Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Clusterheadaches.com
 
Search box updated Dec 3, 2011... Search ch.com with Google!
  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegisterEvent CalendarBirthday List  
 





Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 
Send Topic Print
American Healthcare debate... (Read 16235 times)
Bob P
CH.com Hall of Famer
*****
Offline


Shut up Bob!


Posts: 4573
Clio,California
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #175 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:57am
 
I'm completely happy with my medical insurance.  Have never disputed a charge or questioned a prescription.  Got O2, no questions asked.
Back to top
  

Mrs. Barlow, I never, and I repeat never, ever pissed in your steam iron.  "SHUT UP HUB!"
WWW  
IP Logged
 
deltadarlin
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


Posts: 3823
Downsville LA
Gender: female
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #176 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 8:53am
 
I'm extremely happy with our health care/insurance.   It is not cheap (over $300.00 a month for just the two of us and that's medical only) and we have a $500.00 deductible per person, then it kicks in and pays at 90% in system (we have a PPO-Preferred Provider Organization).

I have a wide range of physicians services that I can choose from.  However, all those physicians/services have a contract with our provider that state how much they can charge for services.  I

can use my last medical problems as an example.  I injured my wrist/hand.  The doctor billed $120.00 for the office visit, my insurance company excluded $77.81, covering $48.19, and given that I had met my deductible, I paid $4.82.  *If* I didn't have insurance, I would have been stuck with the original amount.

That being said, *if* they/the doctors are willing to accept that amount from my insurance company (and most likely many others).  Why not just charge that to begin with?

OTOH, my daughter has preexisting conditions, the only insurance we could get her cost $190.00 a month with a $2000.00 deductible and not much choice in doctors.  We have used the charity system, both locally and out of town.  I wouldn't send my dog to the local charity hospital, but the flagship teaching hospital is wonderful.

There's got to be a way to fix this problem.  We keep ranting about the *poor* people we'll have to subsidize when there not the problem.  It's those who fall between the cracks that make up the majority of those without health care.  The working poor (or simply those who work and cannot afford astronomical prices for insurance).
Back to top
  

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to Login or Register
 
IP Logged
 
Marc
Ex Member
****




Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #177 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 11:15am
 
Buzz wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 3:48am:
.........Profit is good. Profiteering is bad.  A modest profit made on an inefficient (and therefore expensive) system is bad. A modest profit made on an efficient system is good.............

...................


Buzz,

I understand your point and the intent behind it.

But, to whom are you willing to grant the power to make the decision of what amount of profit is OK for others to make?

Marc
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
Brew
CH.com Sponsor
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline




Posts: 14163
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #178 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 11:30am
 
Marc wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 11:15am:
I understand your point and the intent behind it.

But, to whom are you willing to grant the power to make the decision of what amount of profit is OK for others to make?

Marc

Hey! I thought your work here was done.... Grin
Back to top
  

"I have been asked if I have changed in these past 25 years. No, I am the same. Only more so."  --Ayn Rand
 
IP Logged
 
loopy
Ex Member



Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #179 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:00pm
 
deltadarlin wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 8:53am:
I'm extremely happy with our health care/insurance.   It is not cheap (over $300.00 a month for just the two of us and that's medical only) and we have a $500.00 deductible per person, then it kicks in and pays at 90% in system (we have a PPO-Preferred Provider Organization).

I have a wide range of physicians services that I can choose from.  However, all those physicians/services have a contract with our provider that state how much they can charge for services.  I

can use my last medical problems as an example.  I injured my wrist/hand.  The doctor billed $120.00 for the office visit, my insurance company excluded $77.81, covering $48.19, and given that I had met my deductible, I paid $4.82.  *If* I didn't have insurance, I would have been stuck with the original amount.

That being said, *if* they/the doctors are willing to accept that amount from my insurance company (and most likely many others).  Why not just charge that to begin with?

