1) how many lawsuits are tossed out yearly as being without merit??? Yet as things stand now, they ADD to the cost of medical care
2) your compliant that our tort system is NOT THE ONLY reason for extra tests is a strawman... It is a major reason and thereby needs to part of the debate... Your arguments would have just fixing one cause while ignoring the other... THAT IS NOT ANYWAY TO DO REFORM... On Aug 17, 5:22 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > jgg, > > If it was a "fake" accusation and/or suit the proper charge would be > attempted insurance fraud, or theft by fraud, which I believe is a > criminal offense. Are you saying your definition of "frivilous > lawsuit" is actually "attempted fraud"? Fruad has always been illegal. > > On Aug 17, 3:23 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > That is the point Zeb... If the lawsuit is frivolous as determined by > > the courts, have the courts fine the lawyer $10,000 for a fake > > lawsuit... > > > On Aug 17, 3:52 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The court will have to determine, on an individual basis. I'm sure > > > they'll consider if there is enough evidence of the charge, if the > > > charge was intentional and/or avoidable, if any damage actually > > > occurred............ > > > > On Aug 17, 12:11 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Jgg, > > > > > Dammit you are not listening. DEFINE "fivilous lawsuit". > > > > You can't "cap" what lawyers earn unless you are also ready to cap > > > > what doctors, hospitals, insurance companies, etc. can earn. > > > > > On Aug 17, 10:45 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Lets start here > > > > > > Limiting the abuse of frivolous lawsuits pushed by lawyers and/or > > > > > patients... One place to start is if a lawsuit is frivolous, charge > > > > > the lawyer and patient for slander and/or label... Limiting putative > > > > > damages... Limiting the practice of suing any and all who MIGHT be > > > > > involved... Capping lawyers compensation to the smaller of a > > > > > percentage or a hard limit... There are other suggestions, I > > > > > understand the any solution is by definition complex and nuanced... > > > > > But not to even discuss the issue or consider it when the WH, as it > > > > > does now, insisted this is a debate on health INSURANCE reform is > > > > > silly > > > > > > On Aug 13, 10:12 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > Third time, give me your definition of tort reform. How can we > > > > > > discuss > > > > > > rationally what you seem to be unwilling or unable to even define? > > > > > > I've already suggested a cap on punitive damages, and punitive > > > > > > damages > > > > > > only. What do you have to say? > > > > > > > On Aug 12, 2:18 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I said together... You suggest payment and delivery system > > > > > > > without > > > > > > > tort reform first... I then asked why not tort reform first... > > > > > > > My > > > > > > > point was and is an unreformed tort system IS a major factor in > > > > > > > health > > > > > > > care raising costs --- it effects and alters how physicians MUST > > > > > > > practice just to avoid greedy lawyers whose principle is to sue > > > > > > > any > > > > > > > and all involved regardless of fault... Even if the lawyer loses, > > > > > > > often their costs ARE required to be paid by the claimants... > > > > > > > So if > > > > > > > you want systemic health care reform, you must have tort reform as > > > > > > > well... The Democrats pretend otherwise... > > > > > > > > On Aug 12, 11:45 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > > WHY should there be tort reform first? Who's struggling more, > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > family that is facing immediate bankruptcy due to medical bills > > > > > > > > or the > > > > > > > > Physician so financially stressed by the cost of medical > > > > > > > > malpractice > > > > > > > > insurance he may not be able to afford a new Mercedes this year? > > > > > > > > > Once again I ask, give me a clear definition of what you mean > > > > > > > > by "tort > > > > > > > > reform". > > > > > > > > > On Aug 12, 10:06 am, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Then what about tort reform FIRST... The problem Hollywood > > > > > > > > > is you > > > > > > > > > have to address all the systemic problems, or at least start > > > > > > > > > to, to > > > > > > > > > have long lasting cost saving health care reform... That > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > Democrats refuse to is telling... Your line of argument is > > > > > > > > > fundamentally the same as Obama's lines " You have to pass > > > > > > > > > health > > > > > > > > > reform now or else", "Any change is better the no change", > > > > > > > > > and "We > > > > > > > > > have thoroughly discussed health care for 40 years".... > > > > > > > > > > If these were true, tort reform would be part and parcel of > > > > > > > > > any health > > > > > > > > > reform reform now... People remember how the emergency > > > > > > > > > "Stimulus > > > > > > > > > Bill" changed the basic formulation of welfare payment due to > > > > > > > > > provision slipped in at the last moment... > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 3:55 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > > > > It does not all have to be done in one piece at one time. > > > > > > > > > > No one has > > > > > > > > > > yet to give a concise definition of tort reform other that > > > > > > > > > > to shout > > > > > > > > > > about "frivolous lawsuits". A cap on punitive damages ONLY > > > > > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > probably be a good place to start. > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 