2002 Medicare Survey

[heartsurgeon]

What is there to pay for other than the pills

this is an example of an idealist goal with absolutely no appreciation of the costs.

physicians cannot care for an infinite number of patients,

there are not an infinite number of nurses, pharmacists, nurses aides, orderlies, xray technicians, laboratory technitians to provide care for these patients

there are not an infinite number of hospital beds, xray machines, blood testing machines, etc to care for these people.

you assume that these facilities are grossly underutilized. you have absolutely no basis in fact fopr this supposition.

my wife works as a physician for the VA system. she goes to work at 8:00 am and comes home at 5:00 pm, and she works non-stop all day taking care of the
several thousand veterans in her "panel".

now she is supposed to provide care for everyone over 70 years of age?

while your suggestion maybe kindhearted, it is not realistic.

why don't you

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

What is there to pay for other than the pills

this is an example of an idealist goal with absolutely no appreciation of the costs.

Yes and No! I think I know the cost involved... at least from the perspective of the accountant.

physicians cannot care for an infinite number of patients,

There are not an infinite number of patients. But, don't ya think it would just be the delta patient.. the ones not being seen now? The rest are being seen by someone, right?

there are not an infinite number of nurses, pharmacists, nurses aides, orderlies, xray technicians, laboratory technitians to provide care for these patients
there are not an infinite number of hospital beds, xray machines, blood testing machines, etc to care for these people.

Ditto my last!

you assume that these facilities are grossly underutilized. you have absolutely no basis in fact fopr this supposition.

The absence of elephants in my living room gives me reasonable assurance that there are no elephants in my living room. I go to the VA hospital and the Naval hospital more often than I'd care to.. Fine physicians and staff!

my wife works as a physician for the VA system. she goes to work at 8:00 am and comes home at 5:00 pm, and she works non-stop all day taking care of the several thousand veterans in her "panel".
now she is supposed to provide care for everyone over 70 years of age?

Well.. tell her I thank her for her efforts. (really)
Not her alone to see the over 70 folks. But, again are they not being seen already...?
The issue here is the cost of going to a private hospital and the medicare issue of not paying the cost and going to the VA or Naval where the cost is what ever it is but, if they need care they need care and if medicare don't cut it in the private world then it will there.. staff to the need.. The infastructure is there and the people are there all we need is the physician. Pay them what ever and that is the incremental cost, as I see it.. one physician can see... 20 folks a day..

while your suggestion maybe kindhearted, it is not realistic.
why don't you

It is a way. Current ways are not effective in paying the private sector costs.. if a leak exists at least try to shore it up before we sink the dang boat... all standing around saying that bucket is too small does little to bail the water.. if enough start to bail the size of the bucket will not matter so long as the amount evacuated exceeds the amount leaked..

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: chess9
CAD:

The Dems have lobbied quite hard for a prescription drug benefit, which is probably something we can't afford as long as we are the world's policeman. I'm not in favor of it for anyone who has income over some reasonable threshhold. I don't see it as fiscally responsible. But, to act as though the Republicans are pushing this bill because they care about poor seniors is ridiculous. That's the way they are trying to sell it and that's one of the reasons why Daniel focused on the supposed "benefit". [N.B.: Few seniors think it is a good bill, AARP to the contrary notwithstanding.] It is loaded with perks for the special Republican interests. None of that was in the bill Kennedy proposed. If you right wingers were really fiscal conservatives you would have been writing your congressman about this abuse of public money which is nothing more than a ruse to raise bucks for Bush's re-election. Instead, Daniel raises the spector of the bill fixing something that isn't broke instead of raising the central issue of the bill. Hypocrisy comes to mind.... Or, maybe just an inability to see the stupidity of Republicans while always finding something about Democratic Party issues to whine about?

This is a common problem here. People talking about the issues that make their side look good, while ignoring the fundamental flaws in their position. Ultimately, you vitiate ALL your arguments because they are assumed to be wildly partisan. Surprise, surprise.

-Robert

Robert, you are pathetic. The reason I made this post was to show that I disagreed with the Republicans. I am trying to show that they are guilty of playing poitics rather than actually helping those that need Medicare. HOLY COW MAN!

 

[chess9]

Daniel:

Ok, Daniel, but next time please tell us how PATHETIC those mewling misanthropes called Republicans are. Don't complain about a minor part of a bill designed to feed the Republican pigs the corn we raised with our seed, our hands and our land. Sheezh....

-Robert

 

[daniel1113]

Originally posted by: chess9
Ok, Daniel, but next time please tell us how PATHETIC those mewling misanthropes called Republicans are.

I don't think the Republicans are "PATHETIC those mewling misanthropes." That is what you think. Just because I disagree with them on an issue doesn't make them "PATHETIC those mewling misanthropes." You've got a lot of anger built up, Robert. You don't really care what I post, or what Republicans do, you hate us both for some reason. Talk about partisanship...

 

[chess9]

Daniel:

I don't hate you. I don't even know you. We're talking here about discriminating between bs and real action. A high level of dialectic tension is necessary to separate the far right wing from its illusions. Sort of a like breaking the bonds of some atomic particles. Some resist more than others. When you're the atom it's a hard concept to grasp.... FWIW, almost all my friends are Republicans and I give them chemistry lessons every day.

As for the Republican Party, about 30% of them are worth saving. People like Olympia Snow, McCain, and usually Chuck Hegel, are decent. Unfortunately, the Republican Party is dominated by crazies like Tom Delay, Trent Lott, and the now gone Gingrich. These are the same sort of people (conservatives, like the old Dem Segs who morphed into the main wing of the Republican Party) who opposed almost every bit of progress in civil rights in this country. These right wingers opposed voting rights for women, equal rights for blacks, they were virulently anti-semitic, anti-Hispanic, and anti-foreign. We see many of those same views lingering in the Republican Party like a dormant virus ready to infect the culture with disease.

The worst that can be said of the Dems today is they promise too much, though lately the Republicans have been doing more of that than the Dems.

Anyway, if everyone who disagreed with you hated you then everyone would hate you because you will disagree with everone about SOMETHING. Tolerance is a good thing.

-Robert