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.
Could you please tell me how your health needs are NOT dictated by the CEO's and underwriters of the private health companies?
Well, first of all, you didn't specify "health needs" - you said:
Quote:
How can you say that you decide your own fate, when your fate is in the hands of CEO's and company Directors.
But I'll respond to your changed statement anyway.
An insurance policy is a contract - it's not some blanket guarantee that whatever bad things that might happen to you in the future will be magically reversed by showing up at a hospital. It's a contract. The conditions of the contract are spelled out in that contract. Terms such as "experimental" and "elective" are defined. You sign on the dotted line, and pay the premium that you agreed to pay, as specified in that contract.
It's not rocket science, geeoro.
If you don't agree with the terms of the contract, you don't have to accept and pay for it. There's PLENTY of insurers around, and you have an amazing selection of choices when it comes to what you want covered, the cost of a copayment or coinsurance, etc.
The one thing that would reduce the cost of health care more than anything else is the reduction or elimination of the staggering damage awards in malpractice lawsuits. In Chicago, before they passed the tort reform laws recently, an OB/GYN was forced to pay $200,000 per year JUST for malpractice insurance. IIRC, it dropped to about half that - still a very unreasonable amount - after the tort reform laws took effect.
There are a number of things that could be done to reduce the cost of health care - and none of them include having the government getting into the insurance business.
You are right Swagger, Private health care is a contract. It carries all the obligations and Dictates of a contract. Depending on how much you can or will pay decides how much or how little cover you get. This is decided by the actuaries who calculate how much risk you present of them having to pay out for treatment. You are governed by THEIR rules and deviation from these rules will lead to breach of contract and probably no treatment funded by them. THEY decide whether you get health cover or treatment or if you are not going to get treatment due to pre existing conditions. It is ALL in their hands. A UHC is a comitment from the health service that they will provide you with health cover and treatment that is free at point of service. You cannot be barred from treatment or health care no matter what your earnings or state of health. YOU decide what doctor you see and you decide if you want to go ahead with treatment or not. As you can see, you are NOT in control of your health cover with a private insurance scheme, They set the rules and YOU follow them. In a UHC, there are NO rules and you will recieve good health care 24/7 at a very low payment or even no payment at all. Guess which one is in YOUR hands?
You are right Swagger, Private health care is a contract. It carries all the obligations and Dictates of a contract. Depending on how much you can or will pay decides how much or how little cover you get. This is decided by the actuaries who calculate how much risk you present of them having to pay out for treatment.
You're right so far.
Quote:
You are governed by THEIR rules and deviation from these rules will lead to breach of contract and probably no treatment funded by them. THEY decide whether you get health cover or treatment or if you are not going to get treatment due to pre existing conditions. It is ALL in their hands.
It's not all in their hands - it's all in the contract.
Quote:
you are NOT in control of your health cover with a private insurance scheme
Yes I am.
Quote:
In a UHC, there are NO rules and you will recieve good health care 24/7 at a very low payment or even no payment at all.
You're living in a fantasy world if you think that any UHC system provides service "at a very low payment or even no payment at all."
Quoting the Founding Fathers in regard to Healthcare is outrageous. If you want your health care needs to be governed by 17th Century ideals,
I think you mean 18th century ideals. The Founding Fathers created this country in the 1700s, which would be the 18th century. Just like the last century, the 1900s, was the 20th century.
Sorry i meant the 18th Century.
You're living in a fantasy world if you think that any UHC system provides service "at a very low payment or even no payment at all."
Considering that i have used a UHC all my life that is cheap and efficient and used by everyone whether they pay tax or not. Even my Stepdaughter when she visited me in the UK was seen by an english Doctor and prescribed Anti-Biotics, all free.
Do you really think that in the UK people go to see the Doctor more than they need to?
That link was about the French system not the UK's. People over consuming health services in France and the effects on costs are starting to catch up with their system. The French system has become a very expensive system and folks over consuming free healthcare services is part of the problem.
Quote:
"But," he said, "I see this every day. People come to ask me to carry out tests and they have already had the same tests somewhere else." How many of his patients sometimes behave in this way? Eighty per cent maybe...
Time to step on board for UHC, the ship passes in november. I only vote democrat once every 16 years, hope it produces the desired UHC this time. Geeoro can argue UHC better than me, and gets a rep earlier in the thread.
Even my Stepdaughter when she visited me in the UK was seen by an english Doctor and prescribed Anti-Biotics, all free.[/color]
No it wasn't.
Maybe you're content with unbelievably high tax rates. I'm not. What's VAT these days, anyway? Around 18% or so for the UK? How about fuel tax? Two bucks per gallon sound about right?
If you think that doctor visit or those antibiotics were free, you've been completely bamboozled.
I understand that there can be and are some positive aspects to the UHC system in some countries, but I don't believe it's OUR federal government's job to FORCE it on the states or the citizenry, nor do I believe they could do it efficiently if they tried. You, on the other hand, seem to believe that every UHC is a utopia where everything's "free", there's no lines, nobody's being rejected, etc., and for some reason, you think you have enough knowledge not only on that subject, but on OUR history and beliefs to be able to suggest that we should implement it, simply because you grew up with it.
Sorry, but it doesn't work that way.
How would you feel if I suggested that the UK should implement a 2nd Amendment style right to bear arms? Everyone who's not a convicted violent felon should be permitted to buy and carry a handgun - your country is crazy for not having such a law, and you absolutely must implement it now, or be seen as a fascist state.
Over the last few decades, Europe and North America has had a relatively booming economy which has let many enjoy a free ride and to pay for inflated health services in posh surroundings. Fancy hospitals were staffed with expensive bloated administration and unnecessary tests and procedures (driven by lawsuits and political correctness) were the norm.
It was okay when someone else is paying the bills. Somehow it became the obligation of employers in both the private and especially the public sectors to pay and pay and pay. No one cares how much it costs if they don't personally pay.
Now, both the private and UHS systems are in trouble now as we are now realizing that the cost of the level of medical care might not be worth it.
Like the housing bubble, too much money flowing into healthcare has driven up the costs. During the housing bubble, which even Greenspan denied existed until just recently, we were all convinced that we needed 3000 square feet and granite countertops in order to live. We could do well and afford better a much more humble and lifestyle.
In this healthcare bubble, we are convinced that a Mayo clinic needs to be within walking distance of Starbucks and Baskin Robbins. We might be better served if we had smaller and more humble clinics to provide preventative care. This bubble should also be allowed to pop.
Last edited by Bob The Builder; 09-17-2008 at 01:08 AM..
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.