OTOH, my daughter has preexisting conditions, the only insurance we could get her cost $190.00 a month with a $2000.00 deductible and not much choice in doctors.  We have used the charity system, both locally and out of town.  I wouldn't send my dog to the local charity hospital, but the flagship teaching hospital is wonderful.

There's got to be a way to fix this problem.  We keep ranting about the *poor* people we'll have to subsidize when there not the problem.  It's those who fall between the cracks that make up the majority of those without health care.  The working poor (or simply those who work and cannot afford astronomical prices for insurance).


This is yet another person who is personally happy with a system that is portrayed as totally broken

Those lower rates that the doctors accept are called negotiated rates.  There are achieved through economies of scale, and are the perfect example of the free market actually providing monetary benefit to the average person (average being one of the 250+ million insured people, that is).  Unlike Medicare, these rates are pretty much what they say they are, negotiated between the insurers and the doctors and hospitals.  Like anything else, there are disputes and adjustments all the time.  Contrast this with Medicare where the rates are IMPOSED, not negotiated.

And, I have to say, $190 a month is a fantastic rate.  I was paying $2800 a month while between jobs on COBRA.  Having a pre-existing condition naturally means she *will* cost more to the insurance company.  How is it unfair to charge her more?  Or I suppose I should pay for that, right?  It's my civic duty, right?

And, of those who 'cannot afford' health insurance, I'd like to see what other things they are NOT sacrificing, like big screen TV and satellite bills, astronomical cell phone bills, drugs, hobbies, what have you.  All of us make choices, some good and some bad.  Why should I be made to pay for someone else's extremely bad choices, including what they budget for in their life?

Our system has big flaws.   But why not fix it instead of destroying it?  Socializing even more than we have already will destroy it, and will quite probably lead to many more deaths.
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
Martin
CH.com Veteran
***
Offline


Ready for anything this
world can dish!


Posts: 101
Ottawa, Ontario
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #180 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:23pm
 
Brew wrote on Sep 17th, 2009 at 3:44pm:
Buzz wrote on Sep 17th, 2009 at 3:16pm:
Good heavens!  Having access to healthcare is a sacrifice of my liberty? Being able to order O2 to alleviate a condition that restricts my life is a sacrifice of my liberty?

Giving the government the power to make critical decisions about your health care IS a sacrifice of your liberty.

I don't expect you to get it. When you start from a point of not having much liberty in the first place, your point of reference is a bit skewed.


This point always comes up... I live in Canada, socialized healthcare galore much like in the UK.  We don't have panels of experts deciding who lives and who dies, OBVIOUSLY.  Although healthcare is government run, they try to save EVERYBODY they don't prioritize and pass-up opportunites to provide health care.  They CANNOT.  We pay for it in our taxes, so I'll get the absolute best care until I kick the bucket.

The point is GOVERMENT is supposed to be representative of the people.  If you don't trust your government, that just reflects the level of trust you have in the American voter...
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
Brew
CH.com Sponsor
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline




Posts: 14163
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #181 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:39pm
 
Quote:
If you don't trust your government, that just reflects the level of trust you have in the American voter...


Well, shyaaahh!
Back to top
  

"I have been asked if I have changed in these past 25 years. No, I am the same. Only more so."  --Ayn Rand
 
IP Logged
 
loopy
Ex Member



Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #182 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:47pm
 
ding ding ding ding

get that man a prize!
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:47pm by N/A »  
 
IP Logged
 
Charlie
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


Happy to be here


Posts: 18971
Jamestown, NY
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #183 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 5:11pm
 
Quote:
Charlie, sorry but that story sounds implausible. It sounds good enough for a mention in an Obama speech, but implausible


Sorry about that. Surprise that the ambulance service was tied in with the hospital. Knock me over with a feather.

Quote:
Funny how you don't see a middle ground. Why do you feel that it needs to be one extreme or the other?


A person has been said to die every 12 minutes for lack of health care in this country. That's why.

