Tuesday, November 16, 2010

Death Panels....Palin was RIGHT, Mr. Krugman?

This is stolen from AMERICAN THINKER........it's worth it, you won't believe what Krugman's finally admitting (make sure you click their links).  The article is called A DEATH PANEL BY ANY OTHER NAME...here it is:


They laughed when Sarah Palin said Obamacare would require death panels to control medical costs. But for some reason no one laughs when New York times columnist Paul Krugman says the same thing. Maybe because he won--inexplicably--the Nobel Prize for Economics.

Yesterday he did it again both on This Week with Christiane Amanpour  and then further explaining in his New York Times column that no, he didn't really mean death panels just because he called them...death panels.

I said something deliberately provocative on This Week, so I think I'd better clarify what I meant (which I did on the show, but it can't hurt to say it again.)

So, what I said is that the eventual resolution of the deficit problem both will and should rely on "death panels and sales taxes". What I meant is that

(a) health care costs will have to be controlled, which will surely require having Medicare and Medicaid decide what they're willing to pay for - not really death panels, of course, but consideration of medical effectiveness and, at some point, how much we're willing to spend for extreme care
No they really are death panels. Having government officials -- panels, if you will -- deciding the cost and medical effectiveness of treatment v. the value of a person's life with the same compassion of Government Motors choosing to cease manufacturing Pontiacs and closing down dealers.


Death panels. Say it again, say it any which way but Sarah Palin nailed it the first time--a death panel by any other name is still a death panel.

Paul Krugman, if you want some highly paid government official deciding whether your life is worth sacrificing to control health care costs put that on your DNR (do not resuscitate) order not on mine.

Update - Randall Hoven adds:

Dr. Krugman prognosticates on ABC's This Week.

"If they were going to do reality therapy, they should have said, OK, look, Medicare is going to have to decide what it's going to pay for.  And at least for starters, it's going to have to decide which medical procedures are not effective at all and should not be paid for at all...  Some years down the pike, we're going to get the real solution, which is going to be a combination of death panels and sales taxes.  It's going to be that we're actually going to take Medicare under control, and we're going to have to get some additional revenue, probably from a VAT."
Z:  More of the article I got that from is HERE.  It's by Ethel C. Fenig.

70 comments:

Karen Howes said...

Oh yeah, we're finding out, after being patronizingly told that the death panels thing wasn't true, that it actually is true.

Whoops.

Always On Watch said...

Cost effectiveness has to become the watchword of everything funded by our tax dollars.

Am I advocating death panels? Certainly not!

But if one is on the government dole, one is at the mercy of the bureaucracy and the budget managers.

To a certain extent, the same is true with private health insurance. Mr. AOW's therapies have been scaled back or eliminated altogether several times because at certain points during therapy the cost doesn't justify the progress. I do have to say that Blue Cross has been living up to its end of the bargain; the policy does have limits stated in the contract.

Chuck said...

But it sounds so much better when someone from the (far) left says it.

AOW is right, we have had this for years, we just called it "managed care".

As a health care provider I have thought before that we are spending money unwisely sometimes. I admit there have been times when we are doing the "million dollar work up" on someone who is not going to get any real quality of life out of the interventions we are doing.

With this said though, I do not want some bureaucrat in Washington making the decision for us. What we need is better research on how to predict outcomes and then present this to families when it is time to make decisions about end-of-life.

This is a decision that should only be between the family and the health care providers. The problem is that health care providers do a poor job of giving realistic expectations to the family.

We often focus so much on trying to save the life of the patient, something we are trained to do, that we don't spend enough time with the family explaining what is really going on and what the likely outcome is.

Also, we try to stay positive for the family and give them hope to comfort them. While this is an admirable goal and the family does need it, we may be doing them a disservice in the long run.

Bottom line is that I think we need to inform families better so they can make the right decision for the patient and themselves. I have often thought that families let a hopeless person linger on with artificial means because they don't fully understand what is going on. We do try but I wonder if we could do better.

In the end, if the family decides they want to continue, let them. It is not up to us to decide what the patient's quality of life is.

Just my two cents...

Joe said...

Whatever the government touches it ruins. That's because it is by nature run by people largely without business experience.

