Health Care (A simpler solution)

[code1211]

Sounds like a great plan until you attempt to get the HC insurance companies to go alongg with it.

They'll tell you that they don't WANT to accept people with pre-existing conditions because they KNOW they're going to lose money on those clients.[/QUOTE]


All that means is that those with pre-existing conditions must pay a little more to get in... Along with everyone else.

There's dirty little secret that the Dems who seem to be pushing this just don't want to talk about. EVERYONE ELSE pays a little more to cover the pre-existing conditions, a little more to cover the uninsured, a little more to cover the drugs needed for everyone else, a little more for those who could already get insurance but have chosen not to.

All of the costs are still going to come in for the 40 million newly insured. Someone is going to pay for it and Uno Who is the likely candidate.

A good question is, "How much is the average premium for those already insured and paying premiums going to rise under whatever plan we are discussing?"

 

[garyd]

Edit in more than half the states they are required by state government fiat to cover pre existing conditions. It doesn't bother the insurance companies that much they just raise their rates. It sure is hell on small businesses though.

 

[Contumacious]

The law would be written in such a way that No Politician from any level of government would be allowed access to this money. l.

Gee whiz, that was done by the Founders Fathers over 200 years ago.

NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER was granted to the Federal Government to be in the health insurance business, NONE. So they should just abolish medicare and medicaid and that's all they have to do!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Darkwind]

So this is government health care period. If the payroll deduction operates exactly as does the Social security payroll deduction, it is Government, socialized health care.

Currently, the charges for any procedure great or small are set by the hospitals and then negotiated down by the insurance companies. Beyond that is the phrase "reasonable and customary" which is the normal cost of procedures of any type from a bruised elbow to a Hip replacement.

These are devices used by insurance companies to reduce the costs charged by Hospitals and health conglomerates.

On NPR the other day, there was a discussion that compared health care to any other industry and the one that they thought was closest was Auto repair. Complex machines that we don't know much about with reelatively standard procedures and costs that may or may not be real.

Of course you can unload the '99 Taurus when the cost is too high and may feel a tad more attached to your daughter.

The insurance companies are not the bad guys here. The hospitals are the guys who keep raising the prices of everything that they do. The insurance companies have found a way to pay for these things.

Why not be angry at the people who charge the tripling rates?

Yes and no.

It is a government mandated deduction, yes. This would not work if the government were to be permitted to control the monies that are being deducted from the individuals paycheck and use it as they see fit to provide some kind of medical service for the deduction. That road does lead down to the same problems we have with medicare and that ponzi-scheme called Social Security.

However, in truth, My idea involved government only to the extent that they create a law that requires a mandatory deduction to be deposited into a special bank account (Normally called a Health Savings Account) that only the individual has access to.

I did leave out something from My original OP and that is the only people authorized to access these funds would be a licensed health care facility or professional (i.e., A hospital or doctor) for payment on services rendered. As for you take on the costs. When hospitals know that payments will be coming from a finite account (as opposed to a huge money fund found in insurance companies) the prices will be pressured downward. After all, if you go to a doctor and tell them that you are going to be paying cash, your bill WILL be lower then the one they would have sent your insurance company.

Also, T makes a valid point in that we need some reasonable tort reform. That too would help in lowering costs. In addition to that, if people are using their HSA's for active preventative and minor medical emergencies, the costs of emergency rooms will go down as well as more people will use clinics for their kids sniffles instead of the emergency rooms where they are, by law, forced to treat everyone.

There will still be a need for some health insurance as catistrophic illnesses or accidents would cost more then any HSA could sustain unless it was from an account that had been accruing a balance sheet for 20 or 30 years.

The whole key however, is to keep the money in the hands of the citizen to be used for health care only.

Otherwise, it will just be another ponzi-scheme and the government is running enough of those already.

 

[Darkwind]

Sounds like a great plan until you attempt to get the HC insurance companies to go alongg with it.

They'll tell you that they don't WANT to accept people with pre-existing conditions because they KNOW they're going to lose money on those clients.

The only real time that the insurance companies would have a say is when you purchase catastrophic health care insurance.

A pre-existing condition means nothing if you are paying cash.

