I'm really afraid to bring this up on here. But I'm wondering what a good solution is on health care, because I'm really stumped.
I don't think that the government should socialize medicine. Australia, Canada, and England are good examples of the bad that happens when countries do that.
I don't think that doctors and hospitals should necessarily make less money. They have tons of massive expenses (med school, malpractice insurance, office costs, school loans, etc.) and responsibilities.
I would lean towards somehow limiting the intake of prescription drug companies, simply because their profit margin (that's what they have AFTER all expenses including research and advertising and such, remember) at this point in time shows pure greed. Yes, it's market-driven. So yes, they CAN do what they are doing. But I believe strongly that that does not make it ethical.
I feel that insurance companies, also, are committing murder by greed -- legal, but not ethical. They design so many loopholes into their programs, and so many ways to get out of covering people, that it's positively sinful how much money they charge for coverage. Which is, again, market-driven, because people MUST pay for the coverage of the unknown disasters.
Anyone who says people should just pay for their healthcare or insurance themselves is, if I may say so politely, a fool. Most people, including people here, live with very little extra cash in savings, if not completely hand-to-mouth. How much money do you have in savings? My hysterectomy and subsequent infection emergency earlier this year would have cost me about $40,000 if not for insurance, and that's NOTHING compared to most major illnesses or injuries. I've known people with cancer whose bills amounted to hundreds of thousands of dollars, with or without insurance. After my aunt's family was hit by an uninsured drunk, they had at least a million dollars in medical costs to cover prosthetics, facial reconstruction, broken bones, hospital stays, and the subsequent medical costs that will be ongoing for the rest of my cousin's lifetime. (and that's NOT counting the money for my uncle's funeral, replacing the car, or the loss of income from my uncle's death.) Most of the time, even with insurance, such illnesses end up costing the ill person and their family at least tens of thousands of dollars out-of-pocket, which most people simply do not and can not have. Sure, we say that hospitals and doctors can treat people for free. But I have NEVER seen a middle-income person be able to do that. They are hounded and hounded by bill collectors for every penny against their bill and are often forced into bankruptcy to stop it. (If I am remembering my research correctly, the majority of bankruptcies from middle-income INSURED families are the results of major medical bills). And forget being able to get new insurance if your illness is pre-existing, or if you have one of the 'forgotten' problems like going deaf. Most of my mom's family are losing their hearing badly and must have hearing aids to be able to function, but we have yet to see an insurance program that covers hearing aids.
So my question is simply this: without saying 'in the millennium' or 'in the United Order' or 'in a perfect world', is there ANY way that we can improve this situation in our country? I think there must be SOMETHING we can do, I just can't figure what that is.
I don't know what the solution is either Dyany. We have been drowning in medical bills ourselves and we do have insurance. If we had all the money we've ever shelled out in medical bills we wouldn't have the debt we have right now and we might have a nice tidy little savings. I don't believe socialized government health care is the answer either. There are lot's of people from countries like Canada that come here to get healthcare because they can't get it in their country. I do believe the government should control how much the pharmaceutical companies make. It is astounding how much drugs cost here, when the same drugs cost a fraction of those charges in other countries. A one month's supply of one of my son's medications without insurance is nearly a thousand dollars. I also believe that the government should do something about the insurance companies. They cheat people right and left. Including the companies that cover malpractice insurance. Cat's BIL is a physician and he was sued over something that was frivolous and he was not at fault, but they still ended up having to settle with the person. (The guy sued a bunch of different doctors). Of course, the guy only got a piddling little settlement, but it was enough to make our BIL's malpractice insurance go through the roof. This country has also become a sue-happy country. People will sue for just about anything and they sue for ridiculous amounts of money. So, who knows? But, something has got to be done. America is supposed to be the land where someone can receive the best healthcare, but so many people can't get it, because they can't afford it.
I oppose government intervention in the market until the market has proven that it can't govern itself ethically.
I oppose even more government programs that provide services, such as welfare, which citizens should provide for themselves and their families or which should be provided by charitable organizations.
Having said that, the market (insurance companies in particular) has clearly proven that it will not ethically provide health care services to the citizens who pay for those services. In this case, I believe the government should strongly intercede on behalf of injured citizens. And in this case, I believe a national health care program is worthy of consideration.
