See other Health Articles
Title: In Massachusetts, Universal Coverage Strains Care
Source:
NY Times
URL Source: [None]
Published: Apr 5, 2008
Author: Kevin Sack
Post Date: 2008-04-05 15:37:09 by F.A. Hayek Fan
Keywords: None
Views: 689
Comments: 53
AMHERST, Mass. — Once they discover that she is Dr. Kate, the supplicants line up to approach at dinner parties and ballet recitals. Surely, they suggest to Dr. Katherine J. Atkinson, a family physician here, she might find a way to move them up her lengthy waiting list for new patients. Those fortunate enough to make it soon learn they face another long wait: Dr. Atkinson’s next opening for a physical is not until early May — of 2009. In pockets of the United States, rural and urban, a confluence of market and medical forces has been widening the gap between the supply of primary care physicians and the demand for their services. Modest pay, medical school debt, an aging population and the prevalence of chronic disease have each played a role. Now in Massachusetts, in an unintended consequence of universal coverage, the imbalance is being exacerbated by the state’s new law requiring residents to have health insurance. Since last year, when the landmark law took effect, about 340,000 of Massachusetts’ estimated 600,000 uninsured have gained coverage. Many are now searching for doctors and scheduling appointments for long-deferred care. Here in western Massachusetts, Dr. Atkinson’s bustling 3,000-patient practice, which was closed to new patients for several years, has taken on 50 newcomers since she hired a part-time nurse practitioner in November. About a third were newly insured, Dr. Atkinson said. Just north of here in Athol, the doctors at North Quabbin Family Physicians are now seeing four to six new patients a day, up from one or two a year ago. Dr. Patricia A. Sereno, state president of the American Academy of Family Physicians, said an influx of the newly insured to her practice in Malden, just north of Boston, had stretched her daily caseload to as many as 22 to 25 patients, from 18 to 20 a year ago. To fit them in, Dr. Sereno limits the number of 45-minute physicals she schedules each day, thereby doubling the wait for an exam to three months. “It’s a recipe for disaster,” Dr. Sereno said. “It’s great that people have access to health care, but now we’ve got to find a way to give them access to preventive services. The point of this legislation was not to get people episodic care.” Whether there is a national shortage of primary care providers is a matter of considerable debate. Some researchers contend the United States has too many doctors, driving overutilization of the system. But there is little dispute that the general practice of medicine is under strain at a time when there is bipartisan consensus that better prevention and chronic disease management would not only improve health but also help control costs. With its population aging, the country will need 40 percent more primary care doctors by 2020, according to the American College of Physicians, which represents 125,000 internists, and the 94,000-member American Academy of Family Physicians. Community health centers, bolstered by increases in federal financing during the Bush years, are having particular difficulty finding doctors. “I think it’s pretty serious,” said Dr. David C. Dale, president of the American College of Physicians and former dean of the University of Washington’s medical school. “Maybe we’re at the front of the wave, but there are several factors making it harder for the average American, particularly older Americans, to have a good personal physician.” Studies show that the number of medical school graduates in the United States entering family medicine training programs, or residencies, has dropped by 50 percent since 1997. A decadelong decline gave way this year to a slight increase in numbers, perhaps because demand is driving up salaries. There have been slight increases in the number of doctors training in internal medicine, which focuses on the nonsurgical treatment of adults. But the share of those residents who then establish a general practice has plummeted, to 24 percent in 2006 from 54 percent in 1998, according to the American College of Physicians. The Government Accountability Office reported to Congress in February that the per capita supply of primary care physicians actually grew by 12 percent from 1995 to 2005, at more than double the rate for specialists. But the report also revealed deep shifts in the composition of primary care providers. While fewer American-trained doctors are pursuing primary care, they are being replaced in droves by foreign medical school graduates and osteopathic doctors. There also has been rapid growth in the ranks of physician assistants and nurse practitioners. A. Bruce Steinwald, the accountability office’s director of health care, concluded