Behold: Our Health Care system - current

[rob]

Have you ever noticed how every "crisis" that comes along is little more than leverage pushing toward less freedom and more government? Who are the willing dupes?

 

Yes, like "border patrol" inspections along interior highways.

 

See my comments in that thread. How do you reconcile your desire for govt services and programs with your love of freedom?

 

Re: health care? I'm not a health care expert. I'm not sure what the answers are, but I do see that there is a problem, and I believe that free enterprise had it's chance. As I've mentioned before, one good first step I'd like to see is to require insurance companies to be non-profit corps.

 

Do I want to see socialized health care? I'm not sure. Propose a plan. I do think that we need to find a plan which assures reasonable coverage for all. How do we get there? I don't know. But what we're doing now doesn't work, and I'm not comfortable with just sweeping the uninsured under the rug and saying that "it's their fault."

 

We often require citizens to do certain things to safeguard their health; we require them to wear seatbelts. We require them to avoid certain drugs. Why not require them to obtain health insurance? Why not subsidize a cheap form of health insurance for those that can't afford private health insurance? We subsidize wheat, why not health insurance?

 

Things like "insurance tax breaks" and shit are just boondoggles. So far I have yet to see a proposal from the right which I feel really has any kind of chance at actually changing anything. I'm not sure I've seen a good proposal from the left, either, to be honest.

 

But at least I think what we have now is unacceptable. How is that incompatable with a love of freedom?

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

Re: health care? I'm not a health care expert. I'm not sure what the answers are, but I do see that there is a problem, and I believe that free enterprise had it's chance. As I've mentioned before, one good first step I'd like to see is to require insurance companies to be non-profit corps.

 

And pharmaceuticals too? And hospitals? And Doctors in private practice?

 

Do I want to see socialized health care? I'm not sure. Propose a plan. I do think that we need to find a plan which assures reasonable coverage for all. How do we get there? I don't know.

 

Everyone has to buy insurance if their employer doesn't cover it. Say as a fixed rate payroll deduction. For those unemployed, it's covered for a time, just like unemployment. Everyone has some copay for each visit and some deductible.

 

[rob]

 

Re: health care? I'm not a health care expert. I'm not sure what the answers are, but I do see that there is a problem, and I believe that free enterprise had it's chance. As I've mentioned before, one good first step I'd like to see is to require insurance companies to be non-profit corps.

 

And pharmaceuticals too? And hospitals? And Doctors in private practice?

 

I think the first step is just to lower insurance costs. Health insurance industry makes billions in profits. That's a good place to start. Should Dr's be non-profit? Of course not. I know some Dr's. They don't make all that much. I think the first place to start is the insurance companies HUGE profits. They're raking it in while denying claims? Fuck that.

 

Do I want to see socialized health care? I'm not sure. Propose a plan. I do think that we need to find a plan which assures reasonable coverage for all. How do we get there? I don't know.

 

Everyone has to buy insurance if their employer doesn't cover it. Say as a fixed rate payroll deduction. For those unemployed, it's covered for a time, just like unemployment. Everyone has some copay for each visit and some deductible.

 

That sounds like a good start. With the profit ripped out of the insurance industry, perhaps cheap insurance would be more realistic. Medicaid exists for the truly impoverished. But, how would we cover those who have jobs and don't qualify for medicaid, but don't have enough for even cheap insurance? I'm thinking of my friend who works at Starbucks for 8 bucks an hour and lives paycheck to paycheck. The cost of insurance would have to come WAY down.

Edited August 27, 2008 by rob

[Fairweather]

How is that incompatable with a love of freedom?

Stated as you did, it's not. Mattp's expressed desire for a government monopolized system has caused me to brush you with his contaminated paint.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

Re: health care? I'm not a health care expert. I'm not sure what the answers are, but I do see that there is a problem, and I believe that free enterprise had it's chance. As I've mentioned before, one good first step I'd like to see is to require insurance companies to be non-profit corps.

 

And pharmaceuticals too? And hospitals? And Doctors in private practice?

 

I think the first step is just to lower insurance costs. Health insurance industry makes billions in profits. That's a good place to start. Should Dr's be non-profit? Of course not. I know some Dr's. They don't make all that much. I think the first place to start is the insurance companies HUGE profits. They're raking it in while denying claims? Fuck that.

 

 

Non-profit doesn't mean they'd get no salary. Part of the problem is having these guys on the stock market, with a board of directors, shareholders, etc. looking to maximize profits. But taking this out of the equation - people working at these companies would still earn a living.

 

[Fairweather]

As I've mentioned before, one good first step I'd like to see is to require insurance companies to be non-profit corps.

 

Health insurance industry makes billions in profits. That's a good place to start. Should Dr's be non-profit? Of course not. I think the first place to start is the insurance companies HUGE profits.

 

 

 

So doctor's $$ = good; insurance co profit = bad? There is nothing wrong with profit, and government seizure of that which has been legally earned is anti-democratic. Tighten the rules governing the industry? I've got NO problem with that. Be careful of unintended consequences though.

