Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Post by LucyRoo & AdamToo on Jul 16, 2007 9:15:11 GMT -5
Something I wanted to share about my nursing home experience:
(because I think part of the problem is people not talking about why our health care system makes us mad)
Frequently patients that did get government assistance for rehabilitative services would be rushed through the rehab process, and sent home sooner than they should have. I have seen too many cases where these people would return home and a few weeks or months later we would receive a funeral card for them because they had fallen and sustained an injury that they could not recover from. So even though the government had "helped" them financially, it was not good enough. A few more weeks of rehab, and confidence building and maybe they would have lived years longer.
Even though it feels as though nothing will change, so why bother..... Write your senators, and congressmen/ women, this is what we put them into office for.
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 16, 2007 10:24:24 GMT -5
lucyroo said:
Something I wanted to share about my nursing home experience:
(because I think part of the problem is people not talking about why our health care system makes us mad)
Frequently patients that did get government assistance for rehabilitative services would be rushed through the rehab process, and sent home sooner than they should have. I have seen too many cases where these people would return home and a few weeks or months later we would receive a funeral card for them because they had fallen and sustained an injury that they could not recover from. So even though the government had "helped" them financially, it was not good enough. A few more weeks of rehab, and confidence building and maybe they would have lived years longer.
Even though it feels as though nothing will change, so why bother..... Write your senators, and congressmen/ women, this is what we put them into office for.
Wow that is horrible....trained nurses and doctors sent home patients they knew were not healed and should have recieved further treatment....those nurses and doctors should be fired .....did you say anything to your boss about what you saw going on??
I believe she was describing unwritten POLICY. Not flukes.
See the movie. It will help you sound more like you know what you are talking about. Sometimes, it is not enough to have Bill O'reilly see it for you and tell you what to think about it.
Post by LucyRoo & AdamToo on Jul 16, 2007 10:49:48 GMT -5
chicagorooer said:
lucyroo said:
Something I wanted to share about my nursing home experience:
(because I think part of the problem is people not talking about why our health care system makes us mad)
Frequently patients that did get government assistance for rehabilitative services would be rushed through the rehab process, and sent home sooner than they should have. I have seen too many cases where these people would return home and a few weeks or months later we would receive a funeral card for them because they had fallen and sustained an injury that they could not recover from. So even though the government had "helped" them financially, it was not good enough. A few more weeks of rehab, and confidence building and maybe they would have lived years longer.
Even though it feels as though nothing will change, so why bother..... Write your senators, and congressmen/ women, this is what we put them into office for.
Wow that is horrible....trained nurses and doctors sent home patients they knew were not healed and should have recieved further treatment....those nurses and doctors should be fired .....did you say anything to your boss about what you saw going on??
No, "trained nurses and doctors" weren't the ones to send them home. They're insurance, Medicare, allowed them only so much rehab. Seriously though, watch the movie. You will learn something.
I have not had a chance to see the movie, ut hope to this week.
Love Moore or hate him, this movie is making people talk and think and I never think that's a bad thing. Good example - my liberal Democrat father-in-law talking to his conservative Republican sister this weekend at a cookout about the movie. They of course disagreed about many points, but when relating the film to their father who is unfortunately on the decline and probably will have to go to an assisted living/nursing facility quite soon they started to come to agreements and compromises and a-ha moments together about the future, the healthcare issues in this country and they ended up understanding and respecting o0ne another's views. Started off as a screaming match, ended with some hand squeezing over the picnic table.
I have heard Michael Moore isn't living the high life off his profits from the films... he uses the profits to make the next film. Even if he is... he makes us think and talk and discuss more than most of the craptastic summer blockbusters that are earning kadrillions (hey, if ginormous is now a word...) of bucks this year.
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 16, 2007 15:01:34 GMT -5
lucyroo said:
chicagorooer said:
Wow that is horrible....trained nurses and doctors sent home patients they knew were not healed and should have recieved further treatment....those nurses and doctors should be fired .....did you say anything to your boss about what you saw going on??
