Full Version: Healthcare Reform
America's Debate > Archive > Assorted Issues Archive > [A] Science and Technology > [A] Health and Medicine
With the rising cost of health care many companies are shifting the expense to their employee's or discontinuing it altogether.
Questions to Debate:
How can we get health insurance cost to a level everyone can afford?
Who or what are the causes of our current healthcare crisis?
I think that HMO's & public health care will never work, because all of the hypochondriacs abusing the system. They demand service for the most minor afflictions and therefore draining the pool of money HMO's and public health care draws from. The only solution to it is to raise the price of HMO's so that these people can continue to get their concerns addressed. That is the current situation as I see it. What are you takes?
Questions to Debate:
How can we get health insurance cost to a level everyone can afford?
Who or what are the causes of our current healthcare crisis?
I think that HMO's & public health care will never work, because all of the hypochondriacs abusing the system. They demand service for the most minor afflictions and therefore draining the pool of money HMO's and public health care draws from. The only solution to it is to raise the price of HMO's so that these people can continue to get their concerns addressed. That is the current situation as I see it. What are you takes?
To be quite honest, our system now is the cause of our problems. In a normal market the consumer and the provider negotiate the price for said goods/service. What we have now is the an employer contracting an insurance rate with 1 or 2 insurance providers who in turn negotiate the rate with the doctor. I the consumer don't really care what the ultimate cost of the goods/service are as long as I don't pay more than my deductible or copayment. I also will go to the doctor for any reason that doesn't necessarily require medical attention.
Ok with that said, medical expenses are very expensive and one procedure can set you back into poverty. So what do we do? Personally, I think the best method, is something through a medical reimbursement account, that is tax free. Employer's and individuals could contribute $ into the account, where the employee is then free to contract with an insurance carrier for the best medical plan that fits their needs. For example someone that is low risk could purchase a catastrophic plan with a high deductible and offset their deductable expenses with the leftover money in the account. If they choose to buy a HMO or PPO or whatever, those people will need to be mindful that if they use their medical insurance in such a way that causes their premiums to escalate they will either 1. pay the higher premium or 2. stop seeing the doctor when they don't need something that isn't medically necessary.
In my opinion, this type of plan is also beneficial for the small and or self employed individuals. For example some states already offer medical reimbursement plans but some are so restrictive that it is too costly to even consider. New Jersey for example, has one, that forces you to purchase your catastrophic insurance through Blue Cross. A plan that has a $5,000 deductible for an individual costs $400 + dollars a month. An HMO for an individual is in the high 380's. If I were able to take advantage of a Medical Reimbursement Account I should have full reign in choosing who I buy my catastrophic insurance from.
Ok with that said, medical expenses are very expensive and one procedure can set you back into poverty. So what do we do? Personally, I think the best method, is something through a medical reimbursement account, that is tax free. Employer's and individuals could contribute $ into the account, where the employee is then free to contract with an insurance carrier for the best medical plan that fits their needs. For example someone that is low risk could purchase a catastrophic plan with a high deductible and offset their deductable expenses with the leftover money in the account. If they choose to buy a HMO or PPO or whatever, those people will need to be mindful that if they use their medical insurance in such a way that causes their premiums to escalate they will either 1. pay the higher premium or 2. stop seeing the doctor when they don't need something that isn't medically necessary.
In my opinion, this type of plan is also beneficial for the small and or self employed individuals. For example some states already offer medical reimbursement plans but some are so restrictive that it is too costly to even consider. New Jersey for example, has one, that forces you to purchase your catastrophic insurance through Blue Cross. A plan that has a $5,000 deductible for an individual costs $400 + dollars a month. An HMO for an individual is in the high 380's. If I were able to take advantage of a Medical Reimbursement Account I should have full reign in choosing who I buy my catastrophic insurance from.
As a health car worker for nearly all of my adult life, this is a subject near and dear to my heart, and the subject of many a debate at work as well.
First off, the concept that we have a market generated with supply/demand type economics in the health care currently is hogwash- the whole shootin' match is controlled by some, usually aligned, major players, with the recipients caught in thier webs. For instance, you here about "over regulation" in health care now and then- so you ask yourself, who creates, makes and oversees these regulation? Well, it is not the goverment! This is actually privatized- accreditation is done by about three firms that are essentially hired by insurance consortiums- Jacho being the most commonly used (though they just went through another name change recently- we just had our inspection this week, they were still calling themselves Jacho I believe) and is a totally corrupt organization with NO goverment oversite- they are completely independent of any laws outside some OSHA and EPA and CDC stuff. Thier sole purpose is to keep insurance companies from being too liable and to spawn a full time consultant industry, producing contract employees whose full time job is to justify thier job!
The AMA- another completely corrupt organization whose sole purpose is to artificially keep doctors numbers low and thier own salaries high.
Drug companies- Oh god, you could do 10 threads alone on this one- and they completely own the republicans, lock stock and barrel, no legislation that will effectively regulate or minimize everything from price gouging to frivolous copyright extensions will ever come about while a republican congress or president is in power.
Insurance companies themselves- completely corrupt, whose main job is to attempt not to pay premiums paid to them- each and every one of them has a force of employees sole job is to attempt to deny claims. I have worked with Utilization review, and have first hand experiance dealing with these poeple, and if I were to ever become dictator for a day, that is where my liquification via Stalin would start, from the top of every insurance boardroom on down!
Almost all anti-european sytle medical system speech is pure rhetoric- every northern european medical system is better than ours, hands down, I have been there first hand to see much of it, unless you happen to be a doctor, then you will get paid far less, but hey, your schooling is free anyway!
I think the first step is to make all essential, non-purely-cosmetic or elective surgery procedures non-profit and take the profit motive completely out of health care. The profit motive and health care are mutually exclusive terms, you do not get good health care for the maximum amount of poeple and turn a profit at the same time, it can't be done. Only the rich get health care in a profit driven system, which is obvious in our system.
The next is to eliminate Jacho, AMA, and regulate them through goverment channels with elected personel and appointed personel commitee.
And also, eliminate private insurance, and go with a national goverment health care program.
Not popular with conservatives or libertarians, but the profit system just doesn't work here, just like with the military or the police, the mission and the profit motive are just plain exclusive.
First off, the concept that we have a market generated with supply/demand type economics in the health care currently is hogwash- the whole shootin' match is controlled by some, usually aligned, major players, with the recipients caught in thier webs. For instance, you here about "over regulation" in health care now and then- so you ask yourself, who creates, makes and oversees these regulation? Well, it is not the goverment! This is actually privatized- accreditation is done by about three firms that are essentially hired by insurance consortiums- Jacho being the most commonly used (though they just went through another name change recently- we just had our inspection this week, they were still calling themselves Jacho I believe) and is a totally corrupt organization with NO goverment oversite- they are completely independent of any laws outside some OSHA and EPA and CDC stuff. Thier sole purpose is to keep insurance companies from being too liable and to spawn a full time consultant industry, producing contract employees whose full time job is to justify thier job!
The AMA- another completely corrupt organization whose sole purpose is to artificially keep doctors numbers low and thier own salaries high.
Drug companies- Oh god, you could do 10 threads alone on this one- and they completely own the republicans, lock stock and barrel, no legislation that will effectively regulate or minimize everything from price gouging to frivolous copyright extensions will ever come about while a republican congress or president is in power.
Insurance companies themselves- completely corrupt, whose main job is to attempt not to pay premiums paid to them- each and every one of them has a force of employees sole job is to attempt to deny claims. I have worked with Utilization review, and have first hand experiance dealing with these poeple, and if I were to ever become dictator for a day, that is where my liquification via Stalin would start, from the top of every insurance boardroom on down!
Almost all anti-european sytle medical system speech is pure rhetoric- every northern european medical system is better than ours, hands down, I have been there first hand to see much of it, unless you happen to be a doctor, then you will get paid far less, but hey, your schooling is free anyway!
