Examiner Editorial
Reader Comments
WB
Jun 22, 2009
Good.
But why wont anyone cover who the people are who stand to profit from the push for electronic records? Not only is the established data that electic records increase errors, 2 friends of Obama from Chicago stand to make billions off this push.
Contact me and I'll send you several pages of links to back up what I'm saying.
Frank
Jun 22, 2009
The Canadian report you read concluded.
"Right now, patients receive excellent care"
I think you better keep searching the internet.
TGC
Jun 23, 2009
"I think you better keep searching the internet."
If they live long enough and qualify, they get good care. I think you need to spin to the choir who are stupid enough to agree with whatever you say.
Thomas Ash
Jun 23, 2009
Infinite demand? Demand will be constrained by the number of treatable health problems people have.
ICK
Jun 23, 2009
A quick internet search reveals the WHO ranks the United States health care system 37th in the last time the organization did such rankings. 37th! (A notch above Slovenia and 15 spots below Colombia).
Two more clicks finds that according to the Commonwealth Fund, the United States spends more as percentage of GDP on health care all other industrialized, but "has fallen to last place among those countries in preventing deaths through use of timely and effective medical care."
The position that this editorial takes is laughable and intellectually dishonest.
yaq
Jun 23, 2009
What about the 45 million waiting for decades for health care, and others 45 million that have high deductible that stops them from seeking health care. Wise up.
esch
Jun 23, 2009
That 45 million number is a thoroughly disproven lie. You wise up and check your facts.
Most of the inefficiency in the current system is the result of bureaucratic bloat, over regulation, lack of competition in MediCare/Medicaid and tort abuse. Going to Universal Health Care would make these vastly worse, not better.
4896
Jun 23, 2009
Re: reader Frank's Jun 22 comment..Long wait times in Canada = fact. Report statement "Right now, patients receive excellent care" = self-serving opinion of the Canadian government.
Jun 23, 2009
45 million? 12 million of which are illegial immigrants, 9 million who are young and simply CHOOSE not to pay for health insurance at this time and another 13 million who are eligible for medicaid, medicare or vet benefits and have not signed up. that 45 million figure is bloated.
Wnope
Jun 23, 2009
The author(s) seem completely ignorant of the fact that "Obamacare" is not a single-payer system, the "socialist" means used by Canada. The public option is built off medicare infrastructure as one choice alongside several private plans. The entire editorial is nonsense if it is attempting to actually address American healthcare reform. Not even Baucus is willing to touch single-payer.
John
Jun 23, 2009
Government Health Care Kills. <--PERIOD.
If you are retired and not paying taxes, what incentive is there to spend thousands of dollars to cure you? NONE!
Only in a for profit private health care system is there an incentive to create new drugs, treatments, procedures and equipment in order to treat disease and save lives.
In a welfare state system it is cheaper to LET YOU DIE than try to save you, especially if you are retired, elderly and not a producer (aka non-taxpayer).
Think about that...
sgs
Jun 23, 2009
I am 63-year-old woman who is basically healthy and who works full time for a small firm that doesn't provide health insurance. So I called Blue Cross to see if I could get a quote on a policy. The moment they found out that I have essential hypertension (well controlled on a generic Rx which costs me $12 every three months), I was deemed such a threat to the company's bottom line that they wouldn't even CONSIDER selling me a policy. I will do ANYTHING legal to support a public system that would strip that company of the profits they use to do all that marketing about how much the "care" about people's health and how much they "care" about families. Bullpucky. All they want is money.
SDSali
Jun 23, 2009
We have public health care already in this country through a public hospital system which provides health care according to ability to pay. Look it up. The problems with that system? Long wait times. You do not have to have insurance to receive medical care in this country. Virtually every state provides medical care according to ability to pay through a public hospital system.
JohnR
Jun 23, 2009
The US spends three times per capita what the Europeans spend. The Europeans keep costs low by rationing. Period. And the only solution for us, is rationing...so let's just admit it and get on with business.
BTW, for people who have insurance, the quality of US health care is superb. Zero waiting, top notch technology, the best doctors, etc. The fool who cited the study that ranks us 37th needs to look into the study; it was based on subjective criteria like "financial fairness", etc. It's meaningless.
