vimothy
yurp
Worthy piece in the New Yorker from a researcher at The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice: The Cost Conundrum, by Atul Gawande. The TDI finds no connection between cost and quality of US health care.
& yet, we're doing it.
Worthy piece in the New Yorker from a researcher at The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice: The Cost Conundrum, by Atul Gawande. The TDI finds no connection between cost and quality of US health care.
And Gates is planning to increase Army troop levels by 22k over the next two years, funded via a kind of backdoor arrangement (diverting supplemental funds originally intended for vehicle purchases), but certainly not suggestive of a reduction in defence spending in the near-term.
They received one-fifth to two-thirds more gallbladder operations, knee replacements, breast biopsies, and bladder scopes. They also received two to three times as many pacemakers, implantable defibrillators, cardiac-bypass operations, carotid endarterectomies, and coronary-artery stents. And Medicare paid for five times as many home-nurse visits. The primary cause of McAllen’s extreme costs was, very simply, the across-the-board overuse of medicine.
And Gates is planning to increase Army troop levels by 22k over the next two years, funded via a kind of backdoor arrangement (diverting supplemental funds originally intended for vehicle purchases)
Aye aye aye what a bunch of morons.
Hannan is, truly, a cunt who is beyond contempt. from a UK-pov, i gather his Sunday Telegraph mates allowed him some column inches yesterday to 'apologise' (i.e. wheedle and do damage-control, possibly ordered by trendy, caring Dave). the piece of shit should not be given the time of day.
I'm not big on tactical justifications, although I'm sure there are trillions of them...war is war is war there will always be another justification some old man will come up with for why we need to go kill people somewhere...(i'm sure this Gates dude is not the focal point of the trouble but that wasn't my point)
As far as I'm aware, he hasn't apologised -- on his Telegraph blog a few days ago he reaffirmed and clarified his position. In any case, why on earth should he apologise? I really don't understand this attitude that no one can criticise the NHS under any circumstances, or (quelle horreur!) suggest that other health care systems are better. The idea that it's beyond criticism, that it's perfect, or the best system in the world, is just tribalist nonsense. Hannan's position isn't evil or even unreasonable, it's just different from yours.
As far as I'm aware, he hasn't apologised -- on his Telegraph blog a few days ago he reaffirmed and clarified his position. In any case, why on earth should he apologise? I really don't understand this attitude that no one can criticise the NHS under any circumstances, or (quelle horreur!) suggest that other health care systems are better. The idea that it's beyond criticism, that it's perfect, or the best system in the world, is just tribalist nonsense.
there's already a war going on, it will continue to go on whether or not the Army expands, as long as it is (which is, as always, a policy decision, made by politicians, not the military) we might as well do it properly & take care of the people who are actually stuck fighting it.
also while I'm def not a fan of this particular war - mostly for practical reasons - lumping everything together into "war is war is war" is nonsense.
He's not simply saying the NHS isn't the world's best (it pretty obviously isn't), he's touring a country with the worst in the developed world and telling them they should stick with what they've got. American healthcare isn't just tomayto to our tomarto, it's a moral abomination which leaves millions of people completely uncovered and millions more severely under-insured.
Hannan's a dangerous ideologue who'd would like something similar introduced here. Evil? If I was bankrupted from ongoing medical problems, yeah, i'd probably call him that.
I'm not a fan of war, period.
you know the relevant Trotsky quote (whether or not he actually said it), I'm sure. clearly, there are things that motivate people to fight. somehow I doubt it can all be chalked up to misplaced adolescent hormones, but hey. you can be convinced of whatever you want - more power to you - but I don't think the hombres armados could, frankly, give two shits. the vast majority of soldiers aren't "fans" of war either, btw. in fact, they're usually a hell of a lot warier about it than the politicians, if only b/c they're the ones who'll actually catch the sharp end & they know the real cost.
back OT, the public option - the whole goddamn point in the first place - looks to be off the table. instead we're getting some wishy-washy business about co-ops which are then supposed to compete with private insurance giants. good luck with that. they also won't, yunno, provide insurance to the 50 million odd Americans who don't have it. I guess I'd be disappointed if I hadn't been expecting some ineffectual nonsense like this from the start. here's to another round of this in 2018.
oh &, ironically enough, it looks as if the lasting effect of the whole "death panels" business will be to keep anything about end of life counseling out of the legislation. which will only hurt - you guessed it - the very same seniors who were supposed to be euthanized by the imaginary death panels in the first place. but I guess that's the price you have to pay if you don't want the Sun Belt to turn into the Gulag Archipelago for grandmas.
Under a proposal by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D., consumer-owned nonprofit cooperatives would sell insurance in competition with private industry, not unlike the way electric and agriculture co-ops operate.
what gets my goat about Hannan is this original TV appearance in the States more than anything.
he gave succour - unintentionally or otherwise because of his own partisanship - to opponents of what is, at least, a worthy attempt to try and improve the situation in the USA
The reason Hannan went on the program is that he thinks that the current reforms won't help them at all. Just because someone criticises a proposed solution for a problem doesn't mean they think there isn't a problem, or that the problem doesn't need solving. He didn't say they should 'stick with what they've got' -- he just advised them against copying the NHS.He's not simply saying the NHS isn't the world's best (it pretty obviously isn't), he's touring a country with the worst in the developed world and telling them they should stick with what they've got.
American healthcare isn't just tomayto to our tomarto, it's a moral abomination which leaves millions of people completely uncovered and millions more severely under-insured.
Hannan's a dangerous ideologue who'd would like something similar introduced here. Evil? If I was bankrupted from ongoing medical problems, yeah, i'd probably call him that.
So what on Earth is the point of it? The bill is over 1000 pages long, creates dozens of new govt agencies, spends billions of dollars and doesn't cover the other 50m people? The money would probably be better spent just paying the 50m people's premiums for a decade, or something.back OT, the public option - the whole goddamn point in the first place - looks to be off the table. instead we're getting some wishy-washy business about co-ops which are then supposed to compete with private insurance giants. good luck with that. they also won't, yunno, provide insurance to the 50 million odd Americans who don't have it. I guess I'd be disappointed if I hadn't been expecting some ineffectual nonsense like this from the start. here's to another round of this in 2018.
The number of uninsured people is terrible, as we all know, but for those who pay, the health care is better than over here (look at waiting times, cancer survival rates). To Americans, stories of NICE denying breast cancer treatment, &c., on cost grounds are scary, because it doesn't happen over there.