Health care may be 1/5 of what you spend

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Forget health care. Are you aware of how much of your earnings goes for taxes; state, local, federal, and sales? One problem with this system is that if people had to write that check every quarter like the self-employed, they would have a real eye opener. And for those who loan the government money every year, interest free, there would be a revolt. Right now, most people are out of touch with reality and where their earnings really go all the way around.

[Ban Hammer 13,336]

Forget health care. Are you aware of how much of your earnings goes for taxes; state, local, federal, and sales? One problem with this system is that if people had to write that check every quarter like the self-employed, they would have a real eye opener. And for those who loan the government money every year, interest free, there would be a revolt. Right now, most people are out of touch with reality and where their earnings really go all the way around.

oh i'm aware of it alright. federal income, state income, state personal property, property, sales taxes, and let's not forget gas taxes either. about 18k a year

[Killer_Clown_2009 0]

Well, with all the money they would be saving by shipping the illegals back home, they could at least give them a lovely parting gift. Maybe a toaster or an amazon gift certificate.

[Addie_Goodvibes 0]

parting gift not bad idea.

with the 10 Billion +/year US tax payers would save by STRICTLY enforcing imm. policy . the national economy would grow, crime would decrease.education quality & standards would rise. housing would be more affordable & health care, health, auto insurance would be more affordable.

[Killer_Clown_2009 0]

A free ticket home and a half decent parting gift might be a good incentive to all these illegal people and encourage them in leaving the US. The government should pass a bill on this and set up a bunch of kiosks in the bigger cities where people can go and take part in the program. Of course, I am sure some people will sneak back in, in order to get a second gift, but then they'll have to leave again.

Edited February 22, 2007 by jane2005

[beameup 0]

I was referring to limiting Government interference in the Free Enterprise System, NOT the Regulatory role of the Government.

You know, the "invisible hand" that guides economics where the Consumer shops for the best deal and Providers compete for Consumers. Here in the Philippines I always get a "discount" - never pay the initial price.

As far as Medical Savings Accounts, if they were held "in trust" and not taxed and "rolled-over" year-to-year, low cost loans are provided for those lacking in accumulation of sufficient funds and everyone was required to participate.

Hey, but it is just a "pipe dream" because once the Government takes control of your life they are like an octopus and will NEVER let go over that "power" over your life. Instead they will further complicate the Consumer-Provider relationship by offering such things as National Healthcare (Hillary-care).

1. Get the Lawyers out of the equation - "frivolous lawsuits".

2. Get the Insurance Companies out of the equation.

3. Establish mandatory Tax-Free Medical Savings Accounts for everyone.

4. Stop giving Free Medical Care to Illegal Aliens.

5. Limit the Role of the Government in the Free Enterprise System.

All this should have done rather than the '60s "Great Welfare Society" and "1965 'Welcome Illegals' Immigration Act".

All the points are great. Point 5 is questionable as the government is the one organization able to heavily punish anyone abusing the system and protect the consumer. Unfortunately the little guy has no way of protecting himself on his own. This is who the government needs to protect. It's not about welfare but more about regulating the industry which is obviously harming the American community. More money wasted on medical means less money to go around in the economy.

[Heracles 417]

I was referring to limiting Government interference in the Free Enterprise System, NOT the Regulatory role of the Government.

You know, the "invisible hand" that guides economics where the Consumer shops for the best deal and Providers compete for Consumers. Here in the Philippines I always get a "discount" - never pay the initial price.

As far as Medical Savings Accounts, if they were held "in trust" and not taxed and "rolled-over" year-to-year, low cost loans are provided for those lacking in accumulation of sufficient funds and everyone was required to participate.

Hey, but it is just a "pipe dream" because once the Government takes control of your life they are like an octopus and will NEVER let go over that "power" over your life. Instead they will further complicate the Consumer-Provider relationship by offering such things as National Healthcare (Hillary-care).

That's the thing, the invisible hand can fail and when it does it is always the much smaller consumer who suffers. This is why the government needs to regulate the health care system to ensure the system does not fail. All they need to do is setup fines for companies between $50K to $1 million, per incident. The same should apply to consumers trying to abuse the system.

So for example, if the insurance companies try to hardball someone who has done everything by the book, the government can turn around and issue the insurance company a nasty fine. After the first few fines, the executives will think twice about pulling any stunt off again. Likewise anyone caught abusing their insurance can also be fined accordingly and banned from even obtaining insurance for x time.. This way the government clearly indicates what is acceptable practices and what is not. Same should apply to any doctor caught abusing the system, they are issued a large fine and/or banned for x years. Hospitals abusing the system should also receive large fines. This way the fine will far outweigh the monetary benefit they received fraudulently.

Last but not least a cap on court room payouts. Maybe even setting up an agency who handles any negligence payouts rather than scum bag lawyers..

