Reply With Quote
The Best Medical System in The World
The Best Medical System in The World
We are the only first world country without universal health care.
And the others who can afford our better service come here for it.
I'd ask for a source/proof, but we all know that ain't gonna happen.
Why should I provide common knowledge of those living near the border?
How about this quick find:
Canadian official has heart surgery -- in the U.S.
One of my lady friends works in a hospital here in Portland. She mentions foreign visitors sometimes that just come here for quicker service.
Tell it to the lawyers.The report underscores how much we could save just by encouraging doctors to order fewer procedures and, on the patient side, by taking a more active interest in lifestyle monitoring. The IOM offers a few specific examples:
•Patients don't need to get more than one colonoscopy every 10 years.
•If you had a fainting spell but it didn't come with a seizure, you can safely forego a $2,000 MRI.
•Avoiding expensive imaging studies for early complaints of back pain.
No kidding. Without proper tort reform, our system will be expensive.
Besides. If we had a Canadian style simple payer, we would but too may lawyers out of work.
Hmm. If only there was a State that recently implemented tort reform legislation, then we could actually take a look at the cost of health care before and after the legislation was enacted.
The Texas Hammer is driving up our healthcare costs!
Tort reform does little except over the plaintiff's bar and indirectly hamper the quality and cost of legal services across the board (at least tangentially).
lol black surgeon
It was a lame form of tort reform.
Are all ideas of tort reform the same? I think not. You sure have a limited concept of things that can be done, don't you.
Pretty sure you can't articulate meaningful differences between different types of tort reform or why the Texan brand was lame.
So explain this to me: given the numerous pleading requirements for federal courts, the availability of summary judgement in both state and federal courts, the numerous rules prescribing sanctions for frivolous pleadings and lawsuits, and lawyers general obsession with credibility and their unwillingness to tank said credibility on a bull lawsuit -- whys any form of tort reform necessary?
We've been over this before. I have better things to do with my time that state the obvious over and over.
How about we return to this fact.
Other first world countries do have an overall cheaper system. Besides the quality argument, what about the recourse argument? What type of recourse do you have with them for liability? Is the state going to may you millions in a lawsuit?
What's the obvious? I haven't been over anything with you before so I can't but assume that you can't articulate any difference between Texan vs. so-called meaningful tort reform. Or why the pleading requirements, plaintiffs bar, or other factors I identified are not sufficient checks.
Besides being irrelevant, other countries don't have the same legal system as the US. So they're really irrelevant.
What does "what type of recourse do you have against them" mean? Under a system of damages caps and precluded/barred claims, ostensibly very little recourse in the case of malpractice.
ok, so wc stalks a chick and she runs him over with a car.
since everyone knows he's a stalker.........does he have a case?
You need some new material Clam Boy. that's already so old.
Texas tort reform wasn't designed to lower healthcare cost. It was designed to lower skyrocketing malpractice premiums and stop the exodus of doctors from Texas, which it did.
http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/201...1/prsc1031.htm
I didn't mention Texas Tort reform. Can you address the recommendations I quoted from the op?
Let's take this one:
Are there any situations you can imagine where the doctor would be sued for following this recommendation? If so why would doctors follow a recommendation that may well get them sued?Avoiding expensive imaging studies for early complaints of back pain.
It is a Corruption Problem Not Waste
When I hear the word “waste” I feel it almost implies the money was overspent by accident or the unnecessary byproduct of laziness/ignorance. For example I wasted money on groceries because I let my fruit go bad. Much of what we see as wasteful medical spending the health care industry sees as a very profitable business model that needs to be protected. The “wasted” money does not simply disappear, it goes to companies and professionals.
If a drug company is given a special government protected monopoly over a necessary drug and Congress also bars the government from regulating what prices the company charges, they are going to charge as high a price as they can get away with.
We can quickly eliminate much of our large administration costs by adopting any of a dozen proven international models, such as an all-payer or single-payer system.
The only reason we aren’t using proven methods to eliminate this waste is because the industry spends millions on lobbying our politicians to not fix the problem and even pass new laws to make the situation worse. When money is being given to government to write the laws to help companies extract more money from regular Americans that is not waste, that is corruption. The waste remains because to eliminate it would mean eliminating much of many companies’ profits.
We don’t so much have a health care waste problem, we have a corruption problem.
My bet is that US citizens who can't afford US health care travel abroad for treatment far, far outnumbers the wealthy foreigners who indulge themselves in luxurious, but not necessarily more effective US health care.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
