How do we fix our healthcare system in America?

[frodo]

''Thanks. Ok. So single payer was definitely not what I was thinking. I was thinking that we should have a choice for insurance company and we could choose ones from out of state-- and we would have more options and that insurance company would cover things without expecting us or requiring us to have a secondary insurance to cover things they won't cover.''

my medicare is suplemented by humana
they pick up what medicare doest not cover

 

[68bucks]

What will change with a single payer compared to a 1000 payers. There will be no competition is one thing and if you don’t like the way they work there is nowhere to turn. I’m assuming the single payer you would like to see would be the federal government. Do we all pay the same premium and do we all get the same level of plan. Or do we just pay nothing and let the government pay for it all. They can raise taxes or print money to cover the cost in both cases the person making more money will pay for more than their fair share.

If it is good for healthcare it should be good for all insurance. Right now if a poor guy and a rich guy buy the same $20,0000 car both the same age and the same risk will pay the same premium for auto insurance. We should have a government run single payer auto insurance where the coverage is taken from the tax base. The guy that pays no tax gets his car insurance for free the rich guy pays more because he can. Sounds good to me. let’s do the same thing with home insurance.

I’m assuming these billions the insurance companies are now making will go someplace as the government is not going to be a profit center. They will just try and break even. They will dictate what they will pay for what and what they will pay for at all. In effect, they will control the medical system thru the purse strings without taking hands on control. That is what socialism is all about. Given a finite amount of money to take care of everyone’s needs and being fair that everyone gets the same level of care decisions will have to be made just like they are now. When you grab the short end of the stick and are denied coverage based around whatever the rule is at that time it is not fair to you. If you can afford more it is not fair for you to expect more or better coverage. As long as we are at it controlling costs let’s get the lawyers out of the picture there is quite a few more billion and limit what we pay these doctors. Might as well take it a step more and tell GE they are charging way too much for these lifesaving scanners they build they make billions off our backs also selling this stuff. Healthcare was actually a lot cheaper before we had all this technology people just died and we didn’t know what they had or a method of treating them. All this diagnostic and treatment stuff was another downfall of capitalism. Without capitalism we wouldn’t have all these cures and healthcare costs would go down.

What's different with 2000 payers vs 1? Well the pool size of course. In insurance the larger the pool the lower the cost for the members. The larger pool has greater ability to negotiate too.

Well if you think with the current or past systems you have any say about what treatment you get or don't get you're delusional. There is somebody at your insurance company right now that decides that. You can switch companies sure (once a year only during open enrollment) but that doesn't change that aspect at all it's not up to you. Your option is to pay out of your pocket and that would remain the same. I believe in Canada you can buy supplemental policies from private companies to enhance your benefits and employers often offer these as a perk. So if you have the money you have that option.

Another comment, if a free market system would be the better way to go why are we even having this discussion? We had a free market system before the ACA and we know for fact that didn't work, we already tried it.

The comments on why not do this for car insurance etc. are just hyperbole. Nobody has mad any such suggestion. Plus you don't have to own a car or a house, those are choices you make. Every single person in the country will need health care sometime in their life unless you make maybe a religious choice or something like that.

 

[bud16415]

So if the free market is the ultimate system for all our ills, then why are we f*ckin' around with the insurance companies? They are the middleman, and they are making decisions that affect the health (and perhaps the life or death) of all of their customers. Yet they take no blame and make these decisions without any medical training. Why aren't we just bypassing these scavengers?

You can bypass the middle man in whole or in part. The company I worked for many years was self insured and it was wonderful insurance. It takes a very large company to do that. As an individual you can say I have saved up 20k in the bank and that is my personal health savings. I will pay into that monthly and pay all my smaller medical expenses out of that. I will also buy a catastrophic plan that only covers major things and the premiums will be much lower. You also have the right to say I don’t want insurance. Many people do that when they go to get treated they should be told you didn’t want to try and help yourself in any way and get turned away. It doesn’t work that way though. We take them in and give them the same treatment anyone else would get. We can ask for payment and attach wages or property, set up payments etc. But in most cases the system has to eat the cost and pass it on to the cost of operation. That then becomes part of the high cost of health care.

