From: jdnicoll@panix.com

In article <109tn3m$2bls2$1@dont-email.me>,
Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:

(nonsense from Lynn zappped)

Any chance people can keep their lines short enough I don't
have to refort by hand when replying?

Actually what you consider real I consider working with
the abstraction of the fossil fuels that are ruining the planet
for multi-cellular life.

While a mass extinction would be in many senses undesirable, the
fossil record suggests it's actually pretty hard to kill _all_
of the complex lifeforms. The Permian gave it the good old
college try and only got 57% of biological families, 62% of genera,
81% of marine species, and 70% of terrestrial vertebrate species...
and almost wiped out roaches. Still left 43% of families, 38%
of genera, 19% of marine species, and a good 30% of terrestrial
vertebrate species. And the roaches.

Now, I wouldn't want to be a large mammal while the ecosystems
are imploding but if humans want to make the lifestyle choice
not to be a 1 kg burrowing omnivore, they have to accept the
consequences.

Mars suggests you might be able to sterilize Earth with a large
enough impact, big enough to blow off the atmosphere and quench
the planetary magnetic field and Venus says cracking out all the
CO2 in the crust would also be efficacious.
--
My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll

--- SoupGate-Linux v1.05
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- FidoNet<>Usenet Gateway -:--- (3:633/10)

From: robertaw@drizzle.com

In article <2k2bckpkfv5414dc2s4g4ovdgh4ti023pc@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2025 19:40:20 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Scott Lurndal wrote:

(Snip)

<snippo more>

Perhaps he realizes, as I do, that this proposal:

If medical professionals were saleried generously, rather than compensated >> per procedure, costs would go down considerably.

means that the gummint would have to take over /all medical
facilities, practitioners, suppliers, other parts of our medical
industry/. Make no mistake: this isn't about insurance; it's about
control. Granted, we would (after some effort) have an actual medical
system.

Not necessarily; Group Health paid its doctors and staff salaries and
did not compensate them per procedure. That didn't stop their costs over decades increasing at about the same rate as every other
hospital/physician group in the USA.

--
"We have advanced to new and surprising levels of bafflement."
Imperial Auditor Miles Vorkosigan describes progress in _Komarr_. -------------------------------------------------------
Robert Woodward robertaw@drizzle.com

--- SoupGate-Linux v1.05
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- FidoNet<>Usenet Gateway -:--- (3:633/10)

From: kludge@panix.com

Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

If medical professionals were saleried generously, rather than compensated
per procedure, costs would go down considerably.

means that the gummint would have to take over /all medical
facilities, practitioners, suppliers, other parts of our medical
industry/. Make no mistake: this isn't about insurance; it's about
control. Granted, we would (after some effort) have an actual medical
system.

Not necessarily; Group Health paid its doctors and staff salaries and
did not compensate them per procedure. That didn't stop their costs over >decades increasing at about the same rate as every other
hospital/physician group in the USA.

This is true and it likely resulted in a lot fewer unnecessary surgical procedure but probably no fewer unnecessary tests. Admittedly it's hard
to really know when a test is actually unnecessary which is part of why
they get done.

Also... the government does not need to take over anything other than
payment. It's not as if the rest of the developed world doesn't already
have working systems. Copy the Canadian system. Copy the UK system but
fund it properly. Even the Italians, who are usually the poster children
for dysfunctional governments, have a functional and effective national
health care system.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

--- SoupGate-Linux v1.05
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- FidoNet<>Usenet Gateway -:--- (3:633/10)

From: scott@slp53.sl.home

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

If medical professionals were saleried generously, rather than compensated
per procedure, costs would go down considerably.

means that the gummint would have to take over /all medical
facilities, practitioners, suppliers, other parts of our medical
industry/. Make no mistake: this isn't about insurance; it's about
control. Granted, we would (after some effort) have an actual medical
system.

Not necessarily; Group Health paid its doctors and staff salaries and
did not compensate them per procedure. That didn't stop their costs over >>decades increasing at about the same rate as every other
hospital/physician group in the USA.

This is true and it likely resulted in a lot fewer unnecessary surgical >procedure but probably no fewer unnecessary tests. Admittedly it's hard
to really know when a test is actually unnecessary which is part of why
they get done.

