Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-12-2008, 03:57 PM
 
Location: DFW, TX
2,935 posts, read 6,713,300 times
Reputation: 572

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix lady View Post
I can't believe people have to debate health insurance. How inhumane!! If a person is sick and doesn't have insurance, what should we as a society do?? Watch them get sicker and die? The way you treat the sick, elderly, children is more a reflection of yourself than anything else.
Which is why conservatives, who are accused of beaing heartless, donate more time and money on average to charities. They aren't interested in being inhumae, nor are they interested in being taken advantage of by their government. They're more interested in making an actual difference and being able to direct funds as needed to organizations that prove their worth through results and efficiency.

But time and again people accuse those who wish to solve the problem differently of ignoring the problem completely. Isn't that quite an ignorant assertion? That the only way is through government? The same solution that only limits the possibilities and has proven to be inefficient and provides little to no recourse when it goes awry?

If progressives supposedly are the thinkers, why do they have such a one track mind?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-12-2008, 04:37 PM
 
Location: CO
1,603 posts, read 3,542,422 times
Reputation: 504
Quote:
Originally Posted by KantLockeMeIn View Post
Which is why conservatives, who are accused of beaing heartless, donate more time and money on average to charities. They aren't interested in being inhumae, nor are they interested in being taken advantage of by their government. They're more interested in making an actual difference and being able to direct funds as needed to organizations that prove their worth through results and efficiency.

But time and again people accuse those who wish to solve the problem differently of ignoring the problem completely. Isn't that quite an ignorant assertion? That the only way is through government? The same solution that only limits the possibilities and has proven to be inefficient and provides little to no recourse when it goes awry?

If progressives supposedly are the thinkers, why do they have such a one track mind?
There have been some examples thrown out that suggest UHS isn't a bad thing though - some have pointed out their experiences in Europe as being much better than the average UHS critic has would have you think.

For the self-employed people like myself who are paying between 10-15% of their annual salary on high-deductible health insurance that doesn't cover very much for our family and definitely doesn't cover preexisting conditions (assuming you are not denied coverage in the first place), what type of solution would you suggest?

I wouldn't go as far as to accuse conservatives as being heartless. But when I'm told that I should just give up my dream of owning my business and go work for a larger company due to the fact that insurance companies can't deny coverage to them, I don't get the feeling that there's too much caring going on. I get the feeling that they can't relate with my situation and just feel that I'm on my own in this - especially those who currently aren't negatively affected by the system.

Are we to conclude that if health insurance is even remotely important to our family, then self-employment isn't part of our American Dream?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-12-2008, 05:04 PM
 
Location: DFW, TX
2,935 posts, read 6,713,300 times
Reputation: 572
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludachris View Post
There have been some examples thrown out that suggest UHS isn't a bad thing though - some have pointed out their experiences in Europe as being much better than the average UHS critic has would have you think.

For the self-employed people like myself who are paying between 10-15% of their annual salary on high-deductible health insurance that doesn't cover very much for our family and definitely doesn't cover preexisting conditions (assuming you are not denied coverage in the first place), what type of solution would you suggest?
First of all, small business owners are plagued with taxes and regulation which hamper their ability to operate and remove the incentive to even be established in the first place.

If your taxes were reduced, you would have more capital to fund whatever expenses you choose.

Next, remove regulations which prohibit individuals from purchasing health insurance across state lines.

The medical industry is the most highly regulated industry in the US. The burden of these regulations is directly passed to the consumers, which is reflected in the cost of care. Reduce the regulations and we'll reduce the overhead associated. For instance, privatize the FDA and encourage competition by other independent labs. Allow the doctor and patient to decide which substances are appropriate for the treatment and get Washington out of the way.

Finally there must be legitimate tort reform. Doctors should not have to close up shop because they can't afford malpractice insurance, but patients should be able to sue doctors and healthcare companies for damages. The system we have today makes it extremely difficult to punish insurance companies for not honoring their contracts, but when there is an award, it's often extremely high. The best system is one that provides consistent punishment at reasonable values... ones where consistently bad doctors can't afford insurance, but good doctors that made a mistake aren't put out of business, and good doctors that have never made a mistake aren't punished out of fear for a large settlement in the future.

Quote:
I wouldn't go as far as to accuse conservatives as being heartless. But when I'm told that I should just give up my dream of owning my business and go work for a larger company due to the fact that insurance companies can't deny coverage to them, I don't get the feeling that there's too much caring going on. I get the feeling that they can't relate with my situation and just feel that I'm on my own in this - especially those who currently aren't negatively affected by the system.

Are we to conclude that if health insurance is even remotely important to our family, then self-employment isn't part of our American Dream?
If you don't get to the root of the problem, you can't solve it. I'm not suggesting it's a simple problem, or that there's a simple solution... but history has shown us that government is an ineffective solution to problems.

By making mandates for doctors to accept Medicare and Medicaid, the doctors are passing the difference in their cost versus the reimbursement on to their other patients. There's been a decrease in the number of medical school graduates who are going into internal medicine versus specialties because the pay is considerably lower due to subsidized care.

Since the AMA has a stranglehold on who may become a doctor, it creates a supply and demand problem, especially given the aging population.

But back to your situation, insurance companies are interested in larger contracts. The amount of risk is spread out among a larger number of individuals, and the purchasing power of that large group equates to negotiation power as well. So another solution is to band together with other businesses and organize as a large group to purchase insurance.

Next, look at the numbers involved. Most people are looking for full service healthcare, where they only worry about a $10 copay. But in the end you have to look at the numbers. You may be paying $5000 a year for $2000 of services, where if you had a high deductible HSA, you could be paying $2000 a year for $2000 of services, and still have protection against major accidents and illnesses.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:29 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top