Our Congressman canceled townhall meeting

Ah, you were the one being ignorant. Very well, I retract my claim to being insulted. =)

Funny how you fail to mention the credit card companies that have lost personal information. And why are their screw ups disclosed? Well, there is a California law that requires credit card companies to disclose these screw ups. Since California is so populous, al lit takes is one Californian to get caught up in the disclosure and the company at fault has to reveal the whole nature of the screw up. Just google credit card breach.

There is no law forcing companies to disclose when your medical records have been breached. Now this does happen from time to time if you read the news, but only because the companies involved want to make it clear to their employees that this behavior will not be tolerated.

That's an interesting puzzlement considering you're the instigating author to a goodly chunk of them.

ate

ish

So? I didn't mention them because we're talking about the government compelling us to release our private information, in violation of the Bill of Rights. The fact that many parties lose our information is an even better reason to oppose such a forcible intrusion by our government.

Mr. Obama says there's a health care emergency so pressing that we have to pass this ridiculous plan immediately--before the August recess originally--yet the plan itself wouldn't be implemented until

I suspect he really wanted to get all this done before the costs start showing up, becoming apparent, especially the recent upgraded deficit figures. It's easy to be popular handing out candy, but harder when the People start having to pay.

The fact is even if it were a good idea--which it isn't--we can't afford it. Our current socialism is already breaking the country's back; we simply don't have another 2 terabucks to squander. We don't have it.

Mr. Obama laments the lack of health insurance "portability," yet the government's every policy works against portability. Suppose you got a policy that you'd own personally, and your employer agreed to pay the premiums for you. And if you quit, you could take that policy to a new employer and make a similar arrangement.

Wouldn't that be a good thing? Except it's illegal.

Sheesh.

Anyway, there's no need for a national entitlement. Any state can pass state-wide care anytime they want. Indeed, there are any number of simple, riskless ways in which the current system could be unshackled, and allowed to be more affordable and efficient. If that were the goal.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

When was the last time government intrusion has driven down costs of anything? When the government gets involved, it ALWAYS raises costs, because of the amount that the bureaucrats strip off the top to line their own pockets.

The way to drive down costs is with robust competion, also known as the Free Market.

Hell, look at yourself! It costs you 3X as much for insurance - that's precisely because of government intrusion into the market.

Hope This Helps! Rich

Um, I pay 3x the cost because I don't work for da man. Government has nothing to do with this.

We have had private health insurance for years. Are you saying they have contained costs? When Bill and Hillary tried to reform health care, it was only 10% of the GDP. Now it's 15%. Clearly the private sector has failed.

From "the hostess with the mostest?" ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Mo, I'm saying that excessive, misguided government regulation has driven up EVERYONE'S costs.

One solution, which the Republicans seem to favor, is to open the insurance industry to interstate competition, which is now prohibited by government edict.

Another factor which drives up costs is insane malpractice awards, which should be capped.

But I saw one of those political shows - the Republican mentioned both of these things (competition and tort reform), and the Democrat responded as if he hadn't heard a single word of it. Now THAT'S brain-lock.

I'm not saying I'm a Republican, or even a sympathizer, but I do agree that these two specific points make a lot more sense than socialized medicine. Hell, why don't they fix the current Medicare disaster?

And one thing that's downright evil is that he's going to punish people who don't want or need insurance, or maybe even can't afford it, by FORCING everyone, essentially at gunpoint, to buy into their scheme, under threat of having money taken away that they don't even have!

That's the problem with socialism - it's based entirely on theft.

Thanks, Rich

My favorite complaint is this: If you go to the doctor, and offer to just pay cash, you WILL pay full list price. He CAN NOT give you a discount, at least not in California or Tennessee. (The two states I have asked doctors about this!)

You see, if they give you a discount, and Medicare or the insurance companies find out, they will immediately reduce his payments accordingly. Their prices are all discounted off the cash price, even if they do cost the doctor more to process and administer. BY LAW he is prevented from offering a discount.

