patrick.net

There are many checks & balances in Medicare. They just don't work. The more layers of fat added at the top, the less money trickles down to the care providers & the patients.

I use hospice as an example. Hospices are reviewed once a year, a sampling of their charts. There are some hospices that are honest, hardworking, caring organizations that only sign on patients who need the care. But I worked for a nation-wide hospice that is FOR PROFIT in a big, big way that provides minimal oversight to the branches and they'll sign anyone one. They hire non-medical professionals to sell their product - and it is a product - so you and I are paying $140 a day for patients to receive care they don't actually need or particularly want, but get it anyway. The program isn't fully explained, the hospices sign anyone on at all that they can... and the oversight has been cut back severely because of the recession.

We could save billions if we had better oversight on hospices. But since hospice saves big insurance a helluva lot of money by keeping them from having to provide medical services for patients who are terminal, big insurance loves hospice. Medicare advantage programs still get their full payment of over $1,000 per month to provide service to patients on hospice, even though the patient doesn't receive much (if any) treatment while they're on hospice.

Once the patient's hospice benefit has paid out its maxium, if the patient isn't close to dying the hospice will discharge them and it's perfectly legal. This is a wonderful program for the insurance companies, the companies providing oversight (less work), and of course the hospice. Not the patient, but who the hell cares about that? And - many doctors refer to hospices that they're the medical director of, talk about conflict. Just like many doctors own an interest in a rehab center and they only refer to that center.

Oh, yea - we need change. Big insurance isn't the answer. Obama's administration shouldn't be receiving info from advisors & big insurance & lobbyists. They should call us people on the front lines who see the fraud and know the ropes. But we're the last people to be asked.

Btw, death panels didn't exist. The program offered payment for doctors to discuss end-of-life issues every five years, rather than the one time that is currently allowed under the Medicare benefit. Conservatives tauted the "death panels" as a horrible example of regulation gone wild, but the truth is that people deserve the opportunity to discuss healthcare options with their doctors.

death panels are an example of innuendos, manipulation and fear mongering. In other words, it's the status quo.

Elliemae said
"Btw, death panels didn’t exist. The program offered payment for doctors to discuss end-of-life issues every five years, rather than the one time that is currently allowed under the Medicare benefit. Conservatives tauted the “death panels” as a horrible example of regulation gone wild, but the truth is that people deserve the opportunity to discuss healthcare options with their doctors.
death panels are an example of innuendos, manipulation and fear mongering. In other words, it’s the status quo."

Did you mention death panels? The article didn't. Neither did I. YOU brought it up. I'm sure you didn't mean to promote the status quo.

The article did mention that non-elected government bureaucrats would decide what is and isn't going to be allowed for doctors to do. It also said it will arbitrarily set a budget each year, regardless of needs of patients.

As I have said and will continue to say nobody but you and your doctor should be making decisions about what type of treatment you will get.

2ndClassCitizen says

As I have said and will continue to say nobody but you and your doctor should be making decisions about what type of treatment you will get.

That's a lovely thought, but here in the real world it doesn't exist. Insurance companies make those decisions right now, not doctors or patients.

tatupu70 says

2ndClassCitizen says

As I have said and will continue to say nobody but you and your doctor should be making decisions about what type of treatment you will get.

That’s a lovely thought, but here in the real world it doesn’t exist. Insurance companies make those decisions right now, not doctors or patients.

Some people have signed away their health to insurance companies. But not everyone.

Lets make the "real world" a better place not worse. A place where no one can tell you what to do unless you agree to let them lord over you (which is what you do when you put yourself at the mercy of government or insurance companies who consequently are mutual parasites on free society).

2ndClassCitizen says

Some people have signed away their health to insurance companies. But not everyone.
Lets make the “real world” a better place not worse. A place where no one can tell you what to do unless you agree to let them lord over you (which is what you do when you put yourself at the mercy of government or insurance companies who consequently are mutual parasites on free society).

Interesting--who exactly are you referring to? Uninsured people? Not sure that is preferable to being slaves to the insurance companies.

I'm all for making the world a better place. Any ideas? How would you make health care with coverage for all affordable? Without insurance companies or government run health care...

2nd class citizen: please understand that not every post replies to you.
Tenouncetrout says

Already they are saying women should even self exam for breast cancer let alone have a mammogram until they are 50, that’s up from 40. And now these phucksticks say even at 50 a biannual mammogram is sufficient.
I guess if you get cancer before the once every two year breast exam, then you’ll be referred to the Death panel.