I think the first step is to make all essential, non-purely-cosmetic or elective surgery procedures non-profit and take the profit motive completely out of health care. The profit motive and health care are mutually exclusive terms, you do not get good health care for the maximum amount of poeple and turn a profit at the same time, it can't be done. Only the rich get health care in a profit driven system, which is obvious in our system.
The next is to eliminate Jacho, AMA, and regulate them through goverment channels with elected personel and appointed personel commitee.
And also, eliminate private insurance, and go with a national goverment health care program.
Not popular with conservatives or libertarians, but the profit system just doesn't work here, just like with the military or the police, the mission and the profit motive are just plain exclusive.
QUOTE
CR
As a health car worker for nearly all of my adult life, this is a subject near and dear to my heart, and the subject of many a debate at work as well.
First off, the concept that we have a market generated with supply/demand type economics in the health care currently is hogwash-
As a health car worker for nearly all of my adult life, this is a subject near and dear to my heart, and the subject of many a debate at work as well.
First off, the concept that we have a market generated with supply/demand type economics in the health care currently is hogwash-
How does your status as a health care worker give you authority on the economics of health care plans?
The relationship between the buyer (patient) and service (doctor or health insurance agency) is economics. Whether that economics is placed in the control of an employer, individual, or government. It is still a service for which the provider of that service receives money.
QUOTE
CR
The AMA- another completely corrupt organization whose sole purpose is to artificially keep doctors numbers low and thier own salaries high.
The AMA- another completely corrupt organization whose sole purpose is to artificially keep doctors numbers low and thier own salaries high.
You sound a bit bitter on the AMA and Jacho. I personally have no problem with industries that choose to self regulate. Perhaps they are corrupt or perhaps they aren’t. You saying they are does not persuade me either way. Whether they are or aren't does not change how the individual chooses its health coverage, how that health coverage is paid for, and whether the health coverage is abused. Currently the individual has very little choice. They also care very little about whether they are abusing their coverage and how that affects the overall skyrockting premiums.
QUOTE
I think the first step is to make all essential, non-purely-cosmetic or elective surgery procedures non-profit and take the profit motive completely out of health care. The profit motive and health care are mutually exclusive terms, you do not get good health care for the maximum amount of poeple and turn a profit at the same time, it can't be done. Only the rich get health care in a profit driven system, which is obvious in our system.
Why should doctor’s, who have to worked very hard to get their degrees, not be able to profit from their intellect and skill? Do you think the cream of the crop will continue to pursue medical education if they will not be fairly compensated? As far as the rich getting health care in a profit driven system, I couldn’t disagree more. I don’t want a government hand out, that really isn’t a hand out because my taxes would sky rocket, but I want insurance that is appropriate for my needs.
QUOTE
And also, eliminate private insurance, and go with a national goverment health care program.
Ughhhh!!!! A national government health care program would, in my opinion, be disastrous. All it will do is remove the employer from the equation and place the government in its place. The patient will still not care if they are abusing the system or not!
edited to add: and we all know how well the government is at managing our money. Just take a look at Social Security.
QUOTE(CruisingRam @ Feb 18 2004, 08:11 PM)
I think the first step is to make all essential, non-purely-cosmetic or elective surgery procedures non-profit and take the profit motive completely out of health care. The profit motive and health care are mutually exclusive terms...
Not popular with conservatives or libertarians, but the profit system just doesn't work here, just like with the military or the police, the mission and the profit motive are just plain exclusive.
Well then, we might as well take the "profit motive" out of food production, clothing manufacture, and home construction. Why should the people engaged in those activities be "allowed" to make one penny more ("profit") than is absolutely necessary for their survival (food, water, shelter)? Of course there are now many things that were once non-existent (indoor plumbing, telephones, computers, "healthcare") that some believe to be "essential" if not a "right". This constant use of the term "CRISIS" regarding "healthcare" is really quite laughable! If we are truly in a "CRISIS" now, what would you call the situation in 1950, or 1900, or 1850, or 1750, or...? 