2:43 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > A partisan solution without tort reform will only make > > > > > > > > > > > matters > > > > > > > > > > > worse... That is the rest of the story Obama is > > > > > > > > > > > refusing to > > > > > > > > > > > discuss... The notion of Health Reform at any cost is > > > > > > > > > > > as dangerous > > > > > > > > > > > as Peace at any cost was in 1938... > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 3:37 pm, Hollywood > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Jgg, > > > > > > > > > > > > > I agree in principle with the solution you suggest. But > > > > > > > > > > > > I hope you > > > > > > > > > > > > realize that the need for a better healtcare system is > > > > > > > > > > > > hardly > > > > > > > > > > > > something new, it was first proposed by President > > > > > > > > > > > > Truman. It's ALWAYS > > > > > > > > > > > > going to be "this needs more study, what's the rush" > > > > > > > > > > > > according to some > > > > > > > > > > > > people. Look at the energy problem, our dependence on > > > > > > > > > > > > oil, most of it > > > > > > > > > > > > foreign. Only an idiot would not have realized the > > > > > > > > > > > > solution must be > > > > > > > > > > > > found after the OPEC oil embargo of 1973. Thirty five > > > > > > > > > > > > years or > > > > > > > > > > > > possible progress towards a viable solution simple > > > > > > > > > > > > thrown away. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 11, 1:01 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or if you want to point to Medicare, just look to how > > > > > > > > > > > > > they base the > > > > > > > > > > > > > payments for doctor visits.... It is a portion of > > > > > > > > > > > > > the ordinary and > > > > > > > > > > > > > customary charges... So if your costs are $50 per > > > > > > > > > > > > > visit, you have to > > > > > > > > > > > > > jack it up to include your profit, Medicare's > > > > > > > > > > > > > discount, and project > > > > > > > > > > > > > that figure 3 years in the future... SO The visit > > > > > > > > > > > > > that cost $50, for > > > > > > > > > > > > > when you might profit $10 if you get $60 you might > > > > > > > > > > > > > charge $100 to have > > > > > > > > > > > > > Medicare discount the bill back to $60... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Or might a doctor have an xray machine in-house so > > > > > > > > > > > > > his elderly patient > > > > > > > > > > > > > do not have make a second appoint at the hospital... > > > > > > > > > > > > > It would be a > > > > > > > > > > > > > sin if he made a slight profit from THAT service > > > > > > > > > > > > > (especially when he > > > > > > > > > > > > > charged less the the Hospital)... The problem with > > > > > > > > > > > > > the Health Car > > > > > > > > > > > > > debate is it is so nuanced that to reduce it to > > > > > > > > > > > > > "greedy insurance > > > > > > > > > > > > > companies and doctors) makes it a meaningless > > > > > > > > > > > > > shouting match... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My solution??? Get a serious bi-partisan panel whose > > > > > > > > > > > > > recommendations > > > > > > > > > > > > > Congress would have vote yea or nay... If Health > > > > > > > > > > > > > Care is so demanded > > > > > > > > > > > > > by the American People, it will wait six-eight months > > > > > > > > > > > > > for folks to get > > > > > > > > > > > > > it right.. Instead Obama demands action, regardless > > > > > > > > > > > > > of viability, now > > > > > > > > > > > > > for his political resume... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 10, 3:54 pm, Hollywood > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > jgg. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Really? And the fact that each and every test is > > > > > > > > > > > > > > billable has nothing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > whatsoever to do with it I suppose? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 10, 2:39 pm, jgg1000a <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nor will help the stupidity and incompetence > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > within the legal > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > community... Why the extra tests??? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Malpractice Insurance requires > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > it because of an uncontrolled tort system... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 7, 6:13 pm, Hollywood > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > jgg, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I seriously doubt that Health Care reform will > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > eliminate stupidity and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incompetence within the health care field. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 7, 3:42 pm, jgg1000a > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will listen because I can't... How can I > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > take Obama and the > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Democrats serious about the seriousness > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > concerning Health Care reform > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > without Tort Reform??? Or perhaps will I be > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > reported to the WH > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > snitch line for actually expecting a debate > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > on issues surrounding > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Health Care???- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
