mattp

Nope, Puget, I learned that two righties always get it wrong.

Bill, I agree that Bob has been rude and crude and I've posted that opinion more than once but I can't see how you could possibly defend Fairweather on this issue. He is in the top 1% of rude and crude on cc.com and he's posted all kinds of belligerent stuff that sounds like racism to me over the years. Again, Bob too scores high marks in the rude and crude collumn and I think it is all a rather distasteful business but Fairweather has been going after him as a homo commie who should go back to the old country so he pretty much deserves whatever flame he gets, doesn't he?

McCain says she'll stand up to those who have put privileges over principal and power over responsibility.

I thought it was pretty well done. His speech and that from Bill Clinton the night before did a pretty good job of presenting what the Obama campaign stands for and why we should vote for him. It should play well against the McCain message that the Democrats are weak on defense and they want more government" but we shall see. Despite Fairweather's assertion that Republican voters are more grounded in reality, the big lies have come from the Republicans lately and I think we're going to see a lot more swift boating and on issues like healthcare we are going to see the same old lies hammered home so that voters believe them. At this point, with the war on terror and the economy and environmental trends being what they are, who has the incentive to lie to voters? I hope Obama can stick to his message and stay out of a dogfight with McCain while being clear about what their differences really are. I thought he did a fairly good job of that last night.

Bring it on, Fairweather. I have shown that virtually every one of your main "factual" assertions in these discussions were wrong and you have made no effort to refute any of mine. On this point, you will find that depending on which proposal is adopted we would obtain varying rates of increased efficiency versus varying rates of increased provision of services so it is difficult to predict with any specificity how these things would balance. If you consider government spending on healthcare to include not only medicaid and medicare but also VA system and coverage costs for Federal employees and other "related" outlays, the actual Federal exependitures are way more than most "studies" acknowledge. Further, if you believe in macroeconomic theories such as "trickle down" I guess you must also accept the idea that a healthier work force will produce more and this will increase revenue as a whole, helping to offset any increase in total government outlay. There is not a simple answer as your "free lunch" jab would indicate but assertions that all we will get from any change is that quality will go down, patients will face long waiting periods, and taxes will go up are the pessimistic guesses of people, like yourself, who have swallowed a bunch of baloney from special interests who make a lot of money in the current system and don't want any changes. We may get some of these things, of course, but everyone will continue to have choices and those like you and KK who dislike socialism will always have the "right" to buy your own healthcare. Unless any new government sponsored insurance is incredibly successful, there will be a market for private alternatives and unless our elected officials turn totalitarian and pull of a major coup, there will remain a large private industry.

Yes. It is bad for private companies that routinely deny coverage through unfair business practices reap and retain huge profits. Go back to the start of this thread and see where you called Dmuja a liar without any basis and I presented tens of articles reporting exactly that. And what is the "government seizure" baloney? You are against the governments providing an expanded public insurance whether or not it would be offered alongside private insurance and whether or not there is any expanded government operation of actual services.

You are correct. Most Americans have said they would support universal coverage, and in many if not most surveys they've said they would support a single-payer system. However, if you ask them "even if that means longer wait times?" or "Even if that means your taxes will go up?" the support goes down. Of course, there is NO evidence that there would be longer wait times or that taxes would go up. Unfortunately, many Americans have been fed the same baloney that you have swallowed hook line and sinker and believe that the VA system provides poor care of that private insurance companies are more efficient than medicare. Special interest groups have skewed public opinion but, even still, surveys undertaken for the last several years show general support for healthcare reforms you brand as filthy socialism. By the way: I could provide dozens of cites but you complained about this and said you won't bother to look them up anyway. If you want, you can confirm my assertion with Google in five minutes.

Say what?

Is trying to impose your beliefs on a nation where most people actually support the idea of universal healthcare an improvement?

Worse than that is where they claim that any aspect of life or politics or some government program in some other country is better than ours.

KK and others frequently complain that the malpractice crisis is driving up medical costs. However, when you try to figure out just how much it may be contributing to our overall healthcare bill, it becomes clear that the amount it tiny. I can’t find good statistics on this, but I find several sites putting the cost of medical malpractice insurance and defensive medicine combed at 2% of the overall cost of healthcare. malpractice costs represent 2% of medical spending link 1-2% of total healthcare costs here Good summary of myths about malpractice here Even on webpages with scathing editorial about greedy trial lawyers I cannot find any claims that the actual cost of the medical malpractice is higher than these tiny percentages, for example example I believe there are some problems with the malpractice system, and I've already acknowledged that the impact on certain specialties like obstetrics is huge, but the arguments from KK and others overstate the situation and ignore the fact that one of the problems is that there is a lot of malpractice. Four years ago, John Kerry said we should not have punitive damages in malpractice cases, we should impose measures to prevent unfounded malpractice lawsuits, and attorney's should be personally barred from bringing such cases through a three-stikes-your-out rule. These sound like sensible ideas to me. Railing against trial lawyers based on BS or suggesting that the existence of a malpractice crisis argues against broader healthcare coverage does not.

