Health-care fearmongering
Fearmongering is unbecoming to a large newspaper like the Rocky Mountain News. In its Aug. 2 editorial, “Single-payer baloney,” the Rocky warns, “Out-of-staters who have medical insurance but don’t want to pay their out-of-pocket costs” and “immigrants” will storm our borders “to get medical care at Colorado taxpayers’ expense” by obtaining “a fake Colorado ID” or checking in “at an emergency room” ... and the bogyman is going get you!
Echoing George W. Bush’s false statement that to obtain health care, one “just has to go to an ER,” the Rocky asserts that “Federal law requires ERs to treat any patient who arrives at their doorsteps, or refer patients to another facility if they don’t have an ‘emergency condition.’”
Wrong! The Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (the federal law governing assessment and transfer of patients seeking emergency care) requires only that a hospital emergency room get the patient to the point where he can move out the door. It is not unusual for patients with serious conditions to be discharged from ERs with no follow-up or appropriate medications, etc.
Contrary to the Rocky’s assertion, nonresidents can’t “demand care” unless they present a true emergency.
Leslie Albin, Denver
A true emergency? Then why on a daily basis can you enter a hospitol and see the er room full of ILLEGALS with children suffering from only colds sitting there getting free medical attention. Why are American citizens who are fortunate enough not to arrive in an ambulance waiting in line behind these ILLEGALS.
AS often enough local and state facilities ignore the law and treat citizens like trash in order to take care of ILLEGALS first because a mayorial or govenor staff tells them they have to inorder to maintain thier jobs.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 06:35 AMIllegals can't use emergency rooms for ordinary care. Tha would be well, ... illegal.
Posted by James Jones on August 21, 2007 07:00 AMIn the past year I have been to the ER 4 times and each time was admitted for a heart attack ranging from mild to, (my husbands definition) is there a cat in here? Each time I spent little time in the outside ER but a long time, before admission, in the treatment area. One out of five times I heard patients on both sides of my bed speaking in English. Once I heard English on one side. The rest of the time I heard Spanish. This was at two different hospitals and both of them were in suburban areas. Once I heard the woman in the area next to me ask her husband, in Spanish, "What name did you give?" Once I heard a doctor ask a patient why they were back in the ER without seeing a doctor at a clinic as they had been told to do.
It is pure sanity and reason to state that those who will illegally enter a country will illegally claim state residence so long as the risk is so much smaller than the benefits. Young workers probably won't come, but you can bet people my age will flood in to take advantage. What happens when the actuarial tables we base cost predictions on are knocked into a cocked hat by a high number of chronically ill who contribute nothing to the workforce and little to the tax base?
Add to that the waste and inefficiency of bureaucratic administration and we will have a system that businesses and taxpayers run from and illegals and those with serious illnesses run to.
Fake ID cards are so easy and cheap to obtain that it would become a cottage industry here albeit one that pays no taxes. Even without a criminal masquerade it would be frightening to line up and trust the government.
What you call fear-mongering is nothing more than a realistic look at the results of patchwork socialism. Let's keep the patchwork in quilts and socialism in the dust heap of history as a failed system of government.
Posted by momma y on August 21, 2007 07:35 AMI like the idea of going to hillary care [socialized health care] so that when it fails and doesnt do anything but cost x times more than today, all the far left liberals will be able to blame Bush for something else.
How about we talk to mike moore and his buddies castro and good ole hugo to set up our health care. just look at how sicko was praised as the best way to cover everyone. i bet everyone in the government would find away around their system so that they and their families would get great care while the American citizens stand in line behind the illigals
It is disgusting to read the words of those who make the assertion, such as the one above, that when they walk into an emergency room it is "full of illegals". Did they go around and ask if they were "illegal"? Did they check papers" No. They did not. So, how do they know? Simply put, they don't. They ass-u-me, that because those who are there and have a different color of skin, are "illegal". There is a word for that. It is called "racism".
Posted by Robert I. Laitres on August 21, 2007 07:52 AMI had a breast biopsy done at a Health one facility.After that I had surgery to remove a mass.It was benign and I am on the mend.
After I had my biopsy ,Health one was calling me everyday within a week for payment.It was only a few hundred dollars,but my husband likes to go over the bill to make sure there were no mistakes.We have caught many in the past.
