Most polls we have seen so far showed Bernie Sanders won it walking away.
Hillary Clinton did quite a bit of sniping which does little to elucidate her position but does wonders for making her look like a mean old cow. She's really not much of a speaker and it was embarrassing hearing her throwing off soundbites which were obvious suck-ups to various interests. That's like product placement in movies to try to garner a few sales. Pitiful.
Bernie Sanders was as aggressive as he needed to be and he drew some deep blood from Clinton when he quoted how much she has been paid to speak privately for Goldman Sachs and how much they have contributed to her campaign.
Clinton said she is on the path but the only one we have ever seen her follow is the one which led her to forty-five million dollars.
Sanders scored one of the best knock-out punches in a debate since the all-time champion: "I knew JFK and you are no JFK."
Sanders said to Clinton, "You have received over six hundred thousand dollars in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs in one year."
We were aware Clinton has taken a great deal from banks but this is one burning outrage. Who does she expect to believe she will serve the people after taking all this money.
We're not going to play the pundits here because you already know what they said if you watched the debate and you probably don't care what they said if they didn't.
There were some things which were particularly frosting and one of them was Clinton's contention she had made such progress with START II for nuclear reduction. Oh, really? There are still fifteen hundred strategic nuclear missiles in the U.S. and Russia so when will this slow-motion change materialize.
She also kept painting Obama as the greatest gift to America since Washington and that was pissing me off too. I was thinking, kee-rist, can you stand on your own damn feet or what. Yah, that would be or what.
No telling how much the debate may have shifted anyone and the basis for the article is that revelation of how much Clinton is getting handed by Big Business. We called that The Establishment in the sixties and guess who joined it.
My position was solidly in support of Bernie Sanders already but this aspect of Clinton makes her candidacy all the more repugnant and her style is rapidly gaining a similarity to that of Trump. That sophomoric sniping from her is going to get tedious extremely quickly.
Hillary Clinton did quite a bit of sniping which does little to elucidate her position but does wonders for making her look like a mean old cow. She's really not much of a speaker and it was embarrassing hearing her throwing off soundbites which were obvious suck-ups to various interests. That's like product placement in movies to try to garner a few sales. Pitiful.
Bernie Sanders was as aggressive as he needed to be and he drew some deep blood from Clinton when he quoted how much she has been paid to speak privately for Goldman Sachs and how much they have contributed to her campaign.
Clinton said she is on the path but the only one we have ever seen her follow is the one which led her to forty-five million dollars.
Sanders scored one of the best knock-out punches in a debate since the all-time champion: "I knew JFK and you are no JFK."
Sanders said to Clinton, "You have received over six hundred thousand dollars in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs in one year."
We were aware Clinton has taken a great deal from banks but this is one burning outrage. Who does she expect to believe she will serve the people after taking all this money.
We're not going to play the pundits here because you already know what they said if you watched the debate and you probably don't care what they said if they didn't.
There were some things which were particularly frosting and one of them was Clinton's contention she had made such progress with START II for nuclear reduction. Oh, really? There are still fifteen hundred strategic nuclear missiles in the U.S. and Russia so when will this slow-motion change materialize.
She also kept painting Obama as the greatest gift to America since Washington and that was pissing me off too. I was thinking, kee-rist, can you stand on your own damn feet or what. Yah, that would be or what.
No telling how much the debate may have shifted anyone and the basis for the article is that revelation of how much Clinton is getting handed by Big Business. We called that The Establishment in the sixties and guess who joined it.
My position was solidly in support of Bernie Sanders already but this aspect of Clinton makes her candidacy all the more repugnant and her style is rapidly gaining a similarity to that of Trump. That sophomoric sniping from her is going to get tedious extremely quickly.
29 comments:
Sanders did reveal his healthcare plan of medicare for all. No copays no deductibles cost estimates 1.5t per year.
Biggest issue I have here ia actually no co pay no deductibles.
I have watch participants in TennCare which is auite similar.
Go to the emergency room for a cold. Because it is easier than making an appt with GP.
I manage my healthcare because I have to pay for visits so I dont go to a Dr unless I need to Not because I need an excuse to miss work another common Tenncare practice.
Copays are an important part of the patient accountability of healthcare.
The fact that nooone has an extra 1.5T laying around is minor to the fact that the healthcare system cant take that kind of overload just look to the justice sysrem for backlogs Or ask the UK what wait times are
Unknown who makes that cost estimate but such things are never accompanied by what insurance companies cost now. When half of every medical dollar goes to overhead in insurance companies, even a Boy Scout with a pocket calculator could do a better job.
We also saw monstrous cost estimates for what the ACA would cost and they didn't happen so huge numbers don't impress me.
