Another point of view

[Rickster71]

 

[markw]

Sorta gives a new meaning to the term "cat scan".

 

[highfigh]

If every aspect of health care has a cost associated with it in the same sense as any other business, a hospital will need to charge a certain amount in order to break even, right? As I see it, if the government decides to force the providers to lower their charges for care, I can only see the providers getting out of the business if they stop making enough profit, and we all know hospitals are already closing because they aren't being paid for non-paying ER visits. If Obama wants a single payer system, and he campaigned on that plan, the only ways the cost to the users of this method will see lower costs will be due to receiving less care or if fewer patients use it, IMO. If doctors and nurses can't make enough to maintain their lifestyle, they'll do something else. Even if the government forces the hospitals, suppliers and medical staff to accept less for what they do or sell, government involvement or control will add to the cost because as we all know, government ain't free and it's one of the least efficient entities on the planet.

 

[skers_54]

If every aspect of health care has a cost associated with it in the same sense as any other business, a hospital will need to charge a certain amount in order to break even, right? As I see it, if the government decides to force the providers to lower their charges for care, I can only see the providers getting out of the business if they stop making enough profit, and we all know hospitals are already closing because they aren't being paid for non-paying ER visits. If Obama wants a single payer system, and he campaigned on that plan, the only ways the cost to the users of this method will see lower costs will be due to receiving less care or if fewer patients use it, IMO. If doctors and nurses can't make enough to maintain their lifestyle, they'll do something else. Even if the government forces the hospitals, suppliers and medical staff to accept less for what they do or sell, government involvement or control will add to the cost because as we all know, government ain't free and it's one of the least efficient entities on the planet.

If Obama was really interested in reducing health care costs, he would target the aspects that decrease its efficiency while increasing its cost. Roughly 30% of the money spent on health care goes towards its administration, with a lot of that being unnecessary red tape. Insurance companies have stringent approval processes that were designed to prevent payment of "unnecessary" treatment. However, this system requires a significant investment of man-hours from both provider and payer to navigate. Streamlining the approval process by automating routine procedures (via a universally compatible and implemented electronic medical records system) could save large amounts of time, money and headache.

The biggest problem with Obamba's present plan is that the time-frame over which Medicare savings are estimated coincide with a projected doubling of the Medicare-eligible population. I'm not sure how he plans save $200 billion while utilization doubles, and I don't think he does either. The government-sponsored plan has not been described enough to estimate its effect (much like the rest of the bill). Also, it does not address the rediculously low reimbursement of preventative and primary care that forces providers to double and triple book in order to meet the demand and turn a profit, nor does it take steps to curb liability (which has played as big a role as any in driving up costs).