Compounding this the fee for service system. If a doc sees you in his office, he gets paid for that service. If he does any treatment, he gets paid for that treatment as well as the visit. So, you find out that the doctor, while seeing you, gave you two aspirin. He can now bill you for that 'treatment' and you notice on the insurance bill an additional $20 charge for two aspirin. You also find them separating their administrative and nursing staffs, so that they can bill you for billing you! The billing process is now a separate service, see...

Charlie

It's legal here, but Obama is going to crush that.

I've been able to negotiate 10-15% discounts at the dentist.

...Jim Thompson

Actually, everybody _should_ pay full list, and whine about it, or shop for another doctor, then the customer should go get reimbursed by the insurance companies. If they'd get the government out of the loop, and let the insurance companies compete, the medical insurers would load up the airwaves with "We're cheaper!" commercials the way the car insurers do.

And if you didn't like the doctor's list prices, you could shop around for another doctor.

Then present _that_ bill for reimbursement.

THAT would bring prices down, as competition (AKA the Free Marked) always does.

Cheers! Rich

Exactly! My wife is an accountant, and somewhat anal about prices. But, when she goes to the doctor, there is no way for her to find out how much it will cost. First, the doctor's staff doesn't know until they are ready to bill exactly what they are going to charge her for. Then, she is on Medicare, so they have to figure out what discounts and prices they will allow, and they there is her deductible, and how it will (or won't) figure into the whole thing. Add on to that the fact that the doctor can take 2-3 months before he gets around billing it out, Medicare takes another month or two to get back to the doc, and then the doc has to bill her for any remainder, and it will usually be four to six months before she actually sees the bill.

Now, if they just put the prices out there, like a car repair shop or other legitimate business, then we could see who really deserves the business. Do I go to the expensive doctor with the magnificent record? Or the cheaper doctor that is just starting out, but already has a pretty good rep? And, I can avoid the charlatan that has really cheap prices, but only gives you two minutes a patient and prescribes the drug de jour for every problem...

Charlie

This is just not true.

I needed an operation a few years ago. ( Hernia )

I asked what the total cost would be, the doctor said they did not know, I would have to ask the hospital.

I asked the hospital and they told me to ask the doctor.

I asked the insurance company and they would not answer my phone calls or letters.

So, the first thing to do is make a list of regular doctor services and give that a standard pricing. ( like auto mechanic's )

Let congress try to pass that and see the fur fly.

See how the free-market handles that.

don

I had a bunch of tests done after an AF episode a couple of years back. One set of tests I wanted to know what it would cost before I agreed to it. Everyone looked at me like I had a third eye. Another I didn't bother (who wudda thunk a couple of simple blood tests world cost me $750 out of pocket). $500 for a 1-mile trip in an ambulance, forget it. I'll have my wife drive, thank you.

Yes, and I can go to the guy just starting out if I want a doctor I can actually talk to.

Yes, and some are there for the drugs. Emergency rooms see this all the time.

But the fact that no one knows prices--or cares--is exactly the problem. There's no incentive to efficiency, and no free market. How could there be when neither patient nor doctor knows the prices? Free markets require the free flow of information.

Well, actually, there is a list of prices & services. They're fixed by Medicare. Or broken, depending on how you look at it.

If everyone had to pay for at least all their ordinary care, in cash, from their own pockets, the system would optimize itself. Patients would economize, as would doctors.

It is exactly government policy that has driven the price of healthcare to where it is. Mr. Obama seeks to expand on all the mistakes. It's silly.

-- Cheers, James Arthur

All you say may be true, but the "free market" will not give up its cash cow for efficiency.

Lets face it, profit is number one. Efficiency to get more profit is number two.

There is no "free market", there is not competition, there is just profit.

When the "free market" idiots figure this out, maybe we will get on the "right track".

(but I doubt it)

don

some time after the invention of the telephone. I don't recall the exact date, :)

And you don't make any profit at all if your product is crap.

The Free Market is painful for those who depend on the Nanny State to _force_ people to buy their crap.

Yes, the Free Market culls the deadwood. This is a _GOOD_ thing.

Are you one of the deadwood?

Thanks, Rich

Free market is also information.

Not hidden agendas for the crooked.

don