But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective.

SCARY!!! The Gov't can't build anything on a budget, but they are going to tell every American what is cost effective when it comes to their health care? Honestly?

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time”

Yeah, this won't get abused... Leaving the door WIDE open for lobbyists.

In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

That's sounds like a great idea! Let's try it out.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

Oh but it will save money in the long run... Always be skeptical of that one.
The US Gov't has not shown that they can run anything and make a profit. Why should we think they can take our largest industry that employs more people than any other industry and make it work better?

 

Huh? So 600 of the 800 Billion Stimulus Bill is going towards Heath IT?? Can you explain.

 

It's fairly self explanatory... there is more money in the bill for the beauracracy of health care than for the Armed Forces.

Of all the points made that was the one that stuck out to you the most?

 

Yes, because it's so Glaringly Untrue.

We spend 600 Billion for the armed services. There is Not 600 Billion in this Stimulus Bill alocated to Heath IT.

 

You're not paying attention again. Read what s2krn wrote. You're reponse shows that you aren't comprehending what he's said.

 

You guys that are debating bhibbs are wasting your time. He has been trying to stir the pot here for years. Unlike momalle, his mind is not open to any facts that he does not approve of.

That is the danger of blindly following a party.

In regards to this thread, socialism doesn't work. The great Margaret Thatcher said it best, "The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of money."

 

I do stir the Pot. There are WAY too many here that Blindly Follow The Republican party. The Rush Limbaughs, and Sean Hanity's.

The entire article was meant to portray the Libs as trying to Socialize Health Care with a Health IT program.

When the REALITY of the situation is it's a Bush policy the Republican's have been pushing it for the last 5 years!

This is Proof you guys blindly follow your party and oppose everything of the D's. When the R's were pushing this you said nothing, probably supported it. Now that the D's actually Did something to put it inplace you're Against it.

I was for this Policy when the R's were pushing it and I'm for it Now.

We should not used computers to track a person's health care, prescriptions, etc. because we're afraid the Government will somehow use it against us? Give me a break!

 

I think we've beat the "we're heading towards socialized health care" and "is socialized health care good or not" issue to death enough times already. Everyone already feels what they feel on the subject.

The real question is, what is the right answer? For most, and you may disagree that there is a problem at all, the problems with American health care boil down to:

1. Insurance. Health insurance is very expensive. Insurance and Pharmaceutical stand behind us, with both hands on our hips. Neither has to make a better product or improve their business to increase the bottom line, they either raise rates or cut services. We now have health care determined by insurance companies instead of doctors, and insurance companies setting rates for doctors. You can complain about the government making these calls, but right now we have companies doing the same thing. The cost is so great, individuals can't afford it themselves and companies are bearing a large portion of it, eating at their bottom line. It's not good for businesses or consumers. People complain about corporate taxes, but insurance costs are as a big a burden.
2. The Uninsured. Who eats the cost for the uninsured? Hospitals and the government. It's a hard sell to say the wealthiest nation in the world has people with no health insurance. Sure they can go to the hospital, but your fixing things after the fact and someone is eating that fee. That someone is you and I.
3. Health Standards. Again, we are the wealthiest nation in the world, we should have the best health statistics in the world, but we don't.

So, while what's being offered up now is far from ideal, and may be detrimental, at least someone is trying to do something. Instead of complaining and criticizing, how about offering a better solution. Should we do nothing and just leave things the way they are? You may feel that way, but it's not going to happen, something is going to change in American health care, you can either fight the plans you disagree with (and probably lose) or you can offer up a better plan.

 

Momalle, not trying to be a smart-alec, but actually the U.S. is the biggest debtor nation in the world. China has over 1.7 trillion bucks in reserves right now. We are no longer the richest in the world.

The problem I have with nationalized health care is there is no way we can afford to provide it to 100% of the population since there are millions of Americans who pay no income tax whatsoever.

Couple that with the cost of living continually rising because of the inflationary monetary policies of the Federal Reserve over the last 100 years and the money just isnt there.

Without the un-constitutional Federal Reserve, the prices of goods and services (even healthcare) would've decreased over time. We are just programmed from birth that prices will always rise since it has been that way since we popped out of the womb.

These issues are so much larger than whoever is President.

 

OK, then let's just say we are a wealthy nation, one if the wealthiest, not richest, how's that? I'm aware of the issues everyone has with nationalized health care, I'm just wondering if anyone has ideas about what to do to improve what we have. It's far from perfect and we can do better.

 

The only way this nation can afford things like health care etc is for us to abolish the Federal Reserve and go back to a currency backed by gold again. The only reason they did away with the gold standard was so that deficit spending can be increased. (Alan Greenspan-1966) This will never happen as long as Americans are not educated about the real reasons things cost what they do.

I don't support Ron Paul on everything, but on these issues he is right. 30 years ago if you made $70,000/year you were rich. Now if you have a family of 4 you literally have no money left over by the time you pay your taxes. Taxes are higher and the 'hidden' tax of inflation has eaten up the difference also.

The Fed has helped cause every recession/depression since it's creation in 1914. Before that, we had recessions, but they were a lot shorter and less severe. Today, the Fed has us fooled into thinking that they are helping, when in fact they make things worse. Without them, the dollar would have more buying power and we would be able to afford healthcare, better roads and bridges, etc.

 

Yeah we are pretty much screwed, have been since the news in Nov 08

 

So, are you saying that if we went back on the gold standard, got the dollar stronger and controlled inflation, you'd be in favor of national health care?

I agree about Paul, he has some real out there ideas, but I believe he's honest and sincere and I trust what he says. Not too many national level politicians I can say that about. I would have Ron Paul at my dinner table.

 

I honestly believe that with the right monetary policy,(the way the constitution spells it out) that we could afford a healthcare policy and much more. Those policies, along with abolishing NAFTA and other damaging trade policies would facilitate companies moving manufacturing jobs back to the U.S. There are so many things the government has done to shoot us in the foot over the last 100 years.

Having said that, I think that there would have to be protections in place to keep some people from abusing healthcare. There will always be hypochondriacs.

 

We are not heading towards national health care.
We are looking at regulated prices for procedures based on region (this is already in place in Medicare and regulated Private Fee For Servce plans).
We are looking at a push for high-deductible health plans and HSA and MSAs.
I have a tornado coming atm so I can't post up figures atm, but I will revisit.
We touched on this a LOT in my CE for health insurance last month, and discussed it at length.
The governmet has too much on it's plate right not anyway, health care has been pushed to a back burner by this administration even though they are democrats who have advocated national health care.