The other factor to consider is that the insurance company likely
pocketed the difference rather than reducing cost to the
patient.

Also... the government does not need to take over anything other than >payment. It's not as if the rest of the developed world doesn't already
have working systems. Copy the Canadian system. Copy the UK system but
fund it properly. Even the Italians, who are usually the poster children
for dysfunctional governments, have a functional and effective national >health care system.

Indeed. And Italy will happily treat visitors as well.

--- SoupGate-Linux v1.05
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- FidoNet<>Usenet Gateway -:--- (3:633/10)

From: psperson@old.netcom.invalid

On Sat, 13 Sep 2025 09:48:19 -0700, Robert Woodward
<robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

In article <2k2bckpkfv5414dc2s4g4ovdgh4ti023pc@4ax.com>,
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

On Fri, 12 Sep 2025 19:40:20 -0400, William Hyde
<wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Scott Lurndal wrote:

(Snip)

<snippo more>


Perhaps he realizes, as I do, that this proposal:

If medical professionals were saleried generously, rather than compensated
per procedure, costs would go down considerably.

means that the gummint would have to take over /all medical
facilities, practitioners, suppliers, other parts of our medical
industry/. Make no mistake: this isn't about insurance; it's about
control. Granted, we would (after some effort) have an actual medical
system.

Not necessarily; Group Health paid its doctors and staff salaries and
did not compensate them per procedure. That didn't stop their costs over >decades increasing at about the same rate as every other
hospital/physician group in the USA.

They were buying everything from basic utilities (power/water/waste
disposal) to this years brand-new equipment from the same suppliers as everybody else.

Medical inflation is so bad it /isn't even included/ in the main
inflation indexes. This is why many Social Security recipients
eventually have to choose between food and medicine: the COLAs are
based on a measure of inflation that does not include Medical
inflation -- and yet Medical tends to become a larger part of their
budget the older they get.

If Social Security had tried to keep up with medical costs, it would
have gone broke decades ago.

Back when I had a dentist, they (there were several) got a new machine
that would allow them to create (some) crowns in-house at considerable
savings -- to them. When I asked how much of the savings they were
passing on to their patients the dentist looked at me as if I were
speaking an unknown language.

Which, in a sense, I was: I was suggesting that a benefit accrue to
someone other than himself.

That's not why I left. But it did contribute to the deterioration of
my relationship with them.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

--- SoupGate-Linux v1.05
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- FidoNet<>Usenet Gateway -:--- (3:633/10)

From: bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com

On 9/14/25 08:22, Scott Lurndal wrote:

kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) writes:

Robert Woodward <robertaw@drizzle.com> wrote:

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:

If medical professionals were saleried generously, rather than compensated
per procedure, costs would go down considerably.

means that the gummint would have to take over /all medical
facilities, practitioners, suppliers, other parts of our medical
industry/. Make no mistake: this isn't about insurance; it's about
control. Granted, we would (after some effort) have an actual medical
system.

Not necessarily; Group Health paid its doctors and staff salaries and
did not compensate them per procedure. That didn't stop their costs over >>> decades increasing at about the same rate as every other
hospital/physician group in the USA.

This is true and it likely resulted in a lot fewer unnecessary surgical
procedure but probably no fewer unnecessary tests. Admittedly it's hard
to really know when a test is actually unnecessary which is part of why
they get done.

The other factor to consider is that the insurance company likely
pocketed the difference rather than reducing cost to the
patient.

Also... the government does not need to take over anything other than
payment. It's not as if the rest of the developed world doesn't already
have working systems. Copy the Canadian system. Copy the UK system but
fund it properly. Even the Italians, who are usually the poster children
for dysfunctional governments, have a functional and effective national
health care system.

Indeed. And Italy will happily treat visitors as well.

Sensible people realize that Public Health starts with individual health.
so sensible medicince demands the treatment of all no matter their residence status or ability to pay. You let a man with a deadly disease walk out into the public and infect other people and you are doing very stupid medicine.
So Trump et al insist that the taxpaying immigrants without documents
should be treated worse than criminals and get no health care.
Not that their employers may treat them like paid slaves as they
did whan i was young.

bliss

--- SoupGate-Linux v1.05
* Origin: Dragon's Lair ---:- FidoNet<>Usenet Gateway -:--- (3:633/10)