Put the elderly on ice?

[News Feed]

No one has come out yet and explicitly suggested that old folks like me (I am about to turn 83) should be treated the way the Eskimos, as folklore has it, used to treat theirs: put on an ice floe and left to float away into the sunset. We are, however, coming dangerously close.

Continue reading...

 

[redrumloa]

The elderly author fears Obama's Death Panels.

The journalist Beth Baker summed up this position: "After people have lived a reasonably full life of, say, 70 to 80 years, they should be offered high quality long-term care, home care, rehabilitation and income support, but not extraordinary and expensive medical procedures."
Baker's interview with Callahan reveals one reason this line of argument should be watched with great concern: Once we set an age after which we shall provide mainly palliative care, economic pressures may well push us to ratchet down the age. If 80 was a good number a few years ago, given the huge deficit and the pressure to cut Medicare expenditures, there seems no obvious reason not to lower the cut-off age to, say, 70. And nations that have weaker economies, the logic would follow, should cut off interventionist care at an even younger age. Say, 50 for Guatemala?

 

[faethor]

With a large aging population nations are going to have to deal with lopsided systems where there might not be enough workers to pay for the eldery care. This includes not just government only systems, like Europe, but also private sector systems, such as the US. An incredible amount of work will go into staving off these diseases and improving conditions of life.

This is just one example - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-15552964 .

100 years ago the average age of death in the US was 50. Now it's nearing 80. The system has morphed and it will morph again.

The rich really have no cost prohibited options. Chris Rock talked about this in his comedy routine. His Dad was poor and while the condition was fairly mundane was sent home and died there. His mother had much worse conditions but saved because Chris was a millionaire so could afford all the treatments. -- In other words we see 'Death Panels' in the USA today! Fear 'Obama' death panels more?! Well that all depends on which side of the poverty line and insurance line the individual sits.

 

[Dammy]

The rich really have no cost prohibited options. Chris Rock talked about this in his comedy routine. His Dad was poor and while the condition was fairly mundane was sent home and died there. His mother had much worse conditions but saved because Chris was a millionaire so could afford all the treatments. -- In other words we see 'Death Panels' in the USA today! Fear 'Obama' death panels more?! Well that all depends on which side of the poverty line and insurance line the individual sits.

Obamacare is unconstitutional and unwanted by the general population. It's funny that it's public approval rating has dropped since it was signed into law. Even worse, the "cost savings" are showing up to be the fraud the conservatives said it would. The long term care portion of it was just removed because, under law, it had to be cost effective. Not only was the Obamacare sold to save so much money, that portion that was just dropped was 40% of the savings. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politic...stration-drops-long-term-health-care-program/ Then there is the 15% private insurance fee increases this year, to pay for the new "rights" under Obamacare they had to implement.

Will the rich have better health care then the poor? It happens everywhere, even down in Cuba, hell hole hospitals for the commoners, top notch medical for Communist Party members. Medicare is pretty impressive on what it pays for. Medicaid (Obamacare) is pretty sad and getting worse. Problem is Medicare is going broke in five years, things have to change. Medicare will not be there for us under 55, get use to it. It's about saving it for those 55 and older, they don't have time (or money) to change to a different system.

 

[faethor]

Obamacare is unconstitutional and unwanted by the general population.

Yes and no. At the time of passing, while close, the majority did support the new Healthcare legislation. When asked not about 'Obamacare' but particular items in the plan such as no-prior condition drops, covering College kids longer, etc. a higher majority back many of the key provisions in the plan. Additionally, when those opposed are asked why they oppose it a large minority stated the bill didn't go far enough.

Then there is the 15% private insurance fee increases this year, to pay for the new "rights" under Obamacare they had to implement.

Interesting enough this year was the end of our 3 year contract which gave us the ability to go out for bidding. The result? 25% reduction in healthcare costs across the board. Certainly not every organization is like this but clearly there is the ability to do better?

Problem is Medicare is going broke in five years, things have to change. Medicare will not be there for us under 55, get use to it. It's about saving it for those 55 and older, they don't have time (or money) to change to a different system.

We have a communist care system for our vets. Which concidentally is at the tops of satisfaction ratings. We have a single payerish type of system for Medicare/Medicaid. We have the private for profit care. Which does all it can to kick out the expensive users and force them to the government system. Thus, the costs of the system are often lopsided with the government picking up the most expensive and those in need and private with the young and healthy who are willing to pay.

I'm part of the ~40% minority who oppose the bill on the grounds that it didn't go far enough. Scrap everything move to single payer. Our first world competition, Japan and Europe, often have better Healthcare systems at half the cost. This would greatly aid US businesses when facing international competition. GM spending more than $1K/car for healthcare and Toyota spending close to $400/car for healthcare demonstrates how the savings could play out if we cut significantly cut costs as Europe and Japan have done.

 

[cecilia]

the congress are all on a socialist system
they retire from congress with FULL motherf'ing pay!
who else gets that????
they have their medical care paid for
etc ad nauseam

why do they rate when they (well, many of them) do nothing ?