Healthcare costs -- the Brill article

[3rdnlng]

They currently wouldn't exist without the government; but we need them to exist to build war machinery. Majority means just over 50%. If you're uncomfortable with that, how's a minority stake of 49%? Or how about we make it preferred shares like we did when we saved AIG and the banks? Without the government, L-M would not be an on-going concern, and the current shares would therefore be worthless.

 

Accounting rules make cost of Sales reflect variable costs only. The government has allowed defense companies to include R&D. I'm sure it's done because the cost of planes like the F-35 aren't determined in a market; more likely some type of cost-plus contract arrangement.

 

Isn't R&D variable? Should R&D come out of profits? Why would it be ok for the feds to have a minority interest if it wasn't ok to have a majority interest? How would the government obtain an interest in Lockheed-Martin? Would they buy shares or just confiscate them?

[Alaska Darin]

They currently wouldn't exist without the government; but we need them to exist to build war machinery. Majority means just over 50%. If you're uncomfortable with that, how's a minority stake of 49%? Or how about we make it preferred shares like we did when we saved AIG and the banks? Without the government, L-M would not be an on-going concern, and the current shares would therefore be worthless.

 

Accounting rules make cost of Sales reflect variable costs only. The government has allowed defense companies to include R&D. I'm sure it's done because the cost of planes like the F-35 aren't determined in a market; more likely some type of cost-plus contract arrangement.

The government ends up "owning" a good portion of the technology that's privately developed. They're even allowed to pass that technology around to competing companies. WHICH IS WHY THEY PAY FOR THE R&D.

 

The government "owning" any commercial entity is a horrible idea. The reason most contracts/projects go over budget is poor government management/incessant scope change. Making that easier would be even worse for the taxpayer.

 

Why not just admit you have virtually no understanding of the process, rather than propose such a ludicrous "solution"?

[TPS]

The government ends up "owning" a good portion of the technology that's privately developed. They're even allowed to pass that technology around to competing companies. WHICH IS WHY THEY PAY FOR THE R&D.

 

The government "owning" any commercial entity is a horrible idea. The reason most contracts/projects go over budget is poor government management/incessant scope change. Making that easier would be even worse for the taxpayer.

 

Why not just admit you have virtually no understanding of the process, rather than propose such a ludicrous "solution"?

Ownership doesn't mean control. Having a stake in the company formally establishes the relationship that currently exists, and the government would receive a portion of their investment back in the form of dividends. Think of it as a sovereign wealth fund.

 

I wasn't being critical about the R&D. It makes perfect sense to include it as part of the cost-plus contract.

[Alaska Darin]

Ownership doesn't mean control.

Why not just type: "I don't have any concept of what it's like to work with the government, so I'll live in ideological land."?

Having a stake in the company formally establishes the relationship that currently exists

You mean because having a legal, binding contract between entities isn't formal enough for you?

The government would receive a portion of their investment back in the form of dividends. Think of it as a sovereign wealth fund.

The government doesn't "invest", it buys things. Goods, services, etc. Often, they are things that no other entity in the world is either allowed to buy or could even afford. On top of that, they put in rules that make it virtually impossible for small or diverse businesses to compete in the arena, which is why there are enormous companies that essentially built to deal solely with the U.S. government.

 

Your "solution" would cost the taxpayer even more money. Jesus Christ, comrade. You actually teach some form of economics?

[TPS]

Why not just type: "I don't have any concept of what it's like to work with the government, so I'll live in ideological land."?

 

You mean because having a legal, binding contract between entities isn't formal enough for you?

 

The government doesn't "invest", it buys things. Goods, services, etc. Often, they are things that no other entity in the world is either allowed to buy or could even afford. On top of that, they put in rules that make it virtually impossible for small or diverse businesses to compete in the arena, which is why there are enormous companies that essentially built to deal solely with the U.S. government.

 

Your "solution" would cost the taxpayer even more money. Jesus Christ, comrade. You actually teach some form of economics?

Slightly better than your usual response.

