Would Socialist Healthcare Be Acceptable If...

[dogtowner]

I can certainly see where the private medical care sector is anything but cost conscious. Lawyers force doctors and medical facilities to own and use expensive medical tests to the max. If you have a broken arm, you are forced to go to hospitals that are equally equipped to remove brain tumors as treat your broken arm... but both treatments pay the same hospital high overhead. I support "no fault" medical treatment - even doctors make mistakes.

The problem is trying to regulate the health care systems on a State level, so medical facilities have incentives to save money. If someone were to regulate without outsider influence, I am sure hospital bills could be cut significantly.

the medicine biz has little incentive to control costs and at.this point where they are rather interconnected in ownership quite a lot of disincentive.

knocking down costs takes money out of their pockets and you can guess how well that would sit.

so hobo, youve been around the block, do you recall the state.of the medical biz prior to medicare ? how about wage controls ? if you want the genesis of what we have todsy, there it is.

 

[Hobo1]

It seems that you start from the position of needing regulation and then move on in your thinking from there. Why assume that the first place to start if you want to save money is in creating regulation at the state level? how about we start from the place where the way to save money is with no regulations then move on from there.

Well, if we were to institute something like kicking the lawyers out of the ambulance chasing business, and implement "no fault" malpractice regulations (like happened with auto insurance), then some regulations (or laws) would have to be implemented. In other cases, deregulation would be necessary to make medical care more capitalistic, ie, eliminating regulations that add regulations on health care facilities. I imagine allowing paramedics and nurses to perform more types of medical treatment would require some government action.

This is not my field of expertise. My meager knowledge comes from what I have experienced, seen and read. I don't think you want unlicensed doctors, do you?

 

[dogtowner]

Well, if we were to institute something like kicking the lawyers out of the ambulance chasing business, and implement "no fault" malpractice regulations (like happened with auto insurance), then some regulations (or laws) would have to be implemented. In other cases, deregulation would be necessary to make medical care more capitalistic, ie, eliminating regulations that add regulations on health care facilities. I imagine allowing paramedics and nurses to perform more types of medical treatment would require some government action.

This is not my field of expertise. My meager knowledge comes from what I have experienced, seen and read. I don't think you want unlicensed doctors, do you?

as you suggest, more medical functions could be passed off to non docs. this is as much (or more) an AMA call as any governmental one.

but this IS.happening quite a lot.

the problem addressing litigation is that med schools stopped teaching how to diagnose and replaced it with teaching testing protocols. going to have to reteach which wont be fast cheap or essy.

its really an involved issue we have and we the people are the only ones wanting change. we may have numbers but they work hard to fool people out of seeing their best interests.

 

[Saxon]

It seems no solution is possible. The health system before ObamaCare was pretty bad too. High insurance premiums, exclusion for per-existing problems, one employer gives health insurance, the next employer does not, limits of coverage on all sorts of treatments, on and on.

I don't want a government program either. But I do envy my Canadian relatives and their health care system - they seem to be doing something right.

Are all you guys happy with the old system?

WTF??? You envy your Canadian relatives and their healthcare system, but you don't want a government program? Canada's healthcare system IS a government program.

edited for content

 

[Saxon]

you mean the contract negotiated (generally with the employer) ? they have no reason to.




surely you have proof of this silly accusation



google this if you believe your claim.



those corrupt judges of yours are actually paid by the government you know...



SMH

if by medicare you mean the govt program you are mistaken. it spends far more than it takes in.

if you mean private insurance they kind of suck at profit with a margin well under 5%.

if you mean the medical community well yes toey do pretty well, even yours up in the great white north, they dont work for free you know.

the rest is just nonsense.

does it ever occur to you to actually look into any of these claims of yours ?

The U.S. health care system is a giant money making scam that is designed to drain as much money as possible out of all of us before we die. In the United States today, the health care industry is completely dominated by government bureaucrats, health insurance companies and pharmaceutical corporations. The pharmaceutical corporations spend billions of dollars to convince all of us to become dependent on their legal drugs, the health insurance companies make billions of dollars by providing as little health care as possible, and they both spend millions of dollars to make sure that our politicians in Washington D.C. keep the gravy train rolling. Meanwhile, large numbers of doctors are going broke and patients are not getting the care that they need.