I appreciate your passion but TennCare is going bankrupt because there is no accountability. I am not arguing cost as no system they put forth will be affordable.
If I can go to am emergency now for free why would a lazy unorganized person wait.
No matter the cost the system can handle that increase in traffic. Insurance overhead is not your largest concern. It is lack of competition. Hospital beds are regulated to per capita quotas. The number of Drs produced every year us limited.
If a hospital buys a new piece of equipment it must be used often enough to pay for it even if thst usage is not medicslly justified
Citizen based review boards ate needed not Dr based
I'll get into costs in another article. Right now it's way, way the hell too cold. Fill in with the standard: Texans sure can build houses ... but they sure can't insulate them and keep them warm.
You know as well as I the system is broken and you saw how Liberty Mutual canceled me. My political position isn't based on that single example and it's not simply sour grapes driving me. This is an egregiously bad, ridiculously expensive system which delivers only a fraction of what people get in other countries. It can't help but be cheaper once the insurance companies are pushed out of it when they take around fifty percent of every medical dollar. You couldn't possibly design a system to do it any worse than that or more expensively.
you can run costs anytime you want. They are useless except to fill time. As like the debt and the budget they are imagination exercises
As to other countries, during a visit to an Australian ER at a karate tournament. They were still using wooden wheelchairs.
And our wait was 4 hours. We were stepped up inline because the payment wpuld be billed to an American insurance company
PS I was just reminded no Xray was given because We were told the cost didnt justify the reward
Maybe a positive or a negative on that one
The only costs I know for sure are in what the system costs now. Too much money goes into it and not enough comes back out. It seems obvious removing the insurance company overhead will reduce costs but there is the fear government overhead will cost more although there's little to justify that when it's not operating for profit. In any case, any government medical program isn't trying to validate whether anyone has the proper policy or whatever or whether you're authorized for treatment, etc. The costs really can't help but be lower when nothing else changes except the insurance companies.
Your comment on this system sucks so lets try another is similar to this pan is really hot that fire dorsnt look too bad
How about real answers with real numbers I havent seen one yet from anyone
As long as lawyers run congress there will never be a decent judical system because lawyers love class action suits that are akin to the lottery
And Drs control hospital beds and # of new doctors. And insurance companies dictate medical procedures allowed
How many people have insurance really doesnt matter
And if our system is so bad why do so many foreigners come here to get the best care.
It is not the level of care that is broken just who controls it
Until that changes it will be just another broken plan. And the government is not the answer
I don't have a citation but there was a recent article written by an American who lives so much in UK that she took out dual citizenship. She commented on some differences between the systems but primary among them was almost no waiting in the NHS system in England. I observed the same thing but that was only in clinic visits.
Similarly, there is rarely much wait time at the VA clinic here and that system is also 100% socialist. It takes months to get an appointment but they move quickly once you're in the system. There's no point in comparing that to NHS except insofar as it's missing the piece for getting appts scheduled quickly (i.e. insufficient resources).
What's the big deal with wooden wheelchairs?? I've enjoyed being carted about in multiple wheelchairs and they were bigger but worked fine. In fact, they were probably a bit easier to roll because of the bigger wheels. For me the wheels didn't matter much because the shoulder was smashed so I couldn't turn them anyway.
Ruling out the government as an answer locks you to a solution which we can see does not work. It's somewhat similar to hearing Clnton trying to defend insurance companies last night which I thought was some of the driest comedy I've seen in some while. Lady?? Do you even hear yourself??
It's easily verifiable that America pays more for medical care but gets less. As you say, the mechanism for delivering it is broken and that specifically is the insurance companies. Medicos are plagued with paperwork from them and all of that is typically blamed on the government but that goes all the way back to the Blue Cross days in California which were a blazing nightmare for yer ol' Mother.
Sanders is absolutely right. There should be no question of anyone's right to health care because there's no way in the world any real human would simply step across someone who is sick and has fallen. There are far too many question of who should get care and far too few regarding how it will be provided (e.g. more clinics rather than emergency rooms, etc).
Everyone surely everyone has the right. And I surely disagree with less for more. It is best for way overpriced
The government cannot even get me a copy of my Drivers License in under 2 hours.
Or it takes 5 years to convict a criminal
Hospitals try to service all illnesses all the time and have every piece of equipment. They need to have specific hospitals for specific illnesses. So that they only needed to have equipment for that area And costs come down dramatically and. are goes up
I rest my case VA wait time for an appt is months. Totally run by the government. And all I hear you do is bitch about the care but love the people who give it. And all the paperwork and rigamarole to get anything accomplished
The VA doesn't have a government problem but rather a resource problem and they aren't funded to fix it. My bitch on that has been consistent.