They have been paid in full . I'd like to know if these people walking into hospitals for care with no insurance are hounded everyday within a week of treatment?I doubt it.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 21, 2007 08:39 AMRobert, nonsense. Throwing out the racist card because people aren't stupid and make certain assumptions that are reasonable is hogwash. In fact, you are assuming people are racists because they didn't "check papers." I guess you are Ass-u-me yourself.
If people are in Colorado in the emergency room and speaking Spanish there is good reason to think they may be illegal. It's not the color of their skin, but the language they speak.
There is a word for what you are doing calling people racists and that is intimidation. But, Bob, that canard doesn't work here.
Posted by jim on August 21, 2007 08:40 AMIf you believe that ILLEGALS do not make any impact on the economy. Then why do you not look into the fact that in Houston, Dallas, ans several other Texas cities hospitols have had to close because they went bankrupt. Why? Because to answer AMENS question. The ILLEGALS could not and would not pay for their sevices in the E.R. Instead of going to clinics and telling the truth they lied, used up tax payer resources and left. No the hospitols could not turn them away. As a result incured large bills and had no way to pay them off.
Yeppers ILLEGALS sure are good for America ...... NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by on August 21, 2007 09:16 AMI work as a PA in the ER of a major Metro facility. Our unofficial records for 2006 (the ones hidden and not made public) reflect that 67.3% of the patients seen (men, women and children) and treated were without documentation - no verifiable name, residence, insurance, etc. Of those 67.3%, 87.9% required assistance with a Spanish translator. Of those 67.3% of the cases, 78.2% were treated for non trauma or injury related bacterial and viral infections -- they were sick with common communicable colds and flus. We processed 105 women through to maternity for eminent child delivery. This is just 1 ER in the metro area.
Although the official stated policy is no treatment for non life threatening or serious trauma patients, the unofficial policy is that all symptoms are potentially life threatening and therefore to be handled, right down to a child's sniffles. After initial medication and prescription are administered if follow up care is required the patient is referred to a street clinic.
For those of you who believe that you are not paying for the routine health care of illegal immigrants, enjoy your denial of reality while you can. At least I benefited by becoming proficient in Spanish during the last 5 years!
Posted by on August 21, 2007 09:23 AMI am a physician and a Republican. I want to temper some of the observations and fears cited here with some data. 1. Most of the Spanish speaking patients you "meet" in the ER are citizens. 2. Most of the "waste" you spend in healthcare money goes to fellow citizens. 3. Most citizens in Western countries with socailaized healthcare receive better and more timely care for less money than we do. 4. Less of your money would go for the care of the poor and illegal immigrants if we had a national health care plan. 5. You want illegal immigrants to have access to health care. If they don't, citizens will suffer. For exemple, infectious diseases like Tuberculosis would be more poorly controlled. Babies born here (citizens now) with chronic medical conditions because of no prenatal care would use up more of your dollars. The examples go on and on. Ironically, we would have to spend MORE money on health care for our citizens if we did not care for illegal immigrants. 6. If we keep doing what we do now in health care, only the rich and the poor will have predictible access to non-emergent health care. And fewer of them every year. There's a reason every Western nation does this.
Posted by Steve on August 21, 2007 09:24 AM"Add to that the waste and inefficiency of bureaucratic administration... "
You mean like how medicare has a 2-3% overhead rate, while private insurance has a 30% overhead rate?
Yea, those wasteful bureaucracies....
Posted by Tbone on August 21, 2007 09:29 AMSteve: you have an obvious agenda. I've seen that argument repeated almost verbatim many times from many directions. In other words, right out of social health care reform 101talking points. While I don't totally disagree with what you say I do get tired of hearing the some old preprogrammed tripe constantly repeated.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 09:42 AMIn Maricopa County, AZ the county hospital was facing severe shortage in operating funds and Proposition 414 was created to increase property taxes to cover a $40 million gap in these funds.
Most info available avoided the obvious reason for this huge influx in uninsured patients but the St Lukes study of the situation did include the facts on pg 8 as they found them:
GROWING NUMBERS OF UNINSURED. While the mix of the uninsured/insured ratio has stabilized since 2001 due to the AHCCCS expansion, the total number of uninsured has increased as the result of decreasing employer-based health insurance, growth in the general population, and the continuing influx of both documented and undocumented immigrants. The dramatic increase in patients seen at the Neighborhood Christian Clinic in Phoenix, for example, consists primarily of undocumented immigrants.
