Specializes in LTC, CPR instructor, First aid instructor..
What I found, by sorry experience, is that publicly funded programs need to be accessed early, to avoid bankruptcy. Pride and denial kept me from applying for aid in paying for my medications, food stamps and medi-cal (in CA), medicaid in VA, when I found myself in early enforced retirement, due to insurance companies adding $1,000/month to the premiums of employees over 55 years of age. Up until now, they could charge whatever they wanted, just as pharmaceutical companies and banks,credit cards, etc. do.
Another problem we need to hurdle is the states' administration of Federal programs. I've been told that VA is responsible for summarily removing $400. from my social security check in March this year, to backpay for Medicare B, which had been paid while I lived in VA, before I left for 6 months to visit my son in CA. So I appealed that. I was told that only VA could reverse that...... I guess Federal funding doesn't cross state lines..... so whenever, for however long I'm away on a visit from the state where I have extra help financially, being poor, I'm not allowed to travel. Sort of like Russia and "Red" China were renowned and for which we dissed them, in this "free" country. I believe that those problems are best handled by this administration as they arise, unchecked from the last one.
Bitterness, disappointment with a system long touted for being "the best"; and lack of concern for others in less fortunate circumstances abounds in this country, with the "haves" and "have nots" being discontent with the way things are going - along with the threat (with accusations from our young), that weare spending "their" money, for which they will be penalized in their old age. Did we promise them a rose garden?
Each generation strives to improve conditions left them by the last one, even post war legacies of greatly disadvantaged veterans. Hopefully the resistance of the military to combining medical facilities and staff, in an effort to stop that wasteful double tiered system, will yield savings. Yet everyone tells me that's impossible. Why? is my question. Nothing is impossible when costs need to be contained, and waste occurs. We've integrated the military, schools and hospitals, etc. which was formerly thought to be impossible, due to long upheld tolerance and the prevalation of aberrant, unreasonable racial prejudice.
I've been a nurse for over 30 years. I don't believe we need Obamacare. What we have always needed is good oversight to prevent fraud and reasonable bills by health care practitioners. Examples: popliteal nerve block for foot surgery $2000, took 1 min to complete, then additional bill for general anesthesia. I understand the high cost of medical school, expensive malpractice insurance, costly overhead expenses. But think about this - the anesthesiologist did 8 cases that day. He made $20,000 A DAY. And this is only one example. I have had 3 offices double bill my insurance, repeatedly. Hospital charges for services not performed. And don't get me started on free medical care for the millions of illegal aliens that have caused hospitals to actually close. Bottom line, wouldn't all this money be better spent making the current system work the way it is supposed to?
I've been a nurse for over 30 years. I don't believe we need Obamacare. What we have always needed is good oversight to prevent fraud and reasonable bills by health care practitioners. Examples: popliteal nerve block for foot surgery $2000, took 1 min to complete, then additional bill for general anesthesia. I understand the high cost of medical school, expensive malpractice insurance, costly overhead expenses. But think about this - the anesthesiologist did 8 cases that day. He made $20,000 A DAY. And this is only one example. I have had 3 offices double bill my insurance, repeatedly. Hospital charges for services not performed. And don't get me started on free medical care for the millions of illegal aliens that have caused hospitals to actually close. Bottom line, wouldn't all this money be better spent making the current system work the way it is supposed to?
Very good post. Tort reform would have cut doctors overhead significantly when they couldnt be sued out the wahzoo. On the flip side, they also should look at taking away licenses of doctors that have made multiple "oopsies".
Tort reform would have cut doctors overhead significantly when they couldnt be sued out the wahzoo. On the flip side, they also should look at taking away licenses of doctors that have made multiple "oopsies".
This is an argument that a lot of people like to make -- however, many states have implemented state malpractice tort reform, and it has had little or no effect on healthcare costs in those states.