No, "trained nurses and doctors" weren't the ones to send them home. They're insurance, Medicare, allowed them only so much rehab. Seriously though, watch the movie. You will learn something.
well your statment of sent home sooner then they should have implies they had the $ available but the doctor said u need to go....The doctor or nurse should have stepped in and said this person is not healthy or rehabbed.....well that is at least what a good doctor or nurse would do!!
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 16, 2007 15:02:19 GMT -5
snoochio said:
I believe she was describing unwritten POLICY. Not flukes.
See the movie. It will help you sound more like you know what you are talking about. Sometimes, it is not enough to have Bill O'reilly see it for you and tell you what to think about it.
well your statment of sent home sooner then they should have implies they had the $ available but the doctor said u need to go....The doctor or nurse should have stepped in and said this person is not healthy or rehabbed.....well that is at least what a good doctor or nurse would do!!
Wouldn't have mattered....the insurance company would have said "our Drs say that x days is all that is necessary so that is all we will pay for. If they want to stay longer, they can pay for it." and that would be that. And the insurance company would then summarily blackball the dr, nurse etc and make sure that all the other insurance cos did the same. Not that it would matter to a "good" dr or nurse mind you...they don't need to feed their families or anything.... This happens every day in every hospital, nursing home, etc....the insurance companies are making decisions that Dr should, and used, to make. And they will override dr and hospital decisions when they don't want to pay for what they deem "extra" "excessive" or "experimental" treatments. And believe me, what they consider "extra" "excessive" and "experimental" will surprise you.....
Post by LucyRoo & AdamToo on Jul 16, 2007 20:53:41 GMT -5
It is really sad that enough therapy is deemed as excessive. I haven't personally seen the insurance documents stating it, but I listen to my patients. I remember doing home health care and one of my patients crying telling me she "got fired" from the home health care agency cause her insurance (private company) would no longer pay. It was heart breaking. She needed the care, but because she hadn't had any falls in over a year, insurance found her to be rehabilitated.
But none of this is really surprising... In a capitalistic society if somethings not paid for, no service is given.
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 16, 2007 22:06:53 GMT -5
I do aggree that inusrance companies are way out of hand and need to be "fixed" this is where the gov't can help by passing legislation....(what that is is still to be debated) This sounds logical to me....however having the gov't run the show no wayy...I don't care if santa claus runs healthcare just not the gov't.....we as americans for many decades now have asked the gov't to fix our society's ills. (drugs,homeless,poverty.healthcare,immigration,enviroment) they have solved none of these issues. In many ways it's worse b/c of their involvment. We need to fix our own problems...
Santa?? Now there's an idea...we can all ask for a new healthcare system for Christmas!!! ;D I'll put it on my list...
But seriously...I'm certainly not in favor of just handing everything over to the government and saying "fix it"...you are correct, their track record on a lot of things isn't exactly stellar. I believe I have stated somewhere earlier that I believe the only thing that will work for the US is a hybrid system....it will take more government involvment (including a combo of legistlation AND funding) BUT it will never be entirely funded nor run by the government IMO....I would LOVE someone like a Bill Gates or Steve Jobs of Health Care to come along and save us all by coming up with some new, brilliant way of doing business that no one has thought of before....but I think that might be asking a wee bit much. The for-profit health care organizations we have in this country now don't seem to be interested in overhauling anything but their profit margins in the upward direction.....
I'm a little tired of people justifying their opposition to single payer healthcare by saying the government can't do anything right. 27 years ago Reagan started this marketing ploy to reign in govt regulation and increase corporate power and Republicans have used their incompetence to validate it ever since. It's marketing genius. Since 1980 Repubs have controlled govt all but 8 years and have used the method of "the worse we do, the more you believe us." They erode the public’s trust in the system by leading poorly and turning their failures into a rallying cry for future Republican candidates. Just because Republicans, and the current administration in particular, have made a mockery of good governance is not a reason to distrust the entire system.
Clinton's FEMA was an example of efficiency to the world and even had European countries coming here to learn how to manage their system like ours. Bush comes in, fires the good managers and hires a failed and corrupt horse judge and has us blame the system when it failed.
