Paul Krugman endorses Death Panels

[Rolfe]

No it doesn't. It's a horrible term.

Would you care to show any universal healthcare system that has anything that could be described as a "death panel"?

What about US insurance companies and their decisions to deny coverage to specific clients for particular conditions or particular treatments? Why wouldn't you describe these ajudications as "death panels"?

Still nobody prepared to hazard a guess as to what freedoms I'm lacking, living under the terrible burden of having all my healthcare needs provided free at point of use?

Rolfe.

 

[TraneWreck]

What about US insurance companies and their decisions to deny coverage to specific clients for particular conditions or particular treatments? Why wouldn't you describe these ajudications as "death panels"?

You have to remember that despite some excellent thinkers at the top, America is a REALLY dumb country.

One of the teabagger heroes is the Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer. She championed a bill that essentially allows police to stop and search anyone who officers have reasonable suspicion to believe is an illegal immigrant. The law will be destroyed in the courts because, obviously, what the hell does that mean? It means "looks Mexican," which violates quite a few bits of established law.

So, she is adored by the Death Panel crowd. What does she do? In a fevered rush to slash the budget, Arizona Republicans, led by Brewer, eliminated funding for organ transplants. People who were literally going into surgery to have bone marrow, kidneys, livers...etc. replaced, were denied those life-saving treatments because they decided to stop funding them. Here are a few examples:

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/money/family-mourns-man-who-was-denied-transplant-11-29-2010
http://www.kpho.com/news/25811486/detail.html
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/11/131215308/arizona-budget-cuts-put-organ-transplants-at-risk

So far 98 people have been denied transplants. The state of Arizona saved about $4.5 million.

If you read about those 98 people, they aren't destitute bums with no jobs, they aren't losers taking money from the system, they're people who have had serious medical issues that private insurers don't want to cover.

The last guy on the list, Randall Shepherd, caught rheumatic fever as a child. He needed a heart valve transplant, and obviously no private insurer will ever take such a patient again.

Shockingly, no one in this thread has remotely tried to explain how free market forces are supposed to help someone like Mr. Shepherd. But if we try to spread his risk across society, making the economic impact of his illness minimal, we're ne0-facist-communist-Hitlers, or something.

 

[BenBurch]

...

Shockingly, no one in this thread has remotely tried to explain how free market forces are supposed to help someone like Mr. Shepherd. But if we try to spread his risk across society, making the economic impact of his illness minimal, we're ne0-facist-communist-Hitlers, or something.

The answer, and the key to their hearts;

"Are there no prisons?" asked Scrooge.

"Plenty of prisons," said the gentleman, laying down the pen again.

"And the Union workhouses?" demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in
operation?"

"They are. Still," returned the gentleman, "I wish I could say they were
not."

"The Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour, then?" said Scrooge.

"Both very busy, sir."

"Oh! I was afraid, from what you said at first, that something had
occurred to stop them in their useful course," said Scrooge. "I am very
glad to hear it."

"Under the impression that they scarcely furnish Christian cheer of mind
or body to the multitude," returned the gentleman, "a few of us are
endeavouring to raise a fund to buy the Poor some meat and drink, and
means of warmth. We choose this time, because it is a time, of all
others, when Want is keenly felt, and Abundance rejoices. What shall I
put you down for?"

"Nothing!" Scrooge replied.

"You wish to be anonymous?"

"I wish to be left alone," said Scrooge. "Since you ask me what I wish,
gentlemen, that is my answer. I don't make merry myself at Christmas,
and I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the
establishments I have mentioned--they cost enough; and those who are
badly off must go there."

"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."

"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and
decrease the surplus population. Besides--excuse me--I don't know that."

"But you might know it," observed the gentleman.

"It's not my business," Scrooge returned. "It's enough for a man to
understand his own business, and not to interfere with other people's.
Mine occupies me constantly. Good afternoon, gentlemen!"