 

[bud16415]

What's different with 2000 payers vs 1? Well the pool size of course. In insurance the larger the pool the lower the cost for the members. The larger pool has greater ability to negotiate too.

Well if you think with the current or past systems you have any say about what treatment you get or don't get you're delusional. There is somebody at your insurance company right now that decides that. You can switch companies sure (once a year only during open enrollment) but that doesn't change that aspect at all it's not up to you. Your option is to pay out of your pocket and that would remain the same. I believe in Canada you can buy supplemental policies from private companies to enhance your benefits and employers often offer these as a perk. So if you have the money you have that option.

Another comment, if a free market system would be the better way to go why are we even having this discussion? We had a free market system before the ACA and we know for fact that didn't work, we already tried it.

The comments on why not do this for car insurance etc. are just hyperbole. Nobody has mad any such suggestion. Plus you don't have to own a car or a house, those are choices you make. Every single person in the country will need health care sometime in their life unless you make maybe a religious choice or something like that.

First off the question of expanding the pool size to one pool over 2000 pools. If you ever studied statistics you will understand that at some number a pool becomes statistically relevant. The same is true for insurance pools. Once your pool size has reached a relevant size adding a million more or hundred million more people doesn’t significantly change its impact. What is does is limit the players and diminish the competition. That is apparent in states where all but one or two of the insurance companies have given up as there is no profit in being there. Profit is incentive in all business.



As to your second comment yes you are true in the old system as in the single payer system there is someone deciding how the limited moneys are to be spent. A single payer system wont have unlimited budget anymore than multiplayer. If the single payer is the government they will be able to tax you higher to cover the costs or take the money from other areas of government to give you better health care than you are paying for. Private insurance companies can’t cut police or education or defense to supplement you getting better treatment.


Item 3. Free market system of insurance did work and worked very well for many years in this country. Maybe we should look at what has changed to all of a sudden say it no longer works.


Item 4. You view healthcare as a right. That’s fine and many countries feel the same. I might ask Neal why is not dental health not a right in his country. Did someone figure out a tooth is less important than a toe.

 

[frodo]

First off the question of expanding the pool size to one pool over 2000 pools. If you ever studied statistics you will understand that at some number a pool becomes statistically relevant. The same is true for insurance pools. Once your pool size has reached a relevant size adding a million more or hundred million more people doesn’t significantly change its impact. What is does is limit the players and diminish the competition. That is apparent in states where all but one or two of the insurance companies have given up as there is no profit in being there. Profit is incentive in all business.



As to your second comment yes you are true in the old system as in the single payer system there is someone deciding how the limited moneys are to be spent. A single payer system wont have unlimited budget anymore than multiplayer. If the single payer is the government they will be able to tax you higher to cover the costs or take the money from other areas of government to give you better health care than you are paying for. Private insurance companies can’t cut police or education or defense to supplement you getting better treatment.


Item 3. Free market system of insurance did work and worked very well for many years in this country. Maybe we should look at what has changed to all of a sudden say it no longer works.


Item 4. You view healthcare as a right. That’s fine and many countries feel the same. I might ask Neal why is not dental health not a right in his country. Did someone figure out a tooth is less important than a toe.

if health insurance is a ''right'' and obama phones are a ''right''
then my care insurance should be a ''right''
then next is my home insurance, then life insurance

hell why Should i pay for anything/
i think the government should pay for everything

 

[bud16415]

if health insurance is a ''right'' and obama phones are a ''right''
then my care insurance should be a ''right''
then next is my home insurance, then life insurance

hell why Should i pay for anything/
i think the government should pay for everything

Frodo

I know you are being sarcastic but you are also correct. There are government models that do exactly what you suggest. They step in and take care of your needs in return tell you how to live your life. It is called communism and China is a great example of that up until a short time ago. Last I checked anyone that would want to leave this country could go to any number of communist countries and they will take you right in. They will give you a job and how many hours to work and a place to live and provide for your needs. I don’t see a lot of people leaving though.

My personal belief is this country was founded in a very unique way with lots of personal freedoms. More was accomplished here in 200 years that the rest mankind’s time on the planet. Our government was an experiment and intended to change and evolve.

