States Show How Not To Fix Health Care

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]Beowolf wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
Beowolf wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
Amazing that all these countries have complete failures with healthcare, isn’t it? Especially when so many counties have the perfect solution! I mean, why don’t we all list all of the counties with this “non-failed” systems?

Let’s be honest. The differences here are between “socialism,” which every first-world country has except us here in the US, and capitalism, which we are losing to these damn socialists. Can’t the left just open there eyes? Every other first world country in the world is a FAILURE! We are the ONLY SUCCESS! These leftists have to open their eyes and quick!

Those other countries? They’re tiny, have limited immigration, and we’re (as in the US) paying for a majority of their defence spending. Plus, they sell their goods to US! When we go down the toilet, when our consumption decreases, and when we stop protecting their assess, those programs are fucking screwed!

This is a positively brilliant point that is almost universally overlooked. For all the crying over US meddling around the world, if it weren’t for our playing global enforcer nobody else, especially Canada, would have the money for half the social bullshit they waste their money on and some of them would no longer exist at all.

You are also correct in that we have been invaded by immigrants, legal or not, since the 60’s, more interested in sponging off our generosity and diluting our culture than becoming productive Americans. England is getting there, but nobody has to contend with this like we do.

I just want to say that I have NOTHING against immigrants. Nothing at all. I just wanted to point out that most European nations have relatively little immigration, if not emigration! American’s pool of dependants is expanding at a far greater rate than that of other countries which have currently bankrupt (seriously, their are few that really work WELL within their defined budget boundaries) socialised health insurance programs.[/quote]

That is because most European countries don’t put up with it. They realize the drain on the economy that these people pose. They have long done away with birthright citizenship seeing its flaws. Talking with my uncle in Rome just last week, he told me when you go to the doctor, they check your citizenship status. If you are illegal, the hospital calls immigration authorities and detains them. The Vatican is in an uproar, but no one really cares. They really address the issue of immigration harshly and thoroughly, and it works.

22

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
What was your premise again? Try to keep up boys. [/quote]

OK, I’ll bite:

Premise: A certain group of people, let’s call them “Statists” (or, innumerate or poor in history), wholly support a nationalized healthcare program in some form including an entity that will compete with private sector (see: “Dirigo Healthcare” or “TennCare”) on a national level.

Five states representing several different demographics, economies, tax structures, geographies, and scopes of coverage have tried the same and all are much more expensive than as advertised while covering much fewer people than expected, failing, and/or close to dissolution.

The “National” plan, as written offers little in the way of change from these plans or any novel ideas (ie. more of the same), yet at a scale magnitudes larger than the 5 states combined. The ‘reforms’ that have been offered from the Majority Party in Congress offers little or no departure from 5 (not including other countries’) failing implementations.

Yet, the said ‘statists’ wholly support the implementation of the program at the Federal level. Their “faith” in government, despite history and live examples of the failing state ‘experiments’, rivals that of the most devout religious fanatics.

Why is this so?

23

Well, when the Democratic Party is in full control of the country, there need not be any inequity where those who treat patients have distributed to them many times the income of those that they treat.

Health care costs must be cut. Doctors don’t need to be paid six figures per year.

Cuba has barefoot doctors and has the best health care in the world. (No, DON’T EVEN bring up the toilet paper: toilet paper IS NOT HEALTH CARE you morons.)

Barefoot doctors… mmmmm, mmmmm! Brings a smile to my face. Which reminds me: Barack Hussein Obama! Mmmmm, mmmmm, mmmmm!

But I digress. Back on topic now:

As for medical equipment being too costly, price controls will take care of that. When the price of a CAT scan machine is set to $20,000 and the price of a scan to $20, then where is the cost problem? Gone. DUH!!!

You Repugnicans just can’t understand simple things. But, so sorry, sucks to be you: Chimpy McHitler is GONE and YOU LOST. Get over it.

24

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Gambit_Lost wrote:
What was your premise again? Try to keep up boys.

OK, I’ll bite:[/quote]

Well, at least you’re making an effort.

[quote]
Premise: A certain group of people, let’s call them “Statists” (or, innumerate or poor in history), wholly support a nationalized healthcare program in some form including an entity that will compete with private sector (see: “Dirigo Healthcare” or “TennCare”) on a national level.

Five states representing several different demographics, economies, tax structures, geographies, and scopes of coverage have tried the same and all are much more expensive than as advertised while covering much fewer people than expected, failing, and/or close to dissolution.[/quote]

Have there been any states that have been anything but “failures?” Would Romney call his plan a “failure?” Would Hatoyama? How about Harper? Why?