there was not a current nationwide shortage. But Mr. Steinwald urged the overhaul of a fee-for-service reimbursement system that he said undervalued primary care while rewarding expensive procedure-based medicine. His report noted that the Medicare reimbursement for a half-hour primary care visit in Boston is $103.42; for a colonoscopy requiring roughly the same time, a gastroenterologist would receive $449.44. Numerous studies, in this country and others, have shown that primary care improves health and saves money by encouraging prevention and early diagnosis of chronic conditions like high blood pressure and diabetes. Presidential candidates in both parties stress its importance. Here in Massachusetts, legislative leaders have proposed bills to forgive medical school debt for those willing to practice primary care in underserved areas; a similar law, worth $15.6 million, passed in New York this week. Massachusetts also recently authorized the opening of clinics in drug stores, hoping to relieve the pressure. “It is a fundamental truth — which we are learning the hard way in Massachusetts — that comprehensive health care reform cannot work without appropriate access to primary care physicians and providers,” Dr. Bruce Auerbach, the president-elect of the Massachusetts Medical Society, told Congress in February. Jon M. Kingsdale, executive director of the agency that oversees the Massachusetts initiative, said he had not heard of major problems, but acknowledged “the prospect of a severe shortage” as newly insured patients seek care in doctors’ offices rather than emergency rooms. Given the presence of four medical schools and Boston’s dense medical infrastructure, it might seem difficult to argue that Massachusetts has too few doctors. The state ranks well above the national average in the per capita supply of all doctors and of primary care physicians. But those measures do not necessarily translate into adequate access, particularly in remote areas. Annual work force studies by the medical society have found statewide shortages of primary care doctors in each of the last two years. The share who accept new patients has dropped, to barely half in the case of internists, and the average wait by a new patient for an appointment with an internist rose to 52 days in 2007 from 33 days in 2006. In westernmost Berkshire County, newly insured patients are being referred 25 miles away, said Charles E. Joffe-Halpern, director of an agency that enrolls the uninsured. The situation may worsen as large numbers of general practitioners retire over the next decade. The incoming pool of doctors is predominantly female, and many are balancing child-rearing with part-time work. The supply is further stretched by the emergence of hospitalists — primary care physicians who practice solely in hospitals, where they can earn more and work regular hours. President Bush has proposed eliminating $48 million in federal support for primary care training programs. Clinic administrators in western Massachusetts report extreme difficulty in recruiting primary care doctors. Dr. Timothy Soule-Regine, a co-owner of the North Quabbin practice, said it had taken at least two years and as long as five to recruit new physicians. At the University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester, no more than 4 of the 28 internal medicine residents in each class are choosing primary care, down from half a decade ago, said Dr. Richard M. Forster, the program’s director. In Springfield, only one of 16 third-year residents at Baystate Medical Center, which trains physicians from Tufts University, plans to pursue primary care, said Jane Albert, a hospital spokeswoman. The need to pay off medical school debt, which averages $120,000 at public schools and $160,000 at private schools, is cited as a major reason that graduates gravitate to higher-paying specialties and hospitalist jobs. Primary care doctors typically fall at the bottom of the medical income scale, with average salaries in the range of $160,000 to $175,000 (compared with $410,000 for orthopedic surgeons and $380,000 for radiologists). In rural Massachusetts, where reimbursement rates are relatively low, some physicians are earning as little as $70,000 after 20 years of practice. Officials with several large health systems said their primary care practices often lose money, but generate revenue for their companies by referring patients to profit centers like surgery and laboratories. Dr. Atkinson, 45, said she paid herself a salary of $110,000 last year. Her insurance reimbursements often do not cover her costs, she said. “I calculated that every time I have a Medicare patient it’s like handing them a $20 bill when they leave,” she said. “I never went into medicine to get rich, but I never expected to feel as disrespected as I feel. Where is the incentive for a practice like ours?”