[mattp]

You claim that "most people" here want universal health care. I have to assume you once again have a Google-survey that backs up your statement, so its fair to ask how the question was framed. A question like that rarely addresses the manner or mechanisms by which we would arrive at your goal. Survey question for dummies: "Would you like everyone in America to have free health care for life?" Duhhh...ummmm...sure...uhhh...I guess....

 

You are correct. Most Americans have said they would support universal coverage, and in many if not most surveys they've said they would support a single-payer system. However, if you ask them "even if that means longer wait times?" or "Even if that means your taxes will go up?" the support goes down. Of course, there is NO evidence that there would be longer wait times or that taxes would go up.

 

Unfortunately, many Americans have been fed the same baloney that you have swallowed hook line and sinker and believe that the VA system provides poor care of that private insurance companies are more efficient than medicare. Special interest groups have skewed public opinion but, even still, surveys undertaken for the last several years show general support for healthcare reforms you brand as filthy socialism.

 

By the way: I could provide dozens of cites but you complained about this and said you won't bother to look them up anyway. If you want, you can confirm my assertion with Google in five minutes.

[mattp]

So doctor's $$ = good; insurance co profit = bad? There is nothing wrong with profit, and government seizure of that which has been legally earned is anti-democratic. Tighten the rules governing the industry? I've got NO problem with that. Be careful of unintended consequences though.

 

Yes. It is bad for private companies that routinely deny coverage through unfair business practices reap and retain huge profits. Go back to the start of this thread and see where you called Dmuja a liar without any basis and I presented tens of articles reporting exactly that.

 

And what is the "government seizure" baloney? You are against the governments providing an expanded public insurance whether or not it would be offered alongside private insurance and whether or not there is any expanded government operation of actual services.

[glassgowkiss]

How is that incompatable with a love of freedom?

Stated as you did, it's not. Mattp's expressed desire for a government monopolized system has caused me to brush you with his contaminated paint.

and you expressed a desire for US to ditch the allies in europe you red fuck. why don't go and suck putin's cock. the reality is you are just a stupid fuckwad and your mom boning high school football team. a classic example, that syphilis and pregnancy don't mix.

[Tokogirl]

 

Re: health care? I'm not a health care expert. I'm not sure what the answers are, but I do see that there is a problem, and I believe that free enterprise had it's chance. As I've mentioned before, one good first step I'd like to see is to require insurance companies to be non-profit corps.

 

And pharmaceuticals too? And hospitals? And Doctors in private practice?

 

I think the first step is just to lower insurance costs. Health insurance industry makes billions in profits. That's a good place to start. Should Dr's be non-profit? Of course not. I know some Dr's. They don't make all that much. I think the first place to start is the insurance companies HUGE profits. They're raking it in while denying claims? Fuck that.

 

Do I want to see socialized health care? I'm not sure. Propose a plan. I do think that we need to find a plan which assures reasonable coverage for all. How do we get there? I don't know.

 

Everyone has to buy insurance if their employer doesn't cover it. Say as a fixed rate payroll deduction. For those unemployed, it's covered for a time, just like unemployment. Everyone has some copay for each visit and some deductible.

 

That sounds like a good start. With the profit ripped out of the insurance industry, perhaps cheap insurance would be more realistic. Medicaid exists for the truly impoverished. But, how would we cover those who have jobs and don't qualify for medicaid, but don't have enough for even cheap insurance? I'm thinking of my friend who works at Starbucks for 8 bucks an hour and lives paycheck to paycheck. The cost of insurance would have to come WAY down.

 

Wow, Rob my sentiments exactly!

A bill, attatched to a recent farm bill, would have cut any Medicare patients from being reinbursed for care provided by all clinics and hospitals that are more than 50% owned by the doctors. In some rural settings, Wenatchee, Omak, etc., that would have ment many folks would have to drive to Spokane or Seattle to recieve some of their care.

I surely don't have an answer to providing healthcare for everyone in need of it and as 5K brings up to much gov't regulation reduces freedoms.

Interesting to note that alot of the exchanges about random searches and healthcare costs gives the flavor of an us vs. them mentality. We elect them or don't elect them that vote.

[Fairweather]

Of course, there is NO evidence...that taxes would go up.

 

 

Mattp believes in the free lunch? You can't be serious.

[Fairweather]

How is that incompatable with a love of freedom?

Stated as you did, it's not. Mattp's expressed desire for a government monopolized system has caused me to brush you with his contaminated paint.

and you expressed a desire for US to ditch the allies in europe you red fuck. why don't go and suck putin's cock. the reality is you are just a stupid fuckwad and your mom boning high school football team. a classic example, that syphilis and pregnancy don't mix.

 

You remind me of that little creature that sits on Jaba The Hut's lap in the movie Star Wars.

[blurpy]

How is that incompatable with a love of freedom?

Stated as you did, it's not. Mattp's expressed desire for a government monopolized system has caused me to brush you with his contaminated paint.

and you expressed a desire for US to ditch the allies in europe you red fuck. why don't go and suck putin's cock. the reality is you are just a stupid fuckwad and your mom boning high school football team. a classic example, that syphilis and pregnancy don't mix.

 

You remind me of that little creature that sits on Jaba The Hut's lap in the movie Star Wars.

