Bloomberg Suggests We Need To Ration Care, Shouldn’t Give Treatment For Fatal Disease To Older Folks

[P@triot]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

 

[Polishprince]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

One thing libs NEVER address in their quest for Government Controlled healthcare is the question of quality as well as choice.

Who will be treated by high quality doctors? Who will be treated by the less competent?

How about choice? In the practice of medicine, there are often different ways to deal with medical problems. How would libs determine which back pain patients will get surgery, which will get chiropractic, which will get scrips for oxycontin? All valid treatments, but with different price points.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

The man is just insufferably arrogant and insensitive.

 

[Dragonlady]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

One thing libs NEVER address in their quest for Government Controlled healthcare is the question of quality as well as choice.

Who will be treated by high quality doctors? Who will be treated by the less competent?

How about choice? In the practice of medicine, there are often different ways to deal with medical problems. How would libs determine which back pain patients will get surgery, which will get chiropractic, which will get scrips for oxycontin? All valid treatments, but with different price points.

Government funded healthcare pays for the healthcare. They don't determine who gets what treatments or which doctors. That's what private insurance does. They have "networks" and all kind of treatment limiting tricks and traps and ways to deny you coverage and treatment.

Who gets the best doctors and treatments - anyone who wants them. That's because the doctor gets the same amount of money for treating a billionaire, as they get for treating a welfare mom. There are no copayments and no extra billings. Doctors decide how many patients they see. Rich people cannot slip the doctor a little extra and jump the line.

There are extras you can pay for - a semi-private or private room. Home care and nursing. One of my friends hired a team of round the clock private nurses to care for her dying father, when he was in late stages Alzheimer. He had been an oil company President. The wealthy will always have access to better care. They're generally better educated and can advocate for their own care. The poor are less likely to question what they're told or seek second opinions, look for alternative treatments, and have less resources to for appliances or aides in their recovery.

John Oliver has a brilliant explanation as to why single payer is oh so much better and cheaper than what you have now. And why you might like single payer even more than the Canadians and the British do.

That's why rich people from other countries go to the USA. They can buy faster service and experimental treatments. And also because the USA is the only country in the world which allows hospitals to sell their services to foreigners. Americans brag that nobody goes to Canada for treatment. They can't. We won't let them. Our taxes pay for our hospitals and our taxes paid for the doctors' education. As long as there are Canadians waiting for treatment, our hospitals are not allowed to sell their services to foreigners.

In a single payer system, your doctor doesn't consult with the insurance company or the government about your treatment, they consult with you. You and your doctor decide your treatment. Not the government and not your insurance company.

 

[2aguy]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

American insurance companies have denying life extending treatments and care to terminal patients for years. Lifetime caps also deny treatment to older patients.

This isn't anything new.

Actually, American insurance companies have sometimes denied PAYMENT for treatments which they had determined were outside of the bounds of the policy they agreed to. They never deny, or guarantee, that anyone will or will not receive a particular treatment. Premium payers have possible avenues of relief that they wouldn't with an all-encompassing governmental system. They can hire a lawyer to fight with the insurance company if they have a case, they can find another way to pay for needed treatment as well.

Liberal plans would ban self-payment.

BULLSHIT. Liberal plans don't ban self-payment. They ban "extra billing". And government health care doesn't pre-approve care. Government health care, pays for care post treatment.

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor. This is yet another scare technique to keep the private health care gravy train rolling for Big Medicine.

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

If you believe this you really are stupid.........

In socialised medicine, you pay for it all of your life through massive taxation....and then, when you get old, you are denied treatment because you are "too old..." The classic left wing bait and switch........

You will be given the option to kill yourself though......the government will fully support that....

 

[2aguy]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

One thing libs NEVER address in their quest for Government Controlled healthcare is the question of quality as well as choice.

Who will be treated by high quality doctors? Who will be treated by the less competent?

How about choice? In the practice of medicine, there are often different ways to deal with medical problems. How would libs determine which back pain patients will get surgery, which will get chiropractic, which will get scrips for oxycontin? All valid treatments, but with different price points.