Perhaps we should all just send our entire paychecks (and all of our other "non-essential" property) directly to the Government! In their infinite wisdom they could create a list of "human requirements" and then "fairly" re-distribute the booty to each and every human?(Socialists take heart, we are halfway there already.)
So what's the difference between the person who grows my food, the one who sews my coat, the one who builds my house, and the one who sets my broken leg? What Cruising Ram is really saying is if a product or service exists, and some people don't have it, then we should steal money from other people and just "give" it to the "have-not's." (Socialists take heart, we are halfway there already.)
Just remember though, every penny YOU earn beyond that which you require for survival (food, water, and shelter) is "PROFIT!")
So Argonaut- do you then think that the military should be profit based, or the police, or the fire department- if you do not buy stock into the fire department your family should be allowed to die in a fire? There is a reason these are gov't run entities- because thier mission is incompatable with the profit motive- everyone should have equal access to justice, to safety from crime, and to health. these are basic human rights. To say "Well, if you are rich enough, you can afford to live, if not, well, just die" is immoral, and this is what YOU suggest.
To suggest that only the wealthy should have healthcare is immoral and unethical, and actually against the law in emergency care at the very least, though they are allowed to attempt to drive you to the poor house.
Notice I did make the disctinction of elective surgery, such as a nose job not from a car crash or injury as a repair.
Also, there is a basic area that you missed with lumping food production, clothes production or car production- the nearly unlimited ability for competition to take over a market from a competitor- the way the AMA is run is as if Wonder bread gets to decide who gets to open every bread factory in America, and sets the standard of what good bread is, and is the final word on this with no other input except from other wonder bread factory owners- whereas with actual bakery standards are set by a federal, state and local regs that apply equally to everybody(well, in theory, regulation of biz overall is another thread, I am using this as a broad example) and anybody that can meet certain guidelines can open a bakery and compete as they wish.
To suggest that only the wealthy should have healthcare is immoral and unethical, and actually against the law in emergency care at the very least, though they are allowed to attempt to drive you to the poor house.
Notice I did make the disctinction of elective surgery, such as a nose job not from a car crash or injury as a repair.
Also, there is a basic area that you missed with lumping food production, clothes production or car production- the nearly unlimited ability for competition to take over a market from a competitor- the way the AMA is run is as if Wonder bread gets to decide who gets to open every bread factory in America, and sets the standard of what good bread is, and is the final word on this with no other input except from other wonder bread factory owners- whereas with actual bakery standards are set by a federal, state and local regs that apply equally to everybody(well, in theory, regulation of biz overall is another thread, I am using this as a broad example) and anybody that can meet certain guidelines can open a bakery and compete as they wish.
QUOTE(CruisingRam @ Feb 18 2004, 11:08 PM)
"So Argonaut- do you then think that the military should be profit based, or the police, or the fire department- if you do not buy stock into the fire department your family should be allowed to die in a fire? There is a reason these are gov't run entities- because thier mission is incompatable with the profit motive- everyone should have equal access to justice, to safety from crime, and to health. these are basic human rights. To say "Well, if you are rich enough, you can afford to live, if not, well, just die" is immoral, and this is what YOU suggest.
To suggest that only the wealthy should have healthcare is immoral and unethical, ..."
To suggest that only the wealthy should have healthcare is immoral and unethical, ..."
Your argument is riddled with logical fallacies! Allow me to list just a few of them for you: Fallacy of the excluded middle; Argument by emotive language; Fallacy of extension (straw man); Fallacy of the rhetorical question; Argument from adverse consequences; And the Reductive Fallacy (oversimplification). You might want to review these and other logical fallacies in the "survival guide" on this website. Having said that, let me reiterate that every penny earned by anyone, beyond that which is required for one's survival (water, food, and protection from the elements) is PROFIT. Furthermore, I believe that I (or anyone else) owe you (or anyone else) absolutely nothing but to refrain from killing you, assaulting you, stealing from you, and to abide by any other voluntary cooperation I/we/you/they may have agreed to!
