Home | Real Estate Search | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Public Notices | Galleries | Obituaries | Subscriber Services | Kingman Digital | Contact Us
Kingman Daily Miner | Kingman, Arizona

home : opinion : columns May 1, 2016


11/25/2012 6:00:00 AM
Guest Column: Now we all get health care, right?
G. Keith Smith
Medical Doctor

It's after the election, and a lot of people are excited that they can now get health care. Or maybe not quite yet, but by 2014, when Obama-Care is fully implemented.

The only problem is that health care is not like an Obama phone. The phones are all made by a standard process in a factory, probably in China, and they usually work.

You can use them to call a health care provider. But you usually get the "if this is an emergency, hang up and dial 911," followed by the phone menu.

How will this change with ObamaCare? Doesn't that give you a right to health care?

Whenever someone tells me about the "right" to health care, I ask, "From whom? From me?" This question exposes this "right" for the robbery and slavery that it is.

Take it to the next step. Do you really want to exercise your "right" to health care on a physician who doesn't want any part of this bargain? What kind of care do you think you'll receive?

Years ago, I stopped doing cardiac anesthesia, because well over half of the patients were "covered" by Medicare and payment to me for my services was well below what I thought acceptable ($285 for my last 6-hour cardiac anesthetic). Soon thereafter I stopped my dealings with Medicare (and Medicaid) altogether as I increasingly saw myself as the recipient of money taken from my neighbors against their will.

As an aside, the angriest patients I've ever encountered were the Medicare patients I subsequently treated with no charge whatsoever. My providing charitable care elicited patient rage like none I've encountered since.

About two weeks after I quit, an angry cardiac surgeon, inconvenienced by my departure from the group of available cardiac anesthesiologists and with his finger in my face, told me that he was going to see to it that I was forced to do these anesthetics, so as not to disrupt his schedule. I guess he thought he had a "right" to my services.

It didn't help things that I laughed. I said, "Dr. X, I'll be happy to visit with the family before their loved one's elective surgery and inform them that I want no part of this and that I don't really want to be here, but someone is making me do this. Maybe you all would like to wait for an anesthesiologist who wants to be part of this, because I certainly don't."

This cardiac surgeon suddenly understood. Now imagine this on a large scale. Angry mobs of folks waving their ObamaCare "insurance" cards in the street demanding their free health care outside a closed and vacant doctor's office.

That is what Obama-Care is: an insurance card. Come 2014, you'll have to certify to the IRS that you have such a card, one that is acceptable to the government. Or else you'll have to pay the government for the "choice" to not have insurance: a minimum of $95 at first, climbing to $695 in a few years.

So keep that Obama-Care card handy. Either you or the taxpayers will have paid maybe $15,000 a year for it. Or it is very likely to be a Medicaid card. You'll need the card when you call the health care provider. If you make it through the phone menu, your insurance number will likely be the first question you will be asked. This will tell what type of care you are eligible to receive and from whom, and how much the provider will be paid.

It is likely that the provider will not be a physician. The physician you might eventually see will not be working for you. He'll be working for an ObamaCare Accountable Care Organization, which is paid for not providing care.

If too many doctors quit, the government might try to make them work. But will your doctor still care if you point a gun at him? The fear of having to see such a doctor may be the great new incentive for "wellness."



Dr. G. Keith Smith is a board certified anesthesiologist in private practice since 1990. He practices in Oklahoma.


    Most Viewed     Recently Commented
•   MCSO: Man linked to missing woman is arrested (2243 views)

•   Fun Run forecast: It's gonna be a good weekend (1332 views)

•   Desperate for some help (Letter) (800 views)

•   Brit's fixation on Route 66 par for this traveler's course (726 views)

•   Obituary: Merlin Carl Gulbranson (532 views)



Reader Comments

Posted: Monday, December 10, 2012
Article comment by: Capt. Nice

a bit of trivia for the obama lovers: When they ask a new patient in a hospital is there anyone you fear? Guess who most people say.....you got it......., our messiah and chief....maybe he is more than just eye candy to some!

Posted: Sunday, December 9, 2012
Article comment by: Origional Kingman Resident

@ Chuckle

Frank Lee Speaking's comment about people having children that they expect the rest of us to pay to support is not a "straw man argument". It goes to the very heart of the entitlement mentality that is ruining our country. People exercising irresponsible behavior are rewarded from the wages of the responsible citizens. There is no motivation for irresponsible people to take responsibility for them selves.