What we have now makes me warm all over:

Insurers without serious oversight, allow everyone with cash to have a shot at competent health care, so long as it makes a whole lot of money for people with no interest in health care and doesn't kill too many of the right people.

Charlie

Back to top
  

There is nothing more satisfying than being shot at without result---Winston Churchill
135447360 mondocharlie mondocharlie  
IP Logged
 
JustNotRight
CH.com Sponsor
***
Offline


CH version 15.0.8 member
since 2005 aka GingerS224


Posts: 1300
Wilkes-Barre, Pa (USA)
Gender: female
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #184 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 5:25pm
 
Brew wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:39pm:
Quote:
If you don't trust your government, that just reflects the level of trust you have in the American voter...


Well, shyaaahh!


Not necessarily true.

**********************************
It also depends on the following:

How good or bad of a lair the politician is or was during elections.

What said politician actually does or doesn't do while in office.

The Level of Ethics in each politician.
**********************************


Personally I have more faith in the American people than I do it's elected leaders, for the reasons posted above and in previous comments I've made on this topic.


Back to top
  

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to Login or Register
An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind.
M.K. Gandhi

If you are going through hell...Just keep going
WWW JustNotRight gngr.stewart GingerS224  
IP Logged
 
Cathi_Pierce
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


Posts: 1191
x0|Oregon City|USA||0|0|OR,Oregon
Gender: female
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #185 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 6:36pm
 
NOW, we're getting somewhere!  IF you have medical insurance, you are paying a premium for that coverage, and if you have coverage, JUST LIKE YOUR HAZARD INS(aka Homeowners' Insurance), there are pages and pages of legalese attached stating what is covered and what is not, and what the limits would be in the event of a.....a..whatever, appendix removal. IS It appropriate? I hate reading that term "reasonable and customary", coz it seems their( this insurers') impression of R&C is about 10-15 yrs behind........so perhaps we need to look to the policy itself, to make some discoveries and adjustments....
BUTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT......
I still contend that, Malpractice Insurance should be outlawed! Doctors...as well as MANY other professionals-should have to have accountability...in the case of a Dr, shouldn't he earn the respect of his patients, inasmuch as, when they come to see him, he SHOULD BE very aware of their need to have him perform his very best, or it will live on his conscience till the day he dies? If a doctor is good, she deserves to be well compensated for a job well-done.....
THEN, we need to make the public aware that the legal system is there for HEINOUS, ok, GRIEVOUS acts which really SHOULD have been avoided.........and if there is a criminal act..........thumbscrews, and no license!
Anywhooo,
Just a thought.......
Cathi
Back to top
  

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away.
 
IP Logged
 
Marc
Ex Member
****




Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #186 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:29pm
 
Yep.

But we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.

Marc
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:32pm by Marc »  
 
IP Logged
 
deltadarlin
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


Posts: 3823
Downsville LA
Gender: female
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #187 - Sep 25th, 2009 at 8:07pm
 
Loopy wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 1:00pm:
The problem with this is, she should not have been penalized because the insurance co. did not follow the letter of the law.  In Louisiana, insurers can only go back one year on pre-existing conditions.  They went far beyond that, therefore she could not get decent health insurance.   We could have hired an attorney and fought this out in court, however, in the meantime, she would have been uninsured.  She ended up in the high risk pool.

[quote author=595A5A454C350 link=1253114665/179#179 date=1253898018And, of those who 'cannot afford' health insurance, I'd like to see what other things they are NOT sacrificing, like big screen TV and satellite bills, astronomical cell phone bills, drugs, hobbies, what have you.  All of us make choices, some good and some bad.  Why should I be made to pay for someone else's extremely bad choices, including what they budget for in their life?


This pony just doesn't do tricks for me any more.  Show me the statistics.  How many people on here, Ch.com, are working stiffs who don't have insurance or are under insured and cannot afford to pay for their medicine or to even see a doctor?   What about the minimum wagers that work at places that don't offer insurance?  Please don't hit me with the argument that they can get better jobs with health care.  If everybody gets a better job, then I hope you don't enjoy eating at Sonic or shopping at your local dollar store.