[Dorkington]

I'm of the opinion that certain industries shouldn't be "for profit". Two of them being education and healthcare.

 

A more educated and healthy society is a stronger and wealthier society.

[Rob's House]

Sitting in DMV, been here for over an hour, no end in sight. Just reminded me of all the left wing dipshits who think everything will be magically improved when these !@#$s are running the hospitals. The willful idiocy of the left is astounding. Hope leftards are still popping wood over this healthcare bill when the rubber meets the pavement. Of course they can just admit that all they cared about was that it was an Obama bill that was about healthcare and that was all that mattered to them because they swallow his rooster & have no brain.

[DC Tom]

I'm of the opinion that certain industries shouldn't be "for profit". Two of them being education and healthcare.

 

A more educated and healthy society is a stronger and wealthier society.

 

Maybe not wealthier, if people aren't working for profit.

[B-Large]

Sitting in DMV, been here for over an hour, no end in sight. Just reminded me of all the left wing dipshits who think everything will be magically improved when these !@#$s are running the hospitals. The willful idiocy of the left is astounding. Hope leftards are still popping wood over this healthcare bill when the rubber meets the pavement. Of course they can just admit that all they cared about was that it was an Obama bill that was about healthcare and that was all that mattered to them because they swallow his rooster & have no brain.

 

First, what reason does anybody have going to the DMV anymore? I haven't been to a DMV is 15 years, all that **** can be done on-line...

 

Second, The Afforbale Care Act doesn't have government running hospitals.... its a coverage Bill, not a Healthcare Bill. Hospital are run by greedy CEOS at Academic Medical Centers working 90 hours a week, spening Monday- Friday evenings at Fundraisers, and generally walkig a fine like to keep Quality Measure and Patient Satisfaction numbers up... the article painted a vivid picture of these bastards of healthcare.

 

Third, do you kiss your mother with that filthy, whorish mouth of yours???

[Dorkington]

Maybe not wealthier, if people aren't working for profit.

There are *plenty* of for profit industries.

 

That being said, my ideal will never happen in the US, so there's nothing to fear.

 

Sitting in DMV, been here for over an hour, no end in sight. Just reminded me of all the left wing dipshits who think everything will be magically improved when these !@#$s are running the hospitals. The willful idiocy of the left is astounding. Hope leftards are still popping wood over this healthcare bill when the rubber meets the pavement. Of course they can just admit that all they cared about was that it was an Obama bill that was about healthcare and that was all that mattered to them because they swallow his rooster & have no brain.

 

Every time I have to deal with the DMV, everything is handled fairly quickly. I either take care of my services online, or I go at a low traffic time.

 

But, you're comparing a waiting room situation to an appointment making situation, and I think that's a bit unfair in comparison of services. If you had to go and sit in a lobby and wait for your number to be called to get a general check up, that'd be an incredibly inefficient system. Whereas if you could call up, or log in and set an appointment, that'd be more efficient.

[Rob's House]

 

 

First, what reason does anybody have going to the DMV anymore? I haven't been to a DMV is 15 years, all that **** can be done on-line...

 

Second, The Afforbale Care Act doesn't have government running hospitals.... its a coverage Bill, not a Healthcare Bill. Hospital are run by greedy CEOS at Academic Medical Centers working 90 hours a week, spening Monday- Friday evenings at Fundraisers, and generally walkig a fine like to keep Quality Measure and Patient Satisfaction numbers up... the article painted a vivid picture of these bastards of healthcare.

 

Third, do you kiss your mother with that filthy, whorish mouth of yours???

Target & Papa Johns are run by greedy CEOs too, but somehow manage to give me what I want quickly & affordably. And if you don't think ACA is an end around to government run health care I've got some real estate deals we should discuss. And my mom can smell Obama's rooster on liberal's breath too.

 

FWIW I kind of give you a pass on this b/c I know your reason.

[B-Large]

Target & Papa Johns are run by greedy CEOs too, but somehow manage to give me what I want quickly & affordably. And if you don't think ACA is an end around to government run health care I've got some real estate deals we should discuss. And my mom can smell Obama's rooster on liberal's breath too.

