Medical liabilty claims only account for about 5% of overall healthcare costs.

My statement about the $75 aspirin is not a joke, it's reality.
If the aspirin costs $75 during a hospital stay, I currently have three options:

A) Pay extermely hgh premiums so that the $75 aspirin is covered.

B) Pay low premium, low coverage Ins and pay for the aspirin with my Ins Savings Plan (Tax deferred, earning 1.5%)
(I could afford a half a bottle, no more)

C) Don't check into the hospital.

 

Well option D - buy bottle at Rite Aid for 5 bucks.

I understand what you are saying and I agree.

My wife's company just switched to a new type of medical insurance. She is given a "credit card" where she charges all visits, prescriptions,etc. When she hits her limit of X dollars we are responsible for the next X dollars. When the next level is reached we (insurance and us) share the costs.

People at work hate it because there is some out of pocket costs but it is likely the way insurance will go. Medical insurance abuse is a major cause of high costs. Do we use fire or auto insurance for maintenance? No. Heck when you get in a minor accident you'd rather pay out of pocket than involve the insurance company. Yet medical insurance is used every time people have the sniffles.

I like the credit card bit because it makes the consumer/patient acutely aware of the costs of each medical procedure. Heck I'll bargain with the doctor to get better costs. "come on doc....treat the sore throat and throw in a flu shot and you've got a deal"

When you remove the prohibitive nature of costs on demand then people will raise their demands...the supply doesn't increase so the price goes up. People don't understand that your copay isn't the cost to see the doctor it is simply a subsidized costs....somebody is paying it.

 

On the topic of health insurance. .

What really gets me is all these Drs that are leaches, someone really needs to do something. I have medical bills in excess of over a million dollars easily. I can't fathom how a Dr who came in my hospital room once and asked me how I was feeling is able to charge the insurance company THOUSANDS of dollars for his 'services' Its just not right. .

That about sums it up.

 

I will first confess that I am a rabid consertative republican somewhere right of Rush. The speech last night was ok, but lacked passion. You can't expect to hear specifics in this speech as the SOU is not designed for that. I agree with a few of you that Bush, and for that matter, the entire republican party has squandered their chance to make needed changes to our country. They have done many things right. Iraq, despite the ABCCBSCNN news network, is going well. Rebuildng a backwards country takes years. Germany took many years to reform after World War II. I know, my dad was part of the occupation forces that kept the peace. Taxes have been low and our economy has flourished despite 9-11.

I actually withheld my RNC donation recently because they are not doing all they were elected to do. I belive they are getting the message and beginning to make some changes. Alito was part of that change, Bush's statement that amnesty was not part of illegal immigration control was another part of it. His impassioned statement about taxes also was meaningful.

The real story was that the democrats response to his speech was shameful. Why can't they acknowledge that Bush has done some things right? Are we now two countries fighting against each other?

He're my opinion: For you republicans, hang in there, Bush will gain momentum as no other president has in his last two years and if you're democrat, get used to it. Unfortunately, your party has no head. They are controlled by special interests and single issue groups. They cannot lead the country by bashing the president. They need to stand for something but they do not have a unified idea on how to run the country. Current liberal ideas do not work, thats why democrats are completely out of power and will likely remain that way for another half of a generation.

If the democrats go back to their roots, as in "JFK", they could regain power, although I don't see it happening because they will always upset one sector of their special interests.

They can't soften their "every woman should have an abortion" stance because they fems would get mad.

They can't reduce taxes because the "little guy" would get mad. They can't fight a decent war because the "peaceniks" will get mad.

They can't reduce spending because their constituents would get mad. They can't actually help the private job sector grow because the unions will be mad.

They can't help the (insert race) because the (insert race) will be mad.

They can't tell the truth about their idea that government should control everything or the whole country will be mad.

So, Bush may not be the best there is but he acts on his beliefs that we are the best, the strongest and freest country this world has ever seen and we'll be danged if some two-bit Islamic fascists are going to take any of that away from us.

Maybe his communication skills suck, but at least his heart is true and he will fight for your right to drive your F-150 in freedom until death.

 

My wife was in the hospital and received an 3x6' piece of eggcrate foam placed under the sheets.
Upon check-out we were told we could take it with us for home use. Apparently they aren't re-used and it had been paid for in the hospital bill.

I walk out the door with it under my arm along with the bill where the charge for the foam padding was $87.50.

I can purchase the same foam at Home Depot for $2.99.

Something is wrong.
A leader of the most powerful nation on earth wihere the clear majority of both Houses consists of his own Party, should be able to tackle this and come up with something better than a Texas tin horn tax deferred savings plan.

But, I'm only a goat herder, I could be wrong.

