Universal Health Care

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(etyler88 @ Jul 30 2007, 02:20 PM) [snapback]487557[/snapback]</div>

Does a nation stupid enough to elect GW twice deserve universal health care?

 

This poll, or any other political poll here in FHOP is a forgone conclusion.
If you want to know the outcome before the poll is done, all you have to do is look at this recent political poll here in FHOP.
http://priuschat.com/The-Impeachment-Poll-t36602.html

It's a waste of time.
Soon some ultra liberal will come on here and say, "See! This is proof that 90something percent of the country demands universal health!".

 

Yes if Universal means every person has to take responsibility for their own healthcare.

No if Universal means I have to pay for someone else's care via taxes and the Feds run the whole thing.

Look at Medicare - do you really think that is a sustainable model? Granted, the current system needs fixing too.

My argument is that people must take ownership. When people are blind to the cost of something, they will demand unlimited quantities of it. It is economics 101. Let them feel the pinch and they will economize and spend wisely.

High deductible plans are the way to go. Catastrophic illnesses are covered along with basic checkups. Everything in between is paid for by the user. This type of plan along with a mandated Health Savings Account to pay for the "in-between" is the only solution. There would need to be a small safety net to cover the truly needy and those who are uninsurable due to pre-existing conditions. There would also need to be serious disincentives for poor lifestyle choices: smokers, overeaters, drinkers. Want to do those things, fine. Just don't ask me to pay your way.

We should also force some serious re-working of the health insurance industry to cut out the bloatedness and make it much more competitive.

 

all I can say is that MEDICARE has worked for the last 41 years so yeah it works

given the government doesn't keep screwing it over

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(etyler88 @ Jul 30 2007, 03:20 PM) [snapback]487557[/snapback]</div>

Not sure what this means - or if the study you are citing is not created with inherent bias.

Name one country with a successfully run universal health care system that has a heterogeneous population, that has 5% of it population made up of illegal immigrants, encompasses hundreds or even a dozen or so languages and cultures, allows for medical malpractice like we do, supports technological innovation and allows for its spread, promotes pharmacological advances, etc.... that does not limit access to care.....

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TimBikes @ Jul 31 2007, 01:48 AM) [snapback]487894[/snapback]</div>

This is why I voted "Maybe yes". While I hate the idea of giving government more money to waste, the current system is already wasteful. The insurance companies have incentives to provide the least possible care in order to lower costs while at the same time doctors have incentives to provide more care than is needed in order to keep from being sued or simply to get more money from the insurance companies. And the paper work is a freaking nightmare on top of it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(05_SilverPri @ Jul 31 2007, 09:17 AM) [snapback]487945[/snapback]</div>

The thought i love most is letting the government know every one of your little itty bitty medical problems and then in a decade or so (or less) they will have your genetic profile too! That thought alone would never ever let me support universal health care.

Forget that you cannot name one government run thing from the mail to social security that is run even in a barely acceptable fashion - and you want to trust them with your life - jeeez. the question is, will the letter informing you of your medical condition get there before it kills you :lol:

Even better, will there be government paid lawyers available to sue the government for its medical malpractice :blink:

Here is another random thought - will there be enough hotel rooms in Cuba to handle the flow of Americans seeking superior health care

 

"Forget that you cannot name one government run thing from the mail to social security that is run even in a barely acceptable fashion - and you want to trust them with your life"

Ummm....Actually, we the patients would still be "trusting our lives" to YOU the doctor. The SAME doctors we do so with NOW! The governement would just eliminate the middlemen (plural) of the inusrance company, benifits administrators, insurance lobbyists, Pharma sales reps, and other useless middlemen.

BTW, how is the post office run in a "barely acceptable fashion"?
They are the ONLY government entity that is completely self sufficient, requiring ZERO tax money to run it, and I've never had any problem sending or receiving mail, and I send and receive a LOT of mail. Sure they have the occasional worker that "goes postal", but that's pretty rare, and not unique to postal workers.

I'm not saying it would be perfect, as a new system would be sure to have its own problems. But at least American companies could be more competitive in a world economy where non-US companies don't have that additional expense of insurance coverage for it's employees.