2ndClassCitizen says

As I have said and will continue to say nobody but you and your doctor should be making decisions about what type of treatment you will get.

Insurance companies tell you what treatment will be paid for, hence they tell you what treatment you will get. Unless you're a multimillionare, the doctor doesn't make the decisions.

tatupu70 says

2ndClassCitizen says

Some people have signed away their health to insurance companies. But not everyone.

Lets make the “real world” a better place not worse. A place where no one can tell you what to do unless you agree to let them lord over you (which is what you do when you put yourself at the mercy of government or insurance companies who consequently are mutual parasites on free society).

Interesting–who exactly are you referring to? Uninsured people? Not sure that is preferable to being slaves to the insurance companies.
I’m all for making the world a better place. Any ideas? How would you make health care with coverage for all affordable? Without insurance companies or government run health care…

tatupu70 says

2ndClassCitizen says

Some people have signed away their health to insurance companies. But not everyone.

Lets make the “real world” a better place not worse. A place where no one can tell you what to do unless you agree to let them lord over you (which is what you do when you put yourself at the mercy of government or insurance companies who consequently are mutual parasites on free society).

Interesting–who exactly are you referring to? Uninsured people? Not sure that is preferable to being slaves to the insurance companies.
I’m all for making the world a better place. Any ideas? How would you make health care with coverage for all affordable? Without insurance companies or government run health care…

As so many have found, insurance is not what it is believed to be and is often not there when you need it. Warren Buffet made a good bet on Geico and it has paid off big. Insurance companies make big money at the expense of the insured. What makes it worse is when coverage is mandated by law (ie car insurance companies have a captive market because all car drivers are forced to buy). This is what current health care legislation would do, mandate we all pay them regardless of whether we want or need it.

As a matter of fact I do have some ideas on how to make health care more affordable. Starting with removing the tax breaks to employers who buy insurance and instead giving those tax breaks to individuals. Let us all write off 100% of our health care expenses and insurance premiums. Allow people to have the same tax breaks employers have now except that individuals buy their own health insurance (and thus will not lose it when they change jobs or move to a different state).

Second we need to drastically reduce government involvement in health care. Medicare, medicaid are driving up costs due to fraud, waste and abuse. This will be true of every government program. Instead we could offer qualifying beneficiaries a health care account. They can use the money in this account for health expenses only. This will encourage competition among health care providers as well as encouraging beneficiaries to seek out the most bang for their buck by choosing providers who do not overcharge (funds would be limited in these accounts so both patients and providers must be wise stewards of the money so that it will last them all year).

Insurance should be restricted to what it was meant to be: for unexpected and relatively infrequent events like car accidents, broken bones, cancer etc...
This would drive insurance costs down and give the consumer more money in their pocket for health maintenance like regular check ups, maintenance blood pressure meds etc..

We also need to remove the onerous regulations that have driven non-profits and churches out of the health care business. There is too much red tape and much of it has to do with medicare. In my home town alone two hospitals have closed in my lifetime. At the same time the city has grown to nearly double. So people have to drive farther to wait in longer lines.

We need to encourage the establishment of more minute clinics and such for simple illnesses like yeast infections, sinus infections and ear aches. Allow people to visit a nurse practitioner or PA for less than half to cost of an ER or Walk in Clinic with an overpaid and overworked MD. Allow qualified beneficiaries to use their medical accounts mentioned earlier for these visits to make their health care dollars last longer. The PA and nurse practitioners are qualified professionals and they know when they are out of their league and need to refer people on to a specialist.

These are just a few ideas that will make health care more affordable and accessible to everyone.

elliemae says

2nd class citizen: please understand that not every post replies to you.

Ellie,

WHIch post did I misinterpret?

Ellie said:
"Insurance companies tell you what treatment will be paid for, hence they tell you what treatment you will get. Unless you’re a multimillionare, the doctor doesn’t make the decisions."

Ellie,

"Multimillionare" is surely an exaggeration. But I am not arguing for the status quo. I am simply arguing against an ever expanding involvement of government in our lives from cradle to grave.

Actually, I don't think that multimillionare is too far off. I've seen hospital bills that topped a million for one stay. That's billed charges, not what the insurance paid.

I agree that it's scarey to have more government - and I'm a dem, mind you - but right now it's scarier to have an insurance company dictate my care.

