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.
On Friday, the New York Times revealed that major players in the nation’s health care debate -- including big insurance companies, lobbyists representing consumers, physicians, hospitals and the pharmaceutical industry -- may soon unveil a consensus plan advocating comprehensive legislation that requires every American to carry health insurance.
Scary. My profession will be ruined by socialized medicine and universal health care. Say bye, bye for good to quality doctors! Like we haven't already begun leaving due to rising malpractice costs. The American people need to ask their doctors about health care.
We need to treat health insurance like car insurance. We need to fine people that cannot show proof of insurance on their tax forms. Look at what Mitt did in Massachusetts. Massachusetts has great healthcare and is the most insured state in the country and it costs the state $0.
Scary. My profession will be ruined by socialized medicine and universal health care. Say bye, bye for good to quality doctors! Like we haven't already begun leaving due to rising malpractice costs. The American people need to ask their doctors about health care.
We need to treat health insurance like car insurance. We need to fine people that cannot show proof of insurance on their tax forms. Look at what Mitt did in Massachusetts. Massachusetts has great healthcare and is the most insured state in the country and it costs the state $0.
from the article:
"On Friday, the New York Times revealed that major players in the nation’s health care debate -- including big insurance companies, lobbyists representing consumers, physicians, hospitals and the pharmaceutical industry -- may soon unveil a consensus plan advocating comprehensive legislation that requires every American to carry health insurance. "
This sounds like the Massachusetts plan to me. Massachusetts now requires everyone to carry insurance. So if the medical profession in Mass. hasn't been ruined by their new universal insurance law, why would the US medical profession be ruined by similar legislation?
"On Friday, the New York Times revealed that major players in the nation’s health care debate -- including big insurance companies, lobbyists representing consumers, physicians, hospitals and the pharmaceutical industry -- may soon unveil a consensus plan advocating comprehensive legislation that requires every American to carry health insurance. "
This sounds like the Massachusetts plan to me. Massachusetts now requires everyone to carry insurance. So if the medical profession in Mass. hasn't been ruined by their new universal insurance law, why would the US medical profession be ruined by similar legislation?
Obama and Congressional Democrats do not support legislation like that. Massachusetts' health coverage system is not "universal heathcare of socialized medicine". Hillary Care called for multiple payors and Democrats didn't support that because they wanted a single payor system similar to Canada and England's. They also wanted to salary doctors. I still think that universal coverage is unlikely to pass the senate due to budget reasons and Republicans are unified against universal coverage.
You are correct but Massachusetts has 94.6% compliance and only 3% is subsidized. This level of compliance is what I would consider good enough. I worked a community hospital in a hispanic neighborhood of Chicago where 15% of patients were illegals, and less than half of the overall population had insurance. I think the United States needs to treat health coverage like car insurance and we also need to stop treating illegals and releasing them back into the streets. One reason we could not report is because Chicago is a sanctuary city for illegals.
I do not believe in jumping from point A to point C. The first step to fixing the healthcare issue is not to throw money at it, but rather to require medical insurance, much like what was done with car insurance. Individual states can provide discount insurance rates, and the federal government can step in and help on an as needed basis. The problem is, a lot of the ininsured Americans (some of my family included) are under the impression that they do not need health insurance...
Either way, the European and Canadian UHC setups destroy quality for the sake of availability. Instead, the US should follow Aussie and Kiwi models of a general purpose system for those who need it, but a private sector for those with insurance. That way you maintain quality with the added bonus of availability to everyone..
I do not believe in jumping from point A to point C. The first step to fixing the healthcare issue is not to throw money at it, but rather to require medical insurance, much like what was done with car insurance.
You cannot force people to pay for insurance if they don't want it. It s different with cars, where there is the reason of safety on the road. You are not required by the law to own a car (and insure it) if you don't want.
The only way to proceed in the direction of universal healthcare, is to provide a basic healthcare package for every citizen and pay insurance if you want extras.
I do not believe in jumping from point A to point C. The first step to fixing the healthcare issue is not to throw money at it, but rather to require medical insurance, much like what was done with car insurance. Individual states can provide discount insurance rates, and the federal government can step in and help on an as needed basis. The problem is, a lot of the ininsured Americans (some of my family included) are under the impression that they do not need health insurance...
Either way, the European and Canadian UHC setups destroy quality for the sake of availability. Instead, the US should follow Aussie and Kiwi models of a general purpose system for those who need it, but a private sector for those with insurance. That way you maintain quality with the added bonus of availability to everyone..
Australia has the best government funded health care program, but their quality of care is still not even close to the level that the United States has. In Australia physician pay is also regulated and that means lower quality care. The United States needs to treat health coverage like automobile insurance and that will be good enough.
You cannot force people to pay for insurance if they don't want it. It s different with cars, where there is the reason of safety on the road. You are not required by the law to own a car (and insure it) if you don't want.
In my plan, people would be allowed to opt-out but they cannot enter a hospital or clinic. How about that?
So when you opt-out of health coverage and you have a heart attack don't come to the emergency room.
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.