They have ruined rail service (Amtrak), mail service (currently borrowing money from the U.S. Treasury to pay its deficits), health care (Medicare, Medicaid and now medical insurance), retirement (bankrupt Social Security) and everything else.

But can they admit that they've ruined those things...no. Instead they rationalize what has happened and passed the blame on to someone else.

Death Panels are only the tip of the iceberg of things that are wrong with the health care law.

Palin was right. Will the liberal/progressive left ever admit that? Of course not. According to them, she said it out of ignorance...never mind that she was right.

They did the same to O'Donnell with regard to the Constitution and "separation of church and state."

She was right...but never mind.

Z said...

Chuck, your being a nurse really makes me set up and listen when you discuss these subjects.......

I had a friend who had an octuplebipass 2 years ago..at the age of 95. It was tough even for me to somehow justify in my own mind the EXTRAORDINARY expense as he was hospitalized for weeks and weeks afterwards, etc.......and he can walk and watch TV, but he's almost completely uncommunicative to his wife and caregivers and one wonders...he isn't the same wonderful man.......BUT, was it up to the GOVERNMENT to say "No, he's too old?" I think not. And, the family, whom I was with at the decision in the hospital, was told "If we don't do this NOW, he has maybe two weeks!"..and hew as talkative and his own charming self then, before the surgery!

VERY tough call.

Yes, we need to REALLY study OURSELVES as relatives if extraordinary measures are added-value to the patient....it's a very tough call but I believe it could bring costs down if people were more informed.

Since Mr. Z was facing a year on drugs that made him feel lousy (he'd only taken about 2 months worth when I lost him) and THEN, if the drugs had worked, facing a heart transplant SO he would be strong enough for the ensuing stem cell transplant, I can only thank God for taking him in his sleep when he did, completely unexpectedly and, I believe, as a result of the 3 liters of water they took out of his chest the day before.

Z said...

This POST is mostly about HYPOCRISY, really...
I wanted you all to see, and wish America could (and they would if we still had an honest media), how utterly HYPOCRITICAL our media was once again.
Palin is called LIAR by Krugman...news all over, make her look STUPID, ridiculous, silly........ for what she said...
and then HE SAYS IT?

WOW (by the way, did anybody see it at least on the one channel Americans can rely on ..FOX?)

cube said...

Will Palin get an apology from Krugman? Of course not. Leave it to Palin to mention it though. She will.

BTW I didn't see it on FOX, but then again I have scaled back my watching because I find it too repetitive to stand for long periods of time. I get the majority of my news from the internet.

beamish said...

Just because Krugman says it doesn't mean he's making a sincere effort to not be an idiot on most other topics.

Susannah said...

"Leave it to Palin to mention it though. She will."

I hope she does. Nobody else will do it for her...

Great post, Z!

FrogBurger said...

Great post. It's simple math. We get older with less young people with a crappier economy. An unsustainable model with a collectivist framework will require sacrifices and prioritization.

I suggest we start with all the leftists first to get them a taste of their own medicine.

Then we see if they want to change their mind.

Ask my mom who just spent 2 months in CA who treated her lung problem better. Not the French doctors who are scrutinized and poorly remunerated. Instead the American acupuncturist, doctors and other specialists who CARE b/c they can make a good living.

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
FrogBurger said...

We can discuss the issue Ducky but we have the right to life and the collective has no right over my body.

I wonder how the leftards reconcile being pro choice and wanting to save money over old people because they cost too much.

If you Ducky advocate prioritizing health care sendings based on age, I hope you'll apply those principles first to yourself.

See I'm proposing people do what they think is best for themselves. It's this concept called individual freedom. You should try it sometimes. It is actually something that is much deeper than expressing your individualism via the purchase of an iphone or ipad.

Sam Huntington said...

I completely agree with Chuck's views. The issue must remain with individuals and their families. But you have to admit the discussion lends itself to weird. On the one hand, we are doing everything to extend life, including punishing people who smoke or like to take a drink ... we tax them until they either agree with government or go broke. On the other hand, because so many older people are driving up the cost of health care, government must convene "death panels."

Wouldn't it be cheaper to encourage smoking and drinking? Or is it just me?

Brooke said...

It should be the family's decision as to what extents to go to for support of life, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

Now, as a STNA, I often see people who are out of their minds with dementia and suffer non-stop with no understanding of why they are in pain. I certainly wouldn't want that. Let the body take it's natural course, rather than going to extreme measures.

