Medinnovationblog, authored by Dr. Reece, has an interesting post on how Wal-Mart can teach the physicians a few lessons in business and service. All the factors important to improving health care are discussed:
- Price matters. Wal-Mart’s slogan of “We sell for less” has been a smashing success. Some physician groups have taken the clue by opening and owning their own clinics and by lowering overhead in “cash-only” practices.
- Access matters. Longer hours, no waiting and quick patient processing appeals to health consumers. Some physicians have responded with open-scheduling, see patients on the day they call.
- Transparency matters. Patients like to know in advance or at the site of care what things will cost. Some physicians, particularly in cash-only practices, are posting prices in their offices.
- Predictability matters. Consumers like to know what they are in for. Predictability is what successful corporate franchises, and other in-store clinics, like CVS and Minute Clinics, strive for.
- Location and convenience matters. Walmart got its start by placing its stores in rural and suburbs where competitors had not gone and where parking was ample and free.
I agree with Dr. Reece that these new clinics are or are going to be one of the biggest innovations in the world of health care. But one potential road block for this innovation is that “in-store clinics take two to three years to show a profit, and at least seven clinic operators – short on capital – have closed up shop.” If anyone can make this innovation work, it is probably Wal-Mart.
$25 million for yanking hospital privileges sounds a little steep to me, though I could be wrong.
Clinton health plan may mean tapping pay:
WASHINGTON - Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton said Sunday she might be willing to garnish the wages of workers who refuse to buy health insurance to achieve coverage for all Americans.
The New York senator has criticized presidential rival Barack Obama for pushing a health plan that would not require universal coverage. Clinton has not always specified the enforcement measures she would embrace, but when pressed on ABC’s “This Week,” she said: “I think there are a number of mechanisms” that are possible, including “going after people’s wages, automatic enrollment.”
Clinton said such measures would apply only to workers who can afford health coverage but refuse to buy it, which puts undue pressure on hospitals and emergency rooms. With her proposals for subsidies, she said, “it will be affordable for everyone.”
Of course it will be affordable for everyone, especially when you STEAL from the most productive citizens and when you STRIP their liberties from them. These Dems make the silliest fuss about how our government should not be “spying” on us, how we should not be in this stupid war in Iraq, about how we shouldn’t sacrifice our freedoms for security, yet they go on to say in the same goddamn breath that we should sacrifice our freedoms so everyone can have cheap health care, which is a form security and wellbeing.
To me, the biggest difference in the government doing what it thinks it needs to do to protect us from terrorists and the government doing what it thinks it needs to do to give us cheap health care is that people are largely incapable of insulating themselves from the threat of terrorists. I can’t collect foreign intelligence, I can’t tell the State or Defense Departments to work whatever magic they might have. I am extremely dependent on this government to protect me from military threats, whereas I and other people are less dependent on the government in regards to health care.
Has any of these Dems explained why taking away freedoms and liberties for cheap health care better than taking away freedoms and liberties in order to kill terrorists before they kill me?
