|
Posts:
3,583
Registered:
5/1/02
|
|
(1 of 24)
My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 3, 2009 5:46 AM
|
First, let me say that I think the basic problem in the whole health care debate is a lack of identifying the basic characteristics of the state of health care in this country and the practical issue that need to be recognized and addressed.
Whereas:
1) Millions of Americans do not have any health care coverage because they can't afford it. It doesn't matter if it's 20 million or 40 million.
2) If the private sector was able to get coverage to these people they would have done so already. Leaving it to private industry is not the solution.
3) Any public option is going to cost a lot of money. There's no way around it.
4) A Public Option cannot, and should not, compete with private industry in terms of the kind of coverage it provides. We cannot have the government actively competing with private industry. Any Public Option should protect Americans against catastrophic illness and accident, pre-and post natal care, maintenance medication, and life-saving emergency room treatment. That's it.
5) Any health care legislation that takes 1,000 pages to describe is unacceptable. It is too cumbersome, too complicated, and re-invents the wheel.
I think the first thing we must do is agree on the above statements. If we don't, then we are never going to come up with a health care plan that works, or will even come for a floor vote.
Therefore, I propose we simply redefine the qualifications for Medicare. Base eligibility on age and income. We already have the system in place; it is simply a question of making more people eligible. Medicare is certainly NOT the best health care plan out there; but then, it isn't supposed to be.
I really want to know what you all think.
--
"Come, Spirit. Help us sing the story of our land. You are our Mother; we, your field of corn. We rise...from out of the soul of You"
|
|
|
Posts:
8,349
Registered:
6/30/03
|
|
(2 of 24)
Medicare is not a bad option...
Nov 3, 2009 6:05 AM
|
All the administrative functions are there and they actually run a decently lean ship, for a government shop. The amount we all contribute to medicare would go up, but probably not as much as we think it should.
I would still like the health care and insurance complex to fess up to actual costs. What we see on our bills isn't a true representation, because they have all those funny accounting things going on. Wife has a procedure costing $2500 on paper, yet the total paid out by us and the insurance company was more like $500. Huh?!?
So, if you can add that into your requirements, I'm on board....
--
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
|
|
|
Posts:
7,040
Registered:
6/27/03
|
|
(3 of 24)
Re: Medicare is not a bad option...
Nov 3, 2009 6:14 AM
|
I had a friend who had a little girl. They were charged $3,000 for a circumcision fee on her little girl. Needless to say, that bill wasn't paid.
--
"We contend that for a nation to try to tax itself into prosperity is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to lift himself up by the handle" --- Winston Churchhill
|
|
|
Posts:
8,349
Registered:
6/30/03
|
|
(4 of 24)
Re: Medicare is not a bad option...
Nov 3, 2009 6:18 AM
|
Unless they were Ethiopians...never mind.
The problem with electronic processing is that you have codes. Codes still must be entered by humans, so you'll get oddities like this once in awhile. I've actually had similar problems in the past, though not something like this.
I do like the bar code system that many hospitals use, but there is still the human factor involved. Things must be labeled correctly and scanned correctly. And, since not everything has barcodes, you still have to combine the records, at some point.
We'll get there. Eventually.
--
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
|
|
|
Posts:
13,670
Registered:
8/15/00
|
|
(5 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 8:54 AM
|
We need to redefine the qualifications for insurance in general. Insurance is overused, and what should be costing patients $25-35 dollars to go to a doctor and pay for a quick visit to address their cold, flu, allergy, corn, wart, et al, instead it's a bill costing hundreds of dollars on an insurance policy that they might or might not pay a copay for, and the entire cost is passed onto the employer that they needed to be working for to get affordable health care in the first place. All of this has nothing to do with medicare, the system in place, mind you, which is something that I think must be phased out completely like all insolvent government systems eventually. I think it's not only not the best system, but it's unsustainable unless ground level changes to the industry are made as outlined above.