An average employee with a spouse and 2 kids costs a company about $12,000 a year for their 75% share of the insurance coverage!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Jul 31 2007, 07:04 AM) [snapback]487967[/snapback]</div>

Medicare is going bankrupt. Medicaid is bankrupt. What makes you think the government can run a larger scale program efficiently? Without the profit motive <gasp> there is little incentive to run the program efficiently. When Medicare needs to save money, they reduce how much they are going to pay the doctors. Lets see how long that can last.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Darwood @ Jul 31 2007, 10:04 AM) [snapback]487967[/snapback]</div>

you are under a huge misconception - the doctors will no longer be your advocate to get to you the care you need whether it be because they are doing so out of fear of malpractice or because they are a good doctor - you lose your only advocate to get you the care you need. the doctor becomes the AGENT of the government.

also, you will lose the better candidate doctors. those who go into medicine knowing that there are some rewards for their dedication to caring for other and sacrificing a decade plus of their lives earning potential will for the most part not want to do that if they are not going to get a return on their investment. tell me, who is going to pay for medical school education - the current debt of med school graduates is greater than six figures - how do propose to pay for that?? if it were me (and now it is my kids) i would go to law school or get an MBA (my number 2 starts his JD/MBA program in three weeks) - why pursue medicine - two or at most 4 years of post graduate education and he is out earning a very very nice income and not being on call, not being chased by lawyers (he is in fact going to do the chasing if he wants to), not fighting insurance companies, not dealing with patients who choose their doctor by the insurance plans they accept or moan about a $10 copay while they go out and spend large sums of money on dinners or plays or movies, etc, etc

the govt does not eliminate the middle man - they become it.

please, how much do they charge and if it were not for fax machines, fed ex, dhl, etc etc - they would be swamped. if the us mail service was even a little ok at doing the mail there would never have been the need for all the other companies big and small that do their job and do it better and more efficiently.

and you are wrong about the american companies and health care too. first of all you are now trusting the govt to run 20% of the american GDP!!!! second, the fix is located in small but effective moves, not a change that affects 300 million people and 4-5 TRILLION dollars -- let Minn and Mass experiment first and see what happens.... in fact why dont you read about Minn attempt to socialize medicine... look at other countries and their inability to run a socialized health care system - you are just going to import new problems and not fix old ones. here are some ideas for you.

1. change the tax codes to give individuals the tax benefits for purchasing insurance and not companies.
2. allow companies to sell policies across state borders and allow them to sell policies with different coverages - do NOT mandate each policy has to cover Mammograms or whatever - let people choose what they want to buy coverage for.
3. make medical malpractice NO Fault - you will save tens of billions of dollars.
4. allow for open and free competition -privative medicare for those who want to.
5. allow individuals to carry their policy from job to job.

 

TimBikes,

I agree with you 100%.

I lived in Canada (Toronto), for 3 years and the health care system sucks.

If you want to see a doctor, you have to find one that is accepting new patients. That is right, not all doctors want new patients because there is a salary cap. Why work harder and still get the same pay. Yeah, this mentality will get you the best care right? So if you love the freedom to pick the best doctor in Canada, you better not hold your breath or you might die before you get an appointment.

That leads to the waiting lists. My wife had to wait 3 weeks to get an ultrasound to make sure our first unborn baby was ok. Well by the time she had the ultrasound it was too late. We lost our first unborn child without any chance to save our baby. I regret not flying back to the USA to get an emergency ultrasound.

5 years later, back in the USA (so glad to be back) I am a full-time student again and have to pay $4,000 / year in health care insurance for my family of 3. We now have a 2 year old baby boy. I am ok paying the high fees because I work hard and am proud to be able to provide for my family.

I say no to Universal Care it has any similarities to Canada.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Spoid @ Jul 31 2007, 10:21 AM) [snapback]487977[/snapback]</div>

You are so correct. Most physicians do NOT take medicaid.

Funny thing in Massachusetts where they have effective socialized medicine - there is a huge wait time to see an internist :lol: seems they are not paying so well, so most have closed their practices to new patients or have or going to leave the state. it is real simple - capitalism works in all fields including medicine. you cannot socialize medicine and expect to find 500,00 doctors who dont mind not making a good living for all their sacrifices.

like i said before, my kids are not going into medicine like i did - i have not allowed it or actively discouraged it.

and even if the govt could run the mail system well - it is nothing like running health care - you really have to drink a lot of kool aid to believe that the govt could even come close to running it. heck, they cant even keep track of who and who is not a citizen here - watch the flood of illegals come in here for free health care when the govt takes over..........get your pocketbooks out.

 

"the doctors will no longer be your advocate "
What happened to the hippocratic oath? Who says doctors will get paid like postman? they'll still make the big bucks. Why wouldn't a gov't insurance plan offer protection to the doctors, like caps on malpractice?

" the doctor becomes the AGENT of the government."
No they don't. The government acts as the insurance company. Are doctors in the present time acting as agents of the insurance company?

"the govt does not eliminate the middle man - they become it. "
That's the whole point! The current middle MEN, are overnumbered, overly complex, and sucking the profit out of the doctors that actually DO the work. By simplifying the middleman and eliminating SOOO many confusing insurance plans and procedures, there is a great deal of money to save, not from doctor salaries, but from all the OTHER profit takers in the chain.

"would never have been the need for all the other companies"
Parcel delivery and letter delivery are two different things.