Is it time to evolve into socialize medical country? I don’t know is my answer. I am fully convinced they should leave ACA 100% intact. It was put into play by the progressives party and they should let the experiment run its course. It could be wonderful thing for all. And if it isn’t people will want to try something different.

 

[68bucks]

First off the question of expanding the pool size to one pool over 2000 pools. If you ever studied statistics you will understand that at some number a pool becomes statistically relevant. The same is true for insurance pools. Once your pool size has reached a relevant size adding a million more or hundred million more people doesn’t significantly change its impact. What is does is limit the players and diminish the competition. That is apparent in states where all but one or two of the insurance companies have given up as there is no profit in being there. Profit is incentive in all business.



As to your second comment yes you are true in the old system as in the single payer system there is someone deciding how the limited moneys are to be spent. A single payer system wont have unlimited budget anymore than multiplayer. If the single payer is the government they will be able to tax you higher to cover the costs or take the money from other areas of government to give you better health care than you are paying for. Private insurance companies can’t cut police or education or defense to supplement you getting better treatment.


Item 3. Free market system of insurance did work and worked very well for many years in this country. Maybe we should look at what has changed to all of a sudden say it no longer works.


Item 4. You view healthcare as a right. That’s fine and many countries feel the same. I might ask Neal why is not dental health not a right in his country. Did someone figure out a tooth is less important than a toe.

Bud,

I agree with you that there will always be a situation in any system for some authority to allow or disallow a particular procedure or expense. There really isn't any alternative due to limited funding. My main point in my remarks was to highlight the point that those opposed to single payer always play the "death panel" card claiming the government will decide who lives and who dies based on what they allow. I simply want to point out that that situation exists now and has from the beginning. The main difference in the two systems being that the private insurance system makes those decisions with profit as an underlying influence. I think that is what I object to about the current system of private for profit insurance.

I also completely disagree that the old private insurance system worked. Perhaps back in the 50's or 60's it may have but its been well documented that healthcare and insurance costs have been rising at a far greater pace than inflation ever has. I mean if it was working, as I said, we wouldn't be having the debate, we'd all be happy and healthy. Of course as its been pointed out by several the technology that has developed since the 50's and 60's has really added to the cost but also to the number of treatable diseases. The greater amount of litigation fits in there somewhere too. But I will say that there are numerous studies that show litigation only adds incrementally to the cost, its not a huge deal. The right tends to want to take away our right to hold parties accountable when they screw up by saying that adds a bunch to the cost of healthcare. States that have passed tort laws prove that. They have not significantly lower cost.

If you look back at my posts I never said or implied that insurance is a right. Now if we develop a system that we pay into over our working days like medicare then it becomes a right because you paid for it. I have often wondered if we had a VAT for healthcare how much would that tax have to be. That way everyone would be contributing to it, no free riders. Or maybe we partially fund it that way, I don't know. I just can't get past he notion that the wealthiest country in the world by far cannot figure out a way to pool our resources and get everyone health care. We could use the current private insurers to pay the bills maybe that's what they do now. They would just become operated as a non-profit with heavy government oversight and all their silly rules and stipulations would go away and simplify the system, make it uniform. Maybe they could earn bonuses for preventing fraud to help with that because its a big problem with the system we have now and likely wouldn't be better in a single payer system. With dental or vision care the cost are usually affordable for most. Heck most dental policies pay for preventative care but you pay a high percentage of the cost for fillings, crowns, etc. Plus there aren't really any dental situations that you might run up hundreds of thousands of dollars in cost for a problem ending up with yourself in bankruptcy.

By the way I have studied statistics and I understand diminishing returns regarding pool size but the make up of the pool is just as important as the size. A pool of 5 million healthy people and a pool of unhealthy people have vastly different healthcare costs.

One last thing that bothers me about our system is the bond with employers. With this system you often become obliged to a job you hate simply because of the benefits. It also places a competitive disadvantage on US companies that most of their foreign competitors don't have.

 

[frodo]

Frodo

I know you are being sarcastic but you are also correct. There are government models that do exactly what you suggest. They step in and take care of your needs in return tell you how to live your life. It is called communism and China is a great example of that up until a short time ago. Last I checked anyone that would want to leave this country could go to any number of communist countries and they will take you right in. They will give you a job and how many hours to work and a place to live and provide for your needs. I don’t see a lot of people leaving though.

