I heard some journalist say, "If you think health care is expensive now, just wait until it is free."
Okay. Point by point again:
- You're again missing the point. The current system sucks. We shouldn't have insurance companies controlling healthcare of the population. We should have a system where the incentive is to provide the best care at the best price. That's not what we currently have. Gov't incentives or anything else aren't going to fix the fundamental problem with the current system.
I am not missing the point, I have been outlining to you in first grade language, that I don't agree with your utopian liberal views. Government interference, along with their lack of accountability is the problem. Unfunded mandates are the problem. The proponents of government run health care seem to think that the Tooth Fairy, aka The American Taxpayer, will keep coming up with a magical supply of money. A free market approach that incentivizes and rewards human behavior, along with, perhaps, very little government influence. That is our best hope for sustainabilty. In fact, the NHS in Britain, UK is NOW talking about looking into starting some privatization measures to save the NHS as the systems finances are spiraling out of control. The PC Trusts, 151 of them, are being eliminated by 2013 and the GP's will now have the final say over who gets what/when. This is a role that they are not wanting for obvious reasons, but, alas, they are being forced
to do this by the "system".
The Canadian Health System have mentioned the "P" word as well, meaning "p" as in privatization, to control costs.
We have Canadians coming across the border for cancer drugs that American pharmaceutical companies have invented over an average period of 10-15 years at a cost of 1.3 BILLION dollars. These cancer drugs show great promise. The best hope for survival can't be had if the drug is deemed too expensive and thus, is not approved in the Canadian formularies. Hip replacement surgery, mitral valve surgery are done here in the US, without the typical 18 month wait time in Canada. Canadian quadruplets were born in Montana because there were not enough neonatal intensive-care beds for all four babies in Calgary. The US health care system does not suck (your word) 80% are very satisfied with the system when they are sick and need the best. Yes, the sick are served at great cost and quality. Yes, it is very expensive here, but there are enough MRI machines, CT scanners, and researchers, well-trained doctor/specialists and high tech innovative news breaking approaches in regard to disease and injury. The expensive job of inventing medical devices and medications are done here. So, what price do you put on curing someone with lymphoma, leukemia, breast cancer, prostate cancer?
The working poor and the non-working poor get treated, but more so, as the government keeps dictating what doctors and hospitals will get paid for Medicare and Medicaid services, more doctors are refusing to take care of these government insured patients. So, in the meantime, emergency departments are filling up and the wait times are miserable. All this is government initiated and the poor and elderly suffer the most because of governing by good intentions. The government run health care programs keep racking up costs, so they institute price controls by cutting reimbursements to doctors and hospitals and they ration care by denying claims. Eventually, doctors refuse to see government dependent patients. I could pull out more examples of the pitfalls of government interference, but I will stop for now. The list of examples is very long.
- We already addressed the whole Medicare/Medicaid issue. Those supposed denials have a reason. Medicare/Medicaid doesn't drop people as they don't need to make a profit. Insurance company numbers adjusted for dropped customers would be way higher.
In reality, the denials are disguised price controls measures. Price controls always raise prices. The socialist government plans ration care with denials as well. Private companies do this as well, but not as much as government run plans. So, where does the patient/consumer go? The patient shows up in the emergency department where federal law mandates that they must be treated. Government insurance, which they are already enrolled in, rejected them, so now the costs are passed onto the private sector and we pay higher premiums to cover the cost. Hospitals lose money , go out of business, or they just pass it on disguised as the $100 aspirin. Somebody has to pay for the doctor, nurse, I.V.'s, catheters, latex gloves, paper products, janitorial care,electricity and medications that were consumed by the patient. Seriously, tell me you don't know this.