 

[Rolfe]

In a fevered rush to slash the budget, Arizona Republicans, led by Brewer, eliminated funding for organ transplants. People who were literally going into surgery to have bone marrow, kidneys, livers...etc. replaced, were denied those life-saving treatments because they decided to stop funding them. Here are a few examples:

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/money/family-mourns-man-who-was-denied-transplant-11-29-2010
http://www.kpho.com/news/25811486/detail.html
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/11/131215308/arizona-budget-cuts-put-organ-transplants-at-risk

So far 98 people have been denied transplants. The state of Arizona saved about $4.5 million.

If you read about those 98 people, they aren't destitute bums with no jobs, they aren't losers taking money from the system, they're people who have had serious medical issues that private insurers don't want to cover.

The last guy on the list, Randall Shepherd, caught rheumatic fever as a child. He needed a heart valve transplant, and obviously no private insurer will ever take such a patient again.

That is profoundly shocking. Words literally fail me. There is a death panel right there, in the US state-funded system.

Here is one example of how a society with universal healthcare treats people needing a heart transplant.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/six-weeks-ago-she-made-history-now-abigail-is-ready-to-play-1.873103

This little girl is middle-class - father an architect, mother a school teacher. However, she would have got exactly the same treatment, helicopter flights and experimental last-ditch artificial heart and everything, even if her father had been an unemployed labourer and her mother a cleaner.

And that's how we like it and that's how it should be, and I gladly pay my taxes so that it will go on being like this.

Rolfe.

 

[varwoche]

That is profoundly shocking. Words literally fail me. There is a death panel right there, in the US state-funded system.

This painfully underscores the most frustrating aspect of this entire debate: That the forces in favor of reform allowed the teabag crowd to screech with impunity, essentially, that black is white, up is down, more is less.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

You have to remember that despite some excellent thinkers at the top, America is a REALLY dumb country.

One of the teabagger heroes is the Governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer. She championed a bill that essentially allows police to stop and search anyone who officers have reasonable suspicion to believe is an illegal immigrant. The law will be destroyed in the courts because, obviously, what the hell does that mean? It means "looks Mexican," which violates quite a few bits of established law.

So, she is adored by the Death Panel crowd. What does she do? In a fevered rush to slash the budget, Arizona Republicans, led by Brewer, eliminated funding for organ transplants. People who were literally going into surgery to have bone marrow, kidneys, livers...etc. replaced, were denied those life-saving treatments because they decided to stop funding them. Here are a few examples:

http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/dpp/money/family-mourns-man-who-was-denied-transplant-11-29-2010
http://www.kpho.com/news/25811486/detail.html
http://www.npr.org/2010/11/11/131215308/arizona-budget-cuts-put-organ-transplants-at-risk

So far 98 people have been denied transplants. The state of Arizona saved about $4.5 million.

If you read about those 98 people, they aren't destitute bums with no jobs, they aren't losers taking money from the system, they're people who have had serious medical issues that private insurers don't want to cover.

The last guy on the list, Randall Shepherd, caught rheumatic fever as a child. He needed a heart valve transplant, and obviously no private insurer will ever take such a patient again.

Shockingly, no one in this thread has remotely tried to explain how free market forces are supposed to help someone like Mr. Shepherd. But if we try to spread his risk across society, making the economic impact of his illness minimal, we're ne0-facist-communist-Hitlers, or something.

Hey, I had a heart valve transplant! Well, an artificial one but that's probably also immensely expensive. So why am I not dead?

 

[brodski]

Hey, I had a heart valve transplant! Well, an artificial one but that's probably also immensely expensive. So why am I not dead?

Incompetent public sector death panels.

The much more efficient private sector death panels would have had you cold by now.

 

[AlBell]

This painfully underscores the most frustrating aspect of this entire debate: That the forces in favor of reform allowed the teabag crowd to screech with impunity, essentially, that black is white, up is down, more is less.

Try "There is no free lunch.".

 

[BenBurch]

Try "There is no free lunch.".

I hope you have cause to think of those words as you depart this mortal coil.

 

[AlBell]

I hope you have cause to think of those words as you depart this mortal coil.

I'll volunteer to forgo the last couple of months and save the $200,000, or whatever, that often costs. Can I count on you to ensure my hope is granted? My 'death panel' that is.

 

[BenBurch]

I'll volunteer to forgo the last couple of months and save the $200,000, or whatever, that often costs. Can I count on you to ensure my hope is granted? My 'death panel' that is.