A million dollar bill for health care is far less common than millionaires are. My point is there are many more people who can pay for their care than there are the few who can't.

Still costs are outrageous and government has, is and proposes to continue to make it worse.

2ndClassCitizen says

A million dollar bill for health care is far less common than millionaires are. My point is there are many more people who can pay for their care than there are the few who can’t.

Unless you are polite enough to die a sudden death, it is highly likely that you will incur health care costs late in life that exceed the entire value of your assets.

How much do you think a year's worth of treatment for a brain tumor costs? Brain tumors are a hell of a lot more common than millionaires.

2ndClassCitizen says

A million dollar bill for health care is far less common than millionaires are. My point is there are many more people who can pay for their care than there are the few who can’t.

I believe that I'll add that quote to my top ten favorites, along with (and I'm paraphrasing):

"Heckuva job, Brownie!"

"Fool me once, can't get fooled again!"

“No! No! No! Bear Stearns is not in trouble. If anything, they’re more likely to be taken over. Don’t move your money from Bear.”

"I can see Russia from my house!"

and so on...

2ndClassCitizen says

elliemae says

2nd class citizen: please understand that not every post replies to you.
Ellie,
WHIch post did I misinterpret?

2ndClassCitizen says

Did you mention death panels? The article didn’t. Neither did I. YOU brought it up. I’m sure you didn’t mean to promote the status quo.

My comment, which included a reference to death panels, was in response to several posts. Ten oz Trout mentioned death panels.

"Ten oz Trout mentioned death panels. "

There's alot of truth in jest, I mean the Medical health care liberators, are daring to propose that women forgo even self breast exams. And this just weeks after breast awareness day.
To think of all of those pink ribbons I've endured over the years to support the cause of BC awareness. In hopes that just "ONE" woman would get a mammogram and catch her cancer early.

But of course this kind of preventive and early detection has no room in this new "INSURANCE BASED" health care system, based on the current defunct insurance health care system in America.

With this lot having closed door secret Saturday Votes, Come one! Do you really find "Death Panels" a far stretch? I certainly don't it's not like we're talking about Dolphins with lasers on their heads. We're talking about a bureaucrat that would give the Emperors thumb on whether or not you get treatment or not.

This like Washington building a new flying machine based on the Hindenburg design.

What's not to get about "Death Panels"?

Tenouncetrout says

We’re talking about a bureaucrat that would give the Emperors thumb on whether or not you get treatment or not

Um, no we're not. That's not at all how it would work.

Seriously--in your mind, do you think that there would be a government employee in every Drs. office that would be consulted before the Dr. ordered any tests or recommended any treatments?

Death panels is just another fear tactic. Fear is best weapon to keep the staus quo. Because the corporate world loves the system just the way it is--robbing us blind when we are most vulnerable. Sick.

The Government would be another insurance company. Understand?

What's not to get that the insurance industry has a Nation where at least 80% of the citizens are fit as a fiddle, convinced they need to "PREPAY" at least $1,200 a month or more to the big Insurance machine. Which whines and moans anytime you make a claim or need a procedure. When if you took that same money and put it in a savings account or a readily liquidated investment. By the time you needed any serious medical condition you could pay for with your own money.

If the heft profits weren't being propped up and supported by the suckers paying in so much in premiums. Then the prices would fall on their own and most Americans would be able to afford to pay as they go to the hospitals.

Make no mistake this is not Universal health care. The fine now is being set a $700 a year for not participating. And that is beautiful do you know why? Now they are free to charge the same hefty premiums as the other insurance companies, that have thousands of lobbyists in Washington helping them craft this legislation. And for those that can't afford it, will have to pay that $700 at tax time, and not be eligible for the health care anyway. This is just creating a new class of uninsured. The middle class and the unemployed.

The only other way to make health care afordable is to have a total government run health care system that does not compete. But is there for those that can not afford to feed the profit machine that our boi/medical/phama industries are in this country. And our Tax dollars already foots the R&D bill, anyway. So I don't buy the innovation crap.

The private medical industry can be free to charge what ever they want to people wanting abortions, boob jobs, innovative and experimental cancer treatment, private physicians, ect...

A government run health care system would never totally expel the need for the private medical expertise in this country. Never.

elliemae says

2ndClassCitizen says

A million dollar bill for health care is far less common than millionaires are. My point is there are many more people who can pay for their care than there are the few who can’t.

