Building a better health care system

[Digibomber]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : XXXXXXX

What do people think should be the right approach?

 

[Oddball]

I reject the premise.

"WE" don't need to provide jack shit.

"WE" need big gubmint to get the hell out of the way and quit pretending that their meddling is doing anyone, besides they and their bureaucratic hangers-on, any favors.

 

[Oscar Wao]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

Remove some of the dumb assed regulations that are in place right now (like I can't get health insurance from some insurance company in another state if it's nicer and more affordable than the Hoosier State's one?! Like double eu tee eff mate!).

For starters...

 

[KittenKoder]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

Remove some of the dumb assed regulations that are in place right now (like I can't get health insurance from some insurance company in another state if it's nicer and more affordable than the Hoosier State's one?! Like double eu tee eff mate!).

For starters...

Didn't you hear, there is no regulation in healthcare ... none at all, remember? That's the reason it's corrupt, yeppers, no regulations in healthcare exist right now.

 

[DiveCon]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

Remove some of the dumb assed regulations that are in place right now (like I can't get health insurance from some insurance company in another state if it's nicer and more affordable than the Hoosier State's one?! Like double eu tee eff mate!).

For starters...

that is a states issue though
the states need to allow that

 

[Digibomber]

I reject the premise.

"WE" don't need to provide jack shit.

"WE" need big gubmint to get the hell out of the way and quit pretending that their meddling is doing anyone, besides they and their bureaucratic hangers-on, any favors.

What premise do you reject, that health care costs are outlandish and we need to do something about them? Have you tried paying for health care with your own money and not someone else's?

Did you even read the article, I said nothing about big gubmint. I just said that we need to make people responsible for their own health and use their own money to pay for health care. Not someone else's, not tax payer's, but your own. That is the only way costs will come down in this country. Increasing free market competition amongst medical providers will reduce costs and spur innovation.

We need health-care reform not more health-insurance.

 

[Oddball]

I've more than tried, I've done so....And so have of a lot of my friends and acquaintances.

The problem with costs is direct product of separating the consumer from the costs of the end service. A situation caused, as least in part, by the attitude that "WE" have to do something....That's the premise that I reject.

 

[Digibomber]

The problem with costs is direct product of separating the consumer from the costs of the end service. A situation caused, as least in part, by the attitude that "WE" have to do something....That's the premise that I reject.

That is exactly what I am saying. In order for costs to reduce, the consumer needs to be responsible for paying for the end service. If that doesn't happen the costs will continue to spiral out of control.

If "WE" don't do it, who else will? "WE" have to take responsibility for the mess that has been created, maybe not by "US", but "WE" are the one's who are affected. The big gubmint that you talk about will do nothing to reduce costs and "WE" are the ones who will end up paying the price.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A two-tier system, like Australia, will control the health cost spiral. Just as USPS keeps FedEx, Airborne, etc., honest on their prices, so will a government payer option along side the health insurance industry. That is why the health insurance folks are squealing so loud and why they are buying such huge ad loads with Laura, Michael, Glenn, Sean, RushbinLimbaugh and the other demagogues of the right. A government payer option will stop the bleeding and permit the healing.

 

[reiidlynch]

Health care is a system which want pre planning. The calculation of caring life and health is necessary. It increase perfect balance of life and health.

 

[philipjames]

Good job.Keep it up.health is a very important issues and its completion is very necessary.

 

[auditor0007]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

Remove some of the dumb assed regulations that are in place right now (like I can't get health insurance from some insurance company in another state if it's nicer and more affordable than the Hoosier State's one?! Like double eu tee eff mate!).

For starters...

In theory, purchasing health insurance across state lines sounds like a great idea. I'm afraid in practice though, it would create a nightmare for many who chose cheaper insurance from out of state companies. I could be wrong, but it seems that the door would be open for much more fraud.

 

[auditor0007]

A two-tier system, like Australia, will control the health cost spiral. Just as USPS keeps FedEx, Airborne, etc., honest on their prices, so will a government payer option along side the health insurance industry. That is why the health insurance folks are squealing so loud and why they are buying such huge ad loads with Laura, Michael, Glenn, Sean, RushbinLimbaugh and the other demagogues of the right. A government payer option will stop the bleeding and permit the healing.

