Comments on: Group Opposes St. Luke’s Street Closure

By: Remote control newspaper

Remote control newspaper — Wed, 22 Jun 2016 08:03:49 +0000

Does the Statesman still have employees in Boise?

By: Sheldon of Idaho

Sheldon of Idaho — Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:48:17 +0000

The Statesman has once again demonstrated their absolute lack of ethics. After an editorial endorsing the Jefferson Street closure, an opponent of that closure, Eric Kingston, wrote a Guest Opinion in response.
On the Statesman web site, they have the anti-closure title, and then–immediately beneath it–a giant picture of St Lukes’ paid consultant, along with a video promoting the insane “cycle track”.
You must continue below that big picture to actually read the guest opinion.
Talk about “bait and switch”!!!!!!
Thanks, Statesman, you’ve done it again.

By: High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter — Wed, 18 May 2016 01:39:47 +0000

Dave – far be it from me to defend NYT quoters like Ms. Becky while potentially incurring the wrath of our own Guardian Angel – but I think her point is we can dispense with the “because of our 125 year history of selflessly saving the sick and dying we have decided in our unquestionable infinite wisdom we need your public street” shtick. That hog wash needs to park itself behind the real reason – the feeding the gluttonous non-profit beast. Of course, in this day and age and with St Lukes current leadership that should have been obvious from the get go. I just wish Boise City Counsel would have taken 10 minutes to do what Becky did – their own googling so they wouldn’t have bought that “fairy tale” hook line and sinker. Further adding to my frustration is they probably have the NYT site bookmarked anyway!

So Dave it is agreed that the task at hand is what is going to down on June 22nd. When our state legislature, in its infinite wisdom, decided that it needed to save Idaho construction interests…er, the rights of the disenfranchised of rural Ada Co. from noted city slickers Comrades Richardson/Eastlake, they made sure that the expanded representation of ACHD would include sensible people because they would be elected by sensible people.

Yet here we are, the first session of the Lukes/ACHD charade passed with a 4-1 vote in favor of “giving and spending” with only the one for sure lib, Jim Hansen, the lone dissenter. Was frankly assuming that the Commission was going to end this nonsense right then and there back in March. Like Private Pyle says, “surprise, surprise.”

The only thing that is going to save those neighborhood NIMBYs and us tax payers is that I still can’t figure out what tangible benefit those commissioners can hope to get by letting Lukes slam that scoop shovel into Jefferson. City of Boise has clocked in with its 40-pieces-of-silver wish list (re: baseball, facility for the college and “choo choo”) but less clear is what is in it, besides more work/less budget for ACHD.

There is no question that the diamond producing pressure of $t Luke$ has been and will continue to be at play – its whats gotten this whole charade to this point. No, the real question is how our county wide commission responds for the vote that truly counts – the vacation of public property in the form of Jefferson Street.

Guess I’ll be grabbing a lemonade and will watch the show…

By: Rocky

Rocky — Tue, 17 May 2016 00:28:55 +0000

Sick and tired of Luke’s handing out free soccer balls and putting their name all over green bikes while socking it to us health care consumers with medical bills that only skyrocket up and up. St. Luke’s employees aren’t happy either from what contacts are telling me. Many are bailing to Als. In-the-trench workers getting insulting raises–or none at all if they’ve topped out–while executives continue to get double digit hikes yearly. Used to feel like a family they say but no longer. And to add insult to injury they get asked over and over for donations back to help the Luke’s “cause.” And now they want yet another public street to add to their portfolio? Hope ACHD doesn’t roll over and play dead like City Council. Shame on them.

By: Becky

Becky — Mon, 16 May 2016 23:29:44 +0000

This weekend, a friend of a friend told me to check out a Facebook page “Paying Till It Hurts.” It’s a follow-up to a series of New York Times articles focused on the price of healthcare in the United States. I recommend people check out both the Facebook page and Google “New York Times Paying Till It Hurts” for the series of articles.

Someone posted an article titled “HOSPITALS ARE ROBBING US BLIND Forget Obamacare. The real villains in the American health care system are greedy hospitals and the politicians who protect them.” After reading this, I’m curious what is the real motivation behind St Luke’s and St Als buying so many doctor offices and outpatient clinics. The article states, “From 1999 to 2013, the cost to employers of an average family health policy increased from $4,200 to $12,000 per year.” As a middle-class family, we are experiencing the cost issue first-hand through ever increasing employee contributions, larger deductibles, and co-pays. Here are a few excerpts from two articles.

