Archive for July, 2010

Centralized Hospitals vs. Private Practice Physicians

Friday, July 16th, 2010

Started By: lbmdpa, MD, Neurology, 12:17AM Jul 11, 2010

I have had privileges at our largest hospital for 17 years and have been in hospital leadership for 8 years and was Chief of Staff as well. Now, I find myself leaving. All the active neurologists at the hospital resigned. The current hospital administration wants only MDs that it can control. They want employed MDs like hospitalists, ER docs, radiologists, anesthesiologists and pathologists. They want 501A arrangements which are dummy corporations owned by the hospital that employ doctors. With the loss of consult codes in January, we found that we were operating at a loss when we went to the hospital. When the hospital wanted to put in a stroke certified program which would have increased our work load and wanted to bring in a stroke “medical director” and would not negotiate any reimbursement, we decided to leave and do outpatient practices. It is really sad. Has anyone else been forced to leave (or chosen to leave)their hospitals due to economics or administration policies?

#1 of 29, Added By: An_6356537, DO, Anesthesiology, 6:50AM Jul 11, 2010

Are you kidding? Hospital based practice, ie. anesthesiology, radiology and pathology primarily, have been dealing with hospital system extortion practices for at least 10 or more years now. This is not new, just new to you. It is clear that the hospitals (and other facilities) are branching out their control arms now to other specialties, as you point out. Fortunately, you have an ability to practice outside of a facility, whereas the vast majority of anesthesiologists, etc., do not. It won’t be long before enough docs filter in from other countries who will be fully willing to become employed by the facilities, and all private practice in the USA will go down. That is the ultimate goal.

Hospitals have been slowly taking control of the physicians on staff for many years using such agrements as ‘PPO’s’ and such. With the threats of reduced reimbursement do to government control, it will only get worse. Hospitals are already showing signs of eating each other.

#2 of 29, Added By: TCARRUTHERS, MD, Family Medicine, 8:32AM Jul 11, 2010

I have to maintain privileges at at least one hospital due to insurance company mandates. However, I haven’t had an inpatient in at least two years. My patients would show up in the ER, and if they needed admitted the ER doc would call the hospitalists. I would not even be notified. I’ve even had that happen with people I sent to the ER from my office and told the ER they were coming.

It’s ironic that the inscos insist I have hospital privileges while the hospitalists have taken over my inpatients whether I like it or not.

GOP Senator Boehner Endorses Marxism

Friday, July 9th, 2010

“From each according to his ability, to each according to their need.”  Karl Marx

Now please tell me how Boehner is different from Marx 

BOSTON (MarketWatch) — The time has come for the nation to face some facts according to Republican Rep. John Boehner House minority leader.

Boehner wants to;

1)  increase the retirement age to 70

2) plus tie cost-of-living increases to wages rather than the consumer price index

3) limit payments so they only go to people who need them

“We need to look at the American people and explain to them that we’re broke,” Boehner was quoted as saying in The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. “If you have substantial non-Social Security income while you’re retired, why are we paying you ….” 

Spoken like a true believer in Marxism

Comment #1   Rabbi Phil Ander 7-9-10

Shirts & Skins ………………..Republicans & Democrats.
Both on the same team……they just switch positions

Now you know why nothing changes when the party in power changes

Comment #2 Pete Zah (Armenia)      I lived under the promises and threats of Socilaism/Marxism in Armenia.  You Americans must study history because you do not know what you are in for.   Why do you think the people rose up, even with the threat of torture and death, to overthrow the Socialists controling Armenia?

Huh?

Monday, July 5th, 2010

Pelosi: Unemployment Checks Fastest Way to Create Jobs 

July 1, 2010 Unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Thursday.   Talking to reporters, the House speaker was defending a jobless benefits extension against those who say it gives recipients little incentive to work. By her reasoning, those checks are helping give somebody a job.  

“It injects demand into the economy,” Pelosi said, arguing that when families have money to spend it keeps the economy churning. “It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.”  Pelosi said the aid has the “double benefit” of helping those who lost their jobs and acting as a “job creator” on the side.  “It’s impossible to think of a situation where we would have a country that would say we’re not going to have unemployment benefits,” Pelosi said.  

Democrats have been trying for more than a month to pass a bill extending jobless benefits to more than 1 million people. Currently, jobless benefits last nearly two years — up to 26 weeks paid by state treasuries with federal help for up to an additional 73 weeks.  Of course, those workers could be sending a lot more money into the economy if they had jobs since unemployment benefits generally do not cover the entire cost of lost wages.   The counterintuitive statement drew jeers from Republicans, who claim Democrats can’t figure out any way to tackle the economic slump that doesn’t involve spending massive amounts of taxpayer money.  

“No plan to create jobs — just more stimulus spending,” House Republican Leader John Boehner said at a dueling press conference.  Despite the wave of unemployment aid and stimulus spending dating back to the end of the Bush administration, the jobless rate is still hovering close to 10 percent. New figures out Thursday showed new jobless benefits claims rising for the second time in three weeks. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., on Thursday called the newest extension plan “fiscal insanity” because it is not paid for and will only create future problems.  

