tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post116648141505286094..comments2024-01-05T04:34:50.465-08:00Comments on Economic Populist Commentary: unlawflcombatnthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09023628392835748327noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post-75674914784942029472007-04-04T15:17:00.000-07:002007-04-04T15:17:00.000-07:00Mayor McCheese,Like most posters with no tangible ...Mayor McCheese,<BR/><BR/>Like most posters with no tangible argument and no references to support their alleged "facts," you resort to personal attacks such as my being "high as a kite."<BR/><BR/>You're comment about HMO profits: "<I>if you think the other 90% of the health care dollars go only towards HMO profits you are high as a kite. </I>" is typical Right-Wing distortion of what I said. I said administrative costs were over 90%. Again, unlike you, I <B>have</B> the actual numbers. When I worked for the now defunct Universal Healthcare, the company received $70/month per Medi-Cal patient. (Almost 100% of our patients were Medi-Cal.) I had been "paneled" 2,500 patients. In case you can't do the math, I'll do it for you. <BR/><BR/>12 months x 2,500 patients x $70/patient = $2.1 million/year. My salary was $96,000/year.<BR/><BR/>My salary was 4.6% of the total amount of money the HMO received. Medications dispensed were purchased by the HMO for 1/10th to 1/20th of the price that a private individual would pay at a pharmacy. Hospital payments by the HMO were capitated (i.e., the HMO paid a fixed amount for unlimited hospital care). <BR/><BR/>Clearly payment to physicians was a minuscule part of their costs. Since we used Medical Assistants, instead of Registered Nurses, the cost for ancillary help was also relatively small. <BR/><BR/>The HMO also received special deals on lab work. The basic Chem-12 that would cost a private patient $100 cost the HMO only $5.<BR/><BR/>Yet with all of these cost controls, and limits on payouts, insurance companies and HMO's continue to raise rates at an astronomical rate. <BR/><BR/>Again, the increased cost of medical care is due to increased administrative costs, increased salaries of HMO and insurance company management, and increased profits for shareholders.unlawflcombatnthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09023628392835748327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post-1170748613348302102007-02-05T23:56:00.000-08:002007-02-05T23:56:00.000-08:00Dude, you have been predicting an imminent recessi...Dude, you have been predicting an imminent recession for the last 3 years. Don't worry, if you hang in there long enough, eventually you will be right!James B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/01475924582753322002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post-1166862060010532362006-12-23T00:21:00.000-08:002006-12-23T00:21:00.000-08:00Doctor, either you did not read what I wrote or yo...Doctor, either you did not read what I wrote or you have lost your marbles. <BR/><BR/>1. I did not mention anything about MD compensation in my post. The factoid you are touting (that MD compensation is only 9% of health care spending) I am not disputing... but it is irrelevant to my point about HMOs and administrative costs. <BR/><BR/>2. I also did not say that health care costs are rising primarily due to MD reimbursement. You are putting words in my mouth. I hope you are more attentive in listening to your patients. <BR/><BR/>3. In fact, I did not say anything very specific about what IS driving costs, I only said that HMO's/administrative costs are NOT the primary driver as you are purporting. If you want me to tell you what I DO think is driving costs I would be happy to do so... I'm not sure you are interested, though, since you appear to have made up your mind already. <BR/><BR/>4. Your commment about "corporate media propoganda" seems a little nutty. If anything, the corporate media bashes HMOs regularly. That is what you are doing now, so who is buying that lie? HMOs are not perfect, and some are worse than others, but for the most part the HMO bashing in the media (and in your blog) is misdirected and sensationalized.<BR/><BR/>5. My "alleged information" comes from the CMA and was published in the LA Times in August 2006. Let me know if you want me to send you the article. Wait, is the CMA part of your HMO conspiracy theory too?<BR/><BR/>6. There are a myriad of costs and cost drivers in the medical care system beyond MD salaries... too many to list. If you think the other 90% of the health care dollars go only towards HMO profits you are high as a kite. <BR/><BR/>From what I can tell, you had a bad experience with a former employer and you feel the need to vent...and vent... and vent some more. Perhaps you are too disgruntled and too focused on your own personal issues (i.e. how much money you make) to have a reasonable discussion with anyone else. Perhaps I am wasting my time talking to a wall.<BR/><BR/>I leave you with this, from my view, you haven't even come close to hitting on the real issues. There are larger systemic problems that need to be addressed to make our healthcare system better .. paying MDs more money has nothing at all to do with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post-1166840778354367152006-12-22T18:26:00.000-08:002006-12-22T18:26:00.000-08:00"I saw your post on patrick.net from 10/30/06 rant..."