Docs tell 83-year-old Swede she's 'too old' for treatment

Easy to fix. Medicare now has for clients the people that are most likely to require care, the old and disabled. So require all Americans to have Medicare. Then we would have many that do not use the system for years at a time, other than preventive checkups.

I have thought that that would be the way to do it for a long time but no one has offered that as a plan ,have they? I wonder if that could erase the unfunded liabilities that is twice our current GNP?

Not quite that simple. Until costs are brought under some control, they will continue to rise and eat up a much larger percentage of GNP, regardless of who is running the system. Again, with our current system, the private side has just as many if not more unfunded liabilities as Medicare. One point though; through such a system, everyone would pay into the system, and that is something that is not happening currently.

Many young healthy people choose to go without insurance. But then if they become sick, they complain about not being able to get coverage at a reasonable price. This does not address the problem of those who do pay for coverage, get sick, and then get booted out of the system due to their pre-existing condition. But the truth is, the majority who are denied coverage never paid in the first place. This is why, even in a private system, some form of insurance should be mandatory, even if it is only a high deductible plan with an HSA.

Controlling costs seems to have been forgotten,the thing I'm hearing more about is universal access,not controlling costs.
 
I was watching Charlie Rose a couple weeks ago and Paul Krugman was on there pitching a single payer plan and he said government already controls 60% of healthcare in the USA so why does private markets get the blame? I think group health insurance is one of the dumbest things there is,8% of us have individual health insurance and I think that is the way to go Emma.

That doesn't negate what I said above.

I'm just stating there is another option Emma, how about Health Savings Accounts for starters or allowing insurance companies to sell their policies nationally or giving people who want individual health insurance the same tax breaks as group insurance? There are options other than corporate or government based,imho anyway.

Isn't that what the health insurance exchange is designed to do?
 
That doesn't negate what I said above.

I'm just stating there is another option Emma, how about Health Savings Accounts for starters or allowing insurance companies to sell their policies nationally or giving people who want individual health insurance the same tax breaks as group insurance? There are options other than corporate or government based,imho anyway.

Isn't that what the health insurance exchange is designed to do?

I honestly haven't read on that until just now,sounds good on the surface but why not just have a bill that declares that insurance can be sold nationally under the interstate commerce clause,why more government bureaucracies?( I know,I was born in the wrong century,:lol:)
 
stop the fuckng lies...

here is a piece of truth for your ass:

been done here:

Life-Support Stopped for 6-Month-Old in Houston
Yesterday Sun Hudson, the nearly 6-month-old at Texas Children's Hospital in Houston, diagnosed and slowly dying with a rare form of dwarfism (thanatophoric dysplasia), was taken off the ventilator that was keeping him alive. A Houston court authorized the hospital's action, and Sun died shortly thereafter. Today's Houston Chronicle and Dallas Morning News have most of the details.

Both papers report that this is the first time in the United States a court has allowed life-sustaining treatment to be withdrawn from a pediatric patient over the objections of the child's parent. (The Dallas paper quotes John Paris, a bioethicist at Boston College, as its source.) If true, the unique Texas statute under which this saga was played out contributed in no small way to the outcome. As one of the laws co-authors (along with a roomful of other drafters, in 1999) let me explain.

Under chapter 166 of the Texas Health and Safety Code, if an attending physician disagrees with a surrogate over a life-and-death treatment decision, there must be an ethics committee consultation (with notice to the surrogate and an opportunity to participate). In a futility case such as Sun Hudson's, in which the treatment team is seeking to stop treatment deemed to be nonbeneficial, if the ethics committee agrees with the team, the hospital will be authorized to discontinue the disputed treatment (after a 10-day delay, during which the hospital must help try to find a facility that will accept a transfer of the patient). These provisions, which were added to Texas law in 1999, originally applied only to adult patients; in 2003; they were made applicable to disputes over treatment decisions for or on behalf of minors. (I hasten to add that one of the co-drafters in both 1999 and 2003 was the National Right to Life Committee. Witnesses who testified in support of the bill in 1999 included representatives of National Right to Life, Texas Right to Life, and the Hemlock Society. Our bill passed both houses, unanimously, both years, and the 1999 law was signed by then Governor George W. Bush.)

HealthLawProf Blog: Life-Support Stopped for 6-Month-Old in Houston

so we already let people die...it aint a brave new world .....just your dumbass dont know much about it.
 
Medicare has different problems, Physicians opting out of Medicare and a 30 trillion dollar unfunded liability that will be hitting it in a few years if nothing is done about it.

Again, you talk about the unfunded liability of Medicare, and it is true. But how much is the unfunded liability of private care in that same timeframe? Is it not as much or even more? Just as with Medicare, the unfunded liability of private insurance and private healthcare can only be paid for with more funding, no matter where that funding comes from. This is why costs must be controlled to some extent, or we will end up spending half of our GDP on healthcare at some point, which of course will decimate our economy.

What unfunded liability with for profit private care?

