Health

Rave

Bill O'Reilly Demands Health Care Reform

Posted 12 months ago|26 comments|731 views
Written by
Coloranter Raver
Denver, CO
Americans don't get it, health care, not just medicare not just Obamacare, needs reformation across the board. Here's what conservative talk show host and columnist Bill O'Reilly wrote 26 May 2011, "voters simply do not understand that Medicare has to be reformed." (source). He goes on to throw in the idea that social security is in the same boat and that no amount of raising taxes will fix either program. Well, score a point for Bill O'Reilly. Both programs and, indeed, the entire US economy is in trouble insofar as we continue to allow giant corporations to dictate costs to us and allow the middle-men insurance companies to derive their profits as well. The USA pays far, far more for health care than any of our peer nations. What is driving up the costs of medicare? What is eating up an escalating portion of the GDP? Health care costs. The day that health care became an industry was the beginning of the downfall of our economy because it is the one thing most people will do anything to protect. The majority of people want to live and live long. It's easy to profit of it because they will do almost anything to stay alive and keep their loved ones alive. Which is precisely why it cannot and should not be an industry and cannot and should not be left up to profit mongers to set prices and run middle men. People don't want to talk about nationalized health care in the United States because they've been brainwashed by the very companies that are gaining from the inflated costs. Well, then, listen to Bill O'Reilly, he's right. Something has got to change. What needs to change, however, is the power of who's making this decision. It needs to be taken out of the hands of the health care, pharmaceutical, and health insurance industries and given back to the people. And we need to instituted nationalized health care immediately. It's the only way to save the budget while keeping any semblance of a health care system in our country. Ironically, there's no peer nation with whom we do business that doesn't have a nationalized from of health care from China to the UK. Why do we continue to ignore it? Why do we continue to mess with intermediate hogwash like the latests health care plan? And, finally, why do we listen to the fork tongues who tell us our economy is collapsing and we need to reform medicare and social security by either privatizing them or eliminating them when, in fact, we can have both by nationalizing them instead!
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
12 months ago: When the costs of health care go down, the GDP goes down. It's not taking a bite out of the GDP, it is part of the GDP. If health care costs go to zero, the GDP instantly shrinks by 12%.

As long as there is still a private option, I would support a public universal health care system. I just wouldn't use it.
Coloranter Raver
Coloranter Raver
Denver, CO
12 months ago: The point is, our nation is going bankrupt, and one of the largest contributors is escalating health care costs. Let's quit wasting money on insurance companies and allowing them to drive up health care costs and go to a nationalized plan.

So far, every nation that has undergone conversion to a national plan has ended up succeeding in producing quality, lower-cost care. Why would you want to stick with your private plan? You would be willing to be taxed for the public plan but still pay for private?

It would be illuminating to see what it is about the private plans that people hold so dear?
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
12 months ago: No waiting to see a physician
No waiting to be treated after seeing a physician
No denial of being treated in the manner I see fit, not the way some government bureaucrat sees fit.
No denial of services based on age, or "economic feasability"
Coloranter Raver
Coloranter Raver
Denver, CO
12 months ago: When I was a teacher, I always has private health insurance. On average I paid 20% of my premiums and my school paid 80%. In total, my potion of my premiums was around $80 a month.


My favorite trip to the doctor...
I had a lump on my back. The earliest appointment I could get to see my health insurance mandated physician from the book of approved physicians was three weeks. I went into the office, waited 2 and a half hours for her to get to me – long after my scheduled time, and when she finally came in to see me, she told me it was a swollen sebaceous cyst. There was nothing to do put leave it alone. Surgery would cause more trouble than worth she said. The visit cost me $320. I found out my deductible was $500. So, I paid the $350. Four years later, and this is way too much info, but the cyst became infected. It spread to consum about a third of my midsection. At this point, however, I was self-employed and had no insurance. How come? I couldn't afford the $1200 insurance premiums being quoted to me by private carriers for self-employed individuals. I went after much debate to an urgent care facility. The doctor told me the least expensive thing to do was to have him cut a hole in my, suction out the infected tissue and then seal me back up. The other option was to be dead in a week to ten days. I had about $700 in cash. He said he'd take $500 to do it, but that would be without any anesthetics. Anesthetics would cost around $500 more. So, I bit on a pencil in excruciating pain with my sister holding my hand. I felt like it was 1870s in pre-statehood Colorado. The doctor was amazed. He said most people would have passed out after about 10 minutes of pain. I was lucid the entire time. The pencil didn't do to well. When it was done, I had a cavity the size of a golf ball that remained and had to be stuffed daily with guaze for a month through a small hole to keep it from reinfection. The whole ordeal ended up costing me $1200 in real dollars. The physician told me the other physician who told me not to worry about it was insane, but, of course, the insurance company wouldn't have wanted to pay for it.

