Start the conversation
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
My good friend Mark Kot is the real Hamptons Doctor. He doesn't make house calls because his Southampton Urgent Medical Care facility is where everyone goes for the best medical care in the Hamptons.
I asked him for his take on Obamacare. Yesterday he sent me the little ditty below, and I need to share it with you today.
He got it off the Internet. Which means it's true. No, I'm not kidding. Well, at least this time I'm not kidding. This Internet ditty is true.
Before I share it with you, let me tell you why it is so true and so frightening…
Dr. Kot used to be an emergency room doctor at the local hospital, but he saw too many things there that weren't in patients' best interest. He saw long waits for people who needed immediate attention. He saw people getting billed huge amounts just because they had good insurance that would pay the tabs. He saw inefficiencies in the layers of bureaucracy that envelop hospitals. He saw a lot of things that needed changing, but he couldn't change what he wasn't able to control.
So in 2003, he went into private practice. He's the only doctor in his stylish and beautifully appointed facility. His welcoming room – you just can't call it a "waiting room" – is like a Hamptons house living room. He employs (as in created jobs, very good-paying jobs) 18 people at the year-round office.
No one waits more than a handful of minutes to get in. Everyone gets the best care for what they need and no "add-ons" or bill-padding, ever. Not that hospitals would ever do that (except for the ones that have been caught doing that).
They take some insurance, they have to. But most folks pay "out-of-pocket," whether it's the TV anchor paying by check, an area waitress paying with cash, or a poor-wee-bugger scraping along in life that Mark doesn't charge.
What that does, Mark tells me, is make his office more efficient. He doesn't have to wait long periods for reimbursements. He can manage his extensive payroll and other expenses more efficiently, which means he charges his patients less and he can pay his people more and run a better medical care facility.
That's why his reputation and the facility's reputation are renowned in the Hamptons.
Only there's a problem.
Obamacare may put him out of business.
Why? He's lectured me on what Obamacare will eventually create, and frankly I don't understand all the nuances he's explained, but he's board certified and been a practicing doctor for 26 years. He knows his business.
So, rather than explain it all to me again, he sent me this little ditty…
Join the conversation. Click here to jump to comments…
About the Author
Shah Gilani boasts a financial pedigree unlike any other. He ran his first hedge fund in 1982 from his seat on the floor of the Chicago Board of Options Exchange. When options on the Standard & Poor's 100 began trading on March 11, 1983, Shah worked in "the pit" as a market maker.
He helped develop what has become known as the Volatility Index (VIX) - to this day one of the most widely used indicators worldwide. After leaving Chicago to run the futures and options division of the British banking giant Lloyd's TSB, Shah moved up to Roosevelt & Cross Inc., an old-line New York boutique firm. There he originated and ran a packaged fixed-income trading desk, and established that company's "listed" and OTC trading desks.
Shah founded a second hedge fund in 1999, which he ran until 2003.
Shah's vast network of contacts includes the biggest players on Wall Street and in international finance. These contacts give him the real story - when others only get what the investment banks want them to see.
Today, as editor of 10X Trader, Shah presents his legion of subscribers with the chance to earn ten times their money on trade after trade.
Shah is also the proud founding editor of The Money Zone, where after eight years of development and 11 years of backtesting he has found the edge over stocks, giving his members the opportunity to rake in potential double, triple, or even quadruple-digit profits weekly with just a few quick steps.
Shah is a frequent guest on CNBC, Forbes, and Marketwatch, and you can catch him every week on Fox Business's "Varney & Co."
He also writes our most talked-about publication, Wall Street Insights & Indictments, where he reveals how Wall Street's high-stakes game is really played.
Congratulations on a great beat-up.
I live in a country where doctors run their own businesses, but are paid by the government. The current payment for a standard consultation is less than $30 US. My doctor's surgery employs 6 doctors on rotation, and about 6 ancillary staff. I get to se a doctor within 30 minutes, barring emergencies where need beats convenience. And the doctor drives a nice big Mercedes; he's not struggling.
You say Dr Kot is the ONLY doctor, and has 18 staff! So, how does enough medical work get done in this practice to support 19 people. Either the rate of pay for the staff is about $1 per hour, or Dr Kot is charging about 10 times Australian rates just to cover wages.
I think this shows the major issue with the US medical system. Everybody pays and pays regardless, but those who can't can just suffer.
Congratulations good ol d USA
"It's not that the local hospital isn't a good facility; it's just that no one goes there anymore, it's too crowded"….
Nobody there…because it's too crowded…..Really???
That's a bit of wry irony…a clever cultural reference…a play on Yogi Berra's famous statement regarding a popular restaurant: "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded."
It's HUMOR.
This is an old rant that circulated internet rags right after the bill was passed. Tim Geitner is no longer Treasury Sec. Rosalind whatsername is no longer the "obese" Surgeon Gen….etc. so it's all a little old. I will bet Dr Kot finds a way to stay in practice.I am not in favor of the healthcare bill, but would like to see fact based reading come across my screens. Like who were the people who actually wrote the bill and their credentials….that would be interesting.
I see that my previous response to this article was buried so I will submit another one. I have served on labor union health boards and am familiar with medical insurance economics. I am surprised that there has been such an ill informed right wing response to Obamacare. In insurance you spread the risk over many people to permit those few who need healthcare to afford it when they need it. In medicine,very few people need extremely expensive treatments such as heart transplants,cancer treatments etc. Those few drive up the average cost of treament tremendously. We lucky few who do not need these treatments must pay a relatively small amount for care we thankfully will never need. When Iwas in my 60's,my wife and I both had individual policies and because of our age paid $14000 a year when we had not incurred expenses in that amount over the previous 10 years. Obamacare spreads the risk over many newer uninsured people. After careful actuarial calculations,it was decided that these new people would not materially effect the premiums for everyone if the rest of the insurance reforms were carried out. On of the prime reasons this is so is because we already pay for much of these underinsured treatment. Uninsured people go to the emergency room unannounced and incur costs far in excess of the normal costs if they had gone to a family doctor.The family doctor can head off expensive treatment and monitor problems much cheaper in the overall picture. Also,when the uninsured were treated at the local hospital as they were required to do,the cost of their treatment was included in the hospitals annual costs . Because of the way insurance payments are calculated, the uninsureds treatment was actually included in the per patient cost of the insureds treatment. In effect we were already paying for their costs under a different accounting method. Ideas which we now accept as valid such as social security,nedicare,unemployment comp,workers comp employ insurance actuarial principles to cure societal problems by spreading the risk and eliminating expensive cures. In the same way we have lowered rates on mortgages,car loans, car insurance et al. Many fought these innovations but time has proved them right. Give Obamacare a chance and I think over the years these numbers will prove out.
If ObamaCare needed a chance the chance should be forfeited by the very people who wrote it, the day they exempted themselves from it. There is a valid reason they exempted themselves. They know more about the details in the 2700 page Law than anybody commenting on this article. It might seem like a good idea but it doesn't work. The UK, Canada, you can pick your poison but they all have become burdensome to the taxpayer. A better solution would be to reform Tort Law and encourage a market based solution. But one has to understand how markets work to understand the true efficiencies that can be created. Government has never been known for efficiency. Mr Malmed is obviously at the age he believes in Social Security but that is underfunded today and will not be sustainable for future generations especially after the Baby Boomers exhaust the IOUs. The same will be with ObamaCare then if you can't fix the immigration problem with the current laws on the books because the President choses not to enforce them, that is one more acceleration pedal to bankrupting this Healthcare plan and any other Government entitlement left.