The other major overhaul in the knitting of the system is the introduction of competition. Not this government crippled so called free market health care system that partisans want to pretend we have. I'm talking about if you live in Georgia, you get some of your policy from Rhode Island, you get the other part of your policy from Montana, you get the rest of it from Arkansas. None of this competititon-stunting nonsense where you have to get insured from a carrier in your own state, and then you turn around and find out there's only just about one choice to choose from. That's not the way to keep costs down. And you put your policy together prudently and customize it just for you and your personal health condition and finances.
Look at all of the examples of health care where government and insurance companies are not involved. LASIK, plastic surgery, hair transplantation. All of these services are more advanced than ever and producing better results than ever, and oh yeah, all of them are hitting record low prices. And that's thanks to competition and the free market. That is the solution to the problem. We are programmed to be tools to believe that deflation is something to be scorned and avoided when deflation is the very thing that helps the poorest of the poor the most. And the partisans will feed the richest of the rich while talking out the other sides of their mouths that they actually care about the opposite. The only people who care about guzzling money through the health care industry are the ones investing in the health care industry and lobbying government to quicken the flow. And government is. Everywhere government pours money, prices quickly and steeply rise. It's the same in every application.
--
The first thing you need to stop believing in, is everything that your half of government tells you. ~Musashi
The only thing as bad as a pro-war Democrat is a liberal Republican. ~Musashi
|
|
|
Posts:
5,564
Registered:
1/29/08
|
|
(6 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 8:59 AM
|
I agree with most of what you propose, and I think "expanded Medicare" is an idea that has some traction in certain areas. It's certainly worth a deeper look.
I would disagree with you on your 4th point. It would certainly be a break from our traditional view of government/business, but short of another solution it might be the only way to get private insurance to improve.
--
**
When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea. - Eric Cantona
|
|
|
Posts:
18,507
From:
Washington DC
Registered:
7/21/04
|
|
(7 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 9:20 AM
|
> We need to redefine the qualifications for insurance
> in general. Insurance is overused, and what should
> be costing patients $25-35 dollars to go to a doctor
> and pay for a quick visit to address their cold, flu,
> allergy, corn, wart, et al, instead it's a bill
> costing hundreds of dollars on an insurance policy
> that they might or might not pay a copay for, and the
> entire cost is passed onto the employer that they
> needed to be working for to get affordable health
> care in the first place. All of this has nothing to
> do with medicare, the system in place, mind you,
> which is something that I think must be phased out
> completely like all insolvent government systems
> eventually. I think it's not only not the best
> system, but it's unsustainable unless ground level
> changes to the industry are made as outlined above.
>
Now you begin to make some sense.
It's about time.
--
---
"We are content and happy if Obama can stay forever as president of the United States"
- Libyan Terrorist Moammar Khadafy
|
|
|
Posts:
5,564
Registered:
1/29/08
|
|
(8 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 9:34 AM
|
Blind squirrels... acorns... 
--
**
When the seagulls follow the trawler, it is because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea. - Eric Cantona
|
|
|
Posts:
14,443
Registered:
11/8/08
|
|
(9 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 9:50 AM
|
> First, let me say that I think the basic problem in
> the whole health care debate is a lack of identifying
> the basic characteristics of the state of health care
> in this country and the practical issue that need to
> be recognized and addressed.
>
> Whereas:
>
> 1) Millions of Americans do not have any health care
> coverage because they can't afford it. It doesn't
> matter if it's 20 million or 40 million.
True.
> 2) If the private sector was able to get coverage to
> these people they would have done so already. Leaving
> it to private industry is not the solution.
True
> 3) Any public option is going to cost a lot of money.
> There's no way around it.
It should only cost upfront money like anyone has to put into a business for start up money, until a business can become self-sustaining through revenue. That normally takes, on the average, about 5 years for private business, and 10 years or more on a public option. Far more people involved on a national single payer public option level. It depends on the economy and the general health of people involved in the public option going in and continuing. Everything costs money, and people have to work for a living to pay their healthcare premiums even on a public option. Too many freebies can collapse even the public option and bankrupt a nation.
> 4) A Public Option cannot, and should not, compete
> with private industry in terms of the kind of
> coverage it provides. We cannot have the government
> actively competing with private industry. Any Public
> Option should protect Americans against catastrophic
> illness and accident, pre-and post natal care,
> maintenance medication, and life-saving emergency
> room treatment. That's it.