I think it's high time we stop believing the rhetoric put out by insurance companies about the 'problems' with nationalized care. I'm sorry, but the system we have now is not only broken (see the movie Sicko and you'll see what I mean) but these scare tactics about not waiting, waiting for treatment, and no denial are the biggest hogwash on the face of the earth. If you are lucky enough to have health insurance with no denials and no waiting, you are amoung the elite 1% not the rest of us small biz people who cannot even afford insurance. You are being lulled into a false sense of scurity where corporate bureaucrats are denying your claims. Which, by the way, is not a part of any of the nationalized plans on earth where there is no denial of claims or services there is just service. Not like here where you paned thousands upon thousands in a lifetime and then get told you haven't met your deductible or your claim is denied. You do realize there are now thousands of physicians employed in the USA whose sold job is to deny claims? They aren't even doctors anymore. This is a real gigantic issue that is sinking our nation and destroying it like a cancer from within. Eventually, the cyst will burst and the ensuing infection, will kill us all.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
12 months ago: Private insurance companies now have 30% profits, and they are still increasing rates and trying to deny service to people! If they had their way they would deny service to 30% of the population that has "pre-existing conditions".

On the other hand Medicare is non profit and only has 3% administration compared to 30% for private insurers. The private insurers spend most of their time and administrative costs trying to find a way to get out of helping people. If everyone had Medicare for all and no one was denied service everything would be so much simpler and half the cost.

Fortunately the Affordable Care act has a lot of flexibility in how States care for their citizens as long as they care for as many people and as cheaply as the Affordable care act does.

Vermont is taking advantage of that and is going to have the first single payer, essentially Medicare for All, health care system. The single-payer system, Hsiao wrote, "will produce savings of 24.3 percent of total health expenditure between 2015 and 2024." http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/05...

Canada started it's Universal Health Care system in the same way. Saskatchewan started Single payer health care and it was so successful, economical and popular, that the other provinces soon adopted the same system.
12 months ago: Of course it needs reform. Social Security and Military spending needs reform too! Hell, government spending period needs reform. He problem is no one wants their pet spending project reformed.
Coloranter Raver
Coloranter Raver
Denver, CO
12 months ago: DJ,

You are correct that reform is needed across the board. The interesting thing about health care is that it is a prime candidate for government control and nationalization. Why? Because all of the profiteering middlemen need to be taken out of what should be an altruistic humanitarian enterprise.

It is a common practice in our nation to blame social programs for consuming the federal budget. We keep hearing the harbingers of small government chant that small is better and that the gov't is creating a nanny state. The truth of the matter is that profiteers are driving up the costs of health care, there is little or no compeition, and they are like ghouls making money off our fear and illness. In actuality, the gov't run health systems in our peer nations save their nations hundreds of millions a year. Being against this reform is the proven Achilles heel of the Tea Party. If the really were about saving money, they'd be in favor of nationalized care.
12 months ago: C.R.
Public healthcare is wasteful because it is over regulated. Since it isn't for profit redundant procedures and expenses are common in the name of ensuring fairness and equity. These costs add up in much the same way that military spending adds up. They to practice redundancy in the name of safety and national defense. Sin the Military is not for profit this wastefulness is allowed to ad up. Sure contractors are allowed to take advantage but the problem starts at home.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
12 months ago: "BBC Social Affairs Editor Niall Dickson said ... the NHS had neither machines or the staff to deliver treatment on time."

