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.
Simple, but politically incorrect solution: Get government and insurance out of healthcare entirely.
Insurers are parasites taking a skim from the patient and interfere with the physician.
Government meddling is behind the shortage of trained physicians and medical care workers.
Deregulate and decriminalize the trade in healthcare and medicine.
Access to medical education for everyone.
That's the only acceptable "Universal" health care - where everyone can treat anyone to the best of their ability.
There certainly needs to be non-profit in the delivery of health care.
My thinking is the AMA is behind the shortages, as long ago as a 80 years.
Be careful with deregulating and decriminalize. Snake oil salesman abound today, deregulate and that bunch would outnumber doctors and nurses.
Not everyone is cut out to be a doc. I've met a few easy button lazy docs as it is.
It works based on the very basic concept of survival. If you are lazy, you will likely starve. If you choose not to work, you will not be able to pay for coverage. If you choose to expect handouts, you will find few are willing to give them.
Everyone else who are special cases, well... charity does wonders and in fact, before the moochers came along and started legislating theft from the people for such, our country ran quite well on this concept of individuals choosing to help those who were in "need" of help. The problem with this and why so many progressives dislike this is that when people have a choice, they tend not to help those who refuse to help themselves and so it kind of makes it difficult for the freeloaders and entitled. It also limits the ability of the politicians to buy votes, a foundation principal to which democrats survive.
No it didn't work quite well otherwise it would still be working quite well. Most hospitals back in the late 1800s early 1900s where in fact mostly charitable until they weren't. Those who where treated at these mostly charitable hospitals were the poor and middle class. Advances in the medical field put an end to it over a very short span time. The current debate about how to deliver health care to the masses is almost exactly what was being discussed and researched by prominate people 100 years ago. When the depression hit in 1929 things changed in a hurry and not for the good. Actually it was the progressives during the early 1930s who backed off of univeral care in favor of employer provided insurance. Mandated for-profit insurance was heavily favored in the 1910s, discarded because most of the insurance provided would only cover the worker, not the family and especially not a pregnant wife. Not good.
No it didn't work quite well otherwise it would still be working quite well. Most hospitals back in the late 1800s early 1900s where in fact mostly charitable until they weren't. Those who where treated at these mostly charitable hospitals were the poor and middle class. Advances in the medical field put an end to it over a very short span time. The current debate about how to deliver health care to the masses is almost exactly what was being discussed and researched by prominate people 100 years ago. When the depression hit in 1929 things changed in a hurry and not for the good. Actually it was the progressives during the early 1930s who backed off of univeral care in favor of employer provided insurance. Mandated for-profit insurance was heavily favored in the 1910s, discarded because most of the insurance provide would only cover the worker, not the family and especially not a pregnant wife. Not good.
Again, it works wonderfully well for the free individual who is responsible for themselves. It does not work well for the lazy freeloading communist who thinks others should pay for them.
You are responsible for yourself, I am responsible for myself. Any help I provide another is of my own decision and none of your business.
If this bothers you, then you are not fit to live in free country because you can not accept the responsibility of freedom.
Your reasoning to redistribution for health care can be applied to everything, which means we can justify by your own logic the complete removal of liberties in order to serve this idea that everyone will be better off being told how to live than actually being left to it themsleves.
You do not know me, you do not know what is best for me and you have no right to steal from me to chase after your emotionalized causes of subjugated charity.
Your health care is your responsibility. The well being of your health is between you and the doctor you pay.
The rest of your argument can be summed up as emotional rhetoric.
Again, move to a socialist/communist country, it seems you aren't up to the responsibility of living as a free individual.
Enjoy wherever you go!
Still going I see. I have no problem with your ideas at all--like I said from the very beginning--I'm willing to entertain the idea that the GOP is perfectly capable of improving healthcare after repealing Obamacare. I'm simply asking you for about the 12th time to list for me quantifiable goals that should be reached according to your ideas, goals which should be targetable by the GOP with well written laws. "Everyone pays" is an extremely weak endpoint, because that does very little to asses the actual outcomes of healthcare coverage. Why do you have so much trouble answering the two simple questions posted at the very beginning of this thread?
I'll help you out even further with an example from science. For example in drug research we evaluate how well a new therapy works on quantifiable endpoints such as
-How much did this new treatment X increase the time of survival for a population Y? Did this meet the threshold for significance?
-How much time Y did treatment X reduce hospital stay length by? Is that statistically significant?
-How much was pain reduced by upon treatment X using gold standard measurements that might meet FDA adequacy?
Can you list any such ideas for quantitative endpoints for a health care system where 'everyone pays'? Stop avoiding the question and answer it.
Or the part where insurance companies dropped those who needed costly medical care?
Solved with proper attendance to contract law.
Problem is, people are extremely lazy and inattentive when they as signing these contracts, but all of a sudden have a tantrum when they are applied. While there are exceptions, most of the problems with people today is they are lazy and irresponsible.
Still going I see. I have no problem with your ideas at all--like I said from the very beginning--I'm willing to entertain the idea that the GOP is perfectly capable of improving healthcare after repealing Obamacare. I'm simply asking you for about the 12th time to list for me quantifiable goals that should be reached according to your ideas, goals which should be targetable by the GOP with well written laws. "Everyone pays" is an extremely weak endpoint, because that does very little to asses the actual outcomes of healthcare coverage. Why do you have so much trouble answering the two simple questions posted at the very beginning of this thread?
I'll help you out even further with an example from science. For example in drug research we evaluate how well a new therapy works on quantifiable endpoints such as
-How much did this new treatment X increase the time of survival for a population Y? Did this meet the threshold for significance?
-How much time Y did treatment X reduce hospital stay length by? Is that statistically significant?
-How much was pain reduced by upon treatment X using gold standard measurements that might meet FDA adequacy?
Can you list any such ideas for quantitative endpoints for a health care system where 'everyone pays'? Stop avoiding the question and answer it.
Goals....
1) No government health care.
2) Massively deregulate the industry moving the government out of it completely.
those two things will reduce costs DRAMATICALLY.
You do realize there is no need for the FDA?
Private industry in other areas (engineering, manufacturing, etc..) do have organizations that are specifically designed to establish quality standards to which companies certify for in order to be highly rated? Then, consumers responsibly evaluate what they will accept and we go from there.
The high costs of health care is primarily due to government involvement.
1) No government health care.
2) Massively deregulate the industry moving the government out of it completely.
those two things will reduce costs DRAMATICALLY.
NUMBERS. Do you not understand the concept or the term 'quantifiable'? Answer the question for the 13th time....it's like I'm talking to a wall that has no idea how healthcare outcomes are measured and how endpoints are assessed for public health studies.
You said those two things will reduce cost 'dramatically'. OK then, entertain me. What does 'dramatically' mean? Does that mean reducing health care expenditures by $1? $10? $1 million? $1 billion? And once you settle on a number, what if that goal is not reached? Would that mean your idea was a failure?
Last edited by fibonacci; 01-03-2017 at 09:13 AM..
They will vote to "repeal" it. The Fox News crowd and Republicans will all high five each other. The actual sunset on Obamacare will be 3-4 years out. Republicans will keep pushing back the effective date. See how this will work?
Ah, so it will work exactly the way Obama rolled it out in the first place. Delay, delay, exemptions...until after the next election.
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.
