Healthcare: American Style

[bombarde32]

Ok ... so here's a question. With all the focus on health care at the moment ... what do you believe? What would you do you if you had the power to reshape American health care?

Me personally - I believe tort reform is required to eliminate defensive medicine (doing tests/procedures to limit lawsuits) which immediately raises capacity and lowers cost.

Rebalance payment incentives to promote general practicitioners and geriatric care where the best preventative medicine can take place warding off the more intrusive and costly specialists down the road. Since we'll need less of them they can move to family care or something more useful for the broader population.

Don't require health insurance. It's my body. I can care for it how I see fit. This is not car insurance where I can kill/damage someone else and they need protected from me. Give a window where no one can be denied for pre-existing conditions and after that ... if you took the risk and didn't sign up then you accept the consequences.

The government should give the market one last chance to control costs, improve care and act in a morally acceptable way (pharmaceuticals, insurers, doctors, etc). If they cotinue to fail, bring in a government sponsored insurance plan to compete and force their hands.

We should provide credits on a sliding scale to low income people for insurance. We already subsidize it through ER care so lets get the people under a plan where they can seek treatment before they have to go the ER.

Lastly, no free lunches! I have no problem helping someone while they are on unemployment. Or subsidizing coverage for someone who makes 15k a year and is feeding a family of four. But if you sit on your butt all day and are a deliberately non-productive member of society when you have the option to be something more ... don't cry to me when we don't cover you.

That's my 2 cents - have at it!

 

[markw]

You bringnup some good points, particularly with regards to tort reform. For years doctors here have been railing about excessive insurance premiums and greedy lawyers.

 

[highfigh]

I believe that 12 million people without health insurance going to the ER, which costs far more than any other care giver, is sapping our hospitals and driving our other health care costs up. Someone has to pay for the ones who won't pay, so it ends up being everyone else, anyway. I also believe that gang-bangers who come from ANY other country and engage in any kind of organized crime should be imprisoned for life, paid for by their country of origin. If that country won't pay, it comes out of any aid or trade between the US and that country. No exceptions. Mexico has a lot of oil and we have a lot of illegal Mexicans. We need to balance the books for the last 30 years.

Having a government provided health care plan only avoids talking about the real problem- people who shouldn't be here in the first place are using our system to bankrupt the country. Also, the people who eat crap food for years and sit on their *** watching TV for hours every day are surprised when they have a heart attack or develop some other disease and this wastes a huge amount of money that could save more lives. When we need to have a Fattest City In America poll, it's time to get up and do something other than go to the fridge for more food.

I don't have a problem with immigrants- I just want them to go through the normal process, like someone who wants to live in most other countries, so they can be productive members of our society.

 

[highfigh]

Don't require health insurance. It's my body. I can care for it how I see fit. This is not car insurance where I can kill/damage someone else and they need protected from me. Give a window where no one can be denied for pre-existing conditions and after that ... if you took the risk and didn't sign up then you accept the consequences.

For someone under 65, not having health insurance is risky, at best. If a hospital bill is sent to collections, and this does happen, they can and do take people's house. Yes, the place where they live. Leaving them with nothing. If that homeowner has enough equity in the house, they can't file for bankruptcy, either. At least, in Wisconsin, anyway.

Government controlled programs don't compete with anyone.

We need some way to have walk-in clinics for the uninsured. They're not using it for emergencies, it's mostly general health care. Shooting, stabbing and accident victims will only go to emergency care, anyway. I mentioned this in other threads- that way, the clinic can file a claim with whatever agency necessary and hospitals won't be forced to go under, like the one that was close to my house. Actually, it's still there but it's no longer open.

 

[bombarde32]

For someone under 65, not having health insurance is risky, at best.

I agree 100%. But my point remains that the federal government should not be in charge of dictating how you care for your body or your children - or if you do at all. I do, and will always carry health insurance for me and my family. But it shouldn't be because the government says I have to.

 

[lsiberian]

For someone under 65, not having health insurance is risky, at best. If a hospital bill is sent to collections, and this does happen, they can and do take people's house. Yes, the place where they live. Leaving them with nothing. If that homeowner has enough equity in the house, they can't file for bankruptcy, either. At least, in Wisconsin, anyway.

Government controlled programs don't compete with anyone.

We need some way to have walk-in clinics for the uninsured. They're not using it for emergencies, it's mostly general health care. Shooting, stabbing and accident victims will only go to emergency care, anyway. I mentioned this in other threads- that way, the clinic can file a claim with whatever agency necessary and hospitals won't be forced to go under, like the one that was close to my house. Actually, it's still there but it's no longer open.