"Hundreds of Scots die waiting for NHS heart treatment "
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/6...

"If we are seeing so many people dying as a result of delays it begs the question of how bad things are in other specialities," she said.

'Quarter of a million people waiting more than 18 weeks for NHS treatment'
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/health...

Wait times in Canada average 18 weeks, up 2 weeks from a year ago. Prince Edward Island averages 44 weeks.
http://www.todaystrendy.com/increasing-w...

Wait-list weary Canadians seek treatment abroad
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles...
BadCyborg
BadCyborg
San Antonio, TX
12 months ago: Ah, CR, O'Reilly is not a conservative. At BEST he is a centrist, from my perspective, while he is rather to the right of most media people, he, like the network for which he works, is at best centrist. In reality, O'Reilly and Fox are quite to the left of most people who honestly consider themselves to be conservatives. O'Reilly and Fox only APPEAR to be conservative because the rest of the media is so far left.

I cannot stand O'Reilly because he is so much of a leftist and a ststist.

However, In this instance, I believe he is 100% on the right track. Representative Ryan's plan is the best hope I've seen so far. I know he isn't presenting it sufficiently simply for most of the people to get it but it IS the right way to go and it WILL NOT result in a cut in Medicare.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
12 months ago: Ryan's plan for Medicare does absolutely nothing to reduce medical or health costs. It simply transfers the costs to the old and infirm who can least afford it. In fact by privatizing Medicare it would be doubling the health costs because the private insurers would add 30% profit and 27% administrative costs above what Medicare pays.

Health costs would be reduced dramatically if we invested in technology. Now there are so many illnesses with different symptoms and treatments, and so many drugs, with so many side effects, with differing interactions with other drugs, that no physician can even hope to know a tiny fraction of all of this information.

This is where computers excel. A nationwide access to master computers with artificial intelligence similar to the one that just beat Jeopardy, could aid with diagnosis and suggest best treatment. RIght now most docs arre just guessing and they often guess wrong, so they try to cover their butts by overtreating and getting expensive things like MRI's and CAT scans when they are not needed.

If the doc followed the accepted protocols from the master computer, the costs would decrease significantly, it would eliminate the millions of doctor caused deaths and mistakes, and if they followed protocols the docs should be shielded from litigation so there would be minimal million dollar payments because the doc and hospital screwed up.

The Social Security system is not broke. It is the only government program that is NOT bankrupt and even if nothing is done to"fix it" will remain solvent until 2037 at which time they will still be able to pay 80% of what they promised. All it needs is to have the payment cap raised to $ 250,000 as Obama suggested.
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by sunny2
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by sunny2
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: We all have family on Medicare. Sure, when you go to a hospital for anything from physical therapy to being treated for a disease with only a Medicare Card, you can get the worse care imaginable and treated differently than others that have private insurance. You're considered 3rd rate, not suppose to be obvious, but it is. One room for those with private insurance and the others are thrown together who have Medicare with careless and impatient personnel and doctors who could care less and are not considerate or interested. They offer nothing to you that will really help and forget x-rays that's unheard of. Many doctors can be rude and seniors are treated without any importance and many times without respect. Something has to be done to give everyone receiving health care equality. The stigma will be gone from Medicare while the rich can worry only then about their facelifts and plastic surgeries. If you want good medical treatment, you can't have it as certain good treatments ask for money up front. Medicare has set rates, but you don't get the special care, and you kind of face with raised eyebrows. Plus, the hospitals and doctors make it clear they want their money quickly if there is any balance left to pay. They will but it straight to collections and be ruthless to get it paid. You are never going to get equal care the way it is. Government makes it very clear that they don't feel Seniors are important by the way they are putting so much stress and worry on the people. They say that anyone on it now won't be affected, but what is the difference. Until they come up with something better, everyone will worry over it.

sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: There is also another side of the healthcare spectrum.
I know of people personally who have had an affluent life, but when it comes to having a heart transplant or specialized treatment, they never have enough insurance to cover it. They wind up poverty stricken. We need some sort of balance. Doctors in England are not looked up to as if they are celebrities. Only in America are we so impressed by them. Doctors go to college and study just like everyone else. Make doctors do what they took a solemn oath to do.When they see $ signs, that's all they concentrate on. I haven't met a good one yet.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: Ya see, Sunny
That's just the thing. I go to the doctor rarely, because I don't need a doctor to confirm for me what I already know. If anything, I need him only to write out a prescription for an antibiotic, and that's very seldom.