My personal belief is this country was founded in a very unique way with lots of personal freedoms. More was accomplished here in 200 years that the rest mankind’s time on the planet. Our government was an experiment and intended to change and evolve.

Is it time to evolve into socialize medical country? I don’t know is my answer. I am fully convinced they should leave ACA 100% intact. It was put into play by the progressives party and they should let the experiment run its course. It could be wonderful thing for all. And if it isn’t people will want to try something different.

It is finished, Aetna is pulling out, It did not work and it was never supposed to work. it was a stepping stone to socialized medicine
something I am dead set against
they need to go back to the old private insurance we had
and let people buy insurance across state lines, that will keep the price in check.
as far as the poor goes. Medicaid below a certain income

 

[bud16415]

Bud,

I agree with you that there will always be a situation in any system for some authority to allow or disallow a particular procedure or expense. There really isn't any alternative due to limited funding. My main point in my remarks was to highlight the point that those opposed to single payer always play the "death panel" card claiming the government will decide who lives and who dies based on what they allow. I simply want to point out that that situation exists now and has from the beginning. The main difference in the two systems being that the private insurance system makes those decisions with profit as an underlying influence. I think that is what I object to about the current system of private for profit insurance.

I also completely disagree that the old private insurance system worked. Perhaps back in the 50's or 60's it may have but its been well documented that healthcare and insurance costs have been rising at a far greater pace than inflation ever has. I mean if it was working, as I said, we wouldn't be having the debate, we'd all be happy and healthy. Of course as its been pointed out by several the technology that has developed since the 50's and 60's has really added to the cost but also to the number of treatable diseases. The greater amount of litigation fits in there somewhere too. But I will say that there are numerous studies that show litigation only adds incrementally to the cost, its not a huge deal. The right tends to want to take away our right to hold parties accountable when they screw up by saying that adds a bunch to the cost of healthcare. States that have passed tort laws prove that. They have not significantly lower cost.

If you look back at my posts I never said or implied that insurance is a right. Now if we develop a system that we pay into over our working days like medicare then it becomes a right because you paid for it. I have often wondered if we had a VAT for healthcare how much would that tax have to be. That way everyone would be contributing to it, no free riders. Or maybe we partially fund it that way, I don't know. I just can't get past he notion that the wealthiest country in the world by far cannot figure out a way to pool our resources and get everyone health care. We could use the current private insurers to pay the bills maybe that's what they do now. They would just become operated as a non-profit with heavy government oversight and all their silly rules and stipulations would go away and simplify the system, make it uniform. Maybe they could earn bonuses for preventing fraud to help with that because its a big problem with the system we have now and likely wouldn't be better in a single payer system. With dental or vision care the cost are usually affordable for most. Heck most dental policies pay for preventative care but you pay a high percentage of the cost for fillings, crowns, etc. Plus there aren't really any dental situations that you might run up hundreds of thousands of dollars in cost for a problem ending up with yourself in bankruptcy.

By the way I have studied statistics and I understand diminishing returns regarding pool size but the make up of the pool is just as important as the size. A pool of 5 million healthy people and a pool of unhealthy people have vastly different healthcare costs.

One last thing that bothers me about our system is the bond with employers. With this system you often become obliged to a job you hate simply because of the benefits. It also places a competitive disadvantage on US companies that most of their foreign competitors don't have.

I don’t have the trust you have in the government running large industries I guess. No doubt they can do it they run the armed forces, the postal system, social security, VA and Medicare. They could all benefit from some private sector approaches IMO.

I don’t think you will see death panels at least called death panels in any system we take on, but there are degrees and elements to all insurance systems and it is commonly heard talk of end of life strategies. If you agree or don’t with the concept of quality of life and medical treatments, there will always be some amount of it in the treatment process.

As to the insurance companies’ profits they are somewhat mild in the total cost of healthcare. The biggest drivers are still in the industry of healthcare itself, drugs and medical treatments and salaries for all the above.

I grew up with health care as a kid thru my father’s plan that was paid for as a work benefit and my whole working life I did the same thru my workplace. I never felt like I was held hostage by my benefits. I always viewed it as great place to work offering a great overall benefit package and just one more reason to want to stay and work for them. I can attest in the 50’s thru 80’s IMO the system worked well.