We need to blame those who really deserve blame. The government is not evil unless we allow it to be so. The government turns bad when we elect the wrong people. Instead of letting the Republican party trick America into blaming the “system” for their colossal failures, convincing us that the government is inherently too stupid and too encumbered with bureaucracy to solve our problems, blame the real culprits. Blame those elected officials who refuse to submit to the will of the people. Blame those who trample on the Constitution, use their power for personal gain, and use the tools that we give them to help their own selfish and self-perpetuating causes. And blame ourselves for being to lazy to fight back. (though admittedly since 1980 our work schedules have increased and pay decreased so we are intentionally kept more harried and distracted.)
History shows that government can work for good. But only when it's not a spectator sport. Don't believe the hype. Don't crawl in a hole and withdraw. That's what they expect. GET OFF YOUR @ss AND PARTICIPATE.
Tom Morello shot a video for the movie at Bonnaroo this year, did that surface anywhere during the film?
I think it was to be over the final credits if I remember him correctly from the Roo. Honestly, I had been need ing to pee for much of the second half of the film and didn't want to miss anything. So I bursted out of the theatre to the bathroom as soon as the credits were about to roll. Not only do I not know if the Morello tune made it, I don't know if there was additional footage that i may have missed ?!
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 17, 2007 10:38:55 GMT -5
troo said:
Sorry in advance for the preaching but...
I'm a little tired of people justifying their opposition to single payer healthcare by saying the government can't do anything right. 27 years ago Reagan started this marketing ploy to reign in govt regulation and increase corporate power and Republicans have used their incompetence to validate it ever since. It's marketing genius. Since 1980 Repubs have controlled govt all but 8 years and have used the method of "the worse we do, the more you believe us." They erode the public’s trust in the system by leading poorly and turning their failures into a rallying cry for future Republican candidates. Just because Republicans, and the current administration in particular, have made a mockery of good governance is not a reason to distrust the entire system.
Clinton's FEMA was an example of efficiency to the world and even had European countries coming here to learn how to manage their system like ours. Bush comes in, fires the good managers and hires a failed and corrupt horse judge and has us blame the system when it failed.
We need to blame those who really deserve blame. The government is not evil unless we allow it to be so. The government turns bad when we elect the wrong people. Instead of letting the Republican party trick America into blaming the “system” for their colossal failures, convincing us that the government is inherently too stupid and too encumbered with bureaucracy to solve our problems, blame the real culprits. Blame those elected officials who refuse to submit to the will of the people. Blame those who trample on the Constitution, use their power for personal gain, and use the tools that we give them to help their own selfish and self-perpetuating causes. And blame ourselves for being to lazy to fight back. (though admittedly since 1980 our work schedules have increased and pay decreased so we are intentionally kept more harried and distracted.)
History shows that government can work for good. But only when it's not a spectator sport. Don't believe the hype. Don't crawl in a hole and withdraw. That's what they expect. GET OFF YOUR @ss AND PARTICIPATE.
I do aggree we need to all get involved. I just never ever would have thought you would be saying the gov't is good and can be trusted with our health. under clinton people were still being busted for drugs and healthcare and immigration were a mess. SO even if you like an elected official it doesn't mean things runs smooth. Clinton had good points and bad...I don't care what side of the fence u fall on or who is elected next.....they all need to stay out my business ..
for example, IF the gov't has control of healthcare this gives them much more access to my medical records which I don't want. they already tell me what substances they think are healthy for me (booze cigarettes are good to them) other things u go to jail. The gov't regulates me enough as it is , I want less involvment by them as possible.
I can see this same ole tired senario being played out.... gov't says we have no money to pay doctors we need to either cut care or raise taxes. They scare us with cutting care and kids not getting help. So guess what higher taxes. They do this all the time in chicago with the mass transit....the gov't says we need more money or we cutt service......
in private healthcare if they mismanage and can't afford to pay doctors they go out of business and I go to another doctor. If gov't runs the show which they have never proven they can do it right we get screwed 6 ways to sunday.......just my .02 cents
Chic: I knew you'd chime in. You and I always seem to get into these (which personally I like) So for a brief rebuttal;
Good government and participatory government would fix the problems you mention. During the "big government" days of FDR Americans would never have accepted the intrusions we accept today. Helpful govt has no correlation to intrusive govt. In fact while conservatives endorse small govt in lack of regulations and corporations being left alone, they also inevitably endorse stronger police state, more invasive searches, stronger drug laws and release of private records to both govt and corporate entities. (Carter, the last liberal Prez, endorse an end to the War on Drugs, Reagan increased the war with easier searches, property forfeitures, etc.)