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-12) not displayed.
.
.
.
#13. To: robin (#10)
Not true. I've said for years that the problems we see today are caused directly by the interference of the government, first by creating medicare/medicade and then by creating HMO's. The solution is not to beg the government to interfere more but to demand that they cease and desist from interfering at all.
You have no intelligent response to my posts, so you attack me personally. Life's too short for such posters; another for the bozo list. Ciao. On the one hand you accuse and blame the government for every conspiracy known to man, yet on the other you want to trust them with your very life and yet I'm the asshole for pointing out how fucking crazy those two simultaneous views are? You are living proof of why women should never have been given the vote.
Your post didn't say anything.
BINGO!
"Man is rather stupid than wicked." - Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
She's F4um's Sybil
don't you think Robin makes a good point here and regarding the difference between single payer vs universal? while i'm in total agreement with you about government interference (i'm an anarchist), let's face it, the reality is that's not going to end. for all intents and purposes, we've got government healthcare now for the welfare recipients and illegals. why not discuss possible viable solutions?
And who is this "single payer?" The United States government. How will this "single person" get paid? Via taxation. How much of the taxes will go to pay the bureaucracy? If it's like other government programs, more than 55%. How will this 'single payer" keep health care costs down? By price controls and regulating the lives of Americans. As for corporate welfare, using that as an excuse to provide healthcare welfare for the whole country is bogus. The answer is to get stop corporate welfare, not expand it to everyone. In the end though it doesn't matter what I say. The American people are socialist to the core and will demand nationalized healthcare. If not this election cycle, then the next.
The only solutions she's willing to discuss are the ones in which the government takes over the healthcare industry. I reject that as a solution because I see government involvement as the root of the problems we already have. I'm of the opinion that, unless one is discussing invasion of the country, government is never the answer to the problem.
i agree, but how? you know what i think? nothing's going to stop it except a complete economic collapse and a complete collapse of this leviathan. so in that vein, hell, let's all pile on the gravy train and hasten its demise. then it's every man/woman for him/herself which is exactly what i want.
So you win an argument by saying that which insults every woman on the forum. Do you also shot at your foot as a method of checking to see if a gun is loaded?
You are correct. Nothing is is going to stop it and we are all going to end up as slaves to the government. Robin is a perfect example of why. Here's a woman who has spent literally years believing the worst about Uncle Sammy, yet even SHE can't fathom any other way to fix healthcare except to hand it over to that very same Uncle Sammy. If she can't fathom any other way, then how can the average clueless, head-in-the-clouds American be expected to? The experiment has ended and it has been proven a failure. Man does not want freedom or liberty.
I'll take the same policy & deductable the illegals, disabled and over 65-set get.
Obama, albeit using slightly different terms, agrees: "To defeat al Qaeda, I will build a twenty-first-century military and twenty-first-century partnerships as strong as the anticommunist alliance that won the Cold War to stay on the offense everywhere from Djibouti to Kandahar." - Sen Obama, June 4, 2007
I'm not here to win an argument but to express my opinion. I don't really care if that opinion does or does not offend. People are free to agree or disagree with my opinion as they choose. Their offense is not my problem.
Get over yourself, she is not character deficient for not seeing an issue the same manner with which you do, and for disagreeing with you. "You mean, after all this time and place as a poster you are dumb" attacks are entertaining, and a stable at the Café Paranoia which is Free Republic, but surely you can discuss this with Robin in a more meaningful way with less personal attack to it. You should cool down, it is you you are hurting here, not Robin. If you have personal issues, that is what internal E mail systems are for. When you try to rake someone over the coals this way in open forum, nothing positive is ever going to come from it.