I think the legal aspect of the cost is very hard to pinpoint and measure as a lot is a hidden cost. Beyond the litigation and cost of another insurance called malpractice. I took my sister to our old trusted family doctor / surgeon a few years ago when she was quite sick. He poked in her belly for about 10 seconds and said you need your gallbladder out and we will do the surgery at 8:00 tomorrow morning. He said until then you will be busy getting a days’ worth of tests and scans to confirm he was correct and to please the worried legal people that didn’t think he knows what he is talking about. He had the OR scheduled first thing and of course the tests proved out she needed it out.
I also know a young ER doc and he tells me the same thing that the vast amount of the tests he orders are required as CYA.

We do agree that healthcare must be paid for by someone and it is an industry.

Here is a good read in Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peteru...ive-ruining-american-healthcare/#7162e63637b9

 

[frodo]

We do agree that healthcare must be paid for by someone and it is an industry.

^^^ truth spoken here

:rofl:

 

[frodo]

Frodo

I know you are being sarcastic but you are also correct. There are government models that do exactly what you suggest. They step in and take care of your needs in return tell you how to live your life. It is called communism and China is a great example of that up until a short time ago. Last I checked anyone that would want to leave this country could go to any number of communist countries and they will take you right in. They will give you a job and how many hours to work and a place to live and provide for your needs. I don’t see a lot of people leaving though.

My personal belief is this country was founded in a very unique way with lots of personal freedoms. More was accomplished here in 200 years that the rest mankind’s time on the planet. Our government was an experiment and intended to change and evolve.

Is it time to evolve into socialize medical country? I don’t know is my answer. I am fully convinced they should leave ACA 100% intact. It was put into play by the progressives party and they should let the experiment run its course. It could be wonderful thing for all. And if it isn’t people will want to try something different.

Forced to buy something you do not want goes against my grain

 

[68bucks]

Forced to buy something you do not want goes against my grain

I don't like the prospect that the government requires you to purchase something you don't want either. Problem is I don't know what you do about people that say they don't want health insurance and pocket or spend that money. Then low and behold they get sick of injured and end up in the hospital and run up a $100,000 bill, an easy thing to do. They can't pay the bill so the hospital eats it which we know they really don't do they roll it into their already high cost plus they probably write it off their taxes. So then we end up paying the bill and making up the difference in lost tax revenue. Meanwhile the person ends up filing bankruptcy and we have to foot the bill for the courts too. And why? Because that person decided they didn't want to be a responsible person and buy insurance. I mean you know they will need it sooner or later. On the other hand if they were paying their insurance through a payroll deduction or with a VAT or something they would have insurance , avoid bankruptcy, and not burden everyone else. There are a lot of people that fit into that category.

I find one irony in your statement though. You were forced to pay for Medicare and have elected to use that system. It's socialized medicine more or less depending on your definition of socialized medicine. So are you glad that was the situation or would you rather you were on your own to find and pay for private insurance at this point in your life? Not being facetious just curious how someone on Medicare feels about that.

 

[68bucks]

I don’t have the trust you have in the government running large industries I guess. No doubt they can do it they run the armed forces, the postal system, social security, VA and Medicare. They could all benefit from some private sector approaches IMO.

I don’t think you will see death panels at least called death panels in any system we take on, but there are degrees and elements to all insurance systems and it is commonly heard talk of end of life strategies. If you agree or don’t with the concept of quality of life and medical treatments, there will always be some amount of it in the treatment process.

As to the insurance companies’ profits they are somewhat mild in the total cost of healthcare. The biggest drivers are still in the industry of healthcare itself, drugs and medical treatments and salaries for all the above.

I grew up with health care as a kid thru my father’s plan that was paid for as a work benefit and my whole working life I did the same thru my workplace. I never felt like I was held hostage by my benefits. I always viewed it as great place to work offering a great overall benefit package and just one more reason to want to stay and work for them. I can attest in the 50’s thru 80’s IMO the system worked well.

