Sarah Palin: bat****, or howling-at-the-moon bat****?

[Guynemer]

Part two.

[Guynemer]

NYE, here is my question from the previous thread before that tyrant Lori closed it:

Where would extubation in respiratory failure fall under that classification, nye?

Or palliative opiates for terminal bone cancer?

[notyoueither]

Where you want them to, but not all conditions where end of life counselling could be broached are as you have illustrated.

What about people with degenerative diseases? The point of the author was an ethical question of having doctors (trusted authorities) incentivised (paid) to introduce people to early end of life strategies when they do not ask for it ([to] encourage the old to just croack already).

Hey, I'm all for jumping on the ice floe when my useful time is up, but I also see the POV of people who are more clingy than I (intend to be).

[Japher]

I don't think mandating any type of health care for legal consenting adults is a good idea; either requiring it or not.

I do agree, however, that there should be prereqs for certain procedures. Say, new hip? lets shake the cardio issue that has sent you to bed rest first.

I know someone who is rejecting her liver transplant because she decided to take up smoking again. That really angers me, especially since she is on medicare/medicade and was forced to quit smoking to get the transplant. WTF? I would really like to see this stopped, but then...

[Kidlicious]

Straybow posted:

"The only scarcity is in places like Canada and UK."
See Lori's post in the first thread. Scarcity for health care exists in every nation. Health care is one of the most important services produced. The problem is that resources are often diverted to less important areas of the economy.

"The rising cost of health care isn't a problem."

1) People are struggling to pay their bills.
2) Many people can't afford insurance.
3) People forgo recommended care.
4) Less employers offer health care benefits as the cost increases.
5) The federal and state governments have strained budgets due to healthcare costs.

You can't be serious dude.

"The costs rise because we're getting better diagnostics and treatments over time."

That's only a small part of the reason. But the increased cost of those treatments must be justified by both the benefit of them and the implications for the whole health care system and the economy. It's not enough to just say costs have increased because health care is now better than it was before.

"More hospitals with MRI and CAT machines."

Again. Sure that's better because a patient doesn't have to travel as far to get to one of these machines, but does the increased cost justify this? And can we as a society afford these costs.

"More effective drugs."

Indeed. The inflation rate for prescription drugs far exceeds the general inflation rate. Same point does the benefit exceed the cost.

"The most serious obstacle to availability in this country is the enormous tort insurance burden placed on doctors and hospitals, which none of the Dems are addressing."
Source?

[Jon Miller]

Tort insurance was calculated to be a small amount of the total health insurance cost by KH and myself in another thread. I couldn't find it last time I looked, but it was this year.

JM

[Kidlicious]

Tort insurance was calculated to be a small amount of the total health insurance cost by KH and myself in another thread. I couldn't find it last time I looked, but it was this year.

JM

KH is usually wrong due to tardness, but I'll take your word for it.

[Dinner]

This is not really about Sarah Palin but it is about the lying crazy lady who invented the "death panels" lie which Palin popularized among the wing nuts. Betsy McCaughey, the Former Republican Lt Gov of New York & appointed "Health care expert" at the right wing astroturf group The Hudson Institute, completely made up the lie that Obama's "death panels" were going to kill your Grandmother has now resigned because, she claims, the media is picking on her. By picking on her she means pointing out she's a liar who pulled a claim out of her butt.

http://washingtonindependent.com/56008/death-panel-myth-creator-betsy-mccaughey-resigns-from-medical-board

McCaughey recently got destroyed on the Daily Show with Jon Stuart when Stuart ran circles around her and her death panel claims along with her new claim that Obama's going to eliminate $500 billion from Medicare, which is also a lie. Watch this clip from the Daily Show.

[Guynemer]

Wait, she resigned today? The day after her TDS appearance?


Jesus, another scalp for Stewart's belt?

[Dinner]

It looks that way.

[Guynemer]

Hold up.

To be clear: she did not resign from the advocacy group, but as director of Cantel Medical Corp., whatever that is.

The timing is strange, but probably has nothing to do with what happened on TDS.

[Dinner]

OK, had to reread that. Yes, she resigned from Cantel Medical Corp. but is still working for the astroturf group so she can still make up lies to scare seniors claiming Obama is going to kill them and take away Medicare from them.

I have to say it is funny that Republicans are claiming the government could never run a decent health care program while also claiming that they're planning on ending Medicare which is an extremely popular and successful government run health care program.

[Guynemer]

Where you want them to, but not all conditions where end of life counselling could be broached are as you have illustrated.

What about people with degenerative diseases? The point of the author was an ethical question of having doctors (trusted authorities) incentivised (paid) to introduce people to early end of life strategies when they do not ask for it ([to] encourage the old to just croack already).

Hey, I'm all for jumping on the ice floe when my useful time is up, but I also see the POV of people who are more clingy than I (intend to be).

I guess I just find it unlikely that people are going to be browbeaten by their doctors into choosing to deny themselves medical care when a) it is their life we're talking about, and b) the allegedly greedy doctor would stand to make far more money by keeping the patient alive, come hell or high water, for as long as possible.

[Dr Strangelove]

Straybow posted:

"The only scarcity is in places like Canada and UK."
See Lori's post in the first thread. Scarcity for health care exists in every nation. Health care is one of the most important services produced. The problem is that resources are often diverted to less important areas of the economy.

"The rising cost of health care isn't a problem."

1) People are struggling to pay their bills.
2) Many people can't afford insurance.
3) People forgo recommended care.
4) Less employers offer health care benefits as the cost increases.
5) The federal and state governments have strained budgets due to healthcare costs.

You can't be serious dude.

"The costs rise because we're getting better diagnostics and treatments over time."

That's only a small part of the reason. But the increased cost of those treatments must be justified by both the benefit of them and the implications for the whole health care system and the economy. It's not enough to just say costs have increased because health care is now better than it was before.

"More hospitals with MRI and CAT machines."

Again. Sure that's better because a patient doesn't have to travel as far to get to one of these machines, but does the increased cost justify this? And can we as a society afford these costs.

"More effective drugs."

Indeed. The inflation rate for prescription drugs far exceeds the general inflation rate. Same point does the benefit exceed the cost.

"The most serious obstacle to availability in this country is the enormous tort insurance burden placed on doctors and hospitals, which none of the Dems are addressing."
Source?

One of the major problems is that the American dream of the 1950s, working for a big corporation and getting a decent wage has largely vanished. More people now are working for small businesses or working part time, perhaps even multiple part time jobs. They're not being offered insurance as part of their employment package.

You do realise that they typical insurance package costs about $ 4000 to $ 8000 / year. If your wage is $ 10 / hour, you make $ 20,000 / year, and a health insurance policy would eat up 1/4 of your pay, or if your employer shelled out for an insurance policy it would be essentially a 25% raise.

It amkes me wonder. If the US had government had gone ahead and instituted universal health care 40 years ago would the flight of industrial jobs out of the country been prevented? How different would US society be today?

[Ben Kenobi]

It hasn't prevented the flight of industrial jobs up here.

What happens is that it tends to raise the cost of workers. Your workers are more expensive work tends to go elsewhere.

We just paid a massive bailout to keep the few remaining auto workers up here.