Hell, let's make it "fair" and give everyone the same benefits as Congress! Whooo hooo we'll all be living high on the hog then! What do you mean how do we pay for it? Who cares! I want it and I want it now!!! Seriously though, this is just one reason why socialism never works. If group A receives taxpayer money then group B will demand it. If group B gets it, then why should group C not have it as well, and so on and so on. It never ends, and in the name of fairness we all end up as tax slaves, except for the rich and political elite of course (usually one and the same). It's a shame that "we the people" can't remove ALL entitlements for Congress people. This might go a long way in removing the problem of career politicians.
I would suggest you do the same. It is nothing but cognitive dissonance to spend years painting the government as being the most evil entity upon the face of the earth which has been involved in every rotten thing that's happened in the last x number of years and then turn around and claim that this same government is the only one that can "save" us from the big bad HMO's who the government created in the first place. It is not a personal attack to point out the lunacy of these two points of view. It's the equivalent of spending years raising hell about the child molester on your block only to turn around and ask that same child molester to baby-sit your child for you. She has every right to have any view she wants and I have every right to call that view insane if I want. Once again, you are not required to agree with my opinion.
I totally agree and this is why I knew, deep down, RP would never be taken seriously. Obama is a socialist, Hillary is a socialist and toss McCain into the pot too. We have no choice, and no power. All we have left are our guns and most here, I think, will willingly surrender them when the knock on the door comes. It's way, way over.
Obama, albeit using slightly different terms, agrees: "To defeat al Qaeda, I will build a twenty-first-century military and twenty-first-century partnerships as strong as the anticommunist alliance that won the Cold War to stay on the offense everywhere from Djibouti to Kandahar." - Sen Obama, June 4, 2007
I mean women in general, not any particular one. They shouldn't be allowed to drive, either, not when I've seen them do a 17-point parallel park.
"Man is rather stupid than wicked." - Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Then I assume you are not going to collect social security retirement benefits when you are of age too. Seeing how dependent it will make you to the man's monthly check. When I was injured falling from a tree I used the Veteran's Administration for medical care, so does that give me cognitive dissonance too? I mean, think about it, I got gravely injured protesting and used government money to heal myself with. So I am a hypocrate, yes? I would say you were unreasonably rude and disrespectful to Robin with no cause. You turned disagreement on an issue into an ad hominem attack. Health care management is a hugely complicate issue and saying opinions about aspects of it are as simple to reach as not being stupid enough to let the neighborhood skin junkie take care of your child is disingenuous and is an analogy that does not work.
Here's a nice collection of women drivers to back up your argument.
"I'd like to live just long enough to be there when they cut off your head and stick it on a pike as a warning to the next ten generations that some favors come with too high a price." Vir Cotto, Babylon 5
That video is why I never let women drive my car. People can call me all the names I want.
"Man is rather stupid than wicked." - Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Also consider that this is the state of Mass, not the federal govt.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Are you not a good climber? I've climbed trees and have never fallen. I haven even jumped from tree to tree and never fell. What caused you to fall?
The question isn't is it broken but why? Unless you find and act to correct the correct why you will get an endless succession of failed fixes. As long as one only treat the symptoms the disease will continue to progress. The symptom is inadequate availability of actual health care. That does not mean that Socialized Government Controlled Deathcare is the solution. You have identified only the symptom not the cause of the condition. And I have pointed out repeatedly that "Single Payer" = Government Controlled and Defined "Medicine" to benefit the Medico-Pharmaceutical Complex, and the death of alternatives to AMA/Big Pharma (Rothschilds, Carnegies, Rockefellers et. al., - the usual suspects) Deathcare. It means the death of independent healing arts, which are already ailing from government fiats and restraints instituted to benefit the Robber Barron Spawn and the Pharmaceutical Companies they own. What needs to change is government protectionism for favored cronies and to allow free access to that type of healthcare a person chooses - not what some Bureaucrat ORDERS them to. Yes, more of the same failed centralized government puppet dictated, for the benefit of the usual suspects, AMA Deathcare. What this is, is a command economy in healthcare and it is the antithesis of freedom, and of cleaning up the hellthcare morass. The Beneficiaries: Big Pharma and the Robber Baron Spawn.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
I agree with your sentiments. What we have is poorly working, the only ones benefiting from the changes from the early 1960 seem to be the Insurance and the predatory private hospitals. And besides, lets be honest, our system IS communistic or socialist, however you want to look at it. From what I can see, the moment you have a government that taxes the general population you have a system such as above. The real question is how ethically does it perform. And the government lately gets poor marks in that operational question and the health care industry is deep in the manure bucket as well. Calling people communist is a reactionary emotional response - and we have way too much of this in our political discourse. We need solutions, and the current system is, in my opinoion, failing badly at providing them.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" Yeh I tried that, there are better ways.