I agree with that, but in order to really begin cutting costs, we need to change more than just offering a public option. Education costs for those entering the medical field need to be reduced in some way. One way to do this would be to have hospitals and healthcare organizations sponsor med students. Those students then would be required to provide so many years of service with that provider at a reduced pay rate. Bringing more people into the medical field as doctors would help to put a downward push on the pay of doctors across the board. While I am not against people trying to make as much as they can, we have a system where the costs to enter the medical field are so high, it limits who can enter. But once the educational costs are paid for, these doctors expect huge returns on their educational investment, which I completely understand. If we reduced the upfront costs though, then many of these doctors would be happy earning a better than average living without the need to make huge earnings.

 

[KissMy]

I reject the premise.

"WE" don't need to provide jack shit.

"WE" need big gubmint to get the hell out of the way and quit pretending that their meddling is doing anyone, besides they and their bureaucratic hangers-on, any favors.

I don't think we need to provide care for working age people either, but Reagan, Bush, Clinton & Obama have all forced us to.

Reagan signed the "Patient Anti-Dumping Act" forcing us to pay the healthcare bill for everyone in this country & it's territories.

 

[KissMy]

In theory, purchasing health insurance across state lines sounds like a great idea. I'm afraid in practice though, it would create a nightmare for many who chose cheaper insurance from out of state companies. I could be wrong, but it seems that the door would be open for much more fraud.

It is no different than investing in companies across state lines or banking across state lines.

The McCarran–Ferguson Act of 1945 is the only reason you can't buy out of state insurance forcing free market competition to drive down cost. This act exempts insurance companies from the interstate commerce laws. It makes it legal for insurance companies to engage in price fixing, racketeering & have antitrust exemptions.

 

[lizzie]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

I am of the opinion that we need to do away with comprehensive coverage and return to catastrophic coverage, just as it was prior to the mid-70's. HMO legislation is probably the primary reason we have had soaring health care costs for the past couple of decades.

 

[JohnMoore]

I completely agree with your comment. if you observed that many hospitals are providing a top class service to the patients and many hospitals are government hospitals. Few days ago Mr.Obama has announced some help to the hospitals as well. Beside those things I am not happy with the private institutions who are taking a more money for the treatment. While some private services are nor encouraging the health awareness. That is a very sad thing for us. People should be aware of the good things and need to become more social and more aware about their health.

 

[editec]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

While I do not think there is any IDEAL solution, I definitely do think that a universal health care system would be better than the mess we've got today.

Short of some draconian HC system, the price of HC is going to continue to rise regardless of what system (socialized or capitalist) we have.

The reason the cost of HC is rising faster than everything else really is an ORGANIC response to an aging population AND better HC that also (and properly) costs more.

 

[Old Rocks]

The main problem with the current administration's health care reform proposal is that it does nothing to control the spiraling costs of health care and adds a large tax burden to be paid of in the future.

While we still need to provide universal care and protect families from bankruptcy the main driver of any reform should be to reduce the rising cost burden to businesses and individuals.

My belief is that it can be achieved through a combination of a high deductible catastrophic insurance and reducing regulation to help medical providers compete. Read more at : In Search of a Better Health Care System « Hoot Hoot Hoot!

What do people think should be the right approach?

Remove some of the dumb assed regulations that are in place right now (like I can't get health insurance from some insurance company in another state if it's nicer and more affordable than the Hoosier State's one?! Like double eu tee eff mate!).

For starters...

In theory, purchasing health insurance across state lines sounds like a great idea. I'm afraid in practice though, it would create a nightmare for many who chose cheaper insurance from out of state companies. I could be wrong, but it seems that the door would be open for much more fraud.

That would create a system like the present credit card system. Where the state that allows the bussinesses the most room to rape the consumer gets the businesses.

 

[Old Rocks]

The present system that we have has us paying the highest per capita amount for health care of any nation in the world. Yet we fail to cover a significant percentage of our citizens, and many more are way under insured.

This has led to the situation of having the highest per capita costs, and third world results.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVgOl3cETb4]"We're Number 37" - Paul Hipp - YouTube[/ame]

There are many democratic nations doing far better, some even that are not industrial, like Costa Rica.
It is time to look at how other nations are succeeding where we are failing and learn something.

Sick Around The World | FRONTLINE | PBS