Tweet
Maybe he likes it...
-
-
If it were Yngwie Ass your nose would be in it..
Comment
-
I have listened and am ready to comment so here how it go..
I have been wondering for days what does th AMA think, The American Medical Association.
Why aren't they spearheading all the debates. Why are they silent, they represent all doctors and hospitals they are the lawyers and the mouth piece for the medical association, are they not..?
Why havent -THEY- told us what -THEY THINK-??
I am upset at all the yahoos here and on the tube in the paper drolling on and on about this and that who do we listen too who knows what is best?
What do the doctors think?? about the lack of privatized medicine staring them in the pocket book..?
Fukk everybody else.
They say they are -FOR- Obamas plan, but I believe within some guidelines that have yet to be ironed out.
I believe this translates to as mentioned in this thread, Illegal Aliens clogging up the system, and what I fear and have witnessed is poeple glutting thier doctors for drugsand not taking care of themselves thru proper diet and self worth treatment of thier bodies.
Addicts and I mean JUNKIES that live in suburbia and bowl for the PTA and go to church ... like little subrban housewives with prozac to feel god about life daily, and ambien to pass out and not deal with life at night, and vicodin to ease the pain of the daily grind of nothing .
So I looked around a little bit and here is a quote from thier position.
What should be done to improve the system?
We need to control the unnecessary costs that are littering our health care system. We need to provide
quality, affordable health care for all Americans. We need to promote prevention and wellness initiatives
that can help you avoid diseases such as obesity, diabetes and cancer. And we need to protect the vital
relationship between you and your doctor, and limit interference by insurance companies and
the government.Last edited by thome; 08-20-2009, 08:54 PM.Comment
-
Well...The AMA, like the AARP, is fighting it's own membership.
Doctors seem to think Obamacare is bullshit too..
Forbes.com - Magazine Article
Doctors Versus The AMA
David Whelan, 08.17.09, 1:15 PM ET
James Klemis, an interventional cardiologist who practices in Memphis, was at a lake house on a Saturday earlier this month when he got a text message from a friend about a health care town meeting that evening. He jumped in his car and drove 45 minutes to an inner-city auditorium. There he met up with 15 of his doctor colleagues, who all showed up to give their congressman, Steve Cohen, an earful.
"It's a very poorly crafted plan that's being rushed through," Klemis says, who spoke out against what he called socialized medicine at the event.
Doctors like Klemis are organizing against ObamaCare all over the country. Yet it's without the support of the biggest national doctors lobby, the American Medical Association. Within two days of the House passing its health bill through the Energy and Commerce Committee in late July, the AMA gave the President a rare bit of good news by endorsing the bill.
It was a shock to many of the group's 250,000 doctor members. The bill contains a vigorous new public health plan for people under the age of 65. The Lewin Group, a research organization owned by UnitedHealth, estimates that the legislation would cause somewhere between 34 million and 85 million people to go from having private to government insurance and would pay doctors on average 14% less than private HMOs. This weekend, there were reports that the White House is floating the idea of reform without a public plan, though all the bills that have made it through committee contain one.
Just like the AARP has had to backtrack in its support of ObamaCare since it became clear that many older people fear they will lose Medicare benefits, the AMA has also begun to backtrack some, saying that it expects the final bill to look different. Says AMA President James Rohack in a statement: "We're at the beginning of the process, and we'll stay engaged to improve the final bill."
If the AMA can't squelch this grassroots rebellion, it might be less able, in the future, to claim to represent doctors in public policy debates. Physicians had already been concerned over increased government control of health care and the Medicare-like price setting of a new government plan. In fact, AMA leadership had been speaking out against such a public plan all year, while promoting ways to reform the insurance market and other less controversial measures. At its June House of Delegates meeting in Chicago, the doctors there had deliberately avoided endorsing one, while voting for a list of other principles.
The bill that passed through the House in July also notably offered no relief from malpractice lawsuits, the top priority of the doctors' lobby for years. President Obama had promised to consider tort reform during a conciliatory speech at the same June meeting, though the bill has not turned out to have any. "We're irate," says Klemis, an AMA member.
The president made things worse by saying doctors choose to perform surgery on patients to make money when cheaper care would be better, citing tonsillectomies and foot amputations of diabetic patients as examples. The College of Surgeons, with 74,000 members, called Obama's statement about taking out kids' tonsils for money: "ill-informed and dangerous. We were dismayed at this characterization." The Florida Medical Association, with 19,000 members, also sent an angry letter.
