Free Burgers for Obama's Birthday

No credit cards required. Receive free subcriptions to industry publication specific to you interests.

http://tinyurl.com/l8w7x9

RetailSecret of AR 12:49PM August 05, 2009

The 'innovative' idea of a 'pay for value / outcome' pack came after the CBO had previously pointed out this health care reform wouldn't work without 'fundamental' change in the out of date system. It is said that as much as 30 percent of all health-care spending in the U.S. -some $700 billion a year- may be wasted on tests and treatments that do not improve the health of the recipients, and this 700 billion dollars a year can cover a lot of uninsured people.

The expected Benefits of this 'innovative idea' are as follows ;

1. Meet the objective of revenue-neutral.

Supporters of the agreement say it could save the Medicare System more than $100 billion a year and 'improve'

care, that means more than $1trillian over next decade, and virtually needs no other resources including tax on the

wealthiest. Supposedly even the 'conservative' number of such savings might be able to meet the objective of

revenue-neutral.

2. Quality and affordability.

If you are a physician, and your pay is dependant upon your patient's outcome, you will most likely strive to

prescribe the best medicine earlier in the process, let alone skipping the wasteful, unnecessary treatments.

3. No intervention in decision-making.

The innovative idea of 'a pay for outcome' will more likely prompt team approach and decision, as at Myo clinic.

Under the 'pay for outcome' pack, for good reason, best practices as 'recommendations' would simply help them

make a better decision, and the government won't still have to meddle in the final, actual decision-making

process as a non-expert.

4. Speed up the introduction of IT SYSTEM.

The pay for 'Outcome' pack is most likely to expedite the introduction of Health Care IT SYSTEM.

The synergy effect of the combined Health Care IT & a pay for 'outcome' system may allow the clinicians to

'correctly' diagnose and effectively treat a patient earlier in the process so that it can measurably scale back the

crushing lawsuits and deter the excuse for unnecessary cares to make fortunes.

5. Accelerate the progress in medical science, in return, it saves more cash.

6. Settle the regional disparity.

7. Reduce the emergency room visits & save immense costs.

Public health insurance plans such as Medicare and Medicaid paid for more than 40 percent of U.S. emergency

room visits in 2006, according to government figures released recently. Many experts say reducing these hospital

visits would be an important way to lower the enormous, and growing, expense of U.S. health care.

I share the opinion that unlike the insurer-friendly senate plan by 'some' members, only a strong public option will be capable of getting the premium inflation under control and saving the U.S in turbulence.

To my knowledge, a dual system tends to deliver better results than a pure single payer system. Supposedly, to be or not to be might be up to the innovations like a pay for value program, otherwise, the forthcoming start-ups may fill the void with competitive deals. The competition based on 'fair' market value would be a beauty of true capitalism, not monopoly, an objective for anti-trust.

Thank You !

HSR0601 3:26AM August 05, 2009

and all his like.

cant believe he's from cali.

[shudder]

good day

KENNY of CA 8:07PM August 04, 2009

GTFO of here, ARE YOU SURE IT'S HIS BIRTHDAY???

Get a F'in LIFE!!!

Pat of NC 5:08PM August 04, 2009