Hardship in America

[FayeforCure]

About a third of Americans (32%) say there have been times in the past year when they have been unable to afford health care, which is consistent with Pew Research Center surveys over the past decade. That is far higher than the percentages in four Western European countries who say this. People in the United States also are more likely to say they have been unable to afford food in the past year.

http://www.people-press.org/2012/03/02/for-the-public-its-not-about-class-warfare-but-fairness/

And Republicans want to make it harder for the people.

[mtraininjax]

Dr. Brian Klepper was in town yesterday to speak to the Chamber's Healthcare Council, he had a slide in his presentation that showed the average family has a healthcare plan that costs $15,000 per year in 2012. They paid 1/4 and their company 3/4, Dr. Klepper echoed what others in healthcare have been saying, yes, I know, no kidding really, healthcare is broken.

In fact, Dr. Klepper stated that the problems plaguing healthcare are NOT Republican or Democratic (Sorry Faye), they are doctor related. There is a thing called the Resource Based Relative Value Scale that is used to figure out the value of a procedure.  The fact that the AMA’s RVS Update Committee (RUC) is made up of 27 doctors who are specialists and 2 that are in Primary Care, they decide what the values of each procedure are and the reimbursement levels. This leads to the problem that our Healthcare system is designed to make specialists wealthy, while cutting out the Primary Care doctors. When in fact, if the PC docs had more time to spend with patients, they would be able to resolve more issues there and have less of a need for the specialists.  The RUC has doctors who are policing doctors, does this sound familiar with the Financial mess? The Fed and US Treasury bailed out bankers, who are now deemed too big to fail. Both Financial and Healthcare systems are flawed because DC puts the people who cannot regulate themselves, in charge of the entire system.

This is NOT a Republican or Democrat issue, if it were, we would have had a bi-partisan agreement on the debt cuts, but with 6 from each party, no one could agree on anything. We have flawed systems with specialists regulating themselves and no one overseeing who can stop the mess.

[FayeforCure]

The fact that the AMA’s RVS Update Committee (RUC) is made up of 27 doctors who are specialists and 2 that are in Primary Care, they decide what the values of each procedure are and the reimbursement levels. This leads to the problem that our Healthcare system is designed to make specialists wealthy, while cutting out the Primary Care doctors. When in fact, if the PC docs had more time to spend with patients, they would be able to resolve more issues there and have less of a need for the specialists.  The RUC has doctors who are policing doctors, does this sound familiar with the Financial mess? The Fed and US Treasury bailed out bankers, who are now deemed too big to fail. Both Financial and Healthcare systems are flawed because DC puts the people who cannot regulate themselves, in charge of the entire system.

This is NOT a Republican or Democrat issue, if it were, we would have had a bi-partisan agreement on the debt cuts, but with 6 from each party, no one could agree on anything. We have flawed systems with specialists regulating themselves and no one overseeing who can stop the mess.

That is called regulatory capture as explained here:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=14230.0

Where is true, impartial government oversight when you need it?


More importantly, the reason a third of Americans had trouble paying for their healthcare is primarily because 50 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 millin Americans are underinsured.

ie LACK of a SINGLE Payer system

[mtraininjax]

More importantly, the reason a third of Americans had trouble paying for their healthcare is primarily because 50 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 millin Americans are underinsured.

ie LACK of a SINGLE Payer system

Faye, I received a call from a friend of mine in Canada, a place with a single payer system. He said everything he eats, drives, consumes is all much more expensive there than in the United States. How many under insured or uninsured would be happy having a happy meal, their luxury item of the day, with a higher cost associated because of having a single payer system? Are the working poor going to be happier to pay more for Everything, just so they can be covered in healthcare?


ie EVERYTHING YOU CONSUME WILL BE MORE EXPENSIVE under a Single payer system. Is that what is best for a country and its people?

[Dog Walker]

More importantly, the reason a third of Americans had trouble paying for their healthcare is primarily because 50 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 millin Americans are underinsured.

ie LACK of a SINGLE Payer system

Faye, I received a call from a friend of mine in Canada, a place with a single payer system. He said everything he eats, drives, consumes is all much more expensive there than in the United States. How many under insured or uninsured would be happy having a happy meal, their luxury item of the day, with a higher cost associated because of having a single payer system? Are the working poor going to be happier to pay more for Everything, just so they can be covered in healthcare?


ie EVERYTHING YOU CONSUME WILL BE MORE EXPENSIVE under a Single payer system. Is that what is best for a country and its people?

MT,  Canada has a higher sales tax and lower income tax rate than we do.  That's why your friend's stuff is more expensive.  Canadians like to gripe about their taxes as much as anybody, but will scream if you try to touch their Medicare.  Their health care costs are lower than ours.