I believe that I’ll add that quote to my top ten favorites, along with (and I’m paraphrasing):
“Heckuva job, Brownie!”
“Fool me once, can’t get fooled again!”
“No! No! No! Bear Stearns is not in trouble. If anything, they’re more likely to be taken over. Don’t move your money from Bear.”
“I can see Russia from my house!”
and so on…

Ellie, I am glad you are entertained. The good news however is that while EVERYONE is complaining about the cost of health care there are more people who can afford their care and are paying for it than there are those who are not/will not.

tatupu70 says

Tenouncetrout says

We’re talking about a bureaucrat that would give the Emperors thumb on whether or not you get treatment or not

Death panels is just another fear tactic. Fear is best weapon to keep the staus quo. Because the corporate world loves the system just the way it is–robbing us blind when we are most vulnerable. Sick.

I gave some of my solutions, where are yours? Death panels is yesterdays headline, no sense beating a dead horse. Pun intended.

2ndClassCitizen says

tatupu70 says

Tenouncetrout says

We’re talking about a bureaucrat that would give the Emperors thumb on whether or not you get treatment or not

Death panels is just another fear tactic. Fear is best weapon to keep the staus quo. Because the corporate world loves the system just the way it is–robbing us blind when we are most vulnerable. Sick.

I gave some of my solutions, where are yours? Death panels is yesterdays headline, no sense beating a dead horse. Pun intended.

He he he, here we go selective reading again.

Beeps and Squeaks baby!

Beeps and Squeaks!

2ndClassCitizen says

I gave some of my solutions, where are yours? Death panels is yesterdays headline, no sense beating a dead horse. Pun intended.

Well, not exactly. You implied that you had a solution that didn't involve insurance companies. Where you and your Dr. got to choose your treatment. Your "solutions" are mostly the same stuff we've been hearing for a while. Tort reform, crossing state lines, etc. That stuff is a drop in the bucket.

Call me crazy, but if every other civilized country can make universal health care work--why can't we? By any objective measure, US health care ranks somewhere from the middle of the pack and the bottom. And our health care costs per person are #1 by a long shot. The current system doesn't need a few tweaks here or there--it needs to be blown up. It doesn't work.

Despite Elvis's sermons to the contrary, there are situations where the free market just doesn't work. Troy nailed it earlier-- inelastic demand, assymetric information. You can't have a free market when those conditions exist.

tatupu70 says

2ndClassCitizen says

I gave some of my solutions, where are yours? Death panels is yesterdays headline, no sense beating a dead horse. Pun intended.

Well, not exactly. You implied that you had a solution that didn’t involve insurance companies. Where you and your Dr. got to choose your treatment. Your “solutions” are mostly the same stuff we’ve been hearing for a while. Tort reform, crossing state lines, etc. That stuff is a drop in the bucket.
Call me crazy, but if every other civilized country can make universal health care work–why can’t we? By any objective measure, US health care ranks somewhere from the middle of the pack and the bottom. And our health care costs per person are #1 by a long shot. The current system doesn’t need a few tweaks here or there–it needs to be blown up. It doesn’t work.
Despite Elvis’s sermons to the contrary, there are situations where the free market just doesn’t work. Troy nailed it earlier– inelastic demand, assymetric information. You can’t have a free market when those conditions exist.

I implied no such thing. Only that we can make changes that will give the patient and doctor more control rather than less (which is what will happen if Obamacare passes). But thanks for putting those words in my mouth. If universal health care works why do patients come from all over the world to the United States? Why do Canadian doctors leave Canada for greener pastures in the US?

I would argue that there is no free market in health care because:
A) government regulations and programs like medicare and medicaid make sure that doing business is only profitable for large corporations who know how to game the system and lobby in their own favor -this needs to end for a free market to return
B) Medicare, medicaid, and private insurance insulate the patients from the true cost of various treatments which removes any incentive for them to maintain their health let alone choose a reasonably priced physician/treatment- this too needs to end for a free market to return
C) There is too much emphasis on promotion of disease states rather than health maintenance. "Ask your Dr. if ....... is right for you!" Drug companies are constantly coming up with new diseases and promoting them on TV- this is a free market reality, however since most people do not actually pay for their own medication the demand/supply curve is severely skewed in the wrong direction. If everyone were directly responsible for the cost of their own medication (not relying on private or public insurance to pay for most if not all of the cost) we would have a true balance in supply and demand.

I am sure there are more reasons why the health care market bubble continues to inflate, and most of them are due to government interventions that have driven costs up.

