Universal Healthcare

[anatess2]

8 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

I agree. However, I wouldn't mind if a health savings account could be set up with employers so that money for healthcare could be set aside before other taxes. An individual could choose to have a certain percentage put away every month that could be called upon as needed, and importantly spent as they wished and not limited to a list of approved treatments.

Why do you need employers to take on the responsibility for that?  You can set one up yourself and get the tax break.  And you don't even have to be employed to have one.  It's called exactly what you call it.  Health Savings Account.  I have one.  I am employed but I negotiated a higher per-hour rate with my contracting company in exchange for very minimal contract requirement from them - they give me a W2 instead of a W9.  I don't want any "benefits" including anything to do with Health stuff.  I can do all that myself.  Obamacare killed that contract (one of the things that really made me mad about that stupid thing).  Of course, you can only use it for medical things (not just approved treatments).  You can go to Walgreens and swipe your Health Savings Card to pay for it.  Walgreens have this thinga-magig where the chocolate bar you scanned with your cough suppressant doesn't get deducted from your Health Savings Card, you have to pay for that with a different payment type.

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[mikbone]

37 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I'm astounded at how violently I've done a 180 on those books.  30 years ago I was a huge fan, learned much about the nature of evil and the dangers of black-and-white thinking.  Now I look back at a pedophile rapist protagonist in the first three books, and one who murdered her own mother in the second three, and I wonder what the crap was I thinking.  Both of them spending thousands of pages selfishly stuck in their own crap.  Lots of notions about lots of important things, but the healing power of an atoning sacrifice was utterly absent.  Dood gained purity by burning magically until the blackness in him was fully a fused part of him instead of being burned away.  Symbolism of the chemical makeup of white gold.  

As I look down at my keyboard, I see my white gold wedding band on my finger.  Now I'm ticked off at my younger self. 

The Giant was the christ figure, not Covenant...

[The Folk Prophet]

9 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

The reason has become cultural due to the grip of health insurance.

Right. And the grip of health insurance is a result of the ridiculous costs of medical stuff. Visiting a doctor for 5 minutes to have him/her listen to your breathing and then prescribe you an antibiotic should cost 25 buck. Maybe 50. Instead it's...what...400? The antibiotic should cost you $10.

The system is messed and self-perpetuating. It self-perpetuates because the government sticks their big fat noses in things and "regulates" them (as you've pointed out).

If the free market had been allowed to regulate it in the first place things would be hunky-dory by now.

[SpiritDragon]

2 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Why do you need employers to take on the responsibility for that?  You can set one up yourself and get the tax break.  And you don't even have to be employed to have one.  It's called exactly what you call it.  Health Savings Account.  I have one.

That'd be a great way to go, too when it's an option. Good call!

[anatess2]

dup.

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Right. And the grip of health insurance is a result of the ridiculous costs of medical stuff.

This is backwards.  The ridiculous costs of medical stuff is a result of the grip of health insurance.  It's the same concept as the pitfalls of socialism.

But regardless... you are correct that this system is broken in a complex manner because of the self-perpetuating mess ups that has become woven into the American culture.

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[zil]

57 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Now I look back at a pedophile rapist protagonist in the first

I read to that point and took the unread books back to the store for a refund.  Lots of people try to justify continuing to read, but once the main character becomes a rapist, forget it, I'm out.  The things people unnecessarily submit themselves to in the name of "realism" baffles me.

Edited November 14, 2018 by zil

[zil]

15 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Right. And the grip of health insurance is a result of the ridiculous costs of medical stuff. Visiting a doctor for 5 minutes to have him/her listen to your breathing and then prescribe you an antibiotic should cost 25 buck. Maybe 50. Instead it's...what...400? The antibiotic should cost you $10. 

The system is messed and self-perpetuating. It self-perpetuates because the government sticks their big fat noses in things and "regulates" them (as you've pointed out).

If the free market had been allowed to regulate it in the first place things would be hunky-dory by now. 

I suspect insurance (detaching the cost from the consumer) and frivolous law suits (or at least absurdly high amounts awarded by juries) are more responsible for the high prices than the reverse.  But yes, self-perpetuating, and all the "solutions" ignore these problems.