 

You arent wrong...a tax deferred savings plan while not a bad idea is akin to grabbing a bucket to save the titanic....

I hear the water is cold....can you swim?

 

I can appreciate your feelings....and Rush isnt a conservative he is a Republican hack/apologist.

I would love to see Bush make some real changes...I doubt it will happen.

Bush's legacy will consistent primarily of the following IMO:

Good:

Guiding us through 9/11
Taking down the Taliban
Some tax cuts
Showing a willingness to lead from conviction not public opinion
Roberts and Alito
Showing the world we will do what we say we will

Bad:

Iraq
Ignoring illegal immigration
Huge spending and govt growth
No Child Left behind
Failing to fix SS or the IRS (not unique to Bush but he did have Congress)

Bush is a middle of the road president in terms of historical context...not the worst, not the best....he had a chance to be one of the greatest...and for that I am sad.

 

As is blaming medical liabilty as a root cause.
It represents 5% overall, liability limits would cut that to what, 2% - 3%?

It's the old mis-direction strategery this Administration has turned into an art form.

Somehow they are able to pull it off and for that they should get credit.

 

Unfortunately, 2 years is not enough to fix some of those problems but he can at least get back on the right track and set the stage for 2008. If he fails to do that, can you say....President Clinton...again?

 

Perhaps but it is a real problem.

Doctors in many states (Maryland and Pennsylvania for example) have stopped performing many services because they cant afford the malpractice insurance.

My wife's OBGYN will no longer deliver children because of that reason. How horrible that this highly skilled woman will care for my wife and child but cant deliver because of liability insurance costs due to insane lawsuits. This woman was unbelievable during the delivery of my children and when there was a complication during my sons delivery she ran that delivery room like a general. She is unbelievably skilled and I wouldn't want anyone else in the room. Now you get the on staff doctor to deliver.

Many doctors have quit performing many other high-rish/high/reward surgeries for the same reason. Granted the actual costs of settling are small but the unseen consequences are my major concern.

Limit the liability...limit the losses....limit the insurance costs...increase the pool of skilled doctors...increase supply of doctors...decrease costs...lower insurance premiums...increase the number of people with health coverage.

 

written and performed by a pinko Canadian

 

I thought George did well last night... He made a lot of strong statements...




That said, I still think Bill was a better President...
Hillary will be good too.

 

How ironic that we are back around to insurance companies again.
So I'm gouged by the health insurance company and my doctor is gouged by the malpractice insurance company.

The Bush answer is to limit the amount of liability I may pursue against the wrongdoing of my doctor, hopefully reducing my doctors insurance premiums.

End of Story.

Oh wait, I get a tax deferred savings account earning 1.5% to buy my $75 aspirin.
I don't know why in hell I can't understand that all of this is such a great strategery for me. It must be good for me, because he was smiling when he said it.

 

You're missing one key point here -- what a Congress really needs to move an agenda forward is a large enough majority that they can override the threat of either a fillibuster or a veto. The Republicans don't have that yet, and until they do, they are not likely to move forward with a particularily aggressive agenda.

Anything the Republican's would really like to do will never see the light of day right now because it would never receive the amount of Democrat support required to bring it to fruition. And anything the Democrat's would really like to do will never see the light of day right now because the entire country would likely revolt.

As far as GW goes, while I'm extremely disappointed in his failure to contain the growth of government expensitures, I am a realist in that I believe our leaders will never make the tough fiscal decisions until the proverbial "loaded gun" is literally pointed at their temples. If they can still sit there and say that is a problem that is 5, 10, 20 years away, they will choose to just ignore it!

With this being said, I have to say that I am thoroughly disgusted at how the Democrats have handled themselves as a minority party. For them to sit there and pretend that programs like Social Security, and Medicare, and Medicaid, are not facing dire financial circumstances in the near future is unconscionable.

And what is with the endless bashing of Bush? OK folks -- we get that you don't like him, but how about moving on and telling us what you would do instead of simply telling everyone how awful you think Bush is! Sounds to me like they are operating with an empty arsenal!

The fact that Roberts and Alito were appointed to the Supreme Court speaks volumes about how the Democrats have become almost irrelevant in Washington. In and of itself, this will likely have a greater impact on changing the country over the next 30 years than any "government program" the folks in Washington could come up with over the next few years!

Whether you like him or hate him, Bush is our leader for the next three years. If you think he's doing a poor job as President than create your gameplan now and you should do well in 2008. The fact that the Democrats have no agenda beyond bashing Bush tells me they are pretty much bankrupt in the arena of ideas.

 

Thanks, well said. I just wish politicians could function beyond party lines. Used to, you could vote for the person, not the party. The politician would believe in something and cast votes accordingly. Voting something just because it is the correct party makes me sick.