Additionally, why was FLS's comment hypocritical? Are you suggesting that he has had children and expecting the tax payers to finance it?


Posted: Saturday, December 8, 2012
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“No, Frank, eliminating Medicare and Medicaid are not solutions unless you wish to live in a country where people just die on the streets.”

After seeing FLS’s posts regarding the parasites who rely on Social Security or use Medicare and watching as the godless Republicans want to destroy both, I think I have come up with a new solution.

Of course for years I have advocated removing the earnings cap on Social Security making ever dollar obtained (note I did not say earned) taxable for FICA as a permanent fix for Social Security and no one has yet been able to explain why that would be a bad idea. You know, fairness and all.

But I think what we need to do is restructure both systems so that you are only able to take out as much as you put in. Of course I realize a few people who rave here who thrive on using Medicare and Social Security would be out of luck, but so be it. I too would lose my Social Security – but I think I could hang on to Medicare for another year, maybe two (the curse of being relatively healthy).

So, readers, what do you think? Is it time to remove the parasites (as FLS is fond of calling us) from the system by allowing us to only take out as much as we put in? And should we have to pay back any excess we have already drawn? Any thoughts?

w/c247


Posted: Friday, December 7, 2012
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

@FLS

"If a woman chooses to have kids she cannot support, in spite of the easy availability of low cost birth control, why is it the taxpayers responsibility to pay for them?

Considering the available options to avoid it, a woman who has kids she cannot support is stupid, irresponsible, or both."

Again, nice attempt at a straw man argument....I shouldn't bite though. Especially since this post is amazingly hypocritical.


Posted: Friday, December 7, 2012
Article comment by: Open Up Med School Admission to All Meeting Requirements

Yes, LA many that meet the high standards of medical school are turned away each year because there are caps placed on admission numbers. These caps have been in place for years and are cemented in by AMA. They understand supply and demand of the free enterprise system. Linda - the more doctors mean lower piece of the pie for each doctor.

Posted: Friday, December 7, 2012
Article comment by: A Future America?

No, Frank, eliminating Medicare and Medicaid are not solutions unless you wish to live in a country where people just die on the streets.

Opps, that's right the official Republican position is, "Let 'em die."


Posted: Thursday, December 6, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@nice chuckle

If a woman chooses to have kids she cannot support, in spite of the easy availability of low cost birth control, why is it the taxpayers responsibility to pay for them?

Considering the available options to avoid it, a woman who has kids she cannot support is stupid, irresponsible, or both.


Posted: Thursday, December 6, 2012
Article comment by: Differeint People

@ Frankly Speaking - "So using your logic if i run a supermarket and a person comes in with no money, or not enough money, i should give them what they want for free, right? Does your view of "compassion" apply to all professions? Oh wait, for liberals it only applies when they are on the receiving end of getting something for nothing."

and using YOUR logic, your grocery store should charge $50,000 for a gallon of milk that is nearly at, if not past, it's expiration date? My compassion applies to making a reasonable profit for myself without pricing my goods so that the poor and hungry people starve or get sick from defective goods, or services.


Posted: Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Article comment by: Linda Athens

Walmart Black Friday demonstrations - from The American Thinker: Picketers were bused in union workers.


"Considering the fact that most demonstrators were bused in and paid to be there, it would seem that the UFCW efforts to make a big splash on Black Friday went for nothing."


From Bay Area newspaper.

Union plans Black Friday protest at Bay Area Walmart stores
By Paul Burgarino Contra Costa Posted: 11/22/2012 02:40:45 PM PST


"Several Bay Area Walmart stores are likely to see union picketers on Black Friday as a show of solidarity with labor strikes around the country.

The protests involve a handful of people at a handful of stores, most of whom don't even work for Walmart, but are union organizers and union members, a company spokeswoman said.

The picketers are expected at Walmart's San Leandro, Richmond, Fairfield and San Jose stores on what is known as one of the busiest shopping days of the year, according to the group OUR Walmart.

The group's website also calls for picketing at Walmart and Sam's Club stores in Antioch, Concord and Pleasanton.

"It's a big statement to try and take their destiny into their own hands," said Mike Henneberry with the United Food and Commercial Workers union Local 5.

The labor union backs the OUR Walmart group. Walmart workers are not unionized."