 

FWIW I kind of give you a pass on this b/c I know your reason.

 

I think comparing PIzza's and Retail Consumables is not apples to apples to Healthcare for a variety of reasons, but I agree alot can be done to offer many types of care more efficiently, and less costly. My shot at the Healthcare CEO was in jest, I report to our System CEO, while compensated nicely, it is a B word of a job, endless hours and mind numbing issues across the board... I would never want that job, not for a ship full of cash.

 

I am glad to hear your mom has not lost her sense of smell... lol....

 

Yeah, I appreciate the latitude, as you know from my posts the passage of ACA was bittersweet.

[Rob's House]

I think comparing PIzza's and Retail Consumables is not apples to apples to Healthcare for a variety of reasons, but I agree alot can be done to offer many types of care more efficiently, and less costly. My shot at the Healthcare CEO was in jest, I report to our System CEO, while compensated nicely, it is a B word of a job, endless hours and mind numbing issues across the board... I would never want that job, not for a ship full of cash.

 

I am glad to hear your mom has not lost her sense of smell... lol....

 

Yeah, I appreciate the latitude, as you know from my posts the passage of ACA was bittersweet.

I was comparing them to DMV. Anything government runs (Post office, SSA, DMV) is horribly inefficient and wasteful. It's undeniable. It makes me want to rip my hair out because people who should have enough sense to know better are ignore this truism and push for government takeover of other industries because ....

[birdog1960]

Maybe not wealthier, if people aren't working for profit.

if 10% less of gdp is spent on healthcare, most people will be wealthier.

[Doc]

I'm of the opinion that certain industries shouldn't be "for profit". Two of them being education and healthcare.

 

A more educated and healthy society is a stronger and wealthier society.

Food shouldn't be for profit either then. It is the most basic need. And while we're at it, we should have free shelter. That's a basic need as well. Clothing?

 

There are a lot of "shoulds." Like people should take better care of themselves. They should avoid high risk activities. They should save their money. They should not have kids they can't afford and expect society to pay for them, if not raise them. They should treat their fellow man with respect. I could go on, but I should stop now.

[OCinBuffalo]

the way to address it is rapid f/u after discharge with the pts primary care physician so that he can make sure of improvement, compliance etc. medicare has actually just approved a new code for this. some hospitals have set up clinics for pt after discharge to be seen who don't have primary care docs. they give the visits away in many instances as it's cheaper than a readmission. surprise, surprise - the answer is strong primary care. now, if the answer to "what am i thinking?" includes fraud, then i'm sure i don't know.

That's right Birdog, you can think of ways to beat this idiotic regulation, and you are in favor of this idiocy. How's that feel? To be in favor of something you know is stupid? (Btw, breadcrumbing the ICD codes is the most obvious solution, and no, that is not fraud. Followed by just re-tasking beds as sub-acute, and sub-acute has been around way before your "new Medicare codes". You want to build whole buildings and schit. )

 

Also, how's it feel to make my point for me? Again? If the answer is sound primary care....then why not make a regulation that says "everybody needs an after-hospital primary care plan, and if that plan fails, we blame the plan first, measure the execution of the plan, and see what failed and why"? This 30 day re-admit thing is merely an arbitrary abstraction, and therefore, useless as a quality indicator, and a performance idicator. The only things it indicates is that "sometimes people need to go back to the hospital...for lots of reasons, and, regardless of those reasons, we're, again, going with One-Size-Fits-All".

 

How come you can't see the folly of One-Size-Fits-All? Even I can see it, and I learned a lot of my workflow skill set from SAP. I am up at this god-awful hour because of One-Meeting-Time-Fits-All German tools.

 

If we both come up with mulitple ways to be beat this in <5 minutes(how long it took me), what chance does this regulation have of doing anything other than creating unintended consequences?

 

So I ask...when you said "get ready" above...who exactly should be getting ready, and for what?