5 Freedoms You'd Lose in Health Care Reform

[~Laura and Nick~ 5]

((((laura))))

((((RJ))))

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

...

The American health care system is expensive, ineffective and socially inequitable -- and it comes at an annual per capita cost of $7,500 -- twice as high as in Germany. Since 2000, doctors, hospitals and the pharmaceutical industry have managed to achieve a 70-percent increase in earnings, which Obama calls "health inflation."

The health care industry already comprises a large and growing share of the American gross domestic product. That share is currently 16 percent, compared to only 10 percent in Germany. If nothing changes, it will increase to a monstrous 25 percent within the next 15 years.

The high costs of the system are not matched by comparable benefits and services. The government has no real control over the health care system and pharmaceutical executives, chief physicians and hospital managers set their own salaries. The health care market is like a game of football without a referee. And the American superpower ranks a shameful 37th in international studies of health care systems. According to one such study, about 100,000 people a year die in American hospitals as a result of infections, while another 98,000 die because of incorrect treatment.

America, as a Third World Country. Although the rate of return may not be as high as it is for Wall Street banks, where the US health care system does rank highly is in the profit margins of the medical-industrial complex. When advisors from the McKinsey management consultancy were hired to examine the system, they discovered $480 billion in profits that were not matched by performance.

"Pure Waste"

The renowned Institute of Medicine even estimates that almost one-third of all medical care in the US -- or about $700 billion worth -- is "pure waste."

...

Der Spiegel

And the health reform bill before congress will change all this.......how?

You're right, Gary. The bills currently making their way through the Congress don't effectively address these issues. Which is why I keep saying that - bill or no bill - the needed health care reform isn't happening. It's quite sad to see just how sold out Congress really is.

Let me make this clear, I am in favor of cutting out the waste. It would be great if we just had to insure ourselves for the actual cost of care rather than all the other junk that gets thrown in. Where we seem to diverge is who is to blame for all the waste. The insurance companies are being vilified and made the scape goat here and the government is trying to set itself up as the saviour. I think that is exactly backwards. The waste is caused by the government and the insurance companies are just passing on the extra costs. I want the government out of health care all together. No more regulations that add unneccisary layers of paperwork. Let the free market rule things.

But Gary, the very fact that any government run health insurance system - including that in the US - is by far more efficient than the private sector that we allow to rip us off year after year, decade after decade flies in the face of your assertion. You can't make an argument good enough to make almost half a trillion dollars worth of profits with nothing to show for it - a not unsubstantial part of that made by those very insurance companies - go away and pretend that government regulations are to blame. The lack of effective regulation perhaps.

[GaryC 7]

Gary, you under the presumption that everyone can afford health insurance and anyone who doesn't have an income high enough it is there own damn fault or just tough luck. That's a very callous attitude with regard the 40 plus million Americans without health insurance.

You are under the presumption that a government plan would be better than what we have now. Looking at the track record of other government take-overs I would say the chances are very slim.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If the government was serious about affordable health care and keeping costs down, it would get serious about tort reform. But, laws are written by lawyers, so fat chance of that.

TORT reform would address 2% of the cost. Not even worth fighting over.

[rebeccajo 14]

If the government was serious about affordable health care and keeping costs down, it would get serious about tort reform. But, laws are written by lawyers, so fat chance of that.

I agree there needs to be some limitations on what one can recover.

The problem is - I don't think those limitations would lower premiums. There are states which have passed limits on malpractice payouts but the cost of insurance has not gone down or stabilized in those states.

Tort reform alone could not work. Insurance companies would also have to be held back on premium costs.

Gary, you under the presumption that everyone can afford health insurance and anyone who doesn't have an income high enough it is there own damn fault or just tough luck. That's a very callous attitude with regard the 40 plus million Americans without health insurance.

You are under the presumption that a government plan would be better than what we have now. Looking at the track record of other government take-overs I would say the chances are very slim.

Does Medicare not work?

Has your Dad turned down his Medicare coverage?

