Want to start saving money in health care?

[IDBillzFan]

It's also not cool to be too lazy to use proper grammar and punctuation. The two things aren't mutually exclusive.

Unfortunately, those too lazy to use proper grammar and punctuation refuse to understand that it screams "How can you expect my thought process to be worth considering when I'm too freaking lazy to press the Shift key when typing."

 

Seriously. Shift key. Period. Comma. Maybe a semi-colon once in a while. Apparently it's all just too much to ask from some people sitting at, y'know, a keyboard with all that stuff not much more than an inch away from an available finger.

[Booster4324]

Unfortunately, those too lazy to use proper grammar and punctuation refuse to understand that it screams "How can you expect my thought process to be worth considering when I'm too freaking lazy to press the Shift key when typing."

 

Seriously. Shift key. Period. Comma. Maybe a semi-colon once in a while. Apparently it's all just too much to ask from some people sitting at, y'know, a keyboard with all that stuff not much more than an inch away from an available finger.

 

.,.,.,;.,

 

Let's not go overboard.

[ExiledInIllinois]

I'm convinced that one of mankind's greatest ills is the fear of natural death.

 

Any strange coincidence that religion is being demoted to a minor role? Wasn't that the purpose of religion?

 

Talk is cheap. People like JA (or even for his loved ones) MAY be scratching and clawing to stay alive.

 

My mother passed on back in 1999 from ovarian cancer at the age of 59. She died in hospice, like the article suggests. I always wonder if we could have done more for her. To fight on? It is painful to see a loved one go that way and not do much. It is giving in. The American spirit tells us to never give up. To try and fight to the bitter end. Hope for a miracle.

 

In the end we let my mother go... Never knowing if she wanted to fight on. Doubt is a hard and bitter pill to swallow. All I can hope is that we did the right thing. ??

 

Down by 5, one can't ever win a game if you give up and take a knee on 4th and a zillion from your own 49 with one second left. Who am I to judge people taking the "Hail Mary-Big Ben?" Obviously, we all can judge people bad for that if it doesn't have anything to do with us!

 

To all the grammar police... !@#$ off! I am just a lazy federal empolyee!

[birdog1960]

That is just too easy. Wow. Apologies if you are somehow physically disabled.

no, just a bad typist. so sue me

[birdog1960]

Any strange coincidence that religion is being demoted to a minor role? Wasn't that the purpose of religion?

 

Talk is cheap. People like JA (or even for his loved ones) MAY be scratching and clawing to stay alive.

 

My mother passed on back in 1999 from ovarian cancer at the age of 59. She died in hospice, like the article suggests. I always wonder if we could have done more for her. To fight on? It is painful to see a loved one go that way and not do much. It is giving in. The American spirit tells us to never give up. To try and fight to the bitter end. Hope for a miracle.

 

In the end we let my mother go... Never knowing if she wanted to fight on. Doubt is a hard and bitter pill to swallow. All I can hope is that we did the right thing. ??

 

Down by 5, one can't ever win a game if you give up and take a knee on 4th and a zillion from your own 49 with one second left. Who am I to judge people taking the "Hail Mary-Big Ben?" Obviously, we all can judge people bad for that if it doesn't have anything to do with us!

 

To all the grammar police... !@#$ off! I am just a lazy federal empolyee!

sorry about your mom. i'm sure many of us have had similar experiences and it's always extremely difficult. rest assured that in the current iteration of our health care system, it's highly unlikely that she'd have been referred to hospice, especially at age 59, if there were any hope of recovery, however slight.

[John Adams]

you're worried about me disrespecting other posters because of grammar while you misrepresent the largest organized religion in the country? i'll wager a days pay that i know more about hospice than either of you through my 20 years as an internist caring for hundreds of hospice patients and many more critically ill and dying patients. i can't recall one instance of ever experiencing interference or condemnation from a Catholic priest. i have rarely had issues with any clergy from any faith in such cases. if there's disagreement its usually with the family or due to the patients own strohgly held beliefs which are always respected and deferred to. i have served with clergy on ethics committees and almost always found them reasonable and willing to listen but not always of the same opinion as me. the problem as i see it, comes when these beliefs are forced on nonbelievers . that isn't happening in individual hospice patient cases that i'm involved with.