Why not? It's an insurance business. Doesn't capitalism say competition can be healthy for stimulation of an economy, best price and best quality? That means competing in the type of benefits offered, deductibles, and insurance premiums. The public sector has always been a different type of business from the private sector. However, capitalism doesn't discriminate between public and private sector. Competition says the best, lowest price and best quality of healthcare should be the winner. That forces the private sector to legitimately compete. That means their execs and board will have to stop robbing blind the corporate coffers, minority shareholders, and the beneficiaries paying high prices for premiums and out-of-pocket expenses too. That also means the obscenely paid lobbyists in DC and state capitals will be almost useless against a public option business in competition with the private sector if taxpayers are vigilant, which in vast majority they‘ve never been. That also means everyone but the corrupt could be the really big winners instead depending on the integrity of those in DC, plus, the vigilance of taxpayers encouraging those in DC to maintain integrity.
> 5) Any health care legislation that takes 1,000 pages
> to describe is unacceptable. It is too cumbersome,
> too complicated, and re-invents the wheel.
My Medicare book only uses only 126 pages to describe all coverage and exclusion. A bill can't legitimately be compared to the final draft of coverage and exclusions. However, I'll agree that any bill 1000 pages long is unacceptable when it only takes 126 pages to define coverage and exclusions in the handbook.
Please be aware that when any bill is written, with bi-partisan negotiation, it normally is far higher in page numbers, because they have to write nonsense to discourage the average person from reading all those pages, in order to work in the pork barrels for a corrup bi-partisan final vote.
It shouldn't run over 250 pages without pork barrel burying nonsense. It should define how it will be fund up front and the approximate cost over 10 years (national can take much longer to be self-sustaining - Medicare did), and it depends on the general health of everyone insured under a public option, plus, the economy during any given period, define the coverage, any exclusions, and how the contract will be negotiated with healthcare professionals. Aside from any brief miscellaneous not noted, that should be the extent of any healthcare bill in clear easy to read language. Because sincerely caring about this nation’s health and welfare should come first and always with elected representatives paid for by the very taxpayer‘s they too often rip off.
> I think the first thing we must do is agree on the
> above statements. If we don't, then we are never
> going to come up with a health care plan that works,
> or will even come for a floor vote.
So you didn’t open this up for a good faith negotiation.
> Therefore, I propose we simply redefine the
> qualifications for Medicare. Base eligibility on age
> and income. We already have the system in place; it
> is simply a question of making more people eligible.
> Medicare is certainly NOT the best health care plan
> out there; but then, it isn't supposed to be.
I propose we don't. I’m quite satisfied with my Medicare program. With all due respect, hands off that public option. It isn’t up for negotiation grabs.
> I really want to know what you all think.
Do you really based on this statement?:
> I think the first thing we must do is agree on the
> above statements. If we don't, then we are never
> going to come up with a health care plan that works,
> or will even come for a floor vote.
Because the above is exactly the same hard line attitude of every GOP member deliberately blocking any public option, and who would eliminate Medicare if they could swing it.
> Therefore, I propose we simply redefine the
> qualifications for Medicare. Base eligibility on age
> and income. We already have the system in place; it
> is simply a question of making more people eligible.
> Medicare is certainly NOT the best health care plan
> out there; but then, it isn't supposed to be.
Name one you think is better and how much does it cost and cover? What are the costs of the out-of-pocket expenses of one better? What are the costs of the premiums? What are the upfront deductibles?
|
|
|
Posts:
821
From:
Aurora, CO
Registered:
12/14/99
|
|
(10 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 12:00 PM
|
Two problems with Medicare you aren't mentioning:
1) It is currently financially insolvent.
Making the program bigger will therefore be likely to make it MORE insolvent.
Unless you are also proposing some other changes to the program.
2) Medicare is rife with corruption.
There is currently an unacceptably high amount of Medicare fraud.
Increasing the size of Medicare, without reforming it, simply means INCREASING the amount of fraud.
So if the government is serious about using Medicare as a vehicle for more coverage, it needs to first:
Make Medicare financially solvent, and also clean up the corruption within the system.