By the way, it was government intervention that gave us the insurance power and money bubble. They should never have given a tax break to employers that is not available to the public. You can demonize insurance companies all you want (they are demons) but government gave them what they have. My solution involves taking back health care for the individuals not the corporations by giving the tax break to all Americans. Money spent on health care should be 100% tax free.

Forcing people to get insurance through an employer by unfair tax breaks is surely not "a drop in the bucket."

Fraud waste and abuse due to government programs is certainly not a drop in the bucket.

Increased demand due to taking price out of the equation for millions of people whose state and employer provided insurance "covers" the cost of much of their care is certainly not a drop in the bucket.

2ndClassCitizen says

I implied no such thing. Only that we can make changes that will give the patient and doctor more control rather than less (which is what will happen if Obamacare passes). But thanks for putting those words in my mouth. If universal health care works why do patients come from all over the world to the United States? Why do Canadian doctors leave Canada for greener pastures in the US?

OK--I must have missed it. Which changes that you suggested would give more power to the Dr. and patient to decide their treatment

Really? I have to repeat myself?

"Starting with removing the tax breaks to employers who buy insurance and instead giving those tax breaks to individuals. Let us all write off 100% of our health care expenses and insurance premiums. Allow people to have the same tax breaks employers have now except that individuals buy their own health insurance (and thus will not lose it when they change jobs or move to a different state). **** let me just add in case you didn't read it the first time we should allow 100% write off on ALL medical expenses whether we choose to buy insurance or pay out of pocket entirely.****

Second we need to drastically reduce government involvement in health care. Medicare, medicaid are driving up costs due to fraud, waste and abuse. This will be true of every government program. Instead we could offer qualifying beneficiaries a health care account. They can use the money in this account for health expenses only. This will encourage competition among health care providers as well as encouraging beneficiaries to seek out the most bang for their buck by choosing providers who do not overcharge (funds would be limited in these accounts so both patients and providers must be wise stewards of the money so that it will last them all year).

Insurance should be restricted to what it was meant to be: for unexpected and relatively infrequent events like car accidents, broken bones, cancer etc…
This would drive insurance costs down and give the consumer more money in their pocket for health maintenance like regular check ups, maintenance blood pressure meds etc..

We also need to remove the onerous regulations that have driven non-profits and churches out of the health care business. There is too much red tape and much of it has to do with medicare. In my home town alone two hospitals have closed in my lifetime. At the same time the city has grown to nearly double. So people have to drive farther to wait in longer lines.

We need to encourage the establishment of more minute clinics and such for simple illnesses like yeast infections, sinus infections and ear aches. Allow people to visit a nurse practitioner or PA for less than half to cost of an ER or Walk in Clinic with an overpaid and overworked MD. Allow qualified beneficiaries to use their medical accounts mentioned earlier for these visits to make their health care dollars last longer. The PA and nurse practitioners are qualified professionals and they know when they are out of their league and need to refer people on to a specialist."

The above ideas will weaken the insurance companies and strengthen the individuals (as well as giving us larger paychecks). This will give us more money to spend on our care and give insurance and government less money to use to lobby and dictate our care. Dr's will ALWAYS be willing to give treatment when they are paid for it. Let people keep more of their money and they can actually do so.

@2nd--

2ndClassCitizen says

The above ideas will weaken the insurance companies and strengthen the individuals (as well as giving us larger paychecks). This will give us more money to spend on our care and give insurance and government less money to use to lobby and dictate our care. Dr’s will ALWAYS be willing to give treatment when they are paid for it. Let people keep more of their money and they can actually do so

No, you didn't have to repeat the whole post, lol. I just wanted to see how you made the connection between your suggestions and improved Dr. and patient control of their care. And despite this last paragraph, I'm still not really seeing it. It will still be insurance execs deciding our care. Why would they suddenly give more control to Drs or patients? It's debatable whether your suggestions would lower costs, but even if they did--why would that cause insurance companies to give away more power to the Docs?

Money talks. Give people more money and insurance less and the balance of power switches.

Millions of people with fatter paychecks will decide to buy high deductible insurance with low premiums (for catastrophic needs rather than maintenance). This will give insurance way less power and money, and people more power to dictate what THEY (the people) will and won't pay for with their OWN money.

Also removing the onerous regulations on health care delivery will lower costs so that more people can afford their own care. All of it will be tax free of course too.

