Who is really behind the protests?

#126
#126
MG1968 said:
wow, LG advocates for Federal control of the health care system out of one side of his mouth and out of the other he discovers the 10th amendment.

an OB/GYN called into a talk show I listen to, he said that he is liable for a delivery he performs for 18 years. Another, the wife of an anesthesiologist, said her husband's malpractice insurance premium is 250 thousand per year. Clearly something must be done, if nothing else, the loser-pays system should be implemented.

I agree that it's a state issue, but then again, so is universal health care.
Click to expand...

+1
 
#128
#128
allvol123 said:
Wonder how much he charges per hour?

Should we seek universal legal care? Not everyone has easy access to an attorney. A person can rack up some major bills using an attorney.
Click to expand...

He can not be billing out ANY hours. He is on here all day. If he is billing, I beleive it would be a LARGE red flag with the government that he wants to run our lives.
 
#129
#129
You guys really need to know what you are talking about before you venture into this debate. Each state has its own laws about everything from the statute of limitations to what the standard is for liability. It can vary from state to state enormously.

Florida's system involves numerous complicated steps that have to do uniquely with Florida's tort system, such as presuit screening, the requirement that an expert review the case and endorse it before it is filed, a 90 day screening process with informal discovery, elective arbitration, and caps on certain types of claims.

We even have a few state constitutional amendments having to do with access to certain kinds of hospital records, things of that nature. My point is, none of that translates eaily (if at all) to Tennesee, Michigan, Nevada, or Washington state.

The same institutional issues are not present in discussing a payor system for health care. Note that the health care reform bill does not state how one goes about delivering particular care in a particular situation -- it only collects premiums (of a sort) and provides reimbursement. The treatment is the treamtent, depending on what the doctors in your are provide to you and that has ZERO to do with whether its BCBS or Medicare that pays the tab.

Seriously, you are embarrassing yourselves trying to compare federalizing tort reform with expanding government payor systems.
 
#130
#130
lawgator1 said:
You guys really need to know what you are talking about before you venture into this debate. Each state has its own laws about everything from the statute of limitations to what the standard is for liability. It can vary from state to state enormously.

Florida's system involves numerous complicated steps that have to do uniquely with Florida's tort system, such as presuit screening, the requirement that an expert review the case and endorse it before it is filed, a 90 day screening process with informal discovery, elective arbitration, and caps on certain types of claims.

We even have a few state constitutional amendments having to do with access to certain kinds of hospital records, things of that nature. My point is, none of that translates eaily (if at all) to Tennesee, Michigan, Nevada, or Washington state.

The same institutional issues are not present in discussing a payor system for health care. Note that the health care reform bill does not state how one goes about delivering particular care in a particular situation -- it only collects premiums (of a sort) and provides reimbursement. The treatment is the treamtent, depending on what the doctors in your are provide to you and that has ZERO to do with whether its BCBS or Medicare that pays the tab.

Seriously, you are embarrassing yourselves trying to compare federalizing tort reform with expanding government payor systems.
Click to expand...

Wow, you really are an attorney. Now go out and get some billable hours instead of trying to "enlighten" us idiots.
 
#131
#131
T-TownVol said:
Wow, you really are an attorney. Now go out and get some billable hours instead of trying to "enlighten" us idiots.
Click to expand...

Oh he enjoys it. He thinks he is to us as Obama is to the masses. We are so fortunate to have him here. When gsvol spends time away from here we have LG to pick up his slack.
 
#132
#132
allvol123 said:
Oh he enjoys it. He thinks he is to us as Obama is to the masses. We are so fortunate to have him here. When gsvol spends time away from here we have LG to pick up his slack.
Click to expand...


If you ever again compare me to that buffoon, I shall reach through my computer, into the internet, and through your computer, and strangle you.
 
#135
#135
rjd970 said:
Care to actually address what he said, or are you just content with talking out of your arse?
Click to expand...

What he said pertains to Florida, like he said, it does not concern the rest of us.
The end that the talk comes out is in direct response to who I am speaking to. Can you guess where this is coming from?
 
#137
#137
T-TownVol said:
What he said pertains to Florida, like he said, it does not concern the rest of us. The end that the talk comes out is in direct response to who I am speaking to. Can you guess where this is coming from?
Click to expand...

Either you're too ignorant to understand what he said, or you really are just content with embarrassing yourself.
 
#139
#139
Tort reform will likely be very complicated for sure and i do not fully understand it. That being said I do not believe that health care costs can be addressed without some form of tort reform. Any bill that doesn't address tort should be considered incomplete at best.

I have some ideas of my own why Obama would not address TORT but does anybody else have their own theories about why it isn't included?
 
#140
#140
KB5252 said:
Tort reform will likely be very complicated for sure and i do not fully understand it. That being said I do not believe that health care costs can be addressed without some form of tort reform. Any bill that doesn't address tort should be considered incomplete at best.

I have some ideas of my own why Obama would not address TORT but does anybody else have their own theories about why it isn't included?
Click to expand...
I find it kind of odd that so many conservatives on VN think 250k max on tort reform is plenty but when that same number is used talking taxes you'd think it was barely enough to get by on hmmm.
 
#141
#141
DAVOL said:
I find it kind of odd that so many conservatives on VN think 250k max on tort reform is plenty but when that same number is used talking taxes you'd think it was barely enough to get by on hmmm.
Click to expand...

Thad probably because the two ideas are so radically different that they have no business in the same discussion.

Still unanimous.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#142
#142
The reason the impetus exists so strongly right now for the democrats is the fact that it takes absolute crisis to get America to even listen to stupidity like this. Obama risks losing the crisis and seats if he doesn't do this right now. Fortunately for America, it looks unlikely that he'll get this done now.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#143
#143
BigPapaVol said:
Thad probably because the two ideas are so radically different that they have no business in the same discussion.

Still unanimous.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
What's unanimous that you are delusional for believing in imaginary polls If it does exist please bump it back up and get back to me.I guess I'll hear from you never. lmao:post-4-1090547912:
 
#144
#144
DAVOL said:
I find it kind of odd that so many conservatives on VN think 250k max on tort reform is plenty but when that same number is used talking taxes you'd think it was barely enough to get by on hmmm.
Click to expand...

oh....OK
 
#145
#145
KB5252 said:
I have some ideas of my own why Obama would not address TORT but does anybody else have their own theories about why it isn't included?
Click to expand...

3 reasons:

1) huge amount of money from attorney lobbyists squelches any consideration of tort reform

2) many, many attorneys hold political office. including maobama himself.

3) see #1
 
#148
#148
DAVOL said:
What's unanimous that you are delusional for believing in imaginary polls If it does exist please bump it back up and get back to me.I guess I'll hear from you never. lmao:post-4-1090547912:
Click to expand...
aren't you the same clown who was spewing polls all over me during the presidential run up? Guess there was a reason for unanimity.
 
#149
#149
DAVOL said:
What's unanimous that you are delusional for believing in imaginary polls If it does exist please bump it back up and get back to me.I guess I'll hear from you never. lmao:post-4-1090547912:
Click to expand...

Don't worry, there is still hope that government will completely run your daily life!

Until then, we will still get up every day to support our family and yours!

:p
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top