Historically, the AMA aggressively pushed back attempts to centralize the health care industry. It successfully opposed Harry Truman's attempt to create a national health plan in 1948 and another attempt in 1962. Doctors made it clear, and the public seemed to agree, that they should not be government workers. The AMA tried again but failed to block Lyndon Johnson's creation of Medicare in 1965, but then assumed its usual role, joining other interest groups to help foil HillaryCare in 1993.
This time around it's different, the AMA says. It supports the House bill because it expands coverage to more people (33 million uninsured would be covered, according to Lewin) and forces insurance companies to take all comers, even those with preexisting conditions. The group also secured a promise--although one that's not so secure that it's included in the cost-scoring of the bill--that Medicare would start raising its reimbursement rates for physicians over the next 10 years. If it happens, it would mean $245 billion in increased Medicare doctor payments. "The status quo is unacceptable," the group's president, Dr. James Rohack, a Texas cardiologist, said at the time of the endorsement.
The move proved costly to the AMA. It unearthed longtime tensions with doctors who see $1 trillion being spent on health care but doubt it will trickle down to help their patients or make their practices more financially viable. Right now, Medicare pays an average of $54 for sometimes hour-long appointments, says John Slatosky, a family doctor in Randleman, N.C. To pay for the new public plan, he predicts, the government will have to cut benefits from Medicare. "The AMA has stomped on primary care doctors for years," says Slatosky, who claims he's had to borrow from a bank all year to keep afloat.
An online straw poll on the doctors-only Web site Sermo.com found that 94% of 10,500 physicians polled oppose the bill. While the sample isn't scientific, and may have attracted an anti-AMA crowd, it's gotten attention as a vote of confidence against the group. The head of Sermo, Daniel Palestrant, has been on an anti-AMA rampage all summer, appearing on cable news stations to say that doctors have been sold out. Doctors aren't the reason why costs have risen or people can't find insurance, he argues: "Overall health care spending has gone up while physician salaries have gone down."
Palestrant accuses the AMA of being more concerned with keeping its seat at the White House table so it can protect its various ancillary moneymakers, like its estimated $75 million business licensing procedure codes to HMOs. (The AMA says Palestrant is upset because it ended a partnership deal with Sermo in May. Palestrant says he let the deal expire because the AMA doesn't care about its members.)
Whatever may motivate Palestrant, the anti-AMA bandwagon has picked up speed. Seven state medical associations--including those in New Jersey, Texas and Georgia--took the highly unusual step of breaking with their parent to denounce the bill. Others big ones like Arkansas' have also expressed deep skepticism, without specifically breaking with the AMA.
Several groups of specialty doctors--neurosurgeons, plastic surgeons and general surgeons--have joined the anti-ObamaCare coalition and have even been joined by two physicians who recently served as presidents of the AMA.
"The AMA," says Gregory Tarasidis, a head and neck surgeon in Greenwood, S.C. who is currently president of his state medical association, "came out too early and too strong."Comment
-
My mother............ yes I have one..#####
....has Blue Cross and the addition of the Plus Care I have read it all, but don't really remember, she is like a billion years old.
She pays nothing maybe $3.00 a script and any time she goes for a check up FREE.
Might as well call it Universal American Free Health Care.
They pay all.Our government cause she is over a certain age and that is true for all Americans.
Same if she is hospitalized whatever complete coverage.
So, if you don't need medical assistance the new medical plan is of no meaniing to you only if you get hurt...or whatever.
If you are terminal or incapacitated to the point you can't earn a living yet have a viable amount of life left sometimes decades, you can go on full dissability ( at any age,you must get a doctor to sign off that you have a dissability that is life long and incapassitating))and the goverment pays everything and your rent, and,, and, and...you just can't show a income of like 1200$ a month or something.??
If you are the kind of person who likes to be on permanent speed dial of your doctor, a system manipulator,drug addict , due to real or imagined pain or little monsters in your head you are a problem to any system.
Most people don't use the health care they got and a few make up for that 10 fold.
So I think it is all just political juice to fire thier jobs up(the politicos) with some "Important stuff down at the office today honey, gotta run...."
If all these libs care so much for the people of America (what a joke)..
Why do they hate everybody else in the world is that the next step world wide health care .....It should be or they are not jesus like at all in thier lieing bullsh!t speeches about caring for americans health ....oh yeah the rest of the world we don't care about them...
opps.shhhhhhhh!!!!