Take for example the recent Supreme court rulings where the conservatives said corporate $$$ is free speech and "WE must always err on the side of free speech." and the same day said the Bong Hits for Jesus had no free speech protection as their speech could be hurtful. Keep in mind this was students on public porperty at a non-school function. So apparently only Corpoprate Free Speech is inviolate.
IF the gov't has control of healthcare this gives them much more access to my medical records which I don't want.
All other industrialized countries have socialized medicine and have very strong privacy protections. Unauthorized release of records is severely prosecuted. In fact, under Bush's new executive powers, the government in the US has much more ready access to medical records that other countries.
I can see this same ole tired senario being played out.... gov't says we have no money to pay doctors we need to either cut care or raise taxes.
We now pay twice what any country with socialized medicine pays for health care. The US pays about 16% of GDP while the average for others is 4%. That's and average of 4 times as much. And this doesn't cover as many as 40% of Americans adequately. So on a per capita basis we may be paying on average about 6.67 times what others pay. There is plenty of $$$ for healtchcare if we remove the profit.
I could go on about our adjusted tax rate if healthcare costs are added and the waste and rationing inherent in a for profit system but you get the point.
In summation, good, participatory govt is inevitably less wasteful and less intrusive. And besides it is just wrong that people are allowed (or encouraged) to die in this country because they do not have enough money.
in private healthcare if they mismanage and can't afford to pay doctors they go out of business and I go to another doctor.
or you die awaiting treatment while administrators(paid to make a profit, not heal people) debate over precertifying your "previously existing condition" based more on the cost to them AND your employer(cuz your rates ARE goin' up) than whether the treatment would help.
Ask folks in California how they liked the privatization and deregulation of the electric suppliers, when a business decision sent power away from where it was needed in order to spike prices and hospitals were left without power for hours on end.
for example, IF the gov't has control of healthcare this gives them much more access to my medical records which I don't want. they already tell me what substances they think are healthy for me (booze cigarettes are good to them) other things u go to jail. The gov't regulates me enough as it is , I want less involvment by them as possible.
I bet you have not read your PRIVATE insurer's PRIVACY policy very well have you ?
Among others, they retain the right to turn over information on your health to any law enforcement agency who inquires.
They retain the right to use information about your health to deny you service OR payment for service.
That means a doctor, under pressure from the insurer who pays him, may test your blood and deny you service for anything based on his inability to get paid for it. Wake up !
Not real sure why you fear the government doing any worse than that.
I am in the midst of reviewing health insurance options as part of changing jobs. Of four Major insurers that I have to choose from, NONE OF THEM WILL PAY ANYTHING TOWARDS A YEARLY PHYSICAL OR LABWORK. My copay has doubled no matter who I choose. The only medication I require is NOT paid for at all.
And I'm very lucky to have it.
And maybe you'd like to privatize the fire department so only the insured get saved....
Post by stallion pt. 2 on Jul 17, 2007 12:40:03 GMT -5
Wow...This is one of the healthiest (no pun intended) debates I have ever seen on a message board. Karma to everyone for staying civil.
I think Chicago's distrust of the gov't is at the core of the issue. Many people on both sides of the spectrum in America are convinced that the gov't will only do them harm (and the way things have been run since Nixon its not surprising). The problem is handing things over to corporations, while at the same time removing gov't regulation of those corps, sets up an infinatly worse scenereo.
