Forums | MacLife

radarman wrote:

robco wrote:

Exactly.

As stated, the public option isn't done yet. The Senate Finance Committee will not have it in their bill. It doesn't mean that a Senate bill won't have it. They also have to reconcile the Senate version with the House version and the House version will most definitely have it. It's time for the party leadership to get the DINOs in line.

Do you really think for a minute the insurance and hospital lobbies are going to allow Congress to pass a public option? Those idiots can't go to the toilet without asking permission from some corporate interest.
It doesn't matter how many Americans wanted it, because the average American doesn't pay the bills for elections - and that's all that really matters.

Doctors support a single payor system.
They are tired of fighting the insane insurance company bureaucracies, too.

The new poll, conducted by Indiana University's Center for Health Policy and Professionalism Research, shows a sharp 10 percent spike in the number of doctors supporting national insurance: 59 percent in 2007 compared to 49 percent five years earlier. This indicates that more physicians are eager for systematic changes, said Toledo physician Dr. Johnathon Ross, past president of Physicians for a National Health Program.

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Why couldn't Obama have just rammed something through the way Bush got his little war?

Because Obama's speeches are all fluffy froo froo, while Bush's speeches were more like "YOU GONNA DIE unless Iraq gets conquered, I mean, invaded."

ShnickyShnack wrote:

Why couldn't Obama have just rammed something through the way Bush got his little war?

Cause that would make him a hypocrite.

resedit wrote:

Doctors support a single payor system.

Some Doctors. Quite a few do not.

Your phrasing is technically correct, but the connotations of your word choice are very misleading. I suspect that this is intentional.

A recent survey by the New England Journal of Medicine has 73% of doctors supporting either single payer or public option.

resedit wrote:

No, the connotations of my word choice were not mis-leading.
Absolutely nothing about my statement even remotely implied ratios.

Whatever you want to think, I guess.

DukeofNuke wrote:

radarman wrote:

robco wrote:

Exactly.

As stated, the public option isn't done yet. The Senate Finance Committee will not have it in their bill. It doesn't mean that a Senate bill won't have it. They also have to reconcile the Senate version with the House version and the House version will most definitely have it. It's time for the party leadership to get the DINOs in line.

Do you really think for a minute the insurance and hospital lobbies are going to allow Congress to pass a public option? Those idiots can't go to the toilet without asking permission from some corporate interest.
It doesn't matter how many Americans wanted it, because the average American doesn't pay the bills for elections - and that's all that really matters.

Doctors support a single payor system.
They are tired of fighting the insane insurance company bureaucracies, too.

The new poll, conducted by Indiana University's Center for Health Policy and Professionalism Research, shows a sharp 10 percent spike in the number of doctors supporting national insurance: 59 percent in 2007 compared to 49 percent five years earlier. This indicates that more physicians are eager for systematic changes, said Toledo physician Dr. Johnathon Ross, past president of Physicians for a National Health Program.

Note carefully the lack of "doctors" in my statement. Individual doctors have about as much pull as individual citizens compared to insurance companies and hospital organizations - and those groups, by and large, adamantly oppose a public option for obvious reasons. Insurance companies might actually have real competition, and hospitals might have to really lower costs as a result.

I'm sure doctors are all for it, FWIW.

Tallgeese wrote:

Also, a recent survey by the New England Journal of Medicine has 73% of doctors supporting either single payer or public option.

Understandable.

There's a whole market of people who are not being prescribed the designer drugs that these doctors prescribe to get their free vacations to the Bahamas. Got to get that untapped market to come in and get drugged up.

Tallgeese wrote:

resedit wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

Also, a recent survey by the New England Journal of Medicine has 73% of doctors supporting either single payer or public option.

Understandable.

There's a whole market of people who are not being prescribed the designer drugs that these doctors prescribe to get their free vacations to the Bahamas. Got to get that untapped market to come in and get drugged up.

Interesting theory. I'm sure you have something other than your imagination to back it up.

Of course he does.  He has the best kind of evidence: I'm sure he knows someone from church who has a brother whose best friend from grade school went to college with this guy who lives next door to a doctor who prescribes designer drugs to anyone and then uses the money to cruise around the Caribbean.

Some of you may not buy it, but quite a few do.

Single payer was not presented by anyone but Kucinich, and he wasted his lifetime supply of ridiculously good luck on his wife.

it should have been but it wasn't. It never was. This was no secret, revealed by nurses or anyone. It was in all the campaign literature.

KHannon wrote:

Tallgeese wrote:

resedit wrote:

Understandable.

There's a whole market of people who are not being prescribed the designer drugs that these doctors prescribe to get their free vacations to the Bahamas. Got to get that untapped market to come in and get drugged up.

Interesting theory. I'm sure you have something other than your imagination to back it up.

Of course he does.  He has the best kind of evidence: I'm sure he knows someone from church who has a brother whose best friend from grade school went to college with this guy who lives next door to a doctor who prescribes designer drugs to anyone and then uses the money to cruise around the Caribbean.

Some of you may not buy it, but quite a few do.

I've gotten some free pens and post-it notes over the years, but there are fairly strict rules about even that these days.

Doesn't matter, because I can only prescribe what the patients' insurance plans will pay for. Even if the newest drug on the market is better, I may have to try two or three cheaper options first.

resedit wrote:

Yes, last few years they've started to be less blatant about it, but it still goes on.

Sure, it goes on, but folks with "public option" insurance would not be the ones getting the newer, more expensive drugs. My institution is about 60% Medicaid, and they are stricter than most regarding what they will pay for.

FWIW, if I think a new medication is bullsmurf and doesn't work as well as or better than a generic, I don't prescribe it.

Come on, res, you can't possibly think that naturalnews.com is a reputable source of information. It is so clearly biased against the mainstream medical establishment. Everyone they quote in that article has written a book about alternatives to traditional medicine.

Anyway, I'm not saying doctors are being altruistic, but most would like to see a single payer system just to avoid the headaches and overhead that comes with dealing with multiple insurance companies, not because they are recruiting more suckers for their "designer drugs."