<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Arnold&#8217;s Plan</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/</link>
	<description>Insights on Health Care Reform &#124; NCPA</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 13:39:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doctors in Massachusetts</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-30870</link>
		<dc:creator>Doctors in Massachusetts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 05:36:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-30870</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;Doctors in Massachusetts&lt;/strong&gt;

Every once in a while I come across a blog where I waste a whole afternoon reading all the back-posts.I don&#039;t know whether to thank you...or curse you.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>Doctors in Massachusetts</strong></p>
<p>Every once in a while I come across a blog where I waste a whole afternoon reading all the back-posts.I don&#8217;t know whether to thank you&#8230;or curse you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: David Wilson</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-1930</link>
		<dc:creator>David Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2007 17:15:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-1930</guid>
		<description>Thank you john. You are on target here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you john. You are on target here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judi Buckalew</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-1929</link>
		<dc:creator>Judi Buckalew</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Mar 2007 17:15:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-1929</guid>
		<description>You had an idea whose time has come!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You had an idea whose time has come!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JohnPearson</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-1155</link>
		<dc:creator>JohnPearson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2007 02:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-1155</guid>
		<description>Nice Post. 
 
That was well said. Always appreciate your indepth views. Keep up the great work! 
 
John</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice Post. </p>
<p>That was well said. Always appreciate your indepth views. Keep up the great work! </p>
<p>John</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gordon Horwitz</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-1041</link>
		<dc:creator>Gordon Horwitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:57:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-1041</guid>
		<description>The question I would have for Larry is why would&#039;nt Xerox allow thier workers to leave the group plan and take a LPHD plan and use some of the cost that would have been incurred in having an employee insured ( aprox $8100) to fund their HSA ? This would get your company out of the insurance business and  make for happier employees for sure.

Gordon Horwitz
ghorwitz1@mac.com</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question I would have for Larry is why would&#8217;nt Xerox allow thier workers to leave the group plan and take a LPHD plan and use some of the cost that would have been incurred in having an employee insured ( aprox $8100) to fund their HSA ? This would get your company out of the insurance business and  make for happier employees for sure.</p>
<p>Gordon Horwitz<br />
<a href="mailto:ghorwitz1@mac.com">ghorwitz1@mac.com</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred Chittenden</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-1040</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred Chittenden</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jan 2007 17:43:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-1040</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re getting close, but missing the core of the problem...

The simplest solution to HC financing is to allow providers to deduct the cost of uncompensated charity care they provide from their income.   This would make it clear to everyone that it&#039;s the providers (not politicians) who provide care.  Many providers who currently severely restrict Medicaid and Medicare access would step up and provide more, not less, of such care.   

Long term financing options for those with limited resources and no insurance could be made available by providers with a sliding income scale that makes sense to them and the marketplace (not necessarily politicians).  Patients who pay for their care after the fact ought to be able to do so with tax free dollars, just as (pre-care) insurance premiums are tax deductible.  One might consider closing the &#039;free care tax loop hole&#039; by allowing providers who provide uncompensated charity care to file some sort of a 941 for those they provide uncompensated care for to let the government identify those who feign poverty but really have the resources to pay for their care.  

  Making uncompensated charity care tax deductible would also clear out the red tape associated with Medicare and Medicaid.   Also, with such a simple change in HC financing, providers (and clinics and hospitals) could better develop sustainable plans for providing preventive and walk in care.  Best of all, this could be done without any changes to Medicare or Medicaid programs...  These programs could still be there, but just ignored if it makes more sense to the providers and patients to seek alternative ways to provide care.  

Bottomline -- As it currently stands, the compensation provided by Medicare and Medicaid programs is about 50% or less than the &#039;normal&#039; cost of care, in many cases it&#039;s 30% or less, plus there&#039;s a huge bureaucracy associated with running these programs.   This puts the overall economic cost of providing Medicare and Medicaid care on par with the cost of making uncompensated charity care fully tax deductible to health care providers.  