Every argument Chicago has against the gov't (inept, poor management, a lack of privacy etc) has an equal example in the private sector. The problem is the private sector is not accountable to anyone except their profit margin. If you don't like what the gov't is doing, you can at leat try to affect positive change. With corps you don't have that option. You can take yr business somewhere else as Chicago suggested. but with insurance providers, deregulation has insured that your employer likely has one company you can sign up with, or you can seek private insurance at thrice the price. That's still no guarentee they won't deny you b/c of preexisting conditions, and even if you are accepted the second you get sick you will be catagorically denied on any claim until the company's private investigators can dig up your medical past and se it against you to prove you did have a preexisting condition.
Until the people of this country can get their heads together and realize the gov't is not our enemy, but a tool we are meant to use to affect positive change and provide BASIC HUMAN NECESSITIES (like health care) for the people, we will always be waiting for the free market to take care of us and will always be left hanging.
John: We don't even understand our own music Spider: It doesn't, does it matter whether we understand it? At least it'll give us . . . strength John: I know but maybe we could get into it more if we understood it
Agreed. Unfortunately, the government IS the private sector. Until any of us can raise enough money to offer the everextended hands of politicians, private industry will make our laws. How does a candidate dispell what his opponent has slandered him/her with ? By buying tv time and hiring PR firms that cost millions. There are infintessimally few poor people in government. It is no secret that politicians look forward to the day when they retire from "public service" to work for a lobbying firm so as to peddle the influence they have built and governmental ties they exploit. Why ya think Cheney will die before he reveals how our current energy policy was made ?
Even governmental agencies charged with protecting us have used their roles as greasing points for lobbyists !! That's why, since Reagan, so much PUBLIC PROPERTY in the form of national parks has been turned over to PRIVATE mineral and power interest. US Forest Service ? Policy just changed for the benefit of Timber companies. AD INFINITEM
And TROO couldn't be more right on about the right wing becoming masters of using peoples' ignorance against them. All the while having their cheerleaders scream about the evils of too much government.
Last Edit: Jul 17, 2007 13:06:56 GMT -5 by snoochio - Back to Top
Post by stallion pt. 2 on Jul 17, 2007 13:45:17 GMT -5
snoochio said:
Unfortunately, the government IS the private sector.
This is true, and its the biggest scam ever pulled on the American people. To quote Utah Phillips...."we elect people to go to Washington - who are those assh0les? What have we gotten ourselves into now? They go to Washington, they lease off what we own - public property - to private companies, to sell us back our own stuff for the sake of a greasy buck! That's dumb!"
John: We don't even understand our own music Spider: It doesn't, does it matter whether we understand it? At least it'll give us . . . strength John: I know but maybe we could get into it more if we understood it
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 17, 2007 13:48:54 GMT -5
stallion said:
Wow...This is one of the healthiest (no pun intended) debates I have ever seen on a message board. Karma to everyone for staying civil.
I think Chicago's distrust of the gov't is at the core of the issue. Many people on both sides of the spectrum in America are convinced that the gov't will only do them harm (and the way things have been run since Nixon its not surprising). The problem is handing things over to corporations, while at the same time removing gov't regulation of those corps, sets up an infinatly worse scenereo.
Every argument Chicago has against the gov't (inept, poor management, a lack of privacy etc) has an equal example in the private sector. The problem is the private sector is not accountable to anyone except their profit margin. If you don't like what the gov't is doing, you can at leat try to affect positive change. With corps you don't have that option. You can take yr business somewhere else as Chicago suggested. but with insurance providers, deregulation has insured that your employer likely has one company you can sign up with, or you can seek private insurance at thrice the price. That's still no guarentee they won't deny you b/c of preexisting conditions, and even if you are accepted the second you get sick you will be catagorically denied on any claim until the company's private investigators can dig up your medical past and se it against you to prove you did have a preexisting condition.
Until the people of this country can get their heads together and realize the gov't is not our enemy, but a tool we are meant to use to affect positive change and provide BASIC HUMAN NECESSITIES (like health care) for the people, we will always be waiting for the free market to take care of us and will always be left hanging.
U have me right I have a huge distrust for the gov't to handle any organization (DMV,social security,) the list is endless. Please can anybody tell me a current successful gov't organization??
