Barack Obama is the New Bill Clinton.

[ZRX Doug]

If you want to lower the cost of health care, then lower the cost of being a health care provider.Tort reform has been a major part of every Republican healthcare overhaul package that's been submitted, but nary a peep on the subject from the Democratic side of the aisle. Stop the Jeff Feiger's of the world from bleeding the medical profession dry with frivolous lawsuits so the doc's and pharmaceutical companies aren't blowing all THEIR money on malpractice insurance and huge payoffs, and you'll see a real drop in medical costs.

[ghettopalmetto]

If you want to lower the cost of health care, then lower the cost of being a health care provider.Tort reform has been a major part of every Republican healthcare overhaul package that's been submitted, but nary a peep on the subject from the Democratic side of the aisle. Stop the Jeff Feiger's of the world from bleeding the medical profession dry with frivolous lawsuits so the doc's and pharmaceutical companies aren't blowing all THEIR money on malpractice insurance and huge payoffs, and you'll see a real drop in medical costs.

What percentage of health care provider revenues, would you say, is spent on awards in lawsuits?

You do know, that frivolous lawsuits are thrown out of court. You also know, I presume, that in order for a health care provider to have to make restitution to a patient, they have to be found guilty in a court of law.

If health care providers want to spend less money as a result of losing lawsuits, maybe they need some DOCTOR reform.

[ghettopalmetto]

You wanna know why I go to rallies and protest?
Cap & Trade
The pork-filled "Stimulus" package.
The takeover of GM & Chrysler.
The "Cash for Clunkers" boondoggle.
And countless other big spending pieces of legislation at a time when we quite simply do not HAVE anything to spend.

Did you ever protest for $1.3 trillion in tax cuts that were supposed to "invigorate" the economy?

Did you ever protest a $3 trillion war that was unneeded and unnecessary?

Say what you will about the stimulus package, but that $900 billion shows every indication that it's working sooner than expected.

[ZRX Doug]

Did you ever protest for $1.3 trillion in tax cuts that were supposed to "invigorate" the economy?

Did you ever protest a $3 trillion war that was unneeded and unnecessary?

Say what you will about the stimulus package, but that $900 billion shows every indication that it's working sooner than expected. Wish I

Stimulus is working? Dude, it's time to take off the rose-colored glasses and look around at the real world.Tax cuts? Give 'em more..you do realize that Michigan's new film "industry" is wholly a result of tax cuts, do you not? You see how that works, right? Give those who employ more money, and they will employ more..really basic.But don't take MY word for it, ask JFK, a REAL proponent of "trickle-down" economics..

[ghettopalmetto]

Stimulus is working? Dude, it's time to take off the rose-colored glasses and look around at the real world...

Economic productivity is up. Our financial system has pulled back from the brink of collapse. That sounds to me like the stimulus is working.

Tax cuts? Give 'em more..you do realize that Michigan's new film "industry" is wholly a result of tax cuts, do you not? You see how that works, right?

Ah yes, the world-renowned Michigan Film Industry--just like those in every other damned state in the country. How's that helping Michigan's unemployment rate, by the way? Would you say that there are a SUBSTANTIAL number of Michiganders who are employed in the film industry? Or is it mostly millionaires whose paychecks get sent to Los Angeles addresses?

Give those who employ more money, and they will employ more..really basic.But don't take MY word for it, ask JFK, a REAL proponent of "trickle-down" economics..

Um, yeah, Bush Jr. tried that, genius. Worst employment numbers since Hoover. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

[oladub]

What percentage of health care provider revenues, would you say, is spent on awards in lawsuits?

You do know, that frivolous lawsuits are thrown out of court. You also know, I presume, that in order for a health care provider to have to make restitution to a patient, they have to be found guilty in a court of law.

If health care providers want to spend less money as a result of losing lawsuits, maybe they need some DOCTOR reform.

Only about .4% of health care revenue is spent on awards in lawsuits. At least that is a figure touted by the trial lawyers association. The problem is that doctors, pharmaceuticals, hospitals, etc. have to maintain such high malpractice insurance and perform extra tests which they have to pass on to their customers. The customers then, in turn, have to take out much more expensive health care insurance. More administrators are required all along the way. Even the cost of government provided health care has to go up. My calculations based on what doctors have to pay for malpractice insurance, is that about 7% of our health care dollars go in the direction of lawyers and insurance companies because of the lack of tort reform. This wasn't as much as I expected but it is sure enough to add millions to the number who cannot afford health insurance - perhaps an extra $500-$900/year.

The success of the affordability of Canadian single payer plans has much to do with tort reform. It was no surprise that Teddy Kennedy's largest contributor group was lawyers. I guess they won't be thrown out of Obamacare even though the President claims to be trying to find ways to save costs.

Economic productivity is up. Our financial system has pulled back from the brink of collapse. That sounds to me like the stimulus is working.

Funny!!!

[elganned]

Tort reform is a straw man. 7% [[oladub's number, not mine) doesn't even rise to cost of office supplies.

In addition, tort reform even if enacted will do nothing to promote competition in the health services, which is the only thing that will drive down the cost to the consumer.

Which is what everyone seems to be saying they want, but which is completely overshadowed by the sidetrack issue of promoting competition in the insurance industry.

[elganned]

Quote:
Economic productivity is up. Our financial system has pulled back from the brink of collapse. That sounds to me like the stimulus is working.
Funny!!!

So you're saying productivity is not up? And the financial system is still on the brink of collapse?

[oladub]

So you're saying productivity is not up? And the financial system is still on the brink of collapse?

