The Mean Dilemma

While everyone is being worked up in this mean thing, wanting to be mean but trying to be not so mean, have we forgotten about the basic problem, the unstoppable rising medical cost? Or is Mean Testing a solution to solving this problem or just a diversion, that reducing cost can quietly be swept under the carpet? I am getting some inspiration from President Suharto on how to make more money to subsidise those who are trying to stretch their dollar and savings to last longer. The rich, like Suharto, will not be embarrassed by Mean Testing. They can afford to pay. And he is paying, I hope so, for every day he spent being hooked up to all the machines and surrounded by an entourage of expensive medical professionals. This is a very lucrative market to tap on. Hospitals, private and public, should allocate more resources to provide such services and support to the very rich and charge them accordingly, and no subsidies of course. They don't mind being hooked on to machines and enjoy the publicity. Though this is what advanced medical science can do to hold on to a dying piece of living tissue, it is important for those who can afford to live this way. There are plenty of money to be made. Market the business aggressively so that the very rich can pay for the not so rich or the poorer people. It is time to restructure the whole medical profession and medical business to pursue more profits with a good reason and not continuously lumping the cost to those who can barely afford to pay. With the fear of being sick and admitted to hospitals growing by the days, no one can blame those with a few dollars in their savings, including those in Medisave, to want to hold on to them for as long as possible. No one should harbour the thought of emptying the people's life savings for their own medical care as quickly as possible under whatever schemes. For whatever there is in the Medisave may not be enough.

Notable quote II by LKY

'This way you are not passing the burden (of caring for the elderly) to the next generation.' Lee Kuan Yew LKY 'defended Singapore's CPF scheme and argued against pensions for the elderly, which have to be supported by tax revenues...The CPF scheme, he said, helps Singapore to remain competitive, saying it aims for "minimum tax rates and maximum self sufficiency".' The above was part of his conversation at the Silver Industry Conference Exhibition and is reported in the ST.

Notable quote by LKY

'If we are not able to think for ourselves and decide if what they tell us is either good or useful or not so good, we wouldn't be here.' Lee Kuan Yew What we read in the news, especially the news produced by reputable msm, including Reuters, BBC, NYT or ST or whatever, read it carefully, understand them, and understand what are their agendas. Then decide whether it is to our interests or against our interests. For they are all views, not necessarily right or wrong, but views to influence and manage your way of thinking and seeing things. LKY's comment above was in response to a question on free speech in Singapore. He pointed to Taiwan, the Philippines, South Korea as countries with free press but not necessary free of corruption. The 'media itself is corrupted.' Before anyone thinks that in order to be free of corruption, we cannot have a free media. Both are not exclusive. Why can't we have freer media and corruption free? This is the same as asking why can't we pay our politicians decently, and not excessively, and remain corruption free. Ok, I admit that what is decent or excessive is relative. But we all have this gut feel when things are excessive or not right.

Mean Testing the cure all for medical cost woes

This is the gist of an article by Hobbit posted in the Singapore Medical Association News in April 2006 and reproduced in the ST today. He attributed the problems of the runaway cost and buffet mentality of patients to several causes, poor administrative system to feed patients to hospitals for polyclinics and unwarranted high cost of facilities in heavily subsidised wards. Then there are those who could afford to pay more choose not to. And all these problems can be solved by simply introducing Mean Testing. I am quite shock actually to think that the cream of the professional world could come out with such a simplistic solution to address a host of problems that is due to poor management of systems and resources. What is needed is to put a team to address the system failures and inefficiencies and cut on unnecessary cost in B2 and C wards. People opting for subsidised wards do not need frills and thrills. Just give them decent medical treatment and basic facilities. Please do not add on to their burden by all the extras of a 5 star hotel. Is this so difficult to comprehend? What is important is to look at all the costs, what are and have been included into the costs of providing essential medical services that are unnecessary? Keep the cost down and provide what the people need and not what the provider wants the people to pay for. Why not convert a few blocks of HDB style flats into no frill public hospitals, away from the 5 star hospitals with 5 star price tags? The other issue pointed out by Hobbit is the shortage of doctors in public hospitals and surprisingly the admission that many specialists are running out of patients in private practice. What is the problem then? So difficult to figure what? Do not strangle the supply of doctors. Produce more doctors from the system just like we flood the roads with taxi drivers or with graduates to be taxi drivers. As for an over supply, let the market forces bring them to their senses and an equilibrium. This supply issue applies to other professions especially the legal profession. Produce more lawyers and bring down the cost of legal fees. Why am I wasting my precious time suggesting all these measures when all the supertalents can only think of raising fees and mean testing, and laughing all the way to the banks?

More mollycoddling needed for N level students

Angry parents are blasting at a principal for advising Sec 5 students to go to ITE instead. The students felt hurt. The parents were incensed. What kind of shit to feel insulted for being told the truth? If these students do not buck up, they will only waste their time in attending Sec 5. They may have decent grades at their Sec 4 N level exam. But let's face it, the grades are being sugar coated to look good, to soothe the feelings, to make parents and students feel that they have grades of 1s and 2s. But who is kidding who? When you are in N level, the grades are not the equivalent of the Express level. You need to knock it down by 3 or 4 grades or more. The principal might appear harsh, brutal, and insensitive. Not really. There are many ways to motivate or drive a person to excel. Some may respond to mollycoddling, to bribes, to begging by parents, to more tuitions, but some will be pushed to drive themselves harder by insulting their pride. And that is exactly what the principal hoped to do to some of these students. As reported, one of the student is responding as expected. 'But having decided to stay on, she said she feels added pressure to do well: "I feel quite nervous, and so do quite a few of my classmates."' Some parents are claiming to do damage control on the pride of their children. Some wanted to take the case to MOE. These students and parents need a hard jolt to reality. The students need a lot of effort to be able to qualify to go to the normal stream. Oh they are in the normal stream already. See the pretence? Are N level standard normal or below average? If this is considered normal, so our normal students are at this level? I would advise the sensitive parents and students to read into the principal's intention positively and encourage the students to rise up to the challenge. Prove the principal wrong! The same method is also often used in the military training school when the training officer will tear the trainees to pieces, insulting them to the point of being rubbish, completely useless beans. But on their graduation day, the training officer will march to the young graduate and salute him, addressing him respectfully as Sir. Parents still insist on more mollycoddling?