The big question is why were property owners alone asked to foot the bill for this problem brought on by the influx of illegal aliens when most of the people using the county hospitals are not property owners.
Keep your eyes on the troubles border states are having with the impact of illegals on their societies. Having a state cushion between us and the border slows the erosion but in time these same problems will begin to plague Colorado as well.
Posted by KW on August 21, 2007 09:51 AMI align myself with J (sorry B) that a fence is necessary as opposed to penalizing employers for hiring illegals, though both remedies should be enacted.
The criminal element will not be deterred by law that punishes employers because such element pushes drugs, steals, plunders, tortures, and kills Americans (as in New Jersey) for their livelihood. Bullets are fired into a 7/11 by illegals because they don't like the clerk's cap.
Illegal gang membership is growing and these gangs feel no compunction in committing murder to further their scheme.
Mexico drafts a very, a very, very, onerous law in dealing with illegals on its turf. America should copy Mexico's draft.
It will be difficult with the Vatican calling the shot though: The Supreme Court is Catholic; Ritter is Catholic; Congress and the Senate lick the loins of the Jew born from the "loins of David," while George Stephanopolis (sic) asks the presidential aspirants about their belief in superstitious nonsense about a Jew baby transmogrified into a Christian god. I reiterate Goldwater sentiment:
“There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I'm frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me ... that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in A, B, C, and D. Just who do they think they are?” -- Senator Barry Goldwater, R-Arizona
Posted by Richard Grimes r22037@yahoo.com, Deicide ffrf.org. Web: http://www.geocities.com/r22037/think.html on August 21, 2007 09:52 AMAMEN from me Richard!
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 21, 2007 10:02 AMTBone:
"You mean like how medicare has a 2-3% overhead rate"
Do you have something credible to back that up with? We're talking about the federal government here for one, and 2-3% overhead wouldn't even begin to cover the payroll taxes, let alone run the entire bureaucracy.
Posted by KW on August 21, 2007 10:06 AMSettle down Grimey...so-called "illegals" are not the cause of all of our problems, rather the bulk of our issues are self-inflicted. If we could keep our kids from dropping out of school and demanding high pay for work they don't want to do, we might not need to underpay illegals so badly.
We should be building bridges between out cultures, not walls. We need to welcome the cultural richness that immigrants bring, rather than looking for ways to divide ourselves.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 10:10 AMWhile Steve, the Republican Doc, makes a few valid points about treating illegals (but not about most Spanish patients being citizens) in an attempt to stop communicable diseases from spreading through the community, wouldn't it be better to either stop them from entering the country or "encourage" them to return to their native country in the first place? Legal immigration into this country requires immunizations and medical clearances before migrating - for the safety of the community. Embracing the illegal slave labor in the name of either corporate profits or feel good, misguided compassion is endangering the general health and welfare of our country.
Turning a political eye away from both the existing illegal aliens in the country, and the ongoing daily invasion, is endangering not only the health and welfare of the legal members of our society, it's destroying the financial fabric as well as is reflected by Anon 09:23AM and KW's 09:51AM posts above.
It just keeps getting better and better...
Posted by Trinity on August 21, 2007 10:20 AMKW - don't pick on Tbone. He probably got his figures from "Sicko" as those are the ones tossed out by Moore; and, you know if Moore used them, they just gotta be true!
10:10 - Legal immigrants bring cultural enrichment and diversity; illegals bring crime, disease and lose of jobs to the lower end of the legal working class. Perhaps if wages weren't artificially suppressed by businesses hiring illegal workers for next to nothing we could put a little hope back into the future of some of those potential drop outs.
CA
Posted by on August 21, 2007 10:26 AMDon't be bigoted. There is no such thing as an "illegal" human being.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 10:33 AMSteve,your observation of most of the spanish speaking patients in the ER are citizens is false.
To become a citizen in this country you have to speak English.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 21, 2007 10:39 AMAnon 10:33AM
There may not be any illegal human beings; but there are human beings who commit illegal acts. Unless you want to abolish all laws including murder, theft, fraud - crimes against other human beings - violating a societal law is something for which a human being can and should be held accountable for.
Laws are established for the protection and general welfare of the society enacting them. You are free to disagree with a law and actively advocate against changing it; but, you don't have the right to ignore or violate with impunity a law until it is is change or repealed.
