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 just read an article by Fareed Zakaria in Time that we spend by far the most money on health care (17% of GDP) of any advanced country. Some, such as Taiwan, spend much less (7%), and most others come in about 11-12%. By most measures, we have the most uinsured, among the highest infant mortality rates, lowest life spans, and highest diabetes rates of any of our peers, etc.
I get that people hate ObamaCare, but the status quo stinks. We pay far to much for far too little. It is clearly not good for people or business. American businesses must try to compete, while shouldering a burden that no other advanced nation demands of its companies. Have conservatives been duped into supporting the interests of the health insurance lobby? That is the only thing I can figure.
Or perhaps it is antigovernment sentiment. Like the military, health care is something that is too important to our unity and strength to be privatized. The drive for profit will victimize the most vulnerable, tossing them out precisely when they need help most. It is the sort of situation that requires ethics and generosity as much as enterprise, something government was invented to help with.
There is onyl one way and that is by managing it. Like anyhtig else if the person does have ski i the game they will abuse it. Kind of reminds me of when my employers insruqance started apyig 100% of emergency room treatemnt. It wasn't long before people started going to emergency room for colds. No skin in the game and its abused by a large number.Greed isn't just a wall street thing.
I just read an article by Fareed Zakaria in Time that we spend by far the most money on health care (17% of GDP) of any advanced country. Some, such as Taiwan, spend much less (7%), and most others come in about 11-12%. By most measures, we have the most uinsured, among the highest infant mortality rates, lowest life spans, and highest diabetes rates of any of our peers, etc.
I get that people hate ObamaCare, but the status quo stinks. We pay far to much for far too little. It is clearly not good for people or business. American businesses must try to compete, while shouldering a burden that no other advanced nation demands of its companies. Have conservatives been duped into supporting the interests of the health insurance lobby? That is the only thing I can figure.
Or perhaps it is antigovernment sentiment. Like the military, health care is something that is too important to our unity and strength to be privatized. The drive for profit will victimize the most vulnerable, tossing them out precisely when they need help most. It is the sort of situation that requires ethics and generosity as much as enterprise, something government was invented to help with.
You have to make those who require medical care active participants in controlling costs.
HSAs are a good way to go.
The consumer has to have some skin in the game.
Third party payer is the worst model and making government that third party with its ability to accumulate endless debt is reckless.
This is like the third post asking how to control health care costs this week. Seriously, while all of you brain dead liberals were lapping up Obamacare, the conservatives gave MANY suggestions on just how to do that. Conservative suggestions were ignored en masse and now we're left with a financial albatross (Obamacare) AND still no cost controls.
You have to make those who require medical care active participants in controlling costs.
HSAs are a good way to go.
The consumer has to have some skin in the game.
Yeah right. "They're having a sale on stents at St. Mary's."
Medical care is complicated and we can't expect lay-persons to participate in technical medical matters that may cut costs. An untrained person has no good way to evaluate whether one needs a particular test or procedure or not.
We really don't have to bang our heads against the wall nor re-invent the wheel. Our friends in Europe have already found ways to reduce the costs to half of ours, while delivering better medical results and covering all their citizens.
I just read an article by Fareed Zakaria in Time that we spend by far the most money on health care (17% of GDP) of any advanced country. Some, such as Taiwan, spend much less (7%), and most others come in about 11-12%. By most measures, we have the most uinsured, among the highest infant mortality rates, lowest life spans, and highest diabetes rates of any of our peers, etc.
I get that people hate ObamaCare, but the status quo stinks. We pay far to much for far too little. It is clearly not good for people or business. American businesses must try to compete, while shouldering a burden that no other advanced nation demands of its companies. Have conservatives been duped into supporting the interests of the health insurance lobby? That is the only thing I can figure.
Or perhaps it is antigovernment sentiment. Like the military, health care is something that is too important to our unity and strength to be privatized. The drive for profit will victimize the most vulnerable, tossing them out precisely when they need help most. It is the sort of situation that requires ethics and generosity as much as enterprise, something government was invented to help with.
Government was not invented to help with anything outside of a few very specific and Constitutionally limited roles. Government has a long and well established history of destroying everything it touches while making it substantially more expensive and impressively less efficient than even the most poorly implemented private sector efforts.
You're on quite the left wing propaganda roll this weekend. Did your handlers chastise you for not being prolific enough in your efforts to promote more and bigger government?
This is like the third post asking how to control health care costs this week. Seriously, while all of you brain dead liberals were lapping up Obamacare, the conservatives gave MANY suggestions on just how to do that. Conservative suggestions were ignored en masse and now we're left with a financial albatross (Obamacare) AND still no cost controls.
Can you provide some examples?
If I recall from the Zakaria, Taiwan has single payer at 7% of GDP, and Switzerland has an individual mandate system at ~12% of GDP. Both are pretty similar to us politically. My recollection is that ObamaCare is pretty similar to the proposal put forward by the GOP in the 1990s. Why the outrage?
I agree with those who say skin in the game is important. I think you need to feel some of the pain.
