Posted on 04/30/2009 2:58:28 PM PDT by Bill Dupray
“I don’t know how much that hip replacement cost,” Mr. Obama said in the interview with David Leonhardt of The Times. “I would have paid out of pocket for that hip replacement, just because she’s my grandmother. Whether, sort of in the aggregate, society making those decisions to give my grandmother, or everybody else’s aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they’re terminally ill is a sustainable model is a very difficult question.”
(Excerpt) Read more at patriotroom.com ...
TRICARE is not a problem for most. It simply depends who is providing the care. I am fortunate to be located in an area where I have access to the Johns Hopkins Health Care System.
“”Whether, sort of in the aggregate, society making those decisions to give my grandmother, or everybody else’s aging grandparents or parents, a hip replacement when they’re terminally ill is a sustainable model is a very difficult question.””
Can the man not speak one sentence that makes sense? “Everybody else’s aging grandparents?” I thought he went to college - several of them. How about “anyone else’s grandparents?” “”Sort of in the aggregate - sustainable model.”” Did he never learn English?
Don’t think it would have been too difficult for him to know what the poor woman’s bills were. Who was helping her? It certainly was not him.
Well I’ll definitely take your word for it, but your experience sounds just about the same as my previous private insurer through my job. I currently have great private insurance (although nothing serious has come up yet), and I’m sure it’s way better than any gov’t insurance, but I know that’s not the case for a lot of privately insured people.
My main point is that we should compare apples-to-apples when we discuss this. Many people want to make the false comparison of “current situation = everyone gets infinite healthcare” vs. “gov’t subsidized national insurance = old people and veterans being spit on and thrown in the street”, when that’s obviously a silly comparison. There are clear trade-offs to private, public and mixed schemes, and we should be dicussing those.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/health/2006-10-18-end-of-life-costs_x.htm
Basically, it varies a lot from place to place. Hospice-oriented care is like 1/3 of the cost, and is probably the “way of the future”, so to speak, but a lot of places do a *lot* of unnecessary care and things as people near end of life. My coworker’s 80 year old mom was dying of brain cancer, for instance, and they did a bunch of operations on her in the last month she was alive. He said the total bills came to like $100,000, whereas all of her care prior to like the last three months was something like $10,000. In a situation like that, should we spend $100,000 of health resources for a hopeless situation like that? She probably would have had a much more pleasant end in hospice than in a hospital all bandaged up, but most people find it hard to think like that in that situation.
If they can't care enough whether you live, then they won't care how you die.
Exactly right. The point I was trying to make is these people can't be trusted. We have it good in the military; you can't beat "free," but its also not the rosy picture its often painted. If it is easy to discount certain people from the civilian world, why not military folks? Especially when they have shown a propensity for doing everything in their power to alienate the military. (of course they've also done everything they can to alienate the civilian sector too).
I guess I should have put in my initial post is how is the socialized healtcare going to be paid for? I mean this is coming from the same people that floated the idea of veterans paying for service connected disabilites, think the military is a great place for social experimentation (hitlery clinton), and label returning vets as terrorists.
Education was cheap until they made it "free" too. All this is going to do is create self important bureaucratic positions filled with cronyism.
My main point is that we should compare apples-to-apples when we discuss this.
I agree. However, the same government that runs the military healthcare will be the same that runs the "nationalized" healthcare, the same government that controls education etc etc etc.
I think a better course of action would be to go after frivilous lawsuits that jack up the cost of healthcare. Healthcare would be a lot more affordable if insurance premiums weren't so high due to people's expectations of miracle drugs and get-rich-quick attorneys like John Edwards and his ilk.
Socializing anything gives the government more control over the people vice the people's control over the government. It removes the idea of checks and balances and a representative government. Most certainly, it will create yet another government nightmare vehicle for fraud and waste, with little oversight.
In the end it is about power, control, and pandering for votes.
>>If they can’t care enough whether you live, then they won’t care how you die. <<
Well Morphine costs tons less than the cancer drugs I will probably need....
My father in law had kidney, bone and skin cancer (yes, all at the same time). By all accounts, he could be considered “terminal”. The cancer actually destroyed the ball joint in his hip. They replaced it, and he’s still alive 4 years later. As a result, he is able to take care of my mother in law, who just had surgery for a massive brain tumor.
I thank God that he was free to make that decision so he could be here to help her through this time.
Sometimes, you can’t put a monetary price on quality of life.
Yeah - and he probably fears that MaryJo will be there watching!
mean annual medical expenditures (1996 dollars) for persons aged 65 and older were $37,581 during the last year of life versus $7,365 for nonterminal years.
Last-year-of-life expenses constituted 22 percent of all medical expenditures nationally.
I know it’s not the exact point I made, but it illustrates the issue. Heroic measures to keep people alive for a few extra weeks are cruel, unnecessary and an enormously wasteful practice.
“It reads to me like you agree with BO. He’s saying you can pay for it out of pocket if you like, but it won’t be sustainable for the public system to pay for it. Makes sense to me.”
Fundamental problem: When the Messiah forces either me or my employer to contribute to a ‘public’ system, he is limiting my ability to pay for my own care. That’s the whole damn point. I don’t prefer to have my resources confiscated by others, who will decide for me how to best use them....in any aspect of my life, especially healthcare.
I was in the military. At the pharmacy, I was always treated like I was bothering them (no linkage between customer and payment). My wife ended up giving birth with no pain relief (nobody was on duty - heck who cares...again no linkage between patient and payment). My daughter almost died at one month old, of a heart problem. Only our nagging them and the heroic efforts of one doctor got her airlifted to an NICU in the civilian world. My wife has refused necessary kidney surgery because of an inept doctor. He had actually been fired, but still had a few months left. We had to wait him out, until we could get approval of the necessary paperwork to get the surgery. The wait caused her bad kidney to do permanent damage to her good kidney.
I have dozens of ‘botched operation’ stories; but, I’m trying to stick to problems directly linked to the ‘socialized’ nature of military medicine.
It is a complete myth that military medical care is at all better than civilian care. Period!
The dictator's "healthcare" system at its finest.
Useless eaters will be shown the door.
Right. What good are they anyway...for that matter, what good are you?
A loaded question.....and a sneaky answer....and what’s the most frustrating to me...is a bunch of Freepers fell for it all and are actually discussing the subject rather than go after what the kenyan is advocating.
Bumpity bump bump bump!
Right on!
Lol!
Wasteful to who?
Why should you or anyone other than the patient and doctor be making that decision?
Thanks! /HEAVY sarcasm
My Dad was given 5 years to live. Max. And I mean MAX.
Over 20 years ago.......
Think about the slippery slope this will take us on. This will NOT be limited to the elderly.
YOU could get cancer. Your CHILD could get cancer. You are both now terminal.
Been nice knowin’ ya!
My Dad was given 5 years to live. Max. And I mean MAX.
Over 20 years ago.......
Think about the slippery slope this will take us on. This will NOT be limited to the elderly.
YOU could get cancer. Your CHILD could get cancer. You are both now terminal.
Been nice knowin’ ya!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.