The primary reason this sort of simple market based solution is unlikely to ever happen is under such a system, health care providers, not politicians, would be getting the credit for providing care.  Politicians won&#039;t put up with being out of the loop...   Which really points out what lurks at the core of most contemporary health care problems -- politicians trying to buy votes through other peoples efforts and misery.    Any true solution to fix this problem should empower providers, people and the marketplace while leaving politicians out of the mix as much as possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re getting close, but missing the core of the problem&#8230;</p>
<p>The simplest solution to HC financing is to allow providers to deduct the cost of uncompensated charity care they provide from their income.   This would make it clear to everyone that it&#8217;s the providers (not politicians) who provide care.  Many providers who currently severely restrict Medicaid and Medicare access would step up and provide more, not less, of such care.   </p>
<p>Long term financing options for those with limited resources and no insurance could be made available by providers with a sliding income scale that makes sense to them and the marketplace (not necessarily politicians).  Patients who pay for their care after the fact ought to be able to do so with tax free dollars, just as (pre-care) insurance premiums are tax deductible.  One might consider closing the &#8216;free care tax loop hole&#8217; by allowing providers who provide uncompensated charity care to file some sort of a 941 for those they provide uncompensated care for to let the government identify those who feign poverty but really have the resources to pay for their care.  </p>
<p>  Making uncompensated charity care tax deductible would also clear out the red tape associated with Medicare and Medicaid.   Also, with such a simple change in HC financing, providers (and clinics and hospitals) could better develop sustainable plans for providing preventive and walk in care.  Best of all, this could be done without any changes to Medicare or Medicaid programs&#8230;  These programs could still be there, but just ignored if it makes more sense to the providers and patients to seek alternative ways to provide care.  </p>
<p>Bottomline &#8212; As it currently stands, the compensation provided by Medicare and Medicaid programs is about 50% or less than the &#8216;normal&#8217; cost of care, in many cases it&#8217;s 30% or less, plus there&#8217;s a huge bureaucracy associated with running these programs.   This puts the overall economic cost of providing Medicare and Medicaid care on par with the cost of making uncompensated charity care fully tax deductible to health care providers.  </p>
<p>The primary reason this sort of simple market based solution is unlikely to ever happen is under such a system, health care providers, not politicians, would be getting the credit for providing care.  Politicians won&#8217;t put up with being out of the loop&#8230;   Which really points out what lurks at the core of most contemporary health care problems &#8212; politicians trying to buy votes through other peoples efforts and misery.    Any true solution to fix this problem should empower providers, people and the marketplace while leaving politicians out of the mix as much as possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ralph</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-984</link>
		<dc:creator>ralph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jan 2007 04:06:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-984</guid>
		<description>The problem has been misidentlified. The problem is not that 20% of Californians are uninsured at any moment in time, the problem is that health plans have become too expensive so many Californians have chosen to go without. There are several reasons for this. The Governor assumes it is the cost of the uninsured, but in fact it is that 1) The governement has added so many costly mandates to insurance, and 2) health plans cover too many procedures with too low a co-pay that people have become insulated from the cost of care, which increases utilization. On top of that hospials discourage insurance. I have a plan with a $7,000 deductible, so I ask prices. When my wife went to the hospital I asked the cost. They said $22,000 if I have insurance and $1,299 if I didn&#039;t have insurance. I got them to agree to honor the $1,299 price. 

Does that sound like a fair billing practice?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem has been misidentlified. The problem is not that 20% of Californians are uninsured at any moment in time, the problem is that health plans have become too expensive so many Californians have chosen to go without. There are several reasons for this. The Governor assumes it is the cost of the uninsured, but in fact it is that 1) The governement has added so many costly mandates to insurance, and 2) health plans cover too many procedures with too low a co-pay that people have become insulated from the cost of care, which increases utilization. On top of that hospials discourage insurance. I have a plan with a $7,000 deductible, so I ask prices. When my wife went to the hospital I asked the cost. They said $22,000 if I have insurance and $1,299 if I didn&#8217;t have insurance. I got them to agree to honor the $1,299 price. </p>
<p>Does that sound like a fair billing practice?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lawrence M. Becker</title>
		<link>http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/comment-page-1/#comment-983</link>
		<dc:creator>Lawrence M. Becker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2007 22:39:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.john-goodman-blog.com/arnolds-plan/#comment-983</guid>
		<description>And once again, another idea to shift the dollars around. The emphasis continues to be on who pays rather than understanding what is paid and why. The only sustainable solution is to drive efficiency and better quality throughout the system while also encouraging healthy lifestyles. Thank you Larry Lawrence M. Becker Director, Benefits and Policies Xerox Corporation - Corporate Human Resources</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And once again, another idea to shift the dollars around. The emphasis continues to be on who pays rather than understanding what is paid and why. The only sustainable solution is to drive efficiency and better quality throughout the system while also encouraging healthy lifestyles. Thank you Larry Lawrence M. Becker Director, Benefits and Policies Xerox Corporation &#8211; Corporate Human Resources</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
