Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: BillM

The potential problem with physician owned facilities is that health care is an area where the suppliers can create their own demand — in this case by finding reasons to put patients in their hospitals. The Wall Street Journal has conducted a couple of analyses recently, one involving back surgeries, the other I don’t remember, that suggest indeed this does happen and entails considerable cost.

When this happens it is not deserving of a knee-jerk defense as free enterprise. Given the role of third-party payers — insurance and gov’t — we are all paying for whatever abuse occurs. Sorry, but I’m not willing to pay a share of that.


12 posted on 01/04/2011 10:39:20 AM PST by Curmudgeon2K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Curmudgeon2K

That is why doctors have to swear the Hippocratic oath.

So what you are saying is that we CAN trust the public sector but not the doctor? Remember, you are trusting him with the scalpel in his hand but not your wallet????


15 posted on 01/04/2011 10:54:16 AM PST by BillM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Curmudgeon2K

While that may be true consider this. I was hospitalized for 24 hours recently ( In Northern California at nonprofit community hospital). The total bill was $44,000! Between Medicare and my personal health insurance, the hospital was paid less than $5,000. The hospital won’t discuss their billing practices but you have to believe that neither of these numbers fairly represent the real cost of delivering the care I received. This whole matter raises the issue of honesty in the health care.


16 posted on 01/04/2011 11:12:39 AM PST by vette6387 (Enough Already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Curmudgeon2K

While that may be true consider this. I was hospitalized for 24 hours recently ( In Northern California at nonprofit community hospital). The total bill was $44,000! Between Medicare and my personal health insurance, the hospital was paid less than $5,000. The hospital won’t discuss their billing practices but you have to believe that neither of these numbers fairly represent the real cost of delivering the care I received. This whole matter raises the issue of honesty in the health care.


17 posted on 01/04/2011 11:12:49 AM PST by vette6387 (Enough Already!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Curmudgeon2K
So, a drug dealer or a lawyer or even a politician is allowed to own a hospital, but not a physician? Yours is a typical RINO argument for getting along with the statists.

It is always possible to come up with "pragmatic" reasons why free enterprise does not work in the current environment. This always boils down to the need for the nanny state to "protect" people from making stupid economic choices (or somehow being preyed upon by evil capitalists). By your reasoning, the government should make all economic decisions for us (since only the enlightened, benevolent government knows best).

Even if it were true that patients and insurance companies are so stupid as to always make the wrong choices in purchasing health care (or anything else, for that matter), there would still be no justification for preventing law abiding citizens from owning a legitimate business.

Given your statist sympathies, you should probably consider moving over to DU.
32 posted on 01/04/2011 6:17:06 PM PST by Ragnar54
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson