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.
Anybody in the high risk pool would be greatest consumer of health care sources. Private businesses don’t want greatest consumers, they want greatest profits. I think maintaining that distinction is important. Having said that, do you think republicans should push for killing all government run health care programs and let the free market take over?
Of course, as a private business I want the greatest consumers. The more health care people consume the more I make.
I think Republicans should push for health care reform that returns decision making about the consumption of health care to the consumer. Again the disconnect between the consumer of health care and the payers of health care drive prices up.
Anytime such argument is placed, I'm reminded of a quote by Adam Smith:
"But whoever imagines, upon this account, that masters rarely combine, is as ignorant of the world as of the subject."
While that quotation speaks of the need for a balance between the owner and the workers (union), but the idea applies very much in this context where it is assumed that businesses would be willing to give in to lower costs, while agreeing to accept lower profits. Seniors are not a profit-generating opportunity to begin with.
But there is a bigger problem. Had democrats proposed such measures, people like you would be complaining about government control over life of senior citizens that it would decide how much their lives cost. And that bureaucrats would decide how much to include in the voucher. After all, didn't you all see a $500 billion in cost savings as a government's way to health care rationing?
How about this idea for republicans, considering that they firmly adhere to the idea that government should not dictate anything... propose getting rid of medicare, and VA, and every federal insurance program, and let private companies handle them all. It would work well for all, with millions running around for health care right?
You would think that since insurance companies want more businesses and must compete, they wouldn't deny basic coverage to a lot of Americans in the high risk pool (that would include all elderly).
How about this idea :
get rid of all insurance and subsidies ...completly
go to the doctor,, recieve the service..then pay for the service rendered....its really simple
bet the COSTS would go down dramaticly
government and insurance only push the costs higher
get rid of the government and insurance from medicine...period
Republican Paul Ryan, now chairman of the House budget committee, supports rationing health care for US seniors. His plan to voucherize Medicare is the classic example of rationing care. Under his plan the government would only give seniors a voucher for a certain amount of money and any extra cost would be paid by senior citizens themselves. His plan is to slowly shrink Medicare voucher checks over time leaving senior citizens left to pay more and more for health care.
Why does Paul Ryan and the Republicans want to pull the plug on grandma?
Obama already took over half a trillion out of medicare.
There is no money and we borrowed away the next thrity years already.
How fat is your wallet, because nothing stops you from donating to senior charities now.
As far as the rest goes, there is no money, so what is your plan?
Of course, as a private business I want the greatest consumers. The more health care people consume the more I make.
I think Republicans should push for health care reform that returns decision making about the consumption of health care to the consumer. Again the disconnect between the consumer of health care and the payers of health care drive prices up.
I'm not sure that the most consumers have the knowledge or expertise to make informed decisions about their consumption. They are, to a large extent dependent on the expertise of the health care provider and he/she has a vested interest in maximizing consumption.
Of course, as a private business I want the greatest consumers. The more health care people consume the more I make.
So do I (considering that I deal with health care also). But, that is not in the best interest of health insurance (or any insurance), however. A drug company would like more people on medicines, a physician would like more patients but a health insurance company doesn't like more claims. That is the difference I spoke of early. Greater consumption is antithesis to an insurance business model.
Quote:
I think Republicans should push for health care reform that returns decision making about the consumption of health care to the consumer. Again the disconnect between the consumer of health care and the payers of health care drive prices up.
In other words, you like the idea of government run programs. You see a need for such programs. You just don't want government to be able to tell the providers and administrators it must deal with, what they can or cannot do.
Seeing the free marketeer in you, I would have assumed your opposition to anything government run. Yet, I don't see that.
I'm not sure that the most consumers have the knowledge or expertise to make informed decisions about their consumption. They are, to a large extent dependent on the expertise of the health care provider and he/she has a vested interest in maximizing consumption.
And this really is the crux of the problem and the fundamental difference in the way the left and right view people. The left view people as not as smart as them and in need of their guidence and protection. The right views people as perfectly capable of making rational decisions for themselves.
Under our current system, people are at the mercy of payers who would rather not pay and have a vested interest in minimizing consumption. And this situation will be accelerated by Obamacare.
Obama already took over half a trillion out of medicare.
There is no money and we borrowed away the next thrity years already.
How fat is your wallet, because nothing stops you from donating to senior charities now.
As far as the rest goes, there is no money, so what is your plan?
So, it is okay to sneer, and villify, at any cost savings on Medicare. Or as many of the amusing elderly tea partiers illustrated... "keep government off my medicare".
So, inevitable medicare cost debacle is a non-issue to the fiscal conservatives (or those who pose as such). In fact, they would rather add $311 billion to the cost that the voucher program, as recommended by Paul Ryan, an estimate provided by the same guy (Rick Foster, Medicare Chief Actuary) who conservatives are using as a pawn. Interesting.
Oh, and I also thought conservatives were opposed to deficit spending. How do they plan on financing $311B?
So do I (considering that I deal with health care also). But, that is not in the best interest of health insurance (or any insurance), however. A drug company would like more people on medicines, a physician would like more patients but a health insurance company doesn't like more claims. That is the difference I spoke of early. Greater consumption is antithesis to an insurance business model.
Insurance companies would charge more for high risk consumers as they do with auto insurance but there would be downward pressure on their prices due to competition.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
In other words, you like the idea of government run programs. You see a need for such programs. You just don't want government to be able to tell the providers and administrators it must deal with, what they can or cannot do.
Not exactly. I do not like the idea of government run programs. I do see that we have to continue them, at least for the short term, because people of a certain age have arranged their finances around how the game is set up. I would prefer the option to opt out for younger people.
For the time when we would have to have government run programs I would like them organized as you describe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Seeing the free marketeer in you, I would have assumed your opposition to anything government run. Yet, I don't see that.
See above.
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.
