http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2009/07/02/the-lesson-of-group-health-in-parts Comments On: The Lesson of Group Health, in Parts by Eli Sanders en-us Copyright 2009 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0800 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0800 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Posted by New Health Dialogue]]> Fri, 10 Jul 2009 07:27:09 -0700 The Stranger Posted by ugh]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:53:21 -0700 The Stranger Posted by JesseJB]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 16:10:49 -0700 The Stranger
I mean this article starts out implying that GHC is bad, because rates have increased, AND rates have increased at other HMOs. Isn't that logical? If rates go up, isn't there a reason for it? I'm betting there is, and I'm also betting it's not "too make tons more cash."

It's not small enough? But the size allows for a variety of options and not being shoehorned into a less than ideal choice/surgery/doctor/whatever the fuck.

I guess, now, I need someone to explain to me why the smaller co-op is a better option, because it seems much more limited to me. A regional cooperative, like GHC, seems more manageable and more able to manage major health catastrophes.

Someone tell me why I'm wrong, 'cause I'm just not getting it.
Posted by Swingstab]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:50:20 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Thel]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:46:24 -0700 The Stranger Posted by rtm]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:39:54 -0700 The Stranger

Posted by merry]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:21:32 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Greg]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:04:05 -0700 The Stranger
It's truly member-driven at Group Health. And yep, count me in on the chorus of voices praising GH. The best medical coverage I've ever had, some of the finest doctors in the nation, low-cost meds, online medical records, 24-hour telephone nurse service, etc etc etc... And #10 is right, GH works because it is a fully-integrated system. Don't know how this would apply on a national scale, but the GH system is definitely worth consideration in this discussion.


Posted by merry]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:03:48 -0700 The Stranger Posted by GHC Since Birth]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:48:46 -0700 The Stranger
Yep. GW Bush.

Once again, after all the mental midgets sit down to think it through, it comes back to the ideas of the master.

http://www.injuryboard.com/national-news…


Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:30:33 -0700 The Stranger Posted by rca]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:23:27 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Not profit HMO is still an HMO]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:02:04 -0700 The Stranger Posted by Erica Tarrant]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 12:00:31 -0700 The Stranger
and btw what would be of interest is the means of electing the board of directors of these co ops....who gets to vote? do we end up with a parallel "government"

look at the corporate world, share holder democracy isn't working too good is it.....
Posted by PC]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:37:02 -0700 The Stranger
I've been with non-profit HMOs my whole life and have never had a problem. Of course, I've never had a serious health issue either, so I only know so much.

All that said, I'm not saying this makes sense as a substitute for the "public option," I'm just happy with GHC.
Posted by Levislade]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:35:48 -0700 The Stranger
And demands.

Accept nothing LESS!
Posted by Will in Seattle]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:34:07 -0700 The Stranger "pubic option" =
"Government run taxpayer subsidized".
Posted by Questions??]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:27:58 -0700 The Stranger Posted by jd]]> Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:24:39 -0700 The Stranger