The CBO has projected all of the unfunded liabilities from Medicare. They have also projected that the increases in healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP will be greater within the private sector than it will be from Medicare. Now, you can say that those increases are not unfunded, but the fact is that someone will have to pay for them regardless, so it is the same thing as the unfunded liabilities of Medicare. The only difference is that with Medicare, they will have to be paid, where as with the private sector they can go unpaid and no one will have any heatlhcare from the private sector. But if we want healthcare to continue from the private sector, the increase in costs will be more than that from Medicare.
 
Again, you talk about the unfunded liability of Medicare, and it is true. But how much is the unfunded liability of private care in that same timeframe? Is it not as much or even more? Just as with Medicare, the unfunded liability of private insurance and private healthcare can only be paid for with more funding, no matter where that funding comes from. This is why costs must be controlled to some extent, or we will end up spending half of our GDP on healthcare at some point, which of course will decimate our economy.

What unfunded liability with for profit private care?

The CBO has projected all of the unfunded liabilities from Medicare. They have also projected that the increases in healthcare spending as a percentage of GDP will be greater within the private sector than it will be from Medicare. Now, you can say that those increases are not unfunded, but the fact is that someone will have to pay for them regardless, so it is the same thing as the unfunded liabilities of Medicare. The only difference is that with Medicare, they will have to be paid, where as with the private sector they can go unpaid and no one will have any heatlhcare from the private sector. But if we want healthcare to continue from the private sector, the increase in costs will be more than that from Medicare.

Sounds more like an unintended consequence of Medicare to me,don't create the only plan Seniors can get on for this to happen in the first place. Seniors had care before Medicare,I know that for a fact,my Grandfather had private insurance and bitched like hell having no choice but to go on Medicare or do without insurance.
 
Skogh has suffered from pain and numbness in her legs since 2004....Docs tell 83-year-old Swede she's 'too old' for treatment - The Local

Welcome to universal health care (aka govt care)

An example from England
Pensioner spends life savings on vital op after NHS cancels four times | Mail Online


Ok now all you people who like the idea of govt run health care try and attack the ARTICLE and not me personally. Go ahead tell me the facts are wrong there and call me a moron or whatever else you need to do to make it look like what I just posted wasn't true.
 
You people are so full of shit your eyes float. I know two women here in the good old USA in their eighties told the same. When you are in your eighties there are other complications that maybe you nitwits hadn't thought about. One is my own mother now approaching ninety.

And say your BS were true, the argument then you put forth would be that we should not have healthcare for Americans because eighty year old people in Sweden can't get back surgery. Your buffoonery reaches the heights of outer space.

Dissident Voice : Why Women Need Single Payer
A Better-Quality Alternative: Single-Payer National Health System Reform | Physicians for a National Health Program
Baucus to Meet with Single-Payer Advocates | CommonDreams.org

Why do you think Obama wants everyone over a certain age to be forced into "counseling" every 5 years regarding living wills?

He wants them gone. Netherlands already has non-consent euthanasia...for adults and babies. Sweden's just more of the same.
 
And P.S...aren't the people here who are screaming "SOMETIMES THERE ARE OTHER CONSIDERATIONS THAT HAVE TO BE WEIGHED" the same ones who say a woman's right to chose "treatment" is between her and her doctor, and nobody else?

No? Yes? Make up your fucking mind.
 
you people are so full of shit your eyes float. I know two women here in the good old usa in their eighties told the same. When you are in your eighties there are other complications that maybe you nitwits hadn't thought about. One is my own mother now approaching ninety.

And say your bs were true, the argument then you put forth would be that we should not have healthcare for americans because eighty year old people in sweden can't get back surgery. Your buffoonery reaches the heights of outer space.

dissident voice : Why women need single payer
a better-quality alternative: Single-payer national health system reform | physicians for a national health program
baucus to meet with single-payer advocates | commondreams.org

why do you think obama wants everyone over a certain age to be forced into "counseling" every 5 years regarding living wills?

He wants them gone. Netherlands already has non-consent euthanasia...for adults and babies. Sweden's just more of the same.

omg!
 
See those other three articles.
* Swedish hospitals fail to report patient injuries (13 Jul 09)
* Patient dies due to improper IV administration (6 Jul 09)
* Swedish clinic sterilises wrong patient (30 Jun 09)

That's the way it is when government is in charge,glad she could pay herself to get it done and I gotta admit,I as a taxpayer,don't want to pay for unneeded care that spends millions to extent life a few months and things like that but those things should be a personal choice,not government's,imho anyway.

Do you think that medical errors only occur in countries with government-run nationalized medicine?

None of that stuff could ever occur in this country.

:lol: yeah that's a laugh.
 
Why do you think Obama wants everyone over a certain age to be forced into "counseling" every 5 years regarding living wills?

There is no 'forced counseling'. The section refers to Medicare reimbursement for advanced care planning counseling, meaning they won't pay for it but once every 5 years (except for certain circumstances). The counseling isn't mandated, but rather the reimbursement is --- if said counseling is provided. All this means is providers can charge Medicare for counseling about advanced care planning and be reimbursed, but in most cases no more often than every 5 years.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top