A couple of videos of Peter Schiff
He predicts huge inflation, price controls, general chaos.
Governmnet money doesn't fall out of the sky. Governmnet is a cost to the productive economy and must be controlled. Medicare and social security are broke. The markets for healthcare are distorted through bad policy. The price signals generated through the uninhibited exchange of goods and services don't apply to health care. Costs rise in highly regulated sectors since the check is picked up by a third party. Truly reforming the syatem would entail tort reform first if the legal profession were willing to get off the malpractice gravy train. Deregulating the sector would bring prices down and remove all of the moral hazard built up over the years as folks began to belive that medical care was 'free'. This caro cult school of economics must be abandoned.
I will pray every day so he can lose!
He is disruptive! Talks rubbish and I bought gold and gold shares at his recommendation and lost all my clothes including my under pants!
He will be no asset to the senate or the house of representatives or the state he represents.
NOTHING! NADA! ZIPPO! ZERO!
Because if given the choice based on all my experience with various health plans, I would buy into Medicare in a second. The only who thinks private insurance is better are fools like yourself who don't have experience with both. I told you why.
But someone did a study detailing the obvious.
See the link: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Content/Publications/In-the-Literature/2009/May/Meeting-Enrollees-Needs.aspx
<Why would they be able to compete genius? The govt. doesn't have to break even.>
Rush Ilap, you are such an idiot I don't know why I bother repeating myself.
The total health care budget is $2.5 trillion. If the government took the whole thing over, overhead costs would be $75 billion. If private insurers did it, overhead costs would be $500 billion.
Now I know this may hurt your Republican brain, Rush Ilap, but would you rather see have that $425 billion difference go to help people without insurance or go to insurance companies and their CEOs making eight and nine figure salaries?
Anyone choosing the latter is so brain dead he must be a Republican.
You see the reason the health insurers can't compete is that upper management types are taking out billions for themselves while no one at Medicare makes that much.
The difference between me and you is my 10 years of medical training and 4 years of practice.
You scold me for insulting you, yet you insult the medical profession and demean a lot of hardworking, compassionate, and altruistic people who make many sacrifices to ease others' suffering and pain.
Your damn right you touched a nerve.
<<I have to ask: what sort of medical education have you had to make judgments on the practice of medicine? >>
There's more here about business practices than medicine.
what's your problem?
did I touch a nerve?
<<You are blind, stupid, and have no idea what you are talking about. >>
As to medical credentials, this is an anonymous message board.
Prove YOU know something rather than just insult me.
Otherwise, go to hell.
I have to ask: what sort of medical education have you had to make judgments on the practice of medicine?
I suspect that you have had none so how can you make such ridiculous and baseless accusations of people who have had years of formal training?
Part of the reason some doctors prescribe antibiotics for viral infections is to shut people like you up who think they can practice medicine by surfing the internet, and who then bitch and moan when they "waste" their time seeing a doctor who "does nothing."
It's people like you that will drive the good doctors away from medicine. Go ahead and blame the people who sacrifice their youth in the training years, sometimes their own health with the long hours, and their family lives.
Meanwhile, the insurance and pharma executives will sit back and continue to profit from our broken health care system while many Americans suffer without coverage.
You are blind, stupid, and have no idea what you are talking about.
< One of these days you are going to get sick and see what a f*cking mess the health care system is. >>
Been there and seen it with my own eyes....under a nationalized healthcare system.
The deterioration over the last 10 years is readily apparent.
And I won't burden you with the details of
the incompetent and sorry -ass service that I've had.
But more generally, the issue of cleanliness and infection control is an area that is often overlooked in terms of importance unless the govt wants to cut cost.
And the results are NOT good when this type of spending is reined in.
But these healthcare unions(cleaning staff etc) don't have the same pull as the doctors and nurses unions do
when cost cutting is implemented under a govt run system.
And don't get me started on infection control in the OR.
Lots of short cuts by the nurses and doctors. Simply inexcusable.
Hell, a lot of doctors are clueless the way they dole out the antibiotics for what are often times viral infections and this alone is probablty the biggest reason we've had increased incidence of the various new superbugs that keep cropping up.
Just my opinion, but there could
also be lots more use of narrow spectrum antibiotics instead of the new more expensive widespectrum stuff that often gets prescribed today and this is a problem.
I also think that most doctors today could use more training in microbiology because then they might know about the
likely pathogens causing an infection and would thus be more knowledgable as to what narrow spectrum anti-biotic might do the job. Many could use a refresher course at the very least.
Doc, since you like to keep labeling me as a Republican, it must mean you are a dyed-in -the wool Democrat?
Why must you polarize the discussion?
FYI, and for the umpteenth time, I have little use for either political party.
And shame on you for not willing to listen to the debate including the issues that I raised.
From a business perspective, a nationalized healthcare system has some downsides and it doesn't take a lot of study to see that if you'd only open your eyes to the process that's currently taking place in the many countries that already have nationalized healthcare.
And for the most part, this stuff is predictable when healthcare unions and doctors rule the roost....i.e.
no one seems to look out for LT patients needs or cost control.
Sound familiar with the public sector?
And check out wait times for various surgeries and the lack of availability of some of the newer equipment in some of these other jurisdictions before you give them such high accolades.
You think customer satisaction is so great in the UK and Canada? Think again.
And project forward. (I know, not your strong suit, but give it a try.)
As to the problems you cite WRT to the current state of affairs in US healthcare, how can you be so sure that nationalization will cure the problems?
Just where is the precedent for govt doing things in a cost effective manner?
Or innovating and instituting change once a system IS nationalized?
Think about that when considering the long run.
But put all of that aside and try to be objective (LOL).
It's obvious that the US healthcare system needs work in order to better serve the people, right?
Maybe just a philosophy of mine, but it seems to me that the biggest changes required in healthcare have to do with the delivery of service (rather than techological innovation).
So why destroy the private sector at a time like this?
This is a time when innovation can really happen what with a weakening economy and cost cutting likely to be a widespread isssue.
Do you honestly think that the Obama admin has the wherewithal and business savy to bring forward the proper and necessary innovation in service delivery in healthcare that's needed? Because if you do, I'd seriously
like to know why.
You figure something in it
for you ....maybe WRT end-of-life counselling or sumthin? What's YOUR agenda? LOL