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.
Wrong, most Republicans and the rest of us fiscal conservatives are concerned but feel that the government should be the last entity that the doctors, hospitals, and other healthcare providers should be working for.
Wrong? When did I say that healthcare should be socialized? Where are you coming up with this?
All I said was that the GOP doesn't seem concerned enough about the state of healthcare in the US. Not that the government should be in the healthcare business. I believe we can reform our heavily-regulated and bizarre healthcare system without socializing it.
Wrong? When did I say that healthcare should be socialized? Where are you coming up with this?
All I said was that the GOP doesn't seem concerned enough about the state of healthcare in the US. Not that the government should be in the healthcare business. I believe we can reform our heavily-regulated and bizarre healthcare system without socializing it.
I didn't post that you support socialized healthcare. However, you made the comment that Reps aren't concerned. Why would you make that statement? They're concerned, as am I, but the best solution is to let the free market take care of it. Non-action by the government is GOOD.
However, you made the comment that Reps aren't concerned. Why would you make that statement? They're concerned, as am I, but the best solution is to let the free market take care of it. Non-action by the government is GOOD.
Why did I make that statement?
I made that statement because I think that our healthcare system is unacceptably expensive for everyone, not just the indigent. I think that some change is needed, and it needs to come on multiple fronts.
The GOP's concern amounts to little, without a policy to back it up. While I strongly oppose the "solutions" I see that the Democratic presidential candidates are proposing, I don't see any good ideas by the Republicans, either.
By the way, this thread will be probably be transferred to the General US forum.//Unquote
Well, I found it in one of the state forums and had a hard time deciding where it belonged. But since the need for national health care may be part of the topic, IMHO this was a good place for it.
I didn't post that you support socialized healthcare. However, you made the comment that Reps aren't concerned. Why would you make that statement? They're concerned, as am I, but the best solution is to let the free market take care of it. Non-action by the government is GOOD.
The free market HAS had the reins of the health care in the US all along... and look at the mess it has heaped itself in! Greedy CEOs, greedy pharm. companies, greedy HMOs. Poor to mediocre care at an outragious price while millions go without care whats so ever. How much more can the American person and family take before the free market "takes care of" our issues?
What we're doing now isn't working. The Dems seem at least a little concerned that a change needs to be made, but I don't necessarily agree with what they have proposed. But... at least they are giving me something to look at.
I didn't post that you support socialized healthcare. However, you made the comment that Reps aren't concerned. Why would you make that statement? They're concerned, as am I, but the best solution is to let the free market take care of it. Non-action by the government is GOOD.
let the free market "take care" of health care? so no more medicare, medicaid, county, or va hospitals? the sick get penalized with exorbitant premiums and the poor get no health care at all? income for ceos, actuaries, medical billers, lawyers, accountants etc takes a chunk of our medical care costs even though those people have nothing to do with the actual provision of medical care?
sounds to me like the free market only "takes care" of the healthy and wealthy. that explains its political success, but makes it far from a good idea if you believe in health care as a basic right.
The free market HAS had the reins of the health care in the US all along... and look at the mess it has heaped itself in! Greedy CEOs, greedy pharm. companies, greedy HMOs. Poor to mediocre care at an outragious price while millions go without care whats so ever. How much more can the American person and family take before the free market "takes care of" our issues?
If you read the prior correspondence in the thread, you'll see where 40-60% (depending on how you look at it) of the overall cost of healthcare in the US is paid for by taxpayers. I wouldn't exactly call that the "free market".
This is not a battle of poor V rich, people who have insurance and had money are being wiped out due to a major illness that insurance does not cover fully or denies.
Currently, many ins. co. do not consider bone marrow transplant to be medically necessary. This is not a rich person or poor person disease, anyone could suffer from this. What I want is for people to realize that your insurance is not going to be there if you get too sick! And uninsured are not the reason your insurance costs go up, they don't pay for the uninsured! When was the last time you were addmitted to a hospital or dr's office and treated without them asking you first how you were going to pay? Has anyone see the Discover commercial with the guy on the operating table wait for his credit card to go through while the doctors wait? This is not far from the truth. I an uninsured, my husband needed gallbladder surgery, I had to put the bill on two cards before they would schedule the surgery. We are not poor, I just can't get insurance.
[quote=jhlcomp;1122908]You've raised the question of the century. ...
Let's address the multi-tiered service system. My health insurance is through the government, specfically Mutual of Omaha (which is changng effective January) we are with Beech Street network and then it trickles down from there. Why does health care require all these layers? I know I am not addressing a solution to your question, but trying to get a better understanding why we need so many layers. QUOTE]
The layers you refer to were first introduced in the late 80's early 90' and started with managed care. You see, the insurance company was to become the watch dog for the bad doctors who were over-charging your insurance company and that is why your premiums were increasing. (RIIIGHT) So in steps an hired nurse or MD under manage care companies, who in turn are the go between the provider(your doctor) and the insurance company. These managed care groups were then given the power to determine if the care you were getting was "medically necessary". This term was introduced to give the public that the MD's were treating there patients with tests that were not needed to make more money. ( Mind you not all Doctors practiced this way) Now medically necessary is tossed around to mean anything from "No you do not need that cancer treatment; No you do not need that liver transplant" you get the picture. So Beech Street is the managed care for your Mutual of Omaha, Beech Street will also enter into other managed care systems due to other areas of employers, or join with other companies to gain more customers. The levels begin to become a web, so when you provider calls to verify your insurance, we have to go through many levels to get to the person we think is making the decisions. This is were is gets fun, cause a provider and call your ins., be told how your benefits are to be handled, and then the provider finds out that they were mis-informed sometime up to 60 days later when we get the benefits notice denial. Then we get to tell the patient that the bill is now theirs, and who are they mad at, the Dr. Insurance companies have a recorded message that the benefit quotes they give us over the phone are not a guarantee to payment.
No our country is not in an health care crisis, and this is just a tip off of one ice burg.
As anonymous correctly pointed out, the healthcare industry is not a "free market". Just ask those who spend exorbitant salaries to hire help just to conform to governmental regulations.
No, I do NOT consider healthcare a basic right. If only the wealthy can afford healthcare, then the solution is to become wealthy, at least wealthy enough. The poor DOES have access to healthcare, thus the reason healthcare has become so expensive. They only cannot afford insurance, so they must pay as they go. Get an education, make yourself marketable, and conform to the American culture so that you can get a good-paying job, so that you can afford either insurance or can afford to pay-as-you-go.
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.
How much longer should the free market have?!