Will you?

Edited July 29, 2009 by rebeccajo

[GaryC 7]

...

The American health care system is expensive, ineffective and socially inequitable -- and it comes at an annual per capita cost of $7,500 -- twice as high as in Germany. Since 2000, doctors, hospitals and the pharmaceutical industry have managed to achieve a 70-percent increase in earnings, which Obama calls "health inflation."

The health care industry already comprises a large and growing share of the American gross domestic product. That share is currently 16 percent, compared to only 10 percent in Germany. If nothing changes, it will increase to a monstrous 25 percent within the next 15 years.

The high costs of the system are not matched by comparable benefits and services. The government has no real control over the health care system and pharmaceutical executives, chief physicians and hospital managers set their own salaries. The health care market is like a game of football without a referee. And the American superpower ranks a shameful 37th in international studies of health care systems. According to one such study, about 100,000 people a year die in American hospitals as a result of infections, while another 98,000 die because of incorrect treatment.

America, as a Third World Country. Although the rate of return may not be as high as it is for Wall Street banks, where the US health care system does rank highly is in the profit margins of the medical-industrial complex. When advisors from the McKinsey management consultancy were hired to examine the system, they discovered $480 billion in profits that were not matched by performance.

"Pure Waste"

The renowned Institute of Medicine even estimates that almost one-third of all medical care in the US -- or about $700 billion worth -- is "pure waste."

...

Der Spiegel

And the health reform bill before congress will change all this.......how?

You're right, Gary. The bills currently making their way through the Congress don't effectively address these issues. Which is why I keep saying that - bill or no bill - the needed health care reform isn't happening. It's quite sad to see just how sold out Congress really is.

Let me make this clear, I am in favor of cutting out the waste. It would be great if we just had to insure ourselves for the actual cost of care rather than all the other junk that gets thrown in. Where we seem to diverge is who is to blame for all the waste. The insurance companies are being vilified and made the scape goat here and the government is trying to set itself up as the saviour. I think that is exactly backwards. The waste is caused by the government and the insurance companies are just passing on the extra costs. I want the government out of health care all together. No more regulations that add unneccisary layers of paperwork. Let the free market rule things.

But Gary, the very fact that any government run health insurance system - including that in the US - is by far more efficient than the private sector that we allow to rip us off year after year, decade after decade flies in the face of your assertion. You can't make an argument good enough to make almost half a trillion dollars worth of profits with nothing to show for it - a not unsubstantial part of that made by those very insurance companies - go away and pretend that government regulations are to blame. The lack of effective regulation perhaps.

IMO we would just be trading one rip off for another rip off. But the big thing is that now we can exersize some control by changing jobs, buying our own insurance or doing without and taking our chances. If the government took things over they got us. No way out. I don't like that idea.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, you under the presumption that everyone can afford health insurance and anyone who doesn't have an income high enough it is there own damn fault or just tough luck. That's a very callous attitude with regard the 40 plus million Americans without health insurance.

You are under the presumption that a government plan would be better than what we have now. Looking at the track record of other government take-overs I would say the chances are very slim.

What's your solution to those who cannot afford health insurance, Gary? I'm all ears.

[GaryC 7]

Does Medicare not work?

Has your Dad turned down his Medicare coverage?

Will you?

He has Medicare. He doesn't like it at all. He has to buy a supplemental policy to cover what medicare does not. Is that what is in our future? We will have the cost of the government coverage AND the need to buy supplemental coverage?

[rebeccajo 14]

IMO we would just be trading one rip off for another rip off. But the big thing is that now we can exersize some control by changing jobs, buying our own insurance or doing without and taking our chances. If the government took things over they got us. No way out. I don't like that idea.

Gary -

Even in the UK (which according to my research in the truest model of socialized medicine on the planet) people have choices. They can buy extra health cover if they like. There are private hospitals they can go too if they chose. They can ask to see a different doctor at the HealthCentre if they like.