Government funded healthcare pays for the healthcare. They don't determine who gets what treatments or which doctors. That's what private insurance does. They have "networks" and all kind of treatment limiting tricks and traps and ways to deny you coverage and treatment.

Who gets the best doctors and treatments - anyone who wants them. That's because the doctor gets the same amount of money for treating a billionaire, as they get for treating a welfare mom. There are no copayments and no extra billings. Doctors decide how many patients they see. Rich people cannot slip the doctor a little extra and jump the line.

There are extras you can pay for - a semi-private or private room. Home care and nursing. One of my friends hired a team of round the clock private nurses to care for her dying father, when he was in late stages Alzheimer. He had been an oil company President. The wealthy will always have access to better care. They're generally better educated and can advocate for their own care. The poor are less likely to question what they're told or seek second opinions, look for alternative treatments, and have less resources to for appliances or aides in their recovery.

John Oliver has a brilliant explanation as to why single payer is oh so much better and cheaper than what you have now. And why you might like single payer even more than the Canadians and the British do.

That's why rich people from other countries go to the USA. They can buy faster service and experimental treatments. And also because the USA is the only country in the world which allows hospitals to sell their services to foreigners. Americans brag that nobody goes to Canada for treatment. They can't. We won't let them. Our taxes pay for our hospitals and our taxes paid for the doctors' education. As long as there are Canadians waiting for treatment, our hospitals are not allowed to sell their services to foreigners.

In a single payer system, your doctor doesn't consult with the insurance company or the government about your treatment, they consult with you. You and your doctor decide your treatment. Not the government and not your insurance company.

Moron, they come to America because we have more diagnostic machines and we have all of the medical treatment innovation.....and they don't have to wait months or over a year to get an MRI here...the way you have to wait for one in Canada...

You have no idea how it works in those countries.......

Who gets the best doctors and treatments - anyone who wants them. That's because the doctor gets the same amount of money for treating a billionaire, as they get for treating a welfare mom. There are no copayments and no extra billings. Doctors decide how many patients they see. Rich people cannot slip the doctor a little extra and jump the line.

You really are clueless....

There are no copayments and no extra billings.

Because you are paying for it long before you use it...you pay through massive taxation on every dollar you earn your entire life whether you are using the service or not....and then, when you need it, you get denied because of your age because the system is out of money and doctors......because the doctors get tired of being government clock punchers.........

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

Orderly utopia awaits comrades

 

[2aguy]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

One thing libs NEVER address in their quest for Government Controlled healthcare is the question of quality as well as choice.

Who will be treated by high quality doctors? Who will be treated by the less competent?

How about choice? In the practice of medicine, there are often different ways to deal with medical problems. How would libs determine which back pain patients will get surgery, which will get chiropractic, which will get scrips for oxycontin? All valid treatments, but with different price points.

Government funded healthcare pays for the healthcare. They don't determine who gets what treatments or which doctors. That's what private insurance does. They have "networks" and all kind of treatment limiting tricks and traps and ways to deny you coverage and treatment.

Who gets the best doctors and treatments - anyone who wants them. That's because the doctor gets the same amount of money for treating a billionaire, as they get for treating a welfare mom. There are no copayments and no extra billings. Doctors decide how many patients they see. Rich people cannot slip the doctor a little extra and jump the line.

There are extras you can pay for - a semi-private or private room. Home care and nursing. One of my friends hired a team of round the clock private nurses to care for her dying father, when he was in late stages Alzheimer. He had been an oil company President. The wealthy will always have access to better care. They're generally better educated and can advocate for their own care. The poor are less likely to question what they're told or seek second opinions, look for alternative treatments, and have less resources to for appliances or aides in their recovery.

John Oliver has a brilliant explanation as to why single payer is oh so much better and cheaper than what you have now. And why you might like single payer even more than the Canadians and the British do.

That's why rich people from other countries go to the USA. They can buy faster service and experimental treatments. And also because the USA is the only country in the world which allows hospitals to sell their services to foreigners. Americans brag that nobody goes to Canada for treatment. They can't. We won't let them. Our taxes pay for our hospitals and our taxes paid for the doctors' education. As long as there are Canadians waiting for treatment, our hospitals are not allowed to sell their services to foreigners.