Cathi,
I'm going to have to disagree with you about malpractice.  There are good physicians who do no hard and are sued because something happened that noone could have foreseen or prevented.   Turn any tv on or read a magazine and you'll see an ad that reads, "child born with cerebal palsy?  The doctor may have caused this, call our law firm and we'll help you/your child get what they deserve".

As Marc said, "we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.".


Back to top
  

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to Login or Register
 
IP Logged
 
Kevin_M
CH.com Sponsor
***
Offline


withered branches grow
green again.


Posts: 8754
Michigan, USA
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #188 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 7:26am
 
Marc wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:29pm:
McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.


Don't actually know what temp it was served at back then but held now at 170-180 degrees.  Hot, don't know if that can burn.  The apple pies are held at the same degree range and can be a cautious bite.  Much hotter though if right from the oven before cooled, the filling can stick as if napalm.  I'd eat it last to be safe or at least have a cold drink handy.
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
Cathi_Pierce
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


I love YaBB 1G - SP1!


Posts: 1191
x0|Oregon City|USA||0|0|OR,Oregon
Gender: female
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #189 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 9:15am
 
Delta, My reply is this...deep pockets...again, we are living in such a litigious society, if there WERE no way to pay the aSTRONOMICAL lawsuits, don't you think they'd go away? A large portion would, I assure you! And, yes, Lawyers who jump on the "Class Action" Bandwagon would probably be out of business.
As a Realtor, my company pays Errors and Omissions Insurance. I've always had a hard time with that..isn't it MY job to be certain I represent my clients WITHOUT error?? Doesn't matter ,says my attorney, ONE chink in my armor, and the whole company could go down in flames if I don't carry E & O.
So, it's not really for ME, it's for the client who wants to make some REAL money by finding something wrong with our transaction and suing me over it...
THAT'S when I say, malpractice insurance should go away. That will get the legal bloodhounds off our scent and they can go elsewhere!
Anyway, that;'s just my take on it......
Cathi
Back to top
  

Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away.
 
IP Logged
 
Marc
Ex Member
****




Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #190 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 11:22am
 
So, who's got the guts to set the new trend and go barefoot with no liability/E&O coverage?  Wink

I worked very closely with a the 7 Eleven corporate guys awhile back. They had a HUGE fund set aside for out of court settlements of "slip and fall" lawsuits. They were getting an average of one per day. Even with video of the person spilling a liquid, then "slipping" in their own mess, they discovered that it was cheaper to pay them off than go through the expense of a lawsuit.

I just love it when attorneys become elected officials.

Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 26th, 2009 at 11:23am by Marc »  
 
IP Logged
 
monty
CH.com Hall of Famer
*****
Offline




Posts: 1056
The Swamp, Florida
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #191 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 12:14pm
 
Marc wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:29pm:
But we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.

Marc


And that is a good thing, IMO.

Quote:
McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.

McFact No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.

McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars.

McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to Login or Register


McFact #4 is very interesting - she wouldn't have sued McDonalds if they had agreed to a settlement ... for her medical bills!

Back to top
  

The outer boundary of what we currently believe is feasible is far short of what we actually must do.
 
IP Logged
 
Lobster
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline




Posts: 2417
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #192 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 12:59pm
 
In a perfect world:
- My daughter would have a pony.
- I would have a bowl of ice cream with every meal.
- My insurer would cover pre-existing conditions.

In my world:
- Our yard is too small for a pony.
- That much ice cream would make me a fat ass.
- It is not financially viable for an insurer to cover pre-existing conditions.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 26th, 2009 at 1:04pm by Lobster »  

Rock beats Scissors.
 
