Private Vs. Universal Health Care system

[Jadow]

I'm not criticizing them, I'm just saying, you're right, they made their choice, and they should have to deal with it. I made my choice to live healthy, I should be rewarded for that, and not have to pick up the tab for people who didn't make as wise of a decision.

 

[TraumaRN]

I'll agree to disagree with you, understand my point of working at a major inner city teaching and trauma hospital where the majority of our patients are uninsured and you can figure out from there why I disagree with you.

On the other hand I really have to disagree with your Cato Institute recommendation. The fact that they speak of ever increasing quality and deregulating health care in the same paragraphs that's definitely not a good thing.

The focus needs to lay on two things, number #1 getting the costs of drugs DOWN, they account for roughly 18% of all health care costs.

Secondly the hospitals themselves need to make themselves more accountable, more cost efficient, and more quality minded than they already are. Too many times patients still receive unneccessary tests, procedures etc etc, my hospital and medical center have focused on saving costs and holding staff more accountable for their actions, no repeat tests or meds, reducing as many errors as possible while implementing electronic charting and more. And from what I've heard so far it's working quite well at improving the hospital while saving money, which for us is a big deal when often times we never see one penny from many many patients.

 

[Jadow]

the cost of drugs has never been lower.

There are just newer and better drug available today that have high retail prices.

You take all the drug available in 1998 (not exactly the healthcare dark ages) and they are ALL generic today.

There is a short 7 year window for companies to make a profit on the drugs they spend billions to research and develop, then they go generic.

You look at comparative cost of drugs and quality / price, and the cost of drugs only always goes down because of this.

 

[Jadow]

Now, while I am against govt healthcare, I would be in favor of it if it came in the flavor of a high deductible, low premium plan with forced HSA savings.

The thing I'm scared of is there are just so many people who go to the hospital for frivilous reasons, or take their 4 year old in for every little thing, it's just insane how much waste there is. They should not get away with that without paying something. Say $50 per doctors visit, and have a $1000 deductible before 1 cent of tax money is used.

Also, a pet peeve. WTH do they only write presciptions for 1 year? I get alubteral for my athsma, and will continue to get it for years, I'm otherwise healthy, why do I need a doctor's visit for $80 once per year just so they can refill my damn prescription, now that's a waste.

 

[Ornery]

They should not get away with that without paying something.

Jadow's making damn good sense! They should pay for ALL their doctor visits, WTF? They pay to have their cars repaired and think nothing of it, so what's more important? It's amazing what people are willing to budget for. Try to take somebody's damn cell phone away, and listen to the whining. Imagine how many times you could get a checkup for the cost of that stupid phone. Now, move on to the cable bill, and two new car payments... :roll:

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: Jadow
Now, while I am against govt healthcare, I would be in favor of it if it came in the flavor of a high deductible, low premium plan with forced HSA savings.

The thing I'm scared of is there are just so many people who go to the hospital for frivilous reasons, or take their 4 year old in for every little thing, it's just insane how much waste there is. They should not get away with that without paying something. Say $50 per doctors visit, and have a $1000 deductible before 1 cent of tax money is used.

Also, a pet peeve. WTH do they only write presciptions for 1 year? I get alubteral for my athsma, and will continue to get it for years, I'm otherwise healthy, why do I need a doctor's visit for $80 once per year just so they can refill my damn prescription, now that's a waste.

Now you are getting on some good topics, and a quick rebuke with that drug argument, generic are great but only if your doctor prescribes them, and most people dont know drugs enough to ask or question what their doctors are prescribing. Remember some docs get money for prescribing certain drugs from the pharm companies(definitely shady if you ask me).

The prescription thing and albuterol I cant answer to but I agree wasteful spending right there. I'll check into it tho.

And the point about frivolous things.....it's why many ER's have 'urgent care' or 'express care' for the bumps and bruises which people wig out about way too often. I wouldnt know tho, most of our ER cases tend to need care because most dont have a primary care doctor in the first place. And often times the free clinics tell them to come to our hospital because the clinic may not have the resources to handle the case. Again somewhat vicious cycle there, it's obviously a little different in the suburbs.

 

[Buttzilla]

Higher Costs, Less Care

intesting article i found on the washington post.

touched on a few subject already mentioned here.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Buttzilla

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: chambersc

Originally posted by: Ornery
i assume that those in the higher tax bracket where bear the bulk of this burden.

Hillary's plan was to force businesses to pay for it. Great plan, eh? :roll:

...yeah, it is. you can't burden the worker with insurmountable bills while big business is reporting record profits.

What about businesses that are recording record losses?
Or small businesses? You can't punish the successful for being a success, and you can't let the failures off for failing.

This is why I would propose that we take American business out of the business of providing health care for their workers and families. Let everyone pay a percentage of their income (ALL income, not just wages) for health insurance. This way, everyone who has an income contributes.

but the argument would be that those who end up contributing more to their health coverage is going to get better care. in sense, less paper work, less waiting, whereas those who contribute little is always going to get shuffled around in the system.

How's the doctor's office or hospital to know what you contributed?

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Ornery
...everyone who has an income contributes.

Hah! Therein lies the rub. :frown:

I wouldn't call it a rub. I know tons of people who don't work and get health care. They're called kids and spouses. I pay health insurance premiums for my wife and my kids. We're already paying for the people I think you're refering to, through Medicaid and higher hospital bills due to hospitals writing off the uninsured.

Also, if everyone was required to contribute, it would mean that the Wal-mart and McDonald's employees who are currently on public health and pay nothing, would start to pay something.

 

[SampSon]

I will always prefer private healthcare.
You gotta pay to play, if you can't pay, then you're probably not worthy.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Jadow
Just some talking points against universal health care.