Dr. Atul Gawande documented in a v. interesting and worthwhile article last year in The New Yorker that a small town named McAllen, TX, has one of the highest rates of Medicare spending (and healthcare spending in general) in the US (even after accounting for the usual variables), despite TX having a strict state tort reform law.
“'McAllen is legal hell,' the cardiologist agreed. Doctors order unnecessary tests just to protect themselves, he said. Everyone thought the lawyers here were worse than elsewhere.
That explanation puzzled me. Several years ago, Texas passed a tough malpractice law that capped pain-and-suffering awards at two hundred and fifty thousand dollars. Didn’t lawsuits go down?
'Practically to zero,' the cardiologist admitted.
'Come on,' the general surgeon finally said. 'We all know these arguments are ********. There is overutilization here, pure and simple.' Doctors, he said, were racking up charges with extra tests, services, and procedures."
The healthcare bill is a start. I am not happy with all of it. We need national healthcare in this country. And I object to anyone using the term "Obamacare" Once you use that term, I tune you out because I know where you are coming from.
The healthcare bill is a start. I am not happy with all of it. We need national healthcare in this country. And I object to anyone using the term "Obamacare" Once you use that term, I tune you out because I know where you are coming from.
Can you please explain why we "need" it? Because people often confuse needs with desires.
The healthcare bill is a start. I am not happy with all of it. We need national healthcare in this country. And I object to anyone using the term "Obamacare" Once you use that term, I tune you out because I know where you are coming from.
Well, you'll have to tune out just about every news organization then. From left to right.
We need it because the system is broken and has been for some time. "Obamacare" is a term used by people who never voted for Obama and don't like him. It is a catchphrase used by the right. Sort of like the term "teabagger" which I am sure you don't care for.
I oppose this bill because 1) it was rushed through Congress in a very unethical manner, 2) is unaffordable, 3) no one read it, 4) a bunch of politicians with no understanding of health care deciding how health care should be reformed is a joke, 5) and it was entirely politically motivated - if they truly wanted to reform health care, they would've taken the time to research more and understand more about how the system works, what works and what doesn't work, and they would have implemented it piece by piece, as they evaluated the implications of the process step-by-step. I'm not against health care reform, but I'm against this particular means in gaining "reform," which I think is anything but reform.
Our government is a joke. They've more than proven that by passing a bill that the country - not just Republicans -didn't like or want.
"But as a whole, I think, most people say health care is too expensive yet spend astronomical amounts of money on other comforts. Blue cross website offers basic health care plans at around 100 bucks a month. Now, that could be a lot of money for some people. But the people complaining about that 100 bucks are usually walking around in 100 pair of shoes, with 70 jeans and 60 dollar shirts, and dont forget that 300 dollar iphone with 100 dollar a month cell phone plan. So health care, for the most part, is about priorities. There are far far too many people out there with their a hand stuck out (while wearing a 500 dollar watch) wanting free health care."
I agree. Nearly every person I know who's uninsured has no qualms about having an expensive apartment, an iPhone, an iPod, a new MacBook Pro, expensive clothes, and money for the bar. But they never have money for their medical care.
My one friend posted on Facebook yesterday about needing $300 for a doctor's visit and wondered where she was going to come up with it. If I hadn't just gone shopping with her for furniture, clothes, sunglasses, and then out to lunch, I would feel sorry for her. I didn't buy a thing while shopping. She bought everything she liked. Priorities, people, priorities.
For those who truly, truly can not afford health care, there should be help. A lack of priorities should not be a reason to need government assistance.
Social Security and Medicare. Are these bad and socialist ideas? If you would like to get rid of those "socialist programs" I wonder if you would ever get elected to any office? And if you are all for less federal government and lower taxes, how about cutting my taxes substantially. Say 50%. And give me a check for the 37 years I have been paying into the system. It is my money, correct? And how about we stop spending multiple billions on unecessary wars and military buildup? And yes, I am a Democrat and a liberal. And proud of it!
FranEMTnurse, CNA, LPN, EMT-I
3,619 Posts