Assuming every hospital will cure every disease isn't a realistic requirement any more than the idea every illness has to be remedied in a hospital. Some of the most important medical resources are the front-line clinics where we go when we don't think it's going to kill us but a doctor really ought to look at it. If you don't have money, don't even bother.
There would be immense savings in pushing E.R. traffic out to those types of clinics and it would be peanuts to build them. Trauma care has an obvious need for the E.R. but anything else only goes because of the requirement to treat.
It seems obvious E.R. care would benefit tremendously because the focus would go directly to dealing with the worst and time would not be diverted to situations which take time away from critical need.
The hospitals today try to do that. And it is the biggest fail we have. I just spent $12m on a new MRI and you Drs better keep it full
Or just have one deluxe imaging center for many hospitals to share
VA is not underfunded look at the bonuses paid out to falsify paperwork to say they had no issues
There are med first units everywhere but here TennCare patients use ER instead. Why woild that practice change if it cost them nothing to go to ER
If you love VA healthcare you will love Sanders plan which allocates less person per year than the VA presently spends per person
Ah hell lets get in line for services now
I see the VA first-hand and no-one is ordering tests which aren't needed. Besides, an MRI is about as important as an X-ray machine these days so it's appropriate to invest hospital dollars in them.
There are some aspects about VA healthcare which I do love, particularly the dedication in everyone involved with it. You would have far fewer thoughts of corruption in the organization if you saw it in action.
The main complaint regarding the socialist demon is it will rack up big government dollars in overhead but that's exactly what happens now with insurance companies and it's not clear why there is so much resistance to fixing it. In some cases, privatization is warranted but not in this one. The insurance companies have neither served honestly nor even efficiently.
I would probably agree that VA doesnt order tests for no reason
But as I said the VA ptesently spends what Sanders plan will spend per person
Downright scary. I hope he has a plan to fix the system not just change who pays for it
PS The US presently spends about 9k per person per year.
That's the hell of it. The US spends plenty but so many are skimming the fat that the money isn't getting it done as well as it should. There is a lot of similarity to casinos since those insurance companies didn't build those luxy skyscrapers by giving anything away.
No the hell of it is Sanders plan will bring the whole system to VA levels wothout a plan to fix the system.
The US presently has the best quality but at the worst price.
Why can Big pharma sell the same drug in Canada as it does it the US for 1/3 the price it sell in the US Look at the buses of seniors going to Canada to buy thier medicine and come back
Fix the issues
Noone lists a plan to fix the issues. Big insurance doesnt go away is his plan just replaced by big government Lets look at the IRS for the epitome of well run government Bad example they say they are underfunded to do the tasks at hand also
Seems to me that with about 35m people unisured in this country that if we covered all these people with VA style healthcare at $6k per person and charged them co pay per visit minimal charges $25 then they could all be coveted for about $210B
per year. Then if by regulated price controls of Big Pharma, Health care premiums and set UCR for hospitals then cutting only 30% would bring our costs inline
Example I sent someone to a hospital for treatment
Hospital initial charge $22000
Since I have insurance the pre negoitated price $$3000
After deductibles and Co pays my out of pocket about $1100
Why the $19000 difference in insured priced and uninsured price.
I am not a big one for government regulation but at this point it is necessary to get pricing to realistic levels.
This added to more doctors more competition between hospitals that specialize
Not a great solution but a beginning. I dont see solutions just changes in who pays and how
Absent from your arithmetic is the second column of two-column accounting and that's when you take roughly 50% of what America is paying for medical care now and use that to pay for the items you have listed. It would cover these things with money to spare. The governmental cost to do what the insurance companies do is vastly lower because there is no value added by insurance companies and they're only necessary when access to cover is restricted.
Sanders has more of a plan and a better focus on the actual issues in the country than anyone I have heard in many years. In fact, I have never heard a politician address these things with his clarity.
His health plan is cover everyone but not how. He does have a way to pay for it increasing employer payroll tax and taxing investment income. The HOW is the important part
Assume everyone in the country takes whatever is being spent on medical insurance now plus the employer contribution and instead of sending that to an insurance company it gets sent to the government. Without the insurance company overhead, somewhere near half of that money will go to benefits and that should easily be sufficient to cover those who do not have insurance without changing any other thing.
The government needs the actuarial tables insurance companies make and that infrastructure must exist to produce them. It's important for accurate allocation of resources, etc to have a reasonable forecast of what the year's needs will be. It's a cost to do that but it's a one-off to build it. Staff costs will likely be to ex-insurance company people but only a fraction of how many exist now because most of them are in-place to contest claims.
Although the 50% estimate is high, it's not as radically high as it may seem and the insurance companies cost one massive pile of money. It's close to inevitable the government can do it better.
Post a Comment