Repeal Health care

[cawacko]

So tell me, how does the "freemarket" plan on solving the Healthcare dilemma in this country?

We've tried the "free market" approach ever since the inception of this great nation and half the population still can't get the care they need.

I'll readily admit that when it comes to details of health care and its coverage I lack a lot of knowledge on the subject. There are many well better versed than I to answer your question.

My understanding though is we currently have a system that is part market based and part government run/involved. The suggestions would be to ease the current control government has which will allow for better options for patients as well as allowing for costs to drop.

Again I admit for specific programs there are many better than I that can give those examples.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

So tell me, how does the "freemarket" plan on solving the Healthcare dilemma in this country?

We've tried the "free market" approach ever since the inception of this great nation and half the population still can't get the care they need.

if you think the last 45 years of the medical field has been free market, you haven't really been paying attention.

 

[zappasguitar]

I'll readily admit that when it comes to details of health care and its coverage I lack a lot of knowledge on the subject. There are many well better versed than I to answer your question.

My understanding though is we currently have a system that is part market based and part government run/involved. The suggestions would be to ease the current control government has which will allow for better options for patients as well as allowing for costs to drop.

Again I admit for specific programs there are many better than I that can give those examples.

See? That's what I'm talking about right there...that ridiculous mantra (no offense) that if we just let the free market do what it does, then magically costs will drop for the consumer.

Here in Texas, deregulation and the "free market" have contributed to a 60% rise in the cost of premiums and in out of pocket healthcare costs for my wife and I in the past 6 years.

Our premiums jump an average of 8-17% a freakin year! No matter WHAT.

 

[apple0154]

I'll readily admit that when it comes to details of health care and its coverage I lack a lot of knowledge on the subject. There are many well better versed than I to answer your question.

My understanding though is we currently have a system that is part market based and part government run/involved. The suggestions would be to ease the current control government has which will allow for better options for patients as well as allowing for costs to drop.

Again I admit for specific programs there are many better than I that can give those examples.

The parts the government controls, such as Medicare for the elderly, came about because the free market didn't fill the need. As far as the free market is concerned it's like that old saying, "been there, done that."

We have to remember that every country that currently has a government run/controlled system started out with a system just like the current US one, a "pay or suffer" system. This is where the Repub "philosophy" veers from logic. They talk about a free market system when there isn't one country they can point to as an example. On the other hand the citizens in every country that switched to a government plan insist on keeping it.

As Zappas Guitar notes in msg #60, "We've tried the "free market" approach ever since the inception of this great nation and half the population still can't get the care they need."

The Repubs make it sound like the free market approach has never been tried when it's the only thing that has been tried for over 200 years.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

Here in Texas, deregulation and the "free market" have contributed to a 60% rise in the cost of premiums and in out of pocket healthcare costs for my wife and I in the past 6 years.

zap, that isn't true. that deregulation was a red herring designed to cover a more insidious scheme by the texas government to install retired insurance executives and health insurance doctors on to the state medical board. Now those same 'doctors' have regulated doctors to such an extent that they get kickbacks from insurance companies for the amount of money they save the insurer over the health of the patient.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

As Zappas Guitar notes in msg #60, "We've tried the "free market" approach ever since the inception of this great nation and half the population still can't get the care they need."

this isn't true either. Back before the 60s, not a single small town doctor ever let a patient go without care, providing it for free when necessary. It wasn't until big pharma and big health insurance companies got the power to regulate the medical field did good care become hard to get.

 

[apple0154]

this isn't true either. Back before the 60s, not a single small town doctor ever let a patient go without care, providing it for free when necessary. It wasn't until big pharma and big health insurance companies got the power to regulate the medical field did good care become hard to get.

Whether or not doctors in the 60s offered free care the world is not the same place today. There is nothing stopping a doctor from providing free services today, however, very few do. Also, with the advances in medical treatments a small town doctor lacks the skill, the place and the equipment to offer specialized care. They're basically a primary physician, a family doctor.