These are not drop in the bucket changes and it is a major shift away from insurance based health care delivery to out of pocket pay where the consumer dictates what they will and won't pay for. (thankfully people's pockets will be fuller when they quit deducting insurance costs from their paychecks.

By the way using the word "debatable" to describe how these changes will lower costs is a good way to cast doubt. But the reader who understands the politico-economics of health care will understand that government intervention is, has and will continue to drive up costs. Obamacare will do it in spades.

My ideas will reduce government intervention and the fraud, waste and abuse that comes with it. It will also give tax write offs for 100% of medical expenses meaning your health care dollar goes something like 15-30% farther. That is not a drop in the bucket. And insurance companies will lobby against this plan with their last stolen tax payer subsidized dollar.

With OweBama care, the quality of care will decline. The system will be overloaded, therefore service must be rationed. As a result a panel of disinterested government employees will be making the decision of who...and when, one might be ENTITLED to the service or treatment they need.

Why do words like fraud, waste, mismanagement, abuse keep popping up? This is a disasterous, costly experiment destined to fail. Oh well, I guess the politicians know whats best for us.

Wait a minute, the politicians will NOT be on the same plan as us serf's? Then why are we being told it's it a good plan??? All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. Can we ever trust the government? And they want us to trust them with our life when they have proven themselves to be untrustworthy? UGH.

2ndClassCitizen says

If universal health care works why do patients come from all over the world to the United States?

Because universal care in other countries are for the citizens of that country. You can't just walk in and have procedures done and pay for it in any first world country except America. There is an outfit in New Zealand starting to promote medical tourism. It might die on the vine quickly however since people have already figured out that any bad outcomes will be put on the backs of the NZ taxpayers.

2ndClassCitizen
I don't understand your post. You say get the government out at every suggestion, but then offer some type of government intervention to achieve the results in the same paragraph. Huh?

High deductible catastrophic health insurance has been around since the beginning of health insurance. Only a very very tiny number of policies are written every year. What would be the reason that millions of people would suddenly start buying them now? It's always been an option, yet employers and private buyers, the very people you say would be most interested, have shunned them almost totally.

taking from a worker to support a non-worker is the liberal model behind this entire medical game.

If care is to be "free", make Docts and Pharms dontate their stuff for "free" to those unable to pay the fee for service. Insurance instantly becomes a thing of the past and prices drop like a stone. Free care recievers can not sue, period, no matter the outcome to help Docs and Pharms save costs ... free care is get what you are given, period --- just like those socialist example everyone says look so great. Lets try this idea before we destroy are system and start forcing those who make healthy choices to pay for the care of those who regularly take risk with their health and do not make the choices that gain them care.

Interesting fact: The same side of the isle that demands to let sodomites practice AIDS distribution are now wanting everyone to lose weight and not smoke to limit insurance exposure. Absurd thought process and freedom removals of anything non-deviant is the order of the day in lib-land. This is why liberalism is obviously a mental disorder -- those two simple things I just pointed out ... they mesh well with refusing to kill a convicted murderer (huge burdan remains on tax-payers, while at the same time demanding the right to murder an innocent unborn human (and have tax payers pay the abortatorium) ... it's insane. America can not afford liberalism. Human kind can not afford liberalism.

Bap33 says

taking from a worker to support a non-worker is the liberal model behind this entire medical game

Is that really what you think? You realize that we already pay for the uninsured--all they have to do is go to the ER. But, you don't agree that the system is broken? Health care costs in the US are far and away the highest in the world. And they are rising at rates much greater than inflation. Talk about jobs going overseas--if we don't get this fixed, no company will be able to afford to be located in the US.
Bap33 says

Lets try this idea before we destroy are system and start forcing those who make healthy choices to pay for the care of those who regularly take risk with their health and do not make the choices that gain them care

Again, you realize that this already the case? Insurance premiums are the same whether you made healthy choices or you regularly take risks with your care, so healthy people end up paying for the people who make poor choices...
Interesting fact: It costs more to put a criminal to death than it does to house him for a life sentence...

It costs more to put a criminal to death than it does to house him for a life sentence…

Not in China.