 

You sir, are a Grade A class 1 moron. My wife has run into enough Catholics afraid of taking hospice care to fill a room. And she's also had many patients scared off hospice by priests.And those are only the people who have made it to the stage where they will even consider hospice--an entire legion of people won't even consider talking to the hospice workers because of their beliefs.

 

As I said, and I don't expect your not-so-nimble mind to grasp this subtlety, there is a tension between Catholicism and hospice. Hospice is allowed in Catholicism but if you stray to far into "willing to cause death" or stopping treatment to cause death, you're going to hell. Given the fine line there between "wanting to die" (Hellfire) and "allowing yourself to die" (no Hellfire)--and I'll say it IS a fine line because many people at end of life are often wanting to die--how do you not acknowledge that Catholic beliefs are in tension with hospice?

 

This isn't a Catholic bashing thread by the way. It just so happens a Catholic piped up first. Other ethnicities and religions have different hospice issues. Some poor people don't trust the "system" when it recommends hospice, feeling like their needs are being disregarded just because they are poor. Many people feel it's not dignified to stop feeding or giving water, even though that's one way a patient may be signaling they are ready to die.

[John Adams]

As a strictly practical aside, Medicare reimburses hospice $100/day. That's for skilled nursing, drugs, doctors, and any equipment. So from a practical standpoint, lots of people can't afford hospice care but they can afford chemo and the like. Another stupid consequence of government-run medicine.

 

(Most hospices are thus non-profits.)

[ExiledInIllinois]

sorry about your mom. i'm sure many of us have had similar experiences and it's always extremely difficult. rest assured that in the current iteration of our health care system, it's highly unlikely that she'd have been referred to hospice, especially at age 59, if there were any hope of recovery, however slight.

 

Exactly, that is how I cope with it. Yet, there is always doubt about "quiting" on her.

[OCinBuffalo]

As a strictly practical aside, Medicare reimburses hospice $100/day. That's for skilled nursing, drugs, doctors, and any equipment. So from a practical standpoint, lots of people can't afford hospice care but they can afford chemo and the like. Another stupid consequence of government-run medicine.

 

(Most hospices are thus non-profits.)

Heh you think that's bad?

 

Last time I checked, Medicaid only pays long term care providers $32 dollars a day, and they expect the exact same treatment for their patients as those who have private insurance/pay privately.

 

Of course what ends up happening is: care across the board goes down, because the private pay people's money is being used to balance out the shortfalls from the Medicaid people, and there simply isn't the budget to do the job right. And when that happens? Then the government has the gall to come in and say: "Hey you don't have enough staff! You aren't taking care of my Medicaid patients well enough! I am gonna take money away from you!" And then here come the lawyers, adding 0 value and taking even more money out of the system. Cue: those Brown Chiari ads during the Sabres games.

 

Well, no schit Sherlock, of course things ain't right. You get what you pay for. If we have people not paying anything, and the government is paying next to nothing, what in the hell do we expect?

 

There are fundamental problems with how all of this is being done. The good news is: there are enlightened people who know how to fix them. The question is: will they be allowed to do so?

[Doc]

Any strange coincidence that religion is being demoted to a minor role? Wasn't that the purpose of religion?

 

Talk is cheap. People like JA (or even for his loved ones) MAY be scratching and clawing to stay alive.

 

My mother passed on back in 1999 from ovarian cancer at the age of 59. She died in hospice, like the article suggests. I always wonder if we could have done more for her. To fight on? It is painful to see a loved one go that way and not do much. It is giving in. The American spirit tells us to never give up. To try and fight to the bitter end. Hope for a miracle.

 

In the end we let my mother go... Never knowing if she wanted to fight on. Doubt is a hard and bitter pill to swallow. All I can hope is that we did the right thing. ??