But when I do go to the doctor, he and I have an understanding. I'm the boss (for the time we are together) and he is my employee, and as long as he performs satisfactorily, he will remain in my employ. As soon as he does not meet my standards, he will be fired from my stable of providers and I will seek out a new physician.

I hired a heart specialist when I had a cardiac checkup a few years ago. (Everything checked out fine) After we had all the tests run, the stress test, the dye test, (should have been called the "die" test, if you don't die, you're ok) I asked Ol' Boy if that was the latest greatest diagnostic tools avaiable. He said "Well, no, there's a new thing out called CMR, which shows the heart and surrounding vessels in 3D, shows right where any blockages would be, any leaking valves, pretty much anything physically wrong would show up on this test. But, your insurance doesn't cover it, and it costs about a grand."

I said, " What if I paid for it myself?"

He whipped out the pictures he had taken of his own heart, kept in the pocket of his lab coat for just this kind of occasion. He snuggled up so close it was really kind of uncomfortable. I mean, here he was, showing me pictures of his own insides, and practically sitting in my lap, cooing over the tiny speck that got him taking Plavix. But, the point is, the guy was working for me, and working for my business. It's the God-complex that people give to these doctors that works in reverse against the people themselves. And it's why so many want to see them taken off their high horse. They want to bring the god-men down to their level instead of elevating themselves beyond what they are.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: And in all that jibber jabber up there, I left out my point.

Right now, you are your doctor's boss, for as long as you wish to have him.

After government healthcare takeover, the government is the doctor's boss.

Hmmm, it's a no brainer in my book.
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: Box many doctors go into other areas to make money.
They get together just like lawyers will and get involved in big business becoming partners together and having ownership in projects and developments. I had a doctor tell me that he hated the profession and couldn't wait until he got out.
Woman doctors are somewhat better but can be a little less sympathetic with woman and shrug complaints off. There are some good ones, but not many.
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by sunny2
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: Box...I get your point, but I don't see it as a no brainer because it is too complex. I see it as a no win situation at this point because the people working on this to change it can't possibly have the experience to know anything more. What they should do is go to the patients and ask questions.
When you go into a group medical office with several doctors, in my area, you are not their boss because you are a patient, and you are out numbered. They have the freedom to say whatever they want on the medical reports and charge what they want and act towards you in any way and who is going to prove differently. As far as they are concern, you are the patient and have no say. Many times their staff is rude and not efficient. The doctors are not aware or are aware of how poorly their staff runs the office but will stand by them tooth and nail as long as they collect the money. You can't complain or else they will get rid of you. You are not their boss as they pretty much control. The way it is means we are at their mercy. They know how to cover for themselves. I've had a doctor's assistant steal my insurance checks, and the doctor had battled me for the money all the while protecting her. When she was found out, no apology from anyone, and they didn't want me as a patient any longer and became very nasty. I can go on and on. If you have money in the first place, they will treat you good, but run out of it and see how fast they get rid of you. I'm healthy but from time to time you have to see them. I cringe at the thought of it. I can go on and on about other things too. Male doctor's can be insulting to woman, and they can be as low as the next jerk. I rather not go to one at all. They also love to hit on woman which is uncomfortable and sickening. They do a lot and get away with it. Government in total control probably is not good, but it might level off things somewhat if there were stricter regulations and constant tests for them to undergo, including mental evaluations and testing of stress levels from time to time. One of the biggest requirement to keep up their education on all the newest and latest development in medicine. It is a matter of not getting slack and getting up standards. We may need a certain degree of Government control.
Just because doctors have a medical degree doesn't make them less ignorant. The ones that are good are a blessing, but they are hard to come by. Something has to be done. I just don't think there is anyone out there really aware of what is going on. With all that said, maybe only the goods ones will choose that profession.
If it were more controlled, it would eliminate the bad ones that are only in the profession to see that green.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: I never gave them the power over me or my body or my health care decisions. I take it upon myself to become informed as to my own health care needs, and they are basically just the pencil pushers that I have to go see to acquire some of the compounds necessary, or to get certain tests run that I can't do in my own garage. The doctors that don't like the fact that I question them don't get to see me again. No love lost, I'm sure. The doctors that think they are the final word on how my health care needs are to be met don't get my business.

