5 Freedoms You'd Lose in Health Care Reform

[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.

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.

UK residents have a NHS premium withheld from their wages - much the way we have a medicare premium withheld from ours right now. It is a percentage of the wages just like ours.

That makes it very different from a 'set' employee contribution.

I'm active on two or three other forums that are principally for persons moving to or from the UK. I've seen countless threads where US citizens moving to the UK ask if they should buy private coverage. 9 times out of 10 they are advised it is completely unnecessary. Most persons in the UK are satisfied with the services received over there.

It's a very different model than I would ever expect to see in the US anyway. In the UK, EVERY ASPECT of healthcare is owned by the government. The hospital buildings are owned by NHS. The staff is paid by NHS. I truly cannot imagine that kind of 'public healthcare' in the US - at least not in my lifetime.

[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.

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.

Once again, I'm sorry that your family and your Dad had to endure that.

I would hope that his doctor knew the proper diagnosis to send into Medicare so the claim could be paid. Sometimes things we think that insurance won't pay - can be paid if the doctors take the time to code the services properly.

[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.

UK residents have a NHS premium withheld from their wages - much the way we have a medicare premium withheld from ours right now. It is a percentage of the wages just like ours.

That makes it very different from a 'set' employee contribution.

I'm active on two or three other forums that are principally for persons moving to or from the UK. I've seen countless threads where US citizens moving to the UK ask if they should buy private coverage. 9 times out of 10 they are advised it is completely unnecessary. Most persons in the UK are satisfied with the services received over there.

It's a very different model than I would ever expect to see in the US anyway. In the UK, EVERY ASPECT of healthcare is owned by the government. The hospital buildings are owned by NHS. The staff is paid by NHS. I truly cannot imagine that kind of 'public healthcare' in the US - at least not in my lifetime.

Don't get me wrong Becca. I understand where you are coming from and you have every right to your opinion. I just have a HUGE distrust of the federal government. I just don't want them to have that kind of control over me. It's my opinion and right or wrong that is how I feel.

[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.

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.

Fix your insurance issue by changing jobs? Look at the flip side of this funky coin.

[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.

Once again, I'm sorry that your family and your Dad had to endure that.

I would hope that his doctor knew the proper diagnosis to send into Medicare so the claim could be paid. Sometimes things we think that insurance won't pay - can be paid if the doctors take the time to code the services properly.

It was a pissing match between medicare and workmans comp. In the end neither would pay. Yeah, two government agencies arguing over who got to pay and in the end it was my father that paid.

Fix your insurance issue by changing jobs? Look at the flip side of this funky coin.

I have done it, twice in fact. I am not sorry I did because the new jobs turned out better than what I had before.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

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.

Many companies in the UK offer private insurance to employees as a perk - I had BUPA through my employer which I only ever used for the dentist (hated NHS Dentists). Total cost of my BUPA policy? Less than $800 a year. There was no co-payment and it covered all my claims that I made on it.

As a percentage of income the cost of BUPA + National Insurance (the tax which pays for both the NHS AND your state pension) was less than my total healthcare costs this past year.......never mind what I contribute social security. And I have a great health insurance policy through my current employer.

I always find it interesting to hear about the costs and quality of "socialized" healthcare from those that have never experienced it

Edited July 29, 2009 by Trompe le Monde

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Fix your insurance issue by changing jobs? Look at the flip side of this funky coin.

I have done it, twice in fact. I am not sorry I did because the new jobs turned out better than what I had before.

That's not what I meant. I think it would be just dandy if career choices wouldn't be limited by whether or not a potential employer is in a position to provide health insurance. It sure hurts those small businesses that just can't compete with the big dogs for top talent.

[GaryC 7]

Fix your insurance issue by changing jobs? Look at the flip side of this funky coin.

I have done it, twice in fact. I am not sorry I did because the new jobs turned out better than what I had before.

That's not what I meant. I think it would be just dandy if career choices wouldn't be limited by whether or not a potential employer is in a position to provide health insurance. It sure hurts those small businesses that just can't compete with the big dogs for top talent.

I work for a smallish company right now. I think we may have 2000 employees. I have great insurance because they need top talent to do the job. It was one of the main reasons I left my old job, better insurance.

[Ban Hammer 13,333]

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.

yeah, for an excellent example of government run health care, just look at the VA!

[MrsCat 6]

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.

yeah, for an excellent example of government run health care, just look at the VA!

My husband liked his prosthetic leg being put on backwards thank you very much. He has positraction now.

[GaryC 7]

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.

yeah, for an excellent example of government run health care, just look at the VA!

Ick, dont' get me started on VA care. Both of my brothers are 20+ year retired Navy and they cannot stand the VA. They are both paying, through their employers, for private coverage. For them the VA is nothing but a fall back of last resort.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Anybody out there got a $19,000.00 hospital bill you are trying to pay off?

After it was reduced (as 'charity') by 25% of the original cost?

What is your point? Good health care is expensive.

Hmmm, but so is $hite healthcare in this country.

A license to print money - and rip off the public at large.

[GaryC 7]

Anybody out there got a $19,000.00 hospital bill you are trying to pay off?

After it was reduced (as 'charity') by 25% of the original cost?

What is your point? Good health care is expensive.

Hmmm, but so is $hite healthcare in this country.

A license to print money - and rip off the public at large.

You just described the government to a "T". Am I wrong?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Anybody out there got a $19,000.00 hospital bill you are trying to pay off?

After it was reduced (as 'charity') by 25% of the original cost?

What is your point? Good health care is expensive.

Hmmm, but so is $hite healthcare in this country.

A license to print money - and rip off the public at large.

You just described the government to a "T". Am I wrong?

No - but that's not what I was talking about.

Good healthcare is expensive, but so is bad healthcare - which was my point. In this case paying more doesn't necessarily guarantee a better standard of care.

[GaryC 7]

Anybody out there got a $19,000.00 hospital bill you are trying to pay off?

After it was reduced (as 'charity') by 25% of the original cost?

What is your point? Good health care is expensive.

Hmmm, but so is $hite healthcare in this country.

A license to print money - and rip off the public at large.

You just described the government to a "T". Am I wrong?

No - but that's not what I was talking about.

Good healthcare is expensive, but so is bad healthcare - which was my point. In this case paying more doesn't necessarily guarantee a better standard of care.

I know, but neither does the government run option guarantee better care or a lower cost. At least we have some choice right now. Not long ago I changed doctors because I didn't like the quality of care. It wasn't a problem with my insurance.