However, that is MY decision, not the gov't's... And when the gov't is in charge of health care those with differing opinions will have no choice.

Joe said...

Ducky: "...the nation has lost the skill of adult conversation."

That kind of conversation begins with having a mind opened enough to hear both sides of an issue.

Let me ask you, sir, do you have a mind opened enough to consider that "death panels," whether you call them that or not, are a part of the health bill?

Do you have a mind open enough to understand the Constitutional principles of life, liberty and property (not the "persuit of happiness"...that's the DoI)?

What do you mean by "...adult conversation?"

Is that one where the conversatinalists listen to you dispassionately? What about your responsibility to listen to them dispassionately?

FrogBurger said...

Wouldn't it be cheaper to encourage smoking and drinking? Or is it just me?

Good catch.

They want to ban burgers, fat, sweets, smoking (cigarettes, not pot) and then they don't want us to live longer b/c we cost too much.

Another illogical nonsense from the sophistic left. Well actually it is logical if you're the authoritarian fascist type.

heidianne jackson said...

anyone who read the bill knew that sarah palin was right. but as per usual, the majority of people get their news via soundbites and believed the soundbites they were hearing on this matter - primarily because they wanted to. and hey, who the hell wants to read a 3000 page bill anyhow?

krugman isn't worried about the death panels, because he believes that no matter how old he is, his life's value will have been sufficient to always warrant him "extreme care." i'd venture to posit that most elitists believe that about their lives...

FrogBurger said...

This death panel debates proves another point of mine: socialism is never social.

In the system that the lefty fascists like Obama or Ducky advocate, rich people or people in power will always be able to access good healthcare to grow old. While the rest of us won't have an option since there will only be public option or the private market will be so stifled and regulated that prices will be prohibitive for the masses.

heidianne jackson said...

good point, fb - people who advocate socialism and/or communism often cite the need to control "greed" as a justification. but how is it that if greed needs to be controlled that there is anyone cable of controlling it?

if none are fit to govern themselves, how do the elites set themselves up as being able to govern the rest of us? greed is not controlled under socialism, it is merely sanctioned for those who are in control.

greed is a human condition. at least in a free market capitalist society, i have every bit as much chance of being successful - greedy or not - as anyone. under socialism, if i'm not part of the elite ruling class (or invited into it) i'll never have a chance to realize my dreams.

thanks, i'll continue eschew and fight against socialism at all levels.

Z said...

Ducky, no offense, but what an ass you can be.
I was very sorry you had to resort to your typical CRAP of name calling and belittling people as if you're GOD.
I almost thought we could have had a conversation.
it's clear you're NOT READING the comments or you'd see that some of us DO see the need for some kind of way to fight the HUGE amounts of money, for example, spent on my friend's husband who, at 96, had an octuple (sp?) bypass....
If you can't talk like an adult, leave and don't come back.
Thanks. I was so pleased to read your comment and was looking forward to conversation on that until you started in again. ...what a shame.
Then you had the temerity to suggest WE can't talk like ADULTS.
Ducky, go..........just go.


then I read THIS from SAM HUNTINGTON and BURST into laughter!
"Wouldn't it be cheaper to encourage smoking and drinking? Or is it just me?"

I LOVE THAT..everybody just smoke and drink as much as you want......it'll save money! I LOVE THAT! :-) OH, thanks, Sam, after having to slam Ducky again, this felt so good.

Joe, you're so right about Ducky.....thanks for that. I WISH liberals could speak without insulting, but..alas.

Yes, FB...the elitist lefties will always be covered. None of their own would dare kill them.

Heidianne..it was VERY CLEAR in the bill..so where the HECK were the Republicans CALLING THEM ON IT? Cowering in the corner..>AGAIN.

I"m getting SICK TO DEATH (oops..just kidding, dean panels!>>) of the Republicans staying QUIET...what the heck are they afraid of?