Our anti-socialism friends get angry when I question whee they get their information and complain when I provide references to outside sources, whether web links or (gasp) a book that I admit I have not read. However, their arguments depend on a number of assertions that amount to fiction, and they have yet to provide any evidence to support these ideas. Consider these items: Claim: government provided healthcare is inherently poor quality Really? the Veterans’ Administration has been slammed for providing poor quality care in the past but all current studies I can find indicate it is known for excellent care and recent innovations in record-keeping. The President gets care at Bethesda Naval Hospital. The medicare system, once touted as socialism, is one of the most if not the most broadly subscribed healthcare insurance systems in the country. It is more efficient in terms of administrative cost and the claims process than any private insurance company. Even those who can afford any healthcare they want still use it. Claim: it will cost all of us more if we have universal coverage I already noted that the medicare system is more efficient than any private system. In trying to evaluate prospects for increased cost with universal coverage, I find few editorial comments and no numerical studies or estimates of potential increases in cost to consumers associated with current proposals when browsing the web searching “U.S. healthcare costs” “healthcare reform” and similar items. It may cost us more in the end but this is far from certain. What we DO know is that the US spends more per capita on healthcare than anybody, and we get less for it. We are the only civilized nation that doesn’t have universal healthcare of some sort.

I'm curious to hear how folks think the problems with denial of claims or cancellation of coverage, or for that matter the medical malpractice situation would play out with a move toward universal coverage. I think it is self-evident that the coverage issues would be aided and I see potential for improvement in the malpractice area but can anybody credibly argue that they'd likley get worse? I'd like to hear it.

To be fair, I should note that KK has good company trotting out the malpractice claims issue. Factcheck, cited on the prior page, was reporting on similar claims made by our esteemed president Bush the Lesser when arguing for liability caps.

can you explain what the cost of malpractice insurance is, and what part that plays in the overall economy? I doubt he'll respond. It has been well established that the Republican hype about malpractice lawsuits being the root cause of all that is wrong or even much of what is wrong with our medical system is overbloated hype and pandering to folks who are not interested in facts, figures, or real discussion.

Fairweather, do you have any basis for accusing dmuja or his co-workers of lying or being wrong? Here's a compilation of news stories that suggest insurance companies may regularly do what dmuja reports above. Los Angeles city attorney NEWS SECTION ABC Delgadillo Files Lawsuit Against Blue Shield July 17, 2008 Associated Press City Attorney Asks Blue Cross to Substantiate News Release Claims March 3, 2008 Lawsuit alleges scheme by health insurer to cancel policies February 21, 2008 Cuomo to Sue Major Health Insurers February 14, 2008 American Medical News California Appeals Court Rules against Insurer's Rescission Practices February 11, 2008 Capitol Weekly Administration Fails to Reinstate Health care in Illegal Insurance Cancellation Cases April 3, 2008 Senate Hearing to Probe Regulation of Health Care Industry March 27, 2008 State Probes Blue Cross February 25, 2008 CBS News Insurer Gave Bonuses For Dropped Policies? November 9, 2007 Daily Kos LA City Attorney Files $1 Billion Lawsuit Against Blue Shield July 17, 2008 CNS LA City Attorney Sues Blue Shield of California July 17, 2008 Daily News City Suit Targets Blue Shield for Canceling Policies July 17, 2008 Financial Times LA Launches Action Against Health Insurer February 21, 2008 CNN Mom Wins Fight for Autism Insurance April 1, 2008 Forbes LA Sues Health Net Over Cancellations February 21, 2008 Good Morning America/ABC News Battling Blinding Disease and Insurance Company June 18, 2007 Internet Press LA City Attorney Sues Blue Cross Over Cancellations July 17, 2008 KTLA Blue Shield Sued for Canceling Policies July 17, 2008 Los Angeles Daily Breeze LA Sues Insurance Company February 21, 2008 Assess Risk in Health Plans January 27, 2008 Los Angeles Daily News Health Net Target of Delgadillo Suit February 21, 2008 Candidates Look to State as Debate Grows about Universal Health Coverage, Industry Reform February 2, 2008 Los Angeles Times Congressional Committee to Probe Health Insurers July 18, 2008 LA City Attorney Files Suit Against Insurer Over Cancellations July 17, 2008 Healthcare Insurance Probe Grows March 5, 2008 Cutting Off Health Insurance? March 1, 2008 Penalty Cuts Insurer Profit February 28, 2008 Health Net ordered to pay $9 million after canceling cancer patient's policy February 22, 2008 Heat is on Health Insurers February 14, 2008 State Steps up Scrutiny of Insurers January 30, 2008 Is This a Healthy Way to Choose Who Gets Care? January 20, 2008 Health Insurer Tied Bonuses to Dropping Sick Policyholders November 9, 2007 Blue Cross Cancellations Called Illegal March 23, 2007 MarketWatch Statement on City Attorney Action July 17, 2008 When Health Insurance Gets Taken Away March 6, 2008 Medical News Today Health Insurers Admit Need For External Review Of Rescission Practices, USA February 27, 2008 Modesto Bee Blue Shield Sued for Cancellation Policy July 17, 2008 Money Magazine/CNN Think You're Insured? Maybe Not. March 15, 2007 LA City Attorney Sues Health Net Over Cancellations February 21, 2008 The Neutron Bomb of Health Insurance February 13 2007 msnbc.com/NBC News 9 Things Insurers Don't Want You to Know How to protect your health and family from loopholes and lapses August 15, 2007 NBC LA City Attorney Files Lawsuit Against Health Net Inc. February 21, 2008 New York Times Insurers Agree to Develop a Set of Standards in Rating Doctors April 2, 2008 3 Leading Executives Resign at Insurer Under Inquiry January 26, 2008 Health Spending Exceeded Record $2 Trillion in 2006 January 8, 2008 It’s Not Just the Uninsured November 17, 2007 Reuters LA City Attorney Sues Blue Shield July 17, 2008 LA City Attorney Sues Health Net Over Cancellations February 21, 2008 NY AG Probes Health Insurers Over Reimbursement February 14, 2008 Sacramento Bee Blue Shield Sued Over Deceptive Practices July 17, 2008 Lawsuit Alleges Scheme by Health Insurer February 21, 2008 San Francisco Chronicle Blue Shield Sued for Allegedly Canceling Policies Illegally July 17, 2008 LA Says Health Net Illegally Halts Coverage February 21, 2008 San Jose Mercury News UnitedHealth Facing Big Fine for Thousands of Alleged Violations January 30, 2008 USA Today Individual Health Policies Leave Many Behind July 17, 2008 Candidates Go Opposite Ways on Health Care March 26, 2008 States Act to Protect Individual Health Insurance Coverage February 21, 2008 People Left Holding Bag when Policies Revoked December 13, 2007 The Wall Street Journal More Heat on CA Insurers Dropping Policies February 21, 2008 NY AG on UnitedHealth Database: Garbage In, Garbage Out February 14, 2008 Measuring a Doctor's Quality Remains an Art January 29, 2008 Washington Post More Hitting Cost Limit on Health Benefits January 27, 2008

