Comments on: Why the elderly are against health reform

By: JOHN from Doylestown, Pa.

JOHN from Doylestown, Pa. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 21:29:20 +0000

My Wife and I are 73 years of age and quite frankly the only health plan we can afford is a Medicare ADVANTAGE Plan. There are people who have committed suicide because of health or / and money . Talk about losing your savings , even with a cap on out of pocket costs, this will surly do just that.
A huge number of SENIORS will not make it without the ADVANTAGE Plans.
If I understand this correctly , Medicare is unsustainable mainly
because of the ADVANTAGE Plans.
I voted for Obama because we needed change, but he never mentioned this kind of change.
I just want to touch on one change he talked about.
It must be very comforting to the past and present Government
that not to long ago a certain CEO received a $50mil. bonus
and that his company recorded a $ 40 BILLION profit in ONE QUARTER for a product that we cannot survive without.
Gasoline went from $1.79 to $ 4.79 back to $ 1.79 and then
up to $ 2.79 a gallon all in 11/2 years. Now at $2.79 a gallon
does the Government think we are getting a bargain ?
Are they that stupid or do they think that we are that stupid ?
At $ 2.79 a gallon now , if a barrel of oil goes back to $ 150.00
AGAIN , we will be paying over $ 6.00 a gallon.
It makes you wonder just what is going on that we do not know about.
If anything needs to be socialized or nationalized it is the oil to gasoline industry.
Just think if a gallon of gas was $ 1.79 and the Government
put just ONE dollar tax on top of that to make it $ 2.79 a gallon
what that would do for Social security now and in the future
I MEAN REALLY, lets face it , THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THIS
COUNTRY IS AMERICA.
The Radical right keep bringing up what the Rev. Wright said that was so wrong ” Not God bless America but God damm
AMERICA “

By: Donald Green MD

Donald Green MD — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 11:21:00 +0000

Dear RN, First before answering you, I would like to know just how open you are to an answer. I do not deal with fears that people think will happen, but try to see if some solution can be fashioned in a discussion where concerns are addressed and acceptable conclusions drawn. In order to explain without getting slogans and contrived numbers in return I would set the following premises as the basis of an exchange. You would have to accept that there is a difference between “socialized medicine” and “social health insurance.” You would also have to accept that our present situation needs drastic overhaul or else health care expenses will gobble up our economy without achieving universal access. You would also have to understand that our current system of under insurance and no insurance results in 20,000 needless deaths a year. If you consider each of these items a reasonable foundation for dialogue, I will continue. Let me know.

By: Donald Green MD

Donald Green MD — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:01:35 +0000

“A study published in today’s Annals of Internal Medicine, a leading medical journal, reports that a survey conducted last year(2007) of 2,193 physicians across the United States showed 59 percent of them “support government legislation to establish national health insurance,” while 32 percent oppose it and 9 percent are neutral.”

My reasoning seems to hold water with a super-majority of physicians. As for the Commerce Clause debates, none of it nullifies the power of Congress to institute national health insurance. The preamble to the Constitution also states as you know, “In order to form a more perfect union…..promote the general welfare…” Making our fellow citizens healthier and more prosperous is not a far fetched interpretation.

I don’t know exactly what you mean by being emotional so I will assume it is a distraction. I have actually stated what I support and why. I do not believe I used such tense language in my descriptions to be accused of being over wrought. Calling people out in that manner tells me you have some other underlying agenda, such as marginalizing people who you disagree with. In plain English, it ain’t nice.

By: M T RN

M T RN — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 00:35:17 +0000

I first want to say that I have been following the health care debate since its inception. Dr. Green I would like to know how the proposed health plan can be anything but socialized medicine. The government will choose the people to oversee the plan and they will set the price of their plan lower than most private plans and will force hospitals to close because they can no longer subsidize the care they have to give to those on the public plan. As for the uninsured, if the demographics of the people who make up this group, the majority of them would be found to be illegal aliens to our country. I have practiced 32 years and have fought the Medicare debacle for years. How can this health care plan as written at present not force doctors to leave in droves. They are drowning in paperwork as it is. Of course if you follow the utilitarian ethics, you can truly argue that it is the best for the country. But what about those who are suffering from chronic disorders that require frequent hospitalizations, do you ration their care so some other less ill patient can get care? If you follow Obamacare that is exactly what will happen.

