quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Too bad those numbers dont reflect the cost of defensive medicine. The total cost of medical malpractice is $55 billion A YEAR, of which $45 billion A YEAR is defensive medicine.

Of course you knew that already, you just choose to ignore it so you can trivialize the problem.

quote:

For the study, Mello and her colleagues analyzed numerous areas of the medical liability system, including payments made to malpractice plaintiffs, defensive medicine costs, lawyer fees and other administrative costs, along with the costs of lost clinician work time.

"Physician and insurer groups like to collapse all conversations about cost growth in health care to malpractice reform, while their opponents trivialize the role of defensive medicine," study co-author Amitabh Chandra, a professor of public policy at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, said in the news release.

"Our study demonstrates that both these simplifications are wrong -- the amount of defensive medicine is not trivial, but it's unlikely to be a source of significant savings," Chandra said.

quote:

The trigger for the "death panel" claim was a provision in the House of Representatives Bill 3200 (2009) that would have reimbursed physicians for counseling Medicare patients about living wills, advance directives and other end-of-life issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

How is it making it worse? It is exactly how it works now, except that the death panels are people with a pecuniary interest in the outcomes.  Tell you what, get single payer universal passed.  

We have something similar to single payer that is, if health care is unaffordable there is medicaid and medicare.

Wouldn't it be better to the figure out how to eliminate the more than 100 billion a year in fraud these programs generate ?

Perhaps you should look up who is committing these frauds you are whinning about.

What about affordable drugs ?  Why does it cost Americans so much for drugs when Canadians are cutting deals and buying in bulk and Americans  get them cheaper by ordering from or going to Canada ? 

Do youy think it is the liberal left that is doing that?

Why should it cost 100 million for a drug company to get a drug on the market ?

How much do you want it to cost?

And why in Gods green earth can't we address tort reform ? That alone could save gajillions on our medical bills.

So if a doctor cuts off the wrong leg you do not want him sued and have his license revoked?

All these things would go a long way toward driving down the costs without restructuring what amounts to 17% of the economy. 

So you would be in favor of "single payer" instead of the for profit system now in place that does not work, as you have pointed out.

SCZHEEEEEEESH

quote:

the English translation is "I am clueless about anything discussed on this board, so I'll run to moveon.org for a recycled soundbite, and will sound oh so clever doing so".

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

How is it making it worse? It is exactly how it works now, except that the death panels are people with a pecuniary interest in the outcomes.  Tell you what, get single payer universal passed.  

We have something similar to single payer that is, if health care is unaffordable there is medicaid and medicare.

Wouldn't it be better to the figure out how to eliminate the more than 100 billion a year in fraud these programs generate ?

Perhaps you should look up who is committing these frauds you are whinning about.
 Gosh, if you know who, please report them.  I don't care who it is, I want their balls on my mantel. Are you implying they are republicans ?

What about affordable drugs ?  Why does it cost Americans so much for drugs when Canadians are cutting deals and buying in bulk and Americans  get them cheaper by ordering from or going to Canada ? 

Do youy think it is the liberal left that is doing that?
 I don't care who is responsible. Can't we just straighten it all out ?

Why should it cost 100 million for a drug company to get a drug on the market ?

How much do you want it to cost?
 A whole lot less than that. Do you think that cost is reasonable ?

And why in Gods green earth can't we address tort reform ? That alone could save gajillions on our medical bills.

So if a doctor cuts off the wrong leg you do not want him sued and have his license revoked?
Certainly not and you are deliberately missing the point.

All these things would go a long way toward driving down the costs without restructuring what amounts to 17% of the economy. 

So you would be in favor of "single payer" instead of the for profit system now in place that does not work, as you have pointed out.
Where did I point this out or even imply that ?

SCZHEEEEEEESH

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Now, since you brought up the subject of the Independent Payment Advisory Board...

The President’s framework instead builds on the improvements made by the Affordable Care Act. It tackles Medicare fraud and excessive payments for prescription drugs, proposes a stronger Federal-State partnership in Medicaid, and includes a series of health care reforms that would save $340 billion by 2021, $480 billion by 2023 and at least an additional $1 trillion in the following decade.

Key to these savings is a proposal to strengthen the Independent Payment Advisory Board – IPAB, which was created by the Affordable Care Act. Here’s how IPAB works:

15 experts including doctors and patient advocates would be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to serve on IPAB.

IPAB would recommend policies to Congress to help Medicare provide better care at lower costs. This could include ideas on coordinating care, getting rid of waste in the system, incentivizing best practices, and prioritizing primary care.


IPAB is specifically prohibited by law from recommending any policies that ration care, raise taxes, increase premiums or cost-sharing, restrict benefits or modify who is eligible for Medicare.

Congress then has the power to accept or reject these recommendations. If Congress rejects the recommendations, and Medicare spending exceeds specific targets, Congress must either enact policies that achieve equivalent savings or let the Secretary of Health and Human Services follow IPAB’s recommendations.

IPAB is a backstop – it would only take effect if Medicare costs grow too fast. We’re already implementing a series of reforms that will improve the quality of care and reduce costs. In fact, according to Congressional Budget Office projections, Medicare spending won’t hit the targets that would cause IPAB’s recommendations to take effect in the next decade. But independent experts agree that IPAB will offer constructive ideas and help keep Medicare cost growth per enrollee affordable in the long run:

Experts including former Bush Administration Medicare Official Mark McClellan called for “[strengthening] and [clarifying] the authority and capacity of the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB).”

Former Congressional Budget Office Director Former CBO Director Robert Reischauer called IPAB a “big deal” that “could generate substantial savings.”

Experts from the Commonwealth Fund wrote “the Affordable Care Act includes important provisions that will finally begin to control unchecked health care costs, such as…the creation of the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Building on and extending these provisions across the health system has the greatest promise of slowing the growth of government health care budget outlays, private insurance premiums, and underlying health care cost trends.”

A coalition of economists including three Nobel laureates said “the Affordable Care Act contains essentially every cost-containment provision policy analysts have considered effective in reducing the rate of medical spending” including an Independent Payment Advisory Board.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/20/facts-about-independent-payment-advisory-board

Exactly how is the panel now a "death panel"? Its not, nor was it the aim of those against the HC Law. The complaint was that the Law would pay Drs to talk to granny about how to end her life.

Ahem... advanced directives.. which can only be discussed with that patients physician. Who else would know the exact diagnosis and the long term prognosis for the disease disorders a paticular patient would have?

Palin jumped all over the reimbursement for 15 minutes of a Physicians time to have a face to face meeting with each of his patients to have this discussion.

quote:

The trigger for the "death panel" claim was a provision in the House of Representatives Bill 3200 (2009) that would have reimbursed physicians for counseling Medicare patients about living wills, advance directives and other end-of-life issues.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

the English translation is "I am clueless about anything discussed on this board, so I'll run to moveon.org for a recycled soundbite, and will sound oh so clever doing so".

That seems to be your m.o. but no one thinks you are clever in the least.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Too bad those numbers dont reflect the cost of defensive medicine. The total cost of medical malpractice is $55 billion A YEAR, of which $45 billion A YEAR is defensive medicine.

Of course you knew that already, you just choose to ignore it so you can trivialize the problem.

Trivialize the problem?

[

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

1/2% is not a gazillion dollars.