Fairweather, Try dropping the personal attacks and answering a single point in the discussion. Oh - something besides how I am a socialist or I suggested you might be interested in a book that I had not read. You might even enjoy it.

I think you are right, Tokogirl. In certain high risk specialties, malpractice insurance is a huge factor. Across the board, as compared to total healthcare costs, not so much. And the cost of malpractice insurance has been repeatedly shown to be driven by a combination of factors related to the insurance and investment industry in addition to the payment of claims. There is a malpractice problem, but it is not nearly as simple as KK would suggest and part of the problem is that there is a lot of malpractice.

KK, Google is not discussion, you say, so I guess I won't search for discussions of just what percentage of our healthcare costs are attributable to malpractice claims, or whether there are any concrete proposals for an alternative way to assure quality healthcare. But if you get bored some time, try it.

Fairweather, I have been very clear about what I am for and I provide a basis for my ideas. You, on the other hand, have been obsessed with the label "socialism" but refuse to suggest anything concrete about what would, could, might, or should be better and refuse to back up your assetions. Even your pal KK says something more substantive than you do when he complains of malpractice lawsuits, though I'm not sure what that issue has to do with this discussion.

Those are my words, Fairweather. Now: how do they answer any of the questions we are discussing here on THIS PAGE? Yes, I tend to think that our best answer lies in MORE GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT. I don't know how it would could or should work. But where have you shown that government run healthcare is inherently worse? Where have I said that the only changes I would accept would be government run facilities only? Where DO you get your information that you refuse to support?

Question about the "medical malpractice crisis." How does this relate to a discussion of whether universal healthcare is a good idea, or whether broader coverage of any kind and combination of public and private sector services would be worth pursuing?

Nope. I pay my taxes without complaining about it and I pay for my own healthcare insurance plus deductibles, co-pays and uncovered services. I pay enough for myself AND a few others, in fact.

Show me where JayB answered these questions for you.

So spewing unfounded assertions with no apparent basis in fact and refusing to even provide any reference or source when questioned is real discussion? Feel free to post any "real discussion" about how government healthcare in America today is inherently and systemically worse than private. Explain where you got the idea that all proposals for healthcare reform that would draw the support of Democrats or someone like myself would have all healthcare delivered in government run facilities and provided by government employees. Show us where you got the idea that people who go bankrupt over medical expenses actually deserved it because they "chose" not to insure themselves.