 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / General / July 2009Obama CommieCare debunked
A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care costs": http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597297859757163.html -- RIch > A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care > costs": > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597297859757163.html Whats interesting in this typical rightarded piece of Republican pig sh.t is that it starts right out telling us that a single payer system will put a lid on the totally out of control and skyrocketing technological rent seeking that is driving the costs of health care through the stratosphere. Research and development and clinical trials in health care should be conducted in a world wide university grant system funded by GDP based assessments of all nations. At present the American middle class is paying for virtually _ALL_ of the research, development, and clinical trials of all the new medical technology. And this is because of the US patent system and the US enforcement of IP rights. Welcome to reality, lying pigs.  Signature"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson >> A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care >> costs": [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Welcome to reality, lying pigs. "Reality" is not dreaming of some solution to a problem that will never happen. >>> A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care >>> costs": [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > "Reality" is not dreaming of some solution to a problem that will never > happen. Yet better realities do begin in dreams and imaginations. And I see no other solutions out there. Do you? Signature"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson >>>> A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care >>>> costs": [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Yet better realities do begin in dreams and imaginations. And I see no > other solutions out there. Do you? Yes I do. Return the rationing decision back to the person who needs the medical care. > > A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care > > costs": [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > rent seeking that is driving the costs of health care through the > stratosphere. One reason that health care costs are increasing is because modern medicine keeps people alive longer, and older people need more medical care. Most people don't have serious health problems until they are in their 60s, after which they need LOTS of expensive care, from heart surgery to hip replacements and so on. Health care costs could be contained if the oldest (and most expensive) patients were euthanized, or at least denying them expensive treatments. One year of health care for an older person might cost as much as ten years for a younger person. And since the elderly are retired and do not contribute taxes to the national health care system, they wind up being a serious drain on medical resources. My solution would be to create HMO suicide clinics, where Americans over 65 could choose from several cost-effective termination methods, administered by a licensed Nurse Practitioner. > Research and development and clinical trials in health care should be > conducted in a world wide university grant system funded by GDP based [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > -- > "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson >> > A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care >> > costs": [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > their 60s, after which they need LOTS of expensive care, from heart > surgery to hip replacements and so on. All quite true... > Health care costs could be contained if the oldest (and most expensive) > patients were euthanized, or at least denying them expensive treatments. I am a coot and I actually agree with you to a certain extent. I want a new knee but I don't NEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEED a new knee because I an retired. If it is a case of waiting a year to get it scheduled at lower cost I should WAIT. Also I want to join the hemlock society because I want to decide when I kick off. I will not be interested in a nursing home. An old folks home is OK but when you start talking actual nurses I want it done with. > One year of health care for an older person might cost as much as ten > years for a younger person. And since the elderly are retired and do > not contribute taxes to the national health care system, they wind up > being a serious drain on medical resources. I have been over and over and over this deal and it comes out the same way every time: On a whole life basis the cost of medical care for the average person is what it is. You should pay for YOUR care BEFORE you get old and that is somewhat the way it is right now with medicare taxes. It is really no different than Social Security. You pay in and at 65 you get the benefits. No reason why health care shouldn't be the same way and in reality it IS that way. Believe me: You WILL be old too and, as you say, when you get old you are no longer productive. Only the productive can pay. Only they have something with which to pay. You are "saving" for your retirement as you pay the medicare taxes. That is the reality. > My solution would be to create HMO suicide clinics, where Americans over > 65 could choose from several cost-effective termination methods, > administered by a licensed Nurse Practitioner. Sounds good to people at age 40 or so. It loses its appeal thereafter pretty fast. Some of us actually worked all or lives so we could have those "golden" years. And some of us served our country and have VA medical care as part of the compensation for serving. You pay for that also because only the productive CAN pay. Reality is what it is. >> Research and development and clinical trials in health care should be >> conducted in a world wide university grant system funded by GDP based [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> -- >> "Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson Signature"Those are my opinions and you can't have em" -- Bart Simpson >> > A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care >> > costs": [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >over 65 could choose from several cost-effective termination methods, >administered by a licensed Nurse Practitioner. Your solution would not work because people want to live, even if they are old. A real solution would be to free the organ trade. That way clinics, hospitals could set up businesses with the extraction, conservation, marketing and distribution of organs. Currently most of those scarce utilities are left to rot with the rest of the useless body. This solution would also work for many families, that will receive handsome paychecks to console them for their loss. The residuals that will be buried or cremated could be adorned so as to look okay. Maybe just bury the head in a small box, saving burial costs. > >> > A nice shredding of the statist lie, "gubmit will lower health care > >> > costs": > > >> >http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597297859757163.html > A real solution would be to free the organ trade. > The residuals that will be buried or cremated could be adorned > so as to look okay. Maybe > just bury the head in a small box, saving burial costs. Suppose someone wishes to donate his brain? -- Rich |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.