IP Logged
 
Lobster
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline




Posts: 2417
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #193 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 1:21pm
 
Cathi_Pierce wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 6:36pm:
I hate reading that term "reasonable and customary", coz it seems their( this insurers') impression of R&C is about 10-15 yrs behind........


A provider charges $1000 for a procedure.
The insurer instead pays a UCR, say $600.  Depending on your policy, you are likely not liable for the difference due to your fine insurer negotiating UCR rates in advance with the provider community. 

Thus I am failing to understand your position.  Is it...
1 - We should pay the billed amount, even though it would double the amount of our health care cost.
or
2 -  Health Insurers are bad, with being able to give an real specifics.
or something else?

If your insurer sucks, what did you learn when you shopped your insurance business around?
Back to top
  

Rock beats Scissors.
 
IP Logged
 
Callico
CH.com Hall of Famer
*****
Offline


Author of "Stranded at
Romson's Lodge


Posts: 4916
Aurora IL
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #194 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 1:36pm
 
monty wrote on Sep 26th, 2009 at 12:14pm:
Marc wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:29pm:
But we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.

Marc


And that is a good thing, IMO.

Quote:
McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills.

McFact No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.

McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars.

McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.

Multimedia File Viewing and Clickable Links are available for Registered Members only!!  You need to Login or Register


McFact #4 is very interesting - she wouldn't have sued McDonalds if they had agreed to a settlement ... for her medical bills!




Monty,

where does personal responsibility come in?  The reason the amount was lowered was the woman drove out of the drive with the coffee between her legs.  When she hit the brakes she squeezed her legs together and popped the top off of the coffee.  Where is that McDonald's responsibility?  Had she used the coffee in the appropriate manner she would have been fine.  I've done similarly.  Should I sue McDonalds?

Jerry
Back to top
  

"Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of dung by the clean end." Texas A&M Student (unknown)
Jerry Callison  
IP Logged
 
Charlie
CH.com Alumnus
***
Offline


Happy to be here


Posts: 18971
Jamestown, NY
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #195 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 3:21pm
 
Quote:
But we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.


I'm hoping something can be done about bankrupting MDs for mistakes. However:

Contrary to what we are told by companies that are major shareholders in the very media that reports these things, successful monster lawsuits are rare. No one reports on the guy that won $5,000 in a lawsuit, only those that are big enough to sell the latest wonder drug make a splash. "Tort Reform," as it so often called, is a fantasy for every big corporation, not just the medical profession. The magic number is usually $250,000 as the maximum. Big companies are drooling over the possibility of such a thing. They can easily come up with enough lawyers to defend their iffy behavior, while you or I cannot. The goal is simply to wear us down. When there is a possibility of some serious financial discomfort, it might pay to make deals or simply pay up to aviod embarassment. With a limit, it's worth going all the way as the plaintiff will likely be forced to give up after realizing that the lawyers will wind up with more money than they, the winner. It would be a gold mine for companies with deep pockets that know that they can handle a suit that won't be very monetarily successful to the plaintiff, no matter the outcome.

If there was ever an illustration of a double-edged sword, this is it. However, when applied to medicine, there should be something we can do but some arbitary cap isn't necessarily healthy either.

Charlie
Back to top
  

There is nothing more satisfying than being shot at without result---Winston Churchill
135447360 mondocharlie mondocharlie  
IP Logged
 
Kevin_M
CH.com Sponsor
***
Offline


withered branches grow
green again.


Posts: 8754
Michigan, USA
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #196 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 3:35pm
 
Callico wrote on Sep 26th, 2009 at 1:36pm:
Should I sue McDonalds?


I might think the holding temp has been lowered and there is a sturdier cup design now and certainly the lid, too, which can also keep it warm longer.  It would be a harder case to press than when the older design and temp was used.

