What does Obamacare have to do with Tucson?

[exnodak]

Isn't it amazing the quality of health care available for these tragic gunshot victims? There is no argument that Obamacare will change the landscape of healthcare in the future if it is allowed to survive.

There is no argument that can be made that Obamacare will improve the system we have seen engaged this last weekend. It can only degrade it.

It begs the question: Would Giffords have even survived the bureaucratic evaluation process much less the triage? Probably not.

If Obamacare is left to mature, the decay of quality medical service like we just witnessed will be dramatic. At best it will become "average". Triage will yield "average" decisions. Treatment will be minimal or "average". Traumatic headshot wounds would never see the inside of an operating room based on quality of life and the victim's residual productivity and public value. (NIH, Emanuel)

This is the discussion that needs to happen NOW!

 

[philibusters]

Thats a lot of claims, but without a lot of explanation of the claims.

 

[Aerogal]

Not really, just google the mess of the UK National Health program. My Aunt needs a knee replacement. She's 69 but they won't do it because she's too old. Mr. A's grandmother (in NE) got both hips replaced in her late 70's.
This is a personal example. I'm sure there's many more that are worse.

 

[GoodnessME]

Isn't it amazing the quality of health care available for these tragic gunshot victims? There is no argument that Obamacare will change the landscape of healthcare in the future if it is allowed to survive.

There is no argument that can be made that Obamacare will improve the system we have seen engaged this last weekend. It can only degrade it.

It begs the question: Would Giffords have even survived the bureaucratic evaluation process much less the triage? Probably not.

If Obamacare is left to mature, the decay of quality medical service like we just witnessed will be dramatic. At best it will become "average". Triage will yield "average" decisions. Treatment will be minimal or "average". Traumatic headshot wounds would never see the inside of an operating room based on quality of life and the victim's residual productivity and public value. (NIH, Emanuel)

This is the discussion that needs to happen NOW!

Gabbie would have received the "best of care".....She is exempt from Obamacare.....ALL serving on Capital Hill are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Larry Gude]

Isn't it amazing the quality of health care available for these tragic gunshot victims? There is no argument that Obamacare will change the landscape of healthcare in the future if it is allowed to survive.

There is no argument that can be made that Obamacare will improve the system we have seen engaged this last weekend. It can only degrade it.

It begs the question: Would Giffords have even survived the bureaucratic evaluation process much less the triage? Probably not.

If Obamacare is left to mature, the decay of quality medical service like we just witnessed will be dramatic. At best it will become "average". Triage will yield "average" decisions. Treatment will be minimal or "average". Traumatic headshot wounds would never see the inside of an operating room based on quality of life and the victim's residual productivity and public value. (NIH, Emanuel)

This is the discussion that needs to happen NOW!

How would you like to approach the conversation?

You are correct that Obamacare, like medicare/medicaid, are not going to make care better or cheaper. That's not the goal. The goal is to buy votes the old fashioned way; with promises of something that someone else will pay for.

But, what about the other side, a healthcare system that costs 1 out of every 5 dollars in our economy? The current system of government protected monopolies may make it better in that truck loads of money are available to constantly push the bar ever higher in terms of what can be done, especially in bad situations such as the shootings, as you mentioned, but also in dealing with heart troubles, unusual diseases, cancer treatment, etc.

It's great to have care this good but, what about food, shelter and clothing not to mention education and other day to day living costs? What about the exorbitant cost and inconvenience of even basic, simple care? We have the best healthcare in the world and we do not have a market place to match. I would argue costs will go down, service will improve and, think about this, a competitive marketplace would actually improve quality of care simply through the pressures of the marketplace to innovate and increase efficiency.

So, Obama wants more of what is wrong in the first place, government, and the other side wants the status quo. Neither is a good idea for the nation as a whole.

 

[exnodak]

How would you like to approach the conversation?

I've already approached it, and you and others are now engaged. Let's get it going.

 

[exnodak]

Gabbie would have received the "best of care".....She is exempt from Obamacare.....ALL serving on Capital Hill are!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It doesn't matter if she was serving in Washington or not. She and the others were shot in Tucson. No matter how "privileged" you are, once Obamacare kicks in the Doctors, staff, and infrastructure will become mediocre and unresponsive.

There will be no incentive for competitive excellence, which is what we just saw demonstrated. It will all be "standardized" care produced by a "standardized" federal SOP and all the Doctors and Nurses will receive a "standard" pay no matter how good they really are. All the equipment will be purchased through "standard" bidding procedure, and on, and on.

 

[aps45819]

There will be no incentive for competitive excellence.

Just like the Chevy Volt.
The all electric that's not all electric, costs $41k and has less head and leg room than the $17k Chevrolet Cruze

 

[Mongo53]

Just like the Chevy Volt.
The all electric that's not all electric, costs $41k and has less head and leg room than the $17k Chevrolet Cruze

BS, we all know Americans are dying to buy and drive electric cars, after all the dozen or so liberal activists that have bought government subsidized electric cars in the past, had nothing but glowing reviews about how they were saving the world by making their enlightened choice. We all know a secret cabal of oil industry, conservative government and Illuminati all conspire to take away those electric cars from the people. [/SARCASM]

 

[Larry Gude]

I've already approached it, and you and others are now engaged. Let's get it going.

Ok, well, there's the problems, government excess.

On the one hand, we have really good medical care if you're really sick or hurt because government has protected the industry from the free market so it's really expensive. Good but, expensive because of no competition.

On the other hand, in exchange for legislative protections, politicians demand the industry not turn anyone away and go to great lengths in treatments and adding to that, want insurers to cover hi risks and treat them as low risks and, to cover that mess, demand everyone buy certain products.

And the turd cherry on top of this treat is the third party payer system where hardly anyone pays, directly, for their health care and, of course, costs run wild.

So, we need an end to third party payer, an end to monopolies and an end to government going from promoting the general welfare to providing it.

Engaged consumers, like any other product in a free market, will seek and will balance quality and service and price and the whole problem is fixed.

My sister pointed out the huge problem with my plan; the transition from now, where costs are so incredibly high no one wants to deal with taking on the direct costs as they are in order to reap the benefits later. The catch-22 is that ONLY through the transition and the pain of it, will the health market be fixed.

We demand more and we don't want to pay for it. It will, somehow, by paid for by the rich when in actuality we all pay for it every day in every way.

Problem with a solution and no one wants to face it.