The funny thing is that the prison industry and the medical industry aren't in the business of *creating* wealth, just preserving it. And they get paid more to make the situation worse, not better.

ahhh .. contre' Bap33 pays into the same system .. BY FORCE .. so putting HIS money to use makes perfect sence. Only the most mentally deranged mind would fail to understand something so simple. I would not need/or have access to, any welfare for housing if it did not exist ... and it only exists because I (and other producive dopes) pay taxes. So, Doc, remove the forced wealth transfer system and we will all be on the same page. Do you agree with ending all forced wealth transfers from the masses that are now used to subsidize the individual (like, FHA housing stuff)?

lol free ride .... you're insane, but I still like you.

tatupu70 says

Again, you realize that this already the case? Insurance premiums are the same whether you made healthy choices or you regularly take risks with your care, so healthy people end up paying for the people who make poor choices

that is 100% wrong. Permiums reflect exposure/utilization and therefore healthy choices will result in lower premiums.

Ihave said before, end all health insurance. Forced Docs and Pharms to charge based on a fee-for-service basis ... like auto repair.

Here's a thought. I have to pay for a ticket to watch a professional ball game. Tickets cost alot because players make alot. Rich people sit in the best seats. Regular people sit in regular seats. Poor people sit in cheap seats. Really poor people can't afford the ticket so they do not get to watch the ball game. The prices are so high, why? Because those doing the work make a premium. This is how all professional services are -- other than Docs and Pharms due to welfare and insurance.

So, if you feel all people should get free access to professional services, then you must also feel I should get free box seats, right? No? Why not? I want them, and thee only reason I do not get them is because rich people are the only ones that can afford them. Why is that fair?

It would be fair if the ball teams were forced to allow free seats in the free seat area. The seats would not be as nice as paid seats, but they would be there. That is how Docs and Pharms should be made to operate. Watch how fast the border gets sealed and the illegals get shipped home when the BMW diving Docs and Pharms have to care for the hyper-breeding folks for free. As it is now, they se them as cash-cows, only the cash in tax-payer cash.

one last thing .. NOMO ... neener neener!

^ That's unfair to bap. Refusing money on the table may be the most principled thing to do but it's beyond the call of duty.

This doesn't mean bap isn't a total tool for his views on the strawman liberalism that he brings here.

The top 10% of this country owns over 2/3rds the wealth. Doctors are making so much money they have trouble finding investments for all of it.

Maybe me & bap can agree that the current system is a total racket at least.

So, if you feel all people should get free access to professional services, then you must also feel I should get free box seats, right? No? Why not? I want them, and thee only reason I do not get them is because rich people are the only ones that can afford them. Why is that fair?

This is an important question.

In my version of left-libertarianism, everyone should have access to that which is necessary to become and remain a productive member of society.

Nothing less and nothing more. This is actually the rationale behind Finland and Spain's recent broadband initiatives.

Bap, what your limited worldview apparently fails to understand is the economy is rife with vast and powerful wealth concentrations that chisel money every hour and every day out of productive people.

The gas station, the doctor's office, the pharmacy, the check to the landlord, and the check to the mortgage servicer. These are ALL examples of rentierism gone OUT OF CONTROL.

Liquidate the rentiers and us productive people can afford to provide access to public goods, for everyone.

bob2356 says

2ndClassCitizen says

If universal health care works why do patients come from all over the world to the United States?

Because universal care in other countries are for the citizens of that country. You can’t just walk in and have procedures done and pay for it in any first world country except America. There is an outfit in New Zealand starting to promote medical tourism. It might die on the vine quickly however since people have already figured out that any bad outcomes will be put on the backs of the NZ taxpayers.
2ndClassCitizen

I don’t understand your post. You say get the government out at every suggestion, but then offer some type of government intervention to achieve the results in the same paragraph. Huh?
High deductible catastrophic health insurance has been around since the beginning of health insurance. Only a very very tiny number of policies are written every year. What would be the reason that millions of people would suddenly start buying them now? It’s always been an option, yet employers and private buyers, the very people you say would be most interested, have shunned them almost totally.

Thanks for reading and taking the time to respond to my post.

The fact that people come from all over the world to visit specialists in the United States shows you how the "only country in the civilized world without universal health care" has the best doctors in the world. So we have that going for us, but it would probably change if we decided to be like all the cool kids at the UN and went to government run medicine.

My plan is to phase government out of health care over time, because the powers that be, and the people they control would not be able to go cold turkey on a stoppage of ALL government programs (there would be rioting in the streets). These government interventions need to be scaled back and phased out over time to preserve freedom and avoid chaos that would come from completely ending all government subsidies overnight.

