Whether this is a good solution or not, whether it works in other countries or not, the costs are out of control and the current system just isn’t working for too many people.
Most Support U.S. Guarantee of Health Care
A majority of Americans say the federal government should guarantee health insurance to every American, especially children, and are willing to pay higher taxes to do it, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll.
[…]access to affordable health care is at the top of the public’s domestic agenda, ranked far more important than immigration, cutting taxes or promoting traditional values.
Only 24 percent said they were satisfied with President Bush’s handling of the health insurance issue, despite his recent initiatives, and 62 percent said the Democrats were more likely to improve the health care system.
Americans showed a striking willingness in the poll to make tradeoffs to guarantee health insurance for all, including paying as much as $500 more in taxes a year and forgoing future tax cuts.
[…]Americans remain divided, largely along party lines, over whether the government should require everyone to participate in a national health care plan, and over whether the government would do a better job than the private insurance industry in providing coverage.
Nearly 47 million people in the United States, or more than 15 percent of the population, now go without health insurance, up 6.8 million since 2000.
[…]
Nearly 8 in 10 said they thought it was more important to provide universal access to health insurance than to extend the tax cuts of recent years; 18 percent said the tax cuts were more important.
Health care costs will not come down and be available to everyone until everyone is responsible for handing over the cash for their care.
Medicare is NOT an efficient delivery system. It operates on the low overhead not because of efficiency, but because of government mandate on what the carriers get paid. The same for what Doctors get paid. Not based on worth, but based on how much the government decides it is going to allocate.
Why not go to high deductible plans, have the employer put funds into a savings account tax free (or the individual, or in the case of the poor, the government). Money is doled out for care (with insurance for major illness) and at the end of the year.. you get (in cash) any money left in your account with NO tax!
Imagine how people would work to take care of themselves if it meant an extra bonus at the end of the year. Imagine how they would shop around for cost efficient options. Imagine the reduction in paperwork for doctors and hospitals. Imagine competition and responsibility for self with a safety net for all.
Now imagine the people currently making overhead on managing the system as is letting this happen. Never mind…
Funny how many of the same people who look down on the poor dumb Christians for not believing in macro-evolution and natural selection are usually against the idea that humans should also be subject to it.
#34,
So what is it? What makes the right think they should not shell out for the good of the whole? Why is the right so callous and cold-hearted when it comes to caring for a whole civilization?
So they may then call themselves, and with chest expanding pride, Libertarians.
Once I am forced, by law and the threat of violence, to subsidize the risk of all the idiots out there unwililng to take responsibility for their own health and safety, then I am going to want laws against risky behavior. I that we should immediately lobby for such things as bans on motorcycles, skiing, skateboarding, and other activities which are of significant risk to the body. We should also demand that everyone wear helmets to bed or while in the bathtub. Noone should be allowed to engage in risky sexual behavior which may lead to a lifetime of expensive medical treatment.
Everyone should be required to get at least 1 hour of heavy exercise per day, and that government sponsored gyms are the best way to achieve this – anyone not getting their gym card marked by an agent each day should be fined and possibly sent off to an exercise camp. Any activities which are at some point deemed unsafe or likely to cause significant expense to the public health budget should be outlawed and the practitioners fined and/or imprisoned if they do not immediately cease the behavior. Stupid teenage behavior, such as playing with fire or other dangerous materials should result in criminal fines on the parents, the proceeds of which go toward the health budget.
The only way to really guarantee health care is to ensure that when granddad needs a new hip and grandson needs a new knee, that we have the resources to provide what’s need to both of them.
Expsensive, risky behavior will require rationing of healthcare that we can’t really afford and prevent us from guaranteeing healthcare to all who need or want it. Or are we just talking about guaranteeing care to those who need it? Who, then, will define need? If granddad needs a new hip, will that just be defined as a “want”? After all, granddad is retired and well past his productive years.
Someone please define what “guaranteed” health care means, and then how it can be “guaranteed.”