Instead of whining and advocating ignoring the immigration laws in favor of those who violated them, continue to work toward changing our archaic immigration laws; and, if you so desire, work for amnesty for those who have already broken them. But don't whine and complain about society wanting the existing laws enforced. They were established for a reason.
Posted by Trinity on August 21, 2007 10:45 AMCIgaAMen - Don't confuse Steve's argument with facts. It will put a serious crimp in his agenda.
CA
Posted by on August 21, 2007 10:48 AMWe need lots of Wal mart type clilnics. I wonder what % of ER patients just got sick when their doctor is closed. Mine works 4 days a week.
Posted by Sharon B. on August 21, 2007 10:56 AM"wouldn't it be better to either stop them from entering the country or "encourage" them to return to their native country in the first place?"
Let's undress that extreme euphemism.
"Encourage": deny the opportunity to work for a living, and deny health care and educational opportunities, to some twelve million or more people. In other words, starve them back to where the adults came from. Make life so miserable for the adults and the children that the profound misery that drove them here will look good to them. When they get sick enough and hungry enough, they'll leave.
A lot of the posters here would love that. The American people as a whole would not stand for it because they still have a sense of decency and they still hold in high regard the values that have made our country great. In my opinion, most Americans do not want to change the sign on the Statute of Liberty from
"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
to
"While we looked the other way when you come here and while we stood by while you grew your children and your roots here, we no longer want you, so we will close our schools, hospitals and jobs to you and to your children, and force you back to the impoverishment that enabled to us to get you here in the first place."
While it is clear that the capitalists will not let that happen, I think it is just as clear that the morally sound among us will not let that happen.
I think a vast majority of Americans still believe that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness".
The great debate that has raged throughout our history has been between those who believe that and those who do not, such as most of the posters here.
Posted by Truth on August 21, 2007 11:04 AM
Folks. My only agenda is a strong and healthy and competetive country. Health care costs are eating into the profit margin of our nation's companies such that they are no longer competetive in the world market. We have the most expensive, least effective health care "system" in the world. Not enough space here to give you data, but it is easily obtainable from credible unbiased sources. Leave health care in the market if you want to, but at least look at the data to see what you are buying. Small business owners are increasingly interested in a national health care system that actuallly works to produce a healthy work force.
My experience is different than the one the PA cites. Most of the Spanish-speaking patients in our ED here in Denver are documented citizens. I agree with him on this, though: you are all paying for the care of the undocumented immigrant RIGHT NOW. You are all paying for the care of the uninsured and underinsured RIGHT NOW. If you are lucky enough to have health insurance, you all have rationed care RIGHT NOW. And I agree, it's hard to trust the governement; but you all trust multi-million dollar CEO's to make decisions about your health care access RIGHT NOW. At least you can vote the government out. You have to really understand what you have NOW to understand why change makes sense.
And of course I have an agenda. So do all of you. What fun would it be if you didn't? That's why we write into an opinion blog. So, if that's your only retort, save space for folks who disagree, but have something to back it up!
Posted by Steve on August 21, 2007 11:18 AMSteve there is no such thing as a "documented citizen".
They are "documented immigrants"
To be a American Citizen you must take a test in English and speak English.
I can't believe you are a Dr.
Please tell us where you practice so we can avoid the facility.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 21, 2007 11:27 AMTruth- nice to see your bleeding heart ill conceived and misguided compassion crying for your new liberal pet project ---the illegals. Hell yes we should starve them out --- buss them out if necessary. Get rid of the parasites. You can go with them and help them at home just like you worked with all of the children you did in central america.
They can take their ill-gotten booty, the fancy cars and trucks that they buy not buying taxes and medical, and go home ---period. Good riddance.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 11:38 AMTruth --
You're right, I don't want to change it: ""Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
That is on Ellis island where LEGAL immigration took place. LEGAL immigrants are more than welcome. The ILLEGALS chose to sneak across the borders rather than do it LEGALLY.
Are you really so dense you don't understand the difference? You've lost the debate about displaced American workers, criminals and illnesses being brought with the ILlEGALS multiple times in these blogs. You just disappear when you run out of your limited fact based logical arguments. Yet you keep coming back pouring our emotional laced babble in support of illegal immigration. You are getting a little addled. your emotional based crap actually engenders more animosity towards illegals than a rational argument would. Keep up the good work. I know that your proud of your compassionate stand for liberals new pet project, go man, go!
