Health care - administrative incompetence

[Shalamar]

If doctors are going to be paid what doctors are paid under the NHS, it will feel like donating time to most doctors.

The free market doesn't let anyone die. People die everyday; can't change that can we?

The free market, in insurance, certainly does. People die when they can not afford the health care they need. There are people on this board who have talked about the horror stories of losing almost everything, because they did receive the care they needed.

Are you trying to say that doctors getting paid what you imagine to be less, is more important than the life of another human being?

 

[xjx388]

And I want an answer as to where my assumptions are wrong - they will be wrong but I have erred on the side of underestimating costs by assuming only the costs of thee surgeon and anaesthetist, and that the cost model is based on both having only one year experience and working 60-hours per week for 50 weeks in theatre, which I hope is laughably high, I'd hope... This provides a very conservative hourly rate for the cost of labour involved in a 5-hour surgery.

Let's pretend your numbers are correct and apply in a free market. Now what?

 

[xjx388]

The free market, in insurance, certainly does. People die when they can not afford the health care they need. There are people on this board who have talked about the horror stories of losing almost everything, because they did receive the care they needed.

Are you trying to say that doctors getting paid what you imagine to be less, is more important than the life of another human being?

You're almost there . . . I'm bracing for it . . . .

 

[Emet]

No. The most important factor was the economy and the recession.




http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...e-healthcare-law-or-want-it-more-liberal.html

Nope. I've got a poll too. It shows that 80% of likely voters thought heathcare was equally important as the economy.

Interesting way of interpreting the AP Poll. If I found what you were referring to (80% thought healthcare was equally important as the economy), then the answer is no. They were asked to rate issues and how important they were.

How important are the following issues to you personally:

Economy 89%
Healthcare 80%

And they weren't asked to rank issues as far as I could see, just comment on whether the issues were important to them.

And I have a poll showing post Americans don't favor the new law.

HC1. In general, do you favor, oppose, or neither favor nor oppose the law changing the health care system that the U.S. Congress passed last March?Favor strongly 9
Favor somewhat 21
Neither favor nor oppose 30
Oppose somewhat 17
Oppose strongly 23
Refused 0

Only 30% favor it at all.

The most interesting thing here is that you did not link to the above poll that I could see.
Hmmm. Perhaps the numbers came from this poll:

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2010/september/apstanfordrwj-poll-should-health-law-have-done-more

HC1. In general, do you favor, oppose, or neither favor nor oppose the law changing the health care system that the U.S. Congress passed last March? 9% - Favor strongly
21% - Favor somewhat
30% - Neither favor nor oppose
17% - Oppose somewhat
23% - Oppose strongly
0% - Refused

(Ask if HC1 = oppose strongly, oppose somewhat or neither favor nor oppose):

HC1A. Which of the following best expresses your view of the health care law that Congress passed last March?

28% - I oppose most or all of the changes made by the law
20% - I oppose a few of the changes made by the law
23% - I favor most or all of the changes made by the law, but I think that law doesn’t do enough to improve the health care system
28% - I oppose the law because I think the federal government should not be involved in health care at all
1% - Refused

(Ask if HC1 = favor strongly, favor somewhat or neither favor nor oppose):

HC1B. Do you think that the health care law passed last March by Congress should have done more to change the health care system, or do you not think that?

61% - It should have done more
36% - Do not think that
3% - Refused

HC2. How much, if at all, should the health care system in the United States be CHANGED from what it was like in February, 2010, before Congress passed the law to change the system? Would you say it should be changed…

17% - A great deal
22% - A lot
35% - A moderate amount
16% - A little
9% - Not at all
1% - Refused

Curious that they are worded the same, and the numbers match up identically, wouldn't you say?

Exit Polls: Economy, Voter Anger Drive Republican Victory


Exit poll results collected from voters as they left their voting stations Tuesday underscore the economic distress defining the 2010 election. Eighty-eight percent of voters today say the national economy's in bad shape, nearly as many as the record 92 percent who said so two years ago. Only 14 percent say their own family's financial situation has improved since 2008. And few see much respite: Compounding the political impact of the long downturn, 86 percent remain worried about the economy's direction in the next year, including half who are "very" worried.
(...)
The economy prevailed as the most important issue, cited by 62 percent, compared with three others listed – health care, 19 percent; illegal immigration, 8 percent; and the war in Afghanistan, 7 percent.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/vote...m-exit-poll-analysis/story?id=12003775&page=1

 

[Shalamar]

You're almost there . . . I'm bracing for it . . . .

Ahh.. You think that the lives of other people are unimportant, next to doctors getting paid what you feel they should be paid.

Tell me, why do doctors in, pretty much the rest of the world, still manage to do well despite the entire population getting the care they need.

You sicken me.

 

[kellyb]

Childish or Realistic? -
I pay over $1000.00/month in property taxes alone - and I live on less than 1/3 acre.

I pay over 40% on every dollar and that does not include sales tax, gas tax, payroll tax, personal property tax, blah, blah, blah.

Enough is enough, really.

You federal income tax rate is 40%?

 

[Fiona]

If doctors are going to be paid what doctors are paid under the NHS, it will feel like donating time to most doctors.

"'I could show you hills, in comparison with which you'd call that a valley.' "

 

[Rolfe]

Ah, the argument from authority I've been accused so many times of employing.