In a single payer system, your doctor doesn't consult with the insurance company or the government about your treatment, they consult with you. You and your doctor decide your treatment. Not the government and not your insurance company.

You don't know what you are talking about....nothing you said is even close to being accurate...

The Ugly Truth About Canadian Health Care

Mountain-bike enthusiast Suzanne Aucoin had to fight more than her Stage IV colon cancer. Her doctor suggested Erbitux—a proven cancer drug that targets cancer cells exclusively, unlike conventional chemotherapies that more crudely kill all fast-growing cells in the body—and Aucoin went to a clinic to begin treatment. But if Erbitux offered hope, Aucoin’s insurance didn’t: she received one inscrutable form letter after another, rejecting her claim for reimbursement. Yet another example of the callous hand of managed care, depriving someone of needed medical help, right? Guess again. Erbitux is standard treatment, covered by insurance companies—in the United States. Aucoin lives in Ontario, Canada.

When Aucoin appealed to an official ombudsman, the Ontario government claimed that her treatment was unproven and that she had gone to an unaccredited clinic. But the FDA in the U.S. had approved Erbitux, and her clinic was a cancer center affiliated with a prominent Catholic hospital in Buffalo. This January, the ombudsman ruled in Aucoin’s favor, awarding her the cost of treatment. She represents a dramatic new trend in Canadian health-care advocacy: finding the treatment you need in another country, and then fighting Canadian bureaucrats (and often suing) to get them to pick up the tab.
-----

My health-care prejudices crumbled not in the classroom but on the way to one. On a subzero Winnipeg morning in 1997, I cut across the hospital emergency room to shave a few minutes off my frigid commute.

Swinging open the door, I stepped into a nightmare: the ER overflowed with elderly people on stretchers, waiting for admission. Some, it turned out, had waited five days.

The air stank with sweat and urine. Right then, I began to reconsider everything that I thought I knew about Canadian health care. I soon discovered that the problems went well beyond overcrowded ERs.

Patients had to wait for practically any diagnostic test or procedure, such as the man with persistent pain from a hernia operation whom we referred to a pain clinic—with a three-year wait list;


or the woman needing a sleep study to diagnose what seemed like sleep apnea, who faced a two-year delay;

or the woman with breast cancer who needed to wait four months for radiation therapy, when the standard of care was four weeks.

I decided to write about what I saw. By day, I attended classes and visited patients; at night, I worked on a book. Unfortunately, statistics on Canadian health care’s weaknesses were hard to come by, and even finding people willing to criticize the system was difficult, such was the emotional support that it then enjoyed. One family friend, diagnosed with cancer, was told to wait for potentially lifesaving chemotherapy. I called to see if I could write about his plight. Worried about repercussions, he asked me to change his name. A bit later, he asked if I could change his sex in the story, and maybe his town. Finally, he asked if I could change the illness, too.

 

[2aguy]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

One thing libs NEVER address in their quest for Government Controlled healthcare is the question of quality as well as choice.

Who will be treated by high quality doctors? Who will be treated by the less competent?

How about choice? In the practice of medicine, there are often different ways to deal with medical problems. How would libs determine which back pain patients will get surgery, which will get chiropractic, which will get scrips for oxycontin? All valid treatments, but with different price points.

Government funded healthcare pays for the healthcare. They don't determine who gets what treatments or which doctors. That's what private insurance does. They have "networks" and all kind of treatment limiting tricks and traps and ways to deny you coverage and treatment.

Who gets the best doctors and treatments - anyone who wants them. That's because the doctor gets the same amount of money for treating a billionaire, as they get for treating a welfare mom. There are no copayments and no extra billings. Doctors decide how many patients they see. Rich people cannot slip the doctor a little extra and jump the line.