By: Evinx

Evinx — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:49:36 +0000

Dr Green,
Again, you failed to be specific on your reforms. Not surprised.
And the part of the Constitution you referred to has been debated from the time of Hamilton and Madison. Your arguments are illogical – kind of surprising as most doctors are not so emotional in their reasoning as you are.

Good Luck to you.

By: Donald Green MD

Donald Green MD — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 21:01:40 +0000

Well Evinx, The jig is up. The Constitution is not specific enough for you. Of course health care is a necessity for survival unless you want to drift back a few thousand years. I have cited many known statistics but you blithely set them aside. So I conclude you think our present set up is just fine. It tells me no argument will persuade you. I guess there was no harm trying. By the way we do not let people starve in this country and have programs such as food stamps and also affordable housing programs(section sponsored by government. The problem with health care, however, is its unpredictability. This means everyone needs some kind of payment mechanism at hand to be taken care of. This can be done haphazardly and cost an arm and a leg or in a more orderly fashion by having Medicare for all. This is the only way we will get a handle on costs. I don’t think you won’t believe it until it happens. So as Thomas Paine stated: “Time makes more converts than reason.”

By: Evinx

Evinx — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:51:34 +0000

Dr Green
Your response was a non-response. No details. No specifics.
Talking about promoting the general welfare does not give one a right to someone else’s labor. What about food? What about shoes? These are extremely impt – more so than health insurance.

Those of us who oppose Obamacare do want reform – just not what he is selling.

Mackey’s op-ed was on the right track. Remove the state mandates. Allow insurance to be sold across state lines, eliminate employer paid benefit to be replaced by individuals purchase their own (with tax deductibility/ or earned income credit). The key is to break the third party payment – where the perception of free currently exists.

I would be happy to go on but you never stated any specifics. Details matter. Oh yes, this a comment forum and not a court room – if it was, your general welfare argument would not stand up to legal scrutiny either.

By: Donald Green MD

Donald Green MD — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 12:47:42 +0000

Everyone suddenly points to government as the source of their impoverishment or lack of needed services. Pulling out costs that may exist or stating “hidden costs” in government programs lacks the power of evidence to make it stand up to the barest criteria for either a legal or scientific basis.

It is not government programs that have ignited this present crisis in the economy or health care. So if we remove Medicare, Medicaid, the VA, and the Indian Health Service from the equation what is your solution to reform health care? Obviously you are aware that I think a updated and improved governmental program is necessary. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution gives Congress the power to promote the general welfare. Health care access and affordability(health insurance) falls into this catagory and should not belong to free enterprise. I am not saying the deliverers of care should not be private and entrepreneurial but this also demands strong ethics on their part or there should be strong penalties. It is time for those opposed to government intervention to put their cards on the table. So far the proposals increase the bottom line of what we pay for health care and continue the slow decline of the general business of this nation. People overwhelmingly want reform in this country. You will have to tell me how the history of the HMO movement and other private insurances have proven their value to this country. There is no there there.

By: Evinx

Evinx — Sun, 23 Aug 2009 06:13:21 +0000

Dr Green
Some of your numbers are simply incorrect. There is tremendous cost shifting going on bcs of Medicare + Medicaid low reimbursement rates. The low admin costs in Medicare result in huge fraud – approx $60-75 billion per year – no one really knows. Medicare shifts costs to the DOJ and other agencies so of course their stated admin costs are low. But in reality, they are not.

Whether it be defense dept or post office or fannie/freddie, when has a govt program come in below budget? The fed govt is no model for effiiciency; to argue that they are, defies all history and logic.

Ideally, what would you suggest for reform?

By: yep

yep — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 23:01:36 +0000

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8l2ZE4v9kw4

ya….words just can’t describe it.