1/2 U.S. personal bankruptcies from medical bills

[:) Smiley]

Well, a commonly raised point around here is that since the 70s, CA has built only a few universities but lots of prisons. Now why do we need all these prisons? Part of it is because many mental institutions were shut down around that time and the people there put out on the streets.

As far as physical infrastructure such as highways, we're probably going to have to wait for the next earthquake to get new ones. The state's sprawling growth doesn't help- money that could be used for upgrading gets spent on building pipes and highways out into the Central Valley.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Dissident


umm, in case it isn't clear, not everyone has the ability to be a doctor. Or I'd be one.

The fact is people are not created equal. Some people were created to be slobs posting in an internet forum while working some dead end job. (that's me )

There are a lot of intelligent people in other professions where their intelligence isn't really required for the job.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Flubber
Oh and canadian doctors do quite well-- they are just not among the super-wealthy like in the US-- its a very good living

Not all doctors here are super wealthy. I don't know the breakdown, but I know a lot of them really don't really make all that much when you consider their education costs.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kidicious


There are a lot of intelligent people in other professions where their intelligence isn't really required for the job.

Then they should be intelligent enough to find another job.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
I agree, most of our public infrastructure is really outdated.

Schools, roads, hospitals, bascially everything that has to do with the fabric of social services.

It's espeically bad here in California.

I notice that most of this stuff was built around 1960-1970.

After that there seems to be a dry spell of infrastucture improvements.

Howard Jarvis' and the anti-property-tax movement got Proposition 13 passed in 1978, IIRC. Looks like cause and effect to me...

[Sikander]

The main problem in the U.S. is the insurance companies. They factor into almost every facet of the waste in the U.S. healthcare system. They settle frivolous lawsuits because they make more money when doctors are liable to lawsuits and need ... liability insurance! They create Byzantine rules for payment which force every individual player in the system to hire their own rules lawyers / high priests in order to placate the insurance gods in just the proper way for each seperate insurance company.

If the government does nothing else, they should strictly regulate the insurance industry and force them to adopt universal standards, forms etc. They should also explicitly legalize insurance unions, which like credit unions would be able to supply their members with services designed to simply provide the best service for the price. Let these companies see some real competition for a change rather than simply bullying the state legislatures and congress and in the end their customers.

Oh and sorry Imran, but the lawyers are half the problem on the liability side (along with their partners in the insurance industry) which accounts for at least 25% of the cost of healthcare. You provide nothing for only 12.5% of the largest sector in the economy. Congratulations scum!

[Sikander]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Then they should be intelligent enough to find another job.

I get paid to surf the internet, though I'm sure a stupider person could do my job. But quitting doesn't seem like the smart move for me.

[Combat Ingrid]

This thread made me think of Chuck Schuldiner (R.I.P.) and the generous help he got from the wonderful american health system

The mother of DEATH/CONTROL DENIED mainman Chuck Schuldiner, Jane Schuldiner, has spoken out about her son's ongoing and heart-wrenching battle to receive medical help after being diagnosed with pontine glioma, a rare type of brain tumor, two years ago. Here is a message from Ms. Schuldiner:
...
"This has been one of the worst days since we found out about Chuck's illness. He went to Cedars Sinai hospital in Los Angeles, California today for his appointment for the first treatment. Beth, his sister, went with her father's credit cards, power-of-attorney, and a Letter of Intent from Music Care to help with the large expenses of this treatment. Beth was told by the Vice President of Cedars Sinai's comprehensive Care Center, Floyd Frasier, #310-425-0600, that none of these were acceptable to them. The Executive Director, Paul Odea, would not even talk to her. Beth was frantic, asking if Chuck's treatment could be started until she could get the matter resolved. No was the answer. After finally threatening to get her attorney involved and to go to the media, as she had to do when the surgery took place last year in New York, they finally took the cards, allowing the procedure to take place. I am telling you this so all of you will know of the continuing saga of how the American health system is willing to let a person die for the sake of money. My son has never expected charity. For two years, he and Beth have paid over $200,000.00 of their own money, plus the generous donations of his fans and friends, for the treatments for his illness, aware every time that if he does not get the money, he will die. Even when the cash is paid, the attitude of the caregivers and hospitals are one bordering on contempt that he does not have insurance. There is something terribly wrong when a country as great as America will let their citizens die for lack of insurance or money. Unfortunately, we had to have a devastating illness to realize that we are unprotected in many ways. I am asking the people who read this to please get insurance, immediately. This could happen to you if you live in the United States of America. Chuck's illness was caused by a split cell, it is a fluke, not genetic or anything he ate or drank or the air he breathed. That also could happen to any of us. So please, as healthy as you are today, you may, God forbid, desperately need that insurance tomorrow. I want to thank you all for your emails, letters, cards and support you have given Chuck. As in last year, it means so much, not only to Chuck, but to us, his family. Sincerely, Jane Schuldiner."

