I don't get it: which number is bigger $600 billion or $54 million???

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by healthmyths, Oct 20, 2011.

  1. healthmyths
    Offline

    healthmyths VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    9,435
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +936 / 31 / -0
    Tanning TAX 10%
    At any rate, proponents of the tax estimated that shaking down the 25,000 stand-alone tanning salons across the country would produce $200 million for the 2011 fiscal year and $2.7 billion over 10 years.
    Oops.
    On Thursday, the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration issued a new report which found that just 10,300 tanning salons filed returns, generating only $54.4 million from July 1, 2010, through March 31.

    That means revenues are running at a dismal 36 percent of projections.
    Tanning tax - Opinion - ReviewJournal.com

    SO only $54 million???

    YET the biggest single controllable cost Driver $600 billion a year documented by physicians as a valid real number.. NOTHING!
    NO tax on the lawyers that DRIVE defensive medicine costs out of FEAR of lawsuits!
  2. Euro
    Offline

    Euro Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2011
    Messages:
    312
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Scandinavia
    Ratings:
    +25 / 0 / -0
    I agree with you it’s a good solution, or you could do something with the laws.
    It’s corruption when lawyers is getting away with that amount of money because of defensive medicine.
  3. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Likes Received:
    5,590
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,591 / 0 / -0
    Taxing tanning salons.

    The Masters have no shame at all.
  4. healthmyths
    Offline

    healthmyths VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    9,435
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +936 / 31 / -0
    actually what it shows the their total ignorance!
    Really the total REASON for health care increases can be found in the opinions of the experts.. i.e health care providers!
    They say 1 of ever 4 dollars is spent out of fear of being wrong and then sued!
    $600 billion and NOT ONE effort to reduce by simple Tort Reform!
    YET stupid taxing of tanning salons?
  5. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,336
    Likes Received:
    1,093
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,096 / 0 / -0
    Yeah, why hasn't anybody thought of doing tort reform?

    If only more states had implemented some form of collateral source rule reform. If only the same was true of joint and several liability rule reform. If only states would cap damages which, aside from this map of state damage caps enacted since 1986, nobody seems to have done!

    [​IMG]

    And yet here we find ourselves in this sad situation in which malpractice reform has never been attempted by anyone anywhere. Ever. I wonder how much this tragic situation is costing us?

    National Costs of the Medical Liability System:
    According to the CBO in 2004:

    Or CBO's more concrete estimates of how much tort reform would reduce spending from 2009:

    Does tort reform have zero effect on costs? No, but the claim that it's a silver bullet (with its ~0.5-2.5% reduction in cost growth annually) to controlling health care costs seriously overestimates the magnitude of its effects.

    As for why tort reform wasn't included in last year's health reform package--well, actually it was. The ACA contains exactly the same approach to tort reform contained in Paul Ryan and Tom Coburn's comprehensive health reform bill from two years ago: federal money to encourage states to try implementing new approaches to tort law at the state level.

    Ryan's bill:

    The ACA:

    Wow, it looks like they even lifted the language directly from Paul Ryan's legislation. Shocking stuff.

    I have to say, I think you're definitely the frontrunner for having the mostly aptly chosen username of anyone on the forum. Well-done.
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2011
  6. healthmyths
    Offline

    healthmyths VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    9,435
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +936 / 31 / -0
    I am NOT saying the $600 billion number..
    the people that create the $600 billion say so!

    According to a 2010 survey of physicians by Gallup for Alpharetta-based Jackson Healthcare, one of every four dollars spent in health care goes to defensive medicine.
    The Hidden Costs of Healthcare | HealthFlock
    90% of physicians when POLLED said:

    f 1,231 physicians...(90%) Ninety percent of physicians surveyed said
    "doctors overtest and overtreat to protect themselves from malpractice lawsuits.
    "Defensive medicine is when doctors order multiple tests, MRIs and other procedures, not because the patient needs them, but to protect against litigation based on allegations that something should have been done but wasn’t. according to the survey published Monday in Archives of Internal Medicine.
    Doctors Practice Medicine in Fear, New Study Finds

    As the emergency room physicians said:
    According to a poll conducted by the American College of Emergency Physicians, nearly half of emergency physicians, 44 percent, say the biggest obstacle to cutting costs in emergency departments is overcoming the fear of lawsuits. The poll, made up of 1,800 emergency physicians, also found that more than half of physicians, 53 percent, state that the reason they conduct the number of tests they do is due to the fear of being sued.