As far as "healthcare" being a "human right" (strange that I missed that in the Declaration or Bill of Rights), I wasn't aware that relatively modern and constantly evolving technologies could be considered "rights" that must be "affordable" to all.
Of course, you really don't believe that, do you? What you really mean is that some people should pay for other people's "healthcare". Why can't you just be honest and say it?And if these "some people" have to pay for the healthcare of the "other people", it seems to me they should have a say as to the behaviors (diet, smoking, drinking, drugs, exercise, bungee jumping, sex,...) that can effect "other peoples" health!
Doesn't that seem "fair" since "some people" are on the hook for the "healthcare" costs of "other people"? Nevermind the infringement of individual liberties, imagine the astronomical price to be paid for the required enlargement of the "justice, police, and fire departments"! Sounds unpleasant to me! I hope the day never comes when I could be jailed for "breaking leg while skiing!" As to your "immoral and unethical" (and isn't that subjective?) comment- I had no idea you were so religious?
And by the way, you mentioned your salary on another post and considering that you make three times what I do (and I'm uninsured) I find it ammusing to hear you lecture me about the "wealthy" and "morality and ethics"!
Delfuego,
The prices are too high as it is. This is what is leading to all the lawsuits. People justify themselves into it because they 'got raped' by their doctor or HMO. I was pondering this question yesterday and didn't come up with much, so I abandoned the post I was going to leave. I think we need to do something though because the problem is getting out of hand. What came first, the chicken or the egg. Doctors charge more because their insurance prems are so high, leading ins companies to charge more their customers, leading customers to file more lawsuits, leading ins companies charging more. I do think the bigger cause for it is the insurance companies, but how to put a check on that, except call a lawyer? Maybe some kind of reward to patients for fewer doctor visits by the ins. company? But they don't care, they profit either way.
I came up a possible insurance fix when thinking about other types of insurance. Like life insurance vs. car insurance. Life insurance has the built in reward but you have to die to get it. Ironic, eh? So then, an idea for a new car insurance company: Payback a percentage of the premiums as a reward for avoiding accidents. It would be almost like having a savings account. Right now our system doesn't discrimate against accidents or going to the doctor for a hangnail (since I am already paying insurance, why not use it? - but those copays are still offensive, no?). It is almost like they want you to get hurt so they can make money (professional confilct of interest for doctors; HMOs just see the dollar signs). Seriously, I could undersell every car insurance company out there (yes even the almighty Geico)! Problem is, it takes money to make money. It would be nice to see more of these types of companies out there, though. Same could be done with HMO's too!
QUOTE
The only solution to it is to raise the price of HMO's so that these people can continue to get their concerns addressed. That is the current situation as I see it. What are you takes?
The prices are too high as it is. This is what is leading to all the lawsuits. People justify themselves into it because they 'got raped' by their doctor or HMO. I was pondering this question yesterday and didn't come up with much, so I abandoned the post I was going to leave. I think we need to do something though because the problem is getting out of hand. What came first, the chicken or the egg. Doctors charge more because their insurance prems are so high, leading ins companies to charge more their customers, leading customers to file more lawsuits, leading ins companies charging more. I do think the bigger cause for it is the insurance companies, but how to put a check on that, except call a lawyer? Maybe some kind of reward to patients for fewer doctor visits by the ins. company? But they don't care, they profit either way.
I came up a possible insurance fix when thinking about other types of insurance. Like life insurance vs. car insurance. Life insurance has the built in reward but you have to die to get it. Ironic, eh? So then, an idea for a new car insurance company: Payback a percentage of the premiums as a reward for avoiding accidents. It would be almost like having a savings account. Right now our system doesn't discrimate against accidents or going to the doctor for a hangnail (since I am already paying insurance, why not use it? - but those copays are still offensive, no?). It is almost like they want you to get hurt so they can make money (professional confilct of interest for doctors; HMOs just see the dollar signs). Seriously, I could undersell every car insurance company out there (yes even the almighty Geico)! Problem is, it takes money to make money. It would be nice to see more of these types of companies out there, though. Same could be done with HMO's too!
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.