I SPOKE TO ELMER'S BROTHER ON THE PHONE ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY.......WE NEED TO CUT COSTS SOMEHOW...WE CAN'T STOP HELPING AMERICANS TO LIVE...WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET COSTS DOWN TO WHAT THEY ARE IN EUROPE, FOR EXAMPLE. Some Americans actually think HEALTH CARE IS FREE IN GERMANY AND FRANCE..what BULL PUCKEY! IT isn't and WASN'T EVER but our liberal media tells you it is so you think that can work HERE.
And, then some Americans tell me "But, Z, what you got charged was after insurance, it can't be $300 for an MRI anywhere!"
No, I had no insurance in France..it COST $300. HOW, that's what we need to figure out.
It's going to HURT at first but I believe Americans are in for a LOT of financial hurting until we fix the mess of ENTITLEMENTS.

HEck, then the REAL hurting will come when we have to reeducate our children.

Anonymous said...

How easy it is to talk of cost-effectiveness when it isn't you, your mother, father, grandparent, or spouse.

Suddenly it matters a lot when your loved one is reduced to being a cost effective statistic!

This also will apply to infants or the disabled, handicapped, people who certain advisors believe don't contribute to society and therefore are expendable.

This is what comes from a one size fits all approach, and why the government is the last place you'd look for compassion.

Krugman pairs our lives with raising taxes. Revenue matters a hell of a lot more to the government than our lives do.

If we think, well, we'll pay for it. The government won't allow it. We can't have the advantage of money over someone who doesn't have the money, now can we?

Remember, in the left's world, it's a level playing field. Individuals have no say. Shared misery. True equality.

Except of course for the elitists who don't have to play by everyone else's rules.

Besides, the left will be only too happy when the generations who remember what it was like to be free, are dead and gone.

Pris

beamish said...

I pay taxes, exhorbitant taxes, for my cigarette smoking habit.

That money should be funding a way to medically replace my lungs with a portable respirator that will allow me to continue smoking if 45years of government sanctioned atmospheric nuclear testing catches up with me and I catch cancer.

;)

Z said...

Pris, FANTASTIC comment, as usual.
YOu know very well that I've thought Soros underestimated this health care and stimulus by about ten years.....you can't QUITE ruin America, even WITH OBama (who paid for Harvard, anybody know? heh), unless the generation of Americans who still love this country and who still at least remember the constitution are around........
if he'd waited 10 years, he'd have had a LOT less trouble measuring us all for grey fabric for Mao Jackets!

Z said...

Beamish, you are NUTS.

I LOVE IT! :-)

beamish said...

Not nuts.

Native Americans smoked tobacco for thousands of years before science invented cancer.

;)

FrogBurger said...

Native Americans smoked tobacco for thousands of years before science invented cancer.

My first smoke as a boy scout was made out of moss wrapped in tree bark. Wasn't very good to say the least.

WomanHonorThyself said...

they simply refuse to call things as they are Z! .Have a beautiful night my friend>:)

Leticia said...

At least Sarah Palin isn't being scoffed any longer. The truth always comes out in the end.

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Always On Watch said...

Chuck's comment is so very important. I hope that everyone who reads this thread will pay attention to what Chuck said.

Mr. AOW and I have been on a very steep learning curve with Mr. AOW's recovery from a large thalamic stroke.

Thank God that Mr. AOW and I have had for the past several months a group of therapists who communicated honestly with us.

Ducky's here said...

Joe, since you went on an anti-government rant a couple thoughts:

1. Amtrak -- Eastern corridor service is great. True high speed rail isn't far off. I sure prefer Amtrak to NYC rather than going through the hassles at Logan, especially with the new "grope or x-ray exposure" stupidity.
Don't know why you think government "ruined" it.
Should be expanded to cover our major transportation corridors whenever possible.

2. Mail service -- I flip the flag on my mailbox and someone picks up the stuff and generally has it at the destination in a day usually, sometimes two. Not a bad deal at all.
Too bad they can't charge junk delivery what it costs.

3. The government ruined social security? I don't get it. SS has been successful. It's unfortunate that Saint Ronnie Raygun raided it to finance his deficits but it's still sound.
You'd rather trust the market which has been flat for over a decade?

4. Medicare -- well that is the gorilla in the room isn't it. I have no idea why Obama's catfood commission said absolutely NOTHING about insurance costs. Me, I start with a page from Germany and make insurers non-profit. Blue Cross used to be an it served the purpose quite well which is to deliver insurance not generate profits.

