Without Bush to kick around

Gonz said:
Did you personally investigate every one of these claims?

If not, then, according to spikes rules, you are lying.
Click to expand...

Yeah that's it, avoid the questions posed, shift attention so someone else's inconsistancy. Typical of someone who has no real answer....
 
randomJACKASS said:
Read the fucking thread I haven't got time for your nonsense.

Here's a clue: post #157
Click to expand...

Preposterous!

Statistically insignifigant? That is until it happens to you or one of yours! You aren't very thorough in you statistics. You don't account for this being data compiled from just three companies. You don't account for the vast majority of paid claims being ones that the insurance company can settle cheaply and still keep those premiums rolling in. You also don't count all the probably 100K that they tried to weasel out of but could not! You are looking at only what you want to see that supports your narrow minded view of the situation and telling us that 20,000 people who got fucked over because of legalese, and the predatory practices of the company that is supposed to be protecting, is STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT?

I hate myself for this, but all you folks with this attitude, I hope rescission, hits close to home!
Click to expand...

There's a question?
 
Tort reform is a double edged sword.

While the ridiculous suits that float around (hot coffee at McDonalds) need to be stopped, there are a few that require large payouts to get the attention of the accused.

The reason I'm unsure of what measures to take is OTC. I guuran-damn-tee that what you see as criminal malpractice (as an example) and what I ses are worlds apart. more often than not.
 
Gonz said:
Tort reform is a double edged sword.

While the ridiculous suits that float around (hot coffee at McDonalds) need to be stopped, there are a few that require large payouts to get the attention of the accused.

The reason I'm unsure of what measures to take is OTC. I guuran-damn-tee that what you see as criminal malpractice (as an example) and what I ses are worlds apart. more often than not.
Click to expand...

Well my major point is that, even in cases of loss of life, 100 million dollar payouts are ludicrous, how about a one mil cap? I doubt we'd be as far off as you think on the malpractice thing. The standard would be simply can you prove in court that the doctor knowingly acted negligently, or with disregard to the patient. If it can win a civil suit, in this day and age of computer records and such, it ought to be pretty clear it would be worth trying criminally.

Where I think you and I would differ is what should be the consequences to the doctor? I mean if a doctor does screw up, but it can be proven that there were some mitigating circumstances, or it was an honest mistake (yes that happens). Short or intermediate prison terms and or required uncompensated community service could be useful. Leave them the license unless it rises to the level of gross malpractice or incompetence. The way things are so far as I have heard nowadays is two lawsuits and you lose your license. Yes we do have to make the consequences of this serious, but until the incentive to cash in big is removed we will all pay for the nonsense.
 
randomJACKASS said:
Well my major point is that, even in cases of loss of life, 100 million dollar payouts are ludicrous, how about a one mil cap?
Click to expand...

A one million dollar jury award, to someone making $37,000,000/year is cost of business expenses. Especially when the defendent is, typically, insured for well more than that.

I'd prefer completely outlawing class action suits. The only winners there are attorneys.

randomJACKASS said:
negligently
Click to expand...

That's a hard word to define. Acting with purposeful intent is a better barometer. Havign a bad day should not get a competent doctor treated as if he's a boob.


randomJACKASS said:
If it can win a civil suit, in this day and age of computer records and such, it ought to be pretty clear it would be worth trying criminally.
Click to expand...

Civil = preponderance of the evidence & 9/12 verdicts.
Criminal = beyond a reasonable dount & 12/12.

That's why so many lawsuits suck. Convince, bribe or coerce 3/4 of the jury & you've won. I'd rather see it 12/12 & loser pays.

However, turn an accident into a crime & you'll see nothing get done. If ram a van full of nuns wiith my big truck, due to a moments lapse in judgement, after 20+ years of accident free driving, do you think I'll keep driving a big rig & take a chance of getting thrown in jail?

randomJACKASS said:
required uncompensated community service
Click to expand...
Bring back slavery or indentured servitude?

randomJACKASS said:
Leave them the license unless it rises to the level of gross malpractice or incompetence.
Click to expand...

Now you're talking liabiltiy issues for the state. He has two other "mishaps" & you allowed him to continue practicing?

Tort reform is a major issue without a clear winner. Both sides are right. Who gets scrweed worse, an innocent victim or one time mistake?
 
Just a few postings at 0bama's official Web site by 0bots who openly favor the denial of medical care to seriously ill senior citizens for the purpose of saving money.


anthea El Paso, TX

I work in an ICU and witness many elderly (dementia,end of life ) being kept on life support, increasing health care dollars because family members will not let go. Often because they do not want to lose financila benefits received by the patient. The health care team should have more responsibilty to determine if life support should be initiated or ended when there is no hope.
Click to expand...


A Message to Secr. Designee Daschle - How to Reform our Healthcare System

The questions is do Americans now believe that health care is a right and not a privilege as I do? I don’t believe that exotic and futile health care however, is a right. Half our health care dollars (my estimate which may not be completely correct) are spent on futile health care at the end of life or the beginning of life.

We need clear guidelines as to when a person at public expense will be placed under hospice care and taken out of the ICU and guidelines for other such end of life decisions.

We cannot give every possible treatment to stretch out misery and suffering to the very last moment, nor keep brain dead people “alive” on ventilators at public expense instead of using that money to help those that can be saved!
Click to expand...

Maureen Salem, NH

I have been a nurse for 30 years. For 25 of those years, in Home Health and Hospice. We need to cut costs at end of life care. Too many doctors keep people alive too long on expensive medications and ventilators in hospital beds because they have not discussed end of life choices. The cost of chemotherapy just to keep someone alive to suffer for a few months longer is a waste of money.
Click to expand...

Can you say "death panels?"
 
Wow Cerise is stooped to finding random people on the internet that she disagrees with and posting it here.

sarah-palin-airbrush-tee.jpg
 
‘Death Panel’ Myth Creator Betsy McCaughey Resigns From Medical Board


Betsy McCaughey — an outspoken proponent of the myth that Democrats’ health care reform proposals will lead to the creation of “death panels,” as well as a former lieutenant governor of New York and adjunct fellow at the Hudson Institute — has stepped down from her position as a director of Cantel Medical Corp., which bills itself as a “leading provider of infection prevention and control products in the healthcare market.”

McCaughey found herself the subject of widespread ridicule after an appearance on “The Daily Show” Thursday, during which host Jon Stewart aggressively challenged her positions on health care reform.
Click to expand...

http://washingtonindependent.com/56...or-betsy-mccaughey-resigns-from-medical-board

Nice.
 
I don't have a savior. And those are random stories by random people that you decided to post here for unknown reasons. What exactly did you hope to prove?
 
Those are just a few moderator-approved postings at 0bama's official web site by 0bots who openly favor the denial of medical care to seriously ill senior citizens for the purpose of saving money....... A.K.A. "death panels."
 
You mean that some people have have opinions such as keeping brain dead people alive on ventilators is wasteful.

And these random people with their opinions who have no part in the bill don't agree with you.

How are their opinions relevant here exactly Cerise?

There are no death panels. Palin lied to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top