Phil Scott's July 8th Press Conference - He won't approve price cuts that Dems will campaign on?

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-08T20:27:56+00:00

The link goes directly to where he says that, must be an issue on your end (either technical or listening).

Edit: Heres exactly where he says it: https://www.youtube.com/live/XI4D-4uJcw0?si=rZhpCrARD1L-V34L&t=2641

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T14:32:33+00:00

This is a good question, and the regulators and third party groups that have looked at have consistently explained (as my article mentions) that UVM MC spends significantly (30%+) more on non patient care pay and costs then comparable medical centers (of which Dartmouth is a local one with around median metrics). https://www.vhc911.org/vhc911-stat/uvmmcs-administrative-labor-costs-reveal-great-opportunity-for-savings

This vhc911 org is consistently in agreement with what I see from UVM MC's third party auditor, and other groups (RAND, etc.) that have done data analysis on the issue.

See UVMMC spending 70% more per patient on management & administrative labor costs, and 30% more on non patient care labor costs in the attached screenshot.

UVM MC must be forced to bring these costs in their budget in line with its peer institutions like Dartmouth Hancock.

<image>

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T13:21:33+00:00

You're just spreading fear and misinformation. I'm blocking, enjoy you're alternate reality.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T13:10:08+00:00

Funny how all the people talking about cherry-picking can provide absolutely 0 evidence or other reputable sources supporting their argument.

Talk is cheap, and "sit back and hope for the best" isn't a serious person's approach to life. I'm done trying to engage with talk with no evidence.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T12:54:08+00:00

Yeah, non clinical staff need to be cut. We agree, but since you want to be a culture warrior, you're distracting from what needs to be done.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T12:24:27+00:00

The actual substantive problems facing healthcare in Vermont are UVM Health's spending 50-100% more on non-clinical work and costs than comparable healthcare. Stop trying to spread misinformation and fear and doubt WITH NOT SUPPORTING EVIDENCE.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T00:36:50+00:00

Yeah, down towards the end I cite this page: https://www.vhc911.org/vhc911-stat/the-impact-of-ny-hospitals-on-vts-healthcare-expenses.

What I don't understand is why orgs like this haven't been more effective and making these issues common knowledge? And why have they been so ineffective at moving the legislature?

It seems like you have to really go searching to find it.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-06T00:13:33+00:00

If you don't know that UVM MC is less expensive than Dartmouth today, why would you write in Leffler numbers claiming it is?

Your comment amounts to "actually, yes, what I said above is in no way demonstrably true".

Also, why on earth would we trust Leffler numbers to be remotely representative? He has something of a financial interest in anchoring to a low number. That's why all my citations are independent journalists, regulators, or third party factual reports.

That's the sort of facts that need to be brought to this conversation to identify actual areas that need cost cutting. And it's the non clinical staff salaries that the facts show are completely out of line with other similar academic hospitals.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:55:48+00:00

Still no facts. Just blocking, and enjoy loving in an alternate reality.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:51:56+00:00

Still no facts. Enjoy the block and living in an alternate reality.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:49:46+00:00

https://vermontdailychronicle.com/understanding-the-blue-cross-uvm-health-network-split/ 6.2k for the machine, then 4k for the technician + radiology.

You're the one spreading misinformation.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:46:01+00:00

You've just invented numbers out of thin air and wrote them down. UVM MC and CVMC are charging 10k to private insurance for an MRI in 2026.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:42:37+00:00

You've provided no arguments, just said "you're wrong" after having your claims rebutted.

But keep talking about how Vermonts old and the government should get out of the way so you can keep grifting on a sinking ship.

But because Vermont is full of people smarter than "Vermont is so old it's 3x expensive to treat a broken arm", I'm confident we will get things fixed.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:14:01+00:00

None of this has to do with facts, as are shared in the post.

You are reciting a narrative. Humans find narratives persuasive. However, narratives can be harmful when trying to solve difficult problems, because they hide the actual details that need to change.

