Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:08 PM
 
33,862 posts, read 16,906,563 times
Reputation: 17135

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
Portability of insurance is of utmost importance to a economy. If people feel they have to stay working at a place for the health insurance - then new innovations and new businesses are not formed and employees are less likely to innovate and take the risks...that end up making our country great.
I have changed jobs and simply moved from one employer coverage to another employer coverage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:15 PM
 
6,790 posts, read 8,184,004 times
Reputation: 6998
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
I like my employer coverage, always have. I would not mind an exchange if the options were strictly private sector and unsubsidized, as well as no gov't mandates on anyone, or rules from gov't on coverages required.

Let the consumer decide, and pay.

Most will wisely prefer employer coverage.
You do realize that taxpayers subsidize your employer based coverage. The unisured end up paying more in taxes so those with employer based coverage can get their benefits tax free. The fact is that millions of Americans do not have coverage through their employer. There are not enough jobs with health benefits to go around but those people still need affordable coverage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:20 PM
 
Location: Sarasota, Fl
809 posts, read 743,344 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by craigiri View Post
Portability of insurance is of utmost importance to a economy. If people feel they have to stay working at a place for the health insurance - then new innovations and new businesses are not formed and employees are less likely to innovate and take the risks...that end up making our country great.
Yup! I wasn't smart enough (in my condition) to navigate COBRA and the world of private insurance circa 2005.

Despite the trouble I had with US healthcare (we have the worst spine care in the civilized world), I emphasized more for my boss. He had a special needs child and that made him a slave to the company.

US healthcare is broken. The ACA was a wobbly first step towards fixing it. And now?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:20 PM
 
33,862 posts, read 16,906,563 times
Reputation: 17135
Quote:
Originally Posted by detshen View Post
You do realize that taxpayers subsidize your employer based coverage. The unisured end up paying more in taxes so those with employer based coverage can get their benefits tax free. The fact is that millions of Americans do not have coverage through their employer. There are not enough jobs with health benefits to go around but those people still need affordable coverage.
Realize it yes? I liked McCain's 2008 idea. Tax it-give a flat $7,500 deduction to singles with coverage, $15k families with coverage, except I think it should be $7,500 per tax return limit.

That would tax Cadillac plan surplus value, and it would stop providing a tax credit to a non-working spouse.

In reality, I think family coverage cost gap should be subject to a gift tax. The non employee folks covered are not benefitting the employer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:46 PM
 
Location: Ohio
24,623 posts, read 19,105,746 times
Reputation: 21738
Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
  1. The USA is the only developed country still without universal health care in some form. 58 countries now have universal health care in some form. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...al_health_care
  2. USA health care costs are considerably more than any other country, and over twice as much as all the 30+ OECD countries how provide health care. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ure_per_capita
  3. All of the 30+ other OECD countries cover all their citizens, and medical bankruptcy is unheard of. The USA has a patchwork of coverage and millions without access still.
  4. Despite the high costs, the USA has poorer outcomes than about 2/3rds of developed countries based on longevity, infant mortality, etc. US health outcomes far worse than other comparable nations, report finds | Fox News
To address point #2, as societies acquire greater wealth, people become less accepting of disease, more aware of health issues and their own health, and more assertive in pursuing good health and living a longer and more enjoyable life.

"As personal income increases, people demand more and better goods and services, including health care. This means that holding other factors constant, as higher personal income increases the quantity and quality of care demanded, overall health care spending increases as well. GDP is a good indicator of the effect of increasing income on health care spending."

Source: United States Government General Accounting Office GAO-13-281 PPACA and the Long-Term Fiscal Outlook, page 33.


To address Point #3, read:
Hearing on “Working Families in Financial Crisis: Medical Debt and Bankruptcyâ€
Tuesday July 17, 2007 1:00 pm
Room 2141 Rayburn House Office Building

GOVERNMENT DOCUMENT NO COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS

Nor is there any evidence that medical bankruptcies are creating any sort of crisis for the bankruptcy system or that the percentage of medical bankruptcies has been rising over time.