 

Down by 5, one can't ever win a game if you give up and take a knee on 4th and a zillion from your own 49 with one second left. Who am I to judge people taking the "Hail Mary-Big Ben?" Obviously, we all can judge people bad for that if it doesn't have anything to do with us!

 

To all the grammar police... !@#$ off! I am just a lazy federal empolyee!

If Health Care Deform stands, you'll have the end of your life decided for you, by people who won't be qualified to make that decision. I know the term "death panel" gets people riled-up, but that's exactly what they'll be. And it's already been spelled-out, when talking about how much money is spent in the last year of life. Who knows? It may just become like Logan's Run.

[birdog1960]

If Health Care Deform stands, you'll have the end of your life decided for you, by people who won't be qualified to make that decision. I know the term "death panel" gets people riled-up, but that's exactly what they'll be. And it's already been spelled-out, when talking about how much money is spent in the last year of life. Who knows? It may just become like Logan's Run.

if? the only question is how far it goes from here. hospitals all over the country are sending management types and chief medical officers to geisinger and mayo to see how to do it right and float thnrough the change. people are using massachusetts as a case study. but guess what: no death panels in the recent legislation or in mass. many argue end of life care policies should be instituted but no one's been willing to do it. i would predict guidelines on counselling patients as a first step. were a long way from any form of "death panels".

[Doc]

if? the only question is how far it goes from here. hospitals all over the country are sending management types and chief medical officers to geisinger and mayo to see how to do it right and float thnrough the change. people are using massachusetts as a case study. but guess what: no death panels in the recent legislation or in mass. many argue end of life care policies should be instituted but no one's been willing to do it. i would predict guidelines on counselling patients as a first step. were a long way from any form of "death panels".

People are using Mass as a case study...for what? How to raise costs and provide worse care? Our only hope is for a Republican Congress and prez, and repealing and replacing this monstrosity in 2013.

[birdog1960]

People are using Mass as a case study...for what? How to raise costs and provide worse care? Our only hope is for a Republican Congress and prez, and repealing and replacing this monstrosity in 2013.

to see utilization trends, make plans based on them, predict winners and losers and improve the model. and you're right-that's the only chance if you want to lay your bet on that side. the constitutionality argument aint goin nowhere.

[IDBillzFan]

people are using massachusetts as a case study.

 

Too bad they didn't do that before the bill was passed.

 

New report in Mass. finds record numbers dumping healthcare coverage

By Julian Pecquet - 06/30/10 12:40 PM ET

 

A new Oliver Wyman report for the Massachusetts Division of Insurance says thousands of people in that state are waiting to get sick before buying health coverage — and then canceling it when they no longer need it. Insurance companies throughout the healthcare reform debate warned that such an outcome was inevitable if health plans had to cover all applicants but people weren't required to buy insurance when they're healthy.

 

The report found that the number of people who abandoned their coverage within six months of enrolling more than quadrupled between 2006 and 2008, from 3,508 to 17,177. The result: Other policyholders — particularly employees of small businesses who get employer-sponsored coverage — end up paying higher premiums.

 

State officials are looking at ways to fix the problem, the Boston Globe reports. Efforts include Senate President Therese Murray's bill to allow people in the individual market to buy insurance during just one month per year, and Gov. Deval Patrick's legislation to restrict enrollment in the individual market to two annual periods — in June and December — with exceptions for "life changes."

[Magox]

Too bad they didn't do that before the bill was passed.

Thanks for the link. Hmmmm

 

Should the lemmings be surprised? My guess is that they will stay silent as they have been over the last few months. I mean, there really isn't much for the left to be proud of now a days. After all, they are the one's in charge, and they are the one's that promised hope. Ya, how's that working out?

 

On a slightly related subject, CBO Chief came out with a report:

 

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/30/news/econo...commission_cbo/

 

Douglas Elmendorf, chief budget cruncher for Congress, got to play the role of bad-news bear before the president's bipartisan fiscal commission on Wednesday.

 

gist of his testimony went something like this: The outlook is bad under current law and daunting if many current policies are extended as expected. And even that may understate the fiscal problem the country faces, because it doesn't factor in potential effects of debt on economic growth.