Z said...

what a shame, Ducky, you almost made it through.
Sorry the right just can't do anything right and the lefty gods are smiling on your bunch so much these days (sarcasm, of course) that you feel you can be that insulting but it won't be happening at geeeZ anymore.
Start your own blog; put COnservatives down as much as you'd like. You're not using GeeeZ anymore.
Write sensibly, write for discussion, leave out the idiotic and boring insults.........that would be nice.

Oh, except I guess the lefty gods aren't shining too much on Rangel, huh? I was thinking that the ink the left had to use to actually print TRUTH against a LEFT (gasp!) must be mixed with their tears today.

Always On Watch said...

Sometimes the problem with medical recovery is that the healing of the human body can be unpredictable, especially when it comes to the brain.

In certain cases, the outcome will be clear; in others, not.

Ducky's here said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Z said...

Ducky, congratulations, you actually made it through without insulting.
Except your points are ludicrous, you really think Joe means the MAIL and AMTRAK? The mail service is going bust, by the way, fast.

By the way, civil servants and the self-employed have private health insurance.
THE COSTS are what must be brought down..and they are low there.

Z said...

Excuse ME, Ducky, but Krugman didn't need to say THE WORDS...Sometimes I think all nuance is lost on you.

And, of course, according to Krugman, if you're honest enough to read/listen to him, Palin was right...whatever the heck YOU want to call it.

heidianne jackson said...

z: "The mail service is going bust, by the way, fast." and amtrak can't operate without HUGE federal subsidies - but i suppose it's much better for our tax dollars to prop up a mode of travel that can't support itself rather than let people spend their own money to travel how they'd like.

as for social security, reagan raided it to pay for his deficits? really, that's what you got, ducky? reagan should have vetoed more of the social spending then there wouldn't have been those deficits.

defense spending is legitimate - social spending is not. neither are ear marks for special projects for states or cities or counties. check it out - the constitution is viewable in several places on line in pdf format.

Craig said...

Palin is called LIAR by Krugman...news all over, make her look STUPID, ridiculous, silly........ for what she said...
and then HE SAYS IT?


I don't know if Sarah was lying, but what she said was clearly untrue. At the time, a provision in the health care bill allowed for a consultation, voluntary, to prepare a Living Will (a patient's wishes for end of life care) every 5 years and it would be covered under the bill. That is what the 'death panel' people were specifically pointing to. It was absurd.

Whatever Krugman meant, he wasn't referring to anything in the current health care bill.

He has nothing to apologize for.

Z, Just curious. Do you receive SSI survivor benefits?

Craig said...


AOW is right, we have had this for years, we just called it "managed care".


AOW and Chuck make very good points. We've had "death panels" for a long time. Insurance Co.s employ hundreds of people whose sole function is to find ways to deny coverage. When the model is for profit, the surest way to maximize profit is to get sick people out of the system. So, you have nameless, unaccountable, private 'bureaucrats' deciding who gets covered and what procedures they can find a way not to cover.

At least with govt. insurance, there is some accountability. The VA, which is pure socialized medicine, is consistently tops in costumer satisfaction. That is when it is properly funded and it was Clinton who cleaned it up. Medicare is #2. Private ins. is last. The biggest problem with Medicare is that the pool of those covered are the one's most likely to need medical care.

It should be the family's decision as to what extents to go to for support of life, NOT THE GOVERNMENT.

Who will pay for it? Good luck getting private ins. for someone in their 70's or 80's.

FrogBurger said...

SS has been successful. It's unfortunate that Saint Ronnie Raygun raided it to finance his deficits but it's still sound.


I'm ready to accept the possible fact Reagan took into social security to finance deficits. I have to check for myself here but please provide numbers. And while you're at it, provide numbers for other presidents, GOP or donkeys so we can compare. I really doubt I'll get that from you but I'm throwing a challenge.

You'd rather trust the market which has been flat for over a decade?

State run economies have been flat for more than a decade. Or even worse, collapsing. Ask the French.
You're supposed to retire after almost 40 years of working so it does give you time. And when you get close to retirement you're supposed to get your equities out of the market if you can't afford the risk.

Is it too much for you to comprehend?

Oh and also, in this case it's YOUR money that you've invested. Not something the gov considers its money.

