C'mon, Give Socialized Medicine A Chance!

[PoliticalChic]

As a general principal Conservatives believe that data should inform policy.

For those not conversant with the concept, it means having more than a feeling about something.

So, before we nationalize healthcare, shouldn't we see if it works, say, in one state?

Which brings me to Massachusetts.

50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?
June 9, 2009 in Current Events, Health Insurance, Supply of Medical Services, Wait Times
From the USA Today, here are the wait times to see a doctor in the following cities:
• Boston: 49.6
• Philadelphia: 27
• Los Angeles: 24.2
• Houston: 23.4
• Washington, D.C.: 22.6
• San Diego 20.2
• Minneapolis: 19.8
• Dallas: 19.2
• New York: 19.2
• Denver: 15.4 days
• Miami: 15.4 days
The first thing that jumps out from these numbers is that Boston has by far the longest wait to see a doctor. Is this caused by the universal health coverage enacted in Massachusetts? The answer is maybe. Physician supply adjusts slowly (i.e., it takes a long time to finish med school). On the other hand, Massachusetts decision to increase insurance coverage lead to a spike in the demand for medical services. Thus, universal health care may have caused the run up in wait times, …
Healthcare Economist · 50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?

It takes three weeks longer to see a medical specialist in Boston than in any other metropolitan area in the country, according to a study by Merritt, Hawkins & Associates, a physician recruiting and consulting company based in Texas.
More than 95 percent of the Bay State’s population is insured, as state law requires residents to get coverage and prove they have it. The Merritt, Hawkins researchers note health insurance “doesn’t guarantee a quick visit to the doctor.”
The average wait time for an appointment with a doctor in many specialty areas is 50 days, according to the study, with the state’s expansion of subsidized health insurance serving as the main catalyst driving up demand for care.
Wait Times Signal Problem with Massachusetts ‘Model’ - by Whitney Stewart - Health Care News

1. People in Massachusetts wait a long time to see a doctor. People in Georgia don't.
2. People in Massachusetts also pay a lot for health insurance. People in Georgia don't.
3. Massachusetts in 2006 passed reforms giving almost everybody health insurance. Georgia didn't.
4. Those reforms are the reason people in Massachusetts pay so much for their health insurance and wait so long to see the doctor.
5. President Obama wants to pass national reforms that resemble the Massachusetts state reforms.
6. If President Obama gets his way, all Americans will end up like those cursed people in Massachusetts–paying more for health insurance, waiting longer for care
Health Care. (united health care, universal health care) » Blog Archive » Legos, Red Sox, and Those Long Waits in Massachusetts

Advocates promised that the Massachusetts plan would make health insurance more affordable, but according to a Cato study, insurance premiums have been increasing at nearly double the national average: 7.4 percent in 2007, 8 percent to 12 percent in 2008, and an expected 9 percent increase this year. Health insurance in Massachusetts costs an average of $16,897 for a family of four, compared to a national average of $12,700.
The Massachusetts plan incorporates a system of middle-class subsidies called Commonwealth Care to help pay for insurance for families with incomes up to 300 percent of poverty level ($66,150 for a family of four) and also expanded eligibility for Medicaid.
The costs to the taxpayers are rising, too, and one tax increase has not satisfied the appetite of the hungry plan. The prospect of huge deficits has elicited discussion of cuts in reimbursements to providers and the imposition of a "global budget," which is a euphemism for rationing.
Massachusetts Health Care: A Model Not to Copy

 

[editec]

Increasing DEMAND without increasing SUPPLY.

Gee I wonder what will happen?

 

[Political Junky]

As a general principal Conservatives believe that data should inform policy.

For those not conversant with the concept, it means having more than a feeling about something.

So, before we nationalize healthcare, shouldn't we see if it works, say, in one state?

Which brings me to Massachusetts.