There was no disruption in Walmart's Black Friday sales which were larger than last year and most of the picketers were bused in from unions - few Walmart employees picketed as most of them do not want to be in a union.

The union workers did succeed in ticking off Walmart customers by getting in their way on a busy shopping day however.

Dozens of stories that the picketers were paid union members. Even MSNBC ran one verifying that. One of the rare times they swerved into truth.


Posted: Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@Ansons Nephew

Re Walmart

Easily proven. Yes. Did ANY walmart in the US have to shut down on Black Friday because its employees walked off? Nope, not one out of approx 8,970. The employees made their voices known by actually going to work.

From a LA Times story:

""We are aware of a few dozen protests at our stores," Restivo said. "The number of associates that have missed their scheduled shift today is more than 60% less than Black Friday last year."

http://www.latimes.com/business/money/la-fi-mo-black-friday-protest-arrest-20121123,0,6435188.story

"Walmart Strike Hits 100 Cities, But Fails To Distract Black Friday Shoppers”

"http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/23/walmart-strike-black-friday_n_2177784.html

(you do like HuffPo, right?) From that article:

""Walmart cuts hours and benefits to push people out," said Tammy, using her phone to capture video of the protest. "It's the same thing at Walgreens. The workers are suffering while billionaires make all the money." But despite her professed anger at corporate greed, Tammy -- who declined to provide her last name lest she jeopardize her job -- was not deterred from entering Walmart to purchase a TV on a layaway plan."

The Dallas Walmart she was going to had a whopping 40 protestors.....in a city the size of Dallas. Hilareous.

Of course, you are free to dismiss what Walmart says in the LA Times story. And as a leftist, I am sure that you will do that. Feel free to take the claims of union scum and protesting groups like the IWW (international workers of the world), a marxist group and dismal failure at organizing anywhere.

That story said 600 protestors were at that CA store …….only 100 were Walmart employees

Did you take part in the massive Kingman Walmart protest? Oh wait, that did not happen?

So no stores shut down due to lack of employees showing up, that’s proof.

LOL


Posted: Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

@FLS

"So explain exactly which method of how she came to be that way makes her situation the taxpayers problem? Wouldn't that be a child support problem?"

Nice attempt at a straw man argument. Spinning words and twisting the subject is not going to work. Sorry.


Posted: Wednesday, December 5, 2012
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“Nope, most of the protestors were leftists and union thugs.”

Can you provide any proof of that assertion?


Posted: Tuesday, December 4, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@nice chuckle

So explain exactly which method of how she came to be that way makes her situation the taxpayers problem? Wouldn't that be a child support problem?


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@Ansons Nephew

Anyone who does not wish to work at walmart or in the fast food industry is free not to do so.

Darn that pesky fact.

Did I miss the massive walkout of walmart employees that leftists assured us would happen on black friday? Nope, most of the protestors were leftists and union thugs.

LOL


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“I see a lot of people working at walmart who are not in their 40's, 50's, or 60's. "Interesting" that you don't.”

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the median age of Wal-Mart employees is over 30 and fast-food workers is over 28. Women, who comprise two-thirds of the industry, are over 32.

Jobs are slowly returning to America, but most of them pay lousy wages with non-existent benefits. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that 7 out of 10 growth jobs over the next decade will be low-wage. That’s why the median wage keeps dropping, especially for the 80 percent of the workforce that’s paid by the hour.

The average Wal-Mart employee earns $8.81 an hour, with a third working less than 28 hours per week and don’t qualify for benefits. These workers are not teenagers with most being in their thirties and forties and having to support their families.

It’s also part of the reason why the percent of Americans living below the poverty line has been increasing even as the economy has started to recover — from 12.3 percent in 2006 to 15 percent in 2011. More than 46 million Americans now live below the poverty line.

Darn those pesky facts.


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“And as long as it does not apply to your peer group who will get their health care for free from the govt.”

And again an untruthful statement regarding me – why do you keep doing that? I pay for insurance, as to most of the people in my “peer group”, as a supplement to my Medicare (which I also pay for). Seriously, you need to stop posting lies about me, it just makes you look … well, you know.


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

@FLS

"Yeah, taxpayers need to be stuck with the tab because condoms or other birth control products are soooooooo outrageously expensive."

There you go, making those assumptions again. Like saying you know how every single mom came to be that way. LoLoL


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@nice chuckle

"I love how you can say a single mom....."