If American workers got the same tax write offs that are now only available to employers, many of them would decline their employer offered insurance, take that money in their paychecks and use it more wisely. If we allowed EVERYONE (not just employers) to write off 100% of ALL of their medical expenses people would be more inclined to purchase those high deductible policies (they could write off the premiums and save the difference). The reason more people don't purchase health insurance policies like this is the tax law gives an unfair incentive for them NOT to. This needs to change.

The fact that people come from all over the world to visit specialists in the United States shows you how the “only country in the civilized world without universal health care” has the best doctors in the world.

RIch people enjoy best access to for-profit services. Film at 11.

Troy says

So, if you feel all people should get free access to professional services, then you must also feel I should get free box seats, right? No? Why not? I want them, and thee only reason I do not get them is because rich people are the only ones that can afford them. Why is that fair?
This is an important question.
In my version of left-libertarianism, everyone should have access to that which is necessary to become and remain a productive member of society.
Nothing less and nothing more. This is actually the rationale behind Finland and Spain’s recent broadband initiatives.
Bap, what your limited worldview apparently fails to understand is the economy is rife with vast and powerful wealth concentrations that chisel money every hour and every day out of productive people.
The gas station, the doctor’s office, the pharmacy, the check to the landlord, and the check to the mortgage servicer. These are ALL examples of rentierism gone OUT OF CONTROL.
Liquidate the rentiers and us productive people can afford to provide access to public goods, for everyone.

Liquidate? Like the Nazis did? I hope not. Also, I hope for everone's sake that doctors, pharmacies, and landlords continue to provide their services. Sure some of them may be gouging, but as long as there are others who are also making a living practicing medicine, pharmacy and renting property we have options.

Don't you see that it is government intervention that has driven up prices? Don't you see that it is the Federal Reserves manipulation of the interest rate and money supply that has cause the dollar to lose over 95% of its value since the Federal Reserve was founded?

It is easy to demonize the guy who collects money from you, but what about the guy who steals your money without you even knowing it. That is what the Federal Reserve is doing. That is why Ron Paul wants to Audit the FED. The Federal Reserve is the real enemy. Sure corporations are making big bank by lobbying congress and making sure that only the big corrupt businesses can make money. But it is the FED who is the biggest enemy of the little guy. Government and the crony companies that run it are only the second biggest. And the doctor, pharmacy and landlord? They are just trying to get by, just like the guy flipin' burgers, only they generally have much higher school loans and mortgages to pay off (thanks to government and FED policies that have driven up the cost of housing, and schooling).

Have a nice day, and please call your people in congress and tell them we need to audit the FED!

wish i was lucky says

We could/should have insurance for emergencies and since that doesn’t happen all that often - it should not cost all that much.
However, as my Dr. suggested - our insurance premiums (paid by us and our employers) should go into a personal healthcare account that we can draw from. Thus we could use the money for real medical such as wellcare, hearing aids, glasses and things that actually tend to go wrong - or that need to be checked and maintained. Bad Drs. will be weeded out of the system because we won’t see them - so they won’t get paid. And if you don’t need medical this month - at least your $600 isn’t in someone elses pocket - it’s still there for you to use another time.
Barring the catastrophic event - I would go with this mode. I probably hardly ever used my Medical coverage for 40 years. Then I had problems that got expensive - but had I had Wellcare - things would have been caught sooner. Also - I have since found many alternative therapies that work much better than all the drugs and some of the surgeries they tried to do to me.

wish,

Your doctor sounds like a reasonable guy. I think he is right on! Thanks for your comment.
I especially like what you said about the fact that most people don't need any health care in any given month so why should you line the insurance companies pocket with an extra $600. That is outrageous. How about a high deductible policy for catastophic coverage and you put the savings in a health care account for use when YOU need it?

Thanks again.

Bap33 says

that is 100% wrong. Permiums reflect exposure/utilization and therefore healthy choices will result in lower premiums.

I don't think it's 100% wrong. Every company sponsored plan that I've ever seen has at most 3 different rates: individual, married, and family. I've never seen different rates for guys who go to McDonalds every day. Or guys who frequent the Chinese buffet for lunch. Or conversely for guys who hit the gym every day or for vegetarians.

No doubt the US has some some great Drs. Not sure why that would change if the government paid the bills instead of big insurance companies.

Comparing healing a sick person to letting them watch a baseball game is a bit ridiculous, don't you think? Baseball isn't life or death. So, in your mind--life, liberty and the puruit of happiness is really just liberty then? Because you obviously don't think life is a right.