There are extras you can pay for - a semi-private or private room. Home care and nursing. One of my friends hired a team of round the clock private nurses to care for her dying father, when he was in late stages Alzheimer. He had been an oil company President. The wealthy will always have access to better care. They're generally better educated and can advocate for their own care. The poor are less likely to question what they're told or seek second opinions, look for alternative treatments, and have less resources to for appliances or aides in their recovery.

John Oliver has a brilliant explanation as to why single payer is oh so much better and cheaper than what you have now. And why you might like single payer even more than the Canadians and the British do.

That's why rich people from other countries go to the USA. They can buy faster service and experimental treatments. And also because the USA is the only country in the world which allows hospitals to sell their services to foreigners. Americans brag that nobody goes to Canada for treatment. They can't. We won't let them. Our taxes pay for our hospitals and our taxes paid for the doctors' education. As long as there are Canadians waiting for treatment, our hospitals are not allowed to sell their services to foreigners.

In a single payer system, your doctor doesn't consult with the insurance company or the government about your treatment, they consult with you. You and your doctor decide your treatment. Not the government and not your insurance company.

You don't know what you are talking about.....you are like the Russian useful idiots here in America telling us that Russian citizens are happy and joyful.....as Stalin was filling mass graves to the tune of 25 million people.....

Canadians Are One In A Million -- While Waiting For Medical Treatment

The only thing Canadian patients are "guaranteed" is a spot on a waitlist. As the Fraser report notes, in 2017, more than 173,000 patients waited for an ophthalmology procedure. Another 91,000 lined up for some form of general surgery, while more than 40,000 waited for a urology procedure.

All told, nearly 3% of Canada's population was waiting for some kind of medical care at the end of last year.

Those delays were excruciatingly long. After receiving a referral from a general practitioner, the typical patient waited more than 21 weeks to receive treatment from a specialist. That was the longest average waiting period on record -- and more than double the median wait in 1993.
----

One Ontario woman, Judy Congdon, learned that she needed a hip replacement in 2016, according to the Toronto Sun. Doctors initially scheduled the procedure for September 2017 -- almost a year later. The surgery never happened on schedule.

The hospital ran over budget, forcing physicians to postpone the operation for another year.

In the United States, suffering for a year or more before receiving a joint replacement is unheard of. In Canada, it's normal.

Canadians lose a lot of money waiting for their "free" socialized medicine. On average, patients forfeit over $1,800 in lost wages. And that's only counting the working hours they miss due to pain and immobility.
----

The Fraser Institute researchers also calculated the value of all the waking hours that patients lost because they couldn't fully function. The toll was staggering -- almost $5,600 per patient, totaling $5.8 billion nationally. And those calculations ignore the value of uncompensated care provided by family members, who often take time off work or quit their jobs to help ill loved ones.

Canada isn't an anomaly. Every nation that offers government-funded, universal coverage features long wait times. When the government makes health care "free," consumers' demand for medical services surges. Patients have no incentive to limit their doctor visits or choose more cost-efficient providers.

To prevent expenses from ballooning, the government sets strict budget caps that only enable hospitals to hire a limited number of staff and purchase a meager amount of equipment. Demand inevitably outstrips supply. Shortages result.

 

[2aguy]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

One thing libs NEVER address in their quest for Government Controlled healthcare is the question of quality as well as choice.

Who will be treated by high quality doctors? Who will be treated by the less competent?

How about choice? In the practice of medicine, there are often different ways to deal with medical problems. How would libs determine which back pain patients will get surgery, which will get chiropractic, which will get scrips for oxycontin? All valid treatments, but with different price points.

Government funded healthcare pays for the healthcare. They don't determine who gets what treatments or which doctors. That's what private insurance does. They have "networks" and all kind of treatment limiting tricks and traps and ways to deny you coverage and treatment.

Who gets the best doctors and treatments - anyone who wants them. That's because the doctor gets the same amount of money for treating a billionaire, as they get for treating a welfare mom. There are no copayments and no extra billings. Doctors decide how many patients they see. Rich people cannot slip the doctor a little extra and jump the line.