I think the legal aspect of the cost is very hard to pinpoint and measure as a lot is a hidden cost. Beyond the litigation and cost of another insurance called malpractice. I took my sister to our old trusted family doctor / surgeon a few years ago when she was quite sick. He poked in her belly for about 10 seconds and said you need your gallbladder out and we will do the surgery at 8:00 tomorrow morning. He said until then you will be busy getting a days’ worth of tests and scans to confirm he was correct and to please the worried legal people that didn’t think he knows what he is talking about. He had the OR scheduled first thing and of course the tests proved out she needed it out.
I also know a young ER doc and he tells me the same thing that the vast amount of the tests he orders are required as CYA.

We do agree that healthcare must be paid for by someone and it is an industry.

Here is a good read in Forbes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peteru...ive-ruining-american-healthcare/#7162e63637b9

Bud,

Don't get me wrong I have serious doubts about the government's ability to manage a large healthcare system well. Though I have read that Medicare does operate more efficiently in terms of administrative cost than private insurance but I think there are definitely things that could be gained by private sector influence. That's why I have thought the current private system could be utilized in some way for a single payer system.

I use the term death panel just because that was a popular right wing term that gets thrown out when single payer system talks start. and you're right that the root of the problem is not insurance profits its the high cost of the care. If that isn't addressed it doesn't matter. The CYA healthcare or defensive medicine fits in there too but at the end of the day if you're going to cut me open for anything and we can verify your suspicions with a $500 test, I'll pay it. But if I show up in the ER and need to get my finger stitched up don't tell me I need an xray, 3 blood test, and an MRI. Just sew me up and maybe give me an antibiotic and I'll be on my way thank you.

 

[bud16415]

The ER doc I know is a no-nonsense kind of doc and if you came in with a cut finger he would rinse it out give you a pain pill stitch it up and give you a couple days of pain pills and antibiotics and tell you if you have any troubles go to your family doctor and don’t come back to the ER for this. His coworkers drive him crazy because there is a one in a million chance something else bad might happen to you from the cut you got. They will request the tests you mentioned and it won’t cost 500 more like 5k and then they will admit you at least for overnight as that gets them off the hook if you happen to have a heart attack that same day.

I asked him what his normal day is like? He said by far most of his cases are drug related. Many ODs where you give them a reversing drug and they leave and use again and are back in a few hours. The other half are meds seekers wanting pain meds. He said he gives them an aspirin and sends them out. They have people needing pain meds so bad they will jump in front of a car and get hit just to come in with pain bad enough to get the good stuff.

 

[nealtw]

The ER doc I know is a no-nonsense kind of doc and if you came in with a cut finger he would rinse it out give you a pain pill stitch it up and give you a couple days of pain pills and antibiotics and tell you if you have any troubles go to your family doctor and don’t come back to the ER for this. His coworkers drive him crazy because there is a one in a million chance something else bad might happen to you from the cut you got. They will request the tests you mentioned and it won’t cost 500 more like 5k and then they will admit you at least for overnight as that gets them off the hook if you happen to have a heart attack that same day.

I asked him what his normal day is like? He said by far most of his cases are drug related. Many ODs where you give them a reversing drug and they leave and use again and are back in a few hours. The other half are meds seekers wanting pain meds. He said he gives them an aspirin and sends them out. They have people needing pain meds so bad they will jump in front of a car and get hit just to come in with pain bad enough to get the good stuff.

The drug problem right now is enough to kill any health system, A while ago our cancer hospital had an overflow in ER 50 people in the beds in the hallways.

 

[frodo]

I don't like the prospect that the government requires you to purchase something you don't want either. Problem is I don't know what you do about people that say they don't want health insurance and pocket or spend that money. Then low and behold they get sick of injured and end up in the hospital and run up a $100,000 bill, an easy thing to do. They can't pay the bill so the hospital eats it which we know they really don't do they roll it into their already high cost plus they probably write it off their taxes. So then we end up paying the bill and making up the difference in lost tax revenue. Meanwhile the person ends up filing bankruptcy and we have to foot the bill for the courts too. And why? Because that person decided they didn't want to be a responsible person and buy insurance. I mean you know they will need it sooner or later. On the other hand if they were paying their insurance through a payroll deduction or with a VAT or something they would have insurance , avoid bankruptcy, and not burden everyone else. There are a lot of people that fit into that category.