A study by Ian Domowitz and Robert Sartain, for instance, find little correlation of medical debt with other sources of financial distress, such as job loss or income interruption.[1] Fay, Hurst, and White find that health problems by the head of a household or spouse that cause missed work are not a statistically significant factor in bankruptcy filings.[2]

[1] Ian Domowitz & Robert L. Sartain, Determinants of the Consumer Bankruptcy Decision, 54 J. Fin. 403, 413 (1999).

[2] Scott Fay et al., The Household Bankruptcy Decision, 92 Am. Econ. Rev. 706, 714 (2002).
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-1...83.htm...which debunks the myth of medical bankruptcies.To address Point #4, and specifically infant mortality, you can see what your own CDC has to say:



Source: US Centers for Disease Control

"If the United States had Sweden’s distribution of births by gestational age, nearly 8,000 infant deaths would be averted each year and the U.S. infant mortality rate would be one-third lower."

Note the cause of the "high" infant mortality rate....

"The main cause of the United States' high infant mortality rate when compared with Europe is the very high percentage of preterm births in the United States."



Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
So what are ALL the reasons the USA has the highest costs by far, significantly poorer health outcomes, while leaving millions without?


Show us the "significantly poorer health outcomes"...



Source: CONCORD Study funded by the US Centers for Disease Control and the British National Health System.

US outcomes are clearly superior to others, especially to the British and their NHS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Midpack View Post
Here's what I gather just as a place to start, in no particular order, but please add as you see fit.
  • lifestyle (obesity, smoking, drugs)
  • high cost and profit for intermediaries (insurance)
  • excessive profit for some product and service providers - medical devices, pharma, hospital groups, doctors & other medical professionals
  • administrative burden (millions of microplans)
  • high charges for specialized services
  • forced use of expensive specialized facilities for routine medical needs (emergency room)
  • multiple regulations around the country
  • punitive legal awards
  • diagnostic overuse (expensive tests even for routine matters)
  • treatment overuse (especially end of life)
  • excessive unproductive labor vs technology
  • plus significantly/ironically, excessive usage by patients who have no idea how much the services are actually costing them
  • almost none of us ever asks "what does it cost?" or makes any attempt to be selective - there is little else we buy without considering the price
You omitted gun violence, automobiles (Americans drive far more miles than their European and Asian counter-parts, placing them at greater risk to injury/death due to accidents), and the fact that the US has a heterogeneous population, unlike the homogeneous populations of the 50-odd countries that have universal care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:54 PM
 
Location: Miami,FL
653 posts, read 813,775 times
Reputation: 735
Bc our government does such a wonderful job running things ::sarcasm:
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:55 PM
 
Location: Miami,FL
653 posts, read 813,775 times
Reputation: 735
Quote:
Originally Posted by wanderlust76 View Post
I would like to see employers taken completely out of the healthcare equation the last thing I want is corporate America involved.
Spoken like a true communist
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:57 PM
 
5,722 posts, read 5,786,399 times
Reputation: 4381
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobNJ1960 View Post
I like my employer coverage, always have. I would not mind an exchange if the options were strictly private sector and unsubsidized, as well as no gov't mandates on anyone, or rules from gov't on coverages required.

Let the consumer decide, and pay.

Most will wisely prefer employer coverage.
Not if healthcare is done properly they won't. Employers shouldn't be involved in the healthcare process.

Employers don't want to put out money for healthcare. The money employers save on healthcare could be put to a more attractive benefits package in other areas such as wages and vacation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 03:58 PM
 
33,862 posts, read 16,906,563 times
Reputation: 17135
Quote:
Originally Posted by maverick5575 View Post
Spoken like a true communist
amen
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2017, 04:41 PM
 
18,794 posts, read 8,420,430 times
Reputation: 4125
Some thoughts on this:

http://www.arnoldkling.com/blog/the-...e-policy-mess/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:25 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top