“I support, and Republicans have supported, extending unemployment benefits, but we must not do so at a cost to the deficit, to the economy and to future generations. Our inability to get our fiscal house in order isn’t just damaging future generations; it is wreaking havoc on jobs today,” he said in a statement.   

Pelosi criticized Republicans Thursday, saying she’s still optimistic the bill will pass though it failed again in the Senate Wednesday night.

 Comment #1  Remember she is 3rd in line for the Presidency of the United States.  Keep up the great articles they make one think.

John Profumo (United Kingdom)  

Analyst: Obama has U.S. economy in ‘death spiral’

Monday, July 5th, 2010

‘Simple math’ confirms unemployment won’t be solved by government hiring By Bob Unruh 7-4-10A new analysis of the U.S. economy shows that since 2007, the private sector has lost 10.5 million jobs while the public sector has added 720,000 jobs, creating a “death spiral” for the nation’s economy.   The study comes from The Free Enterprise Nation, a nonpartisan national membership/advocacy organization for individuals and businesses that make up the private sector.   The analysis was done using statistics about employment data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.   The recession of the last two years exacerbated the larger problem that already was in place, it revealed.

 

“Over the 10-year period between March 2000 and March 2010, the private sector lost over three million jobs, while the public sector gained nearly two million jobs,” the analysis concludes.   Among the changes were California’s loss of 665,800 jobs in the private sector. But government in the Golden State added 163,800 jobs.   Also, Michigan lost 791,700 private-sector jobs, a “staggering” 20 percent. Government bureaucracies, however, kept all but 7 percent of their positions.    

Jim MacDougald, president and CEO of The Free Enterprise Nation, recently appeared on the Fox News Channel to talk about a new campaign called “I own you.”   Further:

  • North Carolina showed a 10-year loss of 138,200 private-sector jobs, or 4 percent of its private-sector workforce, while adding 127,100 government jobs, a 20 percent increase.
  • Colorado’s population increased by 17 percent in the past decade while losing 3 percent of its private-sector jobs. Government employment increased by more than 17 percent during the same time frame.
  • Tennessee lost 157,300 private-sector jobs while adding 13,900 in government agencies.
  • While Texas added 616,000 private-sector jobs, it also added 295,200 government jobs, almost one bureaucratic position for every two positions in private enterprise.
  • Florida also added private-sector jobs overall – 39,600. But it also added 127,100 government positions.
  • Massachusetts lost 168,700 private-sector jobs but still found the need to add 7,500 government jobs.
  • Wisconsin lost 149,400 private-sector jobs; added 22,300 to government payrolls.

 

“The consequence of this employment shift is that a smaller number of private-sector employers and workers are saddled with the tax burden of financially supporting a growing government workforce,” said MacDougald.  “Since public-sector workers are paid more on average in compensation and benefits than private-sector workers, it is financially unsustainable for the government to continue to grow while the private-sector workforce shrinks,” he said.   He explained to WND that while the problem is massive, there is the potential for a solution.  

“There are 89,000 taxpayer-supported entities that make up the ‘public sector,’ and no one is in charge of their collective efforts. About one-half of the 22 million public-sector workers are in public education. (And only about one-half of the people employed in public education are teachers!)” he said.   “It is possible that the federal government thinks it can solve the unemployment problem by hiring more people, but, if so, it would be another indication of just how far removed from reality the federal government’s economic policies are,” he said.   “Our population grew by 25 million from 2000 to 2010. We needed to create at least 20 million new jobs. Instead, we lost 3 million in the private sector. The ‘shortfall’ of 23 million jobs could not possibly be made up by government hiring, as they would have to double in size in order to do so,” he said.  

The real problem is not necessarily with the number of government jobs but the cost of their “huge pensions, early retirement and health-insurance benefits.”  “That is where the real ‘cost of government’ is,” he continued. “As numbers of workers in the private sector decrease, and public-sector hiring increases, it places an impossible burden on those individuals and businesses left who actually pay taxes.   “Unfortunately, the current approach is to charge more taxes to those who actually pay federal income taxes (one-half of tax filers), and businesses. Businesses (employers) have no choice but to reduce overhead, which means fewer domestic workers. A death spiral,” he warned.   The solution would be a hard pill to swallow for many, he warned.  

Among the moves that would help would be to terminate all government pension plans, “vesting everyone 100 percent in benefits accrued to date.” Pensions could be replaced with a type of 401(k) retirement plan that is funded by employer contributions.   Then there would be need for a hard look at what government actually does.   “Do we NEED government to do that for us? If not, stop doing it,” he said.   Next would be to ignore – or better yet banish – public-sector unions.   A “zero-based” staffing and budget plan would require officials to review what work is required and how many workers are needed to do it.  “Public policy-makers must ask: How many people do we NEED to do what we are hired to do? Do we really NEED one administrative/management employee for every teacher? Once those questions have been asked and answered, we must rebuild each public-sector entity from scratch,” he said.  