In the last couple years they've gone to a more quality(?) regular coffee to compete in the market better (probably with Tim Hortons).  Competition made simply selling crappy coffee very hot for more aroma wasn't wise for more than one reason.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 26th, 2009 at 3:43pm by Kevin_M »  
 
IP Logged
 
Kevin_M
CH.com Sponsor
***
Offline


withered branches grow
green again.


Posts: 8754
Michigan, USA
Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #197 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 4:04pm
 
Charlie wrote on Sep 26th, 2009 at 3:21pm:
The goal is simply to wear us down.


Typically.


I think I caught a blurb on the radio about the Exxon/Valdez lawsuit paying out.  Quite a few recipients have passed away and most amounts seemed wonderingly if worthwhile after all the years.
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
loopy
Ex Member



Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #198 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 6:40pm
 
Charlie wrote on Sep 26th, 2009 at 3:21pm:
Quote:
But we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.


I'm hoping something can be done about bankrupting MDs for mistakes. However:

Contrary to what we are told by companies that are major shareholders in the very media that reports these things, successful monster lawsuits are rare. No one reports on the guy that won $5,000 in a lawsuit, only those that are big enough to sell the latest wonder drug make a splash. "Tort Reform," as it so often called, is a fantasy for every big corporation, not just the medical profession. The magic number is usually $250,000 as the maximum. Big companies are drooling over the possibility of such a thing. They can easily come up with enough lawyers to defend their iffy behavior, while you or I cannot. The goal is simply to wear us down. When there is a possibility of some serious financial discomfort, it might pay to make deals or simply pay up to aviod embarassment. With a limit, it's worth going all the way as the plaintiff will likely be forced to give up after realizing that the lawyers will wind up with more money than they, the winner. It would be a gold mine for companies with deep pockets that know that they can handle a suit that won't be very monetarily successful to the plaintiff, no matter the outcome.

If there was ever an illustration of a double-edged sword, this is it. However, when applied to medicine, there should be something we can do but some arbitary cap isn't necessarily healthy either.

Charlie


Tort reform is not just about the lawsuits, it's about changing the behavior of virtually mandated waste.  The cost of medical care is astronomical in part because a lot of tests are run without any statistical medical justification simply because *if* a lawsuit were to come up later, the bases were covered.

It is interesting how all of these topics can be viewed so completely differently depending on your political leanings.
Back to top
  
 
IP Logged
 
Marc
Ex Member
****




Gender: male
Re: American Healthcare debate...
Reply #199 - Sep 26th, 2009 at 7:05pm
 
monty wrote on Sep 26th, 2009 at 12:14pm:
Marc wrote on Sep 25th, 2009 at 7:29pm:
But we live in a world where a jury will award $10 million dollars to a person because McDonalds served coffee that was so hot, that she actually got burned by it.

Marc


And that is a good thing, IMO.



With this logic, all of the oil companies should be open for litigation for knowingly selling a highly flammable (explosive) product. Same with O2 suppliers - they know darn well that their product can kill people. Damn, they are evil!

Don't even start me on people who actually dare to sell pizza fresh from the oven! Melted cheese at 400 degrees makes hot coffee look like child's play.

This concept is the very basis of our fundamental disagreement. I strongly believe in personal responsibility. Others want to be taken care of and any accident is because of evil corporations. If you burn yourself with hot coffee at home, do you sue your wife?

I know that it seems outlandish to some, but fresh hot coffee is actually hot enough to burn you. Wow, what a concept - someone needs to pay!

The divide continues to grow because of very fundamental differences in opinions of personal responsibility.

Spin it with other extreme examples, or any other way you want - that is the reality today: I had an accident, so SOMEONE must pay!

Marc
Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 26th, 2009 at 7:36pm by Marc »  
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 
Send Topic Print

DISCLAIMER: All information contained on this web site is for informational purposes only.  It is in no way intended to be used as a replacement for professional medical treatment.   clusterheadaches.com makes no claims as to the scientific/clinical validity of the information on this site OR to that of the information linked to from this site.  All information taken from the internet should be discussed with a medical professional!