Health care victory

[FlashLackey]

the USPS is failing because there are better and easier solutions now then there were back before the internet. if i want to send someone some funny pictures i can instantly send them via the internet, and save myself a trip to the post office and the cost of a stamp, and the cost of developing film.

How then do you explain UPS and FedEX outperforming USPS?

looks at other health care systems around the world there are some that are way better then ours, but people are not making billions of dollars in profits off of them so they will never happen here.

I don't think that is remotely true. Over-all, the US has the best quality of health care in the world. It just arguably costs too much.

As for Matt Damon, yes i think the Oscar winning actor is very good at what he does, show me one movie he has been bad in.

Show me one that he was good in.

While I'm sure there is some merit in the idea behind what you say, the reality is that most of our medical innovation comes from non-profit university researchers funded by the government.

28% funding from NIH. That indicates that more than double that comes from industry.

Furthermore, which organization innovations come from does nothing to contradict jeff2a's point. Researchers are paid to work for the NIH and if they create some innovation there, it greatly advances their careers and financial possibilities just as it would at any other company.

Unfortunately in the real world large, corporations like insurance companies do win cases of basic claim denial just by bankrupting the other side through a long drawn out court process.

Most people who are in that position are already in financial trouble and cannot afford the attorney fees for a courtfight in the first place.

If a person has a winnable case, there are attorneys like Edwards and Brokovich there to represent and profit from it. Someone not being able to sue a giant company with billions of dollars is an indication that they never had a case.

Unless the insurance company doesn't want to pay in which case they use a loophole to deny the legitimate claim... like hiring an in-house medical reviewer to claim a treatment is "experimental" which is wholly subjective and based on that person's opinion alone.

If the company has paid for someone else to have the treatment, they have no case denying someone else. One sentence wins that case "Have you paid other clients with the same policy for this treatment?"

I guess in your world major corporations don't ever hire accountants to find loopholes so that they can cheat on their taxes either?

I guess in your world, you hysterically speculate that they do. Perhaps you don't understand the difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance. Another good subject that should be touched on in high school economics.