems were so screwed up. I know of no example where the same happened with commercial insurance. Another example: Effective 1/1/09, providers get a 2% "bonus" from Medicare for using E-prescribing (this is phase I of the mandate for EMR). I had several provider-clients who signed up for it. Because of the bureaucracy required to get paid for this additional 2%, NOT ONE is still doing it. The truth is that the only payers having real trouble in getting claims paid are Medicare and Medicaid. So how is it you figure more government payers is going to be an improvement?