Friday, June 11, 2004

Hospitals and the concentration of wealth

Title: For-profit hospitals bill bigger
Source: CNN
Date: June 10, 2004

From the article:
    "'Investor-owned hospitals charge outrageous prices for inferior care,' Woolhandler said in a statement.

    'The for-profits skimp on nurses, but spend lavishly on their executives and paper-pushers.'

    Himmelstein pointed to fraud cases involving for-profit health care companies including Columbia/HCA Healthcare Corp. , which was hit by a Medicare scandal in 1997; Tenet Healthcare Corp., which is being investigated for allegedly overbilling Medicare; and HealthSouth , where 15 former executives have pleaded guilty to criminal fraud charges."
    In a commentary published in the journal, Dr. Steffie Woolhandler and Dr. David Himmelstein of Harvard Medical School commented that 13 percent of all U.S. hospitals are for-profit, and said converting them to nonprofit status could have saved $6 billion of the $37 billion spent on care at investor-owned hospitals in 2001.
Where is the $6 billion being wasted today? The answer:
    "The reality is that for-profits face significant economic challenges. The first is they have to generate revenues that will satisfy shareholders," Devereaux said.

    "Second, they have high executive bonuses. Thirdly, they are very top-heavy and have high administrative costs. Also, they have to pay taxes. That is a lot of extra money that they have to come up with," Devereaux added.
And that doesn't count all of the known and unknown fraud, overbilling, etc.

What if you applied this type of analysis to the medical industry as a whole? For example, to drug companies. The top five drug companies in the U.S. pay over $10 billion per year simply in dividends. That's just one piece of the puzzle, and just that one little piece costs us $100 per household in the U.S. Then add to that the shocking executive salaries (Henry A. McKinnell -- just one executive out of tens of thousands in the pharmaceutical industry -- received $28,151,481 in 2003 from Pfizer, for example), the bonuses, the stock grants, the jets, the lavish office buildings, the top-heavy administration costs, the billions spent on advertising, that amazing price gouging (prices in Canada for the same drugs are consistently lower by a factor of 50 percent), etc, etc.

These are the costs of the concentration of wealth. If we were to eliminate these costs across the entire health care industry, the savings would, at a minimum, total $1,000 for every man, woman and child in the U.S.


At 7:33 PM, Blogger Mike said...

Thought you would like this. make mone

At 3:51 PM, Blogger Joe said...

Gary J. Bonas II
Juris Doctorate (J.D.)

To: Tim Banta, Aletha McNiel (PMS), Partner Agents with Scripps Health

M.D. Faith Barnett & M.D. Prabhnakar Tripuraneni & Chris Van Gordon

Scripps Clinic, 10666 N. Torrey Pines Rd., La Jolla, Ca. 92037

Tim Banta (T.B.)
1521 West Cameron Ave. P.O. BOX 2220, West Covina, Ca. 91793-9971

From: Gary (Cash) J. Bonas II (I.D. # 32971839 “Arrow” & L538102707
Date: March 02, 2007

Re: Your Ongoing Fraud Billing Claims & With Felony Penalty Interest
To date you have ignored my diplomatic informative verification letters & offers of compromise, about the cash you owe me, dated 2-19-07 & 3-2-07 concerning your un-backed billing crimes (every penny), including your most pink letter dated April 4, 2007 outlining this:

Principal: $5062.35
Interest: $318.99
Total Due:

Rate of Interest:

10.00% (Late Fee in concert Penalty Rig, for stock men who don’t work & expect to get paid)

This is a fluid, ongoing draft, submitted to A.G. plus as back up.
Un-backed numbers, up-rigged for stock holders, ripping on the material term in all contracts that you are duty bound to verify, based on an oral contract you drafted, which I never agreed to, tacking on a penalty charge masked as “interest”, by in felony house agreement:


One core law fact is this – NO ONE may pick whatever number &/or as many charges as they can get away with & collect IT. It is the owners’ (seller’s) burden to show that he fixed the numbers in that lease contract by the sole lawful price protocol:


“The public policy expressed … may not be circumvented by words used in a [cookie cutter letter oral] contract.

It is not that hard to be faithful to those in need that we make the chose to serve & have the duty to serve faithfully: all you had to do was add IT up & divide, aka:
Measuring each individual service item charge & setting a single price accordingly.


The fact is that you did do that calculation, they you did a host of other stuff designed to wiggle UP as much as possible to the figures you calculated that you might be able to collect by pumping out canned letters using postal roads. In house you, your infidelity to faithful protocol is:
“[D]escribed as a "good source of [extra, free] revenue"-pursuant to a strategy of "maximizing fee [revenue] income."

You spend huge indirect in house resources over-reaching. Doing that is both unfaithful & a big time calculated risk because In-house “obligations of any kind” not to honor the above FAITH, like the chief M.D. talking with & paying his bookkeeper to call around & get nearby rental rates, like talking about & agreeing with his stock holding partners to using other’s numbers as an UP or DOWN bench mark, is not IT. Any single in house pact not to honor the above rule is:

“… unlawful per se.” “

Price is too critical … to allow it to be used even in an informal manner to restrain [cost] competition.


“[One] … seeking the benefits of a clause purporting to fix … [a percentage price tag penalty box or anything else] must … prove that the clause is valid under the facts [& law]…. The applicability of … [any duty to pay] … depends upon the actual facts not the words that may have been used in the contract.”

My letters you have ignored area very easily made exhibits to a check box negligence complaint, which opens the door to HOT COFFEE punitive damages. Based on facts, this is reasonable:


Of course esquires would love billing you a whole lot of money for dragging out the inevitable, by abusing process in my first hand experienced, humble opinion. I personally think that is a waste of energy & time, which is money. But that is your decision.

Progressive isn’t just our name, it’s our approach, our attitude and our way of thinking about business, ours as well as yours.
One real simple prototype cookie cutter looks like this sample:


A) To serve & charge injured We The Little People faithfully;
B) Revenues equal [labor] costs, not a penny is left over for a single stock holder;


Breach is the only real issue, which turns on what a “reasonable person” would have done & would do! It is a fun black & white issue to whip up in a host of different ways, from my 20-20 law-fact view.


Sick & injured people, a sympathetic class, emotional distress, financial depression, on a class wide basis!


$1.00 at issue triggers punitive damages based on “deep pockets,” which deep pockets are sustained soley by bad acts in voilation fo the revenue equals cost rule!


We value you and your customer, because you are valuable to US. So while your IN HOUSE FINANCIAL goals will always be our top priority, we place enormous value on the balance between the financial performance you deserve and your reputation in the community. To accomplish this, we combine tried and true expertise with forward thinking and unparalleled innovation. We work to thoroughly know your business so that we are able to design specific solutions for the challenges you face.

Chris Van Gorder, FACHE
Scripps Pres & Chief Executive O

Van Gorder manages all functions of the $1.6 billion corporation.

Just saw some under-reported numbers (off invoice medical stuff), so I just changed my mind, lets make IT 8 figures.


Executed: _________________ ___________________________
Gary J. Bonas II

C: My D Prep File
C: Class action


Post a Comment

<< Home