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.
Honestly, on the whole I am much more in favor of bottom up solutions. I have seen models here in the US that are working better and at lower costs.
Like to name or describe one of them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr
Many of these countries you are alluding to w/ a broad brush have serious issues w/ their health care and tax burden.
Since about everyone is getting better health care than we are at a cost that's at least 35% lower than ours, no, actually not. Many countries do have current fiscal problems to address, but these in the main are continued fallout from the ravages wrought by the global recession.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDusr
Certainly studying models is useful. I don't think "all" these other countries have figured it out either. Only limiting yourself to what is currently "out there" is akin to what was going on when "everybody" swore the earth was flat and could tell you why. Criteria is specific and can be measured this is how you see if your outcomes are meeting your goals. However, first you need clear goals that there is at least a relative consensus on, ideally full consensus.
Every national model out there is different. Japan is not like France. Canada is not like Taiwan. None of these existing systems would necessarily be appropriate for the US. What they offer is examples of how things might work and can work under varying circumstances. We are starting with a very large and entrenched private system that we have to be able to rely on for all our health care during the transition period. This is like moving the space shuttle from its hangar to the launch pad used to be. Very cautious, very careful. There meanwhile isn't much debate over what the goals are. Better overall care for everyone at lower cost. Pretty simple on that end of things.
Obama wasn't pushing anybody's dream. Weren't you watching? The only thing that could have passed was something that a majority actually didn't like...but not enough to vote against it. Realizing that was why Obama was able to succeed where everryone else for a hundred years had failed. Health care -- regardless of where it comes from -- affects everybody. Keep that in mind. There is no system for lefties.
Yeah, and it is going to cost more and more. Like I said, more and more mandates in your health plan is going to cost YOU more, the HC companies are not going to EAT any costs.
Yeah, and it is going to cost more and more. Like I said, more and more mandates in your health plan is going to cost YOU more, the HC companies are not going to EAT any costs.
Get a grip. Health care costs and premiums were already increasing each year by factors two, three, and four times the rate of inflation. Health care costs were progressivley devouring personal income, already having left some 45 million Americans with no health insurance coverage at all. What is wrong with this picture? Anything?
The purpose of HCR is not to crush insurance companies or drug or device manufacturers or hospitals or doctors. It is to create a health care financing system under which the worst abuses of the insurance industry are eliminated and a health care industry that delivers broad-based and effective health care at fair costs and reasonable profits can be developed over the long-term. Do you have issues with any of that?
Since about everyone is getting better health care than we are at a cost that's at least 35% lower than ours, no, actually not. Many countries do have current fiscal problems to address, but these in the main are continued fallout from the ravages wrought by the global recession.
Every national model out there is different. Japan is not like France. Canada is not like Taiwan. None of these existing systems would necessarily be appropriate for the US. What they offer is examples of how things might work and can work under varying circumstances. We are starting with a very large and entrenched private system that we have to be able to rely on for all our health care during the transition period. This is like moving the space shuttle from its hangar to the launch pad used to be. Very cautious, very careful. There meanwhile isn't much debate over what the goals are. Better overall care for everyone at lower cost. Pretty simple on that end of things.
Ok, don't want to hijack this thread. So not gonna get in a debate here.
A similiar model used for pretty much everything has worked well for communities. They provide quality living, good food, shelter, transportation, and health care in some for as little as 10,000 a person.(in the US)
These aren't necessarily large communities either. Have seen co-op, open source type models used for all kind of things. They pool resources, contributors directly benefit, have say so, have greater transparency.
Many other countries have quality issues and a large tax burden so such a figure broadly applied would need to be looked at in depth. Some governments do things better than others.
Many see a direct correlation between Big Govt in Health Care and cost here. Basically our problem is Big Govt and Big Bus imo. They work hand-n-hand.
Get a grip. Health care costs and premiums were already increasing each year by factors two, three, and four times the rate of inflation. Health care costs were progressivley devouring personal income, already having left some 45 million Americans with no health insurance coverage at all. What is wrong with this picture? Anything?
The purpose of HCR is not to crush insurance companies or drug or device manufacturers or hospitals or doctors. It is to create a health care financing system under which the worst abuses of the insurance industry are eliminated and a health care industry that delivers broad-based and effective health care at fair costs and reasonable profits can be developed over the long-term. Do you have issues with any of that?
Slice it any way you like. Bottom line is there is going to be huge costs associtaed with the new mandates..........consumers WILL be paying for them..........above and beyond regular premium increases.
A similiar model used for pretty much everything has worked well for communities. They provide quality living, good food, shelter, transportation, and health care in some for as little as 10,000 a person.(in the US)
These aren't necessarily large communities either. Have seen co-op, open source type models used for all kind of things. They pool resources, contributors directly benefit, have say so, have greater transparency.
Many other countries have quality issues and a large tax burden so such a figure broadly applied would need to be looked at in depth. Some governments do things better than others.
Many see a direct correlation between Big Govt in Health Care and cost here. Basically our problem is Big Govt and Big Bus imo. They work hand-n-hand.
Nice job on all of the references. But...sorry, ideology trumps logic on this issue........even if Obamacare makes things more expensive and less efficient.
Slice it any way you like. Bottom line is there is going to be huge costs associtaed with the new mandates..........consumers WILL be paying for them..........above and beyond regular premium increases.
Your bottom line might as well be that HCR will make your toenails turn purple for all the weight that's been put behind it. Remember when your 4th grade teacher reminded you to show your work on the math test? Well, there you are again.
Do you think it was good that insurance companies could refuse coverage for pre-existing conditions or could just cancel your policy if you got sick? Should ability to get health coverage really have been tied to the ability to get a job? Those sorts of frightening mandates as you want to call them are to be considered in the light of a system that has spent up to 30 cents out of every health care dollar for something other than health care. Or a system that makes a free 14% profit just by charging through Medicare Advantage instead of Medicare. Or that uses fee-for-service incentives to do billions worth of needless work at exorbitant costs. Or that rapes US consumers for common drugs that are sold at relative bargain prices almost everywhere else in the world. Did you want to comment on any of those sorts of things?
Last edited by saganista; 07-13-2011 at 08:21 AM..
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.
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.
