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.
I suppose we could just forget medical advancements because they are expensive and just go back to using leaches...
Well, maybe not that far... but tapering back the standard of care would be a good start.
Lets say we set the mark at +/-1964 just before Medicare went into effect...
and call that "expanded Medicare for all". I suspect 90% wouldn't need more.
Want more or better? OK... go get a private policy.
Well, maybe not that far... but tapering back the standard of care would be a good start.
Lets say we set the mark at +/-1964 just before Medicare went into effect...
and call that "expanded Medicare for all". I suspect 90% wouldn't need more.
Want more or better? OK... go get a private policy.
That's pretty much what the ACA is doing...the bronze plans are pretty basic...if you want more, get a silver, gold, platinum...
Sorry, but pre 1964 and my daughter would be dead....and I probably would be too...no thanks....
I'm talking about a single payer NHS approach.
Nothing paid direct from individuals (beyond general taxation) but ONLY for the basics.
I picked 1964 as the model for that limited that standard of care (Dx, Tx, etc) because that
is what was envisioned by the professionals and the legislature when Medicare was created.
If that's not enough to meet someones need, and not to be cruel, they (you?) are on their own.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Your own government has identified the cost factors that are escalating the costs of health care.
Here they are ranked in order by your very own General Accounting Office....
1] Technology up to 65%
2] Consumer Demand up to 36%
3] Expanding Health Benefits or Insuring more people up to 13%
4] Healthcare Price Inflation up to 19% (caused by Consumer Demand and insuring more people)
5] Administrative Costs up to 13% (caused by Technology, Consumer Demand and Regulations)
6] Aging/Elderly up to 7%
I'm talking about a single payer NHS approach.
Nothing paid direct from individuals (beyond general taxation) for the basics.
NO thanks...move to Canada if you want that system. I want freedom of choice and easy access to medical care thanks...AND I don't want to fork over half my income in taxes....
...the same things cost far more in the American health care system than anywhere else.
It costs $13,000 to have a hip replacement done in Belgium.
In the United States that same procedure is over $100,000 (7 X as much).
Whether we have Obamacare, a single payer system, or a national health service like Britain,
the truth is the fundamental problem in America is simply cost.
Whatever system we put in place has to do two things:
1. Cover everyone; 2. Do so at a lesser cost than we have been paying.
I just want a system with a simple, meaningful and achievable goal.
Be all of what most need ... and be most of what all need.
The notion that *any* system can be all things to all people in all circumstances is insanity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by golfgal
I want freedom of choice and easy access to medical care.
And if you have the dosh then you can have that too.
See? It works!
This article from NPR illustrates the fact that the same things cost far more in the American health care system than anywhere else. It costs $13,000 to have a hip replacement done in Belgium. In the United States that same procedure is over $100,000 (7 X as much).
Whether we have Obamacare, a single payer system, or a national health service like Britain, the truth is the fundamental problem in America is simply cost. Whatever system we put in place has to do two things:
1. Cover everyone; 2. Do so at a lesser cost than we have been paying.
I'm astounded by the TV ads for hospitals and medical insurance companies. Why are they spending millions of dollars to advertise? And it's no secret that these advertising costs are then passed on to consumers as a 'business expense' for these institutions. But is advertising on TV really necessary for a hospital or a medical insurance company? Or even a pharmaceutical company. After all, aren't most of the new drugs available by prescription only?
I'm astounded by the TV ads for hospitals and medical insurance companies. Why are they spending millions of dollars to advertise? And it's no secret that these advertising costs are then passed on to consumers as a 'business expense' for these institutions. But is advertising on TV really necessary for a hospital or a medical insurance company? Or even a pharmaceutical company. After all, aren't most of the new drugs available by prescription only?
Most of the health insurance ads I see on TV - read in the paper - or get in the mail are for various Medicare plans. There are tons of them now during open enrollment period. I don't see many ads for hospitals - except ads for local hospitals in the local papers. Guess the companies/providers advertise to get new customers/retain old customers. What's wrong with that? Robyn
...Oh, I did see a young girl w/Sue Herrera, today. She maybe spends $650/yr visiting her neighborhood clinic. Policy under the ACA will cost her $2,100/yr, plus she'll still be stuck with payment for her sick visits - unless Dr. can code these on something under preventive - because her deductible is $2k or something like that. I sympathize with her. I never had any money as a single person. Remember those days very well. At her age, $250/mo. for health care is a budget-buster, probably putting her in the negative. Guessing, she's not earning all that much maybe $60k, if she's lucky - and does live in NY with all the attendant expenses and taxes. Glad I'm not that age and single, anymore. It's not easy. Only time I had any financial cushion was after I married. I do feel for the young people.
Must have been an interview I didn't see. The women I saw were both pretty middle age (40's - early 50's). One was in California - the other in Florida.
Like the line from an old TV show - "there are 8 million stories in the naked city - this has been one of them".
I agree about being young. Many things are much more expensive today - and salaries haven't kept pace. My husband and I lived well on $19k/year in 1971. Today - the equivalent income would be $109k. Robyn
I'm astounded by the TV ads for hospitals and medical insurance companies.
Why are they spending millions of dollars to advertise?
And it's no secret that these advertising costs are then passed on to consumers...
Around here they're selling fear (of penalties) not plan benefits or rates.
It's shameful.
IMO because of our lack of tort reform, doctors pay high premiums for malpractice insurance. Drugs are more expensive in the US than other countries, because we pay for the research and development and also the high cost of overhead of the insurance companies so they can do those piles and piles of paperwork. Unfortunately our Congress is full of lawyers who would never vote for tort reform.
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.