"Satan / Cheney in "08" www.grahamazon.com/sp/ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-payer_health_care The Beneficiaries: Big Pharma and the Robber Baron Spawn. The opposite is true in Germany, Switzerland and France. They have price caps on drugs, which Big Pharma hates. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care www.pnhp.org/ This is because private insurance bureaucracy and paperwork consume one-third (31 percent) of every health care dollar. Streamlining payment through a single nonprofit payer would save more than $350 billion per year, enough to provide comprehensive, high-quality coverage for all Americans.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Well said. I like robin and agree with her on many things, but this one blind spot puzzles me. She is willing to trust control of healthcare to the same cabal which she excoriates for its psychopathic foreign policy. The same government which has a revolving door at the FDA, waged war on alternatives to big money Pharma produced "treatments", approves Aspartame in opposition to its own scientists, prohibits Stevia as a sweetener, and invariably takes the side of the criminal Pharma Combine and the AMA Cartel. All of these are known, and proven, and therefore it is a puzzle. I must conclude that she has a false datum which she regards as true.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
The opposite is true in Germany, Switzerland and France. They have price caps on drugs, which Big Pharma hates. No, the opposite is not true. It is still the case that Big Pharma has a monopoly on the products, and alternatives are either not supported or suppressed. You still have a Government Monopoly, controlled from behind the curtain, on what types of health treatments are supported and allowed. Methinks Big Pharma is crying Crocodile Tears all the way to the Bank, which they also own.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Excellent point, when anyone can get care in ER, once their problems are serious enough, then that is socialized medicine; but at its worse. We pay twice for health care but get less. It's the worst of both worlds. And we know some sort of health care changes are coming, it behooves us to know something about the choices, and be ready to point out the weaknesses in whatever plans are brought to the table. We should also be ready to look for the inevitable corruption that will likely result. Without all the usual health care lobbyists, there should be less corruption, but perhaps it will simply be new faces.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
They have price caps, here's an interesting comment about that in Switzerland: "Within Europe, we are almost the only country left with a strong drug company sector," said Swiss congressman Felix Gutzwiller, a doctor who also heads the University of Zurich Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine. "The public has a very peculiar attitude about that. They want a high level of innovation, but there is a permanent discussion about the cost of medications."
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Again the debate is held within the limitations of the Allopathic/Pharmaceutical based paradigm. It is an artificial limitation upon the debate, that research, that should be taking place for inexpensive alternatives to toxic pharmaceuticals is not only not taking place but the government, which gives money to Big Pharma hand over fist, will not support it and in fact does everything it can to suppress it. However, there is no 1000% profit in non-patentable low mark-up natural treatments. Not only that there is no need for hundreds of dollars in addtional drugs to treat the side effects of the one prescribed to treat, but not cure, the original problem. Of course there is a profit to be made, and a strong demand for alternatives (51 cents of every dollar spent on health care by private individuals is spent on alternatives - many people are well aware that the toxic pharmaceuticals are only one way to treat and that there are alternatives) but it is not at Big Pharma's "accustomed" percentage. That is why Big Pharma and their Subsidiary the FDA work endlessly to prevent such alternatives from reaching the market and harming Big Pharma Profits.
