AP: says" health care will cover more, cost more"

polaris_x

know1 wrote:

They can't? Have they tried? The only reason they think they can't is because everyone is paying over-inflated prices designed to keep the health insurance industry afloat.

Do you think if everyone suddenly stopped using insurance and offerred to pay in cash that the doctors would just close up shop because nobody could afford them? I don't.

but in a de-regulated system ... who's to say docs don't charge $100 a visit each time? ... there would be enuf people who could afford to pay it and will and there will those who can't ...

WaveCameCrashin

scb..,
that's a berry heart warming story and I agree with you,but let's be honest with our selves. Times are not that simple anymore. I have no problem with helping out the less fortunate,but I don't think you or I should be forced to by the gov.

OutOfBreath

polaris_x wrote:

but in a de-regulated system ... who's to say docs don't charge $100 a visit each time? ... there would be enuf people who could afford to pay it and will and there will those who can't ...

So they'll end up with poor doctors for the poor, and decent doctors for the rest.
Do all doctors REALLY need all those years of education?

A bit harsh in my eyes really, but I hope the same people don't start bitching about the quality as well, as you can't have both...

Probably would have been a drag on the economy as well if every decent working man has to pile up a nest-egg of money incase he or his kids get sick. Or let them die if he can't afford it. Free market baby! Noone can force care on you, and noone should be required to anything.

Peace
Dan

polaris_x

OutOfBreath wrote:

So they'll end up with poor doctors for the poor, and decent doctors for the rest.
Do all doctors REALLY need all those years of education?

A bit harsh in my eyes really, but I hope the same people don't start bitching about the quality as well, as you can't have both...

Probably would have been a drag on the economy as well if every decent working man has to pile up a nest-egg of money incase he or his kids get sick. Or let them die if he can't afford it. Free market baby! Noone can force care on you, and noone should be required to anything.

Peace
Dan

hey brother!

do you find these health care debates as interesting as i do? ... i mean we both live in countries where the health care is essentially socialized and everyone for the most part is supportive of it ... it's become part of our fabric ... same thing with education to a lesser degree ...

FiveB247x

Not that there's some specific and set benchmark of attainment, but I do find it interesting to see what "an outsider" thinks towards the debate in the US. Seems like everything is so overly partisan and politicized that the issues get lost. For those who have alternative types of healthcare systems in your nation, what do you think? What's practical, expected to be upside, downsides and merely misconceptions? Do we have it all wrong? Is there a better way or is this a pipe dream?

polaris_x wrote:

hey brother!

do you find these health care debates as interesting as i do? ... i mean we both live in countries where the health care is essentially socialized and everyone for the most part is supportive of it ... it's become part of our fabric ... same thing with education to a lesser degree ...

polaris_x

FiveB247x wrote:

Not that there's some specific and set benchmark of attainment, but I do find it interesting to see what "an outsider" thinks towards the debate in the US. Seems like everything is so overly partisan and politicized that the issues get lost. For those who have alternative types of healthcare systems in your nation, what do you think? What's practical, expected to be upside, downsides and merely misconceptions? Do we have it all wrong? Is there a better way or is this a pipe dream?

well ... it's a clusterfuck for you guys for a multitude of reasons ...

1. as you said - the country is divided and extremely partisan for the most part ... it's hard to accomplish anything when half the people believe so strongly on one way and the other half opposite ...

2. the corporatization of gov'ts - nothing gets passed in washington unless some corporation benefits (for the most part) ... you can't manage any social services if the interests of coporations is at the forefront

soo ... although we are totally screwing it up here in Canada ... mainly because we have conservatives in power now ... the motivations are primarily in the interests of privatization and taxation ...

for healthcare to work ... you have to treat it sort of like the fire department - where the majority of money is used to pay for the service itself ... right now - everyone has to get a huge cut ... drug companies, insurance companies, related health associates ... it won't work - it's not sustainable ...

OutOfBreath

FiveB247x wrote:

Not that there's some specific and set benchmark of attainment, but I do find it interesting to see what "an outsider" thinks towards the debate in the US. Seems like everything is so overly partisan and politicized that the issues get lost. For those who have alternative types of healthcare systems in your nation, what do you think? What's practical, expected to be upside, downsides and merely misconceptions? Do we have it all wrong? Is there a better way or is this a pipe dream?

The best way is to treat it as a utility, more or less. Minimum of overhead and some control on the cost-side negotiating drug prices, setting standard fees for doctors etc.