Yes, well, it appears that Tatyana really does have these qualifications. You don't appear to have any medical qualifications at all.

Rolfe.

 

[Tatyana]

Ah, the argument from authority I've been accused so many times of employing.



Yet most insurers in the US provide lapatinib to their patients with very few restrictions. Can you explain how a profit monster ($307mil in Q3 '10)like CIGNA can provide it yet the wonderful NHS will not?

Sure, give me a few minutes and I will find some tabloid or blog to support my claim.

The profit monster is getting kick backs from big pharma.

Go on, tell me what your education is.

Just for transparency.

 

[jimbob]

And I want an answer as to where my assumptions are wrong - they will be wrong but I have erred on the side of underestimating costs by assuming only the costs of thee surgeon and anaesthetist, and that the cost model is based on both having only one year experience and working 60-hours per week for 50 weeks in theatre, which I hope is laughably high, I'd hope... This provides a very conservative hourly rate for the cost of labour involved in a 5-hour surgery.

Let's pretend your numbers are correct and apply in a free market. Now what?

Why don't you tell me where they are wrong instead, rather than implying that they are incorrect?

Anyway to answer your question. High tech health care is inherently expensive. No amount of free market ideology will change that. You seem to be implying that it will improve matters.

There is an administrative overhead of greater than 30% in the US system, compared to a couple of percent in many UHC systems.

 

[Rolfe]

If doctors are going to be paid what doctors are paid under the NHS, it will feel like donating time to most doctors.

I think you need to do some better and more valid comparisons of medical salaries between the two countries. As I mentioned, my friends who bought an ocean-going yacht almost on a whim are both NHS doctors.

And once again, please explain how it might be possible for the free market to bring down the costs of complex and resource-heavy medical and surgical treatment to the price of a Happy Meal, and yet doctors continue to be paid better than the (very generous) salaries paid by the NHS?

Rolfe.

 

[Fiona]

Ah, the argument from authority I've been accused so many times of employing.

Do you know the difference between an argument from expertise and an argument from authority? I don't think you do

 

[bookitty]

You're almost there . . . I'm bracing for it . . . .

Doctors should be able to use mortality to blackmail a patient for obscene amounts of cash. A doctor, going into the field for altruistic reasons. Perish the thought!

Did I get it?

 

[Shalamar]

Doctors should be able to use mortality to blackmail a patient for obscene amounts of cash. A doctor, going into the field for altruistic reasons. Perish the thought!

Did I get it?

Perhaps all Doctors in the US will move to other fields if they are forced to get paid for everyone they have to treat?

 

[Emet]

You federal income tax rate is 40%?

How about this:

I already pay 38% of my income to the Federal Government. How much more do I have to deprive myself of?

[Please don't derail this with the "overtaxed" route, as my effective tax rate is less than 10% of my income, and that includes VAT and property taxes]

 

[Rolfe]

Why don't you tell me where they are wrong instead, rather than implying that they are incorrect?

Anyway to answer your question. High tech health care is inherently expensive. No amount of free market ideology will change that. You seem to be implying that it will improve matters.

There is an administrative overhead of greater than 30% in the US system, compared to a couple of percent in many UHC systems.

The problem is, even if the overhead is 50%, 50% of a fair-sized fortune is still a small fortune.

Rolfe.

 

[jimbob]

If doctors are going to be paid what doctors are paid under the NHS, it will feel like donating time to most doctors.

The free market doesn't let anyone die. People die everyday; can't change that can we?

Now, UK surgeons can make more than the figures I used in my calculations, if this will feel like "donating time", maybe you could tell me what sort of annual income you think I should factor in for surgeons and anaesthetists? And how many hours per week they should be in surgery, and their annual holiday, so I can increase my estimate for the hourly rate to one that you are happy with.

Then you can explain how someone on $8/hour could afford to pay for this.

 

[Tatyana]

My education is irrelevant, really. As is yours.

Apparently you are ignoring all the other stuff I've cited and focusing on the tabloid.

What about this?

That is two years old.

I think you don't realise how well bad press works in the NHS.

http://www.chooseandbook.nhs.uk/patients/wait

At least go to the original source:

http://www.performance.doh.gov.uk/waitingtimes/index.htm

http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publication...spitalWaitingTimesandListStatistics/index.htm

Please link me to the sites that list the performance of the US health care system, month by month, as it is in the third link.

Ta.

 

[Rolfe]

Childish or Realistic? -
I pay over $1000.00/month in property taxes alone - and I live on less than 1/3 acre.

I pay over 40% on every dollar and that does not include sales tax, gas tax, payroll tax, personal property tax, blah, blah, blah.

Enough is enough, really.

Childish, because taxes are not theft, however excessive.

I really wish you guys would get your stories straight. Over on another thread, BaC is telling us all how bad we have it in Britain because of the stonking amounts of tax we pay, while he's free as air because Americans pay less.

I think xjx388 took the same line in this thread too.

So which is it? Are you taxed till your pips squeak and can't possibly afford any more, or is it the central pillar of America as a free society that you have lower taxes than in commie Europe?

Rolfe.

 

[kellyb]

How about this:

That second quote was really from Agatha. Xjx just messed up where he placed the quote bracket.

I'm not sure that I believe xjx is in the 38% federal tax bracket, though.