No, how about you stay on machines until they cannot keep you going a second longer. A wreck with no quality of life to speak of, who can only respond to pain, moaning constantly. And you leave your family destitute from the expense of your care.

That seems fair.

 

[TraneWreck]

Hey, I had a heart valve transplant! Well, an artificial one but that's probably also immensely expensive. So why am I not dead?

Are you operating on the theory that if two situations share one detail in common they must be similar in all respects?

Here are a couple of issues that may explain why you're still alive:

1) Do you need a new procedure?
2) Will you die if you don't get it?
3) What age did you have this procedure done? Shepherd had his heart valves replaced as a teenager. Unless he receives insurance through his employer (which he currently does not) no private company will offer coverage to such a high-risk patient.
4) Did you have insurance when your procedure was done?
5) Are you on that same plan?
6) Are you insured through your employer? If not, are you simply buying as an individual on the private market?

So what's your answer? Just get insurance? How do you propose doing that?

He's a plumber, by the way. So he's gainfully employed performing a necessary service to society. He's not a bum or a grifter. They're demanding that he come up with $100,000 to $120,000 of private funds.

Or how about this guy:

One of the patients who has felt the budget ax is Francisco Felix, 32, of Laveen, Ariz., whose liver has been damaged by hepatitis C. According to an account published in The Arizona Republic, Felix was admitted to Banner Good Samaritan Medical Center in Phoenix on Monday night after learning that a dying family friend wanted her liver to go to him. But when Felix couldn't come up with $200,000 to pay for the procedure by Tuesday morning, the hospital wouldn't operate on him and the liver went to another patient.

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/11/131215308/arizona-budget-cuts-put-organ-transplants-at-risk

How many people can come up with $200,000 in a night?

I guess he just should have made sure to have a few hundred thousand dollars in the bank in case he got sick. I'm sure you have at least a half million in yours just in case that heart valve goes and your insurer doesn't want to cover it because it's a pre-existing condition or your previous surgery caused you to reach your lifetime cap in coverage.

 

[AlBell]

No, how about you stay on machines until they cannot keep you going a second longer. A wreck with no quality of life to speak of, who can only respond to pain, moaning constantly. And you leave your family destitute from the expense of your care.

That seems fair.

I'll just wish you an interesting and event filled life.

 

[ServiceSoon]

No it doesn't. It's a horrible term.

Would you care to show any universal healthcare system that has anything that could be described as a "death panel"?

What about US insurance companies and their decisions to deny coverage to specific clients for particular conditions or particular treatments? Why wouldn't you describe these ajudications as "death panels"?

If that's the term we choose to use, then it has to be used equally in discussions of both single payer and private market systems. The distinction is that in a single payer system you are stuck with what ever the gov decides; while in a private market system you have a choice. Isn't it unfair to suggest that if somebody was taxed to pay for a service that doesn't serve their specific needs, that this person has the choice to additional expenditures through private insurance? I guess if you refuse to agree to this I can always use the same argument in reverse. I'll let you pick

Still nobody prepared to hazard a guess as to what freedoms I'm lacking, living under the terrible burden of having all my healthcare needs provided free at point of use?

Rolfe.

Our health insurance decisions will become politicized and thus unpredictable. Example: President Bush JR passed an executive order banning federal money from being used for abortion except for special cases. President Obama changed this policy through the same means when he was elected president. This on-again off-again scenario has played out since the SCOTUS’s ruling in Roe vs. Wade.

You will also loose freedom of choice. That choice could be something as simple as which specialist you want to see or which company you want to support. or as complicated as which procedure you want to utilize to treat your cancer. Apparently one area the US beats the Britain system is in the treatment of cancer.

Proponents of UHC completely neglect that it isn't as if the US's higher health care cost can be completely attributed to the profit the health insurance industry makes. Suggesting that the replacement of the private health insurance with a universal one would cure the higher cost compared to other nations can only be understood as a lie. The US would have to completely duplicate other UHC systems in order to have similar expenditures. Duplicate things such as implementing government price controls, making health insurance compulsory, among many other things that American’s don’t agree upon.

It's not free. Can we please agree to stop obfuscating this point?