That's really good information you found about the doctors' RVS committee.  New to me anyhow and a cause for rethinking some opinions.  I didn't know that how the costs were set and sort of assumed that the Medicare panels did it.

[FayeforCure]

More importantly, the reason a third of Americans had trouble paying for their healthcare is primarily because 50 million Americans are uninsured and another 50 millin Americans are underinsured.

ie LACK of a SINGLE Payer system

Faye, I received a call from a friend of mine in Canada, a place with a single payer system. He said everything he eats, drives, consumes is all much more expensive there than in the United States.

Thank you for that typical Republican anecdote.............: "because one person says so, it is true for all Canadians"

Never mind that REAL studies and REAL polls have shown that people are willing to pay more in taxes to have universal healthcare.

It never ceases to amaze me, the extend to which Republicans want to continue living in their dream world ( remember the American Dream is called a dream because you have to be asleep to believe it~ George Carlin)

Here are some more killer myths Republicans do not want to let go of:

March 1, 2012 at 18:51:13

The (Republican) Myths That Are Killing Us

By

Alan Grayson (about the author)


As the Republican demolition derby rolls on, I continue to be amused by how each remaining contender tries to assume the "small government" mantle.

Mitt Romney wants a government so small that it provides universal health care.

Newt Gingrich wants a government so small that it will establish a permanent base on the Moon.

Rick Santorum wants a government so small that it will fit inside a woman's uterus.

The only real remaining advocate of small government is Ron Paul.  Dr. Paul appears to be disqualified from the Republican Presidential Primary, however, because he is unwilling to drench himself with the blood of our imagined enemies, like Gerard Butler in the movie "300."

But what about that Jon Huntsman guy?  This week three different people told me, quite independently of each other, how sorry they were that Governor Huntsman never gained any traction in the Republican Presidential Primary.

I told them that they should get over it.  Huntsman wasn't any better.

It somehow counts as an act of courage for Huntsman to have tweeted:  "I believe in evolution." 

And evolution is not something that you "believe" or "disbelieve."  Evolution is like gravity; it's not like Santa Claus or the Abominable Snowman.  (Question:  Why do they both live at the North Pole?)

Be that as it may, neither Huntsman nor any other Republican Presidential candidate has been willing to take on the hard myths.  The myths that are killing us.  Here are a dirty dozen, right off the top of my head:

(1) The Government can't create jobs.  (Tell that to FDR, who created four million jobs in three months.)

(2) Tax cuts reduce the deficit.  (Doesn't it bother them that a man named "Laffer" came up with this one?)

(3) A fetus is a baby.

(4) The poor have too much money.

(5) Cutting the federal deficit will end the recession.

(6) The rich are incentivized by tax cuts, while the poor are incentivized by lower wages, no benefits, an end to the minimum wage, and unemployment.

(7) An unwanted child is God's will.

( Everyone who wants health insurance has it.

(9) The problem with education is the teachers.

(10) The "free market" satisfies every human need.

(11) There is no discrimination in America anymore.

(12) The distribution of wealth and income are irrelevant.

I don't remember Jon Huntsman disputing any of these myths.  And these are the ones that do the real damage.  Show me a (Republican) candidate who is willing to take on these myths, and I'll pay more attention.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/The-Myths-That-Are-Killing-by-Alan-Grayson-120301-981.html

[BridgeTroll]

Didnt Grayson just lose an election?

[ronchamblin]

Didnt Grayson just lose an election?

I think he did lose an election.  Another is coming up however.  I wonder if he will win on this one?  I sometimes wonder if a candidate's loss means that he or she was ultimately not the individual who would do the best job for the most people?  Or does a win mean that the candidate would be the one to do the best job for the most people? 

Can we assume that the American voter can be depended upon to consistently make the right decision regarding who would ultimately do the best job for the most people?  Are enough of the American voters sufficiently informed about the issues, about the different candidates so that anybody should feel confident that the American voters consistently elect the candidate to ultimately serve the most people best? 

A win or a loss by a candidate cannot be a judgment as to the individual’s ultimate value or qualifications to serve the people.  A loss can only mean that, for that election, more American voters, those who actually voted in that particular election, by whatever learning, intelligence, wisdom, ignorance, stupidities, or qualities, voted for the other candidate.             

[fsquid]

Emulate Brazil and France's system which provides a basic healthcare plan to all and then allows people to purchase on their own or through their employer, a supplemental plan for more advanced procedures.  Canada and UK's plan would be a disaster with a country the size of the United States.

[Ajax]

I agree with Grayson's skepticism of the current Republican Presidential candidates, but his 'myths' contain a lot of straw man fallacies. 

[FayeforCure]

This is how Republicans like it: