SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Lane3 who wrote (10123)10/5/2009 1:18:53 PM
From: Lane31 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
I've posted previously about my exercise in trying to avoid entering Medicare. I reported here that certain problematic provisions were no longer in force. It seems I may have been mistaken. I just found this piece from folks who should know.

"Also, the right of patients to privately contract with physicians to ensure they have the medical care they want, without penalty—regardless of what the government pays—must be recognized and protected. Today, if a doctor wants to bill a patient for additional payment over the Medicare reimbursement, he has to withdraw from Medicare entirely for two years. A patient who agrees with this arrangement can't receive any Medicare money for that service, either."

"Dr. Palmisano, president of the American Medical Association from 2003-2004, is spokesman for the Coalition to Protect Patients' Rights, a group of more than 10,000 physicians. Drs. Plested and Johnson were presidents of the American Medical Association from 2006-2007 and 1996-1997 respectively."

online.wsj.com

It has been my understanding that doctors may no make private agreements with Medicare patients for greater reimbursement. Now I'm not so sure.

The reason I find that concerning is that, while I don't care for any sort of single payer construct, I can differentiate between one that allows the patient to go outside the system or to make additional payments either out of pocket or via supplemental insurance and one that disallows them. If Medicare still disallows the freedom to supplement, then the probability increases that somewhere down the road ObamaCare might do the same thing. Not encouraging.



To: Lane3 who wrote (10123)10/5/2009 1:36:36 PM
From: Lane32 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
Some actual data. From CBO.



I seem to recall an earlier comment about professionals losing purchasing power of late. That would not seem to be so.



To: Lane3 who wrote (10123)10/5/2009 1:54:54 PM
From: Road Walker  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 42652
 
What is the basis for an 8 year framework?

That was the origin of the discussion... frankly that was last week and I don't remember the context.



To: Lane3 who wrote (10123)10/13/2009 4:50:00 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 42652
 
That's the time frame Stiglitz picked, but using it (starting from a peak), and using figures for households, seems designed to make things look worse then they really are. And even if the period and chosen stat were more neutral I agree with you that eight years is too short of period to draw really meaningful conclusions from.