__________________
The ability to qualify for, receive, and act on personal revelation is the single most important skill that can be acquired in this life. - Julie Beck
Thanks for the support, guys. Even though we still don't have a good answer, it's nice to know I'm not totally 'out there.'
Here's something that happened to us this year that really chapped my hide and brought a lot of feelings on the subject to a head.
My dad was laid off from a corporate job almost 15 years ago. He decided to go into independent sales, so he was self-employed. Since there were still many kids at home (there are 8 of us and 5 or 6 were still at home), he knew he still needed health insurance for emergencies so he got some self-employed insurance. Once my mom was diagnosed with diabetes, they HAD to stay with insurance lest she be labeled with a 'pre-existing condition' and never able to acquire independent insurance again. This was not cheap, though they quickly moved to just coverage for my parents -- I believe the average cost was $400 a month. The deductible was very high (I think around $2500) and they never once met it because my parents couldn't afford to go to the doctor that many times in the year (though my Mom NEEDS to because of her diabetes). Well, this year my dad had some problems that they believe stemmed from a very small stroke. It took 2 MRIs, a CAT scan, and an MRA for the doctor to even guess at that. Those tests tend to run about $4000 a piece, but my parents were thinking, 'ooo, good thing we've been paying into that insurance forever, because we've FINALLY met our deductible and can maybe get some of the $70,000 or so back that we've paid into it!'
NOT.
The @)#%@!! insurance said they would not pay a penny, or even apply a single penny towards the deductible. Why? Because my dad had the tests on an outpatient basis rather than being admitted to the hospital. That's what I call ethical gerrymandering. That's one of the kinds of thing I think they need to change.
I oppose government intervention in the market until the market has proven that it can't govern itself ethically.
I think the insurance market has proven this already. I am in favor of a one-payer system. At the very least, all insurance companies and hospitals should be not-for-profit, just like IHC.
Dyany wrote:Why? Because my dad had the tests on an outpatient basis rather than being admitted to the hospital.
Just another fine example of why for-profit hospitals and insurance companies are a bunch of liars and theives.
And why we all should be VERY acquainted with the rules of our various insurance plans, including preferred providers and the pre-approval process. It usually takes hours on hold to get customer service, but it is very much worth it.
I think that any government run health care system, even the current medicare/medicaid system, is fundamentally flawed. I have never seen an example of a government run system that would be better than returning the tax money to the people and giving them a better opportunity to buy their health care on the free market. But our current free market health care system is also flawed. Malpractice suits drive the cost of a doctor's time through the roof. John Edwards can afford to pay for $500 haircuts because he got rich suing doctors. Medicines are expensive and most are designed to keep you taking the medicine, instead of curing you. Many promising drugs that may cure a person never see the light of day because they don't make it past the expensive tests that the FDA has set up. I'm not sure what the cure for the situation is.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
I don't want the same folks that brought us the Motor Vehicle Department, the IRS, and the US Postal Service having anything to do with my health care. Aside from that, I'm open to listening to options.
The question is: how can the free market possibly make ethical behavior profitable, and therefore economically preferable and driven by the free market? I just don't see that as possible.
So, I think that there have to be some laws made. Not for the gov't to take over, but to limit the corruption in health care, pharmaceuticals, and insurance. Problem is, how can they do so to the extent it needs to be made without legislating so much that it takes ridiculous amounts of oversight and practically turns into a government agency anyway?
The question is: how can the free market possibly make ethical behavior profitable, and therefore economically preferable and driven by the free market? I just don't see that as possible.
So, I think that there have to be some laws made. Not for the gov't to take over, but to limit the corruption in health care, pharmaceuticals, and insurance. Problem is, how can they do so to the extent it needs to be made without legislating so much that it takes ridiculous amounts of oversight and practically turns into a government agency anyway?
Somehow it seems to me that having government legislate to eliminate corruption in health care is sort of like saying that you should have Howard Stern oversee decency in radio. The government is a magnet for those who are corrupt and seeking power.
I've worked in the healthcare industry (from the point of view of helping make software programs for nurses). Once the government gets in on the act, they legislate every little thing, including how the computer program checks your password. It's like the camel's nose under the tent.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
I don't want the same folks that brought us the Motor Vehicle Department, the IRS, and the US Postal Service having anything to do with my health care. Aside from that, I'm open to listening to options.