Then ask yourself how many countries have the plan you are advocating for? Are there any problems with that plan? Any “failures?”

I would encourage you to call your representative and ask them to stop talking about death panels or political wins if healthcare fails, and start talking about reforms. Obama can’t move right if no one will vote for it when he does.

[quote]Yet, the said ‘statists’ wholly support the implementation of the program at the Federal level. Their “faith” in government, despite history and live examples of the failing state ‘experiments’, rivals that of the most devout religious fanatics.

Why is this so?[/quote]

Well, I certainly am not a part of whatever strange group you’re referencing. But for an answer I suggest you look at those who are on the other end of the extreme. There’s numerous people on this very forum who fully believe that if government were completely taken out of the equation there would be peace and prosperity, despite all that history teaches. Why is this so? Answer this and you’ll have your answer for that.

25

All you’ve said is “Yeah, but what about the other guy?” …

re: State programs that are not failures: None. All the state run healthcare experiments are in shambles.

re: These ‘reforms’ you mention— what, exactly are they and how are they different from the state level ‘reforms’?

26

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
All you’ve said is “Yeah, but what about the other guy?” …[/quote]

No, I’ve tried to show you why most people don’t agree with your premises.

According to the people I mentioned? Why don’t they believe this to be the case?

Did I mention reforms? I’m pretty sure I didn’t. I did suggest that you mention reforms though.

27

re: [quote]No, I’ve tried to show you why most people don’t agree with your premises. [/quote]

You’ve not done this at all.

re: The people you mentioned-- Of course they won’t admit failure. I could post a literal library of the failures of my ‘local’ state healthcare Dirigo. The numbers don’t lie. Gov. Baldacci certainly won’t let his baby ‘fail’ at any cost-- even if it costs billions to insure 2000 people.

re: Japan’s system. Success? Really?

The model isn’t a great success story.

No? Are you using a ghost writer for your posts then not reading what they wrote under your username?

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
I would encourage you to call your representative and ask them to stop talking about death panels or political wins if healthcare fails, and start talking about reforms. Obama can’t move right if no one will vote for it when he does.[/quote]

28

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
re: No, I’ve tried to show you why most people don’t agree with your premises.

You’ve not done this at all.[/quote]

Well that was the effort. You can lead a horse to water and all that.

So why won’t they “admit it?” And was the problem better or worse before their plans?

[quote]re: Japan’s system. Success? Really?

The model isn’t a great success story.[/quote]

This was actually a pretty good article. What surprises me is that you have read it and immediately label it a “failure.” From your own article:

The Japanese visit a doctor nearly 14 times a year, more than four times as often as Americans. They can choose any primary care physician or specialist they want, and surveys show they are almost always seen on the day they want. All that medical care helps keep the Japanese alive longer than any other people on Earth while fostering one of the world’s lowest infant mortality rates.

They are going to have problems in the future, no doubt. But to claim that a healthcare system which helped to create a society with the lowest infant mortality rates and longest-lived people as a “failure” is a bit extreme, don’t you think?

[quote]Did I mention reforms? I’m pretty sure I didn’t. I did suggest that you mention reforms though.

No? Are you using a ghost writer for your posts then not reading what they wrote under your username?

Gambit_Lost wrote:
I would encourage you to call your representative and ask them to stop talking about death panels or political wins if healthcare fails, and start talking about reforms. Obama can’t move right if no one will vote for it when he does.[/quote]

I’m not really sure how to respond to this. I said that you should tell your representative to start mentioning reforms. I didn’t suggest any specific ones that you should mention. Where is the disconnect?

29

[quote]Beowolf wrote:

This is a positively brilliant point that is almost universally overlooked. For all the crying over US meddling around the world, if it weren’t for our playing global enforcer nobody else, especially Canada, would have the money for half the social bullshit they waste their money on and some of them would no longer exist at all.
[/quote]

Exactly. Canada is in such a vulnerable geopolitical situation that our military is indispensable to it. Without our protection, North Korea would probably launch a massive amphibious invasion from across the Pacific Ocean and conquer the entire country. Canada should realize that its only protection from military invasion is a couple thousand miles of partly frozen oceans and start chipping in.

30

You’ve not led me to any water. If you have, it must have been sewer water and who would want to drink that? :confused: (enough cliche)

I didn’t label the Japanese model a failure. “Not a success story” doesn’t necessarily equal “failure”. However, there are serious problems, enough that jumping to using it as a template, especially given the size, scope, and magnitude of the US is certainly not warranted at this time.

re: reforms.