Yes, the financial system continues to erode. The Cash for Clunkers debacle is an example. Sure, some inventory is cleared up by borrowing from China and paying people to buy cars but the moment the program ends sales dropped back to pre C4C levels. Government has replaced individuals as the borrower.

California banks are not even listing all their defaults because they would then have to reduce the value of their book and declare bankruptcy. The government knows this but looks the other way because the FDIC is almost broke. Even the FHA might now need a bailout as 17% of its loans are in trouble.

The Postal Service is doing so poorly that it might not be able to service its obligations to fund it's retirees' health care plans at the end of this month.

The dollar has lost 15% of its value since March which is a big reason everything imported from tuna to gas is going up in price. China, Russia, and some of our enemies are conspiring to do things that would further devalue the dollar.

Hundreds of freighters are parked off the coast of Indonesia because trade is down 40%. Hundreds of commercial airliners are parked in the desert of our southwest for lack of customers. Want photos?

As ghettopalmeto points out, we now have he worst employment numbers since Hoover although I thought it was worse under Reagan. Attacking the economy with more taxes and debt is not a solution although C4C and housing purchase subsidies might paint a smiley face on the economy.

Tort reform is a straw man. 7% [[oladub's number, not mine) doesn't even rise to cost of office supplies.

Seven percent of the cost care is not chump change. I'm suggesting that it would mean $500-900 annually for families. That is a lot more than the $2B that the President negotiated with large pharmaceuticals in exchange for 30-48B new customers.

[ghettopalmetto]

No one claimed everything was back to business-as-usual, Oladub [[unless you're a Wall Street trader, of course). You'd be hard-pressed to say we're in as precarious a position as we were a year ago, though.

[elganned]

So if the average cost of a broken leg is $10,000, tort reform would save me $700. What a bargain!

Look, tort reform or no tort reform, the cost of health care will not come down significantly until doctors are forced to compete.

The "Invisible Hand" has to come down hard on the health industry. Even Cc would [[or should) get behind that.

[oladub]

No one claimed everything was back to business-as-usual, Oladub [[unless you're a Wall Street trader, of course). You'd be hard-pressed to say we're in as precarious a position as we were a year ago, though.

We are in a more precarious situation. Much more debt. Higher unemployment. False hopes.

[oladub]

So if the average cost of a broken leg is $10,000, tort reform would save me $700. What a bargain!

Look, tort reform or no tort reform, the cost of health care will not come down significantly until doctors are forced to compete.

The "Invisible Hand" has to come down hard on the health industry. Even Cc would [[or should) get behind that.

You really wouldn't like the things that would have to be done to bring in competition. Sure, cash only medical clinics offer $50 doctor visits. I'm all for it but the insurance companies and possibly the trial lawyers would fight that. How about letting cancer patients try experimental drugs instead of holding them back at the cost of billions of dollars by the FDA? Or eliminating prescriptions? You want competition right?

[ccbatson]

The true costs of protective medicine far exceed what the left tells you....700 dollars? you must be joking. One MRI done because of fear of suits 9and lots of them are done for that reason) costs 2500 dollars.

[rb336]

The true costs of protective medicine far exceed what the left tells you....700 dollars? you must be joking. One MRI done because of fear of suits 9and lots of them are done for that reason) costs 2500 dollars.

only gutless doctors. Most of those "protective medicine" tests end up being done by companies in which the doctor calling for them has a vested interest. hell, even the AMA admits that

[elganned]

The true costs of protective medicine far exceed what the left tells you....700 dollars? you must be joking. One MRI done because of fear of suits 9and lots of them are done for that reason) costs 2500 dollars.

You'd send somebody for an MRI for a broken leg? Really?

Our health care system in action. No wonder we pay 30% more for the same results as the rest of the developed world.

[elganned]

You really wouldn't like the things that would have to be done to bring in competition.

I don't think you're in a postition to say what I'd like and wouldn't like. Why don't you elaborate so I can say?

Sure, cash only medical clinics offer $50 doctor visits. I'm all for it but the insurance companies and possibly the trial lawyers would fight that.

This is the necessary step I wouldn't like? Insurance companies and lawyers fighting change? How would that be different than today?

How about letting cancer patients try experimental drugs instead of holding them back at the cost of billions of dollars by the FDA?

Hear, hear!

Or eliminating prescriptions?

That's a little extreme; I don't know that you or I are competent to judge whether amphetamines or morphine are medically necessary to our conditions, whatever they may be.

You want competition right?

Yep. More doctors is the answer. More doctors, more competition between doctors, more efficiency, lower cost. It's the Capitalist Way.

[ccbatson]

WHAT?? Are you joking Elganned? If not, you should know that all of the things you say you want are NOT going to happen with Obamacare...more than likely, the opposite would result.

[elganned]

"Obamacare" is a straw man. NONE of the plans currently on the table address the real issue, which is the cost of health care, not the cost of insurance.

But the right has successfully sidetracked the issue and the left has allowed it, and we'll all continue to pay and pay as a result.

Mark my words, we'll revist this problem within ten years when the current "solution" proves not to be a solution at all.

[ccbatson]

I agree that the problem will not be going away. What will happen is that the Medicare/Medicaid [[and Obamacare) elements will go bankrupt and we will develop a tiered system that will look like a free market system [[but be semi underground). Look at all other examples of failed socialized medicine in the world for a road map...India is a good one BTW.

It would be better/less painful/with less collateral damage to preemptively privatize the system by choice. However, it is highly unlikely to happen.