 

[cancel2 2022]

Yes! Let's remain the only industrialized nation to keep the worlds most expensive pay or suffer system and see if by doing so we can go from rating 37th in the world while paying the most per capita of any nation on the planet to say the 68th best system while paying half of GDP!

You know what the reich wings opposition to health care reform really boils down to the fact that ya'll have this philosophy. "I got mine so FUCK YOU!"

Real big of ya.

I will never understand how the same people who proclaim that the US is the richest nation on earth, then turn around and say that it is unaffordable.

 

[Canceled2]

I will never understand how the same people who proclaim that the US is the richest nation on earth, then turn around and say that it is unaffordable.

One really only needs to look at the national debt of the UK and Canada to understand the rd you all have taken that we fight against.

Still here are what free healthcare has already done in the US

 

[apple0154]

One really only needs to look at the national debt of the UK and Canada to understand the rd you all have taken that we fight against.

Eh, let's take a look.

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
US: each citizen's share of this debt is $43,604.83

http://www.davemanuel.com/canada-debt-clock.php
Every man, woman and child in Canada currently owes $16,209.04 for their share of Canada's public debt.

Hmmm, $27,000 less per person and free medical.

Your post reminds me of a past congressional hearing when a congressman said to a witness, "I know you're working hard. The question is, "For whom?"

 

[apple0154]

Still here are what free healthcare has already done in the US

(Excerpt from above article)Medicaid, another onerous drain on the economy, provides medical and health-related services and funding to the poor......Whenever monies — hundreds of billions annually for Johnson’s long-running War on Poverty — are forcibly removed from the private sector, then the private sector is unable to use that money to make products, provide services, employ people, and increase the standard of living. Thus, the average worker, because of diminished employment opportunities, is impoverished by the invisible hand of the government. That individual then relies on government subsidies, further stressing the system of dependence unleashed by our rulers, which will then again take away even more jobs and opportunity further down the road. Truly a vicious cycle.

Yet most Americans, not understanding this mechanism, submit to big government’s supposedly well-intentioned programs. The government is then empowered to strengthen its paternalistic ways, introducing more policies and therefore, more control.(End)

Now let's look at what Medicaid is.
"Medicaid is the largest source of funding for medical and health-related services for people with limited income in the United States. Because of the aging World War II/Korean generation, the fastest growing aspect of Medicaid is nursing home coverage. As the Baby Boomer generation begins to reach nursing home age in 2020 to 2040, the nursing home aspect of Medicaid will boom, causing concerns for federal and state budgets."
Medicaid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia@@AMEPARAM@@/wiki/File:Centers_for_Medicare_and_Medicaid_Services_logo.png" class="image"><img alt="" src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Centers_for_Medicare_and_Medicaid_Services_logo.png"@@AMEPARAM@@en/a/a1/Centers_for_Medicare_and_Medicaid_Services_logo.png

So, we have the government paying for nursing homes for those requiring one which the author, Bob Confer, likens to the government robbing from the healthy, employed citizen to pay for ( "monies — hundreds of billions annually for Johnson’s long-running War on Poverty — are forcibly removed from the private sector").

Conclusion: Canada, as well, has a similar proportion of elderly citizens requiring nursing homes and, as well, supplies them along with medical for everyone else and the national debt is $27,000/person less than the US.

Is medical really a cause of a high national debt or could it be that free enterprise, "pay or suffer" medical is the culprit? What is more likely? What is more logical? (These are not trick questions.)

 

[Phantasmal]

How is it going to limit the quality of our care any more than insurance companies already do?

This is a comment I have heard from other people who obviously have never had to use their private health care plans extensively, like when you have cancer. They limit what "preferred" doctors you may see and they also will limit some procedures and others, if not pre-approved, they won't pay for them. They also tell you what types of drugs are allowed, so what is the difference?

 

[Phantasmal]

I guess I'll have to repeat myself .... as I said to Apple ....