    Defensive Medicine - Fear of Medical Malpractice Lawsuits


    So tell that to the thousands of physicians who unlike YOU have to contend with the fear every day of being sued many times frivolously!
  7. Greenbeard
    Offline

    Greenbeard VIP Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    6,336
    Likes Received:
    1,093
    Trophy Points:
    88
    Location:
    New England
    Ratings:
    +1,096 / 0 / -0
    Maybe you're not getting my point here. Tort reform is not some untested concept that could have any effect we imagine because, hey, we just don't know (that stuff that opened my previous post? that was sarcasm). Numerous kinds of tort reform have been tried in numerous states, giving us some empirical evidence for its effects. For example,

    Is there empirical evidence for "Defensive Medicine"? A reassessment.

    Low Costs Of Defensive Medicine, Small Savings From Tort Reform

    Even the high-end estimates from those sympathetic to these arguments don't get anywhere near 25% of spending: Do Doctors Practice Defensive Medicine?

    In other words, it's what I've already said: savings from tort reform are modest, not a silver bullet for lowering costs. And some forms would undoubtedly be a good idea. But the hesitance to institute some of the more common ideas nationally is due to the fact that tort laws actually do serve a purpose: to protect the consumer. If the reductions in patient outcomes from some variety of tort reform outweigh the spending reductions by physicians, that's not necessarily a good thing.

    The Welfare Effects of Medical Malpractice Liability

    Encouraging state-level experimentation would be a fine way to start separating the wheat from the chaff.

    And about doctors' opinions? I've got some bad news for you. Whatever defensive medicine they do practice out of paranoia over being suing may not be substantially reduced by implementing tort reform (at least the reforms that certain folks want to impose at the national level--i.e. those that have already been tried in many states).

    Physicians’ Fears Of Malpractice Lawsuits Are Not Assuaged By Tort Reforms

    We don't need 50 more threads on this myth.
  8. healthmyths
    Offline

    healthmyths VIP Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2011
    Messages:
    9,435
    Likes Received:
    914
    Trophy Points:
    73
    Ratings:
    +936 / 31 / -0
    You wrote" Even the high-end estimates from those sympathetic to these arguments don't get anywhere near 25% of spending: Do Doctors Practice Defensive Medicine?

    Who EVER SAID 25%???
    The Daniel P. Kessler, Mark McClellan study
    We find that malpractice reforms that directly reduce provider liability pressure lead to reductions of 5 to 9 percent in medical expenditures without substantial effects on mortality or medical complications. We conclude that liability reforms can reduce defensive medical practices. "
    9% of $600 billion is over $50 billion! Directly reducing insurance claims has a direct a reduction in insurance premiums as average company pays 80% of premium in claims.

    So you agree then in your last comment "The high level of malpractice concern among physicians in our sample, even those practicing in relatively low-risk environments, is striking." that "defensive medicine" is from physicians,i.e. the guys generating the claims is a concern.

    It is then whether a $60 billion or $600 billion cost driver and the source i.e. fear of lawsuits agreed the motivation to CYA!

    I am always of the opinion to follow the money!
    And lawyers donated $300 million to Obama/Democrats.
    There was ONLY a token "demonstration" study of Tort Reform in Obamacare.. nothing like what Illinois or Texas or FL have done to at least stabilize the rising defensive medicine costs!
    So all your substantiation just confirms "defensive Medicine" is a bigger problem then the token "Tanning Tax" in Obamacare which is what was just one more idiocy illustration!

Share This Page