I find one irony in your statement though. You were forced to pay for Medicare and have elected to use that system. It's socialized medicine more or less depending on your definition of socialized medicine. So are you glad that was the situation or would you rather you were on your own to find and pay for private insurance at this point in your life? Not being facetious just curious how someone on Medicare feels about that.

I pay humana for enhanced plan. Humana Gold ppo
because medicare does not address my issue
so actually I have both

you are incorrect in assuming I do not pay for my insurance

 

[zannej]

I don't like the prospect that the government requires you to purchase something you don't want either. Problem is I don't know what you do about people that say they don't want health insurance and pocket or spend that money. Then low and behold they get sick of injured and end up in the hospital and run up a $100,000 bill, an easy thing to do. They can't pay the bill so the hospital eats it which we know they really don't do they roll it into their already high cost plus they probably write it off their taxes. So then we end up paying the bill and making up the difference in lost tax revenue. Meanwhile the person ends up filing bankruptcy and we have to foot the bill for the courts too. And why? Because that person decided they didn't want to be a responsible person and buy insurance. I mean you know they will need it sooner or later. On the other hand if they were paying their insurance through a payroll deduction or with a VAT or something they would have insurance , avoid bankruptcy, and not burden everyone else. There are a lot of people that fit into that category.

I find one irony in your statement though. You were forced to pay for Medicare and have elected to use that system. It's socialized medicine more or less depending on your definition of socialized medicine. So are you glad that was the situation or would you rather you were on your own to find and pay for private insurance at this point in your life? Not being facetious just curious how someone on Medicare feels about that.

The problem is not always that a person is irresponsible and not willing to pay for health insurance. Sometimes a person flat out can't afford it. A friend of mine wanted to get medical insurance for himself and his daughter but the monthly premiums were more than 50% of his monthly income and his job didn't provide medical insurance.

A lot of people in this area are in the same boat. The local businesses only hire part time and/or use loopholes to avoid paying for any employee benefits. I know people who work 2 to 3 jobs and still can't afford health insurance and barely get enough hours to pay the bills. (Part of this is low wages but also inflated costs-- 11% sales tax, utility costs recently tripled, and the slum lords overcharge for rent).

Insurance rates in this state (Louisiana) are some of the highest in the country. And the hospitals do write off the losses. They get money from the state (from taxpayer dollars obviously) for people not paying AND they sell the debts to collection agencies. If the prices for treatment/medicine were reasonable, a lot of people would be able to pay out of pocket even if they didn't have insurance. If they couldn't pay it all at once, they could make payment plans. But the hospitals here charge absurd prices for things.

If the legislators would stop worrying about themselves and actually give a damn about the future of the country (putting aside the whole "us vs them" crap where they reject ideas/plans just because it came from the other side without actually evaluating the merit) and consideration for the citizens, they could do something to prevent medical companies, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies from major price-gouging. I'm not saying there should be zero profits, but at least make it so they can't charge insane prices for things that most people can't afford. And maybe they should establish standards to set/cap prices for specific things so prices won't be so arbitrary. I also think they should have hospitals publicly post the itemized prices of procedures, medicines, etc (including how much it costs to have a nurse hand you a pill) so that patients can compare prices with other facilities.

Of course, that won't solve the problem of people who don't work and have no income, or of illegal aliens or con artists who give stolen SS#s and then don't pay.

 

[bud16415]

The problem is not always that a person is irresponsible and not willing to pay for health insurance. Sometimes a person flat out can't afford it. A friend of mine wanted to get medical insurance for himself and his daughter but the monthly premiums were more than 50% of his monthly income and his job didn't provide medical insurance.

A lot of people in this area are in the same boat. The local businesses only hire part time and/or use loopholes to avoid paying for any employee benefits. I know people who work 2 to 3 jobs and still can't afford health insurance and barely get enough hours to pay the bills. (Part of this is low wages but also inflated costs-- 11% sales tax, utility costs recently tripled, and the slum lords overcharge for rent).

Insurance rates in this state (Louisiana) are some of the highest in the country. And the hospitals do write off the losses. They get money from the state (from taxpayer dollars obviously) for people not paying AND they sell the debts to collection agencies. If the prices for treatment/medicine were reasonable, a lot of people would be able to pay out of pocket even if they didn't have insurance. If they couldn't pay it all at once, they could make payment plans. But the hospitals here charge absurd prices for things.