“We have to ‘reinvent’ the public sector, based on a fundamental requirement that it serves the taxpayer, not the other way around. It is a huge job to do, and it will take years. There is no silver bullet. But it can be done,” he said.   WND columnist Dan Mangru also has criticized the government‘s “fuzzy math”.   And longtime top-rated radio talk-show host Roger Hedgecock said more and more federal spending just depresses the economy.  

“Three professors at the Harvard Business School, in a study titled ‘Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?’ have concluded, based on 40 years of data, that federal government spending does not stimulate local business spending. In fact, the opposite occurred. The more federal spending, the less corporate spending,” he reported.  “And the same results show up whether the state is large or small, whether the firms are large or small over a period of 40 years. In fact, the study shows the results ‘most pronounced in geographically concentrated firms and within the industries that are the target of the spending.’ In plain speech, federal ‘bacon’ is toxic to economic growth in the private sector,” he wrote.  

July 4th why it is important

Sunday, July 4th, 2010

What Price Freedom?

By John W. Whitehead 6/30/2010

Let me tell you about 56 men who risked everything—their fortunes and their lives—to take a stand for truth. These men laid everything on the line, pledged it all—”our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor”—because they believed in a radical idea: that all people are created to be free. They believed that freedom is a spiritual concept in that the rights we possess are, in their words, given to us by the Creator. Let me emphasize: at the heart of these rights is a radical freedom—the freedom to speak, to dissent, to protest and to seek relief, if necessary, against an unjust government—that is, one that won’t listen to the people.

Labeled traitors, these men were charged with treason, a crime punishable by death. For some, their acts of rebellion would cost them their homes and their fortunes. For others, it would be the ultimate price—their lives. Yet even knowing the heavy price they might have to pay, these men dared to speak up when silence could not be tolerated.

Their signatures, famously scribbled on a piece of parchment, expressed their unfettered willingness to speak out against the most powerful empire in the world. These 56 men were the signers of the Declaration of Independence.

Some we remember for their later accomplishments—such as Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, both of whom went on to serve as American presidents. But there were others—such as Lewis Morris, Carter Braxton, Thomas Nelson and Richard Stockton—who do not often get mentioned, who sought not glory but rather a cause. They knew that sacrifice was necessary to secure freedom, and they were willing to make the sacrifice.

Lewis Morris lost his entire estate. The British ravaged and destroyed it, sending his family fleeing in desperation with nowhere to go.

Carter Braxton’s entire career and way of life were decimated. Losing his ships to the British Navy, his shipping company was forever lost and he was never able to revive it.

Thomas Nelson’s price for liberty was to the tune of $2 million—and that was in 1776. He ran up the $2 million credit debt for the “Patriots’ Cause.” In the end, repaying the debt cost him his entire estate. He died bankrupt and was buried in an unmarked grave.

Richard Stockton paid dearly also. Once a prominent judge, he gave up his cherished seat on the bench to fight for liberty. For his decision, he was dragged from his bed and tortured by British soldiers.

All in all, of those 56 signers, 9 died during the Revolution, 5 were captured by British soldiers, 18 had their homes looted and burned by the Red Coats, 2 were wounded in battle and 2 lost their sons during the war. Remarkably, these men—who were community leaders, business owners, judges, lawyers and inventors—sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor so that you and I could live freely in a nation where we have the right to stand up and speak out.

There are many more stories of heroic patriots throughout American history who have risked it all to preserve the freedoms we possess. Most of them have come from radically different walks of life—different upbringings, different educations, different ideas. But the one thing that unites them is their love of and commitment to freedom and their willingness to stand up and speak out, no matter the cost. Although many of them lost everything, they were willing to sacrifice in order to raise their voices in truth. They put freedom before their own interests. Because of their bravery in speaking truth to power and their commitment to unwavering principles, history has judged them to be extraordinary.

Thus, it is only right that we should still honor them every Fourth of July. Yet how do we do so? We go through the motions, spouting patriotic sentiments and putting on displays of national pomp and circumstance that at the end of the day mean nothing. Sadly, as a nation, we have become jaded and apathetic, content to celebrate our independence with cookouts and fireworks but little else.

America, we must remember, is a concept. We must earn our right to be American. What does that mean? First of all, it means learning the core principles of citizenship that are laid out in the Constitution. Any person in this country who cannot list from memory the rights enshrined in those 462 words that make up the Bill of Rights is not a true American. Unfortunately, this applies to the great majority of the populace. Second, it means taking a stand on those principles and fighting to keep the freedoms that are being stripped from us on a daily basis. This may well mean grabbing a picket sign and taking to the streets.

The bottom line is that we owe it to those who have put their lives on the line for our freedoms to make our citizenship count for something. We need to take responsibility for what’s going on around us. And we need to stand up and support those who refuse to remain silent when they see an injustice and who, like those 56 brave men, dare to put it all on the line in order to speak truth to power.