And it helps the economy run by infusing cash.

I guess it's too complicated for you.

Z said...

Craig.. I won't divulge that but I will say my husband was a German and worked mostly for Germany, even when he was here. nuff said.

As for Palin, she was absolutely right, of course, as Krugman confirms, no matter how people want to spin it. She only got to the chase before most could figure it out; sure, consulting with families of the elderly is a great idea, but that consulting wasn't enough, was it...and now, according to Krugman, well.....:-)

FB, let Ducky live in his private lib world...Reagan was bad on ALL counts, he could never do any good, and that's where libs are happiest.

By the way..I had a friend email me today that he's surprised Nixon couldn't make a comeback considering how other really bad guys have been reelected...I reminded him it's only liberals who get second chances.

Z said...

http://movies.yahoo.com/news/usmovies.thehollywoodreporter.com/jeanluc-godard-honorary-oscar-meant-nothing-me

Gee, Ducky, the lefties wants to show how open minded they were in embracing Godard and HE ISN"T HAVING ANY OF IT.
IMagine this stupid comment? :

"“There is no question," Littman said. “Godard has been an irreverent provocateur for his entire career, but he never used his art to promote bigotry, and that's the key distinction that I had to understand so I could honor him tonight."

Yes, let's give him the Gov's award because he never used art to promote bigotry...unlike..........who?

And then Godard says "Gov's award...did Schwarzenegger give it to me?"

HA!

Anonymous said...

Craig, I read that section. It requires seniors to participate every five years in a "consultation"
if they have an ongoing medical condition or suffering poor health.

Now, what if that consultation is an evaluation of a patient's viability as to survivability and that info is forwarded to a board of bureaucrats to decide whether or not this patient's needs are cost-effective?

Do you really want to get into semantics? Does it matter what it's called, or does it matter what it does, and if we have squat to say about it!

Since the existence for such a board was passed in the first stimulus bill, which btw, was passed before the healthcare bill, why do you think that is? It's now referred to as a rationing board. It already exists.

Now, whatever the particulars are, why in a free country, are we even discussing this, and why are you defending the loss of our autonomy over what happens to us?

What makes you think we need the government for end of life options? I for one can discuss this with my family if I so choose.

You can parse words all day long, the fact is, the government as it is at the moment, want's to control every aspect of our lives, and even how and when we die.

If you like that, be my guest. I can think for myself, it's a shame you can't! Count me out.

Pris

Mustang said...

Craig’s claims are an example of the axiom, if you speak a lie often enough, it becomes true. If VA hospitals are socialized medicine, then we should be doing all we can to avoid it. Want to feel like scum? Go to a veterans’ hospital where people treat you like crap and should you actually survive treatment, enter a lotto —you’re one very lucky person. Who besides Craig defends VA the as our nation’s finest health care system? Well, a simple Google search reveals Krugman blogs at the NY Times, Doug Waller at Time Magazine, and Slate, a Washington Post online publishing entity. The Mises Institute, on the other hand, responded to Waller’s claim with this statement: “I found this [Time Magazine article] surprising as nobody I know has had anything good to say about working or receiving care at VA Hospitals.” If the VA hospitals are a stellar example of socialized healthcare, then we ought to give Walter Reed Hospital six gold stars.

shoprat said...

It's OK if the New York Times acknowledges the truth because no one reads it anyway. I guess enlightenment is whatever the enlightened say. We say it and we are fear mongering. They say the same thing, perhaps calling it something else, and it is a serious proposal.

Ducky's here said...

Excuse ME, Ducky, but Krugman didn't need to say THE WORDS..
-----------------------

No, but you did. And you also had to mention Palin.

Anyone leading with the "death panel" phrase and bringing in Palin is concerned with sensationalism and not content.

beamish said...

Ducky,

How much should the government-run health care system budget to keep you alive?

Should this budgeted amount exceed or fall short of the amount the same system should budget to keep me alive?

Z said...

Ducky, you say "Anyone leading with the "death panel" phrase and bringing in Palin is concerned with sensationalism and not content."

The DEATH PANEL is the SUBJECT, ..when you learn journalism and take the energy to keep with a blog every day, let's see what you lead with.
Palin? WHAT? It's called a HEADLINE.