“Obamacare law reinforces the trend of providers, including doctors and hospitals, to merge into large regional health systems that dominate local markets. The law also introduces new rules and restrictions that will reduce the degree of competition in the insurance market.”

“This growth of monopoly power is not the result of free-market forces, but the deliberate product of public policy. Instead of honestly budgeting in order to finance health care, policymakers have repeatedly sanctioned monopolistic hospital markets in the hope that dominant providers will use higher revenues to cross-subsidize indigent and emergency care.”

“The New York Times reports that hospitals have been buying up doctors’ offices, because doing so allows the exact same offices to charge Medicare higher prices for performing the exact same services, because the government has decided that hospital-based care is intrinsically more expensive than office care.”

“As for why hospitals charge such high prices, it’s fairly simple: They do it because they can. In a competitive market, a provider who jacks up prices risks losing customers to competitors who charge less. But what if incumbent providers have the political muscle to keep competitors out of the market?”

EDITOR NOTE–Becky, we will let your comment stand, but the issue is not Obama, the NYT, or hospital monopoly. The issue is closing Jefferson St. in Boise, ID. Future commenters,PLEASE PLEASE stay on topic!

By: Bill goodnight

Bill goodnight — Sun, 15 May 2016 15:16:08 +0000

With overwhelming public opposition to this proposal, particularly by the neighboring public, how could it possibly not be in the public interest to retain public ownership in and access to Jefferson street?

By: High Plains Drifter

High Plains Drifter — Sat, 14 May 2016 17:33:42 +0000

Should of figured non-sensical, illogical behavior such as this would have its roots in the Obummer/Bieter administration. As always, follow that money. But to pull off what our patron Saint of Bullying is trying to accomplish with this ill conceived expansion (unless you’re one of the few remaining cheerleaders for Obamacare) you need all battalions marching in lockstep both in public and behind the scenes.

Roll call! All the smaller non profits that depend on Mother Lukes for funding? Check. Fans of Dave Frazier memorial downtown train circular? Check. Baseball/Soccer fans who like their Stadiums attached to malls? Check. Real estate developers and supporting industries? Check. The other paragon of virtue called St Al’s? Check. The Boise City political machine? Check. State board of Education? Check…and finally, our very own office of the Governor of the great state of Idaho? (hustling back from weighing in on the latest schhol board election). Check and Mate!

Today’s lesson: Cash money is best but land and influence work as nicely as currencies as well.

The irony in all this is that the second President Trump takes a chain saw to ObamaCare there stands a great chance that St Lukes won’t be able to gouge it’s poor customers for office visits as anticipated.

Then what? Dollars to donuts your elected officials havent thought about it and you can be sure that the Board and highly compensated staff of St Lukes RMC don’t worry about it because their non tax paying advantage allows them to move on to the next scam.

Politics over free market economics.

By: Robert

Robert — Sat, 14 May 2016 15:31:28 +0000

Just be happy. Last I saw Idaho was a Republican State. Run ruled and corrupt as they come.

By: Just Be Happy

Just Be Happy — Fri, 13 May 2016 20:20:26 +0000

Thank goodness all you liberal idiots elected Obama to fix all this waste and expense in the healthcare industry. LOLOLOL all the way to the offshore bank!

Oh dear, St. Luke’s needs your donations to build a new wing… come to our fundraiser walk and save an executive / doctor’s vacation home.

By: Becky

Becky — Fri, 13 May 2016 18:09:19 +0000

I was talking to some friends after reading this article in the Guardian. Since two of them are in the medical profession, I asked why half of the St Luke’s expansion was for medical office buildings. Both of them basically said, “You know it’s all about the money. St Luke’s can charge a lot more for the same outpatient procedures, imaging, and medical tests when performed on a hospital campus.” They suggest I Google it for myself. Within 10 minutes I find an article talking about why hospital outpatient departments are more costly than doctor offices. The following is a short paragraph I copied from the article. “A new study from the National Institute for Health Care Reform (NIHCR) suggests that the easy buck helps explain the current wave of physician practice acquisitions by hospitals. Researchers found that hospital outpatient departments may charge 2 or 3 times more for common diagnostic imaging, colonoscopies, and lab tests than if those services were rendered in community settings such as a physician’s office or a free-standing imaging or ambulatory surgery center.” Has anyone received a St Luke’s medical bill that was sky high?