Yeah, taxpayers need to be stuck with the tab because condoms or other birth control products are soooooooo outrageously expensive.

LOL


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@Ansons Nephew

I see a lot of people working at walmart who are not in their 40's, 50's, or 60's. "Interesting" that you don't. Anyone working there in their 60's is likely supplementing a retirement income.

And you think it is fine that the govt allows the insurance companies to pass the cost of the fee they, the govt., will charge on to consumers? Oh wait, of course you do, if ovomits sock puppet, Sebelius, orders it. And as long as it does not apply to your peer group who will get their health care for free from the govt.

Now THAT'S really funny.

LOL


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Nice Chuckle

@FLS

"Walmart is no longer going to provide health coverasge for employees working less thasn 30 hours a week."

Sorry to burst your bubble, but they have been doing that for years.

Further, I love how you can say a single mom that works for 9.50/hr...you know, 2.25 more than minimum wage....that still qualifies and needs a little help is a parasite living off the system.


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

"This should help the American Family’s bottom line."

So you are now saying that the insurance companies should be allowed to operate as parasites? Intersting.

And of course you don't bother to understand that this fee will apply only to "exchange" operatons and not to the millions of people who will not be using the exchange program.

Obama won - live with it!


Posted: Monday, December 3, 2012
Article comment by: Anson's Nephew

“Minimum wage type work is where people start.”

So those 40, 50 and 60 year olds working at Wal-Mart are just starting their careers? LOL!


Posted: Sunday, December 2, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

The fun obamacare story of the day:

"The Obama administration said Friday that it would charge insurance companies for the privilege of selling health insurance to millions of Americans in new online markets run by the federal government."

"The cost of these “user fees” can be passed on to consumers. The proposed fees could add 3.5 percent to premiums for private health plans sold in insurance exchanges operated by the federal government"

"In proposing the new rule, Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, said that fees charged by the federal government would be “sufficient to cover the majority of costs related to the operation of federally facilitated exchanges.” She did not say how the remainder of the money would be raised. …"

This should help the American Family’s bottom line.

LOL


Posted: Saturday, December 1, 2012
Article comment by: Frank Lee Speaking

@nice chuckle

Re: "hatred"

So what would you call someone who, in as country of such opportunity, settles for a very low ewage career? Underachiever, lazy, or both is quite accurate. Minimum wage type work is where people start. They then learn more and move on to something better.


Posted: Saturday, December 1, 2012
Article comment by: origional kingman resident

@ Anson

I stated that if you have information on how Obama Care will be funded other than using the premiums paid by all to pay out on the claims filed by a few it, would be interesting to read the details of how this will be accomplished.

What is not interesting is reading about how no one believes your facts so you no longer back up your rejection of the facts presented by others with facts of your own.

It seems that your self serving explanation is just a cover up for the fact that Linda's assessment of how Obama Care will be funded on the backs of the younger, healthier mandated subscribers is correct.



  - Page 1 -  Page 2



Article Comment Submission Form
Comments are not posted immediately. Submissions must adhere to our Use of Service Terms of Use agreement. Rambling or nonsensical comments may not be posted. Comments are limited to Facebook character limits. In order for us to reasonably manage this feature we may limit excessive comment entries.
Submit an Article Comment
First Name:
Required
Last Name:
Required
Telephone:
Required
Email:
Required
Comment:
Required
Passcode:
Required
Anti-SPAM Passcode Click here to see a new mix of characters.
This is an anti-SPAM device. It is not case sensitive.
   


Advanced Search

Find more about Weather in Kingman, AZ
Click for weather forecast



Find it Features Blogs Milestones Extras Submit Other Publications Local Listings
Real Estate Search | Classifieds | Place an Ad | Find Kingman Jobs | Kingman Chamber | e-News | Contact Us | RSS | Site Map
© Copyright 2016 Western News&Info, Inc.® The Kingman Daily Miner is the information source for Kingman and surrounding area communities in Northern Arizona. Original content may not be reprinted or distributed without the written permission of Western News&Info, Inc.® Kingman Daily Miner Online is a service of WNI. By using the Site, kdminer.com ®, you agree to abide and be bound by the Site's terms of use and Privacy Policy, which prohibit commercial use of any information on the Site. Click here to email your questions, comments or suggestions. Kingman Daily Miner Online is a proud publication of Western News&Info, Inc.® All Rights Reserved.


Software © 1998-2016 1up! Software, All Rights Reserved