FA_Q2
Gold Member
I have two major issues with an American single payer system that I wanted to discuss. One is the concept that the government is going to refine healthcare to make it cheaper and the second is the unbalance of power this would create.
I have some serious issues with the idea that the government can run the healthcare industry more efficiently then the free market does. The free market has a reason to run a tight ship; they need to turn a profit. The government does not have that motive. The governments track record in managing finical matters is abysmal. Medicare/Medicaid bankrupt, Post Office Bankrupt and Social Security Bankrupt. Remember Freddy and Fanny, done. The government has never run a program effectively and we have to pay for it. Just take a look at the defense budget; it could easily be half what it is now but it is riddled with inefficiency. Having worked with government agencies I have never seen the blatant misuse of resources anywhere else.
Another issue is the unprecedented power this give congress in the aria of health services. Right now, congress makes the rules (with influence from the insurance companies not control) and the insurance companies must make it work. With single payer, the price tag and the laws will come from the same body. That is where the so called death panels will come from. Though they are not truly death panels per sea there will be a cost analysis involved that will prohibit the use of cutting edge medical technology to save lives as well as denying care to those that may need it because of cost. Before I get flames about how this is no different from the system that we have now with insurance companies denying care, I agree totally. THE POINT THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THE SAME BULLSHIT AND SINGLE PAYER IS STILL THE SAME SHIT. If you replace single payer with provisions that will prevent insurance companies from the standard deny anything you can then you have one element of true reform. I believe that any treatment a doctor believes to be required should be performed and payment received after without the chance of an insurance company to deny a claim. If a claim is obviously erroneous then the insurance company should have to go after the doctor for erroneous claims. This will stop bankruptcy from medical conditions and help weed out corrupt doctors. There is a serious conflict of interests when you put the same people that will benefit from reduced medical costs in power of what medical procedures are to be covered and what procedures are not.
I also believe one of the largest items that needs to be addressed overall is the need for people to actually pay for their minor services. This may be subsidized for VERY low incomes but for the most part should be implemented. Prices are as high as they are for two reasons we do not pay for health care and many health services are over regulated. A good example comes to mind when my wife attempted to get her teeth cleaned without dental insurance. We called all the local dentists and tried to get quotes. NONE of the receptionists knew what the price was. THATS INSANE. After much waiting we got a spread of 200 to 1000 dollars for a simple cleaning. The latter dentist would go out of business for gouging if you had to pay for the services received. The price issue is not an insurance problem as many believe, it is a service one and the best way to drive those prices down is with good ol competition through actually paying for your services.
Other elements I believe need to be addressed are; tort reform, pre existing conditions, the dreaded health insurance mandate (torn on this one at the moment), regulation reform and one of the most important is competition (both in insurance and in services).
That is enough for now, I may go into better detail if there is enough responses to this thread.
I have some serious issues with the idea that the government can run the healthcare industry more efficiently then the free market does. The free market has a reason to run a tight ship; they need to turn a profit. The government does not have that motive. The governments track record in managing finical matters is abysmal. Medicare/Medicaid bankrupt, Post Office Bankrupt and Social Security Bankrupt. Remember Freddy and Fanny, done. The government has never run a program effectively and we have to pay for it. Just take a look at the defense budget; it could easily be half what it is now but it is riddled with inefficiency. Having worked with government agencies I have never seen the blatant misuse of resources anywhere else.
Another issue is the unprecedented power this give congress in the aria of health services. Right now, congress makes the rules (with influence from the insurance companies not control) and the insurance companies must make it work. With single payer, the price tag and the laws will come from the same body. That is where the so called death panels will come from. Though they are not truly death panels per sea there will be a cost analysis involved that will prohibit the use of cutting edge medical technology to save lives as well as denying care to those that may need it because of cost. Before I get flames about how this is no different from the system that we have now with insurance companies denying care, I agree totally. THE POINT THIS IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THE SAME BULLSHIT AND SINGLE PAYER IS STILL THE SAME SHIT. If you replace single payer with provisions that will prevent insurance companies from the standard deny anything you can then you have one element of true reform. I believe that any treatment a doctor believes to be required should be performed and payment received after without the chance of an insurance company to deny a claim. If a claim is obviously erroneous then the insurance company should have to go after the doctor for erroneous claims. This will stop bankruptcy from medical conditions and help weed out corrupt doctors. There is a serious conflict of interests when you put the same people that will benefit from reduced medical costs in power of what medical procedures are to be covered and what procedures are not.
I also believe one of the largest items that needs to be addressed overall is the need for people to actually pay for their minor services. This may be subsidized for VERY low incomes but for the most part should be implemented. Prices are as high as they are for two reasons we do not pay for health care and many health services are over regulated. A good example comes to mind when my wife attempted to get her teeth cleaned without dental insurance. We called all the local dentists and tried to get quotes. NONE of the receptionists knew what the price was. THATS INSANE. After much waiting we got a spread of 200 to 1000 dollars for a simple cleaning. The latter dentist would go out of business for gouging if you had to pay for the services received. The price issue is not an insurance problem as many believe, it is a service one and the best way to drive those prices down is with good ol competition through actually paying for your services.
Other elements I believe need to be addressed are; tort reform, pre existing conditions, the dreaded health insurance mandate (torn on this one at the moment), regulation reform and one of the most important is competition (both in insurance and in services).
That is enough for now, I may go into better detail if there is enough responses to this thread.
I do not see how their complacency with their care has anything to do with where our care needs to go. 