 

[brodski]

Isn't it unfair to suggest that if somebody was taxed to pay for a service that doesn't serve their specific needs, that this person has the choice to additional expenditures through private insurance?

Three points.
Firstly that argument isn't generally accepted in education, where you have the state system funded from general taxation and a private sector on top of that, why it is different for health?
Secondly, the fact is that the existence of a state health-care sector, particularly emergency care, in effect subsidies private health insurance. I have additional private insurance despite being covered by the NHS. I can get care at both private and state sector hospitals, I can get very quick access to consultants meaning that waiting lists don't exist for me. This costs me £6 a month. Thats six pounds Stirling, less than ten US dollars a month. What is the typical cost for US health insurance?
Thirdly, your taxes already pay for health-care- you pay more in tax for health-care than I do but chances are you can't access it as it is not universal.

 

[Shalamar]

If that's the term we choose to use, then it has to be used equally in discussions of both single payer and private market systems. The distinction is that in a single payer system you are stuck with what ever the gov decides; while in a private market system you have a choice. Isn't it unfair to suggest that if somebody was taxed to pay for a service that doesn't serve their specific needs, that this person has the choice to additional expenditures through private insurance? I guess if you refuse to agree to this I can always use the same argument in reverse. I'll let you pick

Our health insurance decisions will become politicized and thus unpredictable. Example: President Bush JR passed an executive order banning federal money from being used for abortion except for special cases. President Obama changed this policy through the same means when he was elected president. This on-again off-again scenario has played out since the SCOTUS’s ruling in Roe vs. Wade.

You will also loose freedom of choice. That choice could be something as simple as which specialist you want to see or which company you want to support. or as complicated as which procedure you want to utilize to treat your cancer. Apparently one area the US beats the Britain system is in the treatment of cancer.

People under UHC often have a higher freedom of choice than the current US system. Sure, you can choose to see a different specialist than your insurance company wants.. But you'll have to pay for it yourself. You can even choose different treatments.. again, you'll pay for it yourself if your insurance company won't cover it.

Under UHC, The doctors and the hospitals decide your care. Not an insurance company. Want to see a different doctor? Specialist? Hospital? No such thing as 'out of network'. Lose your job? Change your job? Still covered. And you can continue to see your current health care provider.

The job of the government in these cases is typically 'who do I write the cheque out to?'

Proponents of UHC completely neglect that it isn't as if the US's higher health care cost can be completely attributed to the profit the health insurance industry makes. Suggesting that the replacement of the private health insurance with a universal one would cure the higher cost compared to other nations can only be understood as a lie. The US would have to completely duplicate other UHC systems in order to have similar expenditures. Duplicate things such as implementing government price controls, making health insurance compulsory, among many other things that American’s don’t agree upon.

It's not free. Can we please agree to stop obfuscating this point?

No-one ever claimed it was free. They do claim it is free at 'point of service'. You don't need to suddenly find $200000 for an organ transplant if you insurance won't cover it, or if you find yourself unemployed, and thus, uninsured.

This is one of the top problems I have with living in the US... That people who need health care, can have it denied for a number of reasons. Or they can lose everything they have.. even if they are insured.

 

[brodski]

I'm sure you have at least a half million in yours just in case that heart valve goes and your insurer doesn't want to cover it because it's a pre-existing condition or your previous surgery caused you to reach your lifetime cap in coverage.

Read his previous posts in this thread, read his location, then read the post you responded to again. I think you missed his point.

 

[TraneWreck]

Read his previous posts in this thread, read his location, then read the post you responded to again. I think you missed his point.

Goddamn details.

Apologies to MarkCorrigan.

In order to save my ego from having to deal with such a mistake, I will now lash out:

WHY ARE ALL THESE GODDAMN BRITS WITH THEIR GODDAMN DRY SARCASM POSTING IN MY COUNTRY'S FORUM!?!?!

See, it wasn't my fault after all.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Try "There is no free lunch.".

"if you get sick, die quick"

That's pretty much what you are fighting for.

 

[varwoche]

Try "There is no free lunch.".

If only Palin and her ilk would express their misguided beliefs so honestly. Instead we get DEATH PANELS.