And what planet are you living on? No..the road and the car are not fine. Universal Health Care has proven to be a huge burden on their economy. Wake up, take off the blinders and study the facts.

Europe especially has suffered economically, paying for overloaded Worker Benefits its Governments have guaranteed. Many of these Countries...IE Greece, are trimming way back because of failed economies and new budget constraints. The big Socialism Experiment is proving once again to be a big failure.

What we have passed here is not Universal Health Care. What our Inept President and Swamp Draining Congress has forced on us, is a Mandate on the Public that is not going to do a damn thing except raise the cost of Premiums as is presently happening, and collect a whole bunch of new taxes. What was passed here is the biggest scam and Constitutionally incorrect piece of legislation of my lifetime.

What an effin hoax... lets mandate Insurance so we can say that we have provided Insurance Universally. How pathetic.

The health care reforms assure that I can not be denied coverage, I like that! It was a good thing!

 

[zappasguitar]

this isn't true either. Back before the 60s, not a single small town doctor ever let a patient go without care, providing it for free when necessary. It wasn't until big pharma and big health insurance companies got the power to regulate the medical field did good care become hard to get.

Sorry, but that right there is just more horse hockey!

Doctors cared for everyone back then out of a sense of obligation.

A sense of obligation to the oath they took as Doctors to HEAL THE SICK AND INJURED.

Today the Hippocratic oath isn't what drives Doctors...it's the almighty DOLLAR.

 

[Phantasmal]

this isn't true either. Back before the 60s, not a single small town doctor ever let a patient go without care, providing it for free when necessary. It wasn't until big pharma and big health insurance companies got the power to regulate the medical field did good care become hard to get.

The families use to bring something to give to the doctor, a barter, in exchange for his services. This was back in the day when doctors went into the field to be doctors and not to make money! It was back in the day when medicine wasn't for profit! It all changed when people weren't the focus, anymore and money became their focus! There are still those people who go into medicine to make a difference, but most of them, it is a different motivation.

 

[Phantasmal]

if you think the last 45 years of the medical field has been free market, you haven't really been paying attention.

It is why it is now ill and needs a doctor!

 

[christiefan915]

This is a comment I have heard from other people who obviously have never had to use their private health care plans extensively, like when you have cancer. They limit what "preferred" doctors you may see and they also will limit some procedures and others, if not pre-approved, they won't pay for them. They also tell you what types of drugs are allowed, so what is the difference?

Today our paper had yet another article on insurance company scams, and how people are powerless when it comes to fighting for their rights.

When Dawn Pawelak of Penn Hills had a nerve block injection at her Monroeville doctor's office, she said the charge was $5,623 because the procedure was billed through UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside.

Her insurance covered all but the $250 "operating room service" deductible -- which she is appealing because, she says, she was never in an operating room: "It's ridiculous."

...Highmark spokesman Michael Weinstein said that, in Mrs. Pawelak's case, "It sounds like they're billing it as a hospital outpatient visit, versus a physician's office visit, in which case they would be getting a much higher reimbursement without any additional clinical benefit for the patients."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10264/1089029-28.stm#ixzz10DhacSYi

 

[Phantasmal]

Today our paper had yet another article on insurance company scams, and how people are powerless when it comes to fighting for their rights.

When Dawn Pawelak of Penn Hills had a nerve block injection at her Monroeville doctor's office, she said the charge was $5,623 because the procedure was billed through UPMC Presbyterian Shadyside.

Her insurance covered all but the $250 "operating room service" deductible -- which she is appealing because, she says, she was never in an operating room: "It's ridiculous."

...Highmark spokesman Michael Weinstein said that, in Mrs. Pawelak's case, "It sounds like they're billing it as a hospital outpatient visit, versus a physician's office visit, in which case they would be getting a much higher reimbursement without any additional clinical benefit for the patients."

Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/10264/1089029-28.stm#ixzz10DhacSYi

Criminal and what will become of this, where is Erin?