1. There is no constitutional right to healthcare.
2. Why should healthy, responsible people, have to pay for the health care of obese, french fry eating slobs.
3. In every state, children under 18 are eligible for free government healthcare already.
4. No-one is turned away from the ER if they can't pay

I would also recommend you read the Cato Institute's healthcare section.

http://www.cato.org/healthcare/index.html

1. So? The government does lots of stuff that isn't in the Constitution. Conquering Iraq and proping up Israel isn't in the Constitution either.
2. Do you have fat, disgusting french fry eating slobs on your private health insurance plan? I do and so does everyone else. What's the difference what kind of plan they're on? I'd have no problem with mandatory yearly physicals and penalties for excessive weight, even in a government plan.
3. Not true. In Illinois, you have to be poor/lower middle class to qualify for Medicaid.
4. The ER is not a substitute for real doctor visits. A trip to the ER usually occurs when symptoms are too bad to tolerate, often after the possibility of cheap care has passed. Also, when the uninsured hit the ER and can't pay their bill, who eats the cost?

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Jadow
true about group health care, I've been subsidizing others for years, but at least it's not the government forcing me to do it.

I'm on a high deductible plan with HSA now, and LOVE IT!

Congratulations, you're rich.

 

[Ornery]

There is no reason to believe a universal health system would be handled any better than our current fvcked up Social Security system. I had no say in that abortion of a program, so I'll be damned if I let our resident Socialist/Communists slip this crap past me without a fight.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Ornery
There is no reason to believe a universal system would be handled any better than our current fvcked up Social Security system. I had no say in that abortion of a program, so I'll be damned if I let our resident Socialist/Communists slip this crap past me without a fight.

Face it, our private care system isn't any better.

And if Bush had gotten his gift to the stock brokers through, SS would be in a lot worse shape.

 

[Ornery]

I can opt into or out of any heath care I choose to now. What choice do I have for opting out of that fvcking Social Security nightmare I didn't ask for in the first damn place?

 

[Jadow]

And if Bush had gotten his gift to the stock brokers through, SS would be in a lot worse shape.

LOL I don't have it in me tonight.

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Ornery
I can opt into or out of any heath care I choose to now. What choice do I have for opting out of that fvcking Social Security nightmare I didn't ask for in the first damn place?

Good question. What can I do to opt out of paying for that Iraq nightmare I didn't ask for in the first damn place?

 

[mchammer]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: Ornery
I can opt into or out of any heath care I choose to now. What choice do I have for opting out of that fvcking Social Security nightmare I didn't ask for in the first damn place?

Good question. What can I do to opt out of paying for that Iraq nightmare I didn't ask for in the first damn place?

lol, the next step in that line is the govmt decides everything.

 

[Ornery]

1. Yep, now he wants the "government" to handle healthcare as well... great plan! :roll:

 

[mchammer]

Originally posted by: Ornery

1. Yep, now he wants the "government" to handle healthcare as well... great plan! :roll:

Well think of it this way, with Medicare, Medicaid and all the various laws governing group health insurance, they more or less are managing it anyway, and it can't get that much worse.

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: mchammer

Originally posted by: Ornery

1. Yep, now he wants the "government" to handle healthcare as well... great plan! :roll:

Well think of it this way, with Medicare, Medicaid and all the various laws governing group health insurance, they more or less are managing it anyway, and it can't get that much worse.

yes it can: bigger government = bigger beareaucracy = less efficient. if you think private care is bad, government healthcare will only make it worse.

america has the best healthcare in the world, though due to privitization, we don't have the best coverage.

medicare/medicaid/SS all need to be fixed. frankly, a 70+ year old SS system is NOT suitable for the modern economic situation

 

[Ornery]

...it can't get that much worse.

I take it you're into Russian Roulette?

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: Ornery

1. Yep, now he wants the "government" to handle healthcare as well... great plan! :roll:

Hey, if the private sector was doing such a bang-up job, I wouldn't be complaining, but all I see are increasing figures. Higher premiums, higher executive salaries, higher copays, higher profits, higher deductables, and higher numbers of uninsured.

Can the government do better? I'm not sure. I think the real question is, can it do worse? Frankly, I can't see how.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: EatSpam

Originally posted by: Ornery
There is no reason to believe a universal system would be handled any better than our current fvcked up Social Security system. I had no say in that abortion of a program, so I'll be damned if I let our resident Socialist/Communists slip this crap past me without a fight.

Face it, our private care system isn't any better.

And if Bush had gotten his gift to the stock brokers through, SS would be in a lot worse shape.

why? how? can anyone for a moment stop and think, rather than listening to the BS spread by AARP?

 

[TraumaRN]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: mchammer

Originally posted by: Ornery

1. Yep, now he wants the "government" to handle healthcare as well... great plan! :roll:

Well think of it this way, with Medicare, Medicaid and all the various laws governing group health insurance, they more or less are managing it anyway, and it can't get that much worse.

yes it can: bigger government = bigger beareaucracy = less efficient. if you think private care is bad, government healthcare will only make it worse.

america has the best healthcare in the world, though due to privitization, we don't have the best coverage.

medicare/medicaid/SS all need to be fixed. frankly, a 70+ year old SS system is NOT suitable for the modern economic situation

Not to bust your bubble.....BUT

In spite of all the money spent on health care in the US there is still a problem of access and quality(not just privatization)
Based on the World Health Organization (WHO) ranking 191 countries the US is # 1 in only one category.
That being: responsiveness of the health systems level and distributions (dignity, autonomy, confidentiality, prompt attention, quality of basic amenities, access to social support, networks during care and choice of provider)