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.
So now that everyone should be insured, do you want universal health care? Let's hear your arguments.
Quote:
For instance, the average expenditure for each of the approximately 3 million people comprising the top 1 percent of spenders was more than $90,000 in 2009 (Figure 2). The top 5 percent of spenders were responsible for $623 billion in expenditures or nearly $41,000 per patient. In contrast, mean annual spending for the bottom half of distribution was just $236 per person, totaling only $36 billion for the entire group of more than 150 million people.
Sad thing is its not about craftsmanship anymore. Medicine is less of a craft and more based on assembly-line production. Proof of this is you can see the same provider for a decade, and he still has no clue who you are or what your issues are until he skims over your chart.
I remember as a kid, my pediatrician knew me on sight, and knew my family as well. He spent about 5 minutes just chatting before starting his exam, and took the time to think about what you are telling him. Now and necessarily, you rarely spend more than 5 minutes on average with your provider. Its not cost-effective to spend more time than that with any patient.
Its like the Theory of Relativity - every action has an equal and opposite reaction. There is a cause and an effect. Sadly, no one can really afford to call quality healthcare a luxury, aside from the Insurance carriers.
That's newtons 3rd law
I got out of the healthcare industry due to several factors (mostly corporate life bores me). But there is a simple reality: we (Americans) utilize insurance more like a warranty instead of what it was designed for. It's been this way a long time and payors, and providers, can't keep up. Ultimately the patient is sort of an assembly line.
There are 3 components to healthcare: subscriber, provider, and payor. It's easy to blame the payor. They seem flush with cash and are an impersonal corporation... And they 'denied my kids claim'. It's easy to blame a provider: the wait is too long, they charge to much, and in the ER they took this person over 'me' first. 'We' never look at ourselves.
So 'we' ask the government who operates more like 'the dirty hmo' than the hmo themselves... Yet they solve the problem?
Everyone should look in their own medicine cabinet first before making negative statements about an industry few know much about... Even inside their industry. Ex: I was talking to a doc complaining about his rate with payor x. I asked which fee schedule the rate should have been reimbursed at. He wasn't aware the contract he signed differentiated rates between PPo, hmo, npos based off the penetration of payor x. The lowest member groups had the highest fee schedule percentage, to make up the volume, keep the network for the members, and provide access to care.
The irony is: the members employer switched carriers and their doc was no longer in network. So who's to blame? Member? Provider for not asking if coverage changed? New payor for not asking if member had a pcp (PPo plan so it's not necessary, just recommended)? Old payor for not reminding member to double check that pcp was in network for new carrier? Government for demonizing payor profits to play on your emotions and allow them to win or retain their elected position? All the above?
You use good source material. Most won't get it and that's not a negative... Working inside, doing data analysis, or reading much of the federal register puts tge industry in a whole different light than public discourse.
Well, I like your spirit, but reality is that would create even less jobs in the country. Medicine, including Insurance carriers, (aside from government and law enforcement) are like one of the main employers left in America.
I guess we could all sit around and do nothing except work at McDonalds or Walmart, but then where are the taxes coming from to make all those checks good? Cause and effect.
1. Medical care is not a jobs program. there would still be the same number of doctors and nurses, perhaps even more.
Creating FOOMP would mean at least one office in each state, with many workers to write all those checks or create all those electronic transfers. There would be a net increase in jobs. Good paying jobs, due to the Davis-Bacon wage act!
2. What taxes? We now have a National Debt of over 19 TRILLION dollars! So what if it increases to 40 trillion to pay for the medical care that FOOMP sends checks out for? It will never be paid anyway, no matter what the dollar amount is!
Quote:
Originally Posted by monkeywrenching NO, forcing people to buy private health insurance or forced to pay a tax is just plain wrong.
how would those same people who want the ACA/obamacare like it if they were forced to buy an assault rifles, 10,000 rounds of ammo, 30 30 round magazines, a semi-auto pistol with the same amount of ammo and magazines or forced to pay a $5,000 tax because they do not own the items listed above.
liberals/democrats would be screaming that it is unconstitutional and illegal, but it would fall into the same category when they forced obamacare onto the American people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469
You're comparing having health insurance to owning assault rifles...seriously
You sure missed the foundational principals in that one.
If your friend has insurance of any kind, tell her that when their prescriptions aren't covered to call the state department of banking and insurance.
And what are people supposed to do while they wait out the red tape process? Pay out of pocket and stop paying their bills? Stop taking there necessary medicine. Protest at the capital?
I agree with you up until the bolded parts. Healthcare needs don't stop if you're unemployed. "Assault a healthcare worker"??? That's got to be the oddest statement I've ever heard. I can't even imagine the thought process that would come up with that. As far as the last sentence, the prisons are filled with people who commit violent crimes, burglary, aggravated assault, etc. who get free healthcare now. What you are proposing is unethical and would never be accepted by the general populace.
A better option than these convoluted and unworkable ideas is to guarantee basic healthcare to every legal citizen period, no restrictions. Cosmetic and elective surgeries (not including those for disfigurements caused by other medical procedures or conditions) would be covered by private insurance.
Additionally, if you are a criminal and serve your time, you should have your full rights of citizenship restored after you have served your time.
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.