[Guest]

13 hours ago, askandanswer said:

Could you elaborate please?

One of the characters in the stories was a type of stone mason.  But in that world, it was a person who could take broken pieces of stone and mend it back to a solid stone.

[Traveler]

55 minutes ago, Lost Boy said:

Most here are completely clueless on universal health care. 

First it is not socialized medicine. It is socialized insurance.. 

Second what we have today is not a capitalistic system. Your choice today is highly limited. 

With a universal health care system, the hospitals, doctors, etc are not government owned or government employees. They remain in the private sector. 

Doctors wages are not capped, but the price that they get paid for a procedure is set. But today what they get paid is set as well by the insurance company. 

The amount you pay into the system would not go up for most citizens. The only thing that really changes is the flow of money. Instead of money going through an insurance company, it would go through a government agency. 

The benefits are as follows.  Risk of bankruptcy due to medical debt mostly goes away.  All citizens get good health care and good health care means lower crime and more people in the work force. No more worrying about whether you have money to cover a needed procedure. 

 

I thought I would share with you two personal experiences:

First - While doing consulting in Phoenix I met a doctor (and member of the church) that had a clinic in Mexico.  He use to have a practice in New York.  I was interested in why he opened up a medical clinic in Mexico.  He said that he can fly a patient from New York to his clinic, perform open heart surgery, keep the patient at his clinic under medical care during recovery and fly the patient back to New York for less than they will pay for a year of medical insurance - and he makes more profit than when he charged outrageous  prices for his services in New York.

Second - About a year ago I had to have cataract surgery on one eye.  I was prescribed specialized eye drops for pre and post surgery that would cost me $600 in deductibles from a decent medical plan.  I refused to pay the for the medication and first argued with the pharmacists and got no where - so I went back to my doctor and requested that he prescribe a generic or something else.  My doctor said there was no generic of substitute.  (You are right about one thing - our current system is not capitalistic).  I went back and argued some more with my pharmacists - Finely they said there was one other possibility - I could buy the eye drops out of pocket without filling an insurance claim - my out of pocket expense would by $150.

 

Most in the discussion concerning the cost of medical care in the USA do not realize that the top three reasons for increases in medical costs over the last 50 years is not medical.  Currently over 80% of what a person pays for their actual medical care (with or without insurance) does not go towards their specific medical care.  Let me explain what happens when money goes through a government agency (which is currently one of the top three reasons already for the most substantial increases in medical costs).  Lets take Social Security for example.  By federal law any private retirement fund must operate with 6% or less overhead or the controllers of that fund go to federal prison.  Social Security operates with 60% overhead.  That means that only 40% of the funds collected will be returned to those receiving Social Security.  Currently those receiving Social Security - if they only received back what they put in - using the current life expectancy tables they would receive $70,000 per year on average.  Guess what happens to money going through a government agency?

Any purported changes to health care that does not address directly why health care costs are sky rocketing - is in essence a scam.  Currently one of the most rapidly increasing costs of health care is the amount paid to government for services that have nothing to do with patient health care.  The notion that universal health care will decrease health care care cost is an outright bold face lie and deception!  Especially because it does not decrease the cost of governmental interference, nor does it address the other two reason that health care costs have increased much more than inflation for the last 60 years.

One last point - I have a brother that use to be a strong advocate of universal health care - a couple of years ago we (my brother and I) were on vacation in Norway when he contracted a gull stone.   Norway has the best universal health care in the world or so it is touted.  After his experience - he has had a complete reversal in his attitude concerning universal health care.  His response was that anyone that advocates universal health care has never been forced in to using it.

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

41 minutes ago, zil said:

I suspect insurance (detaching the cost from the consumer) and frivolous law suits (or at least absurdly high amounts awarded by juries) are more responsible for the high prices than the reverse.  But yes, self-perpetuating, and all the "solutions" ignore these problems.

The basic concept of insurance is to prevent someone from going bankrupt from a catastrophic cost.  When insurance goes beyond helping in catastrophic situations to common, regular and usual situations - the purpose for insurance has been removed and a very different purpose substituted.  

 

The Traveler

[askandanswer]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

You even have celebrities yelling at women's marches for insurance to cover tampons and birth control.