No one has a right to health care, NEXT? If you think so, then your concept of what rights are is flawed. If the majority of “Americans” agree with this tripe, then this nation sure has fallen from grace. The worst thing about this is there will be government mandated diets inorder to curb the costs of HC. Freedom of choice you want? No more. Independence turned into dependence with the creation of government healthcare. What incentive will people have to take care of their bodies if they have no cost based incentives to drive their life choices? “Ah, fuck it. I am going to eat transfats, smoke, drink, and not exercise. Fuck my health. The government will fix me up for free.” Its bad enough we have the FDA killing the progress of the freemarket in this area. If you think we need the FDA, you can’t think for yourself.
Mr. Fusion has no real grasp on the concept of the freemarket. He thinks some how the government is going to be more efficient at healthcare than the private sector. How will that be done, Mr. Fusion? Magic? You can’t have efficient healthcare when government ” officials ” will be over paid. Government has already drove up medical costs with its crazy antics of the past. What possibly leads you to believe that they will get it right this time? Oh and what gives you the right to steal from others to get your super efficient magic happyland healthcare?
So they may then call themselves, and with wealth extraction pride, Communists.
47, 48…
And what are the Market forces governing the COST of medical???
Goods and materials…Then comes insurance.
If you took off the profit margins, by 80%, the corps would STILL make money, and most of the GOODS and materials would be about 1/3 the cost.
THEN every clinic could have an XRAY machine….And almost anything ELSE they wanted.
Then ALSO, most doctors could have Anylical analysis done on ANY samples they had, at LESS then 1/2 the price…
I dont THINk you remember when the GOV and state, SUPPLIED most of their OWN goods, and LIFE was cheaper..
“And what are the Market forces governing the COST of medical???”
In the U.S, or the forces involved in a freemarket? The two would not be the same, so make a choice here.
“If you took off the profit margins, by 80%, the corps would STILL make money, and most of the GOODS and materials would be about 1/3 the cost.”
Why would the business still want to do business when such an act would mean they would be losing money due to inflation?. If you take a look at this list linked in my name, you will see that below the top 50 businesses out of 296, they make less then 10% net profit. Now real inflation can be anywhere between 2% to 4%. If you take 80% of those companies profits, that will leave them with net profits of 2%, which would mean that would be breaking even or losing money. That is just for the ones that make close to 10%, many don’t even come close. So what will happen? They will go out of business leaving the top 50 guys with no real competition. Which would mean they would make even greater profits, yet still able to make the 80% payment. Why would they even strive to cut costs when they have no other businesses to worry about? The main problem is pantents given that they provide an unfair market advantage.
“I dont THINk you remember when the GOV and state, SUPPLIED most of their OWN goods, and LIFE was cheaper..”
When was that? How is it cheaper when there is a greater overhead? Or do you discount taxes when you make this claim?
#45,
Let’s see, $10K a year would be almost twice what I was paying for both myself and my wife when I was paying for insurance as an independent contractor.
That was probably a few years ago. How much are your co-pays and out of pocket costs? What are your contributions? Go ahead, break your leg and find out how much you end up paying.
What about families that only make $10K a year? If we presume they are exempt, where does the $10K you expected them to pay come from? That’s right! It comes from the rest of us.
If they earn less then 10K already, they are covered by Medicaid. More important, this shows your lack of intelligence. Why should someone who disagrees with ANY government policy be forced to pay for it? Simple. Because we elect people to run this country. If you don’t like their decisions, vote for someone else.
Your argument can just as easily be used against the Iraq war or funding for Air Force One.
…please help us to understand how this grand notion of universal health care is not socialized medicine.
A rose by any other name will still smell as sweet. If you want to call it socialized medicine, universal health care, Medicare, Health For All, or Get Better, it doesn’t matter. It is the concept that everyone in this country should have a right to good health care. Except neo-cons and the self aggrandizing right wing nuts who may all die as far as I care.