My headline is absolutely RIGHT ON the money. WHy do you continually obfuscate anything that makes you uncomfortable ? It's almost pathological, no offense.

"sensationalism and no content?" IT"S THE WHOLE POINT OF THE CONTENT. THe WASHINGTON POST DID THE SAME THING!! Geeez!! :-)

We would like to have a conversation about content..actually, we HAVE..sorry you don't read the comments.

Z said...

Mustang, SO TRUE about the VA hospitals.......who can't see THAT???

Shoprat...and they don't even SEE what they're doing, these libs!

Pris...what's the expression.."Cradle to grave"...how disgusting. YOu are SO RIGHT.

Z said...

There's an article that just came on the Yahoo homepage..it includes this 'teaser' "One in three patients with advanced cancer spend their final days in hospitals receiving costly, aggressive treatments they may not want, according to a major national study released Tuesday."

THIS is what we have to discuss...."they may not want" is the key...unbelievable.

beamish said...

"One in three patients with advanced cancer spend their final days in hospitals receiving costly, aggressive treatments they may not want, according to a major national study released Tuesday."


Alex, that's "What is Tiergartenstra├če 4?"

Joe said...

Ducky, Ducky, Ducky: In the first place, I am not anti-government, I just want government to do what governemtn is supposed to do and keep the heck out of things it is not supposed to do.

Amtak: Losing money every year.

USPS: Going bankrupt.

VA: Worst agency in the fed govt. (I threw that one in for free)

SS: Depends on a non-existent "trust fund," whose proceeds have been put in the general fund. Going broke.

Medicare: Going broke. Must be supplemented.

Health Care: Yeah. Let's use the government record on the above and trust them to get THIS one right...DEATH PANELS AND ALL.

Palin was right. You just haven't the courage to admit it.

Craig and Heather said...

The concept of nationalized health care is just disturbing. But, perhaps now I can see why there's been such a big push this last decade to get everyone on prescription medication.

Anyone leading with the "death panel" phrase and bringing in Palin is concerned with sensationalism and not content.

The term "death panel" definitely has an ugly ring to it.

And the substance here smells a lot like "money is more valuable than people". It's what eventually happens when a "free" society gradually trades off personal responsibility and risk-laden liberties for empty promises of security made by civil-government-as-provider.

Heather

Elmers Brother said...

Insurance Co.s employ hundreds of people whose sole function is to find ways to deny coverage.

but more often times then not it's AFTER the procedure.

Elmers Brother said...

insurance companies deny less than 3% of procedures compared with Medicare, Medicare denies over 6% procedures

Anonymous said...

Krugman is a dangerous lunatic or a put-on like Ducky and shouldn't be taken seriously.

That said rationing has been part of the system for a long time, it just hasn't been emphasized. There really is just so much human being can do for others before they go bankrupt and destroy themselves -- which is what the government is trying to do, of course.

Krugman is part of the Death Wish Establishment -- another far more apt name for liberalism.

Tocsin

Craig said...

If the VA hospitals are a stellar example of socialized healthcare, then we ought to give Walter Reed Hospital six gold stars.

Walter Reed was a disgrace. Mustang, if your going to try and make a point, get your facts straight. Walter Reed is run by the DOD, not VHA.

You haven't made an argument here, just unsubstantiated anecdotal claims, attributed to no one ("nobody I know ", says an unknown somebody at the anti-govt. Mises Inst.) and not any links to anything that might buttress your point.

Maybe you have experience with the VA and aren't satisfied. You are the exception according to quantifiable studies. The VA did get bad marks when the so-called Patriot Republicans wanted to prove govt. doesn't work by being incompetent. "Starving the Beast."

I think Vets deserve the best care available. Especially now, when two needless wars are putting a strain on the system. Who's going to step up and serve them if not the govt.? Churches?

Not only are Vets getting good care, it's being done way more cost effectively than private health care. Link

“The VHA’s experiences have become a model around the world,” the editor-in-chief of Healthcare Papers, Peggy Leatt, wrote at the time...Patients routinely rank the veterans system above the alternatives, according to the American Customer Satisfaction Index. Last year, the government program got a satisfaction rating of 85 for inpatient treatment, compared with 77 for private hospitals. The index, a University of Michigan project, found that veterans’ outpatient care scored 3 points higher.

