Tuesday, September 07, 2004

Tabloids declare Libs winner on health.

Well the tabloid's have declared John Howard the winner on bulk billing even though the extra money promised to save medicare may just end up in the pockets of GPs.
The Daily Telegraph started the praising with a story titled Dr John's amazing health elixa and backed it up with an editorial with more of the same.
Rupert's southern tabloid ran this story by Jason Frenkel and Gerard McManus, and didn't they get it off to a pitifully bias start with their lead paragraph declaring "AUSTRALIANS will save at least $5 on a basic doctor's visit under a $1.8 billion Medicare pledge by the Coalition."
Cmon guys investigate the spin don't just peddle it.
In fact peddle it the Hun did, with two journos, Steve Lewis and Sid Maher whacking their names at the top of the same story for their online edition.
Michael Harvey continued the campaign to endorse the Libs healthcare package with his now predictable mix of hard news and commentary in The Herald Sun. It really is staggering the Herald Sun seems unconcerned that Harvey's punditary and hard news appears on the same page.
For a better story on the Medicare promises go to the age.

4 Comments:

At 4:55 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What a crack up,
The herald sun journos are plagerising each other

 
At 9:45 pm, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Alan Jones has declared the medicare promises debate as a points win to Liberal.
Have a look at this simplistic nonsense. How Jones lives with himself for broadcasting this crap is beyond me. My CAPS ARE COMMENTS.

Alan Jones Today Show Editorial

MEDICARE 7 September 2004
If there has ever been anything thrust upon us that most approximates middle class welfare, it has to be the Medicare system. YEAH IT'S PAID FOR BY THE MIDDLE CLASS TO.
It's clear that neither party is prepared to forsake it.BULLSHIT, THE LIBS HAVE TRIED TO DESTROY IT FOR YEARS
Indeed, both major parties seem terrified at the prospect of anyone thinking they would do anything about dismantling Medicare.
Yet the notion that you should be paying for my health care and that I can bulk bill is ludicrous. FUCK OFF ALAN, YOU PAY A BIGGER MEDICARE REBATE THAN NON-MULTIMILLIONAIRES, AND IN REALITY YOU'D PAY FOR MY MEDIAL BILLS IF I GOT SICK.
And there are hundreds of thousands of other Australians like me who should be paying our own way on health care. YOU DO ALREADY ALAN, AND THEN SOME.
And as for the Medicare levy, which some seem to imagine qualifies them to queue up for free health care whenever they want it, well that barely pays for 10% of the total health bill. 10% WHAT CRAP ALAN.
Free health care should be for those in genuine need. IT'S NOT FREE YOU DILL, HAVE YOU HEARD OF THE MEDICARE LEVY.
And to be fair, on some fronts, Labor and Liberal agree with that.
Consider the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.
You can't get those drugs for nothing. NO SHIT ALAN.
If you are not a concession card holder, you pay the first $28.60.
And rightly so.
If you're a concession card holder, you pay $4.60.
It steadies us up a bit on the over-servicing front. BULLSHIT ALAN, THE PBS APPROVALS BOARD PREVENTS OVERSERVICING AND NOT THE COST OF MEDICINE.
But now, Mark Latham says he will increase the Medicare patient rebate to 100% of the schedule fee, designed to encourage doctors to bulk bill.
The Prime Minister says the Coalition will give all patients a 100% rebate on the schedule fee whether they visit a bulk billing doctor or not.
The reality is, we are pouring more money into bulk billing to cover more people who should be paying for at least part of the cost of going to a doctor. DON'T PUSH YOUR AGING WETERN SUBURBS AUDIENCE ALAN, THEY LIKE BULK-BILLING.
However, the 100% rebate on the schedule fee is not the problem. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT NOW ALAN? YOU JUST CRAPPED ON FOR AGES ABOUT PAYING FOR YOUR OWN MEDICAL EXPENSES.
I spoke last week about anaesthetists.
The guts of the issue here is twofold.
One, you can't escape them, but two, their schedule fee is ridiculous.
In other words, the government will rebate 100% of the schedule fee, but an anaesthesia unit, which is the way they calculate the cost of an anaesthetic, is valued at $16.50 in the Medicare benefits schedule.
In the AMA list of medical services and fees, it's $56.
So promising 100% of the schedule fee still leaves people out of pocket. ONLY IF THE GOVT BREAKS IT'S PROMISE.
The great mystery of all of this is, yet again, the insurance fiasco surrounding health. THAT WOULD BE PAYING YOUR OWN WAY WOULD IT?
Can you imagine going out and being only able to insure for part of your car or part of your house.
But with health, you can't insure for the full cost.
Why shouldn't a patient be able to go to a health insurer and say, "I would like to attend doctors who charge around the AMA fee. What is the premium?" FUCK ALAN YOU HAVE TOTALLY LOST ME NOW. CAN YOU STICK TO ONE TOPIC OR ARE YOU TRYING TO CONFUSE EVERYONE? AND ANYWAY WOULDN'T FULL REBATES LEAD TO SOME MASSIVE OVERSERVICING. WHAT INSURANCE COMPANY IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD RUN THEIR BUSINESS LIKE THAT?
So all the promises yesterday are about retaining Medicare, bulk billing and schedule fees.
But if any government sticks the schedule fee way below the cost of providing the service, then, quite frankly, the doctor is being ripped off and the patient, under the guise of a so-called free health system, is paying four times - a Medicare levy, health insurance premium, general tax and the gap.
Yesterday might have been an attractive health auction.
But it doesn't take us anywhere towards solving the real problems of health insurance and health costs.
That said, there is a huge shortage of doctors. FINALLY YOU HAVE SAID SOMETHING SANE SO GET ON YOUR HIGH HORSE AND CALL FOR MORE UNI PLACES AS A LONG-TERM SOLUTION BECAUSE WE KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE IMPORT FUNNY SPEAKING DOCS FROM OS.
The first thing a patient wants is access to his or her doctor. ANY DOCTOR WILL DO IN REGIONAL AREAS AND OUTER SUBURBS.
So in what is a virtual points decision to the government, the Prime Minister is saying whether you go to a bulk billing doctor or not, you will get a 100% rebate on the schedule fee.
Hopefully, people on average income will not have to cop large out of pocket medical expenses.
NOW THAT YOUR AUDIENCE IS TOTALLY CONFUSED WE COME TO THE LIBERAL PARTY ENDORSEMENT. THANKS FOR NOTHING ALAN.

 
At 10:43 pm, Blogger Robert said...

Jones is running the Liberal party line. The Fin Review had a column today which was exactly the same. By arguing for a position further to the right than the Liberals, these commentators want Howard's proposal to seem like a sensible compromise.

 
At 11:19 am, Anonymous Anonymous said...

With eight years of negative media against the Coalition Government I see this article as chicken feed bias compared to the 99% of others in support of Labor.How is 'Dr Johns amazing elixa' any different to article appearing into today’s SMH titled 'Super Policy a fair go for all'

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/08/1094530649885.html

Ummmm hang on a minute, it is different! Where are comments opposing this policy???? Fair dinkum, I have had a gut full of labor bias and negativity rampant throughout the papers and television. I suggest you all read the SMH a little more often, please find a positive article on the Coalition. The issue here is that negative press and politics does not win elections. As a swinging voter I object strongly to negativity, particularly when exists a positive side to the equation. Anecdotally I have seen countless articles not giving the government a fair go, there must be a balance in presenting an argument. If I were to read an editorial I would expect a subjective argument, no problems with that. What I am concerned about is bias on the front and first few pages, particularly of the SMH'S.

Hypocrites!!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home