It is weird for me to see people on this board saying we need to trust the gov't....we need to elect good leaders and work with gov't.....my karma is where it is today because I support the war in Iraq.....so if u hate the way Bush and the republicans have run the country don't u find it risky to put your healthcare in their hands? Bush is the current president so u can say what if u hate the furture president and his policies
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 17, 2007 13:53:26 GMT -5
snoochio said:
chicagorooer said:
for example, IF the gov't has control of healthcare this gives them much more access to my medical records which I don't want. they already tell me what substances they think are healthy for me (booze cigarettes are good to them) other things u go to jail. The gov't regulates me enough as it is , I want less involvment by them as possible.
I bet you have not read your PRIVATE insurer's PRIVACY policy very well have you ?
Among others, they retain the right to turn over information on your health to any law enforcement agency who inquires.
They retain the right to use information about your health to deny you service OR payment for service.
That means a doctor, under pressure from the insurer who pays him, may test your blood and deny you service for anything based on his inability to get paid for it. Wake up !
Not real sure why you fear the government doing any worse than that.
I am in the midst of reviewing health insurance options as part of changing jobs. Of four Major insurers that I have to choose from, NONE OF THEM WILL PAY ANYTHING TOWARDS A YEARLY PHYSICAL OR LABWORK. My copay has doubled no matter who I choose. The only medication I require is NOT paid for at all.
And I'm very lucky to have it.
And maybe you'd like to privatize the fire department so only the insured get saved....
Snoochio I am sure people have problems with their healthcare policies. I just haven't been exsposed which lead me to believe this cases are more on the rare side......My father had open heart surgery...no problem with medicine coverage anything....I have not heard one person in my family indicate insurance didn't cover what they should have...sure there may have been so wrangling and discussion but never any serious issues.......I hope i can keep up this streak
The point has been made that they are not mutually exclusive. We CAN not kill Iraqi's based on false pretenses and still provide healthcare not based on wealth.
Your mother was a hamster and your father reeks of elderberries !
Post by chicagorooer on Jul 17, 2007 13:55:53 GMT -5
snoochio said:
The point has been made that they are not mutually exclusive. We CAN not kill Iraqi's based on false pretenses and still provide healthcare not based on wealth.
Your mother was a hamster and your father reeks of elderberries !
jason u never fail to make me smile... weren't u banned???
Unfortunately, the government IS the private sector.
This is true, and its the biggest scam ever pulled on the American people. To quote Utah Phillips...."we elect people to go to Washington - who are those assh0les? What have we gotten ourselves into now? They go to Washington, they lease off what we own - public property - to private companies, to sell us back our own stuff for the sake of a greasy buck! That's dumb!"
--edit for spacing issues
utah phillips rocks. ever check out william burrough's spoken word stuff ?
Loves me some woody guthrie, bruce springsteen, and newly tom morello !
Post by stallion pt. 2 on Jul 17, 2007 14:09:36 GMT -5
It's about accountablility. Yes, I oppose the war in Iraq and don't trust Bush to handle it. At the same time I trust the folks at Blackwater who are also "handling it" EVEN LESS. edit--Also you say Bush and the Republicans as if that were our only choice in gov't. I'm hoping we can do better than a priviliged son and his business buddies running the show.
And for the record, municipal fire and police, the Interstate system, public libraries, public broadcasting, The Tennesse Valley Authority and rural electrification are all examples of public projects that did work. I challange you to explain to me how a for-profit corperation can be expected to take care of public health when their business charter speciffically states they are leaglly bound to only increase their shareholder value.
I'm not saying the private corps have no place in the picture. I don't want the gov't to run the pharmaceutical corps for example. But I do expect them to regulate the industry and keep prices low enough that medicine does not become a privilage of the rich. HMOs and insurance corps are another story. They have got to go. Their only job is to prevent people from receiving care to keep down the bottom line.
edit---Yeah, I really dig Burroughs' spoken word stuff as well, esp his album w/ the Disposable Heroes of HipHoprisy.
John: We don't even understand our own music Spider: It doesn't, does it matter whether we understand it? At least it'll give us . . . strength John: I know but maybe we could get into it more if we understood it
Now there's an idea...we can all ask for a new healthcare system for Christmas!!! ;D I'll put it on my list...