It's like you said, Sunny. There are good doctors and then there are really crummy doctors. Just because they have M.D. behind their name doesn't mean anything except that they graduated from med school. It's up to us to weed out the bad doctors in the same way we weed out the crummy resaurants and shoddy workmen. If you have a doctor that doesn't listen, if his staff are rude and condescending, then get a new doctor. Don't recommend him to others, and don't give him any more of your money.

But think forward to a time when he can say "Hey, my hands are tied by government red tape. I have an excuse to be less than excellent."
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: Box....That's good you take charge of your medical care.
You give sound advice. Thank you.
Government control means taking away our free will little by little.
I've seen the worse side of doctors and how they treat people.
I don't think Gov. control over healthcare is really the answer but they can't let it go this way for long.
You wonder what the Gov. has up its sleeve next.
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by sunny2
sunny2
sunny2
Content Removed by sunny2
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: Also, Box, many medical students educated in other Countries are not up to the standards of our medical training from top Universities. They may continue their schooling here, but it is totally different.
11 months ago: What Altruist says about a single payer health system makes sense. The article he links makes sense. Canada (and now Vermont) have implemented a system where you get treated period.

That's just too simple. Insurance companies can not make any money. Health insurance is removed, any and all lawsuits that health insurance companies create are removed, and the whole thing is just too simple.

You're hurt, you go to a hospital and get fixed. That's just too simple.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: We have a RR member who is a healthcare provider in the NHS system. He has on several occasions written about his experiences in which the NHS denies treatment on basis of age or prognosis.
Out Of The Box
Out Of The Box
 Moderator
11 months ago: "You're hurt, you go to a hospital and get fixed"

We already have that in the entire US. And as long as you pay 10 bucks / month on your tab, they can't sue you for the unpaid balance.
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago:
Wikipedia.org/healthcareinEngland

National Health Service (NHS)The National Health Service (NHS) is free at the point of use for the patient though there are charges associated with eye tests, dental care, prescriptions, and many aspects of personal care.
The NHS provides the majority of healthcare in England, including primary care, in-patient care, long-term healthcare, ophthalmology and dentistry. The National Health Service Act 1946 came into effect on 5 July 1948. Private health care has continued parallel to the NHS, paid for largely by private insurance, but it is used by less than 8% of the population[citation needed], and generally as a top-up to NHS services. Recently there have been some examples where unused private sector capacity has been used to increase NHS capacity and in some cases the NHS has commissioned the private sector to establish and run new facilities on a sub contracted basis. Some new capital programs have been financed through the private finance initiative. The involvement of the private sector remains relatively small yet, according to one survey by the BMA, a large proportion of the public oppose such involvement.

[edit] Funding and management
sunny2
sunny2
11 months ago: They have their problems in England, too, as far as what I wrote previously.
Hospitals will let you bleed first before they treat you if they feel you don't have enough insurance. You wait. They don't accept you as an in patient in many cases. It is stressful on people who need treatment. Some will turn you away. Some hospitals are closing because they are not profiting. Long standing hospitals that were non profit have turned to making a profit but can't swing it. They are pretty poor. Their equipment is not up to date and the doctors aren't really top rated.
Altruist
Altruist
Eugene, OR
11 months ago: Paul Krugman has been writing a series about the US system compared to the Canadian system. Lots of graphs and charts and debunking of Republican horror stories. http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpr...

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.