50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?
June 9, 2009 in Current Events, Health Insurance, Supply of Medical Services, Wait Times
From the USA Today, here are the wait times to see a doctor in the following cities:
• Boston: 49.6
• Philadelphia: 27
• Los Angeles: 24.2
• Houston: 23.4
• Washington, D.C.: 22.6
• San Diego 20.2
• Minneapolis: 19.8
• Dallas: 19.2
• New York: 19.2
• Denver: 15.4 days
• Miami: 15.4 days
The first thing that jumps out from these numbers is that Boston has by far the longest wait to see a doctor. Is this caused by the universal health coverage enacted in Massachusetts? The answer is maybe. Physician supply adjusts slowly (i.e., it takes a long time to finish med school). On the other hand, Massachusetts decision to increase insurance coverage lead to a spike in the demand for medical services. Thus, universal health care may have caused the run up in wait times, …
Healthcare Economist · 50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?

It takes three weeks longer to see a medical specialist in Boston than in any other metropolitan area in the country, according to a study by Merritt, Hawkins & Associates, a physician recruiting and consulting company based in Texas.
More than 95 percent of the Bay State’s population is insured, as state law requires residents to get coverage and prove they have it. The Merritt, Hawkins researchers note health insurance “doesn’t guarantee a quick visit to the doctor.”
The average wait time for an appointment with a doctor in many specialty areas is 50 days, according to the study, with the state’s expansion of subsidized health insurance serving as the main catalyst driving up demand for care.
Wait Times Signal Problem with Massachusetts ‘Model’ - by Whitney Stewart - Health Care News

1. People in Massachusetts wait a long time to see a doctor. People in Georgia don't.
2. People in Massachusetts also pay a lot for health insurance. People in Georgia don't.
3. Massachusetts in 2006 passed reforms giving almost everybody health insurance. Georgia didn't.
4. Those reforms are the reason people in Massachusetts pay so much for their health insurance and wait so long to see the doctor.
5. President Obama wants to pass national reforms that resemble the Massachusetts state reforms.
6. If President Obama gets his way, all Americans will end up like those cursed people in Massachusetts–paying more for health insurance, waiting longer for care
Health Care. (united health care, universal health care) » Blog Archive » Legos, Red Sox, and Those Long Waits in Massachusetts

Advocates promised that the Massachusetts plan would make health insurance more affordable, but according to a Cato study, insurance premiums have been increasing at nearly double the national average: 7.4 percent in 2007, 8 percent to 12 percent in 2008, and an expected 9 percent increase this year. Health insurance in Massachusetts costs an average of $16,897 for a family of four, compared to a national average of $12,700.
The Massachusetts plan incorporates a system of middle-class subsidies called Commonwealth Care to help pay for insurance for families with incomes up to 300 percent of poverty level ($66,150 for a family of four) and also expanded eligibility for Medicaid.
The costs to the taxpayers are rising, too, and one tax increase has not satisfied the appetite of the hungry plan. The prospect of huge deficits has elicited discussion of cuts in reimbursements to providers and the imposition of a "global budget," which is a euphemism for rationing.
Massachusetts Health Care: A Model Not to Copy

Gee, I've been hearing conservatives say that Americans don't wait at all.

 

[PoliticalChic]

As a general principal Conservatives believe that data should inform policy.

For those not conversant with the concept, it means having more than a feeling about something.

So, before we nationalize healthcare, shouldn't we see if it works, say, in one state?

Which brings me to Massachusetts.

50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?
June 9, 2009 in Current Events, Health Insurance, Supply of Medical Services, Wait Times
From the USA Today, here are the wait times to see a doctor in the following cities:
• Boston: 49.6
• Philadelphia: 27
• Los Angeles: 24.2
• Houston: 23.4
• Washington, D.C.: 22.6
• San Diego 20.2
• Minneapolis: 19.8
• Dallas: 19.2
• New York: 19.2
• Denver: 15.4 days
• Miami: 15.4 days
The first thing that jumps out from these numbers is that Boston has by far the longest wait to see a doctor. Is this caused by the universal health coverage enacted in Massachusetts? The answer is maybe. Physician supply adjusts slowly (i.e., it takes a long time to finish med school). On the other hand, Massachusetts decision to increase insurance coverage lead to a spike in the demand for medical services. Thus, universal health care may have caused the run up in wait times, …
Healthcare Economist · 50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?