<I>I saw your post on patrick.net from 10/30/06 ranting about HMOs. I have to point out a major flaw in your argument. According to you: "The largest part of health care spending goes toward administrative costs. <BR/><BR/>That is a major myth that is no where near true.</I>"<BR/><BR/>No, in fact, I'm completely correct. The AMA has published numbers showing that physician compensation is only 9% of total health care costs. <BR/><BR/>Common sense and recent events completely support this. Medicare reimbursements, which are the basepoint for Insurance company reimbursements, were reduced by 4% this year, and have been increased much less than inflation over the last several years. I'm well aware of Medicare rates as they send me notifications of intended <B>reductions</B>. <BR/><BR/>What you're doing is popularizing a truly malignant myth that health care costs are rising due to increased reimbursements to doctors. Nothing could be further from the truth. The cost increases over the last 10 years have been almost exclusively due to increased administrative costs and other non-physician services, including pharmaceuticals. <BR/><BR/>It's really disturbing to read a post from someone who's so completely bought into the Corporate media propaganda about the cause of increased healthcare. <BR/><BR/>Private insurance reimbursements for doctors are based almost exclusively on Medicare reimbursements. If Medicare reduces rates, so do private insurers. Though insurers may pay more or less than Medicare, they use Medicare rates as their guidline. In addition, if doctors accept Medicare payments as payment, <B>they are forbidden by law</B> to charge more than the Medicare-allowed payment for services. (Doctors can "bill" for more, but they are legally prohibited from even accepting a larger amount, much less trying to collect it.)<BR/><BR/>Regarding your alleged "information," where do you think the information about the percentage of money going to medical care came from? It came from the insurance companies so they can justify raising rates, while blaiming the increase on doctors. It simply is not true, and can't possibly be true due to virtual price controls placed on physician fees by Medicare.<BR/><BR/>Also, who knows what they're including as "medical care"? They can include anything under the sun. <BR/><BR/>Also, health insurance companies are not liable for medical malpractice, despite the fact that they make <B>many</B> medical decisions. Only the physician is held liable for medical decisions, despite the fact it may have been made by an HMO administrator. <BR/><BR/>Show me a reliable source for your numbers, and what their definition is of "medical care." <BR/><BR/>When I worked for an HMO back in the late 90's, the state of California paid the HMO $2,100,000/year for the 2,500 patients I was medically and legally responsible for. I was paid a <B>fixed</B> salary (no bonuses) of $95,000/year. Where do you think the rest of that money went? To nurses? For drugs? <BR/><BR/>"<I>but you are way off target in attacking HMOs for health care cost increases.</I>"<BR/><BR/>No, <B>you</B> are way off base in your defense of HMOs. I worked for one as a physician. And I know exactly what the numbers were and what they had to pay out. HMOs and insurance companies are 100% responsible for high cost of medical care. The only "driver" of high medical costs is the profit motive of insurance companies and HMO management. <BR/><BR/>I <B>do</B> thank you for alerting me that there are people out there who are as badly misinformed as you are. <BR/><BR/>I'll try to change that.unlawflcombatnthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09023628392835748327noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post-1166833661101735892006-12-22T16:27:00.000-08:002006-12-22T16:27:00.000-08:00Mike -I saw your post on patrick.net from 10/30/06...Mike -<BR/><BR/>I saw your post on patrick.net from 10/30/06 ranting about HMOs. I have to point out a major flaw in your argument. According to you: "The largest part of health care spending goes toward administrative costs." <BR/><BR/>That is a major myth that is no where near true. In fact, a recent report by the California Medical Association published in the Los Angeles Times (August 2006) compares the five largest medical insurance programs in California ranked by the percentage of revenue spent on medical care, and the results do not support your view in the least: <BR/><BR/>Kaiser Permanente 93.0% <BR/>PacifiCare 86.1% <BR/>Health Net 85.7% <BR/>Blue Shield 83.4% <BR/>Blue Cross 78.9% <BR/><BR/>KP at 7% administrative cost is downright impressive for any business let alone health care for 8 million people... The non-profits certainly do better than the for-profits, with Blue Cross the least efficient and most questionable on profit-taking and spending. <BR/><BR/>I agree with you that there is much room for improvement in healthcare delivery and financing in the US, but you are way off target in attacking HMOs for health care cost increases. The real drivers behind the problem have nothing to do with HMOs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9411176.post-1166796981881328502006-12-22T06:16:00.000-08:002006-12-22T06:16:00.000-08:00"Meanwhile, the Corporatists and the NeoCon-Artist..."Meanwhile, the Corporatists and the NeoCon-Artists continue to claim the economy is "the strongest ever" and claim the statistics support them"<BR/><BR/><BR/>Why don't you show me where they have claimed this?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com