 

...and you remind everyone else of Jabba the Hutt...

[mattp]

Bring it on, Fairweather. I have shown that virtually every one of your main "factual" assertions in these discussions were wrong and you have made no effort to refute any of mine.

 

On this point, you will find that depending on which proposal is adopted we would obtain varying rates of increased efficiency versus varying rates of increased provision of services so it is difficult to predict with any specificity how these things would balance. If you consider government spending on healthcare to include not only medicaid and medicare but also VA system and coverage costs for Federal employees and other "related" outlays, the actual Federal exependitures are way more than most "studies" acknowledge. Further, if you believe in macroeconomic theories such as "trickle down" I guess you must also accept the idea that a healthier work force will produce more and this will increase revenue as a whole, helping to offset any increase in total government outlay.

 

There is not a simple answer as your "free lunch" jab would indicate but assertions that all we will get from any change is that quality will go down, patients will face long waiting periods, and taxes will go up are the pessimistic guesses of people, like yourself, who have swallowed a bunch of baloney from special interests who make a lot of money in the current system and don't want any changes. We may get some of these things, of course, but everyone will continue to have choices and those like you and KK who dislike socialism will always have the "right" to buy your own healthcare. Unless any new government sponsored insurance is incredibly successful, there will be a market for private alternatives and unless our elected officials turn totalitarian and pull of a major coup, there will remain a large private industry.

[blurpy]

Bring it on, Fairweather. I have shown that virtually every one of your main "factual" assertions in these discussions were wrong and you have made no effort to refute any of mine.

 

On this point, you will find that depending on which proposal is adopted we would obtain varying rates of increased efficiency versus varying rates of increased provision of services so it is difficult to predict with any specificity how these things would balance. If you consider government spending on healthcare to include not only medicaid and medicare but also VA system and coverage costs for Federal employees and other "related" outlays, the actual Federal exependitures are way more than most "studies" acknowledge.

 

There is not a simple answer as your "free lunch" jab would indicate but assertions that all we will get from any change is that quality will go down, patients will face long waiting periods, and taxes will go up are the pessimistic guesses of people, like yourself, who have swallowed a bunch of baloney from special interests who make a lot of money in the current system and don't want any changes. We may get some of these things, of course, especially for those who cannot afford supplemental coverage, but everyone will continue to have choices and those like you and KK who dislike socialism will always have the "right" to buy your own healthcare. Unless any new government system is incredibly successful, there will be a market for it and unless our elected officials turn totalitarian and pull of a major coup, there will remain a large private industry component.

 

In the UK there are private analogues to NHS, and many people purchase private insurance to supplement what they pay for through their taxes.

 

One of the major benefits of universal coverage, if we can figure out how to do it, is the economic stimulus that will result when people are no longer tied to jobs simply for the healthcare benefits. It will also become a boon for small businesses and new businesses.

 

Having been involved with two technology startups I can attest to the millstone that healthcare worries create. Not only is it very hard to afford coverage for employees, it is very hard to attract people in the first place. They may not be too concerned about less pay, or potential disruptions in pay, but few can afford to be without health coverage or with reduced health coverage, especially if they have families.

 

So, in addition, to the social benefits there are real economic benefits to solving this problem.

 

btw, mattp, i applaud your persistence with the knuckleheads. they are clearly uninterested or incapable of sustained, rational conversation. there are those of us out here, though, who read your comments and find them illuminating.

[glassgowkiss]

Blurpy, there is no rational conversation with our pee-wee brain FW. this guy is a total douche fuck stick.

[Dechristo]

btw, mattp, i applaud your persistence with the knuckleheads. they are clearly uninterested or incapable of sustained, rational conversation. there are those of us out here, though, who read your comments and find them illuminating.

 

For many closed dark spaces, even a low-wattage appliance bulb is of sufficient brilliance.

[blurpy]

btw, mattp, i applaud your persistence with the knuckleheads. they are clearly uninterested or incapable of sustained, rational conversation. there are those of us out here, though, who read your comments and find them illuminating.

 

For many closed dark spaces, even a low-wattage appliance bulb is of sufficient brilliance.

 

well, i'm happy it worked, even for you.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

btw, mattp, i applaud your persistence with the knuckleheads. they are clearly uninterested or incapable of sustained, rational conversation. there are those of us out here, though, who read your comments and find them illuminating.

 

For many closed dark spaces, even a low-wattage appliance bulb is of sufficient brilliance.

 

well, i'm happy it worked, even for you.

 

blurpy

[blurpy]

finally, something the kaskadeklimber can understand. now we're talking.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

finally, something the kaskadeklimber can understand. now we're talking.

 

It explains why every time you show up, it smells like shit

[rob]

[blurpy]

 

all right all right, it is pretty sick. score a major coup for KomradeKaskadeKlimber.

 

honestly, that used to be a nonsense word, but has apparently, err, taken on a new meaning.

 

so, now it is time to importune the gods of this little universe, requesting a name change to something a little less offensive.

 

dear gods, please help me...

[prole]

If you had a cuckold fetish, we could call you "Slurpy".

[billcoe]

Flurpy is out too. read #3