Whole Foods CEO On Reform of Health Care

Discussion in 'Healthcare/Insurance/Govt Healthcare' started by Annie, Aug 13, 2009.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Not on destroying what we have:

    John Mackey: The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare - WSJ.com

     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  2. Amanda
    Offline

    Amanda Calm as a Hindu cow

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2008
    Messages:
    4,426
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,006
    I need to shop there more often, I like that guy.
     
  3. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    Fail

    • Enact tort reform to end the ruinous lawsuits that force doctors to pay insurance costs of hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. These costs are passed back to us through much higher prices for health care.
     
  4. geauxtohell
    Offline

    geauxtohell Choose your weapon.

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2009
    Messages:
    15,125
    Thanks Received:
    2,153
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Out here in the middle.
    Ratings:
    +2,155
    In other words: "We can solve the health care problem if people just buy my over-priced "organic" produce".

    Whole Foods has got to be sweating. In a rough economy, luxury items are the first to go.
     
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    So is it the 'fail' that is wrong? Or is it that you are for costs being passed on so trial lawyers get rich?
     
  6. Zoom-boing
    Offline

    Zoom-boing Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    25,064
    Thanks Received:
    7,260
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    East Japip
    Ratings:
    +10,123
    You'd think, with all the debt we're in, that the government would try the least costly fixes first before attempting what will no doubt become a mammothly exorbitant government-run fubar.
     
  7. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    Hot buttons there eh? Rich lawyers. You know rich lawyers are the ones that own the firm don't you? Anyway back to the issue.

    Tort reform is a con. It was done in my country by insurance companies who conned the federal government and some state governments and some of the citizenry to protect their profits because of failed international investments. Poor bastards, down to their last billions.

    One of the problems I have with so-called 'tort reform' is that individual rights will be attacked.

    The tort of negligence is useful because it means that we - all of us - will be careful about how we deal with each other.

    Knowing that being negligent towards someone else could cost us big money is an incentive to be careful.

    I want my doctor or surgeon or my lawyer for that matter to be aware that if they are negligent towards me then I will sue for negligence and I will expect compensation and I expect the court to award punitary damages to encourage the others.

    I don't care if those professionals buy insurance to lay off their potential exposure like a bookie lays off bets. Domestic insurance companies lay off with the big re companies anyway, so it's all a bit like a normal day at Agua Caliente.

    Tort reform is government sucking up to big insurance companies at the expense of little people like me.
     
  8. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Sorry. Even when there is actual malpractice, tangential payments are wrong; as the family is enriched, not the individual. If the costs of caring for someone, give it in the original judgement.

    Now if a profession was so recklessly negligent, there are criminal charges that can be brought, then we don't need to worry about them repeating the behavior.
     
  9. veritas
    Offline

    veritas OBKB

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2009
    Messages:
    1,760
    Thanks Received:
    135
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +135
    The source is suspect. He may be a nice guy, but the fact is, our food supply is controlled by a very few mega corps [just like insurance] and the nice organic labels mean next to nothing. I think you would be surprised if you knew just how huge these corporations were and how much control they have over what we eat and what we can buy.

    And these corporations are scared because if the public option or UHC gets passed they will be in the crosshairs because diet is one of the first things that will be addressed and it is widely known that GM foods and additives are not contributing to the overall wellbeing of anybody other than stockholders of huge nasty corporations.
     
  10. Diuretic
    Offline

    Diuretic Permanently confused

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2006
    Messages:
    12,653
    Thanks Received:
    1,397
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    South Australia est 1836
    Ratings:
    +1,397
    Negligence should be compensated. Professionals might want to risk manage by using insurance companies, that's fair enough, but negligence should be compensated. Disciplinary action against an incompetent professional is another thing entirely. I look at the tort of negligence as being a deterrent, water it down and watch what happens.
     

Share This Page