This is slightly off topic, but a few months back, after many many years of protest, the Australian government finally removed the General Sales Tax on tampons.

[anatess2]

2 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

Most here are completely clueless on universal health care. 

First it is not socialized medicine. It is socialized insurance.. 

THAT'S the problem.

Insurance is bad enough as it is.  Regulating it some more to become socialized is magnifying the problem by a factor of 100.  See:  Obamacare.

 

2 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

 

Second what we have today is not a capitalistic system. Your choice today is highly limited. 

 

Because you don't have a relationship between patient and doctors.  You have a relationship with patients and insurance.  And doctors and insurance.  The insurance LIMITS your doctors and your options.  The government LIMITS insurance (can't sell across state lines, must cover everything and the kitchen sink, etc. etc.) without much regard for patient need.

 

2 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

Doctors wages are not capped, but the price that they get paid for a procedure is set. But today what they get paid is set as well by the insurance company. 

Hence, the problem is exacerbated.

You've had this system so long that American doctors don't know how to do proper medicine.  They are masters at prescribing procedures that have guaranteed payment by insurance, not prescribing procedures specific to a particular patient's needs.  And that's because people has gotten so used to insurance that they go "I CAN'T AFFORD THAT!" if the doctor VEERS from what is prescribed by the insurance company.

2 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

The amount you pay into the system would not go up for most citizens. The only thing that really changes is the flow of money. Instead of money going through an insurance company, it would go through a government agency. 

That's the problem.  The amount you pay into the system is now under the management of the Federal Government who spent $1.7 billion developing JUST THE WEBSITE.

 

2 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

The benefits are as follows.  Risk of bankruptcy due to medical debt mostly goes away.  All citizens get good health care and good health care means lower crime and more people in the work force. No more worrying about whether you have money to cover a needed procedure. 

 

Like I said, exchanging liberty for government dependency to avoid the risk of personal responsibility.

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[anatess2]

25 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

This is slightly off topic, but a few months back, after many many years of protest, the Australian government finally removed the General Sales Tax on tampons.

That's a good thing.

I have no problem joining activists to remove government tax on ANYTHING.

[The Folk Prophet]

1 hour ago, zil said:

I suspect insurance (detaching the cost from the consumer) and frivolous law suits (or at least absurdly high amounts awarded by juries) are more responsible for the high prices than the reverse.  But yes, self-perpetuating, and all the "solutions" ignore these problems.

No. It's the lack of competition. If you mess up and I sue you and you raise your prices then I shop elsewhere and you go out of business. The problem is that I cannot shop elsewhere.

Companies that have competition do what they need to to stay in business. They don't callously kill off their customers. They settle lawsuits as efficiently as possible. They don't price themselves out of potential sales.

Seriously, can you envision what would happen to, for example, Samsung, if they reacted to a lawsuit over their exploding batteries by doubling or tripling their phone prices?

Would you buy a Note 9 for $3000 when there's an equivalent for $1000? I mean, sure, some Apple users are that gullible. But typically...no. If someone triples their price for the same produce you buy the other one. You, as a consumer with many choices, don't care if Samsung got sued. In fact, you're glad of it because it means they'll be more careful about their batteries in the future. But you're not paying ridiculous prices for their products in response.

[zil]

9 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

No. It's the lack of competition.

Everything I have seen says this is caused by insurance and government regulation.

[The Folk Prophet]

4 minutes ago, zil said:

Everything I have seen says this is caused by insurance and government regulation.

Right. Government regulations are the why of there being no competition. Health insurance problems are a result, not a cause.

[zil]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Health insurance problems are a result, not a cause.

I dunno, which came first, the government regulation, or the health insurance company restricting which providers it worked with?  Regardless, as far as I'm concerned, they're both demonic.

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Right. Government regulations are the why of there being no competition. Health insurance problems are a result, not a cause.

 

3 minutes ago, zil said:

I dunno, which came first, the government regulation, or the health insurance company restricting which providers it worked with?  Regardless, as far as I'm concerned, they're both demonic.

I worked for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida.  The reason why there is Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida which is a different company from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of South Carolina or Blue Cross and Blue Shield of <insert state here> is because the insurance companies lobbied for the government to regulate who can insure people where to eliminate competition... hence, the end of interstate healthcare cost competition.