I get it a thousand points of light the new world order the dems are playing into the republicans agena of a one world goverment headed by The USA...shhhhhhh ...don't tell the narrow minde fools they think this is thier idea and is only for the americans they so love...lol
Yes One health Care For all Americans....
More like thatLast edited by thome; 08-20-2009, 09:51 PM.Comment
-
AARP is nothing more than a monthly fee to belong to a membership of a magazine designed towards oldsters, but oldsters think it is something more.
I really don't think they represent anything more than sending out that mag and making money.
To me what I have seen it is like -Tiger Beat- for the aged.
Perhaps they have opened up some debate and helped the elderly. I really am just commenting here and have no real research...?
I do know they have almost got my mom to buy some AARP insurance, to make her more covered thru blue cross, that she never needs, due to what she already has and I caught it before she sent the money.
AARP wanted her to pay for something that is free, if anyone just signs up for it.
I found in my mind...duh... that AARP getting a cut to send her paperwork to something free........ was somewhat questionable in ethics.
It is all very legal just Blue Cross thru AARP a middle man scam..?Comment
-
I was literally waiting for you to give me that exact response Ford...errr...Satan. I just fucking knew you would say that.
Which leads to a bigger question: Why would the AMA (a known right leaning org, right?) go against their own membership (of right leaning medical professionals) ? Something doesn't make sense about that, don't you think?
Is Prescott working his BCE magic down there?Comment
-
The UK equivalent of the AMA the BMA were incredibly against us getting our public healthcare and fought like mad to try and stop it.
Now the vast majority are in favor.
It's not up to the doctors pressure group. It's about the patients not about their conservative self interests.Comment
-
Ladies and Gents....
Be sure to have a say / vote / input or what have you on Universal Health Care.
The Canadian Gov't runs are system and it's poor with "hallway medicine", under paid doctors and nurses and long wait times for specialist. It's not great and it's not FREE.
The taxes we pay here are massive.
Personal income tax
Goods / Service Tax - GST
Provincial Sales Tax - PST
I'll post more on this later.
Don't let the Gov't run the system. They will fuck it up and drive it broke.Comment
-
No that is not completely true.If you are terminal or incapacitated to the point you can't earn a living yet have a viable amount of life left sometimes decades, you can go on full dissability ( at any age,you must get a doctor to sign off that you have a dissability that is life long and incapassitating))and the goverment pays everything and your rent, and,, and, and...you just can't show a income of like 1200$ a month or something.??
It is very difficult to get on disability for many if not most people. There are a few exceptions to that rule one being terminal or blind.
The type of work is often not considered. For example you cut off your fingers and you are a carpenter of 30 years. That person is not disabled and have limited choice on how to proceed after such accident. IF he or she happens to be under workman's comp at the time, there might be limited help. But not if he or she has this accident at home. There are some major flaws in thinking disability is a catch all for the disabled.
Persons on disability, DO NOT have "the government pays everything and your rent, and,, and, and..."
How much a parson receives depends on how much the person has paid in social security. If not enough the government will supplement it up just above $690 a month. They do not "pay your rent", pay your food, buy clothing, buy toilet paper. It comes from that $690. Public housing is a whole other monster. It all varies and from state to state.
What it sounds like is the people you spoke with or know are frauding the system.
And it is not a matter of "you just can't show a income of like 1200$ a month or something." To not report income is fraud. No matter if it "shows" or not.
For every $2 earned a $1 is taken from the total benefit amount. That may sound like a good deal, but when you are dealing in such small budgets, the extra costs can add up pretty quick, especially for some disabilities to be a managed in a day to day work environment. You would be surprised what is not covered.MICHAEL G. MULLENTo put it simply, we need to worry a lot less about how to communicate our actions and much more about what our actions communicate.Comment
-
Okay, to take your "logic" to the natural conclusion....
Let's get the government out of the business of DEFENSE.
ALL private armies, based on a free market system. Want to be protected? Better buy your DEFENSE INSURANCE.
ALL private roads. Why should there be a natioanl highway system? Let Halliburton build and run our highways, they're running out of wars to fuck up.
ALL private cops. Why the FUCK is the government "policing" us??? WTF?
ALL private air traffic control. The government shouldnt be in the business of telling planes when the fuck they can land!!!!!!
All private food and drug inspection. Who The Fuck does the government think they are poking around the health and safety of what we put in our bodies.
moron.Originally posted by KristyOriginally posted by cadaverdogComment
Comment