"20% of the american GDP!!!! " That's a sign of the problem, not a reason not to change things. No other country spends nearly as much of GDP than the US. That's NOT a good thing.


1. change the tax codes to give individuals the tax benefits for purchasing insurance and not companies.
What benefits?

2. allow companies to sell policies across state borders and allow them to sell policies with different coverages - do NOT mandate each policy has to cover Mammograms or whatever - let people choose what they want to buy coverage for.
Further complexity in coverages. People don't know what they will need coverage for, how can you ala cart medical coverage?


3. make medical malpractice NO Fault - you will save tens of billions of dollars.
I AGREE!

4. allow for open and free competition -privative medicare for those who want to.
I AGREE!

5. allow individuals to carry their policy from job to job.
Totally infeasable and a humorous idea. As an employer, you have a group plan. not a collection of individual plans, all different, with different benefits, different agents, costs, etc. What a friggen nightmare that idea would be for companies as well as the insurance providers. And it still does NOTHING to reduce the costs to the employer.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Hard_working_student @ Jul 31 2007, 10:32 AM) [snapback]487985[/snapback]</div>

I am so sorry to hear your story. It unfortunately is not a unique story.

I have a patient who said to me, in Canada health care is free, here in the united states i have to pay for it. He said i gladly pay for it here because at least here they try to save your life whereas in canada they dont care if you live or die - and he said, it is better in canada for the government if you die - its less expensive for them.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jul 31 2007, 08:28 AM) [snapback]487983[/snapback]</div>

Time for me to a chime in again on the doctor " being Owned" by the insurance companies.

I am now currently on oxygen and have a bad heart due to undiagnoised sleep apnea for over 25 yrs.
going without O2 is not a good thing it lead up to cor pulmonale and sleep apnea and SPH(secondary pulmonary hypertension)
Now I went to the doctor because my ex said I was not breathing at night,, this was 20 some yrs ago first doc said you have sleep apnea it's a fad dont worry, ten yrs after that saw a different doc for same prob.
he said yeah you probably have sleep apnea ( BTW then I was only 190 pounds 6'1" and worked out every day, now I can't work out and much heavier) BUT HE (THE DOCTOR) said you have such lousy insurance they probably wont pay for a sleep study. so he did not say it was that important and did not state I should have had it done on my DIME even so it was never done .

so now after another 5 yrs I am worse had ears ringing in the middle of the night , turned blue etc..
I met a doc in Sedona AZ. who said it was very important to have the sleep study done , but it was too late the damage was done.

so now just a tip anyone who snores real loud and if their spouse /partner says hey you stop breathing while sleeping see the doc and GET a SLEEP STUDY DONE no matter who pays for it and be pushy tell the doc you want it done

PERIOD

i wish I had known

I am 45 yrs old and it sucks

So that DOCTOR WAS OWNED IN MY OPINION BY THE INSURANCE COMPANY.. YEAH I'M PISSED
\

 

Like "follow the money", in this case 'follow the opposition'. Oh, wait! In this case it is the opposition making the money with the status quo. Now ignore them and put pressure on your congresspersons to 'do the right thing' as evidenced by all the other first world countries. The closer we get to 'single payer health care' the more vocal the beneficiaries of the status quo will become. The more beneficial it is for the few, the more reason to reexamine our current system.

 

Health care for everyone? Like, just give it away? What are you, a communist? No, health is a status symbol, and it should be restricted to those who can afford it. That should help eliminate poverty, too, because the poor people will die off like they deserve to, the lazy, incompetent fools.

 

i think we need some minimum standard of care guaranteed for all... though i don't know enough about medicine and policy to decide what and how. people have health troubles that could be caught at a basic check-up and cheaply and easily treated, and instead end up in the hospital years later after it gets complicated and don't pay up... so guess who does pay for them in the end anyway? the rest of us, through increased hospital bills.

i do know that we're a couple of average hard working american folks who have been through the wringer from 20 different angles because of health problems. and no, they weren't the typical lifestyle choice type of health problems. (i'm thinking smoking, obesity, etc... though the degenerative disc disease may or may not be related to the time that DH smoked)

the big issue we seemed to have is that rather than admit they didn't know what to do for my DH, doctors wanted to continue seeing him after they'd exhausted their usual treatment choices. rather than, say, referring him to a different specialist or anything... they kept saying to come back next week. or in 2 days. or whatever. but all of a sudden we were out thousands of dollars with zero progress. i started seeking out different specialists on my own after getting frustrated with how hesitant his other doctors were to lose a source of income, which is about how we felt they thought of us toward the end.

the system is definitely broken. i won't admit to having the perfect solution, but something needs to be done about the way things run now.

 

What about the public health? Do you want sick people taking the bus or train to work, because they couldn't afford not too? Who, likely aren't receiving treatment do to a lack of funds. Cases of drug resistant TB have already been in the news.