Posted by on August 21, 2007 11:47 AM"Reprehensible" in the word seen elsewhere is what I find in those who don't have the balls to, at least, attach their initials to their posting as with the Mexican poster 10:10 AM who wants to build bridges between Americans and the criminal element and gang member who is arrested 9 times and each time released because of Bush's policy and the Mexican 10:10 who wants to "share cultures not walls" ~~ for sure, an a-hole and illegal immigrant lover.
Posted by jvb on August 21, 2007 11:47 AMIt's nice to see Truth cut and pasting again. Nothing from Wikapedia this time? Most Americans DO WANT the illegal immigrants to leave - that's what has your panties in a twist. We don't all have your undying compassion for criminals.
KCW
Posted by on August 21, 2007 11:50 AMSteve,
What per centage of the patients treated in the ER pay for the care they receive?
Posted by James Jones on August 21, 2007 12:07 PMIf I were King...
I would have an enormous Statue of Liberty type of statue built near the Mexican the border. This statue would be enormous. It would dwarf the statue on the east coast. She would hold up a giant torch in one hand. This torch would remain lit so it can be seen for hundreds of miles. Her other hand would be extended open to the south as if beckoning for someone to take her hand. This statue would be considered a Wonder of the World.
Surrounded by this statue would be beautiful Roman-style buildings. There would be about a dozen of these buildings. These buildings serve two roles: they would provide shelter for Mexican immigrants and they would contain a magnificent library.
Mexicans seeking American citizenship would travel to this place and spend six months caring for the magnificent sanctuary while studying American history and learning English. Then after the six months, we'd have a big celebration. Fireworks would light up the dark desert sky. The Mexicans would be sworn in. It would be a highly covered event.
Tourists from all over the world would come to see this place, to take part in the biannual festivities, to climb to the top of the statue. Tourists would pay lots of money for the opportunity to see the greatest architectural masterpiece in the world.
The money collected from all the visitors would be used to maintain the site.
Posted by King John II on August 21, 2007 12:14 PMKW--
This is the best source I could easily find:
http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=1623
ALthough I could probably dig up some stuff on the hate site dailykos.
I had a breast biopsy done at a Health one facility.After that I had surgery to remove a mass.It was benign and I am on the mend.
After I had my biopsy ,Health one was calling me everyday within a week for payment.It was only a few hundred dollars,but my husband likes to go over the bill to make sure there were no mistakes.We have caught many in the past.
They have been paid in full . I'd like to know if these people walking into hospitals for care with no insurance are hounded everyday within a week of treatment?I doubt it.
Posted by Can I get an AMEN! on August 21, 2007 08:39 AM
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
AMEN-
I hear you.
In July I passed out twice in my kitchen and my wife called the ambulance and the took me to Lutheran Hospital.
I have no health insurance...but just 5 days later I got a two notices (bills for CAT scan interpetation) from the radiologist demanding a responce within 10 days or they were going to turn me over to a collections agency...It's ridiculous..
here's how it breaks down for an un-insured American...
AMBULANCE $1156
ER VISIT w/ CAT SCAN $2600
ER DOCTOR $576
CAT SCAN READING $176
EKG READING $30
It was a nine mile ride to the hospital and I was in the er for about 3 hours...(turns out im ok, though know one can explain why I passed out)
Who can realistical afford that (some are helpful and allow me to make payments w/o interest for a time)...but as stand alone fees...it's insane!
Especially the ambulance...
I was in a bad car wreck two years ago...in Burlington Colorado and that ambulance was just $350....
You get soaked every month w/ insurance and just straight up reamed w/o out it.
It's brutal
Posted by Grim Reefer on August 21, 2007 01:02 PMGee, I feel like a real snake charmer. I post and the snakes coming writhing up. Thanks for letting me know that I am on the right track.
Posted by Truth on August 21, 2007 01:07 PMTruth, you're on the same "right track" as An American. I wouldn't be too proud of the association. Both of you claim moral victory when people react to your unsupported, ill conceived rantings used to support your non arguments. Snake charmer indeed...more like snake bit.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 01:26 PMTBone - I didn't see anything in your link refering to the overhead of Medicare being only 2-3%
I did see this quote and a few others like it:
"Hundreds of billions are squandered each year on health care bureaucracy, more than enough to cover all of the uninsured, pay for full drug coverage for seniors and upgrade coverage for the tens of millions who are underinsured."