Edited February 22, 2007 by Infidel

[beameup 0]

I was referring to limiting Government interference in the Free Enterprise System, NOT the Regulatory role of the Government.

You know, the "invisible hand" that guides economics where the Consumer shops for the best deal and Providers compete for Consumers. Here in the Philippines I always get a "discount" - never pay the initial price.

As far as Medical Savings Accounts, if they were held "in trust" and not taxed and "rolled-over" year-to-year, low cost loans are provided for those lacking in accumulation of sufficient funds and everyone was required to participate.

Hey, but it is just a "pipe dream" because once the Government takes control of your life they are like an octopus and will NEVER let go over that "power" over your life. Instead they will further complicate the Consumer-Provider relationship by offering such things as National Healthcare (Hillary-care).

That's the thing, the invisible hand can fail and when it does it is always the much smaller consumer who suffers. This is why the government needs to regulate the health care system to ensure the system does not fail. All they need to do is setup fines for companies between $50K to $1 million, per incident. The same should apply to consumers trying to abuse the system.

So for example, if the insurance companies try to hardball someone who has done everything by the book, the government can turn around and issue the insurance company a nasty fine. After the first few fines, the executives will think twice about pulling any stunt off again. Likewise anyone caught abusing their insurance can also be fined accordingly and banned from even obtaining insurance for x time.. This way the government clearly indicates what is acceptable practices and what is not.

Well then you are bringing in a "third-party provider" into the economic equation. What I'm referring to is an economic system where the buyer negotiates the price with the provider without a "middle-man".

I don't hire a grocery shopping firm to do my grocery shopping for me or a car purchasing firm to arrange a price for a vehicle for me. In the same way, medical services can be "purchased" directly by the consumer.

The Regulatory Role of the Government is to prevent price-fixing, monopolies, false-advertising and the like.

Insurance companies do not have your "best interest" in mind, they have "profit for their stockholders" interest in mind.

Like I said K.I.S.S.: You have a buyer and you have a seller. And then you have a "referee" (Government) to make sure there is no "cheating".

Medical Insurance was created during WWII by the Roosevelt Administration in lieu of giving monetary "raises" to employees.

Withholding of Income Taxes from your paycheck was started by the Roosevelt Administration.

[Heracles 417]

Well then you are bringing in a "third-party provider" into the economic equation. What I'm referring to is an economic system where the buyer negotiates the price with the provider without a "middle-man".

I don't hire a grocery shopping firm to do my grocery shopping for me or a car purchasing firm to arrange a price for a vehicle for me. In the same way, medical services can be "purchased" directly by the consumer.

The Regulatory Role of the Government is to prevent price-fixing, monopolies, false-advertising and the like.

Insurance companies do not have your "best interest" in mind, they have "profit for their stockholders" interest in mind.

Like I said K.I.S.S.: You have a buyer and you have a seller. And then you have a "referee" (Government) to make sure there is no "cheating".

Medical Insurance was created during WWII by the Roosevelt Administration in lieu of giving monetary "raises" to employees.

Withholding of Income Taxes from your paycheck was started by the Roosevelt Administration.

There is another way the government can solve this dilemma and rectify the market. If the government was to build and run hospitals and offer health insurance this new competitor would inevitably bring the price down. The thing is I am not a fan of government run health care systems but I have to give credit where credit is due.. Another great idea is to analyze the health care system of the top 20 countries in the world, based on life expectancy.

The question you have to ask yourself is what this or any country stands for. Was this country founded for companies and stockholders, of course not. The governments number one responsibility is to take care of it's people. Most stockholder's could not give a ###### about other people. Heck if there was not a law against it chemical companies would probably dumb their untreated waste into the waterways. Health, Security and education and three areas that the government should either run themselves or tightly regulate, as they are the foundation of every single country. The free market and invisible hand can and should apply to all other industries apart from those three.

Otherwise, for example, if the stockholders of Northrop Grumman had it their way, they would sell all of their weapons to anyone who wants them overseas as this clearly increases their profits and dividends. Yet this is extremely detrimental to the nations security and a direct threat to everyone in this country. Monetarily it is a great idea but in reality for the country it is a disaster. In this example the free market fails the people..

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In this example the free market fails the people...

Exactly. The free market had decades to prove it can establish a working health care system and it miserably failed. All it has accopmplished is a bloated machinery of red-tape and overhead that nop government even managed to create. Meanwhile, one out of six Americans has no access to health insurance and to adequate health care. There's simply no denying that.

I'm happy to report that I am actually already living in the future. Between the monthly premiums I pay for the coverage for my family, my employer's contributions to my health benefits and what I pay in co-pays, deductibles and whatnot, there's more than 1/5 of what I make going for health care today. I always thought that the health care related taxes in Germany back when were bad but really, they weren't. In comparison to what health care sucks up here, it was a pittance and over there, I got top notch, hassle-free health care services in return. I guess less overhead and red-tape has positive side-effects.