[aneeshm]

Che - I want the statistics relating to bankruptcies when the medical system was not socialised . Will you please provide them ?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Flubber
Or-- if you have the money, we remain free to pop across the border and pay the same as the Americans

Interestingly enough, Canada has more of a problem with Americans crossing the border to use the Canadian health care system than vice versa.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Che - I want the statistics relating to bankruptcies when the medical system was not socialised . Will you please provide them ?

The U.S. does not now and has never had socialized medicine, so what you are asking for is already provided in the OP and in the link.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
I agree with you Siddiqui, but up to a point, as long as there is malpractice limits.

Malpractice limits did nothing to stop malpractice insurance premiums from rising in California or Florida, both of which capped pain and suffering payments. I can't believe that you can only get a quarter million dollars for having the wrong limb amputated. That means you lose both limbs, since the other one still has to come off. Imagine only getting $250,000 and never being able to walk again or never be able to touch something with your hands again. That's a crime against humanity.

What did lower the speed at which malpractice premiums in California rose was legistlation strictly limiting specifically that.

[:) Smiley]

RIght, but what are the chances you'll get the wrong limb amputated?

On the flipside, with higher malpractice payments, there's a 100% chance that you'll be paying more for healthcare of all sorts.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Smiley
RIght, but what are the chances you'll get the wrong limb amputated?

I know a guy whose father lost a foot that way.

On the flipside, with higher malpractice payments, there's a 100% chance that you'll be paying more for healthcare of all sorts.

Which is why malpractice rates, not pain and suffering, should be capped. It's not the awards that are crippling our medical system, it's the prices that a captive market has to pay.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Smiley
RIght, but what are the chances you'll get the wrong limb amputated?

Enough that many surgeons will, as a double check, mark each limb while the patient is awake and lucid. Usually its something simple like a red happy face on the "good" foot or knee. My wife is a nurse and has told me that this type of practice is actually quite common among surgeons who have never made such a mistake but who see value in having numerous checks and balances.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Which is why malpractice rates, not pain and suffering, should be capped. It's not the awards that are crippling our medical system, it's the prices that a captive market has to pay.

Capping rates without limiting payouts would probably make providing such insurance uneconomic . . . so if private industry does not provide it, are you proposing a government run (possibly subsidized) malpractice system?

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Then they should be intelligent enough to find another job.

That qualifies as one of the least intelligent things I've heard.

edit: Actually it's not even close, but I like to give you a hard time.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Flubber



Capping rates without limiting payouts would probably make providing such insurance uneconomic . . . so if private industry does not provide it, are you proposing a government run (possibly subsidized) malpractice system?

How does the system work in Canada regarding malpractice? I can't remember...

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious


There are a lot of intelligent people in other professions where their intelligence isn't really required for the job.

yes and perhaps they are intelligent enough to stay there . Some people want careers that stretch their intellect. Others seek a low-stress situation where they can relax. Many people have motivators other than money. ( This is obvious every time that Mrs Flubber refuses an overtime shift when there are no impediments to working it)

To me it depends on what the person wants. . . If a person that is truly very intelligent wants a job paying very well, that is what they will end up having since a truly intelligent person will figure out a way to make it happen ( note that this is the general case -- I accept that some people will face misfortune that can prevent them from attaining what their ability would otherwise allow them to do

[Kidicious]

It doesn't just depend on what a person wants. What other people want matters too.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn


How does the system work in Canada regarding malpractice? I can't remember...

The CMPA for doctors while government either self-insures or purchases insurance for all the other workers ( nurses, techs etc).