Government was not invented to help with anything outside of a few very specific and Constitutionally limited roles. Government has a long and well established history of destroying everything it touches while making it substantially more expensive and impressively less efficient than even the most poorly implemented private sector efforts.
You're on quite the left wing propaganda roll this weekend. Did your handlers chastise you for not being prolific enough in your efforts to promote more and bigger government?
It is an annoying habit of politicians and activists on the right to loudly denounce almost anything they don’t like as “unconstitutional” — including progressive taxes, civil rights statutes, environmental protections, and now healthcare reform. So Republican lawyers and attorneys general around the country are preparing challenges to the healthcare reform bill on constitutional grounds, perhaps hoping that a Supreme Court majority will strike down the legislation with the same flagrant disdain for legal precedent and democratic order displayed in Bush v. Gore.
Along those lines, one of the favorite complaints against the healthcare reform bill is that the founding document doesn’t permit the federal government to order anyone to buy a product or service. That supposedly renders illegitimate the individual insurance mandate that is part of the bill.
As every fervent advocate of gun rights ought to know, however, that argument suffers from a glaring historical flaw. Only a few years after the nation’s Founding Fathers ratified the Constitution, Congress approved the Militia Act of 1792, which was duly signed by George Washington, then the president and commander in chief.
Establishing state militias and a national standard for their operation, the Militia Act explicitly required every “free able-bodied white male citizen” between the ages of 18 and 45, with a few occupational exceptions, to “provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch and powder horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder..”
Within six months, every citizen enrolled and notified of his required militia service had to equip himself as specified above. There was spirited debate in Congress as to whether the state ought to subsidize the purchase of arms for men too poor to afford their own, so that everyone could serve his country. Subsidized or not, however, the founders saw no constitutional barrier to a law ordering every citizen to buy a gun and ammo.
Quotations and facsimiles of the Militia Act can be found on hundreds of right-wing blogs, of course, where it is often cited to demonstrate that the founders would have despised gun control. Few if any of these Second Amendment zealots seem to have realized yet how ironic it is for them to quote this venerable statute alongside their anguished protests against the constitutional validity of any federal mandate.
The reality is that we require our governments to do lots of things in 2012 that were not envisioned in 1789 -- and that's a good thing.
I just read an article by Fareed Zakaria in Time that we spend by far the most money on health care (17% of GDP) of any advanced country. Some, such as Taiwan, spend much less (7%), and most others come in about 11-12%. By most measures, we have the most uinsured, among the highest infant mortality rates, lowest life spans, and highest diabetes rates of any of our peers, etc.
I get that people hate ObamaCare, but the status quo stinks. We pay far to much for far too little. It is clearly not good for people or business. American businesses must try to compete, while shouldering a burden that no other advanced nation demands of its companies. Have conservatives been duped into supporting the interests of the health insurance lobby? That is the only thing I can figure.
Or perhaps it is antigovernment sentiment. Like the military, health care is something that is too important to our unity and strength to be privatized. The drive for profit will victimize the most vulnerable, tossing them out precisely when they need help most. It is the sort of situation that requires ethics and generosity as much as enterprise, something government was invented to help with.
I have two main thoughts on this.
First is, we don't have a true free market in health care. We have a horrible hybrid of government socialism and a private sector CARTEL. So we have two failed models (cartel-ism vs government socialism) being presented to us as our only two choices. A true free market health care system would not have employer sponsored insurance involved at all. People would buy their own insurance in a free and competitive (but regulated) market. Insurance shouldn't cover everyday expenses, as this only drives up the cost of health care and health insurance. I once read an article a few years ago that mentioned cosmetic surgery costs typically go up at the general rate of inflation, while other health care costs go up at double the general rate of inflation. The reason? Cosmetic surgery is a cash business and insurance generally isn't involved. In economic terms, plastic surgery more closely approximates a true free market than the rest of health care.
Since you are an intelligent and open minded person, Fiddlehead, I highly recommend reading:
My second thought is that despite the dysfunctional way health care is done, there are ways for ordinary people to start taking more control of their lives. It's called: eating a plant based diet, full of fruits, veggies, nuts & grains, with meat playing only a minor role and minimal or no processed foods.
According to this article:
36% of cancer is completely preventable
81% of heart disease is completely prevenable
93% of diabetes is completely preventable
Pretty much every culture that has the above mentioned diet expieriences almost none of the diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, obesity, and somewhat less of the cancer that we have in America.
It turns out that in cultures where people live the longest, great high tech health care doensn't play a major role. The things that do? Lifestyles that include regular moderate exercise, plant based diets, regular spiritual practice, and a general sense of community. See The Blue Zones for more:
In theory, a non profit moviated government would do everything it could to promote preventative medicine and healthier lifestyles....but since our government is corrupt and bought and paid for by the medical industry (amongst others), I really don't see that happening. We, the people, are going to have to take matters into our own hands and stop waiting around for some mysterious "other" to rescue us from high health care costs.
Last edited by mysticaltyger; 03-18-2012 at 02:45 PM..
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.