We need health care reform to control costs...but don't think for ONE minute it will improve the quality of our care. Cost control will result in a DECREASE in quality.
Jun 23, 2009
has anyone even considered the number of people who seek health care unnecessarily? I have worked in the health field for years and find that hundreds of people, because they are covered by Medicare or private insurance, will seek the care of a physician when a simple band-aid or an aspirin would take care of the problem.
Freddy
Jun 23, 2009
Great article. The so called public option will inevitably use price controls and other monopolistic tools to out-price private insurers. The best coverage I've seen of this is actually at thedcwriteup.com. They've got reporters at all the hearings and some solid opinion pieces. They're really focusing on this issue.
TAN
Jun 23, 2009
As Sally Pipes notes in The Top Ten Myths of American Health Care, the usual health system ranking systems use faulty statistics including skewed infant mortality data and other causes of death (accidents and murders) in life expectancy numbers. Also included in WHO data is "distribution of health" which renders it useless for objective assessment of health quality.
Commonsense
Jun 23, 2009
They could start saving multi-millions of dollars immediately by cutting off medical support for illegals; something that should have been done long ago.
Kate in Sw Fla
Jun 23, 2009
I understand why doctors, nurses, hospitals, drug companies, therapists and medical supply companies make a profit on providing health care. But insurance companies? What "added value" do they contribute? They don't. They obstruct, to keep money. What they DO do, is syphon off at least 10% of our health care dollars, while providing absolutely nothing towards making us any healthier at all. It is ridiculous. I want a public option. If you don't, fine. Stay with your plan. bit I want a non-profit health care management sstem, not an insurance company. Those who oppose that? They are the ones who oppose choice.
mpe823
Jun 23, 2009
Your argument might hold valid if the plan Obama was proposing was anything like the Canadian system. Fortunatly, for those of us who would like to see our friends and neighbors insured,the plan is nothing of the sort. It would still leave in place private insurers for most Americans and any public option would still have to be purchased unless financial distress could be shown.
Additionally, many of Canada's problems stem from lack of people in the medical profession. America obviously would not have that problem since we already enjoy an influx of Doctors.
RMH
Jun 23, 2009
Ditto Policy Wonk and JohnR. Tell me what program the government has run well and I'll consider Obamacare as a legitimate option. Why will the government suddenly do better in this situation?
mulp
Jun 24, 2009
How about the WTA report on how long the uninsured in the US are required to wait to see a doctor if they are sick and don't have cash to pay?
How about the wait times for the uninsured to get cancer treatment in the US, or merely the cancer diagnosis?
When comparing the US to Canada, one needs to cite the times for the patients in the US in order to provide a comparison to Canada.
For all we know, the wait time in the US for the uninsured to get radiation treatment is six months or two years, so no matter how many of the insured get their treatment in 3-4 weeks, the median will be longer that the recommended 4 weeks, because the people who are uninsured or under insured got that way in many cases because they were sick, lost their jobs, lost their insurance or ran up against its lifetime treatment limits, and once insurance no longer pays, why pay for insurance.
Mikeev
Jun 24, 2009
all I know is i want the same health care plan that the President, congress, and the federal employees have and at the same cost they pay. I am a citizen like them, pay my taxes which pays their expenses. if they put through any plan that doesn't meet this, it is insulting to every citizen in this country. they are going to take care of you but just not as well as they take care of themselves.
Commonsense
Jun 24, 2009
Socialism is NOT for the U.S.
Fred
Jun 24, 2009
Well, as someone who has just the standard BCBS insurance, my wait time from initial diag of cancer to seeing a throat cancer specialist in Michigan was ONE WEEK. After his diag and recommendations (rad chemo for 8 wks) we started on the treatment IN ONE WEEK.
So I cannot let the "for all we know" comment stand, at least for me personally.