The reality is that when a Canadian surgeon operates, their liability extends only to the things that they themselves do or are responsible for. So drug mixups or a nursing snaffu would place liability on the hospital corporation ( the government) if the doctor could not have prevented the problem.

The CMPA ( Canadian Medical protective Association) "insures" most doctors but it is actually a not for profit organization that represents physicians across Canada with respect to a number of issues. As a physician organization they have an interest in discouraging frivolous claims and I believe they have a reputation in the legal community as an organization that will NEVER pay out unless there is a solid claim.

Fees for membership vary by region but a quick look at their fee schedule shows fees like an insurance premium (plus a few hundred bucks for other costs of running the organization)

Obstetrics --Ontario 86K annually
Intensive care Ontario-- less than 5 K annually
Cardiac Surgery (ont)--21.5 K
Cardiac Surgery (Que)--9.4K
Cardiac Surgery (other--9.3 K

Emergency Medicine Ont- 9K
Emergency Medicine Que-4.5K
Emergency Medicine other-4.4K

Obviously there is a large insurance component and I didn't see why Ontario is so much higher.

Family medicine is less than 5K a year as long as you stay away from obstetrics

Source:http://www.cmpa-acpm.ca/portal/pub_i..._REDUCE&LANG=E

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Kidicious
It doesn't just depend on what a person wants. What other people want matters too.

Not to the issue of whether a person gets a high paying job or not. Other people only matter to the extent they change what the person wants.

If a person says thay cannot earn more money because they have to take care of their son . The response is no , thats a choice ( and one I respect btw) but a choice nontheless.

There's nobody out there that could prevent me from going to law school and getting a good job. People I care about could influence me and change what I want but thats different than preventing me. Even someone that fires you is just an obstacle. Why ?? because there are lots of jobs out there that pay well.

Note-- I am not saying everyone can become a multi-millionare or anything. But jobs that provide a good ( what 60 K) to very good (80K) to a very very good ( 100K+), while not commonplace, are not exactly rare either. The very brightest folks will get to those jobs if that is one of their priorities

[Flubber]

As an aside, the blurb after my last post was " the longer the title, the less important the job"

I recently ran into an old acquaintance who was the

Associate Assistant Deputy Minister for policy development

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Flubber
Capping rates without limiting payouts would probably make providing such insurance uneconomic . . . so if private industry does not provide it, are you proposing a government run (possibly subsidized) malpractice system?

That would probably be superior to what we have now.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That qualifies as one of the least intelligent things I've heard.

edit: Actually it's not even close, but I like to give you a hard time.

Kid, you couldn't give me a hard time if you tried.

My point remains.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kidicious
It doesn't just depend on what a person wants. What other people want matters too.

Stop whining, dude...

[Imran Siddiqui]

Do you really think that awarding someone 2 million dollars versus awarding them 25 million dollars really makes that big of a difference besides putting a financial strain on people who have nothing to do with the case in question?

Che already answered part of this. However, to reiterate, the limits aren't $2 million (and after appeals VERY FEW people recieve awards of that amount). They are closer to $250,000. And the caps haven't prevented insurance premiums from rising. Legislation specifically targetting insurance premiums have, however.

Also capping damages prevents people with legitimate claims from getting relief. Because of all the work required for a malpractice claim (expert testimony, collecting evidence, appeals), it isn't worth a lawyer's time if the award will be under $1 million. The lawyer will LOSE money on a malpractice case if it is less than that.

Capping rates without limiting payouts would probably make providing such insurance uneconomic . . . so if private industry does not provide it, are you proposing a government run (possibly subsidized) malpractice system?

Actually, IIRC, Kerry had a plan where the government would subsidize the catastrophic awards (above a certain limit and the government would come in).

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Kid, you couldn't give me a hard time if you tried.

My point remains.

Well, what does intelligence have to do with job preference anyway.

[Kidicious]

Originally posted by Flubber
There's nobody out there that could prevent me from going to law school and getting a good job.

Actually that depends on whether or not there was a job for you, and whether or not anyone would give you the job.

[KrazyHorse]

That most intelligent people prefer jobs where they won't be bored.

If an intelligent person wants to remain in an unchallenging job then bully for them.