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.
The bottom line is that the current health care system needs a reform, in can not continue on this way. If you have over 40 million people without insurance, that is unacceptable. And in the end you will be subsidizing the people without insurance anyway, through extra fees and higher prices the hospitals and doctors charge those that do have insurance and can pay. Does anyone believe they just "eat" it? Of course it is passed on to the rest of us.
Most likely there is no PERFECT health care system, but what we have right now is unacceptable. There should be a task force examining the health care systems out there and construct a system that would work best for the US.
We had that during the first Clinton administration; Hillary was in charge. She failed, miserably, and not entirely due to her own shortcomings.
I agree that we need to overhaul the system. My fear is that we will end up with something worse than what we started with.
We had that during the first Clinton administration; Hillary was in charge. She failed, miserably, and not entirely due to her own shortcomings.
I agree that we need to overhaul the system. My fear is that we will end up with something worse than what we started with.
I remember that all too well. They just need to start again and have a big panel of HEALTH CARE EXPERTS, not politicians that are corporate mouthpieces and have the interest of the wellbeing of corporations - not people. When it comes to healthcare, people must come before profits.
The bottom line is that the current health care system needs a reform, in can not continue on this way. If you have over 40 million people without insurance, that is unacceptable. And in the end you will be subsidizing the people without insurance anyway, through extra fees and higher prices the hospitals and doctors charge those that do have insurance and can pay. Does anyone believe they just "eat" it? Of course it is passed on to the rest of us.
I have previously written about this so, forgive me for repeating this -
I have forwarded the following to my Congressional representatives and several have asked me to followup with their staff regarding my suggestions (which I have)
84% of Americans DO have health insurance
We do not need to change the entire system for the other 16% who do not.
A significant number of the 16% who do not have insurance VOLUNTARILY choose not to have it - some for religious reasons - some for "whatever" reason but, they can actually afford it - they just do not have it. There are some estimates that this is as high as 4% of those without insurance.
As for the others, utilitze existing and in place systems, such as medicaid (not medicare) and use a "needs based" formula.
Create a new classification of insurance pools - and remove the pre-existing condition exemption -
Allow insurance companies to sell health insurance ACROSS STATE LINES (which they cannot do now)
For those who fall below a certain income line (and this can be graduated as is now done) the Federal Government will provide a GRANT - for example purposes only, say that a PRIVATE (for profit) company offers a policy for $500 a month time 12 months = $6000 - this would be the grant - made out to the insurance company for the years premium.
What is accomplished is:
A) You get those uninsured (or under insured) covered
B) You created a new pool for insurance companies to compete for
C) You keep the government out of the insurance business
D) The cost savings (to the government would be astronomical)
Certain reforms would have to be done:
1) Limit the pre-existing condition exemptions
2) Allow groups (professional type organizations) to create existing insurance pools - there is a bill in the Congress right now to do it - Democratic leadership will not allow it to come to a full vote in the Senate
3) Put some caps on PUNITIVE damage awards
4) Expand the HSA provisions
Wonder how many the 84% of the people that do have healthinsurance are underinsured. This is something you won't know until it is too late. A lot of the people that end up filing for bancruptcy file because of medical bills and quite a number of them had insurance, that is scary!
More people would probably participate in HSA's if you wouldn't lose your money, if you end up not using it. Basically that is stealing your money. They should tax you on the money and give you what you did not use or better yet - it should sit in the account until you do need it. It is often very hard to estimate one's health costs for the coming year. Accidents happen, or things just crop up such as back pain, dental problems etc.
I do agree there should be caps on punitive damages, within reason. Americans are very sue-happy and oftentimes I just shake my head.
Overall I am very unhappy with the system, because despite having insurance, why should it take 1 1/2 years to be reimbursed for a bill, which happened to us recently... and it looks like it will happen again. My husband called the insurance company and double checked to whom he should submit a claim. I sent it with delivery confirmation to the insurance company. Waited 8 weeks, called the company, they claim they never received it. Post office says otherwise. So we have to waste our time again, send everything again and make follow up phone calls. This is for our one and only piddly claim this year. It seems to me that the insurance companies are making as much money as they are, because they make it has hard as humanly possible to collect any money from them, and I am totally fed up with them. Never once did I experience this in the 29 years I lived in Germany. The health insurance companies over here, however have NEVER had a problem taking my money.....ok, end of rant :-)
Wonder how many the 84% of the people that do have healthinsurance are underinsured. This is something you won't know until it is too late. A lot of the people that end up filing for bancruptcy file because of medical bills and quite a number of them had insurance, that is scary!
More people would probably participate in HSA's if you wouldn't lose your money, if you end up not using it. Basically that is stealing your money. They should tax you on the money and give you what you did not use or better yet - it should sit in the account until you do need it. It is often very hard to estimate one's health costs for the coming year. Accidents happen, or things just crop up such as back pain, dental problems etc.
I do agree there should be caps on punitive damages, within reason. Americans are very sue-happy and oftentimes I just shake my head.
First off, I have never considered health insurance for "day to day" - only catastrophic.
I have, in my LONG live, never experienced a real problem with the insurance companies I have had, in paying a claim or paying a re-imbursement
HSA are tax free. You don't lose it. It is there to pay for those things (like the day to day or glasses etc) that you obtain. HSA reform would be very easy.
As I noted, two MAJOR changes that are needed (and one in particular WILL REDUCE PREMIUMS) - allow insurance companies to sell across state lines (this will spead the risk model and reduce premiums) - right now, all health insurance sales are state regulated - not federal. The other - allow professional organizations, to create insurance pools, would, if passed, allow some 15 million (estimate) Americans to access affordable health insurance - yet, the leadership in Congress (Senate) will not allow this to come to a full vote of the Senate).