When you read about the mistreatment of rad services going on in one Vet's Hospital because of peer review or lack thereof and that it's a government run health service, you realize that we're screwed.
dismalspring
Jun 24, 2009
socialism vs. aristocracy
government insuranced lifestyle vs. poverish lifestyle determined by the wealthy
dismalspring
Jun 24, 2009
"Making health care 'free' creates an infinite demand for medical services."
Are you suggesting that people would get sick because they could now get treatment, or are you acknowledging that there are now people who are sick who do not clog up the clinics seeking treatment because they don't have insurance?
Does this mean that the only way for Americans to get quick, quality treatment is to keep other (the poor) Americans from being able to get the same treatment, thus allowing them to die so they don't clog up the patient list and cause you to have to wait a little longer for your treatment?
dismalspring
Jun 24, 2009
Here's a "Modest Proposal," why don't we just open a bunch of government run "free clinics" where we can use the poor as guinea pigs for medicine and treatment being developed for those who can afford insurance.
Better yet, we can just eliminate all health care and make it legal to refuse treatment to those who can't afford it. Limit medical treatment to those who can afford the full cost of their treatment, and let those who can't just die. This will not only improve the quality and speed of medical treatment for those who really deserve it (the rich), but it will also eliminate the problem of the homeless and poor because their already shorter lifespan will become even shorter.
DesertDave
Jun 24, 2009
Our doctor situation is not the best. Several years ago there was a crisis in Las Vegas Nevada. Many obstetricians left the area due to outrageous malpractice insurance. The remaining obstetricians stopped taking new patients. A pregnant woman in Las Vegas had to travel elsewhere for care.
Health care pros will leave the system if the feds impose lower fees. If I were entering the medical field as a doctor I would either be a boutique doctor or a plastic surgeon, both operate outside the health insurance arena and make uber money.
pianoslyv
Jun 26, 2009
Just exactly what demographic is the uninsured? Mostly illegal immigrants? Has this country not suffered enough by their hands already? Rework malpractice insurance and the reason for its outlandish cost, follow the money. Obamacare is NOT the solution for the people but for the cronies. Half public, half private will squeeze out private in short order. It won't eliminate the problem of the poor; it will increase its numbers.
Anna
Jun 26, 2009
I am well aware of the Socialized Government Health Care in Canada, The United Kingdom, Germany and Denmark since I have relatives in those countries. When those people are stricken with serious health problems, they go either to Switzerland or come to our country If the plan for socialized medicine being formed by Obama, Pelosi, Reid and others is enacted, Switzerland will be everyone's last resort for decent health care. Why does anyone want to ruin the current health care that we enjoy in this country? Frankly, we need to close down our southern borders and throw out all of the illegal aliens and that would solve not only our health care problems but also a lot of our criminal problems. Wake up before it's too late!
KFIEL@PRODIGY.NET
Jul 4, 2009
You offer nothing to many who held u in the crux of our hands, screaming, CHANGE. Anna, I totally AGREE w/ u! Most of our probs involve the undesirables, or illegals. Why do YOU/ we tolerate them?
Brandon
Jul 17, 2009
if they want to give us health care why can't we have the same health care as congress.And if congress would just pay there share of income tax it might help. THANKS FOR NOTHING OBAMA-DONT GO AWAY MAD JUST GO A WAY
iscount Christian Louboutin Sandals
Dec 6, 2009
Christian Louboutin on sale
Christian Louboutin Boots on sale
Christian Louboutin Pumps
discount Christian Louboutin Sandals
discount Chloe shoes
thomas wylde bags
Post a comment
Local
Another snowball fight planned for Dupont Circle
The Official Dupont Circle Snowball Fight facebook fanpage has over 6,000 fans now, and it looks as if snowed in DC'ers will return for another battle. Full story
Politics
GOP winning war over Miranda rights for terrorists
Even as the administration defends its decision to grant accused Detroit bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab the right to remain silent, the president himself is hinting that things might be done differently in the future. Full story
Local
D.C. region braces for up to 20 more inches of snow
The National Weather Service has the entire D.C. metro area, from Prince William County north, under a winter storm warning for 10 to 20 inches of snow. Forecasters have had their eyes on this storm for days, but the projected snow totals were bumped up late Monday. Full story