Edited February 22, 2007 by ET-US2004

[choji 0]

In this example the free market fails the people...

Exactly. The free market had decades to prove it can establish a working health care system and it miserably failed. All it has accopmplished is a bloated machinery of red-tape and overhead that nop government even managed to create. Meanwhile, one out of six Americans has no access to health insurance and to adequate health care. There's simply no denying that.

I'm happy to report that I am actually already living in the future. Between the monthly premiums I pay for the coverage for my family, my employer's contributions to my health benefits and what I pay in co-pays, deductibles and whatnot, there's more than 1/5 of what I make going for health care today. I always thought that the health care related taxes in Germany back when were bad but really, they weren't. In comparison to what health care sucks up here, it was a pittance and over there, I got top notch, hassle-free health care services in return. I guess less overhead and red-tape has positive side-effects.

Unfortunately the health care system in Germany is fast approaching the US standard. While getting more and more expensive, the level of service and care one receives in D in return is falling fast. The only way out is to buy additional private insurance, which then adds up on top of what one already pays.

But they are not yet chucking people out of the system. Maybe that will be the next step.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In this example the free market fails the people...

Exactly. The free market had decades to prove it can establish a working health care system and it miserably failed. All it has accopmplished is a bloated machinery of red-tape and overhead that nop government even managed to create. Meanwhile, one out of six Americans has no access to health insurance and to adequate health care. There's simply no denying that.

I'm happy to report that I am actually already living in the future. Between the monthly premiums I pay for the coverage for my family, my employer's contributions to my health benefits and what I pay in co-pays, deductibles and whatnot, there's more than 1/5 of what I make going for health care today. I always thought that the health care related taxes in Germany back when were bad but really, they weren't. In comparison to what health care sucks up here, it was a pittance and over there, I got top notch, hassle-free health care services in return. I guess less overhead and red-tape has positive side-effects.

Unfortunately the health care system in Germany is fast approaching the US standard. While getting more and more expensive, the level of service and care one receives in D in return is falling fast. The only way out is to buy additional private insurance, which then adds up on top of what one already pays.

But they are not yet chucking people out of the system. Maybe that will be the next step.

Sure. Germany did make the mistake to open the doors to a private leg in the health-care system some time back. What essentially happened was that those that were contributors to the system as a whole (young, healthy, good income) were allowed to exit out of the public system leaving the latter with the burden and the private insurance companies with the profits. Some of those that exited the public system in their vital years, however, later returned to the public system when the private coverage became either unaffordable or altogether unavailable to them worsening the situation some more. The damage that this particular step has done to the German system is yet more proof that the "market" is not working well when it comes to healthcare. There is, in fact, not a single example worldwide where the free market has managed to establish a functioning health care system. Not one.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It wouldn't be a stretch for some legal framework of standards. Its the middlemen who are the overwhelming cause of the problem - and the main reason so many people are without insurance or are simply priced out of the system.

Seems the more you need it, the less access you have to it. I didn't know that taking certain "red-flagged" drugs can raise your premium by a huge amount.

[beameup 0]

In this example the free market fails the people...

Exactly. The free market had decades to prove it can establish a working health care system and it miserably failed. All it has accopmplished is a bloated machinery of red-tape and overhead that nop government even managed to create. Meanwhile, one out of six Americans has no access to health insurance and to adequate health care. There's simply no denying that.

The "Free Market" never was even given a chance.

Government Intervention done the wrong way is what is the source of the problem.

It started during WWII with FDR's "Health Insurance" offering in lieu of giving actual monetary raises.

Now, in the case of Wartime (WWII) you can understand massive Government intervention in most areas of your life for the good of the country. WWII was over in 3 years. But Government never fully rolled-back it's intervention.

-------------------------------------

Instead of constantly raising taxes, a MEDICAL SAVINGS ACCOUNT should be established - much like Social Security.

If you don't need it you just keep building it up. In this way, the Government doesn't get directly involved in micro-managing

the Health Care Industry. The Government can take the "oversight" role insuring that there are no monopolies or price-fixing.

With the advent of the internet, everyone should be able to obtain information concerning a doctor's performance "score", a hospital's performance "score", competitive drug prices, national averages for certain procedures, regional prices for certain procedures, etc. With this kind of information available it should be easy for the patient (buyer) to find a good deal. Medical Providers would actually compete for your business (what a concept?). "Consumer Reports" types of consulting agencies could do much of the actual research for those less "Internet Savvy".

But it ain't gonna happen:

The Insurance Lobbyists.

The Lawyer's Lobbyists.

The Government's GRIP on your wallet.

ALL WORK AGAINST ANY CHANGES.

IT WILL ONLY GET MORE COSTLY,

AND QUALITY WILL DETERIORATE.

YOU LOSE: INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM and LIBERTY and CHOICE.

[pedroh 21]

that's why i dont go to the doctor.. LOL