If the legislators would stop worrying about themselves and actually give a damn about the future of the country (putting aside the whole "us vs them" crap where they reject ideas/plans just because it came from the other side without actually evaluating the merit) and consideration for the citizens, they could do something to prevent medical companies, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies from major price-gouging. I'm not saying there should be zero profits, but at least make it so they can't charge insane prices for things that most people can't afford. And maybe they should establish standards to set/cap prices for specific things so prices won't be so arbitrary. I also think they should have hospitals publicly post the itemized prices of procedures, medicines, etc (including how much it costs to have a nurse hand you a pill) so that patients can compare prices with other facilities.

Of course, that won't solve the problem of people who don't work and have no income, or of illegal aliens or con artists who give stolen SS#s and then don't pay.

All the problems you mentioned are real problems in our country and not only prohibit people from buying health insurance, they hold them back from buying homes and cars and clothes and going on vacations and educating their children etc. etc.

Those problems are what we as a country should be looking at and it is what has changed from the 50’s thru 80’s. The insurance issue is just one of many things a country that has ran out of speed will suffer from. We remember the good old days and we apply the good old days model to some parts of today when there is something we don’t like and say see how things have changed. Why do all these people have to work 3 or 4 part time jobs to still lose ground is the big question. I go to Walmart and people are buying flat panel TV sets like they are giving them away. As a kid every family also wanted a TV in their home and every single TV you could buy was made in the USA and every part inside the TV was made in the USA. Every car you went to buy the TV in was made in the USA right down to the tires. Everyone that wanted a good job and was willing to work had one and most got health insurance as part of that job.

It is hard to not see there was a winning formula for this country once upon a time.

The question is what happened and why?

Going back to the first post in this thread here is Chris a guy we all know wanting to recapture that winning formula for himself and his family and his then workers.

The question is what happened then to now and why? He correctly sees the deck stacked against his efforts in a lot of ways. Take that one guy times a million guys like him with the drive to put in play the winning formula would make big changes and allow things to start snowballing in the right direction.

Everyone in business and working under the principals of free enterprise are not greedy people. Sure he wants his piece of the pie. That’s the thing about the way this country was before all this everyone could have as much pie as they wanted. It wasn’t one pie to be sectioned up for everyone as we now think it was a growing pie where the bigger the slice you earned the pie got bigger for everyone else.

 

[frodo]

I do not subscribe to the belief the government ''owes' you health care

 

[nealtw]

All the problems you mentioned are real problems in our country and not only prohibit people from buying health insurance, they hold them back from buying homes and cars and clothes and going on vacations and educating their children etc. etc.

Those problems are what we as a country should be looking at and it is what has changed from the 50’s thru 80’s. The insurance issue is just one of many things a country that has ran out of speed will suffer from. We remember the good old days and we apply the good old days model to some parts of today when there is something we don’t like and say see how things have changed. Why do all these people have to work 3 or 4 part time jobs to still lose ground is the big question. I go to Walmart and people are buying flat panel TV sets like they are giving them away. As a kid every family also wanted a TV in their home and every single TV you could buy was made in the USA and every part inside the TV was made in the USA. Every car you went to buy the TV in was made in the USA right down to the tires. Everyone that wanted a good job and was willing to work had one and most got health insurance as part of that job.

It is hard to not see there was a winning formula for this country once upon a time.

The question is what happened and why?

Going back to the first post in this thread here is Chris a guy we all know wanting to recapture that winning formula for himself and his family and his then workers.

The question is what happened then to now and why? He correctly sees the deck stacked against his efforts in a lot of ways. Take that one guy times a million guys like him with the drive to put in play the winning formula would make big changes and allow things to start snowballing in the right direction.

Everyone in business and working under the principals of free enterprise are not greedy people. Sure he wants his piece of the pie. That’s the thing about the way this country was before all this everyone could have as much pie as they wanted. It wasn’t one pie to be sectioned up for everyone as we now think it was a growing pie where the bigger the slice you earned the pie got bigger for everyone else.

Healthcare insurance was non profit back then.