- You still haven't answered: should we get rid of Medicare/Medicaid and Social Security? If the answer is NO, then you need to stop bringing it up. It refutes your point.
portability and did not have health insurance tied to a jobChange
the tax codeReduce
costly government mandatesMade
it possible for people to purchase insurance across
the limits for contributing to tax-free health
savings accounts and let that money roll over each year
to accrue so people could directly pay for non-catastrophic
health care costsIncrease
clinics that are located in retail places such as Target, Wal-Mart, CVS, Walgreens so there is cheap, 24/7 care available for allInsist
on TORT reform so physicians wouldn't have to practice defensive medicine by ordering too many expensive tests to cover their azzes against lawsuitsProvide
vouchers for the working poor and the chronically uninsured and put them in high risk pools and fund those pools
we could possibly phase out or limit the need for these big government financial failures called Medicare and Medicaid, that are eventually going to go bust anyway. Social Security should not be an issue for anyone above the age of 40, they will get their money, as promised
. But, serious steps should be taken to protect the younger workers from paying for this cruel Ponzi scheme tax which will collapse as well, and won't be there for them. These are not my ideas
, but I happen to like these ideas. I have studied information from various think tanks that employ health care economists experts who study these issues as a career choice. How's that for answer?
- The gov't doesn't "think" anything. It's not an entity that thinks or has a profit-making goal in mind. The gov't role only has one concern by definition: working for the good of the people. You don't seem to understand that the only negatives that come from any gov't operations are caused by the same corporations you're defending because they're the ones who are using lobbiests to get gov't members to do what they want. The gov't itself doesn't "want" to do anything. There are special interests, who are those same corporations you defend, who pressure the gov't to do things that are in their best financial interests.
The government doesn't have a profit making motive in mind? You think like a child.
Well, I guess many politicians would never think of listening to the lobbyists and special interest groups to get a bill passed or be bribed with earmarks in exchange for a yes vote on Obamacare. I suppose you think that there are no politicians that want to control people, but rather only help them. You think like a child. And, no politician would ever desire power or money. Amazing how many go into congress with a modest amount of money and come out multi-millionaires. Most are only concerned with getting votes for the next election and will say and do anything for those votes. You think like a child.
- You don't know what you're talking about. A healthy 24-year-old has no problems getting any policy they want because they're young and healthy. Those are exactly the type of members insurance companies love. I've bought those policies when I was 24 and so have my friends. 24-year-olds are the healthiest ones out there. They're not the ones driving anything up. It's the older people who have pre-existing conditions and can't get an insurance company to offer them an affordable plan because they're simply too expensive to keep on any plan. Plus, you lack logic in your entire statement. Insurance companies don't pay for anyone who's not insured. Hospitals who give them free treatment do.
The young "invincibles" are choosing in large numbers not to purchase insurance because they are being priced out of the market by mandates and lack of choice to purchase policies that meet their needs as 24 year olds. Check out what's happening in New Jersey and Massachusetts. The younger people pay higher rates than necessary in part to cover the older or chronically ill. They drop their insurance or don't consider buying insurance at all, knowing that they will still get treatment if they break their leg or get injured in a car accident. So, what is the incentive for them to have insurance in the first place?
- What is expensive? How much is that? You don't know what you're talking about again. Healthcare in the US is most expensive in the world. If anything you say was true, it would be cheapest. Healthcare is just like any other commodity that is too expensive and impractical for individuals to pay for out of pocket, like roads. Those other commodities are gov't-managed for that reason. No one ever addresses getting rid of insurance companies altogether. Right now, we have a system where individuals mostly have no idea what anything costs, so expense is irrelevant to them due to existence of insurance companies. No competition for healthcare prices can be possible under these conditions. The supposed competition that you say supposedly drives healthcare prices down doesn't exist in this country. That's why we have the most expensive care in the world.
Healthcare is expensive, but quality, availability of medical equipment such as MRI's CT scanners, accessibility and cutting edge cancer drugs and innovations are some of the big items there for us in time of need. We don't have wait times like many single payer systems have in other countries. In fact, many come to America to get the best, right away. Money well spent.
Okay, so we can accept a government takeover by reducing our options, imposing mandates, raising taxes, imposing price controls and rationing, thus distorting the free open market or we can work towards putting doctors, patients and consumers in charge by freeing the health care markets so choices are maximized. Innovations will keep coming as well. People want freedom and choice, especially when it comes to life and death matters. I back freedom - not more government control.