What happens if my insurer drops my coverage? I'm screwed with little money to defend myself.

 

[rnatalli]

Don't require health insurance. It's my body. I can care for it how I see fit. This is not car insurance where I can kill/damage someone else and they need protected from me. Give a window where no one can be denied for pre-existing conditions and after that ... if you took the risk and didn't sign up then you accept the consequences.

I strongly disagree with this one. I have to breath the same air as you and if you have TB that you're coughing on me, it's now my problem. That said, if you don't want to wear your seatbelt, I could care less as it doesn't directly affect me.

 

[njedpx3]

good points

Ok ... so here's a question. With all the focus on health care at the moment ... what do you believe? What would you do you if you had the power to reshape American health care?

Me personally - I believe tort reform is required to eliminate defensive medicine (doing tests/procedures to limit lawsuits) which immediately raises capacity and lowers cost.

Rebalance payment incentives to promote general practicitioners and geriatric care where the best preventative medicine can take place warding off the more intrusive and costly specialists down the road. Since we'll need less of them they can move to family care or something more useful for the broader population.

Don't require health insurance. It's my body. I can care for it how I see fit. This is not car insurance where I can kill/damage someone else and they need protected from me. Give a window where no one can be denied for pre-existing conditions and after that ... if you took the risk and didn't sign up then you accept the consequences.

The government should give the market one last chance to control costs, improve care and act in a morally acceptable way (pharmaceuticals, insurers, doctors, etc). If they cotinue to fail, bring in a government sponsored insurance plan to compete and force their hands.

We should provide credits on a sliding scale to low income people for insurance. We already subsidize it through ER care so lets get the people under a plan where they can seek treatment before they have to go the ER.

Lastly, no free lunches! I have no problem helping someone while they are on unemployment. Or subsidizing coverage for someone who makes 15k a year and is feeding a family of four. But if you sit on your butt all day and are a deliberately non-productive member of society when you have the option to be something more ... don't cry to me when we don't cover you.

That's my 2 cents - have at it!

you make some good points you and MarkW. They adress getting to the cause of the problem not trying to put bandaids on the results. You somewhat inferred, but there is currently too much "legal action" which raises malpractice insurance and hence costs. Then there is the cost of illegal allien coverage and those who truly need and cannot afford coverage. And one issue that I am not sure how to address; the quality of care and the ability to diagnose and cure diseases through medical techniques and research has improved significantly and more and more people are kept alive and cured; but it is very costly. We live longer and have a better quality of life than ever before.

I personally think "our government" is completely out of touch with reality. They are trying, but their solutions don't seem to provide true solutions. And I still am unlcear where the $$$ to pay for it will be coming from.

Your thought and opinions may be diffrent than mine ---if so peace, I respect your opinions also.

NJ

 

[njedpx3]

I strongly disagree with this one. I have to breath the same air as you and if you have TB that you're coughing on me, it's now my problem. That said, if you don't want to wear your seatbelt, I could care less as it doesn't directly affect me.

The premium cost should be based on the risk factors of a person. The proposal as it stands now has the younger people paying significantly more than most of their risk factors thus they subsidize the higher risk which promotes a form of socialism that is just wrong! For example, if a person chooses to smoke they have a higher risk and should pay higher premiums.

And as bad as it hurts to admit, may pre-existing conditions are very costly to treat and handle and becuase of the higher risk factor they should pay more for health coverage.

Peace --let's go back to audio/video discussions

NJ

 

[lsiberian]

Peace --let's go back to audio/video discussions
NJ

This is the steam vent for talking anything we like.

And healthcare is a national security issue in many cases. So we can't let people just get bad illness and give it to the rest of us. Something needs to be done.

 

[NicolasKL]

Don't require health insurance. It's my body. I can care for it how I see fit. This is not car insurance where I can kill/damage someone else and they need protected from me. Give a window where no one can be denied for pre-existing conditions and after that ... if you took the risk and didn't sign up then you accept the consequences.

Except, really, it is like that. You can't cause someone else bodily harm by your own health, but you can certainly cause everyone else financial harm via your lack of healthcare.

If you have an income where you're barely squeaking by, and you decide to forego health insurance, and you develop type 1 diabetes (or any of a million other serious diseases, or also accidents, ie, you break both your legs), are you just going to sit at home and wait for death? Or are you going to go to the hospital and receive emergency treatment, knowing you're never going to be able to pay for it?

Because we all pay for that, via increased insurance premiums and increased treatment costs.

By "accept the consequences" are you suggesting that people be left to die outside emergency rooms if they can't prove, prior to treatment, that they have adequate medical coverage? It certainly seems that way. In fact it has to be that way, because getting emergency life saving treatment knowing that you're uninsured and won't ever be able to pay the bill certainly isn't "accepting the consequences."

 

[NicolasKL]

I agree 100%. But my point remains that the federal government should not be in charge of dictating how you care for your body or your children - or if you do at all. I do, and will always carry health insurance for me and my family. But it shouldn't be because the government says I have to.

The government says you have to carry car insurance, largely because of (entirely because of, when you really boil it down) the financial harm you can do to other people. Why shouldn't you also be required to carry health insurance, for the exact same reason?

Which begs the question, why are people A-OK with the socialization of auto insurance, but so vehemently opposed to something that seems so much more important, the socialization of caring for your health?

 

[rnatalli]

The premium cost should be based on the risk factors of a person. The proposal as it stands now has the younger people paying significantly more than most of their risk factors thus they subsidize the higher risk which promotes a form of socialism that is just wrong! For example, if a person chooses to smoke they have a higher risk and should pay higher premiums.

And as bad as it hurts to admit, may pre-existing conditions are very costly to treat and handle and becuase of the higher risk factor they should pay more for health coverage.

Peace --let's go back to audio/video discussions

NJ

You have to be careful with this sort of thing as who determines where the line is drawn? The ACLU fought this in the past. Check out this short clip which is pretty funny and scary:

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf

 

[NicolasKL]

The premium cost should be based on the risk factors of a person. The proposal as it stands now has the younger people paying significantly more than most of their risk factors thus they subsidize the higher risk which promotes a form of socialism that is just wrong! For example, if a person chooses to smoke they have a higher risk and should pay higher premiums.

And as bad as it hurts to admit, may pre-existing conditions are very costly to treat and handle and becuase of the higher risk factor they should pay more for health coverage.

And the more conditions (eg diabetes) and lifestyles (eg bacon eating, smoking) and activities (eg rock climbing) that you identify, the more and more "accurate" your system gets, the closer you are to just paying all of your own medical bills, which I don't think is the point of medical insurance, and it certainly shouldn't be.

Someone shouldn't be essentially confined to a life of poverty (unless they're lucky enough and dedicated enough to be capable of making $200k+ or so a year) simply because they had the misfortune to be born a type 1 diabetic. People like that are already hurting enough with copays and deductibles and pre-existing condition clauses, what you're suggesting is flat out disgusting.

 

[lsiberian]

You have to be careful with this sort of thing as who determines where the line is drawn? The ACLU fought this in the past. Check out this short clip which is pretty funny and scary:

http://www.aclu.org/pizza/images/screen.swf

This is interesting since it comes from a liberal organization.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

What would you do you if you had the power to reshape American health care?

Health care is too confusing for me. I mean c'mon, I am just a dumb knuckle-dragger......

I prefer the government make my life/death health care treatment decisions for myself and my loved family members. Whether I deserve that newest best cancer treatment should be left to the government to decide??....right?

.....the government is there to take care of....and protect us.

 

[NicolasKL]

Health care is too confusing for me. I mean c'mon, I am just a dumb knuckle-dragger......

I prefer the government make my life/death health care treatment decisions for myself and my loved family members. Whether I deserve that newest best cancer treatment should be left to the government to decide??....right?

.....the government is there to take care of....and protect us.

Do you think healthcare companies are there to take care of us and protect us? Or do you think maybe they care more about their bottom line?

Do you think ALL healthcare companies provide the absolute newest, best treatments to ALL their members?

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

Do you think healthcare companies are there to take care of us and protect us? Or do you think maybe they care more about their bottom line?

Do you think ALL healthcare companies provide the absolute newest, best treatments to ALL their members?

Absolutely not, which is why the private HC industry should be eliminated by the government.

Obama-care all the way baby!! If it fails, I swear I will move to Cuba!

 

[mtrycrafts]

...That said, if you don't want to wear your seatbelt, I could care less as it doesn't directly affect me.

And, who will pay for his medical bill if he is short on it or not at all? Welfare for the ones left behind?

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

Obama-care all the way baby!! If it fails, I swear I will move to Cuba!

You might want to do that now
It is free and check out some of their national health stats compared to ours Remember, the US is rather down towards the bottom of the industrial nations and costs 2x more. So, that is what, a 4 fold difference?