[The Folk Prophet]

3 minutes ago, zil said:

I dunno, which came first, the government regulation, or the health insurance company restricting which providers it worked with?  Regardless, as far as I'm concerned, they're both demonic.

There's no getting around the fact that people are evil and will do evil things and that such evil must be regulated. The question is only "how" to regulate the evil. Socialism is one of the worst answers, of course. I believe that capitalism and the free market are self-regulating. The government's regulations should be limited to what the government is for. Police force and military.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

@askandanswer. I support universal healthcare. I think everyone should be able to receive healthcare, regardless of their ability to pay. I'm not an economist; I have no idea how the best way to make that happen, but healthcare is something everyone deserves access to. 

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

@askandanswer. I support universal healthcare. I think everyone should be able to receive healthcare, regardless of their ability to pay. I'm not an economist; I have no idea how the best way to make that happen, but healthcare is something everyone deserves access to. 

So do I.  I also believe socialism is a corrupt system and will corrupt everything it touches, including something that should be as universally good as health care.

I believe the gospel of Jesus Christ should be had by all.  I just don't believe that forcing people into the waters of baptism at the point of a gun is the way to do it.

Edited November 14, 2018 by Guest

[anatess2]

19 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

@askandanswer. I support universal healthcare. I think everyone should be able to receive healthcare, regardless of their ability to pay. I'm not an economist; I have no idea how the best way to make that happen, but healthcare is something everyone deserves access to. 

Why end there?  If people can't eat, they die.  Universal Food.  If people don't have a roof over their heads, they die.  Universal Shelter.  If people don't have clothing they die.  Universal Clothing.

The American Experiment has proven that the best way (not the perfect way because there's no such thing) to alleviate poverty and suffering is through a free market economy working under the US Constitution.  This especially is the best way when applied to a multiculturally diverse group of people.

Edited November 14, 2018 by anatess2

[Tyme]

54 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Why end there?  If people can't eat, they die.  Universal Food.  If people don't have a roof over their heads, they die.  Universal Shelter.

Now you’re speaking my language.

 

Have you ever heard of the tiered theory of an economic system?

Edited November 14, 2018 by Tyme

[marge]

I'm Australian so here we have Medicare, which I guess in theory is 'free healthcare for everyone' but its not perfect, and costs the government money it really doesn't have.  

There are also really long waiting lists, when my child was 2 years old for example he needed a minor operation for his ears (grommets) the waiting list was almost 2 years for the operation to be done on medicare.  My doctor looked me straight in the eye and told me my son would be permanently deaf if I waited that long.  So I paid the $900 for the operation to be done straight away.

Once you are on a certain income level you are forced to have full private health insurance (hospital cover, not just extras like dental/physio/optical) or the tax department will basically fine you when you do your taxes (its called the medicare levy and its between 1-2% of your annual income).  I'm in a small family (2 adults and our child is free until he is 21) and have mid level hospital cover and high level extras (we need the top level optical and dental) and it costs us $190 f/n (which is almost double what our 'fine' would be).  A lot of people can't afford a bill like that or the fine if they don't have it.

The system has many problems, the income thresholds are not very high so anyone in an upper middle class situation is forced to pay for health insurance that they probably can't afford or pay the government a average of a couple of thousand dollars at tax time.  The taxation system is not the best here either, once you hit a certain income level you are taxed 50cents out of every dollar, so when you get a pay rise, you're likely only to see half of it, but that pay rise has landed you in the 'income bracket' for the medicare levy so now you have a $5000 a year health insurance bill or get a fine at tax time.  So a lot of the time the pay rise lands you financially worse off than before you had it in the first place.

Its good for low income earners to have access to somewhat ok health cover (until waiting lists send their children deaf!) its ok for really high income earners because it doesn't really effect them, but its terrible for anyone considered middle or upper middle class ($80 to $120K for singles $160K-$250K for families), because most can't afford to have private health insurance and at the same time, can't afford not to have it.

My husband calls it socialism, which he thinks is way to close to communism.  But he does get a bit extra passionate about politics!

Edited November 14, 2018 by marge