How do you feel about the folks that brought you Enron, massive pollution, sexual harassment, and sweatshops, oh and Ford Pintos that explode on collision?
Sometimes, a little government regulation can be a good thing?
Who is "the government?" The only reason it doesn't do what we want is because we are all glued to our TV's watching the latest episode of whatever takes our minds away from the weighty matters of the day.
That is why I am in favor of private, not-for-profit hospitals, and a single government or not-for-profit payer.
We have a free market, and we do NOT, universally, have quality health care. It's time to give someone else a try.
I'm all for letting the government run it when the someone can show me one department or government entity that they currently run well. While there may be bad apples in the corporate/private sector, there is also a better track record than the government. For every Enron there are hundreds of other companies doing it right.
I don't want the same folks that brought us the Motor Vehicle Department, the IRS, and the US Postal Service having anything to do with my health care. Aside from that, I'm open to listening to options.
How do you feel about the folks that brought you Enron, massive pollution, sexual harassment, and sweatshops, oh and Ford Pintos that explode on collision?
Sometimes, a little government regulation can be a good thing?
Who is "the government?" The only reason it doesn't do what we want is because we are all glued to our TV's watching the latest episode of whatever takes our minds away from the weighty matters of the day.
That is why I am in favor of private, not-for-profit hospitals, and a single government or not-for-profit payer.
We have a free market, and we do NOT, universally, have quality health care. It's time to give someone else a try.
Hoss, socialized medicine has had its chance around the world, and has failed much more miserably than the private sector. Witness Canada. Or England, where recently a man with a spinal injury needed to wait 10 days for surgery that needed to be done immediately. Or the US, where Medicare/Medicaid is a joke. And sure, it's hard to understand how your private insurance works. But ask a senior in this country about how hard it was to understand our latest socialized medicine plan, the prescription drug plan for seniors. It was an extremely rare person who had a good grasp of it.
It'd be like throwing out your financial advisor because your portfolio was underperforming, and instead hiring someone who had just gone bankrupt to manage your investments for you.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
I don't think socialized medicine has failed in all cases, in countries where there's a very small homogenous population (like Sweden, perhaps), but I also don't think it's a good solution for the US, where there are so many other...
... meh ... I so don't care about this conversation ...
--Ray
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
I'm all for letting the government run it when the someone can show me one department or government entity that they currently run well. While there may be bad apples in the corporate/private sector, there is also a better track record than the government. For every Enron there are hundreds of other companies doing it right.
In terms of healthcare, I give you CHIP, the children's health insurance program, as one government program that runs well.
Granted, in Utah, it is a public/private partnership; but it would not exist without government financial assistance. I am not sure how it is done in other states, but in Utah, it is run by Public Employees Health Plan, and functions magnificently.
It provides basic care through a not-for-profit health insurance company to thousands of poor children. In fact, I have had family members who were on CHIP, and then switched to a for-profit employer-provided health plan. The reduction in service and care, and the increase in cost to the family and the employer were stark.
So there's your example, and, I guess, welcome to the right side of the issue Sales?
Hoss, socialized medicine has had its chance around the world, and has failed much more miserably than the private sector.
I am not in favor of socialized medicine. I am in favor of making all health care and health insurance not-for-profit, such as Intermountain Health Care. I am in favor of public/private partnerships, such as the CHIP/PEHP partnership in Utah.
So, I guess I am not in favor of a single payer system, such as medicare.
Now, don't go crazy. If we spent the amount that employers currently spend on health insurance premiums and spent that in a more national way to cover everyone, the country would eventually be more healthy, and poor people wouldn't get their primary care at hospital emergency rooms (the MOST expensive provider).
So, eventually, health care costs would decrease, because we'd be more healthy in general, rather than the constant 20-25% medical inflation that we face in this country EVERY YEAR.
Witness Canada. Or England, where recently a man with a spinal injury needed to wait 10 days for surgery that needed to be done immediately.
Every health system has its issues, even ours. If you think people here (even those with insurance) don't wait for care, or aren't flat out denied care, you are living a pipe dream.
Or the US, where Medicare/Medicaid is a joke.
As is nearly every single for-profit health plan in the US.