FrogBurger said...

Where is my comparative statistical analysis about social security, Ducky? Still doing research?

Craig said...

insurance companies deny less than 3% of procedures compared with Medicare, Medicare denies over 6% procedures

Debunked

Craig, I read that section. It requires seniors to participate every five years in a "consultation"
if they have an ongoing medical condition or suffering poor health.


Nonsense

Elmers Brother said...

Now I am sure there are other angles to look at when looking at stats like these but one must deal with the one from the AMA before preceding with an argument that ObamaCare will do better in not denying claims overall.

Z said...

Page 425 – Practitioners are mandated to provide advance care counseling to their patients. Presumably patients would be mandated to accept the counseling.



Page 427 – “(II) distributes or makes accessible such orders to physicians and other health professionals that (acting within the scope of the professional’s authority under State law) may sign orders for life sustaining treatment;” They may, They may, sign orders for life…….”



Page 429 - ‘‘(4) A consultation under this subsection may include the formulation of an order regarding life sustaining treatment or a similar order.” Yada, yada, yada/ The feds are certainly focused on advance care directives.

Page 430 - ‘‘(B) The level of treatment indicated under subparagraph (A)(ii) may range from an indication for full treatment to an indication to limit some or all or specified interventions.”

Z said...

by the way, doctors around here are starting to deny Medicare patients....they simply can't keep open and get the little they're getting in reimbursement.......and these are dedicated, good doctors who don't want to close.
Also, the liberal docs I know must stop telling me they're sorry they voted for Obama or I'll have to turn into the doctor ax murderer just to save my own sanity :-)
It's unbelievable.

Elbro, it's always okay for leftists to debunk using leftist venues, too, (heck, they still think SNOPES is unbiased!!!!! I swear they do!) but NEVER Okay for the Right to use FOX or NewsMax!!
The fun never stops.

Man, I JUST WISH CNN or MSNBC of ANY of the networks would at least TRY to have the two sides represented as FOX does.
It's laughable about the FOX IS BIASED claims........you just can't make this stuff UP!

Elmers Brother said...

the VA is really not a genuine argument for gubmint run health care. Most vets get a means test before being treated there and pay for a substantial amount of their care. It's 'free' only for a small amount of veterans. Disabled vets also must reach a % criteria before the VA will treat them.

Most retired vets use Tricare. They pay premiums and copays just like any other health insurance, although their out of pocket expenses are siginificantly lower.

VA hospitals have come a long way since the 1990s. Wait times are still long. Also many VA hospitals send vets to private doctors and hospitals for treatment.

Elmers Brother said...

absolutely right Z.

the Mayo Clinic and Walgreens are refusing to take new Medicare patients.

Elmers Brother said...

btw much of that supposed debunking was antecdotal and filled with technical terms like "*hit".

Elmers Brother said...

also my feeling about vets satisfaction surveys are that many times you're not going to bite the hand that feeds you.

Elmers Brother said...

from the Cato Institute:

Analysis indicates that our high medical costs are the result of various government policies that have removed patients as purchasers in the medical marketplace. While that state of affairs may be no more than the unlucky result of misguided policies, it is detrimental to the health of medical markets and, if improperly diagnosed, may eventually prove deadly to the literal health of many Americans.

To lower the currently very large medical expenditures in the United States, the third-party payment system must be reined in. Putting the patient back in control of the medical purchasing decision is the most effective way to control third-party mechanisms, while still providing a safety net for Americans.

FrogBurger said...

Analysis indicates that our high medical costs are the result of various government policies that have removed patients as purchasers in the medical marketplace.

Gov always inflates prices. That's been the case in real estate and rents. Ask Californians why housing is so expensive here: regulations.

Also I read a couple of years ago that the French healthcare system was unable to control costs as well. This with price control over many things.

The left ALWAYS forgets the very high cost of inefficiencies created by bureaucratic structures, regulations, controlled wages or prices. They forget the cost of a decrease of quality in services because of all those things.

Anonymous said...

Craig, nonsense? Then you tell me why you can't consult with your doctor without permission from the government. It's voluntary now is it not?

Then explain to me if you can, why this is in the bill in the first place.

Pris

Elmers Brother said...

the supposed debunking is filled with so many weasel words and false impressions that it's worthless