#46,
Once I am forced, by law and the threat of violence, to subsidize the risk of all the idiots out there unwililng to take responsibility for their own health and safety,
Hey great idea. I want a law preventing idiots taking us to war with lies and fabricated evidence. BTW, we already have many regulations on the books regarding things like automobile safety; food safety; drug safety, preparation, and usage; weapons, ammunition, magazine size, and environmental laws. Not an exhaustive list for sure, but you already get the idea. Unless of course you are one of the idiots that claim the right to fill our water supply with pollutants or drive what you want as fast as you want, where you want, when you want.
Someone please define what “guaranteed” health care means, and then how it can be “guaranteed.”
That you can have health care when it is needed. Forget the bull shit we currently have of a guarantee or right to obtain health care if we can’t afford it. That does not work as the hospitals effectively don’t service the poor and get no reimbursement.
#47,
Mr. Fusion has no real grasp on the concept of the freemarket. He thinks some how the government is going to be more efficient at healthcare than the private sector.
Almost every western country has universal health care. I am unaware of any of them currently being run as dictatorships or third world countries (though some may still be poor). The free market is not working with health care, otherwise there would not be so many under insured, uninsured or bankruptcies from excessive health costs. Every American government health care system is vastly more efficient then privately run plans.
The VA spends less then 2% on administration compared to 25% for some private plans. The VA isn’t perfect, but then have you ever had to deal with a private plan on getting a procedure approved? Just ask your physician about that.
51 – Great ad hominem. If you are against government mandated regulation on the way people live, then you must be for war and destruction. Considering that those who want ever more government are usually the most willing to go along with the destruction of innocent people in order to get their way, I’m thinking that you should look in the mirror when it comes to someone who believes that violence is the solution to our problems.
As for your idea that “guaranteed” means “health care for people who need it”, you’ll have to tell us who gets to define need, what criteria they will use, and what happens to those who think they need treatment but are refused because it isn’t defined as needed by the government. “Guaranteed” means guaranteed if the government can afford it or if you have the right political connections.
#52,
Great ad hominem. If you are against government mandated regulation on the way people live, then you must be for war and destruction.
If one is OK then so must the other. Those most opposed to universal health care are usually the same that are saying we need to go to war or tap American’s telephones.
“Guaranteed” means guaranteed if the government can afford it or if you have the right political connections.
As opposed to “guaranteed” in the current situation which means if your health care provider wants to cover that procedure. Currently you have no decision in the provision of what you get. That is done by the insurance company. Of course you could pay for the procedure your self. In which case the insurance company isn’t paying anyway.
When the government decides not to pay, they can always be replaced next election. When the insurance company decides not to pay, too bad.
RE: My health care costs
That was last year actually. Co-pay was about $1000 and I have already had to pay for an outpatient operation that was under the co-pay.
> If they earn less then 10K already, they are covered by
> Medicaid.
Ooooh…So along with “universal health care” we ALSO have to contribute to Medicaid? I presume we’d have to pay for Medicare too and that oh so wonderful drug card bill that Bush signed like an idiot? Well, that makes all the sense in the world (not).
> Why should someone who disagrees with ANY
> government policy be forced to pay for it? Simple. Because
> we elect people to run this country. If you don’t like
> their decisions, vote for someone else.
Put down the crack pipe and tell me what exactly does that have to do with funding universal health care? I simply pointed out that if you need $10K per family and some families (many) are exempt because, for example, they make $10K or less a year, then their $10K has to come from somewhere. As far as I can tell, it would mean that the rest of us pay more than $10K.
Oh and by the way, on top of the $10K for mediocre health care, most of us will be compelled to pay for additional health care to cover everything that “universal” health care does not or does poorly. It just sounds better and better.
> It is the concept that everyone in this country should have a right to good health care.
What exactly is “good” health care? If we take the broken arm example I mentioned earlier, does it mean that everyone is entitled to the best care available or just enough not to die?
RE: VA
You might want to talk to some veterans about getting care through the VA. Amazingly, their experiences are very similar to those of the British.
If you are for economic liberty (not for government bullshit bloated healthcare) than you must be for the war by Mr. Fusion’s “logic”. HAHAHAHAHA, you have no clue and your dumb generalizations show it. It looks as if your simple mind is stuck in the Democrat/Republican line.