It takes three weeks longer to see a medical specialist in Boston than in any other metropolitan area in the country, according to a study by Merritt, Hawkins & Associates, a physician recruiting and consulting company based in Texas.
More than 95 percent of the Bay State’s population is insured, as state law requires residents to get coverage and prove they have it. The Merritt, Hawkins researchers note health insurance “doesn’t guarantee a quick visit to the doctor.”
The average wait time for an appointment with a doctor in many specialty areas is 50 days, according to the study, with the state’s expansion of subsidized health insurance serving as the main catalyst driving up demand for care.
Wait Times Signal Problem with Massachusetts ‘Model’ - by Whitney Stewart - Health Care News

1. People in Massachusetts wait a long time to see a doctor. People in Georgia don't.
2. People in Massachusetts also pay a lot for health insurance. People in Georgia don't.
3. Massachusetts in 2006 passed reforms giving almost everybody health insurance. Georgia didn't.
4. Those reforms are the reason people in Massachusetts pay so much for their health insurance and wait so long to see the doctor.
5. President Obama wants to pass national reforms that resemble the Massachusetts state reforms.
6. If President Obama gets his way, all Americans will end up like those cursed people in Massachusetts–paying more for health insurance, waiting longer for care
Health Care. (united health care, universal health care) » Blog Archive » Legos, Red Sox, and Those Long Waits in Massachusetts

Advocates promised that the Massachusetts plan would make health insurance more affordable, but according to a Cato study, insurance premiums have been increasing at nearly double the national average: 7.4 percent in 2007, 8 percent to 12 percent in 2008, and an expected 9 percent increase this year. Health insurance in Massachusetts costs an average of $16,897 for a family of four, compared to a national average of $12,700.
The Massachusetts plan incorporates a system of middle-class subsidies called Commonwealth Care to help pay for insurance for families with incomes up to 300 percent of poverty level ($66,150 for a family of four) and also expanded eligibility for Medicaid.
The costs to the taxpayers are rising, too, and one tax increase has not satisfied the appetite of the hungry plan. The prospect of huge deficits has elicited discussion of cuts in reimbursements to providers and the imposition of a "global budget," which is a euphemism for rationing.
Massachusetts Health Care: A Model Not to Copy

Gee, I've been hearing conservatives say that Americans don't wait at all.

Are you trying to appear obtuse?

This is Massachusetts, where a 'universal' Democrat-like plan is behaving exactly the way, to use use your terminology, conservatives have predicted.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

You mean that now everyone can see a doctor?

 

[PoliticalChic]

You mean that now everyone can see a doctor?

Everyone could always see a doctor.

 

[chanel]

You mean that now everyone can see a doctor?

Everyone could always see a doctor.

Got that right. Yet I know people with decent health insurance that never see a doctor. Don't like them. I wonder if Obamacare will make checkups mandatory. I wonder if it will be illegal to go to work with a cold...

 

[Big Black Dog]

C'mon, Give Socialized Medicine A Chance!

You must be off your rocker! The government can't even manage Medicare and Social Security. With this in mind, you want them to manage the health care for ALL Americans? I can't believe you would really want this... This would be one of the biggest mistakes ever made in America. Besides that, the government can't even pay for it. I think this vision is a bit too grand...

 

[Epsilon Delta]

You mean that now everyone can see a doctor?

Everyone could always see a doctor.

Sorry, I must've meant "You mean that now everyone can AFFORD to see a doctor?"

 

[Maple]

Yes and guess who passed that legislation in Masschuchetts, gov Mitt Romney. I am in Colorado and if I get sick, I can get in and see my doctor today.

Tort reform, is a major cause of the rising health care costs that we face, that needs to be reformed, it won't because there are too many ambulance chasers in Washington D.C.

People should be required to carry major medical insurance on themselves and their families to prevent catastrophic losses.

Many 20 and 30 year old healthy individuals could pick up major medical with a high deductible cheaply, yet they think that they will never get injured or sick so they choose not to and the rest of us get to pay in higher premiums when they show up in our emergency rooms.