I’m looking for you (or other backers of the current Pelosi/Obama/Dem offering) to provide some novel ideas of the kind of ‘reforms’ you support. The point of the thread is that the status quo models are flawed enough that using them in any form is a recipe for disaster.

31

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
I didn’t label the Japanese model a failure. “Not a success story” doesn’t necessarily equal “failure”. [/quote]

Well, actually, you did. This was a major part of your premise I was attacking. Specifically, you said, [quote]State programs that are not failures: None. All the state run healthcare experiments are in shambles. [/quote]

I certainly wouldn’t use it as a “template” but I would learn lessons from it.

[quote]
re: reforms.

I’m looking for you (or other backers of the current Pelosi/Obama/Dem offering) to provide some novel ideas of the kind of ‘reforms’ you support. The point of the thread is that the status quo models are flawed enough that using them in any form is a recipe for disaster.[/quote]

Funny, I’m looking for you (or other backers of alternative plans) to provide some novel ideas of the kinds of ‘reforms’ you support.

My point in this thread was to show that your premise was flawed (re: not all state run programs are “failures” nor completely socialist).

32

Last I heard, Japan was not a US state.

My solution is simple: Less government, not complete take over. Closer doctor/patient relationships (many doctors are not even taking insurance any more). I’m not the type of person that loathes a company for making profit doing their business.

Find the history of healthcare in the US (I’ve posted this timeline before). Interference from both R’s and D’s have contributed to escalating healthcare costs. Anything the government controls becomes overly expensive, bureaucraticly (word?) dense, complicated, and inefficient. The “mess” we’re in is directly related to the involvement of government.

You can see hints of ‘free market forces’ (I used the term loosely for lack of a better phrase) when you compare healthcare costs from state to state. My state is one of the 5 that have the failing state plans. Luckily, my insurance comes from out of state because my company is located out of state. I used to have 100% coverage for myself (from employer) and paid family. Now I pay about a third of my premium, plus family, and I get more coverage for less (ie. I come out ahead a few hundred dollars per month.

33

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Last I heard, Japan was not a US state.[/quote]

I would suggest you look up the word “state” in a dictionary.

Interesting, you believe that there is going to be a “complete take over?” Who are you getting your information from? I suggest looking to Bill Frist. Five Republicans that want the GOP to back healthcare reform - CSMonitor.com

Sounds good. How will closer doctor-patient relationships be legislated though? Sounds like a good idea, but certainly not a solution to all the problems we have now.

That’s a good story. I think you should mention that to your representatives when you call them to talk about the types of reforms you want to see. Sounds like you should make sure you don’t lose the good things you already have.

If you’d like, I could give stories about how my mother was denied a surgery because of a pre-existing condition, or how my father was denied the medicine his doctor prescribed because it was “not proven effective” (although it sure worked for my dad after he paid out of pocket and the FDA + his doctor thought it was effective). But we can be honest with each other, can’t we? I know about people in your situation and you know about people in my parents situation, right?

34

Which star in the US flag is Japan?

I’ve sent letters to my Congresscritters and Senators, what makes you think otherwise? (I’m not a passive citizen like the majority of the sheeple). Of course, they don’t read them as I always get boiler plate replies that do not address anything in the letters.

re: Frist et al. I’m not a Republican, so just because some Republicans endorse more government solution does nothing for me. It’s just more of the same. My senators are Republicans (and I use the term loosely). Olympia Snowe has been a key ‘swing’ vote in all of this debacle.

If Arnold thinks it’s a great idea, he should take his collapsing state economy and add “California-Care” to the implosion. I’m actually open to the idea that if States want to take it on, let them. Five have and are failing (see original posted article), including the one I live in.

As far as over simplification, after 50 years of gov’t interference in something (I believe) the government shouldn’t be involved in, perhaps a “total withdrawal” of gov’t from healthcare is an oversimplification, like instant total withdrawal from Iraqistan. However, small steps in that direction are quite doable.

That’s sad about your parents, and yes, I can name folks I know in that situation and those who know people in that situation. I’m glad to hear that your father had a successful surgery. So he paid out of pocket. My grandfather with a 7th grade education saved his money for retirement and medical and paid for my grandmother’s time in nursing home while he was dying (died) of cancer. All the tests, meds, hospitalization, hospice, funeral, and legal all out of pocket. I’ve had a couple procedures paid for out of pocket. I know others who have paid (are paying) out of pocket. In many cases if a doc/surgeon knows this will be the case, they will work with the patient. As mentioned earlier, it’s a trend in many places that docs don’t even take insurance because it lowers their costs and let’s them be doctors and surgeons instead of “health administrators”. I’ve posted about a friend who’s a doctor in W.Virginia who even barters for care for those many family with nothing. What’s your point?

