Thanks jack. I'd still hardly call a few articles as it being "widely" considered a "successfully run" entity, any more than you could say that a few articles of "horror stories" could show its "widely" considered a "badly run" entity. What I'm saying is that there's as many horror stories coming out of the VA and poor views of it it seems as there are positive things coming out of it. To state its "Widely" considered that is to be perputing that a large majority of people in the know consider it that way, which frankly I've never seen any evidence of that fact but that there's a very, very mixed feeling in regards to both the level of care provided by the VA and the successful running of the organization, which are two seperate things.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
From the CBO:
Evidence of the Quality of VA’s Health Care
VA officials have often cited studies that have given the department high ratings for the quality of its medical care. For example, then-Secretary of Veterans Affairs James Nicholson stated in a speech in July 2007, "We lead private and Government health care providers in almost every measure and our state-of-the-art quality care arcs from the research lab to a patient’s bedside."7 Michael Kussman, then-Acting (now confirmed) Under Secretary for Health, gave testimony before the Congress in March 2007 in which he called VA "the Nation’s leader in providing high-quality health care" and cited a number of external research studies to support that claim.8
... A 2004 study assessed the quality of care for VA patients and for patients in a national sample.22 Employing a cross-sectional design, the study compared indicators for a sample of VA patients drawn from 26 facilities located in 2 VISNs and for a national sample of patients from 12 communities—using data collected between 1997 and 2000, a period during which performance measurement and electronic medical records had been implemented throughout VA’s medical system. The authors chose to examine process measures, noting that such measures "are more readily actionable than outcomes measures, require less risk adjustment, and follow the structure of national guidelines."23 Altogether, the study included 348 indicators drawn from national guidelines and the medical literature to address both inpatient and outpatient care, including screening, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up activities.
The study found that, on average, 67 percent of VA patients received the care specified by the indicators, compared with 51 percent of the patients in the national sample. For both chronic care and preventive care, the ratings for VA patients were higher than for the others, but for acute care, slightly lower (although the difference was not statistically significant). For depression, diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and hypertension, VA patients received significantly better care.
Possible Explanations for VA’s Achievements in Quality of Care
Observers have suggested a number of factors to explain VA’s higher scores on many measures of health care quality compared with those of other systems. In particular, VA’s structure as an integrated delivery system makes it easier for the department to apply two important tools:
■ Incentives given to managers and providers to meet targets for quality of care and adherence to clinical guidelines and
■ Health IT systems, which include reminders about tests and treatments recommended according to clinical guidelines.
Other factors may also be important in explaining VA’s performance—for example, the low out-of-pocket costs for the department’s health care reduce the disincentives for patients to seek medical care, thus potentially enhancing the department’s performance in meeting clinical guidelines for preventive care and the management of chronic diseases.
A simple solution to the health care "crisis" that everyone is overlooking is just to incorporate a walmart style program where quality American trained doctors are replaced with doctors imported from the inner most sections of mainland China.
Since these current doctors believe they have earned a right to an above average income (similar to many previous business owners of the past) and somehow need more than minimum wage to be successful in America and have contributed to the expense of health care it should be mandated by any one of the current Czars that these incomes be capped.
Otherwise just import health care just like every friggin thing else so many yearn for and are only able to afford due to exploiting third world nations and physically destroying the majority of the American manufacturing sector to the point that we are almost poor enough to compete again.
Put those same pressures on health care professionals, medical equipment manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, insurance companies, and anything else medical and see how inexpensive health care can be.
Think of it like a "dollar store" hospital where everything is only a dollar and some times it works, and other times well it just does not, sorry
OK that all is a joke, but it is not funny that we have devalued ourselves to the point that even skilled, educated, and experienced working people and families either do not have, can not afford, or are just totally struggling with the costs of health care.
I am not talking about the homeless, or those without employment, or even those who found their way to become way too reliant on government for their very survival, but the average person who in generations past was able to afford their care etc.
The idea of there only being certain areas or industries that are not or can not be devalued to levels of third world nations like has been done to so many in our country is also no joke.
When you consider that current earnings support the ability to live and purchase items that are made at considerably lower costs than if made domestically by those needing to receive a wage that allows one to survive in this country as being the only reason most (not many or some) Americans can even afford the living standards they now have it becomes obvious that this health care problem is deeply rooted in the imbalance of imports, and loss of American manufacturing, and the many good paying jobs that were also lost to imports from third world nations.
Also it was only a few short years ago that most full time employees enjoyed health insurance that was fully funded by their employer. The idea of having to subsidize this with ones income is still very new in comparison, and the fact that it seems only certain positions that are mostly with government and a select few unions actually do cover the full costs and also supply better coverage with lower or nearly non existent costs or co pays etc.
Since most of these employee contributions only go towards the bottom line it seems obvious that something changed that caused this to be needed in order for employers to remain profitable and maintain previous levels or for some just remain in business.
Maybe not everyone is able to see this, but why not address the real causes of the many problems like we seem to have with health care.
I watched countless people complain about the bene's seen at GM during the government take over, and except for the really unusual ones like the paid furloughs etc these are benefits that many Americans used to enjoy in the past before our government joined in the party of sending our wealth overseas, and to corporate concerns.
Why should not everyone who works enjoy the same benefits of a GM worker, a state or federal employee, or better yet the members of the US Congress?
Should we not be fighting to restore our way of life instead of apologizing for it, and stop trying to strip it away from anyone who may continue to enjoy it (our health care professionals included) instead of creating an entirely new dysfunctional system run by some Czar who is little more than a servant to those who are part of the system and those who benefited from screwing up the previous or current system.
Wake up people!!!!
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds"
Is it a bird?
DRUDGE REPORT 2009®
Pelosi flipping off press?
Are you saying that in your professional experience, the government run health care systems in Alaska are not working, and that is why you object to a single-payer option to health care for the country as a whole?
I object primarily on the grounds that the Government was not created, nor is it in the long term interest of the People for the Government to be the provider of a set of services that are far from the most basic of those required for a fulfilled life.
Since health care would appear far down on the hierarchy of needs, the Government would be able to justify providing everything higher in that list. For instance food, clothing, shelter, employment and energy.
Further, what Government gives it may withhold, modify, ration or corrupt. Thus Government run Health Care should be seen as a potential (and in my opinion clear) power grab.
With medical technology advancing at a rapid pace, one is well advised to consider the implications for a future Government having unfettered access to one's body for any purpose that Government sees fit.
Finally, one of the reasons you see so many people on one public form of health care or the other in Alaska, is that all Alaska Natives ("Indians,") are on native health care programs. Those programs are a marvelous example of Government run, substandard health care at an outrageous price.
I live without health care, and do not participate in public programs to provide it.
Quod scripsi, scripsi