And sure, it's hard to understand how your private insurance works.
Yes, but with plans like PEHP, you can get customer service.
My sister lives in Sweden, has for 20 yrs. or so. She has MS. One thing keeping them from coming back to the States is that her health care would take a hit. She has available to her drugs, etc. that you can't even get here... Don't really know much about this topic except MrCoco works for the gubment and we have kickass insurance.
__________________
Life is tough but it's tougher if you're stupid. -John Wayne
I'm all for letting the government run it when the someone can show me one department or government entity that they currently run well. While there may be bad apples in the corporate/private sector, there is also a better track record than the government. For every Enron there are hundreds of other companies doing it right.
In terms of healthcare, I give you CHIP, the children's health insurance program, as one government program that runs well.
Granted, in Utah, it is a public/private partnership; but it would not exist without government financial assistance. I am not sure how it is done in other states, but in Utah, it is run by Public Employees Health Plan, and functions magnificently.
It provides basic care through a not-for-profit health insurance company to thousands of poor children. In fact, I have had family members who were on CHIP, and then switched to a for-profit employer-provided health plan. The reduction in service and care, and the increase in cost to the family and the employer were stark.
So there's your example, and, I guess, welcome to the right side of the issue Sales?
So your one example is of a private/public partnership. I think my challenge was for one example of a government department or public entity not a private/public partnership. So I'm still waiting for an example.
Yeah, yeah. I knew when I produced the goods you'd wuss out.
You "free enterprise will solve everything" people are so COMPLETELY mistaken if you think unrestrained capitalism is some kind of panacea. It is not. It's probably the most efficient economic model, but human avarice makes it frought with its own dangers. And our healthcare system (the for-profit portion of it) is the current cautionary tale.
Actually, I really didn't have any intention of providing examples which "fit your criteria," because your all-or-nothing approach tends to indicate that you are not in the mood to discuss the issue in a manner that looks toward resolution of the problem.
The idea that the American healthcare crisis can be solved 100% by the "free market" is ludicrous.
The idea that government always gets it wrong and can't do anything right is also ludicrous.
The idea that socialized medicine will solve the problem in a large, homogeneous society is laughable.
But the idea that I presented of a not-for-profit system of private providers and payers who work with government support is one which bears looking at; and I provided you with a shining example of success that is exactly germane to the current conversation.
Argue if you want to, but we don't really have time for the all-or-nothingness that nearly killed CHIP yesterday; and Bob Bennet (benighted Senator of Utah) is still spouting free market idiocies today. I guess when you're a gazillionaire collecting Medicare and a gubmint check, as he is, the issue is not as important as spouting theoretic conservative principles which do not function in reality.
(Explanation: the above post was my attempt to demonstrate in Ray Zone (tm) fashion just why healthcare by government is likely to fail... because the public simply isn't motivated by it... they want to talk about puppies... or something else... and a sensible solution is unlikely to come out of nowhere.)
__________________
I'm not slow; I'm special. (Don't take it personally, everyone finds me offensive. Yet somehow I manage to live with myself.)
I'd rather talk about the controversial move by Ruger to support the Federal Assault Weapons legislation years ago that effectively exempted their weapons but targeted their competitors weapons.
Ray, that's why it's our DUTY to try and come up with good solutions. It often seems hopeless, but we have to at least TRY. And if we DO come up with a good, workable plan, it's our duty to try and share and promote it until hopefully it can see the light of day. Will it really work? Improbable. "Yea, even he can command fifty, yeah even slay fifty, then why not us?" But we do what we can because it's our duty and we have been commanded to do all we can to help our country and our fellow men.
A good solution is for people to take care of their own health. Positive, cheap factors for better health include: Eat healthy foods, Exercise daily, Get an education, Don't Drink, Don't Smoke, Gun safety, Wear a Seatbelt in cars Wear a helmet while bicycling, Procreate after marriage, Things you hear over and over.
If those things were done, then the self-inflicted health problems would mostly vanish and a large chunck of health care costs would disappear.
But, you asked for a good, "WORKABLE" solution, and we know that most people aren't doing those things.
It probably means "wear things out less". I doubt that Brigham Young was encouraging hot pants, for instance.
__________________
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen! - Samuel Adams
Brigham's Secret