 

Based on current policies, debt held by the public would hit 185% of GDP in 2035. And interest payments on that debt would jump to nearly 9% of GDP.

 

Focus on health spending: Spending on health care remains the federal budget's biggest problem, even after accounting for the estimated impact of the health reform law enacted in March.

 

The health care law "made a dent in the problem but did not significantly reduce the challenge," Elmendorf said. "If all the health law measures are implemented, we end up with slightly lower federal health spending by the end of the 2020s."

 

Specifically, Elmendorf noted that spending on major mandatory health care programs such as Medicare is on track to double by 2035, up to 10% of GDP from 5% today. That increase is the equivalent of $700 billion this year in additional spending, Elmendorf said.

 

Add in the less dramatic increase in Social Security spending, and the cost to federal coffers of mandatory entitlement programs will reach 16% of GDP by 2035. That's not very far below what the government has spent on all federal programs and activities on average over the past 40 years.

 

A few Democratic members of the commission registered their concerns that the CBO's assumptions about the effects of the new law are understating its potential to reduce costs.

 

Gee, what a surprise, those guys will take that argument with them to the grave.

 

The larger the debt burden grows, the less money there will be for domestic investment. That, in turn, can suppress income growth and economic growth, which then reduces tax revenue.

 

The only way to bring the federal budget into better balance would be to sharply reduce U.S. spending, drastically increase taxes to rates never before seen in the United States or some less dramatic combination of the two, Elmendorf said.

 

The challenges are great, and the longer policymakers wait to stabilize the debt, the harder their task, Elmendorf said.

 

He gave an example: Say Congress started implementing measures next year to bring public debt back to what it was before the financial crisis. They would immediately and permanently need to cut spending by or increase taxes by 5% of GDP. That's $700 billion a year. And if they wait until 2020 they'd need to make changes worth 8% of GDP.

 

The hearing touched on one of the trickiest fiscal questions facing Congress: When to pivot from economic stimulus to fiscal restraint.

 

Elmendorf said that most economists believe cutting spending and raising taxes this year or next could slow economic recovery. But he added that "reaching agreement as quickly as possible would support the economic recovery because it would provide some clarity [in policy]."

 

While deficits can help boost the economy in a recession, over time government debt can drag it down, he said.

 

"If debt grows unchecked," Elmendorf said, "it means declines in people's standard of living."

[Doc]

to see utilization trends, make plans based on them, predict winners and losers and improve the model. and you're right-that's the only chance if you want to lay your bet on that side. the constitutionality argument aint goin nowhere.

Having a Republican-controlled government isn't what I want to see (I'm "taking out the trash" 11/2/10 and 11/6/12), but it's the lesser of two evils. And don't be so sure on the Constitutionality argument. Everyone thought the SC would rule in favor of the NFL over ANI in the antitrust case, and it was 9-0 against the NFL. Setting a precedent by allowing the government to force citizens to buy a product from a private company, citing "interstate commerce" as the reason they can, is a dangerous one.

[Doc]

Gee, what a surprise, those guys will take that argument with them to the grave.

Yeah. The truth is the CBO's assumptions about the effects of the new law are understating its potential to substantially increase costs.

[Adam]

Exactly, that is how I cope with it. Yet, there is always doubt about "quiting" on her.

Went through a lot with my dad's passing last summer. You do what you can to make them more comfortable and you do what you feel is right at the time. Don't second guess yourself.

[Dave_In_Norfolk]

As a strictly practical aside, Medicare reimburses hospice $100/day. That's for skilled nursing, drugs, doctors, and any equipment. So from a practical standpoint, lots of people can't afford hospice care but they can afford chemo and the like. Another stupid consequence of government-run medicine.

 

(Most hospices are thus non-profits.)

How dare the government pay for things to cure the ill

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Like you, I have no idea what comes next

 

 

You know, I admire your persistence. And I suppose this would make you an honest atheist. Because an honest atheist wouldn't fear death if there isn't anything beyond. To that (rare) person, death's just an endless sleep.