You were saying????

 

[Saxon]

I can certainly see where the private medical care sector is anything but cost conscious. Lawyers force doctors and medical facilities to own and use expensive medical tests to the max. If you have a broken arm, you are forced to go to hospitals that are equally equipped to remove brain tumors as treat your broken arm... but both treatments pay the same hospital high overhead. I support "no fault" medical treatment - even doctors make mistakes.

The problem is trying to regulate the health care systems on a State level, so medical facilities have incentives to save money. If someone were to regulate without outsider influence, I am sure hospital bills could be cut significantly.

You mean like OUR regulated healthcare industry? Here, a doctor charges OHIP too much money, the government bloody well wants to know why, and the explanation had better be good or he loses his license. Down there, with such little regulation, the State cannot do shit, whilst the doctors bleed their patients dry, forcing them all into bankruptcy. No Canadian has ever gone bankrupt over medical bills. It happens every single day in the good ol' US of the A.

 

[dogtowner]

You were saying????

quoting yourself again ?

 

[Saxon]

quoting yourself again ?

Nope. I quoted an American speaking about the USA's wonderful private healthcare system. He mentions what we CAnadians have known for decades.

 

[dogtowner]

Nope. I quoted an American speaking about the USA's wonderful private healthcare system. He mentions what we CAnadians have known for decades.

how would one know if you chose not to cite your text ?

 

[Saxon]

how would one know if you chose not to cite your text ?

I keep forgetting to do so. I copy, then paste whilst closing the tab. So sue me. Doesn't help that I am a lazy fucker.

 

[Cruella]

my, my, my

Obamacare author warns implementation could be a “train wreck”

 

[dogtowner]

my, my, my

Obamacare author warns implementation could be a “train wreck”

could be ?

 

[cashmcall]

I have a different view on the role of the stste ins commish's perhpas having worked in insurance.

these guys are generally elected and under restriction by state laws. in this sense they are operating at.the will of the people. that being said, most people are ignorant of all this and do not generally appreciate the effect these actions have on their premiums.

in short we have an education problem.

i think if you asked most people if folks should have the freedom to buy a bare bones ins policy (becsuse they are of modest means or enjoy good health and are looking for catesttrophic coverage) they would day 'you bet'.

if you told them the reason they cant is regulation their pols set in place they might just be receptive to pols suggesting it be done. i feel thats the right way and all before thinking of the state's rights implications.

i really dislike the argument of "selling across state lines" as it means surrendering authority to the feds that they should not have. imo of course.

I read Mississippi has adopted lawsuit abuse reform (tort) in their state back in 2009 and has reduced their healthcare premiums by 42% in the last year due to this reform. Gov. Barbour estimates America can save almost 100-200 billion dollars a year implementing just this one reform.

 

[dogtowner]

I read Mississippi has adopted lawsuit abuse reform (tort) in their state back in 2009 and has reduced their healthcare premiums by 42% in the last year due to this reform. Gov. Barbour estimates America can save almost 100-200 billion dollars a year implementing just this one reform.

there is little doubt that this would help but it needs to be nationwide to combat creative lawyers. texas did as well less impact.

another idea for consideration is to implement "loser pays". if a plaintiff simply sues to settle (as nearly all cases do) and has no case to obtain a win and they do lose, they pick up the court costs and opposition legal fees. do that and it doesnt stifle those who really were harmed (and it DOES happen) but its got to be real. case load goes through the floor making courts happy, quack lawyers find new jobs which makes most people happy and we can bring defensive medicine under control.

 

[Centrehalf]

Healthcare is a complex issue and there have been a lot of very good points made in this thread. I guess what I'd like to ask all of you is "Do you think medical care is a right?"

Maybe if we answer that question first then we can move on from there. I'll admit up front that I do think it's a right. I'm one of those guys that thinks we didn't go far enough and should have had single-payer. I think mandating dealing with insurance providers is a horrible idea and will bite us on the ass in the very near future.