[HM2Viking]

The long-term fiscal condition of the United States has been largely misdiagnosed. Despite all the attention paid to demographic challenges, such as the coming retirement of the baby-boom generation, our country's financial health will in fact be determined primarily by the growth rate of per capita health care costs. Yet discussions of Medicare and Medicaid policy as well as broader health care reforms have not seriously addressed the issue of how to slow growth in spending.
Source: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/extract/357/18/1793

[CRNA2007]

you can always ask for a paycut to lower prices for women, children, minorities, and the elderly.

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

The long-term fiscal condition of the United States has been largely misdiagnosed. Despite all the attention paid to demographic challenges, such as the coming retirement of the baby-boom generation, our country's financial health will in fact be determined primarily by the growth rate of per capita health care costs. Yet discussions of Medicare and Medicaid policy as well as broader health care reforms have not seriously addressed the issue of how to slow growth in spending.
Source: NEJM -- The Challenge of Rising Health Care Costs -- A View from the Congressional Budget Office

[HM2Viking]

our country's financial health will in fact be determined primarily by the growth rate of per capita health care costs. Yet discussions of Medicare and Medicaid policy as well as broader health care reforms have not seriously addressed the issue of how to slow growth in spending.

[Armygirl7]

Originally Posted by CRNA2007

you can always ask for a paycut to lower prices for women, children, minorities, and the elderly.

...why didn't you include the category "men," in this list?

Also why the provocative reponse? Obviously even if nurses did take a pay cut it would be a drop in the bucket and not influence the rate of per capita spending as the boomers age. Did you even read the article?

HM2Viking, thanks for this article. The necessity of certain expensive prcedures and technology has always been of interest to me. I have seen sometimes a scenario where the company manufacturing the technology has the most at stake in terms of getting the procedure adopted by physicians. When in doubt, follow the money right?? These issues face private as well as medicare systems:
"Increasing health care costs represent a challenge for private as well as governmental payers, and the trends in both sectors largely reflect the same underlying forces."

And this is always the frustrating point - I think especially for nurses who are sometimes struggling with lack of staff and suppplies etc:
"Meanwhile, despite the high cost of the U.S. health care system, the degree to which it promotes the population's health remains unclear." You just wish sometimes you could put some of the high-tech but useless budget items by the wayside and fully fund proper nursing care and education.....

Interesting article - and yet another way the Boomer demographic is influencing major factors in American life. The writers are bringing up some touchy issues - but necessary if we want healthcare in the U.S. to be about "Health!" There's a link to another free article by Drs. Orszag and Ellis about addressing these costs. Do you subscribe to JAMA? Is it worth it?

[oramar]

Originally Posted by HM2Viking

our country's financial health will in fact be determined primarily by the growth rate of per capita health care costs. Yet discussions of Medicare and Medicaid policy as well as broader health care reforms have not seriously addressed the issue of how to slow growth in spending.

In the early 1990 the rate of health care spending did slow. They did control it for a while. The interesting thing is they did it off the backs of nurses. I know I was there. Nurses were layed off in droves and replaced by unskilled workers. They also froze wages and cut wages. It actually worked for a few years(maybe two or three) but it exploded in their faces a few years down the road when the great shortage of the late 20th century occured.

[Armygirl7]

Originally Posted by oramar

In the early 1990 the rate of health care spending did slow. They did control it for a while. The interesting thing is they did it off the backs of nurses. I know I was there. Nurses were layed off in droves and replaced by unskilled workers. They also froze wages and cut wages. It actually worked for a few years(maybe two or three) but it exploded in their faces a few years down the road when the great shortage of the late 20th century occured.

Right- they learned by trial and error that it certainly wasn't the wages of nurses that is responsible for the rising per capita helath care costs.

That's what's interesting about this article - it discusses some of the ACTUAL measurable reasons that healthcare costs per capita have skyrocketed and it has mothing to do with the wages of either nurses or doctors. It has to do with the uselessness of certain very very costly procedures that have become SOP in a lot of hospitals - where the efficacay is not balanced by the results at all and yet - the proceudres/equipment/tests continue to be used and billed to private insurers and medicaid. And again the article raises the question of money spent vs. net gains in actual health/wellness.

If anything nurses should be paid more for the increasingly high-skilled work they do and because they spend the most time with the patients trying to teach them self-care and educating the patients about HEALTH!!!

[pickledpepperRN]

Many of the same hospitals laying off nurses and replacing them with unlicensed personnel who couldn't count a pulse were remodeling the lobby.
Putting in fountains, trees, and art work.

How about those that now have a harpist in the lobby and insufficient nurses on the units?