"The difference between an honorable man and a moral man is that an honorable man regrets a discreditable act even when it has worked and he is in no danger of being caught." ~ H. L. Mencken
Not really. The cabal likes the way things are. IMO, this shows a fundamental misunderstanding about the various types of health care. Single payer is about how health care is payed. Universal is more govt intrusive, yet still private health care is involved. If you were a Swiss citizen, where gun ownership is encouraged (how horribly socialist!), you could choose from a cafeteria of health care choices. From the Dallas Morning News: A family of four in Switzerland pays an average of $680 a month in premiums. Government assistance helps pay premiums for those less well off. Health care prices are set each year after negotiations between insurance companies and medical providers. While everyone in Switzerland is obliged to buy insurance, the 87 Swiss health insurance companies also have to offer a basic health care plan priced without regard to risk. The companies can't make a profit on this basic plan, and they compete for profits by offering high or low deductibles and supplemental benefits. A healthy 24-year-old living in Bern pays the same premium as someone like Mr. Zbinden (300 Swiss francs a month, or about $242). The Swiss think the quality of their medical care is among the best in the world. They spend more of their national income on health care, 11.5 percent, than anyone except Americans, who spend 16 percent. The Swiss have the freedom to see any doctor in their canton, and they don't have long waits. And Swiss health care providers have much less paperwork than their U.S. counterparts.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
You two have identified the problem with U.S. health care: the laws are geared to big money, profit, while human misery, the end product of illness, takes a back seat, uunless one is destitute or an illegal alien. The health care laws in European countries, on the other hand. are geared to protect common people and make treatment affordable. Unless and until these criminals laws in America are either revoked or reformed it's futile to discuss the problem.
Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think.
Yeah, universal health care coverage is big mistake. Health care is not a right.
God is always good!
There isn't now and it's doubtful there will be in the future. It is possible to find physicians who are into alternative medicine as well. I have such a doctor. She has a license for acupuncture as well. When I had the flu 2 months ago, she did not prescribe Tamiflu, although I saw her within 48 hours, she told me to get Elderberry syrup and Holy Basil. I told a few people at work who were also sick and they all said it helped. One guy who is married to a German said the Germans use Elderberry a lot.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Yet anyone who suggests this will be called a communist on this 4um. I would like to know what label our current form of govt is.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Label it "Plutocracy," rule of the wealthy, and call it what it is, "Predatory Capitalism."
Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think.
Those work very well. Commie!
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
Common sense would say government is better equipped to handle health care than the private sector. It's not ethical to profit from human misery. Only the very stupid equate Universal Health Cre to Communism. Germany, Canada or Switzerland are not Communist countries.
Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think.
And they are far more ethical than the Bush Regime as well.
'Individuals should not take responsibility for their own defense. That’s what the police are for. ... If I oppose individuals defending themselves, I have to support police defending them. I have to support a police state.”' Alan Dershowitz
You clearly have no reasonable suggestions for the current state of our health care system.
#14. To: robin (#12)
(Edited)
You say I'm insane while you just repeat yourself?
#15. To: robin (#12)
You have no intelligent response to my posts
#16. To: Hayek Fan (#14)
women should never have been given the vote.
#17. To: YertleTurtle (#16)
#18. To: Hayek Fan, robin (#13)
There are many free nations in the Western world with working solutions for health care that do not enrich a handful of greedy CEOs on Corporate Welfare. Furthermore, they actually provide the health care that the companies promised to provide.
#19. To: christine (#18)
don't you think Robin makes a good point here and regarding the difference between single payer vs universal?
#20. To: christine (#18)
why not discuss possible viable solutions
#21. To: Hayek Fan (#19)
(Edited)
As for corporate welfare, using that as an excuse to provide healthcare welfare for the whole country is bogus. The answer is to get stop corporate welfare, not expand it to everyone.
