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

[Kuciwalker]

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.

Source? I tried finding historical data on the % of Americans employed by small businesses but was thwarted.

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?

Thankfully, no.

[Zkribbler]

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

Jesus, another scalp for Stewart's belt?

It's a sad fact that most of the best investigative journalism done in America today is on his comedy show.

[Elok]

It's a sad fact that most of the best investigative journalism done in America today is on his comedy show.

I hear this a lot, but honestly, was there a time in history when satirists were not society's most powerful and valuable critics? There's a reason why Shakespeare gave all the good insights to "fool" characters.

Also, I don't think that Stewart's show qualifies as investigative journalism. For the most part, he's just taking publicly available information and rearranging it so it stings, no?

[notyoueither]

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.

Looking at it in large numbers, if we take 1000 people facing grim ends, but who are not yet near end term, and we have doctors introduce the option of turning off active treatment for palliative care or other end of live courses, how many more people would opt for that over the same group where doctors do not introduce the options?

ie, would it discourage a certain number of people from seeking active care?

It isn't a cut and dried issue, for me. It's further complicated by the advent of euthenasia as a possible 'treatment' for some patients being advocated by some health professionals.

For those who would be moved towards turning off the switch early, would that be a bad thing? For all? For some? How do we feel about the possibility of mistakes or abuse? Would it be 'better' for a greater number of people than the alternative of them having to seek out that advice in an unregimented system from unpaid healthcare professionals? We can discuss these questions without accusing each other of murdering grandmothers or being cariboo barbies.

[Kuciwalker]

ie, would it discourage a certain number of people from seeking active care?

ISN'T THAT THE ENTIRE POINT OF INTRODUCING AN OPTION?

Seriously. "If we tell people they have an option to avoid active care and just be euthanized, could more people choice to avoid active care and just be euthanized?"

[Zkribbler]

I
Also, I don't think that Stewart's show qualifies as investigative journalism. For the most part, he's just taking publicly available information and rearranging it so it stings, no?

Let's not muddle up my brilliant insight by adding in a bunch of facts, okay?!

[notyoueither]

ie, would it discourage a certain number of people from seeking active care?

ISN'T THAT THE ENTIRE POINT OF INTRODUCING AN OPTION?

Seriously. "If we tell people they have an option to avoid active care and just be euthanized, could more people choice to avoid active care and just be euthanized?"

[megasize]OVER PEOPLE WHO SOUGHT IT OUT ON THEIR OWN![/megasize]

IOW, people who are not prepared to face the decisions.

[notyoueither]

Actually, sorry, I did not say that. I said over where doctors did not introduce the options.

My bad.

I introduced the people who seek that councelling as is in your current system in a later paragraph.

[RoboCon]

Hello there! I see you are discussing Sarah Palin. Perhaps I can be of assistance.

Federal government to reduce this amount of brave soldiers. Entitlements to Kuci's development and infrastructure, maintaining Kitty Dukakis and control the movement of capital and international trade for all illegals, states, civil rights, equal justice for whites, prostitutes. Oerdin, turn the needle to gay. Overall trade between Red China and limit fair competition - our founding fathers would NEVER buy a GM product after Israel. 9-11 changed everything. JM's post is an example of a decision of the court how that freedom Democrats FASCIST Bank.

[Solomwi]

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

Not to mention that most states have already enacted some form of tort reform specifically targeted at doctors. As a defense attorney (specifically a med mal defense attorney) who believes the best possible legal environment for all parties is unlimited damages, but strict adherence to the doctrines of contributory negligence and assumption of the risk, I find tort reform to be nothing but a red herring.

Some jurisdictions require a malpractice complaint to be accompanied by an affidavit from a doctor stating that the claim has merit (I think Colorado is one, but don't hold me to that). Here in Alabama, the plaintiff has to find an expert, who has to share the same qualifications (especially board certifications) as the defendant doctor, and who will say that (a) the doctor's performance fell below the appropriate standard of care, and (b) that deviation from the standard probably, as opposed to possibly, caused the plaintiff's injuries. The discovery rules on any action against a healthcare provider, even contract actions, are also tightened here, to the point that I heard a judge recently characterize them, fairly and noncontroversially, as putting the plaintiff in a strait-jacket. In short, doctors are already the most protected people in this state, and I don't think we're alone or even in the minority, as far as lawsuits go. A blanket statement of "we need tort reform to reduce medical costs" doesn't hold much water without specifics of what reforms are being considered.

[Drake Tungsten]

Palin is crazy like a fox. All she had to do was refer to Obamacare's "end-of-life consultations" as "death panels" to create a furor that highlighted the dubious nature of the consultations and eventually got them removed from healthcare reform. All too easy...

[notyoueither]

It would have been very easy for that lady to hand Stewart his ass on a platter.

She should join Apolyton and learn how it's done.

[Zkribbler]

... I find tort reform to be nothing but a red herring.

Some jurisdictions require a malpractice complaint to be accompanied by an affidavit from a doctor stating that the claim has merit (I think Colorado is one, but don't hold me to that). Here in Alabama, the plaintiff has to find an expert, who has to share the same qualifications (especially board certifications) as the defendant doctor, and who will say that (a) the doctor's performance fell below the appropriate standard of care, and (b) that deviation from the standard probably, as opposed to possibly, caused the plaintiff's injuries.

Solomwi -- In addition to what you say above, I would add that juries LOVE doctors. Most of the defense verdicts I saw were in medical malpractices cases.

It's interesting that Alabama feels the need for the law you described. As a pratical matter, if a plaintiff's attorney does not have a qualified expert who'll testify that there was a deviation which fell below the standard of care, and that deviation probably caused the injury, the plaintiff has no chance of winning. Even with those things, it's doubtful.

[Dinner]

Palin is crazy like a fox. All she had to do was refer to Obamacare's "end-of-life consultations" as "death panels" to create a furor that highlighted the dubious nature of the consultations and eventually got them removed from healthcare reform. All too easy...

Dubious nature? Living wills, which allow people to specify exactly what type of care THEY WANT, are dubious?

[Kidlicious]

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.

Doesn't your government pay for health care? It's a business subsidy. Employer based insurance makes exports more expensive.