There are extras you can pay for - a semi-private or private room. Home care and nursing. One of my friends hired a team of round the clock private nurses to care for her dying father, when he was in late stages Alzheimer. He had been an oil company President. The wealthy will always have access to better care. They're generally better educated and can advocate for their own care. The poor are less likely to question what they're told or seek second opinions, look for alternative treatments, and have less resources to for appliances or aides in their recovery.

John Oliver has a brilliant explanation as to why single payer is oh so much better and cheaper than what you have now. And why you might like single payer even more than the Canadians and the British do.

That's why rich people from other countries go to the USA. They can buy faster service and experimental treatments. And also because the USA is the only country in the world which allows hospitals to sell their services to foreigners. Americans brag that nobody goes to Canada for treatment. They can't. We won't let them. Our taxes pay for our hospitals and our taxes paid for the doctors' education. As long as there are Canadians waiting for treatment, our hospitals are not allowed to sell their services to foreigners.

In a single payer system, your doctor doesn't consult with the insurance company or the government about your treatment, they consult with you. You and your doctor decide your treatment. Not the government and not your insurance company.

It's not just Canada...

Just look at the United Kingdom's government enterprise, the National Health Service, which turns 70 this July. Today, British hospitals are so overcrowded that doctors regularly treat patients in hallways. The agency recently canceled tens of thousands of surgeries, including urgent cancer procedures, because of severe resource shortages. And this winter, nearly 17,000 patients waited in the backs of their ambulances -- many for an hour or more -- before hospital staff could clear space for them in the emergency room.

 

[MeBelle]

Mini-Mike himself is 77 or 78.

Does he intend to forgo treatment himself, in the interest of his policy?

Nope - he'll get treated privately by top notch docs he personally hires

 

[MeBelle]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

American insurance companies have denying life extending treatments and care to terminal patients for years. Lifetime caps also deny treatment to older patients.

This isn't anything new.

So it's OK with you?

Kool .....

 

[CowboyTed]

Bernie's Brown Shirts need to work on defunding Bloomberg

BTW, I haven't seen Bloomberg's tax returns yet. What's holding them up? And what's holding up the Liberals demanding the forms?

Why should we... Trump is not showing his, would be too embarrassed...

Trump set the rules on this.

 

[CowboyTed]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

Go live in a country that actually has the programs purposed... The amazing bit is how little bureaucracy there actually is at patient level.

Why do you think it is alright to lie about this... Have you no integrity?

 

[Gracie]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

Wow. Ruth Ginsberg will be in big trouble with him as POTUS, eh?

 

[CWayne]

Government health care leaves treatment between the patient and his/her doctor.

Imagine the ignorance of starting a sentence with “Government healthcare” and ending it with “leaves treatment between the patient and their doctor”.

Um...it’s government “healthcare”. Which means treatment is controlled by the government. Which is what the left wants. They love a fascist totalitarian state where the government controls everything.

Go live in a country that actually has the programs purposed... The amazing bit is how little bureaucracy there actually is at patient level.

Why do you think it is alright to lie about this... Have you no integrity?

Read posts 28 and 29, and then make that statement again.

 

[Votto]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

I'm guessing no one will ever ration little Mike's health care...…….EVER!

 

[JoeB131]

I’m so old I remember when you were mocked for suggesting Death Panels were coming.

And this was when he was paying a shiva call in 2011 with a grieving family whose father had just died. And when they change 95 to 75?

Twitter

Wow... you guys are panicking, aren't you?

 

[JoeB131]

We should all have $65 Billion for a day and see who we cure. Instead of buying a nomination, Bloomberg could be saving lives

The difference between Bloomberg and Trump. Bloomberg is really a Billionaire!

 

[22lcidw]

Anybody got cures for terminal illnesses?

Thought not.

Its the agendas. They start out in one aspect and keep moving and moving some more. There are problems to be sure. You guys are like the ultimate partiers. It ends there. Its all inclusive. And no one else counts. Over the decades politicians andthose involved in political ways have made these statements with different ways of handling it. They will sell this to us in some way. We do not know how the future is going to be economically or in a disaster way either. But the Prog...ohhh the Prog. They have been around since the beginning of time. Selling themselves as angels and finishing up as devils.