Incidentally, many states already have “Guaranteed Issue”, that is, they must cover “uninsurable” or “existing conditions”. Maine and Mass are two that have it in total. They’re state systems are still in shambles. GI is a nice step but does little for program viability.

You’ve still not offered any novel ideas.

35

Meant to post this chart of states with GI (guaranteed issue laws):

36

[quote]SteelyD wrote:
Last I heard, Japan was not a US state.

My solution is simple: Less government, not complete take over. Closer doctor/patient relationships (many doctors are not even taking insurance any more). I’m not the type of person that loathes a company for making profit doing their business.

Find the history of healthcare in the US (I’ve posted this timeline before). Interference from both R’s and D’s have contributed to escalating healthcare costs. Anything the government controls becomes overly expensive, bureaucraticly (word?) dense, complicated, and inefficient. The “mess” we’re in is directly related to the involvement of government.

You can see hints of ‘free market forces’ (I used the term loosely for lack of a better phrase) when you compare healthcare costs from state to state. My state is one of the 5 that have the failing state plans. Luckily, my insurance comes from out of state because my company is located out of state. I used to have 100% coverage for myself (from employer) and paid family. Now I pay about a third of my premium, plus family, and I get more coverage for less (ie. I come out ahead a few hundred dollars per month.

[/quote]

Great post.

G O V E R N M E N T holds some sort of hypnotic mystical divine sway over the minds of a disturbingly large portion of the current US population. There is no other entity in the comprehensive history of creation that can so universally destroy almost anything it gets it’s hands into and remain not only credible, but PREEMINENTLY credible at that. What other outfit could bankrupt and destroy like government and still be turned to for a product or plan.

Now people are willing to trust their very lives to a social bureaucracy with a track record of hideous failure. It’s creepy.

37

Why would it be surprising that when, today, the great majority of adults lived in trust of their government-run schools and teachers to make everything okay for nearly all the formative years of their life?

And it is not as if those government employees spent likely even one second total over 12 or more years warning about dangers of government, or as if they were likely to provide any such influence even indirectly – quite the opposite.

I well recall the English teacher that was quite visibly angry at my paper on Franklin D Roosevelt: he said he had to give me an A for the writing, but if it were a history class it would have been an F (however, every single fact given was indeed a fact.) Heaven forfend that expansion of power of the Federal Government should be seen by a student as anything but good.

Barack Hussein Obama, mmmm, mmmm, mmmm! (the little schoolchildren sing.)

38

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Funny, I’m looking for you (or other backers of alternative plans) to provide some novel ideas of the kinds of ‘reforms’ you support.
[/quote]

Ok here is my alternative as a right wing conservative:

5-10% of income is automatically taken away as a tax and placed into a bank account similar to how superannuation is taken in Australia. Every person has a mandated insurance account. They can then spend this money on any insurance policy they want including simply saving the money up. The unspent money is kept locked in the account for 5 years. After that time you can take it out. This money can be spent by you alone.

The government gets out of the healthcare market as much as possible. This means throwing away the regulation that gives HMO’s such power. And throwing away regulation that stops insurance companies from competing over state lines. Allow doctors to advertise prices etc.

A complete medical check up is required at least once per year. This is NOT covered by your insurance and is either paid out of pocket or via money in your mandated insurance account.

Regarding pre-existing conditions: Before taking out an insurance policy a complete medical check up is required. If they find a serious condition it is NOT covered. However everything else is covered. So the insurance companies cannot claim in the future that the condition you developed existed before the policy was taken out. When switching policies or insurance providers the medical check up is waived.

Medical insurance will also only cover severe problems/accidents etc. None of this minor stuff. Sore throat and you have to visit the doctor? Suck it up and pay for it yourself. Fall off your roof and need to go to the ER? Covered by insurance.

And because it is insurance there will be a time limit for coverage of some chronic conditions (I’m actually not sure how this is handled at the moment). In that I mean if you get diabetes and require a daily injection for the rest of your life the cost will only be covered for 2-3 years by the insurance company.

Bascially medical insurance should act in the same way every other form of insurance works.

39

[quote]phaethon wrote:
Basically medical insurance should act in the same way every other form of insurance works.[/quote]

I’ve really never understood why anyone ever thought it should be any different.