 

[Darkwind]

Tort Reform No Cure For What Ails Our Health Care System
With the current debate concerning health care reform heating up, I want to share with you some thoughts on malpractice law suits and its role in the health care debade. The article was authored by the American Association for Justice of which I am a sustaining member.

Among the crowds gathering at health care town halls, there’s an undercurrent of anger by people who are relying on misinformation to halt any true reform. One of the common myths is that the only change our health care system really needs is tort reform. While some like to tout the perceived "success" of tort reform in their states, the evidence belies their assertion.

A recent Washington Independent article took issue with the push to promote tort reform as a health care panacea. The piece, entitled “Tort Reform Unlikely to Cut Health Care Costs”, cites academics like Harvard’s Amitabh Chandra and University of Pennsylvania’s Tom Baker in arguing that tort reform is merely a distraction from what truly ails our current health care system. In fact, Michele Mello, a professor of Law and Public Health at Harvard, tells the Independent that “If you were to list the top five or ten things that you could do to bring down health care costs [tort reform] would not be on the list.” [Also see article in the Atlantic]

Tort Reform No Cure For What Ails Our Health Care System: New York Brain Injury Lawyer - New York Brain Injury Attorney

Tort is PART of the Solution...the Largest problem is getting the Government Camel's NOSE out from under the tent and let the FREE MARKET handle it.

People will gravitate to the best deals...

And for those that don't have Insurance? It's your own FAULT. YOU are NOT entitled to it. It is a commodity, like anything else. You WANT good healthcare insurance? Then work your ASS off like the REST of us to get it...

Elevate yourself to get to where you want to be, instead of DRAGGING the rest of us down to your level of WHINING, and empowering the GOVERNMENT by the point of a GUN to take it From those of us that WORK HARD for it.

Enough said.

Ah, the 'fuck you, I've got mine' argument.

Yeah, don't you just hate the unions?

 

[Diuretic]

Tort is PART of the Solution...the Largest problem is getting the Government Camel's NOSE out from under the tent and let the FREE MARKET handle it.

People will gravitate to the best deals...

And for those that don't have Insurance? It's your own FAULT. YOU are NOT entitled to it. It is a commodity, like anything else. You WANT good healthcare insurance? Then work your ASS off like the REST of us to get it...

Elevate yourself to get to where you want to be, instead of DRAGGING the rest of us down to your level of WHINING, and empowering the GOVERNMENT by the point of a GUN to take it From those of us that WORK HARD for it.

Enough said.

Ah, the 'fuck you, I've got mine' argument.

Yeah, don't you just hate the unions?

Let's hear it then

 

[Darkwind]

Let's see. Every industrial nation on earth, save the US, has a national health care system. And almost all of them have much better results with their systems than we do. Longer lifespans, healthier old ages, and a much lower infant mortality rate. At 1/2 to 3/4 the cost that we pay per capita. And they cover all their citizens.

Are they really that much smarter than we are that they can do this and we cannot?

You cannot back that claim up. The United States has the best recovery rates of any nation in the world. That is the only real legitimate measure of how well a health care industry performs. In nearly all categories of survivor and recovery rates, the United States ranks at or near the top.

Lifespans are the have no real bearing on the measure of a health care system because it does not take into account lifestyle, genetics and environmental factors like diet.

However, if you do the research you'll find that when matched with the European countries that have national health care, our county measures almost exactly the same when broken down by ethnicity. I have always found it amusing that when debating lifespans, the United States gets lumped into one category and the whole ethnic mix of our nation gets dismissed.

But if you do research on a Caucasian vs Caucasian, Black vs Black, Mediterranean vs Mediterranean, Asian vs Asian...you'll see that we actually measure up pretty well. Lifestyle not withstanding.

And lets face it. America has the least healthy lifestyle on the planet.

Think that might be the deciding factor on our longevity rather then health care? I do.

 

[Darkwind]

Ah, the 'fuck you, I've got mine' argument.

Yeah, don't you just hate the unions?

Let's hear it then

Ask any IAW member if they should give up something for the betterment of the nation.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Let Congress, Obammy and the unions try it out first... then get back to me. Oh wait, that's right, they've been exempted from what is "best" for us.

What asshat is buying any of this?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Unions.. last bastion of the useless.