The big plus the way I see it, is that if it comes across as a public expense paid by tax money, it is possible to be pro-active on health issues. It will be seen very clearly in the national budgets, and steps towards improving health would lead to reduced costs in the budget. This will be important in the decades to come as medical science advances and evermore advanced treatments become available at ever increasing prices. Priorities must be set, and I think it most fair in a system that takes us all into account by need, not money. The system the US has now camouflages the increasing cost of health to some degree, as it is taken in by insurance plans. I've seen increasing cost been used as an argument against socialized systems, but they are not an iota less in the US system. Just not on the national budget.

Downside can be waiting time for less essential procedures.

But let me stress that
1. Death panels do not in any form exist
2. No medical decisions are made by anyone not a medical professional
3. Although there is some waiting for some procedures, generally things run very smoothly for patients.

(edit) As for the tone of the American debate on this, I find it nothing less than hysterical. Some of you people are so afraid of anything public (yet totally trusting of anything big corp) that it's mind-boggling. But it's the tone that gets me. Fine enough not to want public options, but DAYM how big demons one can make out of a couple of small ant hills.

Peace
Dan

_

know1 wrote:

scb wrote:

know1 wrote:

In other words, say no to insurance and pay out of pocket.

That's great in theory, but the most people can't afford to do that.

They can't? Have they tried? The only reason they think they can't is because everyone is paying over-inflated prices designed to keep the health insurance industry afloat.

Do you think if everyone suddenly stopped using insurance and offerred to pay in cash that the doctors would just close up shop because nobody could afford them? I don't.

But in reality everyone's not going to suddenly stop using unsurance at once, so the people who do will have to pay the inflacted prices. And even if everyone did and the prices dropped, medical expenses, no matter how fairly/cheaply priced, can sometimes get completely out of hand. There is no upper limit and the average person could only pay so much.

Cosmo

prfctlefts wrote:

Chant exactly what ???? :?
More power to you if you can afford it...
Well let me ask you this.. as far as medicare goes don't they have a right if they were promised they would be taken care of if they payed into it ? Seniors that is...
Do you think we should ween future generations of Medicare.
and as far as your last comment goes. WTF does that have anything to do with. :? I care about my fellow man also , but guess what My felow man isn't going to pay my rent next month,buy my groceries this week, or put gas in my car. so call me greedy then if I say I care more about what's in my bank acct... I think when it comes down to it people are going to more concerned about their own survival for them and their family especially if you are on a really tight budget like most famalies are.

...
MediCare. The Tea Party people are always esposuing the evils of Government Run Health Care, yet... participate in it... and say things like, 'Keep Your Hands Off My Medicare'. MediCare is Government Run Health Care... that they participate in. Doesn't that mean they support an Evil Government Run Health Care System? They can CHOOSE to opt out of it... if it is Evil... why don't they?
And I don't know why you are even arguing my last comment... you validate it with your statement, ".... I say I care more about what's in my bank acct.". I never said anything about 'Greed'... that was your interpretation. You add some rationalization to justify your point... which is fine. It still makes my comment true.

gimmesometruth27

Cosmo wrote:

prfctlefts wrote:

Chant exactly what ???? :?
More power to you if you can afford it...
Well let me ask you this.. as far as medicare goes don't they have a right if they were promised they would be taken care of if they payed into it ? Seniors that is...
Do you think we should ween future generations of Medicare.
and as far as your last comment goes. WTF does that have anything to do with. :? I care about my fellow man also , but guess what My felow man isn't going to pay my rent next month,buy my groceries this week, or put gas in my car. so call me greedy then if I say I care more about what's in my bank acct... I think when it comes down to it people are going to more concerned about their own survival for them and their family especially if you are on a really tight budget like most famalies are.

...
MediCare. The Tea Party people are always esposuing the evils of Government Run Health Care, yet... participate in it... and say things like, 'Keep Your Hands Off My Medicare'. MediCare is Government Run Health Care... that they participate in. Doesn't that mean they support an Evil Government Run Health Care System? They can CHOOSE to opt out of it... if it is Evil... why don't they?
And I don't know why you are even arguing my last comment... you validate it with your statement, ".... I say I care more about what's in my bank acct.". I never said anything about 'Greed'... that was your interpretation. You add some rationalization to justify your point... which is fine. It still makes my comment true.

i agree about the medicare issue cosmo. tricare is another government run healthcare system for active and retired military people. we have an airforce base near my clinic and we see a shit ton of tricare. they go to the base medical facility then the orthopedic issues get referred to us. tricare pays very well, but getting referrals is a headache sometimes. the service people have the option to take tricare or purchase different health insurance. a lot of these teabaggers that were shouting in the health town halls a few months ago were either discharged or retired vets. and the retired ones over 65 get tricare AND medicare so they are doubly hypocritical.