I am dubious about whether the government can actually achieve these goals, but I would like to see if they can.
AFTER that is done, we could actually have a serious discussion about using Medicare as a tool to insure more people.
Why would you want to increase the size of a corrupt and insolvent program?
If the government cannot make Medicare run solvent, and with a minimum of corruption, then it is the wrong tool to use to fix the current system.
I tend to believe that it currently embodies exactly what is WRONG with government involvement in health care.
"Denial is a great place. I've heard the summers are nice there."
|
|
|
Posts:
13,670
Registered:
8/15/00
|
|
(11 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 2:43 PM
|
Now you begin to make some sense.
It's about time
LOL yet I've been saying the same things for a long, long time. I never endorsed Medicare or public options for anything. I was the one blowing the whistle about it for years. It's making sense to you now because it's politically fashionable for it to do so.
The kool aid likes. The kool aid says "it's okay". The kool aid always makes sense to those who drink it, the kool aid is just pretending to support free markets this year, while the same talking heads you listen to for all your info. were supporting socialism last year.
"I was for the Patriot Act." ~ Glenn Beck
"The $787 billion bailout" isn't nearly big enough. ~ Glenn Beck
Did that make sense to you in 2008, or did what I say in 2008 make sense?
--
The first thing you need to stop believing in, is everything that your half of government tells you. ~Musashi
The only thing as bad as a pro-war Democrat is a liberal Republican. ~Musashi
|
|
|
Posts:
13,670
Registered:
8/15/00
|
|
(12 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 2:50 PM
|
Private insurance is fine. It's where it comes into contact with government regulations, it's where it already has to pay for a model and a system that's been driven to the stratosphere by government that is the problem. Quit blaming private enterprise when you can't even provide an example of how private enterprise must be "improved".
--
The first thing you need to stop believing in, is everything that your half of government tells you. ~Musashi
The only thing as bad as a pro-war Democrat is a liberal Republican. ~Musashi
|
|
|
Posts:
13,670
Registered:
8/15/00
|
|
(13 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 2:52 PM
|
I tend to believe that it currently embodies exactly what is WRONG with government involvement in health care.
Government involvement perverts the marketplace, and then blames the marketplace for the perversion, and finally insists on even more perversion to solve the problem. But you just said that.
--
The first thing you need to stop believing in, is everything that your half of government tells you. ~Musashi
The only thing as bad as a pro-war Democrat is a liberal Republican. ~Musashi
|
|
|
Posts:
9,416
From:
Lake Pend O'reille
Registered:
2/15/04
|
|
(14 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 2:57 PM
|
"Making the program bigger will therefore be likely to make it MORE insolvent."
Not if people pay for the coverage. There's no reason that everyone has to be subsidized. I'm already paying $10k a year for insurance, with a $15,000 deductible ($7, 500 for each of us). I have to believe that if we were all in one giant risk pool that I wouldn't be paying close to the amounts that I am today by only having the option of buying into small private pools.
"Medicare is rife with corruption."
I haven't heard of corruption within Medicare. I seriously doubt that is a problem.
It's those who submit claims who are corrupt, not Medicare itself. Fraud occurs in all private sectors, including health insurance. With private health insurance fraud inside the companies also occurs in the form of intentionally refusing a claim. Willful refusal to pay a legitimate claim is still fraud.
At least with Medicare we don't get that willful internal fraud committed against the insured.
|
|
|
Posts:
821
From:
Aurora, CO
Registered:
12/14/99
|
|
(15 of 24)
Re: My solution for Public Option health care
Nov 4, 2009 3:23 PM
|
You haven't heard of corruption in Medicare?
Have you even been watching the news lately?
One of the big problems is the Medicare "suppliers" getting paid for supplying NOTHING.
The government hasn't been smart enough to catch most of it, or prevent plenty of others from copying the same scams.
Even the Dems state they can cut Medicare by reining in the fraud and waste.
So perhaps you should read up on Medicare's corruption woes, before making more uninformed remarks on the subject.
"Denial is a great place. I've heard the summers are nice there."
|
|
|
|
|