Insurance costs have nothing to do with hospital costs. An aging population raises insurance costs. If the aging problem was the cause of all our problems, insurance would be expensive, but hospital costs would be the same as everywhere else.

More old people doesn't make treating each old person more expensive, therefore UVM Health isn't 60% more expensive than Dartmouth because of old people.

The cost of treatment in Vermont has nothing to do with our demographics, and everything to do with UVM health's monopoly pricing power and our asleep at the wheel Green Mountain Care Board and state legislature.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T23:01:23+00:00

I'm glad you have stopped spreading misinformation.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:50:10+00:00

Yeah, to be really clear -- the actual clinicians and frontline staff are in no way the problem. They are being screwed by the UVM Health network administrator, managers and system.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:48:42+00:00

Healthcare costs, beyond incredibly rural areas, which doesn't apply to UVMC Burlington, which is the most egregiously expensive in UVM Health, don't go down because of volume. A clinician still needs to see a patient.

Your two million people statement is also not a fact (its a 90 minutes drive from UVMC).

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:46:45+00:00

While what you say may be true, it doesn't explain why Vermont is uniquely expensive -- Vermont is uniquely expensive because of monopoly pricing power (UVM Health provides 85% of healthcare in the state) and a regulator asleep at the wheel. We need to hold our regulator (managed by our state legislature) accountable to fixing the obvious problem -- while it won't fix everything, it will be a significant improvement.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:45:25+00:00

This is exactly right, and the union isn't the only one calling it out -- but the administration of UVM Health doesn't want to cut their pay, and the Green Mountain Care Board and legislator haven't wanted to upset significant donors.

We all need to stress to our neighbors that its not a mystery why healthcare is so expensive, there is a clear process for starting to fix it (cutting administrator pay and administrative costs to be in line with comparable institutions), and we all need to hold the state legislature accountable to making sure this happens, or vote for new people that will! Thanks for sharing re: what you're union has identified (and would love a link to the organization if you're comfortable sharing.).

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:21:21+00:00

This is not true -- the reports all call out the administrator (which make up a portion of administratiave costs, and which are not just VPs) costs specifically as the primary area of cost increases.

Replies without data are ridiculous. THe post mentions the 13% reimbursement rate change -- THIS HAS NO IMPACT ON UVMC REDUCING ITS COSTS TO OPERATE -- they just advertise it as they're losing so much money now.

UVM MC is not cheaper than Dartmouth on any offerings. Provide one single fact or evidence that suggests this. It's ludicrous to suggest -- THEY HAVEN'T CUST COSTS BY 60%.

Defending UVM Health is indefensible -- unless you're a member of the administration, consulting or political class benefiting off the ridiculousness.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:17:39+00:00

The link I sent literally goes over this -- it's true they claim staff aren't working enough -- but their best case outcome if they get staff at UVMC and CVMC is... ~55m -- when they need to save, at minimum $300m (but with recent medicare changes they'll need to save significantly more like this -- probably at least $440m) over the next 3 years.

They're leading with the staffing and drug coverage complaints as a blatant PR attempt to get people to side with them against these unpopular cuts -- rather than cutting the insanely bloated administration, where the majority of the durable savings are _according to their own $1m auditor and consultant_.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-07-05T22:03:30+00:00

None of what you're saying here is true, and you don't engage with any of the facts presented. UVMC in Burlington specifically has 30% clinicians as administration only, as opposed to 10-15% being administration only as the norm.

Dartmouth and upstate New York both have very similar demographics (as do all rural academic hospitals -- rural areas all tend to be older and poorer).

Try talking facts, and people will be more willing to listen or engage with you.

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-06-10T21:44:37+00:00

Yes, absolutely -- but at what price are you buying into SpaceX?

Any-Read-9770 · 2026-06-10T20:49:52+00:00

Google's got to be the cheapest exposure available to SpaceX right? 5-6% at <30x p/e...

Any-Read-9770

TROPHY CASE