45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul.
Two of every three practicing physicians oppose the medical overhaul plan under consideration in Washington, and hundreds of thousands would think about shutting down their practices or retiring early if it were adopted, a new IBD/TIPP Poll has found.
It also calls into question whether an overhaul is even doable; 72% of the doctors polled disagree with the administration's claim that the government can cover 47 million more people with better-quality care at lower cost.
So many debates...so many elephants in the room. The reality is that we ALREADY have a shortage of doctors in the U.S., and even if "only" 10% of them decided to call it quits if/when Congress and Obama enact any kind of reform legislation it would be a disaster of epic proportions to our heathcare system.
The other issue that doesn't seem to interest many people is the "economies of scale". The U.S. is not Canada, France or Sweden. We're BIG. It is one thing to allow the Canadian government - overseeing a population of 33 million - to set price limits on medical providers and producers of drugs; quite another thing altogether to do the same in the primary market - that is 10x the size! The result won't be merely an inability to compete. Some companies will simply go out of business.
As imperfect as our current system is - and I don't mean to suggest that reforms shouldn't be made to improve access, affordability and efficiency - allowing the government, as opposed to the market, to dictate those changes will no doubt lead to unintended consequences...that may just make you SICK!
Contributed by littleoldlady
Ah, that explains that population question I was asked this morning. Well said littleoldlady, well said.
ReplyDeleteSure, just let my Thread O' Awesome wither on the vine. I get it. Excuse me while I go to the back of the bus.
ReplyDeleteExcellent job, lol.
ReplyDeleteI know there are people who were considering medicine as a career that have abandoned those plans at this point, and who could blame them?
(And in case it isn't obvious, Bare is kidding. LOL)
But before I slink off, allow me to acknowledge how wonderful Little Old Lady's contribution is - great article, LoL!
ReplyDeleteFree Government Health Care is to Die for.
ReplyDeleteFree Government Health Care is to Die for.
ReplyDeleteLOL. Excellent line.
Kos has a big story about The New England Journal of Medicine released a poll saying 73% of doctors support a public insurance plan. Of course they don't mention that the NEJM is highly politicized, venturing into areas such as gun control and global warming.
ReplyDeleteDoctors on Coverage — Physicians’ Views on a New Public Insurance Option and Medicare Expansion
Am I the only one who thinks this health insurance scheme amounts to a POWER GRAB, and that's about it?
ReplyDeleteI honestly don't think the Democrats care what doctors might think about it.
Please, prove me wrong.
Update: "After seeing reports about ACORN's actions in San Bernardino, I've asked Atty Gen Brown to investigate their activities statewide." - The Governator, on Twitter
ReplyDeleteNot entirely off-topic, since the SEIU does represent some health care workers in some areas.
I honestly don't think the Democrats care what doctors might think about it.
ReplyDeleteOf course they dont' care (unless the doctor agrees with them) - they know far more about health care than any doctor or nurse. They are experts on any and every field. Just ask them, they'll tell you.
If you were trying to increase your control over a population, what would you do?
ReplyDeleteCorrespondence Committee said...
ReplyDeleteWith Obama's budget and stimulus the % of GDP that Gov't consumes is at 45%.
Roll the health care portion of the the economy at 17% into the gov't sector and 61% of GDP will go to gov't.
It's a power grab, but it's not really that they want to control health care per se. It's they (the leftist) they want control over individuals, so the individual comes to them for their needs.
Unfortunately too many are willing to sell a lot of their liberty for a little health care.
Those who would give up ESSENTIAL LIBERTY, to purchase a little TEMPORARY SAFETY, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
Ben Franklin, the complete citation.
Wonderful write-up and thread topic, littleoldlady.
ReplyDeleteDoes this administration have anything positive associated with it? Anything?
Running Bare said...
ReplyDeleteSEIU claims to represent some health care workers in some areas.
FIFY..
Correspondence Committee said...
ReplyDeleteThe soft way is would be to start taking over essential private sector functions, so that the population becomes dependent on gov't.
Do it incrimentally, do it for a "good" cause or to mitigate a "crisis."
That's one way.....
Weird. The way I was trained in my younger days was to disrupt society, and essential services as much as possible, causing the government to crack down on individual and collective liberties more and more in response, repeat as necessary, until more and more of the population is on your side and wanting to fight against the oppressive government... then when you finally overthrow it, dont' give back the liberties that were lost, but rather tighten the grip even more.
ReplyDeleteBut I suppose this way works just as well.
Do it incrimentally, do it for a "good" cause or to mitigate a "crisis."
ReplyDeleteThe road to hell is paved with good intentions. All this talk of rights and needs is blinding the population to what is really happening. Sure it's just health insurance now. People tend to forget that the people cutting the cheques for medical services tend to dictate how much funding goes toward providing those services. In the end it's all about how much money they are willing to spend to cover costs.
JCM, I'm right on that page with you.
ReplyDeleteOne of the primary things I would do if I meant to exert control on a population would be to force citizens into a state of dependency for life's essentials.
The recipe the Democrats seem to be putting together is one I really, really don't like the taste of.
I would like to believe they want an America perhaps not identical to the one I want, but close enough that it would be recognizable to me. I'm sorry, though - I just don't see it. They seem to want something else entirely.
From the AP: Pelosi worried about angry health care rhetoric
ReplyDeleteHouse Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday that the anti-government rhetoric over President Barack Obama's health care reform effort is concerning because it reminds her of the violent debate over gay rights that roiled San Francisco in the 1970s.
Anyone voicing hateful or violent rhetoric, she told reporters, must take responsibility for the results.
"I have concerns about some of the language that is being used because I saw this myself in the late '70s in San Francisco," Pelosi said, suddenly speaking quietly. "This kind of rhetoric was very frightening" and created a climate in which violence took place, she said.
The following paragraphs then go on to talk about the assassination of Harvey Milk.
So now, being against health care "reform" is not only racist, but anti-gay as well.
Some incremental reforms, least we be accused of "no-ism."
ReplyDelete* Nationwide insurance access and pools.
* Limit abuse of pre-existing condition clauses.
Extend corporate insurance tax breaks to individuals.
* Tort reform, limit punitive damages.
* Increase portability.
* Allow physicians who do medicare and other gov't sponsored plans to also do fee for service.
That's just a couple of ideas.
I think it was William Pitt who said something like "Necessity is the plea of tyrants and the creed of slaves".
ReplyDeleteGet ready, this isn't over by a long shot. There are people in this admin who have serious messiah complexes. Cass Sunstein, for example, a proponent of libertarian paternalism. That is a school of thought that thinks the will of the individual can be abridged in the service of making 'better decisions'. He even wrote a book about it. Hit Amazon and look up 'Nudge'. Guess who gets to decide what the 'better' decisions are.
His book of essays on animal rights used an essay from Peter Singer. Singer wrote an entire book on 'Animal Liberation' that made the argument animals should not be killed for food or anything else.
But infanticide (up until the age of 2, when the little darlings can imagine 'tomorrow') and euthanasia for the disabled - oh, he's down with that in the cause of decreasing suffering.
Trust me on this.
This is just the beginning. I have nightmares.
This is just the beginning. I have nightmares.
ReplyDeleteAs do I. People need to remember that this is the Margaret Sanger worshippers running things. The Eugenics crowd - Poor? Minority? Disabled? Severe learning disabilities? Well, sorry. No resources for you.
P.S.
ReplyDeletePelosi's office did not immediately respond to a request for examples of contemporary statements that reminded the speaker of the rhetoric of 1970s San Francisco.
Go figure.
Anyone voicing hateful or violent rhetoric, she told reporters, must take responsibility for the results.
ReplyDeleteI'm guessing she's exempt?
Okay, here's some facts and numbers from Canada on MRI's. In 2001, we had something like 2.5 machines per million. In Ontario, they DOUBLED the funding for scans and barely changed the figures of diagnosises of the target population of 'poor' people. In fact the gap widened. Canada, going back to the first link, ranks 19th out of OECD countries when it comes to MRI machines. There you have government run healthcare in a nutshell. A diagnostic device to improve treatment and it has massive waiting lists, and few places that it can be done.
ReplyDeleteAtillaTheHoney said...
ReplyDeleteLook at the Netherlands, 1000 cases each year of involuntary euthanasia (murder).
Look at the details in infantmortality, many other countries don't count the infant a "live birth" until it's a day or two old. Especially distressed or premature infants. We count anyone born with a heart beat, and if they die 5 minutes or 5 days later it counts as an infant death.
Agreed Peter Singer's stuff is chilling and he's a medical ethicist at a Ivy League school.
My 3 year old adopted daughter was born drug affected, 2 months premature with severe abdomenal issues.
ReplyDeleteShe was given only a slim chance to live, only hours if nothing was done.
Her mother was homeless and a druggie. Zero insurance other than the charity funds of the hospital, and what state support via Medicad there is for that type of situation.
Within hours of birth she was in surgery, during a 8 hour procedure the necrotic and damaged tissue was removed, a colonstomy put in to give her a better chance to heal.
After two month in the Neonatal intensive care unit we brought her home.
As I said she's now three, prefectly healthy and stubborn as all heck.
That's how she was treated with no insurance and a homeless druggie mom at one of the best hospitals in Seattle.
Looking around at all the gov't run systems I frankly don't see those resources being expended on premature, critically ill infants.
That type of care and treatment is the norm in this country, not the exception.
Years and years of vile anti-Bush rhetoric gets a yawn from these people - but suddenly, we need to take the microscope to this dissent thingy.
ReplyDeleteDoes anyone else think this is a coordinated effort?
I'd like to see their inter-party memos right about now.
Breaking: House votes to suspend payments to ACORN
ReplyDeleteSeventy-five no votes on that, by the way.
ReplyDeleteAll Democrats, guess who.
Correspondence Committee said...
ReplyDeleteNext we need 50 Secretaries of State to no longer accept voter registrations from ACORN.
Ah, good news on that ACORN funding. May their collapse bring down all the rot that they have been part of. Could be the start of a chain reaction.
ReplyDeleteThe roll is just what you'd expect: McDermott, Stark, Waters, Ellison, Waxman...seventy-five no votes on the D side.
ReplyDeleteSeveral voted yes though - the press just got too bad for them, I guess.
Well it's time for me to bail. See you folks in a little while maybe. Pay day today so it's time to pick up on my bi-weekly medication.
ReplyDelete/mmmmmm rum.....
Well, JCM, I've just spent some time in tears.
ReplyDeleteokey dokey. Let's move on. (And I'm following up on the Netherlands thing, tho' I don't know what good it will do)
Ok, wait, let's not move on. Can I say something? No? Tough shit.
{Bare}
One of the uncountable blessings of my life is the parents I was entrusted to. They were older than the parents of my birth cohort and that was a good thing. They gave me history.
They were born in 1915.
Dad's first wife cheated on him so he divorced her. But you know how he did it? He got an annullment because she was epileptic. The man was a gentleman and would not label her with a 'scarlet letter' of divorce. But here is the point - people with that disease - and others with other diseases - were forbidden from marrying. By law. In Pennsylvania.
I don't know how we value anything if we don't value life. In whatever form it is given to us. If life becomes a metric, then what does that make us?
Nancy has the sniffles.
ReplyDeletePelosi Chokes Up Warning Against Political Violence
Link didn't work, cut & paste.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/17/pelosi_chokes_up_warning_against_political_violence.html
AtillaTheHoney said...
ReplyDeleteI don't know how we value anything if we don't value life. In whatever form it is given to us. If life becomes a metric, then what does that make us?
Locke then Jefferson uttered the essential rights:
Life
Liberty
But now it seems those come with "fine print."
To quote Mrs. Squatch,
ReplyDelete"I'd rather walk through hell wearing a gasoline G-string than have Government-run health care."
IAEA's poor nations split on Iran's attack ban bid
ReplyDeleteVIENNA (Reuters) - An Iranian attempt to ban attacks on nuclear sites suffered a setback on Wednesday when fellow developing nations declined as a bloc to endorse a draft resolution, diplomats said.
FAIL.
Ok wait. I'm missing the whole Pelosi thing.
ReplyDeleteSomebody give me a link. Here's a throwaway emal.
alder6354@yahoo.com.
Good Afternoon C2ers. Just read a report about Iran from the UN. When is 44 going to start being a President and stop being a community activist? I pray to God it is before another attack happens to the US or Israel.
ReplyDeleteErik
ReplyDeleteForget about it. This guy never intended to be the President of the US.
New thread upstairs, guys. Time for a drink or two.
ReplyDeleteBack to that libertarian paternalism thing...
ReplyDeleteIt is a complete oxymoron. The left has a habit of attemtping to redefine words and concepts that just sets my hair on fire. What's next? Totalitarian Anarchism?