 

[Diuretic]

Yeah, don't you just hate the unions?

Let's hear it then

Ask any IAW member if they should give up something for the betterment of the nation.

I think you missed my original point. Yes, you did.

 

[Diuretic]

And for those that don't have Insurance? It's your own FAULT. YOU are NOT entitled to it. It is a commodity, like anything else. You WANT good healthcare insurance? Then work your ASS off like the REST of us to get it...

Elevate yourself to get to where you want to be, instead of DRAGGING the rest of us down to your level of WHINING, and empowering the GOVERNMENT by the point of a GUN to take it From those of us that WORK HARD for it.

The argument of the selfish. The poor are morally unsound argument.

This has nothing to do with unions, their objectives and their methods. Unions bargain the details of a labour contract. They are negotiating terms of employment. The employer wants the labour of union members, the employer is prepared to pay a price (in its simplest form this is what is happening) and the union, on behalf of the workers, is negotiating that price.

This has sweet fuck all to do with universal health care and health care for the underprivileged.

You're entitled to your "fuck you I've got mine" argument, but stick to it instead of trying a piss-poor deflection that makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Darkwind]

And for those that don't have Insurance? It's your own FAULT. YOU are NOT entitled to it. It is a commodity, like anything else. You WANT good healthcare insurance? Then work your ASS off like the REST of us to get it...

Elevate yourself to get to where you want to be, instead of DRAGGING the rest of us down to your level of WHINING, and empowering the GOVERNMENT by the point of a GUN to take it From those of us that WORK HARD for it.

The argument of the selfish. The poor are morally unsound argument.

This has nothing to do with unions, their objectives and their methods. Unions bargain the details of a labour contract. They are negotiating terms of employment. The employer wants the labour of union members, the employer is prepared to pay a price (in its simplest form this is what is happening) and the union, on behalf of the workers, is negotiating that price.

This has sweet fuck all to do with universal health care and health care for the underprivileged.

You're entitled to your "fuck you I've got mine" argument, but stick to it instead of trying a piss-poor deflection that makes no sense whatsoever.

You think that people have an absolute right to have money spent on them to provide for their health care?

They do not.

Do you think that the government has the right to destroy the health care of responsible people to provide health care for those who are not responsible enough?

It does not.

Government does not exist to provide anyone with a life that has no risks or a life that is free of worry from risk.

I get tired of people who just want to transfer their mothers apron strings for govermental apron strings simply because they are to afraid to go out and live their life. And more importantly, to go out and participate in their life.

 

[Diuretic]

And for those that don't have Insurance? It's your own FAULT. YOU are NOT entitled to it. It is a commodity, like anything else. You WANT good healthcare insurance? Then work your ASS off like the REST of us to get it...

Elevate yourself to get to where you want to be, instead of DRAGGING the rest of us down to your level of WHINING, and empowering the GOVERNMENT by the point of a GUN to take it From those of us that WORK HARD for it.

The argument of the selfish. The poor are morally unsound argument.

This has nothing to do with unions, their objectives and their methods. Unions bargain the details of a labour contract. They are negotiating terms of employment. The employer wants the labour of union members, the employer is prepared to pay a price (in its simplest form this is what is happening) and the union, on behalf of the workers, is negotiating that price.

This has sweet fuck all to do with universal health care and health care for the underprivileged.

You're entitled to your "fuck you I've got mine" argument, but stick to it instead of trying a piss-poor deflection that makes no sense whatsoever.

You think that people have an absolute right to have money spent on them to provide for their health care?

They do not.

Do you think that the government has the right to destroy the health care of responsible people to provide health care for those who are not responsible enough?

It does not.

Government does not exist to provide anyone with a life that has no risks or a life that is free of worry from risk.

I get tired of people who just want to transfer their mothers apron strings for govermental apron strings simply because they are to afraid to go out and live their life. And more importantly, to go out and participate in their life.

I believe that society should provide all its citizens the ability to access affordable health care. That doesn't necessarily entail the destruction of anything or taking away anything from anyone.

On the purpose of government, that's an interesting discussion of itself but possibly for another thread. But I will say this. As a basic principle I do believe that government is responsible for the minimising of misery. That's not an original thought by me, I'm following others but that's my view of one of government's purposes.