[Dan J 277]

Personally I am glad the dems are losing their nerve over this. I would rather see nothing done than the mess we would have if this junk passes. I like my insurance the way it is.

This is why its hard to get real traction on the issue, too many people are disconnected from the real costs of health care, much to the benefit of those who profit from it. How long will be it be before your employer drops your insurance coverage, or asks you to pay much more than you can afford for it? If it current trends continue it wont be long.

Do we wait until more people join the ranks of the uninsured or do we try to do something about it now?

Unfortunately the current plans being debated in congress has been watered down too much to appease Republicans and other special interests (too much waste/inefficiency is being protected with the myth of protecting freedom of choice), which will likely result in the plan becoming an expensive mistake. Its unfortunate, but a product of our political system.

[GaryC 7]

Gary, you under the presumption that everyone can afford health insurance and anyone who doesn't have an income high enough it is there own damn fault or just tough luck. That's a very callous attitude with regard the 40 plus million Americans without health insurance.

You are under the presumption that a government plan would be better than what we have now. Looking at the track record of other government take-overs I would say the chances are very slim.

What's your solution to those who cannot afford health insurance, Gary? I'm all ears.

I have no answers, but I know the government isn't to solution.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Gary, you under the presumption that everyone can afford health insurance and anyone who doesn't have an income high enough it is there own damn fault or just tough luck. That's a very callous attitude with regard the 40 plus million Americans without health insurance.

You are under the presumption that a government plan would be better than what we have now. Looking at the track record of other government take-overs I would say the chances are very slim.

What's your solution to those who cannot afford health insurance, Gary? I'm all ears.

I have no answers, but I know the government isn't to solution.

You shouldn't let your ideology stand in the way of those who are working hard for real solutions.

[rebeccajo 14]

Does Medicare not work?

Has your Dad turned down his Medicare coverage?

Will you?

He has Medicare. He doesn't like it at all. He has to buy a supplemental policy to cover what medicare does not. Is that what is in our future? We will have the cost of the government coverage AND the need to buy supplemental coverage?

He doesn't HAVE to buy the supplement. The only supplement Medicare recipients are required to have is the prescription supplement. And that is provided free if their income is low enough.

Put the blame where the blame lies. For most Medicare recipients, the blame lies at the feet of the drug companies.

This is why its hard to get real traction on the issue, too many people are disconnected from the real costs of health care, much to the benefit of those who profit from it. How long will be it be before your employer drops your insurance coverage, or asks you to pay much more than you can afford for it? If it current trends continue it wont be long.

Word.

Edited July 29, 2009 by rebeccajo

[GaryC 7]

IMO we would just be trading one rip off for another rip off. But the big thing is that now we can exersize some control by changing jobs, buying our own insurance or doing without and taking our chances. If the government took things over they got us. No way out. I don't like that idea.

Gary -

Even in the UK (which according to my research in the truest model of socialized medicine on the planet) people have choices. They can buy extra health cover if they like. There are private hospitals they can go too if they chose. They can ask to see a different doctor at the HealthCentre if they like.

I am assuming that everyone pays for the UK system through taxes. So if you don't like the care you get you could buy your own policy. So in effect your paying twice. That is what I mean, once the government gets you your had.

[GaryC 7]

Does Medicare not work?

Has your Dad turned down his Medicare coverage?

Will you?

He has Medicare. He doesn't like it at all. He has to buy a supplemental policy to cover what medicare does not. Is that what is in our future? We will have the cost of the government coverage AND the need to buy supplemental coverage?

He doesn't HAVE to buy the supplement. The only supplement Medicare recipients are required to have is the prescription supplement. And that is provided free if their income is low enough.

Put the blame where the blame lies. For most Medicare recipients, the blame lies at the feet of the drug companies.

No, he buys a supplement to Medicare for regular medical services. He needed a cornea transplant a while back. Medicare denied him. He bought a supplemental policy, suffered with the pain for a year until the pre-existing condition clause ran out and got his transplant.