The problem with that line of thinking is you would have to take all that "squander" and channel it into the plan for a government run system.
The money however doesn't belong to the government (yet). This "squndered money" would be confiscated from the numerous sources (millions) such as insurance companies, private healthcare facilities and ultimately, you and me.
That would be akin to saying there are billions wasted in the auto manufacturing business so lets take all that money and create the Government Motor Company and make everyone buy from one provider. Even if a better vehicle was created by this, it cuts into the very fabric of freedom in this country by forcing both business to close and by eliminating choice to the consumer.
It scares me to read there are people advocating the taking of money that isn't theres to pay for the bureaucracy they hope to create.
Posted by KW on August 21, 2007 01:45 PMGrim Reefer,I am fortunate to have insurance.My insurance paid their share promptly and they were hounding me for my 20% even before my wound healed.
If my last name was Rodriguez or another latino name they would not have been calling me.
So Tracey, have you quit smoking since that episode? Sounds like a good motivator.
Posted by Just curious on August 21, 2007 03:02 PMKW- Here you go.
""The recent Medicare bill means a huge increase in administrative waste and a big payoff for the AARP," said study author Dr. David Himmelstein, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard and former staff physician at Public Citizen’s Health Research Group. "At present, Medicare’s overhead is less than 4 percent. But all of the new Medicare money – $400 billion – will flow through private insurance plans whose overhead averages 12 percent. So insurance companies will gain $36 billion from this bill. And the AARP stands to make billions from the 4 percent cut it receives from the policies sold to its members."
Here's another good one:
"Last week, the government reported that health spending accounts for a record 15 percent of the nation’s economy and that health care spending shot up by 9.3 percent in 2002. Insurance overhead (one component of administrative costs) rose by a whopping 16.8 percent in 2002, after a 12.5 percent increase in 2001, making it the fastest growing component of health expenditure over the past three years. Hence the figures in the Harvard/Public Citizen Report (which was completed before release of these latest government figures), may understate true administrative costs.
"
And the way I read the article, the "squandered" money goes into OUR pockets, instead of private insurance companies. Since the gov't plan is cheaper, the article implies that the $$$ saved goes to the consumer.
I don't know anything about the Public Citizen foundation. SO take it w/a grain of salt.
Can I get an Amen - If your last name was Rodriguez you would have given a vacant house as your address -- they couldn't have found you. Phony Id, other people's SS#s and no legal paper trail work wonders in this great society.
Posted by on August 21, 2007 03:33 PMThanks TBone - I didn't mean to imply your quote wasn't in there, just that I couldn't find it in what I read/scanned. Thanks for locating it.
I'm still skeptical as to where they got that 4% figure but like you say, take it with a grain of salt.
Posted by KW on August 21, 2007 03:55 PMKW and TBone The Medicare Modernization Act and the administrative costs associated are partly paid by the Insurance companies.
As much as 30% of HC Insurance administrative costs are associated with Govt mandates based upon local, state and Federal mandates. So when I see that Admin costs have raised by xx% the next question is what is raising those costs?
Posted by bwr on August 21, 2007 04:02 PMBoth the HC Insurance companies and the Govt needs to get its sh&%$ together. Both are spending us out of house and home
Posted by bwr on August 21, 2007 04:04 PMNo doubt about that!
Posted by Tbone on August 21, 2007 06:11 PMLet's not forget that agricultural subsidies taken out of tax dollars result in market disruption in Latin America because US corn products get sold there at below what it costs to produce here (or there).
It also allows corn-syrup laden softdrinks to be sold at lower prices than they should be.
So not only do we fund the obsity crisis, we also fund illegal immigration that pulls those out of work farmworkers into the US.
Careful, Bango Skank. Thoughtful and insightful observations like these might lead some people to believe you to be a concerned American citizen.
I totally agree with your brief analysis of our government lead subsidy follies. We have so many better ways to invest our dollars that might actually serve to the betterment of society.
Posted by on August 22, 2007 01:03 AMBango,
Good reminder. Also remember that ethanol from South America is cheaper than what we produce but we put a subsidy on our ethanol to keep it cheaper. Another reason NOT to give the government any more ways to cause mischief.
Posted by momma y on August 22, 2007 03:28 AM