In other words, there are a number of things that can be done to make health insurance more readily avialable and more affordable WITHOUT changing the entire system to one of a government run system
As an aside, and I have also posted this previously, we are seeing more and more Doctors discontinuing taking insurance - and still maintaining their patient loads. And, the one common denominator? Their costs come down -
[quote=Greatday;1945068]First off, I have never considered health insurance for "day to day" - only catastrophic.
I have, in my LONG live, never experienced a real problem with the insurance companies I have had, in paying a claim or paying a re-imbursement
Well, you are very lucky... I will post a link - this is very common from what i have read.
HSA are tax free. You don't lose it. It is there to pay for those things (like the day to day or glasses etc) that you obtain. HSA reform would be very easy.
We were talking about two different typse of accounts... I was talking about Flexible Health Spending Accounts, the only option we are offered through my husbands employer, and you DO lose the money if you don't use it. It does NOT carry over.
As I noted, two MAJOR changes that are needed (and one in particular WILL REDUCE PREMIUMS) - allow insurance companies to sell across state lines (this will spead the risk model and reduce premiums) - right now, all health insurance sales are state regulated - not federal. The other - allow professional organizations, to create insurance pools, would, if passed, allow some 15 million (estimate) Americans to access affordable health insurance - yet, the leadership in Congress (Senate) will not allow this to come to a full vote of the Senate).
In other words, there are a number of things that can be done to make health insurance more readily avialable and more affordable WITHOUT changing the entire system to one of a government run system
As an aside, and I have also posted this previously, we are seeing more and more Doctors discontinuing taking insurance - and still maintaining their patient loads. And, the one common denominator? Their costs come down No surprise there, the process of dealing with all the insurance companies no doubt adds a lot of time/cost, it is an inefficient process, there has to be a better way! But I won't count on private for profit companies to find it. They are in the business to make money.-[/QUOTE]
Another Insurance Industry Boondoggle
Why is health care so much more expensive in the United States than other economically-advanced countries? One reason is our system of private insurance, which piles the cost of administrative red tape and billions of dollars in profit on top of the cost of actually providing medical care.
An article in today's New York Times vividly illustrates how the red tape impacts costs. The gist is that denying or delaying payment of legitimate claims is built into the way insurance companies do business. Late payments and outright refusal to pay claims can add as much as 20 percent to doctors' overhead costs. And of course, as Dr. William F. Jessee is quoted as saying "it winds up getting passed on to consumers and employers who purchase health insurance."
How can we reign in these costs? The New York Times suggests the disinfecting power of sunlight, in the form of a website which will periodically report on the best and worst insurance companies on various measures of processing claims. That's great as far as it goes, but regulation of insurance company claims practices is potentially more effective. And overhauling the entire system of privately-financed and insured health care could be more successful still.
and an interesting piece from the California Nurses Assoc.
I would be very suspicious of the government taking over such a substantial portion of our national economy. I find it ironic that the same folks who harp endlessly on the government's failings with Katrina, Iraq, social security reform, and a host of other bureaucratic undertakings, are seemingly so enthusiastic about a federally-administered healthcare system.
I would be very suspicious of the government taking over such a substantial portion of our national economy. I find it ironic that the same folks who harp endlessly on the government's failings with Katrina, Iraq, social security reform, and a host of other bureaucratic undertakings, are seemingly so enthusiastic about a federally-administered healthcare system.
well, that all goes back to holding the elected officials ACCOUNTABLE, instead of giving them a blank check... and this applies to all of them, from both parties.
Qualified applicants need not apply
We’re all sick to death of hearing about how tragically unqualified Mike Brown was when hired to lead FEMA. Yes, he was fired from the Arabian Horse job. We get it. But the reason it’s important to keep it in mind is that it fits into a pattern with this administration: when making hiring decisions, these guys just don’t care if you’re qualified.
Matthew Yglesias noted the other day that “this administration, run by a president who seems not particularly interested in policy, has never been big on the idea of qualifications.”
It’s an important point. From Michael Chertoff, to Alberto Gonzales, to Treasury Secretary John Snow, to Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, to Condoleezza Rice, to HHS Secretary Mike Leavit, the president has surrounded himself with people who have no experience in the areas in which they’ve been placed. It is, Yglesias said, as if “Republicans are so convinced that government is inefficient and full of people who don’t know what they’re doing that it just doesn’t occur to them to do it any other way.”
more here...
One million face bankruptcy in UK - Irna (http://www.irna.ir/en/news/view/menu-237/0605222936185813.htm - broken link)
Come On, look at what those cost were for -
Link #1 - The person lost their job because he/she was ill. Not surprised they had financial hardship - same could (probably would) happen here in the US - except that once their job was gone so too (after the COBRA period) could be their health care (if they had any to begin with). In any event the financial strain would almost certainly be even worse here - if for no other reason that the fact that they'd have to pay high insurance premiums themselves at a time when they had no job.
Link #2 - This quotes an average cost for cancer patients of £2,000, but one woman spent £12,000, which included buying a car to get to hospital. Yeah, if you buy a car, it can be expensive. If someone here in the US did that they could end up in financial trouble too - but for those millions of Americans without adequate medical coverage, their hospital bill would be a WHOLE lot more than £2,000. Again, socialized medicine isn't going to save everyone from financial hardship, just make it easier.
Link #3 - Has nothing to do with socialized medicine at all - merely talks about folks who go bankrupt because of too much credit card debt etc. No one is saying socialized medicine will pay your credit card bills or help you be a better money manager.
What is the point of your post? So folks go broke in Britain - that has nothing to do with the debate on medical reform.
Ken
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.
