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.
"The implications of a bend in the cost curve would be enormous. Policy makers on both sides of the aisle see rising health care costs as the central threat to household budgets and the country’s fiscal health. If the growth in Medicare were to come down to a rate of only 1 percentage point a year faster than the economy’s growth, the projected long-term deficit would fall by more than one-third"
"The implications of a bend in the cost curve would be enormous. Policy makers on both sides of the aisle see rising health care costs as the central threat to household budgets and the country’s fiscal health. If the growth in Medicare were to come down to a rate of only 1 percentage point a year faster than the economy’s growth, the projected long-term deficit would fall by more than one-third"
And to piggyback onto that thought....most of our health care spending goes to treat diseases that can be delayed for many years or completely prevented through living healthier lifestyles:
We don't need to wait around for the government to do something. We can start to take control right here, right now by eating decent, non-processed foods, not smoking or drinking to excess, and by getting some exercise.
If Medicare grew only 1 percent faster than the economy growth... what is the economy growth rate? Is that GDP or something else? Sometimes GDP is negative, how does Medicare growth rate go negative? Even then it only saves 1/3 of the deficit... so basically, that isn't the solution but lets talk about it?
I think the point is that any slow down in the growth rate of Medicare (an enormous expenditure) would have a disproportionate and substantial impact on our nations deficit. Which leads me to two thoughts: 1) There is a huge "bang for the buck" in lowering Medicare costs. 2) The projected long term deficit could potentially be far from accurate.
If Medicare grew only 1 percent faster than the economy growth... what is the economy growth rate? Is that GDP or something else? Sometimes GDP is negative, how does Medicare growth rate go negative? Even then it only saves 1/3 of the deficit... so basically, that isn't the solution but lets talk about it?
There is no single solution that's going to fix the deficit, but Medicare will have to be a part of it. The good news is that it's doable. We know our health care system is bloated and inefficient. We also know our unhealthy lifestyles are driving up costs. The hard part is getting people both inside and outside the health care system to change their behavior.
We also know our unhealthy lifestyles are driving up costs.
Mostly BS. The people with poor lifestyles choices tend to die sooner.
This SHOULD bring their overall costs DOWN. It mostly still does.
Making policy choices about how we do "end of life" is the open ended question.
Quote:
We know our health care system is bloated and inefficient.
The single largest aspect of bloat is the terminology used.
The actual year to year expense for our medical (and dental) care is a) affordable and b) budgetable for most working people and without any sort of insurance to back them up. A modest policy akin to home or auto insurance to smooth out the once in ten year hiccup to that budget is all most will ever need.
What people do need insurance for (and few can afford) are the costs for all the OTHER expenses that get lumped into the abyss called the "health care system" principally the end of life, the traumatic and the catastrophic.
Of note... no aspect of those three categories can be afforded by any individual. Period.
We need a 100% participation actuarial pool for these even if we do rein in the "standards of care".
The United States could bring in price controls on drugs, basically legislate that drugs can't be sold for more than the median price they're sold for in a selection of other first world industrialized nation states. They could also choose to have medicare pay only the full cost of generic drugs, and if people want the brand they could just pay the generic cost and have the consumer pay the difference. These two things alone would save trillions over the next several decades.
And to piggyback onto that thought....most of our health care spending goes to treat diseases that can be delayed for many years or completely prevented through living healthier lifestyles:
We don't need to wait around for the government to do something. We can start to take control right here, right now by eating decent, non-processed foods, not smoking or drinking to excess, and by getting some exercise.
and those who don't, should be charged more and be liable for their own lazy selves. Where I live, we are all charged the same rate. Insurance companies can't base your plan off your lifestyle or health. Changing in 2014 though.
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.