#22. To: Hayek Fan (#14)
"You are living proof of why women should never have been given the vote."
Diplomacy is the art of saying nice doggy, till you find a large rock.
#23. To: christine (#21)
i agree, but how? you know what i think? nothing's going to stop it except a complete economic collapse and a complete collapse of this leviathan. so in that vein, hell, let's all pile on the gravy train and hasten its demise. then it's every man/woman for him/herself which is exactly what i want.
#24. To: Hayek Fan (#19)
#25. To: Ferret Mike (#22)
So you win an argument
#26. To: Hayek Fan, Robin (#23)
Diplomacy is the art of saying nice doggy, till you find a large rock.
#27. To: Jethro Tull (#24)
I'll take the same policy & deductable the illegals, disabled and over 65-set get.
#28. To: Ferret Mike (#26)
(Edited)
Get over yourself,
#29. To: Hayek Fan (#27)
Seriously though, this is just one reason why socialism never works.
#30. To: Hayek Fan (#17)
She's F4um's Sybil
#31. To: Hayek Fan (#28)
"It's the equivalent of spending years raising hell about the child molester on your block only to turn around and ask that same child molester to baby-sit your child for you."
Diplomacy is the art of saying nice doggy, till you find a large rock.
#32. To: YertleTurtle (#30)
I mean women in general, not any particular one. They shouldn't be allowed to drive, either, not when I've seen them do a 17-point parallel park.
#33. To: orangedog (#32)
#34. To: christine (#18)
#35. To: Ferret Mike (#31)
When I was injured falling from a tree
#36. To: robin, Hayek Fan (#6)
I'm not a communist. Our current health care system is broken. Americans who become ill have their polices canceled.
Something needs to change. I've posted articles about single-payer which is supported by doctors.
Mass. is trying something that naturally is overburdened at first.
#37. To: robin (#6)
I'm not a communist. Our current health care system is broken. Americans who become ill have their polices canceled.
#38. To: Ferret Mike (#22)
Do you also shot at your foot as a method of checking to see if a gun is loaded?
#39. To: Original_Intent (#36)
The U.S. spends twice as much as other industrialized nations on health care, $7,129 per capita. Yet our system performs poorly in comparison and still leaves 47 million without health coverage and millions more inadequately covered.
#40. To: tom007, robin, Hayek Fan (#37)
#41. To: robin (#39)
The Beneficiaries: Big Pharma and the Robber Baron Spawn.
#42. To: tom007 (#37)
And besides, lets be honest, our system IS communistic or socialist, however you want to look at it.
#43. To: Original_Intent (#41)
#44. To: robin (#43)
#45. To: Original_Intent (#40)
She is willing to trust control of healthcare to the same cabal
#46. To: robin, Original Intent (#45)
#47. To: Hayek Fan (#1)
Those greedy doctors!!! /sarcasm
#48. To: Original_Intent (#44)
However, there is no 1000% profit in non-patentable low mark-up natural treatments.
#49. To: Zoroaster, Original Intent (#46)
You two have identified the problem with U.S. health care: the laws are geared to big money, profit, while human misery, the end product of illness, takes a back seat, unless one is destitute or an illegal alien. The health care laws in European countries, on the other hand. are geared to protect common people and make treatment affordable. Unless and until these criminals laws in America are either revoked or reformed it's futile to discuss the problem.
#50. To: robin, Original Intent (#49)
Yet anyone who suggests this will be called a communist on this 4um. I would like to know what label our current form of govt is.
#51. To: Zoroaster (#50)
Label it "Plutocracy," rule of the wealthy, and call it what it is, "Predatory Capitalism."
#52. To: robin (#51)
Those work very well. Commie!
#53. To: Zoroaster (#52)
It's not ethical to profit from human misery. Only the very stupid equate Universal Health Care to Communism. Germany, Canada or Switzerland are not Communist countries.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest