Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The very liberal AMA is against it, that's one good reason - http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/399/hsr-payment-advisory-board.pdf (broken link)
The very liberal AMA is against it, that's one good reason - http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/399/hsr-payment-advisory-board.pdf (broken link)
so saving money and improving medicare efficiency is a liberal idea
I think the Independent Payment Advisory Board is a great idea, and I am conservative about many things. It gives the country a chance to stop doing all those expensive heart surgeries on old people who don't have much time to live anyway. There is a lot of room to cut costs: those expensive artificial joints for people who don't walk much, cheaper hospice care instead of expensive hospital care, get rid of those crazy costly neonatal intensive care suites, and put a stop to all that expensive innovation in treatment and medicine.
I think the Independent Payment Advisory Board is a great idea, and I am conservative about many things. It gives the country a chance to stop doing all those expensive heart surgeries on old people who don't have much time to live anyway. There is a lot of room to cut costs: those expensive artificial joints for people who don't walk much, cheaper hospice care instead of expensive hospital care, get rid of those crazy costly neonatal intensive care suites, and put a stop to all that expensive innovation in treatment and medicine.
So you actually have no idea what the board is tasked with doing? That doesn't surprise me. Googling something takes up a whole 30 seconds to find out.
So you actually have no idea what the board is tasked with doing? That doesn't surprise me. Googling something takes up a whole 30 seconds to find out.
And you have no idea of the biography and background of the administration "expert" on this system? No concept of the cost-benefit analysis much admired by the administration, as it is used in the UK? No understanding of the kinds of limitations that exist in virtually every other country with heavy government involvement in health care?
How much money is spent on neonatal intensive care in Sweden, or England?
I'm not saying the limitations and rationing schemes and usage boards are bad, I just think it is naive to close your eyes, click your heels together, and pretend that we are about to be transported to a magical place where we get more and better care for less money. Care will be rationed by politics instead of money, so one's value to one's fellow man will be removed from the equation.
And you have no idea of the biography and background of the administration "expert" on this system? No concept of the cost-benefit analysis much admired by the administration, as it is used in the UK? No understanding of the kinds of limitations that exist in virtually every other country with heavy government involvement in health care?
How much money is spent on neonatal intensive care in Sweden, or England?
I'm not saying the limitations and rationing schemes and usage boards are bad, I just think it is naive to close your eyes, click your heels together, and pretend that we are about to be transported to a magical place where we get more and better care for less money. Care will be rationed by politics instead of money, so one's value to one's fellow man will be removed from the equation.
So improved inefficiencies and better practices are rationing and should be shunned?
The very liberal AMA is against it, that's one good reason - http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/399/hsr-payment-advisory-board.pdf (broken link)
liberal AMA. ROFLAO. While it is true that the AMA operates like a Union. It is liberal the same way the NFL player's union is liberal. Both unions only care about themselves and how much they make. They have no other political objective than to keep the money flowing to doctors and keeping the pay high. Other than that...not so much.
liberal AMA. ROFLAO. While it is true that the AMA operates like a Union. It is liberal the same way the NFL player's union is liberal. Both unions only care about themselves and how much they make. They have no other political objective than to keep the money flowing to doctors and keeping the pay high. Other than that...not so much.
The AMA is now liberal because it supported health care reform. Never mind the fact that Obama's health care law wasn't liberal.
The AMA is now liberal because it supported health care reform. Never mind the fact that Obama's health care law wasn't liberal.
They vote for whatever benefits their members. The AMA liked the final bill, which should alert everyone that the final bill was not going to be good for consumers.
The AMA loves the idea that everyone has insurance...that means that they get paid. They do not like the idea of Govt. controlled insurance because that means that their rates are regulated and they probably will get paid less.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While it is true that the AMA operates like a Union. It is liberal the same way the NFL player's union is liberal. Both unions only care about themselves and how much they make. They have no other political objective than to keep the money flowing to doctors and keeping the pay high. Other than that...not so much.