Don't think for a minute that this debate over health care is because the democrats or President Obama cares about YOU. They are attempting to secure their voting block. That's all it is.

 

[Gurdari]

As a general principal Conservatives believe that data should inform policy.

For those not conversant with the concept, it means having more than a feeling about something.

So, before we nationalize healthcare, shouldn't we see if it works, say, in one state?

Which brings me to Massachusetts.

50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?
June 9, 2009 in Current Events, Health Insurance, Supply of Medical Services, Wait Times
From the USA Today, here are the wait times to see a doctor in the following cities:
• Boston: 49.6
• Philadelphia: 27
• Los Angeles: 24.2
• Houston: 23.4
• Washington, D.C.: 22.6
• San Diego 20.2
• Minneapolis: 19.8
• Dallas: 19.2
• New York: 19.2
• Denver: 15.4 days
• Miami: 15.4 days
The first thing that jumps out from these numbers is that Boston has by far the longest wait to see a doctor. Is this caused by the universal health coverage enacted in Massachusetts? The answer is maybe. Physician supply adjusts slowly (i.e., it takes a long time to finish med school). On the other hand, Massachusetts decision to increase insurance coverage lead to a spike in the demand for medical services. Thus, universal health care may have caused the run up in wait times, …
Healthcare Economist · 50 days to see a doctor in Boston…Is Massachusetts’ universal coverage laws the cause?

It takes three weeks longer to see a medical specialist in Boston than in any other metropolitan area in the country, according to a study by Merritt, Hawkins & Associates, a physician recruiting and consulting company based in Texas.
More than 95 percent of the Bay State’s population is insured, as state law requires residents to get coverage and prove they have it. The Merritt, Hawkins researchers note health insurance “doesn’t guarantee a quick visit to the doctor.”
The average wait time for an appointment with a doctor in many specialty areas is 50 days, according to the study, with the state’s expansion of subsidized health insurance serving as the main catalyst driving up demand for care.
Wait Times Signal Problem with Massachusetts ‘Model’ - by Whitney Stewart - Health Care News

1. People in Massachusetts wait a long time to see a doctor. People in Georgia don't.
2. People in Massachusetts also pay a lot for health insurance. People in Georgia don't.
3. Massachusetts in 2006 passed reforms giving almost everybody health insurance. Georgia didn't.
4. Those reforms are the reason people in Massachusetts pay so much for their health insurance and wait so long to see the doctor.
5. President Obama wants to pass national reforms that resemble the Massachusetts state reforms.
6. If President Obama gets his way, all Americans will end up like those cursed people in Massachusetts–paying more for health insurance, waiting longer for care
Health Care. (united health care, universal health care) » Blog Archive » Legos, Red Sox, and Those Long Waits in Massachusetts

Advocates promised that the Massachusetts plan would make health insurance more affordable, but according to a Cato study, insurance premiums have been increasing at nearly double the national average: 7.4 percent in 2007, 8 percent to 12 percent in 2008, and an expected 9 percent increase this year. Health insurance in Massachusetts costs an average of $16,897 for a family of four, compared to a national average of $12,700.
The Massachusetts plan incorporates a system of middle-class subsidies called Commonwealth Care to help pay for insurance for families with incomes up to 300 percent of poverty level ($66,150 for a family of four) and also expanded eligibility for Medicaid.
The costs to the taxpayers are rising, too, and one tax increase has not satisfied the appetite of the hungry plan. The prospect of huge deficits has elicited discussion of cuts in reimbursements to providers and the imposition of a "global budget," which is a euphemism for rationing.
Massachusetts Health Care: A Model Not to Copy

It is about 5 days in the Toronto area. But we have a shortage.
Specialist might take another week or two - again - we have a shortage.

Just my own experience.

 

[Gurdari]

* Those times were for non-emergency, non-disabling issues - like a moderately sore wrist, for example. Times would shorten in more serious cases.

 

[bill777]

If you have to use an asterisk to make your case, then you are wrong. Nice try socialist dirtbag.

 

[Ravi]

Your first link, PC, was pretty interesting and informative. There seems to be no conclusive evidence that socializing medicine is harmful and in fact the authors speculate that MA will eventually produce positive results. Thanks for the link.

 

[Gurdari]

If you have to use an asterisk to make your case, then you are wrong. Nice try socialist dirtbag.

Hahahahaha... awesome.


Poor attempt at making sense, closeted socialist.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I'm going to step out on a limb here. Way out on a limb. I have on flame proof undies so bring on the heat. You can quote me on this if you care to. This socialized medicine crap that Obama is trying to push down the throats of the American public is not going to pass and become law. I can't believe as a country we would allow this to happen. I feel this way for a couple of reasons. First, we can't afford it. It will only work if the program can be paid for. Well, it can't be paid for. It's way too expensive. Secondly, Americans are beginning to open their eyes a bit and are finding out more and more everyday that socialized medicine is not as good as it appears on the surface. It's a bad deal. It's all a big lie being tossed about by the liberal Democrats in Washington. People are beginning to see this. Why do you think Obama wants it ran through Congress so fast? It's because he knows people are on to him. Like I said, this is never going to be. Now, I'll just sit back and watch my prediction come true. Remember, you heard it here first.

 

[sealybobo]

I'm going to step out on a limb here. Way out on a limb. I have on flame proof undies so bring on the heat. You can quote me on this if you care to. This socialized medicine crap that Obama is trying to push down the throats of the American public is not going to pass and become law. I can't believe as a country we would allow this to happen. I feel this way for a couple of reasons. First, we can't afford it. It will only work if the program can be paid for. Well, it can't be paid for. It's way too expensive. Secondly, Americans are beginning to open their eyes a bit and are finding out more and more everyday that socialized medicine is not as good as it appears on the surface. It's a bad deal. It's all a big lie being tossed about by the liberal Democrats in Washington. People are beginning to see this. Why do you think Obama wants it ran through Congress so fast? It's because he knows people are on to him. Like I said, this is never going to be. Now, I'll just sit back and watch my prediction come true. Remember, you heard it here first.

I just got this email in:

Wow!! Thanks to your calls and emails on Friday, Rep. Dennis Kucinich's amendment to let states adopt single-payer healthcare passed the House Education and Labor Committee by 25-19.
Of course the insurance industry will try to kill the Kucinich amendment during future votes, so we will watch carefully and keep you posted.

No, "socialized medicine" isn't even the goal dipshit. So you are right, THAT won't happen. But reform is going to happen. Even if we have to do it one problem/state at a time.

Canada had to do it province by province. We don't know how its going to get done. Hell, we don't even know if we can get it done at all with slaves like you working so hard for the insurance companies.

No offense, but it makes me want to wish bad of you guys. Like, "I wish this idiot was uninsurable because of a pre existing condition or i wish he had to deal with cobra or whatever".

You guys are just selfish stupid people who are afraid you'll pay more and get less. Greedy and ignorant.

 

[xsited1]

You mean that now everyone can see a doctor?

Everyone could always see a doctor.

Sorry, I must've meant "You mean that now everyone can AFFORD to see a doctor?"

Who can't afford to see a doctor? If they're poor, there's a government program just for them. If not, they should have the money to do so. If they'd rather buy an SUV than get health insurance, that is their right. The government has no right to tell a person that they have to buy health insurance.

 

[PoliticalChic]

C'mon, Give Socialized Medicine A Chance!

You must be off your rocker! The government can't even manage Medicare and Social Security. With this in mind, you want them to manage the health care for ALL Americans? I can't believe you would really want this... This would be one of the biggest mistakes ever made in America. Besides that, the government can't even pay for it. I think this vision is a bit too grand...

Dog, it was a joke, a joke.

Tongue in cheek.

Making fun of the left, get it?

 

[xsited1]

C'mon, Give Socialized Medicine A Chance!

You must be off your rocker! The government can't even manage Medicare and Social Security. With this in mind, you want them to manage the health care for ALL Americans? I can't believe you would really want this... This would be one of the biggest mistakes ever made in America. Besides that, the government can't even pay for it. I think this vision is a bit too grand...