Welcome to Gaia! ::

Health care is still private, so these provisions won't effect much yet. It sounds like this is the "cutting the waste" in medicare that Obama promised back in his campaign.

This also sets the stage for the type of government price controls and regulation that will be more powerful under a national insurance scheme.


This article and these points are spun way out of proportion by the capitalist fat cats who line their pockets with insurance industry dollars. The fact is, under the current system, doctors are intentionally withholding treatment to people in order to keep costs down for the insurance companies. I see this as worse. Besides...the UK does this and they are healthier and have a higher life expectancy than the US, so I doubt the risk to seniors is that great.

Actually name calling adds a lot to a debate....

doctors withhold treatment because they get preferred treatment by insurance companies. Insurance policies often have a clause that they get to refer you to their preferred doctors. Doctors make a lot of money by being on these lists because the insurance company will send more customers...err patients their way
Here is a rather more fair minded summary of the situation than I would give.

in order to keep the unholy alliance between doctors and insurance companies from killing you, you have to be like this and become a amateur contract lawyer just to be treated for your illnesses.

so yeah, facts are good in a debate. Facts and their accompanying explanation were called ethos and logos by some famous philosopher guy who Im sure you've heard of. Pathos, the third of that trinity is all about emotional appeal. I think it valid rhetoric to summarize my position on doctor/HMO anti-patient collusion by calling them "greedy fat cats." its apt I think.

its pathos, an appeal to emotion. You attempt to sway your audience by using language that invokes emotions. Its of very limited use on its own, especially to a fact driven person like yourself, but it works well with the other two forms of persuasion, ethos (authority/credibility) and logos (logic). I gave a set of facts and my logical interpretation of what they meant. My goal is to ultimately make you hate/despise the practice as much as myself, so I conclude my analysis with a judgment (like greedy). If I do my job well, I can convince an audience to come to the same judgment of these facts as myself. I want you to think they are greedy so I call them greedy.

The fat cat image is also useful I think. The image of a fat, well fed housecat laying around looking pleased with itself and not giving a rats arse about others goes well with the image of a corporate vp telling doctors that if they can reduce the amount of patient claims on their policies (by withholding treatment) they will get a bonus. Just imagine the fat cat smile of satisfaction as the doctor agrees to betray her duty as the patient's advocate in exchange for money. The fat cat licks its lips, knowing that as soon as it is finished here it will get its next meal by having a policy of denying claims prima facia, and putting the burden on the policy holder to appeal that decision. Afterall, few people actually read their policy, and there is always the chance, that by delaying care, a person